What would my dog choose?

Here Dahlia shows off the wonderful freedom
she gets even without a shock collar

Recently I came across this post on the "truth about shock collars" page.  Now, don't be fooled here.  They're not really giving you the truth about shock collars, but rather their twisted version of the truth (it doesn't hurt, there's no pain, it's just a stim).  But here Robin MacFarlane asks her readers if they believe their dogs would choose to be trained using an e-collar (which is really the most common euphemism these days for a shock collar).

It's an interesting question to ask.  Would your dog choose to be trained the way you train the dog?  Would your dog choose to do obedience or rally or agility?  What sorts of choices would your dog make if given that sort of freedom?

Ms. MacFarlane cites many choices we make for our dogs: vaccinations, what they eat, and what dogs they interact with, among others.  I cannot argue with her there.  There are many choices we cannot allow our dogs to make because they would make poor choices.  I can guarantee my dog would love to eat any leftover meat she found in the garbage.  I'm sure she would prefer not to go to the groomer or ever have a bath again.  She sure wouldn't choose to be hosed down after taking a dunk in our rather disgusting pond and coming out smelling like the swamp thing (please note: I allow her to chase geese into the pond; she does this on command; it's fun for her but it does result in a dog who smells terrible and requires a bath).  In fact, making the choice to drink from the pond at one occasion was also a poor choice she made (resulting in rather a lot of stomach upset and a bacterial infection that required antibiotics).  Dogs aren't known for making the best choices.

But does that mean they would choose to be trained using something that causes a pain in their neck every time they do something wrong?  Would they choose an uncomfortable sensation when they do something wrong over a reward when they do something right?  I may not be a dog, but considering that dogs tend to be comfort-seeking "do what's best for me" types, I would imagine that dogs would answer with a resounding NO.

I know how my dog would respond.

She responds with stress signals to a harsh voice.  I'm not talking voices directed at her, but for example, we adopted our dog during the 2008 presidential election.  There were many evenings of angry shouts at the television.  We had to stop watching the debates because our dog was stressed out by our raised voices.

When we first got her, we didn't expect her to try to herd UPS trucks and when she tried to, in an emergency stop sort of situation, we had to yank her back hard by her collar.  She shut down and rolled over.

I've reached out to touch her and accidentally shocked her (dry winters around here).  She once wouldn't go near me for an hour and after a shock or two, she starts to flinch if I reach for her.

She flinches when I reach for her.

And this is not a purposeful shock.  This is entirely accidental, but it's enough punishment to make her hand-shy for a time.  If I inflicted that on her day after day, year after year, in the name of training how do you think she'd react?  I think I know how.

On the flip side, seeing how she reacts to being rewarded, how her drive in agility has increased as has her tug and toy drive, tells me that she loves the rewards.  Seeing how agility itself has become the reward tells me she loves the rewards as well.

So would my dog choose to be trained using a shock collar?  No.  I can say with absolute certainty that no, she would not choose that.

Free free to comment, shock collar users and trainers.  I will warn you that comments are moderated, but only to stop spam.  I will gladly allow you to have your say.

----
A clarification: My dog does not eat the garbage.  She goes into the pond when I let her.  Drinking the pond water was unexpected and happened as she raced into it, gulping the water as she went (chasing geese into the ponds is no longer happening).  My dog only flinches away from people after being shocked (a smart move, in my opinion).  She is not afraid to be approached by anyone (including young children, other dogs, and cats).  My dog is an easygoing joyful dog to live with, a happy dog who has never been abused in any way.  Any issues she had (e.g. her frustration reactivity to other dogs) has been dealt with in a positive manner.  She does not live her life on the end of a leash.  She is a wonderful dog who is granted a lot of freedom (not crated in the house when we're out, off leash hikes, etc.) because she makes the right choices and she knows that sticking by me and coming back to me are hugely rewarding.


Anyone who comes to this post and thinks I haven't trained my dog and am some sort of martyr with a bad relationship with my dog could not be more wrong.  Perhaps those people should read past this one post that they take issue with because they train using shock collars and I choose not to.

A little (untrue) story

Let me tell you a little story...

I was out walking my DINOS and practicing LAT and BAT when I saw this ROAR across the road.  I shouted over to the person with the ROAR to keep that GSP away from my CKCS.  The other owner said OMG WTF.  I told him I was working on LLW and hoping to get a CGC and he told me to STFU.  I kept going, trying to get away from him, C/T every chance I had.  I'm still on a FSR you see.  My CKCS rushed ahead and got an NRM, but came back so more C/T.  The ROAR moved away with the owner muttering something that sounded like AFAIC MDIF.

Anyway I, I know it's kinda been a roundabout way of saying it
But I guess the whole point I'm tryin' to make here is:



I HATE ACRONYMS.

And I especially hate all these ones that seem to catch on like wildfire lately.  DINOS (dogs in need of space), ROAR (rover on a retractable [leash]), and MDIF (my dog is friendly) are recent ones I've seen used in blog posts and then everyone latches onto them like they're the best thing since sliced bread.  Frankly, every time I see someone tossing them off all I can think of is "you're trying too hard to be one of the cool kids." And I want to punch them.  Seriously.  (Or maybe not so seriously.)

I'm sure this will make me wildly unpopular (WU?), but it's been bothering me for awhile.  I love clear communication.  Silly acronyms and catchphrases aren't helping people communicate with others clearly.  And it also lumps all dogs into one category.  What is a DINOS anyway?  My dog loves other dogs, but she doesn't like them crawling up into her business or humping her.  She's on a retractable leash but she's not running up to these so-called DINOS (which is the implication behind the acronym) because I don't let her.  And because she needs her space too (OMG a DINOS ROAR???!!  Say it ain't so!).

And please folks, if you insist on using such acronyms, try not to call them DINOS dogs, because all that translates to is "Dogs in need of space dogs."  It's like calling it an ATM machine.

On reactive dogs (and having one!)

I rarely speak of Dahlia's reactivity in public and it's certainly not something I talk about with friends and family. Sometimes I still fight against the stigma, against the way that people view reactive dogs.  

Aggressive

Mean

Vicious

Yet she is none of those and nor has she ever been those.  There are many reasons dogs are reactive, but the two major reasons are:

1. Fear.  Dogs that lack socialization often react to every little noise, every little thing they see.  That tall guy in the hat?  They've never seen something like that before, they get scared, and so lash out.  Barking and lunging will make the scary thing go away!  That dog who is easily twice their size?  They've never met a dog that big, they get scared, and lash out at that.  To the laymen it looks like aggression and while it's a form of aggression, the root cause of it is fear.

2. Frustration.  Some dogs have little frustration tolerance and so when they see something they want to get to but can't (because they're on leash or behind a fence), they lash out in frustration.  I liken it to a toddler throwing a temper tantrum. They lose all control of themselves and bark and lunge.  It looks nearly the same as the fear response, but isn't.

The body language for the two is different, especially in the ear set (back for fear, forward for frustration) and tail set (down much further for a fearful dog).

Dahlia came to me with frustration reactivity.  I had never heard the term before and while I knew a lot about the basics of dog training, I realized I better get off my butt and do a more thorough study.  I read a lot.  I spoke with a lot of trainers and behaviorists.  I watched DVDs and read books on body language.  I started to go out and study dogs and their owners and talking to people to figure out why their dogs were acting the way they were.  What caused the reactivity?

Then I set to helping my dog.  I figured out her triggers (other dogs) and how close those triggers could get before she started to react.  I figured out the little body language signs that meant a reaction was imminent.  And so I started the "Look at that" game.  "Look at that!" I would proclaim when we saw a dog just at the right distance away (close enough to be noticed, but not close enough to elicit and over the top reaction).  Dahlia, of course, was looking already.  And then she'd turn to look at me because of my excited voice.  At that point, she'd get a treat.  Something really delicious.

We did this every single day for months.  Little by little we were able to get closer and closer to the other dogs.  Finally she could walk by a dog who was on the other side of the road without reacting about 90% of the time!  So then we moved it closer, first stepping into the grass on the near side of the sidewalk then just off the sidewalk, always creeping closer and closer but always playing the "Look at that" game.

