Forced Retrieve Versus Other Methods

[dogdude]

Hi Leopuppy

I just want to clear up any misconceptions about your version of the "real forced retreive".

It is most imperitive that absolutely no force whatsoever is used to keep the jaws shut around the dumbell other than taking the weight gently at best by placing your hand under the dogs chin.

If you use any kind of force you will end up with broken teeth and a bad association with the dumbell.

It seems that there is a lot of misconceptions about the forced retreive. There should be no "slamming" or any other kind of dangerous forced used. It is certainly a method to be used with trainers with a very cool and calm head because there is no room for frustration with this way more than any other.

[MrsD]

I have used the forced retrieve on my previous 2 GSDs - result was an extremely reliable & very enthusiastic retrieve from both of them, however I never used the ear pinch to get them to open their mouths, definitely not the same way as the link ML posted. Don't know the Steve Austin way, perhaps that is more similar to what I used? Either way, there is no way on earth you could say my dogs were slow slinking or unhappy - they were mad keen once taught!

We will probably use the FR on our current GSD when she gets to that level as she has absolutely no interest in toys, retrieving or chasing anything, however both Jonty & Jarrah love to play fetch, so will be shaping those two rather than using the FR.

[Steve K9Pro]

WMR: love that desciption k9 thast how i feel i want the picture to look effortless like ballroom dancers and you do see apprehension in adog even when subtle i showed a video to a friend of one of vics top dogs working and they straight away noticed its slight head duck and reluctance they dont even own a dog

K9: yep its all in the details...

DD: Isn't the slinking dog look also a clear sign that a dog is unsure of mechanics of an exercise and not only a "sign of aversive training?

K9: no domn believe it is, when you have a dog in high drive ytrying t figure something out, there are no signs of avoidance..

DD: Most dogs overcome the "slinky dog look" when they are totally clear about an exercise and I feel generalising can be misleading.

K9: well they may get over the over advertised "slink", but even a head bob on the sit command is a sign or aversive training... & no it wont go away... it has been chained int he learning of tha command.

DD: Take the drop on recall for instance: At first dog slows dramatically upon the down command because the second command cancels out the first, but after clear understanding, gets back to normal speed. As most novice triallers want to move into open asap their dogs are often caught in transition. The same can be said of retreive on occasions. In my own experience I have found that as long as the dog is motivated, you wont have a slinky dog unless it is not clear on what is required.

What are your thoughts on this?

K9: I think that if this is the case, you didn need aversives in the first place.

Dogs taught the drop on the run through drive won slow, down, they drop fast, & it only get faster.

I have no problem using aversives, none at all. The rule is though that they are applied to stop a behaviour, not teach one.

WS: There's no doubt that there are times of unpleasantness when I train a gundog, but please don't misunderstand me, the VAST majority of my training is positive.

K9: just so you know, none of my comments were adddressed at you, your dogs or your training as I domn know,just a discussion of methods in general.

WS: If however, once a dog has learnt an exercise it decides not to obey, there will be some unpleasantness. A trained dog ignoring the stop whistle and chasing a rabbit is one such example.

K9: I worked with a great bunch of poeple a while back & some more just recently who train gun dogs with that exact line of thought. There were a whole bunch of problems with their dogs, little things, like the whistle stop etc...

All of these problems started small, & got worse the more pressure was added.

I took a motivational approach to clear up he dogs head & the changes in front of our eyes were quite good...

Sometimes training methods have problems built in, & every time you train a problem will arise that you will have to fix.

WS: Every successful working gundog trainer I'm aware of uses some unpleasantness in their training from time to time. Temptations are extremely high for working gundogs, rabbits and ducks at close range, blood and other exciting scents abound. Yes, working gundog owners want driven, enthusiastic dogs. We want far more energy and enthusiasm than the major of dog owners, so we're very mindful of not being overly physical and sapping that enthusiasm.

K9: I havent seen this, I havent seen people "mindful of not being overly physical" at all, I see people pushing to get results at all costs often, & then seeing tha they have lost drive...

WS: However, all that energy and enthusiasm needs to be controlled,

K9: who controls this? This is a question I have asked many people, loe to hear your view...

WS: If you are telling me you can achieve a fully trained, reliable working gundog, a driven dog that goes hard and performs to trial standard without any unpleasantness, then I'll happily part with the $$ for you to teach me.

