# Other uses for a prong



## Zeeva (Aug 10, 2010)

Can a prong be used for correction purposes on practicing things like LAT or recall or down, stay? Or is it simply for loose leash walking and heeling?

For example, if I were to keep a prong on Zeeva while practicing LAT and she doesn't look at me after looking at a distraction, can I correct her by jerking on the prong? Is this too harsh? Is the prong not meant for teaching this?

Another example: if I were to ask Zeeva to down stay (thank you Sunflowers for the down stay rather than the sit stay suggestion), can I jerk on the leash if she doesn't come when called? Again, is this too harsh? And is the prong not meant for teaching stuff like this?

Are there other uses for a prong that I do not know of? 

I'm asking because the prong has worked wonders for Zeeva's loose leash walking and heeling habits. Not so much with Smokey, but I really do blame that on his husky genes...


----------



## Jrnabors (Sep 7, 2012)

Well half the people on this forum are against the prong, but I think that is because they do not understand how it works. Yes, you can use it to correct other things.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

I only use it for loose leash walking, and for correcting his selective hearing when we're out on a walk. That's all I need it for, but other people might have different ideas about it's other uses.

I don't think it would be very good to use the prong to correct something that directly relates to your dog's relationship with you. Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't want my dog looking at me or coming to me because he's trying to avoid something he doesn't like - I want him to do it because he loves me. I know you still need to teach a recall, but I think rewards are the way to go to instill this behavior.

It might be fun for you to make a list of all the things that you want your dogs to learn, and then try to think of interesting "outside the box" ways of trying to let the dogs know what you want. Because that's really all that training is - getting the dog to understand what you're asking him to do. I don't see the point of jerking on a prong to teach something if there's another way to do it.


----------



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

Zeeva said:


> Can a prong be used for correction purposes on practicing things like LAT or recall or down, stay? Or is it simply for loose leash walking and heeling?
> 
> For example, if I were to keep a prong on Zeeva while practicing LAT and she doesn't look at me after looking at a distraction, can I correct her by jerking on the prong? Is this too harsh? Is the prong not meant for teaching this?


The prong is absolutely NOT for correcting LAT!!! LAT is a game, if your dog is not playing it with you you need to go back and train it properly, you should never ever ever correct your dog for not looking at you during LAT. Have you read the book Control Unleashed, which is where LAT came from? If not you should read it and learn more about it before attempting it with your dog. 

I'm sorry to sound harsh, but if you knew anything at all about Leslie McDevitt, who wrote the book and created the LAT game, you'd know that she would be _horrified_ at the thought of correcting a dog with a prong collar for not looking back at the owner during any of the games or exercises she created. 

Raising K9: Leslie McDevitt's LOOK AT THAT! Game

Do you currently use a clicker or a verbal marker with your dogs? You can use either, but your dog should be conversant with whatever marker you use, so that when you click or say "yes!", your dog immediately looks to you for a reward. If you're not there yet, that's a good place to start, but in a low distraction environment, not in the presence of a trigger.


----------



## Zeeva (Aug 10, 2010)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> The prong is absolutely NOT for correcting LAT!!! LAT is a game, if your dog is not playing it with you you need to go back and train it properly, you should never ever ever correct your dog for not looking at you during LAT. Have you read the book Control Unleashed, which is where LAT came from? If not you should read it and learn more about it before attempting it with your dog.
> 
> I'm sorry to sound harsh, but if you knew anything at all about Leslie McDevitt, who wrote the book and created the LAT game, you'd know that she would be _horrified_ at the thought of correcting a dog with a prong collar for not looking back at the owner during any of the games or exercises she created.
> 
> ...


You don't sound harsh at all  I'm just trying to learn as Zeeva doesn't really get LAT (I use 'look'). I don't know much about LAT so thanks for the link. I looked up some youtube videos and tried to mimic those...I just thought maybe a prong correction would be a good learning tool. No worries. I haven't practiced LAT with a prong AT ALL; I asked first as I thought it might be creative but I'm wrong and that's alright 

Here is us practicing 'look' at that: 





I use a verbal marker 'yes' and a treat to distract. We are inside right now. I've tried taking her outside and practicing but she simply doesn't understand it yet or takes forever to look back at me after being distracted by someone or something (other than a treat)...

Thanks for your response


----------



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

It looks like you're using a treat for her to "look" at, and then rewarding her with it when she looks back at you? It also looks like your marker is late too, and not exactly when she's looking at the other thing. That's really not LAT, and it could be confusing her too.  Read the blog post I linked to above and try it the way Robin describes. Robin Sallie is a professional dog trainer who owns a couple of GSDs, but she's also one of the moderators of Leslie's Control Unleashed Yahoo email list, so she understands CU concepts well. 

