[Me]

"If we tell the people that pointing at a bit of ground where the dog isn't and making an unpleasant noise is as horrid to the dog as hitting it, I think we would achieve little.  " SITN

Not that I am disagreeing with this statement in itself as it seems safe enough - but then.. I can't keep it in:

It brought to mind something I'd discussed with others previously ref. citronella collars years ago. A friend bought a citronella collar and stated that it was much more humane than an electric one, she used it when her dog ran off and ignored her. She pressed the button, the dog came back.

I disagreed, I don't see that she could know that the smell of citronella is more or less aversive to a dog (with an incredibly sensitive nose) than an electric pulse, all you can say is that both are sufficiently aversive to stop the dog displaying the behaviour   

[in the hills]

In my opinion a good and experienced trainer of dogs of any kind uses a 'positive' approach as much as possible. With experience from training 'many' dogs they learn to break training into small structured lessons and don't move on to the next lesson until the previous one is mastered. They have the experience as SITN states to read a dogs body language and to use their own voice, body language, movements etc. to encourage the dog to go where they wish and to do as they wish.

I have seen trainers of gundogs that were 'unkind' as stated in the other thread but a good trainer will always try to be positive. By being 'unkind' you can cause more problems than you cure .... a good trainer would know that.

My father compared training gundogs to making cakes.  There is a basic recipe but that recipe is tweaked slightly here and there depending on the dog you are working with. Experienced trainers spot problems before they have even happened. They then take a 'step back' and go back to previous lessons. No need to 'punish' the dog. Usually the dog is confused because your earlier training/ lessons were not good/thorough enough. There is many a time I've heard my father shout to people in his training class not to 'punish' a dog because they were at fault and not the dog!

The 'telling off the ground' trick isn't in my opinion the same as hitting a dog but is 'negative' in some respects surely. The dog is thinking 'oh blimey I'm not going there/in that direction etc.'. Surely it feels a bit 'uncomfortable' or even a little 'afraid' .... at least enough to put it off wanting to do that. If not it would just surely do as it pleased and run into the space regardless. I might do something similar when teaching 'direction work' to a young gundog. I'd be 'warning' the dog not to go there and so possibly you could say being 'negative'. If I'd been thorough in teaching the young dog it's directions I wouldn't even need to do this.

Then you get some dogs that are less biddable and do need the occasional punishment,  stern voice or a very occasional 'tap'. I think that there are very few trainers that can train every dog that goes through their hands without ever using any 'punishment'. Most trainers would, IMO, be using mostly positive, a wee bit of negative and very occasionally punishment. The punishment would only be occasional because if done properly and at the correct time it would be effective and possibly more pleasant in the long run than constantly being 'negative' towards a dominant or head strung dog.

[Old Shep]

We can only second guess what order a particular dog would put various "punishments" or negatives.  I have one dog who's nightmare would be for you to burn the toast (could set off the smoke alarm), and another who cannot stand the smell of dog poo!

[doganjo]

And my youngster goes off into a corner if I draw a breath and cough.  Ordinary clearing of my throat doesn't make her do this.  My son doing the exact same breath then cough doesn't do it - so where did she learn that me doing it is bad or negative?  I have NEVER been negative with her on any aspect of her training.  Who knows what goes on in a  young dog's mind?

[devonlady]

My dear old BC, long gone now, would become afraid if you wanted to take his photograph. To my everlasting regret I don't have one good picture of him   He was never even spoken harshly to in his life so I don't know where that came from)
House training a not too bright Greyhound pup, I had just got him going to the door when he wanted to go. One morning he had just started to pee in the yard when someone blared a car horn. That was that, not allowed to pee indoors, "told off" when he peed outdoors, what could he do? Run upstairs and pee on the bed, Hmm, stair gate so pee on the sofa. That took a lot of sorting out and he was never quite reliable, bless him.

[Porterlauren]

I've struck at least two of my four dogs. Does that make me a bad person?

In fact i'm fairly sure i've struck three of the four thinking about it!

DO people think there is no excuse or occasion to strike a dog?

Generally I adopt positive re-enforcement and this is the most successful method, however there is a big difference between reprimanding a dog for doing something you don't like but it doesn't know is wrong and reprimanding it for breaking the rules!

You have to know your dog, know dog psychology in general and know dog training.

Unfortunately you can get a dog without understanding any of these three things!

