DS: Compulsion and the end result, is it worth it?

Question

Is the compulsion involved in training a dog worth the end goal in any arena; be it sport, police work, PPD, even plain old obedience training, etc.?
Is there a way around using compulsion?
What, in your opinion, does using compulsion in training mean?

If you don't like compulsion and just want to rant about it and not add anything thought provoking, skip the question and move on.
I want to hear from serious people ONLY.

I find this topic interesting.

Answer 1

I guess it depends on what your goals are...If you are not interested in a dog that is FULLY proofed under any and all circumstances, you dont need to use compulsion.

If you are the squimish type, you cant use it, if you are looking at that dog as your child, you wont use it. If you are training dogs for real life applications or even TOP competition in a sport, you will have to use compulsion at some point during your training.



At that level, you can train motivationally til you get to a point, but, after that, you MUST train the dog that it has no choice but to do what its told when its told and that requires physical compulsion.

No one goes to the Nationals or the World cup on motivation alone and we have seen the results of that type of training before.



Is there a way around it? Maybe, if you have a genetic freak of a dog...then again, I have seen a few of them too and they happen to have off days too which means they need some type of compulsion.

Personally, I find nothing wrong with it, once the dog understand what is expected and decides to blow you off...that is not allowed, especially in a real life encounter.



I have no problem causing my dog some pain in order to have him avoid feeling yet more pain that could be deadly. I have no problem with causing him pain when he knows damn well what he is supposed to be doing and decides not to do it because....

I learned a long time a go, longer then most people in here have been alive, that an E collar properly used can do wonders for a dog and its more humane then most other methods out there that people that know nothing about compulsion training understand.



In conclusion, if you are serious about what you want out of your dog performance wise, there is no way around using compulsion and yes, that means physical pain. Hope I helped.





Edit: To address another esteemed poster's answer...if a dog is running out of the ring scared, you either have the wrong dog in that ring and need to "wash" it, or, your training methods simply are not what you think they are and they need to be looked at closer.

I have never understood this idiotic notion of pushing a dog to do something its not capable of doing...you dont buy a Great Dane to pull your sled, you dont buy a beagle to hunt boar, you buy a dog that will fit your needs as far as your training goals, period and you dont force a dog with the wrong temperament to endure something it was not meant to do.



I owned a GSD that was a Sch III when I got him, a 287-290 dog...the idiot that owned him before me in Europe HAD to push the dog to become a 300 dog...something he was not capable of doing nor was he capable of being a National caliber competition dog, EVER...

I got him and trained him as my working dog and in that he excelled...but, regardless of how much compulsion he had applied to him, he would never had made a National level competition dog.

Answer 2

To me, compulsion is initiating (or continuing) a behavior in a dog by force. The force can range from verbal to physical, with varying tools.



It definitely has a place for trainers on a schedule. Can't do purely pos when you have to prepare 10 dogs in 4 months. However, it can come at a cost. The relationship can become less trusting, and you may need to build up some dogs, if you haven't read them right.



And others might have zero respect for a trainer unless compulsion is used. So the eternal answer will always be ... It depends.



PP takes so long, but you can train some aspects with it. It's such a nice change, and the dogs have fun training.

Answer 3

Hmmmm.... I don't care to answer at the moment, getting ready to go out for some Friday night partying ;) Maybe in the morning, if BA isn't chosen...



However, the horse comment got me to thinking. Now, I could be wrong, it's been YEARS and YEARS since I've actively ridden, and I was never really involved in any training, but aren't all physical corrections on a horse not completely based out of fear? Being a prey animal? For example, the whip on the rump, obviously fear motivation, correct? Or no?



Whereas in dogs short, sharp physical corrections are the everyday norm in a wild canid pack and bring about no true fear in the stable animal when used correctly. That is OBVIOUS to those of us in the know ;P and ignored by the R+ only ignorants.



So, if my assumption about compulsion training in horses is correct, would it not be more reasonable to call THAT way crueler then the use of physical compulsion on dogs?



