Dog Training Limerick

angeldaisy

Anyone on here have any experience with trainers in Limerick, so far I've been recommended Dave Brunnock and Mike Pryer ?. I have no experience of either of these, but I need someone to help me iron out some issues with my dog, think there was a history of abuse when she was a puppy.

I want someone who can teach me how to work with the dog and how best to resolve these issues.

Any recommendations?

DBB

Yes, if you'd like your dog trained using ethical, non-punitive, coercive techniques, the only person in the limerick area who can help you is Bev Truss of www.problems.net. Actually now that I think if it, she also has a contact in limerick who she may recommend to you if Bev herself can't help, both Bev and Helen are the only people training dogs in limerick who have the necessary, industry-recognised qualifications.
If your dog is nervous and acting in a fearful way, then you need a behaviourist, not a trainer. Again, these two ladies are the only qualified behaviourists who cover limerick. And neither of them would dream of using choke chains or shock collars as training tools.
I don't know Helen too well, but I do know Bev, and she's excellent.
Good luck!

gregers85

DBB wrote: »

Yes, if you'd like your dog trained using ethical, non-punitive, coercive techniques, the only person in the limerick area who can help you is Bev Truss of www.problems.net. Actually now that I think if it, she also has a contact in limerick who she may recommend to you if Bev herself can't help, both Bev and Helen are the only people training dogs in limerick who have the necessary, industry-recognised qualifications.
If your dog is nervous and acting in a fearful way, then you need a behaviourist, not a trainer. Again, these two ladies are the only qualified behaviourists who cover limerick. And neither of them would dream of using choke chains or shock collars as training tools.
I don't know Helen too well, but I do know Bev, and she's excellent.
Good luck!

What are the necessary, industry-recognised qualifications

DBB

gregers85 wrote: »

What are the necessary, industry-recognised qualifications

Indeed, I'd have been more accurate to say "becoming", or "in the process of being" recognised, or accredited, in the case of trainers.
Professional dog training associations don't yet demand formal qualifications, but like a lot of industries, when people go to the trouble of getting themselves a recognised qualification in the field, it is very much appreciated not just by other qualified trainers, but by owners, because they've a good idea what they're getting, rather than taking a punt on a cowboy. And so, certain qualifications become the accepted norm. As it happens, moves are afoot in the industry to make sure all trainers have reached a certain level of training themselves.
Behaviour is a different story. Although anyone can call themselves a behaviourist now, the title is well on the way to becoming protected, and indeed is already quasi-protected by the insurance companies, who only pay out for consults with members of the APBC (Assoc of Pet Behavior Counsellors), which itself requires members to have a minimum of a degree in companion animal behaviour, plus experience in the field.
Either way, given that there are so many self-titled cowboys calling themselves trainers and behaviourists, it's surely good practice to recommend trainers who already conform to what are to become the industry standards in both fields.

carav10

First off, I'm in no way trying to discredit anyone who has gone and studied and received the qualifications from various courses but I do have a few questions.

Who currently regulates/ approves the current Dog Training Associations in Ireland? I'm guessing they're self-regulating at the moment. (I notice the Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors is UK based) Who would the title be protected by? Is this under review by the Irish government for statutory regulation? As that is the only way to protect the title here in Ireland.

Reason I'm asking is, there are a lot of people out there who have years and years of experience of training and working with dogs who to be honest, would laugh at those who go and study 'dogs' and have the audacity to discredit those who really know dogs from a lifetime of experience just because they haven't got the piece of paper, and like in many courses, come out of it still not having the instinct and hands on experience that is required for dealing with training & behavioural problems. I'm no expert but I have come across people who have studied dog training/behaviour courses, I don't know which ones but they were Ireland based, but I kind of switched off after one of them said she's never had a dog, and another failed to recognise a puppy as a labrador when someone was joking with her that it was some rare breed when she asked what it was (it was a labrador...). I've also come across some having done these courses who have no control over their own dogs, and faced with a problem dog would probably be in serious difficulty as to how to handle it.

