# 100% reliable recall



## Colorado

OK, 100% is an exaggeration, I realize that it can never be guaranteed. But I had a minor incident with my puppy and I'd like to work with her to avoid it.

I was in a field in a park that wraps around a lake in the subdivision where I am renting. It's a pretty isolated field, away from cars and the trail the circles the lake. It was lunch time and I was working with my 5-month old puppy on off-leash recall. She was doing quite well, coming to me every time like a bullet and ignoring all the distractions of a new place. Then she noticed two women taking a walk around the lake. They were quite far--about a football field away. I tried to get focus / recall / just have her platz down. Nope. This time she decided she had to say hi. She tore across the field and started jumping on them looking for attention. It was completely non-aggressive but it turned out that they weren't dog people. The younger of the two women tried her best to kick Nikita. Thankfully she wasn't very athletic and 5-month old puppy is pretty agile; the woman wasn't able to make contact. I was running in that direction and finally the focus worked. Nikita looked at me, I called 'hier' and she left them and came back to me.

Avoiding the discussion on why someone would want to kick a 5-month old puppy, I freely admit that I was in the wrong. The park has a leash rule. I failed to control my dog.

Her recall while on a long lead and in my back yard is very reliable. So I thought I was doing the right thing by bringing her to new areas to proof her against different types of distractions. I've also thought we were doing well. I've been in other places and successfully gotten focus / recall with a squirrel distraction, another dog distraction, etc. 

Any comments appreciated. I'm specifically looking for tips on how to teach a reliable recall in new places while avoiding failures like the one described above. The failures are dangerous (what if they had called animal control? what if she had kept running?) and I think they set back training.

Thanks,

-Dan aka Colorado


----------



## grmnshpd21

I always kept Molly on a 30 foot light leash when in the same situation you explained. We would go to a local school yard for some off leash training and play and I would always keep that leash on her because if she ever did get distracted by a squirrel or bird then I had 30 feet of leash dragging behind her to grab to get her back to me. I would lure her in with the leash and make sure I was much more fun and entertaining than anything else on the field and then praise, praise, praise when she made it to me.


----------



## tracyc

You're doing everything right--just moved ahead a little too fast, IMO. 

Back up one step (to the point where you know the pup will succeed) and keep reinforcing that, then move forward in smaller steps. 

I agree with keeping the long lead on her even while you're working on proofing this in the park. That way you can grab her back. 

You and she both lean from mistakes. Now, you know you need to work on recall with people as distractions...just do it from a safer distance, and keep the long line on.


----------



## big_dog7777

I second a long line on a pup. She will drag it like it's not even there, and you can grab it if she gives you the paw and runs away.


----------



## Maraccz

> Originally Posted By: ZeusGSDI second a long line on a pup. She will drag it like it's not even there, and you can grab it if she gives you the paw and runs away.


DON'T grab it!!! step on it, it will kill your hands to grab. Make sure there is a LARGE knot in the end


----------



## Colorado

I'll try the long lead...I'm still a bit worried. If she runs at me, or perpendicular to me, I'm sure I could step on a 30' lead and stop her. If she were to run away from me, there's no way I could catch her. She's a fast pup and I am a slow white guy.









I could also try with it with me holding the lead, but then I'm limited to recalls of that length.

I'll let y'all know how it goes.

-Dan


----------



## pinkanml

They also make 50' leads, I think, so that would give a bit more distance


----------



## tracyc

Or buy a 100-foot clothesline rope.


----------



## Qyn

> Originally Posted By: ColoradoI'll try the long lead...I'm still a bit worried. If she runs at me, or perpendicular to me, I'm sure I could step on a 30' lead and stop her. If she were to run away from me, there's no way I could catch her. She's a fast pup and I am a slow white guy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could also try with it with me holding the lead, but then I'm limited to recalls of that length.
> 
> I'll let y'all know how it goes.
> 
> -Dan


Your pup is only 5 months old. There will be many stages of joyful lack of focus and downright wilful disobedience to come in the next few years. Your pup is doing great







but you are giving her too much freedom at this young age where, really, she is not disobeying you, she is still too young to totally undertand what you want her to do even though she is well advanced at what she is now doing - be prepared that this may (or may not) change.









Please do attach a long line to whatever length "a slow white guy"







is comfortable with being able to get to if needed. Then you are setting her up to win rather than to fail.

All the best.


----------



## GunnerJones

Two balls, and a long line. throw the ball out let her run after it call/tug her back and throw the other ball. When the pup is older, six months plus consider an E Collar.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

she is doing great for five months!! continue to do what everyone said and she will have that 100% recall. an e-collar should only be used as a last resort for your situation not on your six month old puppy. it is very possible to use positive training for a great recall, it just takes lots of time- and it seems like you are more than willing to take the time


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO an e-collar should only be used as a last resort for your situation not on your six month old puppy. it is very possible to use positive training for a great recall, it just takes lots of time- and it seems like you are more than willing to take the time


I disagree with this statement. An e-collar is a very useful tool for developing near 100% recall when used PROPERLY and taught by a QUALIFIED e-collar trainer. Speaking with first hand experience, when used properly it is not detrimental to a young dog.


----------



## Cooper&me

Sounds like you are doing fantastic. 5 months is still young. She will probably regress during adolesence but if you keep going the way you are the outcome will be great.

The e collar probably has its place but in this case it is a lazy man's solution. Give positive reinforcement a try.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: mjb03
> The e collar probably has its place but in this case it is a lazy man's solution. Give positive reinforcement a try.


Why is it that the mere mention of using an e-collar is immediately associated with laziness?


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

> Originally Posted By: Tracie
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO an e-collar should only be used as a last resort for your situation not on your six month old puppy. it is very possible to use positive training for a great recall, it just takes lots of time- and it seems like you are more than willing to take the time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree with this statement. An e-collar is a very useful tool for developing near 100% recall when used PROPERLY and taught by a QUALIFIED e-collar trainer. Speaking with first hand experience, when used properly it is not detrimental to a young dog.
Click to expand...

i said this because the method he is using is obviously working- he just needs to proof it, which will come in time. and since its working, i don't see a need to use an e-collar. i never said it was detrimental and i never said anything bad about it. but in his situation, it seems like him and his puppy are doing a great job and spending the time to train.


----------



## Cooper&me

What is it if not laziness or a quick fix. Not saying always, it does have a place and I do not want to change this thread into discussion on e collars. It is what it is.


----------



## Dohhhhh

Hi Colorado,

I found this on a site ( http://www.trainmypet.net/info/vet.php)

How big or old does my dog need to be to use static stimulation(e-collar)?
A: The size of the dog that can use static stimulation is really dependent on the size of the receiver collar and if the dog can comfortably wear the collar. As technology improves, the receiver collars are getting smaller and smaller. The best thing to do is to look at the size of the receiver collar and determine if your dog could comfortably wear it based on their body type. As far as age, the old adage "You can't teach an old dog new tricks" just isn't true. Like us, a dog is never too old to learn but puppies can be too young. A good rule of thumb is once a puppy can be trained to simple commands, like sit and stay, he is ready to learn with any type of training (too early and they do not have the attention span to pay attention and to learn). 

There are alot of great articles on this site if your interested in them







Lou Castle also has a WONDERFUL site that had a great article on recall (www.loucastle.com)


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: mjb03What is it if not laziness or a quick fix. Not saying always, it does have a place and I do not want to change this thread into discussion on e collars. It is what it is.


I chose to begin training my 4 month old shepherd on an e-collar for the sake of consistency not laziness. I don’t want my dogs’ only motivation to work for me to be based on bribery, excuse me, I mean rewards. I want my dog to be able to go out in the real world and perform just as he has in his obedience classes. By using my e-collar, I can consistently communicate with my dog and I don’t need an endless supply of treats or a rocket launcher to give him his treats if he should decide to take off after something that holds more interest to him than me. (He is a dog after all)

Training my dog on an e-collar also allows me to maintain gentle effective control of my dog wherever he is and at whatever distance away from me he may be without having to have him tethered by a 20, 50 or even 100 foot leash. (once his training was complete of course) In the event he makes a bad decision, I can change his mind quickly.

My dog has not known the restriction of a leash since he was 6 months old. So if teaching my dog to listen to me, obey my requests because he has learned to be voice conscious to my commands makes me a lazy person then by all means…your right, it is what it is and I shall be a lazy trainer for the rest of my days


----------



## Timber1

Go Giants, from a disappointed Packer Fan most of us folks in Wisconsin will be rooting for the Giants.

As for the E Collar, it has its place but never, ever on a puppy. 

The dog ran after a few people, was never aggressive and just wanted to chase/play. Frankly, it sounds like typical puppy behavior to me.

The various suggestions about long lines worked with my GSD, when he chased a few people. At the time the dog was big and about one year old. With the use of flags, marking the dog's boundary, and long leases I was able to train the dog not to chase joggers. 

As for dog parks and other open sites, leaving your yard and having the dog unleased, etc. could be a problem. I have tried to avoid letting mione off lease, unless I am sure there is no one else around.

As an aside it seems like you have a really nice dog.


----------



## kutzro357

> Originally Posted By: mjb03
> 
> The e collar probably has its place but in this case it is a lazy man's solution. Give positive reinforcement a try.


*Another uninformed poster. I guess all those hunting and field dogs have lazy handlers? Right?*

Edited by kutzro357 to be a kinder gentler response(01/29/08 02:46 PM)


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

> Originally Posted By: Tracie
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: mjb03What is it if not laziness or a quick fix. Not saying always, it does have a place and I do not want to change this thread into discussion on e collars. It is what it is.
> 
> 
> 
> I chose to begin training my 4 month old shepherd on an e-collar for the sake of consistency not laziness. I don’t want my dogs’ only motivation to work for me to be based on bribery, excuse me, I mean rewards. I want my dog to be able to go out in the real world and perform just as he has in his obedience classes. By using my e-collar, I can consistently communicate with my dog and I don’t need an endless supply of treats or a rocket launcher to give him his treats if he should decide to take off after something that holds more interest to him than me. (He is a dog after all)
> 
> Training my dog on an e-collar also allows me to maintain gentle effective control of my dog wherever he is and at whatever distance away from me he may be without having to have him tethered by a 20, 50 or even 100 foot leash. (once his training was complete of course) In the event he makes a bad decision, I can change his mind quickly.
> 
> My dog has not known the restriction of a leash since he was 6 months old. So if teaching my dog to listen to me, obey my requests because he has learned to be voice conscious to my commands makes me a lazy person then by all means…your right, it is what it is and I shall be a lazy trainer for the rest of my days
Click to expand...

tracie, as a trainer you should know that positive food training is not based on a bribe system. it is a positive reward- a way of marking a positive behavior. i for one have a dog with an amazing recall and i don't need a treat launcher. he knows what i want and is just as happy to come to me as he is chasing that squirrel i just called him away from. it really surprises me that you are so quick to bash positive training and say such incorrect things about it- you are a dog trainer and should know that not every method is right for every dog.


----------



## Dohhhhh

I did not mean to sound as if I was bashing any form of training. I am not. I tend to get hackled when the undertone is that positive training (treats ect) is the only way to train. I really get hackled when called lazy. 

There are many ways to get from point A to point B. One way may tend to get me there faster. So what. Faster does not mean lazy or bad. I disagreed with the post of never using an e-collar on a young dog. That was a blanket comment.

I have been training dogs for more years than I care to reveal and have used them all...chokechain, prong, flatcollar, treats, clickers ect. Of them all I "personally" perfer the e-collar. My choice as a trainer. Will I use other methods if I feel the dog needs it HECK YES...whatever works for the dog. The e-collar was another option for the poster to explore


----------



## 3K9Mom

I've tried a lot of different training techniques with my guy -- long lines, all that stuff. 

The one thing that has made him really reliable is this: make him realize that coming to me is always a wonderful thing. Ok, I know that sounds silly. But usually, we *train* recalls -- which training sessions are always loads of fun. Run away (on a long line). Come. Treats and praise. But then, in real life, we call our pups when they're doing something fun and we end that fun. So what do they learn? "Come" means I have to stop my fun stuff. 

So we have to break that.

I take my dog to the park (usually in the fenced in baseball field). Or we'll go on a hike where he's ok to be off leash. Or he's out in the back yard, messing around with my other dog, sniffing, playing, etc. I call him "Camper, Come!" He comes to me. I give him a delicious meaty treat (this isn't time for biscuits or carrots!), some verbal praise , and I send him out to go play again. (I don't rub or pet him because while being petted is nice in the living room, it's not so great to sit there and be petted when what he really wants to do is go play with his friends or go back to sniffing where squirrels are in the underbrush.) 

I do this every 20 minutes or so, not enough to bug him (because then he might tune me out) but enough that he's always kind of listening for me and is ready to come running. What does he learn? Well, he learns that most of the time, "come" doesn't mean "Game over." What "come" does mean is "great treats" and "I get to continue playing most of the time." Also, he learns to keep an ear out for me to be calling him.

Yeah, sometimes, you will end the game and bring your pup in the house or finish up play time at the park, but dogs are like baseball players. If they can get snacks 5 times out of 5, they're feeling pretty lucky. If they can keep playing 4 times out of that 5 times, they're feeling pretty lucky as well. (He gets a snack even when the game is over, of course.







)

The lady across the park will no longer hold much interest for your pup when she knows YOU are like the slot machine that always pays out. 

People can argue that they don't like to "bribe" a dog to do what they want him to do. But your puppy is 5 months old. She's at that perfect age where she absorbs everything like a sponge. Will you have to feed her to "come" every time for the rest of her life? Of course not. But for me, anything I can do to make my puppy think that *I* am most wonderful destination on earth, well, I"m going to do that, until she is trained to come as a reflex. 

Jean Donaldson's book "Culture Clash" has specific instructions on how you can teach your dog not only to come but to come running to you at top speed. It's an interesting book. I don't necessarily agree with every single thing Donaldson says (esp about leadership), but I think you might find it helpful.


----------



## mikaK9

> Quote:The lady across the park will no longer hold much interest for your pup when she knows YOU are like the slot machine that always pays out.


Personally, I'd keep going with all the positive stuff at that age...until the dog really understands and has had opportunities to make mistakes and learn. Because some dogs, like the one in the above quote, can continue successfully on completely positive training. However, I think part of the debate here is recognizing that not all dogs respond to the same training. And I've got one of them for which I cannot get a 100% positive recall under heavy distractions. I think part of it depends on the dog's drive. My dog has EXTREMELY high prey drive. So there is no jackpot I can give him that is better than the chase and catch of that rabbit he is hot on the trail of. His prey drive is just too high. You cannot possibly come up with a good enough reward. For a dog like that, at some point you have to teach them that a recall is required, even if they don't feel like it and even if they don't care about the reward that you have waiting for them. I tried doing it with a pinch collar and have just reluctantly started using an ecollar. Now I wish I had started the ecollar earlier, because the work on the pinch has just caused conflict and lots of banging my head on the wall. I've found that for the amount of correction needed to get my dog to understand that he must recall out of highly distractive situations, the ecollar is a much gentler option. Nothing to do with amount of time/effort required; it simply is the most logical tool to use for him.

But it just comes back to the dog for me. Obviously as people have wrote on here, there are some dogs for which you can have a 100% reliable recall by using all positive methods. But there are also dogs for which you cannot. I'd keep going with the positive since he's responding well to it, and then decide later on down the road (as he matures) whether it will continue to get you a 100% reliable recall.


----------



## shepherdbydesign

I don't believe in a e-collar, specially on a 5 or 12 month old pup. I have a GSD here that is the after math of e-collar used wrongly. so bad that we had a trainer bring one out and the GSD cried and wimpered and it wasn't even on him. I feel that if you can't train using positive training then there is something wrong with the the method of training the said GSD.


----------



## big_dog7777

Just like virtually any other training tool, an e-collar can be very effective when used properly and positively and can be a torture device when used incorrectly. I have not "needed" to use one yet for recall, but I'm sure with some dogs it's the best method. I do use it as a safety net for off lead situations and to sharpen up obedience. One thing that people need to realize is that when used properly nobody is just frying the dog. The stimulation provided by an e-collar set at the right level for a dog is equivalent to a collar tug. I have put one on myself.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: mjb03What is it if not laziness or a quick fix. Not saying always, it does have a place and I do not want to change this thread into discussion on e collars. It is what it is.


it's just another tool. It's not any more or less "lazy" than a clicker, a leash, or a buckle collar. It's an inanimate object. It does not have this quality. 

A "quick fix" usually means something that works only for a short time. Something like putting duct tape on a radiator hose to get the car home or to a garage. The Ecollar is ANYTHING but a "quick fix." 

This is about training a recall. The Ecollar is just a tool. At this stage of the dog's life, I think he's a bit too young. I like to wait until the dog is six months old. Mostly that's a size thing, it's the age at which he's big enough to hold it up. Although I've used them on dogs as small as a Pom.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: chuckI don't believe in a e-collar, specially on a 5 or 12 month old pup. I have a GSD here that is the after math of e-collar used wrongly. so bad that we had a trainer bring one out and the GSD cried and wimpered and it wasn't even on him. I feel that if you can't train using positive training then there is something wrong with the the method of training the said GSD.


Just because someone has used a tool improperly is hardly an indictment of that tool. Used as I advocate it's more gentle than any leash and gives more reliability than any food reward. 

I'm always intrigued when people use the phrase "positive training" because it really has no generally accepted meaning. Can you tell us what you mean by it? 

Those of you who use food rewards should read _The Misbehavior of Organisms." Here's an excerpt. 




Quote: … Here we have animals, after having been conditioned to a specific learned response, gradually drifting into behaviors that are entirely different from those which were conditioned. Moreover, it can easily be seen that these particular behaviors to which the animals drift are clear-cut examples of instinctive behaviors having to do with the natural food getting behaviors of the particular species.

We have termed this phenomenon "instinctive drift." The general principle seems to be that wherever an animal has strong instinctive behaviors in the area of the conditioned response, after continued running the organism will drift toward the instinctive behavior to the detriment of the conditioned behavior and even to the delay or preclusion of the reinforcement. In a very boiled-down, simplified form, it might be stated as "learned behavior drifts toward instinctive behavior." 

All this, of course, is not to disparage the use of conditioning techniques, but is intended as a demonstration that there are definite weaknesses in the philosophy underlying these techniques. The pointing out of such weaknesses should make possible a worthwhile revision in behavior theory.

Click to expand...

http://www.ches.ua.edu/departments/hd/fa...20organisms.doc_


----------



## Cooper&me

> Originally Posted By: kutzro357
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: mjb03
> 
> The e collar probably has its place but in this case it is a lazy man's solution. Give positive reinforcement a try.
> 
> 
> 
> *Another uninformed poster. I guess all those hunting and field dogs have lazy handlers? Right?*
> 
> Edited by kutzro357 to be a kinder gentler response(01/29/08 02:46 PM)
Click to expand...

That was good for a laugh. Did you miss the part where I said e collars had their place? It was a very short sentence. People people people. Why so sensitive?


----------



## kutzro357

> Originally Posted By: mjb03
> in this case it is a lazy man's solution. Give positive reinforcement a try.


Explain how an e-collar properly used is a lazy mans solution? I have been at this a few years and have yet to get my desired results with 100% positive training. So again I say if this pup is of a good size and pretty mature and well along in it`s training how is the e collar lazy. Is a prong lazy? How about a head collar? When you`re done explaining we can both laugh.


----------



## Dinahmyte

I agree with the long line. I would let the puppy run around with the long line on- 30 feet would be good I think. One key to making the recall reliable is only calling the dog when you can reinforce it- the long line will help you do this, make sure to reward her everytime she comes to you. Make yourself more fun and exciting than anything else out there! Good luck, and remember she is still young. =D


----------



## DianaM

I also agree with the long line. Your pup is young yet and will test her boundaries many more times. Don't just reinforce the recall, reinforce the fact that you're more fun than anything- keep treats or favorite toys on you and when she's distracted, clap your hands, start running backwards like you're playing a game, whip out a toy (lots of pups love tug toys), and play a game, stuff treats in her, whatever keeps her happy. Running away from the pup triggers the instinct to chase and that is something that will help you on the recall. Don't stop using that long line for a long time, at least until the early teenage stupids pass her by. She can still run and play games while dragging a long line, and you can save her if she suddenly gets a wild hair up her butt and gives you the furry finger. 

There have been COUNTLESS debates on here regarding the e-collar (search through the forums and don a flame-resistant suit). I really don't want to see this degenerate into another debate that'll get shut down in short order, so I'll say this: research e-collars carefully, research the various methods used with the e-collar, and research the principles of aversion training, motivational training, positive reinforcement, and corrections in training. All have their place in a well rounded training system but different methods prioritize different principles. There is no single training program right for every dog. 

Lou, dolphins (orcas included) seem to do just well on their food- and relationship-based reward systems. Chimps too, and I think Alex the African grey did darn well for himself earning his yummy paychecks by demonstrating the intelligence that that peanut brain can eke out. Maybe they have darn good trainers, maybe they're just darn smart and enjoy working with us. In any case, it's working for them, though they are not rewarded with just food. They do have very strong bonds with their trainers/keepers/handlers. It's a beautiful thing to see a 25' orca willingly work with a 5'8" human and actually appear to have fun. It's also very amazing to see animals try to learn our language (sign or verbal) and try to communicate with us in a way that is so foreign to them. Yet they accept us, deal with our quirks, and do their darn best to tell us about their little tailless kitten or that the toy truck is indeed made of metal and can I go back inside my cage now please?







(Alex was so cute)


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: DianaMLou, dolphins (orcas included) seem to do just well on their food- and relationship-based reward systems.


Diana dogs are not dolphins or orcas. They're also not cats, other kinds of marine mammals (MM's), birds, chimps or any other animal. Those animals have different needs and instincts than dogs. So comparing them often leads people down the wrong road. 

One really major difference is that these animals are take out of their natural habitat and enclosed in cages or pens, depriving them of any contact with others of their kind. They're forced to deal with humans. Another difference is that such things as buckle or correction collars can't be placed on them. They don't fit and they're not used to something like that. 

Dogs are used to being handled by their necks even before their eyes are opened. Mom moves them around the whelping box (or den) to clean and she moves them to her nipple to feed. When we put a leash and collar on a dog we're using a primitive memory. 

The animals you mention have no such memory. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM Chimps too, and I think Alex the African grey did darn well for himself earning his yummy paychecks by demonstrating the intelligence that that peanut brain can eke out.


Not one of the animals you mention have any reputation for reliability. If any of them don't want to perform in tonight's show, they're simply replaced with one that will. They're interchangeable, your dog probably isn't. 

Those animals also don't live in the dangerous environment that we've created, with roads, cars, poisons, and more. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM Maybe they have darn good trainers, maybe they're just darn smart and enjoy working with us. In any case, it's working for them, though they are not rewarded with just food.


It works for them because they have no choice. If they don't perform they don't get fed. Of course they're not starved to death but hunger can make an animal work very hard to get his food. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM They do have very strong bonds with their trainers/keepers/handlers. It's a beautiful thing to see a 25' orca willingly work with a 5'8" human and actually appear to have fun.


Diana I'm sorry but this stuff is not all wonder and light. MANY of those trainers are seriously injured by their charges. They ALL must sign confidentially agreements and they're not permitted to discuss their own incidents or even those they know about outside the "community." However some of them do and those stories are NOT pretty. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM It's also very amazing to see animals try to learn our language (sign or verbal) and try to communicate with us in a way that is so foreign to them.


Again, animals working for their food. Not one of the animals that you mention would hang out with us, if they had a choice. Dogs do. One of my friends was a Navy SEAL Dolphin handler. He tells me that as many as 50% of those animals simply swim off, never to be seen again, the first time they were exposed to the open ocean. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM Yet they accept us


They have no choice. We've forced them into pens, cages, and other types of enclosures where they must perform for the daily food. 

