LGD issues

[dainerra]

As for the "treat training is cruel because what if the dog ignores you and get hits by a car"? It doesn't matter what method you use - the dog shouldn't be in a position where such a thing can happen until the dog is reliable on their training. It's called a leash and being a responsible owner. It doesn't matter what method you use - if the dog doesn't know the behavior he is going to blow you off. If the reward (whether that be that he will avoid punishment or that he expects a treat) isn't greater than the temptation (chasing the cat, barking at the mailman, whatever), he is going to go with the temptation. Until you know that your dog will avoid the temptation because you said so, you need to have physical control of the dog.

 

[DuckGirl77]

First, in response to your second to last post, Don says things work differently for guard dogs and such.

Regarding your statements about the dominance theory not working and the dogs are just being forgiving, I would like to see proof of this before I believe it, and I do not agree.
If a dog can dominate a human, why can't a human be dominant over a dog? I know dogs can be dominant over people: pulling on the leash, barking at people, separation anxiety, growling at people who get close to their food - these are dominant behaviors; dogs will growl and bark at other dogs. In addition, many behavior problems stop without the need for correction when the dog has learned humans are the ones in control. This will not happen if the dog is treat-trained.
Dogs will work for things, yes, but they will not obey every time.
My dog wouldn't work for toys, either. My dog is not weird; he is a typical dog.
As for the barking problem, before I tried ignoring, I had taught him to "speak" and he also knew the meaning of "enough," but this had zero effect on him. The command collar put a stop to it in two days.
I firmly believe the command collar is the best method. My dog is not being forgiving; if he felt I was threatening him he would have been much more aggressive than he was. It was clear he felt his authority being threatened, not his life. I have seen my dog control me for five years. Treats did nothing. I have read many dog training books and tried various things to make him listen. I know people who have worse dogs, so it's not just him.
If humans couldn't be dominant over dogs, why do dogs resist the down command much more than the other commands?
Do you have proof this doesn't work? So far, my dog has shown me it does. If you have never seen Don Sullivan's dvd, I would strongly encourage you to do just that. I was skeptical until then.
If I had the opportunity to test this on a GSD or malinois, I would. But I don't need to. I've seen Don train GSDs on the video, and the best-trained dog I ever met was NOT treat-trained and was a purebred GSD.

As for the "treat training is cruel because what if the dog ignores you and get hits by a car"? It doesn't matter what method you use - the dog shouldn't be in a position where such a thing can happen until the dog is reliable on their training. It's called a leash and being a responsible owner. It doesn't matter what method you use - if the dog doesn't know the behavior he is going to blow you off. If the reward (whether that be that he will avoid punishment or that he expects a treat) isn't greater than the temptation (chasing the cat, barking at the mailman, whatever), he is going to go with the temptation. Until you know that your dog will avoid the temptation because you said so, you need to have physical control of the dog.

Very true, but you know as well as I do that prevention is best. In addition, a well-trained dog will enjoy freedoms a dog that cannot be completely trusted can't. I want my dog to have that freedom. Not so I can be irresponsible, but so he can live the very best life I can possibly give him.

Oh, and you seem to be a diehard dog person like me, so you might find this interesting. I don't know if you've seen this, but anyways, I found it when I was looking up dog research ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/07/dog-brain-scan-mind-mri_n_1495791.html

 

[DuckGirl77]

you can always increase the pressure and corrections if a lighter method isn't working. However, using too heavy a hand too quickly on a dog can irreparably damage the relationship between dog and handler. It can even permanently damage the dog's perspective on the world. You want to have a strong relationship with a dog and their trust in you has to be solid.

I deal with people who place their lives in their dog's hands. Dogs that are the difference between life and death need to be strong and confident. The bond of trust must go both ways and the dog willingly put it's life on the line. These dogs are raised from birth to believe that they are the biggest strongest baddest creatures living on the planet. To take a beating from the bad guy and not back down - to meet kicks, blows and violence with higher levels of aggression.

Dominance theory has no place in that type of relationship. The dog works for the joy of work and for the toy reward that they get at the end of the job.

