|
| Author |
Messages |
|
cwalt
MH
Posts:180
 |
| 09/22/2007 8:46 AM |
|
|
The popular mythology among dog trainers and dog training enthusiasts is
that pack hierarchies are mediated by aggressive interactions and dominance
is the key to pack leadership. I have long advocated a very different
social structure mechanism in which a variable pack status is maintained by
deference rather than aggression. The original ideas about wolf dominance
hierarchy by aggression apparently originated in a paper by Schenkel from
1947: "Expressions Studies on Wolves." . The idea of a dominance hierarchy
was supported by Mech in his earlier papers but he has since reconsidered
the structure of wolf packs and published his ideas that are somewhat closer
to mine. The significance of these differences of view on training cannot
be overestimated, the dominance training idea is wrong.
I maintain that you cannot become the "pack leader" by aggressive dominance
and that dogs do not respond to aggression in the ways that most dog
trainers think that they do. I suspect that one of the first responses of a
dog to an overaggressive training regimen is submission along with a marked
decline in cooperation. The ultimate result of the aggressive dominance
training idea is a dog that is obedient but may express its lack of
cooperation in more subtle ways. The more obvious cases of training related
uncooperative behaviors include burying or abandoning of game out of the
handler's line of sight, eating or mangling of game and blinking, the
deliberate avoidance of game. Among versatile dogs in the US these
behaviors are not uncommon in tests and apologists for such kinds of dog
behaviors often claim that their dogs are "independent" rather than
uncooperative.
The dominance training concept is widespread in several versatile dog groups
in North America and as a consequence the various breeds tested and selected
for breeding are "tough enough to take the training". Yes, these modern dog
lines are temperamentally tougher than they used to be but they also require
more dominance to train. I appreciate tough dogs but I don't want to raise
and train dogs that are a daily test of will to maintain. Many US trainers
love these kinds of dogs and speak about their independence and toughness.
Such dogs are apparently satisfactory for repeated training and testing but
they can also become uncooperative and often unproductive companions in
actual hunting situations. I would rather have a softer cooperative dog
that wants to produce game for me than an animal that performs through sheer
obedience. I want a cooperative low maintenance dog, one that has to be
trained only once for a lifetime of hunting companionship.
Cj
|
|
|
|
|
stuwest
JH
Posts:39
|
| 09/22/2007 9:17 AM |
|
| Please detail your concept of deference more precisely.
Stu, Dawn & Hunter West
Founder, Pointing Labradors
"Letting Labs Point the Way!"
Alma Bottom Pointing Labradors
N4758 350th Street, Elmwood, WI 54740
(715) 639-3900 h&w (715)684-9892 cell
StuWest@AlmaBottom.com www.AlmaBottom.com
Cj wrote:
>
> The popular mythology among dog trainers and dog training enthusiasts
> is that pack hierarchies are mediated by aggressive interactions and
> dominance is the key to pack leadership. I have long advocated a very
> different social structure mechanism in which a variable pack status
> is maintained by deference rather than aggression. The original ideas
> about wolf dominance hierarchy by aggression apparently originated in
> a paper by Schenkel from 1947: "Expressions Studies on Wolves." . The
> idea of a dominance hierarchy was supported by Mech in his earlier
> papers but he has since reconsidered the structure of wolf packs and
> published his ideas that are somewhat closer to mine. The
> significance of these differences of view on training cannot be
> overestimated, the dominance training idea is wrong.
>
> I maintain that you cannot become the "pack leader" by aggressive
> dominance and that dogs do not respond to aggression in the ways that
> most dog trainers think that they do. I suspect that one of the first
> responses of a dog to an overaggressive training regimen is submission
> along with a marked decline in cooperation. The ultimate result of
> the aggressive dominance training idea is a dog that is obedient but
> may express its lack of cooperation in more subtle ways. The more
> obvious cases of training related uncooperative behaviors include
> burying or abandoning of game out of the handler's line of sight,
> eating or mangling of game and blinking, the deliberate avoidance of
> game. Among versatile dogs in the US these behaviors are not uncommon
> in tests and apologists for such kinds of dog behaviors often claim
> that their dogs are "independent" rather than uncooperative.
>
> The dominance training concept is widespread in several versatile dog
> groups in North America and as a consequence the various breeds tested
> and selected for breeding are "tough enough to take the training".
> Yes, these modern dog lines are temperamentally tougher than they used
> to be but they also require more dominance to train. I appreciate
> tough dogs but I don't want to raise and train dogs that are a daily
> test of will to maintain. Many US trainers love these kinds of dogs
> and speak about their independence and toughness. Such dogs are
> apparently satisfactory for repeated training and testing but they can
> also become uncooperative and often unproductive companions in actual
> hunting situations. I would rather have a softer cooperative dog that
> wants to produce game for me than an animal that performs through
> sheer obedience. I want a cooperative low maintenance dog, one that
> has to be trained only once for a lifetime of hunting companionship.