K9: maybe the distance will inhibit the learning..lol..

WS: But I have high standards and know a lot of gundog trainers here and in the USA, and as I said, none achieve these results without unpleasantness from time to time.

K9: how often do they try?

It isnt so much about zero aversives, is more about the use of aversives & the design of a training program that doesnt have the same re occuring need for correction in it.

The standards for gun dogs I agree are high, but there are higher standards required in other dog activities & I have seen those trained without the need for aversives as we know them.

Edited December 7, 2006 by K9 Force

[Steve K9Pro]

DD: I can see what your saying but the only connection I made regarding prongs is that they use no more force

K9: See that doesnt have to be the case, I dnt use a prong collar to add force, but reduce it.

I seen a dog lately that was being trained on a prong, the dog was not responding favourably & he corrections were lets say on a scale of 1 - 10, 10 being the highest, maybe 8 or 9.

I took the dog & used the same collar with level 1 - 3 corrections, & gained control easily.

[wheres my rock]

It is in the deatails you have to look past the bi picture and see whats really going on

i watched a retieve video where the dog was taught using strangulation its produced very fast accurate retrieve wit a wagging tail to the novce it would be impressive it was that fast but if you watched you could see the stress and the frantic behaviour of the dog

what looks great isnt always as great as you think.

[country joe]

There is a vast difference betweeen teaching non retrieving breeds to retrieve using a conditioned retrieve or FF and teaching a retriever FF.

There is also a huge amount of variation in FF itself.

Some teach hold and then intriduce the FF aspects of the conditioned retrieve, some just force from the start (I heard this discribed as hell week)

Some use it just to firm up the hold. Some teach for go as sent and go when sent.

Some use it as the first step in force to pile, force to water, some use it as a step in teaching the dog to turn off pressure as they believe it helps when using electric collars for correction in the field.

There are dogs thrown on the pile while they look for a winner but that happens with everything where the outcome is a winner and a loser.

I have trained retrievers both ways and to tell the truth the mistakes I made didn't have anything to do with FF or no FF they related to basic dog knowledge and lack of application of fundimental training principles.

I have seen plenty of retrievers coming back slow after getting the bird. This in my opinion has not been a FF issue, its been a general pressure issue by applying negative aspects to the return and in my experience its also about demanding to much OB early on with holding and delivery on the return.

As for retrieving trials my opinion is if you can't train a dog to a high standard without FF. (Competitive standard not just dreaming about it and I mean something higher than novice) then you shouldn't do it as you will probably make a bigger mess of the dog than you would have without it.

While I on my high horse I don't think you should use an electric collar if you can't train to a high standard without one for the same reason as above. Its usually a bigger mess to clean up.

Now my personal preference is for not doing FF.

That's not to say I won't play with FF again as I may use it to try and fix issues I have already created or the dog was predisposed to and I didn't pick up on early enough but its not my preference.

I am still not convinced that if you FF every dog you breed from that you don't end up with dogs you have to FF.

I like the idea of positive training. The idea of breeding retrievers that somebody can buy, get a book and finish with a reasonable hunting companion or train for Obiedience or with more knowledge to do search and rescue.

My goal has been to breed dogs like that and I'm happy with what I've bred without FF

I am also happy with what my dog have achieved without FF

Country Joe

[helen]

Country Joe - how would you go about teaching a dog to sit with a dumbell in it's mouth? The problem is the dog makes a concious effort to drop the item before sitting every time.

[leopuppy04]

Hi Leopuppy

I just want to clear up any misconceptions about your version of the "real forced retreive".

It is most imperitive that absolutely no force whatsoever is used to keep the jaws shut around the dumbell other than taking the weight gently at best by placing your hand under the dogs chin.

If you use any kind of force you will end up with broken teeth and a bad association with the dumbell.

It seems that there is a lot of misconceptions about the forced retreive. There should be no "slamming" or any other kind of dangerous forced used. It is certainly a method to be used with trainers with a very cool and calm head because there is no room for frustration with this way more than any other.

