# Training Classes Don't just sign on the dotted line



## solinvictus (Oct 23, 2008)

Please always go and observe the trainer and training classes before signing on the dotted line and handing over your money. 

For me no matter the circumstances what is in the video is unacceptable for me. 

Here is the video. It only shows 7 seconds and the trainer claims that we need to see the young golden prior to the 7 seconds as it tried to bite/snap at him. It still isn't acceptable to me. Is it acceptable training to you? 

This happened at Landmark Retrievers and the trainer was Jeffrey Schultz.

He claims he was defending himself. According to the video/article they are doing an investigation.

Video Of Trainer Hitting Dog Prompts Investigation « CBS Dallas / Fort Worth

A Very Tired False Dichotomy -


----------



## Charliethree (Jul 18, 2010)

Watched that video, heartbreaking, and disgusting for anyone to treat a dog like that, there is absolutely no excuse, no 'defense' for animal abuse. If in fact the dog snapped at the trainer, the question is 'What did he do to the dog to make the dog feel the need to physically defend itself?' Watching the dog with the trainer afterwards, the dog is terrified of him - not without good reason.


Do take the time to ensure that you ARE getting what you think you are getting when you hire someone to work with your dog. BETTER YET, avoid the risk of emotional damage and/or physical injury to your dog, keep them safe and work with them yourself.


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

Absolutely unacceptable and that so-called trainer should be jailed. Period. No excuses.

What did that 'trainer' do to that dog before the video clip? An ex-trainer at the facility outing him tells me that this is not a one-off incident and that this is a person who should be barred from ever again handling any living dog (or horse or cat or whatever).


----------



## gold4me (Mar 12, 2006)

AWFUL. Had that been my dog I would have gone after the so called trainer.


----------



## BriGuy (Aug 31, 2010)

Defending himself against a golden puppy by slapping it across the face numerous times? What a sorry excuse of a human this guy is. This better get enough air play in the area so people know to avoid this creep, and I sincerely hope he does not have a wife or children.


----------



## Charliethree (Jul 18, 2010)

… And He Hasn’t Barked Since:  A warning on the dangers of results-based ethics  - RoverChase


----------



## Pilgrim123 (Jul 26, 2014)

Will the owner be able to sue that so-called "trainer" for any spinal damage the dog may show in later years? The way the dog's spine appears to be bent when it's slammed into the ground is a real concern for me. It's an awful, distressing video.


----------



## Buddy's mom forever (Jun 23, 2011)

The video made me throw up, no words to express my anger. To hear that poor baby screaming and keep going with abuse, it's just unbelievable.
Any place I take my dog I look at his reaction and how they approach him, vets, groomers, kennels stuff...


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

I guess my thing is if it came to me protecting myself from a dog - I'd punch and kick the dog. And do what I can to hurt the dog enough for it to back off and run away. It sounds horrible when phrased that way, but generally is a lot nicer than using pepper spray in the dog's face - getting it in the eyes and mouth. Just specifically referring to any situation similar to what the so-called trainer said was the reason why he was "defending" himself.

Self-defense would not involve grabbing dogs by the ears, hitting them, and throwing them. I would wager this is more along the lines of "breaking" a dog so it will be more trainable going forward.

This trainer - I didn't want to watch the video and did not. I think people like that are the biggest reasons (among many) as far as me never trusting anyone else besides myself to train my dogs.

I've been around dogs who were sent out to trainers who probably used more harsh stuff on the dogs (I would hope nothing as extreme as described in the video link above)... and no, these dogs were not broken or showing signs of fear. Would I send MY dogs to the same trainers? NO WAY. But that said, I don't see broken dogs coming back from these trainers. 

Oh hey - I've been around people who ear pinch dogs while training retrievers for obedience. It's beyond horrible to be sitting in watching a class with 2-3 people doing stuff like that. Because the dogs have their ears grabbed and pinched until they scream. 

But the training works and the dogs do not end up broken or destroyed by this training. These same dogs - I see them sitting in their owners laps and waxing spoiled and happy at dog shows. If they were hand-shy or terrified of their owners, they would not be sitting in their laps like that... 

