Rethinking The Finicky Dog

Most dogs aren’t picky eaters – they are well known for big appetites and less than discerning ‘taste’ about what they will chow down on. But of course “most dogs” does not mean “all dogs”, so what do you do when you have a dog that is finicky about what it eats?

One of the things that get in the way of us understanding our dogs is that we impose our human rationale onto them. With humans, we rely far more on our sense of taste than we do on our sense of smell, so we tend to overlap our thoughts and feelings about food onto our canine companions.

I would think almost all dog owners know that their dog’s sense of ‘smell’ is far superior to that of humans, but what about their ability to ‘taste’ compared to ours?

Scientists have estimated that humans have approximately 9,000 taste buds, but did you know that dogs have considerably fewer? Would it surprise you to find out that they are believed to have approximately 80% fewer taste buds than humans?

Read The Entire Article Here

.

Not All Dog Trainers Are Created Equal

It’s not very often that I’ll participate in the war-of-words that erupts between advocates of ‘Positive Reinforcement’ and ‘Traditional’ dog training methods, because it often ends up being nothing more than a shouting-match (and a rather juvenile one) that really shouldn’t warrant anyone’s time or energy.

Despite that, I recently felt the need to weigh-in and make a very specific point in defence of Positive Reinforcement philosophies and methods. My response was to a Traditional trainer who made an all too common jab that went something like this: “If Positive Reinforcement training works, then how come I have clients who went that route and got nowhere with it?”

I'm sorry, but I cannot abide a blanket statement that R+ doesn't work just because someone didn't have a success with it in their own situation. My response was this: “If a Positive Reinforcement trainer in Seattle, or in Vancouver, or in Toronto does not succeed with a dog’s training, should that lack of success be a reflection of Positive Reinforcement methods as a whole, or should it be a reflection of the particular trainer in question?” Not surprisingly, I didn't receive a response to that question.

It is quite clear that training, behaviour prevention and behaviour modification programs based on Positive Reinforcement can provide very effective, humane and reliable results but, just because someone embraces and uses R+ methods, it doesn’t mean that person has the experience or ability required to successfully handle every situation that presents itself.

I say this because I've seen lots of examples of Positive Reinforcement trainers and Traditional trainers alike who did not have the ability and/or experience to handle behavioural issues and, in some cases, even basic obedience training.

The problem with unqualified and/or inexperienced trainers affects the world of ‘Traditional’ training just as it affects the Positive Reinforcement trainers, and so, ironically, the two sides actually do have at least one thing in common.

I think it would be fair to say that the majority of dog owners have no idea that being a dog trainer requires no qualifications or experience whatsoever (at least that is the case in North America). There just seems to be an assumption by the general public that if you call yourself a dog trainer you are an experienced and capable professional, and that all trainers are 'created equal'. This is certainly not the case in reality.

This lack of standards and qualifications poses a huge problem for the credibility of the dog training industry and an even bigger problem for the welfare of the animals we are supposed to helping. Unfortunately there appears to be no solution in sight.

.