# Equipment-dependent (long)



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

How many of us are mostly or completely dependent on physical means to control our dogs? I'm definitely in that group. From Day One (though we got him at around a year of age), we used a prong with Renji because he is very reactive and pretty hard when it comes to corrections. We do go to training and we do lots of motivational methods to convince Renji that staying with us and maintaining a loose lead is a good thing. When dealing with a stubborn dog, this can be good but he also decides he can have it both ways as the correction for pulling/losing track is not a big deal. We then moved to the Gentle Leader and now I basically have a pissed-off tarpon on the end of my leash, not nearly pulling as much but bucking, rolling, shaking, at times you'd think I was trying to control a green stallion. It certainly didn't add to his reactivity like the prong did in hot situations but his comfort level was lowered and I was still stuck with relying on the leash and the tool. We cannot get anywhere in any trials unless we can break free of this reliance. In short, I have a well _managed_ dog as opposed to a well _trained_ dog. Management doesn't cut it in trials nor should it be acceptable in daily life save for extreme circumstances or unusual situations; the norm should be a well trained dog that obeys because it is more pleasant, it gets what it wants, and it allows for a harmonious partnership.

Many people fail to fully utilize the tools that no store can purchase: body and voice. Our dogs pay very close attention to _how_ we say things rather than what exactly we say. Volume, tone, long and drawn out versus staccato and sharp can make all the difference in the world. Physically, when communicating with a dog all we usually use are our hands. We often forget about the rest of our bodies, pushing away a dog with our hands instead of moving our entire body in front of the dog in a clear signal of "not your concern." Today we went to the park, about a 20 minute walk, using Renji's Gentle Leader rather than our mainstay prong. After a heavy game of fetch, I didn't want to put his GL back on to restrict his panting in any way but I had nothing else left but his flat buckle collar, a pouch of boiled chicken, and myself. Renji does enjoy pulling and will test on a prong or a GL and we tried all manners of training to get him to reduce pulling, but he is a work in progress. I knew that my tone of voice while giving commands does make a big difference and I knew that I could use my body to go a long way with him, so off we went with the buckle collar.

Renji has a tendency to walk faster than I do, a tendency I think most dogs share. It takes a good amount of self-control to settle in at a human's pokey pace. It's also been proven that the pressure from pulling on a collar actually encourages further pulling. Despite a prong, Renji will gladly pull; though not nearly as much, I still do not want a taut leash and it does nothing to teach him not to pull. It is the same with the Gentle Leader though the pressure points differ. He is still used to pulling, but now his discomfort is greater and so is his reaction to the collar. Renji was calmer around other dogs because the prong corrections fire him up (something that happens in quite a few dogs) but he still hit the end of the leash frequently, fought the collar, and I also relied upon the collar and leash way too much. Now that he was on the buckle collar, I radically changed my approach. As much as I could, I pretended that there was no leash connecting me to my dog. Much to my amazement, the results were the best 20 minute walk we have ever had.

I gave the command to walk by my side quietly and calmly, nearly a whisper and in a low, soothing voice. He did not have to walk shoulder-to-leg but he did have to stay reasonably close. If I was beginning to have a lovely view of his rear half, that was outside the zone I decided upon. Once he started to get a little ahead of the zone, I gave a corrective vocal marker. Renji responds well to "hey" and "ah-ah-ah." When giving these negative markers, I made sure to adjust my voice to the infraction. Slightly off, and it would be quiet but firm, a little sharp. If he was quickly exiting the zone, the correction escalated in volume and sharpness but never to an anxious shout or exclamation and as much as possible kept it short rather than "hey hey hey no no no," a trap into which many fall. Sometimes I had to stop and pat my leg to call him back or stop and walk backwards or even turn around, but that is part of using my body. We did walk by two people with dogs but at a distance, and a man, but these distractions would have set him off on a prong or GL. I believe my determination to not communicate through the leash helped him to stay calmer as well. Throughout the walk, I found that I did indeed have a throttle-like control of Renji just with my voice. 

That's our story thus far. If we continue on this path, I will soon have a well trained dog and will be able to leave the management to occasional events rather than daily life. Hopefully we will be able to become less reliant on tools like leashes and collars and more reliant on ourselves alone, save for goodies like treats and toys. Dogs still need a paycheck, after all.

Any stories of breaking through the dependencies, bumps in the road, tips and tricks?


----------



## IliamnasQuest (Aug 24, 2005)

Interesting thread, Diana! I just got done posting in another area on teaching a dog to walk on a loose leash, and one of the points I made was that the tools we use should only be to initially give us the behavior so that we can TRAIN. Unfortunately, most people teach their dogs to become dependent on collars, leashes, etc. We find a collar/harness/whatever that makes our dogs walk calmly and we continue to use it without doing anything to reach the goal of not needing the collar/harness/whatever. And then the dogs become accustomed to it and we run into the problem of being unable to wean the dog from the tool.

This is a training problem more than anything else. I decided a long long time ago that my goal, for all of my dogs, is to have a dog that is consistent and reliable without any leash or collar. I don't always hit that goal (Chows are not the easiest dogs to trust off-leash .. *L*) but that goal helps keep me from depending too much on any particular tool. I try to use collars that are the least invasive to the dog because it's much easier to transfer to off-leash when the DOG has not become too focused on what's around his neck. 

I start off-leash work from the time I get a pup. Trick, Khana, Tazer - they were all doing off-leash recalls at 8-9 weeks of age. I taught them to follow me, to chase me, to anticipate reward and petting and praise and FUN when they came to me. I used the older dogs to help teach the younger dogs - my old male GSD, Dawson, helped teach Trick to come when she followed him to me on a recall, and years later Trick helped teach Khana and Tazer the same thing. I like starting with a non-dependence on leash or collar, because it is good for the dog as well as me.

Now, there are times when a collar and leash are necessary, and at those times I have to choose what is going to work for each particular dog. I like the Gentle Leader harness because it's so effective and easy for someone with sore hands to use (which is my main problem). I occasionally use a prong collar and occasionally use a shock collar if I feel I need some additional control off-leash (for play times mostly). But I also realize that every time I put something like these on my dogs, I'm bringing their focus to what's on their neck and taking it away from me. 

Much of my philosophy came from the work I did with horses many years back. I started out with a horse who had little training - and I had little training (although at the time I THOUGHT I knew a lot! *L*). We were together for 17 years, Fireweed and I, and during that time we developed an absolutely amazing trust. It got to the point where I could ride him with NOTHING on him - no saddle, no bridle, no halter - not even a bit of twine. He responded to my voice and my body cues, and we even rode through the woods and along roads like that. I did demos with him at shows, where I rode out with just a halter and rope, then unbuckled the halter and pushed it off his head and went out into the arena and loped circles and showed how we communicated without the use of any tools at all. I had to trust him absolutely, and he trusted me too. 