You would start with a neutral object first, holding it behind your back and then whipping it out to the side, marking when she turns her head to look at it - you mark the look, then she has to turn back to you for the reward. That's why it helps to have a clicker (or at least marker) savvy dog who understands exactly what that sound means and will immediately turn towards you if they hear it, and if your timing isn't that great with markers, you might want to practice that too. BUT, I have used a treat lure in a pinch with Keefer, to get that head back around to me when I was in a situation where I didn't have as much distance as I would have liked and there wasn't a good bailout option either, so I pretty much had to stay where I was and work with him until the other dog passed. It helps to have something especially yummy and preferably stinky, that you can stick right up to the dog's nose to bring that head back around, if that's what you need to do. I wouldn't do that in the early stages of training because I'd be working at home in a low distraction environment, with a neutral item and it wouldn't be necessary. Ideally, your dog totally "gets" the game before you take it on the road and attempt to use it in the presence of triggers, and even then it's good to plan ahead and look for places to walk where you can control distance and maybe bug out quickly if the situation deteriorates. 

I see your other dog is right there while you're working with Zeeva. I separate my dogs when I'm training one of them, but if that works for you you can actually use the other dog as the LAT object. When I was training Halo to do LAT as a puppy I'd be sitting on the floor with her, and my cats recognized this situation as one where treats would be available. So when Elvis or Emmy would saunter into the room and walk towards us, I'd cue Halo to LAT the kitty! 

I do have some brief video of Halo doing LAT when we were on a busy walking path next to a lake by our house. I was by myself so it's not great because I was training her and trying to video it at the same time, and I couldn't get the dog walking by in the same shot as her, so I only show it after it's already passed by us. My timing is late too, but that's because I was holding a video camera and a leash and trying to deliver treats all at the same time, lol! But anyway, here it is:


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I would not use a prong for LAT. It goes against the idea behind the game. Otherwise I have and do used a prong for heeling, LLW, down, stay, sit, protection, even tracking (but I don't always use prongs for these things). Why would a prong only be used for heeling and leash walking?

I actually disagree with blanketblack. I use a prong with Nikon precisely *because* of his relationship with me. In my opinion, if a correction is so harsh that it's going to shut down your dog or destroy your relationship with the dog, then the correction is inappropriate for the dog regardless of the tool. I don't want to trick my dog into correcting him without him knowing the correction came from me and *I* said nope, wrong. I prefer prongs over e-collars because I like my dogs to know where the corrections are coming from. However I do a lot of NePoPo (just not with an e-collar). -R and +P are *always* paired with reinforcements and release/reward.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

Liesje said:


> if a correction is so harsh that it's going to shut down your dog or destroy your relationship with the dog, then the correction is inappropriate for the dog regardless of the tool.


I like how you phrased that, and I see what you're saying. Thank you for that, it puts it in perspective. I do use it for many things on a walk (sit, leave it, quiet) but I've never considered using it at other times. 
But would that only be for proofing? Or would you actually teach with it?


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Both. I can't make a blanket statement because it really depends on the dog and what I'm teaching in that session but my dogs have not been soft dogs or handler sensitive dogs, they tend to be pretty clear when training and because I use many tools and methods with each dog from day 1, they understand the training, if that makes sense? Even if they're still learning the commands/behaviors they know how to problem solve with clicker training, -R, luring, etc and don't shut down. I've *taught* new behaviors using -R (or NePoPo) and have also used it to "correct"/proof which is more +P (also paired with positive reinforcement).


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

Liesje said:


> I don't want to trick my dog into correcting him without him knowing the correction came from me and *I* said nope, wrong. I prefer prongs over e-collars because I like my dogs to know where the corrections are coming from.


Interesting to hear differing opinions on this. I have heard others say exactly the opposite--they want their dog to believe that their *behavior* caused the correction, as though it came from God, and the handler had nothing to do with it.

I suppose it would depend on the individual dog, and the situation. If you have a dog that is crazy to please you, it makes sense to ensure that the dog perceives the correction coming from YOU. Knowing he has displeased you is punishment in itself, the prong is just to emphasize it. OTOH if the dog is very independent and doesn't care about pleasing you, it would make sense for the dog to perceive the correction as caused by his own behavior. As with e-collars.

