Its been a few months since I've posted anything as have been away. The last time I was having problems with my young dog dropping dummies to shake coming out of water. Thanks to some useful tips the problem has been sorted. We've now reached the stage in our training that distance control is needed.Am blowing stop whistle , and whereas he will listen when nearby , if he further away and I blow him up he keeps coming in. How can I stop this problem?

Need more information to give a solid opinion!
How do you enforce the sit command?
What were the conditions? Running water ,tall grass, windy ? etc....

In the above stated conditions a dog wouldn't hear the whistle. Always determine if your whistle can be heard from the distances you train at.

When its windy blow your whistle into the wind, otherwise the sound won't penetrate.

Make sure all of these factors are considered before any corrections are given!

Good luck with your training!

Malcolm

Whatever method you use to enforce commands and improve reliability, it's important to increase distance gradually. If you find the distance inside which he's close to 100% reliable, start having some (not all) of his retrieves maybe 20% beyond that. Or his sit whistles, if that's the issue. As his reliability at the new distance improves, increase distance a bit more, always including some easier practice at less than his maximum distance. Etc.

Jumping from close-in work to far-off work can really confuse a dog.

Amy Dahl

Thanks Amy, thats helpful. I think I have a habit of skipping too far ahead. Sometimes it takes somebody else to nudge you back a step. M

Here are a few video clips showing a bit more positive method of getting whistle stopping.

Rufus gets reinforcements for whistle stops
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkk4q02VqDI

Rufus gets high value reinforce (tennis ball) for stopping on way to dummy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nB9VkpQ3LEU

Rufus casts away from short diversion marks to long unseen fall
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX06eaVQLcU

Rufus handles away from short diversion marks to long unseen fall with shots added to increase distraction level
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3qeXEiMMKs


Best Regards,
Robert Milner

Thanks Robert,very insightful. It makes training look like fun for my dog. Can't wait to try..
Regards Mary

Robert, tried the tennis ball motivation today. Laid out a mark as per your video and sent my dog. Once he was on his way blew the stop whistle and immediately when he turned he got the tennis ball. When i repeated the exercise it was an even faster response. Thanks a mil. Mary

... And I had a go with Kes in my lunchbreak at work! Thanks
Sue

Robert you will probably take offense but I did not like your training method for sit on blinds. Your dog popped and in one case he never sat and you gave him a back. Those distances are short enough even if you don't use a collar to get your point across real fast. Sit on blinds is a matter of control and I am having the same problem at long distances. Very frustration but Amy I think you hit the nail on the head.

Robert you did not communication to dog and were just throwing fun bumpers waving your hand. I saw potential habits that are going to make life more difficult. I know I'm the bad guy. But that's how I see it.

Mike
Maybe you are being a tad grumpy? When someone has a problem in training, this site is a great place to get new ideas and support. It's up to each of us to choose what works for us and our dogs. Personally, I'm willing to try anything twice.
Sue

Not looking for the level of perfection you're looking for Mike. Just want want my dog to be able to understand what I want from him if I've a bird down in the middle of the Shannon and floating towards the Atlantic..

Mike,
I don't require my dogs to sit on a stop whistle. Some dogs choose to, some don't. Either way it does not affect the completion of a blind retrieve.
The tennis ball method does produce some popping, which frankly doesn't bother me. I like for my gundogs to pop occasionally. It shows they are trying to cooperate.
In any event, dogs will quit doing things that don't pay. If you don't pay the popping, it gradually dissappears.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Robert Milner,

I'm sorry to say and I should not really respond but a dog that doesn't sit on a tot means you have no control from a distance and it leads to other problems such as remote casts or poor direction from a cast. Popping doesn't go away once started. Popping in my opinion does not show cooperation it shows lack of confidence. You are a half a step from using a can of pepples. My first dog before I got involved in the game did blinds with a can of pepples. I have had dogs not sit and have had them do remotes. right now I'm and not getting out of a 2nd series because of lack of control on long blinds. DOESN'T SIT. THINKS HE KNOWS BETTER. POPPING YOUR OUT EVEN THOUGH A MINOR MISTAKE. Don't have popping don't want popping.

