- MemberApril 12, 2021 at 11:33 pm215
The IACP had one thing that really stood out to me:
8. IACP members may not seek to deprive any canine professional of his or her ability to
conduct his or her business by seeking to restrict or ban accepted and established tools
of the trade, or by seeking to restrict or ban accepted and established techniques and
practices within the industry through calls for boycotts, restrictions, bans, or other
actions designed to interfere with free marketplace participation of a canine professional
in his or her business. Accepted and established tools of the trade include, but are not limited to,
leashes, harnesses, training collars, slip collars, prong collars, head halters, remote electronic c
collars, and electronic pet containment systems. Accepted and established techniques and practices
include, but are not limited to, those techniques and practices described in published books, videos,
and professional seminars. A personal preference shall be allowed in the individual member’s
choice of methods, equipment and techniques within their own practice.
I love this in that it sets the expectation that tools are not the same as training, abuse, or education. It also discourages members from saying “I’m better than XYZ because I don’t/do use “this” tool.
I know this is about code of conduct but I really feel like the rest of the site is important to look at for context. This was in the mission statement:
9. Encourages and supports the establishment of dog parks, training and exercise areas within local communities.
<font face=”inherit”>It does seem like both of these organizations are most concerned with </font>standardizing<font face=”inherit”> the way </font>trainers<font face=”inherit”> present to the public and how they represent an industry that allows for differing opinions to be equally qualified as education based on individual preference. </font>
Estheticians (in the US) all have to know the same base knowledge, they have to pass safety tests and prove continually to a state board ethical practice. I just feel like style or tool preference is one thing, but bending animal sciences and behavior to promote marketing ideology is detrimental to dogs and their handlers. If trainers can sell differing definitions of aggression, operant conditioning, canine genetics etc. then we aren’t ever going to be able to reach our potential as an industry and so many dogs and people will suffer as a result.