Given the choice, I would by far go to someone who has lived and breathed dogs all their lives and really knows them, rather than someone with the paper but not the practical knowledge and experience. But then, that's the case with a lot of professions isn't it?! All the paper in the world still doesn't make some people good at what they're doing...!

jimf

very well put

an old saying of my late father was a week in the field is better than a year in university

tk123

carav10 wrote: »

Given the choice, I would by far go to someone who has lived and breathed dogs all their lives and really knows them, rather than someone with the paper but not the practical knowledge and experience. But then, that's the case with a lot of professions isn't it?! All the paper in the world still doesn't make some people good at what they're doing...!

Why not go for the best of both worlds - there's plenty of qualified trainers/behaviourists out there with years of experience too?

TooManyDogs

I did some obedience classes with Mike Pryer with my dogs but I did find his techniques a little hard, my newest dog at the time was a rescue dog who was terrified of life and I refused to let him handle her.

DBB

Sorry for all the text here, but here is LOT of stuff that's been posted above that urgently needs to be corrected. So, forgive the length of my post.

carav10 wrote: »

Who currently regulates/ approves the current Dog Training Associations in Ireland? I'm guessing they're self-regulating at the moment. (I notice the Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors is UK based) Who would the title be protected by? Is this under review by the Irish government for statutory regulation?

It is highly unlikely that the industry will be officially regulated here in Ireland any time soon. All regulation will be industry-regulation coming from the UK, and eventually becoming legally recognised with regard to behaviourists (not trainers). At the moment, however, the UK dog control laws require that certain dogs are exempted from BSL via behavioural assessment by a properly accredited behaviourist, which invariably means an APBC member. Similarly for child fostering/adoption in the UK: dog owners who want to adopt must have the dog assessed as above.

Before I start, I feel the need to make sure that there is a clear distinction between a trainer and a behaviourist, as there is a lot of juxtaposition going on. The amount of study and work that differentiates the two is vast. Just... vast.

Dog training in Ireland, is self-regulated at the moment, by two dog trainer's associations. But do remember that a fair few industries are self-regulated, which can be a bad thing... but if the people involved at the top are themselves highly trained, qualified, experienced etc, and if there is a transparent operating system for the association, then it makes a big difference to the efficacy of self-regulation.
Dog behaviour is currently overseen by ASAB, the Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour, the umbrella organisation of which APBC is a member. They will be responsible for the eventual legal protection of the title of "behaviourist". ASAB and APBC are based in the UK, but have members from all over Europe, and all of their members are bound by strict T&Cs.

As explained above, currently in Ireland, the insurance companies have a quasi-enforcement of what a future "behaviourist" will need to be, what qualifications they need to have, and as such, this goes some way to make sure that insured clients only employ behaviourists who know what they're talking about, because they not only have had to attain a significant level of education specifically in animal behaviour, they also have to demonstrate that they have sufficient practical ability and experience. They also need to do a serious amount of CPD. This last underlined bit seems to be overlooked by people, including some who have posted here. Not only that, but from 2014 onwards, anyone wishing to become a "behaviourist" will need to do substantially more practical, supervised behavioural work than they do even now.

Reason I'm asking is, there are a lot of people out there who have years and years of experience of training and working with dogs who to be honest, would laugh at those who go and study 'dogs' and have the audacity to discredit those who really know dogs from a lifetime of experience just because they haven't got the piece of paper, and like in many courses, come out of it still not having the instinct and hands on experience that is required for dealing with training & behavioural problems.

