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 will physically demonstrate to dogs, using positive techniques, what is desired. 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 tempted with a morsel of food.”
An example in comparison is a Coercer will try to get a dog to sit by wielding a treat over the dog’s head and say, “Sit!” Almost falling backward before a seated position is accomplished, the dog is then rewarded. Similar techniques are used for lie-down and even heel; the dog does what it feels is best to get a treat. Eventually, the dog will respond to a command before rewarded.
A Commander would likely train the dog to sit by lifting the dog’s head by the collar while simultaneously pushing down the rear-end and use the command, “Sit”! Not threateningly, just enough force to get the young dog to comply. Then, praise and/or add a treat. Either way, the pup should eventually learn to respond to a command and remain in that position until released.
Since there were varying levels of experience amongst the group, I knew there were folks practicing one or the other - or both - styles to some extent. However, even the training methods that use treats almost exclusively should move away from total reliance on 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, I have some observations that I would like to share.
During a short break between sessions, one of the training students walked up and shared 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, after a bit of dawdling, it eventually complied. 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 - eventually 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.
This is what I refer to as a “fly-by”; 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. 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 explain the need to have the dog come and stay at his side - standing or sitting - but be consistent and make it stick!
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”.
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. This becomes a Pavlovian response also known as classic conditioning. Both styles should require the dog to 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!”
“…to my way of thinking, the term “stay” is redundant...” Your dog should eventually enjoy following commands 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. Most dogs will eventually require several (consistant) uses of a forceful tug on a check cord (Command-style) to get the point across that there are no options.
My point is this; the dog can be conditioned using either technique but, once conditioning has been achieved, continued coercion with food may not be as effective. Indeed, edible treats may not be required at all. My dog’s response to when I go to the gun vault or put a whistle around my neck proves that there are many inticements that we can use. All that’s required is something that the dog finds exciting and rewarding. The dog’s obedience to the command signal should be its own reward.
Make Training Fun!
Find what excites your dog and use that to encourage and condition command complience.
With either style, the end-goal is for the dog to reliably respond to your commands. Though it’s okay to offer a treat now and then as a reward - sparingly - even Coercers must eventually require their dog to respond to commands without treats. Command-style training is generally quicker due to the practices of physically showing the dog what you want it to do. Coercing relies on repetitively rewarding a behavior until the dog realizes why it is getting the reward and, by complience, it can control the act of recieving a reward. In either case, the dog should respond to a command stimulus as a conditioned response after several reps.
As we have seen, training techniques are often determined by the trainer’s personality - Commander or Coercer. Which ever way you lean, using an appropriate level of commanding and coercing is likely the best strategy. We can all agree that it is more fun for everyone to hunt with a dog that reliably follows commands, so train responsibly and…
- Enjoy Your Dog!
