Not a Protective Bubble

One of the most bizzarre objections that I have heard toward those who do not incorporate correction into training is that the dog will not be equipped to deal with the negatives in life if the handler never makes the dog deal with negative experiences through handler applied correction.

This objection incorporates two erroneous presumptions.

1.  +R based training somehow insulates a dog from everything difficult, negative, or bad in life.

2.  Handler imposed "correction" is the only way for a dog to learn that life is, at times, unpleasant.

Reinforcement based training does not, in fact, cannot, insulate a dog from the challenges of life. Certain vet visits are painful or, at least, uncomfortable. The dog still has to learn to put up with things like nail clippings and baths (for those who, by nature, do not like such things). Dogs who are trained through reinforcement do not get everything that they want all the time. In fact, when reinforcement based training is done properly, dogs learn that there are frequent times when they will not get what they want, and that they need to exercise self restraint.

Dogs who are trained through reinforcement still get accidentally bumped into, called off of things that they would rather chase or investigate, experience fear of something at some point if not many things, and deal with boredom, frustration, and loss.  They experience injury, illness, and every manner of life that is unpleasant that any living creature on this earth experiences.  The fact that the handler is not adding to that by incorporation of further discomfort into training has no bearing on the fact that every dog will experience, and hopefully learn to cope with, the difficulties and challenges of life.

+R based training is an approach to teaching concepts, behaviors, manners, skills, and whatever else the dog needs in order to successfully accomplish what his or her owner/handler desires. It's purpose is not to insulate the dog from the typical, and atypical, experiences that life throws their way.  There actually is no need to attempt to add to a dog's experience of "the negative in life" that by applying leash pops, electric shocks, prongs, verbal reprimands, expressions of dissatisfaction, etc. etc. etc. when one is teaching concepts, behaviors, manners, skills, etc. 

Life does that job quite thoroughly.  Primarily +R trained dogs do not exist in some kind of protective bubble that prevents them from experiencing anything negative, difficult, or challenging in life. That really isn't even possible. 

But . . . Not All Corrections Are Abusive

If you frequent online discussion groups and forums long enough, you end up hearing quite a litany of objections toward +R based dog training.  Some of these objections are grounded in legitimate issues.  The quality of instruction in +R based dog training can vary from trainer to trainer and area to area.  Some of the objections to +R based dog training have been around since an earlier time and many do not realize that the discipline has grown, changed, and improved in many ways.

However, many of the objections are based on flat out misconception.

One of the most frequent objections that I hear to train using +R based methods, directed specifically at those who choose not to incorporate corrections into their work with dogs is that "not all corrections are abusive."  Concluding, therefore, that since they are "not all abusive", they should be used.

 

Is Anyone Saying They Are?

The first aspect of this objection that I would like to consider is this.  Do most +R based trainers really claim that all use of corrections in training is "abusive"?

Based on discussions that I have had with other +R based trainers, I would say "no".  Most +R based trainers would not actually claim that all use of corrections in training is "abusive".We are certainly very much aware of the fact that corrections, and many of the more popular corrective training devices, can be used, and are, in fact, used by some trainers in abusive ways.

 

And we do tend to vociferously object to such practices.  We do hold that there are better ways to achieve the desired results, even when working with dogs with more serious issues, and we do not just sit back and approve of the use of methods in training that are abusive, harsh, painful, and potentially very harmful to the dog.

 

Somehow, there are dog trainers who add the fact that +R based trainers speak out against abusive training methods to the fact that we choose not to incorporate correction into training and they think that the sum total of those two facts equals, "all use of corrections in training is abusive".

 

In reality, that is faulty math.

 

Of course, there are corrections, both verbal and physical, that are more mild, that work by causing a more moderate level of discomfort to the dog, and that can effectively communicate information to certain dogs in certain circumstances.

 

And while it is not my personal choice to employ the use even of those more mild corrections, of course I would not call their use "abusive".

 

"Not Abusive" is Not a Reason

 

If I were going to consider incorporating corrections into my training, I would need a clear and concrete reason to do so.  I would need a lot more motivation than the acknowledgment that not all use of correction in training is abusive.  "Not abusive" is not a reason.

Certainly, "abusive" is a clear reason not to, "not abusive" is not a reason to do so.

Suppose I were to try to convince someone who did not want to use a clicker in training to use one.  If I were to say, "it's not abusive", is that going to convince someone who is opposed to the idea?  It's not likely.  I would need to present real reasons that would lead one to think about the clicker in a different way.

I have been involved with training dogs since 2002, and I have managed to accomplish some things through +R based training that some say cannot be done without corrections.  I have successfully rehabilitated a fear reactive dog.  I have helped an untrained and completely undisciplined adolescent Border Collie become the best behaved dog in our household.  I have trained my dogs to recall reliably to hike off leash in the woods.  And I could go on . . .

In all that time nobody has ever presented any compelling reason to me to abandon the +R based approach that I have chosen in favor of a training protocol that incorporates corrections.

That is why I stick with a +R based training approach.  I find the discipline of +R based training to be enjoyable, an inspiration of creativity and outside-the-box thinking, effective, and absolutely fascinating.

I would need a lot more than "not abusive" to be convinced to consider incorporating corrections into my training.  After all, what I am already doing is not abusive.  And . . . it is so much more than that!
 

Speedy, the first dog I trained.  He started off fear reactive, and I learned

how to help him through desensitization and counter conditioning.

He went on to enjoy a full and happy life, playing off leash on the beach

every summer.  He also enjoyed participation in several performance sports.

Why a Blog?

I am a +R based dog trainer.

This means that I choose to train dogs primarily through techniques and methods that employ the use of positive reinforcers and good consequences to facilitate canine learning.  These ways of training do not include the deliberate incorporation of physical or verbal corrections.

This is currently a topic of hot debate in online groups and discussion forums, and I often have responses to those who object to this kind of dog training in those formats.

While I often do discuss those objections with those who make them in the formats where I read them, very often there is more that I don't say for various reasons.  Therefore, this blog will serve as a place where I can express my responses, thoughts on the topic of dog training, usually +R based dog training, freely, honestly, and openly.

I do not claim to be an expert dog trainer.  I certainly am not.  

I do not aspire to training feats worthy of high accolades.  

First and foremost, I love my dogs and I enjoy training them and participating in certain activities with them.  I have a great interest in Positive Reinforcement Based dog training and I have gone out of my way to learn as much as I can about it.

Some say that only highly skilled and extraordinary people can successfully train through reinforcement.  But I am an ordinary person and it works for me.  So, while not an expert, I am an average person who uses this sort of training on a daily basis.  That is the only point of view that I am coming from, or claim to come from!

One last point.  I am not starting this blog to be negative or to criticize anyone else.  It is a vehicle for my own self expression about something toward which I have a high level of interest.  There are people out there with whom I do not agree.  Much of what I write is in response to what some of them say and write publicly.  It is not intended as a personal slam or insult, but as my honest response.  I believe that discourse, expression, and learning are very positive things.  And those are the exact intention of this blog!

 

This is Tessa.  She is a former stray who was semi-feral when I adopted her.

Through +R based dog training, she has become a confident and happy member

of our household.  She has lovely manners, and enjoys running with me as my

Agility partner