Some people... lol







EDIT: Ok, I guess I'll throw out an answer now that it's morning and the ibuprofen is starting to kick in ;)



I think Greek said what I would of said perfectly. Compulsion, to me, means training the dog that there is no other option. My word, my law. In my mind, if you don't use some sort of compulsion, then obedience becomes nothing more then a game to the dog. What does it want more, the treat and reward at the end of the command, or a reward that would result from ignoring the command? Because in all reality, R+ only training is nothing more then bribing to do what you want. If the dog ignores the command, there is NO negative downfall for it.



In most cases, a dog could completely want to obey and please you. But when it's a choice between a piece of jerky in your hand and that tasty rabbit hopping around across the highway, what might seem more tempting to the dog?



I will say too, compulsion can not always be defined for use by hard or soft dogs. Zeke is a normal, stable dog, and he was trained with almost complete R+ only. It was not until he was almost 2 years of age that I really had to proof or use compulsion on him.



Luther, on the other hand, is an extremely soft dog, but also needed a much higher level of compulsion to get the desired training. Quite the opposite of what many R+ only people will scream, compulsion did NOT shut him down. In fact, it gave him the leadership and command that his weak nerves desired. He needed stability to take over the role of law and "protection", he needed that power to lean on and feel secure under.

Answer 4

Compulsion (IMO) is simply insisting that a dog obey whether he is in the mood or not.



It can be something as simple as continuing to walk when the dog is on leash and stops because he wants to do something else.



Its only "mean" if the dog does not understand what the trainer wants and how to avoid a negative consequence, or the force used is inappropriate for the particular dog. If properly applied, it simply convinces the dog that there is an unpleasant consequence for disobedience.



I think it would be impossible to train an animal effectively without some form of compulsion. I know that even marker trainers will confine a dog to build "drive". I would consider that a form of compulsion.

Answer 5

I do obedience training for competition and I don't believe in compulsion training.



I understand that some people need it - people doing field work, for example, train a forced retrieve. My older dog's utility instructor uses a forced retrieve for her field dogs, but, she doesn't teach that way. I don't agree with the philosophy of causing pain to a dog you're teaching, a dog who can't make a mistake because he doesn't yet know what to do. Compulsion can be an ear pinch, a collar twist, etc.



An ear pinch isn't something I'll ever use. If my dog knew what to do and refused to do it, I could use a collar twist to compel the retrieve, but I've never needed to because my dogs haven't ever refused a retrieve (yet) with the method I used.



One thing I'd like to add, I've seen more than a couple of utility dogs who've been trained using the ear pinch desperately trying to leave the ring. Some of them think they've made a mistake, some are worried about making a mistake, some have just plain had enough.



My dogs are really, really happy in the ring and it shows. If they ever hated obedience so much they wanted to leave the ring, I'd be mortified and know it was time to quit. The day might very well come when my dogs will refuse, but you know what, the world won't end. People aren't perfect and they have bad days. Dogs are also allowed to.

Answer 6

All I know is without compulsion, Launi would NOT have a proofed off leash come. She was trained with an E collar.



I am able to walk her off leash. When another person with a dog comes around the corner, I give her a *hey hey* and she downs. Waits. The others pass. We continue.



Maybe I am not answering the question quite right. But her proofed come has been a blessing to our neighborhood. There was so many Coyotes. They were nesting on my property. Our ducks disappeared. Small dogs were being snatched out of their front yards in brood daylight with the owner watching.



The ducks are starting to come back. The Herons are back. Why? Because when Launi found the coyote nest on our property she destroyed it. I gathered enough fur to use. My husband took her out off leash after midnight. Rode his bike, carried a big flashlight and she found 4 other nests within a 2 mile radius.



I do believe that qualifies. And I owe it all to Greek's excellent advice and help.



Chix: Our county is infested with them. Roaming over 200 acres of the biggest funeral home. George has had traps set, *wildlife exterminators*......still have problems. They cross local streets in broad daylight.



