Starting a dog

[Ooky]

But the result is ultimately the same: making a dog respond to you, not to the sheep. It's Dolores Umbridge instead of Lord Voldemort.

 

That is SO weird - I know I cannot really have any opinion on this that speaks from true experience. But I was trying to imagine starting my dog this way rather than the way I did a few months ago. And I kept thinking it reminded me of when Delores teaches them for a year and doesn't ever allow them to actually do any magic, just read about it.

 

Kathy, I am not trying to knock your method at all. I just started my first dog and I haven't even worked him myself yet, so I don't have ANY experience to speak from. Well, but I sort of do...I am a true beginner so at least I get that part of the equation. I did see my dog responding to and learning from the sheep very clearly, and very directly, using a form of the traditional method. It was amazing to see the landshark pause and even down at balance repeatedly, and it did give me an instant (albeit certainly elementary beyond belief) understanding of where and what balance was. Whether or how well this will translate to me understanding it from inside the pen is a question for another day. But I tell you after watching all these starting videos and reading this thread, I can't wait to get in there and fall on my face. I want to at least try it! I could see the line method holding some appeal to the scared part of me, that is afraid of losing control of my dog, or one or both of us messing up. But there's this whole other part of me that wants to screw up my courage and just try, and be prepared for a confusing, overstimulating ride.

 

Anyway, it sounds like you do many dogs and many students a world of good, and I wish you luck with the continuing evolution of your methods.

[abcollie]

It can have a good feeling about the handler if/when it decides to focus in on her and do exactly as she says.

 

Well put! I tell my students when a dog first starts has 100% sheep on it's mind. Then slowly we try and balance that out where the dog has 75% sheep and 25% handler. It doesn't come all at once *and you don't want it to* ... until hopefully it is almost 50/50. When a sheep is breaking it's about 90% sheep and 10% handler ... when you are first teaching off balance flanks it might be 75% handler and 25% sheep (as the dog is confused) but it should ALWAYS have it's mind on sheep and his ear on you.

 

To me, this is an obedience driven way to think about starting a dog. Even though it appears very sweet and gentle, it is really taking the sheep away from the dog and keeping them until the dog gives up on wanting to get to balance. In a way, it is really quite similar to a force-training method, except that it uses sweetness rather than knocking a dog on the head. But the result is ultimately the same: making a dog respond to you, not to the sheep. It's Dolores Umbridge instead of Lord Voldemort. .

 

Again very well said ... it's breaking their will/drive/spirit but with kindness and calmness.

 

Kathy ... you ask:

What is balance, from the perspective of the dog? For me, as I understand it, and was taught by my mentors and simply put:it is the dog being in just the right place where the dog has control of the sheep.

 

 

 

That's what we are saying ... what you are doing is NOT balance. When you are "that much in the picture" you are influencing the sheep (that's what you do when you walk with your dog) It is NOT the same balance as when a dog is by itself working the stock. You think you are shaping the flank BUT when you are walking with the dog the "shape" is different because the sheep react differently with a person there.

[dracina]

Sorry to bring it up again Karrin, it just seemed that Deb had missed those parts, and from the perspective of a herding coach both of those things are important. Yes, I do think that Jack reacted aggressively to the sheep when you first brought him out, which is why I worked with him myself the first couple of times. There was no reason for you to remember that, really, it was a long time ago and I did not make a big deal of it, because I knew he would get over it. And he did! As far as the timing of the lessons go...it is like starting over when so much time passes between lessons...that is the only reason I mentioned it, since in your posts you brought it up quite a bit as a factor in being concerned about the progress you and Jack were making.

 

My sincere apologies for mentioning it again.

Kathy

 

Kathy,

 

That is simply not true. You never worked Jack. Ever. And Jack never, ever had any issue on sheep or in your presence. Seriously. Period. End of story.

 

I think that it is really a cop-out for someone like you to try to change the focus from your methods to the behavior of my dog. I am very sorry that you feel the need to do that, but I think that it really speaks to your character and credibility. I am sorry that I had to sink so low as to point that out, but that last comment called for it.

 

Please, just stick to the discussion.

 

Karrin

[kathykawalec]

What about the SHEEP ... the dog and person both on one side is TOTALLY different than a dog balancing sheep to the person. The PRESSURE is different!!!!

 

So, if the dog "is controlling the movement of the stock" why does the person have to be there controlling the dog???? A dog KNOWS he's being controlled with a leash and reacts differently ... the person KNOWS they have a leash in their hand and reacts differently ... the sheep KNOW there is a dog AND a person and react differently.

 

The SHEEP should be the ones to teach a dog balance, feel, distance, NOT the handler! It's the handlers job to GUIDE the dog NOT control the dogs movements ... the sheep will show a dog when he's wrong.

 

So, pressure, control, feel and everything else these dogs have been bred for ... is being taken over by a "novice person" (even if you do it in the name of "help"). I'm sure it's easier for the students but our goal should be to bring out what is best in the dogs NOT what is best for the students. I'm ALL for making things easier for novices but not at the expensive of what these dogs have been bred for.

 

Candy, I absolutely agree with you...the experience of the dog is different when it's on a line vs not...and not meant to be used for a very long time, just long enough for the new handler to get a good feel for the relationship between dog and sheep...and to be able to effectively help the dog work.

 

As I mentioned earlier, what I am setting up is a situation where the dog is learning about sheep, the pressure of sheep, the pressure of the pen and draws by learning how to move the sheep around the pen...similar to what the dog would do while driving. The dog is balancing the sheep to the path of travel set by the handler who is communicating to the dog where to move the sheep. The handler is learning how to communicate information to their dog about where they would like the sheep to be moved next. The dog is learning about balance, pressure and about taking direction from their handler.

[stockdogranch]

As far as the timing of the lessons go...it is like starting over when so much time passes between lessons...

