I recently returned from 9-day excursion along the Rhine River. My husband and I had a wonderful time exploring some beautiful cities. But the best part of the adventure was the opportunity to observe the European dog culture I’d often heard about.
I appreciate my husband’s tolerance of my dog obsession. He indulged the turning away from historic buildings or interrupting meals to watch dog-owner interactions. 😅 On past vacations, I was equally distracted when observing stray populations in Caribbean and Mediterranean countries.
In all locations, the overall calmness in canine behavior stood out. In the stray populations, relative calmness was the norm. Conflict in the dog world is generally not a wise choice because the need to back up what you start is understood!
What’s different about the European dog culture?
The difference in Europe, though, was the human component. The dogs were behaving calmly beside their owners in highly distracting environments. Calm behavior in public was the norm rather than the exception.
It was easy to see that the dogs were raised with an expectation of good behavior and appropriate manners. The communication was simple and efficient, with minimal fanfare. There simply was not the indulgence, nuisance, and nonsense so often seen in the States.
We saw dogs EVERYWHERE, of every size, every breed, and all ages. Dogs were in eateries and pubs, on public transportation, and loads of them with their owners as they strolled through the many Christmas markets that spread throughout the cities. All pups were on regular leashes and remained close to their owners. I did not witness a single dog jumping to “say hi” to someone. There was not a single incident of lunging at other dogs that passed by, and precisely zero dogs were standing 15 feet out at the end of a retractable lead imposing on other people.
Essentially, we witnessed loads of dogs calmly observing their surroundings without fuss about the commotion around them.
How did good canine behavior become the norm?
It was refreshing to witness several owners of young pups quickly and unemotionally enforce basic manners. I saw practical and effective interruptions for leg lifting, barking, and forging out to sniff others.
A quick tug of the leash, a body block, or a verbal reprimand was typical. I couldn’t help but remark to my husband how that behavior was not only acceptable, but it seemed to be the expectation. 🤯
In the States, some would be quick to call such actions “abuse.” Online warriors would lecture about the “science of modern dog training” and how “corrections damage a dog” across their favorite platforms. The insinuation of the lecture would imply that anything other than “positive reinforcement only” harms the dog and the human-canine bond.
That, as many of you already know, is nonsense.
The truth of any human-canine relationship is easy to see. Sit back and observe a pet owner with their dog. It doesn’t take but a few minutes to have a reasonable assessment of the relationship and bond because dogs don’t lie.
A reasonable correction to interrupt undesirable behavior did no harm. Dog-owner bonds were not in jeopardy. Quite the contrary, well-behaved dogs get to do more, participate more, and spend far less time at home alone. That is an enhanced lifestyle, not a diminished one.
The moral of sharing this story about the dogs I saw in Europe is to reassure you that you can have a deep bond and demonstrate great affection for your dog while simultaneously utilizing some corrections to assist you in raising a pup to behave well.
It was refreshing not to witness the nonsense and excuse-making for unacceptable canine behavior that has become commonplace here in the US…
…but then again, perhaps I’d be unemployed if more pet owners realized the relative simplicity of correcting undesirable behavior. 🤷♀️
That was a great article. Sadly, not everywhere in Europe is like this. I am in the UK, and have a guide dog. The main provider of guide dogs, The Guide Dogs Association, has gone for the positive reinforcement trend. They say you mustn’t correct behaviour, only manage it. My guide dog has to be on a headcollar because she dives for things on the pavement when guiding me, and if I don’t have it, the diving gets worse. They will not use anything else to stop the diving, because they say that doing so would cause the dog to have fear and cause problems in the dog/handler relationship. However, I am sure that sort of behaviour would be easy to stop with other methods, and I have heard of guide dog owners getting training on the sly because they are frustrated with the guide dogs association’s methods.
They claim that we are not dogs so we don’t use methods that simulate what other dogs do, but that is very anthropocentric, and ignores basic laws of nature. They do allow you to do body blocks, as they don’t see that as negative reinforcement, instead they see it as negative punishment. However, I know that if you only use positive reinforcement and negative punishment, that can lead to redirected aggression out of frustration.