I do completely agree you shouldn't start hard. If the dog doesn't need correction, don't give it! And don't start yanking the collar, start with a gentle reprimand after the dog already knows what you want. But I do not think the relationship would be damaged if you follow Don's rules. His dogs adore him; you can see it! I actually think using treats to train my dog harmed my relationship with him. He wouldn't listen, causing me to be frustrated. He wasn't allowed to come with me in the car unless absolutely necessary because he was hard to control when he was out. He and I are much happier now. I may not be able to read a dog's mind, but that tail wag and that face show it all! Which brings me to another thing I learned.

A study was done, and they found that when dogs wag to the right, they're happy, and to the left, they're scared or timid. Or maybe I got it backwards, but I think that's right -er, correct!
Training a dog this way does not decrease their confidence; it puts them lower than the owner so they can be controlled. In fact, timid dogs will become more confident when they are no longer expected to be the lead dog. These dogs (not timid dogs, but the dogs you speak of) do need special training, though.
On the other hand, it becomes incredibly important for dogs helping the disabled to listen every single time. They need training like this.

 

[Chickerdoodle13]

I do completely agree you shouldn't start hard. If the dog doesn't need correction, don't give it! And don't start yanking the collar, start with a gentle reprimand after the dog already knows what you want. But I do not think the relationship would be damaged if you follow Don's rules. His dogs adore him; you can see it! I actually think using treats to train my dog harmed my relationship with him. He wouldn't listen, causing me to be frustrated. He wasn't allowed to come with me in the car unless absolutely necessary because he was hard to control when he was out. He and I are much happier now. I may not be able to read a dog's mind, but that tail wag and that face show it all! Which brings me to another thing I learned.  A study was done, and they found that when dogs wag to the right, they're happy, and to the left, they're scared or timid. Or maybe I got it backwards, but I think that's right -er, correct!
Training a dog this way does not decrease their confidence; it puts them lower than the owner so they can be controlled. In fact, timid dogs will become more confident when they are no longer expected to be the lead dog. These dogs (not timid dogs, but the dogs you speak of) do need special training, though.
On the other hand, it becomes incredibly important for dogs helping the disabled to listen every single time. They need training like this.

I had written out a reply and unfortunately it got lost. Not sure if I'll hit all the points I had last night. My schedule right now is pretty insane so I don't really have as much time as I would like to search out those studies I've been referencing but hopefully I will have time at some point.

Service dogs are generally trained with incredibly strict guidelines that positive reinforcement only. In fact, I've worked with guiding eyes for the blind and only recently were handlers allowed to start saying "no" to their dogs. Even now, many times they use treats only. Eventually treats get phased out. What you are left with are very reliable dogs that are rock solid in their training because they've had positive associations to everything.

I've seen the difference in obedience and agility circuits between dogs that were trained using punishment and those trained with positive reinforcement. Generally, dogs trained with punishment tend to show a lot more anxiety behaviors during handling (lip licking, ear position back on their heads, nervous tail wagging, and low tail position) and their body positions were low and hunched. Dogs trained with positive reinforcement have more forward and eager body positions and they show much fewer anxiety behaviors, if any at all.

One particular study was done on beagles using electrical collars. One group was trained using only shock collars while the others were trained using positive reinforcement. The dogs with the shock collars showed increased levels of cortisol when in the training environment (cortisol is the stress hormone) and more anxiety towards their handlers when they were present. Both sets of dogs had learned the same behaviors.

Remember, fear is a better motivator in all species, but it leads to more anxiety. Reward is also a great motivator but it has no risks and no anxiety inducing properties which overall means a happier dog with the same outcomes if done PROPERLY.

I have watched Don Sullivan's videos. In one I remember seeing a dog that was exhibiting fear aggression towards strangers. He put a muzzle and a prong collar on the dog and placed it in a social situation with many strangers. Every time the dog growled, he corrected it and told people to pet it. Of course he stopped growling and even started wagging his tail. He was trying to appease Sullivan to stop the punishment. Meanwhile his anxiety cues were through the roof and all he was learning to do is not to growl when he is uncomfortable. This means a dog that learns not to growl will bite without any warning. This happens all too often that I hear "he bit without warning". Positive reinforcement works not to correct the growling but to change the association with something scary to something positive (like treats, or toys, or attention). My dog has had some fear reactivity with strangers since I adopted her and frankly I don't care if she stares at me when strangers are around because she knows strangers mean treats. That's exactly what I want her to do! When she is 100% reliable, I can phase out treats and know she will not bark at strangers because now she has a strong positive association with them. You can't get rid of fear but you can change the attitude very effectively through positives. Through this method, I've reduced the fear reaction so much that now I can see her exact triggers and I know to call her name before she barks. Now she can go to parties and meet strangers that visit the house.