It took about a year to get to the point that we're at now.  Dahlia is almost completely non-reactive.  She has the occasional episode, especially if we're just leaving the house after she's been alone for a few hours, and we come across a dog who is too close and whose owner is jogging with him (the desire to chase is strong!).  But those happen so rarely that I would call her about 99% non-reactive.


The journey to that was long and a constant up and down struggle.  We'd make good progress, then something would happen that would set us back a bit.  She bounced back quicker and quicker each time, but it still was not a steady upward pace.  I've seen this same unsteady progress from other dogs I've helped out and I've read about it from many friends who have dealt with reactivity too.


Recently, I've been reading some stuff from folks who are harassing a friend of mine.  They gave her a dog who had been locked in a room for most of his young life and has a lot of fear and a lot of reactivity.  A lot more than my dog ever did.  It's been only a few weeks and they are expecting a miraculous recovery.  They're expecting this fear aggressive dog to be fine in the house with the person's other two dogs.  They're expecting her to film him outside while training.  They're expecting daily updates (which anyone with a reactive dog knows is pretty ridiculous due to the aforementioned ups and downs of working with reactivity).  It sure would be nice for this dog to learn to live in the human world, but when a dog lacks early socialization, it's hard and it takes a lot of time.


If you have a reactive dog, take heart!  You can work through it, but it will take time and dedication.  It's all worth it though, isn't it?  The moments when a dog finally walks past another dog, notices him, and then look at you instead?  They make it all worth it.

I love my dog

Sometimes I'm really struck by how awesome my dog really is.  And not only that, but by how much the training we've done with her has helped her with her confidence level.

Today I took her out to the park for a Halloween photo shoot.  I had big plans for this one, much more than just a costume.  I was inspired by the purchase of a pair of Doggles (goggles for dogs, if you're wondering what they are) and the video of Weird Al Yankovic's Dare to be Stupid (which you can see here).

The idea required that Dahlia stand up with her paws on a keyboard while wearing a yellow t-shirt with the atomic symbol on it and a pair of Doggles.   Yikes!

I worked my way up to it in the following way:

1. Standing with her feet on a park bench.
2. Standing with her feet on the keyboard which was sitting on the park bench.
3. Doing #2 while wearing the t-shirt.
4. Doing #2 while wearing the t-shirt and the Doggles.

For each one I also worked on getting her to hold the position long enough for me to take photos.

In the end, this was what I ended up with*.



 

All of this was accomplished in less than a half an hour!  She's such an amazing dog!

*Green screen edited in after the fact.

"Dominance training" is silly

I've recently come to the conclusion that the entire idea of "dominance training" is silly.  Now, mind you, I'm not talking about the type of folks who alpha roll their dogs or who use harsh physical punishments to "teach them their place."  Those folks are whole different kettle of fish.  I'm talking about people who feel the need to somehow demonstrate to their dog that they're the boss, the alpha, the top dog, the dog about town, or what have you, usually by doing something they would feel utterly embarrassed to be caught at.

Here's a pretty simple one straight out of Jan Fennell's The Dog Listener:

By ensuring they eat first at meal times, the Alpha pair signal in unequivocal terms that they are the leaders. By giving their leaders first refusal at every meal time, the rest of the pack are acknowledging that they instinctively understand this. Even if there is only enough food for two wolves, the pack will expect the Alpha pair to eat it all to ensure the survival of the pack.

Gesture eating is my way of demonstrating the owner's primacy at feeding time.

The basic gist is that you pretend you're eating something, even part of their own food if necessary, to show them that you can eat first, to show them that the "alpha pair" always eat first.  Try this with your dog sometime and see how silly you feel pretending to eat something to prove something so abstract to a dog who is probably sitting there thinking nothing more than "mmmm food."

Here's another fantastic suggestion from someone commenting on a "tip" about resource guarding.

For example. If my dog is not sharing the food dish i do not “alpha roll” him or put him into the submissive position. I get down on “all fours” and place my head over the top of his, so that my [sic] he is looking at my neck. And then i proceed to back him away from the dish, allowing the other dog to eat.


Now do me a favor and really think about this for a moment.  Let's forget for a second that if a dog has a real resource guarding problem this is sure to result in your getting bit, likely in that neck that the dog is looking at (a place on your body that could result in your getting severely injured, or even killed, and will most certainly end with the death of the dog).  But think about getting down on all fours and pretending you're a dog to somehow "dominate" your dog away from his food.  How silly would you feel if someone came into the room while you were doing that?  I know I'd feel ridiculous even if no one was around to watch.  And I'm pretty sure I'd get laughed at by anyone with any sort of training background.

Other suggestions I have seen range from the misunderstood (playing tug with your dog is not about competition and if the toy ends up with the dog and not you, it doesn't mean he has "won") to the ridiculous (a dog getting on the furniture does not mean he thinks he's the "alpha") to the downright creepy (one trainer suggested humping your dog to show that you're the dominant one).

I'm not really sure how people can believe such silliness.  So have you ever read anything that just made you scratch your head or giggle?  Let's hear it!

Why the "positive only" community is losing to Cesar Millan

I belong to a community on Facebook that is there to debunk Cesar Millan's methods.  This community currently has about 4,100 members.  This seems fairly significant.  4,100 people devoted to positive training and to getting the word out that many trainers and behaviorists do not approve of Cesar Millan's dominance-based theories and harsh punishment-based training methods.  But when you compare this to the over 820,000 people that are in the group devoted to his show and teachings you realize there's a major problem.  Even Victoria Stilwell, TV's voice for positive training, has only a little over 27,000 members in her facebook group.

Positive training is losing.  Cesar Millan is winning.  This is a huge problem and I've been wracking my brain to try to figure out why people gravitate to Cesar and are devotees of his training but will not adopt more positive training methods.  After all, to those of us who use various forms of positive training, from clicker training to lure/reward styles, it's the most logical way to train.

It's based in science.  Operant conditioning uses the four quadrants (positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment) to influence behavior.  While all of the quadrants are valid and science-based, positive trainers focus on positive reinforcement (rewarding the desired behavior) and sometimes negative punishment (removing something the dog likes when he does something that is not desired).  It is not based on outdated dominance theories or the idea that one must be the "pack leader" (there has been much evidence today that dogs do not form packs like wolves do; for some good information on that check out Raymond Coppinger's Dogs: A Startling New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior & Evolution).

It's dog-friendly.  Positive trainers do not use things that will cause pain to their dogs.  The use of shock collars, choke chains or prong collars is not a part of positive training.  Because the dogs are never punished in such a way, they're often more open to offering behaviors and trying new things.  A "wrong" behavior will not received a painful shock or a leash pop and so dogs become more willing to experiment to find the behavior that will gain them the reward.  When you see a dog offering behaviors willingly and with great excitement, it's a reward all its own.

Positive training is hugely rewarding for both dog and human.  When I go into training my dog I'm excited and even better, she is too.  When I mention "doggy class" she dances around the apartment with a grin on her face and attempts to herd me right out the door.  For those of us who see that "reward" when we train, we can't imagine why anyone would want to train using punishment-based methods.

And yet Cesar Millan has a huge following.  His marketing machine is massive (I've seen his books and cardboard cutouts everywhere from Petsmart to Borders and I've seen him on such shows as Bones and The Daily Show; he even had a cameo on South Park!).  He's won over countless people to his way of training.  Hardly a day goes by when I don't read about someone attempting to alpha roll someone else's dog or using Cesar's "shhht" on a dog they meet at the dog park.  I see him consistently quoted in dog communities and the words "calm assertive" are seen almost as often as cries for help.  More people believe in the concept of the alpha than do not.

To those of us who train using positive reinforcement methods it is inordinately frustrating to see someone with such outdated theories, so focused on dominance, and using punishment to train having such a huge following.  It makes no sense and so we find ourselves shaking our heads and getting riled up in frustration.

So where do we go wrong?  Why can't we win more people over to our "side"?  I've seen a fair amount of people who have said "Wow I'm so glad there are better ways to train...I didn't like doing that to my dog."  But I don't see that nearly as often as "But Cesar Millan's methods work!" and a complete unwillingness to entertain the idea that there are other, more dog-friendly methods out there.

