With an estimated 7.9 million dogs in Canada, the demand for professional training is growing, but not all methods are safe. Studies have shown that reward-based training is not only more effective but also better for dogs’ well-being, while aversive-based methods are linked to increased fear and aggression, negative impacts on the human-animal bond, and less training success overall. However, many dog guardians still struggle to understand what these methods actually involve, leaving them vulnerable to outdated or harmful techniques. Although there are third-party organizations that offer certifications, many of these are easy to obtain and not strictly regulated. This study is one of the first to take a close look at Canada’s dog training industry and makes a strong case for better standards and protections for both dogs and their guardians.

The researchers created an online survey for professional dog trainers in Canada and shared it through emails and social media ads to reach a wide range of participants, especially in less populated regions of the country. The survey asked about their educational background, qualifications, training methods, opinions on industry regulation, and more. The questions were tested in advance with a small group of researchers and dog trainers to make sure everything was clear.

The final sample included 706 professional dog trainers across Canada, with an average age of around 43 years. The majority were women (84%) and most (64%) identified as having a European background. Educational backgrounds varied, though nearly half (44%) had completed college or university.

Training Qualifications

On average, respondents had been training dogs professionally for just over 10 years. Most had formal training, with two-thirds (66%) having completed one or more dog training programs. A third (33%) were self-taught through some combination of books, videos, personal experience, and continuing education courses.

Certification was mixed: some received theirs from a training program (30%), while others had been examined or evaluated by a credentialing board (16%). Over a quarter (27%) reported both. Close to a quarter (24%) said they had no certification.

Popular training programs included Fear Free’s Animal Trainer Certification Program, Michael Shikashio’s Aggression in Dogs Master Course, and the Karen Pryor Academy’s Certified Training Partner. Common credentialing boards included the Certification Council for Professional Dog Trainers and the International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants. Overall, respondents identified a total of 138 different training programs and 39 certifications.

Training Services

Trainers were mostly self-employed (80%) and offered a wide range of services from basic manners and puppy classes to addressing fear, aggression, reactivity, and separation anxiety. The most common behavioral issues encountered included reactivity to dogs (64%), poor manners (64%), poor recall (30%), and fear (29%). Close to three-quarters (72%) of respondents recommended veterinary consultations to their clients.

Training Methods

Most respondents described themselves as positive reinforcement (89%) or reward-based (86%) trainers. Over a third (39%) saw themselves as “balanced,” and far fewer used terms like “pack leader” (11%) or “dominance theory” (2%). Again, there was significant variation: respondents’ descriptions of their training approaches resulted in more than 80 different themes.

Most respondents avoided aversive tools like choke (79%), shock (63%), or prong (61%) collars. Common training items used included treats, toys, long leashes, crates, muzzles, and clickers.

Thoughts On Regulation

Opinions on industry regulation were mixed: while a small majority (62%) supported making dog training a regulated profession, almost the same proportion were against it (19%) as were undecided (19%). Self-regulation (52%) was preferred over regulation by animal welfare organizations (24%) or the government (14%). Close to a third (32%) of respondents were undecided on this point.

Interestingly, respondents’ education and training methods seemed closely tied to their stance on regulation. Trainers who described themselves as “balanced,” were self-educated, or used aversive collars were less likely to support regulation than those who had completed a training program or described themselves as “reward-based.”

Limitations

The study has several limitations. The sample may not fully represent all regions of Canada, as it appeared to be overrepresented in British Columbia and underrepresented in Quebec and Ontario. However, this comparison is approximate since general population data may not reflect where dog trainers are actually located.

Additionally, the study may be affected by self-selection bias. Trainers with a negative opinion of the research team’s affiliation with an animal welfare organization or who felt the survey was biased against certain training methods may have chosen not to participate. The researchers acknowledge that the lack of input from balanced trainers during survey design may have introduced unintentional bias in how questions were framed.

Takeaways

Ultimately, the study highlights how Canada’s dog training industry is highly fragmented, lacking standardized education, certification, and terminology. While reward-based methods appear most common, regional differences and varying views on approaches persist. The absence of clear standards poses risks for dog welfare, making it difficult for guardians to choose qualified trainers. Although most respondents support regulation, its success will depend on broad industry acceptance.

For both advocates and researchers, future efforts could focus on:

• Defining core training curricula;
• Understanding what influences trainers’ choices of methods, and aversive ones in particular;
• Addressing systemic barriers that limit entry into the profession, as well as access to training services; and
• Improving collaboration between trainers and veterinary professionals.