Erny

LOL .... it's a habit for my 'touch type fingers' - my name ends in "i" so I'm kind of used to doing that. Sorry. I've edited mine if you would edit my quote within your post . Don't want to be in bit trouble with no Sibe people .

When I'm working with dogs who have prior learning of slow recalls, distance recall can often be useful to grab the opportunity to reinforce for the speed. Then I begin working with them to teach some speed even at more close up distances. I think I have a video clip of Mandela doing a short recall and if memory serves me correctly, it is pretty fast for a short recall. If I can find it, and if I can work out how to upload to YouTube and then link it, I will. <sigh> .... I have lousy computer skills .

Yes I do, except I think the "ish" part plays a big role in the difference between them and the other of the breeds we talk about. I've heard that of the Husky as well. I'd still be interested to know WHAT methods have been tried and tested by any person who claims a 100% recall can't be achieved for those breeds. I know what you mean about safety though. As I've mentioned, my boy has tremendous recall and this is something I am immensley proud of. He's a full on dog and runs like the wind. I wouldn't like to be in a smallish unfenced area off lead, one reason being is that in the one or two seconds it takes for my brain to register he is off (and of course, I might have blinked away for one of those seconds) and then I have to draw breath to recall, he has covered sooooo much ground. With development, it's not quite as lightening fast as it was when he was a bit younger, but it is fast. So I like space, because it gives me a bit more response time. And of course, I'm not really a risk taker for unnecessary reasons that carry nil to next-to-nil benefit to either myself or my dog. So there's no need to push it. But I train for it whenever and wherever possible, for the "just in case of the unexpecteds" that might happen. As I think JulesP said .... how would we know 100% until it was something we could look on with the advantage of hindsight. BUT, for all that us mere mortals can only imagine as reasonable expectations, I still do believe 100% recall is possible, no matter the breed.

The other thing to consider in this "is it possible" line of thought that we are in, is whether our answers are really based on what we know/have experienced, or on what we've tried (or more particularly, haven't tried). That's a bit double-dutch, I'm sorry. To clarify - I agree that some breeds and then some individuals within breeds are more difficult (less biddable) to train than others. But if any of us (including myself) were to say "this xxx breed can't be taught 100% reliable recall" (and this has been said of the Huski, for example) then I think we need to ask ourselves "is that because we're right, or is it only because we haven't used a technique that works for that dog?" Which leads me to a next question. Is everyone's interpretation of "100%" also based on (manner of speaking only) .... "every day average" training techniques (example only : I give my dog food when he gets back). My apologies - now THAT (ie "everyday average") does sound lacking in humility, but isn't intended to be. Or are those who say that 100% (under circumstances that can at least be within reason expected .... for example, my dog isn't proofed to recalling in the presence of a dinosaur) cannot be attained, are meaning that it cannot be attained no matter the method (assuming reasonable humane methods). Note : If there was the presence of a dinosaur, I don't think my dog would need to recall ..... I think I would be running so fast myself I'd be overtaking him. Note : I know that I risk the chance of opening up yet another can of worms by the use of the word "humane". I don't mean for that to become a discussion over split hairs .

Only if everyone wears their DOL names, otherwise I wouldn't have a clue who was who!! Please - tell me what you're after, what you want, what you need and for how long. (Be realistic, please ). Are each of you wanting the whole course to yourself for (eg) a whole hour? Or is it a shorter while? Or longer? Or is it only for part of a course (where another one might be able to share)? I'm just not sure of expectations. Until I know them, I won't know if I can meet them.

There's been a couple of mentions of some person/s posting without "humility". I have posted that I do believe a 100% reliable recall can be trained for (with the disclaimer that I think "100%" needs some definition clarified and that I am taking it to mean the usual things we come across in our day to day lives around and with our dogs). Is it myself that yourself and Diva who believe I am lacking in humility?

