- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,947
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 36
Again, HOW?
And I thought YOU specifically trained police dogs. How would you respond to a dog you, yourself were training hands on, who turned and attacked you.
I geniunely want to know the answer, and not a generic "I would correct the dog" or "I would get the dog under control" answer.......
I again ask, how far would you go, Mr Richling, to correct a dog who is not responsive to your initial stave corrections?
Is their a point where you give up? Or do you feel, as some do, that you must "break a dog down" in order to "rebuild" it again in the manner you feel is proper? And if so, what is your method for "breaking a dog down?"
S
Desensitizing a dog to those sounds and situations along side of positive training would work as well. Do you subject dogs in training to these sights and sounds?? If not, then why? If so, then the dogs should not be stressed when put in those situations or around those noises. Therefore there would not be a need to use your training methods.
Magnus, my AST, started training as a police dog. The trainer used a prong collar and ear grabs as part of his training along with positive training techniques. He did not use overly harsh training techniques. Magnus can be put in any situation now and he does not get stressed. Loud noises, gunshots, fireworks, sirens, backfires, loud engines, unfamiliar people, people in uniforms, children, etc. do not stress him nor do they scare him.
I am wondering why a not so aggressive form of training has made him into an extremely stable canine when you say that it makes them fall apart.
In my experiences, dominant behaviour, hitting, etc. Have actually made the dogs scared and unstable.
Another thing I am wondering about is why you say that dogs are physical animals, when the opposite is actually true. A dog will only use force after repeated warnings. This is why dogs freeze, stare, growl and snap and will only use force as a last resort. Even in the wild canines rarely use force with one another. Canines are pack animals and if one member of that pack was to hurt or kill another pack member, it hurts the WHOLE pack. One less member to hunt, etc. They use their voice and body language (to establish dominance, resolve conflict and teach), not force.
Even puppies develop bite inhibition. If two puppies are playing, for example, and one has not learned bite inhibition and bites the other too hard, he is punished. His punishment is, more than likely a growl from the other puppy, and not being able to play while his playmate tends to his wounds.
So, if you could, please explain to me where your idea of dogs being physical animals comes from.
ETA: Hitting a dog tends to trigger biting in self defense. So to any lurkers reading this thread. If you want to keep your hands intact please don't hit your dogs with a stave or anything else.
It may not happen the 1st time you do it, the 10th time or the 100th time. But everytime you hit a dog it will get more and more irritated, all the while using more and more body language or vocals to show you that he has had enough. Eventually, when you don't respond to his warnings he will bite you.
Magnus, my AST, started training as a police dog. The trainer used a prong collar and ear grabs as part of his training along with positive training techniques. He did not use overly harsh training techniques. Magnus can be put in any situation now and he does not get stressed. Loud noises, gunshots, fireworks, sirens, backfires, loud engines, unfamiliar people, people in uniforms, children, etc. do not stress him nor do they scare him.
I am wondering why a not so aggressive form of training has made him into an extremely stable canine when you say that it makes them fall apart.
In my experiences, dominant behaviour, hitting, etc. Have actually made the dogs scared and unstable.
Another thing I am wondering about is why you say that dogs are physical animals, when the opposite is actually true. A dog will only use force after repeated warnings. This is why dogs freeze, stare, growl and snap and will only use force as a last resort. Even in the wild canines rarely use force with one another. Canines are pack animals and if one member of that pack was to hurt or kill another pack member, it hurts the WHOLE pack. One less member to hunt, etc. They use their voice and body language (to establish dominance, resolve conflict and teach), not force.
Even puppies develop bite inhibition. If two puppies are playing, for example, and one has not learned bite inhibition and bites the other too hard, he is punished. His punishment is, more than likely a growl from the other puppy, and not being able to play while his playmate tends to his wounds.
So, if you could, please explain to me where your idea of dogs being physical animals comes from.
