[dlskidmore]

If hunting them yourself is impractical, set up a few stands and lease them to city folks with their own hunting permits. Fewer deer and pocket money. Win-Win.

[dlskidmore]

@dlskidmore 18973 wrote:

This is exactly what we do for the dogs, only heavy duty.

Correction, the dog lines are not compressing the rubber insert, the nylon is squished up over it, and the ends are fixed to the rope, allowing for it to stretch. Only in case of bungee failure or extreme load does the load transfer to the nylon. This compression method has less shock reduction, but would be less prone to failure than the tension method.

[dlskidmore]

@Tim Harrigan 18251 wrote:

Here is a picture of the nylon rope. The dense rubber insert is compressed when the rope is under tension.

This is exactly what we do for the dogs, only heavy duty. I’ve not found an entirely satisfactory method of affixing the bungie inside the tugs. My most successful was French whipping, but that’s starting to give out on my current set of lines. Thankfully poly and waxed twine are both cheap, so I can just re-thread the bungee through a new rope and try again.

Some of my previous attempts:
[IMG]http://lh4.ggpht.com/_5XMXouoXO_c/SOlYMsPov6I/AAAAAAAAB08/B_ohJ2OytDA/s144/IMG_0610.JPG[/IMG][IMG]http://lh6.ggpht.com/_5XMXouoXO_c/SOlYQ_PlkPI/AAAAAAAAB1E/aaqky95XVgg/s144/IMG_0601.JPG[/IMG]

[dlskidmore]

@Countymouse 18950 wrote:

any amount of power stored in the spring (as represented by spring compression beyond the average draft) MUST be released back into the system.

Not entirely true, some energy can leave the system in the form of heat. Anything that stores or transmits energy has an efficiency rating, of power output/power input. If there was no power loss, a spring that is pushed will bounce back and forth forever and never stop, but it does, because it takes energy to deflect the shape of the spring, and this turns into heat.

That said, I use a shock line for most all dog drafting. It makes it easier on the animal, taking the shock/vibration out of the starts and sudden stops of the load. The energy loss is not considerable in comparison to the comfort it gives the animal, allowing it to work harder/longer.

[dlskidmore]

@Donn Hewes 18874 wrote:

I must say I find this thread somewhat confusing. In the original post you suggested two different approaches, one to learn from a mentor; and the other to learn about the working relationship in layers. I don’t understand what the one has to do with the other and why a good mentor can’t discuss these things as they fit into what you are doing.

The point was not that this style of learning is in opposition from learning from a mentor, but that many of these layers can be book-learned. There are a few steps that are better learned from an advisor, such as fitting equipment properly.

@mother katherine 18878 wrote:

If you look in a number of these threads, a variety of books are mentioned as resources and used by the teamsters to undergird their knowledge and practice.

I’ll have to look around some more for those. I did see your recomendation for Oxen: A Teamster’s Guide

Donn Hewes wrote:

I think all those things are important, but I also am a simple person that likes to know what a person really wants to do. If you really want to work with draft animals you should start today, and never stop. Don’t just read about it, put a harness on.

Well, my Great Dane has a harness, and we should get out more. She could use the exercise. Horses or Oxen will have to wait until we have some pasture to keep them on.

[dlskidmore]

@Countymouse 18857 wrote:

It’s hard to imagine how one would even provide exercise for an animal without some degree of training and work.

Agreed. Grooming is likewise. There is no way I could properly groom even my 129 lb dog without training. These are not layers to be added one at a time to the animal, but layers of understanding for the handler. One can not go straight to the animal training without first understanding the other layers. All must be accomplished to be successful. (Well, molding is optional, there’s always capture and shaping if you’re good at that method…)

A puppy has a strong biological need for exercise, and although I train proper leash walking while I exercise the puppy, I also don’t expect any other training in the way of grooming activities or position changes to occur until after this biological need is met.

A dog has a strong emotional need for leadership, and I can’t begin to train near fear objects until we have established a leader-follower relationship in neutral circumstances.

