Showing posts with label dog abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dog abuse. Show all posts

6.01.2009

Dear Blog, Please forgive my absence...

No, I am not dead, although for a few days I either thought I was going to die or actually wished for it.

I do not believe I have ever been that sick in the entirety of my life.

I also hope that I am never that sick again. Now I am left with the remnants of a sinus infection and the copious nose blowing that accompanies this time of year for me.

My chickens have grown up without me, the coop is still not built but they have grazing opportunities during the day where I can keep a watchful eye on the nest of red tails just adjacent to the property.

My girls are not dull birds, they see the shadows overhead and squawk in alarm as they run frantically to the cover of the big Alder behind the house.

The dogs are starting to settle in to the presence of the noisy, fragrant intruders with only the mildest of curiosity; my eldest, Cotton, was accosted by my largest hen when he became to curious for her liking.

He apologized humbly and distanced himself from her chicken rage.

My pup, not so much.

She thinks the birds are of the most entertaining of sorts, passing up the opportunity for a run in the long, overgrown pasture and the stream for a deliberate study of the funny looking not-ducks and how to access them.

No pictures this day, but I am sure more opportunities will avail themselves in the future.

3.08.2009

Dilettante Dog Training or Worse Yet, Idiot Dog Trainers

There are a lot of things that really twist me up these days; politics, taxes, the cost of food, the cost of fuel, the increasing frequency of unemployment and the corpulent gasbags in Washington not seeing the bigger picture of the immediate needs of a suffering Nation, but painting one of their own with my tax dollars.

But this is a dog blog.

What has really been scorching my noggin are the number of calls I have been getting recently from people who are looking for help after having been failed by other "trainers". The quotation marks are on purpose. They indicate my derision directed at someone who takes peoples' money and cannot complete the job they were contracted for.

Now, don't get me wrong, I know the ratio of owners who are non-compliant from my own dog training students over the last 30 years and I know how 'life' gets in the way and certain events supersede the need or time for pet concerns. Priorities change and that is reflected in drop -out rates from both group classes and private training.

I am also fully aware of the owner who seeks absolution as opposed to putting forth any real effort and is more than willing to blame anyone other than themselves for their personal failure with any attempt at training, regardless of method or trainer.

But I'm talking about the deeply committed owners who have painstakingly sought the advice of a Professional Dog Trainer to help them with real problems. The kind of problems that prevent them from enjoying their pet reasonably and without concern. The kind of problem that can manifest itself as a serious risk to the owners or even the public.

I am speaking specifically of two types of dog "trainers".

The Dilettante "trainer" (referred to as a 'trainerette' by my colleagues) is often a second-career trainer, often coming to the trade as a mid-lifer looking for a change, may or may not even own a dog, has seen the exponential growth of the industry and figures that 'playing with dogs all day' would be a fun way to make a living or supplement an existing one. They are deluded into thinking that dog training is fun (it can be, but it is more often very hard work) and easy (richly rewarding when done well, which takes a degree of commitment that can never be called 'easy').

The Dilettante "trainer" is often educated by reading a few books written by popular* authors, maybe goes to a dog training 'school' for a week or so, belongs to one of the larger trade organizations and spends a few weekends out of the year at seminars by popular* speakers. Or takes a test drive through the newest fad in "Become a dog trainer TODAY" schemes popping up all over the country.

The Dilettante "trainer" usually finds employment at the local chain Box Store, where they must adhere to a one-size-fits-all training methodology passed down by corporate officers to mitigate risk, or bad press. They are often well-intended, but are most often sorely lacking in sufficient experience whether with the dogs themselves or with the dogs' owners, who know even less.

The Dilettante "trainer" can also be identified by their incomprehensible adherence to a philosophy that rejects any and all methods but their own as "dangerous", "inhumane", "cruel" or "ineffective/outdated/outmoded or otherwise disproved by 'science". Mostly through the indoctrination of their mentors; always offered as third hand accounts are the tales of cruelty at the hands of trainers; the kicking, hanging, beating or shocking of dogs.

I have a colleague who has a suspicion about these folks, but we won't go there....

The current rising popularity of "dog trainer" TV shows is another mitigant in the pervading fantasy that "anyone" can train a dog, any dog.

None of these things are inherently bad. Everyone has to start somewhere, but the risk comes in these people actually thinking that they have enough experience, that they are sufficiently prepared to handle anything beyond the socialization of puppies.

Nor is continuing education a bad idea, as long as the mind is not closed to the possibilities of learning from many different teachers. Remember the experiments in perception using an apple. We may all look at the exact same object, but our perspective will not allow us to get the whole picture, until we perceive it from every angle.

So these Dilettantes have a few successes with a few easy dogs, consider themselves fit for public consumption and hang out a shingle as a Professional Dog Trainer.

And then there is the Idiot.

The Idiot dog "trainer" may have similar roots. They can be from military backgrounds or fancy themselves as such, may or may not have attended a school for dog training for any length of time; from the weekend fares offered by many successful trainers or the actual brick-and-mortar variety from a few weeks to a few months, read a variety of books on the topic, or just simply had a dog that they took through some other trainer's course and fancied that they could do that and how much easy money it would be.

