If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
reliable vs. 99% reliable
A retired protection-dog trainer comes in evenings and spends hours
working with our PBs. (He's interesting; 5 years ago, underwent a 'conversion' to 100% positive.) We only have 2 PBs left, btw, but he won't release them for adoption, yet. 3 months is his goal. Last night, he said something about Gus about whom I posted ad nauseum a few days ago. Smiling Gus responds instantly to 'sit', 'stay', and 'down.' "Shouldn't have trained him," he said. "A trained biter is more dangerous than an untrained biter." I keep turning that comment over in my mind. He's laconic, so I didn't ask him to elaborate. I almost see what he means. An obviously out of control dog sends signals that warn people to avoid it. A trained (semi-trained? trained, but not socialized?) dog doesn't. I've turned the implications of that over in my mind until it froze. Comment, so I can start thinking again. (Glancing up, I see I titled this about 'reliability'. Not sure where that fits in, now. Not sure, at this moment, what 'training' means.) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Chris wrote:
Last night, he said something about Gus about whom I posted ad nauseum a few days ago. Smiling Gus responds instantly to 'sit', 'stay', and 'down.' "Shouldn't have trained him," he said. "A trained biter is more dangerous than an untrained biter." I can't see where he's coming from. This makes no sense whatsoever to me. I keep turning that comment over in my mind. He's laconic, so I didn't ask him to elaborate. I almost see what he means. An obviously out of control dog sends signals that warn people to avoid it. A trained (semi-trained? trained, but not socialized?) dog doesn't. This isn't about training. It is about Gus not exhibiting whatever we consider to be "normal" body language for a dog who is feeling threatened (or whatever Gus's problem might be). He goes from acting completely relaxed to putting his teeth on people, with no steps in between (no stiffening, growling, showing teeth, etc.). Why would the fact that he knows how to 'sit' on command have any bearing on this? Just thought of something. You think it is possible that Gus has been actively corrected against giving that sort of warning? I know plenty of people who don't want their dogs growling, showing teeth etc. and attempt to correct them for it. Suja |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Chris wrote:
Last night, he said something about Gus about whom I posted ad nauseum a few days ago. Smiling Gus responds instantly to 'sit', 'stay', and 'down.' "Shouldn't have trained him," he said. "A trained biter is more dangerous than an untrained biter." I can't see where he's coming from. This makes no sense whatsoever to me. I keep turning that comment over in my mind. He's laconic, so I didn't ask him to elaborate. I almost see what he means. An obviously out of control dog sends signals that warn people to avoid it. A trained (semi-trained? trained, but not socialized?) dog doesn't. This isn't about training. It is about Gus not exhibiting whatever we consider to be "normal" body language for a dog who is feeling threatened (or whatever Gus's problem might be). He goes from acting completely relaxed to putting his teeth on people, with no steps in between (no stiffening, growling, showing teeth, etc.). Why would the fact that he knows how to 'sit' on command have any bearing on this? Just thought of something. You think it is possible that Gus has been actively corrected against giving that sort of warning? I know plenty of people who don't want their dogs growling, showing teeth etc. and attempt to correct them for it. Suja |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Chris wrote:
Last night, he said something about Gus about whom I posted ad nauseum a few days ago. Smiling Gus responds instantly to 'sit', 'stay', and 'down.' "Shouldn't have trained him," he said. "A trained biter is more dangerous than an untrained biter." I can't see where he's coming from. This makes no sense whatsoever to me. I keep turning that comment over in my mind. He's laconic, so I didn't ask him to elaborate. I almost see what he means. An obviously out of control dog sends signals that warn people to avoid it. A trained (semi-trained? trained, but not socialized?) dog doesn't. This isn't about training. It is about Gus not exhibiting whatever we consider to be "normal" body language for a dog who is feeling threatened (or whatever Gus's problem might be). He goes from acting completely relaxed to putting his teeth on people, with no steps in between (no stiffening, growling, showing teeth, etc.). Why would the fact that he knows how to 'sit' on command have any bearing on this? Just thought of something. You think it is possible that Gus has been actively corrected against giving that sort of warning? I know plenty of people who don't want their dogs growling, showing teeth etc. and attempt to correct them for it. Suja |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Chris wrote:
Last night, he said something about Gus about whom I posted ad nauseum a few days ago. Smiling Gus responds instantly to 'sit', 'stay', and 'down.' "Shouldn't have trained him," he said. "A trained biter is more dangerous than an untrained biter." I can't see where he's coming from. This makes no sense whatsoever to me. I keep turning that comment over in my mind. He's laconic, so I didn't ask him to elaborate. I almost see what he means. An obviously out of control dog sends signals that warn people to avoid it. A trained (semi-trained? trained, but not socialized?) dog doesn't. This isn't about training. It is about Gus not exhibiting whatever we consider to be "normal" body language for a dog who is feeling threatened (or whatever Gus's problem might be). He goes from acting completely relaxed to putting his teeth on people, with no steps in between (no stiffening, growling, showing teeth, etc.). Why would the fact that he knows how to 'sit' on command have any bearing on this? Just thought of something. You think it is possible that Gus has been actively corrected against giving that sort of warning? I know plenty of people who don't want their dogs growling, showing teeth etc. and attempt to correct them for it. Suja |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
You think it is possible that Gus has
been actively corrected against giving that sort of warning? I know plenty of people who don't want their dogs growling, showing teeth etc. and attempt to correct them for it. Suja That's a most interesting speculation. Gonna see if anyone knows. There's guilt about Gus, because he didn't exhibit the behavior until returning from the vet after his final surgery. One volunteer took him, visited him, and brought him back. I'll see if she has any glimmer of what might have happened during that time. Thanks for the observation, Sija. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
You think it is possible that Gus has
been actively corrected against giving that sort of warning? I know plenty of people who don't want their dogs growling, showing teeth etc. and attempt to correct them for it. Suja That's a most interesting speculation. Gonna see if anyone knows. There's guilt about Gus, because he didn't exhibit the behavior until returning from the vet after his final surgery. One volunteer took him, visited him, and brought him back. I'll see if she has any glimmer of what might have happened during that time. Thanks for the observation, Sija. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
You think it is possible that Gus has
been actively corrected against giving that sort of warning? I know plenty of people who don't want their dogs growling, showing teeth etc. and attempt to correct them for it. Suja That's a most interesting speculation. Gonna see if anyone knows. There's guilt about Gus, because he didn't exhibit the behavior until returning from the vet after his final surgery. One volunteer took him, visited him, and brought him back. I'll see if she has any glimmer of what might have happened during that time. Thanks for the observation, Sija. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
You think it is possible that Gus has
been actively corrected against giving that sort of warning? I know plenty of people who don't want their dogs growling, showing teeth etc. and attempt to correct them for it. Suja That's a most interesting speculation. Gonna see if anyone knows. There's guilt about Gus, because he didn't exhibit the behavior until returning from the vet after his final surgery. One volunteer took him, visited him, and brought him back. I'll see if she has any glimmer of what might have happened during that time. Thanks for the observation, Sija. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Smiling Gus responds instantly to 'sit', 'stay', and
'down.' "Shouldn't have trained him," he said. "A trained biter is more dangerous than an untrained biter." Some people, and I have been one of those, mistake trainability for a sound temperament. Many seem to think that if a dog can be trained to do all the basic obedience stuff, they won't have any problems or issues. But the two issues are separate and distinct. People may let their guard down with a dog that is easily trained and get bitten. They may be shocked because the dog "was so well trained". |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|