I have told you that I follow a bunch of dog trainers, above all in the USA. It is super interesting for many reasons, mostly to see and hear about how they relate to dogs (since they are dog trainers, there is of course a lot of talk about dog training, which is not what I primarily do myself). I just finished watching/listening to one over three hour long conversation between two of these dog trainers, and want to reflect a little on it.
Ivan Balabanov hair a podcast published on Youtube (certainly in other places too, but that's where I see/listen), and in an episode from about a year ago, he has this several hour long conversation with his colleague Michael Ellis from Leerburg (school for dog trainers). Both of these people are big in the dog world in the US, they train and compete in tougher dog sports (for example IPG), they both have their own training centers for prospective dog trainers, they travel all over the world lecturing, holding training courses and so on. In other words, they are on a different level than the local dog trainer in the municipality where we live.
That people have dog for various reasons is nothing new to me. It's so obvious. A person who is interested in perhaps competing with their dog in some dog sport will probably get a breed that works for their purpose. Another wants a clean one, cut companion dog, while a third wants to use his dog for hunting, track or something else practical. And then there are people like me, who are most interested in – well, in all honesty, company, but also the dog's “psychology”, or ways of behaving based on what kind of energy it encounters.
But it was so incredibly, extremely clear in this particular conversation. Among other things, herd walks were mentioned, where drivers walk with a number of dogs that move neatly and neatly forward, as one of the most boring things a dog can experience. It was actually the first time where I felt like I disagreed – at all. I buy straight away that a dog needs freedom on the leash, alternatively loose, to read the newspaper, run around and simply be a dog. Just not, during my chemotherapy treatment, is mostly what my and Boyo's walks look like because I don't have the strength or energy for much more. But usually – especially if I have more dogs with me, the structured walk is my first option.
Men Michael Ellis, who was the one who expressed this particular opinion, also mentions that there is a difference between pet owners (common man, in other words) who may not manage to maintain structure at home or who do not devote a lot of time to training, and those who either work professionally with their dog, competes or otherwise trains a lot with their dog. He believes that these dogs get so much structure that they need some time to just be a dog. And I buy that argument – actually.
It gets me to understand on a slightly deeper level, the conflict unfolding in the American dog world right now. It is also available here, but because the US uses things like electric collars, prong collars and so on, then the contrast there becomes much greater.
I think like this; a few years ago I had many and very fruitful conversations with a person who works as a guardian with dogs. We talked a lot about requirements for dogs, and I realize that there is an absolutely huge difference in the demands that you, as a professional with a dog, have on your dog, and the demanding position one has when the dog is one's pet that does not have to cope with more than to behave socially in society. It really becomes two extremes, and therefore they cannot be compared.
And maybe is it is this contrast that makes it so difficult, for so many, to understand why it is so important to be able to correct your dog in a sensible way.
It is also here it is interesting, considering that both Balabanov and Ellis work with what I would call one of the dog breeds' elite; Belgian Malinois. There are some working breeds that are truly elite dogs, and I would not advise a private person who has never had a dog, or who just want a companion dog, to ever get one. It's just too much dog for us mere mortals to handle.
And I take me the freedom to say exactly that, because I have shared my life with one of the Armed Forces' dogs. My Ella and I adored each other beyond anything, and our relationship was of that special kind that I probably won't get to experience with any other dog. But she wasn't much fun to live with, because she had exactly the qualities required to be able to work in areas where an extreme amount is required of both dog and handler. She had a psyche I have not met in any other dog (except for other FM dogs), energy that stretched out into space, a will and drive that never ended.
I'm coming not to have such a dog again. For slightly different reasons. Partly to let Ella be the only one, just as she wanted to be. Partly because I'm older now, and wouldn't be able to deal with such a dog again. 😀
My very personal and little private conviction is that my idea of how to raise and live together with another dog 100% based on how I had to raise and live with Ella in order for her to function. Of course we practiced a little now and then, but it was more because she thought it was so much fun than because I had a goal with it. But with a dog like Ella, for example, corrections are necessary – at least for me as a private person. Ella and I argued mostly about her energy level and the decisions she made based on it. That's how I learned that a dog that goes up in laps becomes impervious to instructions, and therefore you have to help it lose energy. Sometimes it requires a physical correction – and sometimes verbal communication is enough, or body language.
So even if I'm not a dog trainer myself, have no plans to become one, and also don't spend much time training my dogs, so I can still relate and understand why corrections are necessary. Had I had another dog as my first, maybe it would have looked different. One's own perception of what a dog is and how to handle them is undeniably colored and shaped to an extremely high degree by precisely the first. I suspect that's also why I find Boyo so insanely different and strange compared to her. I'm getting used to it, but there are two completely different ways of thinking and working together with them.
However, I realize, especially after listening to these super skilled men in their long discussion, that I have an approach to dogs that differs from most people's. I'm not going to apologize for that, and I absolutely refuse to join the cult of positive reinforcement. After following the debate between Zak George and Robert Cabral, I have realized and understood that it is indeed a cult, which I find extremely unpleasant. It is an approach that is based less on the dog's needs and more on the practitioner's pretended ethics and morals and self-righteousness to feel like a better person than the one who thinks, works and does differently.
To on something way try to round off, so I can say that I am morbidly impressed by people who train and compete with their dogs in extreme dog sports, or who work in the military, police or similar professions. The dogs that are suitable for that kind of service are so insanely cool that I almost pass out. I wish I had the energy, the energy and the desire to get involved in that way with my dog, because that would be unbelievable. Unfortunately, I know myself very well and know that it is not my thing at all. So I get to focus on what I find even more interesting – namely having a dog that works together with me, and in society.
And have you managed to read this far, I'm impressed. 😀