I'm not a fan of slat removal exactly because of what you've seen.  With some course set ups even advanced dogs who have had plenty of experience with the slatless equipment mistake the teeter for the dogwalk for some pretty spectacular and scary flyoffs.  Putting a dog that isn't very confident with teeters in general into this sort of situation is a nightmare.  I've also heard of issues with fast dogs who fly off the side of the up ramp because they don't have the slats to grip if they come at the equipment at any sort of angle.

I really think at the speeds we're asking from the dogs we need to be fair and safe and have a clear and universal indication of whether it's a teeter or a dogwalk. 

I would be curious if painting stripes on the dogwalk would be effective.  I have not found that dogs recognize the contact zone color at the top of the teeter as a cue to distinguish the two.  Another option might be to change the teeter base to make it more visible from the dog's perspective so they can use that as a visual cue.  My preference would be for very small, rounded slats for traction and obstacle discrimination.

All four of my dogs have issues with the slatless equipment to some extent.  I've also found that my dogs just slide down the contact equipment now that the slats are gone, which I don't find particulary desirable either.  I will only put one of my dogs on slatless equipment at all these days.

We compete in 3 venues and have had no issues from going to slats to slatless or jumping 20,22,24, or 26. Our early training was on all types of equipment ,some of it homemade,in diffrent locations so maybe that is why my boys are very flexable. Our first teetor was a board nailed to a log. Be sure you are not projecting your concerns on to your dog.

My least favorite is the 6'3" AF with slats, very hard on the dogs.

Cheers, Jean

I heard rumor that slats might be removed here (US) from the dogwalk in some venues (might already be in some).  When ordering my new dogwalk, I had one side with slats and the other without slats (both ramps have two sides).

 Non of my dogs could tell a difference.  There are times I'll use slats on one ramp and no slats on the other ramp - again, they could care less.

 I'd prefer no slats on a dogwalk as I don't see much purpose in them and they can cause toe issues.  I do like them on a high aframe (6'3") - as long as the slats are small.  I think all slats in the US are now small.

 I generally don't like visual cues because some dogs and handlers will become dependent upon them and then (mainly the handler) will freak out if they're not there - sending a message to the dog that something's up.

 I would guess that some of the issues are more the handler not being confident because of the change.  Dogs have incredible peripheral vision.  They should be able to see the difference and understand what they're doing by the way the obstacle is handled.

I'm sure some dogs are more sensitive, but better to just work through it than trying to add a different "crutch" that they'll have to lose most likely down the line. 

Renee

Renee wrote: I'd prefer no slats on a dogwalk as I don't see much purpose in them and they can cause toe issues.  I do like them on a high aframe (6'3") - as long as the slats are small.  I think all slats in the US are now small.

I tend to agree with you on this.  I personally don't think we need to keep slats on the dogwalks merely out of concern that otherwise dogs wouldn't be able to tell the difference between dogwalks and seesaws.

Renee wrote: When ordering my new dogwalk, I had one side with slats and the other without slats (both ramps have two sides) .... Non of my dogs could tell a difference.  There are times I'll use slats on one ramp and no slats on the other ramp - again, they could care less.

When I started agility with my first dog Ivan some years back, and didn't know any better, the school where we trained had all their dogwalks set up with one slatted ramp and one slatless ramp.  So from the very beginning, my dog was never given a consistent pairing of slat=dogwalk and slatless=seesaw.  As a result, slats never became a reliably relevant cue for him to distinguish the dogwalk and seesaw.

As Ivan and I progressed, we got to the point where Ivan was running dogwalks in under two seconds and seesaws in under one second.  He couldn't do that consistently if he didn't feel confident about being able to distinguish them.

So he must have been able to distinguish them somehow.

Renee wrote:  I generally don't like visual cues because some dogs and handlers will become dependent upon them and then (mainly the handler) will freak out if they're not there - sending a message to the dog that something's up .... I would guess that some of the issues are more the handler not being confident because of the change.  Dogs have incredible peripheral vision.  They should be able to see the difference and understand what they're doing by the way the obstacle is handled.

I must also admit, I did NOT do the kind of training it would have taken to truly distinguish the planks based on verbal cues. 

But I also don't think Ivan was distinguishing based on my body language.

