doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com OT Force breaking a dog

I apologize for the off topic post but I wanted to tap into this learned audience. Where can I find go info on force breaking a dog to retrive? I have a vague recollection of my grandfather doing something similar to his pointers but I was too young or too dumb to get him to teach me. Thanks, Tyler

Take a look in here

CJ

http://www.navhda.org/

http://www.navhda.org/training.html

James Spencer, in his book "HUP!", describes a very nice method of conditioned retreive that works well. His method is one that can be used by the non-professional as it doesn't require causing your best buddy any pain or discomfort.

Disclaimer: Although I watch Cesar Millan, The dog Whisperer, on TV I should in no way be considered any kind of dog training expert!

Tyler:

Hood Harris used that method at Wheeler between Muscle Shoals and Decatur, Alabama, but I don't know if he is still training dogs. Are you referring to training them on a table with a checkchord?

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Force fetch is not universally admired. Think carefully before you start on any training procedure.

Please have a look at Training your Retriever by James Lamb Free, the definitive classic as far as I'm concerned. If you've got a palooka, get rid of it. It costs no more to feed a dog that wants to please.

Tyler,

+ 1 on Hup.

You didn't mention what kind of dog - If it's a pointer, check out the training seminars by Rick Smith. I thought it was a great couple of days and I learned a lot. Rick doesn't train your dog, he teaches you how to train your dog. He does use volunteer student's dogs to show how to train various things and he demonstrated force breaking very well.

Lastly we come to the "forced retrieve" method. My advice is not to engage in it. If you have a spaniel or retriever that requires you to resort to this, then you have a dog not worth training. Get him a good home as a pet and start again.

Ken Roebuck, Gun Dog Training Spaniels and Retrievers

Sorry but have to disagree with this one... I always work a dog to retrieve without force breaking, but I have seen some dandy dogs, that needed it.. and it made them even that much better. Its like a child, sometimes they need to be spanked.

Force fetching a dog is an activity that many people, perhaps most should not engage in. It is time consuming, not very enjoyable for the humanoid--at least at first. Done correctly and without pain to the dogs, they actually look forward to that time on the line but you have to do it in very small increments. I now do it with a pinch collar and it takes about 6 weeks--doing it every day, 5-10 minutes once or twice a day. Now every dog (pointers & shorhairs) in the kennel is a gung-ho retriever, water or land. But to do it you have to have the mind set that the dog WILL comply; never get angry when they refuse you, just patiently make them do it.

I have John Lamb Free's book and found it to be very much the book I reach for when I have a question. I also have a number of other, more modern books and find most of them simply regurgitate the same material. JLF's book provides a simple, no nonsense approach to all aspects of training.

Gil,
Any birds in AZ this year? Calif may be a bust, since we didn't get 2 drops of rain in the last 8 mos.

I've followed the English dog game for a number of years (my present Lab was imported from Scotland and has 3 British Nat'l champs in her prior 3 generations - a lot better bred than I am). I'm not aware of the British force breaking dogs; as was said earlier, if the dog isn't natural, get another dog. Is it any wonder that the classified ads in Gun dog and Ducks Unlimited mags are filled with ads for British dogs? Because they are natural, they are a helluva lot easier for the average weekend warrior to train. BTW, there is a growing wave of sentiment to outlaw the use of electric training collars in the UK. With a collar, you can make a chihuawa (sp?) into a retreiver, but it sure won't be natural, and its offspring won't be any better

What a bunch a hooey!!!

Just about EVERY Hunting retriever has that is in competition or running serious hunt testing, has been Forced Fetched!

I've trained retrievers for over 15 yrs, and a training program based on force fetch is prety standard proceedure these days!

A good sorce of information is from a guy by the name of Mike Lardy---Totalretriever.com His training methode sare considered the gold standard among retriever enthusiasts.

Force fetch is much more than teaching a dog to retrieve. It will acomplish that, and you will have a very dependable retriever. BUT, it also teaches a dog about pressure and how to handle it. It bulids a much more confident animal that understands you and its work!!

