Simply Grand

Stuffed up my quoting. See next post.

Yes the high pitch tone of a whistle or call does help cross distance, the recalls for my three ("Quinny come!" "Saxsaxsaxsaxsax" and "rileyrileyriley") are all delivered in a high pitched tone that is horribly annoying even to my own ear. Works though. I start all recall training with a high pitch "pup pup pup pup pup" which all dogs seem to instinctively respond to and head toward from as soon as they can hear and walk. Then the next step is to always, always make coming to me a rewarding experience. So distance and ability to physically control the dog don't really come into play.

Yes you did answer it, thank you,but how are you going to graduate from a recall from 20 metres on a long line using the "EH" to recalling from 200 metres away? ETA also, now I think about it, I don't think I ever showed a treat in my hand with Quinn when training recall. By the time I got her I had a good understanding of the concept of conditioning a recall, which doesn't involve "show the treat and lure them in".

Actually now that I think about it, Willem how did you train recall?

Really? Do you think my dog could see whether or not there was a treat in my hand when I recalled her away from a young child (her favourite thing in the world, better than any food) approximately 200m away at the park today? There actually was no treat in my hand and her reward was a pat, which was enough as she has the conditioning and reward history that means when I call "Quinny come!" She does. ETA she and the child were 200 metres away from me, she was right next to the child when I saw them and called her back.

She is pretty good, from what I saw of the other dogs in the class we'll be able to keep up. I haven't done much formal training with her for ages and ages so I need to practice some more to get her there but she is a fast learner and she loves training so I'm hoping they won't have any grounds to say how I train doesn't work!

Awesome blog post Cosmolo, exactly how I feel about it ????

I met someone at the park today who has trained at the club and had the same concerns, she got into the agility side with them and said that the training for that is much more focussed on positivity and rewards. I guess I'm hoping that if we can pretty quickly progress to trialling level where it's more individually working on what you need to than just following the instructors through a class I will benefit from being at the club. I'm not at all worried about being pressured to change my methods to something either Quinn or I are uncomfortable with, because I just won't, and I'm not interested in arguing with the instructors or trying to change their minds if they are set in their ways, it just depends on whether they are going to be questioning me at every turn.

agree partly - if 'bad training' refers to the jerking and stressful placing: I agree; however wrt SG's first post I'm not so sure whether it is just the different trainings philosophy with the employment of force that influenced the evaluation. What do you mean? as I already mentioned the description you gave of the training seems to be similar to the training I experience in our club, however based on the not so detailed information you provided (that's not meant as criticism) 'similar' could be 'very similar' or 'less similar'...and my judgment about whether it is really a not so good training depends on the level of similarity E.g. you mentioned that you watched different classes, so I assume the classes were led by different instructors and my question would be if they all showed the same - from your point of view - negative handling of the dogs? wrt 'jerking': my expectation is that the higher the class, the less force should be required; for me it wouldn't seem right if there was a lot of 'jerking' going on in class 3, class 3 should actually allow most of the exercises without leash and the leash should be used here more or less only to prevent run offs (which can still happen sometimes when training recalls). Also there shouldn't be any physical force required to get a dog to sit, drop and stand - a dog not able to perform this simple task on hand signal or verbal cue shouldn't be in class 3 (except there are medical conditions that would prevent e.g. a sit). Conversely I wouldn't be too much bothered about appropriate applied leash force in class 1 (whether it's 'jerking' or 'just a tug' depends likely on the viewer); it also depends heavily on the type of dog: for some boofheads jerking is just a tug - for other dogs it is a pain inflicting physical correction. If this is not recognized by the owner I would expect that the instructor would point this out and would give the particular owner the right advice. wrt collars: again, a pinch collar (I'm actually not sure whether they are allowed in our club - have to ask) might be justifiable in class 1 or beginner, but in class 3 every dog should be trainable with normal collar. The obedience level associated with the different classes should be clear recognizable IMO. From your description I got the impression that all the classes looked the same for you, and I have some doubts that this was really the case as this would be - IMO - a really bad trainings performance. Hence I took into consideration (I might be wrong here, please correct me and don't take it personal) that you might have been slightly biased when noticing a few things that didn't comply with your understanding of the training you wanted. Ok, fair enough, thanks for clarifying. My first post was a very quick summary of the things making a bit uncomfortable about training a the club, not a blow by blow description of everything I saw, heard and thought while observing mainly the puppy/beginner class and the the level 3 class (as they were the closest) I anticipate going into for an hour. Yes there were differences between the activities and the instructors in each class but I think I've adequately explained throughout the thread why I feel the club as a whole has a different training philosophy to me. From what you've said your club may well have a different philosophy to me also so I may have the same concerns I have now if I had visited your club the other night. The thread has changed a bit, as they do, into a discussion about different training approaches, which you are continuing in your other thread, and that's fine, but how different individuals perceive the level of physical force used and what does and doesn't constitute force to different people doesn't change the face that the club's philosophy is different to mine.