One of my latest conclusions as to where we go wrong is that, as a group, positive trainers seem to be a snarky bunch.  We see red if the name Cesar or the word "dominance" comes up and instead of stating why we believe positive training is a better method of training, we attack.  I've been as guilty of this as anyone else in the community, but I've been trying to make a conscious effort to take a breath and write more on why I think positive training is such a great thing and less on why I think Cesar Millan should be ripped apart by rabid wolverines (I jest!). 

But this is sadly not true of many in the community.  I've seen countless people join dog training communities and leave because of the attitude that was given them.  They made mistakes.  We all do.  But instead of people saying "What you're doing really isn't going to work and may backfire; let me give you some really good solid methods of working on this issue" they get rude responses and accusations.  They get told that they're harming their dog for life, that they are abusive, or that they should never have gotten a dog in the first place.  No one wants to come to a community for help and essentially be chased out by this sort of attitude.  And even worse, this is not going to convert them to positive training methods.

The problem appears to be that many people in the positive training community do not know how to relate to human beings.  We use positive training with our dogs, but do not use the same concept of positive reinforcement with people.  Instead we use positive punishment (positive punishment is where an animal gets a punishment inflicted when they do something we have deemed wrong; e.g. a leash pop for not staying in heel position).  If there are better ways to train our dogs, sure there are better ways to relate to other human beings than through the use of punishment?

So here's my challenge to the community: Think before you write.  Consider your words carefully.  Instead of punishing those people who you disagree with, try to reinforce those people when they do something right.  When someone is training in a way you don't agree with or cites Cesar as their greatest influence, count to 10 and then explain in a calm, rational way why you think that positive training is a better method.

You catch more flies with honey, after all.  You may not catch them all, but you might bring more people over to our side if you use honey instead of vinegar.

It's a beautiful thing (aka A little bit of Rebel)

Ever since I began agility classes at the place I'm currently taking classes at, I've noticed a change come over Dahlia.  It happened quickly and it took me by surprise.  She was never a timid dog, but she was a soft dog who was overly sensitive to certain things: being run into, loud noises, and dogs who wanted to play rough, specifically.

I had her for over two years before we began classes here and she had yet to overcome any of these things.  Some of that was because I simply allowed to it be.  I didn't work on acclimating her to being run into.  I didn't work on getting her used to loud noises.  And I kept rougher dogs away from her.

The first of the trio of "issues" she has (being run into) has been successfully solved through this class.  We got her so involved in tug that I started to incorporate running into her as part of the game.  We'd play tug for a time and then I'd step forward and run into her side, or use my legs to manipulate her side.  She would hang into the tug and growl and start tugging harder.  It was a signal for "amp up the play, girl!" and she took to it brilliantly.  Once she was comfortable with my running into her during play, I would begin to run into her on purpose and then offer her the tug toy.  She'd grab onto it and play.  Now she sees running into her as a signal to play and she is instantly up and excited.  If I don't have a toy there, she settles right down.  But she's not shutting down and that's the important thing!

The second of the trio I'm only beginning to work on more, so we'll leave that for another day.

It's the third of this trio of "issues" that is the real subject of this post, though seeing her play with the tug toy the way she has been is also beautiful in and of itself.  But this last one, playing with dogs who are rough, has been something that has weighed on my mind for some time.  Generally, interaction with a wrestle play type dog goes like this:


1. Dog approaches.
2. Dahlia gets super excited about meeting this dog.
3. Dog jumps on Dahlia.
4. Dahlia issues a pretty clear warning growl.
5. Dog either persists and gets more warning growls or the owner pulls the dog away because my dog is "aggressive."  (This depends on the person at the other end of the dog's leash.  More knowledgeable people recognize the warning.  Less knowledgeable people think she's starting a fight.)

I've gotten used to this.  I really have.  And I've explained to other people so many times that my dog "is really just a chaser and doesn't like to be jumped on."  I've apologized countless times and tried to explain to the less knowledgeable that "no, she's really not aggressive...this is just how dogs communicate."

Saturday morning before class we saw one of the other dogs approach us.  Rebel is a lab puppy who is approximately 8 months old at this time.  Dahlia has met him before and he has certainly gotten the warning growl.  His owner is, thankfully, one of the more knowledgeable people and recognizes that Dahlia is helping to teach him something.  On Saturday morning Rebel clearly had a lot of excess energy to burn because as soon as he saw Dahlia and I, he took a flying leap...straight up into the air.  And then he came bounding toward Dahlia, alternately leaping in the air and rearing up.

I was expecting to experience my list above, step by step.

But I didn't get that.

Instead, he immediately rushed up and jumped on Dahlia.  Dahlia backed up briefly, but then launched herself at him with a big excited growly play face on and leapt on him.  She just pounced, like she pounces on her stuffed toys.  He jumped back.  She rushed forward and jumped on him again.  And they briefly wrestled.

It brought tears to my eyes.  Yes.  For real.  I admit to being a complete sucker when it comes to my dog.  Any time I see her grow like this, I get all teary-eyed.  I told Rebel's owner that this was amazing and I'd never seen her do that before.

And her response?

"I guess all she needed was a little bit of Rebel in her life."

Yes.  I think we all need a little bit of Rebel in our lives!

Love the place you train

Last April, as some of you may recall, I signed up for a class I was hesitant about taking.  Something about it made me nervous and it wasn't until I walked in the door, felt the unfriendly atmosphere and saw the amount of leash pops and jerks on both choke chains and prongs that I realized why I felt so uncomfortable before even going to the class: The website listed no solid training philosophy.  They had the "teaching philosophy" page, as most do, but nothing on it gave a specific method.  Their basic training philosophy was this: 

Instructors will help you to understand your unique dog and how to communicate clearly with him. And they have many methods in their "toolboxes" for teaching certain skills and for help with problem-solving.

There was nothing specific there, no one belief.  I had hoped, when I signed up for the class, that their teaching would be rooted in the "positive first" methodology.  Instead, I discovered quite the opposite.  While no one told me to put a choke chain on my dog, it was clear I was to treat her as if she had one on: use leash pops, drag her into areas she was afraid to go.  Dahlia was nearly shut down on the first day of class.  I walked out of the second.

I will not lie.  Finding an awesome place to train is hard and it's especially hard for those who want to train using positive, force-free methods.  A quick search in any locality will find you many places whose training philosophies do not revolve around positive methods.  In a search of one city, I found the following training philosophies cited on various web pages:

1. Our concept of canine training as we define it, begins when the puppy is born. Training is not simply a set of exercises (loose leash walking, sit, stay, down, down-stay and so on) that a dog must learn when he has reached a certain age. Instead, we approach training holistically as an integrated process that spans the dog's whole lifetime and includes many different facets of the human-canine relationship.  

This says very little about how they actually train.  Holistic probably sounds good to most folks, but then I start noticing Cesar Millan terminology like "calm submissive pack member" and I'm quickly turned off to the whole thing.  This is going to be dominance-based training and it's going to be utter nonsense.  Next!

2. My philosophy is rooted in the fundamental idea that companion animals are social beings, and they need to be treated with respect and dignity. Specifically, dogs are pack animals and need to understand the hierarchy of their social group. Dogs aren’t little kids in fuzzy coats, and I believe that they understand best when communicated to in their own canine language.

Unfortunately, this "fundamental idea" is entirely wrong.  For an excellent article on this, check out Ian Dunbar's recent article, Let's Just be Humans Training Dogs.

3. Our natural approach uses positive encouragement to reinforce behaviors we find desirable. It associates commands with these behaviors to develop conditioned responses, so the dog truly understands what you are trying to communicate.  (Sounds good so far but then...) At the same time, a natural approach means understanding that dogs naturally make a lot of mistakes, lose their attention, or are sometimes downright defiant. In those cases, the use of correction or negative reinforcement is necessary, to discourage and stop or modify behaviors we find undesirable.

This makes the training not quite so positive all of a sudden, doesn't it?  Many people are taken in by the idea of a "natural approach" but frequently that begins and ends with the erroneous ideas of dominance, submission, and who's going to be the alpha or pack leader.  Sure enough, if you continue reading this site's philosophy, you ultimately end up with a discussion of "wolf pack theory."  Here's a hint to people who don't realize it: Dogs are not wolves.  And not only are they not wolves, but they're not pack animals.  Those who have studied feral dogs have discovered that they form loose social structures, but not a strict hierarchy (check out the work of Raymond Coppinger).

