Kommetjie Canine College

20/08/2024

I have been trying to ignore the latest drama in the dog training world, because honestly, it is just starting to get old and boring and most of us have better things to focus on. However, sadly, it has become apparent that the latest saga is affecting many of my colleagues and causing a lot of hurt and confusion for people who are genuinely trying to make sense of what is going on and why certain trainers or behaviour experts who have always claimed to have the best interests of dogs at heart are joining hands with and promoting those who believe that it is quite okay to routinely inflict pain and fear on dogs to get them to do what you want.

The people involved in this are not that surprising, as it is not the first time that most of them have gone down this road. I can only put it down to some underlying insecurity that drives certain people to want to "be like the cool kids" and join hands with balanced trainers to try and stay relevant or because they have run out of healthy ways to increase their followings. It is not incidental that social media is in a furore over this – in fact likely one of the main goals is to create hype and keep those involved in the public eye. There seems to be little thought given to the damage inflicted on dogs in the long run from their publicity stunts, the confusion created for the general public and the hurt to those in the industry who are actually in this to help dogs and promote welfare first.

The original campaign adverts using “superhero” imagery speak volumes about the egos and intentions of the people behind this. It is honestly just gross. They can phrase it all they like in terms of building bridges across the dog training world, but that is not what it is about, even if they are deluding themselves into believing that. It is about their own egos and publicity.

Yes, I am being judgemental and harsh, but I would no more interview or try to learn from a balanced trainer than I would a person who believes that any sort of domestic violence towards their family members (men, women or children) is justified and for their own good. It is honestly sickening.

I am also so tired of hearing about “The Science” and this being used as a weapon on both sides of the debate (anti and pro punishment). This is not about science. Dogs are not laboratory experiments. They are not a thesis. They are not there for us to carry out experiments on to find the quickest ways to get them to do what we want at all times. Dogs are sentient beings with intrinsic worth, who we should regard as part of our families. Our relationships with them should be governed by our ethics and values, not graphs and statistics.

Of course science has an important place in our understanding of behaviour and learning how best to handle problems that may arise (within ethical parameters), but I really would not give a damn if some scientific paper came along to “prove” that punishment would be more effective in a particular situation, because my relationship with my dogs is governed by love, trust and respect and not by what is most convenient or effective for getting my way.

I am more and more finding that I want to withdraw completely from the wider dog training space to my own little corner of the world, where I can hopefully make a difference in the lives of dogs and people in my actual community and avoid the continual merry-go-round of social media dog trainers. I sometimes wonder if any of these people still work with actual people and dogs in the real world or whether they only exist online? I know so many wonderful trainers, who while they may not be good at marketing or have an interest in becoming social media celebrities, do so much good in the lives of real people and dogs on the ground, that I think they are worth more than all these celebrity trainers put together. Perhaps dog training was never meant to be a career that brought fame. We often say that good training, done right, is as boring as watching paint dry, so maybe this is why those seeking fame have to continually invent drama to stay in the limelight.

So here is to all my colleagues, both my good friends here in South Africa and those I catch a glimpse of elsewhere across the world. To those of you doing your little bit in your community, improving welfare one dog and human at a time - you are making a real difference. Thank you for putting dogs and their people first and valuing human and animal welfare above fame and status. Keep doing what you are doing – you are the real heroes.

17/08/2024

It's been real "Cape of Storms" weather for so many of our classes lately, but we had a good turnout today, despite the weather 💦🥶 Here the Advanced Class worked on their chin rests, on the comfort of a pillow or blanket. The faces might look sad, but that is just because they're trying to hold their heads down while still looking up at their humans - some of them couldn't keep their tails still during this exercise as it is one they actually really enjoy 🐾😄🥰

03/08/2024

We were away in the mountains for a few days and spent quite a bit of time walking. Our dogs have always loved hiking and exploring with us, but Primrose really takes it to a whole other level, climbing every rock, paddling in every stream and sticking her nose into every hole and bush - not to mention rolling in and sampling every p**p she comes across 🙈 The amount of dirt collected is directly proportional to how much fun she's having 🙄😄

Watching her sheer joy and freedom this week (freedom within limits of course - we don't allow our dogs to chase wildlife and we obviously need to keep them safe from venturing into harm's way) made me think about how many domestic dogs live and whether we allow them to fulfil their need to explore. Modern dogs are scavengers, descended from hunters, and would naturally spend their day foraging and scavenging for food. They would use all their senses to explore the environment and use up both physical and mental energy doing so.