Did you read the article on "The Misbehavior of Organisms" written by the very people who invented clicker training? It shows many problems with training that uses food as a reward.


----------



## SeriousConfusion

Great post Lou. Very good points indeed.

I think the main point is what are you training for. If the poster just wants a reliable recall for their off leash walking, then setting the dog up for success with a long leash, lots of yummy treats will be fine. For those who work their dogs, 100% means 100% and food can't be used to proof your training. 

JMO


----------



## Achielles UD

I have not yet used an ecollar on a personal dog I have trained. Would I? If I had to yes. I haven't had to though.

I start off my dogs, whether puppy or adult, with food and positive reinforcement. I also use a long line. I use food/reward (playing etc also) and the long line for months! I think this is one of the keys to success. IMO too many people start asking for the recall before the dog is at a point they understand what is being asked and before practicing among thousands of situations/distractions. 

I have success with this, I think, because I dont ask for the recall unless I can enforce it. I have practiced this with my dogs to the point that they no longer have to think about how to respond and whether they have a distraction or not. I have practiced it to the point that it is habit. They no longer think they have a choice about coming or not. They automatically respond.

Honestly, anything that we can train to the point of habit, is pretty much as reliable as it's going to get! (IMHO of course)


----------



## Moesfox

I totally agree with the long line .....we use that with Khan. Even if we ever get to the point where he is 99% trained for recall - I will still use the long line where we live as to many things can come by to distract him - such as wild animals and then darting out into the road - I would never forgive myself if something happened.

Now this is a silly question - what is a E-collar? What does it look like? No-I am not planning on using one - I dont have the need (from what I have read) just curious.


----------



## Dohhhhh

E-collar is short for electronic training collar or remote training collar. Some misinformed people will still refer to it as a shock collar.


----------



## Moesfox

Thank you Tracie


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: MoesfoxThank you Tracie


Welcome


----------



## Colorado

Woah. I got distracted for a few days and came back to check my post only to find it had gotten...popular.









I'm not going to add to the e-collar debate other than to say overall Nikita is doing great and I'm not personally feeling the need to go in that direction at this time. I do find it ironic that a thread I started led to an e-collar debate as once on this list I made a positive mention of an invisible fence and a crowd of people with torches, pitchforks, tar and feathers came running over the hill.

I'll be testing the long line this weekend. I have this feeling that I'm going to have to enforce the recall by pulling her towards me the entire time when she does see a distraction. She really, really likes meeting new people and new dogs. Aside from being kicked at this one infamous time every experience she's had interacting with a stranger has been 100% positive, so that isn't surprising to me.

That said, I shouldn't worry about problems until they occur. As I said, I'll post an update for the curious after we try it out a few times.


----------



## chjhu

I have two examples to add to the recall debate.

I worked with a trainer who, along with his wife, has trained numerous police dogs, competed in Schutzhund and PPD with his own dogs up to the national level. His competition dogs were all exceptionally trained and proofed. One day his champion dog took off after a deer during a hike and forgot all about his perfect recall. The dog took a nice stroll in the woods and the next day he met the owner at the spot where they normally parked their car. This is when my friend got the e-collar. His wife, who felt e-collars were cruel, gave him the big lesson that her competition dogs are so well trained and bonded to her that this cannot happen to her. Well, a few months later her dog took off after a deer. Needless to say, since then these dogs are on the e-collar.

Second example: We just received an adoption application for a GSD. The previous dog of the applicant was killed by a car. She had an excellent recall and went hiking daily - off leash. Everything went well for 1.5 years until that fatal deer showed up. The well trained dog with the excellent recall took off after the deer, ran into the road and ended up under a car.

The fact is that you never know when the right set of temptations will pup up, it can take years. The sad result of the "perfect" recall is often a dead dog. German Shepherds were created to be high drive dogs, and the drive can kick in even in a mellow dog at the wrong moment.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: Achielles CDXI have success with this, I think, because I dont ask for the recall unless I can enforce it.


This is one of the "basic laws" of training success. If you allow a dog the opportunity to disobey, even once, he'll learn that he can get away with it. This is one of the Ecollar's strongest points. You can ALWAYS correct the dog for disobedience to a command. 



> Originally Posted By: Achielles CDX I have practiced this with my dogs to the point that they no longer have to think about how to respond and whether they have a distraction or not. I have practiced it to the point that it is habit. They no longer think they have a choice about coming or not. They automatically respond.


This takes a helluvalotof work. You are to be congratulated that you're willing to put in the time, but not everyone is. Most people will be satisfied with a "good" recall and once one the dog disobeys once, he's learned that he can get away with it.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: MoesfoxNow this is a silly question - what is a E-collar? What does it look like? No-I am not planning on using one - I dont have the need (from what I have read) just curious.


Not silly at all. Here are a few pictures of them so that you can see what they look like.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: ColoradoI'm not going to add to the e-collar debate other than to say overall Nikita is doing great and I'm not personally feeling the need to go in that direction at this time.


I've often written that if you're happy with the results of your training, no matter what method or tool was used (and it's humane), then I'm happy. Often discussions on the Ecollar happen completely independent of anything that the original poster wrote. They sometimes develop a life of their own. 

Best of luck.


----------



## BowWowMeow

Some of us will choose to never use an e-collar, no matter how hard you try to persuade us that it is the most wonderful, humane training tool on earth. We will continue to teach with rewards, lead lines, etc. And for as many e-collar success stories on here that you offer, I can offer the same number of disastrous stories about idiots who use them with no idea what they're doing and ruin their dogs. 

I respect that some of you know how to use e-collars and find them essential for training. Please respect that others of us will choose to use other methods.


----------



## chjhu

This month alone our small rescue has received 4 applications from people who want to replace dogs that they got killed by cars by walking/having them around the house off-leash. All these owners claim that their dogs were well trained to voice commands and had excellent recall. Sadly, these dogs would be alive today if their owners kept them on leash. And they will do it to the next dog. Speaking of disaster. I personally gave up persuading people a long time ago, I am just providing a few tragic examples of the perfect recall. 
People are free to draw their own conclusions.

The e-collar training does not rule out reward based training, btw.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

> Originally Posted By: MomtoBeauand RileyThis month alone our small rescue has received 4 applications from people who want to replace dogs that they got killed by cars by walking/having them oround the house off-leash. All these owners claim that their dogs were well trained to voice commands and had excellent recall. All these dogs would be alive today if their owners kept them on leash. And they will do it to the next dog. Speaking of disaster. I personally gave up persuading people a long time ago, I am just providing a few tragic examples of the perfect recall.
> The e-collar training does not rule out reward based training, btw.



my trainer always said- never set your dog up for failure and i truely stick by this.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: BowWowMeowSome of us will choose to never use an e-collar, no matter how hard you try to persuade us that it is the most wonderful, humane training tool on earth. We will continue to teach with rewards, lead lines, etc. And for as many e-collar success stories on here that you offer, I can offer the same number of disastrous stories about idiots who use them with no idea what they're doing and ruin their dogs.
> 
> I respect that some of you know how to use e-collars and find them essential for training. Please respect that others of us will choose to use other methods.


How can you offer an unbiased opinion of pros vs cons when training with an e-collar IF you have never tried using one?


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: MomtoBeauand RileyThis month alone our small rescue has received 4 applications from people who want to replace dogs that they got killed by cars by walking/having them oround the house off-leash. All these owners claim that their dogs were well trained to voice commands and had excellent recall. All these dogs would be alive today if their owners kept them on leash. And they will do it to the next dog. Speaking of disaster. I personally gave up persuading people a long time ago, I am just providing a few tragic examples of the perfect recall.
> The e-collar training does not rule out reward based training, btw.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my trainer always said- never set your dog up for failure and i truely stick by this.
Click to expand...

I think I like your trainer! At our training facility, we set our dogs up to succeed not fail.


----------



## BowWowMeow

I am not trying to offer an unbiased opinion of them or any opinion of them, other than that some people do not use them _properly_. I am just saying that while some people have had great results, others choose not to use them. 

I am off to walk my dogs now while "bribing" them with treats! Have a great day, everyone!


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

> Originally Posted By: Tracie
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: MomtoBeauand RileyThis month alone our small rescue has received 4 applications from people who want to replace dogs that they got killed by cars by walking/having them oround the house off-leash. All these owners claim that their dogs were well trained to voice commands and had excellent recall. All these dogs would be alive today if their owners kept them on leash. And they will do it to the next dog. Speaking of disaster. I personally gave up persuading people a long time ago, I am just providing a few tragic examples of the perfect recall.
> The e-collar training does not rule out reward based training, btw.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my trainer always said- never set your dog up for failure and i truely stick by this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think I like your trainer! At our training facility, we set our dogs up to succeed not fail.
Click to expand...


just as an aside- the trainer who said this trains 100% positive. so as you can see, you have some things in common. although i follow her methods and not yours, i follow that common mentality on setting our dogs up for success, which maybe gets overlooked in some training and that's why accidents happen. regardless of one's method of training they need to realize their dog's limitations at their point of training and make them earn freedom as their training progresses. you can achieve your training goals using many different methods but the important thing to realize is to never set your dog up for failure!


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: BowWowMeowI am not trying to offer an unbiased opinion of them or any opinion of them, other than that some people do not use them _properly_. I am just saying that while some people have had great results, others choose not to use them.
> 
> I am off to walk my dogs now while "bribing" them with treats! Have a great day, everyone!


I think I beg to differ on the "not trying to offer any opinion" given the fact that a few lines up you posted "And for as many e-collar success stories on here that you offer, I can offer the same number of disastrous stories about idiots who use them with no idea what they're doing and ruin their dogs" It would appear from the posts that you harbor a very negative opinion of them. Which is your right to do so.

For the record, some people do not use prong collars, flat collars or leashes properly either. Don't condemn the tool, condemn the idiot(s)

Beautiful day here in NJ....enjoy your walk


----------



## Dohhhhh

LouCastle
I'm always intrigued when people use the phrase "positive training" because it really has no generally accepted meaning. Can you tell us what you mean by it?
[/quote said:


> BTW....no body ever did answer this question. I would be interested in the answer as well.


----------



## GunnerJones

> Originally Posted By: LouCastle
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: MoesfoxNow this is a silly question - what is a E-collar? What does it look like? No-I am not planning on using one - I dont have the need (from what I have read) just curious.
> 
> 
> 
> Not silly at all. Here are a few pictures of them so that you can see what they look like.
Click to expand...

I love my Dog Tra, it definatley made everything sharper, faster, better, much more reliable. Right now I just use the "Vibrate" setting when teaching a new skill. My latest trick is haveing Erika go after different color "Coz's" which amazes some seeing the old saw is dogs are color blind


----------



## kutzro357

> Originally Posted By: Tracie
> 
> BTW....no body ever did answer this question. I would be interested in the answer as well.


Don`t feel bad, mjb03 never explained lazy tools or the other tools I asked him about. He was laughing and I thought with his explanation we could all share in the humor. Funny how now the noted and known expert posts here the critics are fairly silent. The wheel must have fallen off the bandwagon. LOL


----------



## tracyc

I can't answer what the other poster means by it...but I'll give a go at what it generally means. 

There are several different techniques that you can use to reinforce a conditioned training response. 

1. Apply a positive reinforcement--dog does something good, you treat, dog does it again. 

2. Withold a positive reinforcement--dog jumps up, you ignore (withold attention), dog tries something else. 

3. Apply negative reinforcement--dog pulls, you correct with a leash pop, dog learns not to pull. 

----All are over-simplified for the sake of discussion-----

But that's the basics of training. All three of these techniques are appropriate in different situations, all can be great techniques, and all could be abusive if misapplied. It's NOT the technique, it's the person using it that makes it good, bad, successful, or otherwise. 

I don't think anyone could train a dog by using, for example, only #1 from the list above, which is the "classic" version of positive reinforcement. 

( BTW, I'm a big fan of #2 above---the denial of positive reward. Dogs understand this well, and it is an often overlooked technique.)


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

> Originally Posted By: kutzro357
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: Tracie
> 
> BTW....no body ever did answer this question. I would be interested in the answer as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Don`t feel bad, mjb03 never explained lazy tools or the other tools I asked him about. He was laughing and I thought with his explanation we could all share in the humor. Funny how now the noted and known expert posts here the critics are fairly silent. The wheel must have fallen off the bandwagon. LOL
Click to expand...


well i'm not on any bandwagon. i chose positive training because its what works best for my dog and i enjoy it. i know under the real definition of positive- this is anything you give(which can actually be food or a shock or whatever) however, the term positive training is a generic term for training which does not include physical corrections. mikko is trained with treats and/or toys, physical praise, and verbal praise. to get rid of unwanted behaviors, we ignore if possible, otherwise its an ah-ah or simple no. we also have adpoted a structure and environment that is conducive to this type of training. we have spent tons and tons of time and effort reinforcing positive behaviors. because of all of this praise and time spent rewarding and bonding, his goal is to please (not saying this is the only way to achieve this) us. he hates when he does something wrong and we ignore him and therefore rarely does anything to warrant such a reaction.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: Luca_stl
> 
> I don't think anyone could train a dog by using, for example, only #1 from the list above, which is the "classic" version of positive reinforcement.
> 
> ( BTW, I'm a big fan of #2 above---the denial of positive reward. Dogs understand this well, and it is an often overlooked technique.)


Thank you Tracey. I do believe you made the point I was trying to make. I do not believe that there is a training technique of PURELY POSITIVE training.


----------



## DianaM

How I see positive training:

1) Teach the dog with patience and with motivational methods. Don't be concerned with perfection at first, just keep the dog happy and motivated and reward for good responses. Accuracy can be worked on later. No need to reward with food at every response- once the dog gets the gist, food can be reserved for really good responses or just random rewarding. Use toys if dog has enough drive and desire for the toy.

2) Teach until the dog clearly understands the command in a distraction-free environment, then add distractions as well as appropriate corrections.

3) Train everywhere and anytime and in any conditions! Proof the command in fields, in the city, around other animals, while the dog is elevated, while the human is laying down, just be creative and proof.

I do not believe in a "purely positive" training program. Dogs must have positive consequences as well as negative consequences. The true idea of "positive reinforcement is a big problem. Corrections MUST be there, discipline MUST be there, it's okay for the dog to be wrong and get corrected. This mindset of "positive reinforcement" and "everything positive" is a big problem with parents raising kids IMO, but that's another subject. Personally, I do want to get an e-collar as I love the idea of having one as insurance. Would I use it to train from start to finish? Nope. Would I use it to polish up commands, enforce certain commands having no option but to obey? Yes. Would I rely on it as a crutch? Nope. Would I always have it on the dog just in case? Absolutely. It'd be a very good communication tool at long distances, too. I would also LOVE to have an e-collar right now for crittering purposes. 

Lou, I know many of those trainers are injured by their animals. So what? How many people in schutzhund have injuries from their dogs? I know of at least one person missing a digit due to their dog. Oh well, comes with the territory. These are dogs after all, not robots or animals with cotton for teeth and claws. It's just big news when it's a wild animal in a zoo. Shamu landing on a trainer? You bet that's news, but Shamu isn't going to jump perfect every single time. Anyone who interacts with ANY animal should be aware that they could get hurt at any time. No amount of training will prevent an animal from being an animal. One could get bit hard just by playing an intense game- human hand and dog jaw could very well end up in the wrong place at the wrong time, and it won't feel good. We withhold food from dogs before a big tracking session or a training session, too. It's not a bad thing until the animal truly has to work for a meal or starve to death, rather than just go hungry for a day or so. I think most institutions value their animals enough to feed them even if training goes poorly. I won't get into those less-than-reputable joints.

Humans don't have a big reputation for reliability, either. Comes with intelligence, I suppose. In any case, the progress made with those animals is big. A dog is different, yes, but it is still a dog. We should train to get close to 100% reliability, but to expect it and COUNT ON 100% reliability is dangerous. It should always be in the back of every handler's mind that yes, the dog can act very differently one day, and the handler should have a contingency plan. Many of us don't, but we should. We take risks with our dogs every day, but that's just life.

I read the article and it is very interesting, but the end of the article is what makes the most sense. The paper suggests that the instinct is still there and that should be worked with. This is absolutely correct. In my view (and I could be wrong), there is a base theory for how animals learn that can be applied to many animals, but as complexity and intelligence increase, I think the way we train has to change with the animal. We can use a dog's prey drive and pack drive to train. They are quite used to negative consequences when they do wrong (very physical ones at that). Thus in the dog, there is no reason to eliminate negative reinforcement. It sure does seem to do well for the bond and the performance to keep things motivational and positive when training or at least as much as possible, but corrections appropriate to the infraction should always be used when necessary. Oversimplification, but that's how I see things today. As time changes and I learn more, that will likely change. All our methods should be evolving with time and experience! Getting back to the article, we have a lot to learn about animal behavior yet. Many think it's cut and dried but I do believe we still have a lot to learn. Now one flaw in the article is that it focuses on food reward. One can train positively with toys. Some dogs just won't work for food. They should repeat this experiment with a low food drive dog that has sky-high prey drive and use toys and tugs. I'd like to see the results then.



> Quote:Right now I just use the "Vibrate" setting when teaching a new skill.


I've been curious about that for some time now. Couldn't someone use the paging function like a clicker and use that to mark good behavior to assist in training? It sounds like a very easy way to train without a leash. Does anyone use it in that function?


----------



## tracyc

> Quote:mikko is trained with treats and/or toys, physical praise, and verbal praise. to get rid of unwanted behaviors, we ignore if possible, otherwise its an ah-ah or simple no.


Your techniques sound just like how I do it too--with a focus on positive reinforcement for good behaviors. 

But the three things you list do include examples of all three types of training reinforcement: 

applying a positive reinforcement:


> Quote: mikko is trained with treats and/or toys, physical praise, and verbal praise


witholding a positive reinforcement:


> Quote: we ignore if possible


 and applying a negative reinforcement: 


> Quotetherwise its an ah-ah or simple no.


Saying "no" _ is_ applying a negative reinforcement. It's different from a leash correction, e-collar zap, or newspaper swat only in degree...but not in kind. (I'm not saying any of those other things are good or bad...just that they are also examples of negative reinforcement. 

At every training moment, the thing to ask is this: "Is the dog doing something I want to stop...or _ not_ doing something that I want to encourage?" And then, "What can I give or take away from the dog that will either encourage or discourage the behavior in question." 

There don't have to be any value judgments (good or bad) put on the correction or praise (I don't think the dog puts those judgments on them). "Positive" just means you are reinforcing a desired behavior, "negative" means you are discouraging an unwanted behavior.


----------



## chjhu

> Originally Posted By: DianaM
> 
> It should always be in the back of every handler's mind that yes, the dog can act very differently one day, and the handler should have a contingency plan. Many of us don't, but we should. We take risks with our dogs every day, but that's just life.


I don't think that a responsible dog owner takes risks with their dogs every day. I certainly don't. One can enjoy life with dogs and have fun with them safely. I care about my dogs too much to put them at risk.


----------



## DianaM

What I mean by risk can go down to the very niggling detail of taking your dog in public. Maybe it's an incredibly teeny, almost nonexistent risk, but we risk encountering a loose dog or even someone who walks by our dog and tries to pet the dog without us knowing. Hopefully the dog will react well, but you never know for certain. This is what I mean. I don't mean we take our dogs off leash in the middle of Manhattan!







Simply that we are taking out an animal that operates much on instinct and pack and prey drives, one that is well armed with teeth and strong muscle, an animal designed to kill prey. Even the best owner with the best trained dog takes a risk, just because stupid little accidents happen or Nature happens. Same risks we take by getting out of bed or into the car. This is why we are ready with a leash, or a halt command, or why we put ourselves between dog and public walking down the street. To be responsible owners!

Clear as mud pie?


----------



## Moesfox

> Originally Posted By: MomtoBeauand RileyThis month alone our small rescue has received 4 applications from people who want to replace dogs that they got killed by cars by walking/having them around the house off-leash. All these owners claim that their dogs were well trained to voice commands and had excellent recall. Sadly, these dogs would be alive today if their owners kept them on leash..


This is exactly why I wont take Khan off of a 30 foot lead - I am too afraid of what might happen - we too have lots of deer and other bigger and small things around...it scares me to death. I am in the suburbs - lots of cars and lots of misplaced wildlife


----------



## Moesfox

Not silly at all. Here are a few pictures of them so that you can see what they look like. 


Thank you everyone - I have seen these electric E collars - I guess I did not put E with electric - a big duh moment here


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: BowWowMeowSome of us will choose to never use an e-collar, no matter how hard you try to persuade us that it is the most wonderful, humane training tool on earth. We will continue to teach with rewards, lead lines, etc.


I wonder didja read the post just above this one of yours? There I wrote,


> Quote: I've often written that if you're happy with the results of your training, no matter what method or tool was used (and it's humane), then I'm happy. Often discussions on the Ecollar happen completely independent of anything that the original poster wrote. They sometimes develop a life of their own.


It would seem that I'm perfeclty happy for you to train with any methods that gives you good results. I'm not here to "persuade" anyone of anything. I'm here to educate those who are interested and inform those who want information. If you don't, that's fine with me. Your attitude seems to be a bit hostile but perhaps I'm misreading. And BTW I use rewards, leads, etc., too. 



> Originally Posted By: BowWowMeow And for as many e-collar success stories on here that you offer, I can offer the same number of disastrous stories about idiots who use them with no idea what they're doing and ruin their dogs.


I've been able to fix (with an Ecollar) what many have told me were dogs that had been ruined with an Ecollar. You can "ruin a dog" with any tool if it's not used properly. I've got just as many stories of dogs that were "ruined" (really a misnomer) by the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" as you have about dogs "ruined with Ecollars. But since I'm perfectly happy for you to use what method you like (as long as it's humane) I wonder why you bring this up? 



> Originally Posted By: BowWowMeow I respect that some of you know how to use e-collars and find them essential for training. Please respect that others of us will choose to use other methods.


I don't know any way to make it clearer than I have that I respect whatever you choose as long as it's humane and you're happy with the results.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: MomtoBeauand Riley The e-collar training does not rule out reward based training, btw.


I'm not a big fan of this phrase, "reward based training." It has no generally accepted definition so people can use it for marketing or to confuse. I think it means any training where the reinforcements outnumber the punishments (both terms used in the Operant Conditioning sense). Since I use more reinforcement than punishment, my use of an Ecollar is "reward based training." See what I mean?


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO my trainer always said- never set your dog up for failure and i truely stick by this.


Here's another term that I don't understand. Can you tell me what you mean by it? I've always thought that proofing was setting a dog up to succeed.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: BowWowMeowI am not trying to offer an unbiased opinion of them or any opinion of them, other than that some people do not use them _properly_.


Can you name a tool that "some people do not use _properly? _ I don't think one exists. Any tool can be misused. Any tool can be abused. No tool is idiot-proof to the right idiot. 



> Originally Posted By: BowWowMeow I am just saying that while some people have had great results, others choose not to use them.


Does this really need to be said. I'm not trying to shut you up but don't we all know this already? Does anyone get "great results" with every tool? I think not.


----------



## BowWowMeow

Lou, 

I was writing my response at the same time you were posting yours. I do not train dogs for a living although I have been active in rescuing and rehabbing german shepherds for quite a few years now. Most of my experience has been with fearful and fear aggressive dogs. 

My tone is one of frustration, not hostility. It seems every other person has an ecollar on their dog at the park now and very few know how to use them. The other day I was practically bowled over by a 9 month old overweight lab wearing an e-collar. His person was standing quite a distance away screaming, "No jump, Seamus! Bad dog, bad dog. Come here Seamus. Bad dog, bad dog." When she finally did catch up to Seamus he threw himself at her feet and showed her his belly. 

