# Barnet & District Dog Training Club - anyone tried them?



## Angels_Sin (Dec 16, 2008)

Hi,

I'm wanting to enroll Kas in a training class to help with her social skills around other dogs (she gets over excited) and just general training.

I've found this place near me:

[URL="http://http://www.trainingdogs.co.uk/?gclid=CLL3rNH4gKoCFcEd4QodpmTUyw"[/URL]

Has anyone tried them?


----------



## L/C (Aug 9, 2010)

Haven't tried them but I have been wanting to - just trying to figure out a way to get me and the dog there (don't drive and she is terrified of the tube!). I think they look quite good but I would go and observe a class first (without your dog) so you can make up your mind.


----------



## Fi :-) (Feb 1, 2011)

Funnily enough I was looking at their website yesterday! I have a pup arriving next month and am looking for classes in this area. 

I might go along and observe a class but I think in principle they sound pretty good.


----------



## Angels_Sin (Dec 16, 2008)

They're just down the road from me so I might pop down there and see if I can watch a class if they have any running at the moment. From reading their website I think I might need a couple of 1-2-1 sessions first because Kas gets so excited and playful around other dogs that she'd probably be too disruptive in the class!

L/C - how about taking her on the bus?


----------



## Twiggy (Jun 24, 2010)

I think Annette Conn is one of the instructors and if so her methods will be modern, motivational, clicker type training.

I knew her years ago when she use to compete at competition obedience shows.


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Had a little look on the website- looks okay, but I did notice that they have 'Dominance Hierarchy Problems' in their list of behaviour problems they deal with. This is seriously old-hat and out-of-date, I'm afraid. Personally, I wouldn't choose them to help with behavioural problems if they don't keep up with the appropriate literature in dog behaviour. Saying that, their classes could be well-thought-out and the methods may be modern and positive-reward based.

On a side note, I don't think training classes are a good _initial_ option for dogs that need some behaviour modification. When working on behaviour problems, it's always good to start training new behaviours- behaviours which you want to use around other dogs ('Watch' or 'Let's go!' for example) 'on the road' so to speak- in low distraction environments, to keep a dog 'under-threshold' and not too stressed out. Slowly the distractions can be brought up and you can then look to joining a training class, for training and to up the ante for your behaviour modification programme too.


----------



## Doolally (Oct 12, 2010)

Ohh you must be near me....I'm *trying* to compile a list of recommended training classes that I can give to my puppy owners, so I've emailed all the local trainers to see if I could pop along and watch a class or two so that i'm happy recommending, and that's one that didn't get back to me so I can't comment!!

I can recommend a couple in Enfield, but actually haven't got very far in finding any in Barnet that i've had a chance to go along to!


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

This is what an ex client of Annette Conn wrote about her experiences. This was July 2006...if you have an easy to handle dog & easy to train I doubt you'd have problems

**********

I am not someone very familiar with dogs or animal training; in fact, my current dog (a West Highland White Terrier named Wesley) is the first pet Ive had. My partner and I rescued him from a pound in South Waleswe knew nothing about the dogs history nor even his age. He had a wonderful disposition but little to no obedience training, and we soon learned that he was very protective and territorial, barking at and even biting guests in our home on several occasions. His aggression toward people also extended to joggers in the park and people loitering near our home. On the other hand, he was a wonderful dog with us, his owners, never challenging us, growling or barking at us, and certainly not biting us. This fact convinced us that we should try to contact professional trainers and solve his problems with other people so that we could keep him as our pet.

As someone brought up in a thoroughly liberal environment, and as a vegetarian, I certainly wanted the most humane training programme I could find. I have now come to see that so-called positive-only trainers are at best well-meaning but ineffectual, and at worst con artists. The first positive trainer we contacted came to our home for two hours, gave us several handouts about how to gain dominance over our dog (information which I had actually already read up on both online and in books I read before adopting a dog) and took £100 (GBP) from us.

We tried to implement her techniques and achieved spotty obedience as Wesley worked for treats when he was in the mood for them. On the other hand, her advice about what to do when guests came to our housetethering him in the corner and letting him bark and growl often until he was sick as we ignored him for as long as it took for him to finally give up was detrimental and I believe cruel.

When we confronted this trainer about how ineffectual and disturbing this method was (it seemed very clear to us that Wesley felt cornered and scared being tied down and ignored as strange people came to the house), she looked perplexed; the only advice she could come up with is to put a board up in front of him so that he couldnt see the guests, which of course was a way to avoid the problem rather than solve it. Afterwards, we tried to contact her for follow-ups and to report that the methods werent working, but she avoided our calls and never offered us a refund. I thought that I had put my dogs life in the hands of a professional, but instead I was ripped off and treated unprofessionally.

