Jump to content
BC Boards

Huh?


RoseAmy

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone,

 

Another great post, Pearse!

 

To "kelpiegirl", yes, you can have "an obedient and good dog", especially if the goal is to compete in the upper level classes at USBCHA/ISDS sheepdog trials. But, trialing is all about precision, and that is quite different from the practical work that a dog does at home. For every day work, a dog should be utilizing it's own natural talent and ability to get the job done, and a dog that needs to be told every move to make is pretty much worthless. A "good dog" will make a shepherd's job easier, while a dog that requires continuous instructions will add to the shepherd's work load.

 

Regards,

nancy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Can one not have an obedient AND good dog?

 

A good dog is obedient.

 

A good dog also has the ability to work independently.

 

A dog with no talent can't work independently.

 

It relies solely on being told what to do every step of the way. If there is no instruction from a handler, it will do nothing, or it will do the wrong thing.

 

This is what people are referring to when they talk about an "obedience-trained dog" in derisive terms. What they ought to be saying is "a dog with no natural talent or ability".

 

Pearse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's where it gets a bit obtuse for me. In all my travels, I have yet to meet a dog on it's own field, or even on another's field (that they've been to before) that didn't immediately "get" the pressures, and be able to cover sheep, etc.. I am certainly not in the obedience over all else camp, but I do believe that without a very biddable dog (and I use that term instead of obedient on purpose) you will not go any where in sheepdog trials. At home on the farm, and I would even go so far as to say on a trial field that the dog has run on before, the dog will "get" where he/she needs to be, from the get go. Maybe I haven't been out enough, but I have never seen dogs who trial well, who can't just do the work on their own at their own farm. Hope I never do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's where it gets a bit obtuse for me. In all my travels, I have yet to meet a dog on it's own field, or even on another's field (that they've been to before) that didn't immediately "get" the pressures, and be able to cover sheep, etc.. I am certainly not in the obedience over all else camp, but I do believe that without a very biddable dog (and I use that term instead of obedient on purpose) you will not go any where in sheepdog trials. At home on the farm, and I would even go so far as to say on a trial field that the dog has run on before, the dog will "get" where he/she needs to be, from the get go. Maybe I haven't been out enough, but I have never seen dogs who trial well, who can't just do the work on their own at their own farm. Hope I never do.

 

I have seen dogs that can't work their own sheep on their own field. They just have no feel for sheep or pressure at all.

 

I have seen dogs that really have no interest or ability in working sheep at all of their own accord, but do it because their handler asks/demands it of them.

 

I've also seen dogs that come to the same trial year after year and either can't read the pressure, or just can't cover. They make the same mistakes every single time.

 

I've seen dogs that aren't naturally biddable (very strong willed, strong personality) do well at trials in the hands of a really skilled handler who knows when to assert control and when to leave it alone but those were exceptional dogs with exceptional natural talent, in the hands of a truly skilled handler.

 

But, it's true that there are some dogs that excel working independently on tough stock in terrain where they need to be forceful and resourceful to get the job done that don't trial particularly well because they don't respond well to being micro-managed on the trial field and they have enough presence that they scare the daylights out of most sheep. Those are rare, but valuable, dogs; valuable to the rancher who relies on them, and valuable to the gene pool.

 

Mostly though, that is used as an excuse by handlers who can't put enough training on their dogs. The dog blows through stops and slices flanks and the handler claims that he's a "real dog" and not one of those namby-pamby trial dogs who have no real grit. What that usually means is that the dog will get the job done, after a fashion, on home ground, on the home flock, but without much finesse or real feel for sheep. I haven't seen many really good trial dogs (good meaning they consistently beat other good dogs on all kinds of sheep) who couldn't do just about any farm chore you asked them to, on just about any farm or ranch.

 

As with most things in the natural world, it's pretty much a normal distribution (bell curve) with some dogs on the left end having no ability, some on the right end being superstars, and the rest in the middle being good enough to get the job done most of the time. Fortunately, we get to choose to breed only those on the right end of the curve in an attempt to shift the median to the right.

