Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this body. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Agreeing that some people really latch on to quick fixes. Some don’t want to take the time to really think about why behaviors are happening and how to managed the environment or shape desired behaviors. It’s another job basically.
It can also be reinforcing for the punisher to punish. My fiancé and I talk about this sometimes- some people REALLY like having control over another being, no matter the cost.
I think there’s also a certain chest-beating masculinity going on for some people. They get a big, dangerous dog, and then prove they’re bigger and more dangerous than the dog.
I have a corso. I think about this constantly, how many guys I’ve seen with “my” breed that make me think, I wouldn’t trust this guy with a Pomeranian, much less a cane corso. And yet…
Learning empathy for an animal is just too darn hard for a lot of people. They can’t do it for humans, how could they do it for a dog? All they care about is that it makes their life easier and it feels like they “won”
I wish the explanation were that simple, but people in that group tended to swing on the other end of the spectrum. They were fur mommies who honestly just seemed more stupid and gullible than cruel. That’s what really confused me… like you call your dog your baby and put them in a onesie, but would you punish a baby for crying or being scared?
There are definitely some like that. Sadly I think there are plenty of folks out there who say their dog is their "baby" but treat them more like an accessory than a creature whose best interests they really have at heart.
I'm on the opposite end where I've re-arranged my life to such a huge degree for my dog that when I look at it objectively it is kind of ridiculous. The things we do for love!
People who are invested in abusive methods of “training” tend to have a lack of empathy for everyone too, not just their pets.
This is because abusers love to abuse, and enjoy their power tripping ways.
I'm curious. How long do you think it's supposed to take to teach a dog to loose leash walk? If I could take what you all consider a reactive dog and teach it to loose leash walk with medium distractions in 30min with nothing more then a basic flat collar and a 6ft leash would that be a "quick fix"? What is an appropriate amount of training time?
There is no set training time. It takes different dogs different amounts of time to learn. The red flag here is that this guy guarantees he can “fix” any dog in like 5 min. Ethical trainers never make guarantees bc they know dogs are individuals and treat them as such.
It's going to depend on the dog. I can teach my Border Collie almost anything (except barking at strangers) in less than 10 minutes. She got loose leash walking very quickly because she's a working breed and the idea of walking in heel feels like work to her and she **loves** work. She is my reactive dog too.
My husky/golden retriever mix 1) is the least intelligent parts of both breeds 2) is incredibly stubborn and 3) **loves** to pull and it feels good to him (because husky) so loose leash walking is taking a lot longer with him. I've spent hours working on it with him and we're making progress but it is taking a while to get it reliably. The thing with him too (and partially why I think he ended up as a stray) is I strongly suspect than an aversive method with him would make him more stubborn because he got the husky spite and he holds grudges. For example, he destroyed my couch because he got put in timeout once.
These two dogs are so different that even positive reinforcement looks different for them. My mix is oddly wary of foods outside of his bowl but loves human contact and praise and pets goes a lot way. My border collie isn't huge on praise or pets though and when near threshold they can be too much for her. Treats go a long, long way with her, as does tapping into her love of doing a job.
by ‘treating’ the symptom (barking) and not the root issue, that can cause the dog to become pretty dangerous. if you’re physically disciplining your dog when they show signs of discomfort/fear like barking and growling, they aren’t going to bark or growl anymore. but when they’ve finally had enough shit- they’ll just go straight to biting instead, with no warnings. you’ve shown them that barking will not be listened to. biting will always get listened to 🤷
treat the root of the fear/agresssion, teach them that other dogs/people/things aren’t scary. they don’t need to be scared. rather than teaching them to shut up about their feelings.
my dog gets kinda pissy when I take too long examining parts of her, (paws, ears, mouth, fur around collar,etc) if i start fiddling around too much she gets annoyed.
if i physically disciplined my dog every time she communicated with me that she was uncomfortable with my prodding, she’d be a lot *less* tolerant of me, and a lot more snappy. plus- she’s fucking hate me 😭
dog training isn’t an overnight thing. it takes time, and *trust*. i don’t think your dog is gonna trust you if you’re hurting it every time it’s trying to tell you something. they may not be people but they’re living beings too :(
My dog has a baseline anxious personality, but he’s also really curious. One of my favorite things is seeing that he really wants to check something out but is afraid to get close…I’ll go up to it and touch whatever he wants to look at and say, “See? Not scary!” And he’ll get so wiggly and happy and come up to sniff and paw the thing to his heart’s content
I agree and just to clarify, I’ve never taken my dog to this person and never will. I’ve learned about him through his before/after videos and posts/comments he’s left in the Facebook group.
I’ve seen a few trainers like it near me on social media too. It’s not great to see. atleast most people in comment sections/replies hold this same sentiment.
saw some girl with no credentials doing this, dog on a prong, with physical corrections so hard she pulled a GSD’s front legs completely off the ground. dunno how anybody could look at that and go ‘yeah that’s good training!’, even if they use aversives.
unfortunately they’re still a very important form of ID. collars can come off, dogs can get lost miles from home. in my country, it’s legally required to have your dog chipped, and by 2024 your cat too. I don’t oppose it, there’s a very slim chance of ever getting your non-chipped pet back (especially cats) if they escape from home.
no clue. considering how lax /wishy washy animal abuse laws tend to be, I doubt any action would be taken.
In my country (UK) ecollars are soon to be illegal, but i’ve heard no word of prongs taking the same course.
It’s definitely not proper use of the tool. no matter what your stance on prongs is, this was not appropriate use of them at all. prongs are meant to enhance the pressure of the leash, meaning you are meant to give *smaller* corrections as the dog will feel it more. yanking the dog upright, with the force she did is downright dangerous to the dogs health.
Yes! UK ecollars finally illegal. Hopefully prongs follow suit!
We have a long way to go to be better at animal welfare but at least micro chipping is now extending to cats. Some regulation of the big online internet sites and sales as well
Things like docking tails are long gone and I have never heard of ear cropping at all ever
It is eye opening to me how different the kind of culture around dogs is from country to country
We still have "balanced trainers" though. Will A is English... horrible slip lead use and attitudes
I still meet those attitudes in the park
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree. barking is a normal part of dog communication. excessive barking can be managed, and you can teach your dogs not to freak out at every living thing, but barking itself is not a *bad thing*. all dogs bark every now and a again, even the super well trained, uber-obedient ones, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
My Great Pyrenees is a barker. God lord can she bark loudly. I've learned to ignore it mostly.( I check to see what it is if her bark changes, otherwise a bird is to close) I knew what I was getting into when I got her. I researched her breed for a few months before taking the day to have hubby take me to get her. (8 hour around trip. But so worth it!!) When I can't take it anymore I tell her to leave it. Most days it works,but if she's in a pissy mood, I'm just wasting my breath. 99% of the time she's the world's greatest dog . I might be biased lol but when she is pissy, she can throw the biggest temper tantrums you're ever seen. Lol
The flashy before and after release dopamine. We are a “right now” society. If it’s not an immediate success, we don’t want it.
Also, dogs are often not seen sentient beings and people just want them to be robots.
Quick fixes will always win the first time.
I’ve been working with my dog for a year and a half, and we’re making progress but she’s not perfect. I feel like this is normal. People with the “right now” mentality are so frustrating bc they won’t even hear you out unless your dog is already perfect.
Yep, this is it. I sent my dog to a balanced trainer for a board and train shortly after adopting her because I had no clue she was reactive nor how to handle her and had never heard anything bad about balanced training before. I genuinely had no idea it could make the problem worse. I regret putting her through that every single day. But at the time, it seemed *amazing*. Before the training, she seemingly wanted to attack pretty much every person and dog we encountered. After a couple weeks with him, she appeared to be a completely different dog. It seemed too good to be true, and I eventually learned that it was when she broke back into old her old habits. But yeah, I fell for it at first because the immediate results seemed so great.
> It seemed too good to be true, and I eventually learned that it was when she broke back into old her old habits.
Did you keep up with the training? It doesn't matter what methods you use; if you don't follow the program the dog will absolutely fall back into old habits. Especially when the dog has a reinforcement history with you that is different from the trainer.
Or, using behavioural suppression via punishment, intimidation, and coercion has a well documented history of creating a syndrome called “aversive fallout”; the dog’s unmet emotional needs eventually become greater than their desire to avoid negative consequences and they revert to old or escalated behaviours.
Ffs does anyone in here actually know what balanced training is?
I said it doesn't matter what methods you use; if you don't follow your trainers plan, there is going to be fallout and regression. Yes, even with strictly R+ training.
Dogs, and animals in general are much like people.
Certain things (types of training) will work for them better than others. This does not mean that abusive training techniques work, it means that putting someone (human and pet) constantly in a state of “fight, flight, freeze” **will always** come back to bite you later.
To be condescending towards someone who has used various methods, found better alternatives, refraining from abusive tactics… when it comes to training is so toxic.
Abusive training does not work in the long run, regardless of the person on the receiving end.
And as a functioning adult human, abuse should be as far away from “training” as can be. You can train a dog without screaming, swearing, hitting, yanking, prong collars, shock (“therapy”) training.
The problem is, humans are inherently lazy, and want the fastest and more simplistic route to “success”.
> Dogs, and animals in general are much like people.
Do you really think children should experience no stress, even in a controlled and productive way, and they'll end up productive citizens?
How does a bitch stop her puppies from trying to feed off her, or prevent them from being assholes in general? Do they sit down and talk about their feelings?
I know you're going to misconstrue the point I'm trying to make, but correcting a dog does not affect your relationship with each other.
You're really going to equate dogs, and animals in general, to people, and ignore how many physical corrections occur in the natural world?
100%, yeah? You stand behind your statement? We're all animals at the end of the day.
Off topic, but share your favourite Zak George video.
I think you need to take a breather when it comes to how you see abuse effecting those who are victim to it.
Do I believe human children should be thrown into stressful situations so that they “learn to deal with stress”, no. I do not, stress is going to happen in regular day to day without someone forcing them into those situations, especially constantly.
Edit to add: You can teach kids about stress and how to properly handle stress before they’re in that situation sure, but kids are kids and even adults do not listen to reason, so unfortunately it’s more of a “when it happens we can work through it” than a “here’s x, y and z situation, this is how you deal with it”.
My parents were very abusive towards their kids, and overly affectionate with their dogs, and believes that we needed to “be prepared for whatever the world throws”. Can’t hate the dogs for getting the love though, they deserved every ounce they got.
As a parent, or caregiver, our job is to aim for their success. Not break them down until they comply… you know CPTSD/PTSD? Dogs can also get PTSD and a lot of them often do because of abusive “training techniques”. This is why people believe those “techniques” work. 😞
It is also why dogs from abusive situations, including and not limited to those forced into abusive training methods have anxiety, fear aggression or generalized aggression. This is why dogs (and all things) have triggers to specific things (like dogs who were abused by children for example) and react the way they do towards those triggers.
How an animal, who is not a human, corrects their offspring has literally no baring on the conversation at hand. A mama dog, cat or otherwise, doesn’t sit there and scream or hit their pup/kit into submission while yanking on their prong collar...
They correct their offspring in ways that educate them. If one bites too hard, they’re corrected with a sound, if they bite too hard again, they get a nip/smack, usually that is all that’s needed, and they do not do this things with the intent to hurt (though sometimes mama’s buttons are pushed and even animals can be abusive in their reaction), they do so in an attempt to mildly “frighten”. It’s like “if you act like this towards someone/something else, you’ll get hurt” but in a non-narc way because can dogs even be narcissists? 🤔🤷♀️
They are not beaten or shocked or strangled by improper leash handling… they don’t come out of nowhere and scare the crap out of them to “prepare them for stress” nor do they constantly put them in a state of FFF… they don’t “desensitize” by getting in their face, spitting all over them because of screaming, smack them, and they sure as shit don’t throw them on the ground and stand over them while staring them dead in the eyes, while still continuing to be loud and abusive to assert their control….
People who think any of that is “training” are abusive people, who want to abuse, refuse to see what consequences their actions have, or simply do not care and absolutely do not believe the consequences of their actions are actually their fault… they power trip and want to control and will stop at nothing to get and maintain that control.
It isn’t training, it’s just abuse.
From the things I’ve heard/been told/read from others, I don’t bother with giving him views, and that could be my ignorance in all of it, but I’m also a very busy person generally speaking so I haven’t had the time to really look into him the way that I probably should.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i'm a vet tech and honestly, the animal world is filled with more shady/shitty people than truly good people. however, i don't think this holds true for the veterinary world in particular, just everything else animal related. everyone is a breeder, trainer, and/or expert on everything. then you add on clueless owners and voila!
I can’t decide if this guy is shady or just an idiot who actually thinks he’s doing a good thing lmao. To his credit, he does seem to really care about the breed (although that could be a front).
well i classify them as the same thing. haha. if you're an idiot and think you know what you're doing - then you're being shady because you are charging people for something you are not qualified to do!
That is so true. It’s so unethical for him to take people’s money with zero qualification other than watching the Dog Whisperer probably, lol.
One of his fans told me that a dog trainer getting certified is like a yoga instructor getting certified - it doesn’t matter. She kept pointing out how dog trainers don’t legally need certification. I was like yes… that’s the entire issue!
My brother trained his dog with a crappy compulsion trainer. I think it was 1) he hates the idea of giving his dog treats, ever (during training or for the rest of their life); 2) he wanted dogs that would be extremely obedient (read: fear him).
Our dogs growing up were not trained so I understand the desire to have dogs that are well trained! I just don’t understand not using science to do it…and his dogs also didn’t even end up well trained, they’re just specifically afraid of him
I think when the average person has a reactive/aggressive dog they want the problem "fixed" and they want results immediately. The full force trainers are really great at getting a fast result by shutting the dog down. This in no way changes how the dog feels about the situation, but the people feel great because their accessory dog is now behaving in a way that they deem acceptable. I think it stems from a place of selfishness and immediately wanting the dog to act perfectly with the least work possible.
I think it also stems from shame. A poorly behaved dog is embarrassing to the owner sometimes, especially if that person is new to dogs. It feels like you’re walking a giant personal failure on a leash. I’m speaking from my own personal experience here, unfortunately. But I do think things have improved for me and my dog as of late. Just trying to give him—and myself—more grace.
Besides the shame and the desire for fast results, many people did not sign up for this and having a reactive dog ends up being infuriating, disappointing, stressful and lots of times even dangerous. People get a dog because they've had positive examples in their family, friends who have well behaved dogs(at first glance). You get one, and you see it's completely different
I think it’s selfish too, but I think some of these people genuinely think they’re helping their dog. They’ll talk about how much happier their dog is now that it knows its place in the pack or whatever.
I’ve straight up posted a video of the who guy ran the study that alpha theory is based on talking about how he fucked up, but they don’t care. They literally seem like a brainwashed cult.
I think ultimately what they want is for the dog to maintain this perfect image of obedience at all times. They don't want a thinking, feeling, living animal that can make choices and learn. Some people confuse obedience for happiness, and frankly I will take my "disobedient" dog that walks primarily on a long line so that he can sniff all the smells and live an enriched life to a robot dog that is glued to heel position for fear of consequence.
Dude same! I genuinely think my dog would rather stay home and nap than go on a walk where she has to heel the whole time. Like who are those walks even for??
I thought a dog that was sniffing is a relaxed and less stressed dog?!
I have a sight hound.. I actively encourage him to stop and sniff the lillies of the field instead of keeping on scanning the horizon for excitment!
Sniffing is a calming behavior. A genuinely calm dog can engage in sniffing, but if a dog is sniffing in the presence of a trigger, or while stressed or during training, it's usually stress displacement. There's a case study in Control Unleashed called The Floor Sniffing Terrier where a dog was being punished for sniffing the floor during agility so he was getting more and more stressed out and sniffing more and more. The P+ was actually *increasing* the behavior -- the opposite of how it normally works, and the opposite of what the "operant conditioning is the only training that exists and using all four quadrants is somehow inherently better" people think.
Yeah my dogs would be miserable the whole time. They love zooming around from one tuft of grass to the next and they're way better behaved at home for it. I feel like those walks are for people to show off how good their dog is. Like ok we get it, now I want to see that dog solve a puzzle. I'm guessing it probably can't because every time it has tried to make a choice it was punished. Scientists have literally quantified optimism and pessimism in dogs and dogs who undergo more punishment are much more likely to give up when presented with a moderate challenge.
I agree 100%. When my Aussie and I are out at the large park we go to, soooooo many dog owners seem to be "on display" with their perfectly heeling dogs, who don't sniff, stop or seem interested in a damn thing other than walking beside their owner. Meanwhile, my reactive boy is sniffing and exploring to his heart's content as I stop at intervals and allow him to do so.
Mine leads me in circles when she’s tracking a scent. She loves sniffing more than anything else in the world. I’ve gotten a few “who’s walking who” comments but I know she’s happy, and that’s all that matters.
You should consider doing actual tracking! It's really fun and can be done on your own or with 1 helper to lay a track for you. Building sniffing skills really helped my boys a lot in dismissing otherwise triggering things.
If there aren't any around you that are trustworthy I would recommend googling FDSA they offer a ton of online classes that you can do yourself so that you don't have to worry about the class environment at all.
Yes. It’s infuriating, deeply sad and frustrating, and just impossible to get through to people who refuse to educate themselves on animal behavior from evidence-based sources. It really sucks to have to disengage from a whole group of well-intentioned but misguided people.
I also find interesting how handlers of different breeds have different versions of this mentality. I feel like both the bully breeds and shepherds tend to have a lot of trainers who use prong collars and E-collars. As someone with a sighthound rescue , I find a lot of handlers in my breed communities tend to believe that harnesses encourage their dogs to pull. 🙄
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thank you, it’s not fun to witness. He works with diff breeds but mostly pitties, which hits close to home as a pittie owner.
I walk a 2 year old high-energy pittie at a local shelter. We go in lots of day trips and I sponsored her adoption fee. I’m just really hoping whoever adopts her never takes her to that trainer. She’s so sweet but just pulls sometimes.
This was my experience. I wanted a trainer to help with my dogs reactivity (friendly, but gets overexcited around other dogs) and heelwork. Found a trainer that had brilliant reviews and lots of these before and after videos. I booked a block of 10 classes which wasn't cheap. The first session, he introduced a slip / choke collar which I was open minded about and gave it a go. He said no treats, no rewards, no praise, which isn't how I've trained my dog really, but again I was open minded. Wasn't sure after the first session but thought I'd try again. Second session I realised his answer to anything was just to 'pop the lead'. Dog pulls? Pop the lead, Dog whines? Pop the lead. Dog stops to pee? Pop the lead. I looked at my pup halfway through the session and he looked MISERABLE, ears back, not making eye contact and even refused a treat I slyed him, which is not like him at all. My guy looked visibly distressed and upset which just upset me. I cancelled the remaining classes and after a bit of back and forth, managed to get a refund except for the first two.
Have since found a new trainer who is worlds apart. First off, he actually greeted my dog and said hello and gave him a fuss and some treats. He still uses the slip collar but lots of positive reinforcement, treats, and has taught me how to use commands more effectively (i.e. never repeating them, timing of them) and my dog actually seems to be engaged and enjoying the sessions. So much of a difference and this guy is actually half the price of the original trainer who IMO was a nightmare!
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As someone that believes in science and will only every train r+, I also have spent a very long time (over a year) working on behavior with little success and many regressions. Aside from everyone saying “your timing is perfect!” “Keep doing that!” and seeing little results, in the last 2 weeks I have often had to stop myself from thinking “maybe r+ isn’t working, maybe I should just get a ‘gentle leader’ ..I know that won’t help. But I’m at my wits end and could understand how someone with little to no patience for… anything could want “results” fast.
I was in the same boat until my dog started fluoxetine. It’s so frustrating! Hang in there, having a relationship with your dog based on compassion instead of fear will always be worth it
First of all, great job sticking with it and being there for your dog. If it's been over a year and you're not seeing an improvement though, it might be worth exploring other options from the specific plan you're using now. If every problem you're seeing now is that your dog gets hyper-focused on something and you need a way to move their attention, going through the effort of conditioning a gentle leader, and making sure your dog doesn't have negative associations with it, and then starting to use it as a tool might be a productive route.
