The big international
dog agility survey

Trends, expectations and fears 2022 [a report]

Every agility competitor knows that our sport has long been in accelerating transformation mode. There are lots of positive aspects to this change: when speed is added, we focus on safety aspects more seriously, and sport status opens up new opportunities to agility and the people involved with it. 

At the same time, we are facing many new challenges: how to keep the number of competitors as high as it has been, or even grow it? What do we actually want from dog agility in the future, and are there contradictions if we look at it from different points of view: the dogs’, the handlers’, the agility clubs’ and the whole sport’s? Yes, the entity is quite complex. 

The discussion is ongoing, so we wanted to collect the ideas, hopes and fears of competitors for this edited report. We want to thank all you 257 competitors from 28 different countries for your insights. 

With this report, we hope competitors are heard. We hope it helps active members of agility clubs as well as agility decision makers on a national and international level to make good decisions when taking our wonderful sport forward.

Table of Contents:

Who answered the survey?

Dog agility NOW!

Why do people enjoy competing in dog agility?

What are the best changes in dog agility during the last 5 years?

What are the worst changes in dog agility during the last 5 years? 

How have the changes in dog agility affected training?

How have the changes affected competing in dog agility?

The future of dog agility - what do competitors fear and hope for?

How will dog agility change during the next 5-10 years?

What kind of changes are hoped for obstacles?

What kind of changes are hoped for dog agility rules?

Conclusions

Respondents from all over the world

Altogether 257 handlers from 28 countries answered the survey. The largest part of respondents were from Finland (22%), Australia (13%), Norway (12%), USA (11%) and Sweden (7%). The survey was made for competitors and, thus, we invited only competitors to answer. They are, after all, those who have first hand experiences about the changes the sport has gone through during the last years and, for this reason, they have insights also on the future of the sport.

Experienced competitors with strong insights

53% of the respondents have competed for at least 10 years. This means that they have gathered a lot of experience and insight into dog agility.

Of course, sometimes being experienced may affect the handler’s attitude towards changes in a negative way - but not always. We are happy to have the insights of both experienced and newer competitors. This ensures that we get different points of view acknowledged in the report. 

35% of the respondents compete with one dog, 39% with two dogs, 13% with three dogs and 3% with four or more dogs. In other words, the majority (65%) competes with more than one dog.

The majority (64%) of the respondents are over 36 years old. 9% are younger than 25 years old, 26,5% 25-35 years old, 22% 36-45 years old, 19% 46-55 years old and 24% older than 56.

Dog agility has changed a lot during the last few years. We asked how competitors feel about the sport at the moment and if and how they have adjusted their training and competing due to changes in the sport.  

First the most important question: what makes people compete in dog agility? Why do they wake up at 5 o'clock and drive hundreds of kilometres for a 40-second performance? Yes, we do the same ourselves, so we get it. However, we wanted to know the reasons more specifically. We asked the competitors to choose the three most important reasons for why they enjoy the sport.

The top reasons clearly stood out from the rest. The most important reason to compete in dog agility is cooperation with the dog (91% of respondents). Second place went to the challenge the sport offers (63% of respondents), and third to social context (48% of respondents).

Dog agility today is a completely different sport than what it was a few years ago. What has changed? Which of the changes are positive and which are negative?

Since the respondents come from 28 different countries in which dog agility rules and activities vary a lot, also the changes have been partly very different from one another. We tried to pick out the recurring topics. We have also quoted some open responses.

Safety is getting more attention 

Safety was mentioned somehow in almost every comment and it was clearly the number one topic in this survey when asked how agility has changed recently. 

There were some sub topics under safety: 

• Course design

• Obstacles

• Dog’s physical foundation work and conditioning

• Training the dog (foundations, independent skills) 

The two last mentioned sub topics are discussed under the paragraph “Dog training development”

According to the respondents, courses are now designed so that they are more logical, lines are flowing and distances between the obstacles are longer. Also running contacts are taken into account better than before.  

“Course designing. Much safer for dogs, for example now there’s almost no 180 degree turns from dog walk anymore. And also judges try to make safe lines for dogs.”

Many obstacles have been developed to meet the growing needs for security. A good example of these is the breakaway tyre and soft wall. In the UK, the dogwalk has been lowered.

Many people also mentioned improvements in contact surface material, and the material of jump wings has been changed from wood to plastic in many places. There were also mentions of better and safer surfaces.

Jumping heights had been lowered in many countries, which might affect the length of a dog’s agility career.

“Safer obstacles (breakaway tire, contact surfaces, lighter displace-able jumps). Let our dogs play longer and more safely!”

Increasing knowledge about dogs builds good base for changes 

One of the popular topics in the comments was that knowledge about dogs is increasing due to scientific research. We understand better their biomechanics, wellbeing, learning and so on.

This results in better acknowledgement of dogs and their safety in everything relating to agility.

“More research and knowledge in dog movement biomechanics, general well-being, sport veterinary and rehabilitation lead to more educated trainers and handlers, who take agility like real sport from dogs' requirements point of view. The same knowledge leads to more safety concern from equipment and course point of view ( obstacle manufacturers, rules, judges )”

Dog training has changed

Flowing and fast course profiles require strong independent skills from the dog which has made coaches rethink training methods. Also the increasing understanding of dog behavior and the role of physical conditioning in prevention of injuries has affected the change. Thus, it is a new norm that an agility dog gets physical training and conditioning from early on and foundation work for agility skills is done with care.

“The physical prep and fitness of dogs has become more and more the norm.”

“In our country the development of actual dog training and teaching your dog to really know physically what they are doing. I think this potentially reduces accidents and body awareness makes the sport safer for dogs.”