Wait, what the hell are you using it for? If I'm walking my dog and he's walking nicely by my side then that's exactly the purpose? If something spooks him or distracts him or whatever the entire purpose of the leash is so he doesn't take off into traffic? Exactly! I could easily walk any of my dogs off leash and keep them with me just by talking to them most of the time but I have leashes on them for the just in case, unexpected situations or in case I'm not 100% on the ball. Same reason I rarely have them off leash in unfenced areas.

I'm really slipping in the doggy style stakes mine only have one collar each but they each have a colour scheme, Saxon is red, Riley is blue and Quinn is pink so they used to have matching coloured collar, tag, lead, and harness. But now, Saxon and Quinn both have black and grey Easy Walk harnesses, and Riley had one too so at least they were matching but he chewed through his on about the second day so then he went back to the normal blue harness and the was ok. Then I got a coupler to walk to two little ones on so I got blue to match Riley's lead, so still under control. Then it annoyed me that Quinn's pink lead was too short and I couldn't find a pink one that matched Riley's blue on so I just started using Saxon's red one for her THEN Riley chewed through his blue harness so he's been wearing Saxon's red one. It's chaos!!!

I'm reading but my comments would just be repeating what I said in the other thread. I don't think "force free" is a particularly useful term when it comes to training, it is a bit ambiguous, and I don't use it. I'll quote one of my posts from the other thread. " jerking on a puppy's neck cannot be comfortable and could easily scare and even injure the puppy. Not to mention what I believe it does to the bond of trust and communication between dog and handler. Same with pushing a dog's back end down into a sit and pulling a dog into a drop by the collar, and the jerking the dog's head around by the head collar on each about turn that I mentioned previously. Aside from the potential for physical and mental damage, the other thing about physically moving the dog or using touch cues (eg one person was cueing the sit on halt using a tap on the dog's back) is that it seems counter productive if the aim is obedience trialling. You're going to have to end up not using the physical cues so why not just start off with rewarding the dog for putting itself into the position you want? It doesn't bother me if people do it I guess, as long as they don't get rough if they get frustrated, I just think it's confusing for both dog and handler." Above I'm talking about the use of physical cues that don't hurt the dog in the context of obedience trial training, but I think the same thing applies to training loose lead walking, I don't see the point of using a lead jerk to cue a direction change when you can just use a voice cue and reward to get the same result, and can then employ the same cue to the dog when not on lead. That's a personal choice though, I'd rather not use even gentle physical force with my dogs when I don't need to but if other people want to I don't have a problem, unless as I said they get rough when they get frustrated. Of course I do use force with my dogs, if they don't willing go into the front room where i put them while I am work then I physically carry them or walk them in there by the collar. If they are doing something to endanger themselves or others, or annoy others then I physically intervene if I need to. When Riley was choking on a chunk of cheese I'm sure I hurt him shoving my fingers all the way down his throat to fish it out, but all that's different to pulling a dog into a drop by the collar when you can achieve the same result with luring and rewarding them.

agree partly - if 'bad training' refers to the jerking and stressful placing: I agree; however wrt SG's first post I'm not so sure whether it is just the different trainings philosophy with the employment of force that influenced the evaluation. What do you mean?