Having been soured on so called professional positive trainers and not knowing where else to turn, I looked for advice through books and on the internet. Much of what I read advocated treat-based positive methods and simply said that you must have a lot of patiencethat training can take months and months of consistency and determination. We went to a basic training obedience course and stuck with training the dog consistently for over nine monthsthe methods we tried and repeated daily for months were as follows: spray of water in the face (both without him seeing it came from us and then with full knowledge it was coming from us); a shake bottle with coins; baking tins rigged to loudly crash down near the dog; pulling on a flat collar/leash; food and toy distractions; time-outs; and confinement to a crate. We did get results when it came to normal everyday behaviour, but we saw NO progress when it came to Wesleys problem behaviourif a greater reward was present (such as barking at/growling at/biting a guest or chasing a jogger), he chose to engage in that behaviour rather than obey my command for a food treat, or be bothered about water or a loud noise. I was at the end of my tetherI thought wed have to give Wesley up to a rescue again and ensure that he could be placed in a home on a farm with very few other people around (a highly unlikely scenario 

EDITED OUT..

Sincerely,
C. T. Halberstam
Lecturer, Department of Theology
Kings College, London
Strand, London


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Okay, so that advice is terrible. I feel very sorry for the dog and owner.


----------



## Twiggy (Jun 24, 2010)

*


SleepyBones said:



This is what an ex client of Annette Conn wrote about her experiences. This was July 2006...if you have an easy to handle dog & easy to train I doubt you'd have problems

Click to expand...

*


SleepyBones said:


> OK fair comment, although I expect every trainer/behavourist has some negative feedback occasionally.


----------



## Angels_Sin (Dec 16, 2008)

Rottiefan said:


> Had a little look on the website- looks okay, but I did notice that they have 'Dominance Hierarchy Problems' in their list of behaviour problems they deal with. This is seriously old-hat and out-of-date, I'm afraid. Personally, I wouldn't choose them to help with behavioural problems if they don't keep up with the appropriate literature in dog behaviour. Saying that, their classes could be well-thought-out and the methods may be modern and positive-reward based.
> 
> On a side note, I don't think training classes are a good _initial_ option for dogs that need some behaviour modification. When working on behaviour problems, it's always good to start training new behaviours- behaviours which you want to use around other dogs ('Watch' or 'Let's go!' for example) 'on the road' so to speak- in low distraction environments, to keep a dog 'under-threshold' and not too stressed out. Slowly the distractions can be brought up and you can then look to joining a training class, for training and to up the ante for your behaviour modification programme too.


I did see the Dominance Hierarchy stuff on their website but to be honest, it doesn't put me off. It's something I keep an open mind about purely because in my experience, every social animal I can think of has some kind of hierarchy no matter how subtle, even my chinchillas had to work out who was going to be boss! I know it's all "disproven by science" etc but science is wrong all the time (I just saw in the paper today how theyre now saying drinking 8 glasses of water a day is in fact not good for you!!), so I just go with what my gut feeling is. Aside from that, it's not a problem I have with my dog so I don't really need to worry about it.

As I mentioned further up, I've emailed them to ask about 1-2-1 sessions to start with just because she does get so excited with other dogs, she's not aggressive at all, she just likes dogs more than people! 

Sleepybones, your post does worry me slightly, but then as Twiggy said, everyone must get the odd complaint. You never know, maybe the owners didn't handle the advice the right way, or maybe it was just simply bad advice for that dog. I think I'd still go watch a class so I can make up my own mind, but it's good to keep your post in mind so thank you for sharing


----------



## Angels_Sin (Dec 16, 2008)

Doolally said:


> Ohh you must be near me....I'm *trying* to compile a list of recommended training classes that I can give to my puppy owners, so I've emailed all the local trainers to see if I could pop along and watch a class or two so that i'm happy recommending, and that's one that didn't get back to me so I can't comment!!
> 
> I can recommend a couple in Enfield, but actually haven't got very far in finding any in Barnet that i've had a chance to go along to!


