TheAmazingPuppyWizard@Mail.Com

"Accentuate The Positive -

Punishment Free Training Is A Wonderful
Sounding Concept, A Great Sales Pitch,"
captain arthur haggerty, author, AKC Gazette.

HOWEDY People,

"Accentuate The Positive." That's the title of our
friend captain haggerty's column in the recent a.k.c.
gazette. "When positive reinforcement is all that is
necessary, training is pleasurable to both of you,"
says the good cap'n.

At least we can agree on that.

Maybe the good capt'n has been reading my posts
here and is feeling a lot self-conscious about our
recent progress teaching dog owners to understand
what's gone wrong.

Well, its about time. Too bad the good cap'n (teacher
to uncle matty [see L.A.Weekly article] and our own
boob maida and ???possibly our own anonymous
dogman???) is on the wrong side the fear, force,
confrontation, and pain issue.

Our "traditional trainers" led by the likes of our good
cap'n and our Descartean professors of behavior are
the root of the problem, rather than a source of
information and inspiration that we desperately need
and want...

Too bad our good cap'n is hiding behind the cover of
the akc and their publication The A.K.C. Gazzette,
where he can't be forced to respond to this criticism
and indictment of his methods, methodology, and
madness and engage in discussion or debate or at
least TRY to defend his unconscionalble point of
view that HURTING BRIBING and INTIMIDATING DOGS
or CHILDREN to train them is apuprriate, intellignent,
and justifiable based on his thirty sumthin years of
HURTING INTMIDATING BRIBING and LOCKING DOGS
IN BOXES and tryin to get HOWET callin THAT,
TRAINING and MURDERING dogs he can't abuse
into subordination... or "TRAIN", if you will.

You think he knows enough about dog training and
conditioning behavior to teach you HOWE to use only
positive reinforcement? He can't do it himself, so
HOWE do you expect him to teach you?

The good cap'n mumbles on about his perception of
clicker training and calls it LUCK. He then goes on to
say: "if you have to let a dog know when it is doing
something right, then you must also let it know when
it is doing something wrong." (Don't you just love it
when dog lovers refer to your dog as IT?)

HOWE does the good cap'n extrapolate the need to
let the dog know he's doing something we want, to
being obligated to tell the dog he's doing something
we don't want?

That's the point to USING "PURELY PLEASURABLE

POSITIVE ONLY, NON PHYSICAL SCIENTIFIC and
PSYCHOLOGICAL methods ONLY.

WE do not NEED to tell the dog NO if we
are smart enough to OUTWIT the cunning
of the domestic PUPPY DOG using EFFECTIVE
NON PHYSICAL CONDITIONING.

It's EZ if you know HOWE. The good cap'n doesn't.

Or he wouldn't NEED to HURT and INTMIMIDATE
and LOCK DOGS IN BOXES and SHOCK and
SPRAY AVERSIVES in their eyes and TELL US
IT DON'T HURT.

The good cap'n further shoves his foot deep into his
mouth with: "the latter requires some sort of negative
reinforcement, which, of course, is something of an
oxymoron."

Too bad he doesn't understand the scientific meaning
of the terms positive and negative reinforcent.

Yes I know exactly what the cap'n means. He means
that he does not have the intellect to be able to train a
dog without hurting and confronting him.

First he starts off talking "purely positive" and then he
says that because we tell the dog when he's doing
something right, that we're obligated to tell the dog
when he's doing something wrong.

That's what the cap'n does. Competent dog trainers
don't do that because it's confrontational and causes
aversions to commands and handler and TEACHES
dogs and children to DO those behaviors as soon a
his ABUSER turns his back.

"It can be as uncomplicated as saying a firm NO."

EXACTLY MY POINT.

Competent trainers don't be telling dogs "firmly NO"
on account of that's what provokes dogs to do more
of the same behavior to make us stop in our tracks
to tell them NO and spend time distracted WITH
them, when all we would have needed is to allow
the dog to attempt the behavior and make a brief
variably alternating distraction INSTANTLY followed
with PROLONGED SINCERE EXXXUBERANT
UNCONDITIONAL PRAISE.

Do that a few times in a row and the dog will be
broken of that behavior. But our heavy handed thick
headed weak minded cap'n can't figure that out because
he doesn't have the brains to outwit the cunning of
the domestic puppy dog or he wouldn't NEED to hurt
and intimidate them, would he???

Or, is it because he enjoys jerking and choking and
confronting dogs to make them do what he wants? I
think our friend the good cap'n might have some
CONTROL issues to deal with in his own personality
complex.

