RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Training Programmes? ...idle curiousity!

18K views 85 replies 25 participants last post by  steve schreiner 
#1 ·
One very notable difference between how you train in USA vs how we train in UK, is that it seems (and I may be mistaken) that the majority of you (who are training particularly to compete) are on, or follow, some sort of "programme", which is produced by a particular trainer/kennels. In the UK, there is nothing much parallel to this (other than just a couple of 'celebrity' DVDs), and we all seem to train in a much more 'organic' (haphazard! LOL) way. Perhaps partly because the nature of our game is somewhat different.

Without diverging into picking through the whys and wherefores of what methods are 'better', can anyone tell me is there a 'programme' which doesn't involve the use of an electric collar, or force fetch? If there isn't, there isn't. But just wondered if there was.
 
#2 ·
km, specific to training competitively, for North American competition, particularly field trials, none that has been made known to or gained any traction (via bonafides) with the retriever-training public.

How 'bout training for eyewipes without FF or the e-collar, how do you manage that?:wink:

MG
 
#4 ·
OK, thanks MG. That's a shame. I'd love to see a bit more 'structure' in our training methods over here. We do all tackle the same things and get to the end goal eventually, but we just seem to be a lot less regimented in doing it!

Oh, we bumble along....;-)........
 
#5 · (Edited)
KM,

One "programme" on a DVD is "The Wildrose Way", it's non collar or FF. I've used inverted commas because I don't see it as fully fledged; the basic obedience is very sketchy and IMO insufficient. However if you put basic OB into a puppy and followed Wildrose you'd get a decent hunting dog. If you care to drop me your postal address via PM you can borrow my copy.

In general, all the published Carr based programmes can be used as way markers in non collar / FF training. Again if you want to have a butchers at one (Strawski) let me know. I thinks it's an awful piece of work with many faults, but the structure is the standard model.

As to published works other than DVDs that lay down a plan, where to start? Susan Scales, Peter Moxon, Nigel Mann, Keith Erlandson, Eric Begbie, Vic Barlow, Ken Roebuck ...... that's just the first few on my top shelf!

Eug
 
#6 ·
KM,

One "programme" on a DVD is "The Wildrose Way", it's non collar or FF. I've used inverted commas because I don't see it as fully fledged; the basic obedience is very sketchy and IMO insufficient. However if you put basic OB into a puppy and followed Wildrose you'd get a decent hunting dog. If you care to drop me your postal address via PM you can borrow my copy.

In general, all the published Carr based programmes can be used as way markers in non collar / FF training.

As to published works other than DVDs where to start? Susan Scales, Peter Moxon, Nigel Mann, Keith Erlandson, Eric Begbie, Vic Barlow ...... that's just the first few on my top shelf!

Eug
Thanks Eug, I've got the Wildrose (coffee table) book which has some methods and exercises similar to 'British' methods. I didn't know there was a DVD! Would be interested in a look thanks.

I also have most of the books you mention, along with the odd DVD etc. But none of which are really a 'programme' and that is the difference to me in our methods. We tend to 'dip into' things, but don't rigidly follow any programme with any structure. Not saying that is right or wrong, just an observation that it is different.

I'll look up Carr, not heard of that?
 
#8 ·
That would be Maj. Rex Carr to you, Colonel!

km, as noted above, the force- and collar-based programs are adaptive and can be undertaken without force or collar. But I'm unaware of anyone who's achieved (N. American) competitive success going that route.

Regimenting is a good way to go, though, and why I got into retrievers in the first place - love the training more than the trials. But what we're learning over here is that you can also customize the regimentation for other gundogs - HPRs and (retrieving) spaniels in particular. They do just fine on programs, with a soupcon of force and electricity, of course. Especially - since we're talking regimentation and majors and colonels - what Bill Meldrum's buddy Bob Gutermuth used to call "ye olde sergeant major's dog" the Sussex spaniel



going through her paces going on 12 years now having been trained nonslip (via Mike Lardy's program).

MG
 
#9 ·
As someone who doesn't use the collar or force fetch on my current dog, I've found it necessary to use the "Hodgepodge" method. But it has been incredibly helpful to have the Mike Lardy TRT books and dvds as a backbone structure for my training plan. Thanks to the TRT materials and modifications, my dog got two Senior Hunt Test ribbons at 18 mos. We went a little down hill after that with our blinds, but she is back better than ever on the whistle and taking casts. It's a great program, but I think anyone not using the core force and compulsion methods will need to really watch the dog and change course here and there to get success.
 