Ooh, if you find any good ones, please do let me know! Not very good that they didn't get back to you


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Angels_Sin said:


> I did see the Dominance Hierarchy stuff on their website but to be honest, it doesn't put me off. It's something I keep an open mind about purely because in my experience, every social animal I can think of has some kind of hierarchy no matter how subtle, even my chinchillas had to work out who was going to be boss! I know it's all "disproven by science" etc but science is wrong all the time (I just saw in the paper today how theyre now saying drinking 8 glasses of water a day is in fact not good for you!!), so I just go with what my gut feeling is.


Yes, there is a lot of 'bad science' around, which is precisely where the 'dominance concept' problems in dog training and behaviour came from- scientists studying captive wolf packs that had limited space, limited resources, were unrelated and severely under-stimulated and frustrated. Aggression, fighting and strict ranks were the norm in these societies. However, this is not the norm for wolves in the wild. Yes there is a hierarchy, but it is so different, so more complex and so more harmonious than some people could hope to imagine, we cannot keep to the old 'dominance hierarchy problems' description of behaviour. It's completely laughable :mad2:

And that's if we even believe that dog behaviour is similar to wolf behaviour- which it isn't. Dog behaviour is dog behaviour; wolves share a common ancestor with the dog, but the wolves around today are not even the wolves that were domesticated- those populations have been wiped out. Fact is, there is seldom need for a rigid hierarchy in domestic dogs' lives, as it would be an utter waste of energy. Hierarchies are not formed just because animals feel like it- there needs to be an ultimate goal. Furthermore, mixed-species hierarchies between dogs and humans are, until evidence proves it wrong, a human concept, not an attribute of dog social cognition.



> Aside from that, it's not a problem I have with my dog so I don't really need to worry about it.


You may not think it's a problem with your dog, but some of these trainers rely on the 'dominance concept' to describe any behaviours they deem as rude, over-excited and 'unsocial', so just watch out.



> As I mentioned further up, I've emailed them to ask about 1-2-1 sessions to start with just because she does get so excited with other dogs, she's not aggressive at all, she just likes dogs more than people!
> 
> Sleepybones, your post does worry me slightly, but then as Twiggy said, everyone must get the odd complaint. You never know, maybe the owners didn't handle the advice the right way, or maybe it was just simply bad advice for that dog. I think I'd still go watch a class so I can make up my own mind, but it's good to keep your post in mind so thank you for sharing


Definitely go and look at the class first. It should be pretty clear as to if the trainer has changed her methods, as some of the methods described are obviously dated and inhumane.


----------



## Angels_Sin (Dec 16, 2008)

Rottiefan said:


> Yes, there is a lot of 'bad science' around, which is precisely where the 'dominance concept' problems in dog training and behaviour came from- scientists studying captive wolf packs that had limited space, limited resources, were unrelated and severely under-stimulated and frustrated. Aggression, fighting and strict ranks were the norm in these societies. However, this is not the norm for wolves in the wild. Yes there is a hierarchy, but it is so different, so more complex and so more harmonious than some people could hope to imagine, we cannot keep to the old 'dominance hierarchy problems' description of behaviour. It's completely laughable :mad2:
> 
> And that's if we even believe that dog behaviour is similar to wolf behaviour- which it isn't. Dog behaviour is dog behaviour; wolves share a common ancestor with the dog, but the wolves around today are not even the wolves that were domesticated- those populations have been wiped out. Fact is, there is seldom need for a rigid hierarchy in domestic dogs' lives, as it would be an utter waste of energy. Hierarchies are not formed just because animals feel like it- there needs to be an ultimate goal. Furthermore, mixed-species hierarchies between dogs and humans are, until evidence proves it wrong, a human concept, not an attribute of dog social cognition.
> 
> ...


Yeah that's a good point about the trainers and don't worry, I would keep an eye out for that, I'm not having someone Alpha roll my dog!!

When I said about my views on dominance and hierarchy, I should maybe explain that I'm not buying into the whole "dogs are the same as wolves" thing dont worry  I just mean in a more subtle way I guess. Like do I think some dogs control their owners in certain situations? Absolutely! Do puppies test their boundaries and challenge us? Yep!!! (Not that I think that is about the D word).

I do think a dog is happier knowing it's place in the family and what's expected of it. For example, as I said with my chinchillas, they're social animals so when I introduced them, obviously I had to watch out for fights etc and they mount each other to establish who is boss (it tends to be the female!!). But once they've accepted each other and are comfortable, it's not like one of them eats first or tells the other one where it can sleep! It's just that one of them has a stronger or, dare I say it, more dominant personality!


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> 'dominance hierarchy problems' description of behaviour.


