A Career Path to becoming a Dog Professional

Kay Laurence Dec 2010

I have some sympathy for anyone seeking to become a professional in the dog business. There is either a joyous lack of career path structure or a complete dog’s dinner of choices for the unsuspecting ambitious. Actually in comparison to many current dog dinners you either get the same uniform, bland, taste dry offerings 365 days a year, or a mixture of dead carcasses of varying amounts of pleasure and work involved. I evolved along the joyous lack of structure, which deviated through many enjoyable vistas and would not be called the shorter route. Fun though. 

Over 15 years ago I attended a collective of the University Powers That Decide Future Courses to put forward a proposition for a degree in Canine Studies, attempting to emulate the then emerging and successful Equine Studies degrees. There was interest but due to the complete lack of funding that the equine world enjoys still today, there is no obvious pathway to become a qualified canine professional.

There still exists a significant gap between all the specialists: “breeder”, “rescue”,  “behaviourist” and “trainer”, each path probably dictated by individual skills, interests and the different journeys. Labels have a way of causing more harm than good, and as a person who has travelled a route of both application and study I view them as inseparable. The journey must be holistic, encompassing both species of people and dogs whilst we continue to co-exist and seek a more fulfilling partnership.

The career path has many routes, allowing for individuals to seek their own interests and development but before we divert into different fields there are generic elements that must shape our choices.

1. Responsibility to the dog, as individuals and as a species.

As the professionals, we often take the role of arbitrator looking for compromise between the demands of the client and the needs of the dog. We employ our knowledge, experience and skills to find common ground where all interests are met.

At Learning About Dogs I am involved in many different arbitrary roles:

• Between the conflict of a busy client with a working breed, who has become trapped between their lifestyle and the dog’s innate behaviours. They have a demandingly busy day and have satisfied their perceived duties to the dog by good daily walks, but inadvertently they have allowed the dog to develop an uncontrolled hunting frenzy instead of a mutually enjoyable walk. The result is immense frustration from not understanding why the dog will not come when called (“I always give it treats”) or chase traffic, and the cold experience of holding an empty lead, or unable to walk along the road. The dog faces a restricted future without free running or outings.
• Between the demands of a sport that perceives certain behaviours: speed, animation, contorted movement, unnatural interaction etc., as requirements for success, and the dog’s innate behaviours. The client is in conflict between meeting the social expectations of their chosen sport and their respect, love and compassion for their companion who “fails” to meet these demands. The outcome is frustration caused by the trap between pressure to employ the current training trends that are not suited to their dog or their level of skills and competency.
• Between the dog you have at home and the dog you have outside in the world. The world puts pressure on your dog to behave in a certain way, often in direct conflict with the dog’s innate behaviours. The dog that “should” be friendly to all people, dogs and other animals. The dog that “should” cope with technology, fireworks and invasive interaction. The dog that “should” never behaviour like a dog: bark at uncertain stimuli, chase prey, dig holes, chew furniture, run like the wind, sing for their supper, steal food and have sex when the opportunity is offered. Your client is frustrated between their common sense, intuition and the expectations of society. Sadly it is often the dog society that is more judgemental than the wider communities we live in.
• Between you and the money makers. There is a financial boom in the pet industry which has attracted the financially driven to harvest great fortunes out of your frustrations and love for your dog. The latest piece of equipment that will solve your extending arm pains, the collar that will suppress all natural canine joys, the technique that will result in perfect harmony, the food that will satisfy your eco-ethics. As dog professionals we have responsibility to the dog species, to protect them, and us, from this type of abuse. As professionals we use our knowledge and understanding to give the clients the ability to see behind the marketing that hides the harm caused. This marketing is extremely skilled at using terminology to give clients a good feeling with advertising vocabulary such as “gentle”, “natural”, “easy” or “quick”.

There is also our clients who will become the future professionals and facing an entire forest of difficult choices. Where to invest their time and money to be able to move forward in their career? Organisations that are the politically correct groups to subscribe to, or be certified by?

As professionals, we need to have confidence in our ethics and use our skills and experience to improve the life of dogs, not let them be bent to meet the ignorant demands of clients, organisations or society. You make your career out of what dogs have given you, not what you can make out of using people’s love of dogs.