Training extended to competition fields to support the long term development of agility teams

According to the respondents, competitions are not seen as something totally separate from a dog’s training anymore. On the contrary, instead of getting a result at any price, handlers are ready to sacrifice it in order to affect the dog’s development in the long term. 

“I think the overall mindset especially in my country is changing from the mindset of "clean run no matter what" to trying your best, having fun with your dog, just enjoying the challenge and co-operation with your dog, and aiming for long term progress.”

New size categories increase inclusiveness - new breeds in agility

In many countries the 4th or even 4th and 5th size category have been added to the national rules. The respondents felt that this had made the sport more inclusive for certain breeds.

“Hard to choose, but five size categories in the swedish rules 2017 is the winner. It allowed for more dogs to enjoy agility in a safe and fun way and more breeds to fit for agility.”

International cooperation and training opportunities increased

As requirements have increased in dog agility, opportunities for getting new skills have popped up here and there. 

The number of online courses has exploded. Anyone can now get access to the courses of top coaches around the world at a reasonable price. Some coaches have specialized in running contacts, some in the skills related to jumps and so on.

The judges in some countries get education abroad to learn from the best. Also they have online courses for course design - and these are available also to coaches and regular handlers. 

“International cooperation to develop the sport: In Australia new judges training in Europe to make safer courses”

Requirements of dog agility higher than before

All in all, respondents agreed that requirements have increased noticeably in dog agility. Even if this has a positive side to it of adding interesting challenges, it has also had some negative effects. Some of the most common points made by the respondents were that the needs of the dogs were overrun by high ambitions, the gap between weekend warriors and professionals had increased, it had gotten harder for new ones to join in the sport and the variety of dog breeds had narrowed.

The needs of the dogs ignored

The clear majority of all comments about negative changes was related to how the needs of the dogs are often ignored in one way or another. High ambitions drive decision making and activities both in training and competitions. 

Since the level of requirements has increased also in the lowest classes, the training of the dogs is, according to the respondents, started very early on. The dog needs many more independent skills than before so without good planning, it takes much more time and repetitions to get the dog to the needed level. Today the amount of training is too high, also later during a dog’s agility career. 

“Pushing young dogs too far too fast because the owners want to win”

“Adolescent dogs being asked to do mature dog skills, they are still growing and too young for such training!”

“The speed at which it is "required" to get your dog ready in an increasingly demanding sport. For example, the limit for competitions hasn't gone up from 18 months even though agility has become much more demanding in terms of course design, speed and competitiveness. This easily leads to too much training with very young, immature dogs. So maybe the worst thing is the "what has not happened": the age limit has not been taken up to 2y.”

All this is reinforced by the trend that it is seen as some kind of merit to get the dog to the highest classes as young as possible.

“The high expectations on our young dogs. That it is a feat the younger your dog is high up in classes.”

It’s harder for newcomers to join in

Agility has always been quite a demanding sport for newcomers. One needs to learn many kinds of skills and knowledge: dog training, how to motivate a dog, the rules of the sport, handling skills, reading the course, and so on. Now that the needed skill level has gotten higher, respondents felt that it has gotten harder for newcomers to join in.  

“More competitiveness in the lower classes. Harder for beginners to fit in.” 

“Competing has started to require highly advanced skills both from dogs and their trainers. This has started to make the pool of agility enthusiasts more narrow and it is difficult to get new people to start competing.” 

Harder courses decrease the motivation of regular joes 

Respondents were clearly worried about maintaining the motivation of regular joes and keeping the number of competitors high. Success in dog agility today demands strong dedication to the sport and not everyone has the possibility or even willingness to do so. The gap between professionals (those who succeed) and other handlers has grown wider.

“Extreme split between “professional” and social agility”

“Actual competitiveness scares me. People that don’t live of agility are losing motivation because of that.”

“It's starting to get to a level where we need to divide the professionals and us with a hobby.  It's more difficult to keep up with speed and needed skills.”

“I really dislike the trend of some judges urging each other on to make more and more difficult courses. They almost make a competition out of it. When in a startlist of a 100 dogs, 5 get through the course, that’s not something to be proud and cheerful about, it’s plain embarassing. So bad for recruitment, boring as hell for spectators, a killer for the future training of dogs. It will be the death of the sport if this trend is not reversed.”

Higher speed

Even if the flowing course profiles collected praises when we asked about positive changes, the topic also had a downside. The flowing course profiles result in higher speed. Respondents thought that when there’s a strong emphasis on high speed, it can result in serious accidents, narrowing of breed variety, and require a very fit and fast handler. 

Not all breeds are capable of required speeds 

In the responses, there was a vast concern that not all breeds are capable of the required speeds. To succeed in dog agility, you need  a border collie, kelpie, wocker, or a sheltie. In the UK, they already have classes like “anything but collie” in which speeds are different than in regular agility competitions due to the restriction of the dominant breed. In the answers, also an “anything but spaniel” class was suggested.

“Speed. It should be for many breeds, not just one.”

“The small classes now being over run by spaniels we need a anything but spaniel class for our small/medium dogs!”

“Lajin muuttuminen yhä enemmän muutamien rotujen väliseksi kisailuksi. Karsii meitä muiden rotujen omistajia ns. harrastelijoita kisaajaporukoista.”

The narrowing of breed variety has, according to the comments, also affected the skills of coaches. It’s more rare to be able to successfully coach less conventional dog breeds. 

Added speed was also seen in individual dogs, no matter the breed. Respondents felt that the need for high speed affects the choices the breeders make and this had lead to dogs with overly high drive, who run fast but endanger themselves on agility fields.

High speed causes accidents

Many respondents brought up accidents caused by high speed. While many of them admitted they actually love the speed, at the same time they were worried about the accidents it might cause and especially about the severity of the accidents. 