Exploring and looking for things to meet your needs activates the SEEKING System in the brain - circuitry involved in goal oriented behaviour and the anticipation of rewards. The main neurotransmitter associated with activation of the SEEKING System is dopamine - the chemical that makes you feel really good and on a mental "high".

When our lives have few daily activities that tap into the SEEKING system, we either sink into depression or look for unhealthy ways to get our dopamine highs (drugs, social media, risky behaviour, gambling) and the same applies to our dogs. Some dogs will become quiet and miserable while others will "get into trouble" finding ways that we think are inappropriate or unhealthy to release dopamine in the brain.

Sadly, many dogs live a life of deprivation with little to stimulate them and few opportunities to explore and engage in natural SEEKING behaviours. The whole idea behind enrichment feeding is to try and meet these needs for dogs in more limited home environments.

However, we also need to think about the kinds of outings we take our dogs on and what we expect from them on those outings. Do we keep our dogs on short leashes and control the path they walk or do we let them move at their own pace, allowing them to stop and sniff and investigate whatever they find interesting? Do we take them to natural areas where they can explore and come across a wide variety of odours, where they can climb rocks, traverse logs, cross streams and scratch in mole hills and sniff bushes or do we walk them on flat concrete pavements where there is little to engage with or stimulate the senses?

I understand that some of you will object and say that you live in cities where you don't have easy access to natural areas, but then one really needs to work hard to find and access places where your dogs can explore and you have to get creative when it comes to meeting these needs. Others will say that you can't give your dog freedom, because they can't be trusted off lead - and that is where long lines can be so useful for preventing frustration and allowing more freedom, while still ensuring safety.

Dogs weren't designed to sit around all day in sterile environments, looking at the same four walls. They were designed to explore and to use their bodies and minds while doing so. We owe it to them to give them what they need to be fulfilled and happy, if we choose to bring them into our lives and homes.

12/07/2024

Our Advanced Class dogs are learning to persistently pull a tug or cloth tied around a pole until they work it right off the end - just look at those happy tails - they are having SO much fun 🤗🐾😊

25/06/2024

When do we need to take action against irresponsible dog guardians?

I am not in favour of an over-regulated society. The last four years of blatant insanity cured me of that forever and cultivated a severe distrust of authority in general. However, I have to remind myself that some laws are necessary, and enforcement of laws is essential for society to function at a basic level.

You might be wondering how this relates to dogs…
For many years I have been involved in a couple of groups or organisations that promote responsible dog ownership, especially with regards to dogs in public. The aim of these groups is to safeguard the rights and privileges that we have always had with regards to taking dogs into public spaces and natural areas for exercise, enrichment and companionship during our own recreation.

In my experience, the majority of dog guardians do care about the safety of their own dogs and the well-being of others they may encounter and so try to abide by sensible regulations and codes of conduct. However, there is a persistent minority who are either in total denial with regards to their specific dogs and the upset and harm that they have caused on occasion or who have a sociopathic disregard for the wellbeing of others (and in fact their own dogs), resulting in repeated incidents where emotional and physical damage is inflicted on others – usually other dogs, but also sometimes horses or people. The question then becomes how to deal with such people and whether the authorities are a good option.

I accept that all dog guardians are human, that we all make mistakes, that our dogs are not perfect and that accidents and unexpected situations can arise. There is often far too much judgement and over-reaction of the most minor transgressions and I wish that in general we could all be more gracious and forgiving towards each other when something unexpectedly goes wrong.

However, there is a small percentage of dog-related incidents that do need to addressed far more seriously: those that occur due to repeated human negligence, clear disregard for others and total lack of responsibility, usually demonstrated over a period of time. One has to face the fact that certain dog owners are unwilling to make necessary adjustments to keep others safe and every effort needs to be made to hold them accountable and prevent future harm. When education, offers of assistance and genuine appeals are shrugged off and ignored, that is the time when the authorities need to be brought in.

It is not simply a matter of community safety, but also about protecting the rights of responsible dog owners. Whenever there is a serious incident involving a dog in public, it takes about five minutes for people to start calling for all dogs to be leashed at all times in all places or for dogs to be banned from certain areas. Because of the behaviour of a tiny minority of irresponsible individuals, the rights and privileges of all dog owners come under immediate threat. Instead of addressing the actual culprits, everyone is punished by association. The irony is that this punishment only ever affects those who are law abiding, responsible dog guardians. Why do I say this? Because those who do not care whether their dogs are causing mayhem, do not care about the calls to curtail the rights of dog owners and will continue to disregard any new regulations or restrictions. They remain unaffected, while innocent dog guardians lose out.