I'll disagree wholeheartedly with this statement. I have had hundreds of dogs (heck, probably more than that) over the years come out for lessons. Most come weekly, but then there are those who come more sporadically--maybe once every few months or so. Then there are those who, due to various life changes, don't come out for a year or more. When they do come back out again, every. single. dog. picks up exactly where it left off, as if it had just been out yesterday. This has left me to conclude that for dogs, time is not the same as it is for us, and I have remarked on this numerous times. So, I don't buy that one,

A

ETA:

what I am setting up is a situation where the dog is learning about sheep, the pressure of sheep

But as Candy was trying to point out, the "pressure of the sheep" is not the same as it would be without the handler back there with the dog, since the person puts pressure on the sheep, too.

[Smokjbc]

Kathy,

 

That is simply not true. You never worked Jack. Ever. And Jack never, ever had any issue on sheep or in your presence. Seriously. Period. End of story.

 

I think that it is really a cop-out for someone like you to try to change the focus from your methods to the behavior of my dog. I am very sorry that you feel the need to do that, but I think that it really speaks to your character and credibility. I am sorry that I had to sink so low as to point that out, but that last comment called for it.

 

Please, just stick to the discussion.

 

Karrin

 

I think this aspect should be carried on privately. I can't remember a time when an instructor or breeder has been questioned and voluntarily came here and provided thoughtful explanations of her methods so civilly. I don't agree with her methods, but I don't think she deserves this.

[dracina]

I think this aspect should be carried on privately. I can't remember a time when an instructor or breeder has been questioned and voluntarily came here and provided thoughtful explanations of her methods so civilly. I don't agree with her methods, but I don't think she deserves this.

 

 

Hi Jaime:

 

Although I respect your opinion, I have a different opinion about civility: I do think that lying is really not being civil.

 

Karrin

[dracina]

And I do think that she is purposely trying to avoid the matter at hand, and it looks like it may be working. Can we please just get back to the discussion?

[Eileen Stein]

What is balance, from the perspective of the dog?

 

For me, as I understand it, and was taught by my mentors and simply put:

it is the dog being in just the right place where the dog has control of the sheep.

 

It only involves the handler when we are asking the dog to hold sheep to us. Otherwise, it involves holding a line toward a gate, or holding the sheep off the feeder. It could be driving or gathering, or simply holding still, depending upon the task.

 

But balance has to be in relation to something. The obvious -- and apparently easiest for the beginner dog to understand -- is either a fence corner or a person. Since the fence corner cannot move, nothing good from a training point of view can come of the dog balancing sheep on it, whereas the person can move around, shifting the balance point and requiring the dog to constantly change his position to achieve the satisfying and highly educational feeling of being on balance with the person. Since you're having the dog in the video work in a very small pen, where the dog cannot hold a line for any length of time, you seem to be defining balance as the place where the dog has to be to keep the sheep moving along the fence at the pace you like. Since that is a very human vision, I doubt that the dog feels himself as being in balance at all when he is walking next to his handler at what you consider balance -- certainly not the way he would when balancing to a person. So you have to get the handler to manipulate him into that position (that you like but that means nothing in particular to him) by flanking commands backed up (or taught) with body language and a little surreptitious tugging. That is why, when I watch the video, I'm thinking "obedience on sheep." Though the dog sometimes made moves that you approved as correct, I never got the sense in watching him that the dog had any feel that he was "on balance" at all.

[kathykawalec]

Well put! I tell my students when a dog first starts has 100% sheep on it's mind. Then slowly we try and balance that out where the dog has 75% sheep and 25% handler. It doesn't come all at once *and you don't want it to* ... until hopefully it is almost 50/50. When a sheep is breaking it's about 90% sheep and 10% handler ... when you are first teaching off balance flanks it might be 75% handler and 25% sheep (as the dog is confused) but it should ALWAYS have it's mind on sheep and his ear on you.

Again very well said ... it's breaking their will/drive/spirit but with kindness and calmness.

 

Kathy ... you ask:

What is balance, from the perspective of the dog? For me, as I understand it, and was taught by my mentors and simply put:it is the dog being in just the right place where the dog has control of the sheep.

That's what we are saying ... what you are doing is NOT balance. When you are "that much in the picture" you are influencing the sheep (that's what you do when you walk with your dog) It is NOT the same balance as when a dog is by itself working the stock. You think you are shaping the flank BUT when you are walking with the dog the "shape" is different because the sheep react differently with a person there.

 

Candy,

Interesting point about the shape of the flanks...I'll analyze that further as I work in the future and see what I can discern about that aspect. At this time, it seems to me that a correct flank is determined by the sheep combined with the attitude and release of the dog. I don't actually see how the handler is making a flank "bad" just by being there. It may be making the flank "different", because the sheep are responding to the pressure of the handler...but then the dog is still correct in it's flank at that particular moment as determined by the sheep. Very interesting to consider!

 

So back to your point: assuming that the pressure and balance are significantly skewed by the presence of the handler, and let's say that you are correct in saying that balance is no longer being achieved by the dog: are you then saying that the dogs cannot advance in their learning by re-calibrating to the sheep and the pressure and making adjustments once the handler is no longer near them? That after working on a line for a bit that they are no longer capable of learning how to compensate for the different pressures? Do you think it would make a difference if the handler was next to the dog vs several feet behind the dog?

 

What about when we take them off of school sheep and put them on light sheep, or lambs, or 5 sheep vs 15 sheep? Or out of a small pen and into a small field then into a large field. Do they not make all those adjustments in the pressure by allowing the sheep to teach them, with some assistance from the handler as needed? What about when we teach driving by walking a parallel path to the dog while they are driving the sheep away? Would you then say that the dog is not really learning how to drive and balance sheep because the handler is in proximity? And that the dog cannot learn how to adjust to the handler moving farther away and still hold the balance?

 

If balance is defined as having control of the sheep without any input or influence of the handler, then do we speak about penning in a way other than balance? Or how about shedding? The handler is clearly and actively applying their own pressure to the sheep and the dog while a shed is being set up.

 

Thanks for the thought provoking post!

Kathy

[juliepoudrier]

Kathy,

Just some quick thoughts on this, sort of building on some of what Caroline and Candy have said.