So when I moved to dogs, I carried some of that same philosophy with me. Learn to trust and show your dog that he can trust you. I went through some rough spots - times when I believed the trainers and used force instead of understanding - but finally I came back to the same philosophy of using the least to obtain the most. And for those who want the deepest and best relationship with their animals, it's a valuable philosophy to have.

Good topic!

Melanie and the gang in Alaska


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Melanie, glad to see you have responded. You're actually a big inspiration for me; if I can achieve even a fraction of the control you have, that would be huge for me. You're right that there are times to have leashes and collars, and in today's world I don't think I would trust having Renji completely loose, without even an e-collar for backup, but that is only because no animal- not even humans- is 100% reliable. I feel it is fine to have these tools as backup in case of those unexpected moments as it could mean the difference between life or death or lawsuit, but just because the tools are there does not mean they should be used. 

I made a mistake by not working with Renji from the start in this method so now we have to overcome a large obstacle. I need to refine my leashless communication with Renji and build my trust in him along with Renji having to trust me and listen to me. Not "listen" as "obey," but as in paying attention like two people having a conversation. We cannot have lecturer-student communication but rather a communication more along the lines of two people engrossed in back-and-forth conversation. As you said, this is something that is best begun in puppies; if they learn as much as possible without the leash, that is the world they know and understand and I think a stronger foundation is built. The "philosophy of using the least to obtain the most" says it best. 

I always admire riders who ride their horses with as little equipment as possible. That is true teamwork.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Since my initial post, we went outside several times with just the buckle collar and each time we were 100% successful. Today, his after-work potty break was met with the lab across the street and a bunch of teens running and taking jumps with bikes and of course, the buckle collar. Success again. I should note I am using a very powerful motivator- a can of squeez cheez. Okay, it's not the healthiest, but by golly does it EVER get the job done. 

There is hope for Renji (and me) yet.


----------



## JasperLoki (Sep 25, 2005)

Diana, 

LOL, I can fall into the category as well.

When I go to the park, I use a prong, and he looks at other dogs, but he doesn't touch







(no correction needed, just the collar on is enough for him). I am not a meet and great dog owner anymore, I just socialize him with the few dog friends I have, it's enough. 

I haven't had to do a correction for about 1 year now. 

On the walk at home, and on hikes, I have a 2 inch thick aggitation collar that I use (from Ray Allen K9), it's nice and thick.

Jasper doesn't pull alot, just more interested to say it nicely in other dogs (not aggressive, just wants to see closer









I walk him right next to me on walks at the park and at home. 

On hikes and walks on paths, he gets the long line.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

I'm glad to say Diabla doesn't fall in that category. I had that problem with my Border and from minute one I started training with Diabla with no collar. to the point that when we competed in the novice category, wich is done on-leash Diabla was a little distracted, but when I took off the leash for the in motion exercises and recall she awoke, like she tought that before that we were walking around and "now" the real trial started.

I feel I can trust her as much as you can trust a teenager pup, which is of course not 100% of the time, but close enough to be functional. I started with her as a pup giving a huge importance to the focus, not only looking at my eyes as in the SchH fuss, but to be aware of me and what I'm doing all the time. From my SAR background I inherited an excersice in which, no matter what the dog is doing, if I say Platz she inmediately goes down, as you may have seen in the send away exercise, but done everywhere, under heavy distractions and without warning. We practiced this as soon as she learnt the down and it hasbecome a fun game for her, to the point that when she wants me to play with her she runs and lies-down spontaneously where I can see her, as if by doing so I'm going to throw the ball for her. She has learnt this way that every trekking is playtime and that I'll wait for her to be the more distracted to out of the blue I'll say Platz and if she's not quick enough she'll miss the reward. I prefer this than to be nagging the dog by calling them once and again to reward them and teach them the recall, as sooner or later the dog gets tired and becomes Velcro. Also from SAR I'm not a fan of Velcro dogs.

In on-leash walks she has a tendency to go ahead of me, which doesn't botter me as long as she doesn't pull (I don't buy the dominance - walking ahead CM thing) we still have problems in places with too many people, but its my fault because I don't train enough in that kind of places because I don't go there too frequently either, not I like them. as Diabla is with me most of the day I don't have the need to walk her around the block. In those cases I more likely use a prong

I think part is the early training, and part is a genetic factor since her drives and bidability are the best of any dog I've ever owned or worked with. I know I couldn't ever achieve with other dogs I work with (GSDs too) even if I raise them the exactly same way, what I've got with her. But to me the key is the bond I share with her, and I'm not talking she's in love with me and following with besotted eyes every movement I make, because she's not the kind of sweet girl that follows me around the house. It's more like a healthy balance between love, partnership and obedience. She only occasionally needs a second command and a single no is usually enough to stop any behaviour (not that she doesn't try again a few minutes later, just in case I'm not looking) but overall she's not only attentive, but eager to obey, without that I'd have to be relying in more and more tools. I'm not even using the e-collar I have because I've not felt the need to.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Jack, it doesn't sound like you're equipment-dependent anymore! If you haven't had to use the leash to communicate corrections, that sounds pretty good. However, if you take off the prong and he realizes that he can do whatever he wants, that's a different story.







But it sounds like you have everything under control as it is. Good job!

Catu, great post! Congrats on such success with Diabla. 



> Quote:from minute one I started training with Diabla with no collar.


When I get a pup, I plan on doing this from the first moment as well. I think this really does make a difference not only for the dog but also for the handler. This would force the handler to be creative in keeping the dog's focus rather than nagging/redirecting with the leash.


----------



## G-burg (Nov 10, 2002)

> Quote: Quote:
> from minute one I started training with Diabla with no collar.
> 
> 
> When I get a pup, I plan on doing this from the first moment as well. I think this really does make a difference not only for the dog but also for the handler. This would force the handler to be creative in keeping the dog's focus rather than nagging/redirecting with the leash.


Just something to think about.. And the only reason I'm commenting on this is because I have dogs of different bloodlines..

It depends on the dog.. Some are more apt to stay with you and really want to please, maybe because they have more pack drive.. 

Then there are those that are more independent and you have to work much harder at being more fun then what's going on in the environment.. And you really can't let them off leash because they will run off away from you


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

I'm not at all suggesting a dog be left off leash. I am suggesting the use of the leash more as a safety line as you say and less as the main mode of communication. I'm paranoid when it comes to oopsies in reliability so I don't think I'd ever advocate ditching the leash/e-collar backup.

