# Sit Means Sit - collar enforced training



## GSDmac

I would like to know if anyone has used or what they've heard about this training program. Contemplating on using them and have heard mixed reviews among different dog owners of various breeds, but haven't found a GSD owner that I could get feedback from


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## NancyJ

A have seen a GSD trained using this program. I felt it was too robotic and I am not opposed to ecollars the way Lou Castle trains.


----------



## RowdyDogs

I've known two people who used them (one with a GSD mix, the other with an Aussie) and both dogs were fried by that training program. Specifically, they were often "corrected" with the E-collar for legitimate mistakes--the dog didn't know what was being asked, and the owner was instructed to shock them anyway. I believe there is a place for E-collars in training, but there is absolutely no reason to use them to "reinforce" basic training as was done with these two dogs.

I have also heard significant complaints about their business model, which is (from what I've heard) geared towards making money, not turning out competent dog trainers. It is a franchise system and I've heard it likened to the "Mary Kay" of dog training. Nothing wrong with making money, but what it means for you is that you might go to a Sit Means Sit-certified trainer who is great, but you go down the street to another one and they're an abusive idiot who shouldn't even be allowed in the same room as a dog, and just kept that under wraps enough at the training school to pass. It's the same problem you get with other franchises (like Petsmart and Petco), but with the added risk of easily-misused E-collars being used as a staple of the training.

It might also help if you told a bit about what your training goals are. Are you looking for basic obedience, performance, etc.? That might also color the advice you get, as one of the major objections I (and many others) have to them is the use of E-collars so early in the training...which wouldn't apply if you're looking at Schutzhund training or something like that.


----------



## Jd414

I looked at this training as well so any feed back anyone has would be appreciated. I was looking at what they call the board and train where they take your dog for a week (or longer, up to you) and train with the e collar. Once that us done the dog returns home abs you keep the e collar... 


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## GsdLoverr729

My boss did the board and train with one of his golden retrievers. She returned a completely different dog, in a bad way. She is now DA through fences and on leash, freaks out when given a bath or when her feet are touched ( she loved this before, now she panics, yelps, snaps, etc). She also barks at anything that makes noise, which she did not do before. 
Granted she's a golden, but i would not recommend them after seeing the results she's had.


----------



## Gharrissc

I've seen a demo and wasn't too impressed.


----------



## onyx'girl

I used the sit means sit methods in my ecollar training. 
My instructor was familiar with the exercises and used them with success for her own and other clients dogs.
When it came time for me to start w/ ecollar, we used the same techniques. 
We did not rush anything and it took a few months from beginning to end(proofing stage) for my dog to be trained on ecollar. But we used it for certain things, not behavioral modification, but directionals/send outs/recalls, etc. So it was just incorporated into my training program.


----------



## GSDmac

Thanks for the input. Just looking to improve off leash 


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## GSDmac

Behavior. Mainly in excited states when he tends to only listen with a change of tone. Nothing dramatic just improvements. Just weighing the risk/rewards of this program


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## onyx'girl

I would go with Lou's instruction, if given the choice.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

Id do the research and do it on my own, E collar training is not rocket science. If the dog already knows the command and you just want to use it for proofing off leash the process is very simple. Just collar condition the dog start on leash and move to off leash control. I think with franchises you get the good and the bad, all trainers are not equal. Thats why the only people I truly trust are the TDs at my club and myself.


----------



## RowdyDogs

Since your dog is more advanced (so doesn't fit in to the biggest criticisms I have heard/seen), can you sit in on a few classes, preferably at least one where they're working on issues like you want to fix in your dog? Any reputable trainer should allow potential clients to sit in on 1-3 classes to make sure the methods fit their needs. If they won't allow you to watch even one class, I'd personally take that as a huge red flag. Seeing the methods in action can give you a lot more information than online reviews can, especially for a franchise like this where individual quality may vary hugely.

Personally, I would still stay away because I feel that a method that incorporates an E-collar so early is not likely to attract people who train the way I want my dogs trained. But this is an area that is open to debate, so that's just my opinion.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

Some older threads to check out:
http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/training-theory-methods/172468-sit-means-sit.html


----------



## Nickyb

Big money for not a whole lot. Save your money and invest in an advanced obedience class.


----------



## pancake

I also asked this and because of their heavy marketing it seems this question comes up every now and then. I came to the conclusion (as many others did) that Sit means sit is very very bad news. What they do is not dog training but a simple video game like routine. Their philosophy is that you need the remote collar on them at all time. Well, if that's the case I guess I can just give my dog a shock for everything I don't want it to do. And the more it does it, the harder I shock it. Pretty easy. 
I saw it and was impressed at what was done in 10 minutes but it was too good to be true. They have no regard for address development of superstitious behavior, conditioning, etc. It's mostly remote collar work done wrong. 




onyx'girl said:


> I would go with Lou's instruction, if given the choice.


I would second this. Also, Michael Ellis' (at Leerburg) remote collar concepts are very similar if not the same to Lou's method. Low stims on leash for guidance that teaches the dog to turn pressure off by coming towards you. (For recall work). Using e-collars as a form of punishment for all activities is not recommended. They have their place and I think that the best place for e collars done correctly with low stim is the recall.


----------



## erik

Thats because the shock collars cause a lot of environmental fears. Especially if they are being overused, the dog never really understands whats going on. This is why this franchises training model is so negative. Unfortunately at the surface they look great in their videos and demos. People are so distracted by their desire to get their dogs trained quick and easy, that they don't take the time to research, as well as see how this quick and easy can actually be more harmful in the long run.


----------



## Baillif

E collars don't cause environmental fears. Bad trainers who don't know how to clarify why a dog is being corrected do. 

Any correction no matter what it comes from prong collar/flat collar/slip collar/stick/choke collar/your foot/ your hand/throwing your keys at the dog has the potential to cause a superstition. 

That potential rises based on differences in a few different factors like novelty of the device used to punish or the environment you are in, intensity of stimulus, timing(bad timing obviously means higher chance of superstition), prior experience, whether or not you use an appropriate procedure that teaches a dog clearly, temperament of the dog and probably a few others I am blanking on at this moment.

The tool isn't the issue. It is always the trainer.

And lets say your dog does end up with a superstition of something in the environment because of an e collar correction. Just show him it isn't true. Dogs go through periods of confusion when you are teaching and especially when you use corrections. They get over it once they understand. If you don't leave them in that confused state and continue to teach until they understand. 

That being said. Most SMS trainers are probably crap and don't even really know what I just typed above. You can find someone better that is cheaper or at a similar price. ****, even Ivan Balabanov's pet training courses are cheaper than SMS. Jason Davis is great too he's in Florida as well.


----------



## VTGirlT

Lou Castle's method of e-collar is not only humane but also extremely effective. 

E-collar work, when used correctly, opens up a whole new wave of communication and reassurance for me to my dog Zelda.

Because i did not trust myself using the e-collar without someone helping me right next to me physically, i ended up using a dog trainer, who has similar style to Lou Castle, using low stim levels, guiding the dog and not making them guess what you want them to do, and constant communication. 

She is not fearful of me, the collar, the stim levels i use, etc. Its merely communication. 

As a fear aggressive dog to strangers, and a high prey drive dog, she HAS to have reliable recall. 

You would never be able to tell when i use or dont use the e-collar on her. The other day i forgot to turn her collar on, and everything i asked her to do was perfect i had no idea it wasn't on and apparently it didnt matter to her either, and she always has so much fun off leash! The rush of the release seems to bring her joy in itself, in fact she loves to come in and check up on me all the time now, for a scratch and then prances off with joy, and then if i ask her sit randomly, she will do it immediately, usually intensely waiting for my release, after which she returns to her prancing around with joy in the snow! 

Not sure if this will help, but my first session with an e-collar trainer and some updates, http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...t-session-e-collar-trainer-today-3-hours.html


----------



## Baillif

I don't know personally about what SMS does specifically but OLK9 teaches pretty much the same way. Leash pressure plus low level stim and fade out the leash. In theory anyway.
Maybe they get a little impatient and turn up the juice sometimes.


