Best person to give me advice was years and years back was a BC owner and she owned 6 BC's all at once all lovely behaved but all with different characters.

I went along to a training class to watch my friend and her hubby with thier BC one sunday, I was slightly disappointed how they had so many breeds in one large group on a field but didn't take into consideration the breed.......like Loki's Mom says....... the guy I watched seemed to expect every single one to a high standard, I won't forget the poor Dobie amongst the group that was fear aggressive and no-one once said.....''hello all the other dogs are not fear aggressive'' poor Dobie was stressed to high levels it was sad to watch, and as for the poor owner he was so frustrated that it was obvious the Dobie was going to fail

Well as a dog training instructor myself (not as my main income) and also a competitor and a person who keeps up their CPD my views are as follows:

There is, as yet, not nationally recognised benchmark against which all trainers are measured.

The KCAI is, IMV, the most robust scheme out there and the title of KCAI is going to be, IMHO the one which most people aspire to achieve.

Having said that, there are a huge number of dog training instructors who have nothing after their name bar a full stop, and some of those are far more effective than many who have a plethora of (sometimes spurious) letters after their name.

The legal definition of competency is someone who has the requisite skills, knowledge, ability, training and experience to teach others.

I am continually amazed at those who have only had ONE dog of ONE breed who appear to believe they are in a position to advise others!

ALL dogs can be trained to achieve their full potential, just like humans.

Just as not all humans have the ability to be a brain surgeon, concert pianist or olympic athlete, not all dogs have the makings of a (insert relevant discipline champion).

The problem with people who only train (insert relevant breed) is that they often do not have the knowledge of how to tackle dogs that have a different outlook on life (eg handler dependant v non dependent breeds).

Above and beyond the legal definition of competency I am looking for someone with whom I can gel.

I do not necessarily have to agree with or incorporate all of their views or techniques into my training, but I will generally agree with the overall ethos.

I have attended training courses with several superb trainers with whom I have little in common to increase my SKATE and develop my "eye".

The old saying of "the only thing two dog trainers will agree on is that the third trainer is wrong" is a trite if true maxim.

ALL breeds can be trained to a high standard, and if you do not aim high you will not reach high.

Does that really matter though, if they want to specialise in training that particular breed? I don't think it does?

Afterall, there are specialists in all fields, take the car industry, you wouldn't take your bimmer to the local ford garage for diagnostics would you, so why can't you take a dog of a certain breed to a trainer who specialises in that breed with all the experience they have under their belt? If it's not a problem for THEM to specialise then why is it a problem for a dog owner to have a trainer such as this if they have said breed. Personally, I like the fact that there are trainers out there who do specialise in one breed, whether it be mine or not, I think it counts for a lot, and afterall, it's their choice to be what they are.

For me, it's about experience, I have never bothered to look at their formal qualifications.

Gundog training for example I look at the level they've achieved with their dogs (do they compete in FT's, do they judge tests etc) and if they are highly recommended.

For agility and obedience I go along and if me or the dog doesnt like it then we dont go again.

I think it does matter. There would be a huge difference for example, in training a GSD from an Estrela. The GSD adores it's human and wants to be with them and make them happy. The Estrela couldn't give a monkeys (think training a cat and you get the idea!) Then you might get the trainer who doesn't understand GSDs, and their tendency to be vocal, or the stubborness of a Chihuahua etc. A trainer should know the basic temperaments of different types of dog, and what that means in terms of training that breed. Some dogs you can put 100% into and get little out. My Rio is extremely intelligent and very bonded to me. If I took her to training though and asked her to do something simple that she knows well, such as sit, her response would be 'why? What's the point?' wheras my JRT Rogue would be 'sure, what else can I do to please you?'

Originally Posted by smokeybear
The problem with people who only train (insert relevant breed) is that they often do not have the knowledge of how to tackle dogs that have a different outlook on life (eg handler dependant v non dependent breeds)

Well I agree with both of you here to an extent. One thing I would say though when thinking about this now is that; I have been to training with trainers who teach all breeds and yet seem to know nothing about how to teach owners anything more than basic sit/down and definitely didn't 'know the workings of a dobe'

When I joined a dog class where the trainer there had years of experience in dobes the difference was phenomenal !!

I suppose knowing the breed meant he knew what made them tick? Instead of being in a class where they 'fought' against his breed traits by wanting him to just want to carry something etc the guy in this class really seemed to know what/how I should go about things and also, even with the others in class with different breeds would try something else until they found what worked for that owner/dog.

So I can see both sides a bit but one thing is for sure; I cannot say that I would join a dog class that didn't have a trainer who had worked with/owned/etc the more "difficult" breeds.

So what I suppose I have went the long way round saying is that I agree with Smokeybear in that when I went to a dog trainer who was not really aware of the Dobermanns outlook, I didnt get far but then in the same sense thats where I can see Helena's point here too - would it be such a bad thing if I went to a trainer that had only worked/owned/lived with/trained Dobes for the past 30 years - not for me! but then the problem (as I think was SB's point?) is that if the guy with the Pomeranian attended his class and the trainer could not 'adjust' and learn to train that breed/adjust ways.. and so on...well then it would be the guy with the Pom not getting very far!

My trainer has has loads of breeds, including terriers, toys, guarding and herding breeds. Obviously there will be breeds she's not that familiar with, but a good trainer is always willing to learn. I've not owned loads of breeds, but as a dog nerd I want to learn about all kinds of breeds, even those I have no intention of ever owning. I expect that from a good trainer too.

Something else I thought of was that I would like to see that a trainer was really passionate about dogs and about what they were doing - rather than someone who couldn't really be bothered and was actually doing it just to make some money.

Isn't that exactly what I'm saying there though? I like the fact that some trainers actually specialise in certain breeds, just like I like the garage who fixes my bimmer a lot better than fred in the shed, or the French teacher who teaches me french rather than and english teacher teaching me french, and so on and so on? Get what I'm saying here? That's the only reason I picked that bit out of SB's post coz I disagree with that bit, if these particular trainers choose to specialise in a certain breed, then what does it matter that they don't really know much about other breeds?

I have not met ANY world class or national class trainers that "specialise" in training one breed as yet, and I cannot think of any off hand.

All the top class trainers I can think of work with ALL breeds.