“I love the speed, but higher and higher speeds are also scary, regarding the dogs’ safety.”

“Extreme speed on dog walk and a-frame is often dangerous for the dog. I've seen some very bad injuries caused by this.”

The respondents were concerned about how high speeds are not considered enough in approaches and exits.

“The emphasis on speed without thought of dog safety e.g approaches, exists.” 

Agility demands a fit handler

Faster speed and the course profiles were seen as something that sets new demands also to the handler. To be able to run clean, one needs to be fit and fast. Some respondents felt that this is not possible unless one is young and athletic.

“Enormous speeds, many too tricky courses that you cannot really enjoy while running (rescue mission is interesting in its own way but.. 😃)”

“Courses that requires a fit handler. A course should be able to solve either by good distance handling skills or a fast handler. New challenges, like hidden jumps, makes it close to impossible to solve without being a fast handler. This excludes many of the handlers.“

“Agility became a sport for young, agile handlers and courses nowadays are unable to be completed even with a perfectly trained dog when you are not fit and young anymore.”

Competitiveness has increased 

It became very clear from the comments that competitiveness has increased dramatically during the last 5 years. Many experienced that some handlers take the sport way too seriously which has a negative effect on the atmosphere at competitions.

“Making things too serious among hobby teams creates a nasty environment.”

“Too many competitors and ppl take agility too seriously imo”

Competitiveness also has another side effect. The respondents felt that in many cases dogs have become sport equipment. They had noticed that sometimes the need to win overruns the dog’s needs. For example, a dog’s physical symptoms can be ignored since noticing them could prevent them from going to the start line. The respondents said that it’s quite common that frustration after a failure is unloaded onto the dog.

“It is getting more and more competitive without regarding the needs of the dogs.”

“Too much competitiveness, in some people that provokes unrealistic expectations and there are few who are too hard on their especially young dogs.”

“I find it really disappointing especially of experienced handlers I have seen first hand running their dog when they clearly have some form of injury, with the dog either limping, head diving after the jump or taking very short steps to prepare for the jump. And I particularly find this to be the case in people chasing the high titles such as champion.”

Divided visions among the judges 

Divided visions among judges came up in many comments. Some felt that not all judges have successfully followed the development of the sport and thus, are not up to date with what is needed from course design. This, they said, increases safety risks and can sometimes make it unpleasant to run the courses.

“Joidenkin tuomarien ratasuunnittelu on jäänyt kehityksestä ja turvallisuusnäkökohdista jälkeen.”

“In Canada, many AAC and CKC judges trying to incorporate "European style" challenges without knowing what the hell they're doing, so you end up with squished-together arbitrary jerky courses that are discouraging or dangerous for large or fast dogs.”

There seemed to be significant differences of opinion between the judges from different continents and countries - and also within the organisations, like FCI. The respondents felt that updates in rules can’t keep up with the changes in dog agility trends. Many competitors wished for more agile changes in the rule updates in their organisations.

“The great divide between US courses and European courses.”

“Misalignment between FCI and judges especially in regards to distances. Seems Wild West that we have rules but not all follow. FCI rules should update more frequently to adapt to changes.”

74,7% of respondents said that the changes have affected their training. The changes were both quantitative and qualitative and influenced both the dog and the handler. The themes found in the comments are discussed below.

More agility training

It was a recurring theme in the comments that the teams felt that they needed to train more than before. The sport requires more, so the respondents felt that they are forced to train more if they want to succeed. Others had solved the issue by postponing the start of their competition career, so that they had more time to get to the required skill level before the first competition run.

“The amount of time spent training has increased dramatically, even though I am now a much better trainer than I used to be. I am worried about the impact all this training will have on the dog's body.”

“I have to train more with my dogs, I have to train myself to be fast enough, I struggle to motivate my students to take part in a competitions - people are not willing to devote that much to prepare a dog enough to achieve a clean run on nowadays course.”

“Waited longer before I started to compete with my youngest dog”

“I take longer to move from training to competition to ensure that my dog not only has the skills but is also physically and mentally ready for the challenge.”

Training is started earlier and foundation work is emphasised 

Respondents said they start training earlier than before. When they get a new puppy, they put a lot of effort on foundation work to add both independent skill base and ability to navigate the potentially dangerous parts of the course so that even if they themselves are late in handling, the dog stays safe.

“Started earlier with foundation training”

“My young dog has been doing foundations and other supporting exercises more than my earlier dogs. I have been feeling almost anxious about the amount of new things to consider when building the pyramid of skills.”

“More foundation work on how to safely navigate less than ideal approaches in case I am not where I expect to be to handle the line.”

More physical training for both the dog and the handler

Modern course profiles and faster speeds have made dog agility people more active in fitness training. According to the responses, their dogs also get more physical conditioning. This isn’t only due to the increased need for speed but also the aim at making agility more safe for their dogs.

“Sprinting training for me”

“I work much harder on my own fitness and know I won’t be able to compete when I’m old”

“I spend more time focusing on conditioning and injury prevention than actual agility training.” 

“I am a lot more mindful of both my dogs’ and my own physical conditioning.”

Focus on independent skills, distance work and adding speed 

Changes in course profiles, as well as increased speed also affect training with adult dogs. Speed is added with running contacts, collection from high speed, distance work, independent skills and the verbal cues that the independent skills require.

“More verbal commands to be able to. handle from a distance”

“New challenges, more alternatives for the dog on course that call for better understanding of cues and verbals, more independence, better obstacle skills, more speed, more foundation training.”

“Focus more on skills and the dog’s education rather than handling everything to perfection.”

“Need more skills at collection from speed.” 

“I would not teach stopped contacts anymore. Much more emphasis on verbal cues.”

