Does your akita fetch?
Hi,
I have an akita inu who is ten months old. We go to a class once a week where i am teaching her cent tracking and also to retrieve she is very good at the cent tracking but has no interest in chasing an item to retrieve it i have since heard a few people say most akita's do not like to fetch items
is this true in your opinion?
I have an akita inu who is ten months old. We go to a class once a week where i am teaching her cent tracking and also to retrieve she is very good at the cent tracking but has no interest in chasing an item to retrieve it i have since heard a few people say most akita's do not like to fetch items
is this true in your opinion?
Comments
I've heard this too (most prominently in the movie Hachiko), but I'm not convinced it's true that Akitas don't like to fetch. Even my Shibas will chase and catch things, though only one of them returns it, but both still like the game.
And I don't know about willful dogs--most of the time its not that they are refusing to do something (ie. willful) but it's that they either don't know what you want, or you haven't made doing something more interesting to them than doing something else. They've got to be motivated, but I find that true of most dogs....
You will find top competive dogs have a compulsive retrive even if they come from breeds that have great natural retrieves, like labs or goldens, or if they are in a field of work that dosn't require retrieving. The work ethic build from a compulsive retrieve will spread out into all aspects of the dogs training and give you a much better finish.
----
So I did finally look it up, and yep, it's pretty aversive, and frankly I don't know why anyone would do that to a dog, esp. a dog that is not a retriever anyway (like an Akita). I guess it is this: http://www.gundogmag.com/2011/07/19/the-forced-retrieve/ Frankly, if someone tried that on some NKs I think they'd get bitten, and personally, I wouldn't blame the dog at all.
If I'm understanding correctly, the method jfunk uses is not this aversive? I'm still curious as to what the behavioral method would be?
And of course, I really wonder why this would be needed on an Akita? But perhaps I'm misunderstanding, and the "behavioral method" does not include pain/aversives in the training?
The method described in the link you put up is what I would classify as a "old school" method, not the most adversive I have see, but still up there. I completely agree using this method on akita's and the like could very possibly result in a muzzle punch or a bite.
As for the resons why teach a non retriever a compulsive retreive, there far to many to list, but here are a few of the top ones for me. Utility- I cant count the number of times I have droped my keys with my arms full, me dog will grab and carry them for me, as well as trash, papers, or get a hammer across the room while I am building something saving my knees and letting him particapate in the project. Fun- there is a nearly limitless way to use a retrieve as a lesiure time activity. Work- dogs love to have a job, just as you may have the dog where a back pack on a hike, you can do the same with a retrieve around the house, let them carry a hammer, or pail or what ever, or have them learn to pick up there toys and put them up on command. General improvement on all training- this is a aspect that a lot of people miss about the compulsive retreive, it build a work ethic in the dog, a drive to keep at a task, to do it even if they dont comprehend why they are.
There are many more reason, but I think these are a few of the key ones.
The current method that we use does have some adverse in it, but only after the dog understands how to turn it off, why it is there, and has been though stages lower level presure. Where as the old ways usualy just move from adversive to adversive with out setting up a system for the dog to under stand the presure or how to deal with it. The other key diffrence with the method we use is reading of the stress on the dog, and how well they understand the retrieve and incressing/decressing presure and diffculty of the retrieve as a result of that reading, and then helping the dog burn off that stress when nessecary.
This is far deeper than I ever had planed on going when I anwsered the question "does your akita fetch", lol. I hope this clears up all of your questions.
So, I'm still not sure how your method differs from what you consider the old school. Can you maybe provide some links to websites that describe it? Or a book I could by? As someone training both a nihon ken and a natural retrieving lab I'd be very curious to understand how your method might be better than what I'm trying.
You completely correct that idealy force fetch is part of a training program, though I would start at 14 days with imprinting (if you have access to the pup) rather than 8 weeks. But that is an idea situation, we often teach force fetch to dog who have little to no training program prior to coming to us, even dogs who have lived there entire lives in shelters, and the first part of the force fetch training for them is the concept of turning presure off. A dog with this proper foundation does learn much faster, and the understanding of how how to turn presure off applies to many more areas of training than just force fetch, just one example and probably the most used is heeling and maintaing a loose leash.
The main diffrence in the methods is the amount of preshure used. The method that we use involves constantly reading the dog for compliance or resistance, and the source of these, is the dog trying to please, avoid presure, unsure, stuborn, ect. And then incressing, decressing, removing, or chaning the presure to help through. For most dogs we do not ever have to apply more presure than a ear pinch, which we do diffrently than the most old school ways and is more of a anoyance to the dog than painful, and then overlay with low levels of remote collar so it can then be tought with hands off the dog at a distance.