Force fetch is the foundation of most all modern retriever training!


By the way.. James Lamb Free's book is horribly dated.

Gooser

I'm not aware of the British force breaking dogs; as was said earlier, if the dog isn't natural, get another dog. Is it any wonder that the classified ads in Gun dog and Ducks Unlimited mags are filled with ads for British dogs? Because they are natural, they are a helluva lot easier for the average weekend warrior to train. BTW, there is a growing wave of sentiment to outlaw the use of electric training collars in the UK. With a collar, you can make a chihuawa (sp?) into a retreiver, but it sure won't be natural, and its offspring won't be any better



Unbelievable!! absolute NONSENSE!!!!!!!!


Most GOOD retrievers are Natural!! Thats why they call em retrievers. What FF does is make the act of retrieveing a command instead of a request!! It builds on that Natural retrieving instinct!

Weather situations that get to Miserable conditions, or a wind that is crossing to a path of a blind retrieve will show real fast what RETRIEVER has been FF'd or one that Hasnt!!

what about a dog that has been sent to retrieve a cripple first, with other birds down in the field? You want the cripple retrieved first, right?? A FF'd dog will understand this pressure, and retrieve that cripple flawlessly with a ton of confidence! He will understand to "go where sent" with no questions asked---EVER!!! A very dependable animal!! He will not be distracted when he has a bird in mouth by other birds falling as he returns> He will complete his required task,, then take on the next!! The Un FF'd dog will assuredly spit the 1st bird out and be distracted by the otheres!

FF is a crticle tool in the trainers tool box. It is by no means cruel if done correctly.

Same goes for E-Collars. The real problem with E-Collars is with the guys that use the "burn and learn" rule with their dogs. There is a proper method of conditioning a dog to a collar, and its NEVER unpleasant for the dog! Both my dogs go nuts when they see the collar come out cause they know its time to work and they enjoy it! In fact my younger puppy will retrieve the collar and bring it to me and wait at the door to go!!

A dog that has been correctly collar conditioned is a dog that will only be "corrected" on a command he has been first TAUGHT!!!
_E-stimulation is only a very mild corection with very limited response action from a dog!

If you see a person who has their dog E-Collared and the dog is giving a serious vocal respose from correction , that is a trainer that needs that collar shoved up his you know what!!
You can train a dog the "amish" way,,but in most retriever circles these days FF is a constant!
Totalretriever.com has all the information you need.

Gooser

FF is a normal way to train for field trials and in hunting dogs as well in some cases. Blackdog is spot on this point. Some may find it not for them. Fine. I do not bob my dogs tail or ears but others do. It is not a lazy way to make a dog fetch or even a faster way to get the job done. It is only another tool to be used when needed.

A bad FF training job can ruin a dog just like any other bad training can ruin a dog. It is not abuse as some feel it is if done in a normal way. Trainers do not want to or need to abuse a dog to get it to follow directions. They just want to build a reflex response and FF is one proven method of doing this.

Years ago I had to FF a friends dog which refused to fetch or hold a duck. This dog was going to be put down by the owner if it did not respond. It had had several trips to other trainers and was deemed to be a hopeless case. The dog's bad luck was to be owned by a fellow who would have rather put the dog down than find a home or admit that he could not train the dog. E-colors had made this dog a real mess and I used gentle pressure instead of a E color.

Four days of easy lessons taught this dog what it needed to do and it did it willing and happily. The job does not have to be cruel or abusive and a few easy lessons can make all the difference in the world with a few dogs.

The dog went on for seven or eight years as a fine hunting dog with almost no problems. All right, I will admit that the dog loved hard boiled eggs and would fart for hours after eating a few or even just one. The smell was very nice if you were a dead skunk. I only gave him a few over the years but the owner was a rather suspicious type of fellow. Seemed to think that I was a bad influence on the dog.

