100% Recall

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Mrs Rusty Bucket, basically from what you have said, your dog has no recall and seems to call the shots a fair bit.

If you started training recall in a small area, you certainly could catch your dog and there would be no chance of playing the nyah nyah game.

Every dog loves their freedom and doesnt want to go back on lead!! Its whether you give them the option to disobey or not.

Unless you have 100 per cent recall all the time (which is where this thread started) at some point everyone has to deal with a dog not returning or not returning properly ie, on the first call, and pronto. I'd hate us to get to a point where someone describes how they handle something not working and their relationship with their dogs gets picked over or they feel they need to post cue/response ratios or whatever.

I'm not MRB but in our house we get the kind of boundary pushing you get when you have 6 sighthounds, 2 of whom are under 2 years old and a 330 meter long perimeter fence that backs on to paddocks with bunnies and hare. Considering that context, I think our furkids are remarkably good.

I agree with Erny that one should set one's sights high. Which is why I bother training it in the first place, some people don't with sighthounds which I think is sad. However, I try to be very clear about the difference between the aim and the goal. As PF mentioned earlier in the thread, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

[jesomil]

Quote from Corvus in another thread.

I think this so-called "effective control" is a bit improbable. I mean, how can you ever guarantee that level of control? Given we were just talking in the training thread about the impossibility of 100% recalls. Dogs are living creatures with minds and wills all of their own. Without restraint they can and will do what they please.

Ok, I see where you are coming from now. Your way works for you, and you attain a level of recall that works for you and that is great. In your experience, that seems to be the level of control you work for and attain.

But there are others who work for and attain effective control of their dogs in all situations. Because you havent experienced it, doesnt mean it isnt possible.

The thread on recall was discussing the impossibility of 100% recall because no one in the thread so far had experienced or attained it.

It might be worth spending some time with dogs with this level of control so you can see it is achievable. They arent robots, just highly trained dogs who's handlers have the experience and dedication to teach it to them.

[JulesP]

Not sure why anyone wouldn't want 100% control of their dogs Maybe I am just a control freak.

[OSoSwift]

I always aim for 100% reliability, At this point it has always happened.

However I do not put the theory to the test by letting my dog off lead near a road or near loose Roo's just to test my theory.

I also do not go to dog parks as I don't need to, but due to the fact I haven't trained for a 100% recall in a park full of loose dogs I would hope they would listen, but wouldn't be overly suprised if they didn't.

As they are animals with their own mind I would not say my dogs were 100% reilable under any and all situations. As I have said I use my disgression where they are off lead and able to remove themselves. However, I train to and expect it if that at all makes sense!

Edited May 8, 2010 by Rommi n Lewis

[Diva]

Interesting thread, although it's easy to pick the people who have hands-on sighthound experience from those who don't.

I'm think I'm like Rommi n Lewis - I have a pretty good recall with my dogs, including in an unfenced park with other dogs running around, games of soccer, picnics etc. In fact I think it was probably my 'girls' ssm was so generously referring to below:

I can think of a DOLer who sometimes posts here who has excellent recall on her sighthounds, including in a paddock with a lure coursing machine, which is no mean feat.

I've even had one Borzoi, long gone now, who I could, hand on my heart, swear had a 100% recall even off foxes which were her passion. And no negative consequences for not coming were ever used on her, nor did she ever expect a food reward.

But that's one out of seven. If she was the only dog I'd ever had I'd be posting - as so many do with such bemusing certainty - from a very narrow experience. The rest of my 'zoi are on lead around 'roos or stock, or a busy road. Because no matter how reliable they are elsewhere, I can be certain they are not 100% around that hard-wired response to large, fast moving prey animals until they are positively elderly. They know dogs and kids are not prey - but you need to be conditioning them with great dedication from babies if you want them to accept that hares and roos aren't.

On the other hand, every Belgian Shepherd I have owned has had at least a 99% reliable recall everywhere. Same person handling them, but the breed difference is everything.