2. Responsibility to improve your skills.

Working with another species demands that we become super observant and analytical in seeking the truth about the information on view. Dogs cannot easily explain their feelings or conflicts, we have to observe and assess the evidence.

Recently I was changed from one drug to another to achieve a healthier blood result. The benefit, completely passed unnoticed by me, was evident and significant, and when discussing this with my Doctor I realised that often the diagnosis was identified by the solution that worked, naively I had considered that diagnosis came before prescription. Similarly we often do not know what is causing a behaviour until we see how the solutions affect the behaviour. We have to note what we are seeing, apply a range of possible solutions, and the solutions that works will show an immediate effect on the behaviour. This will give us the correct diagnosis.

I often see trainers trapped into a specific solution, and rather than diagnosis, the behaviour is analysed, or more accurately verbalised, to fit the chosen solution. For instance, lead pulling, this is probably one of the most common grounds for dog-person conflict. Clicker training is applied to teach the dog to walk on a loose lead, when the lead is not tight, click, feed. This protocol favoured by the trainer is applied for all lead pulling dogs, which are rooted in many different causes. It often doesn’t work because of faulty diagnosis.

• The dog as a puppy was indulged to interact with everything that took its considerable juvenile interest. The person mis-guidedly followed the pup everywhere, with good intention, to affect socialisation and cause no harm to its neck. The dog as an adult has no sense of connection and continually opposes the restrictive pressure.
• Result: Conflict outcome: tight lead

 

• The person is walking at a speed is too slow for the dog’s natural movement. The dog can naturally either walk or trot, but neither pace suits the person. The dog’s walk is too slow for the person and the dog’s trot is faster that the person’s stride. If you want to observe the different gaits:
• http://www.youtube.com/user/ladstwo#p/u/7/X7AkrsLd-AQ
• Result: Conflict outcome: tight lead

 

• The dog is walked in an environment of extreme arousal. The scents, sounds and surrounding movements trigger innate predatory behaviours, the dog is over stimulated. The dog does not have the skills in managing their arousal to be in this environment. The ultimate Eat All You Can Chocolate Factory, made all the more stimulating by the infrequent exposure and chocolate starvation. Cadbury workers soon learn an aversive response to chocolate.
• Result: Conflict outcome: tight lead

 

• Lack of skill in teaching the behaviour of connection. The person and the dog are only connected by the lead, which if not present would result in zero connection, a dead dog or an expensive veterinary bill. The lead is a safety device not a suppression tool. Can you imagine a seat belt that locked you in the car and made you sit to full attention all the time? It is there for the accident, it is not there to prevent you moving. Without skill and understanding the person and the dog have not learned to walk together as a partnership. They have not found any compromise for the conflicting interests or have developed a shared experience of co-operation.

The solution may certainly work, where the behaviour of a loose lead could be understood and achieved by the dog, but it would not work if the dog cannot mechanically match your walking stride, or cannot manage its arousal level when approaching Squirrel City, or finds food, or you, of no relevance when surrounded by territorial challenges. Learning to walk together in partnership in a range of different environments demands a lot of skill and understanding, application of many different strategies and a serious number of practice hours to achieve. Practising these skills will be continuous during the early years of the dog’s life.

We have to learn an extensive range of observation and analytical skills, which keeps improving and extending throughout our career. We learn to assess and address the underlying emotional state of both the dog and the client to effect an improvement in the relationship. These are not skills you can learn from books or courses or videos, but from experience in the wide field of partnerships, with our own dogs and working with many and varied partnerships of our clients and learners.

This skill base has to be wrapped into good quality teaching techniques and communication skills. We need the experience of doing it to learn how to do it and how to teach other people to do it.

3. Responsibility to extend your knowledge.

My business is more than dog training, I have always believed that dogs deserve an improvement in our education of them as a species. We have co-evolved for thousands of years side by side, but modern society seems to demand the greatest compromise from the dogs, whereas my own belief is the reverse, in that we are in debt to what the dog has given to us. I hope we continue to learn more about dogs, making their lives better, less stress filled and with more respect for the fabulous animals they are.