 

Pearse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Pearse-

This has been a good conversation. Today I worked my youngster in my home field, which is a mix of hill and dale, and quite a challenge with light sheep. Not crazy, but fit :rolleyes: Anyway, I this topic got me to thinking that I ought to expose him to some of these challenges, and see what he does, as in cover, remember all the sheep, and that sort of thing. Dang it if he wasn't just happy as a pig in mud, AND he listened. Now, that's really nice. Never did he get left with his pants down, so to speak, and I really didn't have to say much. I think it would do us all well to remember that in striving for good scores on the trial field, we need to remember the crux of the matter in these dogs- and it's their ability to think in all situations AND listen. PRetty amazing, really.

 

I have seen dogs that can't work their own sheep on their own field. They just have no feel for sheep or pressure at all.

 

I have seen dogs that really have no interest or ability in working sheep at all of their own accord, but do it because their handler asks/demands it of them.

 

I've also seen dogs that come to the same trial year after year and either can't read the pressure, or just can't cover. They make the same mistakes every single time.

 

I've seen dogs that aren't naturally biddable (very strong willed, strong personality) do well at trials in the hands of a really skilled handler who knows when to assert control and when to leave it alone but those were exceptional dogs with exceptional natural talent, in the hands of a truly skilled handler.

 

But, it's true that there are some dogs that excel working independently on tough stock in terrain where they need to be forceful and resourceful to get the job done that don't trial particularly well because they don't respond well to being micro-managed on the trial field and they have enough presence that they scare the daylights out of most sheep. Those are rare, but valuable, dogs; valuable to the rancher who relies on them, and valuable to the gene pool.

 

Mostly though, that is used as an excuse by handlers who can't put enough training on their dogs. The dog blows through stops and slices flanks and the handler claims that he's a "real dog" and not one of those namby-pamby trial dogs who have no real grit. What that usually means is that the dog will get the job done, after a fashion, on home ground, on the home flock, but without much finesse or real feel for sheep. I haven't seen many really good trial dogs (good meaning they consistently beat other good dogs on all kinds of sheep) who couldn't do just about any farm chore you asked them to, on just about any farm or ranch.

 

As with most things in the natural world, it's pretty much a normal distribution (bell curve) with some dogs on the left end having no ability, some on the right end being superstars, and the rest in the middle being good enough to get the job done most of the time. Fortunately, we get to choose to breed only those on the right end of the curve in an attempt to shift the median to the right.

 

Pearse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Celt has the dual issues of poor handling/training on my part, and natural anxiety on his part. But, by golly, he showed us again today that shortcomings and all (any of his and all of ours), he's figuring out the job at hand - becoming more and more useful, anticipating problems and preventing them, just working his heart out even on the jobs that are really, really tough for his nature, and trying to trust me more as I place more trust in him.

 

So, while he and I are failures on the trial field, he's my bright star on the farm even though far from perfect. I don't know what I'd do without him (or a dog like him) and can't wait until Dan is also ready to help out.

 

These dogs have changed my whole outlook and thereby changed my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sue- I believe Dan's vacation was in the stars, so to speak. This has been Celt's time to step up to the plate, and he has. Soon, you will not even think about any perceived short comings that Celt has, and think, wow, I hope Dan lives up to him! I believe a good dog gets the job done, and always figures it out- in spite of us :D Farm work is never perfect- just think about how you plan to do one simple job, say mow, and the tractor breaks, so you need your tool box, and you are missing the phillips head screwdriver, so you go in the garage to find one and step on a rake.... you get the idea :rolleyes:

 

Celt has the dual issues of poor handling/training on my part, and natural anxiety on his part. But, by golly, he showed us again today that shortcomings and all (any of his and all of ours), he's figuring out the job at hand - becoming more and more useful, anticipating problems and preventing them, just working his heart out even on the jobs that are really, really tough for his nature, and trying to trust me more as I place more trust in him.

 

So, while he and I are failures on the trial field, he's my bright star on the farm even though far from perfect. I don't know what I'd do without him (or a dog like him) and can't wait until Dan is also ready to help out.