 

To me the method using the line with the beginning handler is not helping the dog to read sheep or feel their pressure. As Candy pointed out, the mere presence of the human changes what the sheep are feeling and how they will react. Specifically, the dog isn't really learning how to push sheep because the added pressure from the handler helps to move the sheep along as well. The dog may well be in for a surprise when the handler is no longer there. Likewise, because of handler pressure, the dog may not have to flank as far to produce a desired result because the handler is also moving in that direction and influencing the sheep. There's no way the dog can learn to cover breaking sheep with this method that I can see. And one of the most important things I expect my dogs to do is read sheep who are about to break and contain them, especially at home when my mind might be occupied elsewhere, say, drenching or trimming feet. Heck, even at a trial, by the time I see a sheep break, say, at the mouth of the pen and ask my dog to do something about it, a good, natural dog would already have taken care of the problem. But a dog that's never been allowed to work naturally wouldn't, I don't think.

 

But my biggest concern about this method is what Candy touched on about the dog vs. handler vs. sheep. A talented dog can read and react to sheep way faster than I can, and it's one of the things I count on my dogs to do for me as noted above. For me, whether training or trialing or just working a dog, timing is crucial. I think everyone would agree that novice handlers just don't have good timing. Those who have worked with stock certainly have a better understanding of timing and how stock react to pressure than those who have not. I can read sheep pretty well, but I think my dog does it better. I would venture to speculate that the top handlers in this country not only read sheep with split-second timing, but also anticipate sheep, a talent that comes from years of working with them. So when you have a newbie handler walking around the pen telling the newbie dog where it needs to be, first of all the handler either has to figure that out or be told that, then has to communicate that information to the dog, who then is directed to the proper spot. How much time does all that take? If the handler guesses wrong and pulls the dog the wrong way, the dog most certainly loses control of the sheep (if you consider the dog to have control in the first place, which is a point of contention brought up by others and with whom I agree) and I can't help but think that there will be some level of frutration for the dog because the handler may not be really helping it to be in the right place at the right time. How could the handler be? S/he probably doesn't yet know herself where the right place is.

 

If the newbie handler and dog were instead to go out into the pen with dog broke sheep and the dog is allowed to go around the sheep and start balancing, the dog has a chance to be right, even if the handler is wrong. And in my mind, that's the fundamental difference between the two methods. With the rope, if the handler is wrong, the dog will be forced to also be wrong. With no rope, the dog is able to use its innate instincts, which in the case of a well-bred working border collie, should allow it to read sheep way better than the newbie handler and therefore react to their changing pressure much more easily than the newbie handler can. Granted, not all dogs are well behaved the first few times on stock, but in that case, it makes sense for the experienced person to go in and get things moving in the right direction and then let the newbie handler take over.

 

I see the balance thing sort of as a blend of your view and the view Caroline stated. When the dog is driving, it doesn't necessarily know it's going to a gate or to a tree or to wherever else the handler is sending it. So it can't be balancing *to* any of those things. Instead I consider the dog to be balancing *off* the handler, with the handler as the point from which the dog travels in a straight line on the path set for it. The handler is always in the picture whether the sheep are between handler and dog or the dog is between handler and sheep. In a farm situation, the dog may have a daily job of driving sheep to a specific spot and so I suppose you could say the dog balances the sheep to that spot, but first the dog had to learn to take them to that spot, and to do so it had to balance off the handler.

 

J.

[kathykawalec]

But balance has to be in relation to something. The obvious -- and apparently easiest for the beginner dog to understand -- is either a fence corner or a person. Since the fence corner cannot move, nothing good from a training point of view can come of the dog balancing sheep on it, whereas the person can move around, shifting the balance point and requiring the dog to constantly change his position to achieve the satisfying and highly educational feeling of being on balance with the person. Since you're having the dog work in a very small pen, where the dog cannot hold a line for any length of time, you seem to be defining balance as the place where the dog has to be to keep the sheep moving along the fence at the pace you like. Since that is a very human vision, I doubt that the dog feels himself as being in balance at all when he is walking next to his handler at what you consider balance -- certainly not the way he would when balancing to a person. So you have to get the handler to manipulate him into that position (that you like but that means nothing in particular to him) by flanking commands backed up (or taught) with body language and a little surreptitious tugging. That is why, when I watch the video, I'm thinking "obedience on sheep." Though the dog sometimes made moves that you approved as correct, I never got the sense in watching him that the dog had any feel that he was "on balance" at all.

 

I am seeing the work in the pen as the dog balancing to a path set by the handler...similar to setting a drive line and having the dog hold a line. Folks in this discussion only have one data point, unfortunately, so it's not really possibly for you all to see the dogs actually making decisions and flanking to head off the sheep or hold the line on their own. The dog we see in the video submitted is doing that, and it's difficult to really see it. I agree with you that he is not making the responsive flanks that I usually see in this situation, and prefer to see.

 

The dogs easily learn to flank around and head the sheep off in response to the sheep moving quickly away from them, and stop them or continue the flank to drive them on. I see them eagerly walking on, pushing the sheep forward once they know the line set by the handler, or once they "get" the job at hand, such as head the sheep off, drive them into the corner and hold them there. They are most definitely happy and controlling the sheep, making their own moves in response to the sheep, facilitated by their handler. Some dogs are more keen than others, but I work with all breeds and dogs that are bred for all types of purposes besides herding.

 

I agree that balancing to a person is easily understood by most dogs, but I also see the dogs easily learning how to balance in this driving way. And, so far, it seems to be a bridge that works while the new handler is learning. The team works in the round pen sometimes, in a small paddock sometimes, and sometimes in a rectangular long paddock. And the work varies from working next to the handler to working quite a bit in front of the handler, to working out away from the handler while the handler is near the sheep. The work includes moving the sheep in and out of the pen, out of corners, into new pens etc. Both on and off fences, along the fence or across the pen/paddock. As soon as the team is ready, we switch to a gathering situation, even if I have to hold the line and help for a bit, in the case of a timid handler and/or an overly excited dog.

