I think treat training is cruel. - Page 44

barefangs While I generally enjoy your posts and tend to agree with them I will also say that I feel no obligation to agree with everything you say especially when you are comprehending what I am saying or are just generating sophistry in form of a straw man fallacy, which here on this forum, is a common practice and which I am getting tired off. Nowhere have I said a nonsense which you are putting in my mouth, which in this case is this sentence: "...what makes you think that just because someone uses a clicker they are not in control of their dog and have no established relationship?" I understand that you would be upset with such statement, except I have never said it.
You either are intentionally saying things I have never said or even insinuated, or you as most people here are just 'skimming' over what I have written and then they go off the deep end or you have poor comprehension of written text. Nowhere have I said that just because people are using a clicker that they are not in controll of their dogs or have no relationship with their dog. This is more then being slappy in conveying what I have said this is a true fallacy. I challenge you to point me to where I have said such nonsense and I'll donate $100 to your favorite charity. I'll help you to comprehend what I have said with this statement. I have said and am saying that clicker training is not conducive to establishing a leadership position. I have also said quite clearly that people who are using clicker may have established a leadership position in some other way or intentionally or even unintentionally by their demeanor often without realizing it how.

As far as video goes, I do not do videos which I would post for free. You see I am not here to convince anybody of anything, and that includes you. I am here merely to express my opinions and if some do not like it,....well so be it. I will also say that I do not understand why are you hostile to me since I admire what you have done with your dog and I have said so. As far as me being able to do it differently I have said how to do it and in some cases how I have done it (without a clicker). That is not an attack on your way of doing it using a clicker though.
As far as me using you as an example I will say this to you,You are publishing on the public forum here, so I will use or respond to your post if I choose so same as you are welcomed and do respond to my posts.
As far as your disability goes,... if you would actually read what I am saying here and on other forums and say in discussions with my fellow dog trainers about your video and training, then you would see that I have said that clicker method is very suitable for people who are disabled. So why don't you chill? I am not your enemy no matter how hard you are trying to paint me as one.

Xeph:"I read nothing beyond the first ridiculous post. "

Prager: While someone claim here that this is a common sense statement ( or part of it) then I will say, and I'll be nice about it, yours is just an arbitrary statement which does not have any redeeming value. If you make statements like this and want to start to sound logical then you need to point us to the point which is "beyond ridiculous "and then, most importantly tell us why it is so. Maybe then you can change my or other peoples mind, and I am open to that. As a matter of fact, I am posting here mainly in hope to learn something, but to just spew some arbitrary or even derogatory statement here in the response to my post is not conducive to it. So if you do not give a reason why my OP is ridiculous, then you just,..... well I said I''ll be nice. So let's start all over and tell us what specific part of my post is not true AND WHY.  I would like to learn. I am not facetious.

FANG; Personally, I never went to one of his seminars. I'm poor, I can't afford seminars. You don't need Bart Bellon to understand how to use negative reinforcement. My family has been using this way before it was labeled (just without clicker or marker word).

PRAGER: You say - Just without the marker word? What is a purpose of that?  

Apple :"I said stress interferes with initial learning, not that stress is bad when it comes to learning after a dog has begun to learn a behavior."

Prager: No I insist that initial learning is done faster and retained more permanently when done under stress. I will add that stress must not be debilitating and shutting any response off by stupor reaction. But I thought that would be self-evident and clear.

So back to the study which I have posted on page 40. It, besides other things, says: "The effects of stress on learning and memory are not always clear: both facilitating and impairing influences are described in the literature. Here we propose a unifying theory, which states that stress will only facilitate learning and memory processes: (i) when stress is experienced in the context and around the time of the event that needs to be remembered.

 This quote clearly fulfills your criteria of initial learning"

 Then the study goes on saying this:" (ii) when the hormones and transmitters released in response to stress ( those hormones are released during initial or in subsequent occurrences of stress) exert their actions on the same circuits as those activated by the situation, that is, when convergence in time and space takes place. ( which means at  any time) The mechanism of action of stress hormones, particularly corticosteroids, can explain how stress within the context of a learning experience induces focused attention and improves memory of relevant information."

Your belief that initial learning is done faster and remains more permanently when done under stress in terms of foundation obedience training is ridiculous. I guess teachers should go back to the Hickory stick when teaching 1st graders. The type of task being learned would be a factor. For example, a dog is carelessly playing around on a flat roofed garage and falls off and is injured, but heals up fine. That dog will probably have learned very quickly and permanently to be wary of elevated drop-offs. But that is very different from trying to teach a dog obedience behaviors, many of which are unnatural to the dog and voice commands are eventually added which means the dog has to learn a new way to communicate. Also, I believe that obedience requires a great number of repetitions in different settings/situations so the dog learns to generalize. With that in mind, that is why food and toy are so good for foundation training because you want the dog to enjoy the learning and look forward to it, which builds a better relationship with the dog, contrary to your opinion. So your citing of the research about stress hormones improving attention and memory is only relevant to certain situations and continued exposure to stress hormones will actually lead to decreased attention and memory, which is pretty much common sense. Maybe you could explain how inducing stress during learning builds your relationship with your dog. And don't go to the all positive BS, cause nobody has said anything about all positive except you.

Pragre: which is "beyond ridiculous "and then, most importantly tell us why it is so


She didn't say beyond rediculous. She said she didn't read * beyond* the first * rediculous post*


Apple, as you know,Positive reinforcement can be a kick in the azz. But pragre uses the term positive reinforcement as an insult towards others on here, and speaks of it as though it's all sweet and cuddles and permissiveness. Sounds like he is trying to build an argument for abusive traing, with all his ' stress is best' for foundation training puppies in obedience.

I think laziness is a factor. It takes more effort/thought to manage the dog's food intake to build sufficient food drive, buy and prepare the food, put it in a container to take to the training, put it in an apron, know how and when to present it correctly, mark the behavior correctly and then reinforce, etc. It is much simpler to pull ,or push a dog into a position or give a leash correction. Plus, he sees himself and his dogs as "old style" and it is apparent by the way he relates to people, that he is prone to creating conflict. He talks about praise and petting and I think all good handlers who use food and/or a toy also incorporate praise and petting as well. Some have talked about dogs that lack food or prey drive. Those dogs might require a different approach, but there are many dogs available that have good food and prey drive that allow for food and toys to be used in foundation training. Inductive approaches to training have influenced selection in breeding. I also think some of the "old style" trainers tend to think that dogs with well developed drives are not "real" working dogs because they are used to lower drive, primarily defensive dogs and equate the drivier dogs to being "sporty." Some are and some are not.

I think it's not knowing what to do with a pouch full of food if it was handed to them. Some folks like him only come on here and their own forum and pontificate and besmerch others in order to feel superior ....having no accomplishments other than fantsies. He says his besty and idol has titled thousands of dogs, yet denegrates me for training and titling three of my own dogs....inferiority complex?
Who does training for a living in this day and age, yet has zero pictures nor videos of anything they ever trained, and insults us who do have videos and pictures going so low as to calling me an amature :-/

There's a joke in your last post, but I'll let others figure it out for themselves.

I really don't have time to continue to argue with you, Prager. I'll stick to training my dogs my way and you stick training your dogs your way. Nobody is going to convince anyone here.