So any new people reading this, please keep your dogs leashed for safety! There is a difference between relying on the leash for safety and relying on it to direct the dog's behavior.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

What I did at first was to work with a long leash (3 meters, no loop at the end), only the leash was not in my hand, but hanging behind. This way I could step over it if the pup got too distracted which was not only a safety tool in case of something, but also taught the pup that if we were working the fun was with me and not anywhere else and even if my hands were free she has no choice to go to hunt butterflies whenever she wanted.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally Posted By: DianaM
> 
> 
> > Quote:from minute one I started training with Diabla with no collar.
> ...


I didn't take the collar off, but I did all my training at home (starting at 9 weeks old) off leash. When they were little puppies and not housebroken yet I had them drag a light nylon leash around all the time, but I wasn't attached to the other end when we trained. In a pinch (such as a kitty coming in the room) I could step on it if necessary to keep puppy from bolting out of the room. 

But I totally agree that not depending on having that leash in my hand, or later, even on the dog at all, made me work much harder at keeping training fun, interesting, and rewarding. Outdoors around cars, I used a leash, but we also started off leash walks at the park starting around 4 months old, so being off leash in distracting circumstances became pretty routine. Of course I'm still working on walking nicely ON leash!


----------



## IliamnasQuest (Aug 24, 2005)

Actually I did a lot of training off-leash even with my chows when they were puppies. I will absolutely agree that you need to be more interesting than the surroundings and I took care to have it work out that way .. *L* .. with Khana, for example, it was winter and the snow was deep. We were out in the boonies a ways with very little distraction around us. So we trained in the driveway, off-leash, and it was wonderful.

Starting on a long line is always a good idea so that you can assess your dog and how you want to pursue training. And if you're truly unsure if you can be enticing enough for the dog, then practicing off-leash in a fenced area is a good idea. Another option for a young dog is to tether them to a well-trained dog (Trick has been a great teacher and I was able to use her help with several young dogs).

Khana doing a recall at four months, following Trick (and yes, she's trying to grab her tail .. *L*):










Controlling the environment is important, but I also think it's really important to do off-leash work very young. Too many dogs get so accustomed to being maneuvered by the leash that they never do learn to go off-leash. In many cases it's a training issue. And then there are those who just never become reliable off-leash (but for me, I've never had a GSD who couldn't be trusted loose - chows are another story).

Melanie and the gang


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

With Coke - yes. He is NOT reliable off leash in pretty much any situation. When we walk he is either on a flat or a prong. A flat if DH walks him, a prong if I walk him (so I can walk multiple dogs and not worry about having to control him).

Kenya - no. She is totally reliable off lead and is only on a leash when required by law. We don't have a fence and she has been off leash since day one. She's off leash when we are on vacation, at the park, etc. The only time I use a tool is for training or cleaning up something specific and it is temporary.


----------



## Foo Lyn Roo (May 16, 2007)

We use E collars on both dogs, we plan on using them for the life of the dog.

I think the e collars simply make the dog more ready and aware of your voice and body language.
For instance.
Heel work.

We are taught, if you want the dog to heel you step off with your
LEFT foot, and nick the button and say heel..

If i step off with my RIGHT foot echo knows, he isn't to heel.

Each command, sit, down, stand all have a hand signal to go with it.

We also use even tones to train them.

It works.

Often at home, the dogs do not have their collars on because we are big sissys. LOL and they listen perfectly, almost as if they DO have the collars on.

Indigo is a little unique in that she's a rescue dog and for whatever reason she doesn't respond to the e collar as well and as sharply as Echo does.
We have to keep her's super low (imtalking 2 and 3)
she's only been training a few months though, and she's a tough little bird.
SHe does actually respond better without the collar , at home.
When we are out for walks or whatever, I don't know what I'd do WITHOUT the e collar.


----------



## Foo Lyn Roo (May 16, 2007)

I'm lucky I guess in that Indigo follows Echo's lead, at all times.
We often take them out, the front door to the car, or they might walk with me out of the yard to put out the garbage, without lead or e collar.
I live in a small town, but on the busiest corner, traffice wise of the town, AND right across from train tracks, one of the main reasons we went with E-collars.

Echo will always listen and now, after time I see Indigo, even if she has an urge, will resist it to follow Echo.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: Foo Lyn Roo
> When we are out for walks or whatever, I don't know what I'd do WITHOUT the e collar.


That is exactly why I, even against the advice of some e-collar trainers, don't want to use the e-collar as a teaching tool. I use it as a problem solving in some cases, but not for everything. Not because I'm a pure positive trainer, but because I don't want to depend on something that may be broken tomorrow and I don't have the money to replace.


----------



## Foo Lyn Roo (May 16, 2007)

I don't look at that as dependent. I look at it as a training device, that eventually , they won't need if I don't need it.

Just like when we first got echo we NEEDED the leash to keep him from running off, now we don't.

The dogs need the training collars, to learn how to walk with us in a positive way, and to ignore the distractions. the e collar is a tool, just like a leash would be.
Except Im not yanking on them or scolding them.
Im refocusing them.

Once they are used to the focus, i wouldn't have to use it anymore. although I don't see a time in the future when I wouldn't.
just as tool as one would use leash.


----------



## Foo Lyn Roo (May 16, 2007)

& we never use the collar to punish. Ever.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Foo, I would look at your method as dependent if you try to do your daily routine WITHOUT the e-collar and your dog doesn't know what to do. Those nicks would be the same as leash tugs. What would NOT be dependent would be for your dog to wear the e-collar regularly without its use unless the dog blows off, say, the recall command. Then it acts as a leash, your "insurance policy." Basically, if your dog understood the commands enough to go to a trial where only flat collars are allowed, would your dog be able to operate? If you're training, that's fine, but don't corner yourself into having to rely on the training device. Then you'll be where I am at, retraining my dog to cue off ME more rather than the leash.









Today we had a big test to see how we're doing without a corrective collar. We went to training to do a little work by ourselves. Someone was taking down some snow fencing that was in use for lure coursing and right next to the field the boarding dogs were out. We were able to carry on with our training with only the flat collar. We still have a lot of work to do but I'm determined to wean him off the prong as much as possible.


----------



## middleofnowhere (Dec 20, 2000)

I'm now reading Clothier's "Bones would rain from the sky" as well as Bill Campbell's "Behavior Problems in Dogs" -- both deal with understanding, motivating, and working WITH the dog. My first experiences with "training" dogs was back in the days when "jerk and praise" was the accepted method. I stuck with that for quite a while, swore by the Monks & finally got enlightened. Now I am like a former smoker .. anxious to bring the light to others practicing compulsion.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

It makes training a LOT more fun when you try to avoid anything physical, too. You must use an upbeat voice and have upbeat body language which ends up forcing you into a good mood, then you feel better and get even more upbeat, and things just get more fun and interesting for the dog as time goes on! Plus, you really have to THINK more on how to redirect your dog when his attention decides to wander. I still used the leash to stop him dead in his tracks if he decided to rush over to the other dogs, but that's all, then it's back to voice and body language and goodies. 