You need to be clear about what, or better who, this dominance theory really relates to.

There were only 2 trainers who put their own version of what they called The Dominance Theory forwards to pet owners, one sold them dominance reduction programs & the other wrote a book & made a video about it, I dont know if he sold training under that name or not, the only people who used were those 2 & pet owners they influenced with their version of their own dominance theory.

So, you mean the John Fisher & John Rogerson theory on dominance, not the way you put it as a wide generally accepted dominance theory, it was not.

1. APDT John Fisher  Dominance reduction program
Dog names, health, and news!: The Harmony Program - Energy Healing For Animals

2. APBC Publication - John Rogerson
The Dominant Dog
Amazon.com: The Dominant Dog: John Rogerson: Video


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Angels_Sin said:


> Yeah that's a good point about the trainers and don't worry, I would keep an eye out for that, I'm not having someone Alpha roll my dog!!
> 
> When I said about my views on dominance and hierarchy, I should maybe explain that I'm not buying into the whole "dogs are the same as wolves" thing dont worry  I just mean in a more subtle way I guess. Like do I think some dogs control their owners in certain situations? Absolutely! Do puppies test their boundaries and challenge us? Yep!!! (Not that I think that is about the D word).
> 
> I do think a dog is happier knowing it's place in the family and what's expected of it. For example, as I said with my chinchillas, they're social animals so when I introduced them, obviously I had to watch out for fights etc and they mount each other to establish who is boss (it tends to be the female!!). But once they've accepted each other and are comfortable, it's not like one of them eats first or tells the other one where it can sleep! It's just that one of them has a stronger or, dare I say it, more dominant personality!


It depends on what way we are looking at it, I suppose. Do puppies 'test our boundaries'? Well, to us, that is one way of interpreting their behaviour- but it's too anthropomorphic for my liking. I'd rather stick to what the behaviour is and only offer a small amount of interpretation, e.g. your puppy is mouthing a lot because he is feeling stressed etc.

Does a dog feel happier knowing it's place in a family? Well, I would say a dog feels happier in a consistent routine, where s/he is receiving adequate mental and physical stimulation, and feels safe in her surroundings- not scared of the people, has been well socialised, etc.

About the chinchillas-
This reminds of the early wolf pack studies in some ways. Put a animals in abnormal circumstances, and abnormal behaviours arise. One may well have had a stronger personality, a stronger willingness and need to gain resources, but this isn't a 'dominant' personality- dominance isn't a personality trait, it is only a description of roles in relationships

But dogs are not like this. They have evolved through domestication and have adapted to live in human environment, with evidence of reduced aggression, are easy to socialise, have longer socialisation periods, cooperate with humans and show evidence of social competence in our mixed-species groups. Whether dogs think of us as part of a hierarchy is still unknown- but current research shows that they there is no significant relationship between lack of obedience, aggression etc., and whether we act like a 'higher-ranking dog' or not.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> but *current research* shows that they there is no significant relationship between lack of obedience, aggression etc


Thats completly misleading & you have failed to name any research! & in cases of aggressive dogs highly dangerous to suggest the dog does not need obedience training, what research you are relying on? not APDT John Fishers 'Dominance Reduction Program' I hope. The facts to your supposition are totaly opposite! ALSO relevant, the case of the westie I mentioned, who went to Annette Conn, had not been OB trained, that was the problem (& yes he was taken to the vets, nothing wrong with him except no OB training)

OB training eg, The dog shows body language signs it 'might bite someone, a child maybe' you say "NO" & the behaviour stops, thats OB training, your dog starts to chase a jogger, you say "NO", the dog stops, thats OB training.

Non OB training eg - When the dog is biteing the child/chasing a jogger, you get a treat out of your pocket, hold it up and say to the dog "_If you dont stop that you dont get this"_

Below, the latest and largest ever study ever undertaken on territitorial aggression is the Cordoba uni 2009 study, basics below with a link to the full download > This is an easy to read study for anyone.

BBC UK 40% rise in dog bites over past 4 years.
BBC NEWS | Health | Hospitals see rise in dog bites

*Factors Linked to Territorial Aggression in Dogs (2009)*

Joaquin Perez-Guisado and Andres Munoz-Serrano

A total of 711 dogs 354 males and 357 females, 42 breeds, selected at random apart from breeds & balanced genders, across 5 Spanish cities, Almeria, Cordoba, Granada, Jaen and Madrid.

