There is so much literature out there about “Balanced “, “Force Free” and “Aversive” training, it's a wonder that normal folks can actually make up their minds about how they want to raise & be with their companion animals.
And for someone like me, who is always trying to improve my skills, to learn and understand more about my chosen profession, who sees the good and bad in all the training styles, even for me it is deeply disturbing and confusing. I am ALWAYS second guessing myself, always asking “Is there a better way that I've not tried yet?, and usually the answer is “Yes, there is.” But how to choose which technique to use and how to escalate, if needed, is my challenge.
This is not something new for me.
My whole life, I’ve always had to do my mental gymnastics before committing to doing anything. Even in my previous career. Folks who know me know that i prefer to anticipate & solve all my imagined problems BEFORE I embark on a thing. I like to have my stuff planned out, with as many eventualities allowed for as I can think of.
But real life just LOVES sneaking in and scuppering my best laid plans!
And this brings me to my point.
So with all these promises offered by the various training methods so freely available to the general public, where’s a real life tested assurance? Is there one? Should there be one?
Personally, I feel that ANY animal professional offering promises or guarantees & assurances of a specific solution / resolution of a behavioural or training problem is being a bit naive and is practicing both self-deception and disingenuousness towards others.
When one species (Human) is trying to interpret and communicate with another (dog / cat / horse / rat / fish / snake - take you pick of ANY of the multitude of animals on our planet) and does so without the benefit of science-fictional “translation” devices, then its all just INTERPRETATION, and not literal translation. This means, while the really good ones back up their notions with proper science and much study of both their own and other experts, and can thus be pretty reliable in explaining certain “normal” presentations of behaviour, there is still an aspect of guessing, although this is mitigated with scientific testing, investigation and application.
However, to Joe Bloggs, the (wo)man on the street, they simply don’t have the time, inclination or passion to do the often long, arduous and boring research to get to that point. So then, they interpret what they see through the lens of their own personal reality. This leads to the sadly mis-applied anthropomorphising of a whole HOST of offered behaviours.
Consider the craze at the moment for “Guilty Dog” videos. It's pretty well known that the dogs in the videos aren’t feeling guilt, as we humans know it, but are presenting a range of what would be called “appeasement” behaviours (grinning, squirming, sneezing, wriggle butt-ing etc). But to the human owner, this is interpreted as guilt. And THAT is their reality.
So back to training / handling methods.
Dr Google can be very misleading, if not downright dangerous. All it takes is for the poster of a “how to” article to be better than average at using words to convince folks of their respective truth for there to suddenly be a new craze made up of a couple of folks clicking on the well-crafted article, identifying thoughts that they might find parity with, sharing this on this toxic thing called social media, and through this finding more folks who do the same while absolutely NONE of them stop to test, investigate, assess, question and voila! A new training craze is born!
Think of the idea of the “vanishing human” craze - you know the one where the animal is looking at the human playing peek-a-boo in a doorway with a big blanket, and suddenly the human vanishes. For me, this causes quite a bit of discomfort because I can’t help but watch the animal as it tries to process the idea of its supposed constant human suddenly disappearing, and I can’t help but wince thinking how this whole stupid thing erodes trust and tests the bond we spend so much time trying to forge with the animal.
And the same applies to the Dr. Google training videos and DIY options folks have access to. You can literally pick up all manner of utter codswallop online. And make no mistake, each methodology has its good and poor aspects! But how are the normal people out there to know what is what?
For me, I don’t come down on any of the specific methods, mostly because I use a hell of a lot from all of them. Folks who know me know that I will always start as soft as I can. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. But folks will also have seen that where needed, I will use an aversive and have no problems or hesitation doing so, BUT, I will only go there after I have tried every single soft trick I know. I am constantly learning new tricks and am building myself quite a repertoire. But things do happen where an immediate intervention is super important, and an aversive, used appropriately, with the correct timing and without going the whole “psycho-axe-murderer” (i.e. using only as much force or aversion as will achieve the desired immediate outcome and not an iota more) can be worth it’s weight in gold (or in life!)