> Quote: Now I am like a former smoker .. anxious to bring the light to others practicing compulsion.


I see the light! Praise the cheese! I'll note those books and see if I can get my hands on them.


----------



## Foo Lyn Roo (May 16, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: DianaMFoo, I would look at your method as dependent if you try to do your daily routine WITHOUT the e-collar and your dog doesn't know what to do. Those nicks would be the same as leash tugs. What would NOT be dependent would be for your dog to wear the e-collar regularly without its use unless the dog blows off, say, the recall command. Then it acts as a leash, your "insurance policy." Basically, if your dog understood the commands enough to go to a trial where only flat collars are allowed, would your dog be able to operate? If you're training, that's fine, but don't corner yourself into having to rely on the training device. Then you'll be where I am at, retraining my dog to cue off ME more rather than the leash.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I thought I already stated, that they do listen eventhough we don't put the collars on from morning to night?
even if I didn't.
Yes the dogs listen, to us without their collars on.
However on long walks where there are a lot of other distractions we NEED the collar. they are only 18 and 15 months old.

Echo actually has passed a test for good citizen ship where e collar use wasn't allowed.
which included heeling, greeting, sitting and staying, etc etc.

Indigo, no she hasn't been training long enough to do that yet.

but basically we DO our entire daily routine wihtout the e collar.


----------



## IliamnasQuest (Aug 24, 2005)

The problem I see with the shock collar is that any reasonably smart dog knows perfectly well when that tight collar is not around their neck. The pressure that a shock collar provides is unlike any other collar you would use. Even if you leave the collar on for long periods of time, as usually recommended, it's still inconceivable to me that any reasonably intelligent dog would not know that the collar is there and that the collar can supply a very uncomfortable/painful sensation. 

So the dependence on the collar is huge. This has been a discussion on a training list that I'm on (which includes a number of people who use shock collars to some extent). The general consensus is that their dogs know perfectly well when the collar is on. But since most of the people on the list are competition people, the collar is used minimally and often only for off-leash play times or crittering (which are the reasons I've used the shock collar). These people understand completely the difficulty in weaning dogs off of equipment dependence since once you get to Open obedience you can't depend on any equipment/tools. It's you and the dog, no leash, no corrections, no food, no toys. It's the bond you've developed with your dog that makes or breaks a qualifying score. So your choice is to make your dog fear you (which is what compulsion training does - dog must comply or dog will get a shock/jerk on the prong collar/some sort of correction) or make your dog really want to be with you and working with you (which is what positive motivation training does - dog complies and there WILL be a reward, maybe not immediately but it's coming).

I'm like middleofnowhere - I first learned to train back in the pop and jerk days, when everything was based on "do it or else!". Yes, we praised, but the dogs learned to behave because of a fear of the consequences. I was good at it, but I never really felt comfortable because I could see what I was doing. I finally just decided that the end did NOT justify the means. Providing pain/discomfort to my dog because I wanted a perfect heel position or a perfect sit in front was not the relationship I wanted. 

And what I've found is that the relationship I have with my dogs - one that I truly thought was "perfect" back when I used more compulsion - is MUCH better without using much compulsion. No one who trains with compulsion believes that, but since I've been on both sides I can tell you with absolute honesty that you have a better relationship when you don't depend on corrective tools for training. Are the tools handy? Darn right they are, and with some dogs a correction helps. But training with compulsion as the mainstay of the method only produces dogs that obey because they're afraid not to. And a truly good relationship will never be formed when fear is a part of it.

So my philosophy has changed tremendously over the years and with more experience. First and foremost, my dogs are my companions and I love them deeply. I accept that they're dogs and not little people, accept that they have limitations (as do I), and accept that at times there will be punishment to control them. But the rest of the time, I'm highly positive and happy and enthusiastic in my praise and reward. They love their cookies and I love that they love their cookies. I love the sparkle in their eyes and how their ears perk tightly forward when we're working on things. I love how Khana crowds Tazer out of the way when I'm trying to work on heeling with Tazer .. *L* .. Khana WANTS to be in heel position because she knows that heel position equals reward. I love how I rarely see any stress in my dogs - no stress panting, no tight muscles around the eyes, no tight corners of the mouth, no tucked tails. They prance, they sparkle - they may not be perfect in their heel position or sit in front, but they do these behaviors with enthusiasm and enjoyment. 

And that's what it's all about.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

I missed that part. You have my apologies, Foo!


----------



## hudak004 (Aug 3, 2006)

I definitely agree with you that when you don't have a leash or collar on it really makes you think a lot more about keeping your dog into you. Even using a flat collar will make you think more. 

Unfortunately for me, with Bixler, I will probably always be equipment dependant in some cases. He has more critter drive than any dog Ive ever met. I recently "babysat" TWELVE german shepherds... When taking walks with all of them in the woods we came across many critters and though all of them were interested none were close to the extent of Bixler when he sees one. He really just gets tunnel vision and complety doesnt respond to anything, whatsoever, even raw goodies. So, with him being close to the same weight as me, with lots more strength, with just a flat collar on he will take me for a ride.. been there done that! So I always have to have some type of training collar on in order to remain in somewhat of control, or atleast not get dragged around. When doing any off leash obedience I have to be veryy careful of our surroundings and make sure no critters will sneak up, and if I do let him free to run in a field, he always has to drag a long line, for my peace of mind. Im coming to think this will just always be the case for him, and Im okay with that.. he still gets to enjoy running free with the long line, but I have to always be interacting with him or else he will start to seek out critters.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuestThe problem I see with the shock collar is that any reasonably smart dog knows perfectly well when that tight collar is not around their neck.


This is no different than anything else that goes around the dog's neck or on his body. The trick is to desensitize the dog so that it no longer makes any difference to him. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest The pressure that a shock collar provides is unlike any other collar you would use.


Yes, and? The pinch collar is the same. The choke collar is the same as well. So is the buckle collar. So is the head halter, a no-pull or a no-jump harness. Such is the case with something as benign as a bandanna. Having treats in your pocket, when the dog knows that they're present, is similar, in that it changes the environment. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Even if you leave the collar on for long periods of time, as usually recommended, it's still inconceivable to me that any reasonably intelligent dog would not know that the collar is there and that the collar can supply a very uncomfortable/painful sensation.


Unless of course you never applied a "very uncomfortable/painful sensation." How come you folks always go to this place? It's not necessary but I don't think that I've ever had one of these discussion where you folks didn't say it. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest So the dependence on the collar is huge.


It can be. but it's not necessary. In fact it's easy to avoid. Just as it is with any other tool. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest This has been a discussion on a training list that I'm on (which includes a number of people who use shock collars to some extent). The general consensus is that their dogs know perfectly well when the collar is on.