#12 · (Edited)
Hmm the idea of programs is relatively new, and I hazard to say any professional trainer and most knowledgeable amateurs over here, has his own hodgepodge of methods incorporating a bit of this a bit of that; no-one uses everything out of every program. They use what works for their dog. Now can a great retriever be made without an e-collar? Of course it can but it's harder and takes longer. Most of us stopped riding horses and bought cars at some point ;). Can a dog be a great retriever without FF, maybe but I'd hazard to say everyone teaches their dog that fetch means pick this up and hold it; then enforces the command (which without all the bells and whistles is forcing a fetch) ;). Rex Carr was one of the first to teach others a method, most later trainers who developed programs used his teaching as they learned from him. To find the non-e-collar based methods you have to go back further, and I don't know of any that were actually written down, verses being passed from trainer to trainer (Most trainers I know HATE writing things down). The e-collar took over, and while some trainers still know those methods, I don't think they get passed on or utilized as widely anymore...
 
#13 ·
Hmm the idea of programs is relatively new, and I hazard to say any professional trainer and most knowledgeable amateurs over here, has his own hodgepodge of methods incorporating a bit of this a bit of that; no-one uses everything out of every program. They use what works for their dog. Now can a great retriever be made without an e-collar? Of course it can but it's harder and takes longer. Most of us stopped riding horses and bought cars at some point ;). Can a dog be a great retriever without FF, maybe but I'd hazard to say everyone teaches their dog that fetch means pick this up and hold it; then enforces the command (which without all the bells and whistles is forcing a fetch) ;). Rex Carr was one of the first to teach others a method, most later trainer developed programs from his teaching as they learned it from him. To find the non-e-collar based methods you have to go back further, and I don't know of any that were actually written down, verses being passed from trainer to trainer (Most trainers I know HATE writing things down). The e-collar took over, and while some trainers still know those methods, I don't think they get passed on or utilized as widely anymore.
I started with my first dog in 1979, I didn't know anybody, had never heard of a pro trainer and had no idea how to train my dog, so I went to my local library and looked up any books they had on the subject. I found two, James Lamb Free's book and Richard Wolter's Water Dog. I hate to admit it now, but Wolter's book worked fine for what I needed and gave me more insight into retrievers than I had before. I had moved to Montana when I got my next dog, so had a few more resources, but even though I trained with a good amateur and later a pro, we didn't use the word "program", I just trained day by day doing what these guys said to do. The reality is that I was following a program, we just didn't call it that. I didn't use that word until the Lardy video tapes came out, after that there was more structure in our training. Now you have competing programs and variations of programs, kind of like the West Coast offense coaching tree. Everybody wants to now what program you are following.
 
#14 ·
I have a silly question for the UK folk. OK can't use the collar. I get it, but why can we not "force fetch" (I hate the term because it's really incorrect) a dog? There are multiple methods and tools that could be put to use to get the same result. Might take a tad longer but would produce reliable results.
 
#15 ·
I wonder this as well, the e-collar is only used in the last proofing portion of FF, and that is more about transitioning from a close up (physical-manual) pressure to collar pressure (for later e-collar use). It doesn't have anything to do with producing a reliable retrieve it's just another method to enforce the command. Fetch
 
#18 ·
I'm afraid I can't agree with you on that one! ;-)
Obviously it depends on your definition of 'advanced', but I would consider our retrievers running at the International Gundog League Retriever Championships to be fairly 'advanced', and I don't think there is one amongst them that has been trained on an e-collar or force fetched.....
 
#28 ·
Oh and BTW to answer your question. If you have a dog that will reliably go when sent, fetch and deliver to hand, you can use any of the Carr based programs (Lardy/Smartworks etc.) to teach the skills. All the program does is outline the steps involved in a logical teaching progression. That part is not dependent at all on the use of the collar nor the "force fetching" process. You would simply skip those steps and do the drills in whatever order is called for.

But.. whatyagonnado when he stops fetching?
 