That's just Borzoi, even though 'zoi are among the more biddable sighthounds. Like Whippets I think from what I have seen of them. Salukis and the other ancient oriental sighthounds on the other hand are a whole other level again.

You might well get a 100% reliability with one exceptional dog, but to do it reliably with those breeds in the presence of prey you'd need to be an extraordinary trainer with a great amount of time to spend on it - as ssm said, it would be the London marathon of dog training.

Edited May 8, 2010 by Diva

[jesomil]

Interesting thread, although it's easy to pick the people who have hands-on sighthound experience from those who don't.

How?

But that's one out of seven. If she was the only dog I'd ever had I'd be posting - as so many do with such bemusing certainty - from a very narrow experience.

That would be rather silly holding on to a belief just because it worked with only one dog.

Most of the people that believe a 100% recall is possible are not coming from narrow experience.

On the flip side, alot of the people disagreeing with the possibility of 100% are only coming from experience with their own dogs and their own training capabilities which is very limiting.

Different temperaments make some dogs more likely to recall. Some are nervy, clingy or sensitive so will not need a negative consequence and will have natural recalls.

You might well get a 100% reliability with one exceptional dog, but to do it reliably with those breeds in the presence of prey you'd need to be an extraordinary trainer with a great amount of time to spend on it - as ssm said, it would be the London marathon of dog training.

And that is what you believe from your experience which is fine but others might have different experiences which brings them to opposite conclusions.

[dandybrush]

I didnt use methods requiring me to be more exciting than what they were after though as it simply wouldnt work. I use negative reinforcement always for recalls as that has provided me with happy, confident, safe dogs to take out.

so what was the "negative" reinforcement if they didnt come?

[jesomil]

so what was the "negative" reinforcement if they didnt come?

This is what I said in my previous post...

it all depends on the dog and their temperament. It might be a loud UH!! or a growl and a foot stamp near them, or a grab of the collar etc etc etc. By reading the dog, you can work out what makes them uncomfortable.

There are hundreds of negative consequences you can employ but it depends on the dog and the level of training it is at.

You must start with a basis of good leadership and very good timing or you can really make a mess and get really harsh with no effect.

[corvus]

Yeah, I used to think that. But then I thought I'd try liberating myself from it and seeing what happened

And how did that work for you? Have you been able to achieve a recall where your dog comes immediately and fast under every circumstance?

Did you read the beginning of the thread at all? Once again, I rate Kivi's recall at 95% and Erik's at about 98% or higher. Erik is only 10 months old and sometimes gets confused about who is recalling him, but I expect that his recall will end up as near to 100% as you can get. He's naturally reliable, but currently the reliability falters a bit if Kivi isn't coming as well. That's what accounts for the 2% of times he doesn't come when called. It's something we need to work on with him. I discussed Kivi's reliability earlier in the thread.

My point about "effective control" being unrealistic and 100% recalls being unrealistic is simply that dogs are living animals and they do weird things sometimes. Just as so many other people have said.

I "regularly apologise" because I'm the one that isn't reliable, not my dogs. If I don't call 'em when I should have they don't come. If I don't anticipate them doing something I should apologise for, I don't recall them. We're talking about pretty benign things. I apologise for things like my dog greeting with too much kissy-face, or with some intense butt-sniffing, or sandwiching a dog between them while they sniff, or trying to approach a dog that is unsure whether it wants to talk to them. Basically, if someone looks uncomfortable - dog or person - I apologise and call the dogs away. It's just polite. We apologise if we didn't see someone coming up behind us and are blocking some of the footpath with our dogs, too. Apologies aren't about absolving blame, but acknowledging that you haven't been as ideally polite as you meant to be.

Today we were at the beach and I tried to film some recalls especially for you guys. I'll post them later presuming the camera worked and I wasn't filming the ground instead of the dogs.

[JulesP]

Your dogs might end up having a 100% recall but the only time you can say that with any certainty is the day they die. Until then you simply never know what might crop up. I always think that humility in dog or any animal training is a good thing.

[jesomil]

This thread is not about attacking anyone or anyone having to prove themselves nor is it about ego or the I can do this better than you.

