# Force Fetch, explaining why to others.



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

Is there an article somewhere that was written about WHY we do force fetch? Met some trainers recently that couldn't quite understand why it's necessary or the what the point was. I was not clear enough getting my point across.

I thought that someone on here has probably written something or know someone that has....

Thanks!

Sue Puff


----------



## sdnordahl (Sep 1, 2012)

I've always said it takes the impulse to retrieve and turns it into a comand so there is no question what is expected.


----------



## truthseeker (Feb 2, 2012)

FF, Witch includes hold, fetch, FTP, min T's and T work. is all there to train the dog to work through pressure. AKA, too turn off the collar.

Keith


----------



## Don Lietzau (Jan 8, 2011)

suepuff said:


> Is there an article somewhere that was written about WHY we do force fetch? Met some trainers recently that couldn't quite understand why it's necessary or the what the point was. I was not clear enough getting my point across.
> 
> I thought that someone on here has probably written something or know someone that has....
> 
> ...


Why?
I know why and that's what really matters.
Don


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Since you asked...

What is force fetch?

The Myths

More appropriately, there are more misperceptions than myths surrounding the process of force fetching retrievers. I think it starts with the term force. To the novice trainer/dog lover that word summons visions of a dog being thrashed or brutalized in some way or another. There are stories, some true, some contrived, about harsh measures being used to force fetch, like using bottle openers, pliers, etc. Nothing like that will appear as a suggestion in this text because it has nothing to do with how I approach it. Let’s start there and clear the air about that subject.

	Force: In retriever training this is a term that describes the use of pressure to achieve a sure and reliable response. Influence that moves something, says the dictionary. The amount of pressure is specified more by the dog than by the trainer. Often very little actual pressure is needed.
 Pressure: something that affects thoughts and behavior in a powerful way, usually in the form of several outside influences working together persuasively.

Nowhere in any definition of these terms is abuse or brutality, nor should it be. Like many things, force and pressure are either good or bad depending on how they are applied. 

Another misperception is often the assumption that retrievers do all of their retrieving functions by nature, and shouldn't need to be forced. Frankly, about all that dogs do by nature is to chase after motion, and follow their curiosity about what they smell. We cultivate the rest, both passively and through the use of pressure. Even the most basic puppy-fetch conditioning we all do to get them started is an act we contrive. These dogs retrieve out of self-centered impulses. Bringing birds to us is not a nature-driven act. Thankfully, it can be easily engineered!

Take a well-bred pup and turn him loose in a fenced yard for three years, or so. Leave him strictly to the influences of nature. Then go out one day and see how well he does on the type of retrieving work that would make him useful in game conservation. Compare his work to even an average gun dog with amateur training. How do you think it would come out? No brainer! Whatever natural gifts a dog may have, without some kind of guidance they will tend to be of little value.

It’s not a negative statement that retrievers need training to do the work we need them to do in the field and marsh. That type of work requires a dog to have good natural abilities, but also to be taught how to put those abilities to work because the skills and functions we require are our idea. We invented them. It’s okay. That’s why dogs and trainers are so often referred to as a team. Both contribute to the effort.

The Reality

First of all, force fetch is more than just one thing. It is a definable process with clear goals. But, within the process are several steps or phases. Those steps will be laid out later, but first let’s examine the goals.

1.	To establish a standard for acceptable mouth habits.
2.	To provide the trainer with a tool to maintain those habits.
3.	To provide the trainer with a tool to assure compliance with the command to retrieve.
4.	To form the foundation for impetus (momentum).
5.	Pressure conditioning.

Mouth habits include such important items as fetching on command, even when your dog may be distracted, or moody, or any number of things that might interfere with compliance. Sure, you may get away for years without having such problems, but being smart and being lucky are not the same thing. Force fetch gives you a tool to handle this when it comes up, plus some insurance that it is less likely to come up due to this training. 

Along with compulsion issues we need to mention a proper hold, and delivery on command. If my pheasant is punctured I want it to be from pellets, not teeth. That actually covers some ground in all of the first three categories.

Let’s spend a little time on number four. Lots of people use the terms momentum and style interchangeably. I think it’s important to distinguish between the two because of how they relate to this subject. Force fetch is the foundation of trained momentum, and provides a springboard into subsequent steps of basic development. Style has little to do with this. Here’s why.

	Style: A combination of speed, enthusiasm, and just plain hustle that you see in a dog going toward a fall. Style is the product of natural desire and athleticism. 
	Momentum: In a retriever, the compulsion from the dog’s point of origin; defined in the dictionary as “the force possessed by a body in motion, Measure of movement: a quantity that expresses the motion of a body and its resistance to slowing down. It is equal to the product of the body’s mass and velocity”.

Clearly, this quality is a tremendously valuable asset in the running of blinds and overcoming diversion pressure. It even applies to running long marks, and/or marks through tough cover or terrain. When you need a dog to drive hundreds of yards against the draining influences of terrain, cover, re-entries, and all of the real and perceived factors that are so commonly momentum-robbing, having a dog with a reservoir of momentum is immensely valuable. Force fetch is where that reservoir is established, and can be built upon.