----------



## Persinette

My thoughts on eCollars: they have only 2 places in a training program, and only for certain dogs and certain people with the self-control and experience use them properly.

I don't think a dog should ever be corrected and no compulsion used in the primary training phase of training. Too often, the dog makes a legitimate mistake or is simply confused on what the handler is asking for when they are learning something and they get corrected. This makes for a fearful dog too afraid to try new things in case they are corrected. They become more robotic and react to commands instead of thinking their way threw a problem.

When a dog has completely and thoroughly learned a command, i.e. sit or down or whatever, you have done proofing, then in some instances I think there is the potential for an eCollar. 

For example, if I wanted my dog to Sitz faster, I would train for that--with a high value treat or toy--and only reward when the dog complies lightening fast. If the dog is distracted, I would do stimulus training where we start from far away from the distraction and reward for attention/compliance then slowly approach until the dog can work through the distraction. For most dogs I believe this is enough. Punishment is the lack reward/play. However, for some dogs, there may be a certain stimulus that not even the most high value reward can compete with. For these dogs I think an eCollar or prong collar correction may be warranted. Only, though, when he dog has been proofed and you know they know what you area asking for and they are simply refusing to comply. I would use sparingly.

The other instance I think an eCollar could have merit is in self-satisifying behaviors. I subscribe to the notion that most GSD have some degree of OCD and that should be focused on us when they are young through tug/treats/etc. so we become their primary source of entertainment. If a dog engages in negative self-satisfying like chasing birds, their tail, or barking at the fence incessantly, I think not only can these behaviors become hard habits to break because they have discovered they are fun/get some form of satisfaction from them, but some of there drive/attention is taken off of you as the 'fun' person. If, using stimulus training an redirection, these behaviors can't be broken relatively quickly, I think an eCollar could be used to nip the problem in the start.

Generally speaking though, I subscribe he marker/reward based training for almost any behavior. Especially for high drive dogs, I think the denial of a reward is a punishment in and of itself. I really like the ideas discussed in Ivan Balabanov's Advanced Schutzhund and the idea of Ultimate Punishment, i.e. reward denial, to make dogs more active thinkers on and off the field. His method involves no use of compulsion even with the most advanced and complicated of training tasks. That said, again, certain behaviors need to have a consequence if they are harmful to the dog or others, but only when he dog already knows what is being ask is just refusing.


----------



## newlie

Newlie currently wears an e-collar but I have only pressed the button 3 or 4 times on a low setting. And it did work: After two years of working with him using other methods, he now has a pretty solid recall. I haven't used it anymore because it hasn't been necessary. He comes now when I call, even leaving off chasing the rabbits, and every time he does , I make a big deal out of it to further reinforce what he has learned.

Newlie's trainer was the one who recommended it and showed me how to work it. He told me that he didn't recommend it for a lot of people, that his feeling was that they would take a little too much pleasure in using it. That being said, the list of people who I would allow to use an e-color on my dog is small: Other than me, it would only be his trainer.

I don't know anything about this sit means sit training, myself, although it doesn't sound good from the reviews. But I will say that I am not going to turn over my dog to anyone for a period of weeks and give them carte blanche to do whatever they want with my dog. No way, no how.


----------



## sourdough44

I have the Dogtra 2300 NCP collar. I don't use it much, but no adverse issues. There are to many visions of frustrated owners taking it out on the helpless dog, which is nonsense here.

I knew a guy who had no problem with a stout stick but thought an ecollar was cruel. He now has an ecollar.

It's important to have a good 'page' or vibration feature. Of course one has to back up to training, the dog must be trained to know what is expected. One of the biggies is to come when called, in this area an ecollar is great. Our dog is off leash a lot, out and about. An ecollar is like a 200' leash.


----------



## sabledog3

The sit means sit guys around here are awesome! Unfortunately,I didn't have the money to train with them. They offered a great deal, but I just can't afford a trainer right now.

We have just started e collar work at home. Tell him "here" and buzz the page button. Still working on lead and have not had to use the stim yet.


----------



## JoanMcM

I don t think anyone should use any compulsion collar unless they are working with a REPUTABLE trainer. Most REPUTABLE trainers use them as a last resort if at all. If you want to learn how to train WELL you will find the money to pay to go to a couple of classes.

It makes me sick that compulsion collars are sold over the counter to anybody. If someone is NOT TRAINED on how to use it first, they will DEFINITELY WITHOUT A DOUBT cause themselves and their dogs more problems then they will solve.


----------



## jafo220

I used SMS when there just wasn't anywhere else to turn to. It was a last resort. I'm glad I went through with it. We had a very good trainer. It went well enough, we recommended them to a friend who has a sibling from our dogs littler and it went very well and they had a different trainer than us. 

That said. I talked with Lou regarding SMS after being involved in another thread. My experience and outlook was much different than his. He has been around this much longer than I so who am I to doubt his opinion. Lou is an experienced dog trainer and a nice guy to talk to about this type of training. We came or I guess I came to the conclusion that not all SMS trainers are the same. The methods they are taught by the owner are or can be pretty rough for the dog. What's important is what those trainers being trained do with those methods. That's where the difference in trainers lies. I was lucky to have an SMS trainer who took the methods taught and tweaked it a bit to be more kind to the dog being trained. 

So, what I would do is contact the trainer in your area. Have him or her over for a meeting and ask for references of past clients he has worked with. 

That's the best I can do really. I would recommend them if you have a dog that is just totally out of control like we had. But ask for the references to be sure you know who you're letting train your dog. 

Then, there is nothing wrong with Lou's methods. It's basically the price of the e-collar and you need to read the whole web site before starting or buying the collar. He has a specific request for the collars used, so read first. You can also email him if you have questions and he also frequents this site. Like was mentioned before, it's not rocket science, but it can be intimidating if you've never had any experience with ecollars.


----------



## LouCastle

JoanMcM said:


> I don t think anyone should use any compulsion collar unless they are working with a REPUTABLE trainer.


The Ecollar is probably one of the easiest of tools to use. It's NOT necessary to work directly with a trainer. My site gives complete beginners, who are able to read and follow simple instructions, the ability to use one to train their dog. 



JoanMcM said:


> Most REPUTABLE trainers use them as a last resort if at all.


MANY reputable trainers use them as a FIRST resort. 



JoanMcM said:


> If you want to learn how to train WELL you will find the money to pay to go to a couple of classes.


Nothing wrong with the advice to go to some classes, but it's not necessary to learn to use an Ecollar. . 



JoanMcM said:


> It makes me sick that compulsion collars are sold over the counter to anybody.


It makes me sick that someone wants to impose restrictions on Ecollars. The idea that more intrusion on our freedom is a good thing is, at best, misguided. 



JoanMcM said:


> If someone is NOT TRAINED on how to use it first, they will DEFINITELY WITHOUT A DOUBT cause themselves and their dogs more problems then they will solve.


Sorry, I strongly disagree with your opinion on this. Many complete beginners have used the tool with complete success, some of them right here on this forum. 

I'd bet that you know very little about the modern use of an Ecollar. If I'm wrong, please let us know. I'll suggest that doing some research may open your eyes, if you have an open mind.


----------



## BARBIElovesSAILOR

I went to sit means sit once, as part of my externship in dog training. I was supposed to go check out other local dog trainers to see how they work basically. One of the place I chose was SMS. 

I brought sailor as my dog, but sailor was already fully trained in basic obedience. Sit, stay, down, heel, etc...they still recommended an e collar for us. 