There are dozzens of books that teach the old school method, but unfortatly I do not know of any that teach the method we use of a varation of it, though there may be some out there. The method we use is one that would be hard to put in writing, it is a bit of a art, I am being tought by my boss, and involves reading the dog, something I am not sure how you would put into words. If I was to recomend a book to teach a force fetch it would be "Tom Dokken's Retriever Training", which I am guessing by your use of "presure on/presure off", that you are useing or have atleast read though. Tom's system is probly the most well thought out systems I have seen in print, and lends most to the way dogs learn naturaly.
I dont know that there would be much diffrence in the final product between the two methods, but main advantage I see is that with dogs like NK's the application of to much presure, espicaly if they are having trouble understanding it or you arnt burning it off could very likely result in a bit. As far as the diffrences between training a NK vs. training a natural retreiver all we have to do is look at the genetic drift of the dogs. Both have been breed to be hunting dogs, but a reteriver was not only breed with a love to bring things to the hunter, but also to hunt in union with the hunter and take signals from the hunter to complete the hunt. While most of the NK's where breed to hunt independantly of the hunter, they find, trail, and tree or corner the prey, and the hunter comes in and finishes the hunt. So with that in mind its obvious that most retrievers will be more amicable to training than NK's. With genetic drift in mind we also have to rember that just as to human siblings, even twins, may have diffrent personalities and temperments, so may, and even more so, 2 dogs of the same breed. I feel that training a Akita to be a moderaly skilled retriver is just as impressive, or mabe more so, as training Lab to be a highly skilled retriver.
That said, I suspected the idea of the "forced retrieve" was something I would find problematic, and I do. Frankly, I'm disturbed to read that so many hunting dogs are trained in such a fashion (something I came across when trying to find out what a forced retrieve was). I find the idea that a person would take a puppy (at 2 weeks of age?!) and submit the dog to "pressure" (ie. avoid pain by obeying a person) appalling. I'm also disturbed that "for most dogs we don't have to apply more pressure than an ear pinch" which of course implies that some must get more pressure--like what, exactly? I think of my very difficult Shiba who can also withstand a lot of pain (I know this from the kinds of injuries he's had), and I think, what exactly would someone following this "training" method do to my dog? I imagine the shock collar would get turned up pretty high on him, and I'm thankful that no one is ever going to do that to him.
It will probably never happen in my lifetime, but I do look forward to the day that people don't continue to inflict pain on their dogs in the name of "training."
Reguarding the use of the ear pinch and some dogs taking more than a ear pinch. Firstly the "ear pinch" we use is vastly diffrent than the old school way. In the old school method you use your thump nail pressing aginist the inside of a dogs ear with the collar agininst the outside of the dogs ear to apply presure and some pain to compell the dog to complete its task, the ear pinch we use is an anoyance, we the meaty part of you thumb pressing on the inside of a dogs ear in a circular motion, no a plesant sinsation but not painful. This is the 2nd stage, for most dogs of our force fetch process after dogs have learned they can turn the presure off.
As far as adressing the rest of you statement, it boils down to motivational vs correctional training argument. I teach from a balanced stand point, and I understand that you disagree with the correctional side of my training method. Everyday I see problems casued by purely motivational traning, and caused by purley correctional training. I accept that its your choice to use the method you see fit, and I ask that you do the same for me. I work several times a week with dogs with agression, both wanted and unwanted, due to the balanced method we use I know that that I can put my akita in a sit stay while I work with a patrol dog on bite work, and OB isnt going to jump in because of excitement or protection of me, or if a client is brining in there dog agressive dog and it pulls away from them (or as we have all seen think that all dogs need to greet face to face no matter what the situation) that OB will hold his stay even while that dog is all teeth and toenails in his face trusting I will take care of the situation. This is the last I will say on our disagreement of training methods, I respect your choice, please respect mine.
I do disagree with your training methods, and I disagree with calling them "balanced" which suggests that purely positive reinforcement is "unbalanced." I notice that is often used evasively as well--I've encountered several trainers who train this way who will not explain what their training methods are, but they keep going back to the word "balanced" and I've learned that it is often used as code for variations on old school aversive training. I've heard many kinds of training referred to as "uncomfortable" but not "painful," but I disagree that an ear pinch or a shock from an electric collar is not "painful"--if it didn't cause "discomfort" to the dog, it wouldn't work. There are plenty of dogs who have been well trained with purely positive training, and these dogs can be trusted just as well as dogs trained with punishment based methods.
and I was not saying that you should not train your dog in the way you prefer. That's your right, as much as I may disagree with it. I was simply saying that I find using pain to train a dog to be abhorrent for me, and I wish that more people also saw things this way.
