# Does the fact you titled a dog or 2 make you a dog trainer?



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

I recently heard this and wanted to ask the following - 

I would like to know peoples opinions with regard to whether or not titling a dog or 2 qualifies one as a dog trainer? I keep reading on here about people claiming to be a "trainer" because they titled their dog. I am curious with regard to opinion on this...

To be more specific in this example - I took my dog to abc club and after days weeks months of working with people there, I titled my dog 

To be more specific in this example - I took my dog to abc trainer and after days weeks months of working with said trainer, I titled my dog

I now tell people I am a dog trainer - :surprise: ?

In your opinion what qualifies one as a dog trainer?


----------



## car2ner (Apr 9, 2014)

Depends on if you are asking can someone label themselves as a professional dog trainer. We are certainly trainers of dogs and can give advice that the average JP may not know. 

But to be a Dog Trainer you also have to know about more breeds than just the GSD and you have to know how to read people as well...after all, we humans need the training more than our dogs do sometimes. You also have to keep up with the latest techniques. My hubby trained and worked with a MWD "back in the day", but training has changed quite a bit since "back in the day" and we gladly accepted advice from our TD. He could see holes in our training that we could not.


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

car2ner said:


> Depends on if you are asking can someone label themselves as a professional dog trainer. We are certainly trainers of dogs and can give advice that the average JP may not know.
> 
> But to be a Dog Trainer you also have to know about more breeds than just the GSD and you have to know how to read people as well...after all, we humans need the training more than our dogs do sometimes. You also have to keep up with the latest techniques. My hubby trained and worked with a MWD "back in the day", but training has changed quite a bit since "back in the day" and we gladly accepted advice from our TD. He could see holes in our training that we could not.


:| "To be a dog trainer you have to know about more breeds than GSD" 

So people who only have, know about and train only GSD's can't be a dog trainer in your opinion? Am I understanding this correctly?


----------



## DutchKarin (Nov 23, 2013)

Yeah, people who train a dog or multiple dogs... train dogs. A dog trainer implies they know a lot more than obedience training, really they need to know multiple types of dogs and work well with multiple types of people. People who train dogs just work with dogs. ;-)

My example is that I got many agility titles on an Aussie I owned. He was an awesome dog. I trained him but my agility trainer trained me. He and I got the titles and were pretty high up there. 

My work with Aussie's provided about 25% of what I needed to work with a Dutch Shepherd. That breed requires something different and one thing is the ability to read dogs relatively well. I was not training him well because aussie stuff was not working. I found a trainer that is a certified trainer who trains people and their dogs, IPO dogs, LE dogs and owns malinois as his person dogs. He has spent hours training to be a trainer. Saved my butt! ;-)

Dog trainers can train dogs but more importantly (and usually much more difficult) they train people to train dogs.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

IMO dog training has more to do with natural ability. I know a ton of people who have titled multiple dogs and still can't tell the difference between a dog working in prey or defense. Or understand much of anything for that matter. But they pay their club dues and get enough to get dogs titled. On the flip side, I've seen some people who have titled one or two dogs and are better trainers than majority of the people out there doing it for thirty years. So credentials by them selves mean nothing to me.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

DutchKarin said:


> Dog trainers can train dogs but more importantly (and usually much more difficult) they train people to train dogs.



Training the dog is the easy part:grin2:


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

mycobraracr said:


> IMO dog training has more to do with natural ability. I know a ton of people who have titled multiple dogs and still can't tell the difference between a dog working in prey or defense. Or understand much of anything for that matter. But they pay their club dues and get enough to get dogs titled. On the flip side, I've seen some people who have titled one or two dogs and are better trainers than majority of the people out there doing it for thirty years. So credentials by them selves mean nothing to me.


Very interesting opinion... TY for your reply! :grin2:


----------



## Castlemaid (Jun 29, 2006)

To me, a dog trainer is someone who has more knowledge and experience and ability than I do, and works WITH other dogs. Someone with the people skills to help people help their dogs, loves dogs, ALL dogs, and isn't afraid to take on the hard cases, the aggression cases.

People ask me all the time if I'm a dog trainer - I always answer no, I enjoy doing stuff with my dog, I enjoy learnings, but I'm not a trainer - training my dog is a hobby, and happy to pass on my experience and knowledge to help others, but I don't consider myself a dog trainer - even though I have worked as an assistant in obedience classes that would fit my definition of dog trainer.


