No bad habits from the start or let them develop?

[Pippin's person]

Great thread--I'm guessing Kristen's experience is common? Do new handlers start out more typically in the "A" camp (maybe because of less certainty of what's supposed to happen with the sheep--sort of "at least I can make my dog do what I say, so maybe I'm not a complete baffoon"?) and then move to the "B" camp as they gain more understanding and ability to read sheep and dogs themselves?

 

For those of you in the "B" camp--did you start out more in the "A" camp and change or did you always feel more like a "B"?

[Sue R]

A number of things that Kristen mentioned made me think of myself (and other novices).

 

I think real novices come in two styles - the kind that think that anything their dog does around stock is great and an indication of real inherent stock ability and talent, and the kind that want and expect to see perfection from the get-go. I'm not sure that it isn't until sometime later (maybe a long sometime later) that they get the idea of whether or not they are an A or a B.

 

I think it takes some time and experience to be able to "let go" enough to be a B - to be able to let the dog make a mistake without yelling or panicking or going ballistic; to make a correction and give the dog a chance to respond rather than to try and make the dog right; and to have the patience to realize that each dog will progress at its own rate, recognize steps in the right direction, and give each dog the time and opportunity it needs to fulfill its potential.

 

That said, I am an abysmal handler who is struggling to be the handler that can help my dogs and not hinder them in their progress. It's often disheartening and I am very thankful that the dogs are forgiving and have the desire to work in spite of my shortcomings.

[bexie]

In stockdog training, with the "let them develop" school of thought, you're letting the dog try to find that natural skill and hoping like heck it's in there. But if it's not, you can't bring it out or let it develop - the seed isn't there.

 

Thank you. I sorta knew this in my head, but it is definitely a good point to mention. You're right. I can teach Molly to do a ton of SD tasks with a clicker--a lot she is really good at because she _can_ think and learn and figure out how to read the situation and my needs, others are just doing as told and making me happy. But if she is ever to work stock, all that can be done is to polish her natural skill and instincts.

 

But I think part of why clicker training is working so well is that BCs have that instinct to work with a handler and please that handler. It's bred into them because it didn't help to have a dog that was a great herder if it didn't want to do what you wanted to do. So in a way, clicker training needs that seed of wanting to please, even if it does push the dog off in oddball directions. Also you usually start with something natural to the dog even if you develop it further.

 

Molly emptying the washing machine for me may seem like a totally foreign concept, but really it's just built on her natural desire to fetch things and gather them up. Helping me undress is a fancy game of tug...

 

Sorry, maybe a little off topic, but I wanted to explain the point. I'm sure a dog could to be taught to respond to commands around a herd of sheep with clicker training--isn't that how the AKC holds herding tests for barbie collies? But that doesn't teach the dog to read and balance the flock like a real BC does. It would instead depend on the handler's ability to read the stock and convey enough information to the dog, something useless in the real world, but maybe good enough to get by on well-broke sheep with a basic course you can see all of.

[Smokjbc]

Great thread--I'm guessing Kristen's experience is common? Do new handlers start out more typically in the "A" camp (maybe because of less certainty of what's supposed to happen with the sheep--sort of "at least I can make my dog do what I say, so maybe I'm not a complete baffoon"?) and then move to the "B" camp as they gain more understanding and ability to read sheep and dogs themselves?

 

For those of you in the "B" camp--did you start out more in the "A" camp and change or did you always feel more like a "B"?

 

 

I started in the negative F minus camp- completely clueless, very little help and a very pressure sensitive dog. The training techniques I used for my first two dogs was more "A" type though- lots of circles, very mechanical type drilling, alot of pushing out, etc. My first dog was a disaster but luckily my second dog was not too tolerant of the drilling but had enough natural talent that I smartened up and left her alone. Maybe left her alone a little too much, as she was never very flexible but she did teach me alot about what the dog can bring to the table and I always look for that natural ability to read stock now.