It sounds like a good idea to have small and large dog areas. I would be happy with that Two sides to that coin. I agree that people just want to (and should be able to) enjoy the freedom of peace, quiet and relative safety when their out (with or without their dogs). I also work hard at not subjecting my dogs to undesirable fate at the hands of other people whom, without knowing them and their dogs, I can only assume (for safety reasons) that they and their dog/s are not likely to be friendly and/or responsible/knowledgeable dog-owners. The sad part is that everything we do in life with our dogs (and even everything about our restrictive dog laws) seems to be about avoidance, avoidance, avoidance. The more we avoid; the more we place bans on things our dogs can/can't do, the less life experiences they get and therefore the less likely that they will have the opportunity to be well-balanced, sensitive dogs, learning to be aware and exhibit self-control. If we could scrap half of our dog laws, start over and raise our dogs in an environment as they do in the UK, we would find our dogs to be far more calm and less reactive to others (regardless of size) and we'd also find the dog-owners themselves exhibiting being more in touch with instinctive dog-handling/training/behaviour attributes than what we are achieving here. As it is, with every law/regulation/by-law that comes in, we're getting further and further away from this possibility. And all of this started with irresponsible/disrespectful dog-owners. It's a vicious cycle we have got ourselves caught in.

There are lots of way to work for and attain a reliable recall. The "best" way is what works with the dog, taking into account individuality; prior experiences the dog has had; the intensity of distraction; etc. There is no "one-way" or "best-way" IMO. It's a matter of combinations/alternatives that suit the situation and knowing the dog. One thing that is and IMO should be a constant and that is a reward (whether it is a reward or not depends on the dog's perception of it at that given moment) at the end. But it is not the ONLY factor. Foundation training and general interactions and respect at home (leadership) is a big part of it as well.

How come it has changed though? We were ALWAYS taught - ask before you touch (and that applied to many things, not just people's pets). Exactly WHEN did common sense fly completely out the window? Exactly WHEN did people stop respecting other people's 'property'? I don't know the answer to "WHEN" but I do believe, whether people have a problem with allowing their children to uninvitedly (wrd?) pat their pets or not, that we need to start educating them to ask. And by educating them, perhaps their parents will begin to learn as well.

because this is not about being at dog shows, but it is about aberrant behaviour from children and parents doing nothing about it. When I was a kid (way back before all of these nanny type laws and people suing for the sheer money making value suing gets them) there was a neighbour who lived across the road. This was also back in the days when everyone in the street was your "neighbour" and you knew them and their kids. The child of this neighbour was a real brat of a kid and the parents never did a thing to stop her. Us kids used to hate it when she came over to 'play' because she was a snivelling, whiney, attention seeker and simply, no fun. My Dad is outside chatting with this child's parent and the child kept hitting him in the stomach. Dad told her several times not to do it. Child's father did nothing. Next time, Dad says "you do that to me one more time and I'm going to pull your hair". Child hits him one more time so Dad gave her hair a good yank. Child goes off crying. Father of child does nothing (keeps chatting). Child never did that again and actually was more respectful generally speaking towards my father. And who knows, maybe it was a lesson in life that she was able to take with her and helped to change the way that she treated others . These days if you retaliated that way, parents would be suing you and authorities would be charging you with child abuse. Please also note that not ever once in our lifetime did my father raise a hand (or voice) to us kids. He is a true gentleman, but he is calm and he is assertive, along with kind, generous and compassionate. Ellz - If I were you I wouldn't be embarrassed by your action. Who knows ..... maybe the experience was lesson enough to have avoided the child being bitten by a dog not quite so tolerant/patient, either later that day or at some other time. But yes, unfortunately today's laws have made it so that responsibility is someone else's job, in the eyes of those who should be responsible but aren't.

Great post. Great insights. Go Julie/MDBA

That's exactly right. The parks aren't labelled "doggy kindergarten".