I fully realize that you and all of the other e-collar using posters know what you're doing and I have no problem with your approach. But so many people buy them and do not train their dogs! They simply use them instead of training their dogs! And often their dogs have no idea why they're being shocked. 

So I am reacting to the popularity of e-collars in lieu of training your dog. I suspect that's what some other posters were responding to as well.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKOthe term positive training is a generic term for training which does not include physical corrections.


I know many people who call themselves "positive trainers" and they do use physical corrections. At one time it meant "training without using punishment." But since it's impossible to train without using punishments that's largely fallen from use. 



> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO mikko is trained with treats and/or toys, physical praise, and verbal praise to get rid of unwanted behaviors, we ignore if possible, otherwise its an ah-ah or simple no.


"Ignoring" is punishment. 

In any case, some dogs respond to this. But if a behavior is self-rewarding, such as chasing deer, and the dog is highly driven, an "ah-ah or simple no" probably won't stop it. Neither will ignoring it. 



> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO we have spent tons and tons of time and effort reinforcing positive behaviors.


It's great that you're willing to spend "tons and tons of time and effort" but few people are. A common response to this is "Well then they shouldn't own dogs." This overlooks the reality that many people are going to own dogs and they're NOT going to spend "tons and tons of time and effort." And they shouldn't have to if they don't want to. Dogs have a fairly short life span and I don't want to spend half of it in training. For working dogs this just isn't feasible. 



> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO because of all of this praise and time spent rewarding and bonding, his goal is to please (not saying this is the only way to achieve this) us.


I don't think that most dogs work to please their owners. I think that most dogs work to please themselves. 



> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO he hates when he does something wrong and we ignore him and therefore rarely does anything to warrant such a reaction.


If you ignored him when he did something RIGHT you'd find that he responded the same way as if he'd done something wrong. It has nothing to do with doing the "right thing" and everything to do with your response to what he does. BTW ignoring him is also a punishment.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKOjust as an aside- the trainer who said this trains 100% positive.


It's impossible to "train 100% positive." Punishment must be present somewhere sometime.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: DianaMHow I see positive training:
> 
> 1) Teach the dog with patience and with motivational methods. Don't be concerned with perfection at first, just keep the dog happy and motivated and reward for good responses. Accuracy can be worked on later. No need to reward with food at every response- once the dog gets the gist, food can be reserved for really good responses or just random rewarding. Use toys if dog has enough drive and desire for the toy.


I do this and I use an Ecollar. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM 2) Teach until the dog clearly understands the command in a distraction-free environment, then add distractions as well as appropriate corrections.


I don't do this. I work in an area where the distractions are minimal and let the dog become "bored with them." At least until he calms down a bit. After the behavior is learned I introduce more distractions. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM 3) Train everywhere and anytime and in any conditions! Proof the command in fields, in the city, around other animals, while the dog is elevated, while the human is laying down, just be creative and proof.


I do this too. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM Personally, I do want to get an e-collar as I love the idea of having one as insurance.


It's the ONLY tool that allows you another chance to reinforce a behavior if your dog decides for any reason not to obey. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM I would also LOVE to have an e-collar right now for crittering purposes.


Most people critter their dogs by waiting until he's in full chase. This often causes serious problems. I developed a method that gets results without these problems. Http://loucastle.com/critter.htm 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM Lou, I know many of those trainers are injured by their animals. So what?


Lots of people think that the so-called "positive training methods" are all beauty and light. I was just illustrating that it's not the case. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM How many people in schutzhund have injuries from their dogs?


Lots. I think that show a problem in how they train. I've been working with biting dogs (mostly dogs that bite for real – as in biting humans, not wearing protective gear) for about 29 years. I've never had a handler bitten by his own dog during training. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM Oh well, comes with the territory.


I'm gonna disagree. Of course accidents will happen but most of the dog-bites-handler scenarios I've seen or heard of were due to conflict in the training, usually the handler trying to force the dog to do something against his instincts. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM Shamu landing on a trainer? You bet that's news, but Shamu isn't going to jump perfect every single time. Anyone who interacts with ANY animal should be aware that they could get hurt at any time. No amount of training will prevent an animal from being an animal. One could get bit hard just by playing an intense game- human hand and dog jaw could very well end up in the wrong place at the wrong time, and it won't feel good.


I'm not talking about accidents. I'm talking about deliberate attacks by those animals when they simply don't want to perform and the handler withholds the food. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM Humans don't have a big reputation for reliability, either. Comes with intelligence, I suppose.


That's my guess too. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaM I read the article and it is very interesting, but the end of the article is what makes the most sense. The paper suggests that the instinct is still there and that should be worked with. This is absolutely correct.


I agree but I think it also shows a potential time bomb in work that revolves around food based training. The dog may revert to an instinctive behavior that's VERY difficult to train him out of. 



> Quote:Right now I just use the "Vibrate" setting when teaching a new skill.





> Originally Posted By: DianaM I've been curious about that for some time now. Couldn't someone use the paging function like a clicker and use that to mark good behavior to assist in training? It sounds like a very easy way to train without a leash. Does anyone use it in that function?


It could be done. I don't know of anyone who's doing it though.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: DianaMI don't mean we take our dogs off leash in the middle of Manhattan!


I didn't do this in Manhattan but the downtown area of any busy city will do. I used to train the dog for my police department to work off leash in any environment. I did the same with my personal dogs too.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

honestly, i don't have the time to sit here and pick apart everything you just said. what i said was what term "positive" training" implies. yes, ignoring is punishment, but it is used in positive training. i don't believe in physical corrections- that's my opinion for my dog. and that is my definition of positive training. also i never said he knew the difference between right and wrong, of course he would have the same reaction if i ignored him when he did something right. the point is, he realizes he did something wrong because he didn't like the consequence. and guess what, i can call my dog off of chasing a squirrel, which he would just about sell his soul to do. does not mean he has no drive- as i said i worked my butt off training him and proofing him. and i'd have to disagree- my dog works to please me as well as himself.


----------



## kutzro357

> Originally Posted By: LouCastleIt's great that you're willing to spend "tons and tons of time and effort" but few people are. A common response to this is "Well then they shouldn't own dogs." This overlooks the reality that many people are going to own dogs and they're NOT going to spend "tons and tons of time and effort." And they shouldn't have to if they don't want to. Dogs have a fairly short life span and I don't want to spend half of it in training. For working dogs this just isn't feasible.


My Son trained his retriever using the positive (no physical corrections) method. This was with a very well known trainer. The trainer said it takes 5000 reinforcements of a behavior till it`s truly learned. With his pet dog at 10 reinforcements a day that`s almost a year and a half to keep the dog off the couch. LMAO
Lou it`s refreshing to see a trainer here with credentials that trains in a practical manner.

Ever sit in a restaurant and watch the kids that run around and scream while being raised in a purely positive environment while the parents ignore their outrageous behavior. When they finally sit in their chair and stop yelling and throwing food their parents pat their little heads and say "that`s good Johnny now finish what you haven`t thrown of your french fries."


----------



## DianaM

> Quote:Ever sit in a restaurant and watch the kids that run around and scream while being raised in a purely positive environment while the parents ignore their outrageous behavior. When they finally sit in their chair and stop yelling and throwing food their parents pat their little heads and say "that`s good Johnny now finish what you haven`t thrown of your french fries."


Those "purely positive" parents are the bane of my existence. Kids NEED corrections every bit as much as dogs do, even more. Or else Precious Little Johnny is going to fall flat on his face when he faces the Real World. 

/End threadjack


----------



## mikaK9

In regards to the pager function on the ecollar....
I was actually preferring to use that initially with my dog - kind of to get his attention, but without giving him any kind of painful correction. However, after talking to different people, reading forum posts, and reading Lou's site about finding the working level of the dog, I changed my mind. From what I've learned, the pager function actually disturbs the dog more than the regular nick/constant function of the ecollar. And I've heard it from more than a few people. For some reason it really freaks some dogs out. And if you find the correct working level of the dog, it isn't painful at all with the nick/constant.

I'd strongly urge anyone who hasn't already to go to Lou's site and just read the article on finding the working level of the dog. That's all it took to change some very strong negative feelings I had about the ecollar. And after you read it, you'll see why it makes more sense than using the pager function. 

And Mikko, I don't doubt your dog has strong prey drive. But when it comes to dogs that have through-the-roof prey drive, I just haven't seen it possible to get a recall on all positive. The handler just never seems to be a big enough reward (or whatever the handler has). It doesn't matter how much the dog loves the handler....you're fighting against such strong instincts in the dog and the ultimate reward. With those dogs...someday, somewhere, they will blow a recall. 

And I've seen much more damage done with choke collars and pinch collars than ecollars. Not to say I haven't seen bad things with ecollars.....but the damage has been far worse on choke collars.

It all comes back to the specific dog though and what works best for them. As Lou noted, a lot of the dogs he has worked with are working dogs....as are mine. They tend to have more of that through-the-roof drive. 

Different strokes for different folks, right


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

> Originally Posted By: kutzro357
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: LouCastleIt's great that you're willing to spend "tons and tons of time and effort" but few people are. A common response to this is "Well then they shouldn't own dogs." This overlooks the reality that many people are going to own dogs and they're NOT going to spend "tons and tons of time and effort." And they shouldn't have to if they don't want to. Dogs have a fairly short life span and I don't want to spend half of it in training. For working dogs this just isn't feasible.
> 
> 
> 
> My Son trained his retriever using the positive (no physical corrections) method. This was with a very well known trainer. The trainer said it takes 5000 reinforcements of a behavior till it`s truly learned. With his pet dog at 10 reinforcements a day that`s almost a year and a half to keep the dog off the couch. LMAO
> Lou it`s refreshing to see a trainer here with credentials that trains in a practical manner.
> 
> Ever sit in a restaurant and watch the kids that run around and scream while being raised in a purely positive environment while the parents ignore their outrageous behavior. When they finally sit in their chair and stop yelling and throwing food their parents pat their little heads and say "that`s good Johnny now finish what you haven`t thrown of your french fries."
Click to expand...

well i guess we established that most people here don't use purely positive, but some sort of punishment such as verbal or ignoring behavior. i'm guessing you are going after people who only use praise and never any sort of punishment- which doesn't seem to exist- at least not here. and if you are going after people like me who do not use any physical corrections let me just tell you how many compliments i get when i take mikko to the petstore, or to friends' barbeques, etc. about how well behaved he is. he is certainly not the "child" that runs all over the place while the parent just watches (which i can't stand either). i watch him very intently everywhere we go and make sure he isn't begging for food, sniffing crotches, etc. yet, he doesn't need any physical corrections. now this works for him- so bashing my methods is nonsense- because obviously it works! will it work for all dogs? hmmm, maybe maybe not. but my point is it can work so if you are saying that people like me who don't use physical corrections are problematic-you're wrong.


----------



## big_dog7777

> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO[ and if you are going after people like me who do not use any physical corrections let me just tell you how many compliments i get when i take mikko to the petstore, or to friends' barbeques, etc. about how well behaved he is. he is certainly not the "child" that runs all over the place while the parent just watches (which i can't stand either). i watch him very intently everywhere we go and make sure he isn't begging for food, sniffing crotches, etc. yet, he doesn't need any physical corrections. now this works for him- so bashing my methods is nonsense- because obviously it works! will it work for all dogs? hmmm, maybe maybe not. but my point is it can work so if you are saying that people like me who don't use physical corrections are problematic-you're wrong.


I don't think anyone is saying that any method of training CAN'T work when done properly... WITH THE RIGHT DOG. I think the big disconnect here comes from the variance of dog types and the upbringings of those dogs within the group of people on this thread. Specifically, many of the people posting on training involving correction are training working dogs for sport or street. These dogs have a very high level of prey drive and/or civility combined with an upbringing geared towards creating an adult that is not inhibited one bit by environment or handler. Many of the sport dogs are trained to think that they are pushing buttons to get what they want, not trying to make you happy. Praise is used, and positive teaching is used, but correction is a tool as well. There is a difference between training and proofing in my opinion. Positive training is just that... teaching or training something in a positive manner. Different dogs will have different "ideas" on what actually is positive. For some dogs relatively hard jerks on a prong excite them and they in turn channel that excitement into a bite on a sleeve or suit while having a blast the entire time! 100% positive proofing involving no correction would only work on select dogs in my opinion that have been raised a certain way.


----------



## BowWowMeow

I agree with John. We are mixing apples and oranges here! I'm sure we could all agree (well, not sure, but HOPE we can all agree) that different methods work better for different dogs. 

And like I-Love_My_Mikko, I also do not use physical corrections. When I trained my first gsd I did use them and she was extremely well behaved but was also a very strong alpha. This was also the only game in town at the time (20 years ago). The philosophy was about dominance more than leadership. When I tried that with Chama it did not work as well because she is a very soft dog. Later on I switched her to reward based training without corrections and she did much better. 

People often say that my dogs are much better behaved than most people's children. Just because you choose not to physically correct your dog or your child does not mean that dog or child will not have been taught how to behave nicely. 

Rafi has been here with me now for a month. He has learned about 20 commands, walks nicely by my side on leash, has an excellent (not yet perfect) off leash recall, sits automatically at corners, etc., etc. He is still very much a work in progress. He is submissive (but not overly so) and looks to me for guidance. He follows commands immediately. He has excellent drive and focus and is extremely motivated to learn. He is a very soft dog and follows my tone of voice easily. If I say, "Eh-eh" he stops whatever he is doing. I make all training fun and part of our daily routine. 

I also use the technique where you withhold something until you get the desired behavior. I don't think it's knowing he's wrong so much as knowing whatever he's doing is not getting him what he wants. So he offers different behaviors and I reward when I get the one I want. It typically takes him two repetitions to catch on. I use food with new behaviors or to random reinforce the really important ones (like recall) and I also use praise and toys to reward. 

This is the second dog I have trained this way. And both dogs learned really quickly using this method. I like it and I'll stick with it.


----------



## IliamnasQuest

The term "positive training" has become kind of a catch-all phrase that generally means using a high level of rewards and a minimal level of punishments. I don't believe there's an absolute definition of it, but it does have a generalized definition. Positive training doesn't rule out the use of some types of punishment but primarily the focus is on rewards.

In behavioral terms, positive means "adding to" and negative means "taking away". Reinforcement is something that causes a behavior to happen again, punishment is something that discourages a behavior from happening again. So +R (positive reinforcement) would be adding in praise, treats, toys, etc. -R would be removing something but in a way that would encourage the behavior to happen again (like pulling up on a leash to get the dog to sit - the pressure on the leash goes away as soon as the dog sits). +P is adding something that discourages a behavior (like a jerk on the leash or a shock) and -P is taking away something that will then discourage a behavior (like removing attention from a dog that wants to jump on you).

You can do a whole lot of training using +R and -P.

I tend to tell people that I use "primarily positive reinforcement". While I don't believe that 100% positive isn't possible (I've known people who don't even say "no" to their dogs), I find it to be impractical. There's a balance between reinforcement and punishment that works very well. I think that some of the debate here is on the amount of each that is the proper working level. Personally I think that the best training uses the highest level of +R possible and uses the lowest level of +P possible. 

The debate about shock collar training always brings out those who get paid using this type of training, and of course they will offer a lot of defensive comments in order to sustain their money-making technique. The problem I have with e-collars is that many (if not most) of the use of the collar tends to be in place of other types of training that could teach the dog just as well. I understand and accept (and have used) the shock collar for extreme behaviors with a dog that didn't respond fully to less punishing methods. I won't lie - it was effective. I produced a level of fear of consequence in my dog that helped keep her from taking off after moose and gave her freedom to run and play off-leash. I can't say I'm proud that I used the e-collar but it was a very carefully thought-out choice made on a dog who had gone through nearly a year and a half of solid training and who still had a level of independence that made her occasionally get the zoomies. This, to me, was an appropriate use of this particular tool. 

What I really dislike is people using this tool in place of "real" training. Instead of learning and understanding the premises of positive reinforcement and how to build a desire to work in their dogs, they go quickly to a tool that will force the dog into compliance with little work on their side (hence the thought that the e-collar is a "lazy man's tool"). Not everyone does this, of course, but it sure seems like a large number of people do. Even used as a low level stimulation, this technique is based on positive punishment (adding something that discourages behavior). You are adding a shock (pain/discomfort) to discourage a dog from doing anything other than the behavior you want. This is not a technique aimed toward teaching your dog to trust you. This is not a technique aimed toward building a good relationship. It's merely a tool that provides a punishment, and punishment is not a good basis for overall training.

Lou, I bought my shock collar from you and I read through your pages in preparation for use of it. I spent months considering what to do before actually buying the collar. I modified what you suggested in your articles to better fit my dog - instead of just using the -R/+P aspects of the collar to bring my dog into compliance, I paired the proper response with a high level of +R. I think it was more effective doing this and helped condition my dog to something I could use once I stopped using the shock collar. And that, of course, was my end goal - to STOP using the shock collar. I see this collar as a temporary tool to use only when better methods are not fully successful. 

I know that many people out there view the final result as the measure of success in a technique, but I personally believe that the way you obtain that result is every bit as important. I could go back to the old way of training - a la Koehler, with tons of punishment and not one toy or treat ever used - and I would have dogs that people would view as being perfectly trained. They would be responsive, eager to obey, with focus on me all the time. And those not understanding how the dog was trained would look at them and say "wow, that's impressive!". They wouldn't see the sometimes subtle signs of stress - the tipped back ears, the corners of the mouth tightened, the lowered tail. They wouldn't understand that the dog was only responding out of a fear of the consequences. People who truly understand dogs would see these things, of course, but most people (even people who train for a living) don't see these signs. And I would look good as a trainer to most.

Or I can train my dogs to respond happily and quickly because I've spent a bit more time and taught them to expect rewards for behaviors. I can work to build an automatic response (like when I tell my seven month old pup "here!" and she slides into a stop and then whips around to run back to me) by setting my dog up to do a behavior over and over and rewarding her lavishly with praise and petting and treats and toys. I can use distractions in a logical manner - including distractions like moose and rabbits - and teach her that coming to me means better things than chasing moose. I can add in an occasional correction as needed, providing the dog with a bit of understanding that there CAN be consequences for not responding, but not high enough to build a fear response or a mistrust in me. And I can end up with a dog just as well trained as the one listed above, but one that responds through a love of training and a love and trust for ME.

Corrections are always available, but a good trainer sees those as secondary to building trust and response through positive reinforcement.

And for those who see treats as bribes .. *LOL* .. I suppose a paycheck is also a bribe? Given the correlation, it would have to be. We all work for something. I'd rather have a pocket full of treats with a dog looking up at me with ears forward, face happy and eager, tail up and waving - than to be clutching the control to a shock collar that's strapped tightly around my dog's neck, with the dog looking at me with ears tipped back and lips tightened. I can see the difference in my dog's face when I have the shock collar on her. She knows that the potential for correction is there even though I rarely use it. 

Just my personal opinions - from someone training for a long time, who has trained using most of the tools out there at one time or another.

To the OP: I'm not sure what kind of actual recall training you've done with your pup, but you may want to look into doing some structured exercises with her to help build the desire to come to you, and then add in distractions slowly so that she learns to ignore those distractions. If you can find a fenced area where you can work with her off-leash it sure helps - a long line is better than nothing, but I've never had a dog that didn't know when the line was on and when it was off.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

melanie i always look forward to your training posts. you have a way of communicating what i am thinking much more successfully than i can. i also very much respect your opinion on training being that you have tried so many methods. 

i especially like this part of your post, as i hold this very valuable in my training as well:



> Quote:I know that many people out there view the final result as the measure of success in a technique, but I personally believe that the way you obtain that result is every bit as important.


----------



## big_dog7777

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest
> Or I can train my dogs to respond happily and quickly because I've spent a bit more time and taught them to expect rewards for behaviors. I can work to build an automatic response (like when I tell my seven month old pup "here!" and she slides into a stop and then whips around to run back to me) by setting my dog up to do a behavior over and over and rewarding her lavishly with praise and petting and treats and toys. I can use distractions in a logical manner - including distractions like moose and rabbits - and teach her that coming to me means better things than chasing moose. I can add in an occasional correction as needed, providing the dog with a bit of understanding that there CAN be consequences for not responding, but not high enough to build a fear response or a mistrust in me. And I can end up with a dog just as well trained as the one listed above, but one that responds through a love of training and a love and trust for ME.
> 
> Corrections are always available, but a good trainer sees those as secondary to building trust and response through positive reinforcement.


This whole part of your post is key in my opinion. Training and conditioning the exercises positively to get fast eager response backed by fair appropriate correction for dogs that need it.


----------



## Colorado

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuestTo the OP: I'm not sure what kind of actual recall training you've done with your pup, but you may want to look into doing some structured exercises with her to help build the desire to come to you, and then add in distractions slowly so that she learns to ignore those distractions. If you can find a fenced area where you can work with her off-leash it sure helps - a long line is better than nothing, but I've never had a dog that didn't know when the line was on and when it was off.


Initial recall training was done inside as soon as I brought her home (about 8 weeks). We did a variety of things. I started by dangling a treat in front of her nose, doing my best high-pitched 'hier, hier, hier' while running away from her. When she caught me she got the treat and praise. Once she got that down, I tried to always have some dry treats in my pocket. Randomly, if she had wandered away from me, I would call 'hier' and she would always come bounding too me. (Mind you she was never too far away, as I was in watch-like-a-hawk-during-potty-training mode).

The last inside exercise was a little more formal. I try to feed her about 1/2 her morning kibble meal by hand. For every few pieces of kibble she has to sitz, platz, etc. Once she had a sitz for a few seconds, I added in backing up and calling hier. Given how hungry she was in the morning, this was pretty effective.

Outside training started in my fenced-in backyard. Mind you this is a disgustingly small backyard typical of modern subdivision. I'm renting, so I work with what I have. My initial problem outside was that she was never far enough away from me to be able to do a recall. So we actually started with fetch/bring. I'd throw a toy, she'd go get it, I'd call 'bring', she'd come back to me, get a treat/praise, etc. I found it a little eerie that I didn't really have to train this at all. She knew exactly what to do from the first time I threw the toy.

As she as gotten a little older, she of course wanders and explores the yard. I've proofed hier by calling her from one side of the yard to the other. I've never needed a long line--she comes to me like a bullet every time. Once or twice, she even started--I forget the term--running back and forth along the fence line trying to get to a neighbor's dog. I've read that's not a good habit, so I called her off of that with a hier. She came immediately. I was also pretty shocked at how quickly she was able to differentiate 'hier' and 'bring'. I've thrown a toy, she's run to it, turned around, dropped the toy and started back running to me without it. I've called 'bring' again and she's actually stopped 1/2-way to me, run back to the toy, and brought it back to me. Around here I guess I need to qualify that she is "only" a GSD mix, but color me impressed.

She's about 23 weeks now and as I said in my original post, I've started proofing her outside my backyard. I completely agree that I've apparently pushed her too far, too fast. A training partner would help--I'm relying on random distractions. I don't really know anyone that is into dog training enough that would agree to meet me at a random park in the middle of winter and be a specific distraction at a specific time but I suppose I could bribe someone. (And if bribes don't work on my friends I'll just use a shock collar...







)

If you have specific exercises I might try, I'm all ears. Well, I'm less ears than Nikita, but I'll do my best.









-Dan/Colorado


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest
> 
> The debate about shock collar training always brings out those who get paid using this type of training, and of course they will offer a lot of defensive comments in order to sustain their money-making technique.


So what your saying is that it is only "shock collar trainers" that get paid for their services. Yeah...ok.... I am reading real intelligent logic there.


