Commanders and Coercers!

Which Style of Trainer Are You?

You might coerce a dog with a treat but, eventually, it must feel compelled to follow a command.

I was presenting at a gun dog training seminar and, after a brief demonstration using one of my dogs, I began my intro. “There are basically two kinds of trainers - Commanders and Coercers. Commanders can use positive techniques (a pat, kind word, clicker, etc.) to mark correct responses by dogs. During training sessions the goal is for the dog to learn and complete the task on command. Coercing is considered by some as the ultimate in positive dog training; a practice that entices a dog to learn a task by a cajoling tone and/or tempted with a morsel of food.”

Since there were varying levels of experience amongst the group, I knew there were folks practicing one or the other - or both - to some extent. I believe the best technique uses an appropriate combination of the two. However, the training methods that use both should move away from treats after the dog has been adequately conditioned. Progress toward a more strict commanding technique usually develops a more reliable response. More on that later.

First, before I continue, allow me to state that, like most (reasonable) methodologies used to train dogs, I have no strong negative feelings toward treat training. However, I do have some observations that I would like to share.

During a short break between sessions, one of the training students walked up and told me how wonderfully trained his nearly one-year-old pointing dog was; that the dog was beginning to heel nicely, excelled at “kennel,” and came directly when called. The young owner (everyone is young to me, nowadays) finished his portion of the discussion by explaining how he uses treats to kennel his dog. “All I have to do is rattle the treat container and hush-puppy (not its real name, obviously) dives into his kennel,” the lad proudly proclaimed!

I asked for a brief demonstration on his dog’s call-back, “Release your dog into the training field and call him back when I ask you to.” The gentleman eargerly complied and the young dog beautifully galloped through the field in search of whatever caught its fancy. I waited a few moments for the dog to get throughly engrossed then, asked the owner to call in his dog.

The dog’s response wasn’t very snappy, as could be expected with so much going on, but it eventually complied after a few tries. The dead giveaway, was the dog’s actions that followed. The dog trotted to his owner and continued passed with a brief sniff for any treat being offered. Then, when none was detected, the dog looped around us and bolted back to the field. After a half-dozen or so calls, they - dog and owner - met at a middle ground where the dog was reclaimed.

“Cooper - Come!”

The dog’s response should be happy, immediate, and complete without the need for tid-bits. The check-cord is there if needed.

What I refer to as a “drive-by”, is when the dog heads toward the owner but does not halt at the owner’s side. To be honest, either training style - command or coerce - can develop this misque. In the case of a commander type, I have witnessed dog owners use the return command (come or here or both) but may actually want to just change direction, (say, about-face). The owner calls the dog to “come” but that’s not what the owner really wanted and doesn’t require the dog to comply. When the return command is used in this way, the dog learns that “come” can mean race passed to get ahead of the owner and continue. Eventually, a confused dog will assume all commands to return simply require a drive-by. In either case, the dog is not reliably trained to return when called.

Not wanting to crush his spirit, I offered a “mulligan” to the owner. “There’s a lot of distractions out here today,” I excused. I did continue to briefly teach the need to have the dog come and stay at his side - standing or sitting - but be consistent and make it stick! Perhaps, use a different term for a change in direction; something like, “come” to return to you and “here” to make note of a change in course.

Now, about testing his dog’s level of understanding “kennel” as a command. I suggested that, when the owner returned home that evening, he doesn’t even leave his comfy chair when he commands his dog to kennel. My guess was that the dog would not even make a move until the owner got up and at least moved in the direction of the treat container.

I’ve seen several of these dog behaviors that I call “tricks”; they are a Pavlovian response also known as classic conditioning. It might not be exactly the same as a commanded behavior. Another trick example is when an owner tries to get his dog to (momentarily) sit by wielding a treat over the dog’s head and says, “Sit!” Almost falling backward before a seated position is accomplished, the dog then quickly takes the treat from the owner’s hand and is allowed to bound away by its own volition. The same is true for lie-down and even heel; the dog does what it feels is best to get a treat and then moves on. The owner sees it as compliance - which it is NOT.

So, what is it then? These aforementioned behaviors are primarily the dog getting what it wants from you - not the other way ‘round. To complete coersion training correctly in gun dogs, treats should be combined with a command (audible and/or visual) and the treat is eventually weaned away from the process while the command(s) (audible and/or visual) remain. The dog must remain in the commanded position, (sit, come, kennel, etc.) until released by its owner. Therefore, to my way of thinking, the term “stay” is redundant and rarely used.

“Kennel - Stay!”

Whatever the technique and the term, make certain your dog eventually enjoys doing it for YOU.

The process is similar to any other trained command. For example, while in puppyhood, I can entice pups to come to me by rewarding with praise and/or treats. Eventually, the adolescent dog will come to me when called in the anticipation that it will be rewarded by a cheerful reunion or a fun task. And, finally, the command will evolve into the use of a whistle cadence; 1 blast for direction and two for come to me. Even the beeping noise or vibration from an e-collar can be used. I prefer not to talk or yell while I’m hunting.

My point is this; the dog can be conditioned using either technique but, once conditioning has been achieved, continued coercion is not required. The dog’s obedience to the command signal is its own reward. It is similar to my dog’s response when I go to the gun vault or put a whistle around my neck, I become the center of attention. So, the practice of using rewards doesn’t necessarily require food, only something that the dog finds exciting and rewarding.

Make Training Fun!

Find what excites your dog and use that to encourage and condition command complience.

After the dog has demonstrated that it knows what the command means, you must make it comply - and be quick about it! Don’t command your dog a half-dozen times and then use (reasonable) force. Nor should you then return to enticing your dog with food. All you will be doing is developing a dog that will not respond until it gets what it wants. You should require complience as soon as compliance is tested by the dog and everytime the dog hesitates. That means you must have control (leash, check cord, or e-collar) of the dog before you make the command.

When a dog reliably responds to your commands, it’s okay to offer a treat now and then as a reward - sparingly. It is more fun for everyone to hunt with a dog that reliably follows commands, so train responsibly and…

- Enjoy Your Dog!