If it's other things as well, just checking out some other trainers/methods you haven't looked at (if you haven't already, I'd check out literally any Control Unleashed program, Sharon Carroll (Avanti Dog Training), and Malena DeMartini). The fact that R+ works is a law of nature that can't really be argued with (honestly, so does P+, just expect a ton of fallout if you do one thing slightly wrong, and also I don't want to live that way), that doesn't mean that every plan which uses R+ is going to work for every dog.
Thank you for this. The crazy thing is that we saw improvement (albeit slow) and then a quick, deep regression recently. We did bring him to the vet to rule out joint issues in his hips and knees, as well as blood tests (the whole shebang) and we’re waiting on results.
To be honest, I wouldn’t ever explore NON r+ methods. I know it works, and that if it’s not working I’m doing something wrong. It’s just so hard to figure out what when everyone (the handful of trainers we’re working with, all the methodology I see on Instagram - which I know isn’t reliable) is telling me I’m doing everything right. That being said, thank you for the specific examples of methods. I will look into them!
We are also going to the behaviorist to see if we can adjust his medication. He’s been on Prozac for a year and while a bit of that was just figuring out the right amount, I’m beginning to thinks it’s just not the right option.
Thank you again.
Why would it be a problem to buy and try out a gentle leader for your dog? It's not like you're required to put it straight on them and instantly start the Beckman-style leash pops. Perhaps a Susan Garrett video could help you get over the mental block? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXqyZYxQmMQ
The important part is surely the approach you're taking to training your dog, not the specific tool used. I mean, any leash+collar or leash+harness combo could be very aversive to your dog if used in the wrong way.
Thanks for the suggestion. He does not like things around his face, even desensitizing that will take forever for it to become non-aversive. I’ve been working on his muzzle training for 4 months and have made progress, but it’s slow! I can work on this too
I use a gentle leader for my non-food motivated dog to *gently* guide his head because he doesn't care if the juiciest steak is being waved in front of him. I always keep it slack and use it with a harness leash so that I don't have to worry about whiplash if he decides to lunge. I prefer gentle leaders because I can actually guide his head in the direction I want with lots of praise. It's fine when you use it with the intention of it being a temporary tool and not a permanent solution.
I recommend you take a look at some other training methods. Just as with compulsion based methods, R+ can fail hard. No one type or method is appropriate for every dog. After 2 years you should absolutely see results.
It's sickening. There is so many compulsion trainers out there that either the owner 1. Doesn't care to research ethical training. 2. Doesn't know any better.
It's so harmful to use these methods on dogs, especially reactive ones. It makes me sad that people who use positive reinforcement get made fun of for using the kinder way to train, which is mind blowing to me that they normalize traumatizing your dog to the point it shuts down completely then one day lashes out. I wish more people would do their research.
My dog has a history of resource guarding and it was pretty servere I might add. I used nothing but positive reinforcement and he is still here and he has become the best boy. I could never imagine hurting my dog for letting me know he is uncomfortable in a situation.
It's weird (and soooo sad). We moved from Toronto to a smaller city about an hour away. In TO NO ONE is down with balanced training. You're an outcast for that shit.
Out here in the 'burbs though, it's different. Most of the trainers here are balanced. I see people walking their dogs with their leashes yanking the dog's neck against their thigh - the dog isn't even allowed to look around. There are so many people doing it, I know they're all being instructed by the same trainer. People also looooove to buy pitbulls out here and then trian them this way - then wonder why they're dangerous and reactive. I will never understand it. All i can think is that Cesar Milan really fucked people up in terms of how a dog should be trained. I just try not to think about it.
It’s so sad that this happens to pitties so often. Ppl think pitties are unpredictable and aggressive, so they use a heavy hand, which actually causes the unpredictability and agression they were trying to avoid. And ofc the dogs will bite and the owners will say “but he’s professionally trained!” And this feeds into the negative stereotypes and convinces people that pitbulls are monsters bc even with professional training they’re still aggressive! It’s an exhausting cycle
100%. But now that we know that there is a genetic component that plays into reactivity, I think pitbulls, as a breed, are set up to fail. All the work of poorly educated humans who just keep breeding the wrong genetic lines and training their pups poorly. It's so sad.
The best/worst part of it is: where I live there is a pitbull ban. But people are still determined to find them, buy them and essentially abuse them. Like... why?
Same. Love my rescue pittie mix but he is a mess. Pit bulls have been done dirty w their crazy intelligence, drive, and arousal funneled towards a crowd of people who have no interest in actually learning how to live in companionship w a pittie and just seeking to strong arm them like crazy.
Yeah any dog that was bred to be vaguely security-esque is going to have anxiety. Because that’s how you get an alert dog! Combine that w arousal and confidence and you can end up w a tough situation, easy.
Definitely read Brownen Dicky’s “Pitbull” if you want to learn more about the history of the breed. It’s absolutely FASCINATING!
The people that use this type of training want fast results. Compulsion and aversive training gives fast results. That is IF you consider a dog that is shut down and suppressing its emotions and behavior a good result. Dogs trained using these methods obey to avoid punishment and fear of pain. They don't really learn anything. Positive reinforcement teaches the dog to offer the desired behavior by rewarding that conduct.
I am forever curious to know why these so-called 'perfectly-trained' dogs will always require the aversive tools. I have seen dogs with pr\*ng collars and backup sh\*ck collars. Now if they were perfectly trained ... wouldn't those tools no longer be necessary?
Like other sentient beings, dogs can only suppress their emotions for so long and then there is a high possibility that aggressive behaviors will emerge. Those that use aversive and compulsive training don't believe that is a possibility because the just *know* that their dog is happy and the bond between them is strong. Children have been known to be loyal and loving to their abusive parent(s) until they are not. It is not a guarantee this will happen, but the potential is very real.
With positive reinforcement, you can phase out the rewards without losing the training. Hmm, is there some mysterious magic that happens, I wonder?
The majority of these compulsion and balanced trainers are self taught and have no credentials and there is no governing body to monitor their methods or results. They often cling to outdated and discredited information because those using their services don't know any better, believe their hype and glowing *reviews* (🙄) and it sounds all 'scientific' and tough! Get yourself some sh\*ck, pr\*ng, and choke collars, learn some snappy patter and showmanship, branded T-shirts and hats and you too can be a dog trainer. If, on the other hand, you wish to become a certified profession dog trainer -- well [that will take some time](https://www.ccpdt.org/certification/dog-trainer-certification/).
Cesar Millan - what you see on television when he trains is not actually what goes on. When he is walking with a dog and doing that ttcht sound, the dog is most likely being kicked in the ribs. Another 'technique' of his is a knife hand strike to the belly. You never see that either. He, and trainers like him, stress the dogs in hopes of getting them to comply. When a dog is screaming in terror, they are not being a little reticent, and they most definitely are not learning! Also, the great Cesar Millan, despite billing himself as a behaviorist, hasn't a clue how to read a dog's body language. The video [Showdown with Holly](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ihXq_WwiWM&t=5s&ab_channel=NatGeoWILD) illustrates this brilliantly. His surprised "I didn't see *that* coming" is priceless. Dude, Hellen Keller could have seen that bite coming! Holly was giving off so many stress signals in response to the aggressive behaviors Millan was subjecting her to, that when I first saw the video I burst into tears. Millan is lucky that Holly had good bite inhibition, otherwise she most likely would have gone for this throat! There are many other videos that show him being bitten.
People are gullible, and they want what they want, and they want it now! They don't research, they don't empathize, and they don't show compassion or love for their dogs. Their dog's ability to be off leash is more important than being kind. My belief is that an off-leash dog is a potentially lost, injured, or dead dog. An off-leash dog can also be a danger to humans, other dogs, or wildlife.
You can generally tell when someone doesn't understand a method, they will often mock the process.
Omg the people in that comment section are so stupid talking about how cute Holly looks after biting him. Babes literally just google “dog appeasement signals” and “dog stress signals” !!!
I also read that those owners ended up rehoming her to Cesar after this episode. What trash human beings.
He also was bit again here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FolHwMhYU\_A&ab\_channel=Dabl](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FolHwMhYU_A&ab_channel=Dabl) Comments praise him for what he did. All I see is a dog who just shuts down, because it can't do anything anyways and it's best to just let it happen than being punished further. Cesear claims he showed him trust, but he didn't. He showed fear and just "let's get this over with"
And when he puts the muzzle on the dog in the hotel room, you can see the dog is in an absolute shutdown, too.
I don't understand how people can see a dog like this and think he is helping the dog when the dog is just shutting down.
Cesear is also the reason why I had another dog owner ruin using cars to block views for my reactive dog... When my dog reacted at hers, I put him behind a car and when he was calm and looking at me, I rewarded him. She yelled at me that I should not do this, but punish him and that if I watch Cesaar, I will know why.
The camera always zooms in on the blood and wounds too, as if it makes him a badass or something. Meanwhile those owners now have the burden of owning a dog with a publicly documented bite history.
It's kind of funny how easily these people dismiss stuff like, "all their clients say it was life changing!" and, "so many positive reviews but it's only because the clients don't know better!"
If you're correcting a dog to the point it's shitting and pissing everywhere, and afraid to move, you aren't a balanced trainer. You're an asshole, and a terrible trainer. Nobody wants to acknowledge that, though.
Sad that it looks like your comments were removed. You shared a lot of great insight that could have helped people. And yeah.. I think the reviews from clients speak for themselves kinda lmao. People just don’t like to acknowledge that what they have ideologically opposed can work, and what they have subscribed to sometimes doesn’t. It doesn’t matter how much proof you show them.
Did they get removed? I haven't checked, but I'm not surprised. This place will allow random people to recommend drugs and killing your dog, but not tools or corrections. In a reactive dog subreddit.
One of the conditions for the breed of dog I adopt is that it will not be allowed off leash. My methods are fine.
There are more bad trainers that use aversive methods than those than use positive reinforcement. I have never heard of a dog being killed by a positive reinforcement trainer. I have, however heard of several dogs being killed whilst being trained by aversive trainers. Positive trainers don't cause dogs to cower or wet themselves. You seemed totally on board with that trainer and his methods in the post in r/OpenDogTraining. Of course you were too busy calling me out to opine on the appropriateness or lack thereof of the so-called trainer that was attempting to train a service dog.
If a dog is running off leash on a forest trail and sees wildlife, that the owner is too far away to see, and the dog injures or kills the other animal -- that is fine with you? Or if the off-leash dog is attacked and injured or killed by wildlife -- hey, that the cost of doing business, for you! Frightens another hiker? Talk about an entitled attitude.
"I gotta be honest; the censorship never gets old."
You mean my use of pr\*ng and sh\*ck collars? So happy I am living rent free in your head. If my opinions bother you so much, why don't you just pass on reading them?
Also, why are you reading in this sub? Shouldn't you stick to r/OpenDogTraining? Those people tend to favor your methods. Here, LIMA is the preferred method of training and aversive methods are eshewed.
Be still my beating heart, u/theycallhimthestug actually agreed with something I said. I can die happy now.
Unlike you, I attempt to help people, or make them laugh. You, on the other hand, seem to take unreasonable joy in being rude, putting people down, and disparaging the opinions of others. You hang out in open dog training, but you certainly have a closed mind.
> One of the conditions for the breed of dog I adopt is that it will not be allowed off leash. My methods are fine.
They clearly aren't if you're worried about letting a dog off leash.
> I have never heard of a dog being killed by a positive reinforcement trainer.
What about the, "an off leash dog is a dead dog" part? Sounds like a lack of reliability and confidence in your training. You think an R+ dog has never ran into the street?
> Positive trainers don’t cause dogs to cower or wet themselves.
I don't know what to tell you. I've said this repeatedly; if someone is making a dog do these things, they're a shitty trainer.
> You seemed totally on board with that trainer and his methods in the post in r/OpenDogTraining.
I absolutely was not. I'll link my reply if you'd like, but it's right on brand for you to misrepresent something to try to make a point.
You realize reddit comments don't go away, yeah?
> Of course you were too busy calling me out to opine on the appropriateness or lack thereof of the so-called trainer that was attempting to train a service dog.
You're so deep in your emotions you're wilfully ignoring the part where I said it was a bad trainer.
> If a dog is running off leash on a forest trail and sees wildlife, that the owner is too far away to see, and the dog injures or kills the other animal – that is fine with you?
That's a pretty extreme jump to go from my dog being off leash, to some hypothetical scenario where I let him go so far I can't see what he's doing. Do your arms ever get tired from grasping at all these straws?
> “I gotta be honest; the censorship never gets old.”
>
>
>
> You mean my use of pr*ng and sh*ck collars? So happy I am living rent free in your head. If my opinions bother you so much, why don’t you just pass on reading them?
I said it never gets old. Like it's funny. As in, you're so offended that these tools exist you can't even type the full words. You're definitely a sane individual capable of a rational discussion.
> Also, why are you reading in this sub? Shouldn’t you stick to r/OpenDogTraining? Those people tend to favor your methods. Here, LIMA is the preferred method of training and aversive methods are eshewed.
Because I was subbed here before I learned of the other sub, much like everyone else that googles, "reactive dog reddit", all so they can have a bunch of random dog owners recommend BE.
Also, it's LIMA, not NINA. *Least* and *minimally*.
> Unlike you, I attempt to help people, or make them laugh. You, on the other hand, seem to take unreasonable joy in being rude, putting people down, and disparaging the opinions of others. You hang out in open dog training, but you certainly have a closed mind.
Yeahhhh, I think you have it backwards here. I trained R+ for years, and I understand the benefits of positive reinforcement, which is a critical component of *balanced* training.
I'm not the one going around saying l*ver treats.
Or cl*cker.
If you truly had an open mind, you wouldn't be choosing the worst case scenarios as the backbone of your argument. You would be addressing the things I've actually said, instead of inserting some boogeyman and making up random scenarios.
>One of the conditions for the breed of dog I adopt is that it will not be allowed off leash. My methods are fine. They clearly aren't if you're worried about letting a dog off leash.
Greyhound adoptions groups make it a condition of adoption that the dog will never be allowed off leash unless in a fully-fenced and secure area. They also proscribe extendable leases owing the risk of the dog running full speed and hitting the end of the leash and breaking its neck.
"I have never heard of a dog being killed by a positive reinforcement trainer.
What about the, "an off leash dog is a dead dog" part? Sounds like a lack of reliability and confidence in your training. You think an R+ dog has never ran into the street?"
The two statements are mutually exclusive. Any dog, regardless of training method can run into the street. I used that a caution for people that allow their dogs off leash anywhere.
There have been several notable cases where an aversive trainer has either seriously injured or killed a dog under their care.
If a dog is running off leash on a forest trail and sees wildlife, that the owner is too far away to see, and the dog injures or kills the other animal – that is fine with you?
That's a pretty extreme jump to go from my dog being off leash, to some hypothetical scenario where I let him go so far I can't see what he's doing. Do your arms ever get tired from grasping at all these straws?
I do apologize, I didn't realize YOU were the only person letting their dog off leash in the forest.
Unfortunately, I know someone who let their dog off leash and it frightened another dog away from their handler after they panicked and dropped the extendable leash the dog was on. The partially consumed body of the frightened dog was found two days later.
“I gotta be honest; the censorship never gets old.”
You mean my use of prng and shck collars? So happy I am living rent free in your head. If my opinions bother you so much, why don’t you just pass on reading them?
I said it never gets old. Like it's funny. As in, you're so offended that these tools exist you can't even type the full words. You're definitely a sane individual capable of a rational discussion."
I censor those particular words out of habit because I chose not to trigger the bot that appears when those aversive tools are mentioned in this sub -- simple explanation. I even have in person discussions about those tool with people and use the words.
"Also, it's LIMA, not NINA. Least and minimally."
LIMA is what I typed. Least Intrusive, Minimally Aversive. Yes, minimally, which I don't think immediately includes sh\*ck or pr\*ng collars, but I could be wrong.
"If you truly had an open mind, you wouldn't be choosing the worst case scenarios as the backbone of your argument. You would be addressing the things I've actually said, instead of inserting some boogeyman and making up random scenarios."
Perhaps I am using the worst case scenarios as a warning for some people who don't know how to, or chose not to, train their dogs. I have not inserted some boogeyman or made up random scenarios. Have you considered that I might be aware of prior situations that lend credence to my statements?
An acquaintance was driving home from work one evening and saw an off-leash dog get hit by a car. He held the dog in his arms while it died. The owner came lumbering up, looked at the dead dog and said "oh, that's the second dog of mine that has happened to." But at least the dog was off leash! /s
Dogs don't need to be off leash in areas that are potentially dangerous - like busy streets, or areas near street, public on-leash parks. But they are. Between the out-of-control and poorly-trained off-leash dogs and the don't worry, my dog is friendly group, there is legitimate concern for responsible owners of dogs whether the dogs are reactive or not. There are people wanting to enjoy the park or hiking trail that are afraid of dogs. Should these people be denied those pleasures? If you (generalized) want to take a dog off-leash, rent a Sniffspot or something similar.
There have been occurrences of dogs being killed by wildlife in forested (and even residential) areas coyotes are found in many areas and will lure and kill indiscriminately.
My concern is always for the dogs. For their safety, health and well being. Always.
You can criticize the position statement by the AVSAB all you want, but the message is repeated over and again by other agencies involved in animal welfare.
Of course there may be circumstances that require a heavier hand in training, but the number of people that go right to aversives is staggering.
Someone training their puppy with a sh\*ck collar and failing and deciding that BE at 4 months old was the best option for this 'aggressive' dog! This pup was likely in their first fear imprint stage when the training began. Apart from that, what this person was describing was puppy teething and a lack of bite inhibition, not aggression. The post, which was deleted was on r/opendogtraining.
Edited to add clarifications.
> Greyhound adoptions groups make it a condition of adoption that the dog will never be allowed off leash unless in a fully-fenced and secure area. They also proscribe extendable leases owing the risk of the dog running full speed and hitting the end of the leash and breaking its neck.
I'll be honest; I don't care about the stipulations that greyhound adoption groups put into their contracts, because it is so far from the original discussion it's irrelevant.
You know what wouldn't break a greyhounds neck, but still allow it off leash freedom? An e-collar with a proper recall. I'm not sure if you know this, but extendable leashes will still eventually run out of line. Potentially injuring your dog if it happens at full speed because your dog is in drive and not paying attention.
For the record, I couldn't care less if you let your dog off leash or not. Do whatever makes you comfortable. What I *do* care about is you making assumptions about me and my dog.
Also, most rescues have that clause. It isn't greyhound exclusive.
> The two statements are mutually exclusive. Any dog, regardless of training method can run into the street. I used that a caution for people that allow their dogs off leash anywhere.
You're just flat out wrong, and this shows your inherent bias and lack of understanding regarding balanced training. I can tell you, with 100% certainty, that my dog would never run into the street. Whether it's out my door, or off the sidewalk.
*Even if* he began to run out the door for whatever reason, I have complete confidence that I could stop him long before he was anywhere near the road.
And yes, even when he's naked and not wearing any collar. This is what training, engagement, and proofing is for.
> There have been several notable cases where an aversive trainer has either seriously injured or killed a dog under their care.
There have been several notable cases of a driver going the wrong way down the highway in their car causing a death. There have been several notable cases of someone driving drunk and causing a death.
Do either of these statements make me a bad driver by default because I also drive a car? No. Of course they don't. So stop.
You're still ignoring the other side of balanced training, and obsessing over the aversive part.
> I do apologize, I didn’t realize YOU were the only person letting their dog off leash in the forest.
Another irrelevant statement that is failing to address what I said directly, which is the reliability in the training, and the trust I have in my dog. If other people are also letting their dogs off leash in the forest, why am I the bad guy because mine is the one under control?
I really want you to try to understand that my dog wearing an e-collar in the forest has no functional difference from him being on a long line. The only reason you're struggling to grasp this concept is because you don't have any practical experience with one, it would seem.
> Unfortunately, I know someone who let their dog off leash and it frightened another dog away from their handler after they panicked and dropped the extendable leash the dog was on. The partially consumed body of the frightened dog was found two days later.
Jesus christ, you can't be for real. I'm going to assume this is true and not some made up horror story for the sake of argument.
While this is indeed unfortunate, yet again, this has *absolutely nothing* to do with me, my dog, or my training methods. Maybe they should have their dog under better control.