[SallyintNorth]

There's no point me striking Dot, it would teach her nothing except to fear that she might be struck.  She'd be so upset that I'd hit her, that any connection with what she might have been doing, or about to do, would not be made.  And henceforth, she'd be worried I might do it again, and since she'd not made a connection as to why I'd struck her, she'd be frightened that I might hit her all the time.

Before Dot, I'd have used physical techniques a dog on a very rare occasion when I thought it needed a lot of reinforcement.  Not chasing sheep, for instance, in a pet dog, if other methods weren't working well enough.

I'm not saying I'll never hit a dog again as long as I live, but I certainly plan to spend more time and effort thinking of other ways around any problems.  And aiming to have my dogs care that I've made that 'disappointed in you' noise, so that striking them doesn't become necessary. 

So no, I don't think you are a bad person, Porterlauren.  But I think we'd all be better people, and feel better about ourselves, too, if we found more ways of avoiding physical 'punishment' whilst still having well-behaved dogs

[Porterlauren]

See . . . . . that's the thing. The collie, Twig, is soft, she is a sweet little dog, with the kind of temperament that I know if she was physically corrected, it would do huge damage. A raised tone is all that is needed, and now I have done a lot of training (and had some help) thats rarely even needed.

However, the dogs I have physically corrected. . . . . . are two running dogs and a hound/terrier.

Two had a slap, after they pulled down sheep, working a gorse banking on a hill, flushing and killing foxes, and they flushed a raggedy old coloured ewe from the gorse, couldn't really see her over the cover and gave chase, their blood was up when they got to her and had her pinned down when I got there (quickly). They knew very much that it was wrong, but in the context, and their youth and the heat of the moment they though 'to hell with it'. They did not damage the ewe, but held her down. I got there, gave both a hard slap and pinned them to the ground by their throats. . . . . and from that day forth they never ever touched one, despite the same scenario playing out many times!

The third, is a young lurcher bitch (bull/collie/saluki/grey/whippet) who is incredibly loyal, a very much one man dog, and extremely protective / jealous over me. I was giving the mrs a lot of attention after being away from home for a while and had stupidly not given the dog her fair share when I got in. . . . . . .she decided to snarl, and then snap at the mrs. Needless to say she got a sharp tap on the nose, and a stern telling off.

I feel that I know my dogs, and generally deal with very high drive, very full on dogs, which I expect to kill things on a weekly (sometimes daily basis), as such I expect extreme obedience in certain areas. . . . . . and occasionally will need to use a physical reprimand to achieve this. Mind you i'm talking a slap, not a beating, and it probably happens once or twice in a dogs life at most.

However, I have never EVER struck, slapped, hit or tapped a collie. . . . . . and don't feel I would ever need to. Different dogs, have different hearts and heads, and as a good trainer you need to be able to see inside those two things and make a good judgement call.

I'd say 90% of dog owners can't train a dog properly.

[Me]

I'd say 90% of dog owners can't train a dog properly.

Thats about right - I may still be part of the 90% - but I am trying to break into the 10%!

[in the hills]

Exactly Porterlauren ..... it's about knowing your dog.

I have a young working lab bitch who is extremely sensitive and biddable. She worries. To correct her 'physically' would cause far more problems than it would ever cure. She only makes mistakes if she is confused and that is my fault when I have rushed in her lessons. I can't see any situation when she would need any 'physical' correction. Her faults/mistakes are mine .... my inexperience in handling such a biddable little girl.

However, I'll also admit that I have corrected my Flat Coat 'physically' and other male Flat Coats before him. As is said, when and only when I knew that they knew that they were doing wrong but decided to go ahead and do it anyway. One was an aggressive dog towards other dogs and to some extent to people. These dominant dogs had to 'respect' you and be a bit afraid to upset you.

I think also it depends on the type of 'physical' punishment that you are talking about. I'm only talking about a very quickly administered 'tap'. It's the speed and sort of shock element that stops the dog and not hurting them.

Maybe your view point on this depends on the type of dogs that you have had dealings with. I know people that have had to rehome their male Flatties because they couldn't control them .... I'd sooner have given them the very occasional 'tap' as head strung adolescents than end up with a big, strong dog that I couldn't handle or control.

[Caroline1]

I agree about the 90%. I volunteer for a dog rescue and soooo many of the dogs they are asked to take just have not been trained or had any discipline so are now labelled as biters, naughty, boisterous, out of control dogs that need to be put to sleep (unless you can take them in).

