Crate Training and Other Ills of Our Society
by Terry Thistlethwaite
The term "crate training" is a misnomer. There is no "training"
involved in locking someone in a box and leaving them to
deal with it. Animals will "adjust" to imprisonment just as will
people. Humans who have spent a good deal of time living in
a prison situation will have difficulty living in normal society,
just as dogs who spend a great deal of time being confined to
a box will have difficulty living in a normal home environment.
Both will seek to retreat to the prison when faced with unusual
or upsetting circumstances. Dog owners typically point to the
"happy dog" electing to sleep in the box as evidence that the
crate is a "positive" experience. Dogs which have never been
forcibly confined to these contraptions, however, will rarely
if ever venture into them. While it is fully possible to accustom
virtually any dog to this manner of imprisonment -- either for short
or long periods of time -- it is not correct to term this treatment
"training".
Crates were created as a means to transport dogs safely
in railroad cars, and later in airplanes. They came into more
common use by show dog handlers transporting multiple dogs
in vehicles, and eventually by unwary pet owners encouraged by
the idea that "anyone can own a dog" as long as they have a
box to place it in when they are either too busy to deal with it
or don't want to play with it any more (expanding on the definition
of "toys" to include dogs). Crates became the darling "tool" of the
rescue community wanting to place a dog in every home,
whether the family was up to the commitment of training and living
with a dog or not. The fancier community joined in, noting that
dogs abhor the thought of soiling their sleeping area, thus the
task of housebreaking a puppy is eased by making the puppy
sleep alone in a box (which is notably also fully against the pack
nature of puppies and dogs). A good majority of breeders today will
encourage new puppy owners to buy a box for the puppy to both
sleep in and retreat to when the family is otherwise involved.
The fallacy that wild dogs live in small dens is typically used to
support the idea of a crate as a "substitute den". In reality, wild
canines use dens only as a place to give birth and raise young
pups until they are old enough to toddle out of these whelping
areas. Even at that, dens do not possess locking doors.
Wild dogs live in packs and abhor isolation. To a domestic dog,
their human family is their "pack", and even when other pets
are present, the humans are always viewed as the primary pack
members.
Amazingly, our grandparents and their forebears owned dogs, and
lived with those dogs in their homes without ever putting them in
boxes! Those dogs were the ancestors of the dogs we have today,
and they were housebroken, well mannered, and very much
members of the household. Notably, it was toy breed dogs
especially who were kept as house pets -- the breeds most people
today will tell you are "difficult to housebreak". Yet our human
ancestors had no difficulty at all in housebreaking these diminutive
ancestors of the toy breed dogs we have today. Rather than
locking them in boxes for their personal convenience, our
grandparents took the time to take their dogs outside or to a
specified "potty area" as often as necessary to TEACH them what
was wanted. They also took the time and made the effort to
TEACH their puppies how to behave in other ways, resulting
in dogs typically being accepted as "part of the family" and
brought along to the market, to the neighbor's homes on visits, into
places of worship, and virtually everywhere else the family would
go.
Today we have people who have no clue as to how to TEACH a dog
anything. Sadly, many of these folks call themselves "dog trainers".
Highly intelligent dogs, once prized by societies of people who
understood the animals they lived with, are typically given up by
owners who hire these "dog trainers" only to be told the dog is
"stupid" when he does not respond as they wish to their "methods".
One brilliant little American Eskimo Dog, for example, was about to
be turned in to rescue after three "top dog training experts" had given
up on him. Asked what the problem was, the owner said the dog
barked incessantly every time someone came to the door, and
would not cease until the visitor left. The first "trainer"
recommended putting the dog in a box. When the barking
continued from inside the box, the "trainer" had the owner toss a
can full of nails at the box and shout "No". When that didn't work,
the "trainer" proclaimed the dog to be "stupid", collected a
thousand dollars for his "trouble" and went home. The second
trainer placed a choke collar on the dog and recommended choking
him every time he barked. The dog quickly learned to fear the collar
as well as the hand that attempted to place it on him. After the
owner was bitten in an attempt, the second "trainer" gave up in a
fashion similar to the first. The owner, not wanting to abuse his
dog further, then sought out a trainer who proclaimed the use of
"positive reinforcement". That "trainer" proved to be a person who
positively reinforced the unwanted behavior. The owner was told to
give the dog "treats" every time he barked with the explanation that
the diversion of eating would curtail the barking. Of course, the
dog learned to bark as a way to be rewarded with food. The owner
explained that the "treats" were becoming costly and the dog was
getting fat -- not to mention that his bank account was depleting
quickly after paying these "top trainers" thousands of dollars.
When the owner called me to relinquish the dog to rescue, I asked
if he truly did want to keep the dog, and would he do so if the dog
could be trained not to bark when visitors came. The man very
skeptically replied that he did love his dog and did want to keep
him, but couldn't imagine that he could be trained after all of these
"top experts" had declared the dog "untrainable". I then asked if he
would give my recommendation "two weeks". He agreed. I told him
that every time the dog barked, he, and everyone else present
(including the visitor at the door) were to go into the nearest corner,
face the wall, and not speak or turn around until the dog became
quiet. If the dog began to bark again once they turned around, they
were to resume facing the wall. The owner said, "That's all?"
I told him that it was very important that this procedure was
followed every time the dog barked, and followed by everyone
present, so it would be best to alert potential visitors ahead of time
and make sure they were fully prepared to follow through.
He agreed. Three days later he called back and proclaimed me to
be "brilliant", saying my method not only "worked" but "worked
immediately" and he was in no way ever going to even think of
giving up his "smart little dog" again.
I have a friend who trained his puppy to help him with his disability.
The dog steps carefully along by his side and guides him on a
straight path, offering his shoulder if the man should falter. He
also picks up dropped items, opens doors, turns on lights, and
performs other "Service Dog" duties. When I asked him if he ever
used a crate or a choke collar in training this dog, the look on his
face said "You have got to be kidding!" Then he said, "You know,
dogs are actually very easy to live with, and they adapt very well to
your needs and your likes. I have never trusted a person who
cannot live with a dog, or respected one who has to have a box to
keep one in, and a choke collar to keep one under control."
Interestingly, he added, "Of course, I have only ever owned well
bred purebred dogs. The mixed breed dogs that the shelters are
bringing in from other countries to inflate their numbers are probably
an example of more feral breeding and less domestic
behavior -- I don't know. I do know the rescue groups who deal with
them are sold on choking and imprisoning, but I could never
do that to a dog."
It is sad to consider many of the things a given society comes, thru
whatever perverted means, to accept as "normal" and "common
practice".