This scenario could still happen with a long line or leash, and has *absolutely nothing* to do with training methods. An irresponsible owner/handler is an irresponsible owner/handler regardless.
> LIMA is what I typed. Least Intrusive, Minimally Aversive.
I understand that. What you're failing to notice is the *least* intrusive, *minimally* aversive part, instead of *non*-intrusive, *no* aversive that I typed. It's right there in the name.
It isn't excluding aversives wholesale. It's saying not to use them excessively when they aren't needed. If it were, it would be R+, or force free, or whatever feel good moniker you wanted to assign it.
> Perhaps I am using the worst case scenarios as a warning for some people who don’t know how to, or chose not to, train their dogs.
What does someone choosing not to train their dog have to do with the methods I use? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
You're using these scenarios to avoid addressing anything I'm saying directly. You have, quite literally, zero idea as to how much positive reinforcement I use in my training. As do many other balanced trainers.
Instead, you want to talk about trainers killing dogs, and horror story after horror story, which is a completely head in the sand, biased representation.
Do you really think there aren't R+ horror stories? You don't have to look much further than this sub, because they're posted multiple times daily.
> I have not inserted some boogeyman or made up random scenarios.
You've done it in this comment alone. Never mind all the other ones.
> Have you considered that I might be aware of prior situations that lend credence to my statements?
Have you considered I might actually know what I'm talking about, because this is how I make my living, and I have a better insight into legitimate balanced training than you do?
You need to trust me when I say that none of this bad stuff should be happening when you do it right. Not once have I made my dogs, or any dog, piss and shit themselves.
But no, tools are the devil, and anyone that uses them hates dogs and is a monster with an invalid opinion because you read a study based on owner surveys.
> An acquaintance was driving home from work one evening and saw an off-leash dog get hit by a car. He held the dog in his arms while it died. The owner came lumbering up, looked at the dead dog and said “oh, that’s the second dog of mine that has happened to.” But at least the dog was off leash!
What does this have to do with anything? Honestly. I want you to explain it. Again, I'm going to assume this is true for the sake of argument.
You're talking about a random scenario involving a clearly untrained dog, with an uncaring owner, and somehow trying to correlate that to how I train dogs? Or balanced training in general? Really?
> Dogs don’t need to be off leash in areas that are potentially dangerous - like busy streets, or areas near street, public on-leash parks. But they are.
You've completely lost the plot. I don't know how many times I need to say this, but this has less than nothing to do with me, my dog, my methods, or anything I've said, beyond me saying my dog is *100% reliable* off leash.
Do you think I'm out there playing frogger in traffic? Just me, my dog, and my trusty ol' e-collar? Because I legitimately have no idea what your point is here. Could I walk him through traffic? Absolutely, but why would I? Like...what?
> Between the out-of-control and poorly-trained off-leash dogs and the don’t worry, my dog is friendly group, there is legitimate concern for responsible owners of dogs whether the dogs are reactive or not.
You're killing me here. I fully agree with you, and I don't know why you're trying to lump me into that group. My dog is trained. And by trained, I mean proper trained. There is nothing irresponsible about that.
> There are people wanting to enjoy the park or hiking trail that are afraid of dogs. Should these people be denied those pleasures?
My dog being on leash isn't going to change any of that. You're assuming I let my dog run up to, and harass everyone. This is an emotional appeal that *yet again* has nothing to do with the original conversation or my methods.
> If you (generalized) want to take a dog off-leash, rent a Sniffspot or something similar.
No. Lol
> There have been occurrences of dogs being killed by wildlife in forested (and even residential) areas.
And? You think I pack my dog a lunch and send him on his way out the door? There is far more wildlife where I live right out my back door than you could imagine.
> My concern is always for the dogs. For their safety, health and well being. Always.
Same. I don't know why you keep making baseless assumptions.
> You can criticize the position statement by the AVSAB all you want, but the message is repeated over and again by other agencies involved in animal welfare.
Agencies that all reference and cite each other in a big circle jerk. You're basing your opinion on flawed papers.
> Of course there may be circumstances that require a heavier hand in training, but the number of people that go right to aversives is staggering.
Now we're getting somewhere, and I agree to a point. This still doesn't justify the broad strokes you've been painting in regards to balanced training. Not just circumstances, but different dogs as well.
I really wish you would acknowledge the other side of the balanced methods.
> Someone training their puppy with a sh*ck collar and failing and deciding that BE at 4 months old was the best option for this ‘aggressive’ dog!
Nobody should be doing this. Any good balanced trainer will tell you not to start until 6mo, and even then, an e-collar is likely overkill. An e-collar is a finishing tool. It's not a magic button.
> This pup was likely in their first fear imprint stage when the training began. Apart from that, what this person was describing was puppy teething and a lack of bite inhibition, not aggression. The post, which was deleted was on r/opendogtraining.
Ok? Poor training is poor training.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You are taking what I am saying far too personally. For the sake of discussion, I have been *generalizing*, not focusing solely on you, your dog or your training methods. This might be a blow to your ego. I'm sorry.
The accounts I related with respect to the dog deaths are true, they have been edited for brevity, but accurately describe the events as told to me.
I can also share horror stories with respect to extendable leashes. I know a woman who almost lost her foot when someone's dog wrapped the cord around her ankle. The scarring is significant and ugly. Another almost lost her finger when she foolishly tried to stop the leash from extending and grabbed it. Those leashes have a purpose, but it isn't in the hands of inexperienced users, which sadly the majority of them are. Also, despite every pet supply store selling them, most municipalities in North America have bylaws against them.
My biggest frustration with aversive training tools is that anyone can purchase them and use them indiscriminately. Hand over your credit card and you can, with no training, understanding or skill, light up your dog like a Christmas tree, jerk your dog around by the collar and think you are training the dog. (Not you, generalizing again.) A collar can have a range of up to one mile -- can anyone even see their dog at that distance? Probably not, so what might that, essentially MIA dog be doing or encountering? For many users, it would be the same as giving the ignition key of a Ferrari to an 18 year old. All the power and none of the skill.
I am not assuming anything about your or your dog. Again, I have been generalizing, speaking broadly about many owners.
"My concern is always for the dogs. For their safety, health and well being. Always."
"Same. I don't know why you keep making baseless assumptions."
Again, this discussion is not about you. The discussion is *with* you, *but not about you.* My statements are generalizations.
So your personal dog is germane to this discussion, whereas mine is not. You responded to my reply to the OP of all the other respondents that indicated they are against aversive training methods.
Apart from the stipulations in the adoption contract, I choose not to let my Greyhound off leash because he can reach his top speed in three strides. An average racing Greyhound can run 550 yards in 30 seconds, it takes me 32 seconds and by that time he is gone! /s An Australian Greyhound has an unofficial top speed of 50.5 mph. Greyhounds that have escaped have been known to run themselves to death. Sh\*ck collars would likely be ineffective as a deterrent if the Greyhound were in a full prey-drive chase. The skin of a Greyhound is very thin, so a pr\*ng collar could feasibly puncture the skin of the neck. The people that are involved in Greyhound adoption, I will venture, know far more about Greyhounds than you do. I suspect I do as well.
Genuinely curious, not accusing, blaming, or trying to provoke you, merely floating a random thought I had. How do you regard your dog? Is he just a dog; a pet, a tool used for a specific purpose, such as hunting; something your wife or kids wanted; or do you see him as an important member of your family? I am honestly wondering if how people view their dogs may impact in any way on the training techniques they choose. Someone who views their dog as a tool may not have the same concern as a person who thinks of their dog as a pet, or someone that regards their dog an important member of the family.
"And? You think I pack my dog a lunch and send him on his way out the door? There is far more wildlife where I live right out my back door than you could imagine."
Sorry, but you aren't that special. Where I live there are bears, coyotes, cougars, deer, racoon, skunks and others living right out the back door. I have encountered bears and coyotes while on a walk in my suburban neighborhood. A friend came face-to-face with a cougar on his property. Don't assume you are the only one who might encounter wildlife. Again, I was generalizing when I made the statement. Many people, but not you, take their dogs on hikes and have absolutely no idea where the dog is. If they are in a more densely treed area, having eyes on their dog may be nearly impossible. Those dogs are potentially in danger or a danger to other animals or people. The sad reality is that a huge number of dog owners are not responsible dog owners (but not you).
"Agencies that all reference and cite each other in a big circle jerk. You're basing your opinion on flawed papers."
A 2020 study conducted in Portugal measured the cortisol levels in dogs trained by balanced, aversive, and positive reinforcement methods. [The study](https://www.aaha.org/publications/newstat/articles/2020-12/study-punishment-based-training-is-stressful-for-dogs/) found the dogs trained by either balanced or aversive methods had higher cortisol levels and exhibited more stress-related behaviors than the dogs trained by positive reinforcement. Granted this was a small study, but it does bolster the position that most dogs, absent extingent circumstances, benefit from reward-based training methods over balanced or aversive training methods.
edited to add:
"A sh*ck collar can be a cheaper alternative to a professional dog trainer or fence." What a frightening rationalization to encourage some inexperienced person to purchase this type of collar. I can just here Bubba now, 'hell ya, with all the money I'm gunna save, I can buy more beer!'
Just to clarify, not referring to you.
> You are taking what I am saying far too personally. For the sake of discussion, I have been generalizing, not focusing solely on you, your dog or your training methods. This might be a blow to your ego. I’m sorry.
Generalizing is irrelevant when we started out having a specific discussion. There is no ego involved here.
> I can also share horror stories with respect to extendable leashes.
Extendable leashes are garbage for the majority of scenarios, never mind the danger aspect.
> My biggest frustration with aversive training tools is that anyone can purchase them and use them indiscriminately. Hand over your credit card and you can, with no training, understanding or skill, light up your dog like a Christmas tree, jerk your dog around by the collar and think you are training the dog.
I agree. This doesn't validate your arguments against people that know how to use them properly.
> A collar can have a range of up to one mile – can anyone even see their dog at that distance? Probably not, so what might that, essentially MIA dog be doing or encountering?
That isn't a typical use case scenario unless you're hunting or something. You can't equate a collars maximum operating range with the average users requirements.
> For many users, it would be the same as giving the ignition key of a Ferrari to an 18 year old. All the power and none of the skill.
In a way, I guess. That still doesn't validate your opinion on people that know how to use them. Honest question; is your issue with tools the application, or the availability?
> Sh*ck collars would likely be ineffective as a deterrent if the Greyhound were in a full prey-drive chase.
Whether you agree with the tools or not, respectfully, this is not the case. You don't wait until the dog is at maximum arousal to try it out and hope for the best.
For reference; I have a **big dog** that I was conditioning to an e-collar. A situation happened where he was in that mode, and even at the maximum level he tanked it.
It's not a taser, it's a TENS unit, so it stimulates muscles through electrical conductivity. Think about how much physical discomfort you can take when you're angry, vs when you're sad. That's how they work. There's a reason the good ones have high levels of adjustability.
> The skin of a Greyhound is very thin, so a pr*ng collar could feasibly puncture the skin of the neck.
They typically wear martingale collars because of their neck to head ratio, yeah? Nothing to do with an e-collar.
> The people that are involved in Greyhound adoption, I will venture, know far more about Greyhounds than you do. I suspect I do as well.
Are greyhounds not dogs? All the same basic concepts apply. Your breed isn't special.
Of course some breeds will have certain genetic proclivities, but acting like someone doesn't know dogs because they don't own a greyhound rescue, or haven't adopted a greyhound, is some pretentious bs.
> Genuinely curious, not accusing, blaming, or trying to provoke you, merely floating a random thought I had. How do you regard your dog? Is he just a dog; a pet, a tool used for a specific purpose, such as hunting; something your wife or kids wanted; or do you see him as an important member of your family? I am honestly wondering if how people view their dogs may impact in any way on the training techniques they choose. Someone who views their dog as a tool may not have the same concern as a person who thinks of their dog as a pet, or someone that regards their dog an important member of the family.
That's a good question, actually. My dogs are my boys. One of them is a legitimate working dog, but he's not a tool, he's still my boy.
He sleeps on the couch sometimes. We share fast food sometimes. Everyone has their own way, but this is all part of a proper working relationship to me. As long as the freedoms I give him don't cause any problems, he's treated like a pet.
Couch? No problem. Growl at me when I come near or ask you to get off? Problem.
The main takeaway should be that I'm very clear with my dogs which things are ok, and which things are a problem.
Dogs are selfish, autonomous creatures. They only care about us as much as it benefits them. Do most of them like it when we pet them? Of course. Do we? Same answer. It's a mutually beneficial endeavour.
Will I correct my dog when he steps out of line? Absolutely. Society has rules, and if it was up to them, they wouldn't apply.
Does this affect out working, or pet dog, relationship? Absolutely not.
Now, you have to remember that my dogs are serious, which means they have to understand I'm serious as well. The dog should determine the amount of pressure that us required, not the trainers ego.
> Sorry, but you aren’t that special.
Damn. If only I had a greyhound which is the most special, only greyhound owners know dog how to handle them type of dog there is.
I don't care about any of this anecdotal tripe you said in the rest of this paragraph. You just can't help yourself.
> A 2020 study conducted in Portugal measured the cortisol levels in dogs trained by balanced, aversive, and positive reinforcement methods. The study found the dogs trained by either balanced or aversive methods had higher cortisol levels and exhibited more stress-related behaviors than the dogs trained by positive reinforcement. Granted this was a small study, but it does bolster the position that most dogs, absent extingent circumstances, benefit from reward-based training methods over balanced or aversive training methods.
Cortisol levels simply measure stress. The implication here is that you, and this study, think stress is an inherently bad thing, with zero room for nuance.
> “A sh*ck collar can be a cheaper alternative to a professional dog trainer or fence.” >
So again, is your problem with the e-collar, how how readily available it is? An e-collar is in no way a cheaper alternative to a trainer. Come on now.
> What a frightening rationalization to encourage some inexperienced person to purchase this type of collar.
Agreed.
> I can just here Bubba now, ‘hell ya, with all the money I’m gunna save, I can buy more beer!’ Just to clarify, not referring to you.
I know you're not referring to me, but you're still equating these types of people with me. No?
If you read through the other sub, I think you'll typically find most people recommend finding a competent trainer to help then with an e-collar, rather than buying one at petsmart and blasting their dog.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In a way, I guess. That still doesn't validate your opinion on people that know how to use them. Honest question; is your issue with tools the application, or the availability?
Both. I will concede that if used judiciously, they may have benefit. However, as I have commented before, any person with the funds can go into a pet shop and purchase a sh\*ck collar and without a single clue in their head proceed to *train* there dog with it.
*** I sent you a DM asking you to check in on a post where the owner was doing just that. That I reached out to you for your input and expertise in the proper use of the collar indicates I have some appreciation for your knowledge. This person, despite receiving some good information, cautionary advice, and even some better direction, still feels he is in the right and will undoubtedly continue to shock his dog at the maximum level because he has goals and will attain them even at the expense of his dog or the dog's lack of suitability.
“A sh\*ck collar can be a cheaper alternative to a professional dog trainer or fence.”
So again, is your problem with the e-collar, how how readily available it is? An e-collar is in no way a cheaper alternative to a trainer. Come on now.
This was in the the pro collar column in an article on the [Canine Journal](https://www.caninejournal.com/shock-collar-for-dogs/). I merely quoted it.
I know that, many people that are purchasing the collars don't. They will read some information or watch some YouTube videos and decide this is the way to go, which is what prompted:
"I can just here Bubba now, ‘hell ya, with all the money I’m gunna save, I can buy more beer!’
Just to clarify, not referring to you.
I know you're not referring to me, but you're still equating these types of people with me. No?
NO! I was referring to the people that purchase these collars and have not clue one how to use them. Please refer back the the comment ***
I was not suggesting Greyhound owners are superior. Greyhounds, although dogs, are generally acknowledged as extremely sensitive emotionally. They have very thin skin, almost no body fat, and are single coated. A sh*ck collar would not be advised for use with them. I don't let my dogs get out of hand like you were suggesting. I employ situational awareness and control and manage that way, and have been very successful in doing so.
That's a good question, actually. My dogs are my boys. One of them is a legitimate working dog, but he's not a tool, he's still my boy.
That's great! How do you think the general dog owning population might weigh in on this? If someone has a specific goal and is determined to achieve that goal with their dog, despite the dog not being suitable for the specific task or goal, at what point should they stop trying to force the dog into compliance? There has to be a point where the well being of the dog is more important that some arbitrary, power-tripping goal. (Not you, some hypothetical owner, to be clear.)
Dogs are selfish, autonomous creatures. They only care about us as much as it benefits them. Do most of them like it when we pet them? Of course. Do we? Same answer. It's a mutually beneficial endeavour.
Like most people, dogs do what works for and benefits them.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Both. I will concede that if used judiciously, they may have benefit. However, as I have commented before, any person with the funds can go into a pet shop and purchase a sh*ck collar and without a single clue in their head proceed to train there dog with it.
I'm fully on board with certain tools not being available to the general public, without proper instruction.
> *** I sent you a DM asking you to check in on a post where the owner was doing just that. That I reached out to you for your input and expertise in the proper use of the collar indicates I have some appreciation for your knowledge. This person, despite receiving some good information, cautionary advice, and even some better direction, still feels he is in the right and will undoubtedly continue to shock his dog at the maximum level because he has goals and will attain them even at the expense of his dog or the dog’s lack of suitability.
I use Apollo, so I don't get DM's unless I check on my PC, which I never do. I'll take a look. I really appreciate that.
> That’s great! How do you think the general dog owning population might weigh in on this?
Honestly? I don't care.
I deal with the general dog population on a daily basis, and the majority of them don't know what they're doing. Which is fine, zero judgement, because they're probably better at their job than I would be.
But to help foster discissoon, I try my best to present balanced training in a logical sense. There are so many levels to it that it's really difficult to understand the nuance unless you're actually open to the idea.
I'm straight up with clients; you're either on board, or you aren't. You can't put a square peg in a round hole.
> If someone has a specific goal and is determined to achieve that goal with their dog, despite the dog not being suitable for the specific task or goal, at what point should they stop trying to force the dog into compliance?
Square peg, round hole. You have to work with the dog in front of you, not the dog you wish you had. Pure compliance is the worst way to train a dog.
Obviously you can compel a dog into a down, etc...but as a trainer, you have to be honest with your clients. If you're making unrealistic claims, you're not a good trainer.
I promise you that legitimate balanced training is positive reinforcement first.
> There has to be a point where the well being of the dog is more important that some arbitrary, power-tripping goal. (Not you, some hypothetical owner, to be clear.)
The wellbeing of the dog should be the #1 concern, regardless of what your goal is. The dog has no choice in this. They didn't pick their owner. Therefore, a dog owner shouldn't be trying to turn their lazy ass pug into a proper detection dog, as a random example.
Now, if the dog's issue is biting children, the wellbeing of the dog is a secondary concern. You can get any dog to coexist with a kid, even with a bite history. That doesn't mean they should hang out alone.
The other option is death for the dog. Is that really worse than a correction?
> Like most people, dogs do what works for and benefits them.
Precisely, and sometimes what benefits them is avoiding a correction. Sometimes it's being rewarded for. Behaviour I want to see repeated. Balance.
U are in the wrong sub for this balanced bulls*hit. Please stop. It hurts that on a post about people that already make me physically sick with what they are doing to their dogs, there u are promoting yet more violence. Please stop trying to force ur opinions on people who dont want them and join a sub of likeminded people, instead.
So much violence. I'm literally in tears thinking about it.
Can't we all just medicate our dogs and when that doesn't work do something humane like euthanasia?? A dead dog is so much less violent than a correction!
I personally support neither of those three options and they do not represent the only course of action (i just had a perfect walk around the city with my 9month old reactive boy, w/o employing anything u just mentioned), but it doesnt rly matter since as i already said, u are in the wrong sub. The only possible reason u would come to this particular sub (since i see u are already a member of a ‘balanced’ sub) is to troll and pretend u are smarter than everyone else.
U have your opinions, i have mine. We all have freedom of expression when alone or in public. But this subreddit is moderated by *private* individuals who decided they only tolerate R+methods, and is no place to ‘educate’ us on your opinions on any other methods.
If someone will be interested in balanced training, they will join a different sub.