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

Castlemaid said:


> To me, a dog trainer is someone who has more knowledge and experience and ability than I do, and works WITH other dogs. Someone with the people skills to help people help their dogs, loves dogs, ALL dogs, and isn't afraid to take on the hard cases, the aggression cases.
> 
> People ask me all the time if I'm a dog trainer - I always answer no, I enjoy doing stuff with my dog, I enjoy learnings, but I'm not a trainer - training my dog is a hobby, and happy to pass on my experience and knowledge to help others, but I don't consider myself a dog trainer - even though I have worked as an assistant in obedience classes that would fit my definition of dog trainer.


Very nice explanation, but here again I see the statement "all dogs" just curious as to why?


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

It almost seems like a complete contradiction, but even though what matters most to me is hands on experience, just titling a dog doesn't automatically mean someones a trainer. But someone who has titled dogs in different venues at least gives you something verifiable and someone who's helped others train their dogs to titles gives you a better idea of what they can help you with, more then the we go on pack walks types.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

ipopro said:


> I recently heard this and wanted to ask the following -
> 
> I would like to know peoples opinions with regard to whether or not titling a dog or 2 qualifies one as a dog trainer? I keep reading on here about people claiming to be a "trainer" because they titled their dog. I am curious with regard to opinion on this...
> 
> ...


Just out of curiosity, at what point were you comfortable with calling yourself a pro?


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

Steve Strom said:


> Just out of curiosity, at what point were you comfortable with calling yourself a pro?


When dog handling & training became my paid profession. The year 1986 to be exact! U.S. Army Military Police, U.S. Secret Service (Foreign & Domestic Diplomat Personal Protection Specialist) (Handler & Instructor)

NOTE: Curiosity killed the cat! :laugh2:


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

I wasn't really looking for a death sentence, or even your bonafides. Just your perspective, I was thinking you ran a club or something.


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

Steve Strom said:


> I wasn't really looking for a death sentence, or even your bonafides. Just your perspective, I was thinking you ran a club or something.



No death sentence issued, just a huge Shakespeare fan!

You asked the question so I told you the answer! NO, NO, NO no clubs for me:wink2:, sorry!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

A dog trainer is just that, someone who has trained a dog, or many dogs. Training people to train their dogs is much more difficult. Training a variety of breeds, herding, working, bird dogs, hounds, etc. That gives you experience with what the people you are dealing with are dealing with. 

But yes, you are a trainer if it you trained your dog and titled it. It means you were able to get your dog from point A to point B, by learning and then teaching a variety of commands. It doesn't mean you are ready to train others to do so. 

After getting a number of dogs from point A to point B, you might feel confident giving suggestions to others trying to get their dog from point A to point B -- nothing wrong with that.

But, understand, anyone can make up a sign, Joe Schmoe, Dog Trainer, without every having owned a dog, much less trained one. And they can start taking people's money and making suggestions on how to fix their dogs. They will probably make some money, until word gets around that they are awful.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

I consider myself a dog trainer. I don't have biases against any breeds (of course some I would not own myself and I know my limits on what to take on and refer to others if needed.). My decade of working in education (kids) has helped me deal with people without being judgemental. When I had my first dog and he was doing well in obedience I thought about becoming a trainer until the trainer said that having experience with one dog is not what makes you a trainer but you are that particular dog's trainer! You need to know the ins and outs and the history of the breeds, be able to communicate in and know how to interpret dog language. You need to know their personal history and to take it in account when training them.
I finished two intense courses to become an instructor in Europe, worked in shelters, worked for free for a while, fostered many different breeds and mutts and that's how the business got on its feet. Just applying the techniques is not sufficient. You almost have to become the dog. But most of your work will be people training.


----------



## cdwoodcox (Jul 4, 2015)

I am so close to being able to call myself a dog trainer. I have 1 1/2 seasons of cesar milan's dog whisperer to watch then I should know everything their is to training a dog or more importantly how to teach their owners to walk with confidence. that solves everything right. 
Before someone comments on how watching a show doesn't make you a dog trainer I was kidding. 
I have learned one thing about training dogs in the year I have had Rosko. Dog trainers are no different than drywallers or painters. Everyone's the best and the other guy is usually doing it wrong. 
what makes someone a dog trainer to me is being able to get results in multiple dogs or breeds. Nothing wrong with specializing in one breed. and being able to teach the owner how to replicate and not destroy what you just done.