 

 

Kathy

[RoseAmy]

 

The dogs easily learn to flank around and head the sheep off in response to the sheep moving quickly away from them, and stop them or continue the flank to drive them on. I see them eagerly walking on, pushing the sheep forward once they know the line set by the handler, or once they "get" the job at hand, such as head the sheep off, drive them into the corner and hold them there. They are most definitely happy and controlling the sheep, making their own moves in response to the sheep, facilitated by their handler. Some dogs are more keen than others, but I work with all breeds and dogs that are bred for all types of purposes besides herding.

 

 

 

 

 

I guess I'm dense but I don't see how leading a dog behind sheep teaches it to easily flank around and head sheep off.

[kathykawalec]

Kathy,

Just some quick thoughts on this, sort of building on some of what Caroline and Candy have said.

 

To me the method using the line with the beginning handler is not helping the dog to read sheep or feel their pressure. As Candy pointed out, the mere presence of the human changes what the sheep are feeling and how they will react. Specifically, the dog isn't really learning how to push sheep because the added pressure from the handler helps to move the sheep along as well. The dog may well be in for a surprise when the handler is no longer there. Likewise, because of handler pressure, the dog may not have to flank as far to produce a desired result because the handler is also moving in that direction and influencing the sheep. There's no way the dog can learn to cover breaking sheep with this method that I can see. And one of the most important things I expect my dogs to do is read sheep who are about to break and contain them, especially at home when my mind might be occupied elsewhere, say, drenching or trimming feet. Heck, even at a trial, by the time I see a sheep break, say, at the mouth of the pen and ask my dog to do something about it, a good, natural dog would already have taken care of the problem. But a dog that's never been allowed to work naturally wouldn't, I don't think.

 

But my biggest concern about this method is what Candy touched on about the dog vs. handler vs. sheep. A talented dog can read and react to sheep way faster than I can, and it's one of the things I count on my dogs to do for me as noted above. For me, whether training or trialing or just working a dog, timing is crucial. I think everyone would agree that novice handlers just don't have good timing. Those who have worked with stock certainly have a better understanding of timing and how stock react to pressure than those who have not. I can read sheep pretty well, but I think my dog does it better. I would venture to speculate that the top handlers in this country not only read sheep with split-second timing, but also anticipate sheep, a talent that comes from years of working with them. So when you have a newbie handler walking around the pen telling the newbie dog where it needs to be, first of all the handler either has to figure that out or be told that, then has to communicate that information to the dog, who then is directed to the proper spot. How much time does all that take? If the handler guesses wrong and pulls the dog the wrong way, the dog most certainly loses control of the sheep (if you consider the dog to have control in the first place, which is a point of contention brought up by others and with whom I agree) and I can't help but think that there will be some level of frutration for the dog because the handler may not be really helping it to be in the right place at the right time. How could the handler be? S/he probably doesn't yet know herself where the right place is.

 

If the newbie handler and dog were instead to go out into the pen with dog broke sheep and the dog is allowed to go around the sheep and start balancing, the dog has a chance to be right, even if the handler is wrong. And in my mind, that's the fundamental difference between the two methods. With the rope, if the handler is wrong, the dog will be forced to also be wrong. With no rope, the dog is able to use its innate instincts, which in the case of a well-bred working border collie, should allow it to read sheep way better than the newbie handler and therefore react to their changing pressure much more easily than the newbie handler can. Granted, not all dogs are well behaved the first few times on stock, but in that case, it makes sense for the experienced person to go in and get things moving in the right direction and then let the newbie handler take over.

 

I see the balance thing sort of as a blend of your view and the view Caroline stated. When the dog is driving, it doesn't necessarily know it's going to a gate or to a tree or to wherever else the handler is sending it. So it can't be balancing *to* any of those things. Instead I consider the dog to be balancing *off* the handler, with the handler as the point from which the dog travels in a straight line on the path set for it. The handler is always in the picture whether the sheep are between handler and dog or the dog is between handler and sheep. In a farm situation, the dog may have a daily job of driving sheep to a specific spot and so I suppose you could say the dog balances the sheep to that spot, but first the dog had to learn to take them to that spot, and to do so it had to balance off the handler.

 

J.

 

yes, I agree with your points completely Julie.

 

 

Sometimes the handler does make mistakes, especially in the beginning, but because we don't use the rope to pull the dog or correct the dog, the dog is actually allowed to respond to the movement of the sheep, and the handler facilitates that move. The dog takes the lead quite a bit at first, while the handler is helping to keep the dog out on the flank, to stop, and to hold. Not by pulling it, but by behaving as if it were another dog, and encouraging their dog to mirror their moves. An earlier post I made detailed out the very beginning stages of this part. I am encouraging the students to be a lead dog, thereby modeling the appropriate moves to control the sheep.

 

And, remember these sheep will not simply allow the dog to follow them...they are savvy, not very afraid of dog, won't move well away from people but will gladly move with and stay with people, and will do whatever they want, really. I do have the handlers learn how to move sheep themselves, using light sheep that will move away from people, as well as ducks. A person has to work very hard to move these school sheep themselves. And if the dog does not balance they will simply run to the other side of the pen and stand in their favorite corner.

 

For example, the video shows a dog effectively moving the sheep around the pen in connected lines, rather than a circular shape, on a mostly loose line, whereas the sheep would not be moving at all unless the dog was making them. Or, just running away on their own terms, not moving directly away from the dog.

 

Hope that makes some sense...

[Shoofly]

I agree that balancing to a person is easily understood by most dogs, but I also see the dogs easily learning how to balance in this driving way.

 

Maybe it's just me, but this seems almost cruel when you're talking about a well bred, talented border collie. We've all heard the phrase "the work is the reward". With a dog just starting out, i think it's more a matter of "balance is the reward" - getting to balance, to head the sheep, to hold them to the handler, is self-rewarding to a border collie. To deny that by forcing the dog to stay on a line, driving sheep, is denying the dog his instinct-driven reward. I just can't help putting myself in the dogs shoes and thinking how frustrating it would be.