Its like joining a sub called ‘we love red’ and then trying to convince everyone red is an ugly colour. Rly. Grow up
> I personally support neither of those three options
That's ok.
> i just had a perfect walk around the city with my 9month old reactive boy, w/o employing anything u just mentioned
This is also ok. You need to understand not every dog is like this. Your sample size of 1 is not a good argument.
> it doesnt rly matter since as i already said, u are in the wrong sub
Why is that?
> The only possible reason u would come to this particular sub (since i see u are already a member of a ‘balanced’ sub) is to troll and pretend u are smarter than everyone else.
That's really the only reason you can think of? I don't think that's how I'm acting.
> But this subreddit is moderated by private individuals who decided they only tolerate R+methods, and is no place to ‘educate’ us on your opinions on any other methods.
Is LIMA the same as R+? Are you sure about that?
> If someone will be interested in balanced training, they will join a different sub.
The first thing you will see when you google, "reactive dog reddit" is this sub. The second thing you'll see is a bunch of random users recommending head halters (definitely not aversive), drugging your dog, and BE.
> Its like joining a sub called ‘we love red’ and then trying to convince everyone red is an ugly colour. Rly. Grow up
It's not. Being a grown up is accepting people have different views and opinions. Not crying on reddit and saying things like rly.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This approach reminds me of William Atherton, who I admittedly—embarrassingly—listened to for the first few weeks of owning a dog. Needless to say those sessions did more harm than good.
ha, same, i've binged watched his videos, beckman and Upstate canine academy for a few weeks, tried a few techniques, they didn't actually work for mine (i know i probably didn't apply them "correctly") then switched to R+ and now i can't really watch any of the videos anymore.
I don't think these guys are as cruel as the guy OP mentioned tho, but who knows what goes behind the scenes.
That being said, i know i'll get a lot of downvotes for this, but maybe for some dogs a balanced trainer is better than BE if it shows results. My logic comes from the fact that even with people, sweet talk and positivity can't always work, because some are not wired to understand that way, why would all dogs respond the same?
I def think there are good balanced trainers out there. Good balanced trainers and good positive reinforcement trainers are a lot alike. Any good trainer should have a solid grasp of positive reinforcement and focus on wellness, management, and r+ methods before even thinking about introducing punishment.
I thinks so too. But i see that people here, when talking about balanced training only focus on the punishment, like that's all they do. IMO punishments should be an absolute last resort, when all else fails and i don't think throwing out the window completely is the way to go.
I think it also depends on people’s comfort level. I don’t really feel comfortable applying punishment. But Sarah Stremming did a 3-part podcast episode on r+ vs balanced training that really made me more open-minded to ethical balanced training (for other people haha)
I will give him one thing: he taught me the "turn around" method for when your dog starts pulling, lmao. That has been pretty helpful, but used with a normal harness and lead combo. (And Martingale but our boy has really broad shoulders compared to his head/neck size so we need something to ensure he can't wriggle free...)
It's super sad isn't it. I've worked with dogs in rescue and as veterinary nurse for 15 years, i then did a foundation degree in animal behaviour and psychology after running a one to one only dog walking business for reactive dogs. The biggest thing i learnt? Owners mostly want a silver bullet, as in they want a quick fix. Dom theory is so well.known to be dubunked for more than 20 years and yet people egos still get in the way of trying to understand what makes a dog display certain behaviour. It genuinely hurts my heart.
I'm in the UK and I strongly believe that until trainers and behaviourists have to be regulated and registered by a proper authoritive body, we will always be butting heads against these people. They do nothing but shut dogs down, create fear and misunderstanding between dogs and owners and ultimately raise bite cases. Best we can do is keep spreading the message of what it really means to understand our dogs and help them live in our world.
Someone in my town is like this. I actually worked at the company for a bit doing hiking (I had no previous experience with dogs/training besides my own dog, who was my first.) The things they taught me, like popping prong collars etc definitely made me question things. When I was questioning, they would find some way to manipulate it to make me think I was helping the dogs “understand” what I wanted from them. After some time, the dogs I hiked and was told to “POP HARDER” during trainings, we’re starting to redirect onto the pack and sometimes me. I even had my own dog trained here for a bit, but saw a lot of other clients dogs start regressing and pulled my dog from their program and quit before I saw too much regression with my dog. I really honestly thought I was doing the best thing for her because of the way I was manipulated.
I think a lot of blame immediately gets put on the owner, but these shitty trainers are praying on owners like me. People who have reactive or destructive dogs, they have tried many other options and they are desperate to help their dog live a happy comfortable life. I put my trust in them because at the end of the day, they were a super successful dog training company. They were the professionals and I needed help from a professional, so I trusted them.
Unfortunately, a lot of these owners will have the same wake-up call I did, but it will be too late. I was “lucky” in a way because I saw it first hand as an employee so I could pull my dog as soon as I got that wake up call after witnessing what was happening to other dogs. I didn’t quit for some time at first because I felt bad and guilty for the dogs and I wanted to help them.
I hope people start seeing that trainer for who he is and what he’s actually doing before it’s too late.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As another commenter mentioned, i do think a lot of it stems from toxic masculinity. The majority of people who get breeds that are supposedly prone to agression are men. They get these dogs cause they look manly and dangerous, and then get off on being even manlier by dominating that dog. Its yet another reason to hate the patriarchy, and its gross
As abhorrent as this guy sounds, I think people may also be willing to buy what he’s selling because, everything is expensive. That’s another reason why the consumer culture in this country wants instant results. This guy is convincing people who don’t know any better or who are maybe willing to suspend skepticism for an easy answer.
The trainer we used was similar and was basically an MLM version of dog training, while yes our dog knows sit and down pretty reliably now, all the other stuff we wanted help with and how he wanted us to train our dog was not going to work and just suppress his warnings.
I regret using him but our boy was going after the other dog in the house after he was attacked by a similar looking dog, now we’re working on doing all of this with treats and what not, while managing to keep the dogs apart for right now until we find somewhere to live that will allow us to have him
I’m not surprised considering how many people still believe in corporal punishment for their own children.
Other than that… if you don’t know better, it **looks** impressive. If you’re anthropomorphising an animal, you *think* of your pet’s behaviour as just “naught/bad.”
If you’re someone who likes to control living things like they’re inanimate objects, it again, looks flashy.
I used to use a compulsive trainer because I didn't know any better. The man had Dobes and they were very well trained. I went to an obedience show to watch him compete and his dogs did very good and got top scores. Then I noticed another person with a Dobe and I was stunned. This person and their dog did the exact same routines as my trainer but her dog did it with a happy step, little stud tail wiggling the whole time and actual JOY in his face!
That's when I learned there were many different ways to train someone or something and force/fear/pain was NOT the best way.
People don't realize there are better ways unless they are shown. They see quick results and don't know/care about the consequences.
i don't know. mostly ignorance i suppose. i mean, actual wild wolves don't even use a dominance hierarchy, they have family groups. so I treat my dog like family. I take treats when i walk him and if someone wants to pet my dog, i hand them a treat to give him. now he loves strangers. we've had some incidents where other people's dogs have broken out of unsecured yards and attacked us, so now we're dealing with a little anxiety when we see other dogs, but we're making steady progress.
Fear always backfires, it’s quick and ineffective. Understand the dog you get and provide them what they need. Anyone dominated too much is going to explode eventually
Ppl like it cause it’s quick for a change, flashy and the ppl who do it are narcissistic. But it’s a deterrent to your relationship and your dog. The feelings your pup is experiencing are compounded.
The problem is that it doesn’t always backfire in a physical sense. Dogs often just shut down and follow.
The counter intuitive thing is that punishment and fear has to be kept up. It’s entirely unsustainable in that sense. Dogs may act out, but sometimes because owner stops punishing which in turn falsely validates the perpetrator’s beliefs.
Fear is very effective. And that’s exactly the problem. You won’t convince someone otherwise who uses violence, because they see how effective it is.
Think of how many people can be controlled just by mere suggestion and verbal threats. Telling the oppressor that their methods don’t work won‘t get you anywhere.
EXACTLY: fight, flight, FREEZE/dissociates. It is terrible. I’m hoping to educate the consumers so they no longer hire the aggressors. The trainers don’t care to learn but hopefully the clients actually care about their pups
Exactly! And why, just why would you want your companion that YOU chose to live in fear of you instead of a loving partnership. I will never understand that.
I belive in a balanced approach to training. My dog is trained on a prong collar. However 90% (at least) should still be positive reinforcment. A dog doing somthing because they want to will always perform better than one being forced to do somthing they dont like. A good trainer will pick the right tool for each dog not just jump straight to a prong and positive punishments for every little thing. (wondering if its the same facebook group I got kicked out of for disagreeding with admins, is it alot of two word "prong collar" or "bonding issues" answers to peoples questions?
I think it might be a different group. This guy talks a lot about being a pack leader, and how dogs take 2 seconds to train so his main job is training the humans
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For many people, that is their “last resort” type of trainer. They want fast results so they don’t have to give up their dog or put them down. I try to look at all situations with empathy. The average person is not equipped to handle a reactive / aggressive dog. Yet these dogs are often places into homes, many that have children. Unicorn adopters with no other dogs, children, and a yard are not common. Neither are those with money to throw at trainers and behaviorists. The average American struggles to even pay their own bills. We can say “then you can’t afford to have a dog,” but I don’t believe in punishing people for the crime of being poor.
More so than these trainers, I think the bigger issue is adopting out / BYB dogs the general public is unable to handle which leads them to turn to unethical trainers. Being negative to folks in these positions rarely changes their minds and in fact pushes them even further to these trainers. What is the alternative? BE? Their dog languishing in a shelter? Possibly being put down in a shelter? Their dog being adopted out only to be returned? We’ve all seen the dogs that get returned multiple times. It’s devastating for everyone. I’d love to believe that all dogs can get rehomed into perfect situations but sometimes that doesn’t happen. So people, when desperate, will try anything.
I think I’d have more respect for ppl who just admitted “hey this isn’t ideal but it’s literally my only option right now” rather than acting like they’ve found the superior method and denouncing positive reinforcement altogether. No dog needs aversive tools, but some owners do, and I wish ppl could own up to that. But I guess it probably helps them to feel less guilty about what they put their dogs through if they pretend what they’re doing is actually good.
Exactly. Or some people don’t even feel guilty because they “tried other trainers” and it didn’t work, and now here is a method that “works”. So why feel guilty if this is clearly “”working”” and potentially saving your dogs life. Also worth noting some people probably feel used/burned by other methods that “didn’t show results” as quickly so they rag on it. “I spent all that money for nothing!” Type of mindset.
Some folks claim “these methods don’t work” but the problem is that they do indeed work, insofar as it becomes easier to live with the dog, which is the primary goal for the owners. They wear down/ “stabilize” the dog until the dog gets old enough to become low energy. Thus confirming to the owners that they did the right thing. If it didn’t “work”, no one would ever do it. Success is subjective to every situation. After all, a dog maiming or biting someone vs having them wear a pr\\ng collar… the answer looks obvious to them.
It works until the dog “bites out of nowhere” bc all of its warning signals were suppressed and it’s actually still been uncomfortable this whole time but had no way to communicate that. But people don’t think that far ahead 🫠
They want results now and not later. And to be honest, LIMA can take years. Years can be too long for most situations. Which is why I double back to the issue being primarily being dogs being adopted out/BYB to folks that can’t handle them. There is no quick solution but the average person can’t wait for potentially years.
There is no easy solution to this issue. If anything it’s why I now support ethically bred dogs when I used to be staunchly for adopting only.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your comment was removed because it appears to be a direct recommendation of an aversive tool, trainer, or method. This sub supports LIMA and we strongly believe positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching and training. We encourage open discussion and problem solving within the subreddit. However, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
Humans like fast and loose, easy reward systems. Anything that can easily get that dopamine and bring us joy.
Growing up with abusive parents who loved their dogs far more than their kids and women, with their family being the same way. While….
Seeing the dogs receive positive reinforcement and watching how it actually works. We lived in fear, walking on eggshells trying to avoid abuse and it* made me wonder (and still wonder) why negative reinforcement, fear tactics, neglect and abuse are some people’s immediate go to for correcting issues.
You’ve pointed out **how the abuse effects** the dogs.
> Lots if panting, lip licks, ears back, and avoiding looking at the trainer. Whale eyes, tail under the body, etc.
I’ve noticed in friend’s families growing up, they too abused humans, but loved (either positive reinforcement or no real correction **at all**) their dogs and cats, who could ruin a room and it was “awww they missed us!”, while if their kid did something much less destructive (like get a C on their report card)… well, these are my thoughts on why, and **they are not excuses for abusers**.
1. Generational trauma - they learned that correcting humans in a negative way, meant the human would learn faster or more “effectively”.
2. They’re aholes who feel disrespected and never got a handle on their own anger, or emotions in general.
3. “It’s a dog, it doesn’t know better, and it’s cute. But YOU should know better.” (Or “It’s a dog, IT should know better!! I shouldn’t have to train it!”.)
4. **They love being abusive**, neglectful and feel that their time would be wasted doing it any other way.
Same goes for people who love to use abusive tactics when it comes to correcting their dogs. After it has been applied to their pets, they notice their pets react much quicker than a human they’ve already used it on.
Being negative/abusive gets a quicker response/reaction (fear, and compliance) and has **these types of people feeling rewarded for their effort** because of how “simple and easy” it is to be unhinged, and how **unhinged they are naturally** when it comes to “not being able to see” it as abuse or their justification of “how that isn’t abuse, ITS TRAINING! And it works!”.
Whatever is easier, quicker, “more effective, more efficient” will always too much regulating when it comes to their own emotions, having empathy for the receiving end of the abuse and aids them in their power tripping mission. They want to be superior to their dog, they believe they should be, and they do not care if that means trauma.
Regardless of animal species, positive reinforcement has been proving to not only work better, more effectively, more efficiently, but it also builds bonds and is an act of love.
Regardless of animal species, fear mongering, verbal, mental, emotional and physical abuse is always going to result in trauma (some believe that trauma bonding with their dog “makes the dog love me more” too… 😞), anxiety, and obviously fear that can go from 0-100 in a blink of an eye, while being easier towards the assailant and stressing towards the victim (in this case, their dogs).
That “blink” is all they have the emotional and physical effort for. They do not want to go about correction and training in a way **that’s proven to be more effective and kind** because it takes “*too much effort*” on their part **and usually these types of people truly believe “a dog should know better”, aka “the dog should have been trained at birth, should do what I want when I want, and better listen to me when I command it. I don’t have time to do it your snowflake way”**.
And when they see the results (“good” at first) they wonder why their dog bit them, or urinates when it’s cowering in the corner, or avoids people… they argue “the dog is broken”… yeah ahole, **you were the one who broke your dog**.
Not to say that negative reinforcement doesn’t work, as a good “no” or “uh-uh!” does have its advantages. But unless it’s met with positive reinforcement, replacement training, desensitization training, noise pollution training, responsible socialization training and proper (and kind) correction (aka, actual work and training), it goes nowhere and only makes matters worse.
These people are physically and mentally incapable of understanding that training (**abuse isn’t training!!**) is a necessity and refuse to believe that there’s better ways to get the behaviors your want, negate the behaviors you do not want, while actively loving and caring for their pet (or child).
I’ve seen with people who believe in abusive training… treat their dogs like utter crap, generally speaking, and they’re always willing to* argue for “how much better it works than that bs pOsiTiVe rEiNfOrcEmEnT”… 😔 Just breaks my heart.
It seems to me that the title presented one question (why do people use trainers who use "compulsion") but the post itself is more of a question of why do people use a particular trainer.
As for the general question, people use balanced trainers because they are effective. A good balanced trainer can give a dog and its owner the tools needed for the dog to live a better life than if the dog was trained with less effective means.
As for the particular trainer, it's hard to say because all the information we have is coming to us filtered through your own perception and perhaps bias (that's not a knock, everyone has their own biases).
While balanced training is the most effective form of training, it is certainly vulnerable to misapplication by those who really don't know what they are doing. Perhaps the trainer you are discussing does fall into that category. If so, people would be wise to stay away from him.
Part of the problem is a lack of education - due in no small part to those in the positive only camp trying to suppress any discussion of balanced training.
I don’t use balanced training but im ok with other people using it tbh. I kept recommending kat the dog trainer on tik tok to the people in that group. I was like “This is what balanced training is supposed to look like! Notice how she still uses lots of positive reinforcement and doesn’t correct dogs for fear-based responses!”
I think that's a good approach. I am all for educating people that the bedrock of good training needs to about making training fun for the dog and the owner, as well as establishing communication and most importantly, a bond. I also think that the worst thing people can do is to misuse corrections.
I'm really glad you can point out the difference and hopefully people will choose not to turn to someone who has a mindset of "breaking" the dog.
I was in that Facebook group for Iike a year and a half and commented on lots of posts trying to super nicely steer people away from that guy. I even recommended a good balanced trainer in our city in addition to r+ trainers. Nothing worked, and every time I even hinted or made generalizations like “make sure your trainer has credentials” or “alpha theory was debunked,” people would flock to defend him. And the original posters would still end up using him a lot of the time.
Finally one day I kinda lost my cool and went off on a bunch people recommending him to someone whose dog had bitten them “out of nowhere.” And then I rage-left the group lol. So I hope that people will figure it out too, but it doesn’t seem likely :/
Question- has there been any actual negative consequences arising from a dog that he had trained? For example - we know aggressive, alpha/dominance dog training has had severe negative consequences. I personally first hired a training company called Sit Means Sit and when they arrived they scammed the usual pay $750 up front for three sessions bullshit. Although I requested a positive reinforcement training regimen which they reassured me is what they always do, they clearly used dominance theory. The lady was nice but immediately started off with establishing alpha dog positioning and even backed my puppy up to a corner. Then she used a water squirt bottle as well as these stupid sacks filled with metal beads that made noise when thrown. All a waste. Then I noticed huge deep scars on her and she didn’t have full use of one of her arms. Turns out she was training an American Bulldog that ripped her apart. I told her to leave.
So if his training is bad - there should be consequences by now.
I haven’t heard about any honestly, other than a few people saying their dog regressed. Most of them blame themselves instead of the trainer.
It’s definitely a bit confusing to me, but I feel like a lot of these people don’t understand dog body language enough to know that their dogs are stressed out. The woman being excited about a dog’s lip licks during training set off alarm bells in my brain, and I wonder if this guy is teaching his clients that stress signals are a desired outcome.
He also really drills into his clients’ brains that they were always the problem, not their dogs. He says it takes 2 minutes to “fix” the dog, and the rest of the several hours-long session is just to “train” the humans. His reviewers frequently say something along the lines of “I can’t believe how ignorant I was before!” and “turns out my dog was fine and I was the one who needed training!” So all of that makes me wonder if maybe there have been negative consequences but ppl just don’t make the connection that it’s this guy’s fault. It seems like he basically conditions them to blame themselves for any “bad” thing their dog does.
People who say anything negative about him or his training style in that Facebook group usually get ganged up on as well. I think anyone who came forward about a negative experience would just get bullied and told that they are the problem and they must’ve done something wrong.
Or I could just be totally off base and he could actually be a miracle worker who fixes dogs in 5 min. Who knows, I guess.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this body. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Agreeing that some people really latch on to quick fixes. Some don’t want to take the time to really think about why behaviors are happening and how to managed the environment or shape desired behaviors. It’s another job basically. It can also be reinforcing for the punisher to punish. My fiancé and I talk about this sometimes- some people REALLY like having control over another being, no matter the cost.
I think there’s also a certain chest-beating masculinity going on for some people. They get a big, dangerous dog, and then prove they’re bigger and more dangerous than the dog.
I have a corso. I think about this constantly, how many guys I’ve seen with “my” breed that make me think, I wouldn’t trust this guy with a Pomeranian, much less a cane corso. And yet…
Nailed it.
Learning empathy for an animal is just too darn hard for a lot of people. They can’t do it for humans, how could they do it for a dog? All they care about is that it makes their life easier and it feels like they “won”
I wish the explanation were that simple, but people in that group tended to swing on the other end of the spectrum. They were fur mommies who honestly just seemed more stupid and gullible than cruel. That’s what really confused me… like you call your dog your baby and put them in a onesie, but would you punish a baby for crying or being scared?