At some point, we have to be willing to hold individuals accountable, if we are to retain the rights we have fought so hard for with regards to enjoying life with our canine companions. Unfortunately, in my experience, it is incredibly hard to get victims of serious incidents to take a stand. These are often the reasons given why someone will not go to law enforcement and open a case:

1. It’s not the dog’s fault
2. The owner paid my vet/medical bills
3. I don’t want the dog to be put down
4. I don’t like confrontation

Firstly, while it may not be the dog’s “fault”, if a dog has inflicted serious damage on a person or another dog, that dog poses a serious risk to the safety of other people and dogs and cannot be allowed to be put in a situation where they could hurt a person or dog again. If the owner has demonstrated an unwillingness to change, the only hope for preventing future harm is for authorities to enforce change one way or another.
Secondly, I have known quite a few repeat offenders who regularly pay vet bills and have even bought gifts for their “victims”. Yet, they do not change their behaviour and seem happy to simply pay as they go! Genuine remorse involves a change in behaviour, not just throwing money at something.
Thirdly, unless an incident was so severe that the dog is deemed too dangerous to be managed, involving law enforcement does not mean that a dog will be euthanised. In most cases a compliance notice is issued along with a fine. The owners then have every opportunity to abide by the compliance notice, which usually prescribes that the dog simply be managed appropriately to prevent further incidents. If the owners take responsibility, there is no reason for the dog to ever be removed.

Handing a matter over to the authorities is not something that I am suggesting we do lightly, but it is something that needs serious consideration when the following applies:

• This is not the first incident – especially if there is a history of multiple similar incidents
• The incident was of a very serious nature, with severe physical damage
• The owner took no responsibility for the incident and showed no remorse
• The owner is in clear denial of the harm done

No one likes confrontation, but involving law enforcement does not require that you personally confront the perpetrator. Law enforcement deals with them – you don’t have to. Doing something like this is not fun and can feel uncomfortable and stressful. However, we need to look outside of ourselves and consider the needs of our larger community, which continues to be at risk when we do nothing to stop an ongoing problem that we could have done something about.

23/05/2024

I'm going to keep saying this, because I truly believe we have to move away from looking at supposed scientific consensus as the reason for not hurting animals. Science is never settled (that's not the nature of science) and I don't need a study to tell me that shocking a dog or causing fear or pain isn't a good idea. I don't care whether it works or not, I care about the emotional experience and quality of life of every animal I encounter and I believe they have a right to be treated with dignity, respect and kindness. That's not a scientific position, it's a moral one.

It’s not just about “The Science”

For many years those of us with educational qualifications in the field of training and behaviour have been using “science” as an argument to persuade people to switch over to positive reinforcement and abandon aversive training methods. While I still believe that there is plenty of evidence for the efficacy of positive reinforcement and the potential harms of punitive training methods, I am starting to think that we may have been using the wrong strategy by simply telling people to “follow the science”.

The reality is that there is also evidence that punishment works. You can alter behaviour using aversive training tools (albeit with unpleasant fallout) and plenty of people stick with such training methods because they see results. After all, the theory of operant conditioning involves 3 types of learning in addition to positive reinforcement: removing something a dog wants to reduce behaviour (negative punishment), adding something unpleasant to reduce behaviour (positive punishment) or removing something unpleasant to increase behaviour (negative reinforcement). While we understand that there are unpleasant emotional consequences for dogs attached to all three of these types of learning, this does not mean that they don’t change behaviour – they do.

So, what is the real crux of the matter? What are we really striving for by trying to persuade people to use positive reinforcement rather than those types of learning which carry unpleasant emotional consequences? Are we just wanting to change behaviour in the way that we think is most effective? I don’t think so. The true difference between someone who strives to use positive reinforcement and avoids using both positive and negative punishment and negative reinforcement, is that we care about the emotional experience and wellbeing of dogs. Yes, there are lots of things we can do to dogs to change behaviour, but the question is about whether they are ethical or not.

At the end of the day, people have different views on the subject. Some people simply do not believe that animals are emotional beings or that their feelings and experiences matter much. For them, the ends justify the means. Others feel that they have a right as humans to get results as quickly and conveniently as possible and animals have no real rights, so whatever works is acceptable. Some believe that our dogs must be subordinate to us, so some sort of force and intimidation is necessary to create a “dominant-subordinate” relationship. Then there are those of us who recognise that all animals have complex emotions and that we have a duty of care to avoid causing suffering and to promote good feelings in our interactions with them.