Dogs trained as robots can't match dogs trained to use their senses independently of their owners. Field trial performers do well---I've had them, too--- but many times neither hunter or dog knows where a cripple or fallen is; a wave in the general direction to hunt 'em out is better than arm-waving, electronics and whistles.

I've found that nothing beats a happy, hell-for-leather bulldozer doing what comes naturally. As for refusing to hold a duck, I can't see any use for it unless to take pictures. My current Lab has a habit of delivering ducks, cripples first, without commands to the toe of my left boot ---piling up 11 blacks and mallards after a three-shot rally last year.

Gooser, I agree on James Lamb Free. Sexist, too. But the ingredients are there. I'm a disciple now of beginning training at 49 days. Anyway, everyone to their own. One size doesn't fit all. From what I've seen of forced training, it isn't for me. My dog's heart and nose are magic, far better than mine.

Right. Force fetch is the common training method for dogs being run in intense and artificial competitions. It is the method of choice for pro trainers who have to guarantee results in a limited amount of time. It is used by people who insist on absolute control over their dogs at all times. And it works, if that's what you want.

But FF is not a panacea. It will not make a dog a better hunter, just a more obedient one. I have seen too many FF'd dogs in competition who were so controlled by their professional handlers that they were incapable of independent hunting judgment.

Yes, there are superb dogs that have been FF'd. And dogs that have been greatly improved through intelligent and consistent FF training. But I have also seen FF'd dogs in competition, trained and handled by pros, that couldn't find a hen in a chicken coop without handling, and dogs afraid to take a step without checking with their handler.

There are other training methods that are equally effective, but they take more time and patience, and are not focused on competition and pressure. Ultimately, the "right" training method depends on your dog, your skills, and the results you want. Personally, I prefer a dog that wants to hunt for me, over one who feels he has to.

I agree with Mr. Brown. Give me a natural dog anytime. Today's field trials can't be considered anything close to a typical day's hunt. They have evolved into a booby-trapped endurance course in order to sort out entry lists of 100 or so dogs. My Scottish lady has about 1200 retrieves behind her, works as a therapy dog at Detroit Children's Hospital and never has been FFed. The Brits must be doing something right, since more and more kennels are proudly advertising British dogs.

Amen.

Further, you won't ever see any 110#+ true British labs; the US market created these beasts, along w/ the wildly off standard color variations, all by itself. I suppose there's nothing wrong w/ them - just not my 'cup of tea'.

Get you one of these and you can leave the dog at home...

http://www.google.com/patents?id=Ce5tAAA...ions#PPA1963,M1

But I have also seen FF'd dogs in competition, trained and handled by pros, that couldn't find a hen in a chicken coop without handling, and dogs afraid to take a step without checking with their handler.


UNREAL!!!!
A Field trial dog or a HUNT TEST dog (big difference) will not be succesful in competition or testing if handled at ALL on marks. Handleing is used for Blind retrieves only!! I guess I cant argue what you have "SEEN" But I bet that dog wasnt placed or passed in either situation. Highly undesirable!! There is no fear in a correctly FF'd dog!!--Only confidence and reliablity.

Quote:
Further, you won't ever see any 110#+ true British labs; the US market created these beasts, along w/ the wildly off standard color variations,

Horse pucky!!Desirable weights(not saying there wont be larger) for AMERICAN bred Field trail dogs run from 65 to 75 #'s for males and 50-60#'s for Females. Very slim and athletic
The SHOW RING is what developed the Heavy set labs,, and if you look at the pedigree of those SHOW dogs,, you will find a heavy dose of English lines!! This is exactly why you wont see American FT dogs in the show ring--they dont meet the show standard!

Quote:
I have seen too many FF'd dogs in competition who were so controlled by their professional handlers that they were incapable of independent hunting judgment.

A dog in a hunt test or a field trail that comes to the line or hunting blind and is told to sit while it watches a triple mark presented to it,, had better be independent in its thinking, because the handler will have to let the dog "MARK" and retrieve the birds on its own merrit! No HANDLEING allowed! A dog that requires handeling on marks will not be successful!

