mARFa Dog Blog

Dogfighting Images and Robert Steven's First Amendment Rights

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:59:15 -0500

Robert Stevens filmed dogfights and imported Japanese dog fight videos. He sold his videos through his business, “Dogs of Velvet and Steel”. Video titles include, “Catch Dogs and Country Living” and “Pick a Winna”, in which viewers are asked to determine which dog they think will win a fight. He is a pit bull man and I would love to have a copy of his book, “Dogs of Velvet and Steel: Pit Bulldogs: A Manual For Owners” for review and as an addition to my library. The book is reportedly a wealth of information contributed by various dog men on how to select, condition and medically treat injured fighting dogs. It is currently priced on Amazon.com from about $300, used to over $500 dollars, collectible. I won't be buying a copy at those prices.

In 2003, Mr. Stevens was sentenced to 37 months in prison for three counts of trafficking in animal cruelty under a 1999 law designed primarily to, pardon the pun, squash a plethora of sexual fetish videos that depicted women crushing small, live animals with their feet. That law, which dealt with trafficking of images, was struck down in 2008 by a federal appeals court on grounds that it violated the First Amendment. A few days ago, the Supreme Court agreed. Dog lovers everywhere are outraged at the apparent injustice. “What will they allow next? Child pornography?” some asked.

Let me say right up front that I am against animal cruelty and organized dog fighting. I think that dog fighting and recording or selling dogfight videos is disgusting and odious. Creepy and bizarre sexual fetishes repulse me, too. But, I’m a HUGE fan of the First Amendment. The court decided that images of animal cruelty didn't fall into the areas where the government can restrict free speech: obscenity, defamation, fraud, incitement, and speech integral to criminal conduct.

What’s interesting and unique about the First Amendment, and the broad definitions that might restrict freedom of speech, it is that it can change as our society changes - for better or worse. The bad guy in this is not the Supreme Court (although I don't deny it can make less than stellar decisions in hindsight). The decisions of the courts are a reflection of the culture and times.

Justice William O. Douglas said that the First Amendment was designed to invite dispute, to induce a condition of unrest, to create dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, and even to stir people to anger. Animal lovers who are dissatisfied with how our government defines animal cruelty or the things that restrict First Amendment rights, might recognize the Supreme Court’s decision as a "call to arms" to work harder to influence social, cultural and legal change.

Congratulations! You're a Dog Trainer

Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:24:47 -0600

Congratulations! You’re a Dog Trainer

You have a dog, and whether you intended to be one or not, you are now a Dog Trainer. It's true. Whenever you interact with your dog, someone is being trained – it's either you or the dog. And, it’s best if you are training the dog, not the other way around! Learning doesn’t stop just because a scheduled training session is over. Unfortunately, many dog owners don’t realize that they signed up for a fulltime Dog Trainer position when they acquired their dog. When they do realize it, they are understandably unsure of how to do the job. Which book to read? What collar to use? Which training method?

There are hundreds of books about how to train a dog and it's not uncommon for the authors to coin a phrase for a common training technique to make it their own. Although sometimes that helps make a training concept more understandable for some people, it also tends to make the reader think that the author invented the technique and creates a cult following of fans. Some of the best dog trainers are not authors - and some authors are not the best dog trainers. Some people are talented enough to be both.

Here's a tip: Training an animal is primarily a mechanical skill - like driving a car or swinging a golf club. Just like teaching someone to drive a car, you need well-defined standards of what good driving should be and you need good timing. Oh, and don't forget patience.

Good trainers "chunk" information. They break the behavior into smaller steps. They also motivate by finding ways to make learning meaningful and enjoyable for the animal. And, they make a plan. They think about what the desired behavior should look like and plan all the steps needed to get it before they start training the dog.

The principles of learning are universal. Simply put, reinforce a behavior and it’s highly probably that the behavior will be repeated. When learning a new skill, our pets (and us, too) learn most quickly, efficiently and enthusiastically by earning a reward for correct behavior. In dog training, that's usually a food reward, play or petting. It’s up to the trainer to find out what is reinforcing to the dog. Some dogs don’t give a hoot about a dog biscuit but will do anything for a piece of cheese. Some dogs are more interested in playing ball than eating a treat. And some dogs will do anything for love. Have you made a list of all the things that you can use to reinforce a particular behavior for your individual dog?