That leads me to the training philosophy of where I'm now training.  I began training a little while ago at a place whose main focus is agility, but whose training can also spill over into obedience or general training to be a good citizen.  I found the place through an awful lot of searching.  One thing's for sure, places based in positive training are hard to find!  It's much easier to find places like the ones listed above, who were among the first to come up in a Google search.  The new place I go to has the following training philosophy:


If the dog can have a positive experience, then you will have positive results.  The training approach is based on positive training methods,working to build desire and drive... 

They go on to state that they do not allow the use of training collars (choke chains, prongs, or shock collars) and that their entire philosophy is rooted in having fun.


Now doesn't that sound better?  It sure did for me, which was why I signed up with no hesitation.  On top of the lack of training collars, I have noticed a distinct lack of some terminology in this class.  The word "dominance" has never been used.  Not once.  Neither have the words alpha, submissive, or pack leader.  My dog is not out to take over the world and I like that!  During the classes, Dahlia has learned to play tug for fun and has, rather quickly, become an even more confident dog than she was before.  It is fun and that's the most important thing.  Beyond basic obedience (sit, stay, come, etc.), dog training is not ultimately necessary.  So why subject your dog to something stressful and painful simply because you want to do it?  I'm a firm believer in having fun with my dog and this class has been perfect.  


I love the place I train.  Do you love your training facility?  If not, maybe it's time to look elsewhere for someplace you will love.

Herding insinct: She has it!

When we first got Dahlia, one of the things the foster home said about her was that she was a Border collie but had "None of the Border needs for high exercise nor herding behaviors."  We began questioning this right away.

When David and I separated on a walk, she would come around one of us and nip at our heels.

When she saw the geese out in a field she wouldn't run straight at them but instead would go around the outside of the flock.  We never got to see the end result of that as her racing toward a bunch of wild geese resulted in something that should surprise no one: They flew away.

I posted her pictures on Border collie sites and asked if they thought she had collie in her (I fully admit I really wanted her to).  Some said they thought she might; many did not believe she did.  She's clearly a mutt.  A 50 pound black furry mutt of unknown origin.  It's pretty clear she has retriever in her, though she's not a dog who retrieves.  But still, I was sure she had collie in her.  I saw it in her face, in her coat, in her tail.

And recently, I saw it as her herding instinct came out strong and clear!

She met goats.  This is the first time I've seen her actually come into contact with livestock.  There were just two of them, but she was very interested in them from the start.


Oh hi there Miss Goat.  May I come in?


That's right.  She crawled right underneath the fence.  We had to stop her from going all the way under and right into the pen!

But the next day, she faced down the goats outside of the pen, with them free to move around as they wished.  She was fascinated by them.



Ooooo...goats....


But then, all, of a sudden, it's like a light clicked on up in her doggy brain somewhere and she realized what she should be doing with those goats.  What should she be doing?  This!




That's right folks!  She gave those goats the eye and stalk posture and they began to move.  Now granted, she put way too much pressure on and they ran away from her, but she went after them, cut them off, tried to get them to move, well, somewhere.  I have no idea where, but it was clear she was trying to herd them somewhere.

So there you have it.  Dahlia is most definitely a Border collie mix and it looks like the Border collie side is much stronger than the retriever side as she has no interest in retrieving whatsoever.

Play styles and realization

Before I got a dog, I had very specific ideas of what a dog was. One of the major ideas I had centered around play: Dogs like to play fetch. Period. Tennis balls, frisbees, sticks. Anything you could toss a dog would chase after. As far as I was concerned fetch was the number one thing dogs loved to do.

So when we were planning on getting a dog and I went to Petsmart to get treats and toys and beds and all the other paraphernalia one needs for a new dog, fetching toys were high on my list. I came back with a frisbee and tennis balls galore. I was all set for my marathon fetching sessions.

One of the first thing I did when I got Dahlia was show her the ball and toss it out into the yard. At this point, I expected the typical dog reaction: an excited and somewhat frantic race to the ball. Instead I got this:


Mom I do not understand what it is you have done...

She watched the ball fly away from me and then turned to look up at me with this sort of bored and confused look on her face. I could almost hear her thoughts: Mom, why did you throw that thing?

A dog who doesn't fetch? No, this isn't possible, right? Even if she doesn't bring the ball back to me, surely she would show interest in getting the ball, chasing the ball, right? But no. Not even a movement toward the ball. Not even a muscle twitch that told me she was interested in going after the ball. I found that utterly unbelievable. How does a dog not learn how to play fetch in the first two years of her life? I was sure she was play deprived and I would have to show her how to be a proper dog. I swear my motto when it came to dogs was Dogs Fetch.  That would be Canis Fetchis in Latin.

I spent many months getting her interested in toys and then pulling hard to get her to let go of them so I could toss them. Eventually, she started to get it.


Look Mom, I can fetch!

But still, I would have to tug on it to get it out of her mouth and throw it again. I didn't want to teach her a drop it command only because I was afraid doing so would make her lose interest in the game. I wanted her to play and playing should be on the dog's terms, right? So I would tug and tug and finally get the toy and throw it. She'd fetch it and the game would begin again.

Except she would lose interest after about 3 or 4 tosses of the toy and just lay down. I started to believe my dog was just not playful.

But then I began to realize something else. The times she was really playful and really got into the playing were the times when I was tugging on the toy. And I began to realize how many photos I had of her playing tug.







Dahlia loves tug. Loves it. I don't know why it took me this long to figure it out. Maybe it's because I was so locked into fetch as the ultimate in dog games that I didn't take the time to really watch her and realize that, while she enjoys fetching to some degree, she really lives for tug games.

Of course, there's the other side of this: A lot of people used to proclaim tug "dangerous." The reasons ran the gamut from making your dog more aggressive to making the dog dominant (especially if they're allowed to "win" the game). Many people have come up with very strict rules for tug games. You are only allowed to play the game if...If you don't let the dog win... If you teach them to drop the toy...If you don't let the dog leap for the toy. The list goes on and on.

I admit to playing this game with no rules. In play, my dog has leapt for the toy and has even made contact with my arm once when she miscalculated where the toy was. Dahlia is usually a quiet, calm dog, but we're working on agility now and I'm trying to build up some drive in her. Tug seems to be the way to do it. It really amps her up and I'm thrilled to see such excitement and drive coming out of her. I feel no need to put rules on it. Rules may end the play quickly with a dog like mine.

So we play tug with complete abandonment. She loves it. It's become a huge reward for her and I'm using it as a reward more and more. She greets someone nicely and relaxes while I chat with them? She gets to play tug afterward. I used to redirect her to fetching, but I'd throw the ball and end up having to get it myself. I've taken to letting her play tug with the leash on walks or bringing a toy and letting her tug on that. Recently, I've obtained a leash specifically meant for tug games. It's made out of braided fleece and has sheepskin woven into it. It's perfect for the dog who loves to tug!

Tug toy and leash were obtained through Tillie's Tuggies. A portion of the proceeds go to Glen Highland Farm, a local Border collie rescue. After having the leash and tug toy for only a couple days, I can honestly say that I highly recommend them for dogs who love tug games!

Fetch of a different sort

Dahlia's standard idea of fetch, when she's actually interested in it, is essentially this:

1. Mom throws ball (squeaky toy, frisbee, glove...).
2. Dahlia runs and gets the toy.
3. Dahlia runs back near Mom.
4. Dahlia lays down to squeak said toy.

A variation that she sometimes employs is:

1. Mom throws ball (squeaky toy, frisbee, glove...).
2. Dahlia runs and gets the toy.
3. Dahlia runs to Mom.
4. Dahlia darts away and a game of keep away ensues.
5. Mom catches up to Dahlia and a game of tug ensues.

Either way, Dahlia loves it.

But lately, she's added a new twist. She's learning to throw the ball back. That's right. She's running back around me, shaking her head around and then tossing the ball near me. Then she's waiting for me to "fetch" it and toss it for her again.

I think this dog is very empathetic with humans. She tries smiling like us. And now she tries playing fetch like us. Soon she'll be walking on her hind legs (she's already learning to stand on them) and playing on the internet. Watch out world! Here comes Dahlia!