ETA: Hitting a dog tends to trigger biting in self defense. So to any lurkers reading this thread. If you want to keep your hands intact please don't hit your dogs with a stave or anything else.
It may not happen the 1st time you do it, the 10th time or the 100th time. But everytime you hit a dog it will get more and more irritated, all the while using more and more body language or vocals to show you that he has had enough. Eventually, when you don't respond to his warnings he will bite you.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not trying to be argumentative Jaclyn, but ear grabs/pinches are a severe physical punishment, IMO, no better than hitting a dog on its butt. That is a very sensitive area on the a dog and can cause damage to the ear.
I apologize for "hijacking", just had to say that.
I have a question in regards to puppies/novice dogs and how they are trained. When do you feel is the proper age to correct a young dog? And how do you iniatial teach a puppy a new command? Are markers and positive reinforcers used, or just force? Do you use these physical techniques on dogs who are learning what is expected of them and are usure what is being asked of them? Are you 100% positive that a dog TRULY understands a command before corrections are used?
I apologize for "hijacking", just had to say that.
I have a question in regards to puppies/novice dogs and how they are trained. When do you feel is the proper age to correct a young dog? And how do you iniatial teach a puppy a new command? Are markers and positive reinforcers used, or just force? Do you use these physical techniques on dogs who are learning what is expected of them and are usure what is being asked of them? Are you 100% positive that a dog TRULY understands a command before corrections are used?
!
Don't you do PP/bite work? I know there are db retrieves over jumps in Sch I, II and III... do you only do PP, or do you work with other bite sports?
My dog had his foundation in clicker training. I currently use a prong on him for training, he is familiar with an e-collar but purely for recalls when he is off leash running (as a backup).
His stays were taught by gradually increasing both the distance and the length of how far I went away from him, first on leash and then off, and rewarding him for staying.
Currently when he breaks a stay I walk back to him and firmly place him back in a stay and use a collar correction (prong).
Don't you do PP/bite work? I know there are db retrieves over jumps in Sch I, II and III... do you only do PP, or do you work with other bite sports?
My dog had his foundation in clicker training. I currently use a prong on him for training, he is familiar with an e-collar but purely for recalls when he is off leash running (as a backup).
His stays were taught by gradually increasing both the distance and the length of how far I went away from him, first on leash and then off, and rewarding him for staying.
Currently when he breaks a stay I walk back to him and firmly place him back in a stay and use a collar correction (prong).
Most of the people who "followed" him.......were he, himself. Or at least using his computer, most likely by manipulation or some kind of force. LOL. I think there may be a few stragglers left who might answer your question. ROFLOL.
Yes, to have to resort to trickery and violating rules and trust to make himself feel viable is not only disceitful and low down, it's ridiculous too. How anyone can stand up for animals and stand behind him all at the same time is beyond my comprehension.
Yes, to have to resort to trickery and violating rules and trust to make himself feel viable is not only disceitful and low down, it's ridiculous too. How anyone can stand up for animals and stand behind him all at the same time is beyond my comprehension.
S
Good, I hope the little reputation he had crumbles. The guy is truly a freakshow and I firmly believe that he was the cop that got caught taking bribes. Seem kind of funny to me that there would be more than one Martin Richling there that was a cop. And then to use 3 different names on this forum to try and get more followers. What a jacka$$!!!!!!!!
S
The other thing that was bothering me too, is the fact that "his alter ego" said that they headed a training group that has a 100 people and that they want to use his methods. Ummm, is it just me or do training groups with 100 people not normally already have their own training methods by then??
Seems as though Martin Richling is not so bright. No wonder he has to beat dogs, you have to have brains to actually train them.
Oh and I don't care who gets mad at me but I am going to say this.
MARTIN RICHLING IS A SCAMMER. He is an ANIMAL ABUSER and I do not recommend ANYONE USE HIM.
This guy is a nutjob and he should not be a trainer, it sounds like he actually has absolutely no credentials.