I’m sure that they do. Whether the dogs place any value on this is something else indeed. It depends on how the training is done and if the dog is desensitized to it. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest These people understand completely the difficulty in weaning dogs off of equipment dependence since once you get to Open obedience you can't depend on any equipment/tools. It's you and the dog, no leash, no corrections, no food, no toys.


The same is true of virtually any of the biting sports at any level. But this weaning is not really that difficult. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest So your choice is to make your dog fear you (which is what compulsion training does - dog must comply or dog will get a shock/jerk on the prong collar/some sort of correction) or make your dog really want to be with you and working with you (which is what positive motivation training does - dog complies and there WILL be a reward, maybe not immediately but it's coming).


Do people still really believe this? It's put out by those who favor the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" (and that's not meant as a dig) and is simply not true. There's a significant difference between "wanting to avoid something unpleasant" and "fearing it" but some folks never make that distinction. 

I avoid being cold, but I don't fear it. I avoid eating spoiled food but the thought of it doesn’t keep me awake at night. I avoid people I don't get along with but the thought of attending a party with them doesn't strike fear into my heart. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I'm like middleofnowhere - I first learned to train back in the pop and jerk days, when everything was based on "do it or else!". Yes, we praised, but the dogs learned to behave because of a fear of the consequences.


I disagree. Again, not wanting to experience something is NOT the same as fearing it. And comparing the Ecollar to traditional methods is fraught with problems. Especially if you're using the tool as I advocate. Most people just use it as punishment and there the similarity my be consistent. But it's not the only way to use the tool. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I was good at it, but I never really felt comfortable because I could see what I was doing. I finally just decided that the end did NOT justify the means. Providing pain/discomfort to my dog because I wanted a perfect heel position or a perfect sit in front was not the relationship I wanted.


In truth, using the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" (and that's not meant as a dig) causes just as much discomfort; but most people can't see it and many don’t want to believe that it's true. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And what I've found is that the relationship I have with my dogs - one that I truly thought was "perfect" back when I used more compulsion - is MUCH better without using much compulsion.


Most police dogs in the US are trained with compulsive methods. There is no better bond than between a human who LITERALLY places his life in his dog's paws on a regular basis and that dog. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest No one who trains with compulsion believes that, but since I've been on both sides I can tell you with absolute honesty that you have a better relationship when you don't depend on corrective tools for training.


I've been on both sides of this too. (Still am, in fact.) I "can tell you with absolute honesty" that you've gotten this wrong. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Are the tools handy? Darn right they are, and with some dogs a correction helps. But training with compulsion as the mainstay of the method only produces dogs that obey because they're afraid not to. And a truly good relationship will never be formed when fear is a part of it.


If the tools are not used properly that may be true. If they are used properly it's not. This is a theme that's often repeated. The discuss their own tools, no matter what they are, only as being used properly; but only discuss other tools when they're used IMproperly. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest So my philosophy has changed tremendously over the years and with more experience. First and foremost, my dogs are my companions and I love them deeply.


I feel the same and always have. Even with my police dog who was also a "tool" of law enforcement. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I accept that they're dogs and not little people, accept that they have limitations (as do I), and accept that at times there will be punishment to control them.


Ditto. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest But the rest of the time, I'm highly positive and happy and enthusiastic in my praise and reward. They love their cookies and I love that they love their cookies. I love the sparkle in their eyes and how their ears perk tightly forward when we're working on things.


Ditto again. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I love how I rarely see any stress in my dogs - no stress panting, no tight muscles around the eyes, no tight corners of the mouth, no tucked tails. They prance, they sparkle - they may not be perfect in their heel position or sit in front, but they do these behaviors with enthusiasm and enjoyment.


DITTO a third time. If people learn to use their tools properly this is the result. Saying that it's not so with traditional methods OR the Ecollar is off base.


----------



## IliamnasQuest (Aug 24, 2005)

Lou, I'm sure that almost everyone here knows that you are a huge believer in using the shock collar for training. Heck, the only times I see you post are in defense of this collar (and sometimes it seems like you must have people who hurry to let you know that there's a post discouraging someone from using a shock collar, because you haven't posted for over a month and yet here you suddenly are .. *L*). Your website recommends and encourages people to use an ecollar, you give lessons and consultations on the use of shock for training, and you sell the darn things! You even run an email group dedicated to training with shock collars. It's no wonder that you defend this so adamantly.

(And if anyone thinks that the paragraph above is putting Lou down, there's nothing false there - check it out yourself on this site and on his website).

I have dozens of tools available in my training bag. I have prong collars - heavy ones, light ones. I have web collars and leather collars and tracking harnesses and pulling harnesses and easy walk harnesses. I also have a shock collar (bought it from you, actually). Without a doubt, logically and realistically speaking, the shock collar is the most invasive tool I have. When I put it on the dog, the amount of tightness that has to be used in order to make proper contact through the metal prongs to the dog's skin is WAY beyond the pressure needed for any other tool I have ever used in the last 20 years of training. Without ever even turning this collar on, it's invasive to the dog.

This provides an instant discomfort to the dog. Heck, I've seen shock collar training people say that you need to move the collar to a different area of the neck every six hours to avoid causing sores on the dog. None of the other tools I have cause sores if left on the dog. The shock collar is more obvious to the dog because of this constant tightness.

When it comes to the "unpleasant" stimulation (unpleasant being a word that you use on your site), you keep saying it's not a fear of this that causes the dog to want to avoid it. And then you tell us that you don't like the cold, but you're not afraid of it. Well, if every time you were told to do something, you got shoved out into subzero weather for a bit, you'd probably start to view it a bit differently. You'd be afraid - albeit slightly, perhaps - to disobey in any way because you knew that that cold would be waiting. 

Something arbitrary that you don't like is probably not going to cause fear in the same way as something that happens to you without your choice.

As far as the discussion regarding relationship is concerned - as I've already said, those who haven't seen the difference will continue to insist that the relationship gained through compulsion is as good as it gets. But I would hope that they could at least acknowledge the logical side of it: how can a relationship that is based on "unpleasant corrections" (both words that you use to describe the shock from an ecollar on your website) be the same as a relationship based on primarily reward and praise? A dog that obeys because it wants to avoid the consequences does not have the same mindset as one that obeys because it looks forward to the reward. 

There's just no way, logically, that it can be the same. And I have experienced the difference.

The topic in this thread was about equipment dependence. I will stand firm in my belief - both by experience and by logic - that a piece of equipment that is physically more invasive will be more easily noticed by a dog. And for most people, that's going to mean a higher level of dependence in their dogs (and therefore in them). Yes, I suppose you can brainwash your dog into so much compliance that it responds automatically, but personally I'm not going to shock my dog on <u>every command for two solid months</u> in order to gain that compliance (and for those who wonder about that, it's on Lou's website).