Its about people stating in their opinion if it is possible to train a 100% recall.

I believe in my experience, that it is possible, but not everyone agree's.

If this question had been put on a different forum, catering to a different audience of dog handlers, the majority opinion could well be the opposite.

[Aidan3]

Your dogs might end up having a 100% recall but the only time you can say that with any certainty is the day they die. Until then you simply never know what might crop up. I always think that humility in dog or any animal training is a good thing.

Well said.

100% of what? If your dog never encounters anything that would make a recall a real challenge, and this might be unique for this dog, then you will never know. If we actually want to collect data we have to impose limits. I'm more interested in what a dog does in a particular situation as a measure of results; e.g dogs in my reactive and aggressive dogs classes are measured for recalls away from other dogs, and then I only know the probability of what they will do in similar situations. Anything could happen tomorrow.

[JulesP]

This thread is not about attacking anyone or anyone having to prove themselves nor is it about ego or the I can do this better than you.

Its about people stating in their opinion if it is possible to train a 100% recall.

I believe in my experience, that it is possible, but not everyone agree's.

If this question had been put on a different forum, catering to a different audience of dog handlers, the majority opinion could well be the opposite.

Jesomil I find that comment rather rude. And the sort of comment that to be honest is really putting me off any sort of comment in this forum. I just don't think that sort of 'pissing contest' is needed or helpful. You say it is not about attacking but with that one line you have basically put down the majority of people on this thread.

[Diva]

Interesting thread, although it's easy to pick the people who have hands-on sighthound experience from those who don't.

How?

Often, a certain lack of humility when it comes to recall training

Most of the people that believe a 100% recall is possible are not coming from narrow experience.

On the flip side, alot of the people disagreeing with the possibility of 100% are only coming from experience with their own dogs and their own training capabilities which is very limiting.

Oh I believe it's possible too. As my post says. And certainly as I've had one dog who had it and many who were close.

But, as was the point of my post, to do it reliably with sighthound breeds - especially the 'hard core' sighthounds - is very difficult. Very, very, very difficult.

Different temperaments make some dogs more likely to recall. Some are nervy, clingy or sensitive so will not need a negative consequence and will have natural recalls.

That makes sense. Although the Borzoi I had with the "perfect" recall was an extremely self-confident bitch with what I consider as close to a perfect temperament as I am ever likely to find. And I can claim no credit for training that recall, btw. She arrived with it at 10 weeks old and never failed to recall instantly until the day she died.

Jules P - I agree with your posts, you don't ever really know until the opportunity for it to fail has passed.

Edited May 8, 2010 by Diva

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Most of the people that believe a 100% recall is possible are not coming from narrow experience.

On the flip side, alot of the people disagreeing with the possibility of 100% are only coming from experience with their own dogs and their own training capabilities which is very limiting.

Have you trained any of the independent aboriginal breeds? Saluki, Basenji, Afghans etc?

If so, have you trained all of them to 100 per cent recall under all circumstances?

The key message I am hearing from those who have independent hunting breeds is that, as Diva mentions, a little humility goes a long way. That humility does not mean we don't aspire to high standards, we do, but that's because we love our dogs and want them to be safe not because we want to win pissing competitions online.

Wanting our dogs to be safe means taking the approach Rommi and Lewis suggests even if it means someone is sneering somewhere about our lack of training ability because the dog isn't off leash. And if someone with a breed bred to work with humans thinks that's not trying, well, good luck to them. My dogs' safety matters more.

And yes, it was your girls I was referring to Diva

[Erny]

There's been a couple of mentions of some person/s posting without "humility".

I have posted that I do believe a 100% reliable recall can be trained for (with the disclaimer that I think "100%" needs some definition clarified and that I am taking it to mean the usual things we come across in our day to day lives around and with our dogs).

Is it myself that yourself and Diva who believe I am lacking in humility?

[SkySoaringMagpie]

There's been a couple of mentions of some person/s posting without "humility".

