Lou writes: The post that I started this thread with came after an Ecollar debate. The author called the Ecollar "inhumane" and refuses to believe that it can be used as anything beyond a punishment tool. In one of his posts he wrote that it was obvious that I'd never heard of the "Easy Hand Method" of dog and horse training. I replied that I hadn't but that my mind was always open and asked him to discuss it. It took much prodding and coaxing but he finally did. His presentation appears at the top of this thread. It's exactly as he wrote it except that I cleaned up some of his misspellings and typos. Here is my response to him on that list.
Rick wrote: The Easy Hand was developed in the early 50's to break horses to saddle.
LC: Is this technique known by some other name? I've not been able to find a single reference to it on the Internet under the name "easy hand." I've also asked on several horse training emails lists, and no has heard of it.
Rick wrote: Till this point in history the only method recognized was that method that had come down through the years of blindfolding the horse, blanket and saddle, a wrangler mounted in a round coral
LC: Weren't "gentle methods" used in Europe for decades before the "blindfolding" method came along. Isn't this one of those things that was "suddenly rediscovered" and is now being portrayed as something new?
Rick wrote: Two brothers in 52 had an idea of how to save these horses.
LC: Do you have their names or such information as where it occurred. If they're still alive do you have their contact information?
Rick wrote: They built a stall so small that the horse's body touched both sides. The horse was placed into this stall.
LC: I think it's a good idea to discuss briefly some basic differences in the instincts of dogs and horses. Dogs are *predator* animals. They regard the world largely as "Is that something I can eat?" In most environments, they're at or near the *top* of the food chain. Only rarely does a stimulus cause them to have a fear response. Horses are *prey* animals, that is, many animals kill and eat them for food. They're at the *bottom* of the food chain. Their response to many stimuli and virtually any stimulus that they're not familair with is to run from it in fear. Learning theory applies to any animal but to achieve the best results one *should* use different techniques for different species of animals, especially when they regard the world from such vastly different viewpoints.
LC: I won't start up the "Ecollar v. every other method of dog training" argument again but let's remember that this author, and a few others (on that SAR list) who have endorsed this method feel that the Ecollar is inhumane because it "causes pain" to the animal being trained. This method, they feel, is completely humane and causes absolutely no trauma to the animal subjected to it.
LC: I couldn't disagree more with the thinking that this method doesn't involve pain. Taking an animal that's known only the freedom of roaming the open prairie and confining him to a stall that's so small it touches his sides is, I think, one of the most inhumane things that can be done to such an animal. Horse trainers have told me that this can result in the horse panicking. Causing panic in a prey animal doesn't seem to me to be very humane.
Rick wrote: Experimenting with feeding, socializing, exercising, human association, they discovered that the horse became very friendly and obedient when a human took it out of the stall
LC: I've no doubt that it would. The animal is in shock over the complete loss of its freedom and the small, heavily confining stall it's been placed into.
Rick wrote: During these periods of tranquility the human hung on the neck, pulled the tail, placed a blanket on the horses back . A saddle was added later but not cinched. The horse was returned to the restrictive stall any time it showed objection to ANYTHING THE HUMAN WISHED TO DO WHILE OUT IN THE YARD>.
LC: I don't like to anthropomorphize but those who use shaping are fond of it. So I'll use their argument for a moment. In human terms we're seeing the "Stockholm Syndrome." There is where a person is kidnapped or taken hostage and comes to rely on their captor, in this case the trainer, for their very life. In this case the once free horse is confined to an inhumanely small space and soon realizes that only the human can free it. Think of Patty Hurst (for those old enough to remember) who was turned from an admittedly spoiled brat-heiress into a bank robber who sprayed a bank with gunfire from an automatic weapon. This transformation was accomplished by "brainwashing" that mainly consisted of keeping her in a darkened closet for long periods of time. She came to rely on her captors for life, light, food, in short all the necessities.
LC: While this may seem to be a gentle method at the first look, to me it's the worst kind of animal cruelty I've heard a trainer advocate in years!
Rick wrote: The human's voice became Loud shouting the word NO=NO=NO.
LC: This hardly seem to me to be "gentle training?" Many dogs, especially puppies, would simply fold up and urinate on themselves if treated like this. Many horses would simply panic and try to run.
Rick wrote: When the horse responded to human desires it was fed carrots, oats, apples and the human showed him great affection
LC: The horse was fed treats after his spirit was broken and he was compliant. Some might think that the other choice, being shot, was preferable.
Rick wrote: If you can agree to a basic set of rules for training dogs we all can start on the same page. If not don't even try this method. 1- NEVER strike the dog for any reason.
LC: Just like with any other tool, used properly.
Rick wrote: 2- Never raise your hand to the dog giving him the impression you are about to strike him.
LC: Just like with any other tool, used properly.
Rick wrote: 3- Never use any training aid that will bring pain or any extraordinary discomfort to the dog.(Choke, Chain, Prong,"E"collars)
LC: Just like with any other tool, used properly. I guess the definition of "pain or any extraordinary discomfort" varies. Can you tell me where on the "scale" you would put "the bite of a flea?"
Rick wrote: 4- Never deny the dog food or water as a means of punishment or training.
LC: Just like with any other tool, used properly.
Rick wrote: A second cage other than the cage the dog is used to be put into. The cage should be only large enough for the dog to turn with GREAT difficulty from back to front.
LC: Like the too-small-stall that the once free-roaming horse is put into, this borders on animal cruelty, depending on how long the animal was left in it.
Rick wrote: Should the pup resist the task using praise and reward training place him in the restrictive cage SHOUTING the disapproval.Before you walk away blow the police whistle..
