No compulsion

[leanershnitzel]

I recently read a article in which a Swedish shutzhund trainer described how prong and e-collars were illegal in Sweden. He went on to say that trainers who used these methods lacked both imagination and knowledge.

Now, are there top level sport dogs or competent pp dogs who have never had any kind of compulsion used on them? If so, are their prey, defense and fight drives in balance when they are working?

I personally put the prong on every time we go for walks or the training field...hell i've advised people to use them on this very board. Has this been the easy way out this whole time?

My dog is from working lines, and recovers instantly from a correction with no change in demeanor. But I am now wondering if our bond would be deeper if I never had to inflict pain during training.

I am a believer in taking the road less travelled, even if it is harder and longer. This is why these few lines in an article have piqued my interest.

Any thoughts?

[lblax]

just because prongs and ecollars are illegal in sweden doesnt mean they are not in use and compulsion can be administered a million differant ways without these devices.correction and compulsion has its place in all types of dog training and while motivational is the way to teach a dog once he has learned the tasks a certain amount of correction or compulsion is usually needed at some point. even the purists who claim that they have trained there dogs completely motivationally if someone were to go back and review all there training some sort of correction or compulsion was used at some point

[debbiej]

although I have very little experience in this, I have watched young dogs being trained and I would say there is no corrections in the pp training where I am going with Boris. most of the dogs wear prongs only for the obedience part, but corrections are not anywhere near a frequent as the typical obedience classes I've gone to. quick pop, enthusiastic praise for proper response, happy, high energy work.

[Mick Trainer]

I recently read a article in which a Swedish shutzhund trainer described how prong and e-collars were illegal in Sweden. He went on to say that trainers who used these methods lacked both imagination and knowledge. Like others have said here just because he is not using prong or e-collars doesn't mean that he is not using compulsion and like Larry has said compulsion is compulsion, the dog associates it the same way, but lets for discussion sake say he is, that he is using purely modivational methods. It certainly can be done especially where rotuine based OB such as in SchH is concerned. I often say that you can train a dog with a bag of Jelly Beans or s stick with a nail in it if you know what you are doing and certainly this is no exception to that. If you know what you are doing and have heaps of time, resouces etc you can certainly train a dog with no compulsion. It does however take a "LOT" longer and require substantially more knowledge to be able to pull it off. Now this is fine when you have this amount of time and the dog is trained for you for sport and as a hobby but if you are training the dog in real life usually you do not have the routines to work on (this doesn't mean you need compulsion just that it will add even more time to the process) nor such a large amount of time to get it right so if adding compulsion speeds that process up drastically then there is a clear benefit to it's use in this case.

Now to look to seek to find a way not to use compulsion at all you must first look at why you would seek such a path? What dangers to you percieve the use of such devices brings? The answer normally in short is a poor association to a command and a break down in handler/dog relationship and anyone with any reality would agree that thers is such a risk. Though in reality we must ask how big a risk is this really? For me in reality I wouldn't think it is that high a risk as long as the handler either has good handling skills or is working with someone else who has and can teach them. I see few truly adverserial relationships between handler and dog in the real working dog world and almost zero in SchH where for a dog to score the attitude of the dog is paramount to a good score. Now if in reality if there are few people having problems with the use of compulsion and it does speed the process up then I don't see it truly being something we moust avoid at all costs.