At six months old my lab is running blind retrieves, casting reliably, sitting on a whistle, handling all sorts of cover changes and water, running single and double marks out to 80 yards, and running triple marks out to 50 yards. It takes most dogs following an old school "program" a year or more to get to that point. Using the same techniques, I've gotten my big game hunting Kai Ken to find, point, and retrieve birds with some coaxing. Could I make him as proficient a retriever as my lab? Probably. But that would require me to force him to do something he doesn't enjoy.
I understand that you can accomplish remarkable things if you use the full range of training tools and techniques. But there's a bigger question here. The original post asked the question, "Does your Akita fetch?" At some point, the conversation turned to how important it is to be able to train your dog to fetch. But I have to ask, why train your dog to do something they don't enjoy? If I could get my dog to cook me dinner and bring me a beer on the couch by sticking a cattle prod up his ass, would that be worth it? It sounds to me like @jfunk thinks it is, but I have a hard time justifying that to myself.
I have never hidden the fact that I do use some adverse in my training, but it is far from only adverse only training. The reason we classify our traning methods as "balanced" is not to say that others unbalanced, but indicateing that the method we use is somewhere in the middle of the two extreems. An analogy I use sometimes to help illistrate this is, If I was to only build a house with a hammer and no other tools, I would be able to get a framework and roof on, but what if some of the boards where to long, how can I do the electrical with out a screwdriver, or the plumbing without a wrench. So yes I can build a house with only a hammer, but why not use all of the tools in my tool box to build a house that is much more functional or enjoyable?
While I am not a fan of the overuse of aversives in training, and I am most certainly against the Alpha/Dominance theories in dog training (which tends to be a common theme in the "Balanced Dog" meme), I do think we, as a forum, need to be a little more tolerant of people who have differing ideas in dog training.
I'd like us to take a similar approach to dog training as we do to our fellow members who hunt. I know there are many of us who do not hunt, or who would not want to use their dogs in a dangerous sport like hunting, but we still stay tolerant and non-judgmental toward our hunting members.
Can we try to take that approach with training as well?
Thanks!
~Brad
----
@jfunk - We've had other trainers and behaviorists come on the forum hoping to "school" us, only to find that the majority of this forum's member-base is pretty educated when it comes to dog training and behavior. I'm not saying this was your motivation in joining the forum, but I will ask that you not assume anything about the community's knowledge on any subject. The only thing I think is safe to assume (in this community) is that someone here will know something about anything you post.
If you don't want to discuss a specific training method in detail, or be questioned on it, then please don't bring it up. On this forum, I would just expect to be questioned - trust me, I know from experience! ;o)
Thanks!
~Brad
----
Dave, I was hoping you'd jump in here, since I knew you were training your hunting dog with positive training methods. I know it can be done, and I'm glad to hear someone else bring this up.
As for the analogy, I've heard that before too, many times . Part of my argument here is that it is not enjoyable for the dog if they are being hurt, and secondly I don't think of my dog simply for his or her function. I think of my dog as having a relationship with me, and in that relationship, I am not willing to inflict pain in that relationship, for any number of reasons. One is that I believe pain ("pressure") can be really harmful to certain dogs--a timid or fearful dog, like my female Shiba for example, could be totally ruined by any sort of aversive training.
@jfunk has so far not really engaged that much in a discussion of training. You've accused us of shutting down discussion, but what I've seen here is what I've seen from other so-called balanced trainers, who are evasive when asked about training methods, and who use the same analogies as above. I find the evasiveness of some "balanced" trainers to be disturbing, because why hide what the training method is? If we're really going to have a discussion of training methods--a difficult conversation indeed!--then we'd all have to be pretty open about what we were doing. I am glad that jfunk was willing to talk more about the training method, because even if I disagree with it, at least there was some clarity in what the method is.
That said, I know that I'm being more reactive than I need to be because of strong feelings about pain in dog training, and also bad experiences with other "balanced" trainers. Those things have nothing to do with jfunk, though they do of course influence my view of the "balanced" training method. (I'm thinking particularly of a trainer who for the longest time refused to even tell me what her methods were in a puppy class, and when I insisted, told me she wanted to put a prong collar on my 9 week old puppy, and possibly later, an e-collar too, and when I refused, called me an "idiot" and hung up. This person, who works at a fairly well respected kennel/training center here, didn't ask anything about me, my puppy, or his temperament or even breed, before deciding she knew better than I what he needed).
Anyway, clearly I disagree entirely on training philosophies, but like everyone else, I need to be careful about how to phrase things.
A perfect sit-stay in the face of a snarling dog is not a requirement for 99% of dog owners. That's a level of training that you use in your line of work, and it's mostly a marketing tool to demonstrate to potential clients what you, a professional, can accomplish.
In training my dogs, I know that I could use some real pressure on my lab if I wanted to. He LOVES to train and he'll do just about anything to figure out what I'm asking of him. Some pressure wouldn't do anything to lessen his love of training. My Kai, on the other hand, is far softer when it comes to training pressure. Any pressure and he shuts down, so if I use pressure with him (which I've had to in the past to curb deer chasing problems) I have to use it extremely judiciously.
