Crackerjack Canines

01/06/2025

Dear Black Kraken K9,

You are latest trainer on social media to insist that aversive methods, those causing pain or fear, are necessary in professional dog training. But there’s a twist this time: you’ve also accused me of supporting terrorism. We’ll get to that later.

First, it’s crucial to address the harm caused by your narrative and the deeply flawed logic and lack of evidence behind it.

It’s not my place to dictate how individuals train their own dogs, that’s their choice. However, when a so-called professional promotes advice to an unsuspecting public—people who trust them to follow ethical, science-based animal behavior standards—that contradicts modern science and puts public safety at risk, it becomes a serious concern.

You claim that “the only antidote to a bad idea is a better idea,” yet instead of engaging in actual evidence-based discourse, you dismiss the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community by complaining that the evidence isn’t good enough. Meanwhile, you make wild, unsupported assertions typical of those who train dogs as you do, with no credible backing.

For example, where is your evidence that positive reinforcement training leads to higher rates of euthanasia? Where is your evidence supporting the use of aversive methods on any animal in any branch of behavior science? What modern textbooks or studies from the last 15 years can you cite? Have you considered looking beyond dog behavior studies to animal behavior research across species? Do you find any of that relevant?

You frequently dismiss survey studies as “invalid.” Do you trust vaccines for public use? If so, are you aware that survey studies are a critical complement to experimental data in evaluating vaccine safety and efficacy just as they are in the behavior science field? They also play a vital role in shaping public health policies, understanding mental health trends, and addressing societal issues like smoking. Dismissing their value ignores a fundamental component of evidence-based decision-making.

Tearing down a consensus (which you are failing to do) is not the same as showing aversive methods are necessary.

If your approach requires causing discomfort or fear to achieve compliance, it’s not ethical or progressive, no matter how you dress it up and it presents a public health and safety risk.

Train your own dogs however you choose. But when you promote these methods to the public, be prepared for scrutiny and criticism to follow as long as this continues.

You often cite your partner, a PhD-level animal behaviorist, to bolster your credibility. There’s nothing wrong with dissent. Science thrives on questioning assumptions. However, credentials alone don’t make someone correct, and when the majority of experts align on a position, it warrants serious consideration. What we’re seeing here, from both of you, isn’t thoughtful dissent but a broad dismissal of the behavior science community’s established consensus.

Your partner stands virtually alone among her colleagues in her field, and no major behavior science organization supports her assessment, or yours. Not one. I can provide a list of over two dozen organizations if you’d like, or are they all part of some “big positive reinforcement conspiracy” rooted in “ideological capture”?

I’ve seen your partner dismiss studies with claims like “this study is bad” or “that study is flawed,” yet I’ve seen no alternative evidence from her that has gained widespread support in the scientific community. Why should the public listen to you two instead of the broader scientific community?

The burden of proof rests on those defending aversive dog training methods, as they contradict the established scientific consensus on humane and effective practices. If you believe pain and fear are necessary, provide evidence, let it undergo rigorous scientific scrutiny, and only if the consensus shifts should you consider advising their use on the public’s dogs.

Now, let’s talk about intersectionality. You accused me, a Lebanese person, of supporting terrorism, a deeply ignorant and harmful claim.

Just as you’d likely blame an aversively trained dog for biting a person, you blame the Palestinian people for fighting back as their culture is erased from land they’ve inhabited for thousands of years by a settler colonial force that has been there only since 1948. 

Aggression breeds aggression, whether in dogs or people. Both of these are rooted in a culture of dominance and colonization, a culture you continue to uphold by continuing the cycle in the very profession in which we both work.

The inability or unwillingness to see this parallel reflects a culture that values dominance over understanding, perpetuating harm to both people and dogs.

I ask you and the balanced dog training community to begin connecting those dots.

The problem isn’t just ‘balanced’ dog training, it’s the culture that enables and normalizes it.

Zak George

01/05/2025

Such a beautiful, touching tribute from Zak George

Her legacy is astounding.

Not only has she left a profound mark on the dog training and behaviour community, her work with humans as one of the founding members of TAGteach International is inspirational.

On top of that, she was a gifted writer.
I love all of her books but my favourite is “Reaching the Animal Mind”.

Today, we honor the incredible life and legacy of Karen Pryor, a pioneer who transformed the world of animal training and left an indelible mark on our industry.

It’s not an exaggeration to say that Karen Pryor’s groundbreaking work paved the way for trainers like myself, and countless others, to advocate for humane, effective training methods. While the fight for positive change would still continue, her visionary efforts undoubtedly accelerated the progress, bringing us to this better place much sooner than we might have otherwise achieved.

Karen Pryor was one of the first to show the world that animals don’t need to be trained with violence or fear. Her work with marine mammals in the 1960s, grounded in science and compassion, paved the way for positive reinforcement techniques that continue to shape the industry.

She didn’t just teach us how to train better; she taught us to see animals as sentient beings, deserving of respect, patience, and understanding.

Her book Don’t Shoot the Dog! remains a cornerstone in the field of behavioral psychology and animal training, introducing the world to the principles of operant conditioning and the power of positive reinforcement. The Karen Pryor Academy, founded in 2007, has trained thousands of professionals, ensuring her legacy endures in the hands of those committed to ethical training practices.

She laid the foundation for a movement that prioritizes trust, connection, and kindness. The positive changes we see in the industry today, our collective rejection of outdated, punitive methods, are a direct result of her fearless advocacy and unwavering belief in a better way.

Her work changed our field, but more importantly, it changed the way we connect with the animals who share our lives.

Thank you, Karen, for showing us what’s possible when science and compassion come together.

