# "backyard" trainers



## Indiana (Sep 11, 2011)

Personally, I take all trainers with a healthy dose of caution, because just like interior decorators or alternative health therapies, the realm of possibilities is as great as the number of individuals who are involved in that industry. It's such a subjective activity! So I do take my dogs to trainers but I listen and learn and use what I already believe as a filter  I guess I mean that, no matter what their qualifications are, they can still personalize their training methods to either be more beneficial or less, so I am careful.


----------



## MollyMuiMa (Oct 13, 2012)

I am 62 yrs old and can say that there has always been a dog in my life . That being said, I've seen just about every method of dog training out there! It's gone from Swatting with newspaper, to choke chains, to rubbing noses in pee, electric collars, and Alpha Dog rolls, to treat & praise! There are so many modes and methods people use, that it's no wonder so many dogs have problems ! I've come to learn that each dog requires something different in the way they learn. So if I were to have to hire a trainer I would want to watch him in action (unobserved if possible) before I entrusted my animal to them. I would definately look for someone who 'thinks' like a dog and could tell me 'why' I have a problem, not just supress it!:croc:


----------



## Specman (Jun 14, 2012)

This is from another site but may be of help:

"Look for a Dog Trainer with Independent Credentialing. Though educational possibilities are all over the map and there are no licensing requirements, there is one independent national credentialing program. It’s called the Certification Council for Professional Dog Trainers, and its website has a search function to enable you to find a nearby trainer.
Good trainers educate themselves and use the modern, reward-based methods that scientists agree work best.

For manners trainers, the council offers a single level of certification, “Certified Professional Dog Trainer—Knowledge Assessed.” (A second level is planned, to assess practical skills.) The holder of a CPDT-KA has to have completed 300 hours as the lead or solo trainer in classes or in private work. She must provide references from a veterinarian, a client, and another CPDT-KA. And she needs to pass a 250-question exam. Trainers are required to sign a code of ethics and to recertify every three years, either by submitting proof of continuing education, or by re-taking the exam.

This is a good start, but it’s a floor, not a ceiling. Those 300 hours may or may not mean much, since the actual quality of the teaching done isn’t assessed. The written test isn’t terribly challenging. And someone can give the right answers but still favor outdated, coercive methods in real life. All of that having been said, at least the person who holds a CPDT-KA has presented their credentials for independent assessment, and that counts for something."


----------



## msminnamouse (Nov 4, 2010)

> To my way of thinking a professional trainer is a person who has a documented set of certifications, an ability to demonstrate their qualifications by having titled dogs in obedience or other performance or working endeavors with their own dogs, or a graduate degree in animal behavior. While I am sure there are some good trainers who don't have these certifications, I also suspect that there are many such trainers who do more harm than good. I am interested in hearing your thoughts in this area.


I think y'all know where I stand b/c I think I used the backyard dog trainer term!

Like dog trainers themselves, the educations and certifications are also unregulated. It's just a grab bag, really. Like dog trainers, some educations and some certifications are better than others. It all really comes down to researching and going with what you like. 

You get a dime a dozen professional trainers graduating out of ABC who are just clueless and probably don't know more than most well informed pet owners. Petco/Petsmart trainers can be even worse. Or they can be great. You can also get people with no formal education at all but dedicate a lot of their time to reading peer reviewed studies and journals, attending seminars, going to workshops, studying texts, taking advantage of professional forums, etc. It really depends on where you get your info from, if you continue your education, and your ethics, AND your experience. 

Experience is NOT everything no matter how much some people would like to convince you otherwise. These are the people who usually insist that they don't need no books tellin' them what to do because they just have a nat-o-ral way with dogs and they've been doing it for X amount of years before you were even born. And that no two dogs are alike so one way (even though it's not all cookie tossing and ignoring and allowing bad behavior like some would have you believe) doesn't work for every dog so almost anything can be justified if a dog is "stubborn" enough. It's simply not as simple as that. It's so easy to just suppress things without ever uncovering why they're actually happening and how to actually treat the CAUSE. Like I've said before, it's like slapping a bandaid on a festering wound and hoping for the best. Makes no sense and is patently dangerous for all involved.

You know what? Before I knew much, I could really only manage to accomplish something through molding, which is force. Pushing a dog's tush down to teach sit. Picking up their paw to teach shake. Etc. The more and more I learn, the more I leave molding behind. A whole new world is opened where nothing can't be accomplished through shaping, capturing and luring. And if luring doesn't work, shaping and capturing does. And if one way of capturing or shaping doesn't, there are countless other shaping and capturing methods to get the behaviors you want. It's not a one trick pony for small, easy dogs. This is the way it is, studies show that the more education people receive, the less they have to resort to brute, base force. And I'm happy because dogs work with me, not against me. Learning is a big, fun game, a puzzle to work out. It's not a battle.