While a fair amount of ignorance exists around the rich emotional lives of animals and many people have been influenced by outdated pop dog psychology, at some point, no matter how much information a person has, the choice becomes an ethical one. In the end people have to decide whether it is okay to cause fear, pain, frustration and discomfort to get what you want from a dog. Each person has to ask themselves if it is okay for humans to make dogs feel bad to get our way or whether, because the means exist to train and manage behaviour in ways that contribute to positive emotional experiences for dogs, ethics requires us to make a choice for positive reinforcement.

It is not just about the science or about what “works” – it is about how we view dogs, their emotional capacity and their right to lead happy, fulfilled lives that are free from pain and fear. If you believe it is wrong to hurt or frighten an animal to get them to comply with what you want, you will not need science to convince you of that!

16/05/2024

I am reminded of this issue again today after reading a discussion on crating as the norm in multi-dog households vs allowing dogs to live freely and with agency. Acquiring multiple dogs with the knowledge that they will never just live as part of the family and have freedom in the home, because they can't get on and need to be in cages for most of the day is not okay in my view.

It is also not okay to keep getting more dogs when they are clearly showing they cannot cope in the home environment, by displaying signs of anxiety such as urine marking, withdrawing, irritability, depression, active avoidance or regular squabbling with other dogs. I understand that sometimes one gets into these situations without knowing that this is going to become an issue, but if your current dogs already have any of these problems, getting more is knowingly adding to their discomfort.

HOW MANY IS TOO MANY?

This is a bit of a sensitive subject, but one that there is an increasing need for rational discussion on. How many dogs should a person be allowed to keep? There are probably many different views on this, as different people might have had different experiences of multi-dog households and different perceptions about what constitutes quality of life for a dog. I would think that pretty much everyone likely to read this post would agree that “hoarding” as it occasionally appears in the news, is wrong. Hoarding cases that cause a public outcry and result in the authorities getting involved, consist of anything from dozens to hundreds of animals being kept in conditions where their physical needs are not being met: they may have untreated medical conditions, will be neglected and malnourished and are usually living in cages or cramped conditions with no hygiene or cleaning. The dog’s actual physical health is compromised.

However, as a behaviourist, it is my job to also be keenly aware of not only an animal’s physical health, but also their emotional health. With regards to emotional health, one has to consider the animal’s general stress levels, opportunities to engage in natural behaviours and how well the animal’s behavioural and emotional needs are met. For this reason, I don’t think the label “hoarding” should be limited to situations where only physical needs are lacking. Quality of life is not just having food in a bowl, veterinary care and shelter, it is far more than that – quality of life depends on how an animal feels. I am sure that you would agree that having a roof over your head, the absence of physical pain and 3 meals a day, does not equate to happiness and fulfilment. You could have all those things, but a strained family relationship, a stressful job (or no job!), disruptive neighbours, lack of any close relationships or an absence of any kind of restorative recreational activities could result in you being utterly miserable.

The same applies to dogs. Dogs need more than just food in a bowl and shelter. For a dog to be content, they need the following:

1. HUMAN COMPANIONSHIP – note that this is FAR more important than canine companionship for most dogs. We have selectively bred dogs to bond with people. A close bond with human members of the family is far more important to MOST dogs than a bond with other dogs. Dogs don’t just need us around ignoring them all the time – they need quality time with us – time to play, to explore the outside world and to “work” together in fun training tasks or games.
2. OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE IN NATURAL DOG BEHAVIOURS – dogs are scavengers and they also have remnants of the predatory sequence in their behavioural repertoire. Sniffing, stalking, chasing, grabbing, digging and chewing are very important behaviours for dogs. Most dogs do not get the opportunity to engage in these behaviours in our lounges. This is where walks (where a dog can investigate new scents), play fetch, dig in molehills and get to be in the company of their humans while they do so, is incredibly important for dogs.
3. EMOTIONAL COPING SKILLS, SOCIAL SKILLS AND PROBLEM-SOLVING SKILLS, DEVELOPED THROUGH APPROPRIATE EXPOSURE TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD – dogs that seldom leave the home will become unsure how to cope in the outside world. While socialisation primarily takes place in the first 14 weeks of life, dogs need to continue to be exposed positively to the outside world on a regular basis in order to keep their skills sharp.
4. REST! – Dogs need down-time. They need a quiet place to rest at home WITHOUT being disturbed by people or dogs. Dogs needs about 14-17 hours of rest per 24 hour day. Not being able to settle, because they are always being disturbed, will result in high levels of stress for dogs.
5. LITTLE TO NO CONFLICT OVER RESOURCES – Dogs do not enjoy conflict (well, with the exception of types of dogs that were selected to be really good at it – which is another problem in itself for multi-dog households taking on those breeds). Dogs do not enjoy feeling as if they constantly have to “compete” for food, toys, affection or attention, sleeping places and even just some personal space. Doing so raises stress levels and interferes with rest. Dogs that live with chronic stress become either depressed and shut down or they become reactive and fly off the handle at the slightest provocation.