Well, I haven't seen it all, nor do I know it all. But having judged AKC hunt tests, AWS Nationals and at the U.S. Open Pheasant Championship, I have seen a lot of FF'd dogs with pro handlers. They have ranged from some really outstanding performances to pathetic robodogs that couldn't find squat without handling.

FF is a useful gundog training tool, but not always necessary, not always the best. Done well, it can be very effective for certain things, especially competition, But IMHO, too often FF is used as a cookie-cutter shortcut by control freaks.

But if FF is what lights your fire, go fot it.

Exactly.



You might re-read my original statement - your response seems to indicate you read more into it than was presented, IMO.

Quote:

Today's field trials can't be considered anything close to a typical day's hunt. They have evolved into a booby-trapped endurance course in order to sort out entry lists of 100 or so dogs.


Field trails have little to do with hunting! They are a competition between other dogs,--a GAME!! they represent the best of the best. They showcase the capability the dog has and COMPETE agaist others that think they are better.

Hunt Tests on the other hand are definatly designed around true hunting situations. The HUNTING RETRIEVER CLUBS motto is "Concieved BY Hunters FOR hunters!
Tests are set up using true hunting situations and yardages.
they are one of the few that uses real guns at the line,the dog is required to swing with the gun to mark! These tests are as close to true hunting conditions as you can get, complete with marks that drift in river current, and cripples that crawl up the bank and bury themdelves in the grass. ANNNND on those "MARKS" the owner/handler had better not have to handle the dog. The dog is required to mark and use its nose too!.

There is soo much misunderstnding and prue non-sense spewed out about the Hunt testing and Field trial programs.
Some here should go and actually WATCH a test and ask questions before reviewing what a truly trained animal is capable of!!

We all have our standards. If you are satisfied with a dog that has to be taken to where the bird fell and told to hunt it up,, well great for you!. If your dog comes out of the water and spits the crippled duck out on the shore whilst it shakes, and you happy with that,, again thats YOUR standars! If its 20 degress out and a thin flim of ice on the pond your huntin, and the dog gives you a no go because it doesnt feel like it. Well,, go head and wade out and get it your ownself!!

Some of us however enjoy watching GOOD dog work, even more than the actual hunting. In my case its the only reason I go!

Jack,, with all do respect!
Being a AKC judge, you didnt pass many dogs that had to be handled on marks,, otherwise you wasnt followin the standard or rules of AKC!! Talking Master level RETRIEVER dogs here!

wow. As our friend Tyler (who has probably rolled his eyes and told himslef he will never again ask about this or any other subject here)has probably figured out, FF is a topic that always elicits "passionate" responses on both sides of the fence, and there is always a lot of what I consider baloney thrown about "natural" retrievers, etc...and the reccomendation to throw the dog away and get one who will retrieve is so much crap--the news flash to these folks is that not everyone views their dog as a tool, and by now it's too late for that and therefore unhelpful advice.
I've noticed that no one seems to throw a conniption when someone asks about whoa-breaking a pointing dog (who has a "natural" point), and that seems the best analogy to me--the FF simply takes the natural instinct and allows it to be a command that can be controlled or enforced if desired and is the foundation for much other training. Is it required? Not for some people. Is it useful? Maybe more to some than others, but it has benefits that go way beyond retrieving. There is also a way to do it without making your dog into a nervous wreck or interfering with their own desire to hunt, and various iterations of it can be done with as much or as little "force" as necessary or as the trainer desires--for instance you can teach a dog to "hold" with no force at all, and that fixes many retrieving problems.
I'm sure there are plenty of dogs who are nervous, skittish or whatever as a result of both whoa and fetch breaking but that's a trainer problem, not a problem with whoa or FF in general. Blame the trainer, not the concept of FF.

My rec is to find a pro trainer and talk to them about getting some 1 on 1 help teaching you how to work with your own dog--you'll quickly figure out if their training philosophy fits with yours, and when you find one who does will probably learn a lot about training FF and other things that you can't read in any book or (especially) online.

