Dog trainer fights, death threats etc.

Death threats to dog trainers? Threats of rape and violence against their families? Yes, it’s happening. Cancel culture has come for dog training over the last few years or so and it’s getting worse. Most people didn’t seem to notice, but politics and ideologies have invaded dog training and it’s ripping the system apart. Trainers are fighting more now than ever – and the platform is free and open internet. Many are more focused on the fight with other trainers than the dogs they are working with. I’ve been watching dog training methodologies change for years now, and I can only shake my head. “Following” is one of the big issues – trainers on one side or the other have large followings on different forums like facebook, and they use these followers as an army to attack whatever targets they deem negative. I know of dog trainers on facebook – they don’t list their name, and I won’t mention names – they hide behind the anonymity that facebook offers – and stir up their followers using pretty slimy techniques. In turn, their followers – average dog owners – go on the attack. From threatening phone calls, to emails, attacking youtube accounts, websites, review sites etc. It’s embarrassing and sickening.

As a caveat, there is no need to hurt a dog, one doesn’t need to be negative to exact change in the dog. I’m positive only, but in a different way – I tend to avoid using treats, and avoid tools like chokes, e-collars and prongs. One simply needs to understand why the dog is doing certain things and understand the dog itself – what drives the dog. Most times, I find owners are not meeting their dogs needs and they don’t realize it, and this is one of the primary reasons for bad behaviours. Not enough exercise, not enough mental stimulation, no structure, no job – what is really missing is that solid relationship that owners should have with their dogs. So many times, no training is involved – a simple assessment of the dogs needs depending on breed etc, the owner starts to meet the dogs needs and all behaviours disappear. This can be accomplished in one session.

Lets go through history, to see where all this came from.

Burrhus Frederic Skinner, was an animal behaviourist but a human psychologist. Skinner used animals in a lab to try to undertand US – human beings. Skinner is mostly blamed for the creation of the “quadrants” of dog training. But if people would actually sit down and read up on Skinner and his works instead of trainers interpretations of it – there is no mention whatsoever of quadrants. The quadrants themselves were written by dog trainers based on bad interpretation of Skinners early work. Skinner never spoke of negative or positive punishment, but he did mention “positive reinforcement” and “negative reinforcement”. Early on, Skinner defined “positive reinforcement” as removal of negative reinforcement. For example, Skinner would hook up an electrode to a dogs tail, and shock it til the dog performed an action. When the shock was removed, Skinner declared it to be “positive reinforcement”. That was early on, Skinner changed his ideologies realizing that negative reinforcement and punishment was ineffective when it came to animals – humans included. There is a better way – so how did we get to this point? So how did dog training evolve into this mess? Ian Dunbar for example was one of the trainers that pushed the quadrants early on – it became the bible of dog training. But now, Dunbar finally figured out that the quadrants aren’t the way to train dogs – and I highly respect that – punishment isn’t needed and works against you. I don’t agree with everything Dunbar says, don’t need to – but he is right about so many things. I believe Grisha Stewart is another that pushed the quadrants early on, but even she evolved to steer away from them for the most and chose positive reinforcement. Again, I don’t agree with her definition of positive reinforcement – but that’s cool. I don’t feel the need to bash other trainers cause I don’t agree with them.

Later in his career, Skinner understood and accepted that “positive reinforcement” comes through reward from making personal positive choices. If a child is told by the parents to finish their chores, then they can play video games – that’s a form of positive reinforcement. The child needs to make a positive choice in order to get what they want. If they choose not to do chores, then they are only punishing themselves – dogs can to the same. Another example is potty training. Some parents choose to have their child in a reward system that they earn tokens – maybe a sticker. Every time the child chooses to go to the toilet, they can earn a star. When they get enough stars, trade it in for something they really want. It’s putting the onus on the child to make a positive choice to effect a positive outcome. You can do the same with your dog. If they don’t choose wisely and don’t earn that token, it’s on them as it was their choice. How is that wrong – and can it be translated to dogs? The answer is yes.