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

cdwoodcox said:


> I am so close to being able to call myself a dog trainer. I have 1 1/2 seasons of cesar milan's dog whisperer to watch then I should know everything their is to training a dog or more importantly how to teach their owners to walk with confidence. that solves everything right.
> Before someone comments on how watching a show doesn't make you a dog trainer I was kidding.
> I have learned one thing about training dogs in the year I have had Rosko. Dog trainers are no different than drywallers or painters. Everyone's the best and the other guy is usually doing it wrong.
> what makes someone a dog trainer to me is being able to get results in multiple dogs or breeds. Nothing wrong with specializing in one breed. and being able to teach the owner how to replicate and not destroy what you just done.


Interesting, here again I have read about being able to train multiple breeds, interesting!:grin2:


----------



## phgsd (Jun 6, 2004)

Titles don't necessarily make a trainer - I have seen too many people get through trials only because of handholding from their trainer. On their own they'd never be able to title a dog (or train someone else's dog). 

Once someone has titled several dogs they should enough experience to help others, but may not be a true trainer who can really troubleshoot issues.

I think a successful trainer is one whose students have put titles on dogs. And I do think it is more impressive to see a trainer who's worked with dogs of different breeds/temperaments, but is not absolutely necessary.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

ipopro said:


> Interesting, here again I have read about being able to train multiple breeds, interesting!:grin2:


To me, it's not so much breed specific but training different kinds of dogs, with different challenges and issues. While that _can _sometimes translate to different breeds, it doesn't always. There's a difference between working with a dog that has natural focus, is easily engaged, and has a strong willingness to work for food or toys, and a dog that is more difficult to motivate and isn't all that interested. The latter dog requires more skill, and an ability to think outside the box. A dog that's highly reactive to other dogs can be more challenging to work with than one that's neutral towards other dogs - these are just a couple of examples of what I'm talking about. 

I don't know if you're talking about IPO in particular or dog training in general, but in my sport, (flyball) it runs the gamut from very high drive dogs with great work ethics to very low drive dogs that are quite difficult to train. Whippets are common because they're so fast, but many have zero interest in tugs (the preferred reward) although they'll often work for food. But getting them to actually go get the ball from the box when they also have zero interest in balls, and holding it all the way across the start/finish line until they get to their handler in the runback area for their reward, well, that can be a huge and very frustrating training issue!


----------



## Hineni7 (Nov 8, 2014)

Ipopro you keep asking about why the multiple breeds... My opinion is this: A chihuahua has a totally different drive then a great Dane or rottweiler. Herding breeds IS different than a toy breed which IS different then a working breeds which is different then a terrier.. Sure, they are all dogs an certain truths remain the same, but how you go about getting the drives, motivations, and obedience out of the dog is often (not always) determined by the breed... An aggressive dog might lose all aggression when shown he can herd and do it well.. But put another dog like an Akita in that scenario and you will probably have dead animals everywhere because they were bred to hunt bear... So you have to know the breed and what they were used for, then cater to the individual dog.. 

I've trained horses for almost 30yrs..and there is a definite difference in breeds.. Again, some principles remain the same, but knowing how to go about making the animal better without causing new problems is the key.. 

As to a trainer (dogs, horses, whatever) a key is how they work with humans besides the animal.. I've known AMAZING handler's both dog and horse that could not replicate what they have done with their animal. Nor could they explain it so another could do it.. I've also seen the opposite. Someone who can articulate what needs to be done very well but ask them to show you evidence it works with their own dogs/horses and they are at a loss (even though their information is good).. For me, it has to be both.. You can prove out what you teach with your own and others animals, and you can teach it in a way that is understandable for the human, applicable to the given scenario, and with the respect and patience needed for the person learning to learn..it is what I expect from myself to others.. Just my thoughts


----------



## voodoolamb (Jun 21, 2015)

A dog trainer is someone who gets paid to train dogs. 

The thing is there a good trainers and bad trainers. I think a trainer who does title their personal dogs is a sign they are a good one.

