|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|03-07-2014 02:13 PM|
I would love to get Tyson involved in that sort of sport, but ive been told he does not have what it takes now by many people that know what they are talking about. So..im going to do agility with him.
Sent from Petguide.com Free App
|03-06-2014 01:02 PM|
yes, and then, still some of that dedication to task is just there , part of the herding dogs inner quality .
here is an example of major distraction , in a trial situation, behaviour not taught . Inger Olavson who I mentioned probably in the genetic obedience thread , or herding lines thread , has some of her dogs in Sumo and sister Journey , and son Gus pedigrees.
Inger and her "club" Sue Barwig, Johannes Grewe , Carbajal , Nope, Gary Patterson and wife Carol and other great "olde" dog sports people .
One of her dogs Bob vom hause an der Schiene is on my pedigrees , as is another line under her Olympus kennel .
Bob was a Dingo Gero son . Dingo Gero is used as an ideal for balanced movement .
I take this from Schutzhund USA interview March 2011 ,
Inger had qualified with her dog Bob (call name Dingo son of Dingo Gero) for the 1992 WUSV Weltmeistershaft in Linz Austria. There on the track , first article , dog downed and waiting for her to walk up to him, a rabbit bolts out of the grass and went right over the dogs front leg . The dog never budged, and Inger breathed a sigh of relief. Everyone saw it .
That is what I meant in the early socialization comment about the world coming at you --- so many things to challenge us that you have no control over .
That dog had not been conditioned to such an event .
A year later in trials in Nijmegen Holland same dog , tracking portion again, some challenge. The dog stepped on an electrical wire which had dropped onto the road crossing . The wire was still hot and the dog shrieked, his paw burnt. He was distracted a bit with a stick . The judge noted this , dog brought to starting point and the dog continued . He was a bit dazed -- scored 80 points . Inger was enormously proud , what he did not get in points he more than made up for in heart .
Bob vom Haus an der Schiene
some things you can not teach
|03-02-2014 09:11 PM|
I believe in adding in distraction from the start. If things like balls, food, people, cars, are always part if the picture, then proofing is minimized. The dog learns that the only time he gets a reward is when he works and does what you want. The "distractions" become a regular part of the picture.
If you watch any if the Randy Hare stuff, this is his theory as well. He uses the scent boxes. One has the odor you are training for, one is empty, one has balls, one has food, and so on. The dog is allowed to snif and smell, but gets no play until they "notice" the scent you are training on. Then the toy is presented and the play commenses. They learn quickly that "dead" scents bring nothing.
I like that theory. I modify it for my needs, but life and the world are full of "distractions" so might as well just make them part of training from the get go.
Sent from Petguide.com Free App
|03-02-2014 08:45 PM|
Originally Posted by Jack's Dad View Post
I never said you could. Obviously the dog requires the right drives. You start with the right dog, train the dog and proof the dog before the dog starts working in the real world or even the sport field.
The OP was asking about distractors I was giving her examples of how they are trained.
Plenty of SAR dogs try crittering and have to be proofed of the distraction of bunnies or deer..
|03-02-2014 08:41 PM|
Originally Posted by Blitzkrieg1 View Post
To me it's sort of like people who are naturally athletic or musically inclined.
They may have "it" natural talent but they still need education and training, along with repetition.
You can't put something in that's not there but can train around it.
|03-02-2014 08:23 PM|
So why does a guy like Mike and numerous others bother with training at all? Why bother adding progressive distractions to their training? The dog just has to have it right?
You referring to puppy hunting around for a tug? What does that prove?
Originally Posted by carmspack View Post
|03-02-2014 07:45 PM|
Originally Posted by David Winners View Post
Sounds like my Lab. Who vibrates when food is around. Unless she is working. When searching she will jump over an entire pizza and never look at it.
Sent from Petguide.com Free App
|03-02-2014 07:39 PM|
I train dogs to be obedient to odor. I start by using light leash pressure on a harness, pulling directly away from the hide while the dog is in final response. I gradually add more and more pressure until I can drag the dog off the hide and it will not loose focus, returning to the hide immediately when released. Then: go through the same process with verbal commands, gently enticing the dog away with my voice at first, building to strong directional commands that the dog will disobey to stay on source.
This I will train.
Working through crowds, food, animals, traffic, feces, wind, rain, whatever, is work ethic. The dog does become more accustomed to working under distraction through experience, but it is either there or not IME.
An example would be Marshall. He's a little lab, super social, goofy with people, loves attention and food. He's always the center of attention. He will say hello to each and every person in a group before a demo search while I give a brief.
I was doing a search with him down a section of road that leads to a chow hall. I wasn't paying attention to the time when I set the problem up. No sooner had we started the venue and scores of people started walking down the road from the chow hall carrying Styrofoam to-go containers full of food.
Marshall was working off leash about 75 meters in front of me, all on his own without direction. People didn't know he was working. They were whistling, snapping their fingers, calling to him and offering bits of their dinner to him. He was completely oblivious to the people. He was calmly zooming past them, weaving through their feet, working his pattern. The search took about half an hour, maybe 45 minutes. Think PSA for a detection dog, without commands from the handler.
You can't teach that IMO, and I didn't. We had never worked anything remotely similar before. He's just got "it."
As soon as the search was over, he was back to goof ball, clowning around and loving on everybody in sight.
|03-02-2014 07:10 PM|
no -- that is an obedience exercise
the dog works with the focus on the task .
using the SAR dog who could go crittering, but doesn't.
It always works out better when you choose the dog that has it naturally .
You ARE talking about a training process . Work is not obedience though . In work , and even in good obedience you don't keep closing in on the dogs performance or activity , making the range of accepted behaviours more narrow or confined.
where did young Nicholas get that "training"
|03-02-2014 06:40 PM|
I disagree Carmen, that is the foundation for creating reliable focus and obedience. You intorduce distractions in training so the dog gets used to remaining task oriented despite high value competing motivators.
You are talking about the end result, I am talking about the training process. The training process is not complete until you no longer need to correct the dog and it is remaining reliably task oriented.
You see Mike working his detection pups and using food and balls (high value objects) to try and get the dog off task. Then he rewards the dog for ignoring those stimuli and remaining on task. In real life those dogs will deal with the distractors you mentioned however for the training process those objects are used.
Sure you can use other distractors and many do, I was just using those objects as a basic example. Some people will use multiple decoys, groups of moving people or other dogs but generally starting with high value objects is easiest and gets the same message across.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|