Weasel Speak in Dog Training and Dog Rescues
This week, the dog training world learned that a well-known dog rescue planned to ship dogs from their facilities in Utah to a trainer in Florida. That caught my attention initially because I know that Best Friends Animal Sanctuary in Kanab, Utah, has access to great trainers right there. I wondered why they’d feel the need to send dogs such a long distance to get training.
Then I found out who the trainer was - and I was really disappointed. Best Friends chose Aimee Sadler, a trainer who uses electric shock and other painful methods to train dogs (despite the deep and ever-growing body of evidence against those methods and plentiful options for training without the use of pain, fear, and intimidation if you’re sufficiently educated and skilled). When specifically asked about her training methods, Ms. Sadler provided the following statement:
”…we treat each dog individually... that we don't subscribe to any methodology... that we use all tools and techniques to support animals to rewardable behavior and our MISSION is to provide exceptional QOL despite the outcome. Our work is measured... we are 100% inclusive in our approach and welcome discussion around the practical application and contextual understanding within the principles of behavioral science.”
Well, that sounds completely reasonable at first glance. But let’s look closer at some of those words…
“we don’t subscribe to any methodology…” and “we use all tools and techniques” Really? We know what works. We know, based on the evidence out there, what not to do as well. Reports are that Ms. Sadler often uses shock collars and prong collars (and her statement certainly doesn’t rule that out). There is no justifiable use of shock collars in 2019. There’s plenty of publicly-available information about this.
But let’s REALLY look at “we all use all tools and techniques.” So, if it gets a dog to acquiesce to “rewardable behavior” then it’s apparently okay to beat a dog to within an inch of its life. This trainer says in her own words that she’ll do anything to force a dog into compliance. Would you send your dog to her? There’s no way I’d let her touch my dogs. So why would a rescue consider sending their dogs to be subjected to any technique whatsoever? This is unconscionable and shelters and rescues should fire anyone who has made such a horrific decision. I will not support nor work with any shelter or rescue who works with Aimee Sadler or her company, Dogs Playing for Life. I urge other trainers to take a similar stance - though I know that some of the trainers I respect disagree with me on this and believe they can make changes by working from within. I wish them the best.
While I’m at it, let’s talk about Best Friends Animal Society.
I think that Marjie Alonso, the Executive Director of the IAABC, put into words some of what I feel about them right now. She said:
“I am no fan of ‘save them all.’ That puts human belief over the reality of the every day for many animals living miserable lives in cages, scared of everything, isolated and without the ability to express many natural behaviors. There are also some dogs so aggressive that there is no way I can understand the benefit of keeping them alive. It’s exhausting and ugly to live life like that. For whose benefit, really, is ‘save them all?’ I can certainly get behind ‘save as many as possible,’ though.
What do we do when an unowned dog’s life is passing by? If the average life of a dog lasts ten years, how long do we let that dog wait in a shelter or sanctuary before maybe trying less-than-ideal options to offer a chance at a homed life? I don’t know the answer to this, but sanctuaries as a life-long living circumstance are pretty hard on many dogs. And so much depends on the resources available.”
But Marjie and I differ when she says, “there is no way to consider shock collar training to be kind, but the end result might be, in some cases. I don’t know, because as much as we advocate for R+ practices, each dog is an individual, and there are differences in the definition of ‘reasonable’ for owned vs unowned dogs.” Wait a minute. It’s more okay to shock dogs that aren’t owned by anyone? I’m really stunned by that statement. I have to question the ethics of anyone who thinks that way.
I also disagree with Marjie when she says: “Even if this is as feared, I’d want to understand the thinking and reasoning behind it. And then I might strongly disagree with their decision. But that wouldn’t make the organization bad or worthy of turning my back on.”
Let me be clear, I won’t support (in any way) an organization that chooses to use shock to train animals in 2019.
There’s simply too much information out there about this. Refusing to take a such a stance is weak. It’s time we started standing up to people who are abusing animals just because they can. I admire organizations like PPG which take clear positions against the use of shock. Organizations such as IAABC which espouse LIMA (Least Invasive, Minimally Aversive) or similar philosophies are giving practitioners a loophole large enough to drive a truck through - and dogs are routinely being subjected to unnecessary pain as a result. We simply have to do better.
Best Friends Animal Society needs to confirm that they will not send dogs to Aimee Sadler and update their position statement on training dogs which currently states “While Best Friends primarily uses relationship-based training, we do not exclusively practice or endorse one specific methodology. In our support of adopters, rescuers and shelters, we engage trainers who use a variety of methods...” That’s just more Weasel Speak.
Just hours after I originally published this, Best Friends had a meeting with their volunteers to discuss this issue I’ve just watched a video of the entire meeting here are my observations:
1. Their founder and current Chairman of the Board pointed out that prong/shock collars have never been against their policy and still aren’t. All that matters is saving lives - not quality of life.
2. They sent a person, Dr. Carley Faughn to Aimee Sadler’s facility. After observing for 14 hours, she decided that her observation was more valid than all the scientific study out there and made the decision to send dogs to Aimee. Her use of behavior terminology is disconcerting- I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she doesn’t understand the material and that she’s not being intentionally deceitful.
3. Ms. Faughn insists she isn’t endorsing the use of shock/prong collars. But her decision to send dogs there and her stories about her observations are endorsements. Just more weasel speak.
I urge you to spend your limited resources on organizations who take strong and unambiguous positions on kind, humane, pain-free training methods. As of today, that does not include Best Friends Animal Society.