Some Significant Correlations
_The association between people with university studies and dogs with higher levels of territorial-aggression. This link might be due to the fact that owners with university studies could be subconsciously reinforcing this behaviour_

_Not punishing the dog when it deserves it. Perhaps, if the owner does not punish the dog, it feels stronger and might develop a higher level of territorial-aggression_

Conclusions
Territorial aggression depends on *modifiable factors connected to the owner * (obedience training) (environmental factors) and non-modifiable factors connected to the dog.

Factors Linked to Territorial Aggression in Dogs

*Shorter, Cordoba Uni Version*

According to Joaquín Pérez-Guisado, main author of the study and researcher at the University of Cordova, some of the factors that provoke aggressiveness in dogs are: if their owners have never had a dog before, *if the dogs do not receive basic obedience training*, spoiling or pampering the dog too much, not using physical punishment when necessary, getting the dog with the idea of a simple gift or guard dog/pet or on a whim, spaying females, leaving food out indefinitely, and spending little time with the dogs walking them and in general.

Ignorance of all these modifiable factors fosters this type of aggressiveness and makes up what we could call providing a bad upbringing for our dogs, explains Pérez-Guisado to SINC.

The study, which was recently published in the Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, is based on the following fact: almost 40% of dog attacks based on dominance are related to lenient owners who have never given their pets basic obedience training or if they have it was the bare minimum.

owners must treat their dogs appropriately and reestablish dominance over their dogs, adds the researcher

News from University of Cordoba - A University of Cordoba study proves that dogs are aggressive if badly trained

.


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Sleepy, I have already read, and explained my views on, that study a number of times to on this forum. I'm not about to do it again!

I also don't respect studies that come to such simple and fundamentally wrong conclusions of 'we need to re-establish dominance over our dogs'. That is so misleading, misconstrued and just plain wrong on so many levels. Ethologists would have a field day ripping it apart.

The study I was referring to was-

Podberscek, A. L. and Serpell, J. A. 1997. 'Environmental influences on the expression of aggressive behaviour in English cocker spaniels' _Applied Animal Behaviour Science_

Whilst I do think a lack of obedience training means there may be a lack of trust in a relationship, I don't think it's a direct factor contributing to aggression. I know many dogs (my parent's for one) that are not obedience trained, and are 99% fool-proof in novel situations and has never shown aggression before.

My point is more on the 'dominance concept' stuff. Just because people feed their dogs before them, or let them up on the couches etc., it doesn't mean the dogs will be more aggressive or 'dominant'- NB. I am using dominance here in the popular dog training mythological way, NOT the ethological definition of the word.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> I don't think it's a direct factor contributing to aggression.


If you think I meant no OB training can make or initiate aggression in dogs I did not, neither does the Cordoba suggest that.

If a dog has an aggressive predisposition & that predisposition is triggered then it needs go through an OB course ASP before it developes into a rapidly increasing problem. Reward behaviours as powerful as any of the fight or flight drive predispositions are the most intense & powerfull of all rewards for any land mammal.

Relative to the Cordoba study, the dogs they were talking about were agressive dogs, there was nothing I read into that study where they suggested "_As soon as you get a CKC you must start OB that CKC before iit rips your throat out & eats the kids_!"

.


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

I just wanted to throw in here that I don't believe anyone has suggested that no animals have dominance hierarchies. Some species certainly do seem to have strict linear heirarchies. Some (e.g. many primates) routinelly use violence to establish dominanace.

But however monkeys, chickens, or chinchillas behave is beside the point... dogs do not live in strict linear hierarchies led by a single alpha. The usual dominance claims about an alpha eating first, walking in front, claiming the highest resting position etc are pure fallacy. Claims like dogs being dominant over inanimate objects, or that excited, untrained dogs are being dominant when they bounce around like loonies, is laughable. And perhaps most importantly, dogs are experts in the art of negotiation of conflict avoidance - they do not resort to painful physical violence for every misdemeanour.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> e.g. many primates) routinelly use violence to establish dominanace


Now you mention that chimps are cannibleisitic, they even go out specificaly to attack other troops for the purpose of eating them.


----------



## The Pet Coach (Jun 8, 2011)

Angels_Sin What area are you in? Perhaps we can suggest somewhere else. although it sounds like you're quite keen to try them out?  Please have a chat on the phone at the very least and find out their methodology. 

Not really sure how this thread ended up being about dominace, but ill mannered dogs who have no boundaries and don't understand what they're meant to do, can be troublesome, I think that's something we all agree on isn't it? :thumbup1:


----------

