London, Ontario -
2-YO dogs 2 old 2 change?
Every dog must have his day -- or longer -- in boot camp | Herman Goodden | Columnists | Comment | London Free Press

phooey! aint so, IMO...
--- terry

__________________
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
*wolves R wolves, dogs R dogs, + primates R us.*
tmp, sept-2007

I agree with you it's shocking!

I think that is absolutely disgusting! The idea that dogs are just disposable objects that you just "throw away" when they're broken and buy a new one!

Thanks for posting this Terry- sounds like John Wade is certainly one to avoid!

__________________

what really blows my mind, caroline -
is that this dude touts himself as a BEHAVIORIST.
i can hear Ur jaw drop! yup, he does...
so Why is he not FIXING these problem behaviors, vs writing off the dog?

i cannot fathom his heaving the baby out with the bathwater attitude.
just plain un-fathomable... Humans, eh? almost any other species is easier for me, LOL... and, oh, my, that poor dog.
very sad, very frustrating!
this column hits 40k subscribers each week - THAT is frustrating.

i sure hope they are resistant to suspending disbelief!
--- terry

__________________
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
*wolves R wolves, dogs R dogs, + primates R us.*
tmp, sept-2007

I understand why some of you that have not actually met me or attended my seminars have misinterpreted Mr. Goodden's unfortunate phrasing.

Mr. Goodden phrasing where he used the word bluntly was not intended to convey that I willy nilly tell people to abandon their dogs to the needle. He was trying to convey that I did not attempt to misle him into thinking they can all be saved. I do not, nor will I ever bluntly tell someone to put their dog down. My job is provide options, not make decisions. I have a work shop on aggression assessment that I have taught to professionals all over North America from around the world and will be doing another in the Peterborough region in two weeks. It's popularity amongst professionals such as veterinarians, RVT's and trainers is because it helps save dogs, not kill them. It outlines protocols for diagnosis, assessment and treatment. That protocol was followed in this case as it is in all cases I am presented. After an intense assessment (I believe Mr Goodden referred to it as a "marathon" session.) I outline as I did with Mr. Goodden the only 4 options known to exist in cases of extreme aggression with extreme meaning that their is severe and immediate risk of considerable injury. The first is to investigate training options. For this there is a subset of investigative options pursued. There are cases where it is a case of hard wiring and others where it is soft. Either way the factors identifying which and influencing the ultimate outcome via training are too numerous to outline here. The second is the implementation of safety protocols to protect people. It may include the first option but may be a sole option when training is unlikely to provide results or they will not be achieved in a manner for which family and/or the public can be safe. In severe cases the tools and protocols for option 2 are impractical in that they will provide insufficient safety, then option 3 is investigated. Option 3 is to attempt re-homing of the dog. As those experienced in rescue are aware there are not a lot of homes willing to take in an aggressive dog. Most ethical rescues will not take them in. Those willing to do so have limited funds and usually do not have the ability to take them in because they do not have the space. The final option of the four and without using sugar coated words because it is an ugly option in every situation is to kill the dog. This is the exception and not the rule but it does occur with enough frequency to keep me in every case intensely investigating the first 3 options so that it can be avoided as I find option 4 no matter the necessity extremely distressing as well. However I am not a miracle worker and while ownership is a sacred obligation to the dog it does not absolve us of our sacred obligation to keep our family, friends and the public safe.

Some trainers teach obedience and occasionally encounter low level aggression. That is not the case for me. I do hundreds of aggression cases per year and the vast majority are saved and go on to live full lives. However as I specialize in aggression many of the most severe cases find their way to me. This is why I am associated with the demise of more dogs then other trainers, not because I am uncaring or unskilled. Much the same way were a cancer specialist if judged on patient stats alone and then compared to an obstetrician might be thought to be uncaring. Despite best efforts I am faced with option 4 disproportionately then most other trainers. I do not enjoy this aspect of my job but I would not be doing that job if I did not lay out all of a dog owner's options including the dark number 4.

To reiterate; I provide options, I do not make decisions for other people about what amounts to a cataclysmic event in their lives and I would never be so callous as to be blunt in these scenarios.

John Wade
Dog Training With John Wade

Permission to cross post granted.

Hi John,

Thanks for taking the time to explain the piece in the article.

The bit that baffled me was Mr Goodden said the aggression was displayed randomly but as I am sure you know as much as the next person that nothing ever happens randomly so there must have been some underlying factor that was causing the outburts of aggression.

From a curiousity point of view what was the underlying cause of the aggression and how would someone go about rectifying that? I ask this as loads of people use this site for problems witht heir canine friends so a starter for ten is better than a non-starter.

Hope you have the time for a reply

It would be unethical of me to provide specifics in this or any case where the parties are easily identifiable.

Aggression can be random in that we don't have the means/technology to identify the catalyst or catalysts all the time. Much the same as epileptic seizures. We know it's a seizure but we can't predict when and don't know why. However the source of most aggression is easily traced but to someone with little or no experience the aggression would appear to be random and most clients I have met would confess to believing that to be the case before they were shown that the aggression was predictable rather then random. Either way, that doesn't mean it can be "rectified". There are several variable influencing that.

When people are looking to have a problem "rectified" I have to ask what does that mean? For you it might mean that the animal be preserved no matter the cost, for another it might be based on the assumption that all problems are resolvable, for another it might be a risk assessment to identify one of the 4 options I identified, for another it might be follow through on one of the 4.

John Wade
Dog Training With John Wade
The Wade Dog Training Collar

Some can argue older dogs are easier to train as less excitable, prone to distraction and able to hold concentration for longer periods of time. Not to mention quick to grasp the quickproquo of being rewarded for good behaviour, but that would only apply when positive methods were used. I can see an older dog being more likely (and rightly so!), to retaliate if older school methods were to apply instead....

It's the old argument of positive training against dominance methods. Guess which one is the one that makes you feel more Godly! Promises results in fixed amount of times and completely disregard each dog is an individual with individual problems.

Teach a dog as if you were a dog, except you are not a bloody dog (or wolf!), your dog knows that, you don't smell like one, you don't look like any he has ever met.
You lead your dog in the right direction by making him want to do that not because you say so...

Ultimately if everything fails and you haven't managed to scare some discipline in your dog, well start again with a younger model!

Excellent post

__________________

re post # 6 - johnWade

hey, john! :--)

i did not want to comment solely based on a single article, so i went to other sources -
several fellow-trainers whose opinions i have found to be highly reliable are also members of the CAAPDT - the Canadian Assoc (i am not) - all immediately and individually replied that Ur posts to the CAAPDT on-line list have been (variously) Quote, *disturbing, *upsetting, *worrisome and (paraphrasing for length) *personal theory junk-science.

another source were various fellow vet-med connections local to U -
the most-general summary in one reply was that vets and vet-techs Quote, *react with horror when his name is mentioned*, unQuote, as a training or behavior resource, or reference on dogs and their behavior and/or training.

so according to my back-up resources, all of them fellow Canucks, Gooden got it pretty doggone accurately; in fact, many felt that he was too mild altogether in his portrayal and statements.

best regards,
--- terry

__________________
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
*wolves R wolves, dogs R dogs, + primates R us.*
tmp, sept-2007

I'd respond but it's too hard to steer a parked car. I don't think you read the Goodden article completely.