In any case, I wouldn't use a prong for the LAT game, but it can be used as a correction for disobedience--ignoring a command, etc., or it can be used as pressure, ie, teaching a forced retrieve. The latter is pretty old-school, however, and I don't personally like it. I did it once because, against my better judgment, the Schutzhund book told me to.  This was a long time ago, when I didn't have much experience. I figured whoever wrote the book knew better than I did, so I tried it their way. Fortunately the dog was not permanently damaged from it, but I think I was.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I guess I can't really relate since I don't care to own or train a dog that doesn't care about me or our relationship. If a dog doesn't enjoy training then I just don't train. My mutt Coke is this way, he's a very affectionate dog but he just doesn't care for work or training and doesn't have the drive for it. What I mean is, I've had people say they want to use an e-collar so that if their dog reacts adversely to the correction, the dog doesn't "blame" the handler for the correction and then act scared of the handler. My reaction to that is that if the dog is going to react so adversely to the correction, then it's not being done appropriately regardless of who or where it's coming from. I've also seen people go to the e-collar because they are incapable of giving their dog the correction it needs, so this way they can slap on the collar and hand the remote to someone else. I don't agree with that either, but it's not right vs. wrong. It's just that I'm a control freak. I see my dog's training as *my* responsibility, not the responsibility of someone else holding the line/remote or the tool itself. I'd rather make mistakes and learn along the way then not be able to participate in certain aspects of my dogs' training.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

Zeeva, are you looking for or attending any classes yet with your dog? There is nothing like a great trainer in the room teaching so they can not only give hints and tips for me and my dog, but I learn a ton from watching them work with the other handlers/dogs in class.

It's amazing how intricate dog training can be and the instant feedback from a good trainer, the weekly classes and homework between, then back to class to brushup and move on.... all make my dogs so much smarter and faster learning!

Course the best trainers/classes are agility but I'm guessing you MAY learn something from other classes/trainer . There must be some great opportunities in the Chicago area.



Welcome to Dog Obedience Group

http://www.abtconcepts.com/

Dog Training, puppy training, agility | Lombard, Villa Park, Glen Ellyn, Addison, | Elmhurst, Wheaton, Carol Stream | Wiggles-n-Wags Dog Training


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

Ohhhhhhh! For Your K9 | Dog Training - Home 

That looks good!


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> Ohhhhhhh! For Your K9 | Dog Training - Home
> 
> That looks good!


That one does look good. Love Susan Clothier!

:wub:


----------



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

I agree, anything based on Suzanne Clothier is going to be good! They also have classes for "excitable" dogs, and reactive dogs in addition to a variety of sports and basic OB classes.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

She's listed on Suzanne Clothier's website as a recommended trainer - there are not a ton of them, either, so a pretty select group. 

If nothing else, it is an interesting thing to try!


----------



## Lauri & The Gang (Jun 28, 2001)

For Your K9 has a GREAT group of trainers!!


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

Liesje said:


> I've had people say they want to use an e-collar so that if their dog reacts adversely to the correction, the dog doesn't "blame" the handler for the correction and then act scared of the handler.


I see what you're saying, but the way I understand it, the e-collar causes a dog to perceive the correction as being caused by his own behavior, not caused by a person. In this way, the dog internalizes the training so that it doesn't matter whether a person is there or not. When the dog knows that his handler is the cause of the correction, he learns that he can get away with the behavior as long as the handler is not right there to correct it.

I haven't actually used an e-collar, so I am just regurgitating what I've heard other people say about it.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I would disagree with that on the basis of operant conditioning. If the handler is not communicating the "cause" of the correction then there is a problem regardless of the tool or how the correction is delivered. That argument goes against the definition of the quadrants of operant conditioning. Also if it mattered more to the dog where the correction came from than why, then it seems like every Schutzhund field would be full of dogs in total avoidance of their handlers, not the "bad" behaviors.

I'm with you, I don't use them either and yet don't have problems training my dogs to do or not do something consistently. But most of what I'm training is stuff the dog would never do on his own anyway, so whether the handler is there or not makes no difference. Is a dog *supposed* to run down a field and retrieve a 5lb wooden dumbbell without his handler present to correct?