The reality is that the more dogs you have, the less easy it is to fulfil all the criteria in your home that will lead to your dog being emotionally healthy and content. Walking two dogs every day is a commitment, but it can be very enjoyable - I treasure my daily walks with my dogs, even in the rain! Walking 5 or more dogs, is not so easy. The reality is that one person is unlikely to be able to manage or “control” all the dogs effectively in all circumstances. Either the person becomes a menace to other dog walkers or they must find suitable places to walk where they won’t run into anyone else. But most often, they simply stop taking the dogs out. So there goes the opportunity to engage in so many natural behaviours that are fulfilling for dogs and there go the social skills and confidence in the outside world.


What about quality time with people? How much of this do dogs in large multi-dog households actually get? How many people continue to train or work with every dog in some way on an ongoing basis? How often do the dogs get focused and uninterrupted interaction or play with the humans that are so important to them?

What about rest? Well, when there are 10 dogs in a small suburban home, there’s usually not that much rest going on, unless the dog is too old and deaf to hear what everyone else is up to. There is also more than likely going to be some tension somewhere when it comes to resources – the more dogs there are in a limited space, the more aware they are going to be of how close everyone else is to their food or other valuable resources. If you go to the Woollies sale and find 100 people waiting outside for the doors to open, you are likely to experience a spike in cortisol and will probably be a lot more “grabby” when rifling through the sales racks than if you only found a couple of other customers in the store. On the other hand, some of us might just walk away and not even bother trying to find anything – we’d just go off feeling a bit depressed!

We do in fact have by-laws which limit the number of dogs that a person can keep. Suburban homes are limited to 3 dogs. Yet, these by-laws are completely ignored by numerous well-meaning dog owners and by many shelters - perhaps they should not be. There is a line of thought that it is better to rescue a dog and add it to an already full household than allow the dog to end up in a shelter or be euthanised. But one has to ask if “Life at any cost” is a life worth living? I know this sounds tremendously callous, but it comes from a place of consulting in households where people have rescued numerous dogs, but some of them are truly suffering, because they cannot cope in the environment they have been placed in. Sadly, it is only the reactive dogs that “act out” that we get called in to help. Those that given up and shut down, those that are living a quiet life of despair, no one notices.

For me personally, to have the kind of close working, recreational and “family” relationship that I have with my dogs, I know I should only have 2 or 3. At the same time I have colleagues who have 4 or 5, but in those cases their dogs are all also involved in some kind of work and at least two will be “retired” and enjoying quieter senior years, while the younger ones are kept busy and out of the older dogs’ “hair”. Other people may have different preferences and different reasons for the number of dogs that they choose. However, please remember when taking on another dog, that it is not just about what you want from being a dog owner that is important – it should be about whether you can meet that dog’s needs. Not just their physical needs. Not just being at home a lot. Can you meet their emotional needs? Will you able to take them out so they can enjoy the outside world and not live forever in your limited home environment? Do you have the time to build their social and emotional skills? Can you protect them from feeling stressed in your home? Do you have enough resources for every dog and are other people in your home willing and able to help with this? Do you have the means to make them truly happy, not just to keep them alive?

PHOTO: These dogs are all enjoying a lovely walk together – but they do not all live together, and their humans are all on the walk, each one looking after their own dogs and ensuring that they are comfortable and well-managed in public. While they enjoy these outings together, they would be unlikely to cope living with each other all the time – their personalities and interests are all varied, and they would probably get on each other’s nerves if they were forced to co-exist in a limited environment on an ongoing basis. Remember that dogs do not form tightly structured packs – they may have special “friendships” with one or two other dogs, but they generally form loose and transient associations with the broader community of dogs when living without human support. Forcing a large group of dogs to co-exist in a confined space is not natural at all.

10/05/2024

What makes training truly kind?