 

I don't have the patience to be the "A" type- I hate having to micromanage the dog and 14 years after my first border collie was born, I still just think most of what my dogs' do is "so coool" that I tend to let them be themselves so long as they aren't breaking any major sins. If I look at most of my dogs' bad habits, they are almost all because I didn't train them right in that area or handled them poorly through something I should have helped them out with. Or a result of having too many dang dog broke, comatose sheep (very nice sheep but sllllooowww) but not quite equipped facility wise to handle anything a bit on the wild side.

[stockdogranch]

Do new handlers start out more typically in the "A" camp (maybe because of less certainty of what's supposed to happen with the sheep--sort of "at least I can make my dog do what I say, so maybe I'm not a complete baffoon"?) and then move to the "B" camp as they gain more understanding and ability to read sheep and dogs themselves?

 

I think that may be the case. It was for me because that's how I was taught. But as I started working more on my own, and with a number of different dogs, I soon realized that I needed a different approach, as the "make it" school didn't work for every dog. And that style also wasn't me. So over the years, I evolved more and more into the B style. When I started working cattle, the A program just really didn't fit, either (I think (generally speaking) you can get away with micromanaging on sheep moreso than on cattle), and that may have also contributed to my evolution towards B,

 

A

[bcnewe2]

Do new handlers start out more typically in the "A" camp (maybe because of less certainty of what's supposed to happen with the sheep--sort of "at least I can make my dog do what I say, so maybe I'm not a complete baffoon"?) and then move to the "B" camp as they gain more understanding and ability to read sheep and dogs themselves?

 

I think so.

That doesn't mean type B doesn't make the dog behave....like blowing off the handler totally. There is a fine line to keeping all that intstinct working for you or you working against it.

It's the journey we need to enjoy...evolving all the time.

 

Kristen

[juliepoudrier]

For those of you in the "B" camp--did you start out more in the "A" camp and change or did you always feel more like a "B"?

I think I was always more inclined to the "B" camp. But then I think a lot depends on who you have mentoring you and also especially on your own personality and life experiences coming in to it. The first dog I started with was a rescue and the second dog was one who required a lot of finessing around the trial course (by finessing I mean handling around his issues) so I was maybe somewhat "forced" from the start to be a person who didn't try to train a dog through micromanagement (to clarify, the second dog required managing for very specific issues, namely brought about by lack of confidence, but that wasn't the same as micromanaging and expecting perfection at every step) since neither dog would have thrived under that sort of handling. My third dog was Twist and she was so natural from the start that it just reinforced my "leave 'em alone" foundation (although I can look back now and see where I made mistakes in training, I think those mistakes were fewer by virtue of the fact that I was more laissez-faire to start with). She also abhors drilling of any sort (and I personally find it boring), so we just never went there. To be honest, it's entirely possible that my "B camp" attitude was also the result of my knowing that I didn't really know enough to be telling the dog what to do (certainly the case with Twist), and then having my first few dogs being the type who couldn't take that kind of handling (the first two) or didn't need it (Twist) and the propensity toward "B camp" style was born. Had I started out with difficult-to-handle or less natural dogs, maybe I would have started in the "A camp" or been a little more inclined in that direction, but since that way of training really doesn't suit my personality I don't think I would have stayed there long had I gone there.

 

J.

[1sheepdoggal]

I most definitly started out in the camp A, and still have to be reminded to back off, shut my mouth, keep my hands in my pockets, and just let the dog work. Changing camps, has definitly already started to show improvment in my dogs. Its been pretty easy for them to make the transition, once they figured out I wasnt going to stand on them for everything, for me however, its been difficult, and one I stilll need to be reminded of often. Old habits die hard. But I see and understand now, the benifits, so I keep the duck tape close by.

[Denise Wall]

Thanks for all the great responses. I enjoyed reading all of it. I don't really have anything to add that someone else hasn't already said better. I just thought I'd bump the topic up in case people gone for the weekend would like to add anything.