It's not how I train, but geesh - even the way I train gets lumped in the same bag of stuff as those trainers beating the dogs and so on... I correct my dogs. My tool box does include various stuff from verbal corrections to scruff shakes when needed. 

You can't just launch into generalizations or bash it all montages over stories like this. A lot of people do - there's a lot of energy and eagerness to use the worst cases to back up their whole fixation about what the other guys are doing. The word "pain" is overused as well - to such an extent that I swear these people sometimes are referring to a whole different breed than the ones we have. Golden retrievers are a tough sporting breed. They aren't thin-skinned and delicate, nor do they have the tendency to be fearful unless handled very carefully. I've seen breeds like that - and totally different game than goldens.


----------



## Buddy's mom forever (Jun 23, 2011)

Inflicting pain to dogs for any reason is abuse to me. Period.

We are not talking a mad dog coming at a person here.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

This isn't defensive behavior on the part of the trainer. It would be totally fine to punch or kick an animal that was trying to injure you. But if that were the case, you would stop when the animal backs off. I can even see somebody getting bit and then swatting at the dog's nose instinctually in reaction to feeling surprised and hurt. But that's not at all what happens in the video.

This is definitely something completely different: somebody retaliating against a dog who bit, probably telling himself that he was "correcting" the bite. The news article says he was "disciplining and defending." The "defending" is total BS, but the "disciplining" is obviously consistent with his philosophy of training. Given the way he was training, he probably caused the bite himself, but either way, the ethical response to a bite isn't to beat the dog, even if it would work to inhibit biting in the future. And it doesn't work anyway.

As much as I like to argue about the use of corrections, I don't think the video is instructive in that debate. There are plenty of people who love their dogs who use corrections in a way I would assess as _unproductive_, and there are some who use them in a way or at a level I'd even consider _unethical_, but I can see that they're not abusive. And Megora makes a good point that people who use pain to the point that the dog cries out (which I'd definitely put under the unethical header) may still have good relationships with their dogs overall. It's easy to call that abuse, but I'm hesitant, as much as I strongly object to it and would never consider it effective or ethical.

This video is just plain old beating a dog because it bit you, and it's clear that the guy is angrily abusing the dog. No excuse. The guy shouldn't be training dogs if he thinks this is "discipline" or if he takes out his temper physically on a dog. Both are dealbreakers.


----------



## Charliethree (Jul 18, 2010)

It is a sad, sad world we live in, when we have become so desensitized, so accustomed to treating animals in such a way that we are intentionally causing them discomfort, fear or pain, that we have to ask ourselves, just how 'damaging', just how 'bad', it has to be, before it is considered inhumane and wrong to treat an animal in such a way.
Just because they don't cry out, in pain, just because they do not cower in fear, or lash out and bite when they have every reason to, it is 'safe' to assume that they do not feel discomfort, fear or pain, and that they are 'OKAY' with how they are treated? We cannot say for them, 'It doesn't hurt', only THEY know when it 'hurts'.
They have no choice, they cannot run away, they cannot 'say' 'I don't feel good about what you are doing.', and even when or if they try, how many are willing to listen? We SHOULD listen, in all fairness to them!!!


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

@Charliethree - it's very easy to develop emotions and feel judgment based on our own perspectives and biases. I admit, I have my own "issues" about stuff I see which I feel is terrible for the dogs.

My dogs are corrected in training but they all want to train with me. I don't carry treats on my person or have to go fetch my dogs to make them do stuff. They do it because just playing the game with me is rewarding. 

Somebody else may see the choke chain or prong or pop corrections or whatever and consider that to be unethical or abusive....

But me - I know every thing I do is measured and calculated. I'm not just acting out in anger nor am I using a correction in a time or way that my dogs can't handle. This is what I've been taught by experience and my teachers. This is a huge part of balanced training, just as using treats as needed is. It isn't necessary to "break" a dog in order to get through to them. Nor it is it necessary to starve a dog in order to get them "up" about training (where you use food). 

All this feeds my own perspective and experience... and is a pretty big reason what some people on the other side of things say... doesn't make any sense to me.

Being fair though - I know I have my own biases and issues based on what I see. My pet bugaboos or stuff that I see other people do that I feel is abusive or cruel or unthoughtful of the dog.... I'll use a very prominent example, which a lot of people do without thinking twice.