If they are coming back? Then fine. We will know. My dogs know. We see them. And the ducks start disappearing. I will NEVER allow my APBT to go head on with a Coyote. No way. Would she?

Yes. The reason why my husband carried lethal weapons. Both bow and firearm.



I guess we are all a bunch of rednecks who believe in the right to bare arms, know how to shoot, use a dog for vermin eradication, drive pickup trucks & take care of our own. We also hold down full time career jobs.......geezus.

Answer 7

I use compulsion. It helps eliminate the grey areas. Compulsion, corrections, consequences are all the same to me. Once the dog has an understanding then one doesn't or shouldn't have to use compulsion as much. I see it as making the dog understand that he must make the right choice. I also train for the ring. I use compulsion for more then the retrieve. Compulsion can correcting for a no sit by positioning with the leash; reminding with a tug on the leash that over means to jump that jump; etc. Done right compulsion doesn't create fearful dogs even on "sensitive" ones.

Answer 8

A well-trained dog makes everyone happy, including his owner. Take a little time training him, and you'll never regret it; you'll always have an obedient dog by your side. Find more https://tr.im/epOKw



By their nature, dogs are pack animals with a well-defined social order. Through basic training, you need to consistently make sure your puppy understands that you are the leader, not him. So in teaching him the basic rules, you take on the role of pack leader.



To fit into the family circle, your dog must be taught to recognize his name and such commands as come, heel, lie down and sit.

Answer 9

If...you plan on training a dog to be SAFE...you must use compulsion. And I think everyone should have a SAFE dog. One who's safe to himself and others.



Every dog will bite somebody in the right situation at the right time. Period. To be SAFE you need a 100% "No". Almost everyone on the planet has had their dog outside off leash...whether they dropped the leash, something came loose or broke, the fence was open, the kids left the garage door open, a solar flare from the sun caused a gust of wind that happened to tilt the Earth's axis and caused your gate lock to become just loose enough that when your dog breathed on it it popped open, whatever. In that situation to be SAFE you need a 100% "Come" to save yourself a few nights of searching, your dog winding up at the pound, or being hit by a car, or being stolen etc.



For a dog to understand "No means no" you will have had to use a timely correction after saying "No" in a way it stuck into permanent memory whether that be through repetition or through a very adverse outcome. To teach a 100% reliable recall, you must, must use compulsion. I have heard it all about training with 100% positive reward...people swearing their dog would come regardless of the distraction, and I've seen a couple who've come pretty close. But none that was 100%. .01% is just enough to have a flattened dog in the quiet street right in front of your home for your kids to see...



Walking Lady said: "a dog who can't make a mistake because he doesn't yet know what to do" beautiful argument against negative punishment and other methods of training who use physical compulsion before a dog knows what tasks it's being told to perform (Koehler Method being the most popular and renown of these methods). Correcting a dog or pushing a dog into positions before he knows what you're asking of him is unnecessary...effective, sure...but unnecessary. If you truly care about your animals, I don't see why you would cause unnecessary stress instead of perhaps taking a bit more time to show the dog what you want, and have him understand the exercise better. Also with positive reward early in training you can micromanage training. I can reward my dog not only for sitting, but for the motion in which HOW he sits! I teach my dogs to keep their front feet still and "tuck" their rear in behind them. I can teach my dog to down without rocking back, but to simply go flat. These things I can teach in tiny segments with positive reward and markers that simply can't be done in any other way. Now why these may be useless examples to people training backyard obedience, one must think of the possibilities that are opened when one can micromanage behavior like that when it comes to more complex behaviors and advanced obedience trials. (and silly backyard tricks even) But in the end, once the dog knows what is being asked of him, if he doesn't comply he needs a correction.