There is ethology at work here with our dogs. Or as other people incorrectly refer to it, "dog psychology". But either term you use, there is behavioral science at work here. It is a science. What science doesn't benefit from experience AS WELL as knowledge? How can any one person know everything? You can't. That's why a good dog trainer should always be seeking to learn more and more from as many sources as possible. Of course you can always get the blind leading the blind, so that's where your research of your trainer's qualifications come in handy. Did they attend a seminar given by a reputable person in the field or did they watch a television show and presume to call themself another expert (human pack leader leading pack leaders...)? Do the dogs depicted on their website look happy and relaxed or do they look frantic like they're worrying about what consequence may befall them next? 

And even demo dogs have off days. If this is so, how do they handle it? Do they bully the dog into compliance or do they explain why it's happening and show how to remedy it so the dog wants to willingly work with them? Robotic dogs are usually a good sign that something's not right with their methods. I personally want a dog, not a robot. Too many people want robots though. I don't understand why and I find it sad. 

I also find the legion of backyard dog trainers sad because they'll suppress whatever problem ails your dog or ruin your dog trying (or succeeding). 

Dog nips children's heels when they run around screaming. Squirt dog with water. Dog barks at bigger dogs on leash. Administer collar pops. Dog gets defensive at dog park. Parade dog back and forth in the park and restrain him while other dogs sniff him and give a cookie when he gives up and stops struggling. Dog pulls on leash so put on a choke/prong/shock to correct him for what he isn't born knowing. Sad. Sad. Sad.


----------



## lily cd re (Jul 23, 2012)

Yes msminnamouse you were the one who used the term backyard trainer. I hope you don't mind that I borrowed the term. I appreciate your thoughts on this topic. I think it is a really important issue. 

There are so many dogs that end up at breed rescues or in shelters that really didn't need to end up going down that road if only their original owners did right by them when they were puppies. I had the wonderful opportunity to attend Ian Dunbar's science based dog training seminar about 2 years ago. He has so much terrific insight, based in the science of dog behavior, that if more broadly applied could alleviate much of the shelter problem. He strongly is an advocate of getting to the point where we don't need shelters or rescue groups because we do better more broadly with puppies.

I do know a couple of people who are CPDT-KA trainers. I haven't used them (don't need a trainer myself, and that isn't why I started this thread), but I have taken class at my obedience club with them (as fellow "students") and I also know a few people who take privates with one of them for obedience competition training. I find both of them to be really awesome. I can imagine that they aren't all as good as these folks though.

It is so frustrating that it is such a mixed bag in terms of the quality of what people think is good training for their dogs. We took a puppy class at PetSmart and I thought the instructor for that class was very good (I watched her before I signed up for her class), but I've also seen some people with "pet store trained" dogs that were terrible. I've also heard some appalling things from people who paid lots of money to have people come to their homes to train their dogs.

How will we be able to make this better?


----------



## MaryLynn (Sep 8, 2012)

I think right now we're coming into an important era for pedagogy, and I think the best steps forward with making sure our dogs get the right education (and ourselves) would be in creating awareness that not all training is created equal, and that not every type of training will suit a certain individual or their dog. We tend to treat thing, even our children, based off of whatever is the most popular method at the time, and then we move onto the next-we need to stop doing this. I think evolution in teaching is very important, but I think more importantly people need to realize that different individuals respond better than others to different types of teaching. I think this goes for dogs, too even though most dog training seems to actually be for the owners. 

I think we need more people who are willing to work in the industry, without treating it like an industry. I think that services tend to arise to meet the demand of a new market. 

If there was a campaign of awareness, and people "demanded" more formal and quantitative credentials for their dog trainers then that's what companies, and small businesses would start to provide the framework for it.

Right now everything is still treated as if pet owners are cash cows (and face it, we really are), when it should be approached with more mindfulness.


----------



## msminnamouse (Nov 4, 2010)

> Yes msminnamouse you were the one who used the term backyard trainer. I hope you don't mind that I borrowed the term. I appreciate your thoughts on this topic. I think it is a really important issue.


Nope, I don't mind at all. 

What I really don't understand are people paying for advice that they could easily have come up with themselves. Force comes easily, you don't really need any further knowledge to apply it. Do you really need to pay someone else to tell you to put a choke or prong collar on a dog that pulls? Or a shock collar on a dog to shock them? Does it take lessons to be able to press a button on a remote control? Could people not figure out for themselves to push a dog's butt down into a sit when they want the dog to sit? 