Maybe I’m the best Behavior Modification practitioner in the world, but if I don’t know that raisins are poisonous to dogs, I might make a terrible mistake in our first session.

etc…

[dlskidmore]

@CharlyBonifaz 18837 wrote:

theory is crutches…

I agree that theory not backed up by practice is useless. I see this frequently in the dog training world, that many of the new schools are based on theory and scientific studies in isolated environments that produce only short term unreliable results that don’t hold up in real world applications. However, a firm study of theory can be a very valuable addition to practical experience, and can be acquired by the inquiring mind prior to it being practical to start the hands-on work. I know when I read about the theory of classical conditioning and behavior modification theory, and then look back at a world war I era training manual, I can see that theory being applied before it had that name. I can understand why the old school method works, and understand how to correctly modify the method for the temperament of an individual animal or a task not covered in the book.

My dogs are well-trained at the things I put in the correct effort to train, and my only mentor is online. All the local schools are based on a different method than what I use. After getting unsatisfactory results under an instructor, I did my own studying and my own training.

@Carl Russell 18843 wrote:

If the best broke team was in the hands of a complete novice, it would only be a matter of time before they were only performing at the capability of the novice teamster. … Know your work, know what you expect from your animals, and know that they look to you for guidance and you will work through every unexpected situation as if it didn’t exist.

This recalls my #1 rule of dog training: Know thy dog. This is also why in the dog training world you hardly ever use an experienced animal to train the handler. If you train the handler slightly ahead of the animal, you won’t risk backslide on the skills of the animal. (Besides the fact that dogs work for the individual, and have to go through minor retraining with each new handler.)

@Matthew 18844 wrote:

You just have to understand the way they think, act and react. That in my opinion cant be learned from a book it can only be lerarned from spending time with the animals.

I think we agree on some level here, but I still have the tendency to separate the layers of knowledge. I see book learning and hands-on time as equally important, and I would prefer to learn theory before practice. My quest for book learning does not seem very welcome here.

[dlskidmore]

The particular biological and emotional needs and motivations differ greatly I am sure. This is why I’ve been depending heavily on my dairy buddy for learning this, but classical conditioning works on every species, and from everything I’ve read so far, molding and acclimation work the same way for both predators and carnivores.

Folks have been advising me to go straight to getting time practicing the whole package at once, instead of learning each layer in succession. I don’t get how it would be a good idea to touch a plow even under a master’s guidance when I have only a rudimentary understanding of the creature pulling that plow. Shouldn’t the learning process start on the other end?

This is about training a handler, not just training an animal. An animal will never surpass the abilities of the handler.

[dlskidmore]

Thanks Carl. I sent Howie a message.

[dlskidmore]

Don’t know about oxen people locally. I’ve got time to look though.

[dlskidmore]

@mathuranatha 16746 wrote:

Well my best bullock in his prime ,in a single yolk could pull a loaded wagon up a steep gravel drive that could not be towed up with a 4liter 6cylinder [approximatly 150hp]pannel van

How heavy was the van? How much of it’s horsepower went to pushing itself up the hill?

[dlskidmore]

@mother katherine 18529 wrote:

If you are around dairy people, you might consider working cattle.

The idea is growing on me, although I didn’t take you seriously at first. Although I think I’ll likely raise several beefers before I decide if l feel confident enough about my handling skills to put one to work.

[dlskidmore]

Not the story I read before, but pertinent to the discussion:

Working Oxen By Martin Watts, Ox Shoes chapter

[dlskidmore]

Now I have to figure out where I read about ox shoeing. The author of that piece seemed to think it anatomically impossible to shoe an ox while it was standing. I occasionally have had to throw a dog over, and I absolutely hate doing it. I’m concerned that injuries could occur, or that it will engender distrust of the handler. I’d much rather train the animal to position itself conveniently.

[dlskidmore]

I was wondering the same thing when reading the barefoot horse discussion. You still have to throw the ox down to do a trim, not just shoeing?

[Author]

Posts