And last but not least...a dog who consistently scores 280-290 in Schutzhund trials is Nationals material. The top 3 scorers in the 2011 AWDF Championships go as such:

2011 AWDF Champion Mark Natinsky with Edison ot Vitosha 94-98-94 = 286

2nd Place Daniel Cox with Chuck vom Dorneburger Bach 96-91-95 = 282

3rd Place Sean O'Kane with Max ze Stribrneho kamene 97-91-94 = 282

No one even scored in the 290's, http://www.germanshepherddog.com/



In the 2011 Bundessieger only 8 dogs of 49 who made qualifying scores were above 280: http://www.dvg-s-h.de/BSP/ergebnisse.htm



I've never seen a dog personally get a perfect score. I do have a video of the ADRK German National Schutzhund Champion from 2001, the winner scored a 296 which was the highest in the ADRK's championship's history (which has spanned about 60 so odd years).



-add- Chix, you say: "I don't want a 100% compliant, obedient, robotic dog"



So you have a dog you trained to protect you, who isn't compliant and obedient? -crickets chirp- Sounds more like walking lawsuit. Especially after purposely training them to injure human beings. Responsible owners of dogs trained to bite people control their dogs at all times through containment and training to protect innocent people from an animal with a 3-5oz brain who's simply not, and will never be intelligent enough to decide when to inflict possible grave bodily injury to a human being. Backyard bite training (which it had to be because any bite sports club after hearing your philosophy would tell you to change your mind in the next 2 minutes about your thoughts on the importance of having a dog that complies 100% of the time or they'd ask you to leave and not come back) and philosophy that goes against all that are proven to work = Dangerous situation. I don't agree with Koehler method, but I'd rather you use that than have some at home trained Cujo bite some kid's face off or decide you need protection from the county Father of the Year as he walked too close by...

Answer 10

Learning how to train your dog will improve your life and hers, enhance the bond between you, and ensure her safety and it can be a lot of fun. Dogs are usually eager to learn, and the key to success is good communication. Your dog needs to understand how you’d like her to behave and why it’s in her best interest to comply with your wishes. Check here to learn how to train your dog properly https://tr.im/fba88

Answer 11

I obedience train for the ring and compete and title dogs.



I am always amused at the fun and games retrieve folks.

Honestly its good for the shows as those folks have to try again and again for a title.



I use a forced retrieve. It is the only way to get a reliable retrieve.



Compulsion will cause a problem if the task is not clearly defined for the dog.

In training the forced retrieve the method takes several weeks.

I am not going to go into it here, but one does not suddenly take a dumbbell and pinch the dogs ear if it does not pick it up.



However for those that like the fantasy of an ear pinch being applied to a dog out of the blue, as

compulsion training- well that makes it a great talking point for them in talking about training they really know nothing about.



The fact is I have happy and reliable retrieves on my dogs through compulsion.

I will add that I have "soft" dogs as well and compulsion works just fine on them.



I do have to put up with my dogs titling rather quickly while those that use the other methods have months and even years of trying to achieve that same title.



Are their ways around it, of course it is rather popular to beg, cajole, bribe and pray that ones dog will perform the task.



Stand outside an Obedience or rally ring and hear people saying they "hope" their dog performs.



I honestly hope Greek comes and gives an answer.

My brain is completely disconnected at this moment, no coffee and getting ready to leave for a horse show................



ADD: The dog in my avatar is shown doing a retrieve over the jump. She was taught a forced retrieve. She looks pretty happy to me.



ADD2- I am looking at this as I am getting ready to leave, and that is so funny because as I was getting my clothes out I thought Let these people try to work with a horse with these touchy feely "methods" that they want to use on their dog, and see where it gets them.



Will check in on this thread tonight.

Answer 12

Good Morning Sunshine



Do I think it is mean? Not if you know what you are doing if you don't use it correctly it is useless and can be dangerous. It is a necessity in some dogs unless you want to deal with the bad behavior for the life of the dog. It is never my first choice of training and depending on the dog it can take longer for the dog to catch on to the method.

