Canine compulsive disorder gene identified in dogs; shares family with recently targeted gene for autism in humans.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100106193316.htm
Fun with balloons at 60 mph.
My time as an International Association of Canine Professionals member has had an interesting evolution. I had never in 20 years been a member of a single association. I’d just never seen an upside. The representation of balanced trainers simply wasn’t there in the organizations I’d encountered nor were the beliefs and skill set of the trainers in these organizations to my taste. In a convoluted way I found my way to the International Association of Canine Professionals. For the first time in nearly 20 years I had found a pool of trainers that I could learn something from and there were a lot of them at that. So I joined.
I’ve learned that my background in dogs is different from many of you. I had not entered the world of dogs through vehicles like kennel clubs. It was an old time trainer that worked with police dogs that my father introduced me to that got me to believe that it was possible to earn a living at something one could love to do. He had never had anything to do with the sorts of disciplines found in the kennel club ring type work either which I have learned through this list might have been valuable. Anyway, he took me under his wing. I read what he told me to read, watched what he told me to watch, took the leash when he told me to take it and let it go we he told me to let it go. In essence I did what he told me to do and one day it was time and I hand delivered a bunch of flyers and lo and behold someone called me and paid me and I was hooked. I would have been hooked if it had been done for free.
I was making decent money at the time through a more traditional profession; far more then I ever thought possible one could earn in the dog training field but like many of you with talent that you could translate into far greater pay checks in the “real” world, the thought of getting up in the morning and doing something I loved even if it meant getting a check that any sane man or woman knew had little more potential then to pay bills was not a tough decision for me to make.
Somehow over the years I never crossed paths with many other balanced trainers. There were trainers of course but the sort that wouldn’t share what they knew and after a while I learned that this wasn’t because they didn’t want to share what they knew, it was because they didn’t want anyone to discover how much they didn’t know and so I just avoided other trainers. In retrospect I should have made a greater effort to seek out people like yourselves but hindsight . . .
I became established and while by no means rich I was able to pay the bills. Just barely at times here and there throughout my career but well enough to call myself a full time professional trainer. It has been interesting. I worked as the provincial behavior specialist for my provinces century old SPCA, prepped and handled the dogs for a successful television series, hosted radio shows, started teaching veterinary students, teaching at conferences and started writing initially a column for a local newspaper which over time found its was into newspapers with circulation of over 6 million readers. A long way from making my first $35.00 for helping someone get their beagle from peeing on their daughter’s bed. I know that I have been truly blessed.
I was introduced by a friend to the International Association of Canine Professionals and thinking there wouldn’t be a single upside I joined for no other reason then because my friend told me to. You can’t imagine my shock to discover so many people that believed in balanced training and actually knew what they were talking about and as an even greater shock could actually teach me a thing or two or three and as even greater shock – were willing do so. Soon though I saw greater value and that was an organization that could act as a vehicle to stand up for balanced trainer’s that might preserve its values and take an active defense if not offense regarding what I have always felt was a cancer in the dog training world, that being reward good behavior, ignore bad behavior training that is taking over our industry.
Over time for reasons that many of you share I became somewhat disillusioned when it became apparent that little if any progress was being made to protect or promote our industry and that balanced trainers to come would find it very difficult to survive. There really seemed to be no more then lip service to what I believe and still do was sorely needed. I found that member’s concerns were not answered so much as the member was “handled.” Knowing full well that it would be a considerable time sacrifice, after prodding by some friends I decided to run for the board to see if I might lend a hand to get us on a track that would actually be a powerful voice in the industry. There is no doubt in my mind that a well led motivated association of balanced trainers could re-take this industry and not just be a powerful voice in the industry, but become ‘the’ voice.
It was that which motivated me to become involved from the leadership perspective in the International Association of Canine Professionals. I knew going in that many had come before me both elected and appointed with the same concerns and had left in disgust when they learned how dysfunctional the leadership was but ever the optimist I jumped into the fray anyway. While I will never regret that decision to join the International Association of Canine Professionals and become a board member I have found my journey to move from joy to incredulity to disgust and finally to fear.