Thanx dogdude. I then do not understand why the FR is then looked at in such a negative light if what I have done is indeed 'forced'...... I have seen no i'll effects on him and I certianly didn't turn myself into the evil witch of a dog trainer to get him to retrieve. If this didn't work, we wouldn't be continuing with obedience... but it did, my dog has never slinked away, shown that he doesnt like it or anything like that.

[helen]

I have just been experimenting and had a brainstorm. When she returned with the dumbell I just tried the old fashioned push on the rump and voila - she was sitting with the dumbell in her mouth. Would still like any other ideas you have to help along though.

[country joe]

This is something I have used in the past with a dog that would drop the dummy (Bird)on sitting.

I looked closely at the return as there was a point where the dog broke down. By this I mean a point where you could see the dog break stride and drop its head. It was only a small cmovement but that is what I looked for. I concentrated on finding that distance where to me tha dog had started to position itself to sit or drop the dummy or whatever you want to call it.

Just before that happened I would turn call heel and walk away. I would let the dog walk at heel holding the dummy. Then I took the dummy on the move. You have to try and do this without slowing down. More speed in the heel means the dog has to concentrate on you.

Next I went to slowing down and then speeding up the heel a few times before I took it still on the move. The next stage was stopping and then healing off with the dog still holding the dummy. From there it was stop, move in front of the dog as when starting out teaching sit stay as in stand in front of the dog and then return to heal position and heel off. then repeat and take dummy.

Then next stage was stand in front and move back one pace call dog to move up and then return to heel position and heel off. repeat and take dummy.

I don't care and it's probably a good idea to do these exercises 3,4, or 5 times and only take the dummy once as you are trying to create a new habbit.

One trick is to have the dog working up hill. I don't know why but they are less inclined to drop the dummy when moving up hill.

And don't forget speed is also part of the answer as if the dog is consentrating on you it has less time to drop its head.

Use whatever sort of praise you use. I don't have any great problems with good dog, food or whatever form of praise works for you and your dog.

I used the hold command when I thought appropriate during the exercises.

I would think you need to get a feel for that.

It's not the only way to get the job done but it has worked for me in the past.

It may take a month but who cares. I think it took me longer. Just remember its the end result your worried about not how quick you can get there.

You can also teach the hold as a seperate exercise as some do before FF. Spencer has a good example of this in his book That I can't remember the name of at the moment. Spencer advocated teaching hold and then FF in the book I read of his.

Starting out teaching the hold as a seperate exercise from the retrieve is a good idesa for pups. Get out there get it back and lets play. Then combine the two parts of the exercise later on.

This can stop those slow returns that were mentioned earlier if pressure on the return has been an issue.

Country Joe

[dogdude]

Hi Helen

There could be "reasons" why your dog spits the dumbell.

But it would be hard to troubleshoot from behind a pc

Do you use food to motivate the dog? and if so, what is the routine?

If you reward with food either too much or at the wrong time, the dog will often mouth or spit the dumbell in antisipation of the treat.

The times I use food to motivate the exercise is after the finish is complete with dog back at heel.

If this is not the problem it seems like it is just a basic misunderstanding of what is required. Simply go back to the drawing board of the initial learning process until the dog is clear. Sometimes this sought of thing can happen when you teach the dog to quickly. I teach them to be able to do a heel pattern during the "hold" stage with it in their mouth. When the dog drops it on the rare occasion, I usually just point to the dumbell without a word as a reminder and no further correction is required.

[helen]

Thanks for the great ideas. Have lots of things to try, very clever about the hill too.

[Erny]

I would like to add that I certainly would not bother to teach a pet fetch forcefully because fetch is play, retrieve IMO is work.

Hi Dogdude Writing because I found this statement interesting. I've recently been actively involved in Search and Rescue work and have been spending the months since the sad loss of my pet dog and until the arrival of my potential "Search & Rescue" puppy, learning the various aspects of training for this field of important work the S&R dogs do. I have come to learn that these dogs do their work:-

Willingly

Tirelessly

Reliably

Endlessly

Enthusiastically

BECAUSE to them it IS FUN. Or, at least, because the end result (ie their driven goal) is fun.

So, I'm not sure how you differentiate between the "fetch" by a "pet dog" as being for fun and the "retrieve" by a "working dog" as being for work.