I don't think a trainer needs to be savvy about all breeds either, there is nothing wrong with them specialising in a sport/breed. I once knew a gentleman who trained gundogs for duck hunting and field trials. He was amazing. His dogs titled. His dog's hunted. His client's dogs titled and they hunted. He had a way with those dogs, was highly recommended in the area. Cant ever remember hearing a complaint about his training business. Well, his wife wanted her own personal dog and they adopted a little terrier. That dog ended up being a holy terror and aggressive. They ended up bringing the dog to the trainer who's kennel I worked at for help. I don't think his inexperience with ankle biters made him any less of a dog trainer. My boss always recommended him to his own clients how wanted to try their dogs in field trials.

I have put a handful of agility and obedience titles on my own dogs. If you want to count CGC as a title then I have titled 20+ dogs of different breeds. (I fostered and one of my goals for each foster was get them to pass their CGC). And I am no dog trainer. LOL


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

Hineni7 said:


> Ipopro you keep asking about why the multiple breeds... My opinion is this: A chihuahua has a totally different drive then a great Dane or rottweiler. Herding breeds IS different than a toy breed which IS different then a working breeds which is different then a terrier.. Sure, they are all dogs an certain truths remain the same, but how you go about getting the drives, motivations, and obedience out of the dog is often (not always) determined by the breed... An aggressive dog might lose all aggression when shown he can herd and do it well.. But put another dog like an Akita in that scenario and you will probably have dead animals everywhere because they were bred to hunt bear... So you have to know the breed and what they were used for, then cater to the individual dog..
> 
> I've trained horses for almost 30yrs..and there is a definite difference in breeds.. Again, some principles remain the same, but knowing how to go about making the animal better without causing new problems is the key..
> 
> As to a trainer (dogs, horses, whatever) a key is how they work with humans besides the animal.. I've known AMAZING handler's both dog and horse that could not replicate what they have done with their animal. Nor could they explain it so another could do it.. I've also seen the opposite. Someone who can articulate what needs to be done very well but ask them to show you evidence it works with their own dogs/horses and they are at a loss (even though their information is good).. For me, it has to be both.. You can prove out what you teach with your own and others animals, and you can teach it in a way that is understandable for the human, applicable to the given scenario, and with the respect and patience needed for the person learning to learn..it is what I expect from myself to others.. Just my thoughts


Very Nice Post, TY!

My reason for asking is because I want to know if a person is suggesting that a person who can or chooses to only train one breed is not what one would consider to be a dog trainer and if so why they think not? Or a person that can train dogs but not owner/handler is not considered in their opinion a dog trainer.

I truly love all of the different opinions and explanations being shared here. It allows me to better understand peoples view points and statements being made with regard to the subject. Very educational IMO!:grin2:


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

voodoolamb said:


> A dog trainer is someone who gets paid to train dogs.
> 
> The thing is there a good trainers and bad trainers. I think a trainer who does title their personal dogs is a sign they are a good one.
> 
> ...


So you are no dog trainer why, because you don't get paid for the training you do or have done?


----------



## voodoolamb (Jun 21, 2015)

ipopro said:


> So you are no dog trainer why, because you don't get paid for the training you do or have done?


Exactly. I train my dogs. I trained dogs that were not mine. I have even helped people who have problems with their dogs. But I am no dog trainer. 

Just like I change the oil and spark plugs in my car, but am no mechanic.

I see "trainer" as a professional title. I have seen first hand the blood, sweat, and tears it takes to make dog training your primary profession. The long hours, the extreme dedication it takes, the love for dogs you have to have, and that innate dog savvy it takes to be a good one. In a way, I almost find it disrespectful to slap the trainer title on willy nilly. I save it for those who are passionate enough to make it their career.


----------



## Hineni7 (Nov 8, 2014)

My reason for asking is because I want to know if a person is suggesting that a person who can or chooses to only train one breed is not what one would consider to be a dog trainer and if so why they think not? Or a person that can train dogs but not owner/handler is not considered in their opinion a dog trainer.

Imo, the distinction would be payment and 'specialty' (quotes because I don't have italics). I know trainers specializing in just one breed, or just one sport, does not make then less of a trainer. It is their focus and passion is a given a breed or sport, no problem, but they may (may) not be the one I go to outside of that breed or sport... Personally, I do believe it necessary for animal and human to be trained, so if the 'trainer' can only do one or the other (dog/human) then for me, there is a problem.. Why? Because once that animal leaves the environment of an experienced handler and goes back to the inexperienced, it is like speaking a new language in a foreign land.. Training will dissolve if the owner doesn't know how to speak the new language (training)... And obviously, the reverse is true, if a person can talk their training to someone but can't back it up with performance when needed, then trouble will occur... I've seen it over and over.. It is why I don't train horses without owners having lessons... Just doesn't work well otherwise.. Just my opinion and experience


----------



## gsdsar (May 21, 2002)

Yes. I think a trainer can specialize. But I would prefer they do it after they have gotten experience with lots of different things and the decided they really enjoy a specific aspect, like hunting or sport or therapy or LE. 