 

These dogs have changed my whole outlook and thereby changed my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sue- I believe Dan's vacation was in the stars, so to speak. This has been Celt's time to step up to the plate, and he has. Soon, you will not even think about any perceived short comings that Celt has, and think, wow, I hope Dan lives up to him! I believe a good dog gets the job done, and always figures it out- in spite of us :D Farm work is never perfect- just think about how you plan to do one simple job, say mow, and the tractor breaks, so you need your tool box, and you are missing the phillips head screwdriver, so you go in the garage to find one and step on a rake.... you get the idea :rolleyes:

Could be! For the several years that we had both Celt and Bute for work, we always had a dog that could do a job - they both excelled in opposite jobs and were woefully inadequate in opposite jobs. I used to say that between the two of them, we had one good all-around dog and one pet.

 

With Bute gone, Celt has had to so some of those things that Bute found easy, like helping to push cattle into holding pens or driving. Celt was never job-oriented, just instinct-driven, and he has blossomed this last year in being able to do a job and not just react to his instincts. As long as Bute was here, maybe he would never managed to do that because Bute would have been in there doing it and Celt would have been able to continue just doing what he was comfy with.

 

Dan is going to be a very different sort of dog, and will be strong (I think) in the points where Celt is weaker. Hopefully, he will be all-around useful, and we will have two dogs to help us - sometimes, it's hard just having one as he has so much to cover. I do my best to be the "second dog" (and that's a big help for him, sometimes making all the difference between success and failure) but it sure would be nice to have a real dog do that job and let me concentrate on handling.

 

A bit off topic but I think a good example that the work makes the good dog better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Sheepdoggers,

 

Ms. Kelpiegirl writes about asking her dog for more farm work, ". Dang it if he wasn't just happy as a pig in mud, AND he listened."

 

There is nothing, i repeat nothing that relaxes and pleases a sheepdog more than real sheepwork. Too often trailers, on the lower slopes of Pearse's bell curve train and train and train and train. Goeff Billingham once told me, "Training without real work makes a dog hot" and I expect that's true.

 

In my own case I am miserly with real work and give it to the youngest dogs that can manage it -unless, of course, one of my trial dogs has done spectacularly well at the last trial in which case I might give him a treat.

 

I've nothing against treats, you see.

 

Donald McCaig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Tea said. Yes, Pearse, thank YOU for reminding me of the differences between home work and trial work. Makes total sense.

And even I "get" Mr. McCaig's reference to treats (mostly because he writes so well....but I'm guessing it might be taken out of context somewhere.....LOL!).

 

Thanks to everyone for info here!

 

diane

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now don't laugh at me, but I've done quite a bit "dry work" (though i didn't know it was called that) with my dog.

My friend who has stock lives almost 3 hours away, so it's a whole day trip if we go out for a lesson, so Kyla has

only been on sheep a few times. We do agility. (can't keep sheep in the backyard in the 'burbs) :-)

 

We do dry work in some sort weekly and "work" toys, vacuums, push brooms, and the occasional rabbit. It keeps

me and her busy. She walks up, downs, knows what "time" means, bring it up (go faster), there, and flanks. Also

to back up and move out latterly on command. I've also taught her whistle commands for down,

walk up, there, bring it up, and come. (I use 'come' as her recall command)

 

I didn't clicker train this (though she is clicker trained).

 

She has been on sheep one time since i started this with her and she could listen and respond properly to the flanks

(though she tends to like away more than bye), down and walk up on command. I do think part of her "education"

is OBVIOUSLY missing because she has not been on stock much, but for right now we're having fun "kinda practicing".

And it's something she actively has to think about when we are doing it, not just repeatedly throwing a ball. I enjoy that

part of it.

 

I'll let you know how it goes next time she is on sheep! lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished reading ALL of the posts and will have to echo Tea's comment.

Thank you! So much to think about. I feel like a sponge right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She has been on sheep one time since i started this with her and she could listen and respond properly to the flanks

(though she tends to like away more than bye), down and walk up on command.

 

My worry about something like this is that it's too tempting to then tell the dog what to do instead of just letting the dog learn to work (and that's the gist of what others have said in this thread). I don't even start putting commands on a youngster until it's spent some time working stock: learning to feel them and control them on its own, with maybe a little help from me using my body pressure. Once the youngster is more comfortable reading stock and responding appropriately to the way stock respond to it, *then* I start putting commands to actions.