There is little doubt that there are some people who are naturally very talented dog trainers. No doubt indeed. However, I would hate for your post to give the impression that such trainers are easy to come by, because for every good self-styled trainer I know, I know at probably 20 who have also been training dogs for years, but training them using dodgy, often cruel techniques at worst, or at best, because they don't have a good knowledge of learning theory (i.e. how dogs learn), they make an absolute balls of dogs, and don't know how to put things right when they go wrong. Doing something for ages does not qualify anyone, in any field, to be deemed expert: who is the judge of this? You can't call yourself an expert unless you've been assessed by an external, certified expert! I know so many, not just in dog training, who hide behind the "I've been doing ot for years therefore nobody can teach me anything" mantra... Is this really good enough in this day and age? I think such people are living in denial: if they were THAT good, they'd know how little they know.
The trainers who laugh at those who try to better themselves by getting a recognised certification in the subject are usually the ones who use choke chains, who use e-shock collars, and who call positive dog trainers "biscuit-flingers", in the mistaken belief that positive, ethical trainers cannot "correct" unwanted ebhaviours using ethical, non-harmful techniques.
If they went and got themselves a formal qualification, they'd know this stuff.

I'm no expert but I have come across people who have studied dog training/behaviour courses, I don't know which ones but they were Ireland based, but I kind of switched off after one of them said she's never had a dog, and another failed to recognise a puppy as a labrador when someone was joking with her that it was some rare breed when she asked what it was (it was a labrador...). I've also come across some having done these courses who have no control over their own dogs, and faced with a problem dog would probably be in serious difficulty as to how to handle it.

I'm not going to comment on the courses available in Ireland at the moment, as I have reservations about some of them, and I'm not surprised you have come across this sort of thing, because I have too. All I can say with regard is that when people are engaging a trainer, they don't just fall for the "I've done a dog training course therefore I'm a dog trainer", but that they make sure their trainer has been indpendently assessed by an external, professional group to make sure that they do, in fact, know what a Labrador looks like, are used to handling dogs, and have well-behaved dogs themselves. Anyone who is a qualified behaviourist on the other hand is, by definition, a member of the main umbrella organisation.
However, I HAVE to point out, if they did their course in Ireland, none of the people you met had done a behaviour course: training with a dollop of behaviour, perhaps, but not behavioural counselling. There are no behaviour courses available in Ireland, and there will be no behaviour courses good enough to bring people up to the academic standard required by APBC or ASAB any time in the near future. If you want to study behaviour, you have to go to the UK, and you have to do the minimum of a degree.

Given the choice, I would by far go to someone who has lived and breathed dogs all their lives and really knows them, rather than someone with the paper but not the practical knowledge and experience.

Again, let me clarify, if you are getting a behaviourist that meets the standards that are going to be required (legally) and quasi-required (by insurance companies), then you can rest assured that the practitioner has the paper, the experience, the knowledge, and quite likely has breathed dogs their whole lives. A properly qualified behaviourist is a different species to a self-styled, self-titled behaviourist.

an old saying of my late father was a week in the field is better than a year in university

In the case of a behaviourist, this is simply not true. I am not kidding when I say that having an untrained person, no matter how long they've workied "in the field", address behavioural uissues in dogs would be like having brain surgery done by a first-aider. Behaviourists are, and need to be, as highly trained as any human behavioural consultant/psychologist/psychiatrist.
I don't know why people have such a "thing" about a someone who is tinkering with the intricacies of their dog's emotional make-up having the depth of knowledge and experience that's required to do it: it's no less deep than that required for human treatment, up to working alongside vets to prescribe appropriate psychoactive medication for dogs. Would you really want someone who's not trained in this stuff to deal with your dog if it was exhibiting behavioural (NOT training) problems?
I can only assume people have misconceptions about what "proper" behaviourists do because they've never actually seen a "proper" behaviourist do their work!

jimf

very good post dbb

but surely you must first and foremost have a genuine love and understanding to be able to get through to any animal if you have at least the experience of having owned and cared for your own dog you will understand that no 2 dogs are alike

why do student vets go on placement to practices before their final exams this to me means the profession feels it necessary that they have at least some field experience before going out into the very tough vet profession

theres no point knowing it all if you dont have the know how to put it into practice