----------



## 3K9Mom

> Originally Posted By: mikaK9
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:The lady across the park will no longer hold much interest for your pup when she knows YOU are like the slot machine that always pays out.
> 
> 
> 
> Personally, I'd keep going with all the positive stuff at that age...until the dog really understands and has had opportunities to make mistakes and learn. Because some dogs, like the one in the above quote, can continue successfully on completely positive training. However, I think part of the debate here is recognizing that not all dogs respond to the same training. And I've got one of them for which I cannot get a 100% positive recall under heavy distractions. I think part of it depends on the dog's drive. My dog has EXTREMELY high prey drive. So there is no jackpot I can give him that is better than the chase and catch of that rabbit he is hot on the trail of. His prey drive is just too high. You cannot possibly come up with a good enough reward.
Click to expand...


I've been away from the conversation. 

I'd like to clarify. I tried to make it clear that when my dog was off leash, he was off leash in "safe" locations. I wouldn't try positive-reinforcement only training where he could be hit by a car or otherwise injured. My dog is super drivey and yes, if he starts chasing a deer, he's gone. My job is to keep him out of that sort of situation, either with a long line, or in my case, I put an e-collar on him. He knows what it is; he's felt it at a low setting. When I call him, he comes. I don't use the shock any more. But it's there, if I do.

I didn't train the 'constant positive punishment until he is sitting in front of me' approach the way some behaviorists would train it. I trained my own way, with a quick zap at a low level, and being as sensitive as he is, he realized that No meant No, and he responded. I hated using an e-collar, but I needed a dog that would respond every time. 


Dh and I hike, snowshoe, camp, etc in the back country. Read about the wilderness areas of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, etc and you'll understand, the areas we frequent are dangerous areas for a dog to be roaming unattended. There are bears and mountain lions there. We need something that made him reliable. I also train with other techniques that I've developed on my own with my dogs over the years in the back country. My goal is to leave behind the e-collar as soon as possible. 

But the OP asked about a dog in a local park. I don't see why a smart dog in a local park couldn't be trained with consistent positive reinforcement. 

The tools that hunters and backcountry folks need don't necessarily need to be used on your basic everyday urban pet. IMO

And honestly, I would train that urban pet an Emergency Stop/Down, which would keep him from getting hit by an oncoming car as well. (Heck every dog should know an Emergency Stop). It's easier to train a dog pursuing a rabbit to *stop *than it is to train him to leave the rabbit behind altogether. But I suppose that's another topic altogether.


----------



## chjhu

Urban parks have squirrels, rabbits and deer (in our area parks) and they are surrounded by busy roads. Cars can be as dangerous (and at least as likely to be encountered by dogs) as bears and mountain lions.


----------



## mikaK9

> Quote: I've read that's not a good habit, so I called her off of that with a hier. She came immediately. I was also pretty shocked at how quickly she was able to differentiate 'hier' and 'bring'. I've thrown a toy, she's run to it, turned around, dropped the toy and started back running to me without it. I've called 'bring' again and she's actually stopped 1/2-way to me, run back to the toy, and brought it back to me. Around here I guess I need to qualify that she is "only" a GSD mix, but color me impressed.


Color me impressed too







Sounds like you two are off to a great start. And I know the problem with finding training partners. It's hard enough for me to bribe DH to help....I don't have much luck with others. I even train with a sport and work group...but outside of structured training, it's hard to coordinate schedules, willingness to work in the cold, etc. I'd say stay on the same path, but wait for the bigger distraction training til you can find someone else to help, or keep the pup on a long line all the time. Perhaps check out a schutzhund group in your area. Even without getting into the sport, maybe you'd meet some people who could help with training every once in a while. I know I'd love to have some extra people to help lay tracks for my sport dog....I'm sure there must be someone in your area who's looking for the same. An exchange of talents if you will


----------



## mikaK9

> Quote:The debate about shock collar training always brings out those who get paid using this type of training, and of course they will offer a lot of defensive comments in order to sustain their money-making technique.


Very cynical viewpoint. Just because I use a method you disagree with doesn't mean I get paid for ecollar training. Odd logic there. And I don't get paid for ecollar training.



> Quote:They wouldn't see the sometimes subtle signs of stress - the tipped back ears, the corners of the mouth tightened, the lowered tail. They wouldn't understand that the dog was only responding out of a fear of the consequences.


Actually, that's how my dog looked after training by use of a choke collar and pinch collar. Since using the ecollar, things are improving for us. And no, taking those negatives out of the equation are not an option for my dog. He is a working dog and must recall and must comply with other commands....whether he wants to or not. Positives are not always strong enough for such a strong working dog....believe me, I've tried. I use positive training whenever possible.



> Quote:Or I can train my dogs to respond happily and quickly because I've spent a bit more time and taught them to expect rewards for behaviors. I can work to build an automatic response (like when I tell my seven month old pup "here!" and she slides into a stop and then whips around to run back to me) by setting my dog up to do a behavior over and over and rewarding her lavishly with praise and petting and treats and toys.


Clearly we are working with different dogs. If I had a dog like yours, then that positive training is fantastic, and that's exactly what I build my training on. But at some point, a working dog with high drives (and that's high compared to working/sport dogs) will fail a recall command if all the failure means is lack of toy/treat/affection, etc. We must be talking about different dogs.



> Quote: than to be clutching the control to a shock collar that's strapped tightly around my dog's neck, with the dog looking at me with ears tipped back and lips tightened. I can see the difference in my dog's face when I have the shock collar on her. She knows that the potential for correction is there even though I rarely use it.


I'm not sure exactly how you introduced your ecollar, but since you said you skipped steps, I can only imagine that played a role in your dog's view. My dog is just fine with the ecollar. It is a mild annoyance at most when I've used it. Maybe a difference in how it was introduced.



> Quote: I'd like to clarify. I tried to make it clear that when my dog was off leash, he was off leash in "safe" locations. I wouldn't try positive-reinforcement only training where he could be hit by a car or otherwise injured. My dog is super drivey and yes, if he starts chasing a deer, he's gone. My job is to keep him out of that sort of situation, either with a long line, or in my case, I put an e-collar on him. He knows what it is; he's felt it at a low setting. When I call him, he comes. I don't use the shock any more. But it's there, if I do.


Gotcha.....I completely understand and agree!


----------



## kutzro357

mikaK9, you forget this is the internet and we are all master trainers with PHD`s in animal psychology, plus we are professional athletes and do some modeling on the side. 
The only one in this entire conversation that can be documented as for real is Lou.


----------



## 3K9Mom

> Originally Posted By: MomtoBeauand RileyUrban parks have squirrels, rabbits and deer (in our area parks) and they are surrounded by busy roads. Cars can be as dangerous (and at least as likely to be encountered by dogs) as bears and mountain lions.


That's what I said. Twice now. I wouldn't allow my young GSD offleash where there are cars around to bash him. Not ever. 

I don't live in the woods. 

Sometimes, I think we expect our dogs to listen better than we do. Sigh...


----------



## DianaM

> Quotelus we are professional athletes and do some modeling on the side.


If that's true, somebody's been misplacing my professional athlete/model paychecks...









One thing I can say about a quality e-collar is that a stimulus is constant and even. Jerks on the prong can vary greatly even if we don't intend the variations. I'd like an e-collar just to make that particular training variable a lot more constant and steady. I'm curious as to why dogs seem to find the paging function more disturbing than the stim. Could it be the noise or the sensation of a large object on the neck that is vibrating?


----------



## chjhu

> Originally Posted By: 3K9Mom
> I wouldn't try positive-reinforcement only training where he could be hit by a car or otherwise injured. My dog is super drivey and yes, if he starts chasing a deer, he's gone. My job is to keep him out of that sort of situation, either with a long line, or in my case, I put an e-collar on him.


I understand, this is what you would do with your own dog.




> Originally Posted By: 3K9Mom
> But the OP asked about a dog in a local park. I don't see why a smart dog in a local park couldn't be trained with consistent positive reinforcement.
> The tools that hunters and backcountry folks need don't necessarily need to be used on your basic everyday urban pet. IMO


This is what you feel others should be doing in an urban park (that is surrounded by roads with vehicles and has deer squirrels and rabbits). Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I would not recommend something to others that I would not feel to be safe for my own dog.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: DianaM
> 
> 
> 
> Quotelus we are professional athletes and do some modeling on the side.
> 
> 
> 
> If that's true, somebody's been misplacing my professional athlete/model paychecks...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One thing I can say about a quality e-collar is that a stimulus is constant and even. Jerks on the prong can vary greatly even if we don't intend the variations. I'd like an e-collar just to make that particular training variable a lot more constant and steady. I'm curious as to why dogs seem to find the paging function more disturbing than the stim. Could it be the noise or the sensation of a large object on the neck that is vibrating?
Click to expand...

They misplaced mine too DianaM!









As for the pager function...my dogs HATE IT. I think it is the sensation of the vibration. When it vibrates, the entire collar, not just the box vibrates and I think the dogs find it EXTREMELY bothersome. It could be the noise as well since their hearing is so much better than ours.


----------



## mikaK9

> Quote: mikaK9, you forget this is the internet and we are all master trainers with PHD`s in animal psychology, plus we are professional athletes and do some modeling on the side.
> The only one in this entire conversation that can be documented as for real is Lou.


Well, I didn't want to brag......

guess I should be off to catch my plane for the big game this sunday









And the pager function....actually, it was more startling to me than the lowest constant level I could feel (I tested the ecollar on myself like Lou suggested). Makes sense it would be the same for the dog. Kind of more startling/sudden. I hadn't even thought about the sound of the vibration....good thinkin.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO what i said was what term "positive" training" implies. yes, ignoring is punishment, but it is used in positive training.


Yes, I know. But it seems not to be very _positive _to me. It seems to me that the term "positive training" is more of a marketing device, than an accurate description of what's done. Nothing wrong with that though. 



> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO I never said he knew the difference between right and wrong, of course he would have the same reaction if i ignored him when he did something right. the point is, he realizes he did something wrong because he didn't like the consequence.


If he did something right and you ignored him, he'd think it was something wrong. My point is that he does NOT know the difference except via the consequence. 



> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO and guess what, i can call my dog off of chasing a squirrel, which he would just about sell his soul to do. does not mean he has no drive


That's great! As I said, if you're happy with the results of your training, so am I. 



> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO and i'd have to disagree- my dog works to please me as well as himself.


We'll have to agree to disagree on this. It's too much anthropomorphizing for me.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO i'm guessing you are going after people who only use praise and never any sort of punishment- which doesn't seem to exist- at least not here. and if you are going after people like me who do not use any physical corrections let me just tell you how many compliments i get when i take mikko to the petstore, or to friends' barbeques, etc. about how well behaved he is.


 No one is "going after you." I'm writing posts, you're writing posts. I certainly don't think you're "going after me!" Is it not possible to disagree with you without "going after you?" 

I think it's GREAT that you get compliments on your dog wherever you go. How many times do I have to write that if you're satisfied with the results of your training, so am I? 



> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO now this works for him- so bashing my methods is nonsense- because obviously it works!


So you tells us. Can you show me a post where I've "bashed" you? I don't think one exists. 



> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO will it work for all dogs? hmmm, maybe maybe not. but my point is it can work so if you are saying that people like me who don't use physical corrections are problematic-you're wrong.


I've never said this.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Positive training doesn't rule out the use of some types of punishment but primarily the focus is on rewards.


I use an Ecollar and my "primary focus is on rewards" too. Using an Ecollar doesn’t mean that you can't use other methods and theories too. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest You can do a whole lot of training using +R and -P.


The more ways you have to communicate with the dog the faster learning will occur, the longer it will last, and the better the overall training picture will be. Training that is a balance of reinforcement and punishment is what works best. If you can find me a scientific study that says that one side of OC is more important than another, I'd love to read it. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest The debate about shock collar training always brings out those who get paid using this type of training, and of course they will offer a lot of defensive comments in order to sustain their money-making technique.


I guess those who make their living with so-called "positive training" don't get paid? I've used just about every tool and method that exists in dog training today. The Ecollar is by far the easiest to use (easiest on the trainer), the easiest on the dogs, the safest (it's impossible to cause any physical injury by way of the stim that an Ecollar puts out) and the fastest tool that exists for training dogs on the planet today. 

As to getting paid. I'm a retired police officer. I live off my very nice pension. I don't make a living from either training dog or selling Ecollars, (although I am a dealer for several brands). Even if you don't count the time that I spend helping on the Net and/or the phone, Ecollars are still an expense for me. I LOSE money on them. I'm afraid to try and figure out an hourly cost for how much time I spend on the forums giving advice, my heart would probably stop. Lol. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest The problem I have with e-collars is that many (if not most) of the use of the collar tends to be in place of other types of training that could teach the dog just as well.


I don't think that there is any methods that "teaches the dog just as well." I've never found anyone that could demonstrate it to me and I've been around some of the best trainers. But even if there was, if it was "just as" good, why would you have an objection to the Ecollar? 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I understand and accept (and have used) the shock collar for extreme behaviors with a dog that didn't respond fully to less punishing methods. I won't lie - it was effective. I produced a level of fear of consequence in my dog that helped keep her from taking off after moose and gave her freedom to run and play off-leash. I can't say I'm proud that I used the e-collar but it was a very carefully thought-out choice made on a dog who had gone through nearly a year and a half of solid training and who still had a level of independence that made her occasionally get the zoomies. This, to me, was an appropriate use of this particular tool.


I'm glad it worked for you. but I use the tool far differently than what you describe, probably different than you've considered (based on what you just said). I don't produce ANY level of fear of consequence. I don't blast the dogs off chases. Instead I use the level of stim that the dog first feels for all basic OB and for crittering too. I'd suggest that you take the advice that a couple of posters have given and read some of my articles. I use the Ecollar quite differently than you do and it gives quite different results. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest What I really dislike is people using this tool in place of "real" training.


Oh please. There's nothing "unreal" about training with an Ecollar. And there's nothing "more real" about training that doesn't use it. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Instead of learning and understanding the premises of positive reinforcement and how to build a desire to work in their dogs, they go quickly to a tool that will force the dog into compliance with little work on their side (hence the thought that the e-collar is a "lazy man's tool").


You really have no idea of how I use an Ecollar or you'd not be saying this. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Not everyone does this, of course, but it sure seems like a large number of people do.


I agree that some do. The key here is EDUCATION. The results that come from using low level stim are better. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Even used as a low level stimulation, this technique is based on positive punishment (adding something that discourages behavior). You are adding a shock (pain/discomfort) to discourage a dog from doing anything other than the behavior you want.


I'm sorry but this is wrong. The primary use of an Ecollar (as I use it) is in the area of negative reinforcement. You think, again based on your statement, that when the dog does something that the handler doesn’t want he's punished. That's wrong. if you read the articles you'll see this. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest This is not a technique aimed toward teaching your dog to trust you. This is not a technique aimed toward building a good relationship.


Most of my work has been with police dogs and SAR dogs. Dogs that search for people and contraband. I don't think that any work with dogs requires a better relationship between the dog and the handler than this kind of search work. And so I use an Ecollar. If what you say WAS true, I'd be using some other tool/method. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest It's merely a tool that provides a punishment, and punishment is not a good basis for overall training.


You've assumed that there's only one way to use the tool, the way you know of, the way that you've been describing. That belief has lead you down the wrong road and you've drawn many improper conclusions about it. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Lou, I bought my shock collar from you and I read through your pages in preparation for use of it. I spent months considering what to do before actually buying the collar. I modified what you suggested in your articles to better fit my dog - instead of just using the -R/+P aspects of the collar to bring my dog into compliance


Every word you've written so far is NOTHING that I talk about in my articles. You may have read the articles, but you've not gotten anything out of them, probably because you had a prior attitude about how to use the tool. For example, the way that you tell us that you stopped your dog from chasing moose HAS NOTHING TO DO AT ALL WITH WHAT I TEACH. NOTHING! 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I paired the proper response with a high level of +R. I think it was more effective doing this


There's a clear disclaimer in the articles page. In the second paragraph it says


> Quote: The protocols are written as they are because they've been found to work after years of testing. If you're a beginner, this is very much a "read and follow the instructions carefully and closely" situation. If you're the type of person who doesn't read the instructions when you get a new toy, the Ecollar and these methods are probably not for you. * If you decide to skip a step or modify the protocol you may get the desired result and you may not. * You may get what appears to be a good result only to find later on, that a problem has developed because you've skipped a step. In some ways dog training is like building a house. You need a good foundation or the rest of the project will come crashing down. (Emphasis added)





> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And that, of course, was my end goal - to STOP using the shock collar. I see this collar as a temporary tool to use only when better methods are not fully successful.


Unless people compete in a venue that does not allow the Ecollar to be worn I recommend that the dogs wear it all the time when out. If for no other reason than insurance. Any dog can, at any time, decide to disobey a command. If he's running towards a busy road when that happens the Ecollar user is the ONLY one who has another chance to reinforce the command. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I know that many people out there view the final result as the measure of success in a technique, but I personally believe that the way you obtain that result is every bit as important.


I believe that the MOST important thing is "results, achieved humanely." I don't think there's anything inherently better, on any level, to training that emphasizes one phase of OC over another. If the method is humane and the results are good, then the method is unimportant. Some people w ant to place valued judgments on some methods of training based on how they FEEL about those methods, I'm not one of them. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I could go back to the old way of training - a la Koehler, with tons of punishment and not one toy or treat ever used


If that's what you think Koehler training is then you don't understand the method. Lots of people don't. And many dogs aren't interested in either toys or treats. Mine are more interested in being allowed to fulfill their drives. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest They wouldn't see the sometimes subtle signs of stress


EVERY method used in training dogs bring stress. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest They wouldn't understand that the dog was only responding out of a fear of the consequences.


Ever read Steven Lindsay? He wrote three large volumes called "Handbook of Applied Dog Behavior and Training." In Volume three he wrote,


> Quote:… competent electronic training may actually promote social attachment, reward, and safety, With the behavior- contingent cessation or avoidance of ES, * dogs experience immediate emotional relieve that subsequently merges into a state of progressive relaxation incompatible with social aversion and fear *… (Emphasis added)





> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Or I can train my dogs to respond happily and quickly because I've spent a bit more time and taught them to expect rewards for behaviors.


Why do you think that using an Ecollar precludes the use of rewards? It doesn’t. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I can work to build an automatic response (like when I tell my seven month old pup "here!" and she slides into a stop and then whips around to run back to me) by setting my dog up to do a behavior over and over and rewarding her lavishly with praise and petting and treats and toys. I can use distractions in a logical manner - including distractions like moose and rabbits - and teach her that coming to me means better things than chasing moose.


I'm glad that you can do this. Many people can't. And you'd be unable to use your methods with many dogs. They simply would not find you, or anything you had, as much fun as chasing the moose and rabbits. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I can add in an occasional correction as needed, providing the dog with a bit of understanding that there CAN be consequences for not responding, but not high enough to build a fear response or a mistrust in me.


My dogs, trained with my methods NEVER have a "fear response or a mistrust in me." This doesn’t happen why my methods are used. But it's clear that you haven't used my methods. I don't see any indication of them in anything you've written. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And I can end up with a dog just as well trained as the one listed above, but one that responds through a love of training and a love and trust for ME.


Odd but my dogs trust me completely. I put them into dangerous situations regularly and they never question a command. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Corrections are always available, but a good trainer sees those as secondary to building trust and response through positive reinforcement.


There are many ways to build "trust and response." ACTUALLY teaching the recall with my methods does a far better job of it. And dogs don't develop "trust and response" from just getting treats shoved in their faces. They come to regard those people as treat machines and have no respect for them unless there's a treat in their hand and there's nothing better in the area. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And for those who see treats as bribes .. *LOL* .. I suppose a paycheck is also a bribe? Given the correlation, it would have to be. We all work for something. I'd rather have a pocket full of treats with a dog looking up at me with ears forward, face happy and eager, tail up and waving - than to be clutching the control to a shock collar that's strapped tightly around my dog's neck, with the dog looking at me with ears tipped back and lips tightened. I can see the difference in my dog's face when I have the shock collar on her.


I have no doubt that used as you have used the Ecollar, you're quite right about how your dog regards it. My dogs come running when I pick up their collars and they hear the "tinkle" noise that the roller buckle makes. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Just my personal opinions - from someone training for a long time, who has trained using most of the tools out there at one time or another.


I've been training dogs for about 28 years now. Like you I've used most of them. I wonder why there is such a divergence of our thinking on this. I'll have to say that it's because, while you may have read my articles you didn't apply them. You used the Ecollar as punishment at fairly high levels of stim and so you got what you got – a dog that fears the Ecollar and you as well. My results are vastly different. 

I'd also have to say that there's a wide divergence in the qualities of the dogs that we're working with.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: DianaM If that's true, somebody's been misplacing my professional athlete/model paychecks.


ROFL. I want the SUPER model paychecks. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaMOne thing I can say about a quality e-collar is that a stimulus is constant and even. Jerks on the prong can vary greatly even if we don't intend the variations.


It takes a VERY skilled trainer to deliver exactly the right level of "pop" on any kind of leash/collar method. With the Ecollar, especially the new Dogtras with the LCD readout of the stim level, it's easy to be consistent from one button press to the next. 



> Originally Posted By: DianaMI'm curious as to why dogs seem to find the paging function more disturbing than the stim. Could it be the noise or the sensation of a large object on the neck that is vibrating?


Some find it VERY annoying. Some even panic. Some ignore it completely. I've been using a relatively new brand on the scene, Unleashed Technology, that allows the vibration mode to be adjusted, just as the stim level is adjusted on the other brands. This may be useful for people who want to use the vibe mode but find that their dogs are extra-sensitive to it.


----------



## Achielles UD

I have to say, that I am very intrigued by this entire discussion.

I have not been training for nearly as long as some of you. I started out with jerk/praise/treats in a basic obedience class. Then went "purely positive" (how it was described lol) with no leash/collar/treats only type training. Now I train with a blance of both worlds, I think. I have studied and I am continually looking for more information and things to learn.

I stated earlier that I hve never used an e-collar and I haven't. I really would like to now though! I am a firm believer in giving the dog as much information as possible. If an ecollar used as Lou does, achieves this, I want to learn and use it. What I am doing currently works for the dogs I have, but you never know what is coming next.

In training I really try to leave feelings at the door, so to speak. I figure as a trainer (and fairly young at that lol just 30 yeras young







)the more tools I know how to properly use the better. Afterall, I never know when a certain tool or technique will help a particular dog, whether my own or a clients. I haven't had any negative feelings about e-collars in the past. I just have never had the extra cash to purchase one lol Treats are much cheaper at this point in that I can purchase them in bulk for a low price instead of coming up with one large one-lump sum.

I wont be having the extra cash to purchase a collar anytime soon... so I will be heading back to the articles to read some more! Even if I don't have one... I can still learn about them









/End Threadjack...


----------



## kutzro357

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest"What I really dislike is people using this tool in place of "real" training. Instead of learning and understanding the premises of positive reinforcement and how to build a desire to work in their dogs"


Pretty inflammatory statement. Certainly not something you can prove as fact.



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuestThe debate about shock collar training always brings out those who get paid using this type of training, and of course they will offer a lot of defensive comments in order to sustain their money-making technique.


That`s funny because all I see everywhere is the purely positive bandwagon. It`s advertised in the paper, Border`s Books and the net. Perhaps the +P trainers are just trying to invent the wheel to sell books and add clients. Up until recently any mention of corrections from an E-collar and the purely positive people jumped in like a blanket party.
Thank god there is now some balance on the forum.


----------



## kutzro357

> Originally Posted By: LouCastle
> 
> I've been training dogs for about 28 years now. Like you I've used most of them. I wonder why there is such a divergence of our thinking on this.
> 
> I'd also have to say that there's a wide divergence in the qualities of the dogs that we're working with.