Goatheads

Tue, 12 Jan 2010 15:05:35 -0600

“Goatheads” aka Texas sandburs, are the fruit of the puncturevine, Tribulus terrestris L. and are a bane of existence here in the Southwest. The seeds pods are small, nasty, spiky, thorny, painful things that will puncture your sandals or a tire, not to mention your dog’s paws. My dog refuses to walk in unfamiliar grass but she’s not safe on pavement, either. The stickers are blown by the wind and can hitch a ride on the bottom of shoes, pant legs, car tires and animal fur. There’s always an odd few that turn up on sidewalks. Puncturevine is not a native species, so kill it with impunity. Visit www.goatheads.com to learn how to identify the plant and get rid of the little buggers. Your dog will thank you for it.

Snake Avoidance Training

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 16:56:04 -0500

I was very disappointed in today's Marfa Public Radio KRTS 93.5 FM interview with snake avoidance trainers from "Natural Solutions" (snakeaversiontraining.com) in California. Although the topic was dog training, the major focus of the interview was the muzzled live rattlesnakes in the studio. If there was a dog in the studio, I couldn't tell. But here's a kicker. When asked how to contact the trainers for their training in Alpine tomorrow, listeners were told to call the trainer'' mom! This is rarely if ever a good sign when shopping for a dog trainer! Before dog owners hand over their dog to anyone for training, they should consider the following criteria from the old American Dog Trainers Network website, www.inch.com/~dogs/ reprinted below:

An excellent reputation. Shop around and get recommendations from your vet, the ASPCA, or other city humane societies, other reputable trainers, or your breeder/breed club.

Widespread experience. Inquire about his or her training background, years of experience, and areas of expertise. You deserve to have your questions answered, so don't be timid about asking them.

Humane training methodology and gentle, effective handling skills. Reputable trainers are concerned about their dogs' welfare. They also know that harsh or abusive handling methods are not only unnecessary, but are often counter-productive as well. Electronic collars may or may not be inhumane and like any other collar, can be misused.

A genuine love of and devotion to dogs. When you find a trainer with this important quality you'll know it. The joy of living and working with dogs makes this person shine.

Extensive behavioral knowledge. Dedicated trainers keep themselves up-to-date by attending dog training and animal behavior courses, conferences, seminars and workshops whenever possible.

Affiliations with reputable associations, organizations and training clubs. While this is not mandatory, it's certainly a plus.

Ethics before profit. Is monetary profit his or her primary motive for training dogs? Is everything this trainer does geared towards making money? While financial success is great, ethics must come first.

A NOTE OF WARNING: Unless a dog trainer comes highly recommended to you by *at least* one reputable source, the bottom line for the consumer is BUYER BEWARE!

Remember, absolutely anyone can call himself a dog trainer or behaviorist. Slick ads with inflated claims, grandiose self-descriptions, and impressive sounding titles can be very deceptive. Investigate any stated affiliations a trainer lists on his or her brochure, Yellow Pages ad or web site. If a trainer claims to be affiliated with an organization (past or present) or claims to have "studied" with well-known dog trainers or behaviorists, ask for their telephone numbers and contact them to be sure. A common ploy for some trainers, is to attend a couple one-or two-day seminars or workshops with a well-known dog expert (or University), then claim to have studied with that person (or at that institution). Also, verify how many years the trainer you are considering has been training dogs professionally. While years alone are not enough to determine a trainer's depth of knowledge and experience, it's certainly says a lot.

A FINAL NOTE: Beware of dog trainers who care more about publicity, public relations, and celebrities, than they care about your dog and the quality of training they provide. Many professional dog trainers have worked with celebrities and high-profile people. But take note if the trainer seems totally pre-occupied with dropping names, and bills himself as the "Trainer To The Stars", something that says little or nothing about his ability as a dog trainer.