 

And there's no denying balance is that sweet spot where a dog goes to *hold* sheep - why do you think so many hit that spot and stop or lie down on their own? Teaching a dog to drive, to hold sheep that lean off a line by only allowing it to flank a fraction of what his instinct is telling him to do, is no where near the same thing. If anything, it just teases the dog with a taste of what he wants to do, and no reward other than a "good boy" from his handler, with no satisfaction of his instinctive drive to head the sheep fully.

 

I understand and appreciate the concept of teaching the handler using the line method here, but it bothers me to think what it does in the dogs' minds. I'd rather see the handler learn the concepts and skills without the dog having to go through it. When i was first starting out, i went to a couple of clinics where the hosts had handlers out moving sheep or ducks themselves to learn about reading the animals, without the dogs. I've hosted a clinic myself on reading sheep and trying to help people get into the "sheep mind" - no dogs until the last little bit of the day. It is possible to do.

[Jumpin Boots]

I am seeing the work in the pen as the dog balancing to a path set by the handler...similar to setting a drive line and having the dog hold a line. Folks in this discussion only have one data point, unfortunately, so it's not really possibly for you all to see the dogs actually making decisions and flanking to head off the sheep or hold the line on their own. The dog we see in the video submitted is doing that, and it's difficult to really see it. I agree with you that he is not making the responsive flanks that I usually see in this situation, and prefer to see.

 

Do you have different videos you might be able to share with the board that would show what you are achieving a little more clearly than the video we have seen?

[kathykawalec]

Maybe it's just me, but this seems almost cruel when you're talking about a well bred, talented border collie. We've all heard the phrase "the work is the reward". With a dog just starting out, i think it's more a matter of "balance is the reward" - getting to balance, to head the sheep, to hold them to the handler, is self-rewarding to a border collie. To deny that by forcing the dog to stay on a line, driving sheep, is denying the dog his instinct-driven reward. I just can't help putting myself in the dogs shoes and thinking how frustrating it would be.

 

And there's no denying balance is that sweet spot where a dog goes to *hold* sheep - why do you think so many hit that spot and stop or lie down on their own? Teaching a dog to drive, to hold sheep that lean off a line by only allowing it to flank a fraction of what his instinct is telling him to do, is no where near the same thing. If anything, it just teases the dog with a taste of what he wants to do, and no reward other than a "good boy" from his handler, with no satisfaction of his instinctive drive to head the sheep fully.

 

I understand and appreciate the concept of teaching the handler using the line method here, but it bothers me to think what it does in the dogs' minds. I'd rather see the handler learn the concepts and skills without the dog having to go through it. When i was first starting out, i went to a couple of clinics where the hosts had handlers out moving sheep or ducks themselves to learn about reading the animals, without the dogs. I've hosted a clinic myself on reading sheep and trying to help people get into the "sheep mind" - no dogs until the last little bit of the day. It is possible to do.

 

 

Robin, the talented, well bred border collie wouldn't be spending much time on the line at all. Assuming by talented you are including biddibility and natural flanks and balance. That makes it easy for even a new handler to learn the moves much more easily...so with a little help from me, along with some pulling on the sleeve, and lessons in stock handling without a dog, the line work is very minimal. More like what I would do myself when I start a dog. That dog would not even be in a round pen at all, after the first time when it's talents were shown.

 

It's the less than talented, not so biddible, excitable dogs of all breeds, that need a lot of help to learn, and quite a bit more training to make progress even with an experienced handler, that spend more time on a line with their new handler. A good dog makes all the difference in the world. The dog that is racing around mindlessly, crashing sheep into a fence, grabbing legs and taking down, knocking down handlers...you get the picture. I can handle these dogs because of good timing, well applied pressure and a possible attitude adjustment, although it's sometimes not pleasurable, but there is just no way a new handler can begin to do so.

 

In my experience, the type of dog I am talking about does not allow a reasonable transition from being worked by me, to being worked by their inexperienced handler. So, even if I start them and work them the first few times, and even if when that goes quite well, those dogs fall apart and go back to being frenzied, racing around or whatever as soon as the experienced handler is removed. I'm not talking about training up a dog and giving it back after a month or more...I"m talking about someone bringing a dog over for a lesson once a week, or less, and me working the dog for a few times. Most of these dogs are not working for or with their handler in many/most areas of life, not just in the herding pen. So, I am also trying to help restore some order to the dynamic of teamwork between dog and handler. These handlers also want to learn to work their dogs themselves...and I want them to! And, I am simply not willing to sacrifice my sheep for this cause. Yet, I truly want to help these people and dogs experience herding in a good way, with long term good results. Without adding physical corrections to the solution...because I am not willing to add more violence in any form to the world if I can help it. And, the people who are drawn to me for guidance are also not willing.

 

This line work is the only way I have yet discovered that will allow these dog and this handler to work together safely. And, effectively IMO. And, so far, in my humble opinion, with happy working dogs and happy learning handlers who enjoy both the process and the results. Now, all first time handlers and dogs start this way, and we move forward thru the process at the speed the dog/team allows. This process allows all herding dogs of any aptitude to have the possibility of working, learning teamwork and having a much better life, since they not only are learning how to work, but they are learning impulse control, partnership with a human, and much in the way of problem solving.

 

Further ideas about this welcome!

 

Kathy

[Eileen Stein]

Guess I should respond to this earlier post of yours briefly. I'll have to do it in two parts because there are so many questions.

 

Eileen and others who mentioned this part: We can look to any area of human study: psychology, behavior, neuroscience, chemistry, anthropology, spirituality and find solid theories speaking about humans as creatures who are uncomfortable with the unfamiliar -- with responses ranging from mild stress to extreme fear. We can look at our history and easily find examples of the latter. In fact, we can see that all around us today. Let's start with the middle east. This information about humans reacting adversely to change or perceived difference is widely accepted truth as we know it today. It is what keeps us safe. That is not a "good or bad" judgement...just an "is". This human experience is why folks are picking up segments of my posts and fully explaining why they don't think this concept is likely to work. And, that is just fine, isn't it? As I perceive it, we start with the familiar and slowly and gradually begin to explore the edges of that boundary.

