Communicating on woofy level
One of the key things about dog training is of course getting through to them on their level. Mainly the ways you do this involve the reward / negative enforcement. A slightly additional track is to think about the fact that dogs don’t speak like we do. With Dillon’s training along with linking commands with rewards the commands have also had a non-verbal sign attached. Sit for instance is a clenched fish brought to our chest and slightly moved up. Stay is a flat palm out to him.
Deciding on using these body language indicators has been something really worth while. Whilst we aren’t at the hand signal = action from afar stage, during dog training it proved very useful. Whilst all the other dog owners were repeating the word stay like some mantra, all I did was one and then held the hand signal whilst moving away. Dillon isn’t perfect and a leaf burped a bit away after he was there in stay for a while, so he moved. It was a back to the stay and continue with no leaf burping so success.
Eventually the idea is that more and more body language will be brought in and not replace but support verbal commands. Barley has been trained this way and continues to be trained with body language. It’s something to consider and in theory will stop the having to repeat / call in a field to a certain extent. I’m working on the arms outstretched mean come. Of course, the key to this is that your doggy is paying visual attention, should this not be the case the fact you’ve done verbal is a back up. Along with this you do as a result have to work on the focus part of training. Getting your dog to pay attention so they can see the signals is something key to the entire thing working.
Using body and hand signals is something a lot of trainers will advise and so far it’s working for our two. I’d definitely recommend trying it if you haven’t. Dogs seem (well our two) to ‘get it’ more and quicker than them having to learn verbal commands.
February 23rd, 2007 at 7:41 am
We’ve been using hand signals with Aspen pretty much since we got him. Our friends have a 2 year old deaf aussie cattle dog and the two played together alot. Aspen would watch the hand commands they gave Oskar and picked up on them within a few minutes.
When we took him to puppy school, he responded better to hand commands rather than voice. All the other owners would be repeating commands, and like you, I gave the command once, gave the hand signal, and Aspen would comply and be totally attentive to me. Although the lead trainer couldn’t understand why we opted to use only hand commands. She was disappointed and slightly angry with me because I went against their traditional teaching method.
But it works for us. He does very well with them off leash and impresses other owners when we go to the vet. A few signals, and he’s the quietest, most obedient dog in the waiting room. Now, if only the signal for No Barking would work all the time…. :O)
February 25th, 2007 at 11:54 am
It is true they do pick it up very quickly when using hand signals. I think maybe that trainer needs to be more open - the one we have is and I’d find it hard if they weren’t. I so need that ‘no barking’ signal, we have a slight issue with that but mainly becuase of Barley not Dillon - she is always first.
February 26th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
The trainer works for a well-known pet store, and as the lead trainer, it was her way or the highway. This was also the same person who “diagnosed” Aspen within one minute as being stressed because he used to eat rawhides and cow hooves like mad. Nevermind the fact that he was teething and is a mix of breeds known to chew. Luckily we only had her for the last class. Our original trainer didn’t care how I taught him so long as he was learning.