Lou, you may respond with your typical cut and paste argument, but it's easily explained by your own dependence on the ecollar. It's your way of training, it's your belief, and it's at least part of your income. You've become dependent on making people believe that the shock collar is an acceptable, viable way of making dogs compliant. But compliance does not mean a good relationship has been formed. 

Melanie and the gang in Alaska


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Lou, I'm sure that almost everyone here knows that you are a huge believer in using the shock collar for training.


Some do. Some don't. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Heck, the only times I see you post are in defense of this collar


I wonder why people mention this? There is no requirement on the Forum that I participate in other discussions and so I choose where to spend my time. If you think there's something wrong with this, I'm afraid that's just too bad. 

I used to answer every question that came up that I had an answer to. Then I realized that I had no spare time. It was all being spent helping people on the net. I soon realized that there are plenty of people who have the expertise to help with problems like, housebreaking, pulling on the leash and such. And so I decided to let others help with those problems. At the same time I realized that there are FEW people with knowledge about the Ecollar and so that's where I decided to spend my time. If you think that there's something wrong with this, I'm afraid that's just too bad. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest (and sometimes it seems like you must have people who hurry to let you know that there's a post discouraging someone from using a shock collar, because you haven't posted for over a month and yet here you suddenly are .. *L*).


I do have a network of people who let me know when Ecollar discussions are going on. Do you think that there's something wrong with that? Again if you think so, that's just too bad. 

But in any case, no one told me about this discussion, I found it all by myself!!!!



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Your website recommends and encourages people to use an ecollar, you give lessons and consultations on the use of shock for training, and you sell the darn things! You even run an email group dedicated to training with shock collars. It's no wonder that you defend this so adamantly.


Little bit of the cart before the horse there. I defended the Ecollar BEFORE I had a website; BEFORE I became a dealer for Ecollars and BEFORE I started hosting an emails list devoted to their discussion. AND AGAIN, do you think there's something wrong with that? And if you think so. … well, you know the rest. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest (And if anyone thinks that the paragraph above is putting Lou down, there's nothing false there - check it out yourself on this site and on his website).


Why would anyone think there's anything false there or that it's a "putdown?" I'm PROUD of those things and I just verified it all. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I have dozens of tools available in my training bag. I have prong collars - heavy ones, light ones. I have web collars and leather collars and tracking harnesses and pulling harnesses and easy walk harnesses. I also have a shock collar (bought it from you, actually).


Me too! 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Without a doubt, logically and realistically speaking, the shock collar is the most invasive tool I have.


I think that the choke chain, (which you didn't mention)and the pinch collar, are far more invasive. Right up there is the head halter, which you also didn't mention. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest When I put it on the dog, the amount of tightness that has to be used in order to make proper contact through the metal prongs to the dog's skin is WAY beyond the pressure needed for any other tool I have ever used in the last 20 years of training. Without ever even turning this collar on, it's invasive to the dog.


Unless of course you've done the desensitization that I mentioned in my previous post. YOU think it's "invasive" but I've found that the dogs don't agree. Perhaps you're doing something different than I do or teach. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest This provides an instant discomfort to the dog.


Ditto. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Heck, I've seen shock collar training people say that you need to move the collar to a different area of the neck every six hours to avoid causing sores on the dog.


I say "every four to six hours." 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest None of the other tools I have cause sores if left on the dog. The shock collar is more obvious to the dog because of this constant tightness.


I've seen sores from a pinch collar that was on too tightly. And I've seen choke chains that were left on dogs who grew and wound up with the collar imbedded into the dog's skin so deeply that they had to be cut off by a vet. 

But as often is the case, and something that I mentioned in my last post, you seem to be incapable of discussing the Ecollar used properly. When this is done, sores don't develop. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest When it comes to the "unpleasant" stimulation (unpleasant being a word that you use on your site), you keep saying it's not a fear of this that causes the dog to want to avoid it. And then you tell us that you don't like the cold, but you're not afraid of it. Well, if every time you were told to do something, you got shoved out into subzero weather for a bit, you'd probably start to view it a bit differently. You'd be afraid - albeit slightly, perhaps - to disobey in any way because you knew that that cold would be waiting.


AGAIN you're unable to discuss the Ecollar used properly. I mention "unpleasant" because that's all it is. Your example of being "shoved into subzero weather" is far more than "unpleasant," it's life threatening. And AGAIN it's an unfair comparison. If I was using high levels of stim it might be a reasonable comparison. Since I’m not, it's not only irrelevant, it's misleading. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Something arbitrary that you don't like is probably not going to cause fear in the same way as something that happens to you without your choice.


 <span style="color: #CC0000"> <span style='font-size: 11pt'> Balance of Post removed by Admin. Wisc.Tiger for exceeding the Board rule of 1000 word posts. Quotes are used for word count.</span> </span>


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Folks, we have had plenty of e-collar debates on here. This thread is about falling into the trap of requiring some sort of device on the dog to maintain control at all times. It is not about the e-collar and why it's the best thing since sliced bread or the worst thing since the IRS. It is not about dependence on a tool for training, but ending up dependent on a tool for life because the dog and handler team has never learned how to operate without the leash or the prong or the e-collar as they always end up using it as a prompt or redirection, thus leading the dog to be unable to function in, say, a trial setting where a flat collar and loose leash are required or nothing at all.

So please, no more debates on the e-collar as a training tool on this thread. Please do start another thread for that if you'd like to continue that discussion.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: DianaMIt is not about dependence on a tool for training, but ending up dependent on a tool for life because the dog and handler team has never learned how to operate without the leash or the prong or the e-collar as they always end up using it as a prompt or redirection, thus leading the dog to be unable to function in, say, a trial setting where a flat collar and loose leash are required or nothing at all.


On my website there's a protocol for weaning dogs off the Ecollar that have been trained with my methods. I mentioned it in one of the "debating posts" but it may have gotten lost. It was designed for people who compete and can't have the Ecollar on their dog or who may need to certify, also without it. 

Here it is for those who may have missed it. RIGHT HERE.



> Originally Posted By: DianaMSo please, no more debates on the e-collar as a training tool on this thread. Please do start another thread for that if you'd like to continue that discussion.


YAY Sanity!


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally Posted By: DianaMFolks, we have had plenty of e-collar debates on here.


I think it's a rule or something - there must always be at least one active, hotly debated e-collar thread at all times. If there isn't at least one e-collar thread, one must be started, or another thread must be turned into an e-collar thread.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

Yeah, I like e-collars, but I hate when any device, being the clicker or the e-collar, becomes a religion.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

The e-collar is great, the prong is great, the martingale is great, the leash is great, treats and toys are great, but they stop becoming so great when you have to RELY on them 100% (or even most of the time) for compliance. Such as the dog not sitting unless a treat is presented in front of its nose. Or a dog who will ignore you unless you tug on the leash. Or a dog who won't take a simple verbal correction for a VERY minor problem and correct itself. To put it this way, if you cannot do something with your dog unless you have X tool, time to retrain the dog to work with YOU, and not with the tool.

