Take The Lead Dog Training

When puppies play, they do so with a degree of risk; with deliberate rough and tumble. They purposely put themselves in situations involving certain amounts of danger in order to understand conflict and social limitations - all mammals do this, switching style from approach/attack to escape/evade, depending on whether they are a predator or prey species. They learn not just from their actions and the reactions of playmates, but from the accompanying emotions. It is ESSENTIAL... that the animal experiences these emotions (both negative and positive) during early development in order to gain control over them. This is why we label such stages as ‘socialisation’ and ‘fear’ periods. Life demands that the pup understands the range of emotional responses it has been given, and so life instills a desire to partake in roughhousing and risk taking/boundary testing at the appropriate stage in development to elicit these emotions in moderation. It is essential that people understand this. If the puppy is to develop into the best adult version of its potential self, then we must allow the puppy to experience what nature expects it to handle. Even where it happens, infantile fighting generally lasts only for short periods and usually involves minimal damage with maximum learning. This is likely why it is so common amongst developing litter mates. To only learn social limits at a juvenile to adult stage of growth carries far greater risk of substantial injury, and in any case hampers the dog, usually for life.
Like physical development, emotional development isn’t a process of chance, but design.
Too many fractious, anxious, impulsive, fearful or excessive dogs are the unintended yet largely inevitable consequence of well-meaning, but unnecessary intervention, restriction, omission or prevention during essential rough play.
It would be interesting to study the effect of owner personality type on time to intervene during uninhibited puppy free play?
See More

I believe the short clip I received and posted from a video of Victoria Stilwell discussing death before discomfort for a dog in the States, failed to reflect the full story she had to say on the topic. Until today, I had not had opportunity to watch her fuller video. For this reason, I have removed the clip since I do not support taking comments out of context, regardless of personal thoughts, that is not a fair thing to do. I offer my apologies for posting the clip without diligent investigation beforehand.

On lead when in fields, and training for control in the countryside - There are plenty of other animals at risk from uncontrolled dogs.
Sound advice which should ABSOLUTELY be heeded to avoid repeated, horrific incidents like this.

This month’s ‘Keeping the Balance’ The National Gamekeepers' Organisation member magazine.
Despite battling to defend general licenses for pest control, the NGO are still determined to offer their support in fighting DEFRA’s proposal to ban e-collars.
THANK YOU N.G.O.!! 🤝👍🐾

**please share if you feel so inclined. This is representative of SO MANY owners, crying out for help. For those who ‘blame the lazy owner’, who’s fault is this?**
RSPCA (England & Wales) Dogs Trust
1 YEAR ... I’ll say again - ONE YEAR of high value treats and toys on a long line with a trainer in a secure field ...... And the owner STILL believes that letting the dog off lead will result in FATAL consequences ...
... Sadly, this email isn’t unique; rather it is representative of the majority I receive - several times a week.
Does THIS suggest ‘laziness’?
Does THIS suggest a ‘cruel’ owner?
Does THIS sound like a criminal - an animal abuser?
For Christ’s sake, ENOUGH of the ‘pure reward’ FRAUD 😤😡😤😡😤
**Addition .... If the story of this owner hits 1k shares to help educate people, I promise that I will randomly select someone who has shared it, and give away a private 3hr training/behaviour consultation ALONG WITH a high quality electronic training collar if applicable/necessary. If not, I will give the equivalent value in further training.**
See More

“Frustration - defined as ‘an aversive motivational state preceded by the omission of an expected reward.’” Equally, the reduction or delay in anticipated reward is well documented as inducing not only the ‘negative welfare state’ of frustration, but also frustration-induced aggression.
‘Reward based’ does not by default mean ‘kinder’ or aversive-free.
... All ‘reward based’ trainers should absolutely understand and clearly explain this fact to their clients from the outset. Equally, any ‘purely positive’ or ‘aversive free’ trainer should recognise that such ideology is untenable and therefore such marketing is either ignorant or fraudulent.
See More

