Fear Of The Unknown???

[Labradorks]

Here's a good Robert Milner article, that is very well-balanced.

I also found this interesting. A large number of dogs this weekend at the JH ran the bank. I didn't understand why is was undesirable as it was faster and took less energy. And in this article, there are other reasons why, in the real world, it is a desirable trait.

He has some really good information and great points in his articles.

Doesn't someone on the board here get his dogs from the UK?

[Labradorks]

In terms of situational pressure, once the dogs know what they are supposed to be doing we do try to make it as stressful, distracting, and difficult in practice as we can and yes, we do force them to complete the exercise no matter what. I think the difference is that we don’t start out “forcing” them from the beginning - we give them a chance to learn it without any pressure and then the pressure is applied later in the process, and only if they have refused to comply with a command. I can’t speak for the people Labradorks is talking about though, as none of the people I train with would describe ourselves as “purely positive”. Yes, most of it is, but we do use corrections when warranted.

In addition to training the exercises positively, we spend a lot of time training engagement with the goal being a dog that would rather work with us than sniff, visit, etc. So, we have the trained exercise + the dog that wants to work with us above all else. At this point we generally have very little trouble with the dog complying. We then add some pretty major distractions and this is where our dogs experience pressure. At this point, they know what to do and most importantly, they want to do it more than they want to do other things. Generally, we look at non-compliance as a hole in your foundation and by addressing it that way, we don't create a dog that is afraid to retrieve or stressed over the exercise and creating a flat performance in the ring. Plus, a hole in the foundation is usually handler error, which the dog should not be punished or corrected for. We don't correct in a negative way, but we do correct. It's often as simple as showing them the cookie and saying, "too bad!" and not giving it to them and we use a lot of cheerful interrupters (Denise Fenzi). I don't know what to say, other than it works.

[barry581]

Here's a good Robert Milner article, that is very well-balanced.

I also found this interesting. A large number of dogs this weekend at the JH ran the bank. I didn't understand why is was undesirable as it was faster and took less energy. And in this article, there are other reasons why, in the real world, it is a desirable trait.

He has some really good information and great points in his articles.

Doesn't someone on the board here get his dogs from the UK?

Yes. Both Sophie and Bruce were imported from the UK. I've been friends with their breeders since 1984. I lived in the UK from 84-89, and did conformation with two of my dogs. I also had the pleasure of working several Championship Field Trails and Water Tests put on by the Labrador Retriever Club. Watching the championship level dogs work was amazing. The field trials there are basically a normal days shooting, so the retrieves are realistic, in that they are working dog doing real world retrieves. Not something concocted by a panel of judges to see just what they can get a dog to do.

I read Milner's book, and really like his approach. To the best of my knowledge, the Brits do not force fetch or use e collars. I seriously doubt you'd find a prong collar either. It's even more strict on the continent. A young lady from Switzerland has Bruce's brother, and I met her when I was in the UK back in March. You wouldn't believe all the hoops she has to jump through to even consider breeding from her dog. All clearances, temperament testing, and such. They can't use choke collars, much less an e-collar.

I've honestly enjoyed all the discussion in this post. I find it interesting all the different ways to achieve the same objective. Like most things in life, there are always different way to get things done. With my limited experience in this matter, all I can say is each of us should do what we feel is best for our dogs.

[TuMicks]

I've been having some correspondence with positive obedience folks (pro trainers) who do field work at the MH level and one has a few QAA dogs and the popular positions are below. I simply asked: "Did you get these titles on your dogs with or without force?" and their answers were generally one-liners, no real explanation. Take it for what it's worth. And, yes, I am well aware that if I had spoken only to field trainers and competitors, the answers would be completely different. Just thought you'd all be interested in what I learned from this "unofficial" info-gathering quest. FWIW, the answers to some questions were not what I was hoping for either.

- A good foundation all the way through obedience should not require a FF. I also polled obedience people (non-trainers) in one of my closed obedience groups. Question was: "Do you use a FF in obedience?". I had about 100 replies and from novice through UD, sporting dog owners through toy dog owners, this was also the unanimous response. Owners ranged from novice to utility, both A and B level, young and old (most of the older people had used FF in the past and were having better results without it), and dogs ranged from toy to sporting to giant to mixed breed rescues. The vast majority train for scores not titles.

- Lower level field work through JH at least, should not require a FF. See below for JH+ work.

- FF is done only as required and many do FF with an e-collar, not the traditional toe/ear/table pinching. (I do not know how this is done; I'm just reiterating what I was told.)

- Lower level field work though JH at least, should not require an e-collar. See below for JH+ work.

- Lower level field work through JH should be about a mix of instinct and trainability and experience and one should be able to get a JH without force. They felt that force sometimes got in the way as handlers would over-handle their dogs, not allow them to problem-solve on their own. They said this is more common with those looking to compete at higher levels and had to do with control.