> Cj
> |
|
|
|
|
cwalt
MH
Posts:180
|
| 09/22/2007 9:34 AM |
|
| Please detail your concept of deference more precisely.
Stu
Start here.
http://www.davemech.org/schenkel/index.html
|
|
|
|
|
jmurr
MH
Posts:158
|
| 09/22/2007 2:00 PM |
|
| It's well known, Cj, you are a WEIRDO
I can't understand why anyone would want to hunt an uncooperative dog. Soon those
folks will be able to get a robot dog from the Lego toy makers and they won't have
to train at all once the thing is programmed. Gee, Garmin already has the GPS
tracking technology out on the retail market...
Jere
> The popular mythology among dog trainers and dog training enthusiasts is
> that pack hierarchies are mediated by aggressive interactions and dominance
> is the key to pack leadership. I have long advocated a very different
> social structure mechanism in which a variable pack status is maintained by
> deference rather than aggression. The original ideas about wolf dominance
> hierarchy by aggression apparently originated in a paper by Schenkel from
> 1947: "Expressions Studies on Wolves." . The idea of a dominance hierarchy
> was supported by Mech in his earlier papers but he has since reconsidered
> the structure of wolf packs and published his ideas that are somewhat closer
> to mine. The significance of these differences of view on training cannot
> be overestimated, the dominance training idea is wrong.
>
> I maintain that you cannot become the "pack leader" by aggressive dominance
> and that dogs do not respond to aggression in the ways that most dog
> trainers think that they do. I suspect that one of the first responses of a
> dog to an overaggressive training regimen is submission along with a marked
> decline in cooperation. The ultimate result of the aggressive dominance
> training idea is a dog that is obedient but may express its lack of
> cooperation in more subtle ways. The more obvious cases of training related
> uncooperative behaviors include burying or abandoning of game out of the
> handler's line of sight, eating or mangling of game and blinking, the
> deliberate avoidance of game. Among versatile dogs in the US these
> behaviors are not uncommon in tests and apologists for such kinds of dog
> behaviors often claim that their dogs are "independent" rather than
> uncooperative.
>
> The dominance training concept is widespread in several versatile dog groups
> in North America and as a consequence the various breeds tested and selected
> for breeding are "tough enough to take the training". Yes, these modern dog
> lines are temperamentally tougher than they used to be but they also require
> more dominance to train. I appreciate tough dogs but I don't want to raise
> and train dogs that are a daily test of will to maintain. Many US trainers
> love these kinds of dogs and speak about their independence and toughness.
> Such dogs are apparently satisfactory for repeated training and testing but
> they can also become uncooperative and often unproductive companions in
> actual hunting situations. I would rather have a softer cooperative dog
> that wants to produce game for me than an animal that performs through sheer
> obedience. I want a cooperative low maintenance dog, one that has to be
> trained only once for a lifetime of hunting companionship.
> Cj
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
rospigan
MH
Posts:372
|
| 09/24/2007 2:21 AM |
|
|
Cj wrote:
>>>I maintain that you cannot
become the "pack leader" by aggressive dominance
and that dogs do not
respond to aggression in the ways that most dog
trainers think that they
do. I suspect that one of the first responses of a
dog to an
overaggressive training regimen is submission along with a marked
decline in
cooperation. The ultimate result of the aggressive dominance
training
idea is a dog that is obedient but may express its lack of
cooperation in
more subtle ways. The more obvious cases of training related
uncooperative behaviors include burying or abandoning of game out of the
handler's line of sight, eating or mangling of game and blinking, the
deliberate avoidance of game. Among versatile dogs in the US these
behaviors are not uncommon in tests and apologists for such kinds of dog
behaviors often claim that their dogs are "independent" rather than
uncooperative>>>
I find the modern demand for "instant obedience" most repulsive. 10 years
ago when we started to offer gundog training we usually had 10 meetings mixed
theory and practice, totally about 30 hours. To me that is still not enough, I
would like to have at least 40 - 50 hours. There is a retired man who takes care
of all the practical things when advertising the class, receiving the
applications, payment and such. We only hold the classes and supply the material
for study. Anyway this man has found it necessary during the years to shorten
the classes hour by hour in order to get applications. People are getting more
and more busy, particularly those with children. Their entire life is regulated
by the children who has to be driven from one activity to another, day after
day, year after year. It is extremely time consuming, stressful and expensive.
The parents have to do it since the neighbours parent do it. It is kind of a
rat race that goes faster and faster. They want the dog, they
want it to be obedient but the fact is that they should not have a dog at all.
For example some years ago one of the pupils owning a boar dog invited me to
hunt wild boar with him later that autumn. I met him after x-mas and he said
that he had not had the time to even touch his gun, lot less arrange for a boar
shoot. He wanted but he could not... a prison in his own family!
