Deconstruction II (Tearing down misleading words)

Some of the things that get under a lot of Positive/Force Free Trainers skins is the buzz words that Balanced/Energy/Dominance-Alpha based trainers use as euphemisms.  At this point, I wouldn't mind if they came right out and said what they were really using to control a dogs behaviour; in fact, I would welcome it.  Why?  Because people would begin to understand what these methods really do to their dogs, and the possible side effects they could create.  Since they aren't about to tell the general public what they really mean, I will be happy to educate the public for them.

Various methods are used; I'll talk about the science behind them later (where there is a case for science, and not misunderstanding of science or out right fabrication and spreading of myths), first though, there needs to be some explanation of the words.  Balance.  Most of the time, when I read this, then read the descriptions that follow, there is usually some method of force, intimidation or pain involved (usually for "correction").  It might be wrapped up in words like leash corrections, stern or loud voice, or pinning the dog to the ground (alpha rolling).  I haven't come across any site or explanation that describes the techniques as not using some sort of physical or mental force; if there is, AND they don't use prong, choke or eCollars, I'd like to see it and find out what they do and dissect the method happily in an intelligent debate.  Energy, is usually used to mean that the person has some mystical connection with the dogs mental/emotional state; usually this is in conjunction with the three collar types mentioned above.  You cannot use Energy to train a dog; you can use psychology, but not mystical mumbo jumbo; I can't even make an argument for this because it's so vague and unprovable it defies logic.  Dominance/Alpha.  This is used based on a complete misinterpretation of the science involving wolves; the original author of the papers now wishes he hadn't used the terms, as what he meant, was Alpha = Parent; Beta = older pups (usually around 2yrs); Omega = youngest cubs.  So just as a Parent human is dominant over their child (they hold all the resources) so is an Alpha.  It's a family structure, not some anthropological mockup of dog societies.  Again, with this false theory, there is a lot of force, intimidation and fear inducement in the training.  Not only is it assigning human values to dogs, but forcing dogs into situations that would be considered potentially lethal situations in the real world (the only time a wolf in a fight alpha rolls another wolf is with intent to kill!)

So if all the above is smoke and mirrors, what are they using?  Some of it was mentioned.  If we look at leash pops, prong ("pinch") collars, eCollars, choke and slip collars (nylon chokes) they all have a basis in either discomfort (at best) or pain (at worst) (ie. Positive Punishment in Operant Conditioning terms) or after sustained use and then discontinuing use after the dog does the "right" behaviour - relief (Negative  Reinforcement).  They say that you need excellent timing for these devices to work and that they shouldn't be used by those not proficient in them; yet if you have excellent timing, you don't need them in the first place! (to paraphrase Ian Dunbar).  That is the scientific methodology they use, whether they describe it as such or not.  Alpha rolls and other dominating maneuvers are merely some form of the above as well.  Will the dog learn the correct behaviour that is  being targeted?  Possibly, yes, I will admit they might (it's the nature of learning theory) but they may also develop a negative emotional connection with the technique, the person using the technique, or perhaps with people in general.  Why?  The thing that those that use Balance don't either understand, or ignore, is that Classical Conditioning (Pavlov's research performed over a 100 years ago and well established) is always at work.

They neglect it because they are only focused solely on the behaviour, not the emotion.  If you change the emotion, you will change the behaviour.  The behaviour is there for a reason, it works to accomplish the goal the dog wants.  Eliminating the behaviour may work, but the emotional state will stay the same; so the chance of recurrence is ever present, not diminished or extinguished.  Change the emotion and the need for the behaviour will no longer be valid; the dog may perform the behaviour out of habit and work it's emotions back up, but that is a management issue that doesn't require the use of force, just compassion and empathy.  You don't need to correct a behaviour that is fueled by negative emotions; you need to fix the emotions first.  Blaming a hungry thief for stealing bread and locking them up doesn't make the hunger go away.