I don`t know Lou. I`m 53+ and we`ve had German Shepherds all my life and think that finally there are trainers that have struck a balance between the 2 competing methods. I think you have reached that balance.
Do you have kids? Have you noticed the same thing?


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

> Originally Posted By: LouCastle
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO i'm guessing you are going after people who only use praise and never any sort of punishment- which doesn't seem to exist- at least not here. and if you are going after people like me who do not use any physical corrections let me just tell you how many compliments i get when i take mikko to the petstore, or to friends' barbeques, etc. about how well behaved he is.
> 
> 
> 
> No one is "going after you." I'm writing posts, you're writing posts. I certainly don't think you're "going after me!" Is it not possible to disagree with you without "going after you?"
> 
> I think it's GREAT that you get compliments on your dog wherever you go. How many times do I have to write that if you're satisfied with the results of your training, so am I?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO now this works for him- so bashing my methods is nonsense- because obviously it works!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you tells us. Can you show me a post where I've "bashed" you? I don't think one exists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO will it work for all dogs? hmmm, maybe maybe not. but my point is it can work so if you are saying that people like me who don't use physical corrections are problematic-you're wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've never said this.
Click to expand...

lou, none of these were in reference to what you said. it was because of what kutzro said in regards to parents who only use positive training and their kids who are out of control.


----------



## IliamnasQuest

I'm completely amazed at how some people have taken my words and put completely backward interpretations on them.

Please, someone show me where I said that I used the "Ecollar as punishment at fairly high levels of stim"? Not once did I say that nor did I imply that. I used the low level stimulation technique as described on Castle's site, with one modification - I added in positive reinforcement to further back up the response.

Nowhere did I say that ONLY shock collar trainers get paid - yes, I said that paid shock collar trainers come out to defend what they do when we have these debates, and that's been proven by Lou and Tracie who both earn money through the use of the device. It benefits them to defend the use of this device and that always puts a bit different spin on things.

I stand completely by my statements regarding HOW the use of shock in training works. It builds a fear of consequence into the dog, which makes the dog want to avoid the shock and therefore results in the dog doing the behavior you want. This fear of consequence is because the collar creates a pain/discomfort feeling. How ELSE could it work? If the dogs liked it, they would simply continue doing what they want because what they were doing would be reinforced by it. The collar MUST produce that fear of consequence in order to be effective. Of course, that fear level will vary from dog to dog, but logically it has to be there. This is why the collar, regardless of how it's used, is always going to be at least partly based on positive punishment.

Even used as a negative reinforcement (for example, the dog focuses on a moose in the distance and you press down the continual button and release as soon as the dog transfers focus back to you) it still involves using something that the dog doesn't enjoy in order to create a certain behavior. The dog learns a fear (perhaps mild, but a fear nonetheless) of the sensation and then they learn to avoid the sensation by performing in a particular way. 

The dog that I used the shock collar on doesn't fear me in the way that people think of fear reactions - but I know that when she has the collar on, she's fully aware that the collar can produce an uncomfortable sensation and the thought does create a slightly diminished attitude. I can read my dogs VERY well. The shock level used on her means she flicks one ear in response and that's it. I can pick up the collar and she'll come running to me because she knows we're going out - it's a conditioned response to the collar being part of going outside, and I'm certainly not going to fool myself into thinking that she loves it when I strap an electronic device to her neck so that I can use shock to keep her controlled. Dogs react to what the tool means they're going to get to do, not because they like the tool itself.

I believe that it's important to get humanely achieved results too - and for me, that means using the least amount of punishment possible. That means creating the most comfortable training experiences I can for my dogs. This means always remembering that dogs are living, breathing, feeling creatures who don't necessarily need to be choked, pronged or shocked. This means reading the dog, finding ways to encourage behaviors that can be reinforced, and leaving the more harsh tools alone unless they're truly needed. I don't have a problem with someone using a shock collar for a short-term training on a behavior such as crittering. I do have a problem when a person depends on a shock collar throughout ALL their training. It makes no sense to me that people say "I LOVE my dog" and yet they're so quick to go to devices that are created to cause pain and discomfort all the in the name of "training". 

I find that there's definitely a way to balance positive reinforcement training and fear of consequences. It's not a bad thing to have a dog be a bit fearful of running after a moose or into a roadway. It's not a bad thing to have a dog be fearful of chasing a snake (for those of you who have to deal with poisonous snakes). There are times when I would take fear in my dog over non-fear just because it helps keep my dog more safe. But the balance, to me, leans highly to the more positive side and to the trusting side you build with your dog. I'm long past those days when I worry about a half point deduction in obedience competitions - the titles, the ribbons, the accolades have paled next to my desire to have a close, loving, trusting relationship with my well-mannered but very happy dogs. And to that end I use a minimal amount of correction. 

I've seen what's allowed and accepted in the name of winning and it scares me that we humans would allow ourselves to stoop so low at times. Shock is one of those very "iffy" training techniques because of the high possibility for abuse. I've seen too many people who, instead of properly training, just keep turning up the dial until the dog is a mess. And while any technique, any tool has the potential for abuse, strapping a electronic device around a dog's neck brings the abuse potential to a whole new level.

I don't think the divergence of types of dogs is as wide between us as you want to think - that's always one of those "well, I train harder dogs than YOU do" kind of last minute boasts to try to build up someone's perceived knowledge and experience. My latest shepherd pup is all imported schutzhund lines, granddaughter of the Hungarian champion, with a working police dog as another grandfather - and she's one tough baby, full of a protective nature and a natural confidence. She's doing very well without having to use much in the way of corrections. And I obedience train and title chows - I'm at 15 performance titles on chows. GSD's are EASY compared to chows. My two year old girl was in the ring eight times this summer with eight qualifying scores, completing her RA, RE and CD. She's beating GSD's and BC's and goldens. I haven't used a shock collar to teach her any of the exercises needed and I won't be. I have the dogtra collar here and it will continued to be used only for crittering and off-leash running times, because winning a ribbon or title will never be important enough to me to shock my dog to do it.

And my shepherds .. well, what I'm doing must work, because I can take TRick into the middle of town, the middle of traffic, and she will heel quietly by my side. I can (and often have) leave her on a down-stay outside the door of a busy store, with people walking by pushing carts and talking, and she has never moved. It does boil down to trust and sometimes the dogs learn to trust because they feel the trust you have in them. It's much like when I worked with horses. I used to do a demo where I would ride a horse into the arena bareback, and then I'd lean forward and unbuckle the halter and drop everything into the dust so that there wasn't one bit of rope or twine or leather on the horse. And then we'd lope around barrels, turn circles, lope to the fence and come to a halt so that I could talk to people about the high level of trust you can develop with an animal. I used to ride this horse all over through the woods without even a piece of bailing twine between me and his head - he knew verbal and leg signals and we had a great communication. Not too many people understand that trust, but I do. It took a long time to develop because I had a lot to learn, but when I finally learned patience and understanding and to always consider that my horse was a living, breathing, caring creature - well, then, he learned to trust me. I want my dogs to trust me too. And trust is built through kind, consistent training with a minimal amount of correction.



> Quote:Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest "What I really dislike is people using this tool in place of "real" training. Instead of learning and understanding the premises of positive reinforcement and how to build a desire to work in their dogs"
> 
> Posted by kutzro357: "Pretty inflammatory statement. Certainly not something you can prove as fact."


I was stating my dislike for people using shock collars at times when they can train the behavior just as well without the use of shock. I've seen trainers who slap a collar on a dog and use it for EVERYTHING starting from a basic sit. These types of trainers don't even give the dog a chance to learn it in a non-compulsive way. And I can state for a FACT that I dislike these kinds of people. Did I say that anyone who uses a shock collar is that kind of person? Of course not. 

Okay, will go now so that more misinterpretations of my words can be found .. *LOL*

Melanie and the gang in Alaska


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO
> 
> lou, none of these were in reference to what you said. it was because of what kutzro said in regards to parents who only use positive training and their kids who are out of control.


I tend to agree with kutzro. When in this country's history have you EVER heard of the things that are happening? During my childhood, my mother had NO PROBLEM rattling my teeth RIGHT IN A STORE should I have a temper tantrum in the middle of said store because I did not get what I wanted. I may have tried that ONCE as did my sisters. NEVER AGAIN. Was I an abused child? I think not. I was just taught quickly and firmly what was allowed and what was not. When I went to school, the thought of being shot or stabbed never entered my mind because it just did not happen. Teachers were allowed to teach AND DISIPLINE! Today’s society seems to want to take not only GOD but discipline away from everyone. And just look at where we are......Columbine comes to most peoples mind immediately but the names of schools (from grade school to college) where stabbings, beatings, shootings MURDERS seem endless.

Why? My OPINION.....they have no guidance or disipline anywhere. Little Tammy and Tony are allowed to be "free spirits" in this new era of child raising ways. They are only being children and will grow out of it. They have not been taught right from wrong. They have found that when their parents ask/tell them something....well, they can do it or they can not...either way nothing negative happens. Well, it obviously isn't working now is it!




> Originally Posted By: kutzro357
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: LouCastle
> 
> I've been training dogs for about 28 years now. Like you I've used most of them. I wonder why there is such a divergence of our thinking on this.
> 
> I'd also have to say that there's a wide divergence in the qualities of the dogs that we're working with.
> 
> 
> 
> I don`t know Lou. I`m 53+ and we`ve had German Shepherds all my life and think that finally there are trainers that have struck a balance between the 2 competing methods. I think you have reached that balance.
> Do you have kids? Have you noticed the same thing?
Click to expand...

I'm not Lou of course, but would still like to post my opinion









I too have had German Shepherds all my live. In the past I had really well behaved dogs, one of which was as well trained as the four I currently have but it took me a year and a half of everyday training to get her there. When I trained her, I did not even know e-collars existed. My current five (four GSD's and a Yorkie e collar trained) reached an advanced level of training in a very short amount of time. 

I think your absolutely correct about being able to reach a perfect balance between the two methods. It can be done, it has been done, it is being done


----------



## mikaK9

> Quote: Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest ---I don't think the divergence of types of dogs is as wide between us as you want to think - that's always one of those "well, I train harder dogs than YOU do" kind of last minute boasts to try to build up someone's perceived knowledge and experience. My latest shepherd pup is all imported schutzhund lines, granddaughter of the Hungarian champion, with a working police dog as another grandfather - and she's one tough baby, full of a protective nature and a natural confidence. She's doing very well without having to use much in the way of corrections. And I obedience train and title chows - I'm at 15 performance titles on chows. GSD's are EASY compared to chows. My two year old girl was in the ring eight times this summer with eight qualifying scores, completing her RA, RE and CD. She's beating GSD's and BC's and goldens. I haven't used a shock collar to teach her any of the exercises needed and I won't be. I have the dogtra collar here and it will continued to be used only for crittering and off-leash running times, because winning a ribbon or title will never be important enough to me to shock my dog to do it.


Ummmm.....I thought we were talking about recalls here. If so, it seems we're on the same page for off-leash work.

My working dog also does great in obedience without corrections. In fact, I don't remember the last time I used a correction for "trial" obedience work. So I don't disagree with you in respect to that work and working dogs.

My opinion about our dogs being rather different comes with the exercises that are not specifically about a trial obedience or fun show obedience routines. Specifically....a recall with distractions, outside of a show or trial. I thought that's what we were talking about here.....a 100% reliable recall (I thought that was the title of the thread). And if you say you will use an ecollar for crittering (a recall?) and similar things, then I'm confused on what the issue is. 

The difference in dogs is when it comes to pushing their buttons for instinctive prey behaviors. At that point, I absolutely believe there is a difference in dogs here. The highest drive dogs will not (in my opinion) respond to all positive rewards. That is why they have been used as police dogs...because they are hard and have such strong drives. 

And by the way, it wasn't a "last minute boast." I simply looked at your website, which gave me the impression (from your bio) that you work primarily with dogs that are in the show ring, agility, or obedience aspect of schutzhund. For dogs in those areas, positive is great. But if you have tried doing a recall from a running decoy (or when a dog thinks he is getting to apprehend a bad guy on the street) in sport or police work, you will find that the type of dog which excells in those areas will not likely return for a tug toy/praise/treats. I'm not boasting. Just trying to explain why some of us are seeing different results than others, so that we can all get along.


----------



## kaslkaos

E-collars come up anytime we discuss 100% off-leash recalls, or proofing recalls in the field, etc. because they are effective. Unfortunately, the discussion still gets into an us vs them mode, although it's unclear to me who the 'us' and 'them' is. I use an e-collar in this context and so does melanie. It seems that most responders on this thread use e-collars for off-leash recalls at least in some contexts. It began with someone who had trouble recalling a wonderfully trained puppy in a park. 

So, e-collars are one valid answer. On the other hand, there are many pro-e-collar posts that seem to imply that their training is done exclusively with the e-collar. 

I just want to add, this is not necessary. 

You can use positive reinforcement, add the e-collar for proofing, and continue to use positive reinforcement to train your dog. You don't have to be a purist one way or the other. Using +r (treats, toys) to train your dog won't detract from their recall (it's adding to it), and adding an e-collar to proof safety commands will not diminish all the motivation you've invested into your training (unless you make bad mistakes with the e-collar).

We all have different ideas of what is okay or not okay to do with our dogs, and different philosophical limits. Let's just educate as to the possibilities.

Maybe some more "how I did it" stories would be helpful.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuestI'm completely amazed at how some people have taken my words and put completely backward interpretations on them.


What posts and what people are you referring to? 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I used the low level stimulation technique as described on Castle's site, with one modification - I added in positive reinforcement to further back up the response.


I'd not call that a "modification" to my method. I'd call it an addition and one that I discuss in the protocols. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Nowhere did I say that ONLY shock collar trainers get paid - yes, I said that paid shock collar trainers come out to defend what they do when we have these debates, and that's been proven by Lou and Tracie who both earn money through the use of the device. It benefits them to defend the use of this device and that always puts a bit different spin on things.


I think you need to go back and read what I said. I don't "earn money" from use of the device. I LOSE MONEY on it. I defend the tool because it's the best one extant for training dogs. I want dogs trained the fastest and easiest way (on both the dog and the handler) possible. I made the same arguments long before I became an Ecollar dealer. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I stand completely by my statements regarding HOW the use of shock in training works. It builds a fear of consequence into the dog, which makes the dog want to avoid the shock and therefore results in the dog doing the behavior you want. This fear of consequence is because the collar creates a pain/discomfort feeling.


I agree that avoiding the discomfort of the stim is what makes the Ecollar work but there is NOT any fear involved. Animals avoid discomfort all the time but they're not afraid of it. When they're cold they'll move into the sunlight. When the wind blows and chills them, they move out of the wind. When they're hungry (if they're wild dog) they eat. If they're domesticated dogs and the owner has forgotten to feed them, they come stare at their owners. Some bring their bowls. 

ALL of these things are examples of dogs avoiding discomfort or doing something to relieve it. Yet NOT ONE OF THEM involves "fear." This is just a word that people who dislike methods that use corrections throw out in the hopes of scaring people away from using them. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest How ELSE could it work? If the dogs liked it, they would simply continue doing what they want because what they were doing would be reinforced by it.


No one has said that dogs like stim. Quite the opposite has been said many times. But you're saying they "fear" it and that's not true. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest The collar MUST produce that fear of consequence in order to be effective.


"Fear" is not the proper word. "Anticipation" is. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Of course, that fear level will vary from dog to dog, but logically it has to be there.


I've shown that you're wrong. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest This is why the collar, regardless of how it's used, is always going to be at least partly based on positive punishment.


This has nothing to do with "fear of consequences. And there's nothing wrong with +P either. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Even used as a negative reinforcement (for example, the dog focuses on a moose in the distance and you press down the continual button and release as soon as the dog transfers focus back to you) it still involves using something that the dog doesn't enjoy in order to create a certain behavior.


Yep. Offer a treat to a dog to get him to perform and have him look at the moose. You withhold the treat. It's the IDENTICAL thing. It's "something that the dog doesn’t enjoy (not getting the treat) in order to create a certain behavior." 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest The dog learns a fear (perhaps mild, but a fear nonetheless) of the sensation and then they learn to avoid the sensation by performing in a particular way.


Do dog "fear" getting a chill? Do they "fear" a chill from the wind. Nope. "Fear" is not a factor. But it makes for a wonderful emotional argument. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest The dog that I used the shock collar on doesn't fear me in the way that people think of fear reactions - but I know that when she has the collar on, she's fully aware that the collar can produce an uncomfortable sensation and the thought does create a slightly diminished attitude.


My dogs show no such "diminished attitude." And since the dogs that I work with are about saving lives (police and SAR dogs) I won't have anything that will "diminish" their "attitude." I'll have to say that you're not doing it right, if you seeing this. And if you are seeing this why would you continue to use such a tool? 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I can read my dogs VERY well. The shock level used on her means she flicks one ear in response and that's it. I can pick up the collar and she'll come running to me because she knows we're going out - it's a conditioned response to the collar being part of going outside, and I'm certainly not going to fool myself into thinking that she loves it when I strap an electronic device to her neck so that I can use shock to keep her controlled.


If dogs "feared" the stim, they'd not want the Ecollar put on them. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Dogs react to what the tool means they're going to get to do, not because they like the tool itself.


Yes, and? This is the case with anything. My dogs get excited when I pick up my house keys, when I put on a jacket or get my hat. They've become conditioned, nothing I did consciously, that these things mean good things are going to happen. If dogs "feared" the consequences, they'd react differently to the Ecollar. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I believe that it's important to get humanely achieved results too - and for me, that means using the least amount of punishment possible.


I disagree. It's not about "using the least amount of punishment possible." It's about using the least amount of punishment possible THAT GETS RESULTS! Humane does not mean "not using punishment." It means using punishment (and the rest as well) humanely and not excessively. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest That means creating the most comfortable training experiences I can for my dogs.


If that was the case we'd never do any training at all. our dogs would lay on the couch while we pitched treats at them. But since dogs live in our world they need to be trained and trained to a high degree or reliability. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest This means always remembering that dogs are living, breathing, feeling creatures who don't necessarily need to be choked, pronged or shocked.


I have no problem causing a minor amount of discomfort (about the level of a single flea bite) to a dog to give him training that will probably someday, save his life. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest This means reading the dog, finding ways to encourage behaviors that can be reinforced, and leaving the more harsh tools alone unless they're truly needed.


Yasee here's the problem. You consider the Ecollar to be a "harsh tool." Perhaps used the way that you do, it is. But it needn't be and used as I do and advocate, it's not. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I don't have a problem with someone using a shock collar for a short-term training on a behavior such as crittering. I do have a problem when a person depends on a shock collar throughout ALL their training.


OK then you're free not to do it. I will and I will get reliability AND the ability to correct the dog should he decide to disobey. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest It makes no sense to me that people say "I LOVE my dog" and yet they're so quick to go to devices that are created to cause pain and discomfort all the in the name of "training".


You folks are always throwing out the "Pain card." It's nonsense. An Ecollar properly used causes a moment of discomfort to a dog. It's about the same "pain" as if you thought it was chilly and that you needed a sweater. That's discomfort, not pain, but you folks LOVE to talk about pain. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I find that there's definitely a way to balance positive reinforcement training and fear of consequences.


There's the "fear" word again. lol. "I find that there definitely a way to balance positive reinforcement training and" *anticipation *"of consequences. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest It's not a bad thing to have a dog be a bit fearful of running after a moose or into a roadway.


YES IT MOST DEFINITELY IS. If a SAR dog is afraid of the scent or sight of a moose and the person is in that scent cone of near where the moose is standing, he may, because of that fear, NOT make the find. A police dog (who's fear running into the roadway if the criminal he's chasing does so may break off the chase. A pet who fears either may run the other way and find himself in danger. 

Dog should not be taught to fear anything except those things that bring direct and immediate life threatening circumstances, such as poisonous snakes. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest It's not a bad thing to have a dog be fearful of chasing a snake (for those of you who have to deal with poisonous snakes). There are times when I would take fear in my dog over non-fear just because it helps keep my dog more safe.


Neither the road, nor the moose present the same sort of immediate danger that a poisonous snake does. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest But the balance, to me, leans highly to the more positive side


I have no idea what "the positive side" means. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest and to the trusting side you build with your dog.


I'm not sure why people think that dogs trained with an Ecollar, with my methods don't trust their owners; but it's as far wrong as one can be. Try reading this story. Http://loucastle.com/roma.htm It's about a highly fear aggressive dog that was rehabilitated with an Ecollar. 

It's one of the few times that I worked a dog that I was sure that I was going to be bitten. In fact just before I started working Roma she HAD tried to bite me. After about 20 minutes Roma trusted me enough to climb into my lap and let me put my arms around her as she licked my face. Teaching the recall with an Ecollar as I do, is AN EXCELLENT way to build a bond with a dog and do so very quickly. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I'm long past those days when I worry about a half point deduction in obedience competitions - the titles, the ribbons, the accolades have paled next to my desire to have a close, loving, trusting relationship with my well-mannered but very happy dogs. And to that end I use a minimal amount of correction.


If you think that corrections have destroyed a relationship with your dog (or that it does with any owner) you're not using them correctly. Most police dogs on this planet are trained with corrections and there is no more trusting a relationship than between the police K-9 and his handler who regularly places his life in the paws of his partner. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I've seen what's allowed and accepted in the name of winning and it scares me that we humans would allow ourselves to stoop so low at times.


Please try to stick to the topic. We're talking about teaching basic OB to a dog. Not winning any competitions. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Shock is one of those very "iffy" training techniques because of the high possibility for abuse.


Can you, can ANYONE show me a tool used in training a dog that DOES NOT have a "high possibility for abuse?" 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I've seen too many people who, instead of properly training, just keep turning up the dial until the dog is a mess.


"I've seen too many people who, instead of properly training, just keep *popping treats on their dog, *"Until he's a fat mess. The Ecollar is not any more or less subject to abuse or misuse than ANY tool used in dog training. 

Any tool can be abused. Any tools can be misused. No tool is idiot proof to the right idiot. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And while any technique, any tool has the potential for abuse, strapping a electronic device around a dog's neck brings the abuse potential to a whole new level.


Yes it IS a "whole new level!" No matter how hard he tries, someone who's abusing a dog with an Ecollar is unable to cause any physical damage. As soon as the button is lifted the pain is over. Abuse a dog with a stick and you can leave injuries that last the dog's lifetime. The same is true of a boot, a brick, or a lit cigarette. Those are FAR MORE LIKELY to be used to abuse a dog than an Ecollar. If only for the reason that they're available almost all the time, and don't cost hundreds of dollars. I find it hard to believe that someone who wants to abuse their dog (and abuse is a conscious decision on the part of the person doing it) is going to spend hundreds of dollars to do so. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I don't think the divergence of types of dogs is as wide between us as you want to think - that's always one of those "well, I train harder dogs than YOU do" kind of last minute boasts to try to build up someone's perceived knowledge and experience.


OK. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest My latest shepherd pup is all imported schutzhund lines, granddaughter of the Hungarian champion, with a working police dog as another grandfather - and she's one tough baby, full of a protective nature and a natural confidence. She's doing very well without having to use much in the way of corrections.


What does "doing very well mean?" What lines a dog comes from, what his parents did or didn't do "for a living" mean nothing when we're talking about the dog at hand. So your statement really means nothing. I regularly train dogs with the highest drives around, not just dogs whose parent had high drives. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And I obedience train and title chows - I'm at 15 performance titles on chows. GSD's are EASY compared to chows. My two year old girl was in the ring eight times this summer with eight qualifying scores, completing her RA, RE and CD. She's beating GSD's and BC's and goldens.


