How would that even work? Wouldn't the dog just eat the chicken?

Yes, I don't think Koehler invented the aversive methods (final chapter of the book, last-resort methods). I do think the chicken-around-neck thing was included, and maybe the live-wire-attached-to-chicken one as well. I can look this afternoon.

Much of the Koehler books have nothing at all to do with the oft-quoted things like correcting for digging by almost-drowning the dog (snout held underwater in the hole he dug), but those "methods" are often the first place that Koehler discussions go.

Maybe with good reason. There is no "last resort" for me that goes as far as some of his suggestions, like hitting with a belt for barking.

The Koehler method is based pretty much on the principles of negative reinforcement, I'd say.

Better methods are now widely known (JMO); at the time, when he introduced long lines and some other ideas, and when he headed animal training for Disney Studios, he was revered.

Again, despite the punishment-training leanings (and yes, he does include praise, but there is a lot of setting the dog up for correction), that last-resort chapter is not an example of all of his books or even that particular book.

I'm old and haven't read it for a while, so some particulars may be inexact.

I guess that means my 2 x 4 with a rusty nail in it has to go.

DFrost

 Quote: David C.Frost

I guess that means my 2 x 4 with a rusty nail in it has to go.

DFrost

Yeah, David, you're going to have to go with a clean nail.

 Quote: Jennifer Mullen

How would that even work? Wouldn't the dog just eat the chicken?

Well if he was smart!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 Quote: connie sutherland

I don't want to read it either.

I understand why it was posted the way it was -- because of not being able to post URLs to posts on another board.

For news stories, of course, we can post the URL and a warning (and that's what is requested on this board).


P.S. I am with Dennis about pointing out laws that are incompatible with suggested "training methods."

I hope I didn't offend anyone with my comment about not wanting to read such stuff. I clumsily was trying to write that I am not interested in going to other forums that I know will bring about my ire. I've gone to a few Fluffy/Fifi sites that are stupid, but I've never really looked at a working dog site, since I don't have a working dog.

The internet is full of crap and I try to be dedicated in making sure I don't read/see/hear anything that brings me grief.

Like Dennis and Connie write. I would be so pzzzzzed that I would have to stand my ground which would not doubt get me kicked off which would no doubt make me really angrey, which would no doubt......

I can certainly choose to read, or not, anything posted here, too. So, I'm not offended with the posting, but it is nice that people can post the url with a warning.

There have been some posts with url/s that I won't visit because I know it will result in a sad or anger provoking story about a poor animal.

Hope that clears it up. lol

I think that was clear. It was what I meant too.

Why use 10 words when I can use a million? lol (And to think I wonder why my grandson talks so much!)

You guys are really good, and I mean that - very good folks. If I should have mentioned in the title that there was information which could be offensive, or let folks know before hand what was in my post - I do apologize. I was not offended in any way by your reply Nora. I just didn't mean to catch anyone off guard.

The "chicken site" is a GREAT site for chicken info! Obviously, some of the chicken folks haven't thrown out Koehler's book (we "trained" one of our first dogs by that book in 1976...) Fortunately, a moderator stepped in and "jerked a prong collar" on a few of the folks who were getting a bit testy, and got the post back on line. I did mention the fact that the methods discussed which caused the 'dissension' would easily qualify as felonies.

Hopefully, the post will have opened the eyes of a few dog owners...

Nope. You were fine.

And I am glad that you mentioned sheer illegality, since common decency and animal guardianship failed to strike any notes. Man ....