My Photo

Categories

follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« Weekly Roundup, Week ending 8/10/08 | Main | Lakewood (OH) Residents Fighting Back »

August 10, 2008

Comments

EmilyS

wow, your friend's "top notch" school sure has some old fashioned notions. Who ever heard of using e-corrections to teach a down, for goodness sake! And I'm not sure it's fair to a dog to correct it for warning another dog away from a bone. She's just teaching it NOT to give a warning but to attack the other dog first. (of course she or any human should be able to take the bone away from the dog)

Brent

I honestly don't know a ton about the school, or the program. I do know a couple of trainers who have been through the program that are excellent trainers -- so their results are good. Keep in mind that part of the program is to teach them a variety of different techniques to deal with certain situations....from purely positive training to positive and corrective training. Obviously the e-collar would be on the corrective end.

I think you're absolutely irresponsible if you don't teach a dog to "give up" the bone...you can't encourage possession aggression, even if it is with another dog.

Becky

Shannon's blog is as fabulous as she is!

EmilyS

Brent, you didn't read me. I clearly said that a dog must give up a bone to a person. But it's a common understanding among most people who understand and train dogs that if you don't allow them to give warnings (a growl for example) you force them to escalate. THAT'S irresponsible.. In fact, it's one of the reasons people get bitten... because people ignore warnings AND punish a dog for growling (rather than training to prevent the behavior).. they produce a dog that will attack "without warning".

But between dogs? DIFFERENT, as I clearly wrote.

Do you really think all dogs have to behave like some kind of pacifists? What if that other dog tried to take her dog's bone? Is her dog allowed to object? Or does it have to just accept that kind of theft? What's wrong with a dog wanting to possess something and wanting to keep other dogs away?

And I don't read Shannon's blog as using ecollars to "correct".. but to train a behavior. That's antedeluvian. Of course it can work.. zillions have dogs have been trained the "old fashioned Koehler way" (which the current Koehlers don't use).

I would never treat or train my dogs that way, though. Use a correction to teach a behavior? NEVER, Under any circumstance.

Corrections are for bad behavior, not for training new or alternate behaviors.

I've trained 2 "pit bulls" to multiple and advanced agility and obedience titles, as well as household behavior, so I know just a little bit about this subject.

Anyone who doesn't understand that shouldn't be training dogs.

Brent

Hey, I'm not involved with the program. The people I know that have gone through the program are very good trainers...which is more than I can say for the majority of the 'trainers' I meet. I'm quite certain a LOT more goes on in her training that what she puts in the blog. There would have to be. If you have problems with their training methods, ask her about it. Post a comment on her blog. Email the school she's at. Heck, maybe she mis-typed. I type a blog every day and lord knows I've made more than my fair share of mis-types when in a hurry. Maybe that's not what happened at all.

But then again, no matter what the answer is, I'm sure it won't be adequate for you...

s kennedy

Interesting training sessions. I am not a dog trainer so not qualified to know or say if it's workable. The dog (subject of the blog)seems to be sort of dominant, but many dogs would guard their food/treat when there are other dogs, esp if they think they might lose it. At least that's my experience. However if a dog is put into obedience competition, they are in very close proximity to each other, even w/a 4ft lead. And when they have to walk away from the dogs, I would imagine that's where the problems might arise, if they do.

Caveat

Hey, thanks for the shout-out(s), Brent!

O/T but it looks as though the Dead Pets Act, AB1634, goes to Third Reading today.

http://caveat.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2008/8/11/3833665.html

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)