That's great if that's what you're getting in your recall response Corvus. But I don't understand - in another thread (dog parks) you very much insist that command reliability (effective control) isn't realistic and that you "regularly apologise" to others down at the park. I think it is wonderful if you have achieved the level of reliability in your dogs' recalls you have implied here, but I'm not sure how "reliable" you are talking about above. I don't have to use treats as a reward for recall either. But I do reward my dog in some fashion that he finds satisfying. I've trained him using drive techniques and I've also used the negative reinforcement technique with the aid of the e-collar, which produces a very low annoying (and yes, therefore aversive) but certainly not painful stimulation. His recalls are extraordinary, if I do say so myself - immediate, fast and powerful. The only problem with them is the finish, because he's still coming in too fast and not checking soon enough before he reaches me. We're working on that, but I'd rather have the former than the latter and I don't wish to affect his speed. I hardly ever need to use the e-collar for his recalls anymore, although he's still young and in training, so the e-collar is on him should I require it. The area my boy still needs work on is his 'intensity' when interacting with other dogs and for this I want to use recalls away from other dogs when other dogs are right on him. I can achieve a recall with a (approx) ten foot distance (even if he's the one running full on to them) but if the other dog that might be in the park insists on being right with him, that's our current weak area. We're working on that though and beginning to see signs of improvement. This part of his training relies on other people being responsible and co-operative, and their dogs being of suitable temperament, so I don't often get a chance to work him for this aspect. His recall responses are not just about the e-collar 'cue' either - once he's back I do reward him with whatever is suitable at the time. Sometimes that might be a food treat. Sometimes tug. Sometimes I throw his orbee-ball. It all depends on what the environment allows me to do, what the weather is like (too hot for much running?) and whether he is tiring or not. Mixed in amongst these things is my praise signalling my approval. His other frequent reward is that he'll also be sent off and out again, to do what he wants (sniff etc) so he doesn't cue the recall as end of freedom. I also use the "TOT" exercise - have done so at every meal time since he was 9 weeks old. That equates now to twice a day because that's the feeding schedule he's on. But way back when he was on 4 meals a day and then 3 meals a day, that's how often we practiced "TOT". Recall is just one of the exercises I might put him through during "TOT". I also will take it to another area outside of the home, but it needs to be somewhere that I know other dogs aren't going to help themselves to his food while we're working, so the frequency of that is limited. Not to mention that when it comes to food, if there are other dog distractions where we are, he's not as interested in his food as he would be for the tug. So I don't work "TOT" in outside areas as much. It's also less convenient than the tug anyway. I agree with others that the definition of people's perception of "100%" needs to be clarified. But in general day to day things that we train for, in and around, yes, I think it is possible for the proofed result to give 100% recall response. ETA: The above aside .......... if YOU don't reach for 100%, then your achievement is quite possibly going to be lower than someone who does reach for it, regardless of whether they attain it or not. Why reach for the stars when you can touch the moon?

Is this right? On the odd occasion when my boy was a pup (and when I had nothing else in the cupboard but needed something straight away) I used eucalyptus oil to stop him from chewing on one or two things that he showed inclination to, but were dangerous to him if he did. He hates the smell and therefore it worked as an aversive. I think I've also read where eucalyptus oil can be toxic to dogs. I wonder, therefore, if we should be making them breath it in, especially in such a confined space where the dog can't retreat? ETA: Just asking politely - but can we be a bit judicious about repeating photo's when we hit the "reply" button? I don't think people need to see a photo a dozen times over in the same thread and it would make it quite unnecessarily photo heavy and download cumbersome, not to mention terribly slow for those who might still be on dial-up. It seems to be happening a lot lately and even I have found myself wading through pages for very little in the way of post content, only because the photo's keep getting repeated in each.

That depends on where you live. Most of the parks around me are designated off-lead parks. I'm not complaining about that - I need off-lead areas where I can let my boy stretch out and where I can use distance to train with. But it's not the case where "there are plenty of parks not designated dog parks". I enjoy the fact that we don't have too many of the restrictions in my area of "can't take dog here, can there, not there", but I wish one could rely on the respect and responsibility of others.

Not intending to be the 'thread police' but does everyone always have to keep making a repeat of the same photo every time they reply? It does make the thread unnecessarily photo heavy and that particularly makes it difficult for those on a dial up connection and/or with a limited download.

Perhaps not "remove" but "close"? I think the thread has been very informative for many and would do well to stay.

Ahhh ... I get you. All the details are not quite finalised yet, but we are entertaining the idea that there will those who are in the higher level competition agility sport who would want to just train their own dogs over certain runs/obstacles, to 'fine tune' so to speak. The only thing I haven't yet worked out (because we've been busy working on the class aspect) is how I can do this in a way that will provide agility 'goers' with what they want, but without me needing to pay for the privilege. You see, for each class I pay a ground hire fee and that applies regardless of how many are in the class, be it one or be it six. I also have the instructor's fee to take care of and even though you might be doing your own thing, someone in authority (ie a Pro-K9 representative) will need to be there - if only for insurance purposes. I believe the property owner would want this as well. So for one person, I'm not sure it would work out economical. But these are the 'technicalities' and logistics we still need to work on. It is a service I would like to be able to provide and perhaps if enough people expressed strong interest in it, and gave me some idea of how long they would need on average for their individual 'runs', then I might be able to structure something to suit.