Most dog aggression has been shown to be fear based, not dominance or territorial as was originally believed. This means punishment in an already reactive dog (reactive doesn't necessarily mean aggressive but more like barking, growling, etc. Biting is usually the last resort for many dogs) will only hide the fear and will only teach the dog to be complacent to avoid punishment rather than teaching meaningful coping skills. Also, many dogs that are fearful also have anxiety and these dogs can be even more unpredictable because anxiety is often not controllable and is more physiologic, whereas fear can be repressed (ie: fear while going to a scary movie versus an anxiety attack in a human) This is where that method of training becomes very dangerous. However, I think the average dog owner does not understand enough about dog behavior to truly see why this is. Heck, most people have dogs that have issues and many people just don't see it or they ignore it.

I used to train my previous family dogs with choke collars and punishment methods (I even tried it for a brief stint with my current dog but I saw her get worse and less trusting of me. Luckily I only did this for a short time and she was very forgiving of me). When I entered vet school and was exposed to the most up to date research on dog behavior and training, I quickly changed my mind.

I don't say this to be rude, but I do think that when people don't have good experiences using positive reinforcement, they have not had the proper instruction on how to do so. Not all trainers are created equal and there is a lot more theory behind training than many think. Pretty much everything that can be trained through punishment can be trained through positive reinforcement with the same reliability. The difference is the amount of anxiety and fear induced during training

 

[DuckGirl77]

I had written out a reply and unfortunately it got lost. Not sure if I'll hit all the points I had last night. My schedule right now is pretty insane so I don't really have as much time as I would like to search out those studies I've been referencing but hopefully I will have time at some point.

Service dogs are generally trained with incredibly strict guidelines that positive reinforcement only. In fact, I've worked with guiding eyes for the blind and only recently were handlers allowed to start saying "no" to their dogs. Even now, many times they use treats only. Eventually treats get phased out. What you are left with are very reliable dogs that are rock solid in their training because they've had positive associations to everything.

I've seen the difference in obedience and agility circuits between dogs that were trained using punishment and those trained with positive reinforcement. Generally, dogs trained with punishment tend to show a lot more anxiety behaviors during handling (lip licking, ear position back on their heads, nervous tail wagging, and low tail position) and their body positions were low and hunched. Dogs trained with positive reinforcement have more forward and eager body positions and they show much fewer anxiety behaviors, if any at all.

One particular study was done on beagles using electrical collars. One group was trained using only shock collars while the others were trained using positive reinforcement. The dogs with the shock collars showed increased levels of cortisol when in the training environment (cortisol is the stress hormone) and more anxiety towards their handlers when they were present. Both sets of dogs had learned the same behaviors.

Remember, fear is a better motivator in all species, but it leads to more anxiety. Reward is also a great motivator but it has no risks and no anxiety inducing properties which overall means a happier dog with the same outcomes if done PROPERLY.

I have watched Don Sullivan's videos. In one I remember seeing a dog that was exhibiting fear aggression towards strangers. He put a muzzle and a prong collar on the dog and placed it in a social situation with many strangers. Every time the dog growled, he corrected it and told people to pet it. Of course he stopped growling and even started wagging his tail. He was trying to appease Sullivan to stop the punishment. Meanwhile his anxiety cues were through the roof and all he was learning to do is not to growl when he is uncomfortable. This means a dog that learns not to growl will bite without any warning. This happens all too often that I hear "he bit without warning". Positive reinforcement works not to correct the growling but to change the association with something scary to something positive (like treats, or toys, or attention). My dog has had some fear reactivity with strangers since I adopted her and frankly I don't care if she stares at me when strangers are around because she knows strangers mean treats. That's exactly what I want her to do! When she is 100% reliable, I can phase out treats and know she will not bark at strangers because now she has a strong positive association with them. You can't get rid of fear but you can change the attitude very effectively through positives. Through this method, I've reduced the fear reaction so much that now I can see her exact triggers and I know to call her name before she barks. Now she can go to parties and meet strangers that visit the house.

