What does everyone think of this?(leerburg.com)

[cliffson1]

You really have to have a point of reference to adequately discuss these type of dogs.....period!

[Mrs.K]

Originally Posted by julie87

I never thought of it this way. That its either extreme training to try and fix the dog or put the dog down because of major liability. If I had to chose of course I would rather get beaten and live than die. Although i would never have the guts to hurt my dog... but you made a really good point!


Sent from Petguide.com Free App

I've seen it how handlers dealt with hard dogs. It is not a fun thing to see because I've also seen dogs getting broken over it. It is why the public has such a bad view on Schutzhund. Because of dogs and methods like that. It is still stuck in peoples mind today, even though a lot has changed.

If anyone is proud of having a dog and using these methods to "win" over the dog... I don't know... there is a reason why the public shouldn't know about these kind of things and media campaigns like the ones we have in Germany, to ban Schutzhund, is one of them.

It warps the view of the public about Schutzhund handlers and it does more damage than it does any good. Why do you think the e-collar was banned in Germany? Because of it's misuse to break those hard dogs.

[julie87]

Well u can misuse anything...I think it's more important educating people vs banning training methods I think if someone wants to train their dog using negative reinforcement there are far worse things to use than a shock collar, but thats another topic that's controversial and I'd rather not discuss it


Sent from Petguide.com Free App

[Mrs.K]

Oh, I hear you. Let's not wake that demon because it'll only going to be locked again

And yeah, I do agree with you. The issue is that most people are so set in their ways and views and even radicalized that education is merely impossible. At least with the kind of radicals that view a pop on the leash as compulsion already.

[StephenV]

Originally Posted by SFGSSD

For the person that said he (Ed) recommended euthanasia to a lot of people. Did it occur to you that unless you are a professional in this field (in some cases even if you are) attempting these things may get you hurt if you don’t know what you are doing? Giving direct professional training advice that potentially can harm the inexperienced handler/trainer is a huge liability. Yeah I would say call a professional to deal with it hands on or put the dog down too.

That was me. Let me be more specific with my complaint: He offers direct professional advice based on an email (without ever having seen the poster or their dog) that they should kill their dog. Several times.

Specific example: In his Q&A section on Aggressive Dogs, He begins his advice to someone with "You have described enough for me to recommend that you put this dog to sleep." The dog in question was an 11 month old GSD that chased a running child and tried to nip him in the backside.

[GregK]

I sure hope people don't take him seriously!!!!

[GregK]

Originally Posted by SFGSSD

Please don't take that out of context. He said "I have owned some nasty dogs in my life. I own a male right now that is as bad as anything I have ever seen - probably worse than anything most people will ever see in their life"

I didn't. I was quoting volcano's post.

Originally Posted by SFGSSD

Maybe you could show up with a clicker and a bag of hot dogs and try your luck with the dog

Not a problem. I'd have some other training tools with me as well. Shovels stay at home.

[RowdyDogs]

Originally Posted by SFGSSD

In all honesty, there are a lot of things that have been done and have been proven effective in the working dog world that made my jaw drop over the years. These things that are even practiced today are not something that is usually posted publicly so JQP can read up on it. Ed dared to post it so people that do not understand could freak out. Yeah I guess that was a bad call on his part but it does not change the truth when it comes to handling hard dogs that the emotionally driven trainer would not go near in there dizziest day dreams.
When I was a kid and learning the ropes I was always told that when it comes to training a hard dog your effectiveness is limited by your emotions, till you truly understand the consequences of those limitations you will not be ready to handle a hard dog effectively and safely in a training capacity. This was one of the many things I did not understand till I witnessed the good, the bad and the ugly first hand. The politically correct way of putting this is: you are preventing a liability if you succeed and you are giving this dog a chance at a productive happy life. If you fail, the dog was headed to the Vet to be put down before you even got to the dog, so you can leave knowing you truly did everything you could for the dog, the owners and for the general public.
When you can truly understand it is this or else, your emotions tend to shift as you understand that you are truly giving this dog one last chance. I don’t know about you but if I was a dog, I would choose something extreme over death any day of the week.

