100% Recall

[SkySoaringMagpie]

I definitely agree with you here. Although perhaps I misunderstood, because I thought you were saying that for a public forum type situation, it is better to say to some people (especially new owners of the sighthound group, in the case of recalls) that 100% (using our loose definition that we seem to have established here) is not attainable and that dogs such as saluki's etc should be on-lead if not in a fenced area. That's the part I was differing on - because if it is not written (eg) that 100% recall is attainable but you might need to work harder (for the breed you have) and work and think outside the square, how otherwise would people read to be able to make up their minds?

As I mentioned, perhaps I misinterpreted the meaning/essence of your previous post.

To be honest, I think if you put all the posters here in a room and we had a chat over a cup of tea there would be very little disagreement. But to answer your question, Corvus asked a question about recall during prey drive in the Saluki 101 thread ages ago. My answer, while acknowledging that some people can do it, was that for newbies the "safer answer would be no". For me safety is the primary consideration which is why I bother training recalls in the first place. However the newbie is free to disagree with me and say "OK lady, you say the safer answer is no but I'm going to try". I am not the Boss of all things Saluki and there are plenty of other experienced people posting in that thread.

So if the newbie has a fully fenced area and a spare rabbit or two and has done all their preparation good luck to them!

[Diva]

I definitely agree with you here. Although perhaps I misunderstood, because I thought you were saying that for a public forum type situation, it is better to say to some people (especially new owners of the sighthound group, in the case of recalls) that 100% (using our loose definition that we seem to have established here) is not attainable and that dogs such as saluki's etc should be on-lead if not in a fenced area. That's the part I was differing on - because if it is not written (eg) that 100% recall is attainable but you might need to work harder (for the breed you have) and work and think outside the square, how otherwise would people read to be able to make up their minds?

As I mentioned, perhaps I misinterpreted the meaning/essence of your previous post.

Can't answer for ssm, but on a public forum the bolded bit is what I would say, except I'd probably say highly unlikely instead of not attainable. I'd also explain the principles of how to make it more likely. But if they ever intend on letting the dog off near traffic or wild animals, I wouldn't encourage them to think they are ever going to be able to do it completely safely - unless as ssm just posted, it's in a fenced field.

I would say they have a high probability of getting a perfectly acceptable recall for day to day life, training fields etc, if they remember those particular caveats and work on it.

Edited May 8, 2010 by Diva

[Erny]

Ok - so may I just clarify, for the purpose of this thread (and not for the purpose of novice handlers of certain sighthound breeds) that those who have suggested against 100% (in the terms that we're speaking of) recall possibility, have only said that in case novice people who own certain sighthound breeds are reading?

I'd have to go right back through the whole thread to read exactly who said exactly what, so I'm generalising because I do know that there have been posts that suggest it is not (or very unlikely) possible and that's the part I disagree with.

Edited May 9, 2010 by Erny

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Ok - so may I just clarify, for the purpose of this thread (and not for the purpose of novice handlers of certain sighthound breeds) that those who have suggested against 100% (in the terms that we're speaking of) recall possibility, have only said that in case novice people who own certain sighthound breeds are reading?

I'd have to go right back through the whole thread to read exactly who said exactly what, so I'm generalising because I do know that there have been posts that suggest it is not (or very unlikely) possible and that's the part I disagree with.

Well, the part I'm still most cautious about is the 100 per cent measure. For me it means any time any where in any circumstances - it's a quantifiable measure that means something very specific, the dog always comes back on time, no exceptions. I think I'd be more comfortable saying that you can train a reliable recall on a sighthound.

[jesomil]

That's excellent! Do you have pix of your Affie working? Or not working - either way. We'd love to see them in the Sighthound thread and I'm sure my OH would love to chat to another Afghan trialler.

I have hundreds of photos of the Afghan but am living in Asia for a few months and only have my new laptop so everything else is at home. This Affie is currently about 12yrs old and living the life of luxury. I rescued her from bad circumstances, rehabilitated her and trained her to prove a point. I owned her for only 2 yrs before rehoming her to a great Afghan home.

I think tho' that a bunch of us have been saying we think it's possible. The point I think we have been trying to make is that 100 per cent is a tricky thing to define and it is a long way up the mountain for most people with the chance of something pretty nasty happening if you over-estimate what you and your dog are capable of.