The Idiot perceives the answer to every problem in one dimension and tends to think that dog training is a battle of subjugation and 'dominance'. Just as inept as the Dilettante, these Idiots are wholly responsible for the bad press and current legislation that injures the reputations of Professional Dog Trainers who ultimately are stigmatized by tool use or training methodologies.

The Idiot "trainer" can also be identified by their incomprehensible adherence to a philosophy that rejects any and all methods but their own as "ineffective". Mostly through the indoctrination of their mentors; always offered as third hand accounts are the tales..... You should know by now where I am going with this....

The Idiot "trainer" is the antithesis of the Dilettante and from where the Dilettante gets most of the fodder for their smear campaigns against tools or methods that in an of themselves are not harmful to dogs.

Idiot dog "trainers" are not always easy to identify until they have been hired by an unsuspecting public; and specifically relating to me; the troubling, worrisome accounts I receive from their victims....er... unsatisfied students. Their reputations usually get them in the end, or the lawsuits do...

I answered a call from a woman yesterday who had employed the services of a local Idiot and after several months of no progress decided that her dog getting traumatized by this bully was enough for her to realize that there was something profoundly wrong.

In another call, a young lady contacted me out of desperation for her large mix breed dog that had started showing aggression towards her infant. The dog had also displayed leash aggression towards other dogs and even humans and had a protracted history of aggression towards house-guests and even other family members.

The owner had engaged the services of a "trainer" previously to address these concerns prior to the birth of her youngest child with group classes. She had judiciously applied all of the training methods recommended for her dog, attended all of the classes offered and still was without resolution to her problem.

It was clearly obvious to me that this poor woman's needs were not only not met, but that the "trainer" in question had absolutely no problems with taking her money while offering no substantive solution to her problems.

I asked her if she had contacted the other "trainer" to allow them an opportunity to follow up with their training and was told that she was advised "...that she could continue to come for more group classes at a reduced rate." Needless to say, she declined.

Dilettante and Idiot dog "trainers" are a dime a dozen. A Dilettante "trainer" may be an Idiot too. It would seem that they are both being mass produced in record numbers these days.

Dog Training as a service is one of the last recognizable trades to be wholly unregulated.

It is easy to disguise any income from it.

It is easy to profess expertise since it is not regulated or licensed beyond 'certification' offered by different membership supported organizations. Each with their own Mission, Vision and Agenda.

And owners in the search for potential trainers have little if any information, expertise or guidance with which to draw upon in their selection process.

In an attempt to help with what should be a decision with as much importance as the next movie you want to see, the next new restaurant you want to try or what color your new iPod should be, here's some sound advice:
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor will permit and encourage you to audit classes already in session or view dogs in training before you make a commitment to enroll.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor will protect the health and well being of the dogs in their care by requiring all participants to provide a verifiable veterinary record of all immunizations to date.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor will protect the safety of all participants by maintaining control over the class and the students in an effort to avoid conflicts that could result in injuries to either owners or animals.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor is approachable and willing to answer questions from the students and interacts confidently with the participants.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor will provide clear instructions and demonstrations of the behaviors being taught, either in written, oral or demonstration form.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor will aide students during training time to execute proper techniques in the teaching of behaviors to their dogs.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor is never abusive to their human or canine students.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor is familiar with and is capable of demonstrating the correct application and use of a variety of training equipment and avoids the practice of adhering solely to one training principal, as one size does NOT fit all.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor practices humane training principals, with their ultimate goal being the willing work and companionship of a well trained dog.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor welcomes interaction and participation of family members, and encourages exchanges of information to the benefit of all the participants.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor is committed to providing a positive experience for their students in a dynamic, interactive learning environment.
  • A Competent Dog Trainer or Training Instructor should be prepared to provide additional assistance to struggling students to ensure a satisfactory experience that is both productive and worthwhile.
As an aside, if you become uncomfortable with something your trainer suggests, or something you see your trainer do, do not be afraid to question it, interfere with it or take your dog and leave.


*Popular: 1: of or relating to the general public 2: suitable to the majority: as a: adapted to or indicative of the understanding and taste of the majority popular history of the war> b: suited to the means of the majority : inexpensive popular prices> 3: frequently encountered or widely accepted popular theory>4: commonly liked or approved popular girl>

Just thought I'd let ya know...

2.28.2009

Toxic Asset Mikey Vick to be released to Home Detention Soon

It's just dogs, folks. No-one cares. So he beat up a few pit bulls and forced them to suffer in horrible, painful ways.

So he tormented them, brutalized them, made money off of their pain, what's the big deal?

Surely you must see the greater good in allowing this loser to play ball again?

Surely you must know that the fine institution of football is infinitely more important than a bunch of stupid dogs, right?

They have to make their money back off of him somehow.

And our demented friends at PETA seem to think that subjecting this sociopath to a 'brain scan' will somehow absolve him of his sins and make it all better again, because "science" will have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he will never do it again?

Really, they have suggested this.

