RSPCA Investgate TV Dog Trainner

[Simoman 110]

And on the subject of biting ears, i knew a lurcherman, and his father in law, a very inteligent man, who both swore the best way of correcting a dog was to get on all fours and bite their ear, when i said what a load of bollocks they said "thats what the dam does".........what a crock of shit................

[6pack 60]

It's all very well people shouting off on the forum," I would kick the dog" or I would do what ever.

But maybe just think about what the implications are if that was aired on TV to the general public??!! More idiot walking the streets thinking it's OK to kick dogs in the name of training.

 

And that I think is the point.

 

Alot of this dominance theory in dog training is proven to incorrect, almost as bad as Barabara Woodhouse crimes to dogs and dog training.

 

Would you vary your methods for different breeds?

 

A terrier type always benefits from a firm hand and clear boundries, its what they understand best in their small thuggish little brain (imho) where as, as we all know, taking a tough line with a saluki type is mostly a waste of time and counter productive (same for almost any dog with saluki in the mix)

 

Manwork dogs (again jmho) require mostly trained with your mind with the VERY rare instance of firm hand thrown in now and again.

So are your saying that reward type training is a one size fits all, works for everything method?

Just interested in the subject

 

Oh, and as for that JR........In a family environment......it should have been shot!..........if it had of been a big dog, the RSPCA would come round and do it for you

 

Firm handling and good boundaries is not dominance.

You wouldn't train a Saluki in the same way you would train a terrier, but then you wouldn't put your foot in the mouth of either.

I don't hold much in these power phrases so easily banded about by trainers now days. Purely positive? There is no such thing. No to aversive training? Rubbish, saying no to your dog is aversive. Click and treat!! Can you see that working out ferreting? There has to be a reward and a consequence to every decision a dog makes. Positive training works in attempting to let the dog make the reward based decision.

But then this rubbish that dogs want to be top dog? In their pack of dogs maybe, but do you think they see people as part of that pack? I don't think so. They don't think you a dog - for a start you don't greet them by sniffing their arse (hopefully)

Pack theory is based on wild wolf packs and is out dated by about 40 years now and so easy to pick fault at. For starters the wild and domesticated should be a huge clue.

You can train by beating the crap out of a dog. You can train by less punitive methods also. I prefer the latter. Doesn't mean the level of training or behaviour expected is any less.

[LUMPHAMMER 324]

Could of worn some other type of shoe's

[LUMPHAMMER 324]

puts foot in its mouth.....I've heard it all now!!!!

 

stupid f'ckin pathetic paper twisting the event to make it sounds worse than it is, as soon as anyone with a brain sees that sentence they will realise the story has zero credibility!

 

 

Imagine what ''Earth'' would of put in its mouth

[Sirius 1,391]

Typical THL, get an argument about anything even when given the facts people want a punch up.

Maybe get out of the dark ages with your dominance training and start thinking about it, who know what you might achieve with your dogs.

 

Personal i like a bit of dominance but that's only in the bedroom

Facts??? I thought that was just your opinion....bloody arrogant if you think your opinions are facts!

 

And it's called a discussion, but I guess if you're so convinced you must be right then it's not possible to have a discussion.

 

As for the dominance being in the dark ages....it's called nature, and that doesn't change with trends!

 

Maybe facts was to stronger word...lol, but there is no doubt the lads training methods are rubbish and much of the dominance theory of years gone by is proven to be rubbish I am afraid.

There is no need to completely dominate a dog in most cases or be as confrontational as the young lad was.

It is certainly not nature a man dominating a dog, but probably it is made into a dvd too makes some perverts winky stand to attention :laugh:

[rob190364 2,594]

Typical THL, get an argument about anything even when given the facts people want a punch up.

Maybe get out of the dark ages with your dominance training and start thinking about it, who know what you might achieve with your dogs.

 

Personal i like a bit of dominance but that's only in the bedroom

Facts??? I thought that was just your opinion....bloody arrogant if you think your opinions are facts!

 

And it's called a discussion, but I guess if you're so convinced you must be right then it's not possible to have a discussion.

 

As for the dominance being in the dark ages....it's called nature, and that doesn't change with trends!

 

Maybe facts was to stronger word...lol, but there is no doubt the lads training methods are rubbish and much of the dominance theory of years gone by is proven to be rubbish I am afraid.

There is no need to completely dominate a dog in most cases or be as confrontational as the young lad was.