I fully get the founder’s syndrome hurdle we face but that is a challenge all associations face and in my opinion was resolvable. However the degree of incestuous wrapping that make up the leadership and the way it is used to sway influence was far worse then I imagined once I was able to watch the machinations first hand and most recently been subjected to. I have discussed our situation with many people far more experienced in nonprofits and founder’s syndrome or not they do not understand how we could be so naïve to believe that it is all right to have an executive director that is also a director with also a wife that is a director with significant personal business ties with a major sponsor and so much more. They do not understand either that we have never had an audit in 12 years or could abide being so dependent on two people that as Martin himself confidently volunteered at the Hutto board meeting, “If Pat and I left, the IACP would be done in 3 days.” That the IACP is allowed to so precariously perch is to me nothing less than bizarre. That an offer as recent as last year from Martin to step down in a cooperative and timely manner never came to fruition defies belief considering the IACP’s vulnerability and it is unlikely that his most recent offer this month will come to fulfillment either.
How we could have had board after board that could overlook such lack of balance and negligence in protecting the association’s stability seems impossible. However, as most of us are aware it has not been a lack of will on past board members it has been that our board structure permits abuse more so then a completely elected and therefore more accountable board and that in spite of the best of intentions they have been powerless in the bringing about of meaningful change. This has been the greatest contributor to our brain drain both on the board and off as potential leaders for both board and committee levels become unwilling to invest their time. Even more sadly it has strengthened the hold on what I have come to believe is self-serving rather then membership serving power.
As I said I knew some of this going in but I would not have described it as malfeasance but more so the frog in the pot syndrome. Little by little the best of intentions at the time became dubious practices, which became a horrible culture. The tipping point for me leading to words as charged as malfeasance and abuse of power is not the aforementioned functional issues nor the lack of will to address them in a business like manner, but the tactics I have been witness to that are used behind the scenes to keep from having to do so.
As you are now aware it was I that put my foot down regarding the confidentiality and intellectual property agreements. I have no problem with the idea but the one I was offered was draconian and dangerous to sign for someone that has significant income streams outside of the hands on training of dogs as I do. I was asked to produce a more acceptable agreement in a simplified form, which I did to no end and then I was asked to provide an addition to the current agreement that would serve to protect the rights of those signing as well. I did so and it was not to my knowledge ever considered if even read. Finally the president asked if I would be willing to sign temporarily while the agreement was rewritten more sensibly and I agreed.
While this was going on I also took a firm stance on other issues I simply was not willing to compromise on those being the conflict of interest issues, the lack of representation that our system had led to for our members, the poor return on investment our members were receiving on their membership dollars particularly when compared to the potential it should have, the poor quality of our website, no path plotted from an A to B on any project what so ever let alone our overall mission statement, the arrogance on the appointed board members part that all evidence to the side that they had matters well in hand, and most recently the revelation that no audit has ever been done and that an annual audit is a bylaw compliance and therefore mandatory.
It was inevitable that I wasn’t going to be the most popular belle at the ball amongst what I found to be for the most part a disturbingly don’t rock the boat and complacent board. My “bad” reputation as being confrontational is warranted if confrontational means not accepting evasive, half answers or refusals to answer. I believe this has been the reason for the board’s most recent actions. Never the less I have a threshold for stress that makes a Hutto board meeting no more then a Sunday dinner with the folks and was more then willing to take whatever abuse I had to in order to represent those that elected me and to help build an association to support future balanced trainers.
Where I draw the line is the risk that I take on professionally when there is purposeful malfeasance. My refusal to sign the infamous agreement has been used as an excuse to what I once suspected and now know to be true – keep me from bringing accountability to the board and executive director through implementing completely standard nonprofit business practices. This became particularly evident when I was able included on a committee which was to serve in the future planning of amongst other things a succession plan and compliance with our own bylaws and nonprofit law. It was at that point I was informed that I could not participate on any committee until I signed their agreement. There was no motion, discussion, no vote and no supporting documentation of bylaw, policy or precedent, yet somehow this was permitted to go forward.