DBB

jimf wrote: »

very good post dbb

but surely you must first and foremost have a genuine love and understanding to be able to get through to any animal if you have at least the experience of having owned and cared for your own dog you will understand that no 2 dogs are alike

why do student vets go on placement to practices before their final exams this to me means the profession feels it necessary that they have at least some field experience before going out into the very tough vet profession

theres no point knowing it all if you dont have the know how to put it into practice

Thank you for your kind words
Of course you have to have a love and understanding, no matter what you're getting into! I know several vets who never really liked animals that much, they just did it because they got the gazillion points required in the Leaving Cert! But shouldn't a passion for animals/dogs/any subject, in itself, drive someone to want to get as highly qualified as they can get in their field? I know I enjoy nothing more than watching and listening to people at the top of their game, whilst many of the unqualified trainers described above mock these renowned experts... cf "biscuit flingers".
I did also say that I have reservations about some of the people coming out of some of the dog-trainer courses (I have no reservations about any behaviourist who is member of the APBC though, because I know every one of them has been through the mill both academically and experience-wise, and that they have converted their passion and understanding into a qualification and accreditation of top quality! You'd HAVE to love it to get through it all!)
Perhaps you missed it in my wall of text above , but regarding field experience, I also explained above that qualified behaviourists DO have to show a practical ability to handle dogs and apply their academic knowledge: being a behaviourist is all about applied behaviour after all. This requirement is going to become much more demanding from 2014 onwards, where they will have to do a serious amount of supervised field experience.
This setting of standards is what sets qualified behaviourists apart from the self-titled ones, who no matter how long they've spent around dogs, just don't have the edge that you need to take on the level of expertise a behaviourist (as opposed to a trainer) needs. Again, as I said, it's the difference between a first-aider and a surgeon.
Back to training, some courses do a significant amount of hands-on, practical training with their students, and make sure their students are actually able to run a class and train dogs before they graduate! This, to me, is so important yet so overlooked even by some of the students themselves. But you kinda got to know which is which course-wise, and I'm not getting into it here or I'll be lynched :eek::D

carav10

Great response DBB & very balanced, thank you. I'll read up more on behaviourists ;-)

boomerang

I know both Dave and Mike.

I'm sorry to say it publically, but Mike's training "methods" did huge damage to my nervous rescue dog as a young 'un and made matters far worse. He is not capable of working with troubled dogs, and I don't like his training methods. Large class size, no feedback, very militaristic. And I hate corrections like leash jerks and the use of semi-choke chains so I wouldn't be a fan of his style.

Mike gives you the choice of using positive training methods such as clicker training, but then he also offers training on an electric collar, which I totally disagree with. Some dogs can cope with it, but with a nervous dog who already has poor confidence I think it would be disastrous.

liquoriceall

boomerang wrote: »

I know both Dave and Mike.

I'm sorry to say it publically, but Mike's training "methods" did huge damage to my nervous rescue dog as a young 'un and made matters far worse. He is not capable of working with troubled dogs, and I don't like his training methods. Large class size, no feedback, very militaristic. And I hate corrections like leash jerks and the use of semi-choke chains so I wouldn't be a fan of his style.

Mike gives you the choice of using positive training methods such as clicker training, but then he also offers training on an electric collar, which I totally disagree with. Some dogs can cope with it, but with a nervous dog who already has poor confidence I think it would be disastrous.

Ive also used mike & have a 'problem' dog now as a result of yhe harshness that I was too stupid to stop
Ive used Helen and have been very happy she was recommended by bev truss who I never met but have heard good things about

angeldaisy

Some great responses thanks.

Prob with Beverly is she needs a vet referral, full check up and thyroid tests first. Which is brilliant and does install confidence. Prob is budget it adds a lot to the cost of 'training' which I'm sure isn't going to be cheap. Guess I'll have to save up or ask Santa!!

DBB

angeldaisy wrote: »

Some great responses thanks.

Prob with Beverly is she needs a vet referral, full check up and thyroid tests first. Which is brilliant and does install confidence.