It is certainly not nature a man dominating a dog, but probably it is made into a dvd too makes some perverts winky stand to attention :laugh:

I'm not saying you need to completely dominate them, what I mean is, out of the two of you there needs to be a very clear understand of which one of you is the dominant one.

 

And I don't even want to know about your DVD collection!!!!

[rob190364 2,594]

It's all very well people shouting off on the forum," I would kick the dog" or I would do what ever.

But maybe just think about what the implications are if that was aired on TV to the general public??!! More idiot walking the streets thinking it's OK to kick dogs in the name of training.

 

And that I think is the point.

 

Alot of this dominance theory in dog training is proven to incorrect, almost as bad as Barabara Woodhouse crimes to dogs and dog training.

 

Would you vary your methods for different breeds?

 

A terrier type always benefits from a firm hand and clear boundries, its what they understand best in their small thuggish little brain (imho) where as, as we all know, taking a tough line with a saluki type is mostly a waste of time and counter productive (same for almost any dog with saluki in the mix)

 

Manwork dogs (again jmho) require mostly trained with your mind with the VERY rare instance of firm hand thrown in now and again.

So are your saying that reward type training is a one size fits all, works for everything method?

Just interested in the subject

 

Oh, and as for that JR........In a family environment......it should have been shot!..........if it had of been a big dog, the RSPCA would come round and do it for you

 

Firm handling and good boundaries is not dominance.

You wouldn't train a Saluki in the same way you would train a terrier, but then you wouldn't put your foot in the mouth of either.

I don't hold much in these power phrases so easily banded about by trainers now days. Purely positive? There is no such thing. No to aversive training? Rubbish, saying no to your dog is aversive. Click and treat!! Can you see that working out ferreting? There has to be a reward and a consequence to every decision a dog makes. Positive training works in attempting to let the dog make the reward based decision.

But then this rubbish that dogs want to be top dog? In their pack of dogs maybe, but do you think they see people as part of that pack? I don't think so. They don't think you a dog - for a start you don't greet them by sniffing their arse (hopefully)

Pack theory is based on wild wolf packs and is out dated by about 40 years now and so easy to pick fault at. For starters the wild and domesticated should be a huge clue.

You can train by beating the crap out of a dog. You can train by less punitive methods also. I prefer the latter. Doesn't mean the level of training or behaviour expected is any less.

YES!!!!

[Sirius 1,391]

It's all very well people shouting off on the forum," I would kick the dog" or I would do what ever.

But maybe just think about what the implications are if that was aired on TV to the general public??!! More idiot walking the streets thinking it's OK to kick dogs in the name of training.

 

And that I think is the point.

 

Alot of this dominance theory in dog training is proven to incorrect, almost as bad as Barabara Woodhouse crimes to dogs and dog training.

 

Would you vary your methods for different breeds?

 

A terrier type always benefits from a firm hand and clear boundries, its what they understand best in their small thuggish little brain (imho) where as, as we all know, taking a tough line with a saluki type is mostly a waste of time and counter productive (same for almost any dog with saluki in the mix)

 

Manwork dogs (again jmho) require mostly trained with your mind with the VERY rare instance of firm hand thrown in now and again.

So are your saying that reward type training is a one size fits all, works for everything method?

Just interested in the subject

 

Oh, and as for that JR........In a family environment......it should have been shot!..........if it had of been a big dog, the RSPCA would come round and do it for you

 

I would vary the methods for different cases, and I don't think solely reward based is always the way at all, but in this instance I did.

 

But yes allot of the old dominance theory and pack leader stuff really is out of date. I am not saying it is completely wrong and has no value totally but some of the training methods and quite frankly physical methods are un needed if you work with the animal

 

I think Simoman has posted an excellent post earlier on this thread.

[Simoman 110]

It is certainly not nature a man dominating a dog :laugh:

 

Really? Im not so sure, looks like man has dominated, domesticated and adapted animals for his own purpose since we dropped from the trees and started to wipe our arse

 

I have trained numerous dogs with titbits, toys and games. As a little question, i had a very well bred imported shepherd many years ago, the dog had the highest drive and one of the strongest temperaments of ANY dog i have owned, trained or seen. When this dog was 4 months he was in the kitchen on the floor eating a bone and as i went to pick it up he bared his teeth and growled, i grabbed the dog, gave him a shake and tried the same again, I never ever had a problem with that dog until the day he died, another time a saluki type i bought as an adult gently mouthed me as i got him out the car, it was obvious this was fear linked to travelling, it would of been 100% the wrong thing for me to physically correct that dog, the problem was dealt with and solved with calm repatative training........