Do you see the human experience differently? How so? Why? Can you express examples?

 

I don't agree with the generalization that "humans [are] creatures who are uncomfortable with the unfamiliar" because I know as many people who seek out novelty and adventure as those who are uncomfortable with them. I could as easily make the argument that humans are creatures who get bored with the familiar and thrive on innovation, travel, exotic food, risk, new technology. But what really bothers me about your formulation is the sentence I put in boldface. Contrary to what you say here, there are other reasons to think that something is unlikely to work than discomfort with the unfamiliar. If people are dubious about your concept, it may be tempting and comforting to dismiss them as unwilling to leave their comfort zone, but that is far from the only reason one might be dubious, and it's a bit disparaging to say that it is. "You disagree with me because you're afraid of the unknown, but that's okay."

 

Is it somehow a "bad thing" that folks who do sports/conformation with their dogs want to learn about sheep herding? Are they somehow "less qualified" to engage in herding than those who do not? Are those of us who don't engage in agility or flyball somehow more qualified to work stock dogs? Why should there be a separation or distinction between different groups of people who want to learn? Or, why not?

 

No. No. No. No reason there should be.

 

Why is it implied to be "wrong" or "less than" for a person with border collies who lives in town or the suburbs to keep their dogs fit, active and mentally engaged by participating in agility or obedience or any other sport?

 

It is not so implied.

 

Why is learning in a environment that enables new handlers (of any demographic) to feel comfortable, something to be scoffed at?

 

It's not, unless it's done at the expense of developing the dog's full potential. I meant to mention earlier that I would have no problem with this approach when dealing with other breeds which do not have the same level of inbred ability to be drawn forth and worked with as the border collie does.

 

We spend billions on learning how to do this for adults in business environments, and for our children and young adults in educational settings. Should we not apply the contemporary education protocols that are established in these other learning environments to herding?

 

Not for their own sake; only if they're suitable.

 

Just take any sport activity that humans participate in...where else does the "coach" take a person who has not the slightest idea of what to do, by the arm and pull them around into position again and again as things are swirling around them, as the primary means of teaching?

 

I don't know, but it works well in learning the basics of working border collies on sheep.

 

Why is it OK to pull the above mentioned handlers around, but not OK to help dogs learn to make good moves with gentle guidance from a line?

 

Exactly why is it inappropriate for a dog to learn basic skills in a way that is supportive and educational? (such as using a line)

 

See Caroline Reichard's excellent response.

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

Using a clicker to mark good moves is commonly used these days to teach human athletes to feel and duplicate precise moves, such as those required by gymnasts.

 

I may be speaking as a farmy homebody with limited trial experience, here, but I don't really care about the "Moves" my dog makes. The point of stock work is the "moves" that the stock make.

 

I've hosted a clinic myself on reading sheep and trying to help people get into the "sheep mind" - no dogs until the last little bit of the day. It is possible to do.

 

I was there. It was awesome. Except the part where I got dizzy and barfed. Not Robin's fault. We had human teams to do a Maltese cross, after a discussion over breakfast, of sheepy psychology. I'd be up for another since my memory is kind of vague about the material of the day.

[Eileen Stein]

In other environments where dogs are used as working dogs, we don't put them into situations that they have never experienced and expect them to "figure it out" by trial and error, because it is supposed to be genetically embedded. Such as: a hunting retriever is not turned loose in a field with hunter, guns and birds for the first time they have ever seen such things and expected to know they are supposed to go search to find the birds that are shot and bring them back to their handler unharmed, with no prior training, just because they come from a long line of great retrievers.

 

This is a straw man. The equivalent in sheepdog training would be to send a dog to do a trial course with no prior training, which no one is suggesting.

 

Won't the more naturally talented dogs just "get it" a lot easier and much sooner then those less than talented with a given training protocol?

 

Yes, unless the training protocol is one that screws them up.

 

When a handler or dog do not execute the "natural" good moves that we so covet in our border collies (rightly so) that enable things to go smoothly with the first lessons, as mentioned by those of you who were fortunate enough not to have a confusing or frustrating first dog experience, what shall we do with these handlers and their dogs? Shall we just tell them: you or your dog have no natural aptitude for this activity, so go home and play frisbee?

 

Not after their first lessons, but at some point it might be kinder to do this than to keep them coming back and back for lessons when they are making no progress, no matter what the training protocol.

 

Or, shall we have them keep trying, while our sheep are being chased around and harmed by frantic dog and person? Or, shall we harshly correct these dogs for not knowing what to do naturally? When do we cross the line between teaching and abusing? Where is the line?

 

No. No. When dog or sheep are mistreated.

 

Would it not be better to not approach that line at all, and find a better way to teach?

 

This is begging the question.

 

Do we take our four year old child who doesn't even know the alphabet, hand them a book, and because her parents are competent english teachers or accomplished authors, expect her to read it to us...now...and apply pressure and correction when she cannot? Is this a reasonable analogy? If you think not...why not?

 

No, it's not a reasonable analogy. It's the same straw man as before.

 

Why is it perceived to be ineffective and somehow wrong to look for good moves or good choices the dog or handler are making and give positive feedback on those moves...encouraging that dog or person to duplicate that move or make that choice again? That's all positive reinforcement is...noticing the good moves and saying "yes, that's it!"...can you do that again? Using a clicker to mark good moves is commonly used these days to teach human athletes to feel and duplicate precise moves, such as those required by gymnasts. It is instant feedback at the choice point, creating sharp precision. This is the concept used in electronic games, so popular with kids and some adults...instant feedback on both your problem solving choices and your dexterity. I have "clicked" good moves for a few of my fellow open handlers while they work their dogs and they were amazed on how much it helped their focus and ability to not only handle better, but to train their dogs, because they began to notice the details in thin slices. Why not apply these contemporary learning/teaching tools to our work with herding dogs?

 

Nothing wrong with saying "good" to a handler to mark a good move (or a click, I guess, if you think it has more magical properties than a "good"), but the sheep provide much better, more intrinsic feedback to the dog than a clicker can -- if you give him the freedom to experience it.

