It's all about the training!

[Kibble]

Why can’t a spaniel learn to heel properly?

I had high expectations of my puppy and of my ability to train her. It was a set-back when she couldn't cope with puppy class and I bought The Gundog Club stage one training manual (sit, recall, heel on lead and a simple sighted retrieve)
Having my puppy walk on a lead, without pulling is high on my behavioural priority list. It is not on hers. I spent hours (in short bursts) and lots of treats trying to get her to walk with a loose, clip on lead.
My issue is about what behaviours to prioritise in training a lively cocker spaniel.

I now use a figure of eight slip lead to get to the fields, woods and moors and spend time playing at various retrieves while she shows me hunting. It's more fun than heel work for both of us.
As a byproduct of this she will now walk with full attention on me, more or less at heel, if I have a ball or similar in my hand.

[CockerCanuck]

I agree any dog can be taught to heel on leash and off. Some are certainly easier than others but they all can learn. However , I don't really understand why it would be part of a "Natural Ability" or "Field Test". Seems to me it's more a test of the trainers natural ability not the dogs.

My two current gundogs were studies in contrast when it comes to heel off leash. Once he understood the concept my Chessie was quite happy to comply and is very reliable. The cocker was certainly tougher with a much stronger desire to charge ahead and seek but he eventually got it. With him I did it in short sessions and always with something good like a retrieve at the end. He was much happier to heel when he thought it was leading to something he likes. Sounds like this approach would work with your enthusiastic pup. Take your time and she will get it.

[newf]

Funny, of all my past dogs, mostly labs, my ess was the easiest to train heel. The reason, I believe, he has an abundance of focus and tractability. The former trait, I give the most credit because no matter what it is, he’s single minded on the task.

[crackerd]

Funnily enough I agree with my le Canadien friends - CC on an odd inclusion of heeling for a natural ability test unless it's to see how well the trainer naturally heels, and with newf on the focus and tractability of spaniels - of some spaniels, and specifically in my case, some spaniels of several breeds other than c*ckers and springers that all have been trained as nonslip, which really brings out their focus and if you will tractability (albeit not "auto-tractability" as in dogs trained by compulsion methods becoming all but robotic in the field. Misconception if ever there was one, if that training is properly/kinder and gentler/firmly but humanely implemented.).

Why, I would go so far as saying those trained as above are likely to become an almost perfect picture

IMG_3293.JPG

of obedience and gundog compliance on just about all scores.

MG

[Kibble]

Thank you Newf, Munstyman, Nickheref, CockerCanuck and Crackered for your expert, considered and encouraging replies. I find forum threads very helpul, especially with encouraging me to become more confident in reading my puppy, thinking how best I can train her, and in not getting too stressed about my inevitable errors. It's great that people with gundog training experience are prepared to share their stories of individual dogs and the training approaches they have used. I take the view that if I want to read I should contribute, however limited my puppy training experience. I have question about The Gundog Club.

The Gundog Club' is a UK based organisation (charity) with almost nationwide coverage across England. It provides accreditation for trainers (who run gundog training classes), training manuals and staged assessments. This organisation therefore has the potential for greater gundog training influence, albeit mostly pet gundogs for now, than any one individual trainer alone. Should this be a concern?

The stage one training manual is very prescriptive, even formulaic. I found it daunting and the approach pedantic. I am relieved that this forum has stories of more relaxed, varied and creative approaches to gundog training. I understand the need for basic obedience, but maybe there are different ways to achieve this and working with a puppy's natural ability and desire, in the first instance, seems like a good idea.
The Gundog Club will now only acredit trainers who do not use aversives. In their literature, aversives are defined as 'anything the dog does not like.' Some general examples of likely aversives (such as hitting and growling) are provided.
Irrespective of anyone's view on modern 'force free' versus other 'traditional' training methods, is this definition of aversives workable?
I think the Gundog Club definition is problematic, not to say daft. First I need to know what my puppy does not like and then avoid it. To start with she didn't like her (clip on) lead. She still hates being ignored.
Does a workable definition of 'aversives' in the context of gundog training matter? Is there a good definition of aversives or even of 'force free'?

[crackerd]

Kibble, for answering your ultimate question, it's altogether possible that you may have to call upon a forum member who went unmentioned in your encomium to us more folksy (if occasionally rigid ) trainers. That would be the judge, jury and executioner on aversives and the Kind Hearts and Coronets practitioner of "Never No!," naj.

Truthfully, some of us (few and all apparently on the other side of the aversive gene pool pond) use step-by programmes and augment their implementation with e-collar methodology, one in particular called "indirect pressure" of which the forum archives may contain innumerable threads devoted to same.