#29 ·
Maiden,

I train similarly to your methods over there, based on some of the "celebrity" dvd's and spending time with friends from over there. It seems that there is a large push on RTF for young trainers to be on a program, and I understand the reasoning. If you are doing collar conditioning and FF, you can't just hodgepodge that. There is a very structured, systematic approach to make sure you achieve success in your dog. If you do not follow the steps, the use of the collar may be unclear and, even worse, harmful to the dogs progress. As useful as a collar can be, they can be detrimental to a dog if used improperly. A solid program, particularly for a collar trained dog, is essential in allowing a trainer to track progression and not "skip" any essentials to a Carr based system.

As far as your type training, these programs can be very helpful in giving you new ideas for drills and lessons to teach new skills or the same skills in a new way. I have solidified my "method" based on how I prefer to train a dog, but it is certainly much more organic than one of the dvd program's mentioned above. We have certain "goal's" in certain skill-sets, once we achieve those goals we move forward. As we progress, new skill sets are added. What used to be hodgepodge has become mostly systematic, but far less systematic than a program.
 
#33 ·
km - as has been already mentioned, most of the US based programmes can be used without e collars. To me, the major strength of the US approach is their disciplined step by step approach to training. The drills are fantastic as is the emphasis on keeping things simple and backing up when things get too confusing for the dog - ie simplify!. Carol Cassidy for instance has a book on training a retriever - drills and more. All of which can be done without a collar. Re FF - long before I had ever heard of US systems there was something called the trained retrieve which was all about holding and fetching from hand, etc. Very similar to FF but without the ear pinch. I have had a lot of success now with my dogs - the last three trained using US drills/programmes and would never go any other way.

Some people here seem very quick to use the collar but the better trainers always emphasise the teaching rather than correcting! The correction comes later and relatively seldom with a well trained dog.
 
#36 ·
Thanks everyone for all your useful input. Like I said at the outset, we will probably have to agree to disagree on the use of FF and e-collar. Those are just not 'tools' that I would use, but the structured approach and drills is certainly something that we could encompass in our training a lot more.

I know the differences in our games, particularly when it comes to retrieving over water and use of nose vs eyes, but there are also I believe some fundamental differences in our dogs too. The dogs I work with have biddability in spades, in addition to their desire to retrieve. So, whereas there are a lot of dogs out there that have a huge amount of desire and drive, many of them can be quite self-motivated in that they are doing it for their own love (and I guess this is where you try and square that off with FF? so they do it for you instead of themselves?). These are not the sort of dogs I want to work with. I prefer the ones that are just trying everything to please you (although I am aware of all the literature that says dogs largely act to please themselves...). I'm trying not to fall into the cliché of saying all your dogs are hard-going, headstrong, 'head bangers'!!! LOL but what I am saying is that I believe that some of ours are very much 'softer' and more biddable, quiet and steady, via years of selective breeding. They are triers and aiming to please, and when things do go wrong a quick sharp tone of the voice is really enough to register a 'correction'.

Thanks for all your thoughts. I've found a copy of Smartworks, which I had forgotten I had on my shelf. So, am going to read through that (I already have that Carol Cassidy drill book, which is useful) and try and motivate myself to take a more structured approach to the training of my youngster for the new year.... Happy Training!
 
#34 ·
Some people here seem very quick to use the collar but the better trainers always emphasise the teaching rather than correcting! The correction comes later and relatively seldom with a well trained dog.

Oh, absolutely! It is unfair to pressure (or punish) a dog for things you've not taught. And dogs seem to have a strong sense of right/wrong, fair/unfair. Maybe that's an anthropomorphism but I believe it strongly. In any event, it's just stupid and destructive to punish when you haven't taught.
 
#43 ·
Good discussion, Kennel Maiden. Please don't take the biased comments personally. It happens when people are passionate about what works for them. And admire you for trying to get organized and more structured for the new year! I'm doing the same and it's a fun project.

I'm glad you have had so much success in the past and I know exactly what you mean about the sharp tone being enough.

Renee, there are some dogs who are born wanting to follow and be good little pack members, more than others. My dog is like this and has made long eye contact with people since she was 7 weeks old or younger. Any slight body movement or different tone, immediately gets her attention and gets her thinking of how to please. It's not that they associate it with something harsh or punitive, it's that they are instinctually sensitive to the difference.
 