[dracina]

It's the less than talented, not so biddible, excitable dogs of all breeds, that need a lot of help to learn, and quite a bit more training to make progress even with an experienced handler, that spend more time on a line with their new handler. A good dog makes all the difference in the world. The dog that is racing around mindlessly, crashing sheep into a fence, grabbing legs and taking down, knocking down handlers...you get the picture. I can handle these dogs because of good timing, well applied pressure and a possible attitude adjustment, although it's sometimes not pleasurable, but there is just no way a new handler can begin to do so.

 

In my experience, the type of dog I am talking about does not allow a reasonable transition from being worked by me, to being worked by their inexperienced handler. So, even if I start them and work them the first few times, and even if when that goes quite well, those dogs fall apart and go back to being frenzied, racing around or whatever as soon as the experienced handler is removed. I'm not talking about training up a dog and giving it back after a month or more...I"m talking about someone bringing a dog over for a lesson once a week, or less, and me working the dog for a few times. Most of these dogs are not working for or with their handler in many/most areas of life, not just in the herding pen. So, I am also trying to help restore some order to the dynamic of teamwork between dog and handler. These handlers also want to learn to work their dogs themselves...and I want them to! And, I am simply not willing to sacrifice my sheep for this cause. Yet, I truly want to help these people and dogs experience herding in a good way, with long term good results. Without adding physical corrections to the solution...because I am not willing to add more violence in any form to the world if I can help it. And, the people who are drawn to me for guidance are also not willing.

 

This line work is the only way I have yet discovered that will allow these dog and this handler to work together safely. And, effectively IMO. And, so far, in my humble opinion, with happy working dogs and happy learning handlers who enjoy both the process and the results. Now, all first time handlers and dogs start this way, and we move forward thru the process at the speed the dog/team allows. This process allows all herding dogs of any aptitude to have the possibility of working, learning teamwork and having a much better life, since they not only are learning how to work, but they are learning impulse control, partnership with a human, and much in the way of problem solving.

 

Further ideas about this welcome!

 

Kathy

 

Kathy.

 

Since I am not a professional, nor am I nearly experienced as you or any of the others training or running dogs, I have tried to stay out of the technical parts of the discussion.

 

But I will speak first-hand on what I saw when training with you. And for the record, I was really hoping that you would just be honest and explain your technique as you really work it with your students. However, it is pretty apparent that you're not being honest with what really occurs at your holistic learning center, and painting a very misleading view of how you train your students.

 

You are making it seem that it is only the "bad" dogs who are on a line for any length of time, while good dogs are given more freedom. They are then taken off of the line to learn and progress. I took a few training sessions with you where the other dogs (not just mine) were never allowed off of the line. And they were well-bred, calm, dogs that seemed to a great relationship with the owner. And, if I remember correctly, those dogs also had previous exposures to stock, were working on a farm, and were being handled by an experienced (albeit young) handler.

 

I will also say that I know of other former students who have had the same experience. Again, all Border Collies, all well-bred, calm, good dogs: all never let off of the line while training with you. That I can not personally attest to since I was not there, but I think it is worth mentioning. In fact, I never saw any dog work off of a line with you, except for your own. That is not to say that it did not happen. Maybe all of the dogs and owners were just bad, or not working well together, or didn't have a heart-connected relationship, or whatever.

 

There is no shame in practicing what you believe, Kathy, and I do not think that anyone would hold it against you. But what you are stating in these really long, flowery posts is nothing that I ever witnessed while training with you. And I was only there twelve times over a year, but I do know what I saw.

 

And as many people have mentioned, you can talk it up as much as you want, but you still have not provided any proof that your methods actually work. In fact, to me, it sounds as if you are now tweaking your philosophy with every post, adding a bit here and there to make it seem convincing. I do not think that what you are trying to say reflects the reality of what you are actually practicing. And I can say that first-hand.

 

I am one example of proof that the starting on a line method did not work. And I'm smart, have great, very keen dogs, and want to learn and progress.

 

And that is all that I am going to add, unless I feel that anyone can benefit from the information that I have on this matter. I am going to move on from this topic, because I am interested in continuing my development by actually teaching my dogs how to work sheep. And, there is no doubt in my mind that we can do it, and do it well.

 

Karrin

[kathykawalec]

"http://www.bordercollie.org/boards name='Eileen Stein' date='Jun 16 2009, 09:54 PM' post='306513']

Guess I should respond to this earlier post of yours briefly. I'll have to do it in two parts because there are so many questions.

I don't agree with the generalization that "humans [are] creatures who are uncomfortable with the unfamiliar" because I know as many people who seek out novelty and adventure as those who are uncomfortable with them. I could as easily make the argument that humans are creatures who get bored with the familiar and thrive on innovation, travel, exotic food, risk, new technology. But what really bothers me about your formulation is the sentence I put in boldface. Contrary to what you say here, there are other reasons to think that something is unlikely to work than discomfort with the unfamiliar. If people are dubious about your concept, it may be tempting and comforting to dismiss them as unwilling to leave their comfort zone, but that is far from the only reason one might be dubious, and it's a bit disparaging to say that it is. "You disagree with me because you're afraid of the unknown, but that's okay." "

 

 

Eileen, from my understanding there are both aspects of our human experience..both the explore the world aspect you mention...and the it's really good when what I believe to be true about the world at it's fundamental level doesn't change.

 

The conversation has shifted greatly since, whereas the first comments were mostly based upon this being non-traditional, so why change what doesn't work, or people who would like to do it this way are not like us. Again, not judging those early comments, just an observation relating to one of the reasons change in a community is difficult. And, yes, I agree that there are have been sound reasons presented that stray far from discomfort.

 

Thank you for taking the time to reply to that long post, and for everyone whose comments inspired those questions.

 

Kathy

[Caroline Reichard]

Most of these dogs are not working for or with their handler in many/most areas of life, not just in the herding pen. So, I am also trying to help restore some order to the dynamic of teamwork between dog and handler. These handlers also want to learn to work their dogs themselves...and I want them to! And, I am simply not willing to sacrifice my sheep for this cause. . . .