From the foundation of a forced fetch most modern methods progress through stages that continue to build on this principle. Stick fetch, Collar Condition to fetch, Walking fetch, Force to pile, and Water force are all extensions of the work we do in ear pinch or toe hitch, which are popular means to get it all going. When a dog has finished such a course the result is an animal far more driven, with much more resolve to overcome obstacles and distance and distractions.

Lest we forget ~

I am not suggesting that we harm or abuse dogs in any of this force work I’ve spoken of. The late Jim Kappes said, “A properly forced dog shouldn't look forced”. I completely agree. Momentum and style are distinct terms, each with their own meanings, as pertains to retrievers. I firmly believe that both are traits that should co-exist in a well-trained retriever.

Evan


----------



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

sdnordahl said:


> I've always said it takes the impulse to retrieve and turns it into a comand so there is no question what is expected.



But Steven, IF they're a natural retriever with phenominal desire, WHY force fetch?  

My answer to the one person that was a service dog trainer (who I couldn't believe didnt force fetch) was, "What happens if the owner falls, drops the phone-tells the dog to retrieve it, and he doesn't?"......but he's driven to retrieve they say. I personally wouldn't want to hope the dog decides he should retrieve the phone....


----------



## Brian Courser (Feb 10, 2010)

Bill Spencer wrote an article as to the why. I think the line at the end of it really hit home with me. Something along the lines " if I had a German Shepherd I would FF him for the bond that is created once you get through it"


----------



## Doug Grant (Dec 12, 2005)

The important reason to force fetch is to establish a good working relationship between dog and handler. When force fetch is properly completed, both dog and handler understand how to resolve issues.


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

suepuff said:


> But Steven, IF they're a natural retriever with phenominal desire, WHY force fetch?
> 
> My answer to the one person that was a service dog trainer (who I couldn't believe didnt force fetch) was, "What happens if the owner falls, drops the phone-tells the dog to retrieve it, and he doesn't?"......but he's driven to retrieve they say. I personally wouldn't want to hope the dog decides he should retrieve the phone....


Prolly not a great example in support of your argument. I've known someone that has had multiple service dogs and they NEVER failed to do as asked. At least in my presence. Not sure how they are trained but I'd wager they aren't FF.

Hillman has a way to do it that is not the traditional program. I have not seen it but apparently it works.


Dead horse.


----------



## truthseeker (Feb 2, 2012)

Evan said:


> Since you asked...
> 
> What is force fetch?
> 
> ...


Even;

This is a much more thorough way to explain force fetch. Can I save it?

Keith


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

Without all the metaphors and mumble jumble…a dog that understands in human terms to do what is expected of us in their terms and show reliably in those terms.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

BJGatley said:


> Without all the metaphors and mumble jumble…a dog that understands in human terms to do what is expected of us in their terms and show reliably in those terms.


Can some dogs or all dogs do this without FF? Some have greater drive and desire and I would think you COULD get away without FF? IMO


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

To establish conditioned response to a trained command.


----------



## Rick S (Mar 6, 2013)

I show them an example by pulling my keys out of my pocket and dropping them on the floor. Say fetch and watch him happily pick them up and deliver to hand. I say that's why I FF, plus I'm too lazy to pick things up.


----------



## Jay Dufour (Jan 19, 2003)

Before I changed the term in the early nineties,to "conditioned to deliver to hand" I would get the ole " my dog does not need to be forced " thingy from almost every client. After the whole speel about why ,and how,they never seemed to get it,as they looked at me with the hairy eyeball. When I changed it,they say "awesome"


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Mary Lynn Metras said:


> Can some dogs or all dogs do this without FF? Some have greater drive and desire and I would think you COULD get away without FF? IMO


Just a greenhorn here, but I would have to think there are dogs who could get by without it. The problem to me would be identifying them. I guess I understand the desire (not by you, Mary Lynn) to believe that a given dog would do what we want simply because they want to, but I would rather know that they were compelled to do what I tell them to do. Plus there is the whole pressure conditioning aspect.

I guess I operate under the theory that, like an umbrella, it is better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. YMMV.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

truthseeker said:


> Even;
> 
> This is a much more thorough way to explain force fetch. Can I save it?
> 
> Keith


Sure Keith. Enjoy!

Evan


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Mary Lynn Metras said:


> Can some dogs or all dogs do this without FF? Some have greater drive and desire and I would think you COULD get away without FF? IMO


Force fetch is not performed to create drive in dogs lacking it. It is my firm belief that only _Force Fetch_ can do what Force Fetch does. "Hold" and a hand delivery are co-benefits of what is, in reality, a first rate program of pressure conditioning. That produces a far more stable, reliable, distraction-resistant working dog than stop gap measures that only produce delivery to hand. 

