Judy wrote: Only one "back" an' all! But I wonder how many times we've all heard what's become known locally as the magic grouse; "goback, goback, goback"
That is the one I was talking about Judy, but now when I hear it I will start laughing as I think of "The Magic Grouse".
Judy wrote: ...Semaphore saves miles of walking on the average English shoot. Only one "back" an' all! But I wonder how many times we've all heard what's become known locally as the magic grouse; "goback, goback, goback"
I'm seeing a Gilbert & Sullivan Society modern operetta here, "HMS Semaphore: G'back, G'back, G'back on the High Seas" - but only by navigation of proper retrieving lanes over water courses, if not horses but horsepower for getting them there.
Plus that semaphore is energy efficient and calisthenic as all get out as well. Deep knee-bend, arm extended, animated facial expression, strong exhalation ("Back!") - it's the whole package. Our "production" is far more minimal - Dog at side, lined up for distant blind, single syllable "Back!" commanded, dog keeps running to forever or the stop whistle, which ever comes first. But it's reassuring that the semaphore prevails when the going gets tough for the dog to, er, decipher.
Springfield Pointers wrote:Sit/Stay... There's one that gets used often...
Along with a hand signal! If I say sit I mean my dogs to sit until I move and then come with me without further instruction, if I add stay it means don't move your arras off that spot until I say so regardless of whether the Earth spins or not. Its just what I was taught Gawd knows how many years ago.
This one post gives credence to the title of the thread, as Judy has introduced a verbal command to sit with a visual cue of a `step forward' as release, and then IMV has had to introduce a second command `stay' to hold the dog on sit and ignore the visual release cue when moving away.
Dogs will by their nature pick up body language cues from us whether intentional ( trained ) or unintentional ( association ). Often I think its not the dog that gets confused but the handler that does not recognise what cue the dog is acting on. Taking Judy's example I would guess that many would use a `heel' or similar cue to release the dog from sit when wanting to move off with the dogs. On occasions we would forget, but as the dog acted on the visual cue of stepping forward, they moved off with us. As it is convenient at the time, we do not correct it, and it becomes the norm....until it happens when we don't want it....and then what do you do.....add the `stay' or repeat `sit' usually in a firmer tone
One thing I `try' to do when training my young dogs is discipline myself into using the same cue especially on the sit/stop and release on each occasion especially when these are still in the learning phase out in the field* e.g. a whistle stop gets a whistle release, and a visual hand signal stop gets a visual hand signal release.
* In the very early puppy stage all cues are given together, and linked with association.
Once the dog is confident ( or getting too confident )I will then start mixing things up, this is where I think that its not always us that train the dogs but that sometimes they have trained me, just as they try to pre-empt the next command I'm trying to predict their pre-emption cue
But that's two different cues for two different behaviours? What Stephens was saying is that if you give, say, two sit cues - hand & vocal - for the same behaviour it will confuse the dog. Something I believe most would disagree with?
I actually like pups to start picking up on environmental & body cues & pre-empting what comes next. And I don't think you are doing a pup any favours by being clinically precise in your cues. Making mistakes & learning from them is all part of the learning process. And in any event in real life situations & the heat of the moment your cues are often a bit on the woolly side - at least, mine are - so pup might as well get accustomed to it from the get-go. Much of what we do in the shooting field is one big behaviour chain or a lot of repetitive scenarios and dogs are great at learning in context so I work on developing routines & rituals based around the dog anticipating what comes next so we can cut out superfluous commands. There is an argument that dogs pick up on visual cues better than vocal ones & I think this is so & try to present a consistent sight picture for whatever we might be doing. I think dogs learn better if they can figure things out for themselves in this exploratory way, the downside is that's why they're so good at learning to run-in.
Not to overstay my verbal, er, virtual "sit" command, but if you are getting that block of salt look from your dogs when giving a silent cast, might want to think about going silent with the "card trick" as y'all call it when starting early casting. Foolproof way for a dog, a pup, to learn to look rather than listen in anticipation of taking a cast.
