On the Dane board that I visit, there is someone who claims that he's a
PP'er. He didn't put it that way, but he only uses positive
reinforcement in training, doesn't think that anything else is
necessary, and is a HUGE advocate of clicker training. I don't have a
problem with that necessarily, but his premise is that any training that
involves anything other than R+ is abusive.

When asked how he'd train a large adult dog to walk on a leash if he
can't manage it without a tool, he said that he approves of the use of
GL/Halti, and *any* dog can be trained to use it within 30 minutes.
From personal experience, I know this to be so much doo-doo.

On SnakeProofing a dog, he said that he'd just ask the dog to recall to
him, and when told that is not the intent behind snakeproofing a dog,
sidestepped the question, by saying that my question was not specific
enough.

On asking how he'd go about teaching a herding dog to channel its
instincts appropriately, he said that he would teach each command
separately, and chain them. I can tell why that wouldn't work, but
having never even seen herding (unless 'Babe' counts), I'm sure I'm not
the appropriate person to respond to it.

So, my question is, is there a way to convince someone who thinks that
R+ is the be all and end all in dog training that there is such a thing
as the appropriate use of the other quadrants?

Suja

Suja wrote:

So, my question is, is there a way to convince someone who thinks that
R+ is the be all and end all in dog training that there is such a thing
as the appropriate use of the other quadrants?


I suggest not answering, and if you feel you must, put [eggplant] in the
subject line. Mark my words, this guy is going to turn into the sort
who argues and wiggles and says that you didn't understand him and
twists words and plays games with logic and definitions until you and
everyone who comes near him becomes exasperated in non-defeat.


--Lia

"Suja" wrote in message
newstrld.744$nj.350@lakeread01...

So, my question is, is there a way to convince someone who thinks that R+
is the be all and end all in dog training that there is such a thing as
the appropriate use of the other quadrants?

Why is it so important that you "convince" him? He has his methods and you
have yours.

In reference to the GL...for a lot of dogs it is an aversive...but they can
be "conditioned" to tolerate it. You may want to mention that to him. For
someone to be truly using R+ exclusively I think they would have to free
shape everything. Even that is questionable since some dogs can get
frustrated when first introduced to the clicker if the trainers signals are
less than clear or the dog hasn't figured out the game yet..

BD

Quoth Suja on Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:31:49 -0500,

On the Dane board that I visit, there is someone who claims that he's a
PP'er. He didn't put it that way, but he only uses positive
reinforcement in training, doesn't think that anything else is
necessary, and is a HUGE advocate of clicker training. I don't have a

Hey, I am a huge advocate of clicker training. R+ is indeed heavily
emphasised and a serious clicker group is a great place to get ideas on
how to use R+ to acheive results for which R- and P+ are commonly used.
But clicker training isn't all R+.

Sending him to the clicker training email list (clicktrain; you'll have
to google on it) might or might not open his eyes to this.

problem with that necessarily, but his premise is that any training that
involves anything other than R+ is abusive.

And that's just a closed mind. If he's always been this way, I wouldn't
expect him to change. However it is a stage many trainers go through,
when we first realize that we don't HAVE to use physical aversives in
many, many cases. Maybe he'll outgrow it, maybe he won't. I don't have a
lot of patience anymore with people who label all methods other than
their own to be "abusive". If you similarly lack patience, well, why
answer him at all?

When asked how he'd train a large adult dog to walk on a leash if he
can't manage it without a tool, he said that he approves of the use of
GL/Halti, and *any* dog can be trained to use it within 30 minutes.
From personal experience, I know this to be so much doo-doo.

I haven't used the GL (yet -- who knows, it may be a tool I need in the
future) but my main issue would be with the time frame. I dunno, maybe
you can get the dog to tolerate it in 30 minutes. Of course, it is
aversive to most dogs before they are trained to it; so I'm not sure how
you can train a dog to tolerate a GL while protecting him from any
physical unpleasantness. I expect your Dane guy will redefine on the fly
to get around this one.

On SnakeProofing a dog, he said that he'd just ask the dog to recall to
him, and when told that is not the intent behind snakeproofing a dog,
sidestepped the question, by saying that my question was not specific
enough.

Snakeproofing isn't all that common. Theoretically I think you could do
it with R+, by training a recall with "perceiving a snake" as the cue.
Fortunately it's not a big issue where I live now, but yes, I might take
that approach if I needed to snakeproof a dog (depending on the dog,
depending on whether the dog has any unconditioned response to snakes
and what that response is, depending on how likely it is that the dog
will run into snakes.... depending on a lot of things).

On asking how he'd go about teaching a herding dog to channel its
instincts appropriately, he said that he would teach each command
separately, and chain them. I can tell why that wouldn't work, but
having never even seen herding (unless 'Babe' counts), I'm sure I'm not
the appropriate person to respond to it.

There are people on the clicktrain list who would have appropriate
responses. Minimizing physical aversives in herding training seems to
mostly involve controlling access to the sheep. I don't think you would
want to teach commands and chain them without the sheep present, since
so much of what the herding dog does is about the dog's instincts and
experience WITH the sheep (or other herdable beasties). It seems to me
(as inexperienced with herding as you) that it would be a lot like
trying to teach you how to crochet without letting you near a hook or
yarn until "the behaviors have been chained".