Evan


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

gdluck said:


> Prolly not a great example in support of your argument. I've known someone that has had multiple service dogs and they NEVER failed to do as asked. At least in my presence. Not sure how they are trained but I'd wager they aren't FF.
> 
> Hillman has a way to do it that is not the traditional program. I have not seen it but apparently it works.
> 
> ...


 I know the service dog organization I worked with DID FF their dogs. (one of the largest organizations in the country)


----------



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

Bridget, our local group does FF also, to produce reliable dogs. This is another group in central VA that uses postive methods only. They were observing while I was temperament testing a litter and asked what my dogs did and how I trained. They didn't understand the need when my dogs were obviously so willing to retrieve.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

suepuff said:


> They didn't understand the need when my dogs were obviously so willing to retrieve.


One is not dependent on the other. It's amazing to me that this misplaced idea still exists.

Evan


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Evan said:


> One is not dependent on the other. It's amazing to me that this misplaced idea still exists.
> 
> Evan


Evan the question does still exist but maybe not in the retriever world. I have a lot of people ask me why do we FF??? especially when I show them my pup and how he retrieves so well. Yes I do understand your comment and thanks for answering to my comment.


----------



## Trevor Toberny (Sep 11, 2004)

Is it ok to do more retrieves once the dog is older and FF'd?


----------



## IowaBayDog (May 17, 2006)

Luke T said:


> Is it ok to do more retrieves once the dog is older and FF'd?


If they are handler thrown bumpers, what value are you getting by repeating the same retrieves over and over again? The real question is for a given setup why would you want to run the same marks multiple times? There are methods that will run a concept as all singles and then repeat as a triple or quad but running the same mark over and over doesn't buy you anything except exercise for the dog. During the FF process you will go thru the T work and do a lot of repetitions for blinds but on marks it doesn't really get you much.


----------



## luvmylabs23139 (Jun 4, 2005)

suepuff said:


> But Steven, IF they're a natural retriever with phenominal desire, WHY force fetch?
> 
> My answer to the one person that was a service dog trainer (who I couldn't believe didnt force fetch) was, "What happens if the owner falls, drops the phone-tells the dog to retrieve it, and he doesn't?"......but he's driven to retrieve they say. I personally wouldn't want to hope the dog decides he should retrieve the phone....


Those of us with retrievers deal with this on a regular basis at the ob club. Most with non retrievers just don't get that we are not about to load a dumbell up with peanut butter, not correct a young dog for a drop etc. I'm at the point of just saying well my dog does that part of the job. I just have to work on convincing him to return over a jump and sit front. I do not explain anymore, I just tell them to get over it.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

suepuff said:


> But Steven, IF they're a natural retriever with phenominal desire, WHY force fetch?
> 
> .


Have NEVER had to force a dog to do a danged thing. Thing is- is that the "natural retriever" doesn't possess the skill set to do _*un-*__natural_ tasks. Really 'Puff,.. it's more about your goals and expectations with the dog "in the end".

If someone decides to FF' just to get a "hand delivery", the best thing is to forget about even doing it. 'Ya don't have to FF' to accomplish that, and you'd only waste your time along with the dawgs' time while in it.


----------



## truthseeker (Feb 2, 2012)

Like you said, It's all in what you expect.

Keith


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

suepuff said:


> But Steven, IF they're a natural retriever with phenominal desire, WHY force fetch?
> 
> My answer to the one person that was a service dog trainer (who I couldn't believe didnt force fetch) was, "What happens if the owner falls, drops the phone-tells the dog to retrieve it, and he doesn't?"......but he's driven to retrieve they say. I personally wouldn't want to hope the dog decides he should retrieve the phone....


Sue, you are venturing into a world of people where you are going to find your training methods are really not understood or practiced. I did some volunteer work with Penn Vet School's working dog development program. On the first day we had a dog that wouldn't bring back a toy in an obedience exercise. I went to the truck and got a long line. Showed the "trainer" how we reel in a dog to teach them the rules of toy play so we could use it effectively in training. There was another volunteer there with little to no training experience. Not only did this "trainer" reject the idea, she later pulled me aside and asked me not to "undermine" her in front of other volunteers. Stated she knew what she was doing and had extensive experience. Later I talked to her and found out she had owned and trained something like 3-4 FEMA S&R dogs. She had been on two or three deployments in over 20 years of being on a task force. As time went on there this person became the training manager and I stopped volunteering. There was never a problem between us but I found the training they do in that arena terribly unorganized and far from effective. They can get a dog to run from platform to platform in a direction and control exercise but remove the platforms and you're screwed. None of the program managers would listen to me and I had a 1 1/2 year old (force fetched) dog at the time that I taught the same exercise in a week, while it took them a couple of months. If you saw the casting alone you would cringe. Even with a demonstration they stood by their methods (which didn't include any type of FF). 6 months later most of the dogs in the program would still run off with a toy instead of returning it to the handler so that the next repetition could begin. I was gone fairly quickly as I just couldn't handle the frustration. 