- Upper level field work most likely requires an e-collar. The type of dog that does this kind of work (well) is more about drive than trainability, yet if you get a dog with the trainability, they will often lack the drive required for this level of competition. More drive and you get a dog that is bred to require force and usually handles it well. This level of competition is created around the use of an e-collar and this type of dog. You have to have the right dog (in other words, luck), the right training, excellent problem-solving skills and a thick skin to get a dog that can do this type of work 100% force-free. It has been done, but is very rare. There were a few examples and they were all Goldens and Springers.

This sounds about right. Bridget is a biddable dog who loves birds, but likes to be a diva. She has the smarts and talent to perform at a high level (we went to the Master National) but she just stopped enjoying the work. Branna has drive coming out her ears and the story is still out on her. She absolutely is a collar dog. But having said that, she is "getting it" and is needing less and less in the way of pressure. (But damn! We're never going to be able to take her compliance for granted.) So she's smart AND driven. I think we may have gotten "lucky."

[TuMicks]

I have been corresponding with a trainer in Co. Leitrum in Ireland and am invited to watch him train his dogs when we are over there in September. It should be a hoot. I'm going to give him the b-ball hat I got at the MN in 2012 as a thank-you gift. (I don't wear them cause I look like a dork in b-ball hats. So it's brand new.)

I liked Milner's articles. He gets the gist of things pretty well. I think his complaints about FT's explain the genesis of the Hunting Retriever movement. These are more geared to the best/brightest hunting companions, but even though there is not a true "competition" (where there is only ONE first place dog, ONE second place, etc.) the standards for passing have become stiffer over the years.

Many gigabytes can be used up discussing the relative merits of HT and FT. I would love to wear the white coat and compete with the best and I think RD could do the work. But I just don't live in a place where I have that sort of training circle and opportunities. BUT... I've come to appreciate that the HT game is very subtle and I think often misunderstood by FT people.

True HT distances are not into the next county. No 400 yard blinds. But the suction and hazards and factors can be incredibly intense and all of them right in the dog's face within the first 100-150-200 yards or so. The tests can be very, very complex. I think in response to what the HT people are doing, you're seeing more retired guns in FT's. (Since all guns are "retired" in HT's.)

One thing Milner said about less is more in FF rang a bell. I remember the old days of FF (which I won't describe here.) My 2 HT dogs have been FF'd on a table with the loop of string over two of their toes. I've had the loop applied to my fingers and it is TRIVIAL (as in... hardly anything...) in terms of discomfort. But, we all know that dogs are funny about their feet and they prefer to be on terra firma. So the table with the toe pinch is really more about anxiety/stress than about discomfort. Getting the object in their mouths, experiencing immediate release from the loop, and being praised for holding the dummy is highly satisfying to them under these circumstances. It's a double reinforcement, if you will.

If you've watched Evan Graham's demonstration of how he does the ear pinch... again, it looks remarkably, um, well... trivial. I honestly think that "Force Fetch" is an antiquated term. But it is what it is.

If anyone is familiar with Bill Hillmann's intriguing use of very, very, very low level e-collar stimulation, you can almost see where his methods may one day be viewed as a bridge method between what we know today as "traditional" field training and "positive only" field training.

Nothing in this life is constant. It will be interesting what happens over the next decade or so.

[Labradorks]

Yes. Both Sophie and Bruce were imported from the UK. I've been friends with their breeders since 1984. I lived in the UK from 84-89, and did conformation with two of my dogs. I also had the pleasure of working several Championship Field Trails and Water Tests put on by the Labrador Retriever Club. Watching the championship level dogs work was amazing. The field trials there are basically a normal days shooting, so the retrieves are realistic, in that they are working dog doing real world retrieves. Not something concocted by a panel of judges to see just what they can get a dog to do.

I read Milner's book, and really like his approach. To the best of my knowledge, the Brits do not force fetch or use e collars. I seriously doubt you'd find a prong collar either. It's even more strict on the continent. A young lady from Switzerland has Bruce's brother, and I met her when I was in the UK back in March. You wouldn't believe all the hoops she has to jump through to even consider breeding from her dog. All clearances, temperament testing, and such. They can't use choke collars, much less an e-collar.

I've honestly enjoyed all the discussion in this post. I find it interesting all the different ways to achieve the same objective. Like most things in life, there are always different way to get things done. With my limited experience in this matter, all I can say is each of us should do what we feel is best for our dogs.

Now that you are doing some field work in the US it will be interesting to get your perspective later on down the road.

[Labradorks]

This sounds about right. Bridget is a biddable dog who loves birds, but likes to be a diva. She has the smarts and talent to perform at a high level (we went to the Master National) but she just stopped enjoying the work. Branna has drive coming out her ears and the story is still out on her. She absolutely is a collar dog. But having said that, she is "getting it" and is needing less and less in the way of pressure. (But damn! We're never going to be able to take her compliance for granted.) So she's smart AND driven. I think we may have gotten "lucky."

Smart and trainable are not the same things.