I'm not sure why you tell us this. What difference does it make in this discussion? 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I haven't used a shock collar to teach her any of the exercises needed and I won't be.


As I've said MANY TIMES now. If you're happy with you training and it's give you good results, and they've been achieved humanely, so am I. 

I'm really not concerned that you do or don't use Ecollars. this conversation isn't intended to convince you or anyone to stop what they're doing and start using one. But I'm not going to let people spread misconceptions about the Ecollar as if they were facts. Most of what you've said about them has been wrong. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I have the dogtra collar here and it will continued to be used only for crittering and off-leash running times, because winning a ribbon or title will never be important enough to me to shock my dog to do it.


If your preferred method of training is so good why do you have your dog wear an Ecollar for "off leash running times?" If your methods are so effective, why do you need an Ecollar for crittering? How is it that your dogs trust you when you use an Ecollar for these things? You insinuate that our dogs don't trust us because we use them. What's the difference? 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And my shepherds .. well, what I'm doing must work, because I can take TRick into the middle of town, the middle of traffic, and she will heel quietly by my side. I can (and often have) leave her on a down-stay outside the door of a busy store, with people walking by pushing carts and talking, and she has never moved. It does boil down to trust and sometimes the dogs learn to trust because they feel the trust you have in them.


I do the same. My dogs trust me and I trust them. This has nothing to do with an Ecollar. But you seem to think it does. I wonder why? 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest It's much like when I worked with horses.


Dogs aren't horses. They're also not porpoises, pigs, cats, squirrels, orcas, seals, sea lions birds or any other animal either. I think this has already been established. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And trust is built through kind, consistent training with a minimal amount of correction.


The level of trust one has with any animal has nothing to do with a "minimal amount of correction." It comes from being a fair and just leader. There are many ways to do that, but pushing treats isn't one of them. 



> Quote:Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest "What I really dislike is people using this tool in place of "real" training. Instead of learning and understanding the premises of positive reinforcement and how to build a desire to work in their dogs"
> 
> Posted by kutzro357: "Pretty inflammatory statement. Certainly not something you can prove as fact."


Earlier you wrote,


> Quote: What I really dislike is people using this tool in place of "real" training. Instead of learning and understanding the premises of positive reinforcement and how to build a desire to work in their dogs


And kutzro357 replied


> Quote: Pretty inflammatory statement. Certainly not something you can prove as fact.





> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I was stating my dislike for people using shock collars at times when they can train the behavior just as well without the use of shock.


How is it that you think you know what people are capable of and what they're not? How do you know that someone "can train the behavior just as well without the use of shock?" 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I've seen trainers who slap a collar on a dog and use it for EVERYTHING starting from a basic sit.


" I've seen trainers who slap a" *clicker *into their hand "and use it for EVERYTHING starting from a basic sit." Lol. 

I have no idea what it means to "slap a collar on a dog." My articles are quite clear about how to fit the collar to the dog and then how to find his working level of stim. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest These types of trainers don't even give the dog a chance to learn it in a non-compulsive way.


There's no proof that learning it in a "non-compulsive way" is better, faster or easier. Can you show us some? 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And I can state for a FACT that I dislike these kinds of people.


I do this so I guess that you dislike me. Somehow I'll learn to live with that. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Okay, will go now so that more misinterpretations of my words can be found ..


As is always the case, if you can find someplace that I've misinterpreted your words, please show it to me. If I have I'll be happy to explain. But so far you haven't done so leaving me to believe that it hasn't happened.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

MODERATOR WARNING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! for everyone posting on this topic.

This is for many of you posters, please remember one of the board rules is: Board Rules 



> Quoteue to an increasing number of extremely long posts, posts to the board are be no more than 1000 words. Should a post far exceed this limit please just provide a link on the board to a private web page where the article can be found.


So we all need to pick and choose what we want to comment on a bit more carefully. Please.

Additionally, we can all agree to disagree. So, while generally people are doing well at the 'being polite' while offering their opinion...........continue to do so and everyone can have their say. No personal attacks.


----------



## Timber1

OK, MRl, I will keep this one short and no one will give it much attention because I am a bit of a novice.

However, I think this whole debate could be simplified a bit. For most GSD's there is no need for E Collars, the moderately tough ones can be well trained with something lessor, for example a pronged collar.

Nonetheless, there are situations in which an E-Collar can be helpful. Many of the posters described those situations so let us leave it at that, other then to say that my GSD will never be trained with an E-Collar.


----------



## IliamnasQuest

Oh my, Lou, I definitely ruffled some feathers there .. *LOL* 

First, you've given *your opinion* that dogs don't have a fear of consequences that causes them to avoid the shock. There's a huge difference between moving out of a chilly spot into a warmer spot, and having a collar strapped to your neck that abitrarily provides a shock at the whim of a human trying to get the dog to do (or not do) a behavior that may or may not be natural to the dog. You choose to believe that a dog doesn't have any fear of consequences in that situation, I believe they do and that's the only reason why they try to avoid the shock by offering the behavior you want. I have found that people (or "you folks" in your terminology) who want to use techniques that create pain/discomfort for everyday use generally try to excuse the use by saying it doesn't really cause any pain to the dog. I won't do that. I won't minimize what I do when I choose to use a shock collar (or prong collar) on my dog. To minimize it, in my opinion, is to minimize the concern I have for my dogs (who I love very much and want to treat kindly).

I said earlier: "I was stating my dislike for people using shock collars *at times* when they can train the behavior just as well without the use of shock. " And you said: "How do you know that someone "can train the behavior just as well without the use of shock?" 

Evidently you mis-read (again). Please note the "at times" - this means that when a gentler method can be used and people use a shock collar anyhow because of convenience or whatever other excuse they want to use, I dislike that. I think that makes me pretty darn human. And I know that there are many behaviors that can be taught quite successfully (shown by the high number of people who do it every day) without the use of shock. It's amazing how there are so many people who manage to do quite well without methods like this, and yet you and your buddies try to make it sound like no dog can be trained to reliability without using an e-collar.

The potential for mental abuse is huge with the shock collar - you keep saying it won't cause any physical injuries, but personally I'm as concerned about the dog's mental state as I am the physical state. Maybe that isn't a big concern to you, but it is to me. Are there those who abuse treat training? Well, I suppose if you really want to stretch the imagination, you could call it abuse when someone gives a cookie to a dog when it doesn't actually earn it. But sheesh, who in their right mind would compare potential positive reinforcement "abuse" to potential shock collar "abuse". Do you honestly have no idea how ludicrous that sounds?

I do find it quite amusing that when you state something, you consider it established fact - but if anyone else states something, it's just wrong.

BTW, you gave some of your background in training in your previous posts, I gave some of mine. Evidently when you do it, it's "establishing yourself" but when I do it, it's just off-topic. Another irregularity in your logic, I do believe .. *LOL* .. it's obvious we won't agree, and those who wish to defend the use of shock with their dogs for all levels of training will probably do it until their dying gasp. I won't ever feel bad for telling people to go with the kindest method possible - the one that creates the least amount of discomfort or pain for their dogs - before trying shock or anything else that's based on an avoidance of consequences (using avoidance instead of fear just to pacify you a bit .. *L*). 

Melanie and the gang in Alaska


----------



## kutzro357

I do my own electrical work. I`ve been shocked, REALLY shocked. I try to avoid that situation (learned that) yet I have no fear what so ever of doing electric work. I enjoy it. I have crashed motorcycles, even had a car pull out in front of me and crashed. I still love to ride. I ride without fear. It doesn`t create fear in me when I see a car. It created an awareness, some avoidance but 0% fear.


----------



## Dohhhhh

The original posted asked a question….how to get a 100% total recall. Using an e-collar is one option. Actually, it is the only option that I know of. If anyone can tell me another option that allows the handler to correct the dog (enforce the recall) SHOULD the dog, OFF LEAD and AT A DISTANCE, fail to respond to a recall please, PLEASE tell me, I am all ears (eyes). This is a put up or shut up question. I don’t care to hear practice, practice, practice until it is perfected. This isn’t 100%. There is room for error on the dogs part. Anything I can do to decrease that marginal room for error is the method I choose to use. 

My e-collar has a mile range. My dogs are NEVER allowed anywhere near that distance from me, even so, I still have the means at my disposal to call them back while they have the freedom to run and play.

Things DO HAPPEN that are beyond an owners control. I feel it is better safe than sorry. Once the dog is lost or dead, it is a little late to find out your method really was not as close to perfect as it should have been.

The idea some would have others believe is that use of an e-collar will turn a dog into a fearful quivering bowl of Jello…this is B.S! Over the past several years I have worked with dozens of dogs properly trained via e-collars and not a one of them were as described in posts found on this thread.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

Have to say I agree with those that say for 100%, it's the e-collar for me.

But I also agree that many people are lazy, don't get the proper training, don't read the directions, and can really mess up their dogs IF they don't use the collar properly. So, frankly, I don't necessarily recommend the collar for everyone.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: MaggieRoseLee So, frankly, I don't necessarily recommend the collar for everyone.


Your correct MRL. Some people should not be allowed to own them. Education on the tool is the key. If the collar had been used in the humane way it should have been from the very beginning, I don't think there would be such heated discussions now. The collar is a very useful, humane, tool in a trainers bag of tricks. The instructions that come with the collars (from what I have seen anyway) are crap. The manufactures should take a little more time and put a lot more educational information in their owners manuels and on their websites. They are the ones that make the money.







Not the training professionals that use them.

Lou Castles site has the best educational information on use of an e-collar that I have ever read. His instructions are clear and concise and he is at anyone's disposal who has a question or who does not fully understand a step or topic on his site.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: kaslkaosOn the other hand, there are many pro-e-collar posts that seem to imply that their training is done exclusively with the e-collar.


I'm not one of them. I use many tools and methods. There are some things that the Ecollar is not best suited for. For example I used clicker methods (I don't use the tool though) to teach dogs to bark on command. After training a "stop" barking command I reinforce it with the Ecollar. I train scent work by allows the dog to use his natural instinct. The reward is allowing him to fulfill his drives. 



> Originally Posted By: kaslkaos I just want to add, this is not necessary.


It sounds a bit like this statement speaks against "the exclusive use of the Ecollar." I guess it depends on what you're training but if all you're talking about is simple, basic OB, the Ecollar is a fine tool for teaching it from the start to the finish. Of course, other tools are used as well, retractable leashes, 6' leashes. long lines. tie outs and more. 

While those dogs will learn to avoid the discomfort of the stim, it usually has to occur at a fairly high level of discomfort to get the dog's attention and to get compliance. This may be responsible for some averse of the responses from the dog that people describe. 

But they don't happen when the dog is trained for the behavior with the Ecollar; even if he already knows it, and MOST DO, because the dog learns collar literacy right from the start. This means that the dog knows that when the stim starts, it means that the dog has done (or is doing) something wrong. Not wrong from the moral standpoint, but from the standpoint of what the handler wants. He ALSO learns that when it stop, he's done the right thing. This happens at the level of stim that the dog first feels. It's important to note that I use the continuous mode almost exclusively and for all the basic training. 

People who do it the other way (training first and only using the Ecollar to proof) often have a hard time in understanding how a dog can work at such a low level of stim. It's because they've been conditioned to it from the start. 



> Originally Posted By: kaslkaos Using +r (treats, toys) to train your dog won't detract from their recall.


There are problems with using food inherent in the reward itself. They're rare but people need to be aware of them. If it's used to do anything that the dog does that's instinctively related to food, chasing and retrieving a toy, for example, he may revert to the instinctive behavior to the exclusion of the trained behavior. It's VERY difficult to train the dog out of this instinctive behavior. 



> Originally Posted By: kaslkaos adding an e-collar to proof safety commands will not diminish all the motivation you've invested into your training (unless you make bad mistakes with the e-collar).


If the right level of stim for the dog at any moment is used this is correct. Some dogs are more resilient and forgiving of being a bit off on the selection than others. 



> Originally Posted By: kaslkaos We all have different ideas of what is okay or not okay to do with our dogs, and different philosophical limits. Let's just educate as to the possibilities.
> 
> Maybe some more "how I did it" stories would be helpful.


I've earlier referred to "Roma's story." For those who haven't checked it out, here are the details. 

(Oops, I just read the moderators' warning about post length) Very sorry Maggie, I wasn't aware. I've shortned this post to just the link. If you want to see a "how I did it" sotyr look at, http://loucastle.com/roma.htm 

But here are a few comments from that article. 

Jen, Roma's owner wrote me an email.


> Roma is a fear driven dog (unknown history - was a stray, VERY head shy and submissive with people). We have mostly conquered the head-shyness with strangers through positive reinforcement with clickers and treats. I feel I have built her confidence as much as I can at this point (I have had her almost two years). Her major problem as I see it now, is too much prey/protection drive. Within our yard/house she is WAY confident. She has lunged at and tried to bite (got a pantleg!) one person who came to the door. She puts on HUGE displays of aggression at squirrels, dogs and people who walk within 10 yards of our house (this includes lunging, stomping, full hackles, growling/snarling, "kill shaking" toys or *anything* that is nearby). I'm concerned that these aggressive displays will turn into an attack if she accidentally gets out or off leash.
> 
> A few months later, Jen brought Roma to one of my seminars. While I was talking with Jen about the dog, Roma was on leash a few feet away from me. Someone nearby closed, not slammed, just closed, a car door. Roma responded by coming up at my face in an all out attempt to bite me! I fully expected to get bitten during the next few minutes when I took Roma's leash.
> 
> I then let her wander out to the end of the Flexi-leash. I pressed the button and pulled her towards me. After she began to walk towards me on her own, I released the button. This continued for about 20 minutes or so. (Note: this is the first part of the recall protocol described in detail at http://loucastle.com/recall.htm ). I then knelt down and Roma climbed into my lap and began licking my face. A dog that a few minutes ago had wanted to bite me was not completely trusting me. (Note: quite the opposite of what at least one poster has said happens with the Ecollar)
> 
> The next day we went to a park and I worked on the sit and sit at a distance with Roma. (Note; the protocol is described in detail at http://loucastle.com/sit.htm ).
> 
> My theory on why this method works to give dogs confidence is that the dog is forced by an unseen force, the Ecollar, to stay in one place. The penalty for going into fight or flight as Roma was doing, is the discomfort of the stimulation. Please note that I'm still working at the level where the dog first feels the stimulation. The dog wants to avoid that penalty and as such, holds her position. A child rides by on a bike and where the dog used to chase and try to bite that child, she is forced to hold her sit. She is doing the work. She is not being restrained by a leash. Lo and behold, nothing bad happens to the dog.
> 
> A few minutes later some children playing nearby start screaming and laughing. Roma used to run in abject terror when this occurred, but now the consequences of a stimulation make her do the work and she holds her position. Again, nothing bad happens to the dog.
> 
> A few minutes later a car passes by. This used to terrify Roma who would run until she ran out of strength. Now, she holds her position and she doesn't die!!
> 
> Roma has learned that not going into fight or flight brings pleasant consequences, that is, nothing bad happens to her.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: Timber1For most GSD's there is no need for E Collars


I'll go further. There is not a *need *for an Ecollar on any dog, EVER! We trained dogs for thousands of years before they came along. But they're here now and they're not going to go away. Because they greatly simplify and speed up training without any ill effects when used properly every trainer should have them in their tool box. The fact that "until now" a trainer has been successful does not eliminate the possibility that tomorrow a dog will present with problems that can't be solved with other methods. 

The correct response is EDUCATION. 



> Originally Posted By: Timber1 the moderately tough ones can be well trained with something lessor, for example a pronged collar.


If you'd read my articles you'd realize that an Ecollar is FAR MORE GENTLE than the pinch collar. Not the other way round. The problem here is that you think it's "the other way round." It's not, when used as I teach it.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest First, you've given your opinion that dogs don't have a fear of consequences that causes them to avoid the shock.


It's not just my opinion. Many others here have said the same thing. And Steven Lindsay agrees. I've already cited him in post # 575590. "With the behavior- contingent cessation or avoidance of ES, * dogs experience immediate emotional relieve that subsequently merges into a state of progressive relaxation incompatible with social aversion and fear." * (Emphasis added) 

I've put Ecollars on well over 2,000 dogs. NOT ONE OF THEM had a "fear" of the consequences. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest There's a huge difference between moving out of a chilly spot into a warmer spot, and having a collar strapped to your neck that *arbitrarily provides a shock at the whim of a human * trying to get the dog to do (or not do) a behavior that may or may not be natural to the dog. (Emphasis added)


You completely misstated what's happening. A dog that's being trained with an Ecollar does not receive an "arbitrary stim." He's stimmed for a deliberate purpose and at the same instant he's shown how to make it stop. He's taught how to relieve the minor discomfort. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I have found that people (or "you folks" in your terminology) who want to use techniques that create pain/discomfort


You use the phrase "pain/discomfort" when such is not the case. It's discomfort ONLY. Pain is a continuum. It ranges from the highest level, "I can't stand that for another second!" to the lowest, "It's chilly, I think I need a sweater." I work at the lowest level, where the dog first feels the stim. There using the word "pain" as you do all the time, is off base. People who are anti-Ecollar OFTEN continually use the word "pain" in an emotional appeal. After all, no one wants to cause pain to their dog. I like dogs. I don't like to hurt them and so I found and then modified methods that allow me to avoid doing so. I cause some minor discomfort that lasts for a few seconds at most. I don't have a problem with that. But the anti's will continue to use emotional attacks. They always have, they always will 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest for everyday use generally try to excuse the use by saying it doesn't really cause any pain to the dog.


Yet you keep using the word "pain." 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuestI won't minimize what I do when I choose to use a shock collar (or prong collar) on my dog.


If you're misusing my methods or are doing something different and are causing pain, you're doing something SIGNIFICANTLY different than what I do or teach. This perhaps is at the seat of our disagreement. I'm ONLY talking about Ecollars used as I do. 

The pain of a sharp correction from a pinch collar is NOWHERE NEAR the discomfort of a stim at the level that the dog first feels. I'd NEVER use an Ecollar as it seems that you do. It's no wonder that you oppose their use for other things that you use it for. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest To minimize it, in my opinion, is to minimize the concern I have for my dogs (who I love very much and want to treat kindly).


The insinuation is that I don't love my dogs, and nothing could be farther from the truth. 

This is one of the ploys of those who oppose the Ecollar or oppose some uses of it. They make an emotional appeal. They are often quite successful because many people use emotion rather than logic and reason when making decisions about their dogs. For them it's about _the feelings _ rather than _the reality. _ 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuestAnd I know that there are many behaviors that can be taught quite successfully (shown by the high number of people who do it every day) without the use of shock.


That completely ignores those who CAN'T do this. And it also ignores that there are many dogs that don't respond to the so-called "kinder, gentler methods." 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest It's amazing how there are so many people who manage to do quite well without methods like this, and yet you and your buddies try to make it sound like no dog can be trained to reliability without using an e-collar.


I don't know what "buddies" of mine you're referring to. I'm the only one writing my posts. If you've gotten this from anything I've written, you're not reading correctly. If you can find such a statement I've made please show it to us. 

I noticed that you've made several accusations about things you claim I've said. Each time I've asked for you to show us those posts and you've never done so. That's because, as in this case, they don't exist. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest The potential for mental abuse is huge with the shock collar


It's no larger than with any other tool. If you have some proof of your claim. please show us. I'm pretty sure that I've read every Ecollar study done in the last couple of decades. They've all been done by those vigorously opposed to its use and their conclusions clearly show that. The studies are heavily flawed. I've critiqued one of the most often cited of those studies here. Http://loucastle.com/schilder.htm But please, feel free to supply more. I've probably shown their shortcomings and flaws many times before. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest you keep saying it won't cause any physical injuries, but personally I'm as concerned about the dog's mental state as I am the physical state.


Me too. Please show us the studies that show this. Until then it's just your opinion and mine is different. I'm pretty sure that I've trained FAR MORE dogs with the Ecollar than you have and I think that makes my opinion a bit more valid than yours on this. Especially since it's obvious, based on your statements, that you're not using the tool as I advocate. 

As to the misuse of "treat training:" The results of abuse with treats is insidious. Many people don't cut down on the dog's regular food and so we see grossly overweight dogs. That's a VERY serious health problem that shortens the dog's life and can cause all sorts of health problems. 

As to abuse with clicker training: I was present when a VERY frustrated clicker trainer threw her clicker, striking her dog near its eye. He only escaped serious injury by luck.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: MaggieRoseLee So, frankly, I don't necessarily recommend the collar for everyone.


Heck, I don't recommend dog ownership for everyone. LOL.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: TracieLou Castles site has the best educational information on use of an e-collar that I have ever read. His instructions are clear and concise and he is at anyone's disposal who has a question or who does not fully understand a step or topic on his site.


Tracie is obviously trying out for the position as my publicist. (Hey it's Los Angeles, everyone has a publicist). Sorry Tracie there's no budget for one. 

On a serious note Tracie, thanks for the kind words.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: LouCastle
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: TracieLou Castles site has the best educational information on use of an e-collar that I have ever read. His instructions are clear and concise and he is at anyone's disposal who has a question or who does not fully understand a step or topic on his site.
> 
> 
> 
> Tracie is obviously trying out for the position as my publicist. (Hey it's Los Angeles, everyone has a publicist). Sorry Tracie there's no budget for one.
> 
> On a serious note Tracie, thanks for the kind words.
Click to expand...


Well nuts! I guess you can toss my resume when you get it LOL 

On a serious note as well....someone once said...It is what it is....I have not found anyone that has put the use of an e-collar into as simple a form as you have on your website. If I felt you were an idiot, I would have no problem saying that to you either LOL


----------



## IliamnasQuest

> Originally Posted By: LouCastle I've put Ecollars on well over 2,000 dogs. NOT ONE OF THEM had a "fear" of the consequences.


Oh my, over 2000 dogs. That's just sad to me. No wonder you are so highly defensive of this method. And again, it's a matter of opinion on your part that there is no fear of consequences. Obviously the dogs must want to AVOID the shock or it just plain wouldn't work. You want to diminish that concept into something placid or maybe even kind - but again, I won't sugar-coat it. Dogs on a shock collar perform to avoid the shock, and that means there IS a certain level of fear/avoidance of consequences. Call it what YOU will, that's reality and I believe in reality and not using soft semantics to undermine what's really happening. I'm sorry that you do.



> Quote:You completely misstated what's happening. A dog that's being trained with an Ecollar does not receive an "arbitrary stim." He's stimmed for a deliberate purpose and at the same instant he's shown how to make it stop. He's taught how to relieve the minor discomfort.


It's certainly arbitrary on the part of the human. They choose when to shock and how much to use. And while you call it a "minor discomfort" you have no way of truly knowing how it feels to the dog. Maybe I'd have more respect for people who base their training on a shock collar if they wore a matching collar that gave them the same stimulation every time they pressed the button. I'm sure that it would be more than a "minor discomfort" then.



> Quote:I'm pretty sure that I've trained FAR MORE dogs with the Ecollar than you have and I think that makes my opinion a bit more valid than yours on this.


Oh YES, I'm have no doubt you've done a TON more shock training than I ever will! But what I see it doing to you is making you extremely defensive of any criticism - implied or real - about the use of a shock collar. If you've truly used the shock collar on over 2000 dogs, that says to me that YOU are extremely dependent on a method that deliberately produces a "discomfort" (since you're just so sensitive about the word "pain") to your dogs. What's up with that? Some kind of macho thing? I truly don't understand why someone chooses to use shock SO MUCH. It's almost incomprehensible. But maybe getting the end result is more important to you than the means, and the dogs just have to deal with it. 



> Quote:Especially since it's obvious, based on your statements, that you're not using the tool as I advocate.


