Dogs behaving badly

[MrsFluffyMuff]

I've seen this show being discussed more frequently on mumsnet and some people really love it, some people hate it. My question is, if you don't like the show or you don't like the dog trainer Graeme Hall, why? Just curious as to how he managed to get on TV in the first place if his methods don't work?

P.S if you work for the daily mail, fuck off

YABU = it's a terrible show with bad advice
YANBU = it's a great show with great advice

We paid a huge amount of money for a dog behaviourist for our dog last year. We had 3 intense sessions where he told us what we needed to do, and a year on we are still going through those methods every single day.

Training a dog takes a lot of patience and constant effort, especially if you have quite a serious issue. It’s all about training the owner rather than the dog.

I watch Dogs Behaving Badly because I find it interesting, but a lot of what he teaches is in direct opposition to what we’ve been told.

The dogs this week, as PP said, were a good example. Constantly putting them in each other’s space when they were both clearly very stressed. Allowing the owners to hold them up to each other (!!) and comforting them when they were acting out, therefore reinforcing the behaviour.

Dogs are quite simple creatures really, I’m sure Graeme knows more than I do but he’s absolutely not the right person to be on a show like that.

@RedHelenB

He doesn't shout. But its cleared up a lot of posts on here where people claim.someone is shouting. He is just firm, there is a big difference.

I think dog training is a bit like raising children. You have the attachment parenting types and those who don't think its harmful to leave your baby to cry sometimes.

He definitely does shout. Not so much in this series, but in the first two he absolutely does. There's a memorable episode with a Great Dane that barked at strangers - I think it was series 1 - and he got right up in his face and shouted at him several times.

Speaking firmly doesn't need to involve raising your voice and getting inches away from a dogs' face. He's incredibly lucky that he's not been bitten, to be honest - though I imagine if he was, they wouldn't air it on TV.

I'd like to see a follow up in 6 months time.

@Thelnebriati

I'd like to see a follow up in 6 months time.

I'd also like to see the cases that don't make it to air - either because they're too difficult for him, or because the dogs respond badly to his methods.

If you look back over the series, he never really deals with anything truly serious. Poor recall, lead reactivity, poor manners at the door and some minor resource guarding.

Yes, those issues aren't pleasant to live with BUT they're not on the same level as severe aggression. I notice he seems to steer WELL away from any severe behavioural problems!

It seems rather outdated. Like watching Victoria Stilwell now - she has said she'd do things differently now we know more.

Advice I have never forgotten is that 'rewarded behaviour gets repeated'. So true with children and dogs!

@MrsFluffyMuff

*There are many qualified dog behaviourists who would have been better on the show. *

So how did he end up on the TV giving advice over a qualified behaviourist with certified credentials?

It baffles me too be honest. Maybe he had contacts in the tv business?

Thank you for the suggestions on where to look. One of the books I'm reading backs up the positive reinforcement (easy least puppy squeezy)

From what I've seen, he's pretty awful. Use of aversives and amazingly quick modification of behaviour. Too quick. Often the kind of methods he uses will work as a quick fix, but they aren't resolved. Even the title of the show winds me up. If you like these sorts of training programmes, Victoria Stillwell is slightly better. She is irritating as hell and there's the usual drama for TV thing, but her methods in the episodes I've seen seem pretty sound.

So how did he end up on the TV giving advice over a qualified behaviourist with certified credentials?

The answer to this is easy. Proper dog training following scientific methods is long, slow, boring (to watch) work. It does not make good or cheap telly to have to watch a trainer work for months with a dog to help them overcome a fear (for example).

It is also a field in which there are never any definites and anyone claiming "fixing xyz is easy" is often someone who just doesn't know how much they don't know.

How easy or hard it is to help a dog overcome anything (even problem behaviours often labelled as simple) is determined by the contributing factors, dog's personality, environment you are trying to train in and so much more.

None of that makes for a good TV personality. It makes poor TV to watch a trainer spend 1-3 hours talking to the owner about every aspect of the dog's history and life to try and make sure they don't miss a crucial clue in what is influencing the behaviour. And for this to be a mandatory step before offering any advice at all.

Nor does it make great TV to find someone who answers the question "can the dog be fixed?" with "hopefully".

But that's the reality.

Compare, for example, to Chiraq Patel who has been on TV a couple of times. His approach is very different:

• starts by asking lots of questions about the dog
• often then discusses the dog and their behaviour with another trainer or behaviourist to make sure there is agreement on what might be causing/what might help (if the program allows)
• make suggestions on things to try that might help, rather than be sure he has The Fix

Much more professional approach to helping a dog and owner (imo, anyway).

It baffles me too be honest. Maybe he had contacts in the tv business

He makes good TV, that's why. He's good looking, well spoken and well dressed. And at the same time, he seemingly offers quick, no-nonsense solutions to people's problems.

It's a win for Channel 5. Nice, handsome English chap can turn dogs around in minutes. That means good viewing figures because Britain LOVES dogs.

The dogs are gorgeous on it though. And I was brought up in the Barbara Woodhouse era and don't remember much dog mauling going on. Dogs were treated like dogs , not humans and knew where they were in the pecking order.