He went on to say that trainers who used these methods lacked both imagination and knowledge. Why is it that it is trainers who have chosen not to remove two powerful conditioning tools from their repetoir that lack imagination? Why is it assumed it is because we don't know better that we don't go down the path of using compulsion? Why is it not the opposite that is true that we have had the imagination and knowledge to not only use compulsion but to do so in a way that does not create the potential dangers as spoken about above. There is no reason to say that becasue a trainer still uses compulsion in their training that they are less of a trainer than someone who does not if in the end they get the job done with the dog having the same attitude towars it work, the accuracy to command is the same (usually better but thats a different conversation) and usually the job is done in less time? Why is it that this is not seen as a superior trainer who not only can use motivation well but who also has the skill/knowledge to use compulsion and gain such results? Could I train a PP/PSD/SchH without e-collars, pinch collars etc? Sure but if the results are good, quick and the techniques are easy for people to learn then why would I choose too? I do not often have the luxury of having such a huge amount of time as discribed nor do I have the luxury of a dog failing as to so so will normally mean that it does so in real life. Simply to make things harder for myself? The only true advantage to doing such things is that it forces you to search for other techniques but a truly good trainer will seek such things whether they have the equipment or not simply as it is part of what they do and who they are.

Now, are there top level sport dogs or competent pp dogs who have never had any kind of compulsion used on them? Shiela Booth is famous for trainer her SchH dogs with purely modivational techniques. Once again I truly think that you would have a better chance of doing this with a sport dog. Not to say it couldn't be done with a PSD etc just that it would add a lot to the process and probably put undue pressure on the program etc.

Has this been the easy way out this whole time? Yeah of course. All training collars are there to make life easier. It is their primary function and in reality with a truly great handler non of them arte necessary, they simply speed the process up and make it that you don't need to be a world class handler to get the job done.

My dog is from working lines, and recovers instantly from a correction with no change in demeanor. But I am now wondering if our bond would be deeper if I never had to inflict pain during training. I would be inclined to argue against this though I do expect to get shouted down. I truly believe that part of forming the bond is showing the dog that you will control things, show leadership etc. Now this need not be done with compulsion but I truly believe it is part of it and feel that with a strong, handler hard dog that it brings with it respect. Now just to clarify I am talking only about compulsion that is done correctly.

I am a believer in taking the road less travelled, even if it is harder and longer. Then this sounds like it is for you. In reality all methods should be look at and going down this path at least for a time certainly has merit if you have the time etc to do so and it will be a great learning experience for you, just dont try to paint the picture as this trainer has that you are superior etc than those that do it differently. Pointing out that others do it wrong is simple and a very common problem in the dog training community (only thing two trainers agree on is that the thrid doesn't know what they are doing stuff) but by not being such a person shows greater strength and knowledge in what you do than being so insecure that you have to criticise in this way. Learn from everyone, tyake what you like from each and this is how you will truly become a great dog trainer. I am fortunate to have worked with many truly great dog trainers and I do not do nor agree with everything any of them say or do but nor do I feel the need to criticise any technique etc but rather I let their results speak for the technique and judge based upon that.

Mick.

[leanershnitzel]

Thank you very much Mick! To say that was an insightful reply would be a gross understatement. You have certainly broadened my perspective.

I will try not to see it as subscribing to either one way of thinking or another, but rather look at training methods as a whole and decide what's best for me. With out discounting anything and with out heralding anything as the only way......You blow me away dude!

[IJF1]

Purely Positive training is a myth - it cannot exist. Even trainers who think they only use positive reinforcement, also use negative punishment and extinction. These can be just as aversive as positive punishment (otherwise they would not work). I am all for using as few corrections as is possible (in fact if you are correcting your dog all the time, your trining is flawed) and teaching new behaviours using as much positive reinforcement as possible, but reinforcement always exists with punishment.

As for compulsion, has the person in Sweden ever used a leash to walk a dog? That is compulsion, because the dog must go where they go....

My opinion is that a dog learns quickly when correct behaviour is immediately reinforced with a reward - I believe it learns even quicker when the above is done, but incorrect behaviour is also immediately punished (this does not have to be physical).

P.S. Good post, Mick.

[RottsNScotts]

Let me start by saying that I do believe that into every dog's life, a little compulsion must fall! At the same time, I generally do not use corrections/compulsion for most work until I am satisfied that the dog understands what it is that I am asking of him and has chosen not to do it.