More thought and planning to dog agility training 

Since dogs need to have more skills now than before, it’s natural that also the number of repetitions needed to build a skill set has grown. Respondents felt that they grow too high if one doesn’t pay attention to planning their training carefully. This is the reason AgiNotes was founded in 2017 when we already saw this risk and wanted to offer a tool for better training planning.

The same challenge was noticed by the respondents and what's wonderful is that it seems that there is more structure in training now, and we hope there will be much more in a few years.

“Lot more thought/analysis goes into training - very much on an individual basis for both dog and handler, now not a one size hat fits all.”

“Way more structured. More focus on skills, verbals, layering”

“It has more structure.”

Better dog training methods in use 

Even though there’s a lot of training to be done when building an agility dog, fortunately in addition to better planning, there also seem to be better training methods now. Would we have them, if the sport hadn’t become so much more demanding? Nobody knows..

“That there is a much better way than the training methods of the past.”

“I've actively tried to seek better practices to gain more understanding of improving training methods. I've retrained jump skills, contacts and verbals.”

“Changed my methodology.”

Top level coaching on online courses 

The fast development of dog agility together with COVID19 have made the respondents follow the sport internationally and get the best possible coaching regardless of location. COVID19 accelerated the offering of online courses as coaches struggled with getting an income. Online courses and buying courses from abroad have become a normal part of the respondents' normal activities.

“I have among other things started buying course designs and spots in advanced online handling seminars to try to stay on top of the development, as I really want to be able to compete internationally.”

“I now train on my own using online courses for motivation.”

58% of respondents said that their competing had changed. Some said that it was more due to COVID19 and the decrease in competitions. However, also the development of the sport had affected competing significantly. Let’s see how.

Selecting judges with care 

The most common theme in the answers on how the changes had affected respondents’

competing was that they had started to select judges with great care. The phenomenon is not new but the fast development of the sport and the divide in the judges’ opinions of what kind of sport they wish dog agility were, cause very different course design styles. When individual opinions of the competitors are added to the equation, it isn’t a surprise that not all competitors like all judges’ styles and thus, they select competitions more carefully.  

The most common reason for competitors selecting judges was that they wanted to run courses they considered safe. The second reason was them wanting to run courses with flowing lines and the third was interesting challenges. Even though many answered that the level of requirements is already too high, when we asked about training, many appreciated the “new themes” (flowing lines, high speed, interesting challenges) in the part where we asked about competing and they were ready to travel far to get to the judges offering these on their courses. Respondents said that they avoid judges who are not able to design safe courses for modern speed. 

“Choosing competition based on judges - looking for safe but interesting and challenging courses.”

“Pyrin valitsemaan tuomareita, joilla aiemmin ollut "sujuvat" radat.”

“I look for competitions and judges where I know the agility will have modernised, rather than just choosing the closest ones to home.”

“​​A lot more competition abroad for me especially to meet my favorite judges and get to run on exciting speed and challenging courses.”

“Here in the United States I have to specifically seek out opportunities to test my skills on international style courses because what is required for those has diverged so much from what we see in standard American courses.”

Understanding of safety aspects has grown - dangerous courses are skipped by competitors

As already seen, safety was a big theme in all comments. In addition to selecting judges, it affected competing in many other ways. In general, respondents felt that judges had a better understanding of safety aspects and that there are less dangerous parts on courses than before.

According to the comments, also the competitors themselves have a better ability to consider safety aspects. If they spot something dangerous on a competition course, whether it’s related to course design, obstacles, surface or risks caused by weather conditions, they simply skip the run. In addition to increased knowledge, this says a lot about the values of today’s competitors. They know they are responsible for the wellbeing of their dogs.

“As stated above I learnt about safety aspects and would be fine pulling my dog from a course I deem unsafe. Whereas when I started, I look back realizing we had very dangerous obstacles and lines but the sport has now progressed and I am happy to see I feel everyone has a better understanding of safety.”

“I don’t have to withdraw from as many competitions for the safety of my dog - it is less often now that I see equipment or courses that are unsafe for a dog that runs a reasonable speed or faster.”

“I will never run my dogs in the wet when raining again, and will pull out of an event if I feel the judge has not set the course in a safe way, and is not willing to change it if other competitors feel the same.”

New size classes have opened up new opportunities

FCI is just getting the fourth size category and many countries have that or even five size categories in the national rules already. This, the respondents said, had opened up new opportunities for those whose dogs have not previously been of an optimal size for their category. The lower jump heights of the new size categories have made it more dog friendly to compete with XS and SL dogs.

“Small dogs will definitely compete more now when the jump height is lower. It is a good change.”

“I have been able to continue competing after my dog recovered from an injury as the jumping heights were more reasonable thanks to the intermediate class being between 43.00 and 49.99 cm.”

More challenging courses divide opinions 

Respondents had very different opinions about added challenges on competition courses. 

Some respondents felt that the current difficulty level eats up their motivation to compete. 

“It is more stressful to compete, because I never know how we do on a course.”

“I lost my self confidence.”

“I choose to stay in grade 2 to protect my dogs self esteem rather as compete in grade 3, even though we have all the exams we need to compete in grade 3.”

The other half said that they enjoy the new challenges and that their own skills have developed together with the challenges.

“Tekniikkojen parempi osaaminen ja irtoaminen sekä itsenäisyys myös kisoissa.”

“I fail more, but the courses are so much more entertaining for both me and my dog.”

“More skills to use to navigate a course.”

In dog agility, just like in life in general, the only thing that is certain is change. This is why we wanted to map up what competitors fear and hope for.

The gap between the top competitors and the others will grow - elite class as a solution?