#46 · (Edited)
British, Irish, American, Chinese and Indian; they are all just Labs, they are the most versatile dog in the world, and they all have come from the same foundation stock as such they all have the same capabilities to succeed in any venue in any country, selective breeding for certain traits or not. Most of all and what we often fail to remember as we continuously clump these dogs, as being show (pretty yet slow), British(calm and stoic), American Field (Driven and Hard), is that every dog is an individual, every dog has some excellent traits and some that need work, No Perfect dog for any venue was ever born perfect, they were born with potential; the overall inherit versatility of the Labrador breed, and a few extra quirks from their parents. However we fail to realize our part in all of this, we see certain dogs in certain venues, because we ourselves take that potential and develop certain traits. We utilize methods that empathize this over that, to place a dog in a mold of what it should be to succeed in our chosen venue and we often remove individual dogs that don't fit that mold. Yet the lines still cross back and forth and they still all trace back to that foundation stock.

What it all comes down to, I've trained American Field (some are hard and driven, most are normal labs), I've trained a few imports,(some are calm, but they also have the potential to be maniacs, most are normal labs), I've trained show (some are slow with no instinct, most are just normal labs, which were never been developed toward the sport side). Point of it is you want a lab for your venue you buy a puppy from that stock (stack the odds a bit), but we do the Breed and the Keepers of the Breed an Extreme Disservice clumping dogs as being this or that. They are still all Labradors, they were developed for versatility, spectacular dogs for any venue can come from anywhere. That's the Point of having a Lab.

There's Something to be said of a breed where, Joe-Blow with no real dog experience (aka Me starting out); can take a $200 penny-saver Labrador bitch, train her on the weekends (with Water-Dog ;)). Go out and run these HT< FT<OB<A thingies, hunt-track (birds, deer, people) Retrieve (rabbits, decoys, & beer). The dog is very capable and very happy to of do whatever is asked, sleeps on the couch, and rides in the passenger seat the other ~90% of the time.
 
#47 ·
Hunt'Em Up - the show and working labs in the UK are now so widely polarised they are almost two separate breeds! So, selective breeding really has taken it's toll. A few are trying for a 'dual purpose' lab again, but are not really attaining that goal. The last time there was a dual champion in this country for labs was half a century or more ago I believe? So, I don't agree a lab is a lab any more I am afraid. You couldn't take a UK show champion lab and put it into the field, and expect it to do anything purposeful. It would likely have a hard attack, and certainly wouldn't be jumping over anything. Likewise, some of our whippety, slim labs would just be laughed at in the show ring! So, I do believe we have moulded the breed for our own purposes. Otherwise we wouldn't all be seeking those special sires/dams to breed from. And the way you have moulded the breed for your game over there, I would contend, is somewhat different to how we are moulding the breed for our game over here. Of course it is. We are selecting the desirable traits for what we want in 'our' breed, be that looks, temperament or trainability...
 
#51 ·
Hunt'Em Up - the show and working labs in the UK are now so widely polarised they are almost two separate breeds! So, selective breeding really has taken it's toll. A few are trying for a 'dual purpose' lab again, but are not really attaining that goal. The last time there was a dual champion in this country for labs was half a century or more ago I believe? So, I don't agree a lab is a lab any more I am afraid. You couldn't take a UK show champion lab and put it into the field, and expect it to do anything purposeful. It would likely have a hard attack, and certainly wouldn't be jumping over anything. Likewise, some of our whippety, slim labs would just be laughed at in the show ring! So, I do believe we have moulded the breed for our own purposes. Otherwise we wouldn't all be seeking those special sires/dams to breed from. And the way you have moulded the breed for your game over there, I would contend, is somewhat different to how we are moulding the breed for our game over here. Of course it is. We are selecting the desirable traits for what we want in 'our' breed, be that looks, temperament or trainability...
That is sad to hear. I thought only the US had messed that up!
 
#49 ·
If it is true that the harsh voice or slight body language clearly etc. etc. is effective, then one could use that instead of the nick from the ecollar to communicate with the dog. Where Lardy nicks his dog, for example, just give yours the evil eye, and you would have the same result.
 
#50 ·
Hey Kennel Maiden

In case you've not heard or read it yet, I'll repeat an old saying. The first time I ever saw it in print online, it was typed by my fingers.