It's All Tricks - How the Words We Use in Training Can Affect Our Attitude

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:57:19 -0500

Back when I taught group Obedience classes, I noticed a difference in attitude between Obedience students and the students in my Tricks classes. Students in Obedience tended to be more anxious, serious and hypercritical. Students in Tricks classes were more relaxed, laughed more often and were more forgiving of their dogs’ and their own learning curves. I began to include optional tricks as homework assignments for Obedience students but, less than half opted to train any tricks. In later classes, I tried turning Obedience training into games. But, it became apparent to me that many students who were there for “Obedience” were not there for fun and games That was a long time ago and in retrospect, the reason my students were not having fun was in due, in part, to my limited experience as an instructor but also due to semantics.

Our choice of words is important. Traditional obedience training trickled down from military dog training and some of us still use military terms. “Obedience” means strict compliance with orders and submission to rules. “Command” means to issue orders, dominate and control. Those words give us an expectation of immediate, strict compliance and the feeling that we need to dominate our dogs. No wonder we weren’t having as much fun as the Trick classes!

There was no pressure to achieve in Tricks class because it was not crucial if the dog could roll over, play dead or play the piano. But, I think another reason for the attitude was the words we used. In Tricks classes, we didn't command, we gave “cues”. We didn’t expect obedience. We wanted “performance”.

From the dog’s point of view, it’s all tricks. If you are commanding obedience from your dog, try cueing your dog for performance instead. And smile!

Things That Make You Go Hmmm...

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 21:42:04 -0500

If the best candidates for family pet are being spayed or neutered by responsible dog owners, who is deciding what genes go into the canine gene pool?

Have We Come a Long Way, Baby?

Thu, 23 Jul 2009 17:35:04 -0500

Somebody on Twitter asked “How did we train dogs before shock, prong and choke collars?” This was “re-tweeted” a few times, insinuating that dog trainers should never use these tools and suggesting that they are relatively new, torture devices. At least, that’s the impression I got. I could be wrong but in any case, I’ve got an answer to the question and a reason to blog. Warning - long blog ahead.

Looking at ancient Egyptian, Roman and Greek art and artifacts, dog collars have not changed much in form, only in material. Working dogs wore a strong metal or leather strap around their necks to give handlers control over the animals. Dogs who guarded flocks, or were used to hunt or fight large, powerful animals (including man), wore leather collars studded with sharp nails on the outside to protect the dogs’ necks during battle. Dogs that that pulled wagons or carried equipment wore harnesses suited to the type of work they performed. Dogs were restrained with heavy chains and thick leather straps. Dogs owned by the well-to-do wore fancy collars.

Modern “traditional” aka compulsive dog training methods trickled down from German military service dog training. Large numbers of trained dogs were needed quickly during World War I and the fastest way to train them was through the calculated use of pain. In his 1903 book, “Training Dogs A Manual”, 19^th century German military trainer Konrad Most describes humane training equipment as a chain or leather slip collar (aka “choke collar”). Inhumane was the spike collar, a leather collar lined on the inside with short, sharpened nails that, when used properly, poked bloody holes into the dogs lower neck. Early dog trainers also routinely used short, flexible and non-flexible whips and switches. The trainer’s foot was also used to kick dogs.

In the 1960’s, Blanche Saunders, a student of German military man Weber, took dog training to the masses and popularized our current AKC obedience trials. According to Will Judy, early 20^th century trainer, the relatively benign prong collar was disallowed during AKC obedience trials not because it was inhumane, but because it was confused with the inhumane spike collar, still very fresh in the minds of the public at that time. And so the prong collar, which can be a useful tool, fell into disfavor and remains that way to many trainers. Had Miss Saunders been a protégé of Weber’s counterpart, Hans Tossutti, history would have been kinder to the prong collar and a different collar would be allowed in AKC trials. He considered the choke chain inhumane. Hans founded the New England School of Dog Training in Boston in 1928.