Yes, I agree, it is going to be very difficult to achieve for alot of people but this thread was asking is it possible, not is it possible for a newbie or an average pet owner,

so that is the angle I have been coming from. I dont suggest anyone letting their dogs loose, nor do I suggest anyone going beyond their capabilities without professional guidance.

Re the lack of humility issue, as I have already said the thing that got my back up initially was your comment to MRB about her dog having no recall and calling the shots.

I simply said from what she is desciribing, it sounds as if the dog has no recall and calls the shots. What is wrong with that? Does anyone disagree going from what she said? I am stating what I think, I am not putting her down or saying she is bad. There is nothing wrong with having a dog that doesnt have a perfect recall. It simply sounds like the dog does not understand the command. I can understand how the comment could have sounded bad coming from a defensive point of view but it certainly was not my intention.

[jesomil]

Ok - so may I just clarify, for the purpose of this thread (and not for the purpose of novice handlers of certain sighthound breeds) that those who have suggested against 100% (in the terms that we're speaking of) recall possibility, have only said that in case novice people who own certain sighthound breeds are reading?

This seems to be where it is going.

My comments have never been suggesting it is possible for a newbie to simply go out and train a 100% recall. I have not been referring to newbie's at all, but simply stating the recall is possible.

[m-j]

In answer to the original question I think it would depend on many factors - breed, as has been mentioned here and the dogs individual drive ie being able to be put off from doing what is an innate behaviour and in the case of prey drive how far into or how close to drive satisfaction they are ie if the dog has been chasing something like a fox ( which in my experience the majority of dogs find far more fascinating than a rabbit) and is very close too catching it that is a tall order for a dog to recall out of. Whereas if the prey animal was a distance away it is easier and if the dog is close to you it is easier. As I think diva said it would be very difficult to stop a dog that will badly hurt itself and still continue chasing. I have seen a dog snap it's crutiate and that dog still continued running. One example that I can think of that most would probably remember is the horse (I think it's name was Triple Crown) that broke its leg during the Melbourne cup one year. The jockey had a great deal of difficulty pulling that horse up and even when he wasn't racing with the other horses he still wanted to continue racing dispite the fact that the end of one of his front legs was waving around completely detachted from the rest of his leg. It was a horrible sight. Even though this horse wasn't being called he was still being asked to obey a cue which he initially chose to blow off despite the fact the cue was being constantly applied and he was badly injured.

That breeds previous experience - I have/have had several rescue Greyhounds that I find are harder to teach a recall from prey items than a GH that hasn't had their previous experience. I would certainly never say they were 100% reliable even though most end up good under reasonable distraction. My advise to the new owners is never let your dog offlead in a place where if they choose to ignore your recall they could get hurt or hurt something else, just to be on the safe side.

Other factors could be repoire you have with that dog, your skill as a dog trainer.

So are you saying that you think its ok to manage a dogs environment and always have a bag of treats on board to get a really good recall?

Yes the safety of my dogs is the most important thing to me. Dogs do have minds of their own and 100% reliable recall(every time , immediately, fast, no exceptions) in/with my experience is not possible so having the dog on lead where I know they could get hurt or hurt something else to me is a good idea. I also don't have any problems with having the dogs reinforcer avaliable, it doesn't mean I always have to have them to get a reliable recall. On the other side of the coin if corrections from the handler is the reason why the dog is recalling the reinforcer is always present also.

cheers

M-J

Edited May 9, 2010 by m-j

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Yeah, I kind of winced when jesomil made some unfounded assumptions about my dog's recall.

Her recall is a lot better than "no recall". It's a lot better than most dogs we meet off lead in open spaces, dog exercise areas like cricket ovals and beaches. But it's not yet 100%

Does she call the shots? Sometimes. I want her to feel free to try initiating stuff, whether I choose to respond or not is up to me. Usually I make her work for what she wants. It's a bit hard when she's 50 to 100m up the beach but in fact that is one of the easier places to recall her even though I can't make her come back. I'm there 19 times out of 20, and 20 out of 20 if I run away from her and hide.

There is a balance between her never getting what she wants when she wants it (calling the shots), and me having to tell her what to do all the time.