 

This isn'#t aimed an anyone particular poster..........

[6pack 60]

YES!!!!

 

I disagree. They see me as a dog as much as they see the cat as one.

 

Where's the question Simo? lol.

 

Fear aggression needs a completely different approach, and the breeds also need to be taken into account.

Handling fear aggression with a heavy hand will only increase the fear and increase the problems.

Very few dogs are born aggressive towards people - they would be no use to us if that were the case - but guarding a valuable resource is natural to any animal including humans.

[rob190364 2,594]

Typical THL, get an argument about anything even when given the facts people want a punch up.

Maybe get out of the dark ages with your dominance training and start thinking about it, who know what you might achieve with your dogs.

 

Personal i like a bit of dominance but that's only in the bedroom

Facts??? I thought that was just your opinion....bloody arrogant if you think your opinions are facts!

 

And it's called a discussion, but I guess if you're so convinced you must be right then it's not possible to have a discussion.

 

As for the dominance being in the dark ages....it's called nature, and that doesn't change with trends!

 

Maybe facts was to stronger word...lol, but there is no doubt the lads training methods are rubbish and much of the dominance theory of years gone by is proven to be rubbish I am afraid.

There is no need to completely dominate a dog in most cases or be as confrontational as the young lad was.

It is certainly not nature a man dominating a dog, but probably it is made into a dvd too makes some perverts winky stand to attention :laugh:

Let me explain what I mean when I said the dominance aspect is natural, I thought it was fairly obvious but maybe not.....the dog being a pack animal needs to be part of a pecking order, it's programmed into their brain. In some most cases the dog will automatically see you as being above them in the pecking order, but if not you need to take action. If you do it properly, whether it be heavy handed tactics for some dogs, or more subtle tactics for others, the dog will become a follower of you, it'll be more responsive to training and you won't have the issues that dominant behaviour brings....the whole process is completely natural and it's something dogs have been doing since they evolved into being dogs, not necessarily having a human dominant over them, but having a member of the pack dominant over them....that pack member in this case should be you, in the wild it'll be the alpha male.

[rob190364 2,594]

YES!!!!

 

I disagree. They see me as a dog as much as they see the cat as one.

 

Where's the question Simo? lol.

 

Fear aggression needs a completely different approach, and the breeds also need to be taken into account.

Handling fear aggression with a heavy hand will only increase the fear and increase the problems.

Very few dogs are born aggressive towards people - they would be no use to us if that were the case - but guarding a valuable resource is natural to any animal including humans.

It's not about them thinking you're a dog FFS....let's agree to disagree shall we!

[6pack 60]

Typical THL, get an argument about anything even when given the facts people want a punch up.

Maybe get out of the dark ages with your dominance training and start thinking about it, who know what you might achieve with your dogs.

 

Personal i like a bit of dominance but that's only in the bedroom

Facts??? I thought that was just your opinion....bloody arrogant if you think your opinions are facts!

 

And it's called a discussion, but I guess if you're so convinced you must be right then it's not possible to have a discussion.

 

As for the dominance being in the dark ages....it's called nature, and that doesn't change with trends!

 

Maybe facts was to stronger word...lol, but there is no doubt the lads training methods are rubbish and much of the dominance theory of years gone by is proven to be rubbish I am afraid.

There is no need to completely dominate a dog in most cases or be as confrontational as the young lad was.

It is certainly not nature a man dominating a dog, but probably it is made into a dvd too makes some perverts winky stand to attention :laugh:

I'm not saying you need to completely dominate them, what I mean is, out of the two of you there needs to be a very clear understand of which one of you is the dominant one.

 

And I don't even want to know about your DVD collection!!!!

 

I would say there needs to be a clear understanding of who is in charge, not dominant.

There is a huge difference between domineering and dominant.

[Simoman 110]

YES!!!!

 

Where's the question Simo? lol.

 

Im tired I guess as was trying to point out, one dog growled, one mouthed me, the growl may be less harsh than the mouthing BUT the growler was given a physical correction and the mouther nothing physical, as a blanket appraoch would of been wrong, diiferent methods for different temperaments

[artic 595]

I trained my dogs the Woodhouse way, can't beat it.....

 

SSSSIT!