When working a new or young dog that is trying really hard and may be offering me the wrong behavior in an attempt to figure out the right one, I just ignore the wrong ones and reward the right ones. If they are truly not getting it, I will help them by leading them into the behavior or action to reinforce it then start making it their responsibility to get it.

[lblax]

Originally Posted by RottsNScotts

Let me start by saying that I do believe that into every dog's life, a little compulsion must fall! At the same time, I generally do not use corrections/compulsion for most work until I am satisfied that the dog understands what it is that I am asking of him and has chosen not to do it.

When working a new or young dog that is trying really hard and may be offering me the wrong behavior in an attempt to figure out the right one, I just ignore the wrong ones and reward the right ones. If they are truly not getting it, I will help them by leading them into the behavior or action to reinforce it then start making it their responsibility to get it.

i agree with this 100 % i feel there are basically(and to simplyfie) 3 steps to training
step1: teaching where your dog learns commands and tasks through motivational/repetitition/rewards basically using whatever is fun for you and the dog
step2:compulsion/corrections after the dog is fully comfortable andhas learned the behaviours but either choses not to do them or is slow in doing them.
step 3 : proofing performing commands under any type of distractions this phase shows you your failures as a handler in the previous training and shows that either your dog truly didnt know the meaning of the command or it was not reinforced that it absolutly had to comply

can you train a dog all with step 1??? yes but during the proofing phase the dog may fail his distraction may be more important to him than any of your commands

can you train a dog all with step 2??? yes and the dog may even proof well ive seen many czech imports with a title come to the country this way they are robotic and are not what we desire
a dog that is taught correctly then corrected properly and proofed is a safe happy companion for life..

i believe that for the trainers that are writing articles and books about purely motivational training should change the name to purely motivational teaching. because to call a dog trained he must be proofed and i have yet to find a motivational reward that i could give a dog that actually would be better then him chasing a squirrel

[Ostory]

I use only positive motivation to train my dogs. Not because I am looking for a deeper bond, but because it is my experience that dogs learn quicker with little to no stress. Negative reinforcement is a good way to train dogs, but it does cause stress and and hampers the learning.

That is not to say that I don't administer some negative corrections from time to time, but these situations occure in day to day living, not in our training sessions. I rarely have to correct my dogs, but there are times in social evinorments that it has to happen.

The training itself for the sport is done without any negative corrections, other than if the dog doesn't prefrom the desired behavior, the dog doesn't recieve a possitive reinforcement.

[Ann Felske-Jackman]

Truthfully, I believe that the methods we use are largely dependant on the dog. I have worked with dogs who have such a high williness to please that I couldn't find ways to include compulsion if I wanted to. Other dogs offer me a daily struggle to try to find any positive solution whatsoever.

Mick's responses were very good ones. From there, find what works for you and your dog, you are the only one that knows him well enough to make training choices.

[whisperwalk]

With my last dog I used a halti type collar because I thought prongs and chains were "cruel". He hated it. . . . ALL the time it was on. The dog I have now is capable of knocking down full grown men with a single gallop (he doesn't have to jump, he's so good at taking out knees). At my pp class, I mentioned that I use the prong because I can't afford to have him knock me over and get run over (I'm "becoming" disabled and am unsteady on my feet). She said "that makes sense".

[Ostory]

No item, be it prong collar, electric collar, or anything else is cruel. These are just objects. They can be used in a cruel manner, and they can be used in a sensible manner. That depends on the person. I can use the Halti in a "cruel" manner if I choose to do so.

Being "cruel" is a matter of judgement in the first place.

The most important issue to me is how Effective a training method is. I believe that the most Effective training method for Sport is without negative corrections. Not because I am against the use of "cruel" methods, because I have no issue with cruel methods if they work. I just believe you can get a better prefromance without the stress factor of these methods.

As they say, "They are many Roads that lead to Rome". Each trainer has to choose the way that fits him/her the best. My preference is to train without negative reinforcement, but I don't discount other methods, or have an issue with them.