Willem There is a not very subtle difference to the dog applying the force, and the human applying the force via the leash. But personally I prefer "reward based" rather than "force free". There are times when I use "force" not so much as pushing my dog into doing something but stopping her from doing something. But she's usually the one applying the force. I apply the equal and opposite force in the same way as if I'd tied her to a fence post. So if a dog launches after something it is not supposed to be chasing - I don't want the owner letting it go. there is no difference, not even a subtile one - or you would prove Newton (actio = reactio) and Einstein (relativity) wrong, which would be quite interesting. Fact is that the dog can't apply a force on its own if you don't apply the force on the other end of the leash! You want to move, but the dog doesn't results in tension in the leash, the dog wants to move, but you don't results in tension in the leash, you both want to move, but in different directions or with different speed results in tension in the leash. The difference between you and the fence post is only that you can move, the post can't. For the training there is no difference regarding force respectively who applies the force: you and your dog walking in different directions will result in tension in the leash. Saying that it is the dog that applies the force (and that the exercise is therefore 'force free') because he doesn't follow you is ignoring your existence and intention - but you are the reason why there is the tension in the leash! The purpose of the leash / lead is to 'force' the dog to follow the handler respectively to respond to the handler's movements, not the other way round - so who applies the force? If you want to do a force free training: use a string instead of a leash...(and no collar grab games). Eta: the problem of the 'force-free trainer army' is that they mistaken the objective of the training for a suitable method to get there. The difference is in one case the dog can decide if it would rather keep doing what it wants to do (pull to try and get over there) or stop and relieve the pressure on the lead. In the other the dog can either do what it doesn't yet want to do (follow the handler) or continue to feel the pressure of the lead. And Mrs RB did specifically say that she doesn't claim force free. She (and I) go for reward based training, aiming to make what the handler wants and what the dog wants to do the same thing, eliminating the need for that second scenario where the dog has to do what it doesn't want to do or be jerked by the leash.

Yep, exactly my thoughts too Mrs RB.

It's sounding like I'm going to need to get onto this online stuff! I have knowledge (ok not huge amounts but more than the average joe) about learning theory and general life skills, behaviour modification type stuff but the precision of things like "how do I convey that I want her to sit straight at heel without losing the focus or the automatic sit" is where I need people to bounce off. I'm excited ???? ETA - SC I am not at all the kind of person that can ignore what everyone is doing around me, I suspect that will be what doesn't work at this club. I can say I'm not doing that, and you're not doing it to my dog, but I think watching others be told to do stuff I don't like will drive me nuts, and I'm not so great at biting my tongue sometimes ???? We'll see though, I'll give it a shot.

Hmm, yes I definitely need to learn more about my body language and timing and hand signals or I will confuse her. She's so used to focussing on my eyes to guide her on what I want her to do in more "real life" situations that I have some work to do to get her sitting straight at heel so I was thinking of working on that first with the clicker, shaping basically, with a click and big reward when we get her nice and straight. Because I won't be yanking her around in class when she isn't straight, that's for sure!

Awesome, thanks TSD! I will definitely take you up on that as we progress, I actually think Quinn will come along in leaps and bounds when I get my act together, she loves training and is so responsive. I bought a new clicker today (no idea where my previous ones have gone in various moves) and I'm going to concentrate on using that with her on our own, because I think I need the precision to show her what I want, then use the classes as practice and proofing, unless/until it stresses me or her out.