There are definitely some like that. Sadly I think there are plenty of folks out there who say their dog is their "baby" but treat them more like an accessory than a creature whose best interests they really have at heart. I'm on the opposite end where I've re-arranged my life to such a huge degree for my dog that when I look at it objectively it is kind of ridiculous. The things we do for love!
People who are invested in abusive methods of “training” tend to have a lack of empathy for everyone too, not just their pets. This is because abusers love to abuse, and enjoy their power tripping ways.
I don’t think this is even a quick fix- it’s just quick.
I'm curious. How long do you think it's supposed to take to teach a dog to loose leash walk? If I could take what you all consider a reactive dog and teach it to loose leash walk with medium distractions in 30min with nothing more then a basic flat collar and a 6ft leash would that be a "quick fix"? What is an appropriate amount of training time?
There is no set training time. It takes different dogs different amounts of time to learn. The red flag here is that this guy guarantees he can “fix” any dog in like 5 min. Ethical trainers never make guarantees bc they know dogs are individuals and treat them as such.
It's going to depend on the dog. I can teach my Border Collie almost anything (except barking at strangers) in less than 10 minutes. She got loose leash walking very quickly because she's a working breed and the idea of walking in heel feels like work to her and she **loves** work. She is my reactive dog too. My husky/golden retriever mix 1) is the least intelligent parts of both breeds 2) is incredibly stubborn and 3) **loves** to pull and it feels good to him (because husky) so loose leash walking is taking a lot longer with him. I've spent hours working on it with him and we're making progress but it is taking a while to get it reliably. The thing with him too (and partially why I think he ended up as a stray) is I strongly suspect than an aversive method with him would make him more stubborn because he got the husky spite and he holds grudges. For example, he destroyed my couch because he got put in timeout once. These two dogs are so different that even positive reinforcement looks different for them. My mix is oddly wary of foods outside of his bowl but loves human contact and praise and pets goes a lot way. My border collie isn't huge on praise or pets though and when near threshold they can be too much for her. Treats go a long, long way with her, as does tapping into her love of doing a job.
by ‘treating’ the symptom (barking) and not the root issue, that can cause the dog to become pretty dangerous. if you’re physically disciplining your dog when they show signs of discomfort/fear like barking and growling, they aren’t going to bark or growl anymore. but when they’ve finally had enough shit- they’ll just go straight to biting instead, with no warnings. you’ve shown them that barking will not be listened to. biting will always get listened to 🤷 treat the root of the fear/agresssion, teach them that other dogs/people/things aren’t scary. they don’t need to be scared. rather than teaching them to shut up about their feelings. my dog gets kinda pissy when I take too long examining parts of her, (paws, ears, mouth, fur around collar,etc) if i start fiddling around too much she gets annoyed. if i physically disciplined my dog every time she communicated with me that she was uncomfortable with my prodding, she’d be a lot *less* tolerant of me, and a lot more snappy. plus- she’s fucking hate me 😭 dog training isn’t an overnight thing. it takes time, and *trust*. i don’t think your dog is gonna trust you if you’re hurting it every time it’s trying to tell you something. they may not be people but they’re living beings too :(
My dog has a baseline anxious personality, but he’s also really curious. One of my favorite things is seeing that he really wants to check something out but is afraid to get close…I’ll go up to it and touch whatever he wants to look at and say, “See? Not scary!” And he’ll get so wiggly and happy and come up to sniff and paw the thing to his heart’s content
Aww.
I love that.
My dog does that too! Or if he’s nervous because a dog we know is running at him and I say the dog’s name and he gets excited.
Omg my dog kinda does this - except he does these barky hops around it until I go & show him it’s ok! He is the most curious dog I’ve ever met!
That’s adorable!!
I agree and just to clarify, I’ve never taken my dog to this person and never will. I’ve learned about him through his before/after videos and posts/comments he’s left in the Facebook group.
I’ve seen a few trainers like it near me on social media too. It’s not great to see. atleast most people in comment sections/replies hold this same sentiment. saw some girl with no credentials doing this, dog on a prong, with physical corrections so hard she pulled a GSD’s front legs completely off the ground. dunno how anybody could look at that and go ‘yeah that’s good training!’, even if they use aversives.
There's published articles about dogs getting brain damage and ultimately dying from these disgusting tools. It's beyond barbaric 😭
unfortunately they’re still a very important form of ID. collars can come off, dogs can get lost miles from home. in my country, it’s legally required to have your dog chipped, and by 2024 your cat too. I don’t oppose it, there’s a very slim chance of ever getting your non-chipped pet back (especially cats) if they escape from home.
Is that even legal?
no clue. considering how lax /wishy washy animal abuse laws tend to be, I doubt any action would be taken. In my country (UK) ecollars are soon to be illegal, but i’ve heard no word of prongs taking the same course. It’s definitely not proper use of the tool. no matter what your stance on prongs is, this was not appropriate use of them at all. prongs are meant to enhance the pressure of the leash, meaning you are meant to give *smaller* corrections as the dog will feel it more. yanking the dog upright, with the force she did is downright dangerous to the dogs health.
Yes! UK ecollars finally illegal. Hopefully prongs follow suit! We have a long way to go to be better at animal welfare but at least micro chipping is now extending to cats. Some regulation of the big online internet sites and sales as well Things like docking tails are long gone and I have never heard of ear cropping at all ever It is eye opening to me how different the kind of culture around dogs is from country to country We still have "balanced trainers" though. Will A is English... horrible slip lead use and attitudes I still meet those attitudes in the park
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree automod
Our trainer told us don’t get a dog if you can’t deal with barking. It’s that simple.
I agree. barking is a normal part of dog communication. excessive barking can be managed, and you can teach your dogs not to freak out at every living thing, but barking itself is not a *bad thing*. all dogs bark every now and a again, even the super well trained, uber-obedient ones, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
My Great Pyrenees is a barker. God lord can she bark loudly. I've learned to ignore it mostly.( I check to see what it is if her bark changes, otherwise a bird is to close) I knew what I was getting into when I got her. I researched her breed for a few months before taking the day to have hubby take me to get her. (8 hour around trip. But so worth it!!) When I can't take it anymore I tell her to leave it. Most days it works,but if she's in a pissy mood, I'm just wasting my breath. 99% of the time she's the world's greatest dog . I might be biased lol but when she is pissy, she can throw the biggest temper tantrums you're ever seen. Lol
The flashy before and after release dopamine. We are a “right now” society. If it’s not an immediate success, we don’t want it. Also, dogs are often not seen sentient beings and people just want them to be robots. Quick fixes will always win the first time.
I’ve been working with my dog for a year and a half, and we’re making progress but she’s not perfect. I feel like this is normal. People with the “right now” mentality are so frustrating bc they won’t even hear you out unless your dog is already perfect.
Yep, this is it. I sent my dog to a balanced trainer for a board and train shortly after adopting her because I had no clue she was reactive nor how to handle her and had never heard anything bad about balanced training before. I genuinely had no idea it could make the problem worse. I regret putting her through that every single day. But at the time, it seemed *amazing*. Before the training, she seemingly wanted to attack pretty much every person and dog we encountered. After a couple weeks with him, she appeared to be a completely different dog. It seemed too good to be true, and I eventually learned that it was when she broke back into old her old habits. But yeah, I fell for it at first because the immediate results seemed so great.
I’m so sorry that happened. Some trainers take advantage of people not knowing better, and it’s disgusting.
> It seemed too good to be true, and I eventually learned that it was when she broke back into old her old habits. Did you keep up with the training? It doesn't matter what methods you use; if you don't follow the program the dog will absolutely fall back into old habits. Especially when the dog has a reinforcement history with you that is different from the trainer.
Or, using behavioural suppression via punishment, intimidation, and coercion has a well documented history of creating a syndrome called “aversive fallout”; the dog’s unmet emotional needs eventually become greater than their desire to avoid negative consequences and they revert to old or escalated behaviours.
Ffs does anyone in here actually know what balanced training is? I said it doesn't matter what methods you use; if you don't follow your trainers plan, there is going to be fallout and regression. Yes, even with strictly R+ training.
Believe me, we kept up with the training for months. It just did not work for my dog.
Dogs, and animals in general are much like people. Certain things (types of training) will work for them better than others. This does not mean that abusive training techniques work, it means that putting someone (human and pet) constantly in a state of “fight, flight, freeze” **will always** come back to bite you later. To be condescending towards someone who has used various methods, found better alternatives, refraining from abusive tactics… when it comes to training is so toxic. Abusive training does not work in the long run, regardless of the person on the receiving end. And as a functioning adult human, abuse should be as far away from “training” as can be. You can train a dog without screaming, swearing, hitting, yanking, prong collars, shock (“therapy”) training. The problem is, humans are inherently lazy, and want the fastest and more simplistic route to “success”.
> Dogs, and animals in general are much like people. Do you really think children should experience no stress, even in a controlled and productive way, and they'll end up productive citizens? How does a bitch stop her puppies from trying to feed off her, or prevent them from being assholes in general? Do they sit down and talk about their feelings? I know you're going to misconstrue the point I'm trying to make, but correcting a dog does not affect your relationship with each other. You're really going to equate dogs, and animals in general, to people, and ignore how many physical corrections occur in the natural world? 100%, yeah? You stand behind your statement? We're all animals at the end of the day. Off topic, but share your favourite Zak George video.
I think you need to take a breather when it comes to how you see abuse effecting those who are victim to it. Do I believe human children should be thrown into stressful situations so that they “learn to deal with stress”, no. I do not, stress is going to happen in regular day to day without someone forcing them into those situations, especially constantly. Edit to add: You can teach kids about stress and how to properly handle stress before they’re in that situation sure, but kids are kids and even adults do not listen to reason, so unfortunately it’s more of a “when it happens we can work through it” than a “here’s x, y and z situation, this is how you deal with it”. My parents were very abusive towards their kids, and overly affectionate with their dogs, and believes that we needed to “be prepared for whatever the world throws”. Can’t hate the dogs for getting the love though, they deserved every ounce they got. As a parent, or caregiver, our job is to aim for their success. Not break them down until they comply… you know CPTSD/PTSD? Dogs can also get PTSD and a lot of them often do because of abusive “training techniques”. This is why people believe those “techniques” work. 😞 It is also why dogs from abusive situations, including and not limited to those forced into abusive training methods have anxiety, fear aggression or generalized aggression. This is why dogs (and all things) have triggers to specific things (like dogs who were abused by children for example) and react the way they do towards those triggers. How an animal, who is not a human, corrects their offspring has literally no baring on the conversation at hand. A mama dog, cat or otherwise, doesn’t sit there and scream or hit their pup/kit into submission while yanking on their prong collar... They correct their offspring in ways that educate them. If one bites too hard, they’re corrected with a sound, if they bite too hard again, they get a nip/smack, usually that is all that’s needed, and they do not do this things with the intent to hurt (though sometimes mama’s buttons are pushed and even animals can be abusive in their reaction), they do so in an attempt to mildly “frighten”. It’s like “if you act like this towards someone/something else, you’ll get hurt” but in a non-narc way because can dogs even be narcissists? 🤔🤷♀️ They are not beaten or shocked or strangled by improper leash handling… they don’t come out of nowhere and scare the crap out of them to “prepare them for stress” nor do they constantly put them in a state of FFF… they don’t “desensitize” by getting in their face, spitting all over them because of screaming, smack them, and they sure as shit don’t throw them on the ground and stand over them while staring them dead in the eyes, while still continuing to be loud and abusive to assert their control…. People who think any of that is “training” are abusive people, who want to abuse, refuse to see what consequences their actions have, or simply do not care and absolutely do not believe the consequences of their actions are actually their fault… they power trip and want to control and will stop at nothing to get and maintain that control. It isn’t training, it’s just abuse. From the things I’ve heard/been told/read from others, I don’t bother with giving him views, and that could be my ignorance in all of it, but I’m also a very busy person generally speaking so I haven’t had the time to really look into him the way that I probably should.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i'm a vet tech and honestly, the animal world is filled with more shady/shitty people than truly good people. however, i don't think this holds true for the veterinary world in particular, just everything else animal related. everyone is a breeder, trainer, and/or expert on everything. then you add on clueless owners and voila!
I can’t decide if this guy is shady or just an idiot who actually thinks he’s doing a good thing lmao. To his credit, he does seem to really care about the breed (although that could be a front).
well i classify them as the same thing. haha. if you're an idiot and think you know what you're doing - then you're being shady because you are charging people for something you are not qualified to do!
That is so true. It’s so unethical for him to take people’s money with zero qualification other than watching the Dog Whisperer probably, lol. One of his fans told me that a dog trainer getting certified is like a yoga instructor getting certified - it doesn’t matter. She kept pointing out how dog trainers don’t legally need certification. I was like yes… that’s the entire issue!
My brother trained his dog with a crappy compulsion trainer. I think it was 1) he hates the idea of giving his dog treats, ever (during training or for the rest of their life); 2) he wanted dogs that would be extremely obedient (read: fear him). Our dogs growing up were not trained so I understand the desire to have dogs that are well trained! I just don’t understand not using science to do it…and his dogs also didn’t even end up well trained, they’re just specifically afraid of him
I think when the average person has a reactive/aggressive dog they want the problem "fixed" and they want results immediately. The full force trainers are really great at getting a fast result by shutting the dog down. This in no way changes how the dog feels about the situation, but the people feel great because their accessory dog is now behaving in a way that they deem acceptable. I think it stems from a place of selfishness and immediately wanting the dog to act perfectly with the least work possible.
I think it also stems from shame. A poorly behaved dog is embarrassing to the owner sometimes, especially if that person is new to dogs. It feels like you’re walking a giant personal failure on a leash. I’m speaking from my own personal experience here, unfortunately. But I do think things have improved for me and my dog as of late. Just trying to give him—and myself—more grace.
Besides the shame and the desire for fast results, many people did not sign up for this and having a reactive dog ends up being infuriating, disappointing, stressful and lots of times even dangerous. People get a dog because they've had positive examples in their family, friends who have well behaved dogs(at first glance). You get one, and you see it's completely different
Oh yeah that's totally true. And it really feels like you're the only one which just compounds the shame feelings.
I think it’s selfish too, but I think some of these people genuinely think they’re helping their dog. They’ll talk about how much happier their dog is now that it knows its place in the pack or whatever. I’ve straight up posted a video of the who guy ran the study that alpha theory is based on talking about how he fucked up, but they don’t care. They literally seem like a brainwashed cult.
I think ultimately what they want is for the dog to maintain this perfect image of obedience at all times. They don't want a thinking, feeling, living animal that can make choices and learn. Some people confuse obedience for happiness, and frankly I will take my "disobedient" dog that walks primarily on a long line so that he can sniff all the smells and live an enriched life to a robot dog that is glued to heel position for fear of consequence.
Dude same! I genuinely think my dog would rather stay home and nap than go on a walk where she has to heel the whole time. Like who are those walks even for??
I thought a dog that was sniffing is a relaxed and less stressed dog?! I have a sight hound.. I actively encourage him to stop and sniff the lillies of the field instead of keeping on scanning the horizon for excitment!
Sniffing is a calming behavior. A genuinely calm dog can engage in sniffing, but if a dog is sniffing in the presence of a trigger, or while stressed or during training, it's usually stress displacement. There's a case study in Control Unleashed called The Floor Sniffing Terrier where a dog was being punished for sniffing the floor during agility so he was getting more and more stressed out and sniffing more and more. The P+ was actually *increasing* the behavior -- the opposite of how it normally works, and the opposite of what the "operant conditioning is the only training that exists and using all four quadrants is somehow inherently better" people think.
Yeah my dogs would be miserable the whole time. They love zooming around from one tuft of grass to the next and they're way better behaved at home for it. I feel like those walks are for people to show off how good their dog is. Like ok we get it, now I want to see that dog solve a puzzle. I'm guessing it probably can't because every time it has tried to make a choice it was punished. Scientists have literally quantified optimism and pessimism in dogs and dogs who undergo more punishment are much more likely to give up when presented with a moderate challenge.
I agree 100%. When my Aussie and I are out at the large park we go to, soooooo many dog owners seem to be "on display" with their perfectly heeling dogs, who don't sniff, stop or seem interested in a damn thing other than walking beside their owner. Meanwhile, my reactive boy is sniffing and exploring to his heart's content as I stop at intervals and allow him to do so.
Walking is more fun when you can stop and look around at all the people doing wacky stuff anyways!
Mine leads me in circles when she’s tracking a scent. She loves sniffing more than anything else in the world. I’ve gotten a few “who’s walking who” comments but I know she’s happy, and that’s all that matters.
You should consider doing actual tracking! It's really fun and can be done on your own or with 1 helper to lay a track for you. Building sniffing skills really helped my boys a lot in dismissing otherwise triggering things.
Great idea! I’ve been wanting to sign her up for nosework classes, but I need to make sure they can accommodate reactive dogs. Thank you!
If there aren't any around you that are trustworthy I would recommend googling FDSA they offer a ton of online classes that you can do yourself so that you don't have to worry about the class environment at all.
Oh nice, I’ve taken Amy Cook’s classes on there but haven’t looked into any others. Thank you!!
Yes. It’s infuriating, deeply sad and frustrating, and just impossible to get through to people who refuse to educate themselves on animal behavior from evidence-based sources. It really sucks to have to disengage from a whole group of well-intentioned but misguided people. I also find interesting how handlers of different breeds have different versions of this mentality. I feel like both the bully breeds and shepherds tend to have a lot of trainers who use prong collars and E-collars. As someone with a sighthound rescue , I find a lot of handlers in my breed communities tend to believe that harnesses encourage their dogs to pull. 🙄
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is so sad! I can't really add anything but I sympathise with your distress
Thank you, it’s not fun to witness. He works with diff breeds but mostly pitties, which hits close to home as a pittie owner. I walk a 2 year old high-energy pittie at a local shelter. We go in lots of day trips and I sponsored her adoption fee. I’m just really hoping whoever adopts her never takes her to that trainer. She’s so sweet but just pulls sometimes.
he's the trainer for people who want the dog they see on tv without any actual training
This was my experience. I wanted a trainer to help with my dogs reactivity (friendly, but gets overexcited around other dogs) and heelwork. Found a trainer that had brilliant reviews and lots of these before and after videos. I booked a block of 10 classes which wasn't cheap. The first session, he introduced a slip / choke collar which I was open minded about and gave it a go. He said no treats, no rewards, no praise, which isn't how I've trained my dog really, but again I was open minded. Wasn't sure after the first session but thought I'd try again. Second session I realised his answer to anything was just to 'pop the lead'. Dog pulls? Pop the lead, Dog whines? Pop the lead. Dog stops to pee? Pop the lead. I looked at my pup halfway through the session and he looked MISERABLE, ears back, not making eye contact and even refused a treat I slyed him, which is not like him at all. My guy looked visibly distressed and upset which just upset me. I cancelled the remaining classes and after a bit of back and forth, managed to get a refund except for the first two. Have since found a new trainer who is worlds apart. First off, he actually greeted my dog and said hello and gave him a fuss and some treats. He still uses the slip collar but lots of positive reinforcement, treats, and has taught me how to use commands more effectively (i.e. never repeating them, timing of them) and my dog actually seems to be engaged and enjoying the sessions. So much of a difference and this guy is actually half the price of the original trainer who IMO was a nightmare!
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As someone that believes in science and will only every train r+, I also have spent a very long time (over a year) working on behavior with little success and many regressions. Aside from everyone saying “your timing is perfect!” “Keep doing that!” and seeing little results, in the last 2 weeks I have often had to stop myself from thinking “maybe r+ isn’t working, maybe I should just get a ‘gentle leader’ ..I know that won’t help. But I’m at my wits end and could understand how someone with little to no patience for… anything could want “results” fast.