I am sure you get tired of me saying it depends on the dog and how to get the dog to respond to which method of training. I evaluate the nature, drive and temperament in a dog and if all normal positive training doesn't work then of course I go for the not so normal.

Answer 13

I think Ms. Manners answered perfectly. I agree completely.

Answer 14

I use prong collars. But, I don't buy a guarding breed to defeat it. My last Doberman would not tolerate physical corrections (by hand) - and why would I want to hit a dog that I trained to defend me from others?



Service dogs live a life of servitude. Its human to question the need and as civilization evolves, look inwards as well as outwards.



Its not a bad thing to try to learn new ways because sometimes the end doesn't justify the means.



I strive to do the best for my dogs and learn from my mistakes. Its not always black and white and the grey area means hard choices. Its not as simple as just say no.

********************************

Aphrodite, you live in Ontario. WE have the actions of police at the G20 etched in our memories. Its not appropriate to detail here, but my point is - our dog is an extension of ourselves.



If humans cannot find civilized ways to solve conflict, how can we expect to train a dog to?



*******************************

Training a dog to perform in a ring (UD) is one thing. Training a dog to work in the field for hours in a hostile place, another. Comparing the two is not appropriate. The question is the work, and the need for dogs to execute.



*******************************

I agree with Rotten. I routinely use food as rewards for my dogs now and (right or wrong) I don't "compel" my dog for every little thing.



As a sidebar, I have been out canoeing with my two GSD's and a storm rolled in. I had freezing water in May, high winds and choppy white-capped waters to contend with. My dogs never moved and I never had to ask them. It was one of those "serious" times when they just knew.



Its often only when we are put to the test, that we find out what we are made of and how our dogs will respond. Its through adversity we learn and it is then the bond is tested.



I live a pretty ordinary life these days and frankly, I'm dull. My dogs have a cushy existence. So, corrections are pretty minimal.



However, The collar is insurance for the one situation I cannot anticipate. People can tell me food will work all the time. It doesn't. I don't' care if they believe me or not.



I let my conscience be my guide. Not YA.

:-)

**********************

@Lauri: good for you - my dog is not proofed off-lead. I know it. The fact I walk with 3 much of the time has no doubt influenced my choices. Which I accept responsibility for.



But on coyote - it will be interesting to hear how that works out. According to what has been experienced here in Ontario, when coyotes are culled from a territory - they respond by breeding more often to fill the gap.



If science is accurate and assuming all coyotes act the same, you will soon have more coyotes howling than you did the last time. :-)

*********************

@Lauri: Huh? (shrug shoulders)

******************

At the risk of really annoying some people, I will say this: obedience can be counter-productive.



I don't WANT a 100% compliant, obedient, robotic dog that no longer thinks. I don't train my dog to be subservient to me. I train them to guide me and I am a partner, not a master. So, I keep them leashed.



My dogs are bouncy, alert, and in situations where I am threatened, they will initiate a defense without my asking. Its a fine line. If I still trained them tactically, the level of obedience and degree of compulsion was higher at times, to maintain the appropriate level of balance and control. Which brings me to my point.



Compulsion cannot be defined in absolutes - and the nature of the work and the investment of the handler in the work, can affect a dogs compliance without the necessity of force. A dog worked on weekends for an hour in a sport is not the same as a service dog worked every day.



When I did SAR, at times, we worked for HOURS. A dog cannot work at that level with constant corrections. We often rotated responsibility to rest handler and dog. When we tracked (in training) we often tracked in teams, with the lead dog tracking scent, and the rest following behind at heel. Then we rotated. This is done to conserve energy for dog and handler.



Dogs are capable of discerning the difference between short games where tasks are learned by rote and memorized (ie a UD routine) vs hours spent searching in the field when someone's life is at stake. Its simply very different disciplines - my favorite analogy is comparing a lawyer who studies for the bar exam (and passes) vs a lawyer who spends months preparing for a high profile murder trail. THEN he must demonstrate his abilities in a court of law - because a person's life depends on it. That is where the pedal hits the medal.