It is important to remember that I had been a director without a signed agreement that had been allowed to head the web design committee. It was only when I made myself available to participate in succession planning etc. that it became a “grave” issue.
My objections were dismissed in a board meeting by the president as “duly noted” and business moved on. There was much the board had done up to this point that I didn’t consider to be necessarily nefarious as bizarre business procedures were the norm rather then the exception but as I had signed the agreement in the form recommended by the board there was no longer any issue with me any more then any other board member or member volunteer that had signed it.
If there was to be any doubt in my mind that this is a case of malfeasance, final evidence came when another director refused to sign and yet another officially rescinded willingness to comply with the agreement, as did many other members currently working as volunteers. That the board did not apply the same restrictions on the director also working on current committee as they did I, or any of the volunteers, it is now I think fair to say they were not interested in protecting confidentiality or intellectual property. One can only speculate what is they are protecting but their “rules be damned whatever it takes” mindset does not bode well for what that may be.
I formally asked the president to address this “uneven” application of policy as I did the board and never received a response let alone the rationale used to justify such duplicitous ruling. And so it was revealed conclusively that these actions were designed not to protect the IACP’s welfare but to protect personal interests.
This is proof enough of a despicably confident arrogant belief that accountability cannot be enforced internally or externally and for me is evidence enough of our leadership’s willingness to do whatever it takes to protect a self serving agenda. In other words evidence enough of corruption.
That the board majority has acted so arrogantly and unethically is in itself reason enough to distance oneself but I fear that as despicable as this most recent of events has been these things over time might become worse as the arrogance will inevitably breed even more contempt for both written and unwritten law and at some point there is a chance that an investigatory body will become involved. This would bring great personal risk to me and is where my disgust has evolved to fearfulness for how it might affect my own future.
If I were to be associated with an organization let alone be a board member and should what I see as the walls of deceit be pulled down by the government’s nonprofit enforcement agencies I would pay a price in reputation that could affect my current and future earnings currently in development and as much as I want to stand by my commitment to the membership that is a line I am not willing to see crossed nor a price I am willing to pay.
Even were there no professional risk to me, the logic in continuing is lost once it becomes crystal clear that enough members on the board are unethical enough to confidently embrace “there are no rules except where and when we want them to apply” but more particularly “the membership may have voted you in but you only exist at our leisure.” That is very tough to fight. I would like to make it clear that there were some bright lights and bright moments on the board. Both Jill and Tawni in particular were known to stand up with the betterment of the IACP in mind when it was not popular to do so. Sarah as well I must add.
For those that might think I should pursue a grievance my thoughts are this. Even were the grievance procedure something I believed would prevail the thought that things have deteriorated so badly that an entire board would have to face a grievance for the association to move forward is in itself reason enough for saying the end is here.
As such I must resign from both the board and as a member of the International Association of Canine Professionals.
Foes and even friends will never know how great my regret is. We balanced trainers need an organization like what I once thought the International Association of Canine Professionals was. We do not need an organization that has the potential to harm its members and the industry.
I apologize to all those people that over the months have written me and called me offering encouragement for not contacting you in advance of announcing my decision. Thank you so much for your support, were it not for the risk I have outlined I would have stayed on.
I have never fully understood the reason that resigning directors do so without clearly outlining why, and subsequently have allowed the board to speak for them or leave things to speculation – hence my lengthy post. I wanted you know how I found my way to the IACP, my journey with and where the covenant was finally broken and my reason for leaving.
I have to the best of my knowledge removed any reference to my affiliation with the IACP from my websites and where applicable will inform my business associates that I am distancing myself from the association and my reasons for doing so.