Most dog aggression has been shown to be fear based, not dominance or territorial as was originally believed. This means punishment in an already reactive dog (reactive doesn't necessarily mean aggressive but more like barking, growling, etc. Biting is usually the last resort for many dogs) will only hide the fear and will only teach the dog to be complacent to avoid punishment rather than teaching meaningful coping skills. Also, many dogs that are fearful also have anxiety and these dogs can be even more unpredictable because anxiety is often not controllable and is more physiologic, whereas fear can be repressed (ie: fear while going to a scary movie versus an anxiety attack in a human) This is where that method of training becomes very dangerous. However, I think the average dog owner does not understand enough about dog behavior to truly see why this is. Heck, most people have dogs that have issues and many people just don't see it or they ignore it.

I used to train my previous family dogs with choke collars and punishment methods (I even tried it for a brief stint with my current dog but I saw her get worse and less trusting of me. Luckily I only did this for a short time and she was very forgiving of me). When I entered vet school and was exposed to the most up to date research on dog behavior and training, I quickly changed my mind.

I don't say this to be rude, but I do think that when people don't have good experiences using positive reinforcement, they have not had the proper instruction on how to do so. Not all trainers are created equal and there is a lot more theory behind training than many think. Pretty much everything that can be trained through punishment can be trained through positive reinforcement with the same reliability. The difference is the amount of anxiety and fear induced during training

If Sullivan's method is done properly, the dog will not have anxiety around their owners. I can't speak for anyone else, but if I knew my dog would be scared of me, I would be more hesitant to use this method. My dog is not like that, though.
I'm glad you have at least seen the videos. How do you know that the aggressive dog wagged his tail to make Sullivan happy? He stopped growling to make the corrections stop, but as far as I know a dog cannot make itself look happy when it isn't, and Sullivan would not have corrected the dog just because he stopped wagging his tail. Sullivan was not just teaching the dog not to growl. He was teaching the dog that it was not permitted to exhibit any aggression towards people, including biting. That's why he always has people pet the dog on top of the head. Sullivan has been teaching dogs for years, and this method has stopped aggression.
Reward training does have risks because if there is a situation in which the dog MUST obey but he doesn't want to and the owner cannot control him, there is a problem.
Don Sullivan's dogs are happy to see him, not afraid. I could see that clearly in the videos.
With positive reinforcement, the dog learns people are submissive and will give up food and other good things. Not that we shouldn't give our dogs treats and toys; of course we should! However, I don't believe it should be a routine thing that the dog expects. My dog shouldn't require food. He shouldn't be happy to see me because I mean food. I don't want my dog to think of me as a food dispenser! I am his leader.
Your method did work to get rid of fear anxiety, yes, but it's not the only way. A dog who learns not to be aggressive to people using Sullivan's method learns to never bark at people, while you say your dog may still bark at people, which is an aggressive behavior in most cases. In addition, I will never have to worry that some poor kid will accidentally trip and fall on my dog and get bitten. Yes, kids should be careful, but when a dog has bitten like that, that puts a bad mark on the dog. People don't trust that dog. If someone knew my dog acted like this (he doesn't, but IF he did), they would not want my dog coming to their house or being around them. This would limit the places my dog could go. A book I read said it's ok if the dog bites or growls if a kid acccidentally falls on him, but I don't think so! The kid will be careful, yes, but he will also be afraid of my dog. The only people I want to be afraid of my dog are people who are out to do no good. Dogs can understand when a person is looking to do no good, thus teaching a dog not to be aggressive towards people does not diminish the dog's protective ability.
If used the right way, Sullivan's method works very well. He uses praise, not just punishment. I do as well. If that's enough to get my dog to obey, I don't need to correct him. I don't use treats, though. The positive reinforcement my dog gets is praise. The negative reinforcement he gets if praise is not enough is the correction with the command collar. But when I am done training my dog, I will have confidence that he will obey every time, not just when he wants the positive reinforcement more than the squirrel or the cat. This is why I like Don's method.