My conclusion is that you have to be a strong person if you want to
successfully own a gundog today. You must be strong enough to moderate and say
No! to your children. You must be strong enough to say No! to too much work and
above all you must be strong enough to say No! to your neighbours when they are
stressing you to do this and that, preferably with their children so that they
could have a few minutes rest!
Who is pouring fuel to this rat race? It is the commercial world that you
find on the telly, internet and different other media. They are constantly
whipping our children and young, inexperienced folks to consume more and more of
this and that. In the end the profit is all that matters, not the way they get
the profit.
We pay for this and our dogs pay for it even more. Whatever they need they
have no change to get enough of it to feel well. They must perform at trials and
on the field, and perform well. They are given a handy size tin with instant,
condensed obedience. If this is not working we change the values we rule the
dogs against. Dogs that are governed by e-collars and harsh handling are made
into the standard and voila´- problem solved!
Torsti
Borta Med Vindens Kennel
"Ask not what your dog
can do for you.
Ask what you can do for your dog."
www.rospigan.net
|
|
|
|
|
tc
MH
Posts:117
|
| 09/24/2007 8:50 PM |
|
|
Subject: [working-gundog] on the dominance hierarchy theory
>>Many US trainers
love these kinds of dogs and speak about their independence and toughness.
Such dogs are apparently satisfactory for repeated training and testing but
they can also become uncooperative and often unproductive companions in
actual hunting situations. I would rather have a softer cooperative dog
that wants to produce game for me than an animal that performs through sheer
obedience. I want a cooperative low maintenance dog, one that has to be
trained only once for a lifetime of hunting companionship.
Cj<<
I am one of those US trainers. I have been training dogs for over 30 years.
Six days a week, year round. I had 50 dogs in my summer camp this past
summer
with two trainers helping me to train these dogs. We camped out in the White
Mountains of Arizona and did nothing but train dogs from 5 in the morning to
6 in
the evening, six days/week.
I train more dogs in one year, than most people train in their lifetime.
This is my ideal dog:
Tough? absolutely! I want a dog that will work as long
As I want him/her to. Dogs that will work in driving rain, 40 MPH winds,
Freezing rain, or 100 degree heat. Dogs that can handle rocks, sand, cactus,
ice, sandburs, or whatever I toss it out on. Dogs that will retrieve on land
or in water.
I also want a dog that excels at both the hunting of the game and the
handling
of the cover be it hunting chukar in Idaho, pheasants in South Dakota,
Sharptails in North Dakota, bobwhite quail in Kansas, valley and mountain
quail
in Oregon, & Scalies-mearns-gambels in New Mexico.
Independent? Without a doubt. I want a dog that will hunt for birds, on it's
own without asking me for instructions or direction. He/she is the expert on
birds,
Not me. Take me to the birds, I will tag along and shoot them for you . .
.When
He/she is on point, and the birds leave, I expect that dog to relocate on
it's
own and find them again. I want him/her to do this with no instruction from
me.
If this dog has a stop to flush, and I am not nearby, I expect him/her to
move
on and find more birds. Again, without instruction from me. I want a dog
that has
the ability and the intelligence to think for itself in these situations.
Manners? I demand it. I want a dog that sticks to business. I expect that
dog to
be steady to wing and shot. It should honor another dog on it's own and hold
calmly and quietly while the bird is shot over the pointing dog and
retrieved.
I also want a perfect retriever. A Dog that will retrieve promptly to hand.
A
dog that can track a wounded bird for a great distance and bring it back
without
any command given.
Cooperative? I would expect nothing less. A dog that is well bred, that has
the
right mind, and that is trained properly will perform for you at all costs.
It
will have a never-ending desire to "please" you, and it will be happy and
excited
to do so.
Soft? Only in the need for correction. An intelligent dog will not need
physical
correction. It will only need a trainer that can let the dog know when
he/she is
displeased. That, and that alone, will achieve the desired results.
Great dogs are born, and great trainers bring out their natural abilities.
Most experienced
dog people can spot a mechanical dog in an instance. Those dogs don't win
much in
Competetive field trialing. The great dogs, perform with exuberance and
excitement.
They simply look good doing what they are bred to do.
They perform with such amazing ability and talent that their performances
will be indelibly
burned into your memory. These are the great ones. Those that have the
experience and
the knowledge to recognize these dogs have without a doubt enjoyed watching
one of the most
wonderful events possible in the dog world today!
tc
|
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|
ActiveForums 3.7
|
You must be logged in to use this module.
|
 |
Membership: |
 |
Latest:
NDScoutfam |
 |
New Today:
2 |
 |
New Yesterday:
1 |
 |
Overall:
3254 |
 |
People Online: |
 |
Visitors:
106 |
 |
Members:
0 |
 |
Total:
106 |
Online Now:
|
|
|
|
|