Regards,
John Wade
Wade Dog Training Collars – President
This blog is a side outlet for me to shout out about whatever takes my fancy. Might be about dogs, might not be. It might start out about dogs and end up being about something else. It won’t be always be politically correct but if it were it would hardly be worth reading. Some posts may be of interest to dog owners, others dog professionals and others still just to my friends. You’ll have to figure it out for yourself.
If you feel the need to learn more about me outside of the rantings found in this blog you’ll find it on my public face web site, www.johnwade.ca If you do visit, buy one of my books or sign on to receive my free newsletter and newspaper column so I can bug you once in a while about buying one of my books. If you’re looking for practical advice you won’t ever spend better money on your dog then one of my books.
- John
Hello John:
Could you please specify what you consider to be “disciplinary” measures, versus all-positive measures.
How would you discipline a dog?
Thank you,
L.J.
Dear L.J.
One size does not fit all. It depends on the context, the dog’s temperament, history, breed, bloodlines etc. Discipline shouldn’t be confused with mindless confrontation. Positive reinforcement is much the same. It is provided from the dog’s perspective rather then the handler’s. Not much point giving a dog a piece of lettuce and a rabbit a piece of liver. Discipline or reward, either way it has to have value to the dog.
As far as “all-positive measures”; I don’t consider those at all. At least not seriously. In the natural world there is no such thing. Even those misled into believing in it don’t practice it. Discipline is hidden behind words like “Gentle” leader, which forces compliance due to the pressure on cervical vertebrae in a far more dangerous manner then other training collars. “Don’t feed your dog before class” is another and is a negative used to force concentration. I’m not saying working for one’s dinner is wrong. I’m saying it is not all-positive and the pot shouldn’t be calling the kettle black. Regardless of the semantics related to degree of discipline, for the most part the results produced in all-positive classes are rarely useful beyond a trick level of compliance meaning without the ability to exert self-control and use their attention span outside the proximity of the nearest treat the dogs and their mislead and frustrated owners are at the mercy of real world distractions when on walks and can only be off leash in the most ideal of conditions. All-positive training is non-existent in the working dog world. The joy is in the job and working with the handler.
Mother dogs don’t promise puppies a treat for staying still and silent when a predator is near. She doesn’t put them in time outs as they’ll be at the mercy of predators and very likely dead when she returns. She rewards good behavior, disciplines bad behavior. When balanced with positive reinforcement it packages a clearer message then all-positive or all-negative. This has been proven in a laboratory of far greater scope then B.F. Skinner’s one of the fathers of operant conditioning and its illegitimate child all-positive dog training. There is no evidence that Skinner thought or expected that his work would be so misconstrued as to be thought superior to natural learning let alone a real alternative to balanced dog training anymore then scientists working on human cloning expect it to replace natural reproduction. It was an experiment that demonstrated in a controlled environment, with enough time, the right motivators, sufficient patience and an eye for nuance, an animal’s behavior could be eventually shaped into a semblance of a useful end. It was not an unveiling of superior morality as is suggested by its misguided disciples who infer that if it is not all-positive, other training is cruel. If anything, considering the lives lived by dogs that cannot walk or run free around distractions, the opposite might be said to be true. Shelters are full of dogs surrendered due to behavior easily resolved with a balanced measure of positive and discipline. Far more then are there due to abuse.
We have seen this template of a balance between positive and negative reinforcement in nature from the beginning of time in all social species; including humans. What we have never seen is all-positive and it seems unlikely that dogs are the only species on the planet requiring an aberrant approach to teaching. Nature has a template for everything and every human attempt to circumvent that template including the way social species are wired to learn has always resulted in negative consequences and there is ample evidence to suggest that all-positive dog training has resulted in the same.
I have been blessed with the opportunity to meet and spend time with many of the world’s top dog trainers of all disciplines, positive and balanced and the balanced trained dogs are always just as happy as their counter parts. However, overall they were always better behaved in more varied environments.
-John “Attila” Wade Visit www.johnwade.ca as well.