 

[dainerra]

the problem is that most pet owners (and you sound like that is your primary purpose for having dogs) don't recognize common stress behaviors in their dogs. wagging tail with ears back and leaning towards you is most often viewed as "oh my dog loves me" when it's more likely a stressed submissive gesture.

The behaviors you described above, pulling on the leash, excessive barking, etc are NOT dominant behaviors. That is the problem with methods and theories like Don Sullivan's. They encourage the idea that dogs do things out of a desire to run the show when in 99% of cases it's simply a lack of training and/or simply an excited happy dog. This also sets in motion a subliminal aspect in the mind of the handler - the dog as "enemy" vs the need to build a trusting relationship.

The problem with the method shown in the video is that, at some point, some time, the dog WILL reach the limit of not being able to cover that fear. The dog learns that it has no voice. It isn't allowed to ask to be left alone (that's what a growl is). The dog learns "I don't care if you like it or not. Everyone in the world can touch you all they want and you can't do a thing about it. If you try to say "leave me alone" you're going to be punished. So just sit there and take it or else"

The dog is wagging in an appeasement gesture. Wagging tail doesn't equal happy dog. If people try this at home, you run a good chance of them actually INCREASING the aggression of the dog. Corrections given at the wrong time mean that the dog sees the stranger as the cause of the punishment and amp up their behavior to prevent the stranger from 'attacking' them

You are again showing your lack of unsderstanding of how positive training works. The dog doesn't learn that people are submissive. The dog learns that certain tasks and behaviors are expected and that the performance of said behaviors when asked gets rewarded. Once the behavior is known, the treats go away. But the dog is still rewarded with affection and praise, even if just a smile and a "good boy"

And I have confidence that my dog will obey every time. I can call him off a running deer or even a b**** in heat. He is boundary trained to our property. Has multiple obedience titles. Is a registered therapy dog. We do multiple events teaching the public about responsible dog ownership and teaching kids about the joy of dogs.

 

[DuckGirl77]

the problem is that most pet owners (and you sound like that is your primary purpose for having dogs) don't recognize common stress behaviors in their dogs. wagging tail with ears back and leaning towards you is most often viewed as "oh my dog loves me" when it's more likely a stressed submissive gesture.

The behaviors you described above, pulling on the leash, excessive barking, etc are NOT dominant behaviors. That is the problem with methods and theories like Don Sullivan's. They encourage the idea that dogs do things out of a desire to run the show when in 99% of cases it's simply a lack of training and/or simply an excited happy dog. This also sets in motion a subliminal aspect in the mind of the handler - the dog as "enemy" vs the need to build a trusting relationship.

The problem with the method shown in the video is that, at some point, some time, the dog WILL reach the limit of not being able to cover that fear. The dog learns that it has no voice. It isn't allowed to ask to be left alone (that's what a growl is). The dog learns "I don't care if you like it or not. Everyone in the world can touch you all they want and you can't do a thing about it. If you try to say "leave me alone" you're going to be punished. So just sit there and take it or else"

The dog is wagging in an appeasement gesture. Wagging tail doesn't equal happy dog. If people try this at home, you run a good chance of them actually INCREASING the aggression of the dog. Corrections given at the wrong time mean that the dog sees the stranger as the cause of the punishment and amp up their behavior to prevent the stranger from 'attacking' them

You are again showing your lack of unsderstanding of how positive training works. The dog doesn't learn that people are submissive. The dog learns that certain tasks and behaviors are expected and that the performance of said behaviors when asked gets rewarded. Once the behavior is known, the treats go away. But the dog is still rewarded with affection and praise, even if just a smile and a "good boy"

And I have confidence that my dog will obey every time. I can call him off a running deer or even a b**** in heat. He is boundary trained to our property. Has multiple obedience titles. Is a registered therapy dog. We do multiple events teaching the public about responsible dog ownership and teaching kids about the joy of dogs.