And here comes why I called this post “This is MY Reality”.
I love the idea of force free training. It truly speaks to who i see myself as, BUT, in MY reality, many of my clients (both animal and human) have not the luxury of time or money for the implementation of purely force free methods.
I love how with force free methods the animals end up offering willing co-operation as opposed to enforced compliance from aversive training methods and which can fail under extreme pressure, but I’ve been made to see that I need to sometimes be the one who applies the aversive, who exerts the small moment of pressure on the animal, to expedite the outcome so that the animal & human relationship can continue in a more harmonious way.
And make no mistake, it is usually only mildly unpleasant. But the long term benefit outweighs that short term discomfort in my mind.
I think back to some horses I recently had to help. They’d been free-roaming on a farm nearby for several years and had regressed into semi-feral-ness. Time came and they needed some urgent and substantial veterinary & farrier care. But not one of the horses would take a halter anymore, despite all of them having been backed & ridden in their previous lives. The human farm owners had the means to offer the horses safe sanctuary and sufficient good basic food, shelter and interactions but didn’t have the luxury of much spare time or cash. Thus when time came, a degree of pressure was placed on the horses to get them paddocked, and then haltered and then the veterinary & farrier care needed applied (Plenty of bribery - buckets of treats, but, pressure none the less as time was short, so my approach was a case of present gently, let the halters be thoroughly smelled and inspected, while apples, carrots and jam sandwiches were offered, then applying the pressure of draping the halter on the neck, hand holding the neck strap, hand holding on the head etc until it could be fitted and tied off in short but intense sessions interspersed with much jam-sandwiching. One of the more recalcitrant horses, also the eldest on the farm, still resists being haltered and will make you work a bit before permitting it.)
Or a dog I recently had to help - Its owner had lost his farm, and after this and other personal tragedies had had to move into a relatively small house and yard within a very limited time. The dog had NEVER been leashed, handled nor put into a motor car before. The owner was given a very short time to vacate his land, and needed help to get his dog moved. Again, my method was present gently but apply pressure to help shorten the time. (Many, many, many treats later, and using a simple slip leash wide open so that i could treat the dog through the leash as i gently draped, then progressively looped in, until i could slide the leash on & off easily, all the while using my body language & treats and when it came to the motor car, after speaking really nicely to the humans vet, we elected to sedate the dog for the trip and I am still working on habituating him because cars remain the source of great distress.)
Or the case I recently had of two much-indulged teenaged “power breed” dogs who had begun to squabble. While working on their basic obedience, an incident occurred of unintentional trigger-stacking and consequent explosive behaviour which almost redirected onto the human. I had to intervene quickly with a body-block interruption & aversive correction and just that quickly the offender reset. There is still much work with those two, but just that single iteration of an aversive intervention was sufficient to create a “thinking pause” in the bratty brain of the offending dog.
And this is what I mean by using only as much aversive as is needed to achieve the longer term benefit.
So yes, in my dream world, I’d probably be a full - on “force free” advocate, BUT, in this reality, I need to open myself up to considering other methods too.
In the case of the horses, had we not been willing to apply appropriate pressure, then firstly there would be very lame & ill animals, and for the donkey stallion, his mare and daughter, they’d have been more little donks and not enough forage & shelter.
In the case of the unhandled dog, had we not been willing to put the pressure on, he’d be dead (and not humanely euthanised either!). As simple as that.
In the case of the two bratty teenaged power dogs, one would probably be in hospital, the other on death-row mislabelled as aggressive, and the human most likely with scars.
But you’ll be saying; You've not spoken of the Aversive only method? And that should be your answer. I don’t think any sentient animal, including us humans, operates well when only ever offered distressing options.
So for me, I guess it all comes down to always trying to find the solution that will best fit the needs of the animal AND the human and I suppose this makes me a “balanced” handler, but honestly, since I fall over my own feet most of the time, the title makes little sense. I prefer to think of myself as a conscientious or ethical handler.
Comments