----------



## Zeeva (Aug 10, 2010)

MaggieRoseLee said:


> That one does look good. Love Susan Clothier!
> 
> :wub:


I called them  I'm actually excited about this. But there are two reasons that I'm concerned/hesitant/lazy about taking my two to training. 1. Zeeva isn't so people friendly. I don't THINK she will bite but I just don't trust her. She has growled at a group of people while walking by them and that scared me. And Smokey doesn't really like other dogs--he either fights with them or ignores them from the little interaction that I've had him do with other dogs this is what I've noticed. Now the thing that I am scared about is the screening prior to the classes. Smokey and Zeeva have both failed those for petsmart classes and being the sensitive person that I am, *I took it hard* :c Both had taken an entire month of OB classes with petsmart and still they failed for the second step in the program :c I felt like the petsmart trainer was afraid of Smokey despite the fact that I've NEVER EVER felt that he could harm or bite a person. She was fine with Zeeva (she had a soft spot for GSDs owning an abused one herself). Anyway, my point is that I'm afraid of the initial screening despite the fact that they told me that they don't usually say 'no' to someone and their dog unless the dog is outright dangerous which isn't the case with either of mine. 2. Money. And actually the classes are pretty reasonably priced IMO so I have to get the OK from my husband. 

They are close by me too 

I'd googled a few training classes but not knowing what to look for I'd abandoned it pretty quickly.

Anyway, I know that was a bit long-winded but what I really mean is thanks for the nudge and the info!


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

Liesje said:


> I would disagree with that on the basis of operant conditioning. If the handler is not communicating the "cause" of the correction then there is a problem regardless of the tool or how the correction is delivered. That argument goes against the definition of the quadrants of operant conditioning. Also if it mattered more to the dog where the correction came from than why, then it seems like every Schutzhund field would be full of dogs in total avoidance of their handlers, not the "bad" behaviors.
> 
> I'm with you, I don't use them either and yet don't have problems training my dogs to do or not do something consistently. But most of what I'm training is stuff the dog would never do on his own anyway, so whether the handler is there or not makes no difference. Is a dog *supposed* to run down a field and retrieve a 5lb wooden dumbbell without his handler present to correct?


I see what you're saying. I guess I was thinking more in terms of extinguishing unwanted behaviors that have nothing to do with "obedience" in the performance sense... like chasing chickens. I can train just about any dog not to chase chickens when I am right there... but not all of them will retain the lesson when I am NOT there. In this case, I can see how use of the e-collar might get the point across better than a correction perceived as caused by a human.


----------



## Zeeva (Aug 10, 2010)

Freestep said:


> I see what you're saying. I guess I was thinking more in terms of extinguishing unwanted behaviors that have nothing to do with "obedience" in the performance sense... like chasing chickens. I can train just about any dog not to chase chickens when I am right there... but not all of them will retain the lesson when I am NOT there. In this case, I can see how use of the e-collar might get the point across better than a correction perceived as caused by a human.


Wow. It's like a lightbulb went off in my head


----------



## rshkr (Feb 9, 2012)

you can use a prong to correct an unwanted behavior, you can also use it to teach a behavior.


----------



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

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> She's listed on Suzanne Clothier's website as a recommended trainer - there are not a ton of them, either, so a pretty select group.


Do you have a link to that page? I went to her website and didn't see anything about recommended trainers.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

Zeeva said:


> I called them  I'm actually excited about this. But there are two reasons that I'm concerned/hesitant/lazy about taking my two to training. 1. Zeeva isn't so people friendly. I don't THINK she will bite but I just don't trust her. She has growled at a group of people while walking by them and that scared me. And Smokey doesn't really like other dogs--he either fights with them or ignores them from the little interaction that I've had him do with other dogs this is what I've noticed. Now the thing that I am scared about is the screening prior to the classes. Smokey and Zeeva have both failed those for petsmart classes and being the sensitive person that I am, *I took it hard* :c Both had taken an entire month of OB classes with petsmart and still they failed for the second step in the program :c I felt like the petsmart trainer was afraid of Smokey despite the fact that I've NEVER EVER felt that he could harm or bite a person. She was fine with Zeeva (she had a soft spot for GSDs owning an abused one herself). Anyway, my point is that I'm afraid of the initial screening despite the fact that they told me that they don't usually say 'no' to someone and their dog unless the dog is outright dangerous which isn't the case with either of mine. 2. Money. And actually the classes are pretty reasonably priced IMO so I have to get the OK from my husband.
> 
> They are close by me too
> 
> ...


Cassidy's Mom: Consultations | Suzanne Clothier it is not easy to find on her site at all! 

Don't worry about the screening - my thinking is that she might use Clothier's CARAT - and you can ask if she does - CARAT | Suzanne Clothier look what that does - looks for the good to work with the strengths of the dog! 

My guess is also that this trainer is at a whole different level than any you have met. I could be wrong, but that's my guess - and also, have found with the Clothier based trainer/s I go to now, they also seem to get the person's impact on the dog - and are nice about handler needs. 

I think I would do one dog's assessment at a time - don't take them both on the same day. Doing that would be a lot for anyone to handle. 

Good luck - I hope it works out!


