Aggressive Puppy - Page 8

Peter Caine does not need to acknowledge obvious like when sunny, sky is blue and when you jump in the water you will be wet and we need to use positive part of the training when we train a dog. There is difference between positive methodology which no one sane is against and it is part of 4 pillars of training, and positive ONLY methodology which is pure PC crud causing irreparable damage . That is what he is talking about. If you can not see that then so be it.

Caine may not need to acknowledge "the obvious" but I bet a great many of the punters his video is aimed at need some help with that.
SMH.
Never mind, let's leave it to viewers of this site to make their own minds up, eh ?

Thank you Prager, I appreciate the effort to educate and share knowledge.  None of us like the idea that punishment is part of training, I have to rename it to consequences just to wrap my head around it and yes I am one of those touchy feely tree huggers.  Ok clarification, I love good humanely raised and butchered meet (hmmm steak) and think responsible hunting where one eats what one kills is a good thing to keep herds healthy.  I do not agree with trophy hunting and use of environment to increase profits for corporations.  I am not a Cesar Milan or Leerburg fan.  I absolutely find no use for Leerburg's Dominance Collar or methods.

So I talked to my trainer and behaviorist friends.  Correct me if I am wrong, but not all of the 4 pillars need to be used.  Most dogs do NOT need all 4 pillars.  Rare dogs do.  However, punishment is geared toward just what the dog needs to make a connection between concept and consequences of not heeding the command. 

Again thank you

Great Topic. Never heard of Caine before. Most of his ideas I don't like. But if they work for him, more power to him. Seems like he relies on the Ecollar mostly. His dogs, especially the pup don't look too engaged do they? Does the pup look happy, or like a robot? Not a big fan of the ecollar - even in the most capable hands - and never on a puppy. IMO Ecollar only people are conditioners - not really trainers. His idea of the use of food displacing dominance is B.S. I use it all the time - as a positive / negative reinforcer, and to assert dominance in a positive, low key manner from the time my dogs are old enough to eat - and for the rest of their lives. Again, this is an excellent thread, tons of great advice. Personally, I just wouldn't follow to much of the Caine stuff...especially with the dog that started this thread.

 Of course he mentions that initial shaping of behavior with food is OK and he is using food in that occasion too. He is against continuous reward with food .Which is notion I agree with.  As far as e collar he is mainly using it as a positive reinforcement.  I personally do not use e-collars not because there is something cruel about them but because I do not like  to put anything between me and the dog which is not necessary. That includes the food. I do not like the dog to work for the food where the trainer is just a pez dispenser of rewards. I  do like the dog to work for the handler and not for the reward like food or toy  per se.  I believe that is what Cain teaches and that's why I like him. How he gets there is secondary as long as it is effective and humane. 

@mindhunt. Define "Need". I do not need to drive a car on all 4 wheels i can resort to circus trick and learn to drive car on 2 wheels.
I will say this with prejudice. There are many trainers who make claim the punishment is not needed in training. These trainers besides no training at all are #1 culprit in creating behavioral problems of dogs where many are subsequently being put down. As far as your sentence:"None of us like the idea that punishment is part of training,.." This is not about "liking". This is about reality of life. Today's society is having problem with doing things they do not like. I do not like shovel dog shit every day. Yet I do it because that is the thing to be done or if the kennels are not clean dogs get sick. Same way if you omit one of the 4 pillars of the dog training, then many dogs will take you for ride. Like it or not. This attitude to train the dog in only a positive or in the way we like is extremely cruel since it kills millions of dogs. And this has nothing to do with being tree hugger or hunting. This is about reality. To deny 4 pillars of training is like denying gravity You can deny it but when you step of the cliff we'll see how it will work.

Wow, ok Prager.  lol

Positive/motivational methods are not just treat training.  To utilize positive/motivational methods is to introduce consequences after the dog understands the concept of the command.  Consequences or to use your word, punishment, is part of positive method.

My good friend who is a behaviorist(working on PhD) and trainer, has trained for over 30+ years successfully, trained working K9s with many departments (LEO and FD), service dogs (seeing eye, PTSD, helping with mobility, seizure, diabetes, autism, etc), SAR, and list goes on.  She also specializes in aggression (toward dogs and/or handlers).  She uses positive/motivational methods and consequences as well.  She does NOT use force training.  She does use food and praise to start a pup out then switches to toys and praise.  Her dog's are pretty much flawless in their obedience; however, they do know it is acceptable to disobey if they see something the handler does not and obeying means the handler gets hurt.  She also does not believe all 4 pillars need to be used, mostly 2 or 3. None of the dogs she has trained have had to be euthanzied because of "problems" and he has rehabilitated many an aggressive working dog using 2 or 3 of the pillars.  My other two trainer friends rarely use all 4 pillars and have had pretty successful careers as trainers.  All of my trainer friends use prong collars, not a one uses e-collars or those evil Leerburg dominance collars.  

 I have read the latest studies on how dogs/canids learn, they have right brain/left brain specializing like we do, they have cognitions and affect similar to bright children, they have the same neurotransmitters we do like oxytocin (bonding) and dopamine (reward) to name a few.  I find how dogs learn fascinating.... 

It's the old joke of what is the one thing two trainers can always agree on, what the third one is doing wrong.   

Mindhund  She also does not believe all 4 pillars need to be used, mostly 2 or 3.​None of the dogs she has trained have had to be euthanzied because of  "problems" .......

Hans: Is that actually your argument? OK then.  

Prager said: "I do not need to drive a car on all 4 wheels i can resort to circus trick and learn to drive car on 2 wheels."

What does this mean? Your analogy is backwards. The proper analogy would be having a motorcycle you can drive, using its two wheels, and adding, unnecessarily two more. If someone can use 2 or 3 pillars then why add a 4th? To the newbies, superfluity is not a sign of proper training. Results are all that matters. Less is more sometimes.

And what's the point of bringing politics into this? PC training? Who views training a dog through a political lens? To the newbies, remember it's all about results so beware of what we could define as marketing tricks and packaging. Referring to a training method as PC is all about pressing certain buttons. If you are someone who has an issue with what is perceived as our PC culture this will play on those emotions. Ask yourself, does my dog follow any particular political agenda? I repeat, look for verifiable results.

@ noitsyou: