Soft Dogs = An Iron Clad Case Of Dog Abuse - A Review Of An Article By lying frosty And john (Stick Man) dahl.
The Puppy Wizard
Without ever having read this article in advance, I've written the
subject header and intend to go through the dahl article to prove
beyond a shadow of a doubt that our expert field dog trainers are
incompetent lying dog abusing Thugs.
> Oak Hill Kennel
> Soft Dogs
So called soft dogs means a dog that'll collapse to the ground or shake
and quiver for days after being shocked, choked, pinched, and beaten.
That's what our field dog trainers breed DOWN for, to get a dog that
won't bite them when they viciously pinch and twist their ears between
spikes or the buckle of their collars and the brass of a shot shell.
> by John and Amy Dahl
> First published in The Retriever Journal, December/January 1997-98
amy dahl is a proven liar and dog abuser, who works with her idiot
dh to beat her dogs for her, so she won't break a nail...
> There is not universal agreement as to the meaning of the term
> "soft" in describing a retriever.
Because there's no rhyme or reason to ever hurting a field dog to make
them interested in working... hunting. That's the most NATURAL thing in
the world for a Retriever Dog to do.
> Many enthusiasts
dahl means, DOG ABUSERS.
> confuse lack of desire or recalcitrance in training
*(FEAR)
> with softness
You mean the dog's withdrawal to defend itself by cowering
and shaking and pleading not to be HURT someMOORE.
> while others label shyness, spookiness, and other deficiencies of attitude
HOWER dog abusers blame the dog for being afaid of gettin BEATEN.
> as softness.
What else would we expect our dog abusers to say when they're jerking
and choking and pinching a dog to motivate them to want to work with
them as their partners? Oh. That's the problem. Our field dog training
experts do not train their dogs to be partners, they hurt and intimidate
and force their dogs to do as they're told, or get HURT.
> We apply the term softness more simply to the inability or
> unwillingness of a retriever to respond well to heavy force.
Hunh?
Oh! You mean PAIN, INTIMIDATION, CHOKING, SHOCKING, and BEATING.
> When dealing with such a dog,
In my nearly forty years of specializing in temperament and behaivor
problems in mostly giant breed dogs I've never found the need to beat a
dog with a stick. And it's been over twenty five years since I've used a
correction... I've learned alot during my career.
> the use of pressure (pain, J.H.) must be restricted to the level at which
a
>desirable response is achieved, without overwhelming the dog.
Well ain't that NICE of you! You don't approve of overly HURTING your
dogs to motivate them to want to work and do everything you ask.
> Although there seems to be a tendency among some to drop a soft dog
> like the proverbial hot potato,
Is that on account of there's NO PLEASURE if you can't HURT the dog?
Or is it because they can't train a dog without HURTING it?
Why must you experts HURT dogs to train them? There isn't anything
you do in field work that I don't need to do for protection work, just a
little different spin, that's all.
Dog training is dog training and a dog is a dog.
> we find the soft dog,
But not to our experts. Our experts have hard and soft and lots of other
euphamisms for temperament problems THEY CAUSE by their absurd,
vicious, warped, training methods.
Antiquated doesn't imply ABUSIVE. ABUSE is abusive, anytime.
> on the average, no more difficult to train to top performance than the
> "hard" dog -- the dog which is not very susceptible to pain.
Notice our experts are moore concerned with pain and HOWE to
administer it than actually motivating the dog to want to work.
That's where I start off teaching my students, HOWE to command
their dog's attention through praise and motivate their dogs to
naturally want to do everything they're asked because that's the
most NATURAL thing for a PACK animal to WANT do, follow the
directions of the pack leaders in a hunt... The very most basic
fundamental rules of dog training are UNKNOWN to our experts.
> Often the soft dog can be taught lessons through light pressure more
> easily than the hard dog through heavy pressure.
What? What lessons are taught through pain and fear?
Pain and fear inhibit learning and memory recall and inhibit
the dog from TRYING out of fear of being HURT someMOORE.
> Parenthetically, we would deceive ourselves,
You ain't deceiving nobody no moore. I'm blowing the
whistle on you BIG TIME. You're an incompetent abusive
dog molester and a liar to boot.
> and fail to deal with the project of training a dog properly,
PROPERLY? HURTING DOGS IS NOT PROPER.
> if we did not admit that all correction has an element of pain,
> physical or emotional, in it.
Sorry, lyng frosty dahl. Only dog abusing Thugs need to inflict pain,
fear, and intimidation into a learning situation.
> The key is to understand the
The nature of our dog abusing "trainers." They're mentally deficient,
and incompetent when it comes to handling and training dogs, or
they wouldn't NEED to HURT them.
> use of pressure
You mean PAIN.
> and to apply it to a degree and with a frequency that
> will get the job done without making the dog go sour.
But it may make some dogs go sour... isn't that correct?
NO.
That's not correct.
There's no correct way to hurt and intimidate a dog to train it.
> Soft dogs are not all soft in the same areas or to the same degree.
Yes, I expect you'd know all about the different ways dogs
experess pain and fear.
> Some soft dogs lack drive,
Could that be because you're HURTING and INTIMIDATING them,
lying frosty dahl?
> range,
That could be because they know you can't HURT them at a
distance...or in field trials.
> birdiness,
Perhaps the pain has something to do with diminished
desire to even think about a bird???
> or initiative.
HOWE could your hickory stick fail to motivate your dogs???
> These failings are not necessarily related to softness
Right. They're related to incompetent uncaring vicious rotten dog
abusing Thugs hurting dogs because they don't understand HOWE
to train them without inflicting PAIN and INTIMIDATING them.
> and are about equally common in average and hard dogs.
You mean a dog is a dog, dahl?
> Slowness, dislike of the water, and avoidance of difficult cover may
> all occur in the temperamentally soft dog, but again are not necessarily
> a result of the softness.
Moore doubletalk.
> Dogs that are extremely susceptible to discomfort in cold water, may,
> however, be described as having a form of softness that prevents their
> becoming good cold water dogs, even with extensive training.
I wouldn't know... I'm afraid of cold unless it's food.
> When we think of soft dogs we more often think of those we know
> or have trained who were soft in the sense that it took very little
> physical force to make them comply.
Oh, now that's a switch (pardon the pun).
> Often these dogs were extremely talented, had great drive and speed,
> were birdy and intelligent and had endearing personalities. Several
> made excellent field trial performers.
Rare is it that you have a dog you don't need to hurt a lot?
> Modern electric collars can make training less traumatic for soft
> dogs such as this golden bitch
Yes, shocking the dog is much nicer than beating and twisting its ears
and choking IT... wouldn't you agree, DOG LOVERS?
> One of these was FC/AFC Jaffer's Blackie. Blackie was a large dog
> with great drive, intelligence, and charisma. He was soft. A lesson
> could be taught to him quickly with little pressure,
You mean without hurting and intimidating him much?
> and he would retain it.
Yes. Research into learning tells us we cannot learn and retain and
recall information if we are in pain and under duress.
> Shortly after Blackie came in for training, at 2 1/2 years of age,
> John was running the dog on some lining problems when
> Blackie stopped midway to the dummies
You and john were in front of the dog?
> and plastered his nose to the ground. He was glued to bitch scent
> from a female who had run the test previously.
Well, that would make a dog trainer angry, wouldn't it?
> John ran out, grabbed Blackie by the collar, and gave the dog two or
> three medium whacks on the rump with a training stick while holding
> him partially off the ground.
What is this "training stick?" I've never used a stick except to throw
for the dog to play with. You beat your dogs in training with a stick.
> John then told Blackie to sit, ran back to the line and cast him back
> to the dummies.
And the dog came to you and your dh dog abuser?
> Blackie responded beautifully and we can't remember his ever putting
> his nose down while being run on a test again.
Because you were smart enough to pick IT off the ground and BEAT IT.
> He was an example of a dog having all the right characteristics of a
> competitive retriever
You mean Blackie didn't try to defend himself as any respectable dog
would do because he's been beaten down.
> while soft enough to learn the lessons quickly and with little
> pressure.
Seems to me you'd do well to get the heel outta this business before
you end up in jail for animal abuse.
> FC Oak Hill Exponent (Pudge) was another example of a soft dog with
> great drive, speed, and cold water ability. Pudge was so soft that
> she could and would avoid a simple swat on the rump with a riding
> crop, even when on a check cord.
Why would you want to beat a dog with a horse whip while
it's tied to a tree? Oh! Of curse! You got to tie the dog or IT
will RUN AWAY from your BEATIN.
> This form of softness, moving quickly to avoid physical correction,
Amazing! The dog has the audacity to avoid being beaten by you?
> made her difficult in some ways,
Yeah. You had a hard time BEATING her cause she keeps ducking, you pig.
> but she was so susceptible to what pressure we were able to apply
You mean you was able to train her even though you kept missing hitting
her with your horse whip?
> that her learning rate was almost unbelievable.
Oh. Maybe she became so confident she could outmanouver you swinging
your horse whip that she was able to relax enough to figure out HOWE
COME you were beating her???
> When she was three years old,
Did she make it to four, or did she throw herself into the ocean to
avoid being beaten anyMOORE?
> even though she was an excellent marker, she
> couldn't do tests having two bird throwers close together. Faced
> with this situtation, Pudge couldn't decide which one to go to and
> would pop (stop and look back) out of confusion.
That's because SHE'S AFRAID OF YOU HURTIN HERsomeMOORE.
That's the same problem you guys have with the glove in the directed
retrieve and the other example you mentioned the other day about the dog
going to the previous exercise when the field is changed... you HURT the
dog and that's why they go out of control. Same problem for barking on
line in susan fraser's example where she and lyingdogDUMMY concluded
they've got to "steady" the dog moore by BEATING HIM for barking, the
reason he barks in the first place... kinda like homeopathy or "if it don't
kill you it'll make you stronger."
> This behavior was making it difficult to teach her the more
> challenging marking tests.
The dog was scared out of her wits, becase you and your dummy
husband BEAT HER.
> Pudge had had two force-on-back programs with a stick
You mean you needed to beat her for two sessions...
> and a long 100-yd cord before this
You let her run full tilt for 100 yards and then jerk her assoverbucket
to teach her a lesson. That's a good way to cripple or kill a dog.
> and was well forced to go.
You mean, you BEAT HER IN ADVANCE WHILE TIED, as per
your "STICK FETCH" method.
> John's solution to the popping on marks was to put the electric
> collar on her -- with no preliminary conditioning we are ashamed to
> say, as we would not do this today -
Well let's talk about that, since you refuse to discuss this aspect in
our snake proofing discussions... From your own words, the dog must
be properly conditioned to the collar before and after the training
involving introducing the dog to the shock, so the dog doesn't become
DEPENDENT on wearing the shock collar to be TRAINED... or COLLAR WIZE.
IOW, our so called snake proofing lessons are INEFFECTIVE unless the
dog has been properly conditioned to the shock collar, a proceedure that
requires at least a week, preferable two weeks and a few days of wearing
the collar after the training has been effected to OUTWIT the dog into
responding even in the absence of DURESS, i.e. wearing his shock collar.
Got it?
Your snake and poison proofing methods are faulty, and you
and I know this, and NOBODY is saying nothing, but KILLFILE JERRY.
> - and send Pudge on her marks.
You leave marks on the dog? Naaah.
> When she popped he would give the back cast with transmitter
> in hand, nick her lightly with the collar,
You mean SHOCK her. Let's discuss corrections.
Every incompetent trainer who uses force will agree that a light
correction is going to nag the dog and NOT be effective, and
may even provoke the dog. So, are you giving an ineffective lite
correction, or are you giving the dog an EFFECTIVE correction?
YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS NO MOORE.
As a koehler trainer, you know as well as I do that koehler would
solidly chastise you for giving lite corrections, as he has stressed
throughout his definitive treatise on PAIN and INTIMIDATION
methods of ABUSE you call TRAINING.
> and holler "Back!"
As you shock IT.
> This worked so well that after two or three sessions of this kind
> Pudge stopped popping, drove back to her birds, and made her
> FC within the year.
So, evidentally the lite corrections were EFFECTIVE corrections. That's
why I've offered one thousand dollars for any trainer to train a dog
while wearing a dual tuned shock collar themselves... lite corrections
my @$$.
You're a liar and dog abuser.
> On the other extreme, the really hard dogs we have trained require
> much more frequent and heavy application of pressure to get the job
> done.
You HURT dogs you're too stupid to train.
> Such were Dual Ch/AFC Warpath Macho, who was extremely
> difficult to get to stop on a whistle, and FC Penney's Nifty
> Bouncer, who had convinced himself and almost us that he would never
> wait until he was sent to take off after a bird. Both of these dogs,
> although excellent performers, needed frequent and convincing use of
> physical force to keep them under wraps.
BECAUSE YOU'RE A DOG ABUSER AND DON'T KNOW HOWE
TO MOTIVATE A HUNTIN DOG TO HUNT.
> They, too, were happy, hard workers, but being tough they were
> higher maintenance dogs in training.
"HIGH MAINTENANCE?" You mean they NEEDED A LOT of PAIN.
Yeah. Are there any two letters in the alphabet (FC, JH, CH,
etc.) worth beating your dog over?
Any "trainer" who has to hurt their dog to make him work, should
get the heel outta this business and leave the work to those who
know HOWE to outwit the cunning of a domestic puppy dog
without beating IT.
> What degree of softness, and in combination with what other traits,
> might we want in an hypothetical "ideal" retriever?
Why don't you learn HOWE to make your dogs enjoy working with you and
teach them what you want them to do, instead of just beating choking and
shocking it into them?
> The late Mike Paterno, who trained and handled the famed NAFC/FC Dee's
> Dandy Dude, once said "The easiest dog to train is a soft fast dog.
That so?
> The hardest dog to train is a fast hard dog."
I just love it when two dog abusers talk about abusing dogs. You'll
notice their discussions have no meaning to anyone other than a dog
abuser.
> There is a good deal of truth in this statement.
Yeah. He's talkin abHOWET the same reasons as you
couldn't lay your horse whip on Pudge. The dog HOWEtwits
you to avoid gettin BEAT.
> The fast soft dog may have plenty of speed, style, and momentum
> to make a top retriever while being responsive enough to be brought
> under control easily. Conversely, the hard fast dog -- already tough
> to get under control -- covers so much ground so rapidly that a single
> cast or whistle refusal often puts him beyond recovery.
IOW he's outta HURTING range.
> In trials this gives an overall appearance of discipline
> failure, and in training makes teaching hazard concepts difficult as
> he can get out of the area of the hazard so quickly.
That doesn't have to be the case. If you didn't HURT the dog,
he'd WANT to work and listen.
> A soft dog, especially a smart soft dog, can be particularly
> well-suited to a beginning trainer.
For the reasons stated above. LESS NEED TO HURT IT means
the dog earns faster and remembers easier... because of the
ABSENCE OF YOUR TRAINING METHODS...
> A novice training his or her first dog is usually willing to adapt
> the methods to the dog,
Good point. If you had effective methods, the dog would adapt to the
method. That's called TRAINING, isn't it, lying frosty dahl.
> and to invest the time and tennis-shoe soles needed to teach each
> concept with minimal pressure.
You mean they're willing to actually work at training the dog instead of
just beating choking shocking and pinching and twisting its ears and
toes and testicles and shooting it with slingshots?
> Such a team are Lane and Huck, who have recently begun training
> with us a couple of times a week. Huck (the dog) is very intelligent,
> soft, and responsive. Until his move to our area, Lane had no
> guidance on how to train him.
You mean he managed to train his dog without the help of
watching a EXXXPERT beat the dog at the heel of an expert
dog abuser like you?
> He noticed that the books contradict one another
Imagine that? And I've discredited all the books...
> and treated them with (appropriate) skepticism.
Get outta this busines... dog abuser.
> Using his intuition and his knowledge of what he wanted
> the dog to know -- and his voice -- Lane had taught Huck to mark
> multiple falls and to handle extremely well. Our input has been to
> explain field trials and the types of tests Huck needs to learn to
> compete. Right now it looks as though Huck will be competitive in
> the Derby.
Imagine that, he managed to train a dog WITHOUT HURTING IT???
SHAAAZZZAAAM!!!
> Lane's commands are unconventional, but who cares? Huck is a
> wonderful example of what a soft dog can achieve for a dedicated
> trainer who pays attention to the dog's response and employs a light
> touch.
YET YOU PREFER TO INFLICT PAIN and INTIMIDATION
because you're an incompetent dog abusing Thug.
> By the same token, a soft or sensitive dog will fare less
> well with a trainer who is predisposed to train all individuals
> exactly the same and with plenty of force. And conversely, a hard
> dog might require more force than many novices are willing to apply.
I just love to hear a dog abuser discuss abusing dogs...
> Bitches as a general rule tend to be somewhat softer than males, and
> this may explain the high level of performance they often achieve in
> the hunting field and in trials. Being more easily trained by less
> physical pressure, they learn quickly and retain lessons well.
Hey? That's what I've been telling you bums for years.
Now you notice.
NEXT, you FORGET and resume HURTING the dog again
ON ACCOUNT OF YOU LIKE TO HURT DOGS...AND CAN'T
TRAIN A DOG WITHHOWET HURTIN THEM.
> This is by no means universally applicable, of course.
Of course, that's HOWE come you got that title LYING in
front of your name, lying frosty dahl.
> When we think of such bitches as Nodak Bonnie Girl; Want To
> (Missy), one of the best bitches we have ever worked with; or
> Scarlett of Lakestone, also extremely talented, we are also
> reminded that great hardness is by no means exclusive to males.
Ahhh. Good. I like to remember all the dogs I've hurt in the past
because I didn't know any better. But the problem is, your list of
recent memory is already bigger than my entire list of forty years
professionally working with mostly giant breeds with handler
aggression problems from dogs having been abused by lying
dog abusing Thugs like you, lying frosty dahl.
> Breed differences in softness may perhaps be best addressed by
> considering the Chesapeake Bay Retriever.
Yes, now there's a dog you're AFRAID to HURT cause they'll likely defend
themselves and let you have it, and customers frown on their so called
self proclaimed expert trainers HANGING their dogs because they've been
HURTING them and the dog was provoked to ultimately defend himself.
> While they are considered the toughest of the retriever breeds by
> many writers, the Chesapeake in fact has a distinct inclination to
> softness.
Perhaps that's because you're AFRAID TO HURT THEM CAUSE
THEY TEND TO DEFEND THEMSELVES???
> We have seen many individuals of this breed who were so soft that the
> slightest tap with a training stick would make them flinch and cower.
Yes. The next move is to go for your throat.
Dogs don't LIKE being beaten.
> Some of these dogs can be well trained
SOME?
> if they have great talent and Drive,
But not by a dog abuser. YOU RUIN DOGS.
> but care must be taken to avoid traumatizing them with
> high levels of physical force;
Because they're likely to rip your goddamned throat out for ya.
I'd love to get you in court in front of a criminal jury for dog abuse.
> the Chesapeake rarely can learn through these methods and
> is easily ruined.
That's HOWE COME our Labrador lovers have bred their dogs
DOWN to be willing to tolerate being jerked and choked and
beaten and shocked and having their ears and toes and testicles
pinched and twisted.
> Labs and Goldens can be found in all combinations of softness and
> hardness, as well as with variations in speed, drive and other traits,
> but the same principles of training apply.
You mean if we don't hurt and intimidate the dog they learn faster.
> Chesapeake Bay Retrievers are often soft
You mean they don't understand PAIN and INTIMIDATION. When they
collapse, that's when they get dangerous, because you risk pushing their
SURVIVAL INSTINCT button, and that's when the dog turns on you.
Chessies are too big for a gentle lady like yourself to HANG unless
you're prepared in advance with a hitch on something or a nice tree
limb or door to HANG your student over till his eyes roll back in his
head and his tongue turns thick and blue and falls out the side of
its mouth and when you put IT on the ground it should stagger to i
t's feet and PUKE, or you didn't freakin HANG IT PROPERLY... as
per your koehler book.
> In training the soft dog it is of utmost importance to show the dog
> what is expected of her or him.
Oy! What a miserable s.o.b. you are. A soft dog you're gonna train, a
tough dog you're gonna beat and shock and choke and twist and pinch???
> Often the trainer must find a creative solution to make a concept
> clear to that particular dog.
You mean like my plan to see you criminally prosecuted as a dog abuser?
> Once the dog understands through these demonstrations what you
> require, very little force is needed to get results.
Once you're committed to a criminal facility for the mentally insane,
we'll get laws passed protecting J. Q. Pubic from abusers like you
and janet boss and lying "I LOVE KOEHLER" lynn and cindymooreon...
and the rest of your Thug pals who call themselves EXPERT dog
trainers because they can beat a dog to make it fearful enough to
"REALLY DIG OUT to beat your stick"...
> For example, many dogs need to be convinced to return from an
> opposite shore by water after getting their bird.
Yeah. Imagine if you called IT and IT realized you couldn't HURT IT at
that range?
Maybe YOU FEAR watching five or six months of beatin and choking
and shocking a CASH CUSTOMER'S dog flip you the dew claw and
head for the hills where he won't ever get shocked or choked or beaten
or chucked or cuffed or twisted or pinched again, DISSAPPEAR!!!
Damn, you got lots of ways to HURT a dog, don't you?
I've never done most of what you teach.
> One common method is to first teach the "here" (come) command and
> collar condition the dog,
O.K., EXXXPERT. Collar conditioning refers to leavin the collar
on the dog for a week or two PRYOR to SHOCKIN IT so IT
don't figger the COLLAR is what's to BE FEARED, and will
therefor ONLY work while wearing the abusive device.
> then on the retrieve "here" "here" and they will plunge in and come back.
Yeah? Suppose your shock collar malfunctions?
YOU GOT A LOST DOG AGAIN...
> Alternatively, the "here" command can be taught and thoroughly
> reinforced in the yard using distractions and correction (typically
> a jerk on a long check cord),
Oh... Nobody jerks and chokes dogs to train them to come...
NOT HERE, anyHOWE.
> until the dog is so reliable he or she can be called back across the
water.
Well, seems nobody recommends jerking a dog to make IT come. BUT
SHOCKING IT seems to be in vogue. What's the difference? You're
punishing the dog for coming no matter HOWE you lie about what you're
doing.
We'll discuss the come command, snake, and poison proofing, and
collar conditioning in another EXXXPOSE of our dog abusing Thugs.
> We currently have some Chesapeake puppies who need to learn this
> lesson.
NO DHOWET.
You shove your fingers down their throats to choke them out of mouthing
anything, in the litter box. That's HOWE COME you got to beat and choke
and shock them to take the retrieve article.
AND THAT'S HOWE COME YOU CAN'T TRAIN THEM TO COME
WITHOWET A SHOCK COLLAR BEING WORN AT ALL TIMES.
> They are too small to wear the electric collar
Your pal fraudreck of sit means sit shock collar talk net radio suggested
punching some extra holes in the collar.
Pretty smart, huh?
> and as they are soft-natured
Until you start choking and beating them.
> and beginning to teethe (a condition which exacerbates softness
SOFTNESS??? YOU MEAN PISSIN THEMSELVES HOWETA FEAR
and PANCAKING on the grHOWEnd submissively?
> in many dogs),
Yes, because you shove your fingers down their throats to choke them out
of mouthing ANYTHING, THAT'S HOWE COME YOU GOT TO HURT THEM
TO FORCE THEM TO PICK SOMETHING UP.
> the second method is much too harsh,
For a YOUNG puppy.
> so we are applying the soft-dog method.
You mean, you're REFRAINING from HURTIN THEM.
> We demonstrate the principle by making it impossible to do
> anything but come straight back.
You mean you jerk and choke them on your pronged spiked
pinch choke collar and drag them back to you.
> We use a large trolling reel, 40 lb test monofilament
AND???
> and a trolling rod handle
To jerk and choke the puppy with...
> (end of the line attached to the puppy, of course).
Yes, the chokee.
> Put it in free spool and thumb the spool going out to avoid
> a backlash and when the dog reaches the far shore and the bird
> simply reel him back slowly but with steady pressure.
Choking him all the while on your pronged spiked pinch choke collar.
> If this is done correctly
There ain't no correct way to jerk choke beat or shock a dog.
When you care to TEACH The Puppy Wizard HOWE to do
so, we'll call for a panel of jurists to observe the LESSON
and we'll call it a criminal trial for animal abuse. When the
jurors invite you to halt abusing your dogs, you'll be escorted
to a SOFT ROOM where you'll be swaddled in a nylon shirt
and you'll be wearin a paper robe and slippers, till you come
HOWET of your power induced fog and are ready to be held
for CRIMINAL SENTENCING as an animal abuser.
> the dog will never panic and will take kindly to being guided
> directly back to his ever-so-forbearing trainer.
Where he'll be tied to a tree and beaten to motivate IT to
REALLY DIG IN to beat the stick, and sent again for another
drag and choke till IT gets the idea that runnin away is futile
and painful.
> Usually very few repetitions are necessary for the lesson
> to be learned.
Amazing!
You say you didn't NEED to HURT the dog. But you did need to
hurt him up till then, because that's the nature of a dog abusing
Thug, or you'd have NO WAY to KNOW if the dog is HARD or SOFT
cause the ONLY way you'll KNOW if a dog is soft or hard is to
HURT IT and SEE HOWE IT RESPONDS.
You're no trainer, you're a liar and a dog abuser and you're
rippin your customers off for the best of their dog's abilities
and months of worthless training and board to have you an
your IDIOT dh BEAT and CHOKE and SHOCK their dog till
it is afraid to do anything but HUNT?
Hmm. The Puppy Wizard always thought dogs loved to hunt.
> This method is not for use in "cheating" situations but simply for
> getting a soft, unschooled dog to return and not mill around on the
> far shore.
Right. The "cheaters" get shocked, beaten, or choked IN ADVANCE,
to keep them honest.
> Every aspect of training should be made crystal clear to
> the soft dog before employing such methods as electric collar
> reinforcement, slingshot, etc.
Oh goody, we were talking about your use of the slingshot.
You denied you use it to shoot the dog, as koehler teaches.
I've never read this web page before as my stomach usually
empties uncontrollably HOWETA the wrong end when I read
about hurting dogs to train them by expert dog trainers who
don't do what they say they do when they're talking about
not doing what they'd never do.
Like you've said, you'd never hit a dog.
> Another creative solution was needed for FC Glenspey's Evergreen
> Cricket, whom John got in training at 11 months of age. A talented
> bitch, Cricket was also very soft and had been treated roughly by
> others before she came here.
But you'd NEVER do THAT.
> She would try to escape any physical correction and was good at it.
IMAGINE? You musta tried HARD.
> She had become so shy of big men during her puppyhood that
> any hulking stranger of six feet in height could put her to flight.
Oh. Well, perhaps that's on account of she's afraid your dummy
dh john will BUSHWHACK HER and haul her off the grHOWEnd
and BEAT HER a few times as he's obligated to do at your bidding?
> In one Qualifying stake judged by a particularly large and heavy man,
> Cricket practically bolted when he raised his judge's book over her head
> to call for the birds in the first series.
That's cause it reminds her of your dh john whippin her with a belt
while suspended in the air by her pronged spiked pinch choke collar.
> This fear of large men had to be solved. Cricket loved treats, and
> we capitalized on this by distributing treats to all of the large
> men we knew at a field trial -- there are usually several. John
> would approach these men -- to Cricket, monsters -- with her on lead
> and casually encourage her up to them. The men, having been briefed,
> would call her up in a gentle way and feed her treats. It worked.
> Cricket lost her fear of big men and became competitive in field
> trials.
Whoopie! You overcame the fears you instilled in her...trying to
teach IT to want to hunt...
> The modern electric collar has become an excellent tool for
> reinforcement of taught commands among soft dogs in particular.
You mean, to MOTIVATE the dog to want to work.
> By comparison, the emotion and drama of shouting and running out to the
> dog to make a correction,
To beat the dog? Yeah, that's HOWE COME you have dh dummy john
BUSHWACK the dog... and BEAT IT for you.
> as needed in conventional training,
You think conventional training means HURT the dog?
> can be too threatening for many soft dogs.
You mean, dogs that'll BREAK when you HURT them?
> Furthermore, the superior timing of corrections with the collar
Yeah. See "Swiss Cheese" method where The Puppy Wizard
reviewed your method and pointed HOWET fifteen mistaken
BURNS you inflicted on your dog to confHOWEND her in the
field... That's HOWE COME it takes you six months or MOORE
to train a dog that should take a couple weeks if you didn't HURT
IT.
> generally allows lessons to be learned with fewer corrections.
That so? Pryor, you said you expertly train the dog first, and
ony rely on BURNING THE DOG for "finishing IT."
> The lower levels of shock are no problem for the soft dog
Yeah? Is that HOWE COME they got TEST LITES?
> but they act as a reminder that someone out there is maintaining control.
You mean, ready to HURT them.
> Often corrections
You mean inflicting pain fear and force.
> can be accomplished with no shock at all merely by holding aloft the
transmitter,
THREATENING the dog with the trainsmitter? Didn't you say the
dog won't associate YOU with the SHOCK????
But NOW IT DOES?
> recognizable to the dog from a considerable distance.
BECAUSE THE DOG KNOWS YOU ARE HURTING IT.
> On the other hand,
It's EZier than havin dummy dh john BUSHWHACK AND BEAT HER.
> the really hard dogs sometimes require such an escalation of shock
> intensity that even they are often confused and scared by the sensation
> of hard shock.
That'd be considered CRUEL, even by you, lying frosty dahl.
Wouldn't you agree?
> It is of course absolutely necessary to know your dog
Yeah, kinda like The Puppy Wizard would like to get to know you...
> and what he can take,
You mean HOWE MUCH PAIN IT CAN WITHSTAND before
running away, pancaking, or attackin you or anybody nearby.