If I wanted a totally me focussed dog, I would have got a kelpie. But I'd rather have a dog that is capable of entertaining itself in acceptable ways, when I'm busy doing something else.

I'd also rather have a dog that makes it's own decisions about how to deal with strangers than looking to me for instruction. She's better at picking bad guys from good guys than I am. However I don't want her to eat the stranger, and so far, no problem, she keeps her distance and barks a lot.

I want a dog that will run and explore some of the time. And I reckon I can have that and 100% reliable recall - ie if she's capable of coming back and sees/hears the signal, she comes back at full speed with joy.

I'd be interested to know how Jesomil made the extrapolation from "intermittant recall" to "no recall at all and she's calling all the shots".

[Aidan3]

Ok - so may I just clarify, for the purpose of this thread (and not for the purpose of novice handlers of certain sighthound breeds) that those who have suggested against 100% (in the terms that we're speaking of) recall possibility, have only said that in case novice people who own certain sighthound breeds are reading?

Haha, that's getting very specific! Is anyone familiar with "matching law"? Basically, the bigger the reward for an unwanted behaviour, the more frequently you will need to reward the behaviour you want instead (or the better the rewards you will need to use). So yup, fairly appropriate for nearly any sort of hound and a lot of terriers, indigenous breeds, or lines selected for very high drive.

If they've been able to chase the bunny a lot of times, or got a long way into the prey sequence, it's going to be harder than if it's something that's only happened once, or you've always got them back before they've got too far into the chase (a couple of examples in this thread of people who appear to do this and claim very strong recalls). Lots of reinforced repetition builds stronger responses (note that I have not made a distinction between + or - reinforcement here). For practical purposes, reinforcer frequency can trump reinforcer magnitude.

The sort of experiments they run in labs include things like 8 hour training sessions with thousands of repetitions, and there is no way (IMHO) a pigeon is "counting" how many pellets they got for pecking one key vs another but matching law seems to hold true whether it's just a few trials or hundreds of trials. So (until we can read pigeon minds, and we're working on it) we can probably assume they aren't putting a whole lot of cognition into deciding which key to peck.

[jesomil]

I'd be interested to know how Jesomil made the extrapolation from "intermittant recall" to "no recall at all and she's calling all the shots".

I didnt say that. I said this.

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

I am sensing from your embellishment of exaggerration, you are reading my posts from a defensive viewpoint. I am not saying them like this at all. There is nothing to defend.

ETA ok, delete the rest of that and simplify with this :

Basically I made an observation based on many different scenarios you shared with us on how you manage your dog and getting it on lead, or inside or off the beach. It simply sounds like your dog has not a full understanding of the recall command.

I am not attacking you, i am stating what it sounds like from the info you have presented. I only mentioned it because we were talking about training 100% recalls.

Edited again.....trying to make sure I am coming across right.

Edited May 9, 2010 by jesomil

[jesomil]

If I wanted a totally me focussed dog, I would have got a kelpie. But I'd rather have a dog that is capable of entertaining itself in acceptable ways, when I'm busy doing something else.

I'd also rather have a dog that makes it's own decisions about how to deal with strangers than looking to me for instruction. She's better at picking bad guys from good guys than I am. However I don't want her to eat the stranger, and so far, no problem, she keeps her distance and barks a lot.

Not entirely sure what point you are trying to make here?

I want a dog that will run and explore some of the time. And I reckon I can have that and 100% reliable recall - ie if she's capable of coming back and sees/hears the signal, she comes back at full speed with joy.

You can have that and a 100% recall. A dog that has a 100% recall will run, jump, sniff, play just the same as any other dog but when they hear the command they obey. They dont have to be owner focussed, incapable of entertaining themselves or unable to make their own decisions.

[Aidan3]

I'd be interested to know how Jesomil made the extrapolation from "intermittant recall" to "no recall at all and she's calling all the shots".

I didnt say that. I said this.

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

I am sensing from your embellishment of exaggerration

In fairness to Miss RB, you did say "no recall" which is an exaggeration. You also said you've never seen a reliable positively trained recall and that all your dogs have had 100% recall, regardless of breed or background. It all sounds a bit too "black or white", which could explain some of the responses you have seen.

[jesomil]

Wow, my posts are being twisted and turned.