Electric collars were brought to the public’s attention in the 1940’s and were as controversial then as they are now. They were home-made devices consisting of a 6 volt battery fence charger, a collar and 30 yards of sturdy insulated wire. One end of the wire was attached to the battery; the other, bared end was run through the collar so that it made contact with a dog’s neck. A ground wire was connected to the battery (for safety). According to a 1949 newspaper article in the Spokane Spokesman-Review written by Spokane dog trainer T.D. Burger, Jr., the devices were effective at stopping dogs from killing chickens, chasing cars or the mailman, fighting with other dogs, excessive barking and tipping over the garbage can. As a child who accidentally leaned her bare arms against an electric fence while trying to climbing over into my grandparents’ pig pen, I can tell you how effective that amount is at stopping future behavior. It didn’t stop me from getting in the pen with the pigs the next day, but I never used THAT side of the fence again. To this day I vividly remember the incident and still look for wires and electrodes on all fences. BTW, I hid in the corn silo for a long time, vibrating from the shock, afraid to ask for help for fear of getting in trouble with my parents. I also speak from experience when I say that today’s sophisticated electronic collars are a far cry from a 6 volt fence charger and bare wire “shock collar”.

In the late 60’s, shock collars were being manufactured and sold to the public. According to another Spokane Spokesman-Review reader, a cougar and bear guide with a pack of hounds in 1971, there was disparity between these early models – some of “good quality” and “harmless”. One manufacturer eventually recalled their collars due to a defect that caused burns on dogs’ necks. A 1983 newspaper article in the Ellensberg, WA Daily Record describes snake proofing with a shock collar by a trainer after an earlier Life Magazine article popularized it. The trainer had no idea the amount of current used on the dogs because the company marketing the collar “is intentionally secretive about that” (not sure why so much archival material about shock collars is from Washington newspapers). All trainers who spoke to the reporter insisted that shock collars should not be used by anyone but experienced, professional trainers and are not appropriate for every dog. Electronic collar technology has continued to improve and today’s “good quality” models have a wide range stimulation from a “tickle” that elicits nothing more than an ear flick, a vibration, or a beep in addition to stronger stimulation, making them a more versatile and humane training tool than earlier models. I am not condoning the use of electronic collars here; I am merely trying to point out that some degree of hysteria over these collars is as much due to the public’s memory of early shock collars as earlier generations was of spike collars.

The current raging dichotomy between “purely positive reinforcement” and “compulsion” trainers has been going on for centuries. A look at old dog training texts shows that there has always been a gap between kinder, gentler family dog training that used food rewards and/or praise and compulsive, quick and painful working or military service dog training. IMO, new dog trainers with limited experience, would benefit from learning about the history of dog training, the evolution of training tools and why some are considered unacceptable. Then, they should judge for themselves how inhumane – or not - they are. The answer to "how did we train before choke, prong and shock collars"? We used spikes, sticks, fists and kicks. And we used tidbits of meat, with or without the beatings.

Shelter Dogs Trained for "Will Rogers Follies"

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:34:14 -0500

I was asked to train five shelter dogs to perform in the Theater of the Big Bend production “The Will Rogers Follies” running from June 26 through July 12 at Kokerot Outdoor Theater in Alpine.

Whippet (?) mix Cherry learned to target an object, bow and go to her crate; Shepherd mix Thelma learned to play dead, bow, and recall (come when called; Golden mix Daisy learned to jump on people (also something we usually train dogs NOT to do – don’t worry, it’s on cue) and push an object with her nose and; hound mix Sierra learned to grab and pull a rope.

The fifth dog was adopted before training was completed and could not be in the show. Daisy has been adopted and will go to her new home after the play closes.

Cherry, Thelma and Sierra are available for adoption at Grand Companions Humane Society in Fort Davis but we hope that after people see their performance, they will also be adopted soon. For adoption information, contact Grand Companions Humane Society 432-426-3724 or visit www.grandcompanions.org

See the performers' head shots and bios at Petfiner.com: http://www.petfinder.com/search/search.cgi?pet.Animal=Dog&pet.Breed=&pet.Age=&pet.Size=&pet.Sex=&location=79843

Not Just Another Rant About That Guy on TV

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:07:32 -0500

Although veterinarian behaviorists and animal behavior organizations have come out repeatedly with position statements advising pet owners to avoid dominance-based, aversive training methods, the people who produce the popular TV show starring That Guy in Hollywood (you know who I mean) continue to market to a gullible TV audience. Make no mistake, the program is about ENTERTAINMENT. Here are some excerpts from their website.