I actually like pups to start picking up on environmental & body cues & pre-empting what comes next.
Naj[/quote]
We are at one Naj, if they don't you always have to tell them everything ie to stop after a flush. Whereas if it is pre-empting things after a few flushes and me stopping the dog and then praising it I would hope it begins to understand that it is required to stop after a flush and I no longer have to tell it to, that is when you need to be a rotten shot so it never expects a retrieve no issues with running in then!
On the visual signals I did not realise just how often I tell a dog ( or reinforce a stop whistle) to wait for another instruction by showing my hand with the palm open and towards the dog until I filmed myself shooting. Sometimes not using a stop whistle at all if the dog looks confused just the hand gesture as a "pay attention you need me now" signal. It has obviously become a reflex action from me even though I did not realise I did it. One of the many great things about this forum is it has made me analyse why I do things that I do because they work but was not entirely sure why and may well be changing other things that did not work as well as I would like.Now where is that setter pup?
On a similar theme,a trainer recently asked a group of Retriever handlers if their dogs were good on the recall whistle. All said yes and he began to put them to the test one by one,asking them to sit the dog up and walk away from it with their back turned to the dog and once several yards away they were told to blow recall without looking round and still walking away with hands in pockets. All bar two dogs remained sat despite several attempts to recall them. Of course once the handler was allowed to turn and look at the dog whilst recalling it,all the dogs responded eagerly. His point being that the dogs were not 100% solid on the recall without the visual cue at the same time.
After watching this I tried it on my spaniels that evening and they too remained sat until I looked round at them.
His point was that if the dog needs a visual cue alongside the whistle,then how solid is recall when the dog is out of sight?
Has he a valid point there or is he splitting hairs?
That's a counter-visual cue, pure and simple, a trick if you will that proves only that dogs are creatures of habit. And these dogs have a habit of looking at you to see (and hear) the whistle for recall, right? How many times do you blow a recall whistle with your back turned to the dog but still in its sight? Let's make it more of a real life (for gundogs) situation vis-a-vis the recall. When I take my dogs for a walk or ramble into the marsh, they're often a couple hundred yards ahead of me and out of sight. Five of them usually playing at a remove. When it's time to hightail it for home, I blow the "come-in" whistle in their direction, then do an about-face. Usually by the time I've gone 100 yards and blown the whistle for the second time all five are affording me proper attention to the command as if I were the pied piper.
Splitting hairs. If your dog is out of sight and you blow recall it comes running, yes? How many times over the years have you sat a youngster up in training, walked away, turned to face it, or faced it all the time if very young then blown recall? In the above situation the dog is confused because you've always turned to face it before blowing recall. Wouldn't mind betting if you had gone behind a tree and blown recall the dog would have come running.
In life, it is important to know when to stop arguing with people and simply let them be wrong.
The other favourite along those lines is walking along dog at heel, pipping the stop whistle without breaking stride, how many dogs stop if you don't give a visual cue at the same time? Not many and yet if the dog was running away from you and you blew stop it would stop without a visual cue.
In life, it is important to know when to stop arguing with people and simply let them be wrong.
Only one "back" an' all! But I wonder how many times we've all heard what's become known locally as the magic grouse; "goback, goback, goback"
If I say sit I mean my dogs to sit until I move and then come with me without further instruction, if I add stay it means don't move your arras off that spot until I say so regardless of whether the Earth spins or not. Its just what I was taught Gawd knows how many years ago.
- so pup might as well get accustomed to it from the get-go. Much of what we do in the shooting field is one big behaviour chain or a lot of repetitive scenarios and dogs are great at learning in context so I work on developing routines & rituals based around the dog anticipating what comes next so we can cut out superfluous commands. There is an argument that dogs pick up on visual cues better than vocal ones & I think this is so & try to present a consistent sight picture for whatever we might be doing. I think dogs learn better if they can figure things out for themselves in this exploratory way, the downside is that's why they're so good at learning to run-in.