I believe if a dog understands a recall it comes, if it doesnt, then it doesnt. Maybe we are just using different terminology and not understanding each other. Sorry bout that.

You also said you've never seen a reliable positively trained recall and that all your dogs have had 100% recall, regardless of breed or background. It all sounds a bit too "black or white", which could explain some of the responses you have seen.

I havent seen a reliable positively trained recall though??? I am not being cocky.

I never said all my dogs have had 100% recall regardless of breed or background!!! Wow!! My current 2 do and also the sighthounds i worked very hard with.

Thats after training dogs for 22 years. Crikey, I have trained some dogs to be really bad recallers on my journey. I have done the hard yards and worked with many, many dogs to form my opinions. I have made tonnes of mistakes along the way and have stuffed up many dogs (training wise (and still do)).

My opinions are only based on my experience though and I still have heaps to learn and will continue to learn from those who achieve great things with their dogs .

There is nothing black and white about it.

I still think you can get a 100% recall though

Edited May 9, 2010 by jesomil

[Aidan3]

Wow, my posts are being twisted and turned.

I believe if a dog understands a recall it comes, if it doesnt, then it doesnt. Maybe we are just using different terminology and not understanding each other. Sorry bout that.

Sorry if you think your posts are being twisted and turned, I don't believe that is the case (bar the "all dogs you have ever owned" comment). When you referenced Miss RB you said that her dog had "no recall", those are your words, and clearly her dog has "some recall". I agree that a dog who fails a recall hasn't been conditioned in that situation (i.e "doesn't understand") but at what point can you say they have "no recall"? And how else are we supposed to interpret "no recall"? It's a very black or white comment, and countenanced with some of your other comments it leaves some questions - how are we supposed to interpret your reported "100% recall" if "no recall" actually means "some recall"? Are you being objective or subjective?

I don't want to make a big deal out of it, I'm just being honest with you. It could account for some of the responses you have received.

You also said you've never seen a reliable positively trained recall and that all your dogs have had 100% recall, regardless of breed or background. It all sounds a bit too "black or white", which could explain some of the responses you have seen.

I havent seen a reliable positively trained recall though??? I am not being cocky.

I don't think you're being cocky, I'm just uncertain about how objective you are. And please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not saying you're not objective, but the evidence does not make it clear that you are. If I had no doubt at all I wouldn't bother to bring it up.

[jesomil]

From the way you have interpreted what I have said, I would agree with what you are saying although I really dont get what you are saying with subjective/objective (too many big words ).

Anyway, I now understand how it has been interpreted now you have explained how it has come across. So yes, every dog has a recall .

There are so many hundreds of factors that have to be taken into consideration and differernt peoples interpretation as to what a recall actually is. My ideas and standards are different to the next person and so on.

From what had been written in the few posts previously, there were no examples of the dog in question responding to a recall command. I am not a mind reader to assume it recalled at other times. I was only going on what was said, as I have stated many times before.

It was never intended as an attack or put down. Obviously after further explanation, we found out that the dog has a recall and quite a good one at that.

I merely responded to a post where the person sounded like they didnt have a recall and I was saying that it was a lack of understanding/ leadership problem not the fact that a recall couldnt be taught. I should not have mentioned it and it was a misunderstanding. After all, it matters not whether one dog can recall, it is about dogs in general.

So in reality, every dog has a recall and no dogs have 100% recall taking into account every variable possible.

I still believe in most circumstances that most people are ever going to come across, that you can get 100% recall.

I am always a lurker in these threads but a boring weekend in a hotel has given me the interest to speak up. I am far better at demonstrating than writing so I think I have got my point across and dont really need to say much more! Not unless I am provoked .

ETA punctuation!! oops.

Edited May 9, 2010 by jesomil

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

I wrote a great long reply, and the machine ate it.

And I didn't have time then to write it again.

Essentially I think every dog has between zero and 100% recall. 100% recall - I'd define as every time you call the dog, and it sees/hears the signal and is capable of coming back, directly at full speed - it does.

I have actually seen the occasional dog that never comes when it's called - usually something like a beagle - the owner always has to go get it. I do know some beagles with very reliable recall. But I'd say that was a dog that hadn't been trained at all or didn't understand what a recall was.