I don't care for the training religions as well. Sometimes I use the clicker, sometimes I need a prong, and I'm sure at some point I will benefit from the e-collar. Well I guess the only "training religion" I will preach is to have a strong enough bond and good enough training to be able to work with a dog successfully without those tools or at least with as little as possible, once training has progressed enough. 

I still have to give corrections to Renji, but I use body blocks and my voice as much as possible. Body blocks work WELL, especially if I have another dog on one side of me and Renji on the other. I set a boundary with my body position and that works very well. He can pace all he wants but if he crosses my boundary into my space, that is unacceptable and I'll block him off. He got that concept pretty quick. Keeps him calmer too knowing that I have completely put myself in between him and the other dog/potential threat.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: DianaM
> 
> I still have to give corrections to Renji, but I use body blocks and my voice as much as possible. Body blocks work WELL, especially if I have another dog on one side of me and Renji on the other. I set a boundary with my body position and that works very well. He can pace all he wants but if he crosses my boundary into my space, that is unacceptable and I'll block him off. He got that concept pretty quick. Keeps him calmer too knowing that I have completely put myself in between him and the other dog/potential threat.


True! I always tell people that the dogs should obey because of our "aura". Many people, when the dog refuse to comply to, by example a sit, tend to bend over the dog, as if the problem is that the dog is not hearing and they need to give the command directly in the ear of the dog, but what they are actually doing is adopting a submissive postures and asking to the dog if please would he be so gentle to obey. Sometimes the also step back, maybe thinking the dog need more space for the requested movement, but they are giving another submissive clue to the dog. 

I tell them to do exactly tho opposite, to put themselves in the shoes of the dog and to imagine that someone 3 or 4 times more tall to them (as an electric post) is giving you a command. then if the dog doesn't obey the first command to give the second accompanied of a step forward. No need to touch the dog, but pushing it with your presence.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Good one! Pressure is an excellent, clear way to correct and relieving pressure is an excellent way to "reward." This is very good communication, something that I don't think is used enough.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: LicanAntaiYeah, I like e-collars, but I hate when any device, being the clicker or the e-collar, becomes a religion.


Signs that a tool/method has become "a religion" is when people start talking about how they "feel good" when they use them, how kind they are to the dog and how "inhumane" other tools/methods are. 

There's nothing wrong with those things happening but they shouldn't be the main reason for using that tool/ method. Effectiveness and results–achieved–humanely should be the measure of a tool/method's value.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: DianaMThe e-collar is great, the prong is great, the martingale is great, the leash is great, treats and toys are great, but they stop becoming so great when you have to RELY on them 100% (or even most of the time) for compliance.


This is using the tool for management, not for training.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: LicanAntaiTrue! I always tell people that the dogs should obey because of our "aura". Many people, when the dog refuse to comply to, by example a sit, tend to bend over the dog, as if the problem is that the dog is not hearing and they need to give the command directly in the ear of the dog, but what they are actually doing is adopting a submissive postures and asking to the dog if please would he be so gentle to obey.


Are you talking about the owner putting his head over the top of the dog's head? That's a dominant, rather than a submissive posture. But perhaps I'm not understanding what you're describing. 

Repeating a command without accompanying it with a correction is usually an error. And it leads to having repeat commands all the time.


----------



## BowWowMeow (May 7, 2007)

Ok, imagine I have a steering wheel in my hands and I am turning and turning and now we are heading away from the e-collar debate!









This is an interesting thread (no, not the e-collar debate, the original topic!) and something I have been thinking about a lot lately. 

Rafi seems to have a very high aptitude for training. He is very tuned into me and really is interested in working with me. I have only had him for a little less than 11 months and I have done all of his training myself. 

He no longer wears any kind of training collar and when he starts to pull I can just softly click or call his name and he will turn and loop around my body and fall in beside me. Sometimes I say "Easy" and other times, if he's really pulling I tell him to come around behind me and he does. We have also been doing a lot of work off leash. He will heel naturally and often corrects himself if he gets too far in front of me. He will be trotting along and then loop around behind me and fall into a heel. The other day we were running up on a trail and a bunny ran right in front of us. Rafi LOVES to chase things, as you might imagine. We both saw the bunny and I told Rafi to leave it. He did. Same thing happened the other day when I was drying him on the deck and a squirrel came into the yard. 

Another thing we have been practicing is for me to send him with a "Go" and then call him back with a "Come" or a whistle. That is working very well too. 

He is a very soft dog and responds best to positive reinforcement. I do use a verbal correction (Eh, eh) if he starts to go after a bunny or squirrel and doesn't listen to my "Leave it" command. And I do still have to grab the traffic lead part of my leash if a critter runs right beside or in front of us but for the most part he is doing really, really well without equipment.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

> Quote:
> Repeating a command without accompanying it with a correction is usually an error. And it leads to having repeat commands all the time.


Lou, this is very true. It drives me nuts when owners say a command and give a quarter second for the dog to process before repeating a string of the same command. However, dogs are still dogs and even we humans may not hear something the first time for whatever reason. I think here you need to know your dog and the situation and judge whether he TRULY didn't hear you or heard you and chose to pretend otherwise. Fine line. I just don't think it's fair to correct without an indication in some situations if the dog's mind drifted. Of course that also means some training in that situation is required to better keep the dog's focus so it learns to always keep an ear on the handler.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: LouCastle
> 
> Are you talking about the owner putting his head over the top of the dog's head? That's a dominant, rather than a submissive posture. But perhaps I'm not understanding what you're describing.


No, I'm not talking about an exaggerated posture with the owner over the dog completely,but more an overall lowered posture with the shoulders down and the waist bended. Sometimes at the side of the dog and sometimes over it. I know the book says that over the dog is dominance, but in my experience there are many circumstances where the dog doesn't interpret it that way, probably because they are used to be petted and to receive affection that way. Nothing is black and white with dogs.



> Quote: Repeating a command without accompanying it with a correction is usually an error. And it leads to having repeat commands all the time.


If you step towards the dog with a stiffen and dominant attitude at the moment you are giving the second command _you are_ giving a correction. Not a physical one, but a hierarchical one. Is it not all this thread about that, to use our body languages and our inner influence to make the dog obey us without to have to rely on any external tool?