I can understand that. I've seen it myself (not with my dogs, admittedly), and as a professional horse trainer who has dealt with a lot of "lost causes," I've done some extreme things that I would never, ever use on 99% of horses in the world, or recommend to people, and that would probably have upset anyone watching. As I thought about it a bit more last night, I realized that my last post was a little hypocritical when I considered that.

I'll also admit that I sort of skimmed over the "nastiest dog I've owned in my life" part. I wanted to read the answer in context before replying and had read so much trying to find it before it occurred to me to Ctrl+F, my eyes were crossing a bit. Also, just to be clear, I was using female pronouns in my last post as I thought it was Cindy writing, and I'm still not sure who it was, but it doesn't really matter to me so I'll attribute it to Ed in this post.

I'm not against last-ditch extreme measures to prevent a dangerous behavior--better an extreme correction than euthanasia, as you said--so while I'm still a little skeptical that a shovel was really the best option, I also wasn't there and after more thought will acknowledge that I could be wrong.* I'm also not at all wanting to imply that I doubt Ed's knowledge or credentials with working dogs. I really do respect his opinions and experience, and read his site pretty regularly. I don't agree with everything he says (but I can't really name a trainer I do 100% agree with!), but I have learned a lot from his stuff.

However, I really still think that it was an inappropriate answer to that question. I think for the vast, vast majority of dogs (and especially the ones whose owners are going to be taking advice from that site--most experienced working dog handlers I know don't need advice on how to handle fence fighting), there are far safer and kinder methods to fix that problem. Maybe I have a low opinion of people, but I've known so many people who see an experienced trainer use a controversial method in an extreme case, and then they point to that and say, "See? I can do that too!" then wind up abusing their animals.

I feel that trainers (myself included, as someone who has published articles on dealing with potentially dangerous behavioral problems in horses) have an ethical obligation to consider their audience, and how their advice is likely to be misused. Yeah, any advice can and probably will be misused--from clicker training being used to excuse ineffective training and terrible behavior ("Sorry Fluffy bit you, I'm trying to only use positive training methods so I can't tell him not to!" is one I have literally heard) to e-collars being used to shock dogs who honestly don't understand what they're being asked and turning them into fearful basket cases. But I think that's why telling a story about hitting a dog with a shovel should be reserved for more specific audiences who are likely to understand the circumstances.

As I thought about it more, I realized that a huge part of my problem with that particular story is less the specifics of the story (especially rereading his description of the dog in general), but more how and where it was told. I came away from that answer, even on subsequent rereadings, feeling like that story was told as a good example of how to handle fence fighting in general, not how to handle it with an extremely difficult dog. If he'd even thrown in some examples of how to handle it more gently (for lack of a better word) with less extreme dogs, or cautioned about the dangers of hitting a dog with a shovel, or anything, I'd probably have less of a problem with it.

So long story short (too late LOL), I still find that anecdote in that context very distasteful, and I think it was a very bad call for him to post that. However, I also think most people have written something they later regret (and even if the shovel thing wasn't necessary, I'm sure we've all done stupid things with our animals that we later regret...I for one used to make a lot of rough mistakes with horses because I didn't know any better), and I'm not going to change my overall opinion of him or his training because of it.

*specifically, I was thinking about this last night and remembered a really aggressive stallion I used to train, and some unconventional and somewhat risky methods I used to get him to stop attacking me (he'd already put 3 people in the hospital since he'd been owned by my client, and would attack randomly and without provocation--and he was trying to hurt you, not just posturing), so this was truly a life-or-death situation). I don't want to detail what I did for the reasons I describe above, but it wasn't something I'd ever use on a different horse, and was a last-ditch effort after I'd tried more conventional methods and was still being attacked. So I guess it's even a bit hypocritical of me to say that something never has a place in training, as I'd normally say that the methods I used never should be used. Well, except anger...I'm good saying that anger never has a place in training animals.

edit: by the way, I just wanted to add that I'm really enjoying the civil discussion in this topic. When I first read the OP I was expecting a trainwreck, but the thoughtful posts here have really given me stuff to think about...which is why I post on this board in the first place.