Here's an anecdote I just remembered that I think is relevant to this discussion (which has gone slightly OT from my own original topic, because I wasn't and am not planning to try and have these kind of discussions at the training club, especially during classes): I was in Aldi the other day, which is well set up for kids to run amok in as many will know, not having the traditional aisles, and I passed a lady with her three young sons all with a hand on the trolley. She said to them "thank you boys for doing the right thing and holding the trolley". Smiles from the boys and then they started talking to each other, not being naughty or particularly annoying, still holding the trolley, but apparently not exactly what mum wanted because she then told them several times in a slightly raised voice to be quiet. Now I'm in no position the make any judgement on this woman, and I certainly don't think she did anything wrong, but I thought to myself wow she had such a good result going there with three young boys all holding the trolley, not running around or touching things, and yes she acknowledged it but then rather than making it a fun happy experience for all of them that they had achieved this great result she went straight onto saying (paraphrasing) "but you're not being 100% how I want you to so here's an unpleasant consequence". To me that's what it's like to praise or even treat a puppy for walking on the left on a loose lead and looking at you when that is new to them, but then jerk them by the neck when they look off at something else the next moment and aren't quite as close as they were. You don't need the second bit! You can get the results from the first bit, so why add in the unpleasant consequence? If that makes any sense

I'm not going to get into one of the semantics discussions Willem enjoys so much, but there are a few aspects to why the methods we're referring to don't sit well with me. I certainly didn't see anyone smacking their dogs, shouting at them or otherwise abusing them at this club, please don't think that. But jerking on a puppy's neck cannot be comfortable and could easily scare and even injure the puppy. Not to mention what I believe it does to the bond of trust and communication between dog and handler. Same with pushing a dog's back end down into a sit and pulling a dog into a drop by the collar, and the jerking the dog's head around by the head collar on each about turn that I mentioned previously. Aside from the potential for physical and mental damage, the other thing about physically moving the dog or using touch cues (eg one person was cueing the sit on halt using a tap on the dog's back) is that it seems counter productive if the aim is obedience trialling. You're going to have to end up not using the physical cues so why not just start off with rewarding the dog for putting itself into the position you want? It doesn't bother me if people do it I guess, as long as they don't get rough if they get frustrated, I just think it's confusing for both dog and handler.

I'm not in Canberra anymore HW. The clubs there were very good in my experience.

Thistle, I immediately thought of you guys when I was watching last night! To me it's really important to consider what the individual dog needs and responds to, not just do what has worked on some dogs with all of them. In the level 3 class I think we'll be going into I was watching the heeling and there was a BC working beautifully, tight focused heeling, enthusiastic, and just a little bit bouncy occasionally when holding a sit while the instructor was talking. The owner didn't seem comfortable with it to me but did as she was told and gave a loud growly "sit" and a leash jerk. The dog's demeanour totally changed, it cringed and shrink down, clearly with no idea what had happened and gave the biggest stress shake off once it was released Another dog heeling nicely, knowing what to do and yet still being jerked by the head collar on ever about turn, even tho it was already doing the turn anyway. Like you say PK and Weasels, the biggest thing will be how Quinn responds and how uncomfortable I feel. If we can just go about our business and maybe have it go along the lines OSo describes that would be great but if we aren't having fun we won't keep going.

Also, please everyone keep sharing, it's good to hear what people think ????

Thanks guys :) I think I will give it a go, like bridgie_cat says I will get further if I have a class to go to each week. And I do like to get different views on things and find what works for me, in this case not really with training the behaviours in the dog but in learning what I need to do re body language, trial rules etc. I think it will come down to whether the instructors let me do it how we do it or not. I like bridgie_cat's approach of do what we do and do it well, and explain if asked, otherwise just get on with it. I will have to see how it goes with my frustration levels with watching others be told to do the physical stuff...

Hmm, the trouble is I don't know many people here, let alone like minded ones! On line is an option when I can sort out better internet access I suppose. I didn't always see eye to eye with everyone at the club in Canberra but comparing to this they were definitely more open to modern thinking. The old "never let your pup win in a game of tug or they've won the war" came out in the puppy class here ????