Anyone can call themselves a trainer. The word means nothing except what we, as those hearing it, put to it. There are no required certifications, no required schooling or tests or competency exams. So anyone that wants to call themselves a trainer can. 

I don't call myself a trainer. I don't believe I have the requisite(IMO) knowledge in a variety of things to use that term. Can, and have I, been paid to help someone train a SAR dog.Yup. Would I ever do the same for someone wanting to train a hunting dog. Heck no. Because I don't have the experience. 

So yes, a person can specialize. If someone loves working only one breed and does well with them. Then cool. Not sure it's a trainer I would choose. But that's not the question.


----------



## cloudpump (Oct 20, 2015)

The title of dog trainer has lost its validity. Petsmart calls their trainers, master trainers, after a 2-3 week course, then a brief internship. 
Wouldn't a person that has titled dogs make them just a handler anyways?


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

I think it depends. 1 or 2 dogs? no. Multiple dogs (even if of the same breed)? Possibly. Trained others to train their dogs? Probably.

I can say that I train dogs. I train my dogs. I've even helped others with problem behaviors in their dogs. Am I a "dog trainer"? No. I really lack the people skills to want to do that daily.

Part of the thing about training dogs is having a tool box of ideas on how to handle problems. The more different dogs you've trained, the bigger your tool box is likely to be. 

I have a friend. She has put multiple titles on her personal dogs. She has put multiple titles on dogs for clients. She has worked with clients to help them achieve titles on their dogs. SHE is a trainer. 

I have another friend who classifies herself as a trainer. She has put 1 or 2 titles on her personal dog after multiple attempts. She now bills herself as a service dog trainer. Her photos and videos of training sessions make me cringe. Her clients think that she is awesome. Personally, I consider the dogs that have graduated from her lessons untrained (A SD who steals food left on the counter isn't trained in my opinion. Nor is one that still needs to be given treat rewards in public for doing basic obedience commands while "working")


----------



## middleofnowhere (Dec 20, 2000)

If you train dogs, you can call yourself a dog trainer. Maybe not one suitable for me to look to for advise on a regular basis or maybe not any basis. Maybe not one that hangs out a shingle, maybe a rather rotten dog trainer. Maybe a trainer whose methods I do not like. 

The best advise I got when belonging to a training club was to choose who to listen to. Everyone had something to say but figuring out who I was going to listen to took some time. It worked well for me. 

I think the goal in training should be to get the dog and handler to a place where the dog is happy and the handler is satisfied with how it is working. If someone can do this for someone it doesn't much matter that I don't like that the handler still uses treats as rewards, rewards good behavior more often than I would like to see.


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

cloudpump said:


> The title of dog trainer has lost its validity. Petsmart calls their trainers, master trainers, after a 2-3 week course, then a brief internship.
> Wouldn't a person that has titled dogs make them just a handler anyways?


Very interesting. A trainer can be a handler I would agree, I don't think a handler would necessarily qualify as a trainer. Very good point there my friend!

TY for sharing your opinion...:grin2:


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

middleofnowhere said:


> I think the goal in training should be to get the dog and handler to a place where the dog is happy and the handler is satisfied with how it is working. If someone can do this for someone it doesn't much matter that I don't like that the handler still uses treats as rewards, rewards good behavior more often than I would like to see.


to clarify a bit, the dog has to be lured with a treat in front of his nose to walk by the handlers side in public. Without a treat, the dog simply wanders off and knocks things off shelves, sticks his nose in everyone's crotch and tries to grab meat out of the cooler.
Without a treat, the dog can't be taking out in public.

The other dog counter surfs, not just at home, but has to be muzzled if the dog is going into a restaurant because he will snag food off of tables as he walks by.