Can anyone please direct me to the petition - there MUST be one - headed by animal welfare charities, to demand a ban these medieval electrocution chambers of innocent sentient beings please?
I mean, just eat indoors and close the windows right?
When a fly avoids the swat of the newspaper, is this reflexive and without thought, or a ‘decision’ to avoid a perceived threat and maintain safety?... Where does sentience, awareness and inclusivity end and why? Is it dependent entirely upon the possession of certain biological features (nervous system), from which we draw conclusion based upon our current understanding of them? Does science determine sentience? What of intuition? What is to say that the micro movements of a live fly under dissection are not pain responses of which we have no comparison and so no current understanding? Why would nature equip a species to Intuitively empathise with the plight of another, If that ‘other’ possesses no capacity to feel, and where this compassion and empathy is lacking in an individual, why do we consider them to be suffering a psychological disorder? Who draws the line and by what moral authority? Why is one noxious stimulus designed to end a life permitted, whereas a lesser comparative form of the same stimulus to promote or preserve a life deemed unethical and criminal?
Context is everything.
Have a lovely bank holiday!
See More

Dear DEFRA ...
I believe we have REPEATEDLY stated, that abuse is found not in a tool, but in a rotten mind ...
https://metro.co.uk/…/labrador-puppy-be aten-death-slipper-…/

“Luna’s owner also failed to notice that Luna’s harness was becoming embedded in her skin. Oftentimes, we see embedded collars or harnesses in young dogs that are rapidly growing, where their owners do not seem to appreciate that the dog is growing very quickly. Consequently, the collar or harness needs to be constantly monitored and re-adjusted to prevent injury to the dog.”
No tool is responsible for abuse or neglect.
Banning tools is an ignorant, lazy response to a situa...tion requiring greater education and supervision.
http://www.tailsofasheltervet.com/…/… /luna-embedded-harness/
See More

https://www.sciencedirect.com/…/a…/ab s/pii/S0168159118302211
‘Science’ saying that there is no benefit to using a clicker versus simple reward alone in dog training outside of sport or competition.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-4838257 0

Verbal commands are over rated ... ‘bed’ ...
He was due to be pts last December because of his aggression around human food and human food related contexts .... 😊

Shoestring Confucius ...

I read the following this morning, a line taken from a PowerPoint display concerning punishment. The presentation was written by Henderson State University in 2010.
Here’s the line: [punishment - simply meaning a negative consequence] “Conveys no information to the organism”
... That’s a pretty absolute statement right? I mean, there’s no ‘possibly’, ‘can’ or ‘might’. There’s no consideration given to context, delivery, intensity, duration, frequency, predictability or controllability. It’s written as though it were a truth; a law.
So if you are sewing and prick your finger, you learn nothing of adjusting your positioning of the needle to avoid a future recurrence of the experience. If you pull out at a junction without looking and are struck by an oncoming vehicle, you learn nothing from your error when approaching future junctions. If a child touches a white-hot coal, fallen from a fireplace, she learns nothing of white coals, heat or open fires. If you use your incisors to bite an ice cream and wince sharply, due to the painful sensitivity, you fail to adjust the way you eat ice cream. If you eat spoiled food and consequently vomit, you will learn nothing about the sight, smell or ingestion of spoiled food thereafter.
No information.
This unjustified augmentation of possibility, into ‘absolute certainty’ status - this dishonesty - from educational establishments who would themselves, punish poor attendance through exclusion, or poor performance through FAILURE, is a perfect example of why we have SO many parents and dog owners struggling. The ideology is unfit for the reality. It is absolutely riddled with hypocrisy.
You need only consider the following question:
“If punishment conveys no information to the organism, then why is the organism equipped to recognise and deal with punitive events? What is the value in sensing extremes of temperature, pain or fear? Why, following a punitive experience, might an organism develop avoidance strategies if there is no information concerning what to avoid, how and why?”
See More

When a nature shows you just how much she cares for positively reinforcing alternative behaviours.
“Dog skin is more sensitive to shock than is human skin (in answer to the people who test the e-collar on themselves, see https://www.vetwest.com.au/pet-libr…/sk in-the-difference-be- tween-canine-and-human-skin: “The epidermis of a dog is 3-5 cells thick; however, in humans, it is at least 10-15 cells thick.”).” Masson et al, 2018
... Therefore, this must be FAR more painful for the dog than it would be for a human, since we have a 300% increase in skin ‘thickness’.
But the dog is seemingly far LESS concerned by her predicament than a human might be?
To use ‘differences in skin thickness’ as a ‘scientific’ argument to discredit and discount the fact that electronic collars can communicate effectively at levels a human might perceive as ‘mild’ or ‘irritating’, is poor. It also fails to account for those dogs that show little-no response to levels of stimulation that would make a human jump or yelp?
We are not dogs, and dogs are not us.
See More

When you were comfy, and then your partner comes home from a night out and gets in ..