Running a dog training school, you would think that I would evaluate our success as a business on the outcomes achieved i.e. how many dogs can successfully perform certain exercises in the shortest period of time. That is pretty much what most dog guardians want, isn’t it? To teach their dogs to respond to various cues, so that they “listen” and are easy to live with. It is automatically assumed that if we are using positive reinforcement training methods (our clients are rewarding with food or toys), that the training must be kind and there are no welfare concerns to consider.

But this is not quite true.

While of course I am interested in helping dog guardians to communicate effectively with their dogs and build up a repertoire of helpful behaviours which can be cued to build cooperation between dog and human and keep dogs safe in our world, there is something else that I am even more concerned about and monitor constantly: HOW THE DOG FEELS DURING AND AFTER TRAINING. I am most concerned with how what we are doing impacts on the dog’s emotional state, as ONLY if the dog feels good while working with us, can the training said to be kind and have a positive impact on welfare.

No matter how much you think you are using positive reinforcement, if the dog is not enjoying himself, then the training cannot be said to have a positive impact on the dog’s overall wellbeing. Regardless of how much food you use in training, feeding the dog does not necessarily mean that positive reinforcement is driving the change in behaviour. The food may be completely incidental, and the dog may be responding to other factors. The dog may enjoy the food temporarily each time it is given, but the dog’s emotional state may still deteriorate over the training session.

I will try to explain:

For something to be learned through positive reinforcement, no other external factors should be driving the behaviour. Think of an example from the horse world: A lot of people would claim that when they cue a horse to halt and scratch the horse’s neck afterwards, they are using positive reinforcement and the horse is stopping because of the reward of a neck scratch. In reality, those same people are pulling on the reigns and putting pressure either on the horse’s mouth, nose or pole to get him to stop, then releasing the pressure once the horse stops. This is negative reinforcement and this far stronger motivation of avoiding something unpleasant (pressure) is the driving force behind the behaviour change. The scratching is incidental and probably has zero impact on the behaviour. The same thing can happen when we train our dogs. We may think that because we are following a behaviour with food, we are using positive reinforcement, but if we are also adding pressure or any type of physical or psychological force to bring the behaviour about, our dogs may very well be responding due to negative reinforcement, rather than positive reinforcement. Our job as instructors is therefore not only to help people teach their dogs certain cues, but to constantly evaluate the way the dogs are being taught and whether they are free from fear and coercion during the training process.

Emotional welfare is not only dependant on the true use of positive reinforcement, but also on how the entire training session impacts on emotional state. While positive reinforcement training generally contributes to a positive emotional state (we are adding good things), we need to consider that if we are asking a dog to do something really difficult for them, if it is completely contrary to natural behaviour or interferes with normal coping mechanisms, then ultimately, it can result in the dog’s emotional state deteriorating over the long term. Here are some examples of this:

1. The dog wants to sniff the ground to investigate the new smells in the training area, but we don’t allow any time for this at all and cue the dog to watch us continually instead. By doing this, we are not giving the dog any opportunity to process the environment in a way that makes sense to the dog and any mild anxiety the dog may feel in that environment may not be resolved.
2. The dog may find a particular exercise challenging physically and numerous repetitions begin to the tire the dog physically and mentally, even though each one is rewarded with food, so that the experience starts to become taxing and unenjoyable.
3. The dog may feel more comfortable standing and observing what is going on in the training environment, but we keep reinforcing them for lying down, when they actually feel more vulnerable in this position and their anxiety gradually increases.
4. The dog is struggling to grasp an exercise or is being repeatedly asked to perform an exercise they find difficult, leading to frustration.

Now in all of these examples, the dog might still learn the behaviour and some dogs might even start to become more comfortable with the behaviour over time, HOWEVER some dogs may also become increasingly frustrated or depressed so that the training has a negative overall impact on emotional wellbeing.

So, what can we do about this? Well, we need to be masters of observation. Aside from understanding what is and isn’t natural behaviour for dogs so that we have an idea of when we may be asking too much of them, we also need to watch the body language and demeanour of dogs continuously, so that we pick up any signs of conflict, anxiety, stress, frustration or hesitancy and can immediately change tack to prevent the dog’s emotional state from deteriorating. We need to get to know each dog and how they express themselves so that we can ensure that they are feeling good throughout the training session and guide their owners on how to achieve this every step of the way.

If our training is truly to be kind and have a positive impact on welfare, dogs must feel good while they perform the behaviour we are teaching and be better off emotionally for engaging with us.