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.
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.
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