For me, "WORK" is something the dog MUST do for his own sake and safety as well as for the sake and safety of the community within which we thrust him/her. In otherwords, "obedience" where without it the dog's life and welfare could be in danger as might be the people he lives in amongst and around. All the same, making this sort of "work" fun wherever possible is always my goal. The difference is that for its life's sake, the dog needs to learn that reliability is a MUST.

In the field of retrieving, if the dog doesn't bring back the dumbell, how does that put the dog or community in real danger?

Sorry - perhaps I'm just remiss at being able to properly comprehend your point.

Edited December 10, 2006 by Erny

[Rom]

Wouldn't an ear pinch make the dog head shy? And then if that was so, wouldn't you get a dog that ducks its head away from you when you went to take the dumbell/bird away from it?

I know of a trialler who uses the ear pinch but he also explains that when it comes time to take the dumbell from the dog, he has to make sure that the approach of his hands comes from below the dogs head level. He may not be using the ear pinch in the same way as some, but I'd still be wary of making a dog head shy.

[Tangwyn]

TYou can also teach the hold as a seperate exercise as some do before FF. Spencer has a good example of this in his book That I can't remember the name of at the moment. Spencer advocated teaching hold and then FF in the book I read of his.

Country Joe

Hi Country Joe,

I think the book you're referring to is "Training Retrievers for Marshes and Meadows" by James B. Spencer. An excellent read. A good account of force fetch (or the formal retrieve as she likes to call it) is also to be found in Terri Arnold's "Steppin' Up To Success". I quite like her method because she teaches the fun retrieve first, motivates the send and return and then introduces the formal retrieve using the "create, cause and correct" progression. In Terri's words you "pinch so as to cause mild discomfort, not pain. You want just enough to get a response - no less, no more."

Tangwyn

[Tangwyn]

Wouldn't an ear pinch make the dog head shy? And then if that was so, wouldn't you get a dog that ducks its head away from you when you went to take the dumbell/bird away from it?

I know of a trialler who uses the ear pinch but he also explains that when it comes time to take the dumbell from the dog, he has to make sure that the approach of his hands comes from below the dogs head level. He may not be using the ear pinch in the same way as some, but I'd still be wary of making a dog head shy.

Hi Rom,

Sounds to me like he hasn't carried out the force fetch process properly. Its not a punishment and, carried out correctly, should not cause the dog pain or induce fear or head shyness. As with most things, if you're going to do it properly it takes time and patience. The biggest cause of problems with force fetch are caused by people rushing it, losing patience or lacking the timing or experience to recognise the correct moment to release pressure and reward. If the poor dog is offering something even close to the correct behaviour and the trainer continues to apply (or increase ) pressure it can be detrimental to the dog. Like most animal training techniques and processes there is always potential for abuse by uneducated or ignorant trainers. It doesn't mean that its not a valuable tool if used properly.

Tangwyn

[dogdude]

Hi Erny

I think when I wrote that statement I was making a connection with my own dog in that he has no interest whatsoever in playing fetch. I would not bother to teach him the forced retreive because I think that he would like the game more, because that was my wish. Im happy for him to do it when "I" require him to do it, in an obedience trial or training while I provide the motivation that he prefers.

If I throw a ball, my dog will look at me with "that look" (pfttt!)

This subject came up with Lab and Poodle and he seemed to disagree with me too. Cant seem to put it in the right words! Does any of it make sense to you? Disagree?

[Working_Setters]

K9: I havent seen this, I havent seen people "mindful of not being overly physical" at all, I see people pushing to get results at all costs often, & then seeing tha they have lost drive...

I hope these folk were in the process of engaging your services, as IMO they are clearly in need of assistance. Minimal experience is enough to teach that sort of physicality is going to kill the drive in all but the most hardened (wilful/hard-headed) dogs, and even with these dogs sustained physical abuse must eventually take it's toll. My setters are very responsive dogs and would be quickly destroyed by such a training approach.

WS: However, all that energy and enthusiasm needs to be controlled,

K9: who controls this? This is a question I have asked many people, loe to hear your view...