You guys are talking about training two different types of dogs, gundog vs trial dog. There are quicker easier ways to train gundogs then a trial dog but these methods leave holes in the foundation and if you decide to go on to hunt test or field trials you will spend a lot of time going back and patching holes. If all you want is a good meat dog Roberts methods are pretty good, there simple low pressure methods, they are not designed for the person running FT or HT in my opinion. 90% of retriever owners will never run a ht or ft. Different training method for a different game.

" The reader who is contemplating his first training job may feel he must hang upon each word read and follow. I would much rather that he think... in terms of methods suggested and then patiently to go about the training task making logical adaptations to his own situation.
The old-timer will more likely compare my experiences with his own and in places feel that his own methods are better or that an idea or two here and there is worth trying."

Dave Elliot " Training Gun Dogs To Retrieve" copyright 1952

Nothing has changed!

Tim

quote:

The old-timer will more likely compare my experiences with his own and in places feel that his own methods are better or that an idea or two here and there is worth trying

This is right on--but there is another element. It is not only your methods or mine, it is also what methods might be best for this particular dog? They're not all the same. I have a new pup coming. What methods I will use to train her will depend on what I see from day to day as we set to work training.

Tom,
I agree with your thoughts on no two dogs being the same.
The dog I referred to in my original post is 'Bertie', coming along nicely and well able to cope with me ' trying out', different methods;
I also have his brother who is the other end of the spectrum and has to be taken along one tiny step at a time, very soft, folds completely if any pressure is put on him but is a pleaser and responds very well to gentler methods of training.
I think thats why there are so many successful trainers because each one brings something different to the table.It's the dog owner's responsibilty to know their dog well enough to choose which methods suit the dog best and not the other way round.

But there is a huge difference between the reality of "1952" and "2009" and that is technology. We can do a lot more with the sensitive dogs wth greater efficiency than ever before but it is personal choice whether or not to employ those methods. Also, a variety of information is available at your fingertips with the Internet instead of going to your local library hoping to find the publication you might need.

This thread reminds me of many years ago training with Tom Berger in the early 80's when he first moved to CO. Springs from Minnesota. His brother was Phil Berger (FC/AFC Big River Dago) and he was the son of Tony Berger. Old time, successful non-collar training methods from a successful retriever training family and Tom was a really nice guy. I enjoyed his company and his knowledge immensely. On the other hand, I also trained with Cherylon Loveland and a host of other FC/AFC Labs that were out of the Rex Carr camp in Ft. Collins. The decision for me was real easy, I wanted Chespeakes that ran with lots of style, stopped with precision and handled accurately. And for me, there was no comparison when comparing the different training methods of that time.

But how your achieve your personal goals with your dog is still an individual choice.

Keith

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Keith Carlson,

quote:

Originally posted by Keith Carlson:

This thread reminds me of many years ago training with Tom Berger... Old time, successful non-collar training methods... On the other hand, I also trained with Cherylon Loveland and a host of other FC/AFC Labs that were out of the Rex Carr camp in Ft. Collins. The decision for me was real easy, I wanted Chespeakes that ran with lots of style, stopped with precision and handled accurately. And for me, there was no comparison when comparing the different training methods of that time.


Keith

Keith, that is exactly the point. You have a background that allows you to evaluate and utilize alternative methods. I too value the fact that I first learned to train without a transmitter. Technology has allowed us to train more humanely and with greater precision but as anyone who has ever trained more than 1 dog knows, they don't all learn and behave the same. There are certain times with many dogs when the "program" doesn't work. So we look to alternatives old and new.

Tim

Hey Keith the guy I bought the kennel from Pete Fischer, worked for the Berger's when they trained out of Del-tone kennels in St. Cloud MN. Are any of the Bergers still running dogs?