The most frequent comment about future changes was the growing gap between top competitors and the rest. Some saw this as a threat, some as a natural development and some even hoped for it. The challenge seems to be how to keep everyone happy and how we can support the development of the sport without losing the wide rows of regular joes.

“I think the gap between elite and agility as a social and recreational activity and there will be challenges to make everyone happy. I think the challenges will continue to develop, and also the safety aspect and design of agility obstacles. More countries will allow for four or five size categories. The sport on elite level will be more demanding when it comes to the handlers physical abilities.”

“The level of sport is growing in a huge pace, therefore, I would expect a big gap in between highest level competitors/competition and normal level competitors/competition after this time period.“

Those who saw the growing gap as a threat predicted that the sport won’t be able to draw in new people. They were also afraid that the rising difficulty level will drive the Sunday warriors out of the sport since competing doesn’t offer them good options. The respondents explained that those who are not top competitors and compete only for fun will not necessarily be ready to invest the needed amount of effort or money to raise their skills to the required level. 

“If the changes continue I think people just enjoying it will quit competing. Many train but even quit completely. And those standing left are those competing to win and reach world cups and so on. New people will not join as it is too hard, and costs too much to train a dog good enough to compete.”

“You will need to be a professional trainer to be able to win classes, for the beginners and "happy hobby"-trainers there will be no future.”

“I'm afraid it will get even more difficult with no alternative for those who want to compete for fun and not to become the best.”

Some respondents experienced the development as something logical and natural. There are a lot of competitors and the skill level and methods grow at the same time as the requirements.

“More to elite sport, that is natural since the sport has grown so much and more competitors.”

In both groups the suggested solution was a separate class for the elite. They hoped that the elite class would be dedicated to the absolute top and, at the same time, the requirements of the other classes would lower. This way, they said, regular competitors could also experience success in competitions.

“We will see a new level where it requires a more serious effort to compete at the top level. Effort will be more related to the effort needed in other sports to achieve top level.”

“I kind of like the idea of having an elite class division or something. Which should be for the absolute best competitors. And then lower division for us doing it as a hobby. I think the environment would be better if people could compete with others having the same goals. Less pressure on handlers too. In most other sports, such as football, skiing, 100 meter run etc, elite competitors from the national team are not competing against rookies/hobby competitors.”

“One might have elite classes. If not there might be people quitting because it's too hard to be "successfull" for the ordinary handlers. Not because the dont win, but because they hardly ever succeed with their dogs.“

Breed variety in danger

In spite of the new size classes, respondents were afraid of the narrowing of breed variety. They felt that soon there’s no room for other breeds other than shelties, spaniels and border collies.

“Slower dog breeds are being smoked out entirely. It is / will become a sport for a few breeds only.“ 

“It won't be that inclusive to all breeds and the emphasis will be more and more about speed.”

“Most probably agility is strongly becoming "one breed show". Small dogs are shelties, bigger ones BCs. Boooring.”

Safety grows with increasing knowledge

The majority of respondents focused their thoughts on increasing safety when asked about the future. They had noticed that there’s more research on it going on which helps make data-based decisions when developing the sport, surfaces, obstacles, course profiles and the ways we train. 

“Hopefully towards a more safe sport for dogs. We're just now getting good scientific data on what are the big "danger spots" on agility courses. Right now the data points to for example A-frame, dogwalk and jump height. This data should be assessed and taken into consideration on an international level.”

“Hopefully -- listening to the folks that have genuine concerns about the style of courses, being safe for all dogs; too often those concerns are dismissed only as "lack of training" as though dogs do not succumb to injuries due to repetitive activity-- or that getting from point A to point B is the same for an 8" dog as a 20"+ dog -- after all we have (equine) Dressage as a template for how to cumulatively build skills - mental and physical - to model after”

Developing obstacles was a big theme which we discuss further in the chapter What kind of changes are hoped for obstacles.

Stronger independents skills and better oral cues for dogs 

The respondents predicted that in the future, the focus in training is on independent skills and oral cues, and training will start earlier and is done very thoroughly. To achieve the skill level required by the higher competition levels will demand significant effort.

“I think that the foundations based training (also building the physical side!) will be established.” 

“It's going to get harder to train for the highest levels.”

“More distance handling and verbals.”

“I think the course design will continue to demand high speed followed by independent, technical requirements. I.e long straight stretches followed by a flick or independent layering with difficult obstacles. It will continue to demand either incredible independence, or very athletic handlers - or, most likely, both.”

In some comments, the respondents hoped that future courses would challenge the handler more than the dog.

“I hope the focus will be on fair courses for our dogs. Where the challenge is more for the handler and less for the dog.”

Will speeds get faster or will there be attempts to control it?

It’s clear that at the moment, speed is growing. However, the respondents were divided into two groups according to what they predicted would happen to speed in the future.

Some estimated that the importance of speed will continue growing. There were those who hoped for it, and on the other hand, those who feared it. 

“I think speed is going to be more and more important, unfortunately.”

“I really hope that the speed becomes more important because today sometimes only the really slow dogs make a clean course and that is not agility for me. I love the challenge with discriminations and distance handling.”

About half of the comments related to speed were predictions that there will be some attempts to control it. It was estimated that, instead of focusing on speed, the sport would be more about skills and cooperation in the future . 

“Emphasis on teamwork, skillwork and not so much on sheer speed.”

“I hope it will not become just about speed.. It should be about handling, connection and then speed.”

“Everything in life is a spiral, so I am sure that the increased speed for both dog and handler will turn again.”

It was interesting that even though there was grave fear about ever-growing speed, the majority of respondents hoped for long distances between obstacles and flowing lines.

“I hope the USA will start making courses with more flow and forward movement rather than spinning in place, or making the dog run in a fast straight line and expecting a tight wrap with nowhere to go.”

