Requiring certification and licensure for dog trainers; good or bad idea?
By Will Bangura, M.S., CBCC-KA, CPDT-KA
Regulating the dog training industry by requiring trainers to be certified and licensed has been a topic of debate in recent years. While some trainers argue against regulation, others argue that it is necessary to ensure the quality and effectiveness of training and the welfare of the dogs in their care.
One of the main arguments for regulation is that it would help to ensure the quality and effectiveness of training. By requiring trainers to be certified and licensed, only individuals who have met certain qualifications and standards would be allowed to provide training services to the public. This would help to protect both dogs and their owners from the potential harm caused by unqualified or inexperienced trainers.
Additionally, the regulation would help to address concerns about the abuse or neglect of dogs in the care of trainers. This is because regulation typically involves the establishment of guidelines and standards for the care and welfare of dogs, which would help to ensure that they are treated humanely and with respect.
Another argument for regulation is that it would promote professionalism and credibility in the industry. By requiring trainers to meet certain qualifications and standards, the regulation would help to distinguish qualified and ethical trainers from those who may not have the necessary skills or knowledge to provide effective training. This would make it easier for the public to identify and choose reputable trainers.
Furthermore, by mandating certification and licensure, the regulation would encourage trainers to continue their education and stay up to date with the latest training methods and techniques. This would benefit dogs and their owners, as trainers could provide more effective and humane training.
Moreover, some trainers argue that regulating the industry would help to level the playing field, as it would prevent unqualified individuals from entering the field and undercutting the prices of certified trainers, which would reduce the number of unprofessional trainers and increase the trust in the industry.
The dog training industry should be regulated and require certification and licensure because it plays a crucial role in the health and well-being of dogs and their owners. Just like doctors and counselors, dog trainers significantly impact the lives of their clients and should be held to high standards of professionalism and expertise.
One example of the importance of regulation in the dog training industry can be seen in the use of aversive training methods. These methods, which include physical force, pain, and fear, can cause serious harm to dogs and lead to behavior issues that are difficult to correct. In contrast, science-based, positive reinforcement training methods are effective and humane. By regulating the industry and requiring certification and licensure, it ensures that only trainers who have been trained in these positive methods can practice.
Another example of why regulation is necessary is the fact that there is currently no oversight of the qualifications and experience of dog trainers. Anyone can call themselves a “dog trainer,” regardless of their level of expertise or education. This can lead to confusion and mistrust among dog owners, who may not know how to distinguish between a qualified and an unqualified trainer. Regulation, certification, and licensure would establish a clear set of standards and qualifications that trainers must meet, making it easier for dog owners to find a qualified professional.
Moreover, licensing and certification also ensure that the trainers are held accountable for their actions and conduct; if a trainer does something unethical, unprofessional, or harmful, there would be a clear process for handling complaints and disciplinary action.
One of the main arguments against regulating dog trainers is that it would limit the ability of individuals to enter the field and provide training services. This is because regulation typically involves a process of certification and licensure, which can be costly and time-consuming for trainers to obtain. Additionally, some trainers argue that regulation would stifle innovation and creativity in the field, as trainers would be required to adhere to specific standards and guidelines.
Another argument against regulation is that it would lead to a lack of diversity in the training methods and techniques used. This is because regulation typically involves establishing specific guidelines and standards that all trainers must follow, which may not consider the diverse needs of different dogs and their owners.
However, there are also strong arguments in favor of regulating the dog training industry. One of the main arguments is that regulation would help to ensure the quality and effectiveness of training, as only certified and licensed trainers would be allowed to provide services to the public. This would help to protect both dogs and their owners from the potential harm caused by unqualified or inexperienced trainers.
Additionally, the regulation would help to address concerns about the abuse or neglect of dogs in the care of trainers. This is because regulation typically involves the establishment of guidelines and standards for the care and welfare of dogs, which would help to ensure that they are treated humanely and with respect.
In conclusion, the dog training industry currently lacks regulation, certification, and licensure. While some trainers argue that regulation would limit their ability to enter the field, stifle innovation, and limit diversity in training methods. However, others argue that regulation would help ensure the quality and effectiveness of training, protect dogs and their owners from potential harm and address concerns about abuse or neglect of dogs in the care of trainers. Some organizations, such as the Association of Professional Dog Trainers (APDT) and the International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants (IAABC), have set their own certification standards for trainers. Still, it is not mandatory for trainers to obtain such certifications. It would be important for further research and studies to be conducted to evaluate the potential benefits and drawbacks of regulating the dog training industry and to gather input from trainers, veterinarians, and other experts in the field.
References:
- “The Power of Positive Dog Training” by Pat Miller
- “Dog Training Revolution: The Complete Guide to Raising the Perfect Pet with Love” by Victoria Stilwell
- “Positive Reinforcement: Training Dogs in the Real World” by Karen Pryor
- “Examining the use of aversives in dog training” by Karen L. Overall, MA, VMD, Ph.D., DACVB, DACAW, ABS Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist
- “Certification Council for Professional Dog Trainers”
- “The Case for Professional Certification of Dog Trainers” by Karen L. Overall and Emily Levine, Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 2010
- “Regulation of the Pet Industry: An Overview” by David J. Wolfson and Lisa Adams, Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 2002
- The Ethics and Regulation of Dog Training” by Andrew L. Roszak and Susan G. Friedman, Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 2008
- “The Use of Aversive Training Methods in Dogs and the Implications for Animal Welfare” by Emily Levine, Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 2011
- “The Importance of Professional Standards in Dog Training” by Nicole Wilde, The Whole Dog Journal, 2014