I know that a simple correction as you described can work wonders. However, I think they believe people don’t want to see guide dogs given corrections because that’s bad public relations and could lead to them losing donations. But that is similar to the nonsensical view that you’re a bad parent if you tell off your child, you should just manage their behaviour. It seems to me that the association is more interested in public opinion than on standing up for common sense dog training. It’s particularly telling that they have a failure rate of between 30 and 40% (Because of non guiding problematic behaviours) whereas another service dog company, Total K9 Focus, only has a 10% failure rate. Looking forward to more articles you put up.
Thank you for sharing your experience. It is so important to hear from people that are most affected by these nonsensical mandates. I agree with you wholeheartedly that much of the sentiment behind the positive only movement is coming more from business concerns of potential consequences of not conforming to the popular mantra. Companies and institutions are aware of the potential bullying/fallout that can come from speaking truth about tools and training.
I’ve seen it played out first hand numerous times. I’m ashamed to admit a few of the things I signed off on or not spoken about when I was younger and working to build my career… I’ve had high level obedience competitors have me agree to non-disclosures so no one would learn they had hired me to assist them in using a remote collar to resolve some problems they were having in the ring.
I’ve had industry leaders in the “all positive” circuit talk to me privately to commend my work as fair, valid, and scientifically sound, only to vilify the tools I use once and disparage trainers like myself once they took the stage. The fear of having their base turn on them made telling the truth too great of a risk. One even went to so far as to purchase one of my videos to share with their daughter, explaining it would help her with her dog as other things were not getting the results she needed.
The president of the CCPDT attended one of my workshops years ago. It was pleased to meet him and share my work/thoughts with him. At the end he told me, he didn’t see a time he would be using a remote collar in the scope of his work, but that he saw nothing in-humane or harmful in my approach and that he was actually quite surprised to find it “wasn’t what he had envisioned remote collar training might be”. Yet his organization has redefined LIMA standards to suit their own narrative and motives. Within their criteria for certification they say they will “allow” for the use of aversive tools but only a last resort and only with approval from their organization. Yet they have no one within their organization that is expert with these tools…which it telling that none in the decision making seats have any real idea or experience of how to use the tools they want to regulate access to.
If any of these people truly wanted what was best for dogs and people, they would find the courage to step outside their comfort zones and have serious conversations with those successfully doing the work.
Unfortunately, I don’t think that will happen so dogs and their owners/handlers will continue to be short changed. 🙁
I am happy that you have seen a good training in dogs in Germany.. but nevertheless the ” modern” education by treats and ignoring misbehavior is also the normal game in Germany.As a vet I notice more and more uneducated dogs …” having “traumas ” if educated properly.. I am old …and I love good education
Hi Iris,
Thank you for sharing your experiences. I am hearing this more and more from Veterinarians all over the world. As the approach of “reward what you like and ignore what you don’t like” has grown into a cult like movement that disregards the ethology of dog behavior, more dogs are on being placed on behavioral medications, living limited lifestyles or losing their lives.
That is why I found it refreshing to witness a few leash pops, and owners taking steps segment of pet owners (at least those with a backbone capable of enduring the bullying) that can see through the nonsense and continue to interrupt problematic behavior in a fair, humane and effective way.
Hi Robin,
Thank you for this.
I was almost sucked into the Disney view of dog ownership. I spent a year trying to teach my dog that if she did not bark, jump and be a total arse she would get food.
You know what!
It didn’t work.
As soon as I put in a clear punishment for a behaviour I knew she was aware off. The game changed in a matter of weeks. It was almost as if she went from ‘naw , you don’t mean it’
To oh crap, I better not do that !
Thank you for sharing your experience Beverley.
While I can appreciate that there are some dogs that are very easy, I (like you) am over the holier-than-thou preaching and shaming that the “positive reinforcement only” movement wants to force on every pet owner. The real agenda isn’t the dog’s welfare (dog’s lives are short, getting to realistic training solutions so they can live fuller, more integrated lives, should be a priority) The agenda is about control and funneling $$ into the organizations that want to dictate training choices, and prolong getting to viable solutions so that it takes forever and day worth of classes + drugs, to have a dog that people can simply enjoy without constant management and limiting protocols.
This was such an impactful story to read. I can’t wait to see it in person for myself one day, and now I’ll know to be on the look out for it! Great commentary on the expected standards of dog handlers.
Great insight!!
This is the kind of approach to living and loving dogs that we all need to listen to and learn from!
Great info Robin