Dogs have a brain, they need to make choices, and sadly, this is where many training techniques fail – the dog doesn’t get a real choice – it’s follow the owners choice or face punishment. That’s not much of a choice. If you don’t have a choice, it’s missing out on many opportunities to learn and understand. It’s “listen to me, or I’ll punish you in some way” – that punishment can be anything from a leash correction, e-collar correction or simply removal of the treat reward. That’s what the quadrants dictate. Think about it, when you work with your dog in treat training, you’re forcing your dog to justify every piece of food they receive as a reward. Imagine if you will – you make your child their favourite meal. But then the child has to perform some action for every morsel of food? But this is what some trainers do to dogs, use the meal for training. But then you’ll hear “don’t compare dogs to children” – but that’s exactly what Skinner did. Skinner understood that humans are animals and we share so many of the same things from emotion to what drives us etc.

The justification of every reward can lead to what Skinner defined as “pigeon superstition”. If you treat trained your dog, does your dog do weird things that you didn’t train? If you offer reward at the wrong time, and I see it all too often – your dog is going to wonder why it got that piece of food and try to justify it – and try to figure out how to replicate to get that reward again. The dog is becoming dependent on the treat reward – “Why did I get that piece of food, what did I do to get the reward” – then they try different things to get that reward again.

What “Positive Reinforcement” has become isn’t inherently bad, but it’s mostly incorrect and to me, it’s disrespectful to the dog. You’re taking away the dogs brain, the need to think, to problem solve, and making the dog dependent on you. The dog can’t do anything without your say, without looking to you, and “if” they expect a reward for everything, I see it as a problem. We all know children that are given everything, it’s beyond rewarding, expect the same outcome from your dog. That is what Skinner proved.

Dependent vs independent – the big divide. This is where owners need to make a choice over what they want. Do you want a dependent dog, or would you prefer an independent dog? I want my dogs to be independent, I need my dogs to be able to think and to problem solve – and to that end, I’ve pushed him to make choices and problem solve. Yes, he’s dependent on me in many ways, I need to feed him, I need to take him out to pee etc. When we are at a dog park, he chooses where to go, it’s his time, not mine – and I accept his choice and follow him. When you push your dog to make choices, be prepared to accept those choices cause sometimes the answer is no. When you give your dog the ability to choose – and accept those choices, then the dog is going to be more apt to accept your choices. Imagine as a human living life facing punishment for choices that you didn’t make, living under complete control. Wouldn’t be fun at all.

So what alternate behaviour do you want? I want calm – nothing more, calm in the face of everything. A calm dog is a thinking dog. And a dog that can be calm in the face of anything is what owners really want. Everyone thinks they want a well trained dog until they meet Monty – Monty is the outcome of being given choices. “I know you want to meet that dog – give me calm and you can have it”. It’s working together, compromise – give me calm everywhere, and the world is your oyster.

When I first got Monty, he was 5 years of age and showed aggression. Moving targets – runners, bikes, skateboards – were things to be killed, and he went for blood. Pretty impressive for a 10 pound dog. I’m going to take the lead and show Monty what I want, what I expect. When a moving target came by, I would squat down, be calm, take him by the collar and have him sit until the target passed – then we move forward. No reward given, no treat, no “good boy” – it’s simple expectation – calm down. Starting out, his brain still wanted to attack, but he couldn’t. Quickly, he came to understand what I wanted – to be calm and it didn’t take long for that understanding to come. Rinse and repeat, within a day, he stopped attacking and off leash walks became a charm instead of a nightmare. I didn’t expect him to sit every time a target passed, just be calm. Give me calm, the reward is moving forward again – the walk with the owner – the ability to be off leash and explore his surroundings. To be a Miniature Pinscher – he’s not much of a hunter but chasing mice and squirrels is part of what he is – that is fulfilling the breed. That is a huge reward to a dog. I invested all of my spare time in Monty that first week to get him socialized – and we spent alot of time at dog parks, spent alot of time around people. He needed to learn how to be a dog – from dogs – humans are not capable of teaching dogs how to be a dog.

Be proactive instead of reactive.

Again with Monty, it was being proactive – not reactive. Too many owners today are looking at their dog as a liability and that’s not fair. It’s the owner that is reacting many times – and the dog is going to react in kind. They pull the dog away from things they deem negative. This is why I see people in public claiming they are trying to socialize their dog, but yet, drag their dog away losing out on opportunities for that socialization. Same goes for some trainers, they pull the dog away – “good boy, here’s a reward”. A reward for what? Being dragged away from a dog they want to meet? How is that socialization?

It’s your choice, be the treat or be a treat dispenser.