Putting puppies in a crate that's only big enough for them to turn around in and keeps them pretty confined so they don't move around enough to wake up their bladders and or they are reluctant to pee where they sleep.... And people who use this method might not only have the puppies stuffed in these crates overnight, but 10-12 hours of the day as well.

This is horrible and abusive to me. And it was a pretty huge reason why I loathed crate training and the use of crates. 

Working with 2 dogs at the same time and being able to take multiple dogs to places where there's not a lot of room and the crate may keep a dog safe and secure - I've changed my perspective on using crates. But I still am disgusted by the idea of cramming a puppy into a crate and keeping him confined for majority of the day. This when a puppy should have interaction and exercise and attention and company through majority of the day to bring out the best in the pup. 

I can definitely get very irrational about things like that and nose straps and don't even get me started about invisible fencings and buying dogs when you have no ability or resources to let that dog run and be a dog. <- There's a video on facebook which was pretty awful to me with somebody lunging a rough collie - 10 foot line - on their front lawn. Collies need to run and this dog was not getting adequate space and length to just open up and run. We have a lot of land here, but even that is nothing to our now 11 year old collie when he's running. 

But bottom line - beware of generalizing.


----------



## Cpc1972 (Feb 23, 2015)

I should not of watched that. That poor baby. I am not going to be able to get that out of head.


----------



## Cpc1972 (Feb 23, 2015)

I would love to hear that the owners of that poor dog are suing. The emotional damage that that trainer has caused that dog.


----------



## Buddy's mom forever (Jun 23, 2011)

Dogs don't know ethical and unethical, it is used by humans. Dogs know the pain. Maybe I am projecting too much of humans' world into dogs' world, but any living creature can feel the pain and it doesn't have to understand why pain is there.


----------



## Tennyson (Mar 26, 2011)

After reading on this forum questionable puppy training "techniques" that inflict pain and anguish this video is more of the same.
You get numb to it all.


----------



## goldy1 (Aug 5, 2012)

Buddy's mom forever said:


> Inflicting pain to dogs for any reason is abuse to me. Period.
> 
> We are not talking a mad dog coming at a person here.


Luckily I read the comments before clicking on the video. I don't want to see it or need to see it. There are cruel sick people in the world. I agree with Buddy's mom forever, inflicting pain is abuse. There are no excuses or reasons that would I would be okay with.


----------



## rabernet (Feb 24, 2015)

This link was shared in the Fenzi thread, and Denise published it today. I have chosen R+ training for Noah, and I love that she's even added a R+ Gun Dog class too this session and the folks are having a blast with it. 

This article speaks to whether correction based training is more effective in the ring than R+ or not. At the end of the day - the dog knows while in the ring in competition - there will be no corrections nor will there be any treats (R+). 

“Have to” vs “Want to?” | Denise Fenzi

The original link in this thread is no more horrifying to me than reading a member on this forum recommending to someone that to stop their dog from biting, that they sould bite them back until they cried and even then, to not stop until the dog got the message - or holding cayenne mustard powder in their dog's mouth for 2 minutes to teach them bite inibition. What was more horrifying was that no one seemed to object to this "advice" at the time and I had to speak out about how horrified I was. I was told by this person that I would never get the respect of my dog with R+ training. The thread was since locked and sank away into oblivian. I've never been able to read a post from that member since and not remember those posts.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

> This article speaks to whether correction based training is more effective in the ring than R+ or not. At the end of the day - the dog knows while in the ring in competition - there will be no corrections nor will there be any treats (R+).


Which actually causes a lot of problems for people who rely on reminders, second commands, treats, guidance, luring, cheerleading, etc... to get their dogs to do anything.  