No, I don't think you're quite right here. Vet referral, yes, but check-up and thyroid panel, not unless something is noticed during the consult which suggests there's an underlying medical issue.
It is often a requirement, for behavioural cases (not training), for the dog to have been seen by the vet first, because a lot of behavioural problems have a medical component. Insurance companies only pay out for behavioural consults which were referred by the vet first. However, in many cases, if your vet has seen the dog lately and is aware of the problems you're having, they don't necessarily have to see the dog again for you to get a referral from them.

angeldaisy

DBB wrote: »

No, I don't think you're quite right here. Vet referral, yes, but check-up and thyroid panel, not unless something is noticed during the consult which suggests there's an underlying medical issue.

Well its what she told me I'd need and that was just after I emailed her giving her brief info and asking for info.

Insurance companies only pay out for behavioural consults which were referred by the vet first. .

Do insurance companies cover behavioural issues??

DBB

angeldaisy wrote: »

Well its what she told me I'd need and that was just after I emailed her giving her brief info and asking for info.

Ah! I didn't realise you'd been talking to her: it's common enough for suspicions to be raised re medical contributors to behavioural problems during the initial phone chat, but it is important for other readers to note that having to get all the tests done is not a prerequisite. It always depends on the dog and the specific array of behaviours being displayed.

Do insurance companies cover behavioural issues??

Allianz cover behavioural consults with APBC (Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors) members, by veterinary referral.

juniord

i was walking my dog in waterstown park in palmerstown when he was a puppy , i met a fella walking 4 dogs , he stopped and offered to train my dog for me , i asked him was he a qualified trainer and he said he studied dogs , when i asked him where he studied he replied dead pan serious he watched every episode of the dog whisperer , as i was walking away i asked him did the doctors not mind him being out on his own

DBB

juniord wrote: »

i was walking my dog in waterstown park in palmerstown when he was a puppy , i met a fella walking 4 dogs , he stopped and offered to train my dog for me , i asked him was he a qualified trainer and he said he studied dogs , when i asked him where he studied he replied dead pan serious he watched every episode of the dog whisperer ,

:eek:

It'd be funny if it wasn't true! The awful thing is, this is a really common thing I hear "trainers" and "behaviourists" saying. It is frightening... they're students of a teacher who himself doesn't know what he's doing :eek:
Soooo, if I watch a few more episodes of "One Born Every Minute", I'll be a midwife? :eek: And here was me thinking it'd take a little bit more effort than that!

vanop

This looks like the positive only dog training movement and there buddies in animal welfare or should I say animal rights promoting there friends and trying to cowardly slander dog trainers that don,t fit in there little box.The moderater here is well out of order and should be removed.The moderater is clearly promoting her own crownies. There,s more than one way to train a dog ,trainers the world over have been using a balenced effective approach with excellent results. Some of the worlds top dog trainers use these training tools and get outstanding results. You can be very gentle with a check chain or an remote collar its about how its used. Limiting the used of effective training tools will only lead to more dogs being put down ending up in pounds or over crowded shelters. When used in a humame way these these tools help dog,s even the nearvous one,s .Its all about the correct humane use .

DBB

vanop wrote: »

This looks like the positive only dog training movement and there buddies in animal welfare or should I say animal rights promoting there friends and trying to cowardly slander dog trainers that don,t fit in there little box.The moderater here is well out of order and should be removed.The moderater is clearly promoting her own crownies. .

Welcome to the forum Vanop.
As you're new to the forum, you may not realise that if you have a problem with a post, you need to use the "report post" function, which is the little red triangle on the bottom left corner of each post.
If you have a problem with a moderator's behaviour, you're more than welcome to take the issue up with the Category Mods, whose names you will find at the bottom right of the forum page, or alternatively start a thread in the feedback forum: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=82
Please also have a read of our forum charter, in which you'll find the rules regarding slander, libel, and making personal or unfounded remarks about posters in this forum: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056146511
If, however, you'd like to put aside your opening post and have a reasoned discussion on different approaches to dog training, the forum is open.
Thanks,
DBB