Dog Training Methods and Myths
When we’re training we can’t just be interested in the specific behavior the dog ends up doing at the finalization of the process. How we teach that behavior matters just us much as the final behavior. For example, we are often told we should use all tools available to us to train dogs - nothing should be off limits. However, any critical thought of that for a few seconds should lead to the realization that can’t be the standard for training dogs. Under that ideation, we could use a hammer to hit a dog to stop the dog from jumping up on people. And let’s say that “worked” to stop the jumping up behavior. Well, what is the other outcomes of hitting a dog with a hammer? The dog is going to have physical injuries. The dog is going to have emotional trauma; at the very least the formation of negative associations with potentially anything (any stimulus) occurring during the hammer strikes, which can include - people holding objects, people raising objects (up, such as above their heads), people approaching the dog, peoples’ voices if anything was said during the hammer strikes, people in general, anything else that might be in the environment: children, people riding bikes, cars, etc. In addition, due to the negative emotional associations, the dog is now going to be fearful and potentially aggressive towards others or other stimuli (like vehicles that passed by). This is an example of taking a simple behavior considered a problem: jumping on people (which is actually a pro-social behavior from dogs), and turning it into a severe issue that is now going to be more difficult to resolve: fear and aggression.
So when evaluating what worked, we can’t just only look at the behavior the dog is doing. If someone is causing dogs physical pain and mental/emotional trauma, they are doing harm, and that shouldn’t be allowed in the profession (or for anyone caring for dogs). Doing something harmful to a dog to stop a behavior and claiming it worked, is ignoring all of the harm done to the dog and all of the behavior fallout that results from that. That isn’t teaching/training. It’s abuse masquerading as training.
And we can substitute a hammer for any other similar physical punishment - a choke chain, a prong collar, a remote electronic shock collar, hitting dogs, kicking dogs, throwing objects at dogs, etc. None of these things are acceptable teaching methods. They harm dogs, period.
So this destroys two myths:
All training tools (methods) should be allowed (myth 1).
If the dog does the desired behavior at the end of the process, the training worked (myth 2).
Good training takes care of dogs’ needs. It provides for their welfare. It makes sure they are not harmed; they are confident and free from fear and pain. It acknowledges their emotional health and the reasons for their behaviors, so they can be modified with intentionality, care, love, and providing appropriate guidance so the dogs can learn new behaviors in a physically and mentally stable place and environment. No dogs need to be harmed by collars or other physical corrections. They are sentient creatures that deserve appropriate care from people who know they are required to provide for the dogs’ well-being and welfare.