It's all about the training!

[Kibble]

No need to be particularly aware of what ‘cues’ you’re giving out, they all morph into each other and become part and parcel of the relationship you build with your dog, the one reading off the other. That’s why I don’t think so much in terms of commands but more so in developing routines and rituals on a day to day basis. Makes much more sense to a dog.

Thank you. That's reassuring. I like routines.

This morning my pup ran down the field to the water trough. She knows where it is, jumped in as usual, and looked back up at me. I laughed. She splashed about a bit. Then, when I caught up, she treated me to several vertical take off jumps, which are theoretically not allowed. That communication is a work in progress. I get the puppy behaviour I deserve!

I have read in a recent thread, the suggestion of 'natural ability tests'. I think that's an interesting idea, which might be popular.
I am wondering.
What are the natural abilities you want in a working spaniel, for example?
How would you assess these in a puppy?
Is ability to communicate an important natural alility?
What about puppy personality?

[munstyman]

Natural Ability testing is all about assessing a dogs behavior in a stimulating environment, focusing on those abilities that are useful to its function in the field. Hunting , retrieving and swimming, biddability and reaction to shot are the most important things to assess in the Spaniel group.
The emphasis is on `Natural' not training, so as an assessor you have to watch how the dog approaches the situation it is presented with. Some training is required to control the dog for the assessment to be made, but trained/obedience work is only of value to the biddability portion of the test.
For example when hunting any control of the natural quartering by the handler will/should be restricted by the assessor. The dogs natural pace, beat relative to the handler, use of cover, use of wind/nose need to be seen as much as possible without being overly handled.
Unlike competitions the dogs are assessed against a standard not other dogs, but in order to `pass' the dog has to meet all the standards across all the tests. If a dog fails to meet a standard in one of the tests it is still recorded to provide future reference of that dogs ability/weakness of the test.
Personality/biddability is one of the most valuable aspects of NA testing over competition. Assessment is made both in part of other tests and in individual ( obedience ) tests which are structured to show aspects like confidence, anxiety, partnership and independence.
It is important to remember that the tests are set to tests the dogs approach to the situation not always to completing the test as it would be in a competition. The best example to this is the swimming exercise where you may use a retrieve to get the dog to show it can swim, but it does not fail if it does not retrieve.

[crackerd]

I have read in a recent thread, the suggestion of 'natural ability tests'. I think that's an interesting idea, which might be popular. ...

Very popular in North America for pups up to 16 months old, particularly with certain a NA gundog org. - that "NA" is North America(n) again, not NA (Natural Ability) gundog org., Kibble. Popularity even comes with a luuuvly misnomer: "Trained for 'Natural Ability Tests'"

Back to you for the intricacies , munsty -

MG

[Judy]

I think the Scandinavians are in to aptitude testing, makes far more sense to me that Field Trials.

[crackerd]

I think the Scandinavians are in to aptitude testing, makes far more sense to me that Field Trials.

Surely you mean they're into yaptitude testing, like with the notification system for a capercaillie up a tree and, you know, the prestigious and prodigious yapping championships. https://nationalpurebreddogday.com/bark ... ion-title/

MG

[Judy]

I think the Scandinavians are in to aptitude testing, makes far more sense to me that Field Trials.

Surely you mean they're into yaptitude testing, like with the notification system for a capercaillie up a tree and, you know, the prestigious and prodigious yapping championships. https://nationalpurebreddogday.com/bark ... ion-title/

MG

Reminds me of my second Flatcoat ; she would sit under a tree and bark until someone came along to dislodge the runner for her. She had gone off to look for something during a drive and the next thing I had someone on the radio "Judy, your dog is sitting barking at a tree".

[Kibble]

The UK Gundog Club has non competitive assessments called 'Field Tests', which are described as, 'Designed for retrievers, but also suitable for spaniels'.
Stage One is mostly obedience (heel, sit/stay, recall). There is also a very simple close retrieve.
My spaniel puppy would fail 'heel'. It might be a long time, and require a lot of effort, before she can be relied on to 'heel' well in a new field, when she is hard wired to have her nose on the ground.
Is this assessment really 'suitable for spaniels'? Should I bother? What about all the NA spaniel things my puppy is brilliant at?

[newf]

The UK Gundog Club has non competitive assessments called 'Field Tests', which are described as, 'Designed for retrievers, but also suitable for spaniels'.
Stage One is mostly obedience (heel, sit/stay, recall). There is also a very simple close retrieve.
My spaniel puppy would fail 'heel'. It might be a long time, and require a lot of effort, before she can be relied on to 'heel' well in a new field, when she is hard wired to have her nose on the ground.
Is this assessment really 'suitable for spaniels'? Should I bother? What about all the NA spaniel things my puppy is brilliant at?