This is what I'm really talking about. You don't need to know anything to do this kind of stuff, yet people are getting paid for giving lessons on it. 

Figuring out how to get a dog to walk by your side without any physical force takes some thought. Getting a dog to stop being scared of something and thus, to stop reactive barking, takes some thought too. I'd pay for this kind of advice. 

It's kind of like, parents don't pay for spanking lessons. Apply the hand to the backside when the child misbehaves. Doesn't take any instruction or real thought. Psychoanalysis and schooling, takes instruction and thought.


----------



## msminnamouse (Nov 4, 2010)

> I think more importantly people need to realize that different individuals respond better than others to different types of teaching. I think this goes for dogs, too even though most dog training seems to actually be for the owners.


That's the thing I keep hearing and yes, it's true. But it doesn't justify the bullying methods that some use. Every sentient creatures essentially learns through a process of reward and consequences. Consequences don't have to be physical in nature or even scary to achieve learning and results. Even just positive reinforcement alone encompasses a huge array of methods. It's not all tossing cookies and ignoring and allowing bad behavior, which seems to be a common misconception. It doesn't just work for little, easy dogs, which also seems to be a misconception. It works from great danes down to chihuahuas. It works from troubled dogs down to happy, go lucky puppies. Dogs, especially, are VERY receptive to it because dogs do what works for them.


----------



## lily cd re (Jul 23, 2012)

I agree that there are many positive training methods and it takes creative thinking to accomplish the goal you are working toward. There are also negative reinforcements that aren't physical and actually make the dog think and learn. Stopping access to something the dog wants to redirect their behavior would be an example.

I agree that it is very perplexing that people are so willing to pay for a trainer rather than trying to work with their dogs themselves. What do they think is going to happen when the trainer leaves? It is very unfortunate that despite spending tons of money so many people have dogs that are so unmanageable that they end up rehoming them.


----------



## MaryLynn (Sep 8, 2012)

msminnamouse said:


> That's the thing I keep hearing and yes, it's true. But it doesn't justify the bullying methods that some use. Every sentient creatures essentially learns through a process of reward and consequences. Consequences don't have to be physical in nature or even scary to achieve learning and results. Even just positive reinforcement alone encompasses a huge array of methods. It's not all tossing cookies and ignoring and allowing bad behavior, which seems to be a common misconception. It doesn't just work for little, easy dogs, which also seems to be a misconception. It works from great danes down to chihuahuas. It works from troubled dogs down to happy, go lucky puppies. Dogs, especially, are VERY receptive to it because dogs do what works for them.


Oh I agree, I would never argue or condone using force, I was merely referring to the different positive training methods that are available (there are different methods, so to speak). 

I get asked a lot of questions by my friends, I always tell them that they should seek an animal behaviorist or a qualified trainer, but that I can give them some advice. I feel like all people want to hear is "Just get a choke, or an e-collar, yell really loud and your dog will never do it again." I feel like dog training must be about the only profession out there where people pay for the advice, and then do it all wrong anyways. That or they're willing to pay for advice that's essentially how to terrify your dog 101.


----------



## msminnamouse (Nov 4, 2010)

I was reminded of this thread when hearing some advice that a "professional dog trainer" gave someone. 

Their dog growls/lip lifts/snarls around their 1 year old child. So the "professional's" advice was to throw a choke collar on the dog and yank it when the dog gives these warnings.

What a wonderful way to teach your dog to stop giving warnings and go straight to biting!

This is a large dog and a very young child. The child's life is in danger with this very dangerous advice, and of course, so is the dog's.

This professional clearly doesn't understand learning theory and the need for counter conditioning and classical conditioning and encouraging the dog's attempts at communication when they're uncomfortable.

There's got to be some kind of regulation of the schools, courses and the trainers themselves. Not only are people giving out advice that violates common sense, but they're also giving out incredibly dangerous advice. Dogs are potentially very dangerous, with big teeth, some breeds running very large and strong, and with children and invalids around. There NEEDS to be some kind of regulation for everyone's safety. I can't believe that no gov't entity has tried to enforce any to protect people from themselves.


----------



## lily cd re (Jul 23, 2012)

Yes it is amazing that there are no real regulations on any of this. You have to have a license to cut people's hair, drive a car, and to engage in many other professions, but not to train a dog. Dogs can be as dangerous as many things we would classify as weapons and certainly mis-handling them only deepens that danger. There are many good ways to become a trainer or a certified behaviorist and many good ways to find these people. It is amazing and scary how much people are gullible about believing anything that a "trainer" tells them to do with their dog.


----------