Addressing your question, there are a large range of things people believe are the purpose of FF as we know it. The problem isn't presenting the information to the person but rather, the credibility of the source. If they don't know and "respect" the trainer writing the article you are talking to a wall in most cases.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Jay Dufour said:


> Before I changed the term in the early nineties,to "conditioned to deliver to hand" I would get the ole " my dog does not need to be forced " thingy from almost every client. After the whole speel about why ,and how,they never seemed to get it,as they looked at me with the hairy eyeball. When I changed it,they say "awesome"


The old term "force" is so misplaced and misused that at this point the "modern, humane, science based positive only training" movement uses it routinely to (inaccurately) demonize any training that contains less than desirable outcomes for the dog. As a group, it would pay us all to come up with a more PC way to describe the process (IMHO).


----------



## twall (Jun 5, 2006)

While FF helps with lots of training I think the one thing it does best is allow us to train/condition our dog to pressure. It allows us to incrementally introduce pressure and teach our dogs that there is a way out and everything will be fine if they are obedient. We take advantage of our dogs natural desire to carry things in their mouth with FF.

A lot of FF is not intuitive. It can be hard to explain and even harder to understand to the uninitiated. There is a segment of the greater retriever community that builds their reputation on not doing FF. Many of us thought we would never use FF in the past. Many use FF and don't really understand what they are doing, it is just part of the program.

A more 'PC' may also help FF to be better understood. As it is now FF can be a lightning rod that often divides people. Our descriptions often lead to the misunderstanding.

Tom


----------



## Pam Spears (Feb 25, 2010)

I was at a Connie Cleveland *obedience* seminar last spring. One of the seminar participants had asked for help with teaching the retrieve (with a dumbbell for obedience.) Connie did a 30 minute demonstration of teaching what she called "the trained retrieve." It was force fetch all the way: ear pinch, then e-collar. There were a few wall-eyed stares when she did the ear pinch. Those stares got bigger when she pulled out the e-collar. The dog made excellent progress in 30 minutes, and surprised everyone by fetching from the floor very nicely the next day. This was an obedience dog, not a field dog. Connie stated that every obedience dog regardless of breed would benefit from learning a trained retrieve because of the difference it makes in your relationship: the dog goes from playing a game to doing a job. She even went so far as to say that every dog with a trained retrieve becomes essentially a service dog because they will pick up anything: keys, gloves, whatever you drop. Her own example was that after knee surgery her own dog would pick up her crutch when she dropped it. Her use of the phrase "trained retrieve" made a huge difference in the way the crowd accepted the lesson. I suspect if she had called it "force fetch" they would have shut down and refused to consider the information.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

To the OP, I think there are times when an explanation of what and why we do things is a waste of time. If someone really is interested and wants to know, they are already a long way to appreciating the efforts and theory. More often, it is the one with an anti force agenda that wants to draw you into the conversation. I know when I began, I took a long, long time to "get it" and ff my first dog. (Our Janitor in Charge helped me out a lot with this). But by the time we did, my husband and I did an excellent job with that dog. These days if someone starts getting really worked up about the question, I do what another posted here, drop my keys, glasses, transmitter (!) or whatever and have Indy pick it up for me. I once sent him out into the field to pick up the blind stake. He did it.


----------



## dpate (Mar 16, 2011)

What Tom Wall said...

As I'm getting into advanced training with my dog, I can see where the pressure conditioning comes in. There is so much pressure in advanced training and I'm not talking about the collar. The tight lines, handling to fight factors, recalls, really fine lining, etc. all seem to put a lot of pressure on my dog. FF and a well implemented basics program are a key factor in helping the dog get through this with success in my opinion.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

There's a lot of really good reasons to force fetch.
However, a person only needs one reason, be it relevant or not, to not force fetch.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

And BTW, even those that speak of force fetch with nought but disdain, and publicly rebuff it's proponents at every opportunity, do so themselves engage in some form of it.

That is, if they actually have a dog that reliably retrieves.


----------



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

Thanks everyone! I wasn't looking for an excuse as to why I do it, but an explanation as to why we use it as a tool in training. I like Connies methods and they are fair. The perception I see with PP trainers is that we are being cruel to out dogs. I don't feel that way, but.....others do. 

To play devils advocate, as I've had a lot of PMs and emails, it seems that there are a good number of dogs that hunt reliably without force fetch and even compete. Are we not giving our dogs enough credit? Should we only do FF or a trained retrieve with certain individuals?

NOTE: ALL my dogs are FFd.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

suepuff said:


> .....Should we only do FF or a trained retrieve with certain individuals?


 If you are going to train your dog to handle, and I mean actually "for realz" handle, (not just run out and hunt-em-up in the direction of a cast) you are going to need to FF at some point.

The reason is that indirect pressure has a very powerful influence on behavior(s). 
And in order to train a dog to handle through/past influential factors, you frequently have to apply and use indirect pressure.

Unless/until the dog has been through FF and FTP, indirect pressure also indirectly corrects the dog for fetching. In other words, it punishes the behaviour of fetching.