Positive training by itself gives the dog the option to disobey. I have seen my dog be submissive with a wagging tail and I have seen him happy with a wagging tail. Not everyone can see the difference, I agree. My dog gets positive reinforcement in the form of petting and praise for when he listens and a collar correction when he doesn't.
I ask what proof you have that barking at every passing harmless stranger and pulling on the leash are not dominant behaviors. And what proof do you have that positive training does not mean the dog learns that people are submissive? Now, I know that if you use treats sparingly enough and you also use correction properly, the dog may not be dominant over the people. But, correction is important. That's how the dog learns he is not allowed to disobey. I don't want to use treats at all; I use praise instead and punish the dog when he disobeys. I show him what I want before he is corrected for not doing what I asked.
I know the dog needs to have a trusting relationship with the owner and I'm not sure you completely understand me.
Lack of exercise can be a cause of some disobedience, but the dog must learn to control itself (assuming the owner is responsible and will sufficiently exercise the dog every day.)
Dogs are smart, They know the difference between evildoers and harmless people, and a dog trained using Sullivan's method does not lose its ability to growl. He himself said his dogs growled at someone who was looking into the back of his truck, although they (the dogs) usually didn't. This person was out to no good.
Again, used properly, Sullivan's method does work. Not that there can't be flaws, but if you understand your dog and use the command collar the right way, you shouldn't run into any problems.

 

[mirandaleecon]

Dainerra, how would you handle a dog that is jumping at you with positive reinforcement? And not jumping up as a greeting but jumping up as a threat display. Not sure if that is the best way to describe it but he jumps and bites at me. I'm pretty sure it is just meant as a threat because he has never actually bitten me while doing this but his teeth definitely graze me and at times, he has snarled while doing it.

I understand positive reinforcement is something that takes time and a lot of patience but in the moment, starting with a dog that already has this behavior, what would you do? There's no way to ignore him because he just keeps lunging. If I turn to walk away he bites my butt or legs (he actually does bite here, just not hard). He does not listen to commands consistently in this state. I have told him to sit and occasionally he listens, then I praise him for that.

I'll be honest, right now, the only way I can see being able to control him is with the choke collar. It's the only thing he consistently responds to. I know I can't rely on that though, especially since I can't keep him on a leash forever. I'm trying my best to use positive reinforcement as often as possible but in the mean-time, I need to figure out a solution to let him off a leash without him lunging at me.

I did buy the click-for-calm book and I should be getting that today. One issue I have is that my boyfriend isn't being very open-minded or helpful with Archer's training. Archer doesn't lunge at him and doesn't do it while he's around so I don't think he realizes the severity of it. I honestly think some of the aggression is coming from how he treats Archer. He is very rough with his corrections, doesn't beat him or anything but he has smacked him in the nose on occasion and pulled him by his collar. I can't seem to get him to understand that it isn't helping because Archer actually listens to him, instead I feel like Archer bottles up that resentment and takes it out on me...

 

[Chickerdoodle13]

I do think you need someone to visually determine why your dog is acting this way. It's impossible to tell by an online description alone if he is doing this because he is trying to play, if he is being aggressive, and if it is aggression triggered by something like fear or territorial in nature. Additionally, he may have underlying anxiety that could be adding to the situation.

If the choke collar works to help you deal with him at this time, I don't think it is wrong to use. However, I do think we need to come up with a better way of dealing with the underlying issues going on here. Using a choke collar will only deal with preventing him from jumping but not the root of the issue which could be he has a lot of energy and no outlet or he is triggered by something you are doing or in the environment.

A trainer may start by telling you to work on teaching an alternate behavior. Does you dog like treats? If so, this becomes a lot easier. Use something VERY tasty when training, like tiny pieces of cut up hotdog, boiled chicken, or tiny pieces of cheese. The alternate behavior can be something like "sit" or "look" (command to get him to focus on you) or really anything (I use "touch" as a command to get my dog's attention off of a distraction. She basically touches my hand with her nose) The main thing to remember is that this will need groundwork. You will have to train these things (sit, down, etc) until he does it consistently every time. This may take about 10 - 15 minutes of training every day for a few weeks but you should see he becomes more and more reliable with the command as time goes on. If he stops becoming reliable or loses focus, then you will need to take a step back and figure why he is losing focus (task too difficult, too much training at one time, etc). The clicker will be a great tool for you I think.