“A television show wouldn't get very far without its team of producers paving the way,”

“We're partners in a joint venture with MPH Entertainment. MPH/Emery/Sumner Productions.”

“I called Sheila and suggested that Cesar's ideas would make a good television show.”

“Most of the time we can tell pretty quickly whether or not the story is one we're looking for, and whether the case would make a good episode.”

“People need to understand that they're submitting to be on television, and we will need to use their audition video in the episode.”

“In the beginning we were always on set. But as things progressed, there's much more to do now with CMI and all the products, and we've become much more involved in that side of things. But we're still very involved in finding new stories. And it's become difficult, because a lot of our submissions are the same five bad behaviors over and over.”

I agree. Seeing the 5 most common behavior problems that trainers and behaviorists see over and over does not make for good drama. And, watching real behavior modification can be pretty boring.

So, in their quest for new, exciting episodes, the producers are currently seeking audition tapes from owners of wolf-dog hybrids. These hybrids are illegal in some states and for good reasons. They do not make good pets. They present unique behavior challenges and most owners cannot afford to provide what it takes to keep them (and children) safe in captivity.

Good television requires lots of action and the producers are likely to get more intense action with episodes featuring wolf-dog hybrids than with Fluffy the fear-aggressive toy breed. Controversy also makes for good TV viewing and ownership of these animals is as controversial as That Guy’s training methods.

Arguably, what makes America great is our ability to choose to watch whatever lame-brained reality TV show we want. I won’t ask anyone to not watch That Guy’s TV show.

As P.T. Barnum once said of the pre-television circus business, “There’s a sucker born every minute”. Don’t be one. Read Wolf Park’s position statement regarding wolf hybrids here: http://www.wolfpark.org/wolfdogs/position.html And their guidelines for responsible management of these animals: http://www.wolfpark.org/wolfdogs/guidelines.html

Animal Communicators aka Pet Psychics

Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:46:17 -0500

I have it on good authority that a Marfa animal communicator is peddling her wares in the Big Bend area. I am not impressed. Anyone can be an animal communicator if they quiet their minds. I happen to be a household appliance communicator and my rates are quite reasonable. My specialty is kitchen appliances, but I can do most room varietals, including garage and woodshed appliances.

Concerned Appliance Owner: “Can you tell me why my toaster is depressed?”

Me: “Your toaster is depressed because it feels crumby deep down inside.”

Seriously, a lot of people think their pet can communicate with psychic abilities but when those abilities are put to the test, what's going on is normal not paranormal.

Animal behavior is no secret. Each species has an “ethogram”, a collection of observable behaviors. Ethograms have been published by ethologists (scientists who study animal behavior) for many species. These behaviors are generally organized into categories such as agonistic, appeasement, appetitive, and sexual. When it comes to our pet dogs, cats, horses and birds, there is quite a lot of literature about behaviors and what the behaviors communicate.

Pet psychics (I understand the politically correct term among their industry is “animal communicator” but some are even calling themselves animal “psychologists” which is even farther from the truth) are simply employing a new version of an elaborate psychological ploy that's been around for ages.

Psychics use a skill called "cold reading" to convince clients they have some sort of supernatural ability to know things or predict the future. Cold reading relies on the fact that most people generally want to believe, on some level, that the psychic actually has telepathic powers. Through a complex routine, the psychic subtly coaxes information and cues out of the customer, and offers the material back in the form of insights. The customer, who doesn't recall offering the details, is amazed that the psychic seems to know so much about them.

Researchers who study psychics generally divide them into two categories: those who know that what they do is nothing more than a psychological routine, and those who are intuitive types who genuinely believe they have telepathic powers. The second group is still using cold reading technique although they have learned to do it without consciously trying.