> I choose to train with positive reinforcement. I do this because I want my dogs to work for me because they want to


Totally different subject, but this is something that a lot of people on the positive only side use as a reason for their training theology.... and the problem with statements like this is when you have trainers and dogs going into public training classes or trials (outside of home training) and suddenly they are dealing with dogs who don't seem to want to work for them. And then rather than admit that something was lost in the translation while training, you have people just shrugging it all off and saying dogs don't like obedience anyway. And I'm serious - there's a lot of people who DO this. It's never their fault as trainers as far as really working with their dogs and proofing stuff (including making training fun for the dogs). Instead, you have people who fail in obedience and then go "oh, my dog's just not enjoying it". Which brings out the "dogs don't enjoy obedience - do AGILITY" crowd. Like these people have never seen a golden retriever scrunching down on the dog walk and shaking all over in fear because their owner's making them do something that's really scary (I've seen this a couple times in early agility classes which are done the same time as obedience at one of the places I train at). >.<

The whole reason I got into obedience was with a golden retriever owner, breeder, handler, and trainer whose dogs demonstrated joy when being trained. This despite her being one of those trainers who emphasized "minimal" treats and making the dogs do stuff because they want to please you vs bribing with food. 

Moving on beyond her - I found people who had very similar core/foundation ideas, while utilizing treats/rewards in training as well. But right there at the beginning, the thing that inspired me to get into training was seeing a dog demonstrate joy while training.

Even those who use ear pinches are still people who have a diverse tool box and aren't just all correction all the time and intent on hurting their dogs... if they were, then you'd see a lot more ears pinned back, hunched backs, low hanging tails while their owners interact with them or bring out the training collars. 

You need to go by the body language of dogs - always remembering that they are dogs. They are not human and certainly do not "naturally" interact with each other or with us like humans do. If people realized that, there would be a lot fewer problems understanding or dealing with mouthing, jumping, pawing, growling, resource guarding, etc... how dogs correct each other - it's stuff that would really freak out people who think their dogs are delicate flowers who will break in the wind (or something).


----------



## Charliethree (Jul 18, 2010)

Tennyson said:


> After reading on this forum questionable puppy training "techniques" that inflict pain and anguish this video is more of the same.
> You get numb to it all.


 That is a reality for some, for the rest of us, it MATTERS, their lives matter, the fact that they are suffering matters, to some of us. 


There have been decades of 'questionable techniques' that have become the 'norm' and 'acceptable' in the dog training industry, simply because when they hear it often enough, people stop listening to their 'gut', their moral compass, and they start believing it is true because often they are not aware that there is another choice. New dog owners, those that know no different, are at the 'mercy' of the dog trainer 'next door', they are often unaware that there are options, that dog training is an unregulated industry and that they do not HAVE to learn how to punish their dog 'correctly' to get them to learn, and most are reluctant to do so, but they do because they are led to believe there is no other choice.

I have four dogs, all of them have been taught with reward based training, they are not an out of control, ill mannered, badly behaved bunch that I can't take anywhere, they are quite the opposite. Yet none of them have ever been 'starved' to get them 'up' for training, they have 'rules', they have 'consequences' when they make a mistake, they come when I ask them to, I don't have to 'go get them' or 'make' them 'do', and yes, they respond exceptionally well to what I ask of them, because they WANT to, not because they 'have to'. I don't have to 'bribe' them, wave the treat bag in their faces to get them to respond to what I ask of them, but I do reward them every time they make good choices, every time they get it right. We have a partnership, a way of life, based on trust that I will not harm them, cause them discomfort or pain, based on a history of positive consequences for them, and ultimately, extremely rewarding for me.

All dogs, all animals, learn the same way, repeating the behaviors that have good consequences for them, and avoid repeating those behaviors that don't. We have the ability to choose how we teach, what we teach, and in all fairness to them, there is no need, it is not necessary to cause them discomfort or pain, in order for them to learn to respond reliably, consistently and without hesitation to what we ask of them.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

@Charliethree - I didn't direct my comment at you really, because I don't believe you compete in obedience with your dogs. When it comes to pet training - you honestly could probably keep a bag of treats around your neck at all times if that's what gets your dogs to obey. You could also babble nonstop at your dogs. Strap a corrective collar like a gentle leader around the dogs noses every time you go for a walk and keep your dog in a harness, etc... whatever works.  

In the obedience ring though - you can't use treats. You can't use any corrective collars (choke chains are allowed, but the judge is watching to make sure the leash is maintained in the J shape and is kept loose, no contact on the collar). Harnesses, prongs, etc, are not allowed. The owners may not talk to their dogs during heeling exercises, the dogs are expected to sit automatically and for that matter do every exercise out there without on the spot rewards. 