The guy giving us the free consult proceeded to use his own dog to show what was achievable with SMS and use of the E collar. It was a Belgian or gsd I believe. His dog did some pretty incredible acrobatics, jumping, somersaults, balancing on hind legs on top of something, etc... He was like a ninja dog! The whole time I was watching this incredible feat, I was thinking to myself, I and many people... Do not need their dog to do all of this. The majority of people just want a family/ pet dog that listens and knows the basics. Some people want an acrobat dog, some people want to take it to the next level and train their dog in schutzhund or maybe some kind of advanced dog sport where you would need to take the training to the next level. For a regular every day dog owner, SMS can work, but other methods can work too, costing less money, no use of an e collar, and just as effective. 

SMS would not be for me, if I was serious about finding a trainer. SMS is a good option for maybe a small percentage of people out there who really need some specific advanced training, or have a particularly hard to train/problem dog. I think it boils down to the owners wants/ needs and what the dog needs?

After watching all these incredible things e trainer's dog did, I commented that he must be really proud of his dog, and must be happy to have him as a part of his family. The trainer then told me he was considering re homing him or donating him to the police because his wife was pregnant and they already had other dogs. Hmmm

Anyway, this is my experience with SMS and it this was maybe 5 years ago. In Colorado.


----------



## LouCastle

BARBIElovesSAILOR said:


> The guy giving us the free consult proceeded to use his own dog to show what was achievable with SMS and use of the E collar. It was a Belgian or gsd I believe. His dog did some pretty incredible acrobatics, jumping, somersaults, balancing on hind legs on top of something, etc...


This is fairly common among SMS trainers. Many of them have dogs that do these tricks and more. But we have no idea if they've actually trained the dog themselves or it someone else did it for them. Most people just assume that they did the work themselves. But I can assure you that many of them did not. 




BARBIElovesSAILOR said:


> After watching all these incredible things e trainer's dog did, I commented that he must be really proud of his dog, and must be happy to have him as a part of his family. The trainer then told me he was considering re homing him or donating him to the police because his wife was pregnant and they already had other dogs. Hmmm


This lack of a solid relationship with the dog is not uncharacteristic of SMS. During the three days that I spent with the founder, years ago, he never once showed any real affection towards his own dogs or those of his clients that he worked with. Not one bit of praise beyond, a "what a smart dog." said in a dull, boring voice. He saw the dogs as a means to an end and that end was to make money. He also went through dogs like most of us go through sox. He'd have them for a few years and then they'd just disappear. He'd never explain where they went or what happened to them. I suspect that they just burned out and he put them down. I asked him directly a couple of times but he'd never answer. Hmmm indeed!


----------



## BARBIElovesSAILOR

Thank you for shedding some light on SMS from your experience with them Lou. 

I also failed to mention that the price for SMS training is $500+ however you are allowed to come back as much as you want for the lifetime of the dog. I'm not trying to promote or tear them down, just trying to give the facts so people can make their own decision.


----------



## jafo220

LouCastle said:


> This is fairly common among SMS trainers. Many of them have dogs that do these tricks and more. But we have no idea if they've actually trained the dog themselves or it someone else did it for them. Most people just assume that they did the work themselves. But I can assure you that many of them did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This lack of a solid relationship with the dog is not uncharacteristic of SMS. During the three days that I spent with the founder, years ago, he never once showed any real affection towards his own dogs or those of his clients that he worked with. Not one bit of praise beyond, a "what a smart dog." said in a dull, boring voice. He saw the dogs as a means to an end and that end was to make money. He also went through dogs like most of us go through sox. He'd have them for a few years and then they'd just disappear. He'd never explain where they went or what happened to them. I suspect that they just burned out and he put them down. I asked him directly a couple of times but he'd never answer. Hmmm indeed!



I can shed some light on this along the lines of my experience with the SMS trainer I used. When we began, he had one dog with him. He did the usual tricks. This in my opinion is to "WOW" the clients into thinking this could be their dog someday. It's part of the sales pitch. After all, they are into this to make money. If they fail to train your dog or fail in communication with the client to train their dog, they won't be a trainer for long. That being said, he had one dog with him on the first visit. The second session he brought two dogs. The younger one was in training. I could see even with uneducated eyes that the second younger dog was well behind the first dog in training just by his actions. So I am pretty sure not 100% sure that he was training his own dogs. The dogs he had are also used in some aspects of training. So there has to be some workability between the trainer and the dogs they have. 

Again, this was my personal experience.


----------



## newlie

I have no experience with SMS myself, but I do think with any trainer you have to keep your eyes open, at least initially, you have to ask questions, and you have to get some idea of what their experience is and the methods they use to train. You are your dog's advocate and you are their voice and if need be, you should be the one to say "No" if need be. Some trainers are very good at their job. Some people might call themselves a trainer and be well-intentioned, without actually having the wherewithal to do what needs to be done. Some trainers might have the experience, but if you don't feel comfortable working with them, it's probably not going to work. And finally, there are a few trainers who will do things that I would never allow with my dog. I was told about a "trainer" who in a basic obedience class picked up a dog by it's collar and let it choke for a couple of minutes and then when the dog peed on himself he was so afraid, he seemed satified that he had trained an obedient dog. I guess I'd be in jail if he did that to my Newlie.


----------



## JoanMcM

LouCastle said:


> The Ecollar is probably one of the easiest of tools to use. It's NOT necessary to work directly with a trainer. My site gives complete beginners, who are able to read and follow simple instructions, the ability to use one to train their dog.
> 
> 
> 
> MANY reputable trainers use them as a FIRST resort.
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing wrong with the advice to go to some classes, but it's not necessary to learn to use an Ecollar. .
> 
> 
> 
> It makes me sick that someone wants to impose restrictions on Ecollars. The idea that more intrusion on our freedom is a good thing is, at best, misguided.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I strongly disagree with your opinion on this. Many complete beginners have used the tool with complete success, some of them right here on this forum.
> 
> I'd bet that you know very little about the modern use of an Ecollar. If I'm wrong, please let us know. I'll suggest that doing some research may open your eyes, if you have an open mind.


 I am open to all kinds of training ideas and have been for most of my life. A compulsion trained dog is not trained to THINK which is critical. The dog MUST be shown and understand WHAT you want without being concerned about a correction especially when training is started. Even If compulsion is used because you MUST and most times trainers RESORT to compulsion because the TRAINER is not up to the job or is missing something not because it is actually necessary - timing is everything. A beginner trainer must learn timing before they should be allowed to use compulsion. Without timing and comprehension, you can create more problems than are solved. The whole thought of pushing a button makes you a trainer and your dog is actually trained is pretty irresponsible. Open sales of training devices which inflict pain without proper training time put in is irresponsible and cruel.


----------



## Moriah

JoanMcM said:


> I am open to all kinds of training ideas and have been for most of my life. A compulsion trained dog is not trained to THINK which is critical. The dog MUST be shown and understand WHAT you want without being concerned about a correction especially when training is started. Even If compulsion is used because you MUST and most times trainers RESORT to compulsion because the TRAINER is not up to the job or is missing something not because it is actually necessary - timing is everything. A beginner trainer must learn timing before they should be allowed to use compulsion. Without timing and comprehension, you can create more problems than are solved. The whole thought of pushing a button makes you a trainer and your dog is actually trained is pretty irresponsible. Open sales of training devices which inflict pain without proper training time put in is irresponsible and cruel.


I totally agree that cruelty and harsh training is not appropriate. I have a Dogtra 2300 which has 127 levels. My dog works at about level 14--his working level has gone down from about level 18. I have carefully followed Lou Castle's protocols for recall and they work, are fair, and my dog seems comfortable with how I use the ecollar. He certainly does not look distressed. (If the dog acts distressed the setting is too high!!!) I have been told by both a Schutzhund trainer and an AKC obedience judge who evaluated my boy that my GSD rebounds quickly from correction and can handle an ecollar. I also work with a behaviorist who is wonderful. 

I have mainly clicker trained my guy. I also use food and a marker with an ecollar. Food is always waiting for him on a recall. I never go to a park without high value treats.