[windycanyon]

Sorry, I should have copied Annette's post first. Duplicate for that reason.


Absolutely. I just got in from a work conference followed by rally / obed classes w/ the 2 youngsters but can't agree more. In fact, my open/ util instructor has used Kanzi as a demo a few times, knowing fully she's only 15 mos. AND.... not fully FFd! She got to see where our weaknesses are, and WHY I do FF just tonite.

I asked her permission after class (assuming I get off my butt and finish the FF program) if I can bring Kanzi in w/ an ecollar to her class in the future. Response was Yes, and the other students will likely benefit. She added if / when she adds a new pup (non sporting breed) she will be coming to me for help on that as well. I made her promise not to make cracks about "shock" collars etc, as *I* am sensitive to the whole subject.

Funny story, but I had dragged this gal aside a few yrs ago when she went off on a tangent at a workshop about why that gal had a "shock collar" on her GSD. I requested that she personally experience one. Guess what? She did not even feel the 1.5 low that I often use on my girls for obed. So..... moral of the story is YES, ecollars and pressure can be equivalent to the "right stuff" of parenting in the end. I can't thank my own parents enough for driving my butt to succeed in HS. I see "me" in some of my dogs at times.

[windycanyon]

My trainer does use FF on some dogs, particularly those that are not natural retrievers. I think the difference is that (in my understanding) in field work the pressure is applied from the beginning and the dog learns they can turn it off by completing the retrieve properly. Same with how e-collars are often used - the dog “turns it off” by performing. The way the people I train with (and I on occasion) do it is the dog is taught the retrieve first using mostly positive methods. If they never refuse to do it, they never experience any forcefulness from us (although the situational pressure is of course there). If they do refuse, it is at that point, already knowing the exercise that they refuse for whatever reason (distracted, afraid, etc.) that pressure to comply is applied - an ear pinch if needed, but I’ve never needed more than a collar pop on a prong collar with any of mine - it’s rare that they refuse to retrieve no matter how hard we try to make the exercise. Similarly, if we use an e-collar, it is usually used to apply a correction from a distance, once the dog already knows the exercise. So for example, Mulder used to refuse to turn and sit on directed jumping if I was at the other end of the ring - instead he would choose to sniff the stanchions looking for cookies and only comply if he heard me running up to get him. We eventually addressed this with an e-collar - he was given a quick “pop” with the e-collar similarly to how he was corrected on a prong and given a chance to comply again. For him, he was familiar with a collar pop and while surprised I could “get him” from so far away, the correction made sense to him as it was consistent with how he’d been taught.

In terms of situational pressure, once the dogs know what they are supposed to be doing we do try to make it as stressful, distracting, and difficult in practice as we can and yes, we do force them to complete the exercise no matter what. I think the difference is that we don’t start out “forcing” them from the beginning - we give them a chance to learn it without any pressure and then the pressure is applied later in the process, and only if they have refused to comply with a command. I can’t speak for the people Labradorks is talking about though, as none of the people I train with would describe ourselves as “purely positive”. Yes, most of it is, but we do use corrections when warranted.

Absolutely. I just got in from a work conference followed by rally / obed classes w/ the 2 youngsters but can't agree more. In fact, my open/ util instructor has used Kanzi as a demo a few times, knowing fully she's only 15 mos. AND.... not fully FFd! She got to see where our weaknesses are, and WHY I do FF just tonite.

I asked her permission after class (assuming I get off my butt and finish the FF program) if I can bring Kanzi in w/ an ecollar to her class in the future. Response was Yes, and the other students will likely benefit. She added if / when she adds a new pup (non sporting breed) she will be coming to me for help on that as well. I made her promise not to make cracks about "shock" collars etc, as *I* am sensitive to the whole subject.

Funny story, but I had dragged this gal aside a few yrs ago when she went off on a tangent at a workshop about why that gal had a "shock collar" on her GSD. I requested that she personally experience one. Guess what? She did not even feel the 1.5 low that I often use on my girls for obed. So..... moral of the story is YES, ecollars and pressure can be equivalent to the "right stuff" of parenting in the end. I can't thank my own parents enough for driving my butt to succeed in HS. I see "me" in some of my dogs at times.

[windycanyon]

Smart and trainable are not the same things.

Really? And where are your credentials in assessing that? YOU have 2 labs. 2 RN titles and 1 BN title and YOU are advising this to someone w/ advanced titles on their dogs? This is really insulting, but more than that, ludicrous.
TuMicks has been more than "lucky" I bet.

BTW, I've put a RN on a 6mo old PUPPY -- all scores w/ placements (in the B classes no less). Have 2 BN legs on same dog, was ~13 mo at the time (both high scores). Little effort on my part, I might add. Sorry but neither are anything beyond training ops for most of us. Oh I've lost count of obed/ etc titles here but I think I may be on #14 now????? Back in 1997 when I started, there were no choices outside of CD to train for. No BN, No Rally... all that is really just training. Good training in the ring.