[SFGSSD]

Originally Posted by StephenV

That was me. Let me be more specific with my complaint: He offers direct professional advice based on an email (without ever having seen the poster or their dog) that they should kill their dog. Several times.

Specific example: In his Q&A section on Aggressive Dogs, He begins his advice to someone with "You have described enough for me to recommend that you put this dog to sleep." The dog in question was an 11 month old GSD that chased a running child and tried to nip him in the backside.

I am one to give a chance to a dog more so than the average trainer. I do not like going to extreems to get the job done but sometimes the DOG gives us two options and you are at a crossroad. From the experience level of the handler a lot of the time you only have ONE option unfortunately.
I agree that I would not have jumped the gun on that one and refered it out before presenting that option. But this is from what you said... I did not see the whole post to reference.

[SFGSSD]

Originally Posted by RowdyDogs

I can understand that.
I'll also admit that I sort of skimmed over the "nastiest dog I've owned in my life" part. I wanted to read the answer in context before replying and had read so much trying to find it before it occurred to me to Ctrl+F, my eyes were crossing a bit. Also, just to be clear, I was using female pronouns in my last post as I thought it was Cindy writing, and I'm still not sure who it was, but it doesn't really matter to me so I'll attribute it to Ed in this post.

I'm not against last-ditch extreme measures to prevent a dangerous behavior--better an extreme correction than euthanasia, as you said--so while I'm still a little skeptical that a shovel was really the best option, I also wasn't there and after more thought will acknowledge that I could be wrong.* I'm also not at all wanting to imply that I doubt Ed's knowledge or credentials with working dogs. I really do respect his opinions and experience, and read his site pretty regularly. I don't agree with everything he says (but I can't really name a trainer I do 100% agree with!), but I have learned a lot from his stuff.

However, I really still think that it was an inappropriate answer to that question. I think for the vast, vast majority of dogs (and especially the ones whose owners are going to be taking advice from that site--most experienced working dog handlers I know don't need advice on how to handle fence fighting), there are far safer and kinder methods to fix that problem. Maybe I have a low opinion of people, but I've known so many people who see an experienced trainer use a controversial method in an extreme case, and then they point to that and say, "See? I can do that too!" then wind up abusing their animals.

I feel that trainers (myself included, as someone who has published articles on dealing with potentially dangerous behavioral problems in horses) have an ethical obligation to consider their audience, and how their advice is likely to be misused. Yeah, any advice can and probably will be misused--from clicker training being used to excuse ineffective training and terrible behavior ("Sorry Fluffy bit you, I'm trying to only use positive training methods so I can't tell him not to!" is one I have literally heard) to e-collars being used to shock dogs who honestly don't understand what they're being asked and turning them into fearful basket cases. But I think that's why telling a story about hitting a dog with a shovel should be reserved for more specific audiences who are likely to understand the circumstances.

As I thought about it more, I realized that a huge part of my problem with that particular story is less the specifics of the story (especially rereading his description of the dog in general), but more how and where it was told. I came away from that answer, even on subsequent rereadings, feeling like that story was told as a good example of how to handle fence fighting in general, not how to handle it with an extremely difficult dog. If he'd even thrown in some examples of how to handle it more gently (for lack of a better word) with less extreme dogs, or cautioned about the dangers of hitting a dog with a shovel, or anything, I'd probably have less of a problem with it.

edit: by the way, I just wanted to add that I'm really enjoying the civil discussion in this topic. When I first read the OP I was expecting a trainwreck, but the thoughtful posts here have really given me stuff to think about...which is why I post on this board in the first place.

I have been told by other trainers that I am guilty of what is called "Lumping" when it comes to me teaching others and talking to others. I take a lot of things for granted that are just a given to me that I forget that not everyone knows exactly what I am talking about some times or doing at that moment most of the time. Teaching timing in all circumstances is a huge one that is a challenge for me.
Along the same lines maybe Ed forgot who his audience was for a moment
I am also enjoying this. Trolls are so annoying and really can get ugly fast. I don’t mind anyone pointing out things relevant as long as they are not just purposely looking to get a rise out of anybody.