I walk my boy on a 30 ft lunge line as he loves to "track and smell." He is a powerful dog. I use the ecollar as back up for recall in case of unforeseen events or an emergency in which I need my very high prey dog to reliably come back to me. A loose GSD with high prey drive is at risk for being hit by a car or being accused of poor behavior (chasing) and people want it put down or want to sue. Insurance for a reliable recall is provided by an ecollar. I never go to parks without the collar on.


----------



## Baillif

JoanMcM said:


> I am open to all kinds of training ideas and have been for most of my life. A compulsion trained dog is not trained to THINK which is critical. The dog MUST be shown and understand WHAT you want without being concerned about a correction especially when training is started. Even If compulsion is used because you MUST and most times trainers RESORT to compulsion because the TRAINER is not up to the job or is missing something not because it is actually necessary - timing is everything. A beginner trainer must learn timing before they should be allowed to use compulsion. Without timing and comprehension, you can create more problems than are solved. The whole thought of pushing a button makes you a trainer and your dog is actually trained is pretty irresponsible. Open sales of training devices which inflict pain without proper training time put in is irresponsible and cruel.


This is horse ****. A compulsion dog trained under pressure develops thinking skills just as well as a dog trained by other means. People point toward dogs that are actively throwing behaviors to gain a resource as some indicator that it is somehow more valuable toward teaching dogs than any other way. A dog under pressure will throw behaviors in an attempt to evade that pressure especially if they realize doing nothing doesn't work. 

The good compulsion based trainers don't leave the dog to do so much guess work though. They cue they make the behavior happen and then often reward or at the very least take the pressure away. When you use compulsion based training you want to get the dog to the right answer as quickly and clearly as you can because the point is to get the dog to the point where the pressure becomes unnecessary as fast as possible.

What most people don't realize is it isn't the level of the ecollar the dog finds most distressing. The distress comes because the dog isn't clear on the answer. Once the dog is clear on how to avoid pressure or how to turn pressure off the level of the stim ceases to be a major factor in the stress level of the dog. A low stim with a dog clueless as to how to stop it is way more distressing than a high level stim on the same dog that is clear on how to turn it off or avoid it.

Most yelping, freaking out, alarm, flight is caused by a dog that is unclear on the reason it is being corrected or unclear on how to avoid or turn the stim off. Often those behaviors are packaged into a desired behavior accidentally because the dog thinks its part of the answer. A dog that sits and yelps even without stim because it thinks the yelp is part of the escape for the stim. It also happens with positive reinforcement. You reward when a dog sits and barks even though you really just wanted the sit and the bark becomes packaged with the sit.


----------



## Baillif

On the flip side the level of stim used on the e collar isn't the most important part of getting the dog to learn the behavior quickly and efficiently. Correct timing and procedure take precedent over stim level.


----------



## Baillif

The e collar is a fantastic tool. I believe it is honestly the most humane of all compulsion based training tools, and furthermore there are some dogs that have handler aggression issues where it might be the only way a person can get control of their dog safely without causing unnecessary conflict. 

Banning of the tool is a horrendously bad idea that is only supported by the ignorant.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

:thumbup:



Baillif said:


> The e collar is a fantastic tool. I believe it is honestly the most humane of all compulsion based training tools, and furthermore there are some dogs that have handler aggression issues where it might be the only way a person can get control of their dog safely without causing unnecessary conflict.
> 
> Banning of the tool is a horrendously bad idea that is only supported by the ignorant.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

Interesting, after our last discussion I incorporated more compulsion (escape style prong/ecollar) with some recent pet clients earlier on in the process and dropped some of the reliance on early markers. I like the results so far.


----------



## JoanMcM

Baillif said:


> This is horse ****. A compulsion dog trained under pressure develops thinking skills just as well as a dog trained by other means. People point toward dogs that are actively throwing behaviors to gain a resource as some indicator that it is somehow more valuable toward teaching dogs than any other way. A dog under pressure will throw behaviors in an attempt to evade that pressure especially if they realize doing nothing doesn't work.
> 
> The good compulsion based trainers don't leave the dog to do so much guess work though. They cue they make the behavior happen and then often reward or at the very least take the pressure away. When you use compulsion based training you want to get the dog to the right answer as quickly and clearly as you can because the point is to get the dog to the point where the pressure becomes unnecessary as fast as possible.
> 
> What most people don't realize is it isn't the level of the ecollar the dog finds most distressing. The distress comes because the dog isn't clear on the answer. Once the dog is clear on how to avoid pressure or how to turn pressure off the level of the stim ceases to be a major factor in the stress level of the dog. A low stim with a dog clueless as to how to stop it is way more distressing than a high level stim on the same dog that is clear on how to turn it off or avoid it.
> 
> Most yelping, freaking out, alarm, flight is caused by a dog that is unclear on the reason it is being corrected or unclear on how to avoid or turn the stim off. Often those behaviors are packaged into a desired behavior accidentally because the dog thinks its part of the answer. A dog that sits and yelps even without stim because it thinks the yelp is part of the escape for the stim. It also happens with positive reinforcement. You reward when a dog sits and barks even though you really just wanted the sit and the bark becomes packaged with the sit.


If you are a one dimensional trainer then of course anything outside of point and shock is horse$hit. I feel bad for you and for your dogs.


----------



## JoanMcM

Moriah said:


> I totally agree that cruelty and harsh training is not appropriate. I have a Dogtra 2300 which has 127 levels. My dog works at about level 14--his working level has gone down from about level 18. I have carefully followed Lou Castle's protocols for recall and they work, are fair, and my dog seems comfortable with how I use the ecollar. He certainly does not look distressed. (If the dog acts distressed the setting is too high!!!) I have been told by both a Schutzhund trainer and an AKC obedience judge who evaluated my boy that my GSD rebounds quickly from correction and can handle an ecollar. I also work with a behaviorist who is wonderful.
> 
> I have mainly clicker trained my guy. I also use food and a marker with an ecollar. Food is always waiting for him on a recall. I never go to a park without high value treats.
> 
> I walk my boy on a 30 ft lunge line as he loves to "track and smell." He is a powerful dog. I use the ecollar as back up for recall in case of unforeseen events or an emergency in which I need my very high prey dog to reliably come back to me. A loose GSD with high prey drive is at risk for being hit by a car or being accused of poor behavior (chasing) and people want it put down or want to sue. Insurance for a reliable recall is provided by an ecollar. I never go to parks without the collar on.


 I would have to see what you are doing. I am for dogs being positively trained but what you are saying about reinforcing a recall sounds almost reasonable. However I am old school. If training is done properly at the beginning then the dog is 100% with or with out any collar on. If the dog is not 100% in any public setting the leash stays on. What if there is a technical failure with the collar? Then you are up the creek....


----------



## Steve Strom

I don't agree with your premise Joan. There are some things that the dog has to know, they aren't optional. Its not resorting to compulsion, its using the best option in that case. Chasing some things can be dangerous. Its best to stop that now.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

You didn't dispute any of his argument/reasoning. You did personalize it though. *That* is one dimensional.





JoanMcM said:


> If you are a one dimensional trainer then of course anything outside of point and shock is horse$hit. * I feel bad for you and for your dogs.*


----------



## JoanMcM

Steve Strom said:


> I don't agree with your premise Joan. There are some things that the dog has to know, they aren't optional. Its not resorting to compulsion, its using the best option in that case. Chasing some things can be dangerous. Its best to stop that now.


 I still believe if the foundation is done correctly, then it would be unnecessary. I would have to see the context and why it would be necessary to have a dog off a leash that is not properly trained.


----------



## JoanMcM

Gwenhwyfair said:


> You didn't dispute any of his argument/reasoning. You did personalize it though. *That* is one dimensional.


As opposed to calling other s views as horse$hit? The training as described was one dimensional.


