# Under ground containment system



## Kay13411 (Jul 24, 2003)

I have had the innotek SD-2000 for two of my dogs for 2 years now, and just recently one of them has decided to take the jolt. I have watched him get ready, he walks up to the fencing, hears the tone and then hunkers down and runs through it. 

I am thinking of upgrading the fencing to a innotek SD-5100, this one has a setting that has no warning tone if it is turn up. It also has a hand held remote trainer that could be used with it. 

Does anyone have experience with this, or any other fencing, which might be better then what I am looking at?!?


----------



## Susan and Dacota (Jul 30, 2007)

Does yours have the setting that shocks and beeps at the same time? Have you tried using it if you do? It might be called the high setting. You might want to check and make sure it still shocks.


----------



## lish91883 (Nov 2, 2006)

I would have a real fence put up if it was my dogs. Its not worth their lives.


----------



## Kay13411 (Jul 24, 2003)

Right now I have the setting at the highest, and yes it does give a warning sound and then gives the jolt. 

I have walked the two acres that we have fencing with one of the collars in my hand and it is working. I was just outside with the dogs and you can tell it is working, Rudy just takes the jolt.


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

Perhaps the prongs are not getting a good contact. Does it come with various size contacts? Can you adjust the width of the correction zone from the transmitter in the house?
You may have to set the flags and do some refresher work.



> Originally Posted By: lish91883I would have a real fence put up if it was my dogs. Its not worth their lives.


I thought you were an E-collar trainer. So you`re saying that dogs can`t be reliably trained on an e-collar. Is your dogs life at risk when you are off lead with just the transmitter in your hand??


----------



## lish91883 (Nov 2, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: kutzro357 I thought you were an E-collar trainer. So you`re saying that dogs can`t be reliably trained on an e-collar. Is your dogs life at risk when you are off lead with just the transmitter in your hand??


Comparing an E-Collar with and underground fence is like comparing apples and oranges. My dogs understood the collar and the commands before they were ever taken off lead. Out of the 4 E-collar trained dogs of my own, not one has ever blown through the collar. I’ve never seen a clients dog blow through it once the command and collar was understood.

The OP has a dog that understands the fence but chose to run through it anyway. Now what? Best case, you find your dog unharmed. Worst case, the dog is killed. 

Another major difference is the E-collar has multiple stim settings, where the fence does not. (as is my understanding) Also the dog only feels the fence as it runs through, with the e-collar you can keep tapping the dog until it responses.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Biggest difference between an ecollar and an underground fence is the presence of the handler. The handler is there and thus able to identify a potential problem and proactively work to prevent something from becoming an issue, can draw the dog's attention away from the potential problem, can issue a command to stop the dog and give the dog an alternate behavior to perform, etc... The collar is there as a safety net to support the handler if need be, but it's the handler's presence and instructions that exerts the strongest influence over the dog.

With an underground fence, it's just the fence. An inanimate object which can do none of those things, and with which the dog has no relationship. It's only influence over the dog is the ability to inflict pain, and some dogs are willing to take that instant of pain in order to do what they please.

Sounds like this dog fully understands the fence, but has decided it's worth the jolt to get through it. Going back to do some basic reinforcement training or a more powerful fence system *may* work. But I agree with the idea it's not worth the dog's life to continue to risk an invisible fence when the dog obviously knows what will happen and is willing to blow through anyway. Time for a real fence.


----------



## Susan and Dacota (Jul 30, 2007)

It could be possible that your dog is not getting the full shock. That something is interfearing with the signal? Do you have any metal i.d. tags/rabies tags on Rudy? Is the collor fitted properly? Is the battery still ok? I think it could be possible that if the battery isn't up to par, that the shock wouldn't be...

Just thought I'd throw these things out...You probably have checked, but if not...

As for letting Rudy loose, I would only let him loose while I was outside. Even then, unless he has excellent recall and will come to you instead of charging through, but still, I think I'd keep him on a leash, or long lead. I have been told, the more they go through it, the harder it may be to retrain the dog. It's your choice, you know your dog.









I haven't looked on the internet about your unit, but I would check and see if there are any stronger units out there. If you do invest in a new system, I'd definately go back to square one, put all the flags back up, walk him around,...

Hope you figure something out !


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

There is almost no difference. E-collar has a verbal, e-fence has an audible. Neither works until trained and the dog understands. My fence has various sized prongs, adjustable stim levels (highest could stop a rhino and an adjustable width of correction zone. The correction of the fence is ALWAYS perfectly timed unlike an e-collar that depends on human timing and alertness. (anybody that has dealt with police and vascar or stopwatches knows about that).

It`s apples to apples and doesn`t rely on human timing and reaction. I use an e-fence and have and do train with an e`collar. In both cases it`s the training that leads up to both their uses that will determine the success or failure.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

> Originally Posted By: kutzro357There is almost no difference. E-collar has a verbal, e-fence has an audible.


There is a HUGE difference. It's not about audible sounds or perfectly timed corrections. It's about the relationship between the dog and the handler, the handler's ability to lead and influence the dog's behavior. A dog has absolutely NO social relationship or pack drive directed toward an inanimate object. He has deeply rooted instinct to develop this sort of relationship with others, and to work to maintain that relationship, which is done in part by following the rules set forth by his leader. 

An electric fence used only when the handler is outside and supervising the dog would be "apple vs apple" with an ecollar. An electric fence expected to control the dog on it's own, with the handler completely out of the picture, is an orange.

People may be fooled to think they're one and the same, but the dogs definitely know better.