You've stated more than once that I used the shock collar wrong. Please PLEASE go back and show me where I've indicated a wrong use. Other people have put those words out there but I've said more than once that I used the collar in accordance with YOUR instructions. 

I truly believe you keep saying this as an excuse - after all, how could I possibly have used the appropriate low level stimulation (as per the great Lou Castle) and yet still disagree with you on the regular use of the shock collar for everyday training? *huge gasp* It's just something you can't get your brain around, isn't it? And so you want everyone to think that I used the collar wrong, when the reality is that I used it just like you recommend. And it worked. And I still don't like to use it, because I enjoy dog training and shaping those behaviors into all sorts of great things by using my BRAIN instead of my BRAWN. Like I've said before, there's always time to use compulsion later on, but there's just no valid reason not to do most of your training with the least amount of DISCOMFORT (and pain) to the dog. I don't advocate the use of a prong collar, either, for general training as I've found there are other things that work just as well without causing the pain. Do I occasionally put a prong collar on a dog? Yes, I do, and I'm always aware of the potential pain that it can cause. It's rare for me to use any sort of tool, however, that is based on creating any sort of discomfort. 

Call it an "emotional appeal" if you want, but sheesh - who out there will admit that they WANT to create pain or discomfort for their dogs? Isn't that just a tad bit sadistic? I do love my dogs, and I want them to be as happy as possible while still maintaining the behaviors they're taught. I base my training on as much +R as possible, and teach my classes accordingly. And my students are successful without having to use much correction. If it CAN be done that way, why would anyone CHOOSE to use a shock collar? That's my point. Much of the training done with a shock collar could be done without it, and yet people still choose to put on a collar that creates an electrical impulse on the dog's neck. That's what I really can't understand. Given a choice, I will always try to choose the gentlest method I can.

And while I hear from shock collar trainers that their dogs are just as happy as any other dogs, how can you truly know that? A dog that is highly reinforced for behaviors has a different attitude than a dog that works to avoid the consequences. I've seen the difference. Maybe that difference doesn't matter to some, or maybe they just never learn to read dogs that well, but it's there. 

Melanie and the gang in Alaska
... someone has to be an advocate for the dogs ..


----------



## IliamnasQuest

> Originally Posted By: kutzro357I do my own electrical work. I`ve been shocked, REALLY shocked. I try to avoid that situation (learned that) yet I have no fear what so ever of doing electric work. I enjoy it. I have crashed motorcycles, even had a car pull out in front of me and crashed. I still love to ride. I ride without fear. It doesn`t create fear in me when I see a car. It created an awareness, some avoidance but 0% fear.


Your dog is a dog. You, I believe, are a human. As a human, you should have the capability to think through things to a greater level. Your thoughts/reactions are not comparable to your dog's thoughts/reactions. Just because you can understand why you got shocked (probably your own mistake), it's not valid to assume that your dog is going to think the same way.

I think that people are really stuck on the whole "fear of consequences" phrase. A dog - or human, for that matter - doesn't have to have an overpowering fear for something to have a fear of consequences. It can range from a simple avoidance to a huge fearful reaction, depending on the circumstances. Just because a dog doesn't go running off, cringing and yelping, doesn't mean that the dog doesn't have a fear of consequences.

It's this consequence that makes any sort of compulsion training - by that, I mean any training that is based on creating a situation that is uncomfortable for the dog in order to elicit a particular behavior - effective. You CAN get results with compulsion-based training. I won't dispute that. When I first started training we used a lot of compulsion. But as I studied dogs and learned about behavior I found that compulsion wasn't necessary for most training and I chose to go with the least amount of compulsion needed. I chose to avoid fear of consequences as a mainstay of my training program.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska


----------



## kutzro357

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest
> 
> Your dog is a dog. You, I believe, are a human. As a human, you should have the capability to think through things to a greater level. Your thoughts/reactions are not comparable to your dog's thoughts/reactions. Just because you can understand why you got shocked (probably your own mistake), it's not valid to assume that your dog is going to think the same way.
> 
> Melanie and the gang in Alaska



Exactly. LMAO My post, although the facts are true was sarcasm. We practical trainers are not the ones treating our dogs like little people with fur coats.

I`m not sure I`ve seen anyone here say to use 100% compulsion? Seems all your ranting about is the relative values of compulsion vs reward and the fact you don`t like a tool some choose.

How do you feel about guns and gun ownership? It`s a tool. Laying on a table it does nothing, can`t do anything. Your beef is with an inanimate object and the fact they can be abused.


----------



## Qyn

Up until now the posts have been quote and counter. The last post is not in that vein. 

Kutzro, you are out of line with your both the tone of your comments and the specifics regarding "like little people with fur coats"; "your ranting" and "How do you feel about guns and gun ownership? It`s a tool. Laying on a table it does nothing, can`t do anything. Your beef is with an inanimate object and the fact they can be abused." 

The person you have directed this to does not at all have dogs that fit into that category and the fact that she has used this device and admits its effectiveness while not actively promoting its use from the get go, has been ignored by many of the ecollar proponents on this topic,

Your personal attack is unwarranted and does nothing to promote the use of an ecollar..


----------



## kutzro357

Hmmm and calling people lazy that use that tool isn`t? I can`t help it if you don`t see my point. 
If one wants to engage in debate then one needs to be ready for what follows.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: QynUp until now the posts have been quote and counter. The last post is not in that vein.
> 
> Kutzro, you are out of line with your both the tone of your comments and the specifics regarding "like little people with fur coats"; "your ranting" and "How do you feel about guns and gun ownership? It`s a tool. Laying on a table it does nothing, can`t do anything. Your beef is with an inanimate object and the fact they can be abused."
> 
> The person you have directed this to does not at all have dogs that fit into that category and the fact that she has used this device and admits its effectiveness while not actively promoting its use from the get go, has been ignored by many of the ecollar proponents on this topic,
> 
> Your personal attack is unwarranted and does nothing to promote the use of an ecollar..


Personal attack? ON her? NOT.....this is a personal attack!!!!!!!!!



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest[
> I truly believe you keep saying this as an excuse - after all, how could I possibly have used the appropriate low level stimulation (as per the great Lou Castle) and yet still disagree with you on the regular use of the shock collar for everyday training? *huge gasp* It's just something you can't get your brain around, isn't it?


Which, I have to say has been avoided up until the above post. 

I for one like to "DEBATE" the issue without the personal attackes. Would be nice if others could as well.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest You CAN get results with compulsion-based training. I won't dispute that. When I first started training we used a lot of compulsion. But as I studied dogs and learned about behavior I found that compulsion wasn't necessary for most training and I chose to go with the least amount of compulsion needed. I chose to avoid fear of consequences as a mainstay of my training program.
> 
> Melanie and the gang in Alaska


EXACTLY! YOU CHOSE! Just as e-collar trainers CHOSE to train via that method. Everyone has his/her own opinion(s) as to the best way to train their dog.

Not one time have I read where anyone has attacked your choice of training method. Quite the opposite actually...seems I recall reading over and over that IF your happy with the method YOU CHOSE to use then we are HAPPY YOU ARE HAPPY









I personally cringe at the though of ever again putting a prong collar on my dog. Those spikes look like they could really hurt. I know it did not feel good on my arm when I put it on and gave it a nice tug. There is a thread on prong collar use...why does it not get the same ridicule as the e-collar from the positive reinforcment folks?

I placed the e-collar on what I would call the tenderest part of my body...the back of my neck. I tapped the button...at higher levels than any of my dogs work at. It was not painful. Then I put the collar on the same place as the prong collar. The e-collar was no where near as uncomfortable to me as the prong collar.

Opinions are like eyes....we all have them but I may not see things the same way as you....live and let live


----------



## novarobin

Sorry for the thread hijack but I have to ask. Please don't think this is an attack on Ecollars, just a question. 

I read "How Dogs Think" by Stanley Coren and it said something like dogs don't feel heat. (I am not at home so I can't go back and reference it) They feel an absence of it (cold) but do not process it the same way we do. I was wondering if we know anything on what a shock may be to them? I mean like stronger, weaker, etc. If they don't process heat the same way we do, I was wondering if the shock would feel different. I know they can't tell us but sometimes scientific studies can have an idea how it affects them. Is their nervous system similiar to ours? 
I know I have seen my clumsy lab bang his head and not even flinch. Even when my boys play I can't figure out how they don't get hurt.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: novarobinSorry for the thread hijack but I have to ask. Please don't think this is an attack on Ecollars, just a question.
> 
> I read "How Dogs Think" by Stanley Coren and it said something like dogs don't feel heat. (I am not at home so I can't go back and reference it) They feel an absence of it (cold) but do not process it the same way we do. I was wondering if we know anything on what a shock may be to them? I mean like stronger, weaker, etc. If they don't process heat the same way we do, I was wondering if the shock would feel different. I know they can't tell us but sometimes scientific studies can have an idea how it affects them. Is their nervous system similiar to ours?
> I know I have seen my clumsy lab bang his head and not even flinch. Even when my boys play I can't figure out how they don't get hurt.


I've not read this book nor have I done any scientific study, but based on observance of MY dogs (I will pick one) Carlie, if she bumps herself, she sometimes yips, if another dog nips her sometimes she yips sometimes she does not, if the stim on the e-collar is a bit too high (my dogs all have different working levels and from time to time, I will forget to put the dial back to zero…human error) she yips. I can only assume, as she cannot tell me, that when she yips, she has felt some type of discomfort.

Something I have noticed with all my dogs….if they happen to not hear a command/miss the hand signal for a command and I have tapped the remote, they will either turn and look at me or come back to me in the same manner as if I have called their name.

As for heat, when I open my oven door, all my dogs back up. Do they feel it? Really could not say though I would like to assume, based on their moving back, that they do feel something.

I found this study to be VERY interesting! http://www.trainmypet.net/documents/white_paper.pdf


----------



## WiscTiger

<span style="color: #FF0000">Why is it EVERY time there is a thread about the eCollar I end up locking it because PEOPLE can not seem to debate WITHOUT insulting others.

*Keep the insults out, if you can't do that then don't post. Any more insults to other members will not be tolerated*. 

Wisc.Tiger - Admin.</span>


----------



## Dohhhhh

I stand duly chastised. My apologies to the O.P.








I certainly do not wish to see this thread locked.


----------



## novarobin

I wish I had the book here so I could read the part again and better explain it. They don't process heat like we do. They obviously feel it. 
It was a good book. It went through all of their senses, how they were like and unlike ours. Such as how they see because of the different types of cones/receptors in their eyes and where they are positioned, etc. And also why these would be relevant to their nature.


----------



## gagsd

I am going to, very cautiously!!, stick my neck out here

I think a reason most of us who choose not to use ecollars make that decision, is because 99% of people who do (that I have seen) are in fact abusive.

I hate hearing dogs screaming on the training field. There are days at training that I can not get my puppy out because of all the screaming and it stresses her to hear it. I can not take my daughter to training because I never know what kind of ecollar work will be done and how do you explain that to a 6 year old??

I am not talking about a dog "vocalizing" because it was surprised. This is pain and the dogs whimper, cry, scream. It turns my stomach.

I watched a trial recently where the dog missed the retrieve exercise. He did not immediatly see the dumbell, and had that frantic "Oh God, I have to get back into position" look on his face as he gave up and returned to a beautiful front for his handler. I saw the training sessions and I am quite sure the dog was frantic because he was anticipating painful stim and had learned the only safe place was back in position with the handler. 

I too used an ecollar when I first started.... Under guidance from the only person I have personally met who did not "inflict pain" with it. But I have chosen to distance myself from it because so many people abuse it, far more than any other training device I know of.

Mary


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

> Quote: I think a reason most of us who choose not to use ecollars make that decision, is because 99% of people who do (that I have seen) are in fact abusive.
> 
> I hate hearing dogs screaming on the training field.


And all those people MIS-USING the e-collar are why I don't recommend their use for most people. Properly used, there should be no screaming going on. If your dog is, then you are one of the people that did not read up on how to use the collar, are not using it to 'train' but only to correct, and are giving the e-collar a bad name.

Many (most?) people want a quick fix when training their dogs. They refuse to go to classes. Refuse to listen to a professional. Refuse to take the necessary TIME to learn to train a dog. Correcting a dog is fast, easy and (short term) seems to work well. 

In a high drive dog, in a situation that they are in over drive for (like some retrievers in a field situation) they SO love the work you can 'abuse' them with the collar and they will still work. So it seems to be ok. But for the rest of us with regular dogs, it's not a good situation and there won't be 'training' going on. 

I know people that have come home and found their dog dead because they left it in a run and it's collar got caught on the fencing and the dog hung themselves in a panic. Does that mean collars or bad? Or that we need to be careful how we use the collar??

The problem isn't the e-collar. It's the human element with people being too lazy to learn how to train properly. Too cheap to work with a qualified trainer. In too much of a hurry to work with a dog to 'train' and instead would prefer to correct correct correct with the collar by having the dog go wrong wrong wrong..... I also feel that there are alot of 'Old School' trainers out there who refuse to listen/learn and THINK about there being a new and better way to train then just using the same way they have for the past 30 or so years.


----------



## gagsd

These people are the qualified trainers








Mary


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: gagsd_pup1I am going to, very cautiously!!, stick my neck out here
> 
> I think a reason most of us who choose not to use ecollars make that decision, is because 99% of people who do (that I have seen) are in fact abusive.
> 
> I hate hearing dogs screaming on the training field. There are days at training that I can not get my puppy out because of all the screaming and it stresses her to hear it. I can not take my daughter to training because I never know what kind of ecollar work will be done and how do you explain that to a 6 year old??
> 
> I am not talking about a dog "vocalizing" because it was surprised. This is pain and the dogs whimper, cry, scream. It turns my stomach.
> 
> I watched a trial recently where the dog missed the retrieve exercise. He did not immediatly see the dumbell, and had that frantic "Oh God, I have to get back into position" look on his face as he gave up and returned to a beautiful front for his handler. I saw the training sessions and I am quite sure the dog was frantic because he was anticipating painful stim and had learned the only safe place was back in position with the handler.
> 
> I too used an ecollar when I first started.... Under guidance from the only person I have personally met who did not "inflict pain" with it. But I have chosen to distance myself from it because so many people abuse it, far more than any other training device I know of.
> 
> Mary


In this instance (as described above) your talking about animal abuse and law enforcement officials should be called.

This is NOT the type of e-collar training I am talking about. I would not stand for this type of training for one second and would certainly be "turned off" to it as well.

The picture you paint above is how NOT to use an e-collar and I am sorry for you and for the dogs that have gone through it.


----------



## Dohhhhh

A good rule of thumb: If a trainer makes you uncomfortable with the way they handle your dog or any dog for that matter, find a new trainer


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

> Quote:
> These people are the qualified trainers
> Mary


Good point!







And where my common sense comes in. 

I know people who do field trials for Labrador Retrievers and have made comments like you have. They added that these trainers are (as I mentioned earlier) the people (mostly men







) that have been training these 'high drive' dogs exactly the same way for the past 30 or so years and GOD KNOWS couldn't maybe be open minded enough to realize they can get EXACTLY the same end behavior without having their dogs screaming when the e-collar is used in the way they are choosing to use it.

I've been to a ton of different trainers for obedience and agility and clicker and jump and ............................ classes and seminars. Some of them I liked. Some of them I didn't. Some of them I chose to continue to train with cause I agree with their methods. And SOME I DO NOT! My dog, my brain, my choice.

Once again, if you look at most of the instructions, manuals and training methods for the e-collar......... getting your dog to 'scream' 'is NOT in the current instruction manuals. Instead that is a choice someone has decided to use on their dog that is outside the guidelines and use recommended by any of the collar manufacturers or any of the e-collar instructors that I would choose to learn from. 

It's funny because it really really is 'old school' and many people just refuse to learn there is a better way. Just takes more time and the HUMAN needs to listen and learn something new to pass it onto the dog. When I first started obedience training 15 years ago with my dog, it was almost entirely based on setting up my dog to do something WRONG so I could then 'correct' the dog with the leash/collar. Get up from a 'sit' then I would pop/correct. Forge ahead on the leash then I would pop/correct. Get up from the down? I would pop/correct. All about my dog HAVING to do 'wrong' cause that was the ONLY way I could then 'correct' to make my dog learn to do it right.

Do I train that way now? Nopers. Because now I know better and first teach my dog to do it RIGHT with praise and rewards. And only after do I add the prong/e-collar if needed. But I was open minded, I realized there was a better way for my dog that worked, and I was willing to LEARN this new way and make a change in my training methods.

Many people are not.


----------



## Dohhhhh

> Originally Posted By: gagsd_pup1These people are the qualified trainers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mary


When I read horror stories like this, "qualified" isn't the word that comes to mind.







IF I were to type the word(s) that came to mind...the thread would be locked and deleted









But remember....it is ABUSE of the USE of the tool...not the tool itself. I find trainers who helicopter dogs with all four feet off the ground via choke chain, going round and round just as abusive. Blame the trainer (using THAT word loosely) not the training aid.


----------



## LouCastle

Not one of the over 2,000 dogs that I put Ecollars on thought it was "sad." 

Why would the number of dogs that I've trained make me "defensive of the method?" In any case, I'm defensive of the method because I know how well it works, how easy it is on the dogs and the handlers. At the same time, people who aren't using the tool properly criticize it because of the poor results they're getting. Many of those people are more concerned with _their feelings _than with reality. 

As has been said, it's NOT just MY opinion that there is no fear of consequences. It's the opinion of hundreds of thousand of Ecollar users and Steven Lindsay, a prominent behaviorist too. He says that Ecollar use is * " … incompatible with social aversion and fear." * I wonder why you haven't commented on this? 

Please remember it's just a matter of YOUR opinion that they do cause fear. I think that since I've trained far more dogs with Ecollars than you have, that my opinion is far more valid. But perhaps you're seeing these things because of the way that you use the tool. It'd different from what I do. There is avoidance in a dog who's working to avoid a stim but there is no fear. You can repeat this "fear" thing until you're blue in the face but it won't change the truth. I want to AVOID being hungry so I make sure that I don't miss many meals. I want to AVOID being cold so I wear a jacket. But I don't FEAR either situation and neither does anyone else. If you have this opinion why do you use an Ecollar at all? Aren't your methods sufficient to give you the control that you need? 

I love it when people say things like "you have no way of truly knowing how it feels to the dog." Every mammal on the planet processes "sudden onset pain" the same way. They all have the same response to it, (excepting a relatively small number of deviant humans). They quickly move away from it. Often there's vocalization among those capable of it. The nerve impulse causing this rapid movement doesn't even reach the brain. It goes to the nearest muscle capable of moving the animal away from it and causes it to activate. 

A dog feeling a stim at the level where he first perceives it, sits and scratches as if a single flea was biting him. Some other signs are an ear flick, a blink of the eye, a glance at the ground or their chest. An animal feeling the sudden onset of pain JUMPS away from it and often screams in pain. The nerve impulses for discomfort don't cause sudden jumps or vocalizations. The go all the way to the brain for interpretation. There's no such interpretation for pain. 

Humans who feel the stim at the level they can first perceive it almost universally describe it as a "buzz" or a "tingle." Children who feel it GIGGLE. 

People often make silly comments that the trainer should wear an Ecollar that stims him when it stim the dog. It would be BOTHERSOME and ANNOYING but he wouldn't fear it. I test my Ecollar on my hand, let or neck everyday before I put them on the dog. Guess what, I'm not afraid of doing it. It's only a minor discomfort. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest If you've truly used the shock collar on over 2000 dogs,


Did you just "politely" call me a liar? 



> Originally Posted By: ILIAMNASQUEST But maybe getting the end result is more important to you than the means


As long as the results are achieved humanely, the method isn't important. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest You've stated more than once that I used the shock collar wrong.


I have NEVER made any such statement! If you disagree please show me that statement. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I've said more than once that I used the collar in accordance with YOUR instructions.


If you had been using the Ecollar according to my instructions you'd not be saying that the dogs "fear the consequences." You may _think _ that you're using my methods but if your dogs DO fear the consequences, you're not. More than likely you've combined my methods with your own or someone else's. I'm not responsible for what you get when you do that. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest after all, how could I possibly have used the appropriate low level stimulation (as per the great Lou Castle)


Let's please try and keep this polite, OK? Rude comments like this are what get these threads closed, which is often what anti Ecollar people hope for. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And it worked. And I still don't like to use it, because I enjoy dog training and shaping those behaviors into all sorts of great things by using my BRAIN instead of my BRAWN.


If you're methods are so good, why do you use an Ecollar at all? 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Given a choice, I will always try to choose the gentlest method I can.


One of us has written MANY times now, "if you're happy with the results of your training, no matter what method or tool was used (and it's humane), then I'm happy." Which one of us would that be? Hmmm I wonder. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest And while I hear from shock collar trainers that their dogs are just as happy as any other dogs, how can you truly know that?


I have taken thousand of bites. I've learned to read dogs very well. It's easy for me to tell when one is happy and when one is not. Based on this experience I can say that any dog that I've put an Ecollar on is "happy."


----------



## LouCastle

Earlier kutzro357 wrote


> Quote:I do my own electrical work. I`ve been shocked, REALLY shocked. I try to avoid that situation (learned that) yet I have no fear what so ever of doing electric work. I enjoy it. I have crashed motorcycles, even had a car pull out in front of me and crashed. I still love to ride. I ride without fear. It doesn`t create fear in me when I see a car. It created an awareness, some avoidance but 0% fear.





> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest Just because you can understand why you got shocked (probably your own mistake), it's not valid to assume that your dog is going to think the same way.


A dog trained by my methods is shown at the same time that he's stimmed, how to shut it off by guiding him into the desired behavior. Usually the recall is trained first. The dog learns that if he comes towards the handler he can make the stim stop. 

Next he's taught the sit. He quickly learns that he can make the stim stop by putting his butt on the ground when he's given that command. 

By the time this is done the dog knows EXACTLY what makes the stim start and how to shut it off. Just as Kutzro does with the aversives he mentions. The dog DOES think the same way. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest I think that people are really stuck on the whole "fear of consequences" phrase.


It's apparent that you are. You seem to be the only one who's using it, except when we respond to your comments. 



> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuest A dog - or human, for that matter - doesn't have to have an overpowering fear for something to have a fear of consequences. It can range from a * simple avoidance * to a huge fearful reaction, depending on the circumstances. Just because a dog doesn't go running off, cringing and yelping, doesn't mean that the dog doesn't have a fear of consequences. (Emphasis added)


As you just SO CLEARLY said, it can range to "simple avoidance." That's all it is when an Ecollar is used properly. Thanks for making my point!


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: Qyn the fact that she has used this device and admits its effectiveness while not actively promoting its use from the get go, has been ignored by many of the ecollar proponents on this topic


That point hasn't been "ignored" by me at all. I've asked a couple of times why, if her other methods were so good, why she needs to use the Ecollar at all? She's not answered. 

Her entire argument is based, at least so far, on two points. One is the "fear of consequences" that she claims that Ecollar trained dogs have. I'm sure that some do, but ones trained with my methods don't, so those comments don't apply to what I do. 

Her other comment is about her "feelings." If it makes her feel better to use the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" that's fine with me, and I've said so repeatedly. But she's NOT content to let us train as we see fit because it doesn't mesh with her feelings. Rather she's turned a useful post on how to get a 100% reliable recall, into the usual Ecollar debate.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: novarobinI read "How Dogs Think" by Stanley Coren and it said something like dogs don't feel heat. (I am not at home so I can't go back and reference it) They feel an absence of it (cold) but do not process it the same way we do.


I haven't read the book but I wonder, is this a matter of semantics. We feel heat or is it the absence of cold? We feel cold or is it the absence of heat? Perhaps I'm not understanding the concept. 



