Total Dog Specialist Canine Services

 

 
 
 
 

Effective Use of Training Aids in Desensitisation and Counter-Conditioning

It’s always pleasing to get positive feedback from a client who had significant behaviour problems with their dog; even more so when it further underpins the flaws of the now mainstream methodology embraced by so many trainers, behaviourists and organisations such as the Australian Veterinary Association (AVA), the Delta Society, the Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT) and the RSPCA.


Last month I was contacted a person who had rescued a Labrador off ‘death row’. We had previously met when I was lecturing on fear and aggression in the months prior. The email stated “ ..... and was wondering if I could organise to come down and see you at some point. I have recently adopted a 3 year old labrador who had very little/no socialisation before I got him. He has never shown any aggression to family members but can be very funny around strangers. He has barked, growled and lunged at people and dogs.”

 

At the consultation it was evident my client was on the right track with the desensitisation and counter-conditioning regime she was employing. She is currently studying canine behaviour and training. The main issue I could observe was the disparity in strength between the handler and dog and her confidence to be able to deal with unforeseen circumstances.


As I have done with many other clients, I recommended the utilisation of a prong collar to address the disparity between handler and dog; giving the handler greater control and the confidence to be able to manage potentially volatile situations. I will emphasise the collar was not recommended as an aid to punish or suppress aggression.


This is the response I received from my client last week “Hi Andrew, I came and saw you a couple of weeks ago with my Labrador who had been showing aggression to people and dogs. I just wanted to thank you so much for your help. I have seen significant improvement in him almost instantly after introducing the prong collar and working on desensitisation activities with him. He is still a bit unsure when people approach while walking down the road but will now look up for reassurance and then happily continue on his walk past them with no trouble. He no longer barks or growls at all and his confidence is improving every time. Still got a way to go no doubt but the progress is amazing. His obedience work is coming along very well also.” 


With the utilisation of an effective training aid and the increased confidence of the handler, quality training and conditioning is now being employed. The same results could not have been achieved utilising other aids such as a head collar or front attach harness.


The AVA, Delta Society, APDT and RSPCA all rebut the use of prong collars or any method they consider aversive as having any place in the training or behaviour modification of dogs. Some tout subjective university studies of which the results are not contextual. A hypothesises need to be repeatedly proven to become a scientific fact or valid theory. These studies have no validity in the context of which they are being used. Where are all the negative repercussions of the hundreds of dogs I’ve worked (and those of other quality trainers) whilst employing all quadrants of operant conditioning? On a daily basis I see the negative connotations stemming from promoting poor methodology through: shelter surrenders, kill rates, nuisance behaviours and behaviour problems. The cognitive dissonance begs belief and it is the dog and community at large who pay the price.


The proof of the pudding is in the eating! Not in hypothesises that aren’t worth the paper on which they are written.


Andrew Clark

13 December 2015