I'm pretty sure my dog knows what is required - all of the time and sometimes she chooses not to. We're working on the conditioning but clearly not all the way there yet. If I could use an ecollar here, I think I would, because it would speed things up, as far as learning coming to me would be more rewarding than staying away.

Is similar to children or wayward hubbies with selective hearing. They know what the words they hear mean, and choose not to act. Probably for similar reasons that dogs sometimes choose not to. I lose count of the number of people who scold their dog if it comes back slowly and wonder why it comes back even more slowly if at all, the next time they call it.

[Diva]

Ok - so may I just clarify, for the purpose of this thread (and not for the purpose of novice handlers of certain sighthound breeds) that those who have suggested against 100% (in the terms that we're speaking of) recall possibility, have only said that in case novice people who own certain sighthound breeds are reading?

Haha, that's getting very specific! Is anyone familiar with "matching law"? Basically, the bigger the reward for an unwanted behaviour, the more frequently you will need to reward the behaviour you want instead (or the better the rewards you will need to use). So yup, fairly appropriate for nearly any sort of hound and a lot of terriers, indigenous breeds, or lines selected for very high drive.

If they've been able to chase the bunny a lot of times, or got a long way into the prey sequence, it's going to be harder than if it's something that's only happened once, or you've always got them back before they've got too far into the chase (a couple of examples in this thread of people who appear to do this and claim very strong recalls). Lots of reinforced repetition builds stronger responses (note that I have not made a distinction between + or - reinforcement here). For practical purposes, reinforcer frequency can trump reinforcer magnitude.

Yep, rely on matching law a lot. Agree with all the points m-j and you have made about the 'topography' of the each individual situation too, if I can use that term as shorthand for a whole lot of variables to do with with the dog, the site, and the prey animal.

I feel like the sighthounds have dominated the thread a bit, but I'd really like to hear about scent hounds too - Huski posted about Daisy, and it accorded with what I hear from other Beagle and Basset owners. They get good recalls in human-dominated landscapes but it can all disappear if the hound hits a good scent in a forest etc. No always, but often enough to be well less than 100% reliable.

The other group I wonder about but know little of are the working livestock guardians, those with the original LGD temperament. Is 100% standard recall of a dog like that in the face of a threat to its pack - a similar distraction to moving prey or a scent to a hound I'd think - considered possible by their handlers? No idea myself but interested.

And finally, it was a spitz handler who started the thread - I know nothing about them either but I read a lot of threads on DOL about Huskies that not only like to escape their yards, but that then take off even if their handlers are right behind them. Worst I get if my dogs accidently get out and I'm there is a few zoomies in the front yard, they wouldn't ignore my call and take off down the road - I don't really know what to make of what I read in those threads. Dogs without training, trained with the wrong methods, or more integral than that? It seems to end tragically for a lot of those dogs.

[huski]

Diva, the thing with Daisy's recall is that if she's not on a heavy scent, she will recall quite reliably. I honestly think when scenting like that she is switched off to all around her and can't hear me and that fits in to what I understand about drive peak too. Beagles were bred to focus solely on the scent and that they'd switch off to any distractions around them was desirable. I don't think it would be impossible to train a reliable recall but like I said earlier I think to get that with Daisy I would need to do some ecollar training.

Siberians are notorious for being unreliable off leash and most breeders and owners advise against letting them off leash in uncontained areas. They are stubborn, independent and have a strong desire to run and I don't think the average owner could train a highly reliable recall. I don't think it's impossible to do though.

Edited May 9, 2010 by huski

[Diva]

Diva, the thing with Daisy's recall is that if she's not on a heavy scent, she will recall quite reliably. I honestly think when scenting like that she is switched off to all around her and can't hear me and that fits in to what I understand about drive peak too.

Yep, that's exactly what my beagle owning acquaintances tell me. I even recently had a friend lose a 6 yr old beagle being walked off lead in it's usual location - got a scent and tried to follow it across a road. First time it failed to recall, and the last

[Aidan]

Very experienced dog trainers who hunt always seem to have tales of leaving an item of clothing at the last place they saw their hound, then coming back the next day to collect the dog after it has spent the night in the bush.

Just thinking out loud here, a down might be a better strategy for a hound. That way you could let them get back to the scent on a schedule of reinforcement. It could be taught as part of the article indication in tracking, thus giving plenty of opportunities for training in a controlled environment first.