----------



## Chip18

Baillif said:


> E collars don't cause environmental fears. Bad trainers who don't know how to clarify why a dog is being corrected do.
> 
> Any correction no matter what it comes from prong collar/flat collar/slip collar/stick/choke collar/your foot/ your hand/throwing your keys at the dog has the potential to cause a superstition.
> 
> That potential rises based on differences in a few different factors like novelty of the device used to punish or the environment you are in, intensity of stimulus, timing(bad timing obviously means higher chance of superstition), prior experience, whether or not you use an appropriate procedure that teaches a dog clearly, temperament of the dog and probably a few others I am blanking on at this moment.
> 
> The tool isn't the issue. It is always the trainer.





Persinette said:


> Generally speaking though, I subscribe he marker/reward based training for almost any behavior. Especially for high drive dogs, I think the denial of a reward is a punishment in and of itself. I really like the ideas discussed in Ivan Balabanov's Advanced Schutzhund and the idea of Ultimate Punishment, i.e. reward denial, to make dogs more active thinkers on and off the field. His method involves no use of compulsion even with the most advanced and complicated of training tasks. That said, again, certain behaviors need to have a consequence if they are harmful to the dog or others, but only when he dog already knows what is being ask is just refusing.


Don't get ticked off and go away! 

That's Baillfi and he's pretty straight forward! I find it "refreshing myself" although I don't and can't do or understand a fraction of the things he knows!

But his knowledge is "enlightening" and if nothing else it makes us figure out how we can make "a given suggestion" work for us!" 

I "train" tool free myself "flat collar and leash" and even I got slammed, in the above! He made valid points however! No matter what "we" do to train our dogs, we do shape the dogs behaviour! Being aware is never a bad thing!

For the record I'm changing from a Flat collar and leash to a Slip Collar and if I could train a dog with "telekinesis" I'd go there!


----------



## Steve Strom

JoanMcM said:


> I still believe if the foundation is done correctly, then it would be unnecessary. I would have to see the context and why it would be necessary to have a dog off a leash that is not properly trained.


Well, the thing is, you don't really get to define properly, and the fairness of whatever tool is decided by the dog. You can unfairly and improperly train just as poorly with a leash as you can with an e collar. For context, I used one to stop a dog from going through the screen door after the stupid squirrels that were tormenting him. One time. He never touched the screen again in the almost 10 years I had him. Whether we were there or not. His obedience foundation was just fine, his prey drive was going to get him hurt.


----------



## Baillif

Oh you know me. Crank almost done training for his mondioring 1 and just today at 10 months old had an e-collar on for the first time and all I know is zap zap zap zap zap. Take that thing away from me and I can't get anything done.


----------



## David Winners

Hey man, you know results don't really matter to the FF crowd. It doesn't matter how the dog looks or behaves. It's all about how the training methods make the trainer feel. You need to get in touch with yourself. 

I got in a debate on a FF training group the other day. An owner put a halti on a dog and the dog tore it's own muzzle up trying to get it off. The group was all about proper conditioning to the halti, which could take months to accomplish. My argument was that the confusion and discomfort the halti caused was worse than a prong collar and clear, consistent training. 

They just couldn't grasp that the dog decides what is fair, what is aversive, and what is effective. Once the word prong, shock, correction comes into the conversation, they go into avoidance.


----------



## JoanMcM

Steve Strom said:


> Well, the thing is, you don't really get to define properly, and the fairness of whatever tool is decided by the dog. You can unfairly and improperly train just as poorly with a leash as you can with an e collar. For context, I used one to stop a dog from going through the screen door after the stupid squirrels that were tormenting him. One time. He never touched the screen again in the almost 10 years I had him. Whether we were there or not. His obedience foundation was just fine, his prey drive was going to get him hurt.


*If all else absolutely fails,* And you never want them to do that for *whatever reason* I can see it. But understand what you just did. Honestly, I would sit at that flipping door for a day during squirrel crazy season with the dog until he understood that the call to jump through a door or a window *in pursuit* is *not his call to make*. Why? Because some day I may want him to actually do just that.

I have owned high-drive dogs that would fly10' off the ground to snap a squirrel off a tree trunk. Or jump 23' in pursuit on my own property. The same dogs knew not to jump through windows etc. they knew the difference in environment. I also never owned a dog that was afraid of any noise...they will sit outside with us during fireworks and thunder. One had to be trained out of actually chasing rockets and trying to catch them.

To justify use by saying a dog is just so high-drive it cannot even have normal training attempted is more of an ego trip then a legit training mode of operandi. How is it that every dog is now so 'high drive' there is no training methods that can be used? People supposedly can t even teach a dog basic obedience without gadgets. It is a marketing ploy.

Don t get me wrong I can see compulsion being used in certain circumstances. As you get more experience, those occasions get more rare. I also am against this constant treat bs as well...argument for another thread.


----------



## Baillif

You don't think he could get the dog to jump through that window after someone on a cue just because he punished the dog for trying to go through for a squirrel one time?


----------



## JoanMcM

Baillif said:


> You don't think he could get the dog to jump through that window after someone on a cue just because he punished the dog for trying to go through for a squirrel one time?


his words not mine the dog did not do it again for 10 years. And yes I think dogs could and are so adversely affected that it screws them up.

So why do you feel that your dog requires you to use an ecollar? What goal are you trying to achieve?


----------



## Baillif

Dogs, even the softest most cowardly ones are not that delicate that one aversive experience will prevent you from ever being able to undo an aversion to a stimulus you punished them from if you wanted to and knew your stuff. The fact he was so timed and clear the dog experienced a single event learning experience was fantastic IMO. I take my hat off to him.

I don't need the e collar for anything. It is convenient to teach certain exercises when you can correct the dog for something at a distance and not be in that picture and there are certain behaviors where that is necessary or at the very least helpful in ringsports.

There are also cases with certain aggressive pet dogs where a handler is not able to control the dog any other way and the e collar is the best option to deliver an impersonal consequence and not have a dog come up a leash to try to eat its handler. Even in those cases if I really wanted to achieve it without e collar I could. I would just have a second handler on a long line that would prevent the dog from coming up the leash at me as I prong punished the dog and eventually the dog would condition to thinking he couldn't come up the line and that would be that. E collar is a nice alternative to that though.

The E-collar is a tool, just as a shovel is a tool. If someone told me to dig a hole with my hands I could do it. If someone gave me a spoon I could do it with the spoon, but it's nicer to have that shovel. I don't need the E-collar for training. I can get it done other ways, but why would I not use the E-collar when the situation dictates it as the best tool for a particular job? There are certain tools I don't like. I am not a fan of chokes, I am not a fan of halties, I am not a fan of no pull harnesses, but that's mostly because they are redundant when there are better tools available like prongs and e-collars.


----------



## BARBIElovesSAILOR

I'm not necessarily pro e collar and I know I am in the minority here. I could be anti e collar maybe because I just don't use it? Don't have training on how to? Maybe I just don't like the idea of it? Regardless, I feel E-collars do have a time and a place. For me personally (just my opinion that may be incorrect) I prefer to use all other methods first, then an E collar as a last resort. So far, I have never had to do that. Also, another time I am FOR using an e collar is if it is to save a dog's life. As in, the dog is going to get euthanized in 2 days if it doesn't stop doing x,y,z...

Like I said, I have never had to use an E collar, so I am not the foremost authority on it, and do not really have a place to say what others should do. I just know what I would do, and how and when I would use it if I ever had to. How I would use it would be with a lot research first! Haha.

I don't know if it matters, but all the dogs I have had have been house pets. I haven't had to train dogs in bomb detection, k9 patrol, schutzhund, etc... Just sit, stay, down, come. I didn't need an E collar for any of these things, and I am sure most people don't need e collars for basic commands either. If you do use an e collar for basic commands, I'd love to know your reasoning. Thank you all for reading.


----------



## Baillif

Have you ever put an e collar on yourself at a working level and given yourself a stim? They have applications as a negative reinforcer at lower levels that are annoying but not painful just like a prong collar does. They can be used in a punishing way as well but that isn't the only game in town. You can be very gentle and tactful with an e collar. Done tactfully or even as a punisher it is the most humane of all the options out there because the feeling does not dwell. If you prong correct a dog the sensation sticks around for a bit even after the correction is done and over with. Not so for the collar.