> and learn from,
You sayin we learn best by gettin choked and shocked for
doin HOWER most favorite passtimes???
> before applying any physical pressure in a training situation.
And then what, you GUESS HOWE MUCH PAIN IT LIKES???
> Soft dogs often prove to be excellent performers as well as rapid
learners.
Yeah, that's what happens when you DON'T HURT THEM.
> So we should perhaps not decry the soft dog as an inadequate wimp,
Because they won't stand up to your abusive training methods?
> but rather see softness as a trait to be taken advantage of
Oh? By learning HOWE to train all dogs withHOWET HURTIN THEM?
> through which we can train a dog more quickly, efficiently and thoroughly.
You mean withHOWET HURTIN THEM, like HOWE The Puppy
Wizard's students report?
>The soft dog may be showing us, "Hey! you don't have to hurt me
RIGHT.
> much,
MUCH? You don't gotta HURT the dog MUCH to achieve faster
and better learning than HURTIN IT A LOT???
> I get the idea,
The dog does, the dog abuser doesn't. The dog abuser LOVES
HER WORK. You can tell by the detailed knowled of dog's
response's to the PAIN she enjoys inflcting.
> and I'd like to cooperate."
Yeah, "if you'd kindly stop CHOKIN and SHOCKIN me, please."
> Let's hope many of them are that way and that we, as trainers,
You're not a trainer, you're a dog abuser a liar and a rip off.
> can recognize it and make the most of it when they come to
> us with that wonderful nature.
Ain't that touchin? You gonna LOVE workin dogs when we get
LAWS PASSED protecting them from thugs like you.
> lying frosty dahl
> http://www.oakhillkennel.com/library/force/force2.html
> Oak Hill Kennel, Pinehurst, NC (910) 295-6710
> Copyright © 1998 Oak Hill Kennel
"Warning: Sometimes The Corrections Will Seem
Quite Harsh And Cause You To Cringe. This Is A
Normal Reaction The First Few Times It Happens,
But You'll Get Over It." mike duforth, author:
"Courteous Canine."
You think HURTIN dogs and CRINGING
is COURTEOUS?
"I have heard advice stating that you should pre-load
your dog for Bitter Apple for it to work as efficiently
as possible. What does this mean?"
Means the author is a dog abuser of the worst magnitude.
"When you bring home the Bitter Apple for the first
time, spray one squirt directly into the dog's mouth
and walk away. The dog won't be too thrilled with
this but just ignore him and continue your normal behavior."
You think HURTING your dog is NORMAL
BEHAVIOR?
--Mike Dufort
author of the zero selling book
"Courteous Canines"
You think HOWER pal mikey is playin with
a full deck?
Yeah. When I preload my dog's mouth with bitter
apple, suppose I don't get used to being stupid and
cruel, mikey?
Then HOWE do I train my dog if I can't HURT it?
"I Dropped The Leash, Threw My Right Arm Over The
Lab's Shoulder, Grabbed Her Opposite Foot With My
Left Hand, Rolled Her On Her Side, Leaned On Her,
Smartly Growled Into Her Throat And Said "GRRRR!"
And Neatly Nipped Her Ear," sionnach.
Oh, THANKS, sinofabitch...
And from terri willis, Psychoclown wrote:
"Nope. That "beating dogs with sticks" things is
something you twisted out of context, because you
are full of bizarro manure."
"Get A 30"- 40" Stick.You can have a helper
wield the stick, or do it yourself. Tougher, less
tractable dogs may require you to progress to
striking them more sharply," lying frosty dahl,
ethical breeder, expert trainer.
You think a EXXXPERT trainer got to BEAT
a HUNTIN dog to MAKE IT HUNT?
"Pudge Was So Soft That She Could And
Would Avoid A Simple Swat On The Rump
With A Riding Crop," lying frosty dahl,
discoverer of CANNIBALISM in Labradors.
Perhaps the mom dog didn't want her babies HURT
all their lives like HOWE HOWER dog lovers PREFER
to HURT THEIR DOGS?
"John ran out, grabbed Blackie by the collar, and
gave the dog two or three medium whacks on the
rump with a training stick while holding him partially
off the ground. John then told Blackie to sit, ran back
to the line and cast him back to the dummies."
The Puppy Wizard sez a mom dog eatin her
babies to SAVE THEM from a fate like that
is COMMENDABLE.
We're gonna teach folks THAT AIN'T NORMAL...
The Puppy Wizard. <};~ ) >