Course profiles will demand even better fitness and psyche from the handler

Respondents had a strong vision about higher demands on the fitness and psyche of the handler in the future. The handler will become a real athlete and running the courses will require fitness training.

In addition to fitness training, respondents also thought that mental training will become a part of training of successful handlers. Of course, it is already an important part of many handlers’ training entity but perhaps its role will become bigger.

“The sport will develop more towards other sports, like more handlers’ physical training and mental coaching etc.”

“Muuttuu enemmän fyysiseen suuntaan, radat pitenevät, koiralta ja ohjaajalta vaaditaan enemmän.”

“Harder courses that put more demands on us handlers with our own speed and fitness.”

More size classes to all countries

Size classes and how to define them have been in the center of active discussion both internationally and nationally in many countries. There seems to be a kind of consensus that we need more than 3 size classes. 

68,1% of respondents hoped for 5 and 20,6% 4 size classes internationally. The latter will happen in FCI 1.1.2023. 

“I think there is a need for generalising the 5 height classes europe-wide. Also the level of difficulty could also be something that needs to be further addressed because the sport already got faster and the more speed and difficulty added, the more our dogs are at risk to injure themselves.”

“Hopefully it will continue to focus on safety and fun for both handler and dog, and include all five sizes in all countries.”

Defining size classes is more complex than it first seems. The height at the withers does not necessarily correspond to a dog’s capacity to run or jump - it is affected by many structure-related factors. Respondents brought this up and pondered if there were alternatives for how dogs should be measured. 

“Dog measuring needs to be done by leg length like in flyball.”

“Taking into account physical traits other than just height to choose height category for the dog.”

“I would like a fairer way of measuring the dogs.”

But how to define size classes? It is great that FCI has added the fourth class to international rules (starting from 1.1.2023). However, if one compares those classes to those we’ve had in Sweden and Finland for some years now, there are definitely some differences. FCI defined the large class to start from 48 cm when in national rules in at least Finland and Sweden it is 50cm. Which one is better? Will there be a need for further discussion? 

A Finnish person who has been active in agility for a long time collected some data and drew an image about how size classes and the teams in each class are divided. The data is collected from 74 different places, 134 competitions and over 8000 individual runs. The image shows clearly how, at least in Finland, medium class is the largest and extra small the smallest. Will this kind of data be used when adjusting class definitions in the future? Are there other arguments that should affect the definitions? It will be interesting to see if the definitions will change and if they do, how will they change and will there be differences between the national rules in different countries.

37,4% of respondents were content with obstacles as they are at the moment. However, the majority (62,6%) hoped for some changes. When speed and course profiles change, it is only natural that also the needs connected to obstacles will develop. 

In the comments, the biggest need for changes was connected to contact obstacles. 31,5% wanted changes to dogwalk, 30% to A frame and 17,5% to seesaw. 12,1% wanted adjustments to tire, 10,1% to tunnel, 5,8% to jumps, 5,4% to wall, and 4,3% to weaves.

Almost every obstacle got one or two comments for the obstacle to be totally removed. However, taking the nature of dog agility into account, it is quite probable that not all obstacles will be removed. This is why we’ll concentrate on the suggestions of improvement for each obstacle. 

We’ll make an exception: It is worth mentioning that table and chute are still used in some countries without any estimations on whether they will be left out or not. There were a lot of comments about getting rid of these two obstacles. 

The suggestions were closely (almost 100%) linked with safety aspects, the strongest theme of all comments in this survey. 

“I just wish that obstacle safety continues to develop as we learn more about the sport for example thanks to dedicated research efforts.”

“Performance based safety rules for equipment design. Eg max impact force for a jump to fall over.”

Suggestions on how to improve contact obstacles

In general, respondents felt that contact obstacles need some adjustments due to faster speeds. They also asked for standardisation of measurements, surface material and rebounce (joustavuus) of contact obstacles.

A frame

The most popular development ideas connected to A frame were lowering it and reducing the steepness. The respondents had seen dangerous situations both when entering the A frame and when passing the apex.  

“A frame is so dangerous with the current speed. There has been really bad accidents & close calls. Something needs to be done so that it becomes safer.”

“A-frame - lower appr 20 cm to allow smoother passage (limit the possibility to fly over the apex and straight to ground). “

“A frame - considering current speeds. Is the A frame too steep? Or should course designs be adjusted to ensure the A frame is not met head on at a flat out gallop?”

Dogwalk

Respondents also wanted updates for the dogwalk. Running contacts today are very fast and according to the comments, it doesn’t meet the needs set by the increased speed.  

There were suggestions for making the dogwalk a bit wider, so that dogs would not fall off so easily. Another proposition was to lower the obstacle, so that when a dog fell down, there would be less risks for severe injuries. The respondent felt that these adjustments would not compromise the idea of the dog walk - they would only add safety.

“The dogwal is too narrow for the speed of running contacts”

“I don't see the need for the dog walk to be as high as it currently is. It is devastating to see a dog fall from the current height. The dog and handler skill at completing the obstacle would be just as evidence at a lower hence safer height.“

“If the speed keeps growing, we need lower/wider dogwalks before dogs start to get seriously injured on it more and more. Yes, training and prep is important and should eliminate such things, but accidents do happen.”

All contacts should be, according to respondents, standardised, so that they have the same measurements, surface material and rebounce in spite of the manufacturer. Especially those who train running contacts felt that these qualities affect how a dog performs the obstacle and thus, should be more or less the same.

“Dog walk should be the same length regardless of the company who made it.“

“Dogwalk: one international and standardized length and width”

FCI is giving up on judging the up contact in 1.1.2023. However, respondents hoped for this to happen also on a national level and in other organisations.