(although frankly, I probably heard it, or something like it, from someone else while training years ago)

Question: What's the one thing two dog trainers are nearly sure to agree upon?
Answer: That the third guy they're talking about is doing something wrong with his training.

I have found that generally, you UK folks are masters at polite disagreement. Some of us North Americans....not so much.
 
#52 ·
I agree with you all !:D
For what it's worth KM ,and coming back to your original post. I believe we (uk) do have programs ,but probably better described as a 'Process' or 'Processes' that (we) as trainer/handlers follow,and if each part of the process is not completed then we don't proceed to the next Level.
So there is a Program! and it is usually unilateral following all the basics and yard work that is done on both sides of the pond and beyond!...For those that persue 'competition' This Process/Program takes off in a tangent to suit and follow the rules ,regulations and standards for the competitions We are involved with.

There are some dogs that just don't fit' into (our program/process) in the UK ! That's why there are so many moved on as 'Not suitable for trialling?,So (we) can't say that (we) have the breeding right!

There are also many in the US that are moved in the same fasion ,and that may be due to the 'program' that the dog is on with whatever handler?.

In the 35 years I have been involved with Retrievers ,I know one certain thing ''None of them get up in the morning and decide they are gonna get this drill wrong! and none of them get up in the morning and decide they are gonna get this drill right!''....

Over the last 5-6 years I have learned from friends/colleagues in the US to incorporate many of the practices in Retriever training which has helped me to become a more 'systematic' and precise handler,and I can assure our friends accross the water that there are CC and FF ,and FTP methods used for Retriever training in the UK. (we) just ain't got Swim By yet;).Probably because It's not a priority ''Yet''?

KM ,I believe is a positive trainer but not the puritanical version that is normally associated with the term,but Positive in the way that if the dog is already doing what you want 'Then why tell it'. She also operates at the highest level of competition. Now I however have the enviable task of working with all them dogs and owners who get the 'NOT SO GOOD' :D

Like Chris said/quoted, Yea! , But there is common ground somewhere!? Jeezus! All mine are now cast off with a left hand! and they now do Right and left hand heeling!.....A few handlesrs I seen on the second day at The IGL Championships are doing the same ;)

Now KM , You must come up here to the frozen tundra again,I know you like Scotland,lets do some training on straight line blinds across 5 bodies of water with a few distractions on the way ;)
BTW, These Mericans are not all bad! They just shout alot! :D
 
#57 ·
In the UK ,Eric Begbie ''tried to do a spreadsheet thing'' that according to some was a bit clinical and never allowed for the indivisual, and the Gundog club uk tried to almost make thier so called program a 'patent' ?,which wanted money for a run down on yard drills that could be found in the childrens library section I hear?.

Opportunity exists for an experienced Collar trainer from the US To 'Show us the way'? ;)
 
#60 ·
Renee, it's true my dog does know that when I say "no" it means I want her to stop doing what she's doing. I've even said it pretty sternly at times when I catch her eating cat poop in the woods. But I've never hit her or paired the word "No" with any physical aversive, chase down or other such threat. There are other dogs at my kennel business who hear my stern "No" and could care less. Some dogs are more sensitive and responsive than others. Some are born to lead and others to follow. My current prospect (Flyer) is super sensitive and responsive. My older washout show golden (Buck) acts deaf if I want to redirect his behavior. Not very sensitive or responsive. I'm not a good enough trainer to make much out of Buck, but I think Flyer is going to help me quite a bit!
 
#62 ·
My older dog could care a less what I said to him or in what tone I said it to him. The difference between he and my 4 yo is like night and day. The 4yo is very responsive to the tone of my voice. Like you say some dogs are more sensitive and responsive than others. Having dogs is fun! Reading them is even more fun!:)
 
#64 ·
Then why could I scream at my one beagle till Im blue in the face and she just keeps wagging and being silly but all I have to say to my other beagle is "Daizy what is this?" in a normal soft tone and she pees all over the floor and looks guilty. Both beagles were trained the same way, with the same commands and phrases used.

What causes this difference? Because beagle number 1 has proved a challenged to house break (and train in general) dispute the fact she is FC x FC for like 4 or 5 generations bred. The other beagle is a granddaughter of a SPOFC but otherwise an amish bred meat dawg.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top