miranadobe
Posted : 2/27/2012 1:29:27 PM
spiritdogs
miranadobe
In this case, it isn't about the dog as much as a person in the owner's home, who has no respect for "pawsitive, et al" style trainers.
spiritdogs
I second the recommendation for Posidogs. No dog is such a "special case" that good, solid, knowledgeable positive training will not work. I'd trust my own dogs to Chad before I would take them to that other place.
Anne, you and I have very different positions on whom we would take our own dogs to. Some things are not about a trainer's personal agendas.
That's right. I would never, ever, ever take my dog to anyone who would put a shock, prong, or choke collar on any of them. If a person has no respect for positive trainers, I would let them sink or swim with their own choices before I would knowingly send them to a person who would use those methods. I think that some things are also not about client agendas either when they conflict with my ethics.
The owner doesn't have an "agenda that conflicts with anyone's ethics", other than the person in the home who is attempting to beat the dog. I do not presume the trainer the owner chooses is, or is not, someone who uses one method or tool exclusive to another. She was simply directed to NK9 for a referral of an area trainer. What do you know about NK9's trainer referrals that makes you think the trainers they suggest will "put a shock, prong, or choke collar" on this dog?
In this case, it's about delivery of the message being HEARD - which is important for the safety of this dog and the relationship of this owner and family member, while the owner works to keep them separated and search for alternative housing. The family member needs to hear the message that he cannot beat the dog and expect a worthwhile outcome. We are all familiar with how a message can be obscured by its delivery.
Thank you for your offer of help, Xebby. That's really helpful and kind. When/if I hear back on the names of the trainers the owner has been directed to, I'll PM you. I'm pretty sure because of the urgency of the situation, travel is less important than safety for the dog.