“The up contact should not be judged at all and approaching contacts should be fluent and straight so dogs don't have to change gallop when on an obstacle.”

Seesaw

It was said that the seesaw is a very challenging and unpleasant obstacle for a large number of  dogs, especially for the small ones. 

Some compared the seesaw to the table, which has already been removed in many organisations and countries. What is common with the two obstacles, is the need to do a full stop, which, with modern speed, was experienced as something that disturbs the flow. 

There were also comments on the weight-related difference in the time a dog needs to spend on the seesaw to make it go down. This, respondents felt, is unfair for small dogs.  

“With the speed dogs have today, this obstacle makes no sense, as every dog regardless of size has to make a full stop, but deponering on the weight of the dog and the setting on the seesaw, the time the dog spends before it hits the ground varies. This makes it unfair for the smallest dogs (ie XS/S) and also a lot of extra wear and tear on the body of the dog.” 

Respondents suggested that the seesaw be lowered, and some padding or mechanism would be added to soften the impact on a dog’s body and the noise caused by the ledge meeting the surface. These changes, they hoped, would firstly reduce the risks when a dog falls or flies off the obstacle, and secondly, make the obstacle less scary for small dogs and, thirdly, add visual difference between the seesaw and the dogwalk.

“The seesaw is super hard and scary for small dogs, maybe it could be lower.”

“It should be a different height for different sizes. Especially for small dogs seesaw and aframe are crazy.”

“Lower seesaw to make it visually different from the dogwalk.”

“Dogwalk and the seesaw should look more different compared to each other from the dog's perspective.”

“More cushioning on the downward tilt so less shock travelling up the dogs shoulders.”

“There could be some kind of soft material under the seesaw (the end where the dog « bangs »). Some dogs really seem to struggle with the vibration at the bottom even after understanding the criteria”

“Seesaw that holds the bang from the seesaw and is softer so therefore don’t make a big noise.”

Also for the seesaw, standardisation was hoped for. Respondents said that at the moment there are too many differences between the way seesaws descend and the kind of sound they make when a dog performs them.

“Needs to become more standardised in construction and tipping as the current regulations (UK) are too vague and there are big differences to how different manufacturer’s seesaws tip and/or bounce where fixings are not adequate.”

Suggestions on how to improve tunnels

Most of the suggestions and notions connected to tunnels were related to safety issues. It was said that the tunnel is a challenging obstacle because, when approaching it, a dog cannot know how the tunnel is bent, how well it is secured and what kind of grip its surface offers. It was a common worry, and respondents suggested that there ought to be a more standardised way to use tunnels to help the dogs know what to expect.

“I am convinced that the tunnel is the most dangerous obstacle for dogs because it’s so unpredictable. If a dog runs into a tunnel full speed, he never knows what to expect. The angle of the bend, how the tunnel is secured (firm or floppy, where are the bags he can push against, etc), non-slip or not. This should be more standardized so the dog knows better what to expect instead of having to deal with it when he races through it.”

It was suggested that dark colors be forbidden for dogs to be able to see better when performing tunnels. In FCI rules, there actually already is a recommendation for this: “Light colours (e.g., yellow, orange, light green, light blue, red, etc.) and uniformly-surfaced material should be used.“ However, it seems that this isn’t applied to national rules very widely since the colour-related comment was very common.

“I hope that the tunnels wouldn't be too dark to see in.”

Respondents wished that all tunnels had a surface with good grip. Also here, the need for standardisation came up.

“Mandatory with grip tunnels”

“Tunnels need to have some sort of rules to how slippery/ non slippery they are allowed to be.”

There were suggestions for defining the use of tunnel both as a part of a course and independently. Respondents wanted the entry angle not to be too tight, so that dogs would not crash into the wall of a tunnel when entering it.  

“Tunnels: lighter colored tunnels, not too small entry angles (the risk of the dog running straight to the wall of the tunnel), no sharp sudden curves in the tunnels”

“I wish there would be more regulations to how tunnel entries can be designed on the courses. Seeing the poor dogs slamming their shoulders in difficult entries is tough.” 

There were suggestions on defining how to use the tunnel, however, there was nothing new when compared to the effective FCI rules. Perhaps the rules are not applied in all countries and perhaps there are organisations which do not yet have these guidelines.

Securing tunnels was also a popular theme in the comments. Also for this, there are good recommendations for using one pair of bagging per metre in FCI rules. Perhaps also this is not implemented in national rules or at least not in practise.

“Should standardize tunnel bagging. Can't believe I hear "bags too heavy to carry" when dogs are seriously injured from tunnels moving and bags failing.”

“I wish the tunnel had a rule for enough tunnel bags. I find going to competitions I’m generally disappointed with the lack of tunnel bags (3 on a 5 metre tunnel is not enough).”

As with contacts, size classes seemed to have different needs for obstacles. There were surprisingly many wishes for tunnels with a larger diameter. This, respondents said, would make it nicer for larger dogs to do agility.

“I want the tunnels to be big enough for all breeds. I have a great dane who loves agility, but she really struggles through the tunnels.”

“Larger tunnels to be able to include all breeds.”

Suggestions on how to improve jumps

Jump

Suggestions for improving jumps were connected to jump heights and the material of the jumps. 

Many hoped that jump heights would still be lowered.  

“lowering of jump heights, a dog shouldn't be jumping taller than they are over the length of a long career”

“I'd still lower the jumps - why so high? Lower would mean that courses could be more varied as sharper turns aren't so physically challenging.”

Respondents hoped for changes to the material of jumps. It was suggested that all jumps be lighter and made of plastic. This, they said, would reduce the risk of injuries. 

