@theodor98
Let me give you an example. Two weeks ago, a masters level dog left the ring not once, but twice. This dog showed to the owner multiple times that it wanted to opt out, but the owner kept pushing. Until the dog said fuck it, and left the ring. This dog has never had this problem before. I have observed this dog run many times and it was nothing but a happy and eager team player. But that day, it wanted to opt out. And the owner ignored it until the dog made more drastic decisions for her.
But is that lack of consent or, the dog felt like crap that day, and the handler was too hyper focused on a QQ or points? If the handler was paying attention, s/he should have seen stress signals well before they went into the ring, if this was a Masters dog. Even someone who trains sans any concept of consent, but with an understanding of animal husbandry, should have seen what was happening with the dog.
In the instance you mention above, that sounds like a dog who is sore, or worn out, or has something going on. And that's on the handler to see that at the practice jump, say, "shit", and scratch the dog.
So again, I say, you don’t understand consent.
I'm pretty sure I do, but I also think that long before you walk into the ring to compete, that's A Thing that should have been worked on. I get consent: not every dog will be a world beater, and some will tell you, "I'm trying but I can't do this". I get that: what I don't get is once you and the dog know each other, really know each other, how it is still an issue.
If you have a dog who muddles thru Novice in obedience or a JH in the field, and then can't figure out a water blind, or the broad jump, and just can't do it, the handler has a few options. Train with someone who really knows how to teach a dog these things, keep entering trials or tests hoping there will be a miracle, or find another sport or whatever, that the dog and the human can do.
The first and the third options are a good try: the second one is silly but I'm sure we've all seen it. And what I'm seeing now is people doing that second option (entering a dog who has not a chance in hell of working well), and looking for consent, at the start of a run. And for me, if that dog said in training, I can't do the broad jump or I can't do a water blind, why then did the owner persist in entering?
Don’t shit on those that don’t feel that way and choose to give their dog’s the respect they deserve by listening to them.
I'm not: but I stand by what I've said. If this is your first sports dog, then it may well be that looking for consent, especially in an actual competition, may muddy the waters of, "did I actually train the dog, and communicate to him what his job is and what my job is".
At the trial I was at last week, the first dog in Novice B? As soon as they got to the off leash heeling, that dog went on a zoom around the ring, evading everyone, and then jumping over the ring gates and out of the ring.
I don't see that as lack of consent: I see that as a stressed dog, who didn't want to be there, and who had an owner who was determined to trial anyway. And as soon as the dog had a choice, his choice was to leave. And that's 100% on the owner, for not reading her dog better, and knowing that she really hadn't shown the dog how to deal with stress, and work thru it, and, as well, trust the handler to keep demons at bay.
Maybe people who work with the idea of consent would have seen that at the start of the routine and asked to be excused? I don't know. I think if the handler had been more in tune with her dog, she would have known well before they went into the ring (as with that agility handler you mentioned), that the dog was not up to it.
And again, I don't see that as consent, I see that as understanding dogs, and especially, knowing what your teammate is about.
I am not shitting on the idea of consent: but I think people do have to parse the difference between consent and, the dog is not trained for the task at hand, and the human is tossing them into the ring, to see if anything good will happen. The dog won't magically decide on that day to consent to run perfectly, if the human part of the team didn't hold up her end. In other words, if you didn't train a drop on recall, or a blind cross while your dog is in the weaves, or whatever, you won't suddenly have a dog in a trial who knows these things. There's a big difference between consenting to work with the human (which I think is something that needs to be worked on long before you compete), and consenting to somehow know what the job is, if the human didn't hold up her end of the deal.
And that's what I'm seeing. Part of that may be that there's a difference between working with a trainer who knows what she's doing with these concepts, and on your own deciding how to implement them.
Finally, as I said before, I am big on toys, food, play, shaping. And I also pay attention to, "is the dog enjoying this or not." I've seen too many people shove toys at dogs who didn't want them, or continuously up the food quality for a dog who was not interested in food. That's wrong to me, as it means the handler didn't actually see what the dog thought.