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

suepuff said:


> Met some trainers recently that couldn't quite understand why it's necessary or the what the point was.


FF redefines the relationship between you and the dog.

Before FF you ASK the dog to comply with a command and he does it if he feels like it. After FF you TELL the dog what to do and he does it because you SAID so.


----------



## kdeckels (Sep 12, 2009)

Pam Spears said:


> I was at a Connie Cleveland *obedience* seminar last spring. One of the seminar participants had asked for help with teaching the retrieve (with a dumbbell for obedience.) Connie did a 30 minute demonstration of teaching what she called "the trained retrieve." It was force fetch all the way: ear pinch, then e-collar. There were a few wall-eyed stares when she did the ear pinch. Those stares got bigger when she pulled out the e-collar. The dog made excellent progress in 30 minutes, and surprised everyone by fetching from the floor very nicely the next day. This was an obedience dog, not a field dog. Connie stated that every obedience dog regardless of breed would benefit from learning a trained retrieve because of the difference it makes in your relationship: the dog goes from playing a game to doing a job. She even went so far as to say that every dog with a trained retrieve becomes essentially a service dog because they will pick up anything: keys, gloves, whatever you drop. Her own example was that after knee surgery her own dog would pick up her crutch when she dropped it. Her use of the phrase "trained retrieve" made a huge difference in the way the crowd accepted the lesson. I suspect if she had called it "force fetch" they would have shut down and refused to consider the information.


I'd agree about the class shutting down. "Trained Retrieve" is an great "modern" term. Just as with the ecollar where sometimes less is more, some people (as I once did) misunderstand the difference between pinch and pressure & before you know it they've resorted to bottle caps, empty shotgun shells; any number of things to increase the so called pressure.

My 5 yr old really likes helping with a number of things; carrying laundry, groceries, picking things up (I'm lazy too), & it all started with the trained retrieve (see I like that term).


----------



## IdahoLabs (Dec 21, 2011)

Because - as mentioned - it redefines the relationship between dog and handler.

Because it teaches a dog the appropriate way to respond to physical and psychological pressure - and creates a foundation that allows the handle to eliminate avoidance behaviors -such as shutting down- in other areas.

Because I don't have the time to put up with BS from a dog who just doesn't "feel" like working.

Because it's the first step toward turning handler and dog into a team.

Because properly done, it builds confidence.

Because it creates a work ethic.

IMO it's the best thing you can do for a soft dog.

All my dogs are FF'd - including my Australian Shepherd.


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

suepuff said:


> Thanks everyone! I wasn't looking for an excuse as to why I do it, but an explanation as to why we use it as a tool in training. I like Connies methods and they are fair. The perception I see with PP trainers is that we are being cruel to out dogs. I don't feel that way, but.....others do.
> 
> *To play devils advocate, as I've had a lot of PMs and emails, it seems that there are a good number of dogs that hunt reliably without force fetch and even compete. Are we not giving our dogs enough credit? Should we only do FF or a trained retrieve with certain individuals?*
> 
> NOTE: ALL my dogs are FFd.



I don't know. Are you going to be able to teach the dog to get off a scented point into cold rough water into a strong wind at 200 yards without "trained retrieve?" Is there a fair way to do it without?


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Brian Courser said:


> Bill Spencer wrote an article as to the why. I think the line at the end of it really hit home with me. Something along the lines " if I had a German Shepherd I would FF him for the bond that is created once you get through it"


I think you may mean James B. spencer. If so, I am a big fan of his method. I just spoke with Mr. spencer today! He is getting older bit is hanging in there!

i was honored to get to speak with him, just as I am every time we speak.


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

The question for me is why do we care if the non FF crowd does not do it ? 

Since they do not, that does not mean that I have to justify why I choose to !

You train you bleepin dog your way, I'll train mine my way.


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Swampcollie said:


> FF redefines the relationship between you and the dog.
> 
> Before FF you ASK the dog to comply with a command and he does it if he feels like it. After FF you TELL the dog what to do and he does it because you SAID so.


Hmmm. Most programs that advocate FF require that formal obedience is completed and SOLID BEFORE starting FF. 

Also funny that people promote FF as the absolute. I have to assume that most if not all the dogs at HT and FT are FF. They creep, break, blo off whistles, casts, do i even have to mention heeling to the line, and dont even get me started on no go's.........


----------



## younggun86 (May 2, 2013)

"Hillman has a way to do it that is not the traditional program. I have not seen it but apparently it works."



I have a hard time believing that behind the scenes that there is no preasure being applied to his dogs.... Lots of people out there think preasure is wrong and mean and hes got to sell videos, just an opinion, I could be wrong.


----------



## younggun86 (May 2, 2013)

gdluck said:


> Hmmm. Most programs that advocate FF require that formal obedience is completed and SOLID BEFORE starting FF.
> 
> Also funny that people promote FF as the absolute. I have to assume that most if not all the dogs at HT and FT are FF. They creep, break, blo off whistles, casts, do i even have to mention heeling to the line, and dont even get me started on no go's.........