> Originally Posted By: novarobin I was wondering if we know anything on what a shock may be to them? I mean like stronger, weaker, etc.


I don't think that there's any way to compare what a dog feels to what we feel directly. As far as "stronger, weaker" it's going to vary. But it doesn't really make any difference. We don't turn the stim up until we feel it and then use that level on the dog. Instead we put it on the dog, slowly turn it up, and wait for him to tell us, by his actions, that he feels it. Many people can't feel the level that their dog first perceives, some can, and some think it's very uncomfortable. 

I've worked dogs that didn't feel it until it was on a 60 (out of 127 levels) and others (one a very tough police dog) that felt it on an 8. On that collar I feel it at a 27. I demo'd on a woman years ago who couldn't feel the highest level! Some of this has to do with the conductivity of the skin. Since, when we sweat, salts (which enhance conductivity) come to the surface of the skin. Since dog's don't sweat, this doesn't effect them. Their skin, however is much thicker than ours is though, so that enters the picture as well. 

I can tell by the response of a dog how he perceives it. Every mammal on the planet responds the same way to the sudden onset of pain. (Remembering that Pain is a continuum). They move away from the source VERY quickly and they often vocalize. Think of the last time that you touched something hot! 

But if it's chilly that IS NOT your response. You think about it and then you get a sweater. Dogs feeling the level of stim where they first perceive it, where I do all the basic work, do things such as flick an ear, they look at their chest (just the way they would if a grasshopper landed on them), they blink. The single most common response to this is the dog sits and scratches as if a single flea had bitten him. THE HORROR! LOL


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: Tracie I found this study to be VERY interesting! http://www.trainmypet.net/documents/white_paper.pdf


I like that paper very much. One of my favorite parts is where they compare the power of an Ecollar used at low levels of stim to other, more familiar devices. 

An Ecollar used, as I advocate, emits 0.000005 Joules. An abdominal energizer, one of those passive stomach exercisers, emits 0.914 joules, almost *183,000 times more powerful. * An electric fence charger emits 3.2 Joules, * 640,000 times more powerful. * A defibrillator emits 360 Joules, 72,000,000 times more powerful.


----------



## Colorado

OP here. I almost hesitate to comment here as this thread has grown far beyond my original question. I have no experience with e-collars personally so I can't really add to the "conversation" that you all are having. But I do have question. In this discussion, I've read the following 3 things.

(1) It's been stated many times in this thread that some high-drive dogs, such as GSDs used for police or SAR work, are so motivated by prey drive that even the yummiest treats or most loving praise isn't going to get them to turn back from a rabbit/deer/etc.

(2) It's also been stated (I believe by Lou) that the e-collar can be used at the lowest level of stim. It was described, if I recall correctly, as being in the shade, feeling chilly, and wanting to go into the sun.

(3) Finally, it's been said a dog with an e-collar can have a 100% reliable recall, even pulling the dog off a rabbit/deer/etc.

I don't understand how this is. If these high-drive dogs are really so driven by prey drive, how is it that a sensation level of "feeling chilly" is enough to dissuade them from giving chase? These are the same dogs that will do anything and everything for their human police partner, right? Including taking a bullet, taking down the bad guy even if he is beating on them, etc. I'm failing to see how such a mild sensation would even be noticed by such dogs.

I'm not making any accusations, I just always want to learn more about dog training in general. This discussion has me curious.


----------



## cafrhe

I hesitate to comment here too LOL! But I do have a SAR dog and I have used an e collar on him. I do not train with an e collar though, I have used it purely as a correction.

For me, the recall is the most important command and must be obeyed. I luckily have a very willing guy right now. He came back to me at a whistle before he was trained at all. So technically, his recall is great. 

But he is very high drive. He has run deer on me 2x (once on a walk, once when we were beginning a practice search problem) and once ran my mothers horses (after a practice search problem. The silly things were dancing up and down the fence near where we ended. Griff decided chasing them was a better reward than playing with the 'victim'). 

I believe it is my job to see any deer before my dog does. When I see a deer, or see my dog alert, I call him and we play with his ball. My thought with this, is that he will associate deer with me and his ball (who the heck knows what he thinks tho!!). I believe both deer that he chased broke very close to him and he was in full prey before I knew what was going on. The first one I had no e collar on him. The second one I had the collar on. He got a correction for going after the deer, I ended up using the 2nd highest correction to get his attention (my collar only has 7 settings). There would have been no way to correct him with out the collar. Once they come back there's no point. 

Whether it was the collar, his maturity or that I am more alert, he has not run a deer in a year even though we have seen many and many have run.

But for me, if I have an e collar on him and he runs a deer, he isnt going to get a low stim correction. He will get one that gets his attention.


----------



## StGeorgeK9

One thing that I have noticed personally that actually increases the eagerness of my dogs recall is my practicing her remote down stay.....when I put her in a down stay, or send her to place....the one thing she wants more than anything is to hear me call her name and request her to come....she wants to be with me, next to me, this is a huge mmotivator for her...the more I practice this, the more eager she is at other times to recall (there is a cat, squirrel....but my MOM called me, YEA!!!). It is just practice practice practice....regardless of method used (I happen to use e-collar as well, but I by no means have any qualifications to add any arguments one way or other than my own experience). My experience is, no matter what, the relationship with my dog gets stronger and stronger the more I work with her...her eagerness to be with me becomes her biggest motivator.....not stim, or fear of consequences just eagerness to play with MOM. In my own opinion, the stim of the e-collar is just one method to help the dog re-focus on the desired activity and learn that the requested activity is way more fun than any other they could ever think up....


----------



## GunnerJones

<span style='font-size: 23pt'><span style="color: #3366FF"><span style='font-size: 20pt'>


> Quote: *and must be obeyed*


</span></span></span>



concur, I don't think this can be accomplished by repeative nagging with a dog in high drive


----------



## StGeorgeK9

I will agree that I believe that recall is the most important thing...it can save the dogs life.


----------



## Colorado

> Originally Posted By: BetsyI will agree that I believe that recall is the most important thing...it can save the dogs life.


Hence the reason I started this thread.









Actually, to nit pick, I just want my dog to listen to me even with very tempting distractions. A reliable recall is great. I'd like an emergency down as well. If, God forbid, she ran across a road with traffic or something, I don't want a recall--I want a down and stay down.

I also live in a great area (near Boulder CO) for wilderness hiking. But that also means rattlesnakes, elk, and bears. I have a lot of work to do (and she has a lot of growing up to do) before I'd take her up into the mountains. But I would love to explore areas on dog hikes that are a little more rural.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: Colorado(1) It's been stated many times in this thread that some high-drive dogs, such as GSD's used for police or SAR work, are so motivated by prey drive that even the yummiest treats or most loving praise isn't going to get them to turn back from a rabbit/deer/etc.
> 
> (2) It's also been stated (I believe by Lou) that the e-collar can be used at the lowest level of stim. It was described, if I recall correctly, as being in the shade, feeling chilly, and wanting to go into the sun.
> 
> (3) Finally, it's been said a dog with an e-collar can have a 100% reliable recall, even pulling the dog off a rabbit/deer/etc.
> 
> I don't understand how this is. If these high-drive dogs are really so driven by prey drive, how is it that a sensation level of "feeling chilly" is enough to dissuade them from giving chase? … I'm failing to see how such a mild sensation would even be noticed by such dogs.


WHAT A GREAT QUESTION!!!!! Thanks for asking. 

Your lack of understanding is actually NOT a lack of understanding It's because you're thinking of how most people use the Ecollar for this problem. They're going to wait until the dog is involved in the chase and then they're going to press the button. Used this way MANY dogs won't even feel the stim. 

BUT this is not what I do. I do it like this. http://loucastle.com/critter.htm 

The protocol attacks the problem another way. Attacking this head-on, as is commonly done is easy but occasionally problems come up that are created by that method. It can happen anytime very high levels of stim are used and it can transfer to other work that's done with the Ecollar. 

When this is done the aim is for the dog to associate the very high level of stim, But sometimes a different association is made. the _thinking GSD _ gets it in his head that the pain came because he was away from Mom! And so he returns to her. This makes the stim stop and so he's convinced that he's right. A few moments later Mom sends him out or gives him a release (from OB). He takes a few steps remembers that _"it hurts out there" _ and stops after a few feet. (Some of you [who do sports involving bitework] may have seen something similar if your dog was "blasted" off a bite. Next time you send you, he doesn't want to leave your side). 

Another problem that sometimes arises with a very highly driven dog. especially one that has a very high threshold of pain , is that he "powers through" the stim. He simply "grits his teeth" and goes right through. He feels it but it's not aversive enough to make him stop chasing. 

I developed my protocol to stop police dogs from chasing cat during urban yard-to-yard searches. Knowing that high levels of stim can bring problems to the table I developed it to work with low level stim. 

It's very simple. You need a cat to be the prey animal, you need a "cat wrangler" and you need an Ecollar. It works because you introduce the distraction, in this case the cat, at a great distance where the dog's prey drive is "just barely awakened." At that level of distraction he DOES feel the low level stim. 

Picture a football field and the cat wrangler is walking the cat on a leash back and forth at the "other" goal line. You come in on your goal line. The Ecollar is set on the dog's working level of stim, the one he feels when he's at rest. You start walking your dog back and forth on your goal line. If you dog ignores the cat, move close by cutting diagonally across the field. This gradually moves you to the next ten yard marker. Walk back and forth at that distance. If the dog doesn’t notice the cat, move closer in the same way. 

At some point the dog WILL see the cat and will face towards it giving it a "hard look." At this point you press the button and walk backwards. When the leash pulls tight it will pull the dog backwards. Since no animal likes walking backwards for very far, at some point he'll turn away from the cat to see where he's going. When he turns his head, release the button. He's being rewarded for turning his head away from the cat. Keep working at that distance and at some point he'll avoid looking at the cat again. 

When he does that angle in another ten yards and repeat. This is repeated until the dog gets the idea that he has to look away from the cat to make the low level stim (still at the level where he first feels it) stop. 

I've used this on a dog that in one week, several days apart, was able to chase, catch, kill and feed on two stray cats in his backyard. After about 20 minutes of doing the protocol he was STEPPING OVER THE CAT but not looking at him. 

You can't chase something you can't look at and the protocol uses low level stim at low levels of distraction to teach the dog to look away from the prey animal. 

This has the dog doing the work by itself, without a recall command from the handler. 

I've had clients with SAR dogs that chased deer, walk right up to a deer that had frozen in place, one of their defense mechanisms. Suddenly, within feet of the dog the deer broke and fled. Imagine how much prey drive this invoked! The flashing of hooves, the rapid retreat of the deer, the bleating noise they make! The dog in this situation watched quietly as the deer receded and then went back to work. No command from the handler who watched the whole thing, not believing it.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: cafrheBut he is very high drive. He has run deer on me 2x (once on a walk, once when we were beginning a practice search problem) and once ran my mothers horses (after a practice search problem. The silly things were dancing up and down the fence near where we ended. Griff decided chasing them was a better reward than playing with the 'victim').
> 
> I believe it is my job to see any deer before my dog does.


And naturally the question arises, what if you don't? What if he sees the deer first? What if the chase starts out of your sight. In some conditions, in some types of environments the dog may be out of your sight, even if just for a few seconds. What if the chase starts there? 

My protocol has the dog doing the work. He sees the deer and just goes back to work. Nothing is necessary from the handler. 

Having a reliable recall is great. Having the ability to correct the dog at a distance is great. But neither will help if the dog starts the chase out of your sight. 



> Originally Posted By: cafrhe But for me, if I have an e collar on him and he runs a deer, he isnt going to get a low stim correction. He will get one that gets his attention.


If he's been trained with my protocol a low level stim will get his attention. What you describe is how most crittering is done with an Ecollar. It usually works well but may cause problems, especially in SAR. Because of the high level of stim used it can easily teach the dog to fear deer. They "bite" him from a distance. In SAR if a dog fears a deer he may go into avoidance of it. This may be very subtle and you won't see it, especially with a tired dog. He'll get the scent or see one and avoid that area. If that's where the lost child is, you've missed.


----------



## mikaK9

Although I'm still new to the ecollar, I've seen with my dog that even though it's a fairly low level of stim, it takes him out of his "tunnel vision." And for him, I'm finding that I do have to turn it up a little from his working level when he is highly distracted for a recall. But it is still a fairly low level of stim....believe me, I'd know if he were in pain. But when he gets locked onto something, he gets LOCKED. The last time I used the ecollar when he was already in this mode, it was like I was able to just reach out and tap him on the back of the neck. No pain, no conflict. He just suddenly, in the middle of his craziness, stopped and tried to flick the nagging bug off his neck. But that was all it took....just enough to bring him out of that locked in state. And then (as I continued to call him) he instantly recalled to me for lots of praise and good rewards.

I guess I relate it to me when I'm intensely focused on something (Which I've heard happens from time to time). DH can be talking to me, saying my name, and yet I can still be intensely focused....hearing his voice but not hearing the words. If he taps me on the shoulder, although it doesn't hurt, it's just enough to take me out of my zone, to get my attention.


----------



## Colorado

Lou, thanks for the detailed reply. Your answer has raised more questions in my mind.



> Quoteicture a football field and the cat wrangler is walking the cat on a leash back and forth at the "other" goal line. You come in on your goal line. The Ecollar is set on the dog's working level of stim, the one he feels when he's at rest. You start walking your dog back and forth on your goal line. If you dog ignores the cat, move close by cutting diagonally across the field. This gradually moves you to the next ten yard marker. Walk back and forth at that distance. If the dog doesn’t notice the cat, move closer in the same way.
> 
> At some point the dog WILL see the cat and will face towards it giving it a "hard look." At this point you press the button and walk backwards. When the leash pulls tight it will pull the dog backwards. Since no animal likes walking backwards for very far, at some point he'll turn away from the cat to see where he's going. When he turns his head, release the button. He's being rewarded for turning his head away from the cat. Keep working at that distance and at some point he'll avoid looking at the cat again.
> 
> When he does that angle in another ten yards and repeat. This is repeated until the dog gets the idea that he has to look away from the cat to make the low level stim (still at the level where he first feels it) stop.


(1) I've learned that dogs are pretty specific in where and how they are proofed against certain behaviors. That is, the classic fact that a puppy may learn a platz at home, but not get it a Petco. And then once they get it Petco, they don't get it at a school full of screaming kids. Etc. What you describe uses a cat as the object of the prey. Does this transfer to all prey? When the dog sees a deer, they make the jump that if they looked at the cat, they got the mild stim...so don't look at the deer? If not, I'll let you walk the bear at the other end of the football field on a leash so we can proof against bear prey drive.









(2) Over in the Schutzhund forums, people are obsessed with the idea of cultivating and maintaining the drive level of their dogs, especially their puppies. As in, don't say no to biting, just redirect to a toy. Don't say no if they chase something they aren't suppose to, redirect to something they should chase. I believe Chris Wild stated once if her GSDs got a squirrel in the back yard, good for them. I assume the police dogs and SAR dogs need a drive that is even higher than SchH dogs. How do you feel the training example I quoted above affects drive level? How about for a puppy?

(3) I'm somewhat playing devil's advocate with this 3rd question, but hear me out. What you describe above is not a 100% reliable recall--it is a dog so well trained that it doesn't need a recall because it ignores the distraction even if the handler is unaware of it. Two things about that don't work for me.

-- My puppy is distracted by other people and other dogs--she wants to go say hi. I'm not raising a working dog. I don't want her to not look at other people and other dogs. I do want her to wait for me to say it is OK before she greets them. But I want her to be social and outgoing and friendly. It seems like if I used the method above w/ people, the consequences would be a dog that avoids all people.

-- Since the e-collar is used only in the training, not to stop a dog in prey mode, what exactly do you feel is the benefit of using the e-collar in this situation? What if, using the method above, every time the dog looked at the cat, he got a "ah-ah" and when he looked away he got a treat. Is that somehow a fundamentally different type of reinforcement so that it wouldn't work? I mean the dog is on a leash near you--it isn't hard to use other types of corrections and reinforcements. My (naive?) understanding is that the e-collar is useful for reinforcing when you aren't near your dog. Do you prefer the e-collar because it is consistent (the same way some people support the clicker instead of saying "good boy!")?

Again, just looking to learn more, not looking to judge on your training approach.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: mikaK9Although I'm still new to the ecollar, I've seen with my dog that even though it's a fairly low level of stim, it takes him out of his "tunnel vision." And for him, I'm finding that I do have to turn it up a little from his working level when he is highly distracted for a recall. But it is still a fairly low level of stim


Lest people misunderstand. The dog's working level of stim is what he first perceives when at rest. But it's subject to change. Some of that change is due to minor things such as simply how the dog is feeling on any given day. Just like us, sometimes dogs feel like they can beat the world and at other times feel like the world fell on them. This particularly noticeable as they age. Good days and bad days. On a good day the dog may ignore the stim level that yesterday he felt. And vice versa. 

But more importantly as a dog gets distracted he's NOT GOING TO FEEL the same level of stim that he felt when he was at rest. And so you increase the stim a touch until he does feel it. Now you're at a new, higher level, but it's still where he first perceives it. As the distractions fades you can go back to the basic working level. 

I use the analogy of someone watching the Superbowl. Your team is in the game and they're four points behind in the last two minutes. Your spouse call from the kitchen and says, "Honey, dinner's ready." But because you're a bit distracted you don't pay her any attention. and so she raises her voice. "HONEY DINNER'S READY." But you still don't hear her. Now the pass is in the air. She's walked into the room and is shaking your shoulder. Now she's shouting, <span style='font-size: 14pt'> HONEY, DINNER'S READY!!!!! </span> She's turned up the stim to match your level of distraction. (Sorry for the sexist casting in the vignette). 



> Originally Posted By: mikaK9 believe me, I'd know if he were in pain. But when he gets locked onto something, he gets LOCKED. The last time I used the ecollar when he was already in this mode, it was like I was able to just reach out and tap him on the back of the neck. No pain, no conflict. He just suddenly, in the middle of his craziness, stopped and tried to flick the nagging bug off his neck. But that was all it took....just enough to bring him out of that locked in state. And then (as I continued to call him) he instantly recalled to me for lots of praise and good rewards.


Yep, perfect.


----------



## LouCastle

Earlier I gave a brief (brief for me anyway, LOL) description of my Crittering protocol. 



> Originally Posted By: ColoradoLou, thanks for the detailed reply. Your answer has raised more questions in my mind.
> 
> (1) What you describe uses a cat as the object of the prey. Does this transfer to all prey?


ANOTHER GREAT QUESTION. I've personally crittered about 200 dogs. ONE OF THEM generalized to ALL game. He stopped chasing everything from mice to moose! 

Many dogs have stopped chasing game in the same (roughly) size range as the cat that was used. That would probably include squirrels to badgers. Those dogs respond to the protocol slightly differently. You can critter them off deer by using a small horse; off moose by using a very large horse; off mice by using a rat or guinea pig. Those are animals that are fairly easy to find, many people have them as pets. 

Many dogs have stopped chasing ONLY cats. Some of them have generalized after animals in the same size range as those they chased were used several times. Probably the most common large animal is deer. If you Google "deer farm" you'll find many farms where deer are raised for venison. Those places almost always have a petting farm where you can go pet the hand trained "pet" deer. Many have "rented" those deer for this protocol. 



> Originally Posted By: mikaK9 If not, I'll let you walk the bear at the other end of the football field on a leash so we can proof against bear prey drive.


_I've got a flame-proof suit but not a bear proof suit! _

I don't know of any dogs that chase bear. I do know of one that used to chase elk and one that used to chase mountain lion. Either can kill a dog. Neither dog chases those animals any more. They responded to the "same general size" method. I'd try that if your dog chases bear. Either that or start him hunting and get yourself a BIG gun. 

There are more details in my article. Http://loucastle.com/critter.htm and so no one gets the wrong idea, it's not quite as simple as just doing this once. I recommend that you do this three more times, the next two a couple of days apart and then several days later. But even doing it once will give you more control if you teach the recall with the Ecollar as my site describes. 



> Originally Posted By: mikaK9 (2) Over in the Schutzhund forums, people are obsessed with the idea of cultivating and maintaining the drive level of their dogs, especially their puppies. As in, don't say no to biting, just redirect to a toy. … How do you feel the training example I quoted above affects drive level?


This crittering protocol is used ONLY to stop a dog from chasing game and for dog-to-dog aggression. I use another method (still with the Ecollar) to teach the out that rather than decrease the drives, increases it and teaches a partnership that other methods don't use. 



> Originally Posted By: mikaK9 How about for a puppy?


I recommend that dogs be at least six months of age before using an Ecollar. Mostly this is so the dog is big enough to hold the collar "box" off the ground. 



> Originally Posted By: mikaK9 (3) … What you describe above is not a 100% reliable recall--it is a dog so well trained that it doesn't need a recall because it ignores the distraction even if the handler is unaware of it. Two things about that don't work for me.
> 
> -- My puppy is distracted by other people and other dogs--she wants to go say hi. I'm not raising a working dog. I don't want her to not look at other people and other dogs. I do want her to wait for me to say it is OK before she greets them. But I want her to be social and outgoing and friendly. It seems like if I used the method above w/ people, the consequences would be a dog that avoids all people.


You shouldn't use this protocol except for critters and dog-to-dog aggression. Look at this video. http://www.youtube.com/v/4qmMAFKBuKg&rel=1 One of these dogs used to be aggressive towards the other. Can you tell which one that was? 

But it's not that your dog is chasing people it's that he's leaving your side to go play with them. This is a recall issue, not a crittering issue. 



> Originally Posted By: mikaK9 Since the e-collar is used only in the training, not to stop a dog in prey mode, what exactly do you feel is the benefit of using the e-collar in this situation?


It gives you reliability and the ability to stim the dog when he's at a distance if he disregards your recall command. 



> Originally Posted By: mikaK9 What if, using the method above, every time the dog looked at the cat, he got a "ah-ah" and when he looked away he got a treat. Is that somehow a fundamentally different type of reinforcement so that it wouldn't work?


It might. But still there's no way to reinforce the command if the dog doesn't obey. I've had a couple of people tell me that this has worked for them only to have them call me later for an Ecollar when it failed. 



> Originally Posted By: mikaK9 My (naive?) understanding is that the e-collar is useful for reinforcing when you aren't near your dog. Do you prefer the e-collar because it is consistent (the same way some people support the clicker instead of saying "good boy!")?


That's one reason. A setting of a 10 is always going to be a 10. It's very difficult for people to give the same level of correction with traditional methods time and time again.


----------



## marylou

Lou, wish you were closer to me, I would love to have you help me with Misha. 
She has chased deer 2x, and luckily the bear we ran into was a young black bear who was more interested in going to get a drink (and I saw it before Misha did). The porcupine...well...I guess it'd be "cat size", huh?








I had posted this summer about the deer chasing and got some responses about using an e-collar. Since I don't know how to properly use one, I have been researching the area for a good knowledgable trainer.
Thank you for your informative posts.


----------



## LouCastle

> Originally Posted By: marylouLou, wish you were closer to me, I would love to have you help me with Misha.


Marylou you really don't need me. I know that you're afraid of messing up your dog but it's really hard to do. 

It's just a matter of finding her working level and then following the crittering protocol. I have people practice without the dog so they can get their timing and movement right. It usually takes half a dozen to a dozen dry runs before they've got it. 



> Originally Posted By: marylou I had posted this summer about the deer chasing and got some responses about using an e-collar. Since I don't know how to properly use one, I have been researching the area for a good knowledgable trainer.


Most trainers will just hit the button at a high level hoping to put the dog into avoidance. As I've written that usually works but can fail and can cause problems. My method has never failed (to my knowledge, of course) and you have to work to cause problems because the stim level is so low.


----------