I guess the issue for me is this. If you have a companion dog, and you can train it and build a solid relationship with it without using any aversive- or compulsion-based training methods, why not do it? Pressure, whether it is painful or not, is by definition uncomfortable for the dog.
On the other hand, if you are training a working dog to the highest levels, there may be some things that you can't train without pressure. But why train everything using discomfort as a tool when there are other ways to accomplish the same thing without the discomfort? I'm trying my hardest to train my lab without pressure, and I believe I can train him to a Master Hunter level without compulsion methods. The one area I'm stuck on, however, is delivery to hand. But I'm determined to figure it out without having to force fetch him. Why? Because a MH title on my dog is for my ego, and not his. So why should I put him through the discomfort?
@brada1878 I soulete you advaction of tolerance with diffrent training methods, if we fail to examine ways of doing something difrent from the way we do it, we will never truly know that the way we do it is the best way (that feels like a realy confusing sentence lol)
I hope I havnt put on the aire of coming in here to "school" anyone. I simply responed to the opening question of the thread, the anwsered the questions that came as a result of my responce, and then finaly defended the metods when they where scrutinzied.
I am here spificaly because of the wealth of knowledge I have observed here prior to becoming a member, the methods I use today will more than likely not be the meothods I use a year from now. I contantly strive to evolve with the most current studies, views, and ideas. That being said I do not just assimlate any info that is put in front of me, it must have merit, bassis, mesh with what I know, or have evidence to suport it if it dosn't mesh with what I know.
I have made every effort to explain my methods and discuss why I use them, at some points I don't go into detail on a process, because I have all to often seen dogs suffer due to people taking partial info and running with it. Probably the most common I see if negative association of e-collars, it is for this exact reason we won't sell a e-collar to a client they go thru a e-collar class.
@shibamistress You are correct I did mean defamation, but according to the legal dictionary I just checked (and for the record I have no, I repeat NO, legal back ground so I may be way off on my understanding) it fits the situation just perfectly. Here is a definition from a online dictionary, not a wordy but still carries the same meaning "Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation; decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person."
Reguarding the fact that I have not really engaged a discusion on training. First please refer to my final statment to brada1878. Secondly I am under contract by my employer to only train for them. It may be a bit of a strech, but for me to go into detail about the exact ways I train on a online forum is a breach of that contract. I really value my job and perfer to error way on the side of saftey. That being said This thread has been knocked way to far off track already, start up a new thread about training theory, methods, reasoning behind methods, k-9 psychology, ect, and I will chime in to the best of my ability.
I to have pre-conceived notions about people, situation, places, ect., we have to strive not to let our emotions force us to create prejust. There are charlitans, porly informed, poorly trained people in the world who present themselves experets in any number of areas, once we realize that they are fakes, we must be sure to not let them dirty our perception of others who work in that same area.
As far as the situation you mention with the trainer over the phone. I, like you would put not faith in someone who was developing a training plan for your dog with out having ever met it, none the less even lissening to your description of your dog. Also I will say I don't know of any viable reason you would put a pinch collar on a 9 week puppy, and would be very interested in hearing his reasoning, though I highly dbout it holds any water.
@dlroberts You are completly right, I have friends that have done no traning what so ever with there dog, and are completely happy with it, that is there decision to make. I did list seveal reasons in one of my post earlier as to why a person may want a compulsive retrieve on there companion dog.
A rock solid sit/stay is not a marketing tool, I would never intionaly put a client, there dog or mine, in a situation where one might get injured just to boost my reputation. The first real world application for a solid sit /stay that comes to mind is that pesky random (dog breed x) that some numbskull just lets out without supervision to do it bussiness. You are out for a walk and the fore mentioned thug runs out all teeth and toe nails, I am able to sit/stay my dog and deal with the situation, rather then potentialy risk injury to either dog, or myself if a fight where to break out.
You are exactly correct, presure (wether painful or not) is uncomfortable.
I commend you on your training of your retriever. You are essinaly building your house with only a hammer, and it sounds like a well build house. To do that training is a testament to both your training ability, and your dogs intelegence, and willingness to work with you. There was a video that origionaly brought me to this site several months back, it was of to akitas that where trained for ppd work. These akitas where up there with the best ppd akitas I have seen, though far from the best ppd dogs I have seen, I belive the trainer who trained them shows far more skill than the (hypothetical) trainer who trains the top ppd malonis in the world. Again I say congratulations on the level of training you have reached thruouh purly positive methods, and look forward to seeing when you get that master hunt title.
I applogive for any miss-spelling or gramer errors its been far to long of a day, and I am way to tired to read thru this and correct it