Not Again?

Because you're right, it does get tedious and tiresome. I let the relationship I have with my dogs speak for itself. It's the reason I put it all out there on national television. It's the reason I still enter dog sports competitions. Even though we may not get the highest score or even qualify, my dog is happy and confident in the ring, tail wagging and spirits high. It's the reason I encourage my students and clients to take their dogs out in public, participate in dog festivals, dog sports and other events. It's the reason I encourage them to become therapy dog teams. Yes, it's so much easier to show, rather than tell. So rather than be discouraged, visit that woman's shop often and show her how wonderful your daughter's Chi is coming along using positive training. And if you're lucky there will be other customers in there who get to see it too! Make sure you take some business cards with you!! ;-)

I take my two malamutes to public places from time to time and people do see that they have good manners. However, people who insist on harsh training techniques tend to assume that my dogs behave well because I've got easy dogs.

I've been in two situations where friend's dogs obeyed me but ignored their owners, and the owners still insisted that their techniques worked better. Sometimes people believe what they want to believe and logic becomes irrelevant.

I gave up on choke chains a long time ago because I couldn't get any benefit using them with malamutes. I was concerned about injuries when they pulled, and malamutes are tough enough to ignore any corrections below the danger level.

Sure, some people will never be convinced, and that's okay. But trust me when I say, people are watching. You may not always know who you've inspired, but you are inspiring someone. Keep up the great work!

One thing that really strikes me about your story is the desire to put a chain collar on such a young - as well as tiny - puppy. In my early exposure to training as a student in various classes between the mid-80s and early 90s, the common wisdom was that you didn't start "serious" training with puppies 'til they were 6 months old. At that time - at least in the places where I lived - training by definition involved what we just called a "training collar." People understood that collar corrections were too harsh for young pups. In recent years, it seems like I see more and more use of choke chains and other tools that deliver aversive stimuli being used on very young puppies. So was I just lucky in who I chose to train with, or was it pretty widely accepted 20 years ago that you didn't put metal training collars on young pups?

If my impression back then was right, what's changed? Has the backlash against positive training led some of its detractors to move in the opposite direction?

Thanks to you who have responded. Laurie, I certainly agree that our dogs are the best representatives when they are seen out in public being well-behaved, responsive and happy.
Jeff - I agree that "way back when" the advice was to wait until the dog was six months old, at which time in my recollection nearly "every" dog did then wear a metal training collar. I think there was still the occasional trainer who used discretion in perhaps using a flat collar for some dogs but remember, the metal collar wasn't thought of as a "bad" thing; it was, as you say, *the* training collar. People have to remember that dog training has been going through an evolution and you can't, by definition, criticize something that comes earlier in the evolution with the way things are now.
I think now perhaps there is also severe polarization: those who would *never* use any aversive and those who seem unaware of how much pressure they are putting on dogs and puppies - they are lost in the idea of being "dominant". Luckily there are still many who are what I would call balanced: who understand that dogs can have humane boundaries so as to understand their world, yet without ever moving over into the realm of harsh forcefulness.
It's the definition of that that is also the problem: it's definitely like arguing with a brick wall to try to discuss it.

One of the number one skills we as dog trainers need is the ability to listen. So what happens to us when someone recommends anything contrary to what we know? Do we shut down and go into the you are wrong mode? Or do we ask questions about where did they learn this and why do they think it works? Do we ask them what about the risk of injury (with specifics?) or warn them about the risk? No one responds well to the You are wrong approach. So the best thing to do is change our approach.
At the APDT 2008 conference I was reminded over and over again how many different opinions, techniques, learning experience and abilities well respected trainers have who all believe in the humane treatment of animals... So why be so surprised that there are still people who think they know that they are talking about (because I have Never been that person ;P) when there is no rational, medical or scientific evidence to back them up.
Isn't our role to be the voice of the dogs? If we don't want to use harsh methods on animals why do we sometimes use them on people who believe in things so radically wrong (in our experience)? I always thought that the best thing is to educate people of their OPTIONS and the pro and cons of them all. My opinion is that our responsibility to the animals is to get as much information out there so people can make educated choices. They may make choices that we don't agree with but at least we can know that we did our best to make sure they made an educated choice knowing HOW to use the equipment as humanely as possible.

Interesting comment, Sarraye. There is never any use (in my opinion) to tell anyone that they are simply "wrong". People can not rationally "hear" what someone is trying to say if they are in a defensive mode...I agree that education and discussion is always beneficial. I also do not advocate only the use of certain equipment or training styles - it is the skill and empathy of the trainer that makes all the difference rather than the tools they are using.
However - in the instance I described in my original post - I *was* surprised at this person and her blatantly ignorant comments. I don't mean this as a lack of ability on my part to respect, work with or recognize others who might train differently than I do, but rather a situation which was nearly shocking in my wonderment at the things she kept saying. I didn't catalogue everything that she said in my post, but there was much more that essentially made no sense (and which didn't necessarily have anything to do with "training" per se, such as "insurance won't cover you unless you are using a choke chain", and "the city council passed on ordinance saying that the choke chain was the only "legal" collar to use"???). You just can't argue or discuss or teach a person whose every sentence contained a falsehood or sheer ignorance - or at least let me say that I personally had neither the time nor the inclination to do so. It was too overwhelming for a casual unexpected foray into a pet store. Perhaps another time, if I or someone felt inclined to try and communicate with this person and go over with her every aspect of everything in an attempt to discuss and "teach" her other and better ways. Believe me, over the years I have spent many hours doing just what you suggest, and it is always rewarding to reach an accord with a fellow trainer - but I still remain astonished at the statements this person was making which went far beyond training methods, tools, or styles of training.