This for me is still a messaging and communication issue leading the public with false advertising.  No one can guarantee the behaviour of another organism.  You can adjust the odds in your favour, but you can't make it a sure thing.  The public has the right to know that there are people out there that claim one thing, but do something completely different.  Reality TV has done nothing to help in this regard.  Dog Training is fighting against outdated and erroneous messages coming off TV, the internet and filtered through friends and family who suddenly know what's best for your dog.  The public needs, no, DESERVES Consumer Rights protection.  They acquire a pet that will be with them for up to 15 years or more and ask someone to come and train the dog (an animal with a not so distant past of being a predator with sharp teeth) without telling them how they plan on motivating the dog or what methods they are really using.  Trainers be honest in the way you train dogs; don't flower it up with language that doesn't mean anything or is false.  Owners be as harsh in your questions to your trainers as you need to be until you get an answer you understand; if they continue to make you ill at ease or if it is something you would not do to a child, you have the right to walk away.

Suggested reading:
http://eileenanddogs.com/2013/08/12/calm-submissive/
http://muttabouttown.com/2013/08/13/making-force-free-training-the-norm/

Something Blue... (hold your breath?)

Some people get grumpy when you point out that dog trainers aren't on the same skill level as surgeons when you're comparing regulations and training when you're doing comparisons.  Fine; I can understand that.  How about Plumbers, or Carpenters.  You do need some training and some practice to use those skills.  Grandpas used to build their own houses/barns/sheds/garages etc.  Where they always safe?  Sometimes yes, sometimes no.  Plumbing you know isn't safe when it leaks all over the place, so it's a bit easier to deal with (unless the pipes are already buried behind the walls or under the concrete floor!).

Both Plumbers and Carpenters are regulated nearly everywhere.  Either self regulated in their own industries, or regulated by law.  Why?  Because they can cause a lot of damage (or death!) if they do something wrong.  So what does this have to do with Dog Training?

Anyone can hang out a shingle and call themselves a Dog Trainer and do nearly ANYTHING to a dog.  Even people video taped and put on the internet, having a following from  TV, showing things that would be considered assault or worse if it were done to an adult human or worse, a child.  This might be partly the laws fault, but I don't think it is entirely.  We, as a society, have a different view of dogs than we do of humans; sometimes even other animals.

Those that use abusive, coercive, intimidating or violent means of training dogs are starting to realize the backlash to their techniques.  Slowly we realize as a society that these techniques are not only antiquated, but they aren't needed.  Having a undergraduate science background I realize these techniques CAN get things accomplished, but they also have very serious side effects that are hardly ever mentioned that can put a dog in severe jeopardy.  I can get my car moving if I put pure alcohol in the gas tank, but it's not wise.

Why do we allow techniques can make dogs more fearful, shut them completely down (Stockholm syndrome) and/or make them dependent on the devices in order to comply or cause aggression that wasn't there before, or worse yet, hide the "aggressive" signals what warn people the dog is uncomfortable and about to bite!  What type of life would you have if you had to wear something around your neck that caused you (at the very least discomfort - at worse, pain) every day of your life if you did something someone else considered wrong.  And what happens if you don't respond to those techniques?  You're labelled as "un-trainable" and your owners are given to believe that you are a dog that is incapable of learning and beyond hope.  Where does that leave you?  If you're owners are lucky or dedicated, they find someone that is willing to help and overcome the damage that has already been done; if you're not, you take a trip to the vet.... (80% of dogs euthanized dogs in CFHS shelters are euthanized for "physical and behaviour unhealth" - aka. to sick or bad/unwanted [probably normal for dog] behaviour).

Is it all a matter of Consumer Rights?  It's certainly a good start.  What "whisperers", "dominance", "alpha-dog/pack leader" and the new "energy" trainers generally use is, to be blunt, violence to try to stop behaviours.  If a dog sits when it's supposed to down -Zap, Yank, Yell, Hit, Poke etc.  When the dog finally sits, those things stop (some of these trainers may) give the dog a treat at this point and claim they are positive trainers.

For the time being, if trainers are honest as to what they're using and what side effects are possible, then I think the public will choose to follow more and more progressive training methods.  You can't slap together a house without using code; you shouldn't be train unless you understand what the effects of the training your using are.  For over 100 years science has given us the answers for training, it's time we started listening to science and ethics.  The last of the force trainers will fight and struggle all the way into this century, but sooner or later, they will have to come.  When they do, we'll welcome them happily to a better way of training.

http://cfhs.ca/athome/shelter_animal_statistics