LC: Neither shouting at a puppy nor blowing a police whistle at him should be considered a "gentle method." The shouting can cause all sorts of problems, depending on the puppy.
LC: I think that a police whistle blown often near a dog can cause extreme pain even potentially permanent hearing damage. I've seen dogs get aggressive in protest of this level of hearing discomfort.
LC: Many search groups use police whistles on searches so that the lost person can hear them. Groups who use whistles in that fashion usually train the dogs to ignore them. Do you have some other tool that could be used in that case?
Rick wrote: Walk away leaving him ALONE for no less than one hour.
LC: Leaving a dog alone for "no less than one hour" in a cage that's as small as you've described is clearly inhumane!
LC: BTW being caged (crated, kenneled) is being used here as a punishment. At least in the OC sense of the word. Yet at the start of this you say. "Never use any training aid that will bring pain or any extraordinary discomfort to the dog." It seems to me that being left alone in this crate would bring "extraordinary discomfort" of a mental, emotional and physical nature to the dog. The discomfort caused by other tools lasts for an instant or a few seconds at most. The discomfort here occurs over the course of "no less than one hour" (and as we later learn, up to three hours for some dogs.) I prefer to get it over with.
LC: To pretend that this is a "punishment free" method of training is to deny reality.
Rick wrote: Once the pup learns that if he fails to obey you he will be placed in the DARK CAGE and his actions have made you angry with him, he will soon obey you.
LC: Again, not to anthropomorphize but I'm reminded of prison movies where the malcontent is placed into a pitch black cell. When he comes out he's better behaved. Of course the normal human being suffers severe sensory deprivation and emotional distress. For a great example of this rent the movie "Murder in the First." It details the story of a trial that brought down Alcatraz prison. In the movie a man was driven insane by confinement in a dark place for a long time. And this wasn't even in a place as physically confining as this method advocates. Such dark isolation is now illegal in prisons. The phrase "crime against humanity" was used in reference to this practice in that movie.
Rick wrote: Now why the whistles: As the pup grows he will at times be away from your immediate grasp. He will by this time associate the sound of the whistles with approval or disapproval. He will immediately know the sound of the police whistle means he is doing something you don't want him to do. The silent will tell him you APPROVE of what he is doing.
LC: Every time the police whistle is blown the dog will be taken back mentally and emotionally to the tiny, darkened cage. How anyone can think this is better than a moment of discomfort is a mystery to me!
Rick wrote: If he don't respond get him into the dark cage at once for an hour. don't forget NO-NO-NO and blow the whistle. Sometimes real bad cases will require two to three hours to get his attention..
LC: Three hours in a dark, tiny cage that's so small he can JUST barely turn around; I can't think of a more horrid punishment.
Rick wrote: "THE EASY HAND" Training with NO TRAUMA to the animal being trained.
LC: To think that this method doesn't involve trauma is to be blind to the emotional and mental needs of a dog, or any other animal that it's done to. While there's no physical trauma, the mental and emotional toll taken is why this method has any effect at all.
LC: If you get a book on brainwashing or the interrogation of prisoners during wartime, you'll find these methods described there. But they certainly WON'T PRETEND that there's no trauma involved. TRAUMA is why it works. I've presented a description of this method to about a dozen horse trainers and owners. Three of them, one on this list, (the SAR list that it originally on) used the phrase "Gestapo technique" as to how they viewed it.
Rick wrote: Field Training: Crittering,// runaway dogs( IF we drop the 30 foot leash the BH is GONE he will not wait for you), If he is on Scent Trail even the police whistle can no stop him.// aggression to another dog, ECT.
LC: Why is it that the method doesn't work for those problems? Is it because those behaviors are so highly driven for some dogs? If so, why do you think that the method work with other dogs that are highly driven in other behaviors? Crittering, the recall and dog to dog aggression are probably the three most discussed problems on this list. (This was being discussed on a SAR list)
LC: What do you do for the dogs who critter, don't recall, or show aggression to other dogs? Just exactly what is this training method good for beyond the simplest of OB in the absence of distractions? And what good is a method that doesn't work for these critical behaviors when distractions are present? I can see that we need to train horses to let us mount them but that, obviously isn't the case with dogs.
Rick wrote: The muzzle is used in the field as the replacement for the Dark Cage.PUT IT ON AT ONCE
LC: Let's say that your dog takes off after a critter and won't recall. You blow the whistle but he still doesn't stop, as you predict. And so you have to either wait for him to come back or chase him down and catch him. In either case do you then put him in the punishment crate? If you do this won't it will break the rule that you have to catch him in the act, that he has to know what he's being punished for?
LC: Or do you just not punish the crittering? Doing so will allow it to continue since it's self rewarding.
Rick wrote: The short leash is applied at the same time and the dog held close and ignored for about ten minutes.
LC: Why only ten minutes? The cage which is much more restrictive, much more punishing both physically and mentally is used, with some dogs for up to three hours, yet the muzzle and leash, which are much less restrictive are used for only ten minutes. This hardly makes sense.
Rick wrote: The more time you can restrain the better it will work
LC: Is there some limit to how long the restraint can be applied?
Rick wrote: When the dog makes a find or is doing very well NOW USE THE OK-OK-OK- the silent whistle-the reward.
LC: My reason for not liking this method of dog training is that it's based on one of the most inhumane methods that I can think of. Calling this training, when it's clearly abuse, both physical, emotional and mental is the worst sort of fraud that I can imagine.
LC: It's interesting what some people call humane! If I saw this technique being applied, I'd be making an arrest for cruelty to animals. Just as if I saw an Ecollar being abused.
Lou Castle has been kicked off this board. He is an OLD SCHOOL DOG TRAINER with little to offer.
Top
Previous Topic
Index
Next Topic.jpg)