 

This line work is the only way I have yet discovered that will allow these dog and this handler to work together safely. ...

 

Further ideas about this welcome!

 

Kathy

 

When I first saw "The Video," my assumption was that someone wanted to take a student's money but not let their sheep get hurt while doing it. There may be more to the plan that, but not wanting your sheep harassed must be a big factor in your thinking. Many posters, though, really object to the line being used in the way that you are using it (as a leash, held by the handler). So I have an idea that may help your sheep as well as providing a discussion for the Forum I have not seen before.

 

Penny pointed out that using a long leash this way is really not new at all. In a book most of us have, Glyn Jones describes how his father taught his dogs the basics in the shoeing part of the smithy, where "he would have one of my brothers on the end of a long rope attached to the collar and me on the end of a second piece of rope on the other side. Then he would tell the dog to 'Go away' or 'Come bye', each boy pulling the rope for the apporpriate side until the dog's reactions became automatic in response. Father required blind, unquestioning obedience from his dogs, never allowing them any freedom of thought or action once they had begun their training." (Glynn Jones, A Way of Life, pp 5-6) Many of us have pointed out that the cruelty of such a method may lie more in the presence of the rope than in Glyn's father's heavy hand.

 

If we get in the WayBack Machine, though (am I the only one who remembers Bullwinkle and Rocky? I loved the WayBack Machine), there's another method that may serve better. How about putting the sheep in the the pen and the dog outside of it?

 

I have read on good authority that Gwynn Jones kept his Queen on the outside of the pen for a long, long time (I am recalling months and maybe even close to a year); she was that keen. And the method is still used today. Aled Owen recommends for certain dogs it in his newish training video, Time Well Spent , although I can't at the moment recall if it is Roy or some other dog that is racing about. It's not even a technique found only in north Wales, either. I have heard that Derek Scrimgeouer has used it in clinics as a method for training the look back, and I have seen Serge van der Zweep keep sheep in a pen when teaching students to get flanks of a precision than can be measured in centimeters at the pen or to redirect a dog on its outrun to stratospheric degrees (in one of the best clinics I ever attended.)

 

I'd be interested in hearing others' experiences or thoughts with putting sheep in the pen and the dog out of it. On the face of it, it seems just as awful as leash training a dog, but what I seem to recall is that many I have heard have said that you would expect that the dogs would go crazy with frustration, but they don't. If dogs like Gwynn Jones' Queen, who had an achingly beautiful run at the Supreme in 1990, can be trained that way, why not??

 

And the sheep would like it when the Great Dane came out, too.

[kathykawalec]

Kathy.

 

Since I am not a professional, nor am I nearly experienced as you or any of the others training or running dogs, I have tried to stay out of the technical parts of the discussion.

 

I will also say that I know of other former students who have had the same experience. Again, all Border Collies, all well-bred, calm, good dogs: all never let off of the line while training with you. That I can not personally attest to since I was not there, but I think it is worth mentioning. In fact, I never saw any dog work off of a line with you, except for your own. That is not to say that it did not happen. Maybe all of the dogs and owners were just bad, or not working well together, or didn't have a heart-connected relationship, or whatever.

 

There is no shame in practicing what you believe, Kathy, and I do not think that anyone would hold it against you. But what you are stating in these really long, flowery posts is nothing that I ever witnessed while training with you. And I was only there twelve times over a year, but I do know what I saw.

 

And as many people have mentioned, you can talk it up as much as you want, but you still have not provided any proof that your methods actually work. In fact, to me, it sounds as if you are now tweaking your philosophy with every post, adding a bit here and there to make it seem convincing. I do not think that what you are trying to say reflects the reality of what you are actually practicing. And I can say that first-hand.

 

I am one example of proof that the starting on a line method did not work. And I'm smart, have great, very keen dogs, and want to learn and progress.

 

And that is all that I am going to add, unless I feel that anyone can benefit from the information that I have on this matter. I am going to move on from this topic, because I am interested in continuing my development by actually teaching my dogs how to work sheep. And, there is no doubt in my mind that we can do it, and do it well.

 

Karrin

 

Karrin,

Thank you for your observations about what happens at my farm in all the 8 times you have been there, half of which were for private lessons and there were no others there, and the other half was with one other person. The young woman you mentioned from last year does not have sheep, her dogs were a mixed breed herding dog of unknown heritage and a border collie from agility lines. She actually wanted to learn this way because her dogs were not able to listen to her when they were around her horses. Your observations are limited and your conclusions about the other student are not accurate.

 

As for your other comments: I did not change my story in any way...simply added more detail and depth to what I do and how I think about this, as the discussion deepened. There would be no point in restating the same information over and over again. Nor did I say or imply that I only teach "bad dogs" this way...you will see in my post that I specifically said "Now, all first time handlers and dogs start this way, and we move forward thru the process at the speed the dog/team allows." (I added the underline now) That came after my detail to Robin on why I was moved to search out another way to work with new handlers and their dogs, so that her input would be most helpful by seeing the whole picture of where I was coming from. I would not have students trialing and working at their farms if they never got off the line. And: I would not be pulling handlers around by the sleeve, as I often do, if the dogs were on a line. :-)

 

My intention of posting here was never to defend my methods, or to convince others that what I do works..simply to present an alternative to traditional, and possible get some ideas from the folks on this forum of how I might improve and evolve what I do and how I do it. And maybe inspire some freshness and creativity to how we introduce this work to the uninitiated.

 

I don't actually think you are proof of how this method doesn't work...but, that is just my opinion, and yours is the one that matters. And, I am confident you will do well with your dogs!

 

Kathy

[Sue R]

I have nothing worthwhile to contribute to this topic but I have to express my appreciation for all those who have. It's been illuminating, educational, and thoughtful. Discussions like this always seem to carry some thoughts and ideas that are wonderfully expressed and helpful in some way or another.

 

Thanks to those who have taken the time to write.