My mantra on training - for competition and for my own edification - is, It's gotta be fun for both handler and dog - and electricity is but a scintilla in seeing such training match up with the mantra.

As CC and maybe a couple others here can tell you, training's almost a cult thing with many 'Mericans, primarily for satisfying their, satisfying our competitive jones. That doesn't mean you're out to "win" a training session, a daily training session for many, but that you work with your dog toward becoming a team at the highest levels of our field trial game. Most, myself included, will probably never reach the pinnacle, but we are gratified on almost a daily basis by working with our dogs to get better and becoming more collaborative together in trying to get there. Training's training, as we often say - and ain't that the truth when the training's training for the better?

MG

[ips]

Thank you Newf, Munstyman, Nickheref, CockerCanuck and Crackered for your expert, considered and encouraging replies. I find forum threads very helpul, especially with encouraging me to become more confident in reading my puppy, thinking how best I can train her, and in not getting too stressed about my inevitable errors. It's great that people with gundog training experience are prepared to share their stories of individual dogs and the training approaches they have used. I take the view that if I want to read I should contribute, however limited my puppy training experience. I have question about The Gundog Club.

The Gundog Club' is a UK based organisation (charity) with almost nationwide coverage across England. It provides accreditation for trainers (who run gundog training classes), training manuals and staged assessments. This organisation therefore has the potential for greater gundog training influence, albeit mostly pet gundogs for now, than any one individual trainer alone. Should this be a concern?

The stage one training manual is very prescriptive, even formulaic. I found it daunting and the approach pedantic. I am relieved that this forum has stories of more relaxed, varied and creative approaches to gundog training. I understand the need for basic obedience, but maybe there are different ways to achieve this and working with a puppy's natural ability and desire, in the first instance, seems like a good idea.
The Gundog Club will now only acredit trainers who do not use aversives. In their literature, aversives are defined as 'anything the dog does not like.' Some general examples of likely aversives (such as hitting and growling) are provided.
Irrespective of anyone's view on modern 'force free' versus other 'traditional' training methods, is this definition of aversives workable?
I think the Gundog Club definition is problematic, not to say daft. First I need to know what my puppy does not like and then avoid it. To start with she didn't like her (clip on) lead. She still hates being ignored.
Does a workable definition of 'aversives' in the context of gundog training matter? Is there a good definition of aversives or even of 'force free'?

Can of worms well and truly open....no worries as I opened the same tin a few years ago.......I. started off as a pet gundog owner then evolved to a want to be gundog handler then became a propper working gundog gandler, this none aversive handling does not exist in the real world.....take the dog beating and see how long you last before you give it a right good verbal bollocking.....or worse

[Kibble]

Thank you to crackerd for your replies. I had to look up the meaning of encominum and new words are always a pleasure.
To be clear, I only thanked those who had replied to my specific post. I don't have the experience to judge training methods, nor would I presume to, as I am struggling to train one lively puppy. My issue is really about meaning and how words are interpreted and used (by people).
PS. Thank you for the picture, which must be worth a thousand words.

[Kibble]

Thank you ips. Worms are insideous.
If I had built my livelihood on being an accredited 'The Gundog Club' trainer and the accreditation rules had changed to include the meaning of 'aversives' as 'anything the dog doesn't like' I would be upset. Some trainers have chosen to leave the accreditation scheme.

One of the likely aversives suggested is 'staring' (at the dog). My puppy often stares at me. I thought this was a good thing. She even winks, as in closes one eye, sometimes. I have no idea how to interpret that, maybe something irritating it?
I don't know whether she would like a good bollocking or not. Some athletes pay their coaches to provide words of encouragement, which could be similarly interpreted. My puppy is an athlete. Yesterday she jumped straight up onto the garden table. No climbing on chairs. Not even a run up, just crouch and up. I lifted her off. Not sure she liked that.

[ips]

Thank you ips. Worms are insideous.
If I had built my livelihood on being an accredited 'The Gundog Club' trainer and the accreditation rules had changed to include the meaning of 'aversives' as 'anything the dog doesn't like' I would be upset. Some trainers have chosen to leave the accreditation scheme.

One of the likely aversives suggested is 'staring' (at the dog). My puppy often stares at me. I thought this was a good thing. She even winks, as in closes one eye, sometimes. I have no idea how to interpret that, maybe something irritating it?
I don't know whether she would like a good bollocking or not. Some athletes pay their coaches to provide words of encouragement, which could be similarly interpreted. My puppy is an athlete. Yesterday she jumped straight up onto the garden table. No climbing on chairs. Not even a run up, just crouch and up. I lifted her off. Not sure she liked that.

"Anything the dog doesn't like" is imo taking things to the literal extreme and I would think impossible to abide by in the real world of a shoot day however I applaud the attempt and the mindset