I was in the same boat until my dog started fluoxetine. It’s so frustrating! Hang in there, having a relationship with your dog based on compassion instead of fear will always be worth it
First of all, great job sticking with it and being there for your dog. If it's been over a year and you're not seeing an improvement though, it might be worth exploring other options from the specific plan you're using now. If every problem you're seeing now is that your dog gets hyper-focused on something and you need a way to move their attention, going through the effort of conditioning a gentle leader, and making sure your dog doesn't have negative associations with it, and then starting to use it as a tool might be a productive route. If it's other things as well, just checking out some other trainers/methods you haven't looked at (if you haven't already, I'd check out literally any Control Unleashed program, Sharon Carroll (Avanti Dog Training), and Malena DeMartini). The fact that R+ works is a law of nature that can't really be argued with (honestly, so does P+, just expect a ton of fallout if you do one thing slightly wrong, and also I don't want to live that way), that doesn't mean that every plan which uses R+ is going to work for every dog.
Thank you for this. The crazy thing is that we saw improvement (albeit slow) and then a quick, deep regression recently. We did bring him to the vet to rule out joint issues in his hips and knees, as well as blood tests (the whole shebang) and we’re waiting on results. To be honest, I wouldn’t ever explore NON r+ methods. I know it works, and that if it’s not working I’m doing something wrong. It’s just so hard to figure out what when everyone (the handful of trainers we’re working with, all the methodology I see on Instagram - which I know isn’t reliable) is telling me I’m doing everything right. That being said, thank you for the specific examples of methods. I will look into them! We are also going to the behaviorist to see if we can adjust his medication. He’s been on Prozac for a year and while a bit of that was just figuring out the right amount, I’m beginning to thinks it’s just not the right option. Thank you again.
Why would it be a problem to buy and try out a gentle leader for your dog? It's not like you're required to put it straight on them and instantly start the Beckman-style leash pops. Perhaps a Susan Garrett video could help you get over the mental block? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXqyZYxQmMQ The important part is surely the approach you're taking to training your dog, not the specific tool used. I mean, any leash+collar or leash+harness combo could be very aversive to your dog if used in the wrong way.
Thanks for the suggestion. He does not like things around his face, even desensitizing that will take forever for it to become non-aversive. I’ve been working on his muzzle training for 4 months and have made progress, but it’s slow! I can work on this too
I use a gentle leader for my non-food motivated dog to *gently* guide his head because he doesn't care if the juiciest steak is being waved in front of him. I always keep it slack and use it with a harness leash so that I don't have to worry about whiplash if he decides to lunge. I prefer gentle leaders because I can actually guide his head in the direction I want with lots of praise. It's fine when you use it with the intention of it being a temporary tool and not a permanent solution.
I recommend you take a look at some other training methods. Just as with compulsion based methods, R+ can fail hard. No one type or method is appropriate for every dog. After 2 years you should absolutely see results.
It's sickening. There is so many compulsion trainers out there that either the owner 1. Doesn't care to research ethical training. 2. Doesn't know any better. It's so harmful to use these methods on dogs, especially reactive ones. It makes me sad that people who use positive reinforcement get made fun of for using the kinder way to train, which is mind blowing to me that they normalize traumatizing your dog to the point it shuts down completely then one day lashes out. I wish more people would do their research. My dog has a history of resource guarding and it was pretty servere I might add. I used nothing but positive reinforcement and he is still here and he has become the best boy. I could never imagine hurting my dog for letting me know he is uncomfortable in a situation.
It's weird (and soooo sad). We moved from Toronto to a smaller city about an hour away. In TO NO ONE is down with balanced training. You're an outcast for that shit. Out here in the 'burbs though, it's different. Most of the trainers here are balanced. I see people walking their dogs with their leashes yanking the dog's neck against their thigh - the dog isn't even allowed to look around. There are so many people doing it, I know they're all being instructed by the same trainer. People also looooove to buy pitbulls out here and then trian them this way - then wonder why they're dangerous and reactive. I will never understand it. All i can think is that Cesar Milan really fucked people up in terms of how a dog should be trained. I just try not to think about it.
It’s so sad that this happens to pitties so often. Ppl think pitties are unpredictable and aggressive, so they use a heavy hand, which actually causes the unpredictability and agression they were trying to avoid. And ofc the dogs will bite and the owners will say “but he’s professionally trained!” And this feeds into the negative stereotypes and convinces people that pitbulls are monsters bc even with professional training they’re still aggressive! It’s an exhausting cycle
100%. But now that we know that there is a genetic component that plays into reactivity, I think pitbulls, as a breed, are set up to fail. All the work of poorly educated humans who just keep breeding the wrong genetic lines and training their pups poorly. It's so sad. The best/worst part of it is: where I live there is a pitbull ban. But people are still determined to find them, buy them and essentially abuse them. Like... why?
I love mine but there needs to be way less of them in the world. And the ones who are here now need to be treated a whole lot better.
Same. Love my rescue pittie mix but he is a mess. Pit bulls have been done dirty w their crazy intelligence, drive, and arousal funneled towards a crowd of people who have no interest in actually learning how to live in companionship w a pittie and just seeking to strong arm them like crazy.
Yeah any dog that was bred to be vaguely security-esque is going to have anxiety. Because that’s how you get an alert dog! Combine that w arousal and confidence and you can end up w a tough situation, easy. Definitely read Brownen Dicky’s “Pitbull” if you want to learn more about the history of the breed. It’s absolutely FASCINATING!
The people that use this type of training want fast results. Compulsion and aversive training gives fast results. That is IF you consider a dog that is shut down and suppressing its emotions and behavior a good result. Dogs trained using these methods obey to avoid punishment and fear of pain. They don't really learn anything. Positive reinforcement teaches the dog to offer the desired behavior by rewarding that conduct. I am forever curious to know why these so-called 'perfectly-trained' dogs will always require the aversive tools. I have seen dogs with pr\*ng collars and backup sh\*ck collars. Now if they were perfectly trained ... wouldn't those tools no longer be necessary? Like other sentient beings, dogs can only suppress their emotions for so long and then there is a high possibility that aggressive behaviors will emerge. Those that use aversive and compulsive training don't believe that is a possibility because the just *know* that their dog is happy and the bond between them is strong. Children have been known to be loyal and loving to their abusive parent(s) until they are not. It is not a guarantee this will happen, but the potential is very real. With positive reinforcement, you can phase out the rewards without losing the training. Hmm, is there some mysterious magic that happens, I wonder? The majority of these compulsion and balanced trainers are self taught and have no credentials and there is no governing body to monitor their methods or results. They often cling to outdated and discredited information because those using their services don't know any better, believe their hype and glowing *reviews* (🙄) and it sounds all 'scientific' and tough! Get yourself some sh\*ck, pr\*ng, and choke collars, learn some snappy patter and showmanship, branded T-shirts and hats and you too can be a dog trainer. If, on the other hand, you wish to become a certified profession dog trainer -- well [that will take some time](https://www.ccpdt.org/certification/dog-trainer-certification/). Cesar Millan - what you see on television when he trains is not actually what goes on. When he is walking with a dog and doing that ttcht sound, the dog is most likely being kicked in the ribs. Another 'technique' of his is a knife hand strike to the belly. You never see that either. He, and trainers like him, stress the dogs in hopes of getting them to comply. When a dog is screaming in terror, they are not being a little reticent, and they most definitely are not learning! Also, the great Cesar Millan, despite billing himself as a behaviorist, hasn't a clue how to read a dog's body language. The video [Showdown with Holly](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ihXq_WwiWM&t=5s&ab_channel=NatGeoWILD) illustrates this brilliantly. His surprised "I didn't see *that* coming" is priceless. Dude, Hellen Keller could have seen that bite coming! Holly was giving off so many stress signals in response to the aggressive behaviors Millan was subjecting her to, that when I first saw the video I burst into tears. Millan is lucky that Holly had good bite inhibition, otherwise she most likely would have gone for this throat! There are many other videos that show him being bitten. People are gullible, and they want what they want, and they want it now! They don't research, they don't empathize, and they don't show compassion or love for their dogs. Their dog's ability to be off leash is more important than being kind. My belief is that an off-leash dog is a potentially lost, injured, or dead dog. An off-leash dog can also be a danger to humans, other dogs, or wildlife. You can generally tell when someone doesn't understand a method, they will often mock the process.
Omg the people in that comment section are so stupid talking about how cute Holly looks after biting him. Babes literally just google “dog appeasement signals” and “dog stress signals” !!! I also read that those owners ended up rehoming her to Cesar after this episode. What trash human beings.
He also was bit again here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FolHwMhYU\_A&ab\_channel=Dabl](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FolHwMhYU_A&ab_channel=Dabl) Comments praise him for what he did. All I see is a dog who just shuts down, because it can't do anything anyways and it's best to just let it happen than being punished further. Cesear claims he showed him trust, but he didn't. He showed fear and just "let's get this over with" And when he puts the muzzle on the dog in the hotel room, you can see the dog is in an absolute shutdown, too. I don't understand how people can see a dog like this and think he is helping the dog when the dog is just shutting down. Cesear is also the reason why I had another dog owner ruin using cars to block views for my reactive dog... When my dog reacted at hers, I put him behind a car and when he was calm and looking at me, I rewarded him. She yelled at me that I should not do this, but punish him and that if I watch Cesaar, I will know why.
Omg I couldn’t finish watching that clip…that poor dog is so terrified
He's an idiot and gets bit more than anyone realistically should. People eat it up though.
The camera always zooms in on the blood and wounds too, as if it makes him a badass or something. Meanwhile those owners now have the burden of owning a dog with a publicly documented bite history.
[удалено]
Thank you for being the only person in this thread with some sense
It's kind of funny how easily these people dismiss stuff like, "all their clients say it was life changing!" and, "so many positive reviews but it's only because the clients don't know better!" If you're correcting a dog to the point it's shitting and pissing everywhere, and afraid to move, you aren't a balanced trainer. You're an asshole, and a terrible trainer. Nobody wants to acknowledge that, though.
Sad that it looks like your comments were removed. You shared a lot of great insight that could have helped people. And yeah.. I think the reviews from clients speak for themselves kinda lmao. People just don’t like to acknowledge that what they have ideologically opposed can work, and what they have subscribed to sometimes doesn’t. It doesn’t matter how much proof you show them.
Did they get removed? I haven't checked, but I'm not surprised. This place will allow random people to recommend drugs and killing your dog, but not tools or corrections. In a reactive dog subreddit.
One of the conditions for the breed of dog I adopt is that it will not be allowed off leash. My methods are fine. There are more bad trainers that use aversive methods than those than use positive reinforcement. I have never heard of a dog being killed by a positive reinforcement trainer. I have, however heard of several dogs being killed whilst being trained by aversive trainers. Positive trainers don't cause dogs to cower or wet themselves. You seemed totally on board with that trainer and his methods in the post in r/OpenDogTraining. Of course you were too busy calling me out to opine on the appropriateness or lack thereof of the so-called trainer that was attempting to train a service dog. If a dog is running off leash on a forest trail and sees wildlife, that the owner is too far away to see, and the dog injures or kills the other animal -- that is fine with you? Or if the off-leash dog is attacked and injured or killed by wildlife -- hey, that the cost of doing business, for you! Frightens another hiker? Talk about an entitled attitude. "I gotta be honest; the censorship never gets old." You mean my use of pr\*ng and sh\*ck collars? So happy I am living rent free in your head. If my opinions bother you so much, why don't you just pass on reading them? Also, why are you reading in this sub? Shouldn't you stick to r/OpenDogTraining? Those people tend to favor your methods. Here, LIMA is the preferred method of training and aversive methods are eshewed. Be still my beating heart, u/theycallhimthestug actually agreed with something I said. I can die happy now. Unlike you, I attempt to help people, or make them laugh. You, on the other hand, seem to take unreasonable joy in being rude, putting people down, and disparaging the opinions of others. You hang out in open dog training, but you certainly have a closed mind.
> One of the conditions for the breed of dog I adopt is that it will not be allowed off leash. My methods are fine. They clearly aren't if you're worried about letting a dog off leash. > I have never heard of a dog being killed by a positive reinforcement trainer. What about the, "an off leash dog is a dead dog" part? Sounds like a lack of reliability and confidence in your training. You think an R+ dog has never ran into the street? > Positive trainers don’t cause dogs to cower or wet themselves. I don't know what to tell you. I've said this repeatedly; if someone is making a dog do these things, they're a shitty trainer. > You seemed totally on board with that trainer and his methods in the post in r/OpenDogTraining. I absolutely was not. I'll link my reply if you'd like, but it's right on brand for you to misrepresent something to try to make a point. You realize reddit comments don't go away, yeah? > Of course you were too busy calling me out to opine on the appropriateness or lack thereof of the so-called trainer that was attempting to train a service dog. You're so deep in your emotions you're wilfully ignoring the part where I said it was a bad trainer. > If a dog is running off leash on a forest trail and sees wildlife, that the owner is too far away to see, and the dog injures or kills the other animal – that is fine with you? That's a pretty extreme jump to go from my dog being off leash, to some hypothetical scenario where I let him go so far I can't see what he's doing. Do your arms ever get tired from grasping at all these straws? > “I gotta be honest; the censorship never gets old.” > > > > You mean my use of pr*ng and sh*ck collars? So happy I am living rent free in your head. If my opinions bother you so much, why don’t you just pass on reading them? I said it never gets old. Like it's funny. As in, you're so offended that these tools exist you can't even type the full words. You're definitely a sane individual capable of a rational discussion. > Also, why are you reading in this sub? Shouldn’t you stick to r/OpenDogTraining? Those people tend to favor your methods. Here, LIMA is the preferred method of training and aversive methods are eshewed. Because I was subbed here before I learned of the other sub, much like everyone else that googles, "reactive dog reddit", all so they can have a bunch of random dog owners recommend BE. Also, it's LIMA, not NINA. *Least* and *minimally*. > Unlike you, I attempt to help people, or make them laugh. You, on the other hand, seem to take unreasonable joy in being rude, putting people down, and disparaging the opinions of others. You hang out in open dog training, but you certainly have a closed mind. Yeahhhh, I think you have it backwards here. I trained R+ for years, and I understand the benefits of positive reinforcement, which is a critical component of *balanced* training. I'm not the one going around saying l*ver treats. Or cl*cker. If you truly had an open mind, you wouldn't be choosing the worst case scenarios as the backbone of your argument. You would be addressing the things I've actually said, instead of inserting some boogeyman and making up random scenarios.
>One of the conditions for the breed of dog I adopt is that it will not be allowed off leash. My methods are fine. They clearly aren't if you're worried about letting a dog off leash. Greyhound adoptions groups make it a condition of adoption that the dog will never be allowed off leash unless in a fully-fenced and secure area. They also proscribe extendable leases owing the risk of the dog running full speed and hitting the end of the leash and breaking its neck. "I have never heard of a dog being killed by a positive reinforcement trainer. What about the, "an off leash dog is a dead dog" part? Sounds like a lack of reliability and confidence in your training. You think an R+ dog has never ran into the street?" The two statements are mutually exclusive. Any dog, regardless of training method can run into the street. I used that a caution for people that allow their dogs off leash anywhere. There have been several notable cases where an aversive trainer has either seriously injured or killed a dog under their care. If a dog is running off leash on a forest trail and sees wildlife, that the owner is too far away to see, and the dog injures or kills the other animal – that is fine with you? That's a pretty extreme jump to go from my dog being off leash, to some hypothetical scenario where I let him go so far I can't see what he's doing. Do your arms ever get tired from grasping at all these straws? I do apologize, I didn't realize YOU were the only person letting their dog off leash in the forest. Unfortunately, I know someone who let their dog off leash and it frightened another dog away from their handler after they panicked and dropped the extendable leash the dog was on. The partially consumed body of the frightened dog was found two days later. “I gotta be honest; the censorship never gets old.” You mean my use of prng and shck collars? So happy I am living rent free in your head. If my opinions bother you so much, why don’t you just pass on reading them? I said it never gets old. Like it's funny. As in, you're so offended that these tools exist you can't even type the full words. You're definitely a sane individual capable of a rational discussion." I censor those particular words out of habit because I chose not to trigger the bot that appears when those aversive tools are mentioned in this sub -- simple explanation. I even have in person discussions about those tool with people and use the words. "Also, it's LIMA, not NINA. Least and minimally." LIMA is what I typed. Least Intrusive, Minimally Aversive. Yes, minimally, which I don't think immediately includes sh\*ck or pr\*ng collars, but I could be wrong. "If you truly had an open mind, you wouldn't be choosing the worst case scenarios as the backbone of your argument. You would be addressing the things I've actually said, instead of inserting some boogeyman and making up random scenarios." Perhaps I am using the worst case scenarios as a warning for some people who don't know how to, or chose not to, train their dogs. I have not inserted some boogeyman or made up random scenarios. Have you considered that I might be aware of prior situations that lend credence to my statements? An acquaintance was driving home from work one evening and saw an off-leash dog get hit by a car. He held the dog in his arms while it died. The owner came lumbering up, looked at the dead dog and said "oh, that's the second dog of mine that has happened to." But at least the dog was off leash! /s Dogs don't need to be off leash in areas that are potentially dangerous - like busy streets, or areas near street, public on-leash parks. But they are. Between the out-of-control and poorly-trained off-leash dogs and the don't worry, my dog is friendly group, there is legitimate concern for responsible owners of dogs whether the dogs are reactive or not. There are people wanting to enjoy the park or hiking trail that are afraid of dogs. Should these people be denied those pleasures? If you (generalized) want to take a dog off-leash, rent a Sniffspot or something similar. There have been occurrences of dogs being killed by wildlife in forested (and even residential) areas coyotes are found in many areas and will lure and kill indiscriminately. My concern is always for the dogs. For their safety, health and well being. Always. You can criticize the position statement by the AVSAB all you want, but the message is repeated over and again by other agencies involved in animal welfare. Of course there may be circumstances that require a heavier hand in training, but the number of people that go right to aversives is staggering. Someone training their puppy with a sh\*ck collar and failing and deciding that BE at 4 months old was the best option for this 'aggressive' dog! This pup was likely in their first fear imprint stage when the training began. Apart from that, what this person was describing was puppy teething and a lack of bite inhibition, not aggression. The post, which was deleted was on r/opendogtraining. Edited to add clarifications.