Play styles

I'm currently reading Pat Miller's book Play With Your Dog (you can buy this book at amazon.com and other places). This subject is especially interesting to me because play is one major thing we humans share with dogs. But I also find it fascinating because play is one thing Dahlia struggles with the most. When she first came to live with us, play was completely alien to her. She didn't understand toys. She didn't understand fetch. She didn't understand a dog's play bow. There was nothing she did that could be deemed playful, unless you found her sad attempts at herding us (by trying to grab onto our pant legs) as "playful."

In the two years since then, she's started to get it more and more. She loves her squeaky toys and often pounces on one and squeaks it ad nauseum for 5 or 10 minutes. She'll play fetch. Or rather, her own version of fetch, which consists of running for the ball and then taking off squeaking it (Dahlia will not play with anything that does not have a squeaker). She seems to understand play bows and has even been offering them herself to some dogs.

And what has emerged is a very specific play style.

Miller describes 7 play styles:

1. Cheerleaders (who play on the outside of a group who is more physically engaged and bark) -- these can turn into the dreaded "fun police" if not kept in check.

2. Body slammers

3. Wrestlers

4. Chasers

5. Tuggers

6. Soft touches

7. Self-play


I enjoyed reading her descriptions of these specific types of play as I've seen these dogs at the dog park and among the dogs we meet while out and about and while I didn't name them the exact same thing she did and while I didn't catch them all, I found my thoughts on dog play styles and hers were pretty much in line.

Dahlia falls mostly into category 4 (chasers), with occasional bouts of 1 (cheerleader). The latter especially happens at the dog park, and I am afraid at times I think she's being the "fun police." If she thinks play is getting too rough she'll bark incessantly and sometimes body block one dog and herd him away from the other. Sometimes this is wonderful, especially when she herds a bully away from a more timid dog.

Here you can see her being the "fun police" at the park. These two dogs were playing very roughly together. Dahlia rushed up and started barking at them. They stopped playing. Fun police wins.


The lighter coloured dog (some sort of AmStaff or Pit Bull) kept trying to mount the Boxer. I'm not sure the Boxer enjoyed it, so perhaps Dahlia did the Boxer a favour.


Here you can see her joyfully chasing another dog.



She's also a soft touch. The one thing that I've noticed about Dahlia is that she can't handle the body slammers or wrestlers of the group. She doesn't do those; she doesn't play "bitey face." She's not a physical dog when she plays and, in fact, self-handicaps when chasing in order to not make contact with the other dog. A dog jumping on her will get a warning growl and occasionally an air snap if he/she doesn't get it right away. It has never progressed further than that as the vast majority of dogs understand what the growl means (and for those that don't, I step in and shoo them away!).

Recently Dahlia and I met an Australian Shepherd while out on a walk. He was of similar size to Dahlia and friendly, so we let them meet. I've never met a dog who was so identical to her in play style. We threw the ball for him, which he ran to get, Dahlia close on his heels. Once he got the ball, he stood still and squeaked it, some 20-30 feet away from us. And as we watched, he ran up to Dahlia, dropped the fall 5 feet away from her and waited. When she made a move toward him, he grabbed the ball and took off running in a huge arc, Dahlia at his heels. They did this several times, with his taunting her with the ball and her running after him. They even changed roles with Dahlia being the chased (which is rare for her as she likes to be the chaser).

There was not one warning growl from her. The dogs did not come into physical contact except during the initial greeting ritual.

It was perfect for Dahlia and, I'm sure, perfect for this Aussie friend of hers as well.

It makes me think. When we do finally get a second dog, I'm going to be looking carefully at play styles, even more so than at size or breed. I don't want to have a wrestler who will make her uncomfortable.

Of course, this means I'm setting myself up for a lifetime of chasers, cheerleaders, and soft touches, but there you have it!

Lessons learned

It's hard to believe it's been over a week since I last posted. I vowed to be better, to write more, to keep up with things, but it doesn't always happen.

At any rate, this has been a rough week for me and most of it centers around a new training class I recently signed up for. Dahlia is a fantastic dog. In fact, if I were a normal pet owner I probably wouldn't ever have taken her to one obedience class. She came to us completely housetrained (in the almost two years we've had her she has had only a couple accidents in the house and both of those times she was ill). She didn't jump up on people, walked fairly well on the leash, was able to be left alone in the house with nothing untoward happening, was good with other dogs and people and kids and cats. Really, for the average pet owner, she's a dream.

But I'm not average. And I enjoy doing things with my dog. To date, I've been fairly careful about finding places that focus on positive training. Or, if they don't specifically focus on it, are open to working with Dahlia in a positive way.

I took classes at Petsmart (as much as some people "poo-poo" big box store training, we had a great experience there and they do promote positive training), a CGC class at the local SPCA (the instructor was mainly positive but willing to work with those who were less so), and then an Agility for Fun class at Blue Prints Dog Studio (100% positive). I hadn't done anything with Dahlia like that since last May and decided it was high time to get back involved.

I wanted a place that did real agility, maybe rally. I want to have fun with Dahlia and I think those classes tend to be more fun. I'm not so into the obedience side of things. It's too strict, too structured for me. It was difficult finding a local place that did agility and/or rally. I found some really nice looking ones 45 to 90 minutes away from the Syracuse area, but around town? Nothing.

Then I stumbled upon a local school, just a 10 minute drive away from me. I was somewhat hesitant as their website didn't list any sort of solid training philosophy. At least at the Syracuse Obedience and Training Club (SOTC) they straight up tell you they require "training collars" (read: choke chains), so I knew that was a place to avoid. This new school I found mentioned something about working with each individual dogs to meet their needs.

It left me feeling a little bit nervous, but I signed up anyway, hoping for the best.

Instead what I got was a class with three dogs on choke chains and prong collars, owned by three people who wouldn't even look at me much less speak to me. The first day in class was so utterly unwelcoming that I felt a little bit lost. Where was the camaraderie I had experienced in previous classes? Nowhere to be found. One of the dogs was severely reactive to other dogs, even from 20-30 feet away, and would bark and snap and snarl at any dog that so much as looked at him. Every time he would bark at another dog, the owner would yank him hard on his prong collar. Every single time. And every single time he would bark more and whine more until he finally would stop after a particularly hard yank.

No one stopped her.

The instructor approved and pointed out why it was "working."

I cringed but continued on, trying my best to ignore what this woman was doing with her dog. The other folks were continually jerking their dogs as well. And Dahlia? She was getting more stressed all the time, which worried me. A lot.

Then I discovered that the room itself was distressing to my dear, gentle, super soft and sensitive dog. There were mirrors across the back of the room and Dahlia was freaked out by them. When we would walk near them she would shy away from them, try to pull me away from them. The instructor told me to keep going and drag her along, that she was controlling me by acting fearful. Acting. Yes, my dog is acting fearful to dominate me. She didn't use the "d" word, but I think the concept was the same.

And the next time we walked around by the mirrors, she sort of forced me to walk closer to them and drag Dahlia past them.

This is a technique called "flooding." It's not something I agree with and I was uncomfortable with it. All week it bothered me that allowed her to manipulate me in such a way. The choke chains, the prongs, the flooding, the leash pops. It all culminated in me walking out of class the following week after only 10 minutes. I had begun the class that day with the honest intention of giving it a second chance. I tried to show Dahlia the mirrors weren't scary but I was unable to continue with my positive training as the woman with the reactive dog insisted on coming to the back of the room and standing on one side of it. I'm sure it was clear that I was trying to acclimate Dahlia to the mirrors, but she didn't seem to care. Ultimately, the instructor told me to drag Dahlia again and I stopped. I told her no. And then said I couldn't deal with a class that was so completely the opposite of all I stood for.

And I left.

It was the best decision of my life.

So what lesson did I learn? I learned that if a website doesn't state up front that they do positive training, then they probably don't. In the future, I'll be avoiding any place that I'm hesitant about. I'll go with my gut.

Lesson learned.

In the mean time, I found another place slightly outside of Syracuse, just about a 20 minute drive from my house, called It's All About the Dogs. They do all positive training, no chokes, prongs, or shock collars allowed. It's all about fun. It sounds like the perfect place! We start there in June.