"One good thing about negative reinforcement is that
when appropriately delivered, it can immediately stop
an unwanted behavior."

O.K. cap'n. You can repress a behavior but there is
often a replacement behavior that may be worse than
the behavior you are trying to repress. I can give dozens
of examples like SEPARATION anxiHOWESNESS
CAR SICKNESS, FEAR OF THUNDER, LIGHT /
SHADOW / FLY SNAPPING OCD's, so don't even
THINK of startin with that.

"Now I know there are people who claim that they use
only positive reinforcement and no negatives;" but the
good cap'n isn't familar enough with dog training and
behavior to do that. "I'm a bit skeptical when when I
hear this claim."

And that's all the proof I need to prove our good
cap'n to be an incompetent dog trainer:

HOWE do they PUNISH Shamu?

HOWER GOOD cap'n CONtinues:

"You CAN train a dog using all positives. Generally
speaking, though, it is not as efficacious."

Now ain't that an oxymoron?

Either that or it's an outright lie.

What's the story? If you hurt a dog he's going to want
to work more willingly and more creatively than if you
are only using positive motivation and conditioning
techniques which will make the dog think he's working
instinctively through his natural pack cooperative
teamwork effort as NATURE PROGRAMMED HIM?

Come off it cap'n. Get the heel outta this business
and stop misleading people because you ain't bright
enough to train a dog without hurting them.

Then the good cap'n continues on talking about
corrections and punishiment and says "punishment
free training is a wonderful sounding concept, a great
sales pitch." The cap'n is fighting for his career and
reputation. His ship is sinking fast.

Then our good cap'n, the expert who isn't bright
enough to train a puppy dog without hurting him
has the nerve to say "They are making some great
adjustments and sacrifices for what they feel to be
the sake of their dog."

Does the cap'n think that training dogs quickly and
without fear, force, confrontation, punishment, or
negative side effects is not as sensible as training
a dog by locking IT inside of a crate and a chin cuffing
and scruff shaking and jerking and choking IT on a
pronged choke or shock collar and time outs and
punishments "TO ENHANCE THE BOND between
TRAINER AND DOG"?

Something is very wrong here.

We've got an expert who can't train a dog without
hurting him telling YOU that WE can't train dogs
as quickly and effectively using proven scientific
and psychological behavior conditoning and modification
techniques.

That's outrageous, isn't it folks?

Our simple minded cap'n continues to discredit himself
saying: "Some even feel that corrections would shatter
their relationship with their dog. I'm sure that they
do not have that tenuous a relationship with their
dogs, but if they feel they do, that is their
perorgative."

What's tenuous about a good relationship? Suppose
it only deteriorates your relationship A LITTLE.

That's GOOD?

There's no need to force and hurt dogs to train them.
IF our cap'n's got enough intelligence, he's only using
it to fabricate arguments to defend his thirty sumthin
year history of abusing dogs and calling it training.

He then goes on to rationalize HOWE non force
training takes longer. He don't get it. He don't
understand getting a dog to NATURALLY WANT
to do everything you ask because YOU know HOWE
to make Natural Law work for you to compel your
dog to want to do anything you ask without pain
force, fear, intimidation, bribery or punishment.

The cap'n goes off rambling about the "combination
approach" of sometimes being positive and sometimes
being corrective forgetting about such things as
allelomimetic behavior and consistancy and slobbers
all over himself saying "it reduces stress by letting
the dog realize what's wanted and you can tell by the
expression on it's face IT appreciates the guidance."
"Why limit yourself?"

The good cap'n don't get it because he's not intellectually
capable of understanding. He goes on to say: "Punishment
free trainers deserve credit for taking a road less traveled.

It's not a road that I choose to take.

I want to get the job done expeditiously."

So he confronts and punishes a dog because he
doen't think making a dog want to do everything
you ask using purely positive proven effective
scientific and psychological techniques is possible.

Your positive pal, Jerry "Mr NICE Guy," Howe,

The Amazing Puppy Wizard. <{}; ~ } >

All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-Arthur Schopenhauer

"Thank you for fighting the fine fight--
even tho it's a hopeless task,
in this system of things.
As long as man is ruling man,
there will be animals (and humans!)
abused and neglected. :-(
Your student," Juanita.

"If you've got them by the balls their hearts
and minds will follow,"
John Wayne.

GOT MILK?

ANY QUESTIONS, DUMMIES?
,-._,-,
V)"(V
(_o_) Have a great day!
/ V)
(l l l) Your Puppy Wizard. <{}YPW; ~ } >
oo-oo