It Should Be Fun, but For More Than One

Differing views on a post regarding a dog that went into an agility training venue.
http://www.underdogged.net/?p=182 (entitled what I need in a trainer who went to an agility class with her bully breed dog---breeds that I love by the way)

http://k-9solutionsdogtraininginc.blogspot.com/2008/10/people-skills-in-dog-training.html (and one on people skills in dog training, and it should be fun at all costs to the PERSON)

First of all, if I was running an agility center, I would need people to come in with their dogs with basic obedience. They would have been screened before hand. It might not be fun to find out your dog needs a prerequisite course before coming in.

Two, while the dog may not have been acting aggressively, it is the trainer's responsibility to not only keep the class fun but safe. A dog that may be sending out stressed and out of control signals is a dog that could trigger something in another dog. Dogs do not need to be out of control fools to have fun or compete in agility.

So I wasn't there, and neither was the competing trainer that contributed to her blog about it, but I think it's horribly unfair to put down a dog trainer because the class may not have been "fun" for the individual. Though I do think the one thing that might be improved upon in the future is advance screening of the clientele coming in. Unless you work with many dogs in one environment, then you have no idea how sloppy control on the trainer in charge's actions can affect the atmosphere.

Here's the thing though. These activities are being pushed as so much more "fun" than obedience. But what happens, is you start taking the fun away from everyone else in public and in private settings. You also start legislation in the long term being enacted that end up affecting dogs that are not so dangerous by an overreacting public (to that individual dog based on what is happening to dog training multitudes of dogs).

I am sure that my client's don't find it fun for them (the humans) when I dismiss them from a lesson. Actually, they take it pretty well as they know the reason is that they did not do their homework, and I would rather they not confuse the dog by doing continuing on when the humans haven't done the work that we are building onto. However, if they want to practice the homework they didn't do in front of me that is fine. Or to do exercises coming up sans dog, that is fine too.

I am pretty sure my client's don't think it's a blast when I tell them their dog will continue to be a dangerous dog unless they do the work. Some client's don't find it fun needing to think about different ways to up the distraction level in their training. There are responsibilities that make life not always fun for humans.

Teaching someone, and I don't know whether the trainer in question set you aside and explained "why and what you can do" is not always equated with fun. For instance if they don't do their homework and they have made no progress, you need to be direct. How you are direct can vary according to individual and dog in question, but you need to make humans understand their responsibility and duties to their dogs. This is not always the fun part of my job:) However, when you convince someone to take their responsibility to their dog seriously, that is the fun part.

I do sympathize. I remember going to group "obedience-hahah" classes with an aggressive dog before I was a trainer. All I got for help was shoulder shrugs.