Night time walk

We bounded out of the apartment tonight. Me with happiness over going for a walk with my dog; Dahlia with a big grin at the sight and smell of more snow. We rushed down the steps as we often do. You see, walks are fun. Dahlia gets to race through the snow, stopping to sniff when she wants to and then rushing to catch up to me or racing ahead to find the next bit of interesting snow to stick her snout in.

And me? I get to laugh with pure joy at watching her. She makes me happy. Walks with her make me happy.

When we got down off the porch I saw my next door neighbor coming up the sidewalk with her German Shepherd. "Stop," I said to Dahlia. She froze in place. Even her big doggy grin froze in place. I came up next to her and asked her to wait. We waited.

My next door neighbor has her dog on a choke chain or a prong collar. I can't recall which, but it ultimately doesn't matter. They serve the same purpose. He stepped slightly away from her and toward us. She jerked him with the leash. Not instantly. But a few seconds after he moved.

He whined.

She jerked him again and turned to walk in the opposite direction, again jerking him when he didn't follow her.

Dahlia and I stood frozen to the spot for a moment and watched them walk off. Each time he moved away from her, she jerked him with it. And he whined. We could hear his whine from several houses down.

Finally, when they were far enough away, I released Dahlia. She immediately headed in the direction he had gone.

I didn't want to go in that direction. I called to her. "Dahlia, wrong way!"

She turned on a dime and rushed back to me and then past me, sticking her face into the snow as she went.

And then we started the race down the path. Dahlia pausing to sniff, me calling excitedly to her and watching her race with joy to me.

The grin had returned.

As had mine.

Walks are a joyous time for Dahlia and I. We race along snow covered sidewalks. We trudge through snow-choked fields 2 or more feet deep. I let her off leash in the park to play the "wait/come" game and to play fetch with a snow-covered tennis ball. We jump and play. We meet other dogs and she plays.

I walk along with a smile on my face that matches Dahlia's. Walks are her time, but they're also for me. It's my time to watch my dog be a dog, my time to watch her enjoy herself.

My neighbor's dog doesn't have that joy. He moves with much anxiety, his back legs bunched up awkwardly as he moves down the sidewalk. My neighbor once told me that she's working "very hard" on his training. She walks with a scowl on her face and is continually fighting her dog. It's a war of wills. She's been told she has to be alpha. She believes it. And so it's a constant fight between her and her dog. She MUST win, you see. Or else he will control all.

I believe Dahlia and I are companions, that I take care of her, that we are partners in our joyous walks together. Training is fun. It should be fun. When it becomes not fun it's over.

We returned to the apartment the same way we left it, with smiles on our faces. Dahlia raced up the porch and into the house. I followed slightly behind, shutting the doors and turning off the lights.

My neighbor is still out with her dog, still struggling with him somewhere on her walk. It's not his. Never his.

Dahlia and I are happy and content inside after our lovely, companionable walk.

I like it that way.

Be careful of who you go to training for

Many people nowadays are out there looking for a trainer to help them with their dog. Either they have a "problem dog" (resourcing guarding, varying degrees of aggression, or something more mild like house training issues or jumping up on company and generally being unruly) or they adopted or bought a dog they want to learn how to train.

There are many trainers out there and sometimes the search can be quite daunting. Who do you trust? Who is going to give you a way to work with your dog that gels with what you want? And even more importantly, who is going to give you methods that work and that are humane and that help to build a bond with your dog?

Because this can be so overwhelming, many folks find someone who has advertised in their area and because their website "looks good" they jump at the opportunity to work with that person. But people must look closer. People must question these trainers before they even meet with them. Do not ever simply attend training with the first person you find online. Do some research, check out many people and training facilities, and find the one that is the most successful and most positive-based you can find.

Things to beware of:

1. Websites that do not give any real information on how they train dogs. Many of these sites show a "before" and "after" video and claim that the proof is in the video, but they do not show how they got from point A to point B (and if, indeed, they were the ones who even got the dog from one point to the next). I find, if you delve further into things by writing to the person, you find their methods are often aversive.

2.  Any site that says they always use a certain training collar. This includes choke chains, prong collars, and shock collars. All are aversive techniques that cause pain.  Studies have recently shown that using aggressive training techniques results in more aggression. You cannot treat aggression with aggression and end up with a solid, balanced, happy dog. And for dogs who have more milder problems, who you're trying to teach sit, stay, and come, these collars can create more problems, especially if you have a soft dog who shuts down at the first sign of pain.

3.  Any site that makes use of an aversive tool without ever using any positive methods first.  Take Fred Hassen and his "Sit Means Sit" site. He promotes and solely uses shock collars in training dogs, even on small puppies.  There are no alternatives, there is no "this is a last resort" message.  This is the very first thing trainers in the "Sit Means Sit" franchise go to.  A trainer that promotes shock collars without even considering other, more humane methods, shows a complete lack of understanding of psychology, canine behavior, and (in my personal opinion) a lack of humane treatment of animals. Is this really the kind of place you want to take your dog?

4. If you are comfortable using an aversive method, be wary of how that method is being used.  While I am not a supporter of shock collar usage to train a dog, there is a right way and a wrong way to use this tool.  Putting one on an untrained dog and shocking it until it somehow manages to offer the behavior you want is not the correct way to use a punishment-based tool, yet this is how the "Sit Means Sit" franchise uses it.  Others use this same method with choke chains and prong collars.
Always do your research. I cannot emphasize this enough. You find a website. All looks good. But then you spend a little time finding reviews from people who have experienced that person's training or seen that person's demo and you find out that all is not as it seems.

Take Sit Means Sit again. A little searching on some dog forums found a rather lengthy description from a dog trainer who attended one of his demos.  Unfortunately the original has been removed, but the description consisted of Hassen putting dogs (and even a wolf hybrid) up on a high table and parading them back and forth across it shocking them until they urinated and defecated out of fear.  No matter how many positive reviews are out there for his franchise, something like that would make me leery enough to avoid the place.  A place where something like this might happen, or did happen, is not a place I would trust with my dog.



Let's examine another trainer, Kevin Salem (sometimes written as Kawain, Salim, or any combination thereof) of "Real Life Dog Training." His website (www.dogsecrets.com) touts his great abilities (he's the dog "prodigy," one step up from Cesar Millan of "dog whisperer" fame) and a book (that is still yet to be published) as the be-all end-all of dog training.  At first glance, the website seems good, if a bit on the egotistical side.  But a closer look shows multiple pages disparaging anyone who uses positive training methods such as clicker training or rewarding with "cookies."  Salem uses a method he calls "diverse training," which sounds like a good idea (diversity is always an excellent thing, isn't it?), but the site gives you little information on what is diverse about is (the site is, after all, called "dog secrets").   Instead he offers up some videos of himself "training" dogs.  The videos feature Salem with the untrained dog who he is dragging around by its collar, often quite roughly.  Then, quite suddenly, the scene changes and it's Salem walking the now well-behaved dog.  What you don't see is what worries me: How did the dog get from point A to point B?  He doesn't want to reveal his "secrets" of course, so it's up to you to take your dog to him to find out just what those secrets are.

Unfortunately, to the laymen, these dogs in the "after" portion of the video look calm and well-behaved but a close look at their body language shows otherwise (just as they do in the "after" videos of Hassen and on Cesar Millan's TV show). A fearful dog is not a trained dog. Like Fred of Sit Means Sit, he also touts quick results for owners who have little time to train their dog.. Here's a hint: doing anything correctly takes time; you cannot teach your child to read in an hour and neither can you train your dog in such a short period of time.


So now you've looked at his site.  You think that things look pretty good.  Diversity is a plus.  The dogs look trained.  He has great "customer testimonials."  This is the point at which you need to take any website with a grain of salt.  No trainer is going to put negative reviews on their site.  No trainer is going to say anything less than positive about him/herself.  So you need to look further.

For that, I turn to looking for reviews of a particular trainer.  A quick google search turned up reviews in various places.  Yelp.com lists 9 reviews of "Real Life Dog Training."  Of them, 6 are positive.  So just by going by sheer number, that sounds not so bad.  But it's the content of the bad reviews that might make one leery.


Review #1 of "Real Life Dog Training"

Review #2 of "Real Life Dog Training"

Along with not training their dogs, these people say he's returned them filthy, aggressive, and even injured.  One person mentions a review that has since been removed because both she and this other person have been threatened with lawsuits for stating their experiences.