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

Zeeva said:


> Smokey and Zeeva have both failed those for petsmart classes and being the sensitive person that I am, *I took it hard*


I'm so sorry those people upset you. I know you're sensitive, because I can see from your posts how caring and considerate you are. I just want to say that the whole point of being a trainer is to help you train your dogs...so by not accepting your dogs into the program, they're pretty much saying that they themselves are the failures, not you dogs. Please make sure you know that it had nothing to do with you!


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

Any updates? I want to go there for classes!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Blanketback said:


> I only use it for loose leash walking, and for *correcting his selective hearing when we're out on a walk*. That's all I need it for, but other people might have different ideas about it's other uses.
> 
> I don't think it would be very good to use the prong to correct something that directly relates to your dog's relationship with you. Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't want my dog looking at me or coming to me because he's trying to avoid something he doesn't like - *I want him to do it because he loves* *me*. I know you still need to teach a recall, but I think rewards are the way to go to instill this behavior.
> 
> It might be fun for you to make a list of all the things that you want your dogs to learn, and then try to think of interesting "outside the box" ways of trying to *let the dogs know what you want.* Because that's really all that training is - getting the dog to understand what you're asking him to do. I don't see the point of jerking on a prong to teach something if there's *another way* to do it.


Does your dog only have "selective hearing" when he is on a walk with you? never when you tell him/her to "Come"? That is great!

Dogs NEVER obey because "they love you!". They do what they do because they "think" it will result in the most benefit to them!

What is the "other way to do it?" to teach a dog what you want?

BTW - clearly you have misunderstood the use of a prong to correct a dog's behavior! 

Because one never "jerks" on a collar, prong or otherwise, to "CORRECT" a dog UNTIL you are clear that the dog knows what the command means (has done it consistently)! And just has decided not to obey at that time and under the particular environment and circumstances.

My guess is that perhaps you may not believe in any corrections to a dog (forgive me if I have misinterpreted your attitude toward physical corrections in general!). So if that is the case, then i can see where you would not like the use of a prong - esp. with their terrible reputation among those folks who do not have any understanding of how they work and how to use them. 

Very understandable!


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

codmaster said:


> one never "jerks" on a collar, prong or otherwise, to "CORRECT" a dog UNTIL you are clear that the dog knows what the command means (has done it consistently)!


Speak for yourself, I've used a prong collar for -R paired with +R but as part of the learning process (the dog did not know the command beforehand).


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Liesje said:


> Speak for yourself, I've used a prong collar for -R paired with +R but as part of the learning process (the dog did not know the command beforehand).


 
Ok, I should have said that MOST trainers do not CORRECT a dog for not doing a behavior that they do not know!


Even Bill Koehler (the "devil" himself in a lot of Pos Only modern day trainers that I have run across) would teach that you first "Teach" and only when you are sure the dog knows what the command means do you "Correct" the incorrect behavior.

You evidently will correct when the dog doesn't do something that he/she doesn't understand - different strokes for different folks!


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

codmaster said:


> forgive me if I have misinterpreted


Not a problem. But you seem to have a very difficult time understanding my posts, time and time again. If your bombastic replies are any indication, this can't be good for your health. You might want to consider putting me on your "ignore" list.


----------



## dgray (Feb 24, 2012)

I use a prong on Bella indoors when the cats are around. I'm using it to teach her leave it. She will NOT leave them alone without persistence so it's been helping me snap her out of her "kitty trance".. Lol. 


Sent from my iPhone using PG Free


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Blanketback said:


> Not a problem. But you seem to have a very *difficult time understanding my posts*, time and time again. If your *bombastic *replies are any indication, this can't be good for your health. You might want to consider putting me on your "ignore" list.


 
*BIG* words, Heh! Heh!

Maybe you could try to speak more simply, for me?


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

codmaster said:


> Ok, I should have said that MOST trainers do not CORRECT a dog for not doing a behavior that they do not know!
> 
> 
> Even Bill Koehler (the "devil" himself in a lot of Pos Only modern day trainers that I have run across) would teach that you first "Teach" and only when you are sure the dog knows what the command means do you "Correct" the incorrect behavior.
> ...


Did I use the word "correct"? I don't really know what that means anyway. I use a prong for -R. To me a "correction" implies +P. Since everyone has their own ideas about what equals a correction I prefer to discuss training in operant conditioning terms, since they are already defined and not really up for discussion. There are a million ways to combine and implement them you can't really label one person's -R when it's +P, etc.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

codmaster said:


> Maybe you could try to speak more simply, for me?


No. Use a dictionary. You'll thank me when you're 80.


----------