It is not often I am left without comment, but when organising another opportunity to learn I was informed that an agility/freestyle/obedience show was more important than this specific opportunity to learn, since “I would tell them what they needed to know”. So it was OK for me to go out into the world, out of my comfort zone (leaving my dogs) and “learn”, digest the material and then select which bits they needed to continue to inflate their own ego with more wins/prizes/adoration from their fans. I think this is known as educationally lazy.

It is always your responsibility to learn, improve and seek knowledge. And actually it is quite pleasant in the long run, it keeps you mentally active, you learn to negotiate new hurdles, find out more about yourself and change your view on life. In fact I am very interested in teaching people that want to learn, improve and seek knowledge, and if you arrive at the door with an “educationally lazy” attitude, walk away, Kay Laurence is not for you.

I have discovered I have a fair number of the educationally lazy who see me as a resource to crop new ideas from. “Oh you are so creative” is the frequent bleat. But this comes from seeking knowledge, exploring new ideas, trying out and being proactive. As Stephen Lindsay reminded us “Intelligence doesn’t come from standing still”. When we invest in imitation and replication we inhibit our own creativity. Copying others absolves us from responsibility.

This does not mean that every client that arrives at the door needs a five year apprenticeship in dogs, but they must arrive with the right attitude to want to learn, and it is my responsibility to have the knowledge to feed that appetite. I was never fed the nutritionally unsound “because I said so”, my father insisted on me learning all the reasons, and his lengthy explanations often served well to avert future ”why ….?” questioning.

Dogs are extremely skilled at making us move intelligently, they don’t let us stand still. The dog will arrive that demands you improve your knowledge, practice your skills, change your own behaviour and become a better friend.

2. Having the right mindset is more important than anything else

Attending every course on offer is not going to accelerate your career to the top of the tree, and neither is a drawer full of attendance certificates. You need to attend with your thoughts in place, some education, and an ability to hear, not just listen. Expert after expert, many of whom make it to publication can tell you what to do, but without exploring your own ethical boundaries you will find yourself flip flopping between “methods” and directionless. Instead of a career that is satisfying and fulfilling you will become a collector of methods and need a dog-i-pod to contain all the different solutions you have learned.

Once you know your own ethical boundaries, you can choose aspects of the promoted method that fall within your boundaries. I have watched at least 30 of the Cesar Milan episodes and he does a first class job of helping you pin down your ethical boundaries! With confidence from knowing where I stand I watch, analyse and learn, and select a technique that helps my clients improve their understanding and relationship with their dog. He teaches a particular “stillness” before action, and I find this is really helpful to both the person and dog. That one nugget you learn may be worth the attendance cost, but don’t bother make out the attendance certificate for me thank you. The chances of you attending the course, reading the book, or watching the program and agreeing with everything that is promoted is slim. Our learning history, lifestyles and experiences shape the location of our ethical boundaries.

I am often required to make ethical decisions on behalf of our learners, and this is not my role. My role is to provide the information across the board to allow you to make your own decisions. This is rather similar to the vaccination question. On one hand we have the experts who believe in annual vaccination for all diseases for all dogs, and on the other we have the experts who believe in zero use of vaccine. How can they both be right? We can only make a decision based on the (correct?) information available, and use knowledge to weigh up the options and risks.

I have promoted clicker training from the minute I held the first clicker. Not because I particular like clicking, but because I believe in freedom of choice. I have believed for over 30 years that the dog, and learner, should have the choice and the learning outcome is strong, reliable and extensive. If I am training my dog they are not on a lead, they do not have to stay with me to train, they choose to stay with me. This comes from lead-free learning, respecting that they have the right to make choice and that they will be able to make the right choice. Whatever choice they make is “right”. If the dog is lead free, able to leave, go sniff the carpet, look out of the windows, how much clearer can they express their disinterest in the training at that time? If the dog cannot choose to be with you, how can you believe you are “positive training”?

Fifteen years after that first clicker, and a journey through the Clicker User versus Clicker Trainer debate, it has become quite clear to me that the success of the method, using a marker, is based on the mindset of the applicator, not the method itself.