A continued google search brings up a couple news articles:

Illegal Dog Training Kennel Has Moved  This would be the explanation for all the personal and business name changes.

Amazingly Training Boarding and Training Academy.  Yes, that's right.  Another name for the same business.  If a business consistently changes its name to avoid bad reviews, there's probably something wrong with it.

This gives you the full picture.  You get the websites, the positive reviews, and the negative reviews.  It's up to each individual to weigh the pros and cons and decide if Sit Means Sit or Real Life Dog Training are places they want to take their dog.

I would also add that this person has found this post and has been harassing me for well over a year in order to get it removed.  He's taken to writing fake reports about the dog training business I do not have, paid money to dig me up on the internet, and written nasty misogynstic messages to me since September 2009.  I have given anyone who reads this the opportunity to see the good reviews and the bad.  They're out there for anyone to find.  Would you really want to board your dog with someone who harasses others for reviews they didn't even write?  Please note that none of the reviews above are mine.  I simply looked up his name and found them all.  A google search brought me there.  If they were untrue, do you think he would be so desperate to get this post removed?  Think about it.

After checking out Sit Means Sit and DogSecrets.com, reading their claims about themselves and their customer testimonials, after seeing reviews both positive and negative, I can honestly say the cons far outweigh the pros with both of these places.  I would not be taking my dog there.

Again, I reiterate. When looking for a dog trainer, do your research.

1. Look for reviews of that particular trainer or training facility.

2. Talk to the trainers and find out their philosophy about dog training and how they go about training. Also find out about their experiences with dogs similar to yours. Many trainers deal with basic obedience issues (sit, stay, come), unruly behavior (jumping on guests, puppy mouthing, house training issues), and some mild aggression (resource guarding), but those who have dealt with true aggression are few and far between. If your dog is truly aggressive (human, child, or dog aggressive), you will want to first see a vet to rule out medical issues and then, if there are no medical problems, find a good behaviorist who knows what to do to rehabilitate an aggressive dog.

3. Talk to people who have gone to this person for training. A good trainer will often find ways to connect you with people who are willing to tell you about their experiences. You can also often find people on your local Craigslist or other sites devoted to dogs and dog training who will share an honest opinion of the trainer.

4. Ask the trainer if you can come observe their class or a training session. Any good trainer will be happy for you to come and watch a class (sans dog) to see if they are someone you want to work with. If a trainer refuses, I would personally worry about why. I have once in my life gone against this and ended up paying for a class I walked out of due to their cruel training methods.

5. And mostly, trust your gut. If something feels off, it probably is. If you feel uncomfortable, then they are not the right trainer or training facility for you. Remember, this is your dog and you are the one who has vowed to protect him and keep him safe. Be careful!

Good luck in your search for a good solid dog trainer. There are some fantastic ones out there.

A good place to start might be the International Positive Dog Training Association, which provides lists of positive dog trainers in many areas.

5/14/19: Edited to add
I see today that because of the latest fiasco with Kevin Salem either losing or killing someone's dog, that hits on my post have gone up something like 5200%. Welcome all!

I should have done this a long time ago, but I want to share a couple more posts I made that reference his and his reaction to this post. After I made this, Kevin Salem spent some 3 years sending me harassing e-mails. He threatened me with lawyers and fake court documents, even going so far as to harass my husband through Facebook and trying to get my home address and phone number from the domain that hosts this blog (lucky for me, they sent ME that information and I was allowed to ignore it).

These posts reference the harassment I experienced at his hands:

On harassment, misogyny, and what is slander, really?

A post I didn't want to make 

I'm happy to discuss any of this with anyone! I have never met this man face-to-face, but the online harassment went on for far too long and he took things too far. I only wish that more people would stay far away from him and his "training school."

Book Review: Bringing Light To Shadow by Pamela S. Dennison

Title: Bringing Light to Shadow: A Dog Trainer's Diary
Author: Pamela S. Dennison
Year published: 2004

You can't rehabilitate an aggressive dog using positive training. You must show the dog who is the alpha in order to gain respect. And besides, positive-based trainers won't even take on aggressive dogs.

I cannot count the number of times I have heard a combination of these statements. Add to them the usual glorification of Cesar Millan, and you have the complete picture. According to these folks, he rehabilitates "red zone" dogs, the dogs others have given up on, the ones the positive trainers won't work with because they don't have the guts/know-how/calm assertive energy to rehabilitate them. These positive, rewards-based trainers are handy for training tricks, but that's it.

Except...that's not quite true. Bringing Light to Shadow proves those statements wrong. Pamela Dennison, who already had a houseful of dogs (a border collie mix, a border collie, and a sheltie), decided in a moment of craziness to add a 4th dog to the mix: a rescued border collie named Shadow. She did not know, at the time she brought him home, that Shadow was human-aggressive. As with many aggressive dogs, most of his issues were based in fear. He was a dog who, under different circumstances would have been put down. He was a dog who, under the "rehabilitation" of Cesar Millan, would have lashed out or shut down, leaving him living in a sort of hell.

Instead, Shadow ended up in the hands of positive trainer Pamela Dennison. At the time she had little experience working with aggressive dogs. She had been training dogs for agility, obedience, and herding work. But Shadow became a project of love and she stuck by him through thick and thin.

The book is written in journal format and are the actual entries Dennison made in her journal about Shadow's progression (and sometimes regression) toward becoming a "normal" dog. Included within the pages not only are her moments of looking back and pointing out what she did right and what Shadow did right, but also those moments where she made a wrong move and caused Shadow to regress a bit.

This book is truly insightful and should be on every dog trainer's bookshelf. If you have a dog with aggression issues, this book can make you feel hope. And mostly, it can make anyone realize that positive training can WORK with an aggressive dog. In 18 months she turns Shadow from a human-aggressive dog to one who passes his Canine Good Citizen test. 18 months may seem like a long time, but at the end of the book he was only 2 1/2, so there are many more years to come.

I really enjoyed this book and it's one I'll keep on my shelf and keep referring back to over and over again.

Buy Bringing Light to Shadow by Pamela S. Dennison

On dogs and freedom

I'm reading Patricia McConnell's latest book, Tales of Two Species: Essays on Loving and Living with Dogs. It's a collection of the articles she wrote for The Bark magazine (she still works for them).

In a section discussing what dogs have lost and gained by being housebound and not let out to roam the neighborhood all day, she says "What we can do is be mindful of how often our dogs have the freedom of choice. How many walks has your dog taken in which he got to decide where to go? How often does your dog get to decide when to stop sniffing? Ever let your dog choose the direction to follow at the dog park? These are good questions to ask ourselves as we exercise our dog's minds and bodies at dog parks and agility trials."

We always try to give Dahlia a bit of freedom. Not only do we allow her off leash in safe places as often as possible (and I'm very thankful we have a nearby park where we can do this frequently), but we also allow her to choose her own direction to go in on leashed walks. I often stop at the sidewalk and ask her which way she wants to go. I let her choose until I feel her choice is going to take us too far from home and make the walk back tiring for us both. But ultimately she gets to shape our walks. Sometimes she takes us on familiar walks we've done many times. Other times she takes us to new places or on a different route through the neighborhood, doubling back and following unexpected paths. We let her stop and sniff and spend all the time she wants taking in the "pee-mail." I'm sure some would think it indulgent and still others would consider Dahlia the "alpha" in the relationship. I'm glad to see that Patricia McConnell agrees with our choice.

Book Review: The Power of Positive Dog Training by Pat Miller

Title: The Power of Positive Dog Training
Author: Pat Miller
Year published: 2001

I think this really is the go-to book for learning about positive training and how to implement it with your dog. I've never beaten around the bush with indicating that I'm very pro-positive training and I think Pat Miller is one of the best.

The book begins with a little bit about Pat Miller's history of training, namely that she was a "traditional" trainer at one point, which many were. Traditional trainers focus more on aversives and punishments: leash pops, choke chains, and the like. It tells briefly of her discovery and switch to positive methods. I think this is important: it says that anyone can do it, no matter how they trained beforehand.

From there, the book is divided into three main sections.