Dogs that are at those venues are cranked up, most are high powered animals, and put live guns birds lots of people and dogs and any solid dog will change. I don't think you have watched too many field trials if you are seeing all those these happen, at least not in major stakes.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

Pam Spears said:


> I was at a Connie Cleveland *obedience* seminar last spring. One of the seminar participants had asked for help with teaching the retrieve (with a dumbbell for obedience.) Connie did a 30 minute demonstration of teaching what she called "the trained retrieve." It was force fetch all the way: ear pinch, then e-collar. There were a few wall-eyed stares when she did the ear pinch. Those stares got bigger when she pulled out the e-collar. The dog made excellent progress in 30 minutes, and surprised everyone by fetching from the floor very nicely the next day. This was an obedience dog, not a field dog. Connie stated that every obedience dog regardless of breed would benefit from learning a trained retrieve because of the difference it makes in your relationship: the dog goes from playing a game to doing a job. She even went so far as to say that every dog with a trained retrieve becomes essentially a service dog because they will pick up anything: keys, gloves, whatever you drop. Her own example was that after knee surgery her own dog would pick up her crutch when she dropped it. Her use of the phrase "trained retrieve" made a huge difference in the way the crowd accepted the lesson. I suspect if she had called it "force fetch" they would have shut down and refused to consider the information.


Pam,
I think in my own words that you are definitely on to something there. Those who choose to do would most likely like the idea of a "Trained Retrieve" today and maybe just maybe understand the concept better and not just shut it down for whatever reason. As you said, it might open their eyes and see the benefits first hand in demonstrations.

Chris,

I have used James Spencer’s method and still do.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

BJGatley said:


> Pam,
> I think in my own words that you are definitely on to something there. Those who choose to do would most likely like the idea of a "Trained Retrieve" today and maybe just maybe understand the concept better and not just shut it down for whatever reason. As you said, it might open their eyes and see the benefits first hand in demonstrations.
> 
> Chris,
> ...


I talked with Mr. Spencer quite a while ago back when I was using his method on a couple pitbulls. He was tickled and really got a good laugh. He reminded me this week that he wrote his method up after reading and researching a pointing dog conditioned retrieve book from the 1900's. 

It was from that "old" pointing dog force breaking material that he pieced his own method together. (He mentioned that he could not recall the name of the old pointing dog book author, but we agreed that he probably gave the guy credit in his book.) 

Mr. Spencer seemed to think it was cool that a dog like a pit could take to these same methods to be conditioned to retrieve.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

You need to have a pretty solid sit, as I understand it, because it would be pretty hard mechanically to do FF if you can't get the dog to sit. But, done correctly and thoroughly, FF is really the process that allows you to explain to the dog that he is an employee and not an independent contractor. 

Does that mean he never goes independent on you again? Of course not; they all have 4 legs and a tail and are prone to get wound up and go stupid. FF gives you a foundation of pressure conditioning that allows you to correct the dog and not have him go even more bananas. Bumper not in my mouth then ear pinch hurts then bumper in my mouth then stops hurting is pretty powerful as a concept. The dog knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that pressure means he has made a bad decision and that he can turn the pressure off by making a good decision, i.e., compliance with a command.

There probably are some really great dogs that have not been FF, just like there are some trained without the e-collar. But IMVHO, why would you not want these tools in the toolbox for those times when you need them?



gdluck said:


> Hmmm. Most programs that advocate FF require that formal obedience is completed and SOLID BEFORE starting FF.
> 
> Also funny that people promote FF as the absolute. I have to assume that most if not all the dogs at HT and FT are FF. They creep, break, blo off whistles, casts, do i even have to mention heeling to the line, and dont even get me started on no go's.........


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

DRAKEHAVEN said:


> The question for me is why do we care if the non FF crowd does not do it ?
> 
> Since they do not, that does not mean that I have to justify why I choose to !
> 
> You train you bleepin dog your way, I'll train mine my way.


I tend to lean this same way as Drakehaven. RTF has been on the internet since 1998. 

FF is probably the single most debated, discussed, worried and fussed topic on RTF.

If you want to incorporate it...great. If you don't....great. You can get a dog to perform nicely either way. There are no absolutes.

Although having done it both ways, I doubt I'll have another dog that I don't force break in one manner or another.


----------



## JS (Oct 27, 2003)

gdluck said:


> Hmmm. Most programs that advocate FF require that formal obedience is completed and SOLID BEFORE starting FF.
> 
> Also funny that people promote FF as the absolute. I have to assume that most if not all the dogs at HT and FT are FF. They creep, break, blo off whistles, casts, do i even have to mention heeling to the line, and dont even get me started on no go's.........





younggun86 said:


> Dogs that are at those venues are cranked up, most are high powered animals, and put live guns birds lots of people and dogs and any solid dog will change. I don't think you have watched too many field trials if you are seeing all those these happen, at least not in major stakes.