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

I`ve trained both and don`t see it. The first part is the training without the e-collar. That involves the handler in both. Once that is done the dog knows what is expected you move to either the fence or e-collar. You could boundary train a dog using an e-collar and a handheld. Once the training is for the most part completed(I say it like that because I believe training is never actually complete and is ever evolving) what would be there if you are not 100% focused should the dog decide to test? The fence.
I watched field dogs and retrievers being trained with e-collars and much of the time they are out of sight of the handlers.
Either way, the dogs is taught or trained as to what is expected or what the boundary is, training is reinforced with positive reinforcement when the behavior is correct, correction is applied when the dog bridges the boundary?


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

Let me add. IM not so HO. E-fences are not for leaving a dog home alone 100% unattended. That`s what kennels are for. I believe they are so dogs can be outside with minimal supervision or go out for bathroom breaks etc.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Handler saying "No/Come/Down" followed by an ecollar zap if necessary is very different to the dog than an electric warning "beep" followed by a zap.

The handler's voice command or correction means a world of difference to the dog, because of his relationship with the handler, and the dog's genetic programming to concede to the wishes of his leader. The later is merely Pavlovian conditioning of beep = zap is coming.

Now, if the handler is hiding in the house, peeking out a window using the ecollar to reinforce boundaries without being present or exerting any influence upon the dog himself, than yes ecollar and efence are roughly equivalent. Just as they're roughly equivalent if the handler is outside supervising the dog when using an efence. But if in one situation the handler is in the picture and in the other he is not, it becomes apples and oranges because the handler's presence makes a tremendous difference to the dog. Dogs are far too much social animals. When the handler is there it always makes a difference. It can't not.


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

Sorry Chris but the bonding and handler end of it just doesn`t cut it with me as a reason a dog can`t be reliable in an e-fence. Using that theory hunting dogs would not be reliably trained. Once the initial training is done with the handler and the dog knows what is expected. Knows that a voice command or audible tone means stop and turn (reinforced with positive training) or a correction will result the dog makes a choice. Should he choose to ignore the command or tone he gets a correction. The dogs aversion to the stimulation is what makes the boundary off limits.
The initial training required a handler and bonding and reinforcement.
35 years ago we trained reliable dogs without a relationship with the dog. That command or beep wasn`t obeyed for the love of the handler. It was because the dog understood what was expected and knew the consequences.


----------



## Kay13411 (Jul 24, 2003)

The reason I am looking at the SD-5100 is because it has the romote for training also. This way when I see him hunker down for the jolt I can tell him to come, and if he doesn't I can then correct him. I have been going outside with him, and reintroducing the fence as if I was training him for the first time..


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

> Originally Posted By: kutzro357Sorry Chris but the bonding and handler end of it just doesn`t cut it with me as a reason a dog can`t be reliable in an e-fence.


I never said that bonding with the handler meant a dog couldn't be trained to an efence.

You stated that invisible fence training and ecollar training were the same thing. When a poster mentioned that they didn't believe in invisible fence, you jumped on them and said "but you're an ecollar trainer", and went on again to say that ecollar training and efence training are the same, apples and apples, how could they believe in ecollar training but not invisible fence, etc....

I am merely taking issue with the idea that ecollar training and efence training are the same. They're not. Yes, an ecollar could be employed in a way similar to an efence, in which case they may be seen as apples and apples. But an ecollar has far more uses. And most use it for more than boundary training, so to say someone is off base to believe in ecollar training but not invisible fence doesn't make sense to me. For most ecollar training an ecollar is used as an invisible leash to allow the handler to correct a dog in training. It's use for *training* outside just establishing a boundary already makes it different from an efence. And yes, the presence of the handler does matter.

As for hunting dogs, they view the ecollar much as a roving fence around them and the handler is out of the picture. In that case it is very similar to an efence, sure.

But an ecollar has uses far beyond boundary training. If I'm using an ecollar to train my dog, enforce a long down at a distance, or just out and about and I use it to stop my dog if he takes off after a deer, my very presence and commands given to the dog have a huge influence on his behavior. The zap may enforce my command or provide correction, but it's only part of what influences his behavior. The ecollar isn't doing it on it's own.


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

We will have to agree to disagree. I`ll stand by my years of hands on experience with both.



> Originally Posted By: Chris WildI am merely taking issue with the idea that ecollar training and efence training are the same. They're not. Yes, an ecollar could be employed in a way similar to an efence, in which case they may be seen as apples and apples. But an ecollar has far more uses.


That`s obvious. The e-fence training and the boundary training part of an e-collar are similar. The e-collar can be expanded and used in tons of ways the fence can`t be used. My experience is if a dog can be reliably trained on an e-collar then it can be reliably trained to an e-fence.In that little area of boundary training and hunting dog training they both serve the same function.



> Originally Posted By: lish91883Comparing an E-Collar with and underground fence is like comparing apples and oranges. My dogs understood the collar and the commands before they were ever taken off lead. Out of the 4 E-collar trained dogs of my own, not one has ever blown through the collar. I’ve never seen a clients dog blow through it once the command and collar was understood.


This is the statement I responded to. That is EXACTLY how you train for an e-fence. It takes time and training before a dog is ever cut loose in the fence with a collar. What`s the difference??????? I have yet to hear the difference.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

The E-fence and the Ecollar are similar but they are not the same thing. You guys have already discussed the similarities and most of the differences but so far no one has mentioned (especially as it applies in the case of this problem) a major difference between them. 

The Efence isn't activated until the dog approaches it. By then this dog has learned to "steel himself" to the stim he knows is coming. With the Ecollar the handler can see the dog getting distracted and long before he's at the peak of his drive, give him (for example) a recall command and a stim if necessary, to prevent him from "loading up." Once this dog has reached the level of preparedness that he feels is necessary to get thorugh the discomfort of the stim, it's too late, he's not going to feel it, as if he was at rest. 

By stopping him before he's that distracted, the Ecollar can be used at lower levels than the Efence but before the dog has "steeled himself."


----------