During a psychic reading (aka “consultation”), most people remember the hits but forget more of the misses or ambiguities. For instance, the psychic might say something like, 'I see water.' That could be anything – a puddle, a river, a lake, an ocean, a bottle of Perrier or a sewer pipe. But the customer thinks, “My cousin Julie drowned last year.' And they leave the consultation thinking, 'How did the psychic know about my cousin Julie?'" Of course "animal communicators" have an advantage over regular psychics. The animal can't talk

The proliferation of these people disturbs me on a number of levels, but what concerns me the most is that the animal is not getting the help it needs unless the psychic is saying, 'Your pet says he wants to go to a behaviorist to help with his aggression toward other dogs,' or 'Fluffy says she wants the veterinarian to see why her back hurts.'

Change We Can Believe In

Fri, 01 May 2009 23:04:01 -0500

President Obama's family dog trainer, Dawn Sylia-Stasiewicz, is a fellow IAABC Certified Dog Behavior Consultant and Professional Member of the APDT. She has done more to get the word out about positive training in just a few weeks than any of us has been able to do in years. Thank you, Dawn!

The Caveman Days of Dog Training

Fri, 01 May 2009 18:39:22 -0500

I'm always surprised when I run into someone who thinks that training their pet (or their client's pet) requires force, punishment and domination. Most of my colleagues who learned to train dogs using a choke chain (slip collar) know exactly what veterinary behaviorist Sophia Yin, DVM means when she refers in her new book to her "caveman days" of training. Those early days of my instruction are far behind me (has it really been 40 years?!) and I can call it "old school". Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything else people do that routinely involves seeking out antiquated technology or technicians.

Most of us seek out a professional who uses the most modern, proven equipment and techniques available. Can you imagine going to a dentist or surgeon who uses 100-year-old techniques and equipment exclusively? How many of us still use a 50 year old TV, washing machine, refrigerator, calculator or car everyday? Why then, I find myself asking, do people continue to use out-dated dog training equipment and methods? For one thing, they just don't know any better.

The old school method uses avoidance to train. A dog walks at heel to avoid the aggressive jerk by the trainer on the training collar. A dog sits to avoid having his neck stretched upward at the end of leash and his rear end pushed down to the ground simultaneously. A dog held forcefully onto his back "submits to the alpha" because he learned that resistance is futile. Many studies over the last 20 years have addressed problems associated with training by using aversives, but the public has not yet gotten the message.

In a new study published in the February '09 issue of "Journal of Applied Animal Behavior Science", the old school approach may not be as effective as the dog trainer on a popular TV program makes it seem. The study suggests that training methods in which dogs are corrected using aggressive "discipline" techniques may make dogs more likely to be aggressive toward other dogs and people, including their owners.

Meghan E. Herron, of the University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine and lead author of the year-long study, said. “Our study demonstrated that many confrontational training methods, whether staring down dogs, striking them or intimidating them with physical manipulation does little to correct improper behavior and can elicit aggressive responses.” The bottom line for the public is this: You don't need force to train your pet.

IAABC Animal Behavior Conference 2009

Fri, 01 May 2009 11:13:33 -0500

This year's conference of the International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants (IAABC) featured Behavior Analyst, Dr. Susan Friedman and Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist, Dr. Pamela Reid along with several IAABC member-speakers, including yours truly. The conference was held at the Doubletree in Houston, TX and sponsored by Premier Pet Prodcucts, Comfort Zone, Kong, Association of Pet Dog Trainers, Karen Pryor Academy for Dog Trainers and Austin Cotton.

Susan Friedman is a psychology professor at Utah State University. Over the last decade, she has helped pioneer efforts to apply to animals the scientifically sound teaching technology and ethical standard of Applied Behavior Analysis that is so effective with human learners. Susan is a core member of the US Fish & Wildlife Service's California Condor Recovery Team and has been nominated for the Media Award, given by the International Association of Behavior Analysis, for her efforts to disseminate to pet owners, veterinarians, animal trainers and zookeepers the essential tools they need to empower and enrich the lives of all learners. Susan presented twice at the IAABC conference. Her keynote address, "Beyond Classical and Operant Conditioning - Are There Other Ways Animals Learn" set the tone for the 3-day educational conference. Her second presentation was "A Protocol for the Functional Assessment of Behavior Problems and Intervention Design" I began using Susan's functional assessment model a few years ago after attending one of her talks. I find it extremely valuable in assessing problem behaviors in dogs. It helps me to design an effective behavior-change plan that also fits in with each clients' individual needs, environment and skills. But enough about me.