Youngun's answer is right on.

gdluck, you acknowledge that most, if not all of those dogs you see at tests ... especially FTs ... ARE force-fetched so you really are not making any kind of comparison. Put a NON-force-fetched dog in that scenario and see what you will have.

Regarding an explanation to "non believers"; it is an exercise in futility. The glut of modern day communication ... internet, DVDs, etc ... has given new dog owners all sorts of options when it comes to advice on choosing their training philosophy. The abundance of training material promoting a "humane way to train your dog without abuse" is very attractive and hard to disagree with. After all, who among us wants to abuse our dogs??

Then there are the testimonials that follow, describing great successes without using force ... "my dog is unbelievable, he just loves to please me". In nearly all of these success stories, the big disconnect is EXPECTATIONS, STANDARDS, POTENTIAL. Most of us have seen plenty of examples. I know I have. They truly are proud and impressed with their dog and that is great. But in nearly all cases, when you see the dog he is operating at a JH level with maybe some marginal handling abilities. Eventually, they may squeak through Senior. I remember the first time I saw a dog run a blind. Looking back, it was a pretty simple blind but I was impressed. All I could think was, "Wow, I want to get one of those dogs and teach him to do that!".

Then I went training with a group of accomplished dogs and began to realize what these dogs can really do. THEN I started training with a bunch FTers and their AA dogs ... winners and National qualifiers and I was TOTALLY blown away!

That's what most of these "non-believers" are missing. They simply have not seen what these dogs are capable of doing (and doing happily) and certainly have not tried it themselves. They are happy with their dog and that is fine, but the standard and level of expectation is not on the same page. So it is pointless to expect them to understand.

Now, I emphasized "nearly all" because I do know there are some who have reached advanced levels without "force" in their training. But these are good, experienced dog people who are the exception and have the knowledge and background to pull it off. Very few of these newcomers seeking advice, will fall into that category. What often happens is that they proceed with "clickers and cookies", see early results, get the bug and want to advance further, only to find they don't have the basics adequately instilled in their dog. For every dog that has been ruined with too much force, I would guess there are a bunch that failed to reach their potential as a result of not enough.

Don't try to train without teaching. And don't teach and think you have trained.

JMO

JS


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

how many do i need to see? also thought the AA and open were major stakes, 50 in the open or AA stakes, and quite a few are a no where neer heel, but I don't have to see it as I can close my eyes and hear it, heal......................heal................................heal..............................heal all the way from the holiding blind to the line.


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

younggun86 said:


> "Hillman has a way to do it that is not the traditional program. I have not seen it but apparently it works."
> 
> 
> 
> I have a hard time believing that behind the scenes that there is no preasure being applied to his dogs.... Lots of people out there think preasure is wrong and mean and hes got to sell videos, just an opinion, I could be wrong.


and uninformed


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I tend to lean this same way as Drakehaven. RTF has been on the internet since 1998.
> 
> FF is probably the single most debated, discussed, worried and fussed topic on RTF.
> 
> ...


Completely agree except for "You can get a dog to perform nicely either way" as that info is almost never provided when someones asks about FF. And the fact most regulars here are hardcore trainers, wheras some of the new folk with questions about FF are hunters with family that have no idea how to train a dog. What i think is the biggest factor never considered is how these "hunters" will continue to train. I dunno but I would bet there are LOTS that don't have the grounds or the time to train regularly so the dog will never see the factors that FF overcomes. Its probably true that lots will not even do regular maintenence training after a year or 2. In those cases i think its unfair to the dog and owner to suggest that FF is all but mandatory to get a "good dog".


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

gdluck said:


> Completely agree except for "You can get a dog to perform nicely either way" as that info is almost never provided when someones asks about FF. And the fact most regulars here are hardcore trainers, wheras some of the new folk with questions about FF are hunters with family that have no idea how to train a dog. What i think is the biggest factor never considered is how these "hunters" will continue to train. I dunno but I would bet there are LOTS that don't have the grounds or the time to train regularly so the dog will never see the factors that FF overcomes. Its probably true that lots will not even do regular maintenence training after a year or 2. In those cases i think its unfair to the dog and owner to suggest that FF is all but mandatory to get a "good dog".


I'm not sure that I understand your point.

FF and its value is in the eye and mind of the beholder. 

I may think the only woman to marry is a brunette. You may think it's a blonde. I'd offer that we both can be "right".


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

JS said:


> Youngun's answer is right on.
> 
> gdluck, you acknowledge that most, if not all of those dogs you see at tests ... especially FTs ... ARE force-fetched so you really are not making any kind of comparison. Put a NON-force-fetched dog in that scenario and see what you will have.
> 
> ...


didn't try to imply FF didn't make OB BETTER, just that most times it's implied that the dog does when told after FF and that is just not the case. The dog may be better but it's not an end all.

You are correct those AA and open dogs are amazing.