I have posted that I do believe a 100% reliable recall can be trained for (with the disclaimer that I think "100%" needs some definition clarified and that I am taking it to mean the usual things we come across in our day to day lives around and with our dogs).

Is it myself that yourself and Diva who believe I am lacking in humility?

Can't speak for Diva but no, not you. Jesomil is the one I have a quarrel with here.

I note you say that 100 per cent needs some definition clarified and I think that is the point we are trying to make. High standards are good, great training is great and there are people particularly in the USA who do awesome things with "hard to train" breeds. However, when people try to be realistic about their breed - and let's remember DOL is a pure breed forum that people read and take information from - I don't think it serves any useful purpose to breezily dismiss those people as having "narrow experience".

[corvus]

Your dogs might end up having a 100% recall but the only time you can say that with any certainty is the day they die. Until then you simply never know what might crop up. I always think that humility in dog or any animal training is a good thing.

Well said.

100% of what? If your dog never encounters anything that would make a recall a real challenge, and this might be unique for this dog, then you will never know. If we actually want to collect data we have to impose limits. I'm more interested in what a dog does in a particular situation as a measure of results; e.g dogs in my reactive and aggressive dogs classes are measured for recalls away from other dogs, and then I only know the probability of what they will do in similar situations. Anything could happen tomorrow.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to say.

Maybe I'm a bit weird, but this is why I like recall practise with Kivi. He's a bit of a wild card. I like finding out the 5% of situations in which the recall fails and figuring out why it failed. I like the endless challenge of trying to improve it. Erik isn't anywhere near as interesting and his recall is no real credit to me. I've been downright lazy with his recall training.

Videos of recalls from today:

- Kivi recalling (slowly!) short of greeting a dog.

- Erik's less-than-perfect recall. He lost me.

- Long distance recall from Kivi.

I haven't posted these to show off or say that my way is best or some such, just out of interest. And to illustrate the standards of recall I am happy with. I don't really mind if they trot rather than run or come somewhat indirectly as long as they are coming. Although I've been thinking about your "reward only the fastest and most direct recalls" policy, Aidan, and I think I'll give it a burl. I'm playing around with the same principle with targeting and I think Kivi is more resilient than I think he is and I just need to be smarter and more sensitive about my rewards.

Sorry, OT.

One day I'm going to condition a recall with a Basenji and see how often I get blown off. In secure areas. Well away from roads. With a long line attached.

[corvus]

It occurs to me that orienting is one of the biggest problems we face in recalls with our two. Dogs that start running when they hear the recall but don't actually know where you are. They usually slow down and falter, looking around for you. Last week Erik recalled to two bemused people 10 metres in front of us and we had to call him again so he knew where we were (yep, another apology there). Maybe we need to play more hide and seek in busy dog parks.

[Erny]

The other thing to consider in this "is it possible" line of thought that we are in, is whether our answers are really based on what we know/have experienced, or on what we've tried (or more particularly, haven't tried).

That's a bit double-dutch, I'm sorry.

To clarify - I agree that some breeds and then some individuals within breeds are more difficult (less biddable) to train than others. But if any of us (including myself) were to say "this xxx breed can't be taught 100% reliable recall" (and this has been said of the Huski, for example) then I think we need to ask ourselves "is that because we're right, or is it only because we haven't used a technique that works for that dog?"

Which leads me to a next question.

Is everyone's interpretation of "100%" also based on (manner of speaking only) .... "every day average" training techniques (example only : I give my dog food when he gets back). My apologies - now THAT (ie "everyday average") does sound lacking in humility, but isn't intended to be.

Or are those who say that 100% (under circumstances that can at least be within reason expected .... for example, my dog isn't proofed to recalling in the presence of a dinosaur) cannot be attained, are meaning that it cannot be attained no matter the method (assuming reasonable humane methods).

Note : If there was the presence of a dinosaur, I don't think my dog would need to recall ..... I think I would be running so fast myself I'd be overtaking him.

Note : I know that I risk the chance of opening up yet another can of worms by the use of the word "humane". I don't mean for that to become a discussion over split hairs .

Edited May 8, 2010 by Erny