[Liz P]

I've been reading this thread on and off for the last few days. I definitely started out as a micromanager in every aspect of my dogs' training, from basic obedience to stock work. Then people started telling me I had one of my dogs "screwed down too tight" on stock and I took a step back and thought about what I was really doing. They were right, the more I drilled the dog the worse it got.

 

My oldest male was never trialed and never had "formal" training. I couldn't micromanage him, he would never let me and I would never do that to him. He is a great chore dog because he is both powerful, fair and all natural. I just wish I could go back in time and work him more before his body failed him.

 

Right now I've got 2 young dogs I am working on and my goal is to let them come along at their own pace and learn by doing. I don't want to make the same mistakes I have made with other dogs. I'll let you know in a few years how they turn out

[Cynthia P]

I was in the complete non micromanage with my first dog. I think she would be much better if i didn't allow her to be such an independent thinker early on. So that being said, i'm still for letting the dog find the way, but with much more participation by me.

 

Scott Glen said to me once, it's not that they have to lie down, they have to be able to lie down;

 

i'm certainly not a micromanager when we start but i need to be included and i'm much more "A" than i used to be.

 

Cynthia

[Caroline Reichard]

I'm curious about the point of view on "Type A" training in some posts. Is the assumption that Type A training involves making the dog "get it right" from the very start and that this necessarily requires a lot of pressure and force on the dog?

 

I have seen some Type A training techniques which look more like helping a dog get it right from the very beginning rather than making the dog get it right, and you could even say it was less stressful for a dog than a Type B approach since it helped the dog learn quickly how to do what it wanted to do most: control the sheep effectively.

 

And of course once the dog understands how to correctly control the sheep, it gets to be natural because nobody wants a dog that is just a mechanic anymore than they want a dog they are unable to ever stop. I've seen this done w/very little pressure: certainly it didn't require yelling, throwing things, or being mean to dogs.

 

I wonder if it is mean, overbearing training techniques that squash a dog's sense of initiative rather than how much "getting it right" it received in early training. The two don't have to go together.

[PennyT]

I've started and finished seven or eight dogs by now and every time I wonder how it all happened.

 

When I read Denise's initial post, I noticed that, like the mechanical vs natural debate, the question was posed so that it is loaded in favor of answer b.

 

For me, the choice has to be in favor of letting the dog develop because I have yet to figure out how to insist on the dog being right from the get-go. Sure wish I could.

 

As for answer a being the choice of beginning handlers, I don't see how that is possible because almost no one knows what they are after when starting out.

 

Penny

[Denise Wall]

When I read Denise's initial post, I noticed that, like the mechanical vs natural debate, the question was posed so that it is loaded in favor of answer b.

 

 

How so Penny? Because I stated my normal preference? I want to examine my beliefs. I really want to hear both sides.

 

I think both ways can produce good dogs. I've seen it. So have you.

[bcnewe2]

As for answer a being the choice of beginning handlers, I don't see how that is possible because almost no one knows what they are after when starting out.

That is the answer and the question. When I started out I thought it was all in the training of the dog. I didn't get the "natural" part. I thought it was like driving a car. Go left, right and straight ahead. I didn't have a clue to what all was going on so it left me with thinking it was all in the "handling" or training of the dog....as in mechanical.

 

I think I might have misread the starting post or misinterpreted it. I use both A and B. But I was way more A in the beginning because I didn't understand anything else. Now that B is present in my mind, I find it much easier to not fight the dog but to help him "feel" what it is I want him to do. In the beginning I didn't know there'd be so much "feelings" in the work.

 

I think there are way more camps than A or B and we're lumping them in one of the 2 for this discussion. I might call it mechanical vs. natural when I first started posting in this thread. And I don't think most of the A campers are saying they're mechanical unless they are beginners....could be wrong...won't be the first or the last time that happens.

 

K~