Even body language means points taken off if the judge deems you are giving your dog double commands. A good example, by the way, is something I'm working on correcting - when calling my dog to front (ring length recall), I have to hold my head a certain way and lock it in place. If I'm gradually lowering my head as the dog comes - it can be seen by the judge as guiding the dog into place. Same thing with the finish - if I'm turning my head and looking where I want my dog to go, that's points off. 

Hand position is also something that is watched by the judge. On leash there is some corners you can cut as far as holding the leash at your hip... but off leash, your hand has to either be hanging loose at your side or held flat over your stomach (most golden people keep the hand over their stomach because we don't want to hit our dogs on the heads or "block" them). <= This means on the off leash, your hand is not allowed to be used for guiding/keeping the dog in heel position.

A lot of people who have not trained for the obedience ring - but are getting into obedience through rally have problems with the excess cheerleading and body language. And unfortunately when the dogs notice they aren't being reminded to work every few steps - they are looking around and sniffing the floor in the ring, and so on. 

Using corrections in many cases isn't PUNISHING the dogs for doing something wrong. It can be something like correcting the dog when you see the nose dropping to the floor. The dog looks up and is rewarded (praise or treats or RELEASE) and this is balanced training. IE Rewards based training but balanced with fair corrections when needed. These corrections help polish each and every exercise so you lose as few points as possible in the ring. The dogs learn fairly quickly what's right or wrong when you're not just marking when they are right, but stopping them from being wrong.

Most people who do well in obedience competition use balanced training of some kind. You do have some who will not use corrections... and it doesn't always work out for them. 

A friend of mine has a dog who is brilliant. Not a golden - and definitely smarter than a golden.  This dog is trained with positive only stuff. No corrections. And he walks all over her. He is one of those dogs who is still doing stuff that should have been stopped 5 years ago. The owner has her hands tied because he knows he can get away with it. 

^ This is a prime example of why more people are not impressed with positive only training. It works for all dogs when the dogs will never be put in a position where they would be overly tested... it doesn't work for all dogs in other situations. 

Corrections are not punishments (or not always). Generally, you want to stop your dog in the act of doing something wrong vs going after them after they've already done something wrong. 

People out there who should not own a dog are those who literally punish the dogs. Like the dog peed on the carpet - and the owner has a temper tantrum at the dog. Yelling, screaming, rubbing the dog's nose in the carpet, hauling the dog outside to "think about what he did wrong"... and so on. 

People like this do not learn all this in obedience class. Lot of people I know who train this way are people who think obedience classes are a waste of time and a scam. They train the dogs like their parents trained the dogs, etc. 

I'm saying all this at all, because you do have a lot of people getting brainwashed into thinking that there is only one way to train their dogs. And they're all thinking this is Star Wars and it's good side vs bad side and only the two extreme ends exist.


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

I need to respond to Megora's post 

I do compete in obedience/rally and will be starting up agility again and do fairly well in all venues - even in the advanced classes. I use R+ training and while my dogs may get a verbal NRM (Non Reward Marker), they are trained in a kind and systematic way building the exercises through possitive re-inforcement and breaking down the exercises into small individual pieces where my dog can be successful and have that success built into a happy, tail wagging routine. They rarely have a leash on while training and always wear a flat buckle collar (rolled leather buckle collars while competing).

There is a whole movement out there for training your dog (pets and competitors) using reward based training and ditching the harsh methods used in years past; no we have not become numb to harsh training, nor should we ever.

A blog post from one of my instructors which compares the whole 'Have To versus Want To' theme. There are many, many classmates (online and in person) of mine who do very well in the rings, and others using traditional methods who crash and burn; the end results depend not on the methods used but on the trainer and the individual dog, the training, generalization, proofing and socialization that occurred on the journey - yes, you might call it the bond 

“Have to” vs “Want to?” | Denise Fenzi

ETA: Oops just read back a page and saw the link was already posted, but it bears repeating. 'Have To' in dog training is a personal preference on the part of the trainer, not 'the' way to higher scores or the most reliability in the ring.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

@Sharon - I do know a few people who follow Denise Fenzi..
But they also have either their own way of training (case of some who are teachers) or they train with people who use corrections. I just don't think competitive dog training is all one way or the other. Harsh training isn't that popular nor do most people train like they did 20+ years ago..... most people want their dogs to "want to" vs "have to"... the argument from some and what I don't agree with is that they think saying "no" or using some other correction will either destroy your relationship with your dog or make them not really want to play the training game with you. I don't see my dog or other dogs shutting down or recoiling from all corrections. And I've shared stuff in the past I won't do because I know it's too much for my dogs. The owner needs to know what is appropriate and fair for their specific dog. 