You can run basic blinds that a common hunter would most often see without a FF dog. can you run a 300 yarder with angle entry, a scented piont and hedgerow across a river, down the shoreline bla bla bla. probably not. but that is not OFTEN seen with a skilled hunter. 

i just dont have the time, grounds or desire to train a dog to do those things especially because i can get them to get 98 out of 100 birds without it. And for the 2 birds I do have to get myself, well, it will take a lot less time and money to pick it up myself than to train and keep the skills up to date on the dog to get those last 2.


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

we agree on the brunette too.....................


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

gdluck said:


> didn't try to imply FF didn't make OB BETTER, just that most times it's implied that the dog does when told after FF and that is just not the case. The dog may be better but it's not an end all.
> 
> You are correct those AA and open dogs are amazing.
> 
> ...


Building a Foundation - it's a matter of Personal Taste

I can't believe I'm going here...again. I've been here many times over the past 16 years on the various iterations of RTF (and in other venues prior to that). 

I personally have built my house of straw before. I don't think the big bad wolf ever blew my house down. I actually was quite pleased with my house as it was the first house I'd ever built. I built it, as Sinatra would have said, *my way*. As a kid on a budget, fresh out of school, I was on a mission to prove the local gundog folks wrong. I could train my own gundog, I could do it without Force fetching, I could do it without going to the local pro. In retrospect, I had a dog that I ran in hunt tests who did not make his MHR title until age 6. Ouch! Talk about taking the long route to the destination!

I choose to build a house out of brick now. 

Why? I don't have any more time or training grounds, most likely than others who share your opinion. But, I've found that I ENJOY building a house of brick. I ENJOY feeling that I've laid a firm foundation and have fewer holes in the structure than houses I'd built earlier in my life. 

It's a personal opinion, a personal taste. 

At this point in my life, I'd rather feel that I'm doing the best I can for myself and the dog. 

I want to have a gundog I'm proud of. I want to have a gundog that's welcome in any guiding outfit anywhere in the country. I want to have a gundog that makes folks ASK if they can hunt with my dog again. I might even want to enter some local trials and try to put some points on my dog. For me, that's accomplished by building my house of brick...like the third pig in the story.

Chris


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

gdluck said:


> how many do i need to see? also thought the AA and open were major stakes, 50 in the open or AA stakes, and quite a few are a no where neer heel, but I don't have to see it as I can close my eyes and hear it, heal......................heal................................heal..............................heal all the way from the holiding blind to the line.


You may want to have your homophone fixed. I am pretty sure you were hearing "Heel".


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

I generally agree that it is difficult to change folks' attitude about it, but I kind of like how William Koehler put it:



> It is widely known that dependability in retrieving is required of the dog used in certain areas of the hunting field, in other vocations and in advanced obedience competition. Regrettably, few dog owners know how the retrieving exercise, if soundly motivated, can be used to instill confidence in a timid dog, develop other desirable qualities of character and generally improve his relationship with his master.


----------



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

Doublehaul: This is EXCELLENT and what I couldn't put into words:

It is widely known that dependability in retrieving is required of the dog used in certain areas of the hunting field, in other vocations and in advanced obedience competition. Regrettably, few dog owners know how the retrieving exercise, if soundly motivated, can be used to instill confidence in a timid dog, develop other desirable qualities of character and generally improve his relationship with his master.


----------



## twall (Jun 5, 2006)

gdluck said:


> how many do i need to see? also thought the AA and open were major stakes, 50 in the open or AA stakes, and quite a few are a no where neer heel, but I don't have to see it as I can close my eyes and hear it, heal......................heal................................heal..............................heal all the way from the holiding blind to the line.


Standards are everyhting. I don't think the handlers you are thinking of have as high a standard for heel as for fetch or back. Someone with a competitive obedience background would not consider most field dogs actually heel to the line. For the most part heeling is not judged at field events.

Tom


----------



## IdahoLabs (Dec 21, 2011)

For those of you commenting on the repeated commands... don't confuse the results of FF with poor handling.

Poor handling (second commands) is an entirely different issue that's seen everywhere - pets, rally ring, agility, hunt tests, etc. A well trained dog with a good handler should respond on the first command, not twenty commands or even two commands later. There's a lot that FF will do for a dog, but it won't fix the owner.


----------



## 480/277 (Jun 5, 2014)

If your happy with your dogs and how they perform for you , you don't need to defend or promote any method. Be happy.
lets face it if a guy shoots a 30.06 no ballistic chart or chest thumping is going to convince him a 7mm can do it better.

Further, in the field, actual hunting, most guys are running meat dogs at best. And don't know what good dog work is.


----------



## Im_with_Brandy (Apr 22, 2010)

I think there are still some that miss the point. It's not just about bringing you a dead animal or your car keys or even a cell phone. It is about developing a relation ship with your dog that will spill over into all the training you do in the future. Done right it will also instill confidence in your dog to do what you tell them to do. This is why I think it is very important even if you have help from a pro that you the owner/handler be directly involved in FF of your dog. I don't use heeling sticks or e-collars in any of my training but I will always use FF.


----------

