Re: [PyrNet-L] If Pyrs were easy to train...

["Janice Swenson" <janices@jump.net>]

On 5 Nov 98, at 14:29, David Wong wrote:
> Training a dog to have manners at home and
> training a dog to do well in obedience are two totally different tasks. 
> Although it isn't very difficult to train an average pyr to have good
> manners, it's another thing altogether to bring a dog (pyr included) to a
> level that he/she can perform in a strange environment (dogs and people),
> with distractions everywhere, and without the help of additional commands
> and limited amount of reinforcement. 

Pet obedience is supposed to teach you how to handle your dog in 
strange situations and in strange environments and give you the 
basics.  There's something a matter with this picture if it doesn't 
and you should find another trainer somewhere who knows what 
they are doing.  Going into novice level obedience ring stuff only 
builds on that and teaches precision and you and your dog working 
as a finely tuned team before you hit that ring.  

I took my newf straight from pet obedience classes to a novice 
level obedience class to the ring.  Sonny's following the same 
pattern.  My newf trains with a private trainer for open mainly 
because I find a big shortage of really good trainers in this area for 
upper level obedience.   

> While I believe most dogs can qualify for a CD, all other things being
> equal, for some breeds it means more time and dedication to training. I've
> half-jokingly asked instructors who have trained dogs to the OTCH level
> (the obedience champion title) why they wouldn't train a breed such as a
> pyr.  The answers are nearly identical.  They aren't interested in
> devoting the additional time necessary to get such a breed to perform in
> obedience to that level of training.  I know that these trainers and
> instructors could do it--they've instructed many students with
> non-traditional obedience dogs.  As long as the students have the time and
> the drive to succeed, it can be done. 

I have a tendency to disagree on some of these points.  I've done 
quite a bit of researching what are the non-traditional obedience 
dogs that are out there and talking to the top trainers.  Something 
that is starting to come across is those going to OTCH's and high 
titles with non-traditional breeds is training techniques that are 
used.  It seems the newer evolved techniques, clicker, and the like 
are what are working for the non-traditional ones.  The range is 
narrower and the training is evolving for the better so that people 
are getting them out and competing more than they used to.  It 
seems that a broader range of techniques seem to be able to be 
used with what are considered traditional breeds....anything from 
the old Koehler to what it's evolved into on up and the dog will still 
perform while we see our non-traditional breeds go into shutdown 
when the training technique is wrong.

> I think a few of us will change
> that soon and have fun spending time communicating with our dogs in the
> process. :)

Yes, I think we have a group of people that are ready to change the 
old way of thinking about what pyrs are capable of doing.  

Janice, janices@jump.net
Admiral & Linsey (newfs), Bianca & Sonny (pyrs)  
http://www.jump.net/~janices/
Leander, TX
Visit Old West Newfoundland Club's website at  
http://www.jump.net/~janices/ownc/