The first outlines the ins and outs of positive training: how it works, why it works, why it builds a better bond with your dog. It explains a little bit about how dogs think and learn and outlines some basic training tools you'll need with your dog.

The second gives instructions on how to get your dog to do some basic obedience: sit, down, stay, come, etc. She breaks each of them down into easy steps to achieve them and gives suggestions on common problems people might encounter when trying to teach their dog the particular command. At the end of each section, she gives "bonus games" which are basic tricks you can teach your dog. She stresses, time and time again, that this should be fun: both for the human and the dog.

The third addresses common behavioral problems, such as housetraining, separation anxiety, aggression, socialization, and what to do when there's a baby on the way. Each of these sections can (and are) books on their own, so in the context of a fairly short book they're somewhat glossed over. Miller is, at every turn, careful to note that if your dog has some more serious issues that finding a good positive trainer who can work with you and your dog in person is most important.

I recommend this book to anyone who wants to get started in obedience training with their dog. They'll end up with a really well-behaved dog who loves to work for them.

Buy The Power of Positive Dog Training by Pat Miller

Book Review: How to Be Your Dog's Best Friend by the Monks of New Skete

Title: How to Be Your Dog's Best Friend
Author: The Monks of New Skete
Year published: 2002 (revised updated version)

Part II in my "Know Thine Enemies" series.

I know...this sounds strange. Monks? Non-positive dog trainers?

Well, I found a bit of a conundrum in this book. I wanted to like what they had to say. I wanted to gloss over the stuff I didn't agree with and look to the good stuff. But I had to look at the book as if I knew nothing about dog training and nothing about dogs, as if I were the kind of person who would turn to this book for advice. And therein lies the problem.

There is a LOT of positive stuff in this book. It's the 2nd edition of their book, so the Monks are more up to date with modern dog training ideas than they were in their previous installment. They talk a lot about the human-canine bond and how deep and strong it can be, about how you can learn and grow as a person because of your dog.

Their sections on specific training give various ways of accomplishing each goal. For instance, in teaching the sit they discuss luring with a treat as well as positioning your dog using the collar and a hand on the dog's rump. The major problem with their methods is that they first suggest old-style methods using more force, but then say "a sensitive dog might not respond well to this." I'm not sure why one should begin with force and then retract it if the dog does not respond well. A more positive way would be to begin with luring and move onto something more physical if needed (I don't believe it generally is). They especially advocate the more positive approaches with puppies, but these can easily be used for older dogs as well, both ones who are even-tempered and ones who are more out of control. Clicker training (which they mention briefly) has done amazing things for many dogs of all temperaments.

They point out several myths around house training (push his nose in it, etc.), which I was glad to see. They don't make a huge deal out of dog's living in the moment, but it's a strong part of their training methods.

So all this sounds decent, right? It all falls apart in Chapter 10 on discipline. I found myself scratching my head in amazement as I read this chapter as it takes one far away from the building of a good human-canine bond that they reference many time in this book.

They describe two major methods of discipline: the shakedown (which requires the handler to grab the dog by either its jowls or the skin on the neck, lift their front feet off the ground and shake them while saying "NO" in their face loudly) and hitting the dog under the chin. To the latter, they say How hard do you hit the dog? A good general rule is that if you did not get a response, a yelp or other sign, after the first hit, it wasn't hard enough. That's right -- hit your dog until it yelps. And only then it will understand that it has done something wrong. Not only are these methods potentially dangerous (a dog who is a fear biter or has the potential for aggression is likely to snap or bite in these situations), they are also very detrimental to the human-canine bond the Monks seem to stress so highly. In fact, they mention how the dog may be shaken up mentally and physically and will not approach its handler after such a correction, which is not entirely surprising. Physical punishment is a surefire way to damage the bond.

I do agree with the Monks that a well-placed correction can be valuable feedback, but many dogs respond to a verbal correction. A quick "eh-eh" and my dog freezes and returns to what position she needs to hold.

I was glad to see them retract the suggestion of the alpha roll, though their reasoning for it was a bit off. Yes it's dangerous to owners. There is no doubt there. But it also does not work as discipline, though they seem to think it does and likely still use it in their training.

They also recommend "leash pops" using a training collar (generally a metal or nylon choke collar), which is a quick yank and release type of correction. If used correctly, it's not dangerous (though it is in the hand's of someone doesn't know how to use it), but neither is it a good method for corrections. Dogs who are jerked around are often frustrated and the fact that it can damage their windpipes is enough for me to recommend against them!

So all together, there are some good things here, but also some bad. If you can walk away from it with just keeping the positive stuff in mind while ignoring Chapter 10 and the other more negative, correction-based ideas, then it's not a bad book. But otherwise, I suggest a book more geared toward positive training, like Pat Miller's The Power of Positive Training or a more developed book on the human-canine bond, like Patricia McConnell's The Other End of the Leash or Suzanne Clothier's Bones Would Rain From the Sky.

Book Review: Bones Would Rain From the Sky by Suzanne Clothier

Title: Bones Would Rain from the Sky: Deepening our Relationships with Dogs
Author: Suzanne Clothier
Year published: 2005

I've read a lot of dog books and I think this book is one of the best. Clothier writes in a way that I find it very easy to connect to.

Ultimately, this book is the complete opposite of the one I read by Cesar Millan. The basis of the book is respect, love, compassion, and understanding. Clothier draws on her experiences with her own dogs and with her client's dogs to tell stories that illustrate each of her very well- explained points.

I think the main point of the book, what the book was trying to tell the reader from the beginning and through to the end, came on page 222 with one simple phrase: See the dog. It's something Clothier points out a lot of people don't actually see. They see something that has to be pushed down and dominated. They see a human in fur clothing. They see a bundle of unconditional love. But they don't actually look at and see the dog itself, the dog as a dog. And through that, a lot of miscommunication happens.

She also focuses on dogs as spiritual beings and believes that we can learn a lot from them, from the way they interact, from their body language. At one point she tells a story about a friend who got angry at her and was berating her, shouting at her, and how she wanted to walk away, shout back, get angry back. And then she stopped, imagined her as a dog snapping at her and growling, and realized that a lot of her friend's behavior was based around fear. And she stopped, listened compassionately, and allowed her friend to relax. A lot of people get irritated when people compare animals to humans, but I think the way Clothier does it works really well.

I've read a lot of dog books, read a lot of dog websites, and one thing that has always confused me is the amount of behaviorists and writers who disagree with the alpha/pack theory of dogs but at the same time talk about being a leader. I never could quite figure out how to reconcile the two and it's something I've been struggling with. Clothier, finally, seems to manage to do it and do it well. Again, she compared leadership in a dog/human relationship to leadership in a child/parent relationship. You have to be the leader with your children. You have to give them rules and boundaries. You have to pull them away from things that are bad for them. But at the same time you have to be benevolent, always showing them the way and correcting them when they're wrong without getting angry and lashing out. And in this same way, you should be the benevolent leader for your dog(s). Kindness and compassion mixed with rules and boundaries. Too little of one or the other and your relationship with your dog will suffer, not because the dog is going to then become the leader and the dominant one, but because the dog doesn't know how it fits in, what's expected of it.

And one final point about this book, and it was something I really liked. When you read a lot about these various trainers and their relationship with their dogs, you always have the impression that they do all the right things, that their dogs are great because the trainers know what to do, that they never make the mistakes a lot of us do. Clothier very carefully shows some situations in which she acted all too human with her dogs, where she got angry with them and acted out in that anger. She tells the story of Badger, a dog whose owner could not control him and who she agreed to take in. One night, shortly after he arrived, she got up to let the dogs out and when she came back, he was sprawled on her bed. She wanted him off, in his crate, and he wouldn't go no matter how much she cajoled him. She grabbed him by the collar, which results in his showing his teeth, and then, in an all too human move of frustration and anger with a dog, she smacked him on the muzzle. Soon after she realized how blinded with rage she was and calms down and things resort to normal. But the point she made here was that we all make mistakes, no matter how much training and knowledge we have. We're all human and all prone to the same human mistakes. While it's sad to read of someone smacking their dog, it's comforting to hear we all do make mistakes and we can recover from them.

I definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in learning more about their relationship with their dogs.

Buy Bones Would Rain From the Sky by Suzanne Clothier

Check out Suzanne Clothier's blog here.