----------



## ipopro (May 4, 2012)

Dainerra said:


> to clarify a bit, the dog has to be lured with a treat in front of his nose to walk by the handlers side in public. Without a treat, the dog simply wanders off and knocks things off shelves, sticks his nose in everyone's crotch and tries to grab meat out of the cooler.
> Without a treat, the dog can't be taking out in public.
> 
> The other dog counter surfs, not just at home, but has to be muzzled if the dog is going into a restaurant because he will snag food off of tables as he walks by.


I have seen it a few times myself with other dogs, it's a sad sad world we live in.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

ipopro said:


> I have seen it a few times myself with other dogs, it's a sad sad world we live in.


I see it a lot in fake service dog. but until I watch the dogs that she's trained, never in dogs that are legitimately needed service animals.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Dainerra said:


> I can say that I train dogs. I train my dogs. I've even helped others with problem behaviors in their dogs. Am I a "dog trainer"? No.


Exactly. People see me out in public training my dogs all the time, and I've been asked if I'm a dog trainer (or they simply assume I am), but when asked I always say no, I'm just training my dog. 



Dainerra said:


> Part of the thing about training dogs is having a tool box of ideas on how to handle problems. The more different dogs you've trained, the bigger your tool box is likely to be.


I agree. And like I said in my previous post, it's not so much about different breeds, but different kinds of dogs with different temperaments. I don't necessarily need a dog trainer that is an expert on GSDs (although it's certainly nice!), but I want someone who has experience with working breeds in general.



Dainerra said:


> I have a friend. She has put multiple titles on her personal dogs. She has put multiple titles on dogs for clients. She has worked with clients to help them achieve titles on their dogs. SHE is a trainer.


One of the women in my flyball club is young, just 27 years old. But she's been doing flyball for 12 or 13 years, since she was in High School. She may not be the best person for general dog training (and certainly doesn't think of herself that way), but when it comes to flyball she definitely IS a dog trainer. She can get the best out of any dog, and is always looking for new ways to solve issues and improve performance. She taught the flyball classes I took before joining a club and racing on a team, and I can honestly say Halo and I wouldn't be where we are without her. Neither can many other people currently enjoying the sport. She puts as much into other people's dogs as she does her own, and is committed to helping every dog succeed. Whether she thinks she's a dog trainer or not is immaterial to me, as she completely embodies what I think of and would look for in a dog trainer.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

If you are training a killer whale, are you a trainer? I would think so, even if you are currently working with someone who is teaching you to train the whale. Maybe that makes you an apprentice trainer. But a trainer of killer whales is what you are doing. 

A trainer of dogs is the same. It doesn't matter if we have a carpenter bag of treats around our waist. It is training. The dog is learning. 

I see everyone who OWNS a GSD as a trainer. Some are totally lazy and worthless, and their dogs suffer, and sometimes need to be rehomed. Others need a lot of guidance. Some get their dogs to the place where they title in something. And some are superstars and compete with their dogs at higher levels, or work with their dogs in some venue. A k-9 handler may not have trained his dog originally, but every day he is training the dog on the job, and regularly he trains the dog in groups under a trainer, or on his own. He is a trainer. He has to learn and apply the timing and commands and repetition. 

Just because you use someone's method in training your dog does not mean that you are not doing the training. And just because you go to classes doesn't mean that YOU aren't training your dog. The instructor of the classes I take my dogs to is MY trainer, because she doesn't train my dog at all. She trains me to train my dog. We shouldn't call them dog trainers at all. They are instructors for groups of dog trainers.


----------



## Clay Hill (Jan 27, 2016)

Trainers are a dime a dozen now days. Good trainers on the other hand not so much. Here's a few ways to tell the difference. 

Good trainers
Taylors training to each dog. 
Base knowledge off of both experience and science not one without the other. 
Understand that there are different ways to accomplish training 
Balanced
Not overly full of themselves 
Read each dog separate in each situation an able to adjust on the fly. 
Never train frustrated 
Always end on a high note with the dog wanting more

The rest
Scripted training 
Base methods entirely off of "the science" or "my program" (overly regimented)
Cockyness 
Discounting of others
Unbalanced all positive or all pressure no real use of the right natural drive in each situation. 
Unable to adjust 
Continues to train or corrects while frustrated


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

Clay Hill said:


> Trainers are a dime a dozen now days. Good trainers on the other hand not so much. Here's a few ways to tell the difference.
> 
> Good trainers
> Taylors training to each dog.
> ...


Yeah, that makes me a good trainer!!! Even though I only do private training for pet dogs and their people.


----------

