This is common with trainers who use aversive methods - they attempt to use positive training verbiage to obscure their techniques. Shocking a dog is NOT communication. It IS correction/punishment.Dog #1 - Have a stranger suddenly walk into your home. Have the dog's shock collar set high. Be ready to correct the dog the moment it shows aggressive behavior. (The trainer also emphasized that this shock is not "punishment", but rather "communication")
I admittedly spend time on TikTok and I see this a TON. Just this morning there was a post about training recall using force free methods, and of course there was a commenter that said "well, if they had an APBT they would know it doesn't work". Because APBTs have high prey drive and are prone to animal aggression/reactivity. The funny thing was, someone asked that poster about bully breed mixes, because there are several on that app who have successfully been trained to a high level of recall with force free methods. Nope. Bully breeds "don't count" nor do other dog breeds, because apparently NO OTHER breed or mix can be aggressive or have high levels of prey drive.I also take exception that their dogs are "more complex". All dogs are complex. Their lives may be limited or expansive, but the dog itself is never simple.
I actually have found that places like Petsmart and Petco are more up to date on training methods. I would hazard the guess that it's because they rotate through trainers and those trainers are often young with no history in outdated techniques and self exploration in training techniques - and that is more likely to lean towards the "latest and greatest" of training techniques.Then one day a few weeks later I was in PetsMart and an employee helped me out by holding Gibbs while I did something I can't even remember. We ended up chatting, and I found out she is their in house trainer. She said a few things that actually sounded dog wise, and what the heck, I signed up for their puppy course. All clicker, and to my surprise superior in every way to the place with the great reputation. No lectures about alpha anything. We got shown techniques and got to do them the whole time. Gibbs learned things. I learned things.
I always thought of my own training as balanced in that I will use things like a collar correction and have used a prong collar in the past. However, I joined a forum labeled "Balanced Training," and was appalled to find a high percentage of the threads discussed e-collars, another good percentage discussed prongs, and if there was much discussion of anything on the other side of "balance," I didn't see it. So I'm never using the term again."force free don't work for every dog, some of them need balanced training!" comments.
That's the reasoning I came to also. I'm an old broad myself, and it's hard to give up what you know works for something that only gets you to the same place via a different path -- even when you've decided the different path is better.I actually have found that places like Petsmart and Petco are more up to date on training methods. I would hazard the guess that it's because they rotate through trainers and those trainers are often young with no history in outdated techniques and self exploration in training techniques - and that is more likely to lean towards the "latest and greatest" of training techniques.
In contrast, professional trainers with their own classes usually have years of training background but very little recent exploration in new techniques. They often have an ego due to their background that causes them to fight against new concepts and methods.
Yep. It's that attempt to disguise the use of outdated punishment based training.I always thought of my own training as balanced in that I will use things like a collar correction and have used a prong collar in the past. However, I joined a forum labeled "Balanced Training," and was appalled to find a high percentage of the threads discussed e-collars, another good percentage discussed prongs, and if there was much discussion of anything on the other side of "balance," I didn't see it. So I'm never using the term again.
The problem isn't the tool. The problem is "one size fits all" training such that the same tool is used on every dog.A lot of times the "You can't do -insert whatever here- using positive based methods" will become "Well, you can't do it with -XYZ type- of dog", which becomes, "Well, it's still so unusual that nobody else -could/would want to- do it", and so on and so forth.