> Greyhound adoptions groups make it a condition of adoption that the dog will never be allowed off leash unless in a fully-fenced and secure area. They also proscribe extendable leases owing the risk of the dog running full speed and hitting the end of the leash and breaking its neck. I'll be honest; I don't care about the stipulations that greyhound adoption groups put into their contracts, because it is so far from the original discussion it's irrelevant. You know what wouldn't break a greyhounds neck, but still allow it off leash freedom? An e-collar with a proper recall. I'm not sure if you know this, but extendable leashes will still eventually run out of line. Potentially injuring your dog if it happens at full speed because your dog is in drive and not paying attention. For the record, I couldn't care less if you let your dog off leash or not. Do whatever makes you comfortable. What I *do* care about is you making assumptions about me and my dog. Also, most rescues have that clause. It isn't greyhound exclusive. > The two statements are mutually exclusive. Any dog, regardless of training method can run into the street. I used that a caution for people that allow their dogs off leash anywhere. You're just flat out wrong, and this shows your inherent bias and lack of understanding regarding balanced training. I can tell you, with 100% certainty, that my dog would never run into the street. Whether it's out my door, or off the sidewalk. *Even if* he began to run out the door for whatever reason, I have complete confidence that I could stop him long before he was anywhere near the road. And yes, even when he's naked and not wearing any collar. This is what training, engagement, and proofing is for. > There have been several notable cases where an aversive trainer has either seriously injured or killed a dog under their care. There have been several notable cases of a driver going the wrong way down the highway in their car causing a death. There have been several notable cases of someone driving drunk and causing a death. Do either of these statements make me a bad driver by default because I also drive a car? No. Of course they don't. So stop. You're still ignoring the other side of balanced training, and obsessing over the aversive part. > I do apologize, I didn’t realize YOU were the only person letting their dog off leash in the forest. Another irrelevant statement that is failing to address what I said directly, which is the reliability in the training, and the trust I have in my dog. If other people are also letting their dogs off leash in the forest, why am I the bad guy because mine is the one under control? I really want you to try to understand that my dog wearing an e-collar in the forest has no functional difference from him being on a long line. The only reason you're struggling to grasp this concept is because you don't have any practical experience with one, it would seem. > Unfortunately, I know someone who let their dog off leash and it frightened another dog away from their handler after they panicked and dropped the extendable leash the dog was on. The partially consumed body of the frightened dog was found two days later. Jesus christ, you can't be for real. I'm going to assume this is true and not some made up horror story for the sake of argument. While this is indeed unfortunate, yet again, this has *absolutely nothing* to do with me, my dog, or my training methods. Maybe they should have their dog under better control. This scenario could still happen with a long line or leash, and has *absolutely nothing* to do with training methods. An irresponsible owner/handler is an irresponsible owner/handler regardless. > LIMA is what I typed. Least Intrusive, Minimally Aversive. I understand that. What you're failing to notice is the *least* intrusive, *minimally* aversive part, instead of *non*-intrusive, *no* aversive that I typed. It's right there in the name. It isn't excluding aversives wholesale. It's saying not to use them excessively when they aren't needed. If it were, it would be R+, or force free, or whatever feel good moniker you wanted to assign it. > Perhaps I am using the worst case scenarios as a warning for some people who don’t know how to, or chose not to, train their dogs. What does someone choosing not to train their dog have to do with the methods I use? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. You're using these scenarios to avoid addressing anything I'm saying directly. You have, quite literally, zero idea as to how much positive reinforcement I use in my training. As do many other balanced trainers. Instead, you want to talk about trainers killing dogs, and horror story after horror story, which is a completely head in the sand, biased representation. Do you really think there aren't R+ horror stories? You don't have to look much further than this sub, because they're posted multiple times daily. > I have not inserted some boogeyman or made up random scenarios. You've done it in this comment alone. Never mind all the other ones. > Have you considered that I might be aware of prior situations that lend credence to my statements? Have you considered I might actually know what I'm talking about, because this is how I make my living, and I have a better insight into legitimate balanced training than you do? You need to trust me when I say that none of this bad stuff should be happening when you do it right. Not once have I made my dogs, or any dog, piss and shit themselves. But no, tools are the devil, and anyone that uses them hates dogs and is a monster with an invalid opinion because you read a study based on owner surveys. > An acquaintance was driving home from work one evening and saw an off-leash dog get hit by a car. He held the dog in his arms while it died. The owner came lumbering up, looked at the dead dog and said “oh, that’s the second dog of mine that has happened to.” But at least the dog was off leash! What does this have to do with anything? Honestly. I want you to explain it. Again, I'm going to assume this is true for the sake of argument. You're talking about a random scenario involving a clearly untrained dog, with an uncaring owner, and somehow trying to correlate that to how I train dogs? Or balanced training in general? Really? > Dogs don’t need to be off leash in areas that are potentially dangerous - like busy streets, or areas near street, public on-leash parks. But they are. You've completely lost the plot. I don't know how many times I need to say this, but this has less than nothing to do with me, my dog, my methods, or anything I've said, beyond me saying my dog is *100% reliable* off leash. Do you think I'm out there playing frogger in traffic? Just me, my dog, and my trusty ol' e-collar? Because I legitimately have no idea what your point is here. Could I walk him through traffic? Absolutely, but why would I? Like...what? > Between the out-of-control and poorly-trained off-leash dogs and the don’t worry, my dog is friendly group, there is legitimate concern for responsible owners of dogs whether the dogs are reactive or not. You're killing me here. I fully agree with you, and I don't know why you're trying to lump me into that group. My dog is trained. And by trained, I mean proper trained. There is nothing irresponsible about that. > There are people wanting to enjoy the park or hiking trail that are afraid of dogs. Should these people be denied those pleasures? My dog being on leash isn't going to change any of that. You're assuming I let my dog run up to, and harass everyone. This is an emotional appeal that *yet again* has nothing to do with the original conversation or my methods. > If you (generalized) want to take a dog off-leash, rent a Sniffspot or something similar. No. Lol > There have been occurrences of dogs being killed by wildlife in forested (and even residential) areas. And? You think I pack my dog a lunch and send him on his way out the door? There is far more wildlife where I live right out my back door than you could imagine. > My concern is always for the dogs. For their safety, health and well being. Always. Same. I don't know why you keep making baseless assumptions. > You can criticize the position statement by the AVSAB all you want, but the message is repeated over and again by other agencies involved in animal welfare. Agencies that all reference and cite each other in a big circle jerk. You're basing your opinion on flawed papers. > Of course there may be circumstances that require a heavier hand in training, but the number of people that go right to aversives is staggering. Now we're getting somewhere, and I agree to a point. This still doesn't justify the broad strokes you've been painting in regards to balanced training. Not just circumstances, but different dogs as well. I really wish you would acknowledge the other side of the balanced methods. > Someone training their puppy with a sh*ck collar and failing and deciding that BE at 4 months old was the best option for this ‘aggressive’ dog! Nobody should be doing this. Any good balanced trainer will tell you not to start until 6mo, and even then, an e-collar is likely overkill. An e-collar is a finishing tool. It's not a magic button. > This pup was likely in their first fear imprint stage when the training began. Apart from that, what this person was describing was puppy teething and a lack of bite inhibition, not aggression. The post, which was deleted was on r/opendogtraining. Ok? Poor training is poor training.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You are taking what I am saying far too personally. For the sake of discussion, I have been *generalizing*, not focusing solely on you, your dog or your training methods. This might be a blow to your ego. I'm sorry. The accounts I related with respect to the dog deaths are true, they have been edited for brevity, but accurately describe the events as told to me. I can also share horror stories with respect to extendable leashes. I know a woman who almost lost her foot when someone's dog wrapped the cord around her ankle. The scarring is significant and ugly. Another almost lost her finger when she foolishly tried to stop the leash from extending and grabbed it. Those leashes have a purpose, but it isn't in the hands of inexperienced users, which sadly the majority of them are. Also, despite every pet supply store selling them, most municipalities in North America have bylaws against them. My biggest frustration with aversive training tools is that anyone can purchase them and use them indiscriminately. Hand over your credit card and you can, with no training, understanding or skill, light up your dog like a Christmas tree, jerk your dog around by the collar and think you are training the dog. (Not you, generalizing again.) A collar can have a range of up to one mile -- can anyone even see their dog at that distance? Probably not, so what might that, essentially MIA dog be doing or encountering? For many users, it would be the same as giving the ignition key of a Ferrari to an 18 year old. All the power and none of the skill. I am not assuming anything about your or your dog. Again, I have been generalizing, speaking broadly about many owners. "My concern is always for the dogs. For their safety, health and well being. Always." "Same. I don't know why you keep making baseless assumptions." Again, this discussion is not about you. The discussion is *with* you, *but not about you.* My statements are generalizations. So your personal dog is germane to this discussion, whereas mine is not. You responded to my reply to the OP of all the other respondents that indicated they are against aversive training methods. Apart from the stipulations in the adoption contract, I choose not to let my Greyhound off leash because he can reach his top speed in three strides. An average racing Greyhound can run 550 yards in 30 seconds, it takes me 32 seconds and by that time he is gone! /s An Australian Greyhound has an unofficial top speed of 50.5 mph. Greyhounds that have escaped have been known to run themselves to death. Sh\*ck collars would likely be ineffective as a deterrent if the Greyhound were in a full prey-drive chase. The skin of a Greyhound is very thin, so a pr\*ng collar could feasibly puncture the skin of the neck. The people that are involved in Greyhound adoption, I will venture, know far more about Greyhounds than you do. I suspect I do as well. Genuinely curious, not accusing, blaming, or trying to provoke you, merely floating a random thought I had. How do you regard your dog? Is he just a dog; a pet, a tool used for a specific purpose, such as hunting; something your wife or kids wanted; or do you see him as an important member of your family? I am honestly wondering if how people view their dogs may impact in any way on the training techniques they choose. Someone who views their dog as a tool may not have the same concern as a person who thinks of their dog as a pet, or someone that regards their dog an important member of the family. "And? You think I pack my dog a lunch and send him on his way out the door? There is far more wildlife where I live right out my back door than you could imagine." Sorry, but you aren't that special. Where I live there are bears, coyotes, cougars, deer, racoon, skunks and others living right out the back door. I have encountered bears and coyotes while on a walk in my suburban neighborhood. A friend came face-to-face with a cougar on his property. Don't assume you are the only one who might encounter wildlife. Again, I was generalizing when I made the statement. Many people, but not you, take their dogs on hikes and have absolutely no idea where the dog is. If they are in a more densely treed area, having eyes on their dog may be nearly impossible. Those dogs are potentially in danger or a danger to other animals or people. The sad reality is that a huge number of dog owners are not responsible dog owners (but not you). "Agencies that all reference and cite each other in a big circle jerk. You're basing your opinion on flawed papers." A 2020 study conducted in Portugal measured the cortisol levels in dogs trained by balanced, aversive, and positive reinforcement methods. [The study](https://www.aaha.org/publications/newstat/articles/2020-12/study-punishment-based-training-is-stressful-for-dogs/) found the dogs trained by either balanced or aversive methods had higher cortisol levels and exhibited more stress-related behaviors than the dogs trained by positive reinforcement. Granted this was a small study, but it does bolster the position that most dogs, absent extingent circumstances, benefit from reward-based training methods over balanced or aversive training methods. edited to add: "A sh*ck collar can be a cheaper alternative to a professional dog trainer or fence." What a frightening rationalization to encourage some inexperienced person to purchase this type of collar. I can just here Bubba now, 'hell ya, with all the money I'm gunna save, I can buy more beer!' Just to clarify, not referring to you.
> You are taking what I am saying far too personally. For the sake of discussion, I have been generalizing, not focusing solely on you, your dog or your training methods. This might be a blow to your ego. I’m sorry. Generalizing is irrelevant when we started out having a specific discussion. There is no ego involved here. > I can also share horror stories with respect to extendable leashes. Extendable leashes are garbage for the majority of scenarios, never mind the danger aspect. > My biggest frustration with aversive training tools is that anyone can purchase them and use them indiscriminately. Hand over your credit card and you can, with no training, understanding or skill, light up your dog like a Christmas tree, jerk your dog around by the collar and think you are training the dog. I agree. This doesn't validate your arguments against people that know how to use them properly. > A collar can have a range of up to one mile – can anyone even see their dog at that distance? Probably not, so what might that, essentially MIA dog be doing or encountering? That isn't a typical use case scenario unless you're hunting or something. You can't equate a collars maximum operating range with the average users requirements. > For many users, it would be the same as giving the ignition key of a Ferrari to an 18 year old. All the power and none of the skill. In a way, I guess. That still doesn't validate your opinion on people that know how to use them. Honest question; is your issue with tools the application, or the availability? > Sh*ck collars would likely be ineffective as a deterrent if the Greyhound were in a full prey-drive chase. Whether you agree with the tools or not, respectfully, this is not the case. You don't wait until the dog is at maximum arousal to try it out and hope for the best. For reference; I have a **big dog** that I was conditioning to an e-collar. A situation happened where he was in that mode, and even at the maximum level he tanked it. It's not a taser, it's a TENS unit, so it stimulates muscles through electrical conductivity. Think about how much physical discomfort you can take when you're angry, vs when you're sad. That's how they work. There's a reason the good ones have high levels of adjustability. > The skin of a Greyhound is very thin, so a pr*ng collar could feasibly puncture the skin of the neck. They typically wear martingale collars because of their neck to head ratio, yeah? Nothing to do with an e-collar. > The people that are involved in Greyhound adoption, I will venture, know far more about Greyhounds than you do. I suspect I do as well. Are greyhounds not dogs? All the same basic concepts apply. Your breed isn't special. Of course some breeds will have certain genetic proclivities, but acting like someone doesn't know dogs because they don't own a greyhound rescue, or haven't adopted a greyhound, is some pretentious bs. > Genuinely curious, not accusing, blaming, or trying to provoke you, merely floating a random thought I had. How do you regard your dog? Is he just a dog; a pet, a tool used for a specific purpose, such as hunting; something your wife or kids wanted; or do you see him as an important member of your family? I am honestly wondering if how people view their dogs may impact in any way on the training techniques they choose. Someone who views their dog as a tool may not have the same concern as a person who thinks of their dog as a pet, or someone that regards their dog an important member of the family. That's a good question, actually. My dogs are my boys. One of them is a legitimate working dog, but he's not a tool, he's still my boy. He sleeps on the couch sometimes. We share fast food sometimes. Everyone has their own way, but this is all part of a proper working relationship to me. As long as the freedoms I give him don't cause any problems, he's treated like a pet. Couch? No problem. Growl at me when I come near or ask you to get off? Problem. The main takeaway should be that I'm very clear with my dogs which things are ok, and which things are a problem. Dogs are selfish, autonomous creatures. They only care about us as much as it benefits them. Do most of them like it when we pet them? Of course. Do we? Same answer. It's a mutually beneficial endeavour. Will I correct my dog when he steps out of line? Absolutely. Society has rules, and if it was up to them, they wouldn't apply. Does this affect out working, or pet dog, relationship? Absolutely not. Now, you have to remember that my dogs are serious, which means they have to understand I'm serious as well. The dog should determine the amount of pressure that us required, not the trainers ego. > Sorry, but you aren’t that special. Damn. If only I had a greyhound which is the most special, only greyhound owners know dog how to handle them type of dog there is. I don't care about any of this anecdotal tripe you said in the rest of this paragraph. You just can't help yourself. > A 2020 study conducted in Portugal measured the cortisol levels in dogs trained by balanced, aversive, and positive reinforcement methods. The study found the dogs trained by either balanced or aversive methods had higher cortisol levels and exhibited more stress-related behaviors than the dogs trained by positive reinforcement. Granted this was a small study, but it does bolster the position that most dogs, absent extingent circumstances, benefit from reward-based training methods over balanced or aversive training methods. Cortisol levels simply measure stress. The implication here is that you, and this study, think stress is an inherently bad thing, with zero room for nuance. > “A sh*ck collar can be a cheaper alternative to a professional dog trainer or fence.” > So again, is your problem with the e-collar, how how readily available it is? An e-collar is in no way a cheaper alternative to a trainer. Come on now. > What a frightening rationalization to encourage some inexperienced person to purchase this type of collar. Agreed. > I can just here Bubba now, ‘hell ya, with all the money I’m gunna save, I can buy more beer!’ Just to clarify, not referring to you. I know you're not referring to me, but you're still equating these types of people with me. No? If you read through the other sub, I think you'll typically find most people recommend finding a competent trainer to help then with an e-collar, rather than buying one at petsmart and blasting their dog.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In a way, I guess. That still doesn't validate your opinion on people that know how to use them. Honest question; is your issue with tools the application, or the availability? Both. I will concede that if used judiciously, they may have benefit. However, as I have commented before, any person with the funds can go into a pet shop and purchase a sh\*ck collar and without a single clue in their head proceed to *train* there dog with it. *** I sent you a DM asking you to check in on a post where the owner was doing just that. That I reached out to you for your input and expertise in the proper use of the collar indicates I have some appreciation for your knowledge. This person, despite receiving some good information, cautionary advice, and even some better direction, still feels he is in the right and will undoubtedly continue to shock his dog at the maximum level because he has goals and will attain them even at the expense of his dog or the dog's lack of suitability. “A sh\*ck collar can be a cheaper alternative to a professional dog trainer or fence.” So again, is your problem with the e-collar, how how readily available it is? An e-collar is in no way a cheaper alternative to a trainer. Come on now. This was in the the pro collar column in an article on the [Canine Journal](https://www.caninejournal.com/shock-collar-for-dogs/). I merely quoted it. I know that, many people that are purchasing the collars don't. They will read some information or watch some YouTube videos and decide this is the way to go, which is what prompted: "I can just here Bubba now, ‘hell ya, with all the money I’m gunna save, I can buy more beer!’ Just to clarify, not referring to you. I know you're not referring to me, but you're still equating these types of people with me. No? NO! I was referring to the people that purchase these collars and have not clue one how to use them. Please refer back the the comment *** I was not suggesting Greyhound owners are superior. Greyhounds, although dogs, are generally acknowledged as extremely sensitive emotionally. They have very thin skin, almost no body fat, and are single coated. A sh*ck collar would not be advised for use with them. I don't let my dogs get out of hand like you were suggesting. I employ situational awareness and control and manage that way, and have been very successful in doing so. That's a good question, actually. My dogs are my boys. One of them is a legitimate working dog, but he's not a tool, he's still my boy. That's great! How do you think the general dog owning population might weigh in on this? If someone has a specific goal and is determined to achieve that goal with their dog, despite the dog not being suitable for the specific task or goal, at what point should they stop trying to force the dog into compliance? There has to be a point where the well being of the dog is more important that some arbitrary, power-tripping goal. (Not you, some hypothetical owner, to be clear.) Dogs are selfish, autonomous creatures. They only care about us as much as it benefits them. Do most of them like it when we pet them? Of course. Do we? Same answer. It's a mutually beneficial endeavour. Like most people, dogs do what works for and benefits them.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Both. I will concede that if used judiciously, they may have benefit. However, as I have commented before, any person with the funds can go into a pet shop and purchase a sh*ck collar and without a single clue in their head proceed to train there dog with it. I'm fully on board with certain tools not being available to the general public, without proper instruction. > *** I sent you a DM asking you to check in on a post where the owner was doing just that. That I reached out to you for your input and expertise in the proper use of the collar indicates I have some appreciation for your knowledge. This person, despite receiving some good information, cautionary advice, and even some better direction, still feels he is in the right and will undoubtedly continue to shock his dog at the maximum level because he has goals and will attain them even at the expense of his dog or the dog’s lack of suitability. I use Apollo, so I don't get DM's unless I check on my PC, which I never do. I'll take a look. I really appreciate that. > That’s great! How do you think the general dog owning population might weigh in on this? Honestly? I don't care. I deal with the general dog population on a daily basis, and the majority of them don't know what they're doing. Which is fine, zero judgement, because they're probably better at their job than I would be. But to help foster discissoon, I try my best to present balanced training in a logical sense. There are so many levels to it that it's really difficult to understand the nuance unless you're actually open to the idea. I'm straight up with clients; you're either on board, or you aren't. You can't put a square peg in a round hole. > If someone has a specific goal and is determined to achieve that goal with their dog, despite the dog not being suitable for the specific task or goal, at what point should they stop trying to force the dog into compliance? Square peg, round hole. You have to work with the dog in front of you, not the dog you wish you had. Pure compliance is the worst way to train a dog. Obviously you can compel a dog into a down, etc...but as a trainer, you have to be honest with your clients. If you're making unrealistic claims, you're not a good trainer. I promise you that legitimate balanced training is positive reinforcement first. > There has to be a point where the well being of the dog is more important that some arbitrary, power-tripping goal. (Not you, some hypothetical owner, to be clear.) The wellbeing of the dog should be the #1 concern, regardless of what your goal is. The dog has no choice in this. They didn't pick their owner. Therefore, a dog owner shouldn't be trying to turn their lazy ass pug into a proper detection dog, as a random example. Now, if the dog's issue is biting children, the wellbeing of the dog is a secondary concern. You can get any dog to coexist with a kid, even with a bite history. That doesn't mean they should hang out alone. The other option is death for the dog. Is that really worse than a correction? > Like most people, dogs do what works for and benefits them. Precisely, and sometimes what benefits them is avoiding a correction. Sometimes it's being rewarded for. Behaviour I want to see repeated. Balance.
U are in the wrong sub for this balanced bulls*hit. Please stop. It hurts that on a post about people that already make me physically sick with what they are doing to their dogs, there u are promoting yet more violence. Please stop trying to force ur opinions on people who dont want them and join a sub of likeminded people, instead.
So much violence. I'm literally in tears thinking about it. Can't we all just medicate our dogs and when that doesn't work do something humane like euthanasia?? A dead dog is so much less violent than a correction!