Why can’t a spaniel learn to heel properly? Labs learn not every retrieve is theirs; cattle dogs that instinctively bite heels, learn when it’s not required. All these animals have instincts that drive them but, just as importantly, learn when to rein in that drive. Done correctly, there is no loss of natural drive, just a time and place for it to be used. Instincts are just basic blueprints of how an animal will fit into its environment but these instincts are also malleable to fit what an animal has to adapt to.

[munstyman]

The UK Gundog Club has non competitive assessments called 'Field Tests', which are described as, 'Designed for retrievers, but also suitable for spaniels'.
Stage One is mostly obedience (heel, sit/stay, recall). There is also a very simple close retrieve.
My spaniel puppy would fail 'heel'. It might be a long time, and require a lot of effort, before she can be relied on to 'heel' well in a new field, when she is hard wired to have her nose on the ground.
Is this assessment really 'suitable for spaniels'? Should I bother? What about all the NA spaniel things my puppy is brilliant at?

The whole point of any assessment, be it competition, KC regulated or otherwise, or another form of NA or Field assessment, is to have your dog evaluated by someone else who ( Should ) be experienced enough to give a constructive, independent assessment of the dogs ability.
A dog will perform differently on different ground and in different stimulating environments. All to often we hear how good a dog is from the owner, but then take a different view when, as an independent , we get to see it and put it through what it may not have experienced on the training ground.
The field test you describe, I think ( so don't hold me to it ) is a test of readiness for the shooting field, and as such it is a stepping stone or even a comfort blanket for those who may not have had access to the shooting field in more traditional ways.
As newf said, heeling is a training issue, it matters not what a dog is `hard wired' to do another thing. If the dog is `hunting' on a lead it is NOT concentrating on the heel or the handler.
When formulating the NAT for the UK HPRs I remember having long discussions with my the late friend and contributor `Wullie' as he is known on here. About certain obedience elements included in the test, which by definition are trained not natural. The sit/stay and heel were hot topics in this regard ( HPR owners tend to be very lacking in these areas
These are included as part of character assessment and biddability because they allow only for these elements to be assessed in a structured way, and it is never intended to be an obedience/training `pass' requirement for the test itself, they are only indicators.
eg. The down stay apart from the handler can show whether the dog is anxious, biddable to the command, and has the temperament to `switch off' when required, gives tongue and indeed train ability.
The heel was not about an obedience style heel on or off the lead , as with HPRs the dogs position is often different depending on the circumstances, again it is all about where the mindset of the dog is when asked to heel

Is this assessment really 'suitable for spaniels'? Should I bother? What about all the NA spaniel things my puppy is brilliant at?

Should you bother? That's up to you. If you set your standards high enough and are very conscious about not making excuses for things your dog is not good at *cough* Heeling and train out those weaknesses. Getting any piece of paper that says your dog can or can't do it, is pretty irrelevant. With regard to all the things your dog is brilliant at, again, if it is good at something, be it from natural ability or training, Understand it and use it to your advantage. Fine tune it if you feel the need with more training, but concentrate on the weaknesses and train them up to give an all round better performance. Please remember if it ever comes the time you want to breed from the dog, what was natural ability and what was trained to get the end result , and choose a mate that compliments the dogs natural abilities not the trained ones. ( Which is the whole point of NA testing )

[Nickheref]

The tests you refer to are, I think, designed for people who have no experience of working or training a gundog but wish to take a dog onto a shoot in the future and to guide them and show where if necessary the training is weak or in other words not good enough, it is designed to show the training not necessarily the natural ability. It is not to do with breeding which as Munstyman says is the point of Natural Ability Tests, the point of NA testing is to an extent for dogs who may never have been considered for breeding as they have not competed or shown themselves well on shoots and keep them in the gene pool. However one criteria is that the dog must be trainable and certain parts of the testing will show this up. The hardest hunting spaniel in the word is of no use if you have no idea where it is all day or it is not working with its handler.

In any testing regime to choose which tests of the programme you do is rather like applying for your driving test and then asking not to have to do the parallel parking exercise because you cannot do it, you can of course take the automatic test but then you cannot drive a manual car but either way their are certain parts of the test you must be able to do to be competent.

I am rather old school and teach the off lead "heel" fairly late in their training as I don't need it early on, they do walk at heel when on a lead from an early age and so by the time I need an off lead heel it is a very simple step that most of them barely notice. Just having the lead removed does not mean the dog is free to please itself as the lead being slipped on means we are shortly about to do something, by that point they will have done a lot of quartering and retrieving practice and expect to sit and wait for the me to tell them what we are doing when the lead comes off.