Your legacy will continue to inspire us, and we’ll strive to honor your memory by carrying your vision of compassion for animals forward. Rest in peace, and thank you for everything.

Zak George

01/02/2025

12/25/2024

Merry Christmas everyone!! 😊🎄🐾

12/19/2024

Baast thinking she’s helping wrap gifts this year 😂🎄🐾

12/18/2024

12/18/2024

After releasing Episode One with Wallace, I dove into your comments, reactions, and messages. The feedback was overwhelmingly fantastic.

But….some of you were unsettled, maybe even shocked, by my assertion that it’s still alarmingly common for trainers to slap on a choke chain [or other aversive collar] with a dog like Wallace who was very avoidant of me and extremely reluctant to interact with me initially.

Some questioned whether I was exaggerating, as though these harsh methods were fringe and not baked right into the mainstream. However that IS the status quo, and it’s often excused under labels like “balanced” training, “respect,” or “leadership.”

I’m not here to pick pointless fights. I am here, however, to call out a reality that too many in this industry work hard to keep under wraps: the normalization of pain and fear.

We saw this repeatedly in 2024, even with the faux ‘force free’ community who could not unequivocally condemn the intentional use of pain and fear in this profession.

Consider that researchers at Arizona State University, who collaborated with shock collar trainers, still found that every single dog in a shock collar group yelped in pain when the device was used “properly”. Let that sink in.

These were shock collars being tested on dogs for very basic training skills. And they collaborated with one of the fiercest defenders of shocking dogs in the industry, Ivan Balabanov, who could not even get 20% of the dogs to comply with his pain based approach, and who demonstrated his inability to implement modern evidence-backed approaches that do not rely on pain and fear.

These are facts, and they’re terrifying when you think about how freely pain is administered under the guise of animal training, not only by obscure trainers, but also by those with prime-time TV slots and international seminar tours.

We see shock jocks in media circles tossing out half-baked defenses of these tools as though “dominance and leadership and respect” were a scientific principle, not a thinly veiled justification for violence...

The reality is, the same justifications historically used to excuse violence towards women or children, claims of “teaching respect,” “maintaining control,” or “establishing authority” are the very ones being used to justify inflicting pain and fear on dogs at the professional level.

It’s all rooted in a harmful power dynamic, where those with the most power impose pain to force compliance, while dismissing the emotional harm done to the vulnerable.

The stunned reaction from many of you just shows how expertly this industry’s old guard has gaslighted the public.

They’ve convinced people that pain and intimidation are part and parcel of “good training.” They are not. They never were.

Modern, evidence-based methods that nurture trust, build confidence, and respect each dog’s emotional life are not some fringe ideal. They are here, they are real, and they produce results without leaving emotional and physical scars

Let’s continue normalizing calling out anyone who pretends that hurting dogs is just another “tool in the toolbox.”

(If you are curious to see the clip in question I posted it yesterday and you can see it on my page or you can see the full episode on YouTube.)

12/18/2024

Wishing everyone a wonderful Christmas Season!!
🎄🐾😊

12/18/2024

12/08/2024

https://youtu.be/syi4Cx6v4UE?si=jV-jvuCWX_2jRCUB

Join Dr. Em to learn what we currently know about canine grief. What behaviour changes occur most often? How long do they last? When should you seek veterina...

11/26/2024

The word “ideology” is the favorite buzzword of those whose methods crumble under scrutiny.

But what does it actually mean as it relates to our recent discussions here? 🤔 Ideology: A rigid set of beliefs or practices, often rooted in tradition or power structures, that resists scrutiny and prioritizes adherence over progress or evidence.

Dismissing evidence-based training as “ideological” is a deflection—a refusal to confront the reality that their practices prioritize tradition and control over science and welfare.

Here’s the truth: ideology clings to the past, resists progress, and avoids accountability.

Evidence-based dog training evolves with research, prioritizes the dog’s emotional and physical well-being, and withstands rigorous examination. Calling this “ideology” is not just inaccurate—it’s projection.

The real ideology lies with those defending outdated, aversive methods. They frame their resistance as “practicality” while ignoring the harm they cause.

By misusing the word “ideology,” they try to mask their fear of change and their unwillingness to let go of control.

This isn’t about being “right.” It’s about responsibility.

If a method causes harm, we have an ethical duty to replace it with one that doesn’t.

That’s not ideology… That’s progress.

11/17/2024

Mark Your Calendar for The Dog’s Truth Premiere!

On November 17th at 7 PM Eastern, Kim Brophey & Family Dog Mediation: LEGS in Motion unveils The Dog’s Truth—a groundbreaking one-hour documentary that will change how we see and understand our beloved dogs.

Through the lens of applied ethology, Kim’s L.E.G.S.® model flips the script on outdated narratives about “behavior problems,” revealing the natural consequences of the very unnatural world our dogs live in.

At AggressiveDog.com, we believe in helping dogs—and the people who love them—by uncovering the why behind behaviors. Kim’s documentary aligns perfectly with our beliefs: empowering dog professionals and owners with deeper understanding and expanding the possibilities for dogs with aggression.

This free resource is for everyone. Dog trainers, pet guardians, vets, groomers, or anyone who cares about dogs. It’s a life-changing opportunity to discover the root causes of canine struggles and take the first steps toward meaningful solutions for dogs and their humans.

Want to watch the premiere? Comment "The Truth" below, and we’ll send the link to the trailer directly to your DMs!

Save the Date for November 17th, and let’s come together to reimagine a better life for dogs. A life they deserve.

Together, we can give dogs the good life that leads to the good dogs we all dream of.