“Jumps lighter and plastic. Then they will be safer.”

Tire

There were no concrete suggestions for the improvement of the tire, only requests for its removal.

“I would ditch the whole obstacle as so many dogs are struggling with it and I have seen some nasty accidents. But to be fair, all of the obstacles could probably be improved somehow if we start really considering all the factors.”

Wall

Soft walls have become popular during the last years and respondents hoped that they be mandatory in the future.

“Mandatory with soft wall.”

Suggestions on how to improve weaves

There were two clear themes that came up connected to weaves: the material and a possibility to use a set of 6 weaves.  

Respondents wanted weaves to be made of an elastic material and wooden weaves be given up.

“Weaves should be somehow more elastic or something.”

A surprisingly popular theme was a suggestion of using a set of 6 weaves. It was estimated that it would reduce straining a dog’s body.

“I would like to see only 6 weaves to reduce strain on the dogs.”

The expectations related to obstacles and size classes have already been covered in earlier chapters. Here we’ll dive into other rule-related suggestions.

Harmonisation needed: same rules regardless of country or judge 

In general, respondents hoped that there would not be so strong variation between the rules in different countries. Instead, they suggested, the rules be harmonised. This, however, would require more agile decision making from umbrella organisations, ways to implement the new decisions to national rules and active communication and cooperation between them, the organisations and the countries.

“I wish Same rules in all countries and all results count even if you run in another country.”

“I think, that it'd be nicer to have an international reglement, so that everyone has the same rules, f.ex. that in each country the Jumping class is separate from the agility class (see Sweden).”

Respondents felt that competition levels should be defined more precisely. They said that at the moment, there are too big, judge-related differences between the courses of the same level. One judge sets much harder challenges in a certain competition level than another.

“Some regulations as to difficulty levels in classes.”

In general, distances between obstacles were experienced as too short. Respondents said that the distances set by the FCI rules are not followed in national rules. In addition, they said that many judges use shorter distances than the minimum or the minimum distances, which the respondents did not like. As a solution, they suggested the harmonisation of the rules, some supervision and ways to make people commit to the rules.

“Alignment on Max distances between rules and judges. And max distance should be 8-9m for large dogs.”

I want the judges to FOLLOW the rules when it comes to the distance that is allowed between the obstacles instead of doing 10 and 11 meters between the obstacles.”

“Interval between obstacles for maxi's at least 7 meters! My dogs speed in class one is 6 m/s. How is it possible to land, follow the handling and collect for the next jump in 5 meters? I don’t like the idea of breaking down the speed just because the obstacles are too close to each other and its the biggest reason I avoid the most judges I know use 5 meter distances.”

New competition levels to newcomers and professionals

Respondents hoped that level 0 would be made an official competition level to ease the newcomers' way into the sport. This, they thought, could solve the problem of increased demands of the entry level and the way it makes it harder for newcomers to start competing now that level 1 courses are not the same as they were 10 years ago. 

“In the Swedish rules I would like a very easy official class which you could choose to start with or if you like skip and start in level 1 class. There are still a lot of handlers that are new to agility but the experienced handlers with educated dogs want more challenges in level 1.”

“In our country classes offered so that there is a more social class for people taking it less seriously with their first dog so that the extreme competitiveness doesn’t scare them off.”

For professionals, respondents wished for an elite class. They suggested that the elite class would only be open for very successful teams with a lot of wins and top speed. The criteria should be so high that it would not become a normal goal for regular competitors to get in.

“Also there could be a new "professional" level that one can enter only after set (large) number of clean wins and meeting some outrageous speed limit or smt similar. Something that would say clearly that it is not something that an average handler should think about, as otherwise it would still be a goal to too many people.”

Respondents brought up the need to set age limits for the elite class, so that dogs would be protected from the extreme ambitions that could be harmful for them.

“Add an age limit for dogs entering the elite class and AWC, so that your dog has to be more than 24 months to compete at the highest level. Should not be a problem for most athletes, but also want to focus on not pushing young dogs to the top too soon. Maybe also an age limit on 10 years, with the possibility of prolonging your competitor pass with a written statement from a vet every 6 months for older dogs.”

Mixed breeds’ participation rights to value competitions  

Respondents felt that disallowing mixed breeds to participate in value competitions, does not correspond to modern thinking, and it should be changed. They also hoped for mixed breed dogs to be able to get pedigrees.

“AWC to allow cross breeds as the current pedigree rule is very out dated. In the UK there are many extremely talented agility dogs without pedigree papers that could compete and perform to international standards but are excluded from some major international competitions.”

“Håper at reglene ang NOX- registrerte hunder forandres slik at dem også kan konkurrere i NM å få cert/championat.”

Allowing rewarding in official competitions

Many respondents felt that the big picture of the development of the dog should get more importance, and thus, they said that it should be allowed to reward the dog in official agility competitions.

“Rewarding more permissible.”

“Especially in Finland we should be more open minded of training and rewarding dogs in competitions. We should aim for the best of the animal and long term development of the teams.”

Based on the comments, it seems that competing in dog agility has become quite demanding and there is pressure to further adjust the classes, obstacles and rules. 

How can we secure the wellbeing of dogs when speeds get faster and the required skill level higher? How to maintain the nature of the sport and avoid the need of giving up too many obstacles due to increased risk of injuries caused by the increased speed when performing them? How to make sure the number of competitors won’t collapse but at the same time enable the development of the sport to become more professional. How to keep the dogs safe and keep them from becoming sports equipment?

The decision-makers in dog agility are certainly faced with hard challenges. We hope that the report will help in understanding the experiences, ideas, hopes and fears the competitors have at the moment. And we hope that you, as a competitor, will get new ideas and things to discuss after reading this report!