There are trainers out there that a zillion times better at what they do than this guy.
And Mr. Richling, I really don't give a darn if you are reading this or not.
Seems as though Martin Richling is not so bright. No wonder he has to beat dogs, you have to have brains to actually train them.
Oh and I don't care who gets mad at me but I am going to say this.
MARTIN RICHLING IS A SCAMMER. He is an ANIMAL ABUSER and I do not recommend ANYONE USE HIM.
This guy is a nutjob and he should not be a trainer, it sounds like he actually has absolutely no credentials.
There are trainers out there that a zillion times better at what they do than this guy.
And Mr. Richling, I really don't give a darn if you are reading this or not.
The man is trying to use his schemes and tacky methods here to get more to join his group. Anyone who believes he is a good trainer go ahead and follow him. People followed Manson and Jim Jones too. There are always going to be whack jobs and wacky followers. Just do not try to sell this to us who believe that dogs deserve better.
A person with a good honest reputation does not have to create identities to sell his ideas. His methods would sell themselves. I hope that the Chazzers I have grown so fond of will no longer even consider giving this deceitful animal abuser any more time or defend him in any manner. He has come on here as in other forums and lied to you.
A person with a good honest reputation does not have to create identities to sell his ideas. His methods would sell themselves. I hope that the Chazzers I have grown so fond of will no longer even consider giving this deceitful animal abuser any more time or defend him in any manner. He has come on here as in other forums and lied to you.
Especially because positive techniques and clicker training work so much better, and without all the negative consequences to the dogs - or my conscience.
I have dogs that come when called - always. I have dogs that sit when I say sit, and they stay until released. Not once have I ever had to jerk a leash, issue a physical correction, or make my dogs less than happy about being in my presence. Life is good.
I'm a trainer, but my students have proven to me that it isn't necessary to have any "special powers" to implement positive training. It isn't rocket science, but it is science, and anyone, properly instructed, can do it. So, your smoke and mirrors about how you don't abuse dogs is just that - smoke and mirrors. And, the usual arguments about how pet dog trainers are just pansies won't fly here either. Ask Steve White if you don't believe me. He's a cop with 30+ years of experience who has figured out that positive works for the high drive police k-9's, too. A dog that obeys might be all you want. But, a dog that obeys happily and without fear, and with joy, is what I want.
Nuff sed.
I have dogs that come when called - always. I have dogs that sit when I say sit, and they stay until released. Not once have I ever had to jerk a leash, issue a physical correction, or make my dogs less than happy about being in my presence. Life is good.
I'm a trainer, but my students have proven to me that it isn't necessary to have any "special powers" to implement positive training. It isn't rocket science, but it is science, and anyone, properly instructed, can do it. So, your smoke and mirrors about how you don't abuse dogs is just that - smoke and mirrors. And, the usual arguments about how pet dog trainers are just pansies won't fly here either. Ask Steve White if you don't believe me. He's a cop with 30+ years of experience who has figured out that positive works for the high drive police k-9's, too. A dog that obeys might be all you want. But, a dog that obeys happily and without fear, and with joy, is what I want.
Nuff sed.
Martin Richling
I personally believe is worthwhile to mention that his "Koehler Method of Guard Dog Training" was named Best Dog Book for the Year of 1967 by the Dog Writers’ Association of America. This Method of Dog Training has been praised, championed, vilified and in some cases damned which what has happened here on Chazzzzzzz regarding Martin Richling.
This doesn't necessarily pertain to me personally, but I think it should be mentioned.
I personally believe is worthwhile to mention that his "Koehler Method of Guard Dog Training" was named Best Dog Book for the Year of 1967 by the Dog Writers’ Association of America. This Method of Dog Training has been praised, championed, vilified and in some cases damned which what has happened here on Chazzzzzzz regarding Martin Richling.
This doesn't necessarily pertain to me personally, but I think it should be mentioned.