Yep, there are people and places where corrections are recommended regardless of specific dog. There is no "reading" or understanding recommended before pinning the dog or whatever. Our first ever teacher (lady who taught cheap classes through school system was one of those). We knew nothing but thankfully realized that pinning our dog for 10 minutes every day (I believe to stop resource guarding) was stupid.... and we dropped out of those classes.


----------



## Charliethree (Jul 18, 2010)

In the interest of keeping this thread on track, a couple of items (there are many others), dog owners might want to read and consider, when choosing a trainer and training method for their dog. The bottom line is your dog is relying on you to make an informed choice, about how he is treated and trained, to search out the facts, benefits and risks, there is a ton of reliable, credible, research done, take the time to investigate for yourself, not simply rely on what you have heard, carefully weighing the pros and cons, then deciding what is in the best interests of your dog. 



What are the Implications of Using Training Techniques Which Induce Fear or Pain in Dogs?

http://avsabonline.org/uploads/position_statements/Combined_Punishment_Statements.pdf


----------



## Cpc1972 (Feb 23, 2015)

I not sure how this thread got off track but in that video it is clearly animal abuse. This was not a training technique or a correction.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Cpc1972 said:


> I not sure how this thread got off track but in that video it is clearly animal abuse. This was not a training technique or a correction.


It got off track because some people keep posting stuff that does not differentiate between abuse (people throwing dogs around) and using corrections in training. Arguments like this do not work on people who have been around the block a few times in dog training. They are posted online in places like this to sway the other people out there who don't know any better. It is a form of dishonesty.

Dog training should be fun for both the owner and the dog. That is the bottom line. There are balanced methods which are used by the majority of people who do stuff with any dog they bring home. Telling sign is the dogs thrive out there and they are sponges. And of course the obvious signs - the dogs get excited when they know they are going to train (as opposed to evasive maneuvers). They are bright eyed and engaged. 

Regardless of what method you use and where, these are things you want to see when "playing" with your dog.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Charliethree said:


> It is a sad, sad world we live in, when we have become so desensitized, so accustomed to treating animals in such a way that we are intentionally causing them discomfort, fear or pain, that we have to ask ourselves, just how 'damaging', just how 'bad', it has to be, before it is considered inhumane and wrong to treat an animal in such a way.
> Just because they don't cry out, in pain, just because they do not cower in fear, or lash out and bite when they have every reason to, it is 'safe' to assume that they do not feel discomfort, fear or pain, and that they are 'OKAY' with how they are treated? We cannot say for them, 'It doesn't hurt', only THEY know when it 'hurts'.
> They have no choice, they cannot run away, they cannot 'say' 'I don't feel good about what you are doing.', and even when or if they try, how many are willing to listen? We SHOULD listen, in all fairness to them!!!


I agree with this wholeheartedly. We have deep science on animal behavior and are capable of training without pain, so we should. I admire trainers who are fluent, skilled and creative in marking behavior and chaining it together in a reward-based way. A dog's life is all too short, so any time there is joyful learning with an operant dog I will applaud it.


----------



## solinvictus (Oct 23, 2008)

"I not sure how this thread got off track but in that video it is clearly animal abuse. This was not a training technique or a correction."

This was an instructor during training. It was part of his training technique and it was a correction. To him it was acceptable. In my opinion it was abuse. This is why I originally stated not to go to just any trainer but to do research to make sure that the trainers style and philosophy lines up with your ideas and values.


----------



## Sally's Mom (Sep 20, 2010)

Thank you Solinvictus and Tippykayak for making that observation. It was certainly not a video to spark clicker training vs electronic collar training vs aversives, etc. IMO, it was clearly a person losing it on a dog for no good reason. And it certainly made the dog slink behind him...


----------