 

It seems to me that teaching commands first is doing things backward because as I said, the trainer will then be tempted to tell the dog what to do instead of letting the dog figure out what to do, at least in the beginning. If you don't find yourself falling into that trap, then no harm done. But if you do fall into that trap, you may well end up with a dog who is very obedient while working--clearly knows all the commands--but has never learned to actually read and work stock and so will rely on you to tell it what to do every step of the way. This may work on well-broke stock that give the handler time to think and command and the dog time to respond, but when you get on stock that's reactive in any way, the human really just can't read and react as quickly as a dog can (you have to see what's going on, decide what you need to do to counter it, then tell the dog what to do--it may just take a second or two, but that's a lifetime compared to a dog who knows how to read and react appropriately to stock and can do all that in a fraction of a second), but if the dog has been taught to rely on the human for direction, then you've basically tied your hands in any situation where you need the dog to think on its feet and respond quickly. The converse is that if the dog doesn't have a bunch of commands to respond to, you and the dog together can learn to control the stock in the moment, which is a much better way for a dog to learn, IMO.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Doggers,

 

Thanks, Pearse and Julie for your cogent replies.

 

Some sheepdoggers teach a lie down off stock because its a useful command - off stock. I don’t bother - most times I’ll get a liedown on stock during the first three minute session and I was there when an eight year old OTCH dog was put on sheep for the first time. Wouldn’t stop. Wouldn’t down. Wouldn’t recall. Wouldn’t quit. Its owner in tears.

 

Twenty five years ago, I trained my first sheepdog, Pip, to outrun w/o stock. “Away” meant run out 100 yds to the right.

I thought sheepdog training was about obedience.

 

Although Pip ultimately recovered from my mistake, I abused my young dog’s best window of opportunity when they learn so quickly and importantly.

 

I get cranky with human-centric, feelgood training theories not because I care how my fellow humans waste their brief days on earth - I’ve wasted a few myself. I am cranky because dogs so trained never get a chance to express their full potential. It’s like limiting young Mozart to chopsticks.

 

Donald McCaig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been an interesting thread and I'd like to echo my thanks.

 

I think (as someone who has never trained a dog on stock) that I can still fully appreciate the enormous distinctions between working stock (with their own agenda) and pursuing something inanimate (like a frisbee). (See, I didn't even use "working" in connection with "frisbee"). But - could there be an element of merit to some (not all!) "dry work" if you emphasize "impulse control"?

 

Example: my dog is passionately fond of the stream on our summer walk - wants to bolt as we get near. I could put him on a leash, but that won't let him exercise impulse control. Instead, I down him from a distance, make him stay until I've gotten a ways ahead of him on the trail, then call him to me - repeat until we're at the stream. Every fiber of his being is trembling to rush right past me and streak into the stream, but I won't allow it until I'm sure he's not about to bowl over small children who might be standing there.

 

Would there be benefit to such impulse control exercises before starting a dog on stock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would there be benefit to such impulse control exercises before starting a dog on stock?

 

Perhaps, but as Donald alluded do there is greater danger. The danger is that you dull the impulse to work and control livestock which is both the greatest wonder of a Border Collie and the dogs' greatest joy.

 

If you've never experienced it, you can't imagine it but these dogs truly come alive around livestock and if allowed to do the most amazing things.

 

Pearse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did this with my Dan. He was, and would still be so bad about busting through doors, that it is unacceptable. So, I taught him he has to wait until I release him to leave. I don't do impulse control on sheep though, I basically set it up so that he has some room between he/sheep/me, we are all in the right place, so we don't get the consequences. As these working dogs age, they learn the deal is to work for us, not for them, so they will wait for their reward (sheep), because they know through our good training, that the good reward is coming.

 

This has been an interesting thread and I'd like to echo my thanks.

 

I think (as someone who has never trained a dog on stock) that I can still fully appreciate the enormous distinctions between working stock (with their own agenda) and pursuing something inanimate (like a frisbee). (See, I didn't even use "working" in connection with "frisbee"). But - could there be an element of merit to some (not all!) "dry work" if you emphasize "impulse control"?

 

Example: my dog is passionately fond of the stream on our summer walk - wants to bolt as we get near. I could put him on a leash, but that won't let him exercise impulse control. Instead, I down him from a distance, make him stay until I've gotten a ways ahead of him on the trail, then call him to me - repeat until we're at the stream. Every fiber of his being is trembling to rush right past me and streak into the stream, but I won't allow it until I'm sure he's not about to bowl over small children who might be standing there.

