Become a positive trainer for 7k

[munstyman]

In the society that we currently live in "accreditation" from a proffesional body is an absolute must for many "professions" it is the way of the world and in "most" scenarios is to do with insurance, litigation and or H&S. I myself sat through a seminar in order to gain a loaders accreditation, and spent many many weeks filling in form after form in order for my company to gain "construction line gold level" both of these are purely to do with me stating that i will do things a certain way, (best practice and all that) presumably this positive course will set out guidelines, boundaries and methods that will be universally adhered to by all that gain the accreditation. I see no particular problem with the concept however 7k does sound like a high figure.

PS
I thought there already was a force free training accreditation scheme ran by totally gundogs ?

Ha ha Just add government bureaucracy and you have the Devils Corporate
It is the middle one that often undermines accreditation, as it can become expensive for those to enforce a removal rather than turn a blind eye
I've often asked for them to stop the world as I want to get off . A committee was formed, a think tank was established to look at the possibility. After five years of very expensive research a problem arose in the make up of the think tank as one established expert did not have a piece of paper that confirmed they were an expert. The oversight committee decided to set up an enquiry into the committee original decision to set up a think tank without checking for all those bits of paper. The financial watchdog started action against the over sight committee for the chairman expenses claim for dog food when a Sunday newspaper revealed they only owned a cat. An Animal rights charity decided to take action on behalf of the cat against the chairman for the increased public attention which was interfering with its right to sleep on the window sill and crap in the neighbours garden. The chairman counter sued the cats breeder claiming they sold it to them as a rare breed of dog and was un aware it was indeed a cat as it did play fetch on rare occasions with a ball of string.
Mean while I decided to take the dog for a walk and decided it wasn't such a bad world after all

[ips]

Lol

[Lloyd90]

Your all mad if you think most people on shoots train their dogs.

Most seem to do the complete bare minimum then take them along shooting or beating.

They'll highlight all the good things the dog does right accidentally, whilst ignoring all the problems it causes whilst doing something slightly right.

[Naj]

I totally agree that experience is essential, but this course is addressing turning out competent Trainers (ie. competent to train others) as I understand it. And when comparing costs the modules are over 3 days each, with practical and theory elements, and at 50 quid an hour or even less that will soon add up. There are also assessments. Time will tell how effective it is but anything that can improve the standard of teaching is surely a good thing.

I also agree that an accreditation doesn’t necessarily mean that somebody is particularly good. Practical experience is much harder to come by than theory and certification. But this applies equally to traditional trainers. I know we all have a treasure trove of stories of rubbish Positive trainers to illustrate our points but there are also some poor examples of poor traditional Trainers, and some truly appalling ones. There are plenty of examples of people who have taken their dogs to trainers and been horrified when they’ve grabbed their dogs and started shaking or jerking them about without even a by your leave. And trainers who cancel lessons at the last minute, or even forget to turn up, and when they do spend half the time telling their client how good they are instead of getting on with the training. I’ve even heard of dogs returned as being no good that have been completely cowed. And this from well known trainers. So a bit more professionalism across the board wouldn’t go amiss, I’d have thought.

Naj

[Judy]

I agree (!) with that last comment for sure. Seen too many so called professional trainers with a complete lack of understanding of the way a dog's mind works and some bloody funny ideas re 'curing' issues. Not to mention some strange ideas re working the dogs.

I do feel though at 50 quid an hour it should be 1 to 1!!

[trekmoor]

Is there a standard price for 1 -2 - 1 lessons ? I have lost touch with this a bit but I used to see these lessons priced at between £20 per hour and £35 per hour . One man I know would only do 2 hour sessions (with HPR's) and he charged £60 for the 2 hours.

Being a stingy auld Scots git I have never paid for a lesson in my life. Even now, if I was younger and still working, I would not pay anyone £50 for a one hour 1 - 2 - 1 lesson. I'd rather have the interest and the fun of learning by experience ….and by watching folk who can train a dog work their dogs out at shoots or at tests or at trials.


Very often , if these people are asked nicely, they will try to answer your questions or one of them may even become your own , personal, non-paid , mentor. I did have a mentor, in fact I had several of them just as soon as I began to try to win retriever field trials. If I made a mistake, they would tell me of it in no uncertain terms ! I "took my lumps" and began to win trials.