The method is powerful, effective and efficient and can be equally successfully applied with or without an ethical foundation. Your ethical foundation is personal to you and I find myself in a place of conflict when seeing a behaviour, clicker trained, that is counter to the dog’s best interest. Where a move makes the dog look undignified (walking on their front legs, crawling), where long term repetition of the behaviour is likely to cause physical harm (extremes of heeling, torqued turns in jumping), where the personal space or social proximity of the dog is intruded upon to meet the expectations of the owner, where the dog is clearly stressed being made to perform, interact or suppress its own instincts.

A method appears to be reward based or positive, but it can do a very good job of hiding insidious training. You may blanche at using punishment based training, it does exactly what it says and you can see it outright, but without exploring your own ethical boundaries training labelled as “positive” can have you stepping outside those boundaries without you being aware of it. I regard it as deceptively dangerous.

Questions you may to consider:

1. Am I teaching something that is in the dog’s best interest?

The dog is medium sized, strong, 4 year old, with a medium sized, middle aged lady of uncertain strength.

• Choice 1: The dog is put on equipment that prevents pulling through pressure on the dog’s body, distortion of their balance and long term skeletal damage, but the dog does get an outing and some exercise, albeit in an unnatural pacing. The owner feels safe on the equipment.
• Choice 2: The dog is not exercised in a traditional “go for a walk” format, but given time and space to play with another dog or the owner, given a physical workout on a treadmill or swimming.

2. Am I teaching a suppression of natural behaviour?

• The dog is fearful of strange men and needs to stand still for a temperament test or to be judged in a show ring.
• Choice 1: the dog is clicker trained to tolerate hand contact. The dog is clicked whilst standing still and handled by someone familiar, which progresses to the stranger handling. The rate of reinforcement is high.
• Choice 2: the dog is clicker trained to go and touch a strange person’s clothing and progressed going to the strange person’s hands and seeking interaction. The rate of reinforcement is high.

3. Am I supporting a lack of connection ?

• Is the relationship in conflict, and the lack of connection is the route of the problem. The person thinks that they have a right to “obedience” from the dog since they provide clicks and treats, but they are not prepared to invest time and energy into the relationship? If you solve this problem without addressing the relationship issue have you not actually solved anything and  will they return in six weeks with another problem. Can you ethically be a “fixer of dog problems” or be a “introduction to a great relationship facilitator”.
• Is there a lack of competency, skills and knowledge that I can provide?
• Is there a gap that you can fill with relevant information, deepen the understanding and find a way of co-operation and compromise? What if the client does not have “time” or interest?

4. Is this a square peg in a round hole?

• Is it a question of the lifestyle being completely unsuitable for that particular dog. The person may have the right mindset, energy and time to invest in extensive behaviour modification, or would the dog simply have a better quality of life living in a different environment?
• Can the person put the dog’s best interest ahead of their pride, can you support either decision?

The questions are usually answered by whether the solution demands the greatest cost from the person or the dog. Cost value of dog against person is not financial, but in what they are giving up, their freedom of choice, their time, their health and with safety considerations. We are encouraging an equal amount of compromise. From experience I can advise you that if you are shifting your ethics to meet financial interest, you will be seeking another career fairly soon.

If you are seeking to move along this career path, consider carefully the paths you choose. Do not be lured by multi-certification in a range of methods, but look at your own personal development in respect of what the dogs would ask of you. How much do you know about “natural rearing”, gait and balance development, nutrition and suitable fencing? You will seek a pathway that demands you learn a bit by doing it, study the underlying principles, listen to the environment and make sure the dog’s best interests are served, and then go around that cycle again and again and again.

Be open minded and ready to accept your own limitations for where you are. Sometimes you may be faced with extremely complex situations which are difficult to understand and require a high level of skill and competency to bring about an improvement. You have to find a way to explain this to your client in terms they can understand, teach them skills within their capabilities and give them sufficient information to make choices. Your client may be either your dog or a person and their dog. This is not an easy career, the fact that there is no recognisable professional standard is an indicator of the complexity of what we do. But I have no doubt that dogs deserve every ounce of super human effort we can put into improving our skill, knowledge and understanding.

PO Box 13, Chipping Campden, Glos. GL55 6WX. 0(+44)1386 430189

22 February 2012