Pamela Reid is the Vice President of the ASPCA's national Animal Behavior Center in Urbana, IL and author of the book, "Excel-erated Learning". She has consulted with the US Department of Defense for several years on the use of dogs for narcotics and explosives detection and has served on committees for APDT, Delta Society, American Humane Association, PetsMart, Humane Society of the US, Animal Behavior Society, and the Certification Council for Professional Dog Trainers. Pam spoke about "Dominance Theory". Dogs with behavior problems are often called "dominant" and regardless of the nature of the behavior problem owners are advised that they need to be the "Alpha" and follow irrelevant or abusive practices. This popular misconception has led to a faction of dog trainers who have rejected the concept of dominance altogether. Pam argued that both positions are misguided and called for more research in order to gain a scientifically valid understanding of how groups of dogs enforce social rules. Pam Reid's book "Excel-erated Learning" was instrumental in helping me wade through the sometimes subtle nuances of operant and classical conditioning to earn my CPDT certification.

Expectations

Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:06:08 -0500

A desperate call came to my home phone recently and went something like this:

ME: "Hello".

DOG OWNER: "My vet gave me your number. You a behaviorist, right?!

ME: "I'm a.."

DOG OWNER: "Oh thank GOD! I really need one. He's out of control"

ME: "Who? Your vet?"

I called back from my office phone where I could listen, access my computer and my telephone intake form. The main concern was that the 12-week-old golden-doodle puppy refused to walk on the leash when it was time to go back home. He just sat down and refused to move. The owner had to drag him behind or just carry him. Dog-savvy friends had been called in for advice and to help, but he wouldn't walk home for them, either. "Nothing works," the owner said. Not even hot dogs could lure the puppy that last block home. The puppy spent much of his time in the kitchen because he was not reliably house trained and chewed throw rugs and furniture. He also ate rocks, dirt, sticks - and throw rugs. He went outdoors to potty, but otherwise, didn't spend much time outdoors except for the walk. The owner had researched the breed and carefully chose a good breeder. The parents and litter mates had no medical or behavior issues. But this puppy was apparently not right in the head and the owner was beginning to think he would need to be re-homed.

DOG OWNER: "I just don't know what is wrong with him. My herding dog never acted like this!"

ME: What kind of herding dog did you have"?

DOG OWNER: "A Sheltie. I never had to tell her twice to do something".

ME: "Oh, I love Shelties. Shelties are easy to train, aren't they? Welcome to the world of real dog training! How long has it been since you had a puppy?"

DOG OWNER: "19 years".

After a half hour of questions and answers on the pbone, I was reasonably sure that the owner did not need a veterinarian or a behavior specialist, just a good trainer to help get off to the right start - and some realistic expectations for the new puppy who had been in the home 3 weeks.

We all tend to have selective memories when it comes to a loved one and sometimes the "ghost" of a beloved dog gets in the way of our ability to bond with a new dog. Even the beautifully trained Sheltie was once a puppy. But, that was a long time ago. The owner only remembered the joys of puppyhood, and the unique bond that came from years of sharing life with a well-mannered best friend.

I was relieved when the owner called the next day to cancel the two back-to-back appointments made with me at the end of the phone call out of desperation and frustration. Although I could not personally recommend a trainer in the new town where they were moving, I provided the APDT website address for a trainer directory (in the links section of this website) and a good website for training tips by like-minded trainers to get the owner and puppy some help until a trainer was selected.

Some people would call that bad business. Which brings me back to the topic of expectations. I expected income to be generated from the phone call for help. What about the time I'd spent on the phone with the owner while she was in "crisis"? The expertise I'd provided? Many consultants charge for that time upfront. I expected to have another satisfied client who would report back to the vet. Instead, I had to revise my own expectations.

I expect that owner, armed with some encouragement, valuable knowledge and understanding, will see the puppy in a new light. I expect them to be off to a beautiful relationship. After all, it is the magic of that special canine-human bond that we all expect.