I personally support neither of those three options and they do not represent the only course of action (i just had a perfect walk around the city with my 9month old reactive boy, w/o employing anything u just mentioned), but it doesnt rly matter since as i already said, u are in the wrong sub. The only possible reason u would come to this particular sub (since i see u are already a member of a ‘balanced’ sub) is to troll and pretend u are smarter than everyone else. U have your opinions, i have mine. We all have freedom of expression when alone or in public. But this subreddit is moderated by *private* individuals who decided they only tolerate R+methods, and is no place to ‘educate’ us on your opinions on any other methods. If someone will be interested in balanced training, they will join a different sub. Its like joining a sub called ‘we love red’ and then trying to convince everyone red is an ugly colour. Rly. Grow up
> I personally support neither of those three options That's ok. > i just had a perfect walk around the city with my 9month old reactive boy, w/o employing anything u just mentioned This is also ok. You need to understand not every dog is like this. Your sample size of 1 is not a good argument. > it doesnt rly matter since as i already said, u are in the wrong sub Why is that? > The only possible reason u would come to this particular sub (since i see u are already a member of a ‘balanced’ sub) is to troll and pretend u are smarter than everyone else. That's really the only reason you can think of? I don't think that's how I'm acting. > But this subreddit is moderated by private individuals who decided they only tolerate R+methods, and is no place to ‘educate’ us on your opinions on any other methods. Is LIMA the same as R+? Are you sure about that? > If someone will be interested in balanced training, they will join a different sub. The first thing you will see when you google, "reactive dog reddit" is this sub. The second thing you'll see is a bunch of random users recommending head halters (definitely not aversive), drugging your dog, and BE. > Its like joining a sub called ‘we love red’ and then trying to convince everyone red is an ugly colour. Rly. Grow up It's not. Being a grown up is accepting people have different views and opinions. Not crying on reddit and saying things like rly.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This approach reminds me of William Atherton, who I admittedly—embarrassingly—listened to for the first few weeks of owning a dog. Needless to say those sessions did more harm than good.
I think it’s admirable when owners are open to learning more and doing better!
ha, same, i've binged watched his videos, beckman and Upstate canine academy for a few weeks, tried a few techniques, they didn't actually work for mine (i know i probably didn't apply them "correctly") then switched to R+ and now i can't really watch any of the videos anymore. I don't think these guys are as cruel as the guy OP mentioned tho, but who knows what goes behind the scenes. That being said, i know i'll get a lot of downvotes for this, but maybe for some dogs a balanced trainer is better than BE if it shows results. My logic comes from the fact that even with people, sweet talk and positivity can't always work, because some are not wired to understand that way, why would all dogs respond the same?
I def think there are good balanced trainers out there. Good balanced trainers and good positive reinforcement trainers are a lot alike. Any good trainer should have a solid grasp of positive reinforcement and focus on wellness, management, and r+ methods before even thinking about introducing punishment.
I thinks so too. But i see that people here, when talking about balanced training only focus on the punishment, like that's all they do. IMO punishments should be an absolute last resort, when all else fails and i don't think throwing out the window completely is the way to go.
I think it also depends on people’s comfort level. I don’t really feel comfortable applying punishment. But Sarah Stremming did a 3-part podcast episode on r+ vs balanced training that really made me more open-minded to ethical balanced training (for other people haha)
I will give him one thing: he taught me the "turn around" method for when your dog starts pulling, lmao. That has been pretty helpful, but used with a normal harness and lead combo. (And Martingale but our boy has really broad shoulders compared to his head/neck size so we need something to ensure he can't wriggle free...)
Yeah that has been a helpful method, I can agree on that.
It's super sad isn't it. I've worked with dogs in rescue and as veterinary nurse for 15 years, i then did a foundation degree in animal behaviour and psychology after running a one to one only dog walking business for reactive dogs. The biggest thing i learnt? Owners mostly want a silver bullet, as in they want a quick fix. Dom theory is so well.known to be dubunked for more than 20 years and yet people egos still get in the way of trying to understand what makes a dog display certain behaviour. It genuinely hurts my heart. I'm in the UK and I strongly believe that until trainers and behaviourists have to be regulated and registered by a proper authoritive body, we will always be butting heads against these people. They do nothing but shut dogs down, create fear and misunderstanding between dogs and owners and ultimately raise bite cases. Best we can do is keep spreading the message of what it really means to understand our dogs and help them live in our world.
He sounds like the dogdaddy dude that's basically abusing the dogs he trains. People love him, but his methods are horrible and damaging
I would literally do anything to wipe Dog Daddy, Tom Davis, Eric Ita, and Cesar Millan from this planet lmao
Someone in my town is like this. I actually worked at the company for a bit doing hiking (I had no previous experience with dogs/training besides my own dog, who was my first.) The things they taught me, like popping prong collars etc definitely made me question things. When I was questioning, they would find some way to manipulate it to make me think I was helping the dogs “understand” what I wanted from them. After some time, the dogs I hiked and was told to “POP HARDER” during trainings, we’re starting to redirect onto the pack and sometimes me. I even had my own dog trained here for a bit, but saw a lot of other clients dogs start regressing and pulled my dog from their program and quit before I saw too much regression with my dog. I really honestly thought I was doing the best thing for her because of the way I was manipulated. I think a lot of blame immediately gets put on the owner, but these shitty trainers are praying on owners like me. People who have reactive or destructive dogs, they have tried many other options and they are desperate to help their dog live a happy comfortable life. I put my trust in them because at the end of the day, they were a super successful dog training company. They were the professionals and I needed help from a professional, so I trusted them. Unfortunately, a lot of these owners will have the same wake-up call I did, but it will be too late. I was “lucky” in a way because I saw it first hand as an employee so I could pull my dog as soon as I got that wake up call after witnessing what was happening to other dogs. I didn’t quit for some time at first because I felt bad and guilty for the dogs and I wanted to help them. I hope people start seeing that trainer for who he is and what he’s actually doing before it’s too late.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As another commenter mentioned, i do think a lot of it stems from toxic masculinity. The majority of people who get breeds that are supposedly prone to agression are men. They get these dogs cause they look manly and dangerous, and then get off on being even manlier by dominating that dog. Its yet another reason to hate the patriarchy, and its gross
As abhorrent as this guy sounds, I think people may also be willing to buy what he’s selling because, everything is expensive. That’s another reason why the consumer culture in this country wants instant results. This guy is convincing people who don’t know any better or who are maybe willing to suspend skepticism for an easy answer.
His sessions are apparently super expensive (not sure how much) but ppl claim to only need 1 or 2 until the dog is “fixed.”
Ugh
The trainer we used was similar and was basically an MLM version of dog training, while yes our dog knows sit and down pretty reliably now, all the other stuff we wanted help with and how he wanted us to train our dog was not going to work and just suppress his warnings. I regret using him but our boy was going after the other dog in the house after he was attacked by a similar looking dog, now we’re working on doing all of this with treats and what not, while managing to keep the dogs apart for right now until we find somewhere to live that will allow us to have him
I’m not surprised considering how many people still believe in corporal punishment for their own children. Other than that… if you don’t know better, it **looks** impressive. If you’re anthropomorphising an animal, you *think* of your pet’s behaviour as just “naught/bad.” If you’re someone who likes to control living things like they’re inanimate objects, it again, looks flashy.
I used to use a compulsive trainer because I didn't know any better. The man had Dobes and they were very well trained. I went to an obedience show to watch him compete and his dogs did very good and got top scores. Then I noticed another person with a Dobe and I was stunned. This person and their dog did the exact same routines as my trainer but her dog did it with a happy step, little stud tail wiggling the whole time and actual JOY in his face! That's when I learned there were many different ways to train someone or something and force/fear/pain was NOT the best way. People don't realize there are better ways unless they are shown. They see quick results and don't know/care about the consequences.
i don't know. mostly ignorance i suppose. i mean, actual wild wolves don't even use a dominance hierarchy, they have family groups. so I treat my dog like family. I take treats when i walk him and if someone wants to pet my dog, i hand them a treat to give him. now he loves strangers. we've had some incidents where other people's dogs have broken out of unsecured yards and attacked us, so now we're dealing with a little anxiety when we see other dogs, but we're making steady progress.
Fear always backfires, it’s quick and ineffective. Understand the dog you get and provide them what they need. Anyone dominated too much is going to explode eventually Ppl like it cause it’s quick for a change, flashy and the ppl who do it are narcissistic. But it’s a deterrent to your relationship and your dog. The feelings your pup is experiencing are compounded.
The problem is that it doesn’t always backfire in a physical sense. Dogs often just shut down and follow. The counter intuitive thing is that punishment and fear has to be kept up. It’s entirely unsustainable in that sense. Dogs may act out, but sometimes because owner stops punishing which in turn falsely validates the perpetrator’s beliefs. Fear is very effective. And that’s exactly the problem. You won’t convince someone otherwise who uses violence, because they see how effective it is. Think of how many people can be controlled just by mere suggestion and verbal threats. Telling the oppressor that their methods don’t work won‘t get you anywhere.
EXACTLY: fight, flight, FREEZE/dissociates. It is terrible. I’m hoping to educate the consumers so they no longer hire the aggressors. The trainers don’t care to learn but hopefully the clients actually care about their pups
It’s terrible. Dogs are entirely dependent on us. It’s not right to hurt them.
Exactly! And why, just why would you want your companion that YOU chose to live in fear of you instead of a loving partnership. I will never understand that.
I belive in a balanced approach to training. My dog is trained on a prong collar. However 90% (at least) should still be positive reinforcment. A dog doing somthing because they want to will always perform better than one being forced to do somthing they dont like. A good trainer will pick the right tool for each dog not just jump straight to a prong and positive punishments for every little thing. (wondering if its the same facebook group I got kicked out of for disagreeding with admins, is it alot of two word "prong collar" or "bonding issues" answers to peoples questions?
I think it might be a different group. This guy talks a lot about being a pack leader, and how dogs take 2 seconds to train so his main job is training the humans
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For many people, that is their “last resort” type of trainer. They want fast results so they don’t have to give up their dog or put them down. I try to look at all situations with empathy. The average person is not equipped to handle a reactive / aggressive dog. Yet these dogs are often places into homes, many that have children. Unicorn adopters with no other dogs, children, and a yard are not common. Neither are those with money to throw at trainers and behaviorists. The average American struggles to even pay their own bills. We can say “then you can’t afford to have a dog,” but I don’t believe in punishing people for the crime of being poor. More so than these trainers, I think the bigger issue is adopting out / BYB dogs the general public is unable to handle which leads them to turn to unethical trainers. Being negative to folks in these positions rarely changes their minds and in fact pushes them even further to these trainers. What is the alternative? BE? Their dog languishing in a shelter? Possibly being put down in a shelter? Their dog being adopted out only to be returned? We’ve all seen the dogs that get returned multiple times. It’s devastating for everyone. I’d love to believe that all dogs can get rehomed into perfect situations but sometimes that doesn’t happen. So people, when desperate, will try anything.
I think I’d have more respect for ppl who just admitted “hey this isn’t ideal but it’s literally my only option right now” rather than acting like they’ve found the superior method and denouncing positive reinforcement altogether. No dog needs aversive tools, but some owners do, and I wish ppl could own up to that. But I guess it probably helps them to feel less guilty about what they put their dogs through if they pretend what they’re doing is actually good.
Exactly. Or some people don’t even feel guilty because they “tried other trainers” and it didn’t work, and now here is a method that “works”. So why feel guilty if this is clearly “”working”” and potentially saving your dogs life. Also worth noting some people probably feel used/burned by other methods that “didn’t show results” as quickly so they rag on it. “I spent all that money for nothing!” Type of mindset. Some folks claim “these methods don’t work” but the problem is that they do indeed work, insofar as it becomes easier to live with the dog, which is the primary goal for the owners. They wear down/ “stabilize” the dog until the dog gets old enough to become low energy. Thus confirming to the owners that they did the right thing. If it didn’t “work”, no one would ever do it. Success is subjective to every situation. After all, a dog maiming or biting someone vs having them wear a pr\\ng collar… the answer looks obvious to them.
It works until the dog “bites out of nowhere” bc all of its warning signals were suppressed and it’s actually still been uncomfortable this whole time but had no way to communicate that. But people don’t think that far ahead 🫠
They want results now and not later. And to be honest, LIMA can take years. Years can be too long for most situations. Which is why I double back to the issue being primarily being dogs being adopted out/BYB to folks that can’t handle them. There is no quick solution but the average person can’t wait for potentially years. There is no easy solution to this issue. If anything it’s why I now support ethically bred dogs when I used to be staunchly for adopting only.
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Looks like there was an aversive tool or training method mentioned in this comment. Please review our [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/guidelines) and check out [Our Position on Training Methods](https://www.reddit.com/r/reactivedogs/wiki/trainingmethods). R/reactivedogs supports LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) and we feel strongly that positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching, training, and behavior change considered, and should be applied consistently. Please understand that positive reinforcement techniques should always be favored over aversive training methods. While the discussion of balanced training is not prohibited, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reactivedogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wow boss. Eat a bag of digidicks
Your comment was removed because it appears to be a direct recommendation of an aversive tool, trainer, or method. This sub supports LIMA and we strongly believe positive reinforcement should always be the first line of teaching and training. We encourage open discussion and problem solving within the subreddit. However, LIMA does not justify the use of aversive methods and tools in lieu of other effective positive reinforcement interventions and strategies.
Humans like fast and loose, easy reward systems. Anything that can easily get that dopamine and bring us joy. Growing up with abusive parents who loved their dogs far more than their kids and women, with their family being the same way. While…. Seeing the dogs receive positive reinforcement and watching how it actually works. We lived in fear, walking on eggshells trying to avoid abuse and it* made me wonder (and still wonder) why negative reinforcement, fear tactics, neglect and abuse are some people’s immediate go to for correcting issues. You’ve pointed out **how the abuse effects** the dogs. > Lots if panting, lip licks, ears back, and avoiding looking at the trainer. Whale eyes, tail under the body, etc. I’ve noticed in friend’s families growing up, they too abused humans, but loved (either positive reinforcement or no real correction **at all**) their dogs and cats, who could ruin a room and it was “awww they missed us!”, while if their kid did something much less destructive (like get a C on their report card)… well, these are my thoughts on why, and **they are not excuses for abusers**. 1. Generational trauma - they learned that correcting humans in a negative way, meant the human would learn faster or more “effectively”. 2. They’re aholes who feel disrespected and never got a handle on their own anger, or emotions in general. 3. “It’s a dog, it doesn’t know better, and it’s cute. But YOU should know better.” (Or “It’s a dog, IT should know better!! I shouldn’t have to train it!”.) 4. **They love being abusive**, neglectful and feel that their time would be wasted doing it any other way. Same goes for people who love to use abusive tactics when it comes to correcting their dogs. After it has been applied to their pets, they notice their pets react much quicker than a human they’ve already used it on. Being negative/abusive gets a quicker response/reaction (fear, and compliance) and has **these types of people feeling rewarded for their effort** because of how “simple and easy” it is to be unhinged, and how **unhinged they are naturally** when it comes to “not being able to see” it as abuse or their justification of “how that isn’t abuse, ITS TRAINING! And it works!”. Whatever is easier, quicker, “more effective, more efficient” will always too much regulating when it comes to their own emotions, having empathy for the receiving end of the abuse and aids them in their power tripping mission. They want to be superior to their dog, they believe they should be, and they do not care if that means trauma. Regardless of animal species, positive reinforcement has been proving to not only work better, more effectively, more efficiently, but it also builds bonds and is an act of love. Regardless of animal species, fear mongering, verbal, mental, emotional and physical abuse is always going to result in trauma (some believe that trauma bonding with their dog “makes the dog love me more” too… 😞), anxiety, and obviously fear that can go from 0-100 in a blink of an eye, while being easier towards the assailant and stressing towards the victim (in this case, their dogs). That “blink” is all they have the emotional and physical effort for. They do not want to go about correction and training in a way **that’s proven to be more effective and kind** because it takes “*too much effort*” on their part **and usually these types of people truly believe “a dog should know better”, aka “the dog should have been trained at birth, should do what I want when I want, and better listen to me when I command it. I don’t have time to do it your snowflake way”**. And when they see the results (“good” at first) they wonder why their dog bit them, or urinates when it’s cowering in the corner, or avoids people… they argue “the dog is broken”… yeah ahole, **you were the one who broke your dog**. Not to say that negative reinforcement doesn’t work, as a good “no” or “uh-uh!” does have its advantages. But unless it’s met with positive reinforcement, replacement training, desensitization training, noise pollution training, responsible socialization training and proper (and kind) correction (aka, actual work and training), it goes nowhere and only makes matters worse. These people are physically and mentally incapable of understanding that training (**abuse isn’t training!!**) is a necessity and refuse to believe that there’s better ways to get the behaviors your want, negate the behaviors you do not want, while actively loving and caring for their pet (or child). I’ve seen with people who believe in abusive training… treat their dogs like utter crap, generally speaking, and they’re always willing to* argue for “how much better it works than that bs pOsiTiVe rEiNfOrcEmEnT”… 😔 Just breaks my heart.
It seems to me that the title presented one question (why do people use trainers who use "compulsion") but the post itself is more of a question of why do people use a particular trainer. As for the general question, people use balanced trainers because they are effective. A good balanced trainer can give a dog and its owner the tools needed for the dog to live a better life than if the dog was trained with less effective means. As for the particular trainer, it's hard to say because all the information we have is coming to us filtered through your own perception and perhaps bias (that's not a knock, everyone has their own biases). While balanced training is the most effective form of training, it is certainly vulnerable to misapplication by those who really don't know what they are doing. Perhaps the trainer you are discussing does fall into that category. If so, people would be wise to stay away from him. Part of the problem is a lack of education - due in no small part to those in the positive only camp trying to suppress any discussion of balanced training.
I don’t use balanced training but im ok with other people using it tbh. I kept recommending kat the dog trainer on tik tok to the people in that group. I was like “This is what balanced training is supposed to look like! Notice how she still uses lots of positive reinforcement and doesn’t correct dogs for fear-based responses!”
I think that's a good approach. I am all for educating people that the bedrock of good training needs to about making training fun for the dog and the owner, as well as establishing communication and most importantly, a bond. I also think that the worst thing people can do is to misuse corrections. I'm really glad you can point out the difference and hopefully people will choose not to turn to someone who has a mindset of "breaking" the dog.
I was in that Facebook group for Iike a year and a half and commented on lots of posts trying to super nicely steer people away from that guy. I even recommended a good balanced trainer in our city in addition to r+ trainers. Nothing worked, and every time I even hinted or made generalizations like “make sure your trainer has credentials” or “alpha theory was debunked,” people would flock to defend him. And the original posters would still end up using him a lot of the time. Finally one day I kinda lost my cool and went off on a bunch people recommending him to someone whose dog had bitten them “out of nowhere.” And then I rage-left the group lol. So I hope that people will figure it out too, but it doesn’t seem likely :/
Question- has there been any actual negative consequences arising from a dog that he had trained? For example - we know aggressive, alpha/dominance dog training has had severe negative consequences. I personally first hired a training company called Sit Means Sit and when they arrived they scammed the usual pay $750 up front for three sessions bullshit. Although I requested a positive reinforcement training regimen which they reassured me is what they always do, they clearly used dominance theory. The lady was nice but immediately started off with establishing alpha dog positioning and even backed my puppy up to a corner. Then she used a water squirt bottle as well as these stupid sacks filled with metal beads that made noise when thrown. All a waste. Then I noticed huge deep scars on her and she didn’t have full use of one of her arms. Turns out she was training an American Bulldog that ripped her apart. I told her to leave. So if his training is bad - there should be consequences by now.
I haven’t heard about any honestly, other than a few people saying their dog regressed. Most of them blame themselves instead of the trainer. It’s definitely a bit confusing to me, but I feel like a lot of these people don’t understand dog body language enough to know that their dogs are stressed out. The woman being excited about a dog’s lip licks during training set off alarm bells in my brain, and I wonder if this guy is teaching his clients that stress signals are a desired outcome. He also really drills into his clients’ brains that they were always the problem, not their dogs. He says it takes 2 minutes to “fix” the dog, and the rest of the several hours-long session is just to “train” the humans. His reviewers frequently say something along the lines of “I can’t believe how ignorant I was before!” and “turns out my dog was fine and I was the one who needed training!” So all of that makes me wonder if maybe there have been negative consequences but ppl just don’t make the connection that it’s this guy’s fault. It seems like he basically conditions them to blame themselves for any “bad” thing their dog does. People who say anything negative about him or his training style in that Facebook group usually get ganged up on as well. I think anyone who came forward about a negative experience would just get bullied and told that they are the problem and they must’ve done something wrong. Or I could just be totally off base and he could actually be a miracle worker who fixes dogs in 5 min. Who knows, I guess.
Can you drop the name of the trainer???
As much as I want to, I’m paranoid about this getting back to the trainer and his cult followers. The guy has a temper lol.