Then what you will have to get used to doing is carrying a bit of kibble or treats with you whenever you are walking him (or in whatever circumstance this behavior begins to show). If you begin to see him getting ready to jump on you, ask him to do the alternate behavior. Treat him as soon as he does it. Then release him by saying "ok". If he goes to jump again, repeat. Repeat until he walks with you without jumping. It's ok to give a lot of treats in the beginning. Eventually instead of jumping on you, he will start to do the other behavior instead. (Example: my dog barks at strangers when we are on walks so I taught her to look at me instead. I've done this so much that now no matter who she is walking with, she looks to them INSTEAD of barking when a stranger is approaching. In fact, sometimes she sees strangers before I do and I know because she looks at me).

People tend to have problems when they phase out treats too early. That should be a long process and should only happen when your dog is 100% reliable. Phasing out treats too soon can mean regression.

Another thing I like to teach is the sit command every time you stop walking. Basically, walk a few steps, stop, ask the dog to sit, then treat, release with "ok" then continue walking. Repeat. Eventually the dog will sit and look at you as soon as you stop walking. This is an amazing way to get a distracted dog to focus on you.

I do recommend training on a short leash when you first start. Not to yank on but so you have more control of where the dog is.

This post is not meant to be a replacement for advice of a real live trainer, but rather to give you an idea of how we can treat behaviors like this with positive reinforcement.

 

[dainerra]

Dainerra, how would you handle a dog that is jumping at you with positive reinforcement? And not jumping up as a greeting but jumping up as a threat display. Not sure if that is the best way to describe it but he jumps and bites at me. I'm pretty sure it is just meant as a threat because he has never actually bitten me while doing this but his teeth definitely graze me and at times, he has snarled while doing it.

I understand positive reinforcement is something that takes time and a lot of patience but in the moment, starting with a dog that already has this behavior, what would you do? There's no way to ignore him because he just keeps lunging. If I turn to walk away he bites my butt or legs (he actually does bite here, just not hard). He does not listen to commands consistently in this state. I have told him to sit and occasionally he listens, then I praise him for that.

I'll be honest, right now, the only way I can see being able to control him is with the choke collar. It's the only thing he consistently responds to. I know I can't rely on that though, especially since I can't keep him on a leash forever. I'm trying my best to use positive reinforcement as often as possible but in the mean-time, I need to figure out a solution to let him off a leash without him lunging at me.

I did buy the click-for-calm book and I should be getting that today. One issue I have is that my boyfriend isn't being very open-minded or helpful with Archer's training. Archer doesn't lunge at him and doesn't do it while he's around so I don't think he realizes the severity of it. I honestly think some of the aggression is coming from how he treats Archer. He is very rough with his corrections, doesn't beat him or anything but he has smacked him in the nose on occasion and pulled him by his collar. I can't seem to get him to understand that it isn't helping because Archer actually listens to him, instead I feel like Archer bottles up that resentment and takes it out on me...

a dog that is jumping up as a threat display first needs to be managed so that it CAN'T do this. that means the dog is always on a leash or long line and gets corrected for jumping. At the same time, teaching "sit" for all interactions with people.
Most dogs that jump as a "threat" aren't actually willing to follow through. They have simply learned "if I do this, the people will go away" You can't diagnose a dog's issues online. You need to see the dog in person, find out what exactly is behind the behavior. Dogs do things for a reason, even if it makes no sense to us humans.

Yes, smacking the dog on the nose or pulling by the collar will cause issues in a dog. And, as you see, not always against the person who actually does those things.
Females often get the short shaft when it comes to do behavior because of their own behavior. Generally speaking, females are smaller and less imposing. Their voices are naturally higher pitched and if they are unsure about the dog, commands often come out sounding more like a request.

On a side note, I don't use a clicker because I'm danged uncoordinated and always putting things down and can't find them. Instead, I use a marker word. My timing is much better that way and I mark the behavior at exactly the right time. No fumbling with the clicker that throws off the whole process.