----------



## JoanMcM

Actually we did try out an e collar fence years ago. Seemed to make sense as the best tool at that time - set parameter that never changes. Warning then a pop if the dog goes to close.

We tried it out first before putting on the dog. Good thing we did. The collar was shocking nowhere s near the parameter without warning. Several phone calls with the manufacturer and the thing was still inconsistent. POC was sent back. I wonder how many dogs out there start displaying bizarre behavior and the owners never figure out the thing is malfunctioning.

Numerous accounts of dogs that will run through the shock anyway. Also the fence is easily disabled during ground shifts and the dog just leaves the premises. So how is it after months or years of consistent shock collar use these dogs still are not boundary trained? Or worse cases of dogs that become aggressive because they are 'trained' that when they see stimulus it will cause a shock? Could it be they were just CONDITIONED to avoid shock and NEVER got an understanding of property boundary? Yep.

I boundary trained 3 GSDs and they did not leave the premises. I did put up a fence but it was more to keep other dogs, people, animals OUT. I am not above using a prong but RARELY feel it is necessary.


----------



## BARBIElovesSAILOR

Baillif said:


> Have you ever put an e collar on yourself at a working level and given yourself a stim? They have applications as a negative reinforcer at lower levels that are annoying but not painful just like a prong collar does. They can be used in a punishing way as well but that isn't the only game in town. You can be very gentle and tactful with an e collar. Done tactfully or even as a punisher it is the most humane of all the options out there because the feeling does not dwell. If you prong correct a dog the sensation sticks around for a bit even after the correction is done and over with. Not so for the collar.


I have not had the opportunity to use prong collars either. All the training I have done has been with voice,treats, hand signals, body language, absence of a reward, etc...

When I went to the sit means sit demo with sailor, they did try the e collar on my hands it felt like a vibration, but I am sure he did it at a very low setting.


----------



## Nigel

JoanMcM said:


> Actually we did try out an e collar fence years ago. Seemed to make sense as the best tool at that time - set parameter that never changes. Warning then a pop if the dog goes to close.
> 
> We tried it out first before putting on the dog. Good thing we did. The collar was shocking nowhere s near the parameter without warning. Several phone calls with the manufacturer and the thing was still inconsistent. POC was sent back. I wonder how many dogs out there start displaying bizarre behavior and the owners never figure out the thing is malfunctioning.
> 
> Numerous accounts of dogs that will run through the shock anyway. Also the fence is easily disabled during ground shifts and the dog just leaves the premises. So how is it after months or years of consistent shock collar use these dogs still are not boundary trained? Or worse cases of dogs that become aggressive because they are 'trained' that when they see stimulus it will cause a shock? Could it be they were just CONDITIONED to avoid shock and NEVER got an understanding of property boundary? Yep.
> 
> I boundary trained 3 GSDs and they did not leave the premises. I did put up a fence but it was more to keep other dogs, people, animals OUT. I am not above using a prong but RARELY feel it is necessary.


I don't know the quality or consistency of invisible fencing, never tried them, but with high quality ecollars, I doubt you'll find that kind of inconsistency you are describing. Using modern methods you can avoid this if that was an issue.

I used my ecollar on myself first, I wanted to know how the levels felt and what range I was comfortable using. It also helps to use the collar on people first to help with "timing". On top of that, you should properly condition the dog to the collar including finding their "working" level. That level can vary from dog to dog and under different situations so it's not a one time thing. Following those steps would alert you to a problem before you get started, though again, I doubt you'd see that in a good quality collar.


----------



## Baillif

JoanMcM said:


> Actually we did try out an e collar fence years ago. Seemed to make sense as the best tool at that time - set parameter that never changes. Warning then a pop if the dog goes to close.
> 
> We tried it out first before putting on the dog. Good thing we did. The collar was shocking nowhere s near the parameter without warning. Several phone calls with the manufacturer and the thing was still inconsistent. POC was sent back. I wonder how many dogs out there start displaying bizarre behavior and the owners never figure out the thing is malfunctioning.
> 
> Numerous accounts of dogs that will run through the shock anyway. Also the fence is easily disabled during ground shifts and the dog just leaves the premises. So how is it after months or years of consistent shock collar use these dogs still are not boundary trained? Or worse cases of dogs that become aggressive because they are 'trained' that when they see stimulus it will cause a shock? Could it be they were just CONDITIONED to avoid shock and NEVER got an understanding of property boundary? Yep.
> 
> I boundary trained 3 GSDs and they did not leave the premises. I did put up a fence but it was more to keep other dogs, people, animals OUT. I am not above using a prong but RARELY feel it is necessary.


Invisible fences require training. You don't just set it up turn it on and throw the collar on the dog and put him out there.


----------



## jafo220

Here is my simpleton form of view on e-collars vs treat and praise training. 

Spent the better part of a year and a half with positive reinforcement training on my dog. Two different trainers. Suffered severe ankle sprain, countless bloody hands and forearms, torn clothes and freaked out cat. This dog will walk all over you a year ago. He'll eat every treat you have and kick you in a butt when he's done with you. Yep, rogue dog. He is more than a high drive dog. He's a very intelligent dog with high prey drive and low threshold. He doesn't handle hands on well at all and is not the kind of dog that is going to cuddle with you. He has excellent genes from both sides of the tree. 

Fast forward to now after a year or so with the e-collar. Dog understands clearly his place. We now take off leash walks. He leaves the cat alone a majority of the time. He downs, sits, stays, comes without much problem and doesn't require constant stims to do any of this. He no longer pulls, takes off on a dead run on leash, jumps on anyone and rarely if ever mouths anymore.


----------



## Steve Strom

JoanMcM said:


> *If all else absolutely fails,* And you never want them to do that for *whatever reason* I can see it. But understand what you just did. Honestly, I would sit at that flipping door for a day during squirrel crazy season with the dog until he understood that the call to jump through a door or a window *in pursuit* is *not his call to make*. Why? Because some day I may want him to actually do just that.
> 
> I have owned high-drive dogs that would fly10' off the ground to snap a squirrel off a tree trunk. Or jump 23' in pursuit on my own property. The same dogs knew not to jump through windows etc. they knew the difference in environment. I also never owned a dog that was afraid of any noise...they will sit outside with us during fireworks and thunder. One had to be trained out of actually chasing rockets and trying to catch them.
> 
> To justify use by saying a dog is just so high-drive it cannot even have normal training attempted is more of an ego trip then a legit training mode of operandi. How is it that every dog is now so 'high drive' there is no training methods that can be used? People supposedly can t even teach a dog basic obedience without gadgets. It is a marketing ploy.
> 
> Don t get me wrong I can see compulsion being used in certain circumstances. As you get more experience, those occasions get more rare. I also am against this constant treat bs as well...argument for another thread.


I decided to go right for success Joan. I chose not to keep letting him fail. Less then 5mins. I'll take that trade over an all day, unproductive nag session any day. (Nagging the dog, that not any kind of name calling)

In his formal obedience, it was almost all leash, collar, and rewards. I only used the e for one small thing. Its not a matter of being lazy. Sometimes its better.


----------



## newlie

After two years of positive reinforcement and two trainers, I still did not have a consistent recall with Newlie. Note that I say consistent. He knew the command and would come if he had nothing better to do. I would see him look at me and literally, I could see the wheels turning...: "She's calling me. Do I want to go or not? I don't think so, I know she will pat me and say what a good dog I am, and probably give me a treat, BUT....there are rabbits that need chasing in this yard and she will just have to wait." I don't know how Newlie compares with other GSD's but he appears to have a very high prey drive.

Newlie's trainer bought me an e-collar and showed me how to work it. I would go out on the porch and say "Come, Newlie" one time. I f he didn't come, I would press the buttom on a low setting and hold it until he started the turn to come to me. I had to press the button exactly three times and now have a consistent recall. And when he comes, he doesn't act like a dog who is frightened or under stress. He bounds toward me happily almost as if he finally gets it! "Oh, she's calling me and she wants me right now, I gotta go!!!" And I still make a big deal of how good he is every time he comes to me.