Thank you, Mrs. Rusty Bucket - that information on the "Tech Tread" (or whatever it is - will look it up) is helpful. We're about at the stage of painting the non-slip surfaces now. Dogs can see : red; yellow; green; - at one end of the spectrum, and blue; indigo; violet at the other. But they can't tell the colours within their same groups apart. They tend to show up as different shades of yellow variations (one end) and different shades of violet (other end). All the colours in between come up as different shades of grey. Some of our cross/jump bars are already stripe coloured (left overs from a previous agility era via a past training group). The others, we are yet to colour. We too have used the PVC piping.

Will that be for members only? Or as in hiring out to those outside the club who want access to equipment? Can I just clarify what you mean by your question before I answer please Jess? Are you asking whether one has to train with Pro-K9 Obedience to be able to participate in the Pro-K9 Agility component? The answer to the above is no, you don't have to be a member of one to enjoy the other. There are conditions to this though, and they will relate to what agility experience you already have at a trialling level and that entry to the Pro-K9 Agility 'arm' without going through the Pro-K9 Obedience 'arm' may be subject to an assessment (for which there will be a stand-alone fee). In some instances, there will be a requirement for people to have completed at least the "Foundation Level Course" with the Pro-K9 Obedience component. All we want to do here is to try to make sure that people have sufficient control of their dogs (and the knowledge of handling and control of their dogs) to be able to as safely as can reasonably be expected negotiate the course and participate within the agility group.

Wow! That's great! I have PetPlan and need to lodge another claim. Hope mine is as easy and as speedy as yours was, this time around :p.

I've been on the telephone with the Council person who is familiar with the regulation (and its history). By his verbal accounts, I don't think it is so bad, so long as the Council don't go overboard on its policing unnecessarily. He's going to email me something with it all written out so people can see what it is about. Apparently, the law has been in for 16 years (approx) - it was a law written that included other restrictions. The law was renewed more recently by the amendments to other areas of it. The "1 metre lead" reference, from what I could understand from the phone conversation, was not changed, but this time around, in its renewal, it caught the attention of the news where in the past it did not. It was subsequently, according to Council, then publicised in a way that gave people the wrong impression. Again *apparently*, you CAN have a lead that is more than 1 metre in length but it is about utilising common sense and not allowing your dog to interfere with someone else, so for those environments where the Council thinks common sense might not be applied by some, the law is that there is to be no more than 1 metre's length of lead from the point at which the lead is held to the point at which it attaches to the dog. So, you CAN have a 1.5 metre lead (for example) but fold it up to shorten it to at least no more than 1 metre length where having your dog closer to you might be reasonably expected. It has its flaws, of course, as restrictive laws do. When I am walking my boy (he's tall) down in the busy part of the main street, my lead might only be 6" - 1 foot in length by the time I've shortened it up. Not tight, mind .... it's loose, but it is for when we're moving through *crowds* so to speak. One metre length lead would be too much length in some circumstances. I'll put up a copy of the email I receive once I've got it.

That was really great and yes, many moments of it to bring smiles to my face. I enjoyed every bit of it - a video clip well put together, and I recognise how much training has gone into each one of those dogs for the 'bits' that made up a 'whole'. Whilst I enjoyed watching the whole clip, I especially liked the bit where the Rhodesian Ridgeback (yep, can't help my attention especially being drawn to that) is standing at the shore edge and one of the other dogs (need to go back to recall which one .... a mini-Schnauzer, I think?) comes up behind and seemingly pushes the RR into the water. All of that was such great timing. Thanks for posting that one, Perse.

Ooh .... that's interesting. Do you know what they've revised it to, and where it is written, Sardog? I couldn't find anything on their website about it (no mention of lead length at all). I've rung them and the thoughts there are that the 1 metre lead length regulation still applies, but the actual person who is needed to confirm and clarify is not available to speak with until next week.

Hi tlc. Just to raise a point here, and for the OP's knowledge - vaccinating against CC does not mean a dog won't contract CC. Apart from that, there are so many different strains of CC around.