They are hitching their wagon to Vick to capitalize not so much on the crimes he has perpetuated against other living things, but to align themselves with yet another cash cow to fill their coffers when they themselves are responsible for the mass euthanization of animals. A litany of charges follow PETA, stemming from the activities of several of their members transporting dogs and cats from the Carolinas to Virginia ostensibly for "placement" in homes, but instead turned up dead in dumpsters by their collective hand, with their endorsement.

PETA even admits this.

What about what Vick did? He should be forgiven for these insidious acts? He should be allowed to play football again?

On what planet and in what solar system is it OK for a person to do this?

Have we as a culture been so imbued with the importance of "celebrity" that we will consciously forgive this?

The significance of celebrity has so outnumbered, outweighed our moral obligation to punish wrongdoers of these vicious crimes? We scream about steroids but care nothing about the pain he inflicted on unsuspecting animals? On other living things?

Without a conscience, some football team will allow this deviant to play again. The short memory of the public will soon forget the nature of his crimes.

I don't buy for a minute his claims of remorse.

I don't buy for a minute his concern over what kind of image he has portrayed to his fans.

I don't buy for a minute his worthiness to leave prison and join the ranks of law abiding citizens anywhere, let alone fully expect to be paid to play a game where somehow his life is considered worth more than those animals. Or mine.

Like what he does really matters.

Since they don't have adequate space in the halfway house he was purportedly assigned to, post a stake out to an old 55 gallon barrel or better yet, tie his selfish ass to a logging chain attached to a rusted old car bumper and toss him some stagnant water and a few crumbs of bread every other day.

If there were ever a hope of me becoming a football fan, it has been forever lost with the haunting prospect of that slime-ball rejoining any team.

His early release from prison is a powerful message to people everywhere.

Oh, I'm sorry, I must have forgotten. They were just dogs. And he's a football player.

What was I thinking?

2.05.2009

And Now, the Rest of the Story, or Rub Your Nose in this $%#

This article appeared in a list serv that I share with many of my colleagues.

I will not give credence to it's title or it's content

It highlights the reports of "abuse" by a trainer in New Jersey and similar complaints that have surfaced in New York City, all with incidents that predate either the Minnesota or the New York State bills' attempts to regulate dog trainers.

What I find difficult to believe is that if these reports are true, where is the proof? We insulate ourselves with the trust that these reports are accurate when it is clearly suggested in the case of the New York dog walker/trainer that there may be a hidden agenda, and of the 300 alleged THIRD PARTY reports, no clear evidence exists. Oh, I get it, GUILTY until proven INNOCENT. Gee, what was I thinking....

Huh?

As for the guy in New Jersey, I remember the stink over this a few months ago. A cattle prod was found. A slingshot and a PVC pipe were also found. Early reports suggest that one of these items were found at a colleague's home, not on the property of the target of these charges. If there were concerns 14 years ago as one of the charges suggests, and six since then, why was something not done sooner?

Oh, that's right, it was only important when it suited the proper agenda, like Daschle's taxes or the new head of the Federal Treasury Department and others of the 'New Administration". It only serves a purpose NOW. Not in 1995 when the first alleged crime was perpetrated.

His guilt is assumed, and if he is found so through DUE PROCESS and not the court of public opinion, then we as trainers in our secular community will be justly served as he and his ilk deserve proper punishment for their crimes. Or will we?

Will it be that we are no longer able to practice our craft unless we are supervised by the government to assure that "no harm was done"? Who will be the judge of what constitutes "harm", "inhumane" practices or "abuse"?

What about the owners deeply committed to their dogs who are not served by the government's proposals to endorse certain types of trainers and not others? Will they be forced to give up their dogs because they could not be trained with methods beyond the scope of their definition of approved? How full are the shelters in this country now? How full do you think they will get in the near future if it should come to pass that only "government approved" methods are used?

This is not an endorsement of "punching, hitting, kicking or hanging" dogs by any means. I think such tactics do constitute abuse and I do not personally know of a trainer in my acquaintance who would use such tactics.

It is not the METHOD that defines TRAINED, it is the END RESULT of the training itself. Physically abusing an animal does not constitute a method and defining abuse is the dichotomy. Collars don't abuse dogs, PEOPLE DO. TOOLS are not the issue, who wields the tool is. The banning of tools is the lowest common denominator in all of this and will only serve to be as effective as New York City's current gun control policy.

I see this as a personal vendetta mounted as a political agenda and offered up in a time and place where the controversy can be utilized to it's greatest effect.

The importance of knowing all the facts seems to escape most reporters these days; they are too wrapped up in currying favor amongst their own breed of lobbyists in the political hotbed that surrounds pets and the BILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR their ownership generates in income for hundreds of thousands of people, businesses and, yup, you guessed it, politicians.

It is inconceivable to me how a party or parties can be so deluded by the fervent scree of a few individuals without the basis of FACT, only the emotion laden mutterings of a few misguided, uneducated bleeding hearts who think they know "inhumane" or "abusive" practices based solely on weak evidence and lots of speculation. And, as I said, perhaps a hidden agenda or two.

Tell me, who is more "abusive"?

Linda Kaim
www.lionheartk9.com