----------



## nitetrane98 (Feb 23, 2008)

I've always found that verbal correction has been extremely effective for me and my dogs. After screwing up pretty bad with correcting with my voice while giving the command I learned to give commands in a pretty much neutral voice. The correction comes with the 'NO". And it should be given immediately after the disobeyance, not after you have raised your voice with the command 3 times. You can vary the intensity of the "NO" to fit the infraction but I've found that virtually any disapproving tone will get some kind of desired reaction. Of course, if the dog has never been told "NO" it means nothing to him. I guess I could be just lucky to have had somewhat sensitive dogs, at least sensitive to my approval or disapproval.
In heeling I found that self correction was the most effective means to keep the dog where I wanted him to be. That meant after a certain time that I felt he knew what I wanted and he either surged ahead or wandered off, I gave him slack on the leash and then simply turned away from him or did an about face. When he got to the end of the leash he popped himself and in his mind I had nothing to do with it. There was no verbal correction or any indication from me that I had anything to do with it. It was funny to see them come back to heel and look up like, "Gee I'm glad the boss didn't see that." This seemed to be particularly effective when it seemed like I was having to do a lot of leash tugs and "NO", "Heel." I don't know who coined the phrase, "One good correction is worth 1000 nags." but I believe it.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

Earlier I wrote,


> Quote: Are you talking about the owner putting his head over the top of the dog's head? That's a dominant, rather than a submissive posture. But perhaps I'm not understanding what you're describing.





> Originally Posted By: LicanAntai No, I'm not talking about an exaggerated posture with the owner over the dog completely,but more an overall lowered posture with the shoulders down and the waist bended. Sometimes at the side of the dog and sometimes over it. I know the book says that over the dog is dominance, but in my experience there are many circumstances where the dog doesn't interpret it that way, probably because they are used to be petted and to receive affection that way. Nothing is black and white with dogs.


Some things are "black and white." A dog may be used to being "petted and to receive affection that way" but he still regards it as a dominant position from the human. That is if he's over the dogs head. If he's alongside, probably not–so–much. 



> Originally Posted By: LicanAntaiIf you step towards the dog with a stiffen and dominant attitude at the moment you are giving the second command _you are_ giving a correction. Not a physical one, but a hierarchical one.


If this works for your dogs then have at it. I don't think it's a good way to do it. It will have no effect on many dogs. And it will lead to that "step towards the dog" becoming part of the command and it will soon be required to get compliance. 



> Originally Posted By: LicanAntaiIs it not all this thread about that, to use our body languages and our inner influence to make the dog obey us without to have to rely on any external tool?


Quoting from the original post Diana wrote,


> Quote:How many of us are mostly or completely dependent on physical means to control our dogs?


I'd consider "stepping forward" to be physical. I think that's different from body language. I'd consider that to be stance, not involving movement. But others may have their own definitions. 

I thought this was at least in part, about training so as to be able to work the dog "naked" as at a trial or a certification of some sort. 

Diana wrote in the OP,


> Quote:We cannot get anywhere in any *trials *unless we can break free of this reliance. [She's referring to a "reliance on tools."]
> 
> In short, I have a well _managed_ dog as opposed to a well _trained_ dog. Management doesn't cut it in *trials *nor should it be acceptable in daily life save for extreme circumstances or unusual situations; the norm should be a well trained dog that obeys because it is more pleasant, it gets what it wants, and it allows for a harmonious partnership.


Diana also talks quite a bit about such things as using her body to block the dog but this also can't be done in a trial. Neither can "stepping towards the dog."


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Chris08I've always found that verbal correction has been extremely effective for me and my dogs. After screwing up pretty bad with correcting with my voice while giving the command I learned to give commands in a pretty much neutral voice. The correction comes with the 'NO". And it should be given immediately after the disobedience, not after you have raised your voice with the command 3 times. You can vary the intensity of the "NO" to fit the infraction but I've found that virtually any disapproving tone will get some kind of desired reaction.


I'm also not a fan of this. I've seen dogs that reacted by going into submission when "NO" is said to them with a "raised voice." They forget all about the command and just start showing submissive signals. I've seen the opposite, dogs that have come to completely disregard it. If it works for your dogs that's great, but I don't recommend it. I prefer to give affirmative commands accompanied by physical corrections. Go to the park and you'll see quite a few people who's recall command is "Here. NO! HERE, NO NO HERE DAMMIT. I'm surprised that so many dogs are named "Dammit."


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

> Quoteiana also talks quite a bit about such things as using her body to block the dog but this also can't be done in a trial. Neither can "stepping towards the dog."


VERY good point! See, I'm on step 7 of the 12 step process.







But my first and foremost goal is to have a pet I can live with and THEN trial. It's not life or death that we title, unlike for police dogs where obedience IS life or death.



> Quote:I'm surprised that so many dogs are named "Dammit."


There was a Far Side cartoon where one dog was introducing itself to another dog. "Hi, my name is No No, Bad Dog, what's yours?"


----------



## JulieAnna (Oct 13, 2008)

I was taught to be consistant in your training and then on trial day trust your training.

I use an e-collar and a pinch together (I must be insane). I know that it used to drive my TD nutty. Thinking that my dogs are dependant but they are not. They have been conditioned to "know" that the correction will come should they decide to all of the sudden be independant thinkers and blow me off- this is consistancy and also being well timed it is good training.

When I am training I know my dog has mastered his behavior when he is doing it correctly and quickly and there is no correction being administered for several sessions- I still keep that remote or leash in my hand because good training is quick and fair and should he blow me off I am right there reminding him that I the keeper of all things including toys, treats, and punishment.

Some one said that any good dog will know when the collar is on & off and I have seen first hand that this is true specifically if you are always taking it off & putting it back on- the dog learns to only respect the equipment.

If for instance my e-collar is dead (forgot to charge) I will use what ever I have the pinch and a stern anti-marker- the dog still respects me and is still getting corrected it is just not as swift.

On trial day if he blows the sit he will not get in trouble but it doesn't mean he wont expect to or that he knows he can get away with everything. His mind is not human he is not laying in the long down thinking to himself " I think mom forgot the equipment today so I am going to be a jack ass".

I have used e-collars for 5 years and have never had a dog get sores from them. I do not keep the dog in it every day. On training days before we get in the car they are put into their collars and then loaded into the van. I use the e-collar during tracking as well. I may not correct him, but it is on him just the same. If there is something I am working on at home I might put it on- it depends.

I do have a friend whos dog did get sores from a bark collar and we decided that the dog had an allergie to something in the metal. Also there are longer tines available for thicker coated dogs (like GSD's) with Dogtra. I haven't needed them for my GSD. 

I would also like to add that I am very up beat and positive with my dogs. We have great relationships. We play alot and just because I use compulsion does not mean I do not use positive training methods. 

My goals are to have high in trial OB/ Protection and beat my TD some day..... It will probably take another 10 years and for him to have a sick dog or something









Far Side cartoons are great- I remember that one.

Peace,

Julie


----------