Never said I did. But I've seen FF'd dogs on blind retrieves that could be sent like an arrow to the area of the fall, but couldn't hunt that area without a lot of direction from the boss. And I've seen FF'd dogs that couldn't hunt objectives or use the wind without help. Not that they didn't have the instinct - they had just become handler-dependent.

IMHO, over-handling is the bane of the gun dog world; a good dog should have the confidence to use its own hunting skills without constant whistling and hacking - and the handler should be confident enough to let the dog hunt.

Jack your quote!:

But I have also seen FF'd dogs in competition, trained and handled by pros, that couldn't find a hen in a chicken coop without handling, and dogs afraid to take a step without checking with their handler.

If they were MARKS in AKC retriever hunt tests, Master level,, then as the AKC judge you say you are,, I dont see how you would have passed them. Marking is of PRIMARY importance in these HT's standards. The dog must mark and find the bird on its own!

Your example prolly has nothin to do with a good FF program, Prolly more to do with a Handler that didnt have a clue as to the FF proceedure, and how to teach it correctly.

Jacks Quote:

Never said I did. But I've seen FF'd dogs on blind retrieves that could be sent like an arrow to the area of the fall, but couldn't hunt that area without a lot of direction from the boss.

WOW!!! First off on a blind retrieve there is no "area of Fall"
The dead bird has been planted, and the dog sees no "fall from the sky". The dog has no idea where the bird is, and only goes by direction from the handler. The judges dont want to see the dog drop its nose and hunt,, they want to see deliberat obediant controll. Surprised that you as a AKC Retriever Hunt test Judge dindt know this!!

If the handler puts the dog on the bird as you described,, I would have to be there to see a dog of MASTER level that is sitting at the bird,, and cant come up with it!! Many times handlers will handle to dog to the upwind side of the bird, and have the dog struggle,, but who's fault tis that?? HUUUUM????

And I've seen FF'd dogs that couldn't hunt objectives or use the wind without help. Not that they didn't have the instinct - they had just become handler-dependent.

And from what the AKC will want to see from their HT standard, when you run a TRUE BLIND retrieve, the Judges are looking for obediant control of the dog, and a speedy and direct course to the bird, without destroying the hunting day afield, or cover. It is REQUIRED that the dog be Handler dependant on a BLIND retrieve!!

FF is much like religion or politics. Everyone has their own views. I just get my hair up when Generalizatons are spewed like has been here, about gettin rid of the dog, its a robo dog!,, ect!! Just pure uneducated bull!!!

I have had and trained both FF'd and non FF'd dogs of my own!
I speak from experiance that if done properly a FF'd dog advances through training quicker, and with more confidence than one that is not!
They also are a more DEPENDABLE and RELIABLE animal when it comes to YOUR standards!!

HomeLess, Are you the agent for that self-retrieving gun? I'd like to get one so's I can take my Jack Russell hunting and come home with something. Not that he dosen't like to hunt but if he gets to the bird first the last thing he'll do is bring it to me. Foxholes is what he really likes but I'd better have a shovel in case. "Go to ground" just ain't a waterfowl command. David

Gooser - retriever tests aren't the only game in the world. In the AKC Spaniel hunt test standard, a Master "must also 'hunt dead' on a land blind...' And on a blind retrieve, "area of fall" isn't a literal falling bird, but the general location of a planted bird that simulates an unmarked fallen bird. The handler is not given the precise location of the bird, only that area of fall to which he lines the dog. Once in the area, the dog is expected to use its own hunting skills to supplement the handler's commands.

You are right that "if done properly" FF dogs can advance quicker. In fact, that's why most pro retriever trainers use FF - it's a one-size-fits-all, cookie-cutter method that produces fast results for clients who don't want to spend a lot of time and trainer fees. But in dog training as in food, 'fast' doesn't necessarily mean 'best.'

FF is a lot like training with a hot collar. Done well, by someone who really knows his stuff, on a dog that needs it, it can produce impressive results. Done poorly by hasty and untrained amateurs, it can mess up a gun dog.