For dogs who are keenly tuned in to the sheep, "taking away" and "giving
back" control of the sheep seem to be very useful, according to those
who've done it. But -- oopsie! -- controlling access to the sheep isn't
pure R+. Not allowing the dog to work the sheep could certainly count as
an aversive. At minimum it would be P-...

So, my question is, is there a way to convince someone who thinks that
R+ is the be all and end all in dog training that there is such a thing
as the appropriate use of the other quadrants?

Time, his own experience, and most of all -- don't worry too much about
it. Someone calls you a Dog Abusing Thug here in the newsgroups, you
killfile him when he gets too annoying. Dane List Guy gets too annoying
on an email group, apply a filter if you can and if you can't, just skip
his posts. :shrug: Specifics like how one might train certain things
(leash manners, snakeproofing, and herding) can be interesting, bullying
others for not using those methods is not interesting so why bother with
it?





-----------------------------------------
Only know that there is no spork.

dogsnus wrote:
The last time I looked at Rammel's
page I started laughing because she prohibits the use of frowns.
You are to smile only! It could be damaging to the dog's emotional
well being.

Y'know, the more I learn about clicker training, the more I think I'm starting
to understand what's going on with people like Marilyn. It's kind of like what
causes some Christians to become the wild-eyed fanatics who are ready to send
you to hell for dancing. They take stuff out of context, and focus on it out
of perspective.

Yes, if you have a sensitive dog, your frowns can be an aversive! You may not
even be aware that you're telegraphing your displeasure to a dog, and under
certain circumstances with some dogs, you can actually inhibit their learning
with any kind of correction.

In general, it's a very good idea to be aware and purposeful with all the
messages you're sending your dog, as subtle as they may be in your body
language and tone, and to be aware of how your dog is reacting to your
messages.

But to take that and make it into the gospel, "Never frown at your dog!" is
distorted.

Canine Action Dog Trainer
http://www.canineaction.com
My Kids, My Students, My Life:
http://hometown.aol.com/dfrntdrums/m...age/index.html
Build Your Immune System, Lose Weight
http://www.re-vita.net/dfrntdrums

Has anyone ever,in the history of this newsgroup that is a member
of the Shining Path Klub ever_ been convinced? They just do not
have the brain capabilities of embracing anything other than their
own beliefs.

Elizabeth mentioned the list "clicktrain", where the list goddess (Shirley
Chong) is fair minded enough to espouse the use of the other 3 quadrants of OC,
even to the point of using an ecollar for recall and snake proffing. She is
still considered a clicker guru, and through the years she has worn down many
"Shining Path Klub" g members with her candid acceptance of whatever works
the best in the given situation, including P-, R- and P+.

The Clicker Journal now has *me* writing about retriever training. And lord
knows I'm not SPK member ;- But the editor (Victoria Farrington) realizes that
there are situations (like in the field with sheep or birds) where controlling
access isn't possible, and short of that, high-drive dogs would spend their
lives on leash.

The last issue of The Clicker Journal was devoted to "The Art of Retrieving".
And Victoria, brave soul that she is, printed an article I wrote that described
the steps retriever trainers use to teach a dog the controled retrieve, aka,
the force fetch. She even printed gasp instructions about pinching the dog's
ear during the process.

Now, granted, there is a wide range of techniques to force fetch a dog, and
obviously I described the least aversive for this clicker audience. But the
fact remains that the clicker aficianodos got the issue, and I haven't received
a single piece of hate mail ;-

Gary Wilkes had an article in TCJ a while ago wherin he espoused the use of P+
in teaching shelter dogs because it is the most expedient way in many cases,
and the dogs lives are at stake so there is no time to dance around its use.

So, Suja, you might want to point these "cutting edge" tendencies of the
mainstream of clicker training. And if dane-guy wants to stay mired in the
backwater eddies of his own preconceived notions, there's nothing you can do.

(Well, you could suggest he subscribe to The Clicker Journal and I'll promise
to have smoke coming out of his ears about 6 times a year ;-)



Susan Fraser, owned and trained by
BeBop a Lu SheBop SH
Shamma Lamma Ding Dong CD MH
and Gris Gris Gumbo YaYa
http://mypeoplepc.com/members/chinch...densinthenews/

dogsnus wrote:

Personally I've long since given up on them.When "they" begin to
speak,my eyes glaze over.

I think that I should adopt this approach. If he were a complete loon,
it would be easy. The problem is that he is one of the voices of reason
on a board that's heavy on 'You have to show the dog who's the boss'. I
generally agree with his advice, as it tends to be anti alpha rolls and
other misguided notions of that ilk.

Let's put it this way: If you manage to convince this guy
of anything other than His Way,I will send some Greenies
to the handsome K-Man.

There's probably a better chance of hell freezing over. Then again, I
should've know, 'cause this is the same guy who's all 'Raw! Raw! Raw!',
and advices people to just start feeding RMBs with no research
whatsoever. Unfortunately, lots of people do just that.

Suja

dogsnus wrote in :

That's where your newly practiced bemused look comes in real handy.

....am realizing that I need more coffee as I sit here, trying on faces,
looking bemused at my monitor...

--
Kate
and Storm the FCR