It is heartbreaking.

Now my 4 are trained just enough for my lifestyle but by no means are working dogs. I have a large Angolian shep cross who welcomed a visitor at the weekend by standing up on her (which is completely unacceptable and he knows it) a verbal correction was ignore so a louder verbal and a quick tap on the bum was issued and he  gave me such a surprised look as if to say "how dare you embarrass me in front of my new friend".

[Porterlauren]

To be fair, its a real problem how easy it is to have a dog. People think, well, we are a family, we have kids, we live in the country (any or all of the above, or in many cases. . . . . none) so hey, the logical thing is to get a dog. They then often pick the dog on fashion basis, rather than what will suit their life style, and do bugger all training as a pup. They then have an unruly, untrained idiot. . . . which they try to correct at a year old or more, once the behaviour is a real problem (rather than being cute for a pup).

It's very similar with kids, too many people think. . . . we are in a relationship etc, so lets have kids. . . . without having bugger all idea what to do with them, or any real desire to rear them . . . . so they get turfed out on the street to hang about or stuck in front of the t.v / x-bx all day. . . . . . and then once a teenager. . . . they think bloody hell, this kid is a nightmare, better try and 'sort them out'. If they had done the ground work, they wouldn't need to!!!!

Back to dogs, my personal gripe is folk getting the wrong dog for them or their life, or paying daft amounts for some kind of designer pooch when a mongrel pup from a pound would be far better!!!!!!!

[Caroline1]

... or its the mongrel pups that have been called something fancy so they can charge more like cockerpoos. I still find Labradoodles hard to accept as a breed.

[Porterlauren]

The labradoodle was initially created as a non-shedding dog for the blind. . . .at least as far as i'm aware. And then people just went crazy for them. And now, most shed anyway.

Lets face it, unless you have a job of work for the dog, all you need is something that is healthy, well balanced, and which has a size / exercise need, which fits in with your lifestyle.

Just because you really like collies, isn't enough of a reason to get one. . . . or even two, when you live in a wee flat in town, and work 8 hours a day, and don't really enjoy walking.

And there are millions of other examples. If you've never trained a dog, perhaps a high drive terrier isn't for you!

[devonlad]

been following this really enjoyable thread and agree with so much that's been said. In more militant moments I am adamant that if I ever rose to power, by some bizarre twist of fate then all potential dog owners should be vetted first. to be honest the same probably applies to having children and that's never gonna work.
I grew up in a household where the predominant approach to dog care was my father's " give it a bloody good thrashing". even at a young age this never appealed to me, firstly because I would weep buckets at the sight of my beloved collie skipper getting a hiding, but also because even my unformed mind could see that a succession of beatings didn't actually seem to work, skipper, into grand old age continued to nip visitors, steal food from wherever he could and up until he had no energy left to do so, would empty the bins of the village pretty much every day of his life. no dog that I have ever owned as an adult has ever been hit, partly because they are me friends and loyal companions and partly because I don't believe it makes a jot of difference in modifying behaviour. for the last 14-15 years our household has had two dogs, still going relatively strong and both could not be more different as characters. our spaniel remains as bouncy, pushy and even tempered as the day I bought him home as a wee pup, no more than a slight raised voice, or even just a p[perfected hard stare, is required to tell him whats what. our terrier, barney however is an altogether more complicated chap. veering from absolute adoration and cuddly puppy into a slavering beast, no two days are ever the same with him and over the years he has provided thousands of invites to give him a "bloody good hiding". my father shakes his head in disbelief, but barneys world is ever changing, a product we suspect of him spending the first six months of his life god knows where, until found roaming the streets of Reading. Trying to understand how he operates is not always easy, and there are times when he can be such an ar**hole that resorting to the stick could be easily forgiven, but I have no doubt that it would in no way have made him easier, and would only ever have served to be a release for my frustration at the little git. for most hours of most days he is a  sweet, still cute little fella (as our recent housesitter will no doubt vouch- thanks again jean) but he requires patience and understanding in reasonably large amounts too. those who acquire a status symbol or who see a dog on tv, or in some one elses ownership  and leap in without being prepared to be a "dog owner" madden me. some close friends of ours got a spaniel because they so adored our spaniel. the dog they have is now 2 years old, uncontrollable, sleeping on their bed, eating whatever he pleases. pickj the right breed and then be willing to be what that dog needs you to be