Too many hunters try to use FF or hot collars as a short-cut or substitute for time working with their dogs. How many times have you run into these poor saps afield, yelling and whistling and smoking their supposedly "force fetched" dogs with a hot button? I've seen too many, which is why I advise caution whenever a new gun dog owner starts talking about FF or hot collars - especially in threads like this, which began with a question about "force breaking."

I'm not against FF - it is a useful and effective dog training tool. But it isn't the right one for every dog, or every handler. Yet too often amateur trainers go straight to FF or the hot collar because "the pros all use it," without understanding that the pros don't have the time we have to spend developing the personal bond that pays off with a strong and willing partnership between man and dog.

From Tyler's original post, it appears that he thought the question was off the topic. But it has grown into a monster such as asking which is better: SxS or O/U, double or single trigger, boxlock or sidelock. What a complex thread.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Guys, I have a 15 year old pointer that was FF when he was a youngster, in his time he has pointed and retrieved hundreds of wild quail, usually making other dogs look pathetic, He has won field trials. I have news for you guys... It all depends on the dog... If he/she has it..then they have it.

Tyler,

It might be useful to define a few terms; sometimes fings ain't what they used to be.

Force Fetch is training method (nothing more) that puts the dog under physical pressure; by performing a desired behaviour that pressure is removed by the dog. The pressure can be applied in a variety of ways, the e-collar is only one of them, ear pinch and toe hitch have been common in the past. There are a large number of training schemes available on DVD and in books that detail the process. As a result their is a good deal of commercial interest in moving FF onto the market.

E-collars have developed over the years to the point where the physical discomfort can be controlled and tailored to the individual dogs limits. If you place one on your arm it's very unpleasant but nothing like touching a cars HT lead. Once again commercial interest is a driver.

Field Trials in the US are tests of what might be called "extra-ordinary retrieving" where multiple marks at great distances over land and water are the norm. These retrieves have to be made by the dog running straight lines. It's very hard to see how the training could be achieved without the use of an e-collar; it's the only tool that works instantly over the distances. By their nature these trials do not test "game sense". Dogs bred from US Field Trial lines are obviously likely to excel at that discipline.

British Field trials do test game sense because they are conducted on as near a normal shooting day as possible; all game species may be encountered, fur and feather, runners, dead birds, marks and blinds. There is a concentration on manners also and in particular "vocalisation"; one yap and the dog is eliminated. Extraordinarily long retries are not the norm. Dogs bred from UK Field Trial lines are obviously likely to excel at that discipline. Clearly in the US there is a good deal of marketing and commercial pressure driving this message along.

There are some myths often accepted as fact. Amongst them are the following; I disagree with all of them for the reasons stated.

FF makes a more reliable retriever...No. Training (combined with a good breed line)makes a reliable retriever. I have never seen a properly bred UK Lab refuse a retrieve, never, and collars are not used.

The collar is cruel...No. Idiots misusing it can be cruel.

"Amish" (ie non collar, non FF)training is cruel because it relies on hitting the dog, using rat shot, marbles from catapults, and severe physical punishment. No. idiots doing those things are cruel. Modern training is highly effective and requires a very minimum of negative reinforcement.

To produce a first rate hunting dog neither FF or the collar are required or mandatory; just look at a British FTCh on a hunting day. To compete in US Field Trials they are vital. You pays your money and takes your choice, and there are a lot of folks only too willing to help with the former.

Non FF and e collar books I recommend are "Gundog Sense and sensibility" by Wilson Stephens, "Training Retrievers" by Nigel Mann, and probably most useful for you "British Training for American Retrievers" by Vic Barlow. For FF (non ecollar) check out the AHDC site for "Training the Sporting DOg". For FF (and collar) check the Green Book by the NAVHDA. Stuff by John and Amy Dahl, Mike Lardy, Evan Graham, Rex Carr are regarded as standard FF works.

Regards
Eug