Very early in his competitive career, I realized that I would need to do something to teach Ivan to hit the up contact on the dogwalk and seesaw.  We ended up having a lot of success by conditioning Ivan to run fast and flat on the forehand as he approached dogwalks and seesaws.  By doing so, and by taking away the area on the ground just in front of either kind of plank, we were able to condition him to drive long and flat for the planks, rather than coming in close and jumping up over the up contacts.  Part of the process of teaching this was me running hard telling Ivan to GO GO GO to cue him to run hard, to stay on his forehand approaching the dogwalks and seesaws.  So my body language approaching both was usually quite similar.

I also often continued to run very hard as Ivan ran either kind of plank, often running well beyond the end of the teeter to perform a front cross somewhere further down field.  Ivan's contacts were his own to do.  I did not micromanage them.

I was also able to send him ahead of me in training over a jump and down the dogwalk or seesaw.  Even with dead straight approaches and with me just shouting GO GO GO, Ivan could tell the difference between the dogwalk and the seesaw.

I don't think I'd want him needing to rely on my body language.  Performing the obstacles is hard enough for the dog at such speed.  I'd prefer to allow my dog to concentrate more on the obstacle, not needing to divert attention over to me to figure out which kind of plank he was approaching.

Now that we have our own field, we have a similar dogwalk, slatted on one ramp, slatless on the other.  So all of our dogs will continue to get the benefit of such experience.  My young dog Maverick is now also performing dogwalks under two seconds and seesaws under a second.  He is doing so without me needing to tell him with verbals or with body language which one is which.

I do think that dogs exposed early and often to boards that can be distinguished based on the presence/absence of slats are likely to attend to that cue.  I think it is likely that dogs running fast don't want to hit slats.  In order to not hit them, they need to look for them.  So if they already have a reason for looking for the slats, and the presence/absence of slats reliably cues dogwalk versus seesaw, this will likely become quite a salient cue, perhaps overshadowing other potential cues.

To me, this is NOT a reason justifying slats on dogwalks.  The dogs are looking to AVOID hitting the slats.  It is my opinion, that it would be better to remove the slats from the dogwalks and allow our dogs to develop their abilities to see other potential cues distinguishing dogwalks and seesaws.

By the way, EVERY dogwalk and seesaw I've encountered in competition has at least one big, clear visual difference, even when approached from dead straight on.  Go put your seesaw right next to a dogwalk up ramp.  Ignore the slats.  Perhaps blur your focus.  No, I'm not talking about potential differences in how the ramps are suspended.  If your equipment is regulation, the difference is easily visible.  I believe the dogs can see that difference too. 

And since that difference is practically ALWAYS there, then it seems like the perfect kind of cue.

USDAA

Dogwalk: The bottom 36” (915mm) of each ramp-plank shall be designed as a safety contact zone, shall be painted yellow and must be a significant contrast to the primary obstacle color to form a distinct top line.  The edge of the zone shall be on the top of the ramp … and have no other banding, insignia or other markings within twelve inches of the top line.

Seesaw: The last 36” (915mm) of each end of the plank shall be designated as a safety contact zone, shall be painted yellow and be a significant contrast to the primary obstacle color to form a distinct top line.  The edge of the zone shall be on the top of the ramp … and have no other banding, insignia or other markings within twelve inches of the top line.

AKC

Dogwalk: Contact zones are painted on the lower portion of the plank, 45 inches of the ascending side (upside) ramp and on the lower 42 inches of the descending side (downside) ramp.

Seesaw: Contact zones, 42 inches long, are painted on each end of the plank …

All Contact Obstacles: The color of the zones must contrast with the rest of the panel, but may not be white, black or brown.  Bright yellow contact zones are recommended.

 My sheltie slides down the down ramp on the unslatted DW, much the same as she does on unslatted AF. My lab does not slide on the DW...she does on unslatted AF. 

Personally my preference is slatted, but vets I know, like unslatted. When I see my dogs sliding it doesn't look safe to me. They lean back trying to get some resistance and control with claws grinding on the surface. it seems slower. On slatted surface they run down, and slow a lttle to hit the contact.

Kathy Hildreth Ithaca, NY Meadow CGC NAJ NA TBAD TG2 CL2-F CL1-R, CL1-H(picture) Beauty CGC NAJP Jessie CGC CD NA CL1 CL2F