I don't use the e-collar for teaching tricks or things like that, but a consistent recall could mean the difference between life and death for him.


----------



## BARBIElovesSAILOR

Captain doesn't really challenge me so I guess I am lucky. Haven't really needed any other tool other than what I already described. Sailor was the same as well. However gsd can be head strong and will challenge some. Captain definitely does not have the same respect for my husband as he does with me. I think it depends on the dog. Some are just so eager to please they will do anything you say just because you said it. I don't really think e collar would be necessary for some of these types. For a stubborn dog that might be in danger, e collars are an option. I'm just lucky I guess all my clients and dogs I have had have all listened to me. No need for anything more.


----------



## Steve Strom

JoanMcM said:


> his words not mine the dog did not do it again for 10 years. And yes I think dogs could and are so adversely affected that it screws them up.
> 
> So why do you feel that your dog requires you to use an ecollar? What goal are you trying to achieve?


I missed this Joan. It was a back door onto a deck and yes he calmly went in and out of it for the rest of his life.


----------



## JoanMcM

Baillif said:


> Invisible fences require training. You don't just set it up turn it on and throw the collar on the dog and put him out there.


ah....so you avoid the point I was making and so I know you got it. Good person! The point s if the collar 'taught' why then when the technology fails, the dog leaves the premises? The dog learned nothing just to avoid shock. After weeks or years of use as directed, the dogs still leave the premises.


----------



## JoanMcM

newlie said:


> After two years of positive reinforcement and two trainers, I still did not have a consistent recall with Newlie. Note that I say consistent. He knew the command and would come if he had nothing better to do. I would see him look at me and literally, I could see the wheels turning...: "She's calling me. Do I want to go or not? I don't think so, I know she will pat me and say what a good dog I am, and probably give me a treat, BUT....there are rabbits that need chasing in this yard and she will just have to wait." I don't know how Newlie compares with other GSD's but he appears to have a very high prey drive.
> 
> Newlie's trainer bought me an e-collar and showed me how to work it. I would go out on the porch and say "Come, Newlie" one time. I f he didn't come, I would press the buttom on a low setting and hold it until he started the turn to come to me. I had to press the button exactly three times and now have a consistent recall. And when he comes, he doesn't act like a dog who is frightened or under stress. He bounds toward me happily almost as if he finally gets it! "Oh, she's calling me and she wants me right now, I gotta go!!!" And I still make a big deal of how good he is every time he comes to me.
> 
> I don't use the e-collar for teaching tricks or things like that, but a consistent recall could mean the difference between life and death for him.


i can see this because you did make worthwhile effort. He still has not learned a consistent come but he has learned to avoid shock. Is your yard enclosed?


----------



## Chip18

newlie said:


> to do. I would see him look at me and literally, I could see the wheels turning...: "She's calling me. Do I want to go or not? I don't think so, I know she will pat me and say what a good dog I am, and probably give me a treat, BUT....there are rabbits that need chasing in this yard and she will just have to wait." I don't know how Newlie compares with other GSD's but he appears to have a very high prey drive.


My GSD I never saw that "Look" but when I was training my Boxer I did!


----------



## newlie

JoanMcM said:


> i can see this because you did make worthwhile effort. He still has not learned a consistent come but he has learned to avoid shock. Is your yard enclosed?


Yes, it is enclosed. I have not used the collar for about 6 weeks I would say, and he still comes running to me every time I call.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

No need to argue

I know! Lets all post vids of training. That should clear things right up...haha. 

Nothing better then wasting you and your dogs time in order to make yourself feel emotionally better about yourself as a person.
Only thing better is wasting paying clients time!!!


----------



## jafo220

BARBIElovesSAILOR said:


> Captain doesn't really challenge me so I guess I am lucky. Haven't really needed any other tool other than what I already described. Sailor was the same as well. However gsd can be head strong and will challenge some. Captain definitely does not have the same respect for my husband as he does with me. I think it depends on the dog. Some are just so eager to please they will do anything you say just because you said it. I don't really think e collar would be necessary for some of these types. For a stubborn dog that might be in danger, e collars are an option. I'm just lucky I guess all my clients and dogs I have had have all listened to me. No need for anything more.



Your right and that is whats been said many times in these discussions. It boils down to the dog. Believe me. If my current dog was more like my former GSD, there wouldn't be the need for an e-collar. It boils down to what kind of dog you're dealing with and how efficiently you want to get that dog from point A to point B.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Calling the concept, idea, or premise "baloney" (ahem) is not the same as insinuating the person holding an opposing POV is mistreating his dogs.

It's not even a "he does it too" argument because he didn't in the first place.

:shrug:


Further a trainer that uses different training tools, including rewards, clearly is *not* one dimensional. 





JoanMcM said:


> As opposed to calling other s views as horse$hit? The training as described was one dimensional.


----------



## Chip18

jafo220 said:


> Your right and that is whats been said many times in these discussions. It boils down to the dog. Believe me. If my current dog was more like my former GSD, there wouldn't be the need for an e-collar. It boils down to what kind of dog you're dealing with and how efficiently you want to get that dog from point A to point B.


Bout time someone made this point! 

Mostly it's been a "debate' between people who know what they're doing!" Which is to say... "Any tool improperly used can be abused!" The ones that got it right...no problem!

I don't use anything other than a "Slip leash" myself, that is all I needed with my High Rank Drive, Human Aggressive GSD! So I'm good, that does not mean my next dog won't be different but I'll see.

*Baillif*, however made the point that even if "tool" free you still need to be aware of:

*Any correction no matter what it comes from prong collar/flat collar/slip collar/stick/choke collar/your foot/ your hand/throwing your keys at the dog has the potential to cause a superstition.*

And from Lou:



LouCastle said:


> T
> Sorry, I strongly disagree with your opinion on this. Many complete beginners have used the tool with complete success, some of them right here on this forum.


I was stunned, clearly he has more faith in more dog owners than I do but... he would know! 

I found those two quotes very enlightening myself! 

So with that said...carry on!


----------



## Baillif

JoanMcM said:


> ah....so you avoid the point I was making and so I know you got it. Good person! The point s if the collar 'taught' why then when the technology fails, the dog leaves the premises? The dog learned nothing just to avoid shock. After weeks or years of use as directed, the dogs still leave the premises.


I didn't avoid any point. When you teach a dog with those fences you need to insure your dogs escape attempt is in the right direction IE away from the fence and not through it. An ecollar can provide a consequence but it is not directional. You need to show the dog what the right answer is with a line to ensure they go the right way.


----------



## Baillif

Anyway back to the topic of the main post. I don't have an issue with the way they use ecollar stim and leash pressure to teach stuff. What I think is missing from their programs is clear communication and reward whether it be emotional food or toy for when a dog does the right thing. I'm sure there are olk9 or sms trainers out there that do it though but probably not the majority of them. There is also a lack of clarity in the training because of a lack of clear punishment procedures. Their idea of punishment is really negative reinforcement at a higher level and for some dogs that's enough but for many there is a reliance on the collar to get behavior that would be disappearing if they were doing it right. There is also a bad issue with timing of the stim for many of them. I don't think it is fair to the dog. Also I don't consider a dog that is still requiring negative reinforcement to do behavior a truely trained dog. A truely trained dog should be at a point where if it does the right thing there is R+ and if they do the wrong thing there is P+ and the dog gets asked again till it is successful. The times P+ is necessary should be fairly rare and R- should never have to happen unless it's a strange picture. That's my standard. They don't meet that.


----------



## JoanMcM

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Calling the concept, idea, or premise "baloney" (ahem) is not the same as insinuating the person holding an opposing POV is mistreating his dogs.
> 
> It's not even a "he does it too" argument because he didn't in the first place.
> 
> :shrug:
> 
> 
> Further a trainer that uses different training tools, including rewards, clearly is *not* one dimensional.