 

Would there be benefit to such impulse control exercises before starting a dog on stock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know I am not a dog trainer. My whole goal has been to be able to utilize the islands open unused land and trail system to provide food and clothing using sheep/goats. but this cannot be done without my dogs, and my horse.

I cannot afford to take many lessons, or trial alot.

 

Alot of stockdog people have helped me in this.

But it was my Grandpa's idea.

It has brought me such joy, and helped many young people.

 

I have 4 dogs. All of them I have started in the arena on stock, using my oldest dog to keep sheep out of the corners. Then after a day or two of just figuring out the basics I move to open fields.

 

There are no fences out here. I have found that when the dogs knows its flanks, when and where to lie down. The best thing is just to take it out with the big flock- anywhere from 60 to 120 head. And let it work.

I generally take two dogs.

 

And my dogs are so different.

 

Cap- soft, loose eyed. He does not lay down, but always stands. It works for him so I let him. He is 5 0r 6 The interns can use him.

 

Gunny- she is three or four. She is the dog I used if asked to move cows and calves.

 

Sweep the Broom- The one Derek told me I should Trial- so I am. He is the one I take to shearing jobs to catch sheep. He is a thinking dog, keen and really can gather the 80 acres in tall grass. He has taught me alot. He is 2

 

And Taw- the young one, She is the one who I must just work and be silent. She seemed off balance to me some times but then a friend who is an open handler said, "Are the sheep in the right place?" I thought about this and surprised myself by saying- Yes they are.

 

But when I work Taw I can hear in my head a voice telling me- Don't talk.

 

These boards are an asset.

And Thank you for eveyone's time in sharing their knowledge and ideas.

 

It is funny sometimes.

 

In order to practice on three sheep I must shed them off from the main flock drive them far away and it used to frustrate me when I had to do this until one day I went.....ohhhh! That in itself is the training.

 

And if I forget my glasses I cannot see the sheep.

 

And my dogs, they always do their best.

 

I give the food bank lamb everytime I slaughter.

 

And I think what a gift these dogs are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would do us all well to remember that in striving for good scores on the trial field, we need to remember the crux of the matter in these dogs- and it's their ability to think in all situations AND listen.

 

 

I would suspect that for good handlers/trainers that thought is always in their minds automatically when working a dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh?

 

I think it would do us all well to remember that in striving for good scores on the trial field, we need to remember the crux of the matter in these dogs- and it's their ability to think in all situations AND listen.

I would suspect that for good handlers/trainers that thought is always in their minds automatically when working a dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't agree more there have been lots of good posts, that have explained it all far better then I coud have.

 

As for myself I never think about teaching my dogs "obedenice" on sheep. Rather I see us as partners and teach them to work with and for me. I direct them as to what I need done, where I need the sheep etc. and they carry out my wishes using their instincts and brains to get the job done the best way possible.

 

Just yesterday I was moving my ram whose the size of a pony and a few ewes, when we got to the gate the latch was hung up, I had my young dog the impatient one so I lied her down and gave her a stay for good measure while I tried to get the gate opened.

 

Well love is in the air and I looked back in time to see this ram about to take me and the gate down...I didn't even have time to think OH SH@!@@! let alone react..Not to worry my young one flanks around and gave Mr. Ram a good one to the nose..backs him up 20 feet and stands there..her eyes roll back to me as if to say "Don't worry Mom I've got you covered". I get the gate open and without a word from me she flanks back around and drives them though the gate.

 

Now what would have happened if she had not blown off my down/stay command?? It's not about obedience its about working together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very helpful posts, Pearse, thanks so much for these explanations.

 

B.

 

Stock people don't pooh-pooh obedience on stock. They require it. Often, what the dog thinks is the right thing is not what you want. The dog must understand that if you blow a come-bye, he needs to take it even if he thinks staying where he is is the best choice. What stock people don't want is a dog that cannot do anything without a command. A dog with no talent can get around an easy trial course if it is obedient as long as the stock are not that tough. Absent the control of the handler though, and that dog is useless on its own. A dog like that is no good for real work where it will have to work on its own. If I have sheep in the woods, I need the dog to go in and fetch all of the sheep. I can't see them therefore I can't give commands. The dog needs to be able to work on his own to gather all of the sheep and bring them out of the woods.