It was "tough love" and other newbie trailers fell by the wayside because they "didn't like to be spoken to in that way." If a trainer is not being paid then they can say what they like, how they like as far as I am concerned. They do not need to develop their people skills . All they have to do is to tell you in a straightforward manner what they think about you and your dog and you can take it or leave it.

Develop a thick skin and ask questions ….or pay £30 - £50 for a one hour training lesson.

Wullie

[Naj]

I had plenty of people who helped me along the way but they were all pleasant, helpful and offered constructive criticism and advice and were only too happy to help a novice keen to learn because they’d been there once. I don’t see why anyone should need to be be a twat about it.

Naj

[munstyman]

Whilst I agree Naj, some are so concerned about being nice and `liked', the much needed advice, wake up call and urgency can be lost amongst the pleasantries Sometimes being blunt and to the point is the best way to get through to those that have been at it a while and half know everything
I remember those to the point`ladies and gentlemen' with some fondness and respect from my past, if with a little fear and trepidation, but they certainly kept my mind open when it came to training dogs. And politically incorrect it maybe but a KITA is what some of us need now and again to do right by our dogs and get over ourselves.
As Wullie said earlier, if you go to Tests and Trials, you can learn a great deal by listening in on conversations, opinions and arguments in the gallery, talking direct to competitors, watching other peoples dogs work and how they are handled and take away tips on what works ( and what does not ), what might be worth a try with your own dog, and what might be set aside for now but useful for another. All virtually for free, entry fee and travelling being the only cost....you can do quite a few for the cost of these accreditations . What is more if your dogs walk your talk in such esteemed company, your face will be known and you won't need that piece of paper

[Naj]

That’s great if you want to learn how best to use corrections to train a gundog but if you want to avoid corrections then not a great deal of help, other than with the practical aspects of working a dog in the field. But I don’t believe the certification is anything to do with being nice and liked, surely nobody goes to a trainer for that. And as Wullie says if you’re not paying for advice you may be happy to put up with the crap that might come with it. But someone offering professional training services should be professional in their dealings, an effective communicator and able to train the client, not just the dog. That’s what people or paying for, unless it’s just for bragging rights to say they’ve trained with such and such a trainer, which seems all too common these days.

Naj

[munstyman]

That’s great if you want to learn how best to use corrections to train a gundog but if you want to avoid corrections then not a great deal of help, other than with the practical aspects of working a dog in the field. But I don’t believe the certification is anything to do with being nice and liked, surely nobody goes to a trainer for that. And as Wullie says if you’re not paying for advice you may be happy to put up with the crap that might come with it. But someone offering professional training services should be professional in their dealings, an effective communicator and able to train the client, not just the dog. That’s what people or paying for, unless it’s just for bragging rights to say they’ve trained with such and such a trainer, which seems all too common these days.

Naj

Hang about Naj, I thought that was what these courses were about
If its only about training a specific methodology and attracting only those with blinkers already attached then I would consider it even less value for money or value as an accreditation. Where as you and I and many others have moved towards a more positive training regime and away from the traditional methods its been a journey of informed choice based on many years of experience dealing with the canine mind. I doubt if those seeking this type of accreditation have that broad base to work from, and they will be just as bad as the I've trained a Labrador or even two to obedience standard, got my rosette. Read a few gundog training books, attended a couple of canine behaviour seminars got a certificate for that and now have gained this so I can deal with anything a hard hunting Spaniel or HPR can throw at me ( as dogs are dogs ) As long as it doesn't go further than twenty yards I'll be all you need. Oh and if I mess it up there are always some kind hearted trainers who do know their stuff who will pick up the pieces I'll still keep my fee and my accreditation as I did not breach the set method of training, so the fault lies with you the owner or the dog
You seem to know more about these two trainers than me, but from the website I get the impression its based on retrieving not much said about hunting, which as has been questioned before is often the weak link when it comes to clicker training and positive training, let alone when it comes to HPR working distances. ( Yes it didn't go un noticed that one has Viszlas....for picking up ) Whilst I would have nothing to say if they were just doing a training course, but its the running of a national accreditation scheme run by two individuals based on attending and paying for their course? That just sounds a little off to me