I think treat training is cruel. - Page 3

I know you are very revered...

  

So, is it Reverend Gustav, now?  [sorry, can't stop giggling...that really hit my funnybone...okay, okay, gonna go do something useful with my dog before y'all start yelling at me...]

LOL , SS 😊
I don‘t know all of your histories on this forum...only what Ive seen since I‘ve been posting for the last year...or 1 1/2 years.
I know a lot of you here go back a loooong way. 😏

Gotta go too...Sunday daylight is almost over here on the west coast. Gotta go a walking with the puppies.

Jesse, Gustav deserves our respect, but I couldn't resist a little teasing...

What is Experience?

To me Experience (in the dog training world) is being able to accomplish the same thing many different ways...

Each dog requires a different way of training...Not all training methods work for every dog...

Different applications are needed for different jobs...But I have always been under the theory that I will Show and Introduce a new exercise to a dog and use whatever the dog needs to learn this and I do it thru Motivation...then I will Proof the exercise thru Motivation and Compulsion...

I started training in the 70's and learned the old ways of training...It has progressed immensely and there are better ways of teaching...Not necessarily training...

~Bob~

Jesse, we did have this discussion not far ago.
the issue isn't in food or toy rewards. issue in the perception of training method, in which reward become main stimulus to trig the dog into execution of particular task.

Gustav:
training has evolved

today, advanced level of training (if that can be so called) mainly based on dog's prey. that's a trend in both camps - handlers, who owns the dogs and breeders, who supply this kind of dogs. new generation really don't know how dog can be trained, if that dog don't have sufficient level of prey drive.
back then training through prey drive didn't exist. the dogs, i was grown with, wasn't from prey oriented breeding. and there weren't any problems to train them in past, neither i have problem to use same method today. i guess main reason for changes in training methods isn't that these methods are better, but due to overwhelming amount of dogs, who is not suitable to be trained through the method, through which their predecessors have been trained.

Duke:"third and main problem I have is that I would like to see dogs work from natural drives, not because they are bribed into doing it,

someone saw a muzzle work video from me once and said, where is the reward in this for the dog, so told him, this is todays problem, as many dogs today will only work for reward, not because they naturally want to".

Hans : EXCELLENT point!!!!!!!!!!!

To say that dogs are not trainable to a very high level without treats is totally not so. Look at herding dogs. The sheepherder has not leash or treats,.. ever yet the dogs work tremendously. I have lived for weeks with sheepherders in Low Tatra and other regions of Slovakia mountains just for purpose of learning about dogs. Those guys controlled their dogs 1000 yards away with a whistle or slight motion of a hand. To make a statement like that is lacking understanding of a relationship dogs have for thousands of years where they actually truly worked in the field of real life as hunters and protectors and war dogs where the man's life depended on them, and not just on a green field in park or stadium. I am not disputing that dogs can be effectively trained to perform tricks called obedience for treats. I just think that there is a better way to have a relationship with a dog.

OK, I will say another iconoclastic thing. I am not trying to be insulting, I am just trying to make people who care, think. I would like to qualify that I am not talking about teaching a dog to behave a certain way on my command. I am talking about a relationship with the dog who works for the man because he enjoys the work itself and because he enjoys the handler to enjoy what he does. Here my sheepherder example from above is applicable. Just like Duke said about muzzle attack. The dog does the attack because that is what he wants to do. he enjoys it.
To train the dog with treats is fake training because he does perform motions to get the treat and not because he wants to make those motions. This concept of fake training can be seen in all aspects of training these days. 
IMO all so-called modern training is done that way though. These days the purpose of the exercise is about treated and not about what needs to be done. A dog who works because the work needs to be done is not "fake working" and is not working for a to the work unrelated reward - like a treat.

When I do an attack I only praise the dog in early stages to communicate to the dog that when she is attacking then she is doing the right thing. She is working for me and she needs to know what I want. It is a communication between me and the dog about the work at hand. After that dog gets command and she knows what to do and does it because she loves it and not because of the praise from me or tug toy reward or treat reward. The full satisfaction comes from the fight itself. The only reward is only attaboy but not a purpose of the fight. Such a concept of training is being slowly lost.

ValK said: " Guess main reason for changes in training methods isn't that these methods are better, but due to the overwhelming number of dogs (un)suitable to be trained through the method by which their predecessors have been trained."

I don't think its just sheer numbers of dogs, or that dogs in general are becoming unsuitable for other methods of training, Val, - I think it is about dog ownership in (modern, western,) society. Hate to bang on about this, folks, but 'we' collectively are breeding for our own and dogdom's downfall...

There are far, far too many dogs being sold to people / families just  because they want a dog. Whether its for just a family companion, whether it is for 'protection' of that owner / family, or for people who are competitive and want to do dog sports of whatever kind, lots of new owners DO NOT buy because first & foremost they appreciate DOGS.  Or they would be more honest with themselves about what they can offer that dog.  And in many cases refrain from buying, or get a cat instead !

Other posters here have made two things clear, things I have been saying ad nauseum on the site for years:

There are experienced owner/trainers, who have a range of training skills and methods at their disposal, gained over years of dog-related experience; and all dogs are different individuals, with some methods working better on, & for, some dogs.

 

And then there are 'entitled' people who really don't have a clue what they are doing, get dogs they really ought not to have, and increasingly rely on the ever-burgeoning services of dog-walkers and Reward Only Trainers to sort out their shortcomings.

 

For those opposed to 'clicker training', you need to remember that many of these dog-owning and dog-ignorant people will find it simpler, more easy to remember, once habituated to using the clicker, because they are incapable of controlling themselves and using voice tone and markers with their dogs.  They do not understand the 'rules' for their timing or for talking to dogs, they  do not remember to praise their dogs in training, they would rather address their dogs as human babies and keep up a constant stream of wittering at them, as though they were fluent in their understanding of English [or whatever other language the owner speaks]. That is why that remains a viable 'training' method. Unfortunately.  Have seen this happening over & again at (pet) Dog Training Clubs and elsewhere.

That is not to say there is NO value in using a clicker. Even though more recent research seems to have thrown up problems about the actual efficacy and suitability of clicker use - undoubtedly in the hands of skilled dog trainers it can be a force for good with certain dogs who it is found respond well to it, better than with some other training methods, - if in wider use it means dogs get basic obedience training out of the incompetants who own them than would otherwise be the case, it has served its purpose.

 

 

Jesse, glad we are on same page again.....I don’t look to be revered, but I have had a 50 year passion for this breed and the fortune to have seen and trained with some of the better dogs and trainers. I wish to preserve the breed to the best it can notwithstanding time and evolution.
Sunsilver....you naughty 💁.....haha.
Linda, I agree with you 100%....haha, I know you think I’m probably inebriated 😉
Hans, I don’t think you are iconoclastic, but rather also want to preserve the basic, intrinsic traits of this breed, some of which are being lost because of many of the reasons stated by others including training methodology for competition.
Duke....again I think you see things as they are today with intent on keeping this breed in rightful working place.
I don’t think any training is cruel, if performed correctly, and all of them have their place.....BUT the German Shepherd is a special dog when that bond is established between owner/handler and to not utilize that to fullest seems folly to me.