 

At a trial, the dog is constantly getting information because trials are all about precision. The handler and the dog are a team. The team is trying to move livestock around a course without straying off an imaginary line. The dog needs to be told where the imaginary line is. The dog uses his instinct and training to keep the sheep together and keep them moving. The handler tells the dog where the sheep need to be moved to.

 

In daily work, much of the work can be done without commands. I can send a dog to gather 150 sheep in a field and know that he will bring 150 sheep to my feet, more or less in a straight line, without a single command from the time he leaves my feet. I can ask him to drive the sheep away, and he will take them in a straight line, more or less,without a command, until I ask him to stop . If I walk in front of the sheep, he will bring them along behind me without a single command.

 

In daily work, I'll use commands to tell the dog to do things he wouldn't otherwise do by instinct. For example, if I don't want the sheep brought to my feet, but on a 45 degree angle from where he picks them up to a gate into the yard, I'll use commands. If the dog can't see the sheep from where he is, but I can, I'll use commands to direct him on to the sheep.

 

Trialling is a whole different ball game. The team is being judged on keeping the sheep on line, on the pace the sheep are moving at, and at making it through various obstacles. To do that well, requires constant information between the dog and the handler (and yes the dog gives information back to the handler, not through whistles but certainly through body language). That is why trials are so mentally demanding on dogs. You can work a dog all day in the heat doing chores and he'll never need to go to cool off in a stock tank. Ten minutes on a trial course and that same dog is worn out.

 

The difference between team work on stock and obedience on stock is that the dog who has no natural talent needs to be told exactly what to do all of the time. Out of sight of the handler (on a blind fetch) or when dealing with difficult stock, that dog is lost. A good dog can think for himself. He'll work with a human partner, but he'll work without one too and get the job done. I gave one example of that in an earlier post but here's another.

 

There was a great trial in Wisconsin called the Caledonia SDT. The outrun was 750 yards. The last 300 yards of that was down into a valley across the valley bottom, and up the other side. After the lift, the sheep disappeared from sight for close to a minute. The sheep would veer right into the trees given their druthers. An obedient dog would either follow the sheep or lie down and wait for commands but the handler couldn't see dog or sheep. A good dog would know where the last time he heard a whistle from was and would bring the sheep to that spot. The fetch panels were at the top of the hill. If the dog was offline, no way were you making the fetch panels. I saw lots of good dogs put their sheep bang in the middle of the panels. I should also add that there was a fence on the left side of the outrun with a small gate in it. If you sent left, you needed to tell the dog where the gate was. The dog needed to take the bend out whistle to find the gate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full disclaimer: Most of what I know about sheep and herding fits into the period at the end of this sentence.

Second disclaimer: The cabernet (just one glass...) that I just finished was very good.

 

But while I do NOT propose that clicker training for herding makes any sense (and I have done some clicker training for OTHER behaviors...) - I find it interesting that herding folk (said with all due respect) "pooh-pooh" the idea of "obedience on stock." While I do understand how instinct plays an important and valuable role in herding....why, then, do "handlers" (why are they called that, in this case?) who do some phenomenal trialing - constantly blow their whistles?? I may be totally missing something here (see disclaimers above) - but it would seem to a non-herding folks type, that the dog is constantly getting information (vs. "commands" ??) -

--slow down

--go left

--walk up

--LIE DOWN!

--walk up

--move right

--move faster

--LIE DOWN! (said with a smiley face of course...)

 

So - and I'm asking this, in order to learn, really I am: what is the difference between the constant whistling, and "obedience on stock?"

 

diane

 

Put in the most basic way .... we are whistling to the dog becasue we want "these" things done to the sheep (OK, NOT the lie down :@). I'm NOT trying to slow the dog down BUT to slow the SHEEP down. I don't want the dog to go Left/right I want the SHEEP to go left/right (which of course means the dog has to the direction in order for the sheep to). However, the point is that we give whistles to the dog ... telling him what we want the stock to do ... and expect him to "do the doing".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...