I think working gundogs are different to many other dogs. Any working gundog that I would consider worth feeding is going to be driven by a STRONG desire to find game (my love is Pointers and Setters). Many folks refer to the control I'm talking about as teaching the dog manners, and in a way that's correct. It's teaching the dog control in the face of MASSIVE distractions. So in answer to your question IMO, its a combination of teaching the dog self-control and ultimately of me controlling the dog. A good example of what I'm talking about happened on Friday, I let the dogs out for their morning run, they run around emptying out etc, when they smell a rabbit in a brush pile. They start working the brush pile enthusiastically, round and round, squeezing their way deeper and deeper into the pile. After about 10 mins the flush the rabbit from the depths of the pile, they see the rabbit flush and begin to give pursuit, they've taken about two steps in pursuit of the rabbit when I hit the stop whistle. They were in a state of high excitement, they badly wanted that rabbit, but the instant I blew the whistle, they sat, and their attention focused on me. The dogs weren't cowered into submission, I walked over to the dogs, praised them for a very nice stop and cast them off in a different direction, they took off full of drive in search of new game.

The dogs are trained to the extent that they have the self-control, the presence/clarity of mind, to be able to take commands despite the high level of excitement and are trained to the extent that they will obey the sit command despite a strong desire to do otherwise.

So who controls the dog, I do. But a large part of the way I achieve this control is by teaching the dog self-control. A dog has to hear a whistle command before it can obey it, and in many untrained gundogs, dogs lacking self control, they are driven to fever pitch by the excitement of the rabbit, their mind is focused on only one thing and I think they don’t have a chance of obeying the whistle, as they don’t even hear it, all their attention is focused on the rabbit.

ETA My dogs are still young, and not yet fully trained. With a fully trained dog, the sight of a flushing rabbit (or the sight/sound of flushing quail), is by itself the stop command. A fully trained dog would not have required a stop whistle in the above example, as they would have “stopped to flush” and they would have done so, whether or not I was in sight.

Edited December 10, 2006 by Working_Setters

[Working_Setters]

In the field of retrieving, if the dog doesn't bring back the dumbell, how does that put the dog or community in real danger?

Hi Erny,

The reason I insist that my dogs bring back the dumbell (training dummy) is that I'm preparing them to retrieve shot game in the field. It's unacceptable to me, as an ethical hunter, that dead/dying game be left in the field b/c the dog refused the retrieve. The dog must have the physical/mental ability and the training, to search for as long as it takes to recover game went ever possible.

Whether or not I'd FF if I didn't hunt is an interesting question and I'd need to think it through. Off the top of my head I'm inclined to say I would, b/c to me a command, is a command, the dog doesn't have the ability to decide which commands are potentially life-saving and hence REALLY need to be obeyed, and which commands aren't and so only need to be obeyed if the dog feels like it. I guess I could throw the ball and not say anything, the dog could chase/play/retrieve it if it choose to or ignore the ball if it wanted to do something else. However if I said "FETCH", I'd need the dog to go get the ball, as IMO ignoring "FETCH" today will lead to ignoring "SIT" tomorrow, and "SIT" could well save the dog's life.

[country joe]

Erny.

In general terms not doing the job correctly can have fatal consequences for a gundog.

In Victoria there are 4 different gundog trial games for people and their dogs to play to play. 3 of these involve shooting live ammunition.

I don't need to paint a picture for you of a dog running in at the wrong time.

As for retrieving trials in particular. If someone has never won an All-Age retrieving Trial they really have no idea what it takes. I don’t care what they have accomplished in other areas

You are not training to a standard. You are training to beat everyone else who has already got to the standard and they are working hard to make sure you never win one.

You need to be better than everyone else on that day. THat includes all retrieving trial champions competing on the day.

I have had this discussion with people who have actually won All-Age retrieving trials and this was the agreed outcome.

When you actually stand up there with a blue ribbon in your hand it is a whole new world and to do that a second time to gain a championship is a whole step further.

If you haven’t achieved it you are only guessing at what it takes.

If you haven’t accomplished it you are only guessing that it takes less effort then something else.

Spending time with people who have not been successful (won an All-Age is my minimum indicator of retrieving success) is not a good indicator of what is required.

I’ve heard this argument on community safety used before like it’s supposed to mean something. Like someone is taking the moral high ground. Give me a break.

I’ve bred a search and rescue dog. Whilst I am very happy that the people that got the pup could take the genetic potential the pup had and moulded it into a fine working dog that also can benefit the community. I am no more proud of that as a breeder than I am of the retrieving dogs I have bred.

Country Joe