The training was one dimensional as described. I standby what I said.


----------



## JoanMcM

Baillif said:


> I didn't avoid any point. When you teach a dog with those fences you need to insure your dogs escape attempt is in the right direction IE away from the fence and not through it. An ecollar can provide a consequence but it is not directional. *You need to show the dog what the right answer is with a line to ensure they go the right way.*


Much better vs
"This is horse ****. A compulsion dog trained under pressure develops thinking skills just as well as a dog trained by other means. People point toward dogs that are actively throwing behaviors to gain a resource as some indicator that it is somehow more valuable toward teaching dogs than any other way. A dog under pressure will throw behaviors in an attempt to evade that pressure especially if they realize doing nothing doesn't work. "
I still don t believe the perimeter ecollar fencing ever teaches anything other then avoid shock. The dog never learns to stay in the yard when the thing malfunctions.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

I've found your explanations to Bailiff and others to be more defensive and therefore not convincing at all.

I want to emphasize, this has nothing to do with you personally, just your perspectives and responses to some of the points brought up in this thread in regards to the topic.




JoanMcM said:


> The training was one dimensional as described. I standby what I said.


----------



## SuperG

This exchange is above my pay grade mostly but I find it interesting and am learning as well.

Individuals with such strong convictions and application with results in their chosen dog training methods obviously have very obedient dogs which enjoy their performance and do so willingly. I've seen a few videos of Baliff's dog and am impressed....I might be easily impressed but the spirited performance of that particular dog has motivated me take my current shepherd much further than my previous two...There are other members who have posted impressive videos of their dogs in action in various performance/obedience drills...it always motivates me.

Anyway, I'm just curious if you (JoanMcM) have a video or two out there of your dog(s) doing their thing. It's great being inspired by other people's efforts and results, so I'm being a bit greedy I guess.

Thought I'd ask.


SuperG


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

Still no video?


----------



## Baillif

JoanMcM said:


> Much better vs
> "This is horse ****. A compulsion dog trained under pressure develops thinking skills just as well as a dog trained by other means. People point toward dogs that are actively throwing behaviors to gain a resource as some indicator that it is somehow more valuable toward teaching dogs than any other way. A dog under pressure will throw behaviors in an attempt to evade that pressure especially if they realize doing nothing doesn't work. "
> I still don t believe the perimeter ecollar fencing ever teaches anything other then avoid shock. The dog never learns to stay in the yard when the thing malfunctions.


You don't get what I was objecting to.

You claimed a dog couldn't learn to think when compulsion training is used. You were essentially claiming that a dog somehow was learning problem solving skills when faced with the problem of trying to obtain food or toy or some form of reinforcement and that wasn't the case with a dog trained by compulsion.

I objected specifically to that point because a dog is essentially using the same problem solving abilities when it is figuring out how to avoid or escape something unpleasant. There is no benefit to a dogs critical thinking ability (if they even have that) or to any kind of problem solving skill by using compulsion vs compulsion free methods. That isn't an opinion. That is scientific fact.

As an aside a dog will eventually test the boundaries of an invisible fence because the dog will see pictures of being able to cross that threshold a lot during its lifetime. If it malfunctions and the warning tone never occurs (some models use vibration) to indicate that the dog has reached the boundary and needs to turn back then they will continue on their path. The warning is usually far enough away from the consequence that the dog can test the warning but not necessarily face a consequence. If you left the flags up and got rid of the warning at some point the dog would just learn to avoid the flags and the areas in-between them and over time would be far less likely to test the boundary because it can't be done without being punished.

Also it is proof that punishment won't ever prevent a dog from trying some punished behavior ever again in it's lifetime. Part of the reason is that punishment while it reduces the chance of the likelyhood of a particular behavior it does not necessarily mean it will reduce that chance to zero. This is especially true for self reinforcing behaviors. If you are very consistent you can come pretty close to eliminating undesirable behaviors though.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Unlikely it would make a difference. 


This is an example of a 'gotcha' vs explanation type of discussion. The 'gotchas' will just wear you out because it takes more energy and time to explain.



Blitzkrieg1 said:


> Still no video?


----------



## Chip18

JoanMcM said:


> Much better vs
> "This is horse ****. A compulsion dog trained under pressure develops thinking skills just as well as a dog trained by other means. People point toward dogs that are actively throwing behaviors to gain a resource as some indicator that it is somehow more valuable toward teaching dogs than any other way. A dog under pressure will throw behaviors in an attempt to evade that pressure especially if they realize doing nothing doesn't work. "
> I still don t believe the perimeter ecollar fencing ever teaches anything other then avoid shock


Now we'er learning stuff!



JoanMcM;6682033 The dog never learns to stay in the yard when the thing malfunctions.[/QUOTE said:


> This a valid point and could be easily solved "if" an owner would also teach "boundary training in conjunction with an E fence! "On the lawn" though I doubt most would? By and large folks going E fence pretty much "think" there job is done!


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

err.....O.K. 

btw Chip, watch the quote syntax when embedding or doing multiple quotes. Your posts are hard to read as it is. 

Hope that helps. 

Have a good day. :sun:


----------



## Baillif

People with invisible e fences if they ever bothered to read the instructions that went with the kits would know there was about 2 weeks of boundary training involved using the flags that come with the fences.


----------



## LouCastle

JoanMcM said:


> I am open to all kinds of training ideas and have been for most of my life.


A lot of people say this, but, based on your comments, it does not appear to be so. I notice that you didn't correct my 'guess' that _"you know very little about the modern use of an Ecollar."_ so it appears that at least some of your statements on Ecollars are made with little knowledge behind them. AND since you have repeated some of the nonsense put out by the pozzie crowd, it would appear that you've bought into at least some of their nonsense. 



JoanMcM said:


> A compulsion trained dog is not trained to THINK which is critical.


Here's what I was referring to just above. THE FACT IS that no training method _"trains [a dog] to think."_ Dogs think, no matter what method is used to train them. Some think more than others and different dogs, different breeds, think more about some things than others. Some methods have a dog DOING less but that as nothing to do with a dog thinking or problem solving. "Throwing behaviors" as some dogs, trained with some methods do, has nothing to do with thinking. 



JoanMcM said:


> The dog MUST be shown and understand WHAT you want without being concerned about a correction especially when training is started.


When corrections are used properly dogs are not _"concerned about [them]."_ 



JoanMcM said:


> Even If compulsion is used because you MUST and most times trainers RESORT to compulsion because the TRAINER is not up to the job or is missing something not because it is actually necessary


MORE pozzie nonsense. That group, and since you share some of their thoughts and sayings, you seem to be in their camp, often thinks that because a trainer uses certain tools that "he must use them." I trained dogs for years before I started using Ecollars. Since I learned how fast and effective they are, I won't train a dog without one. 



JoanMcM said:


> timing is everything. A beginner trainer must learn timing before they should be allowed to use compulsion. Without timing and comprehension, you can create more problems than are solved.


ACTUALLY timing is MUCH MORE IMPORTANT with the so−called "kinder gentler methods" than with compulsion. Punishment works if it's applied within three seconds of the undesired behavior. 

If you're three seconds behind your dog with a clicker or marker training, you'll be marking the wrong behavior. He'll be on to some new behavior and THAT'S what you'll be marking. It's not *just *that it's ineffective, you'll be teaching the dog the *wrong thing. * The reason that a clicker is used, rather than just saying "good dog," is that it marks the *precise *moment in time that the dog is "right." If that moment is three seconds too late, not only will he not learn what is desired but he will learn the wrong thing. 



JoanMcM said:


> The whole thought of pushing a button makes you a trainer and your dog is actually trained is pretty irresponsible.


Since no one has made such a statement it's just a straw man argument, a logical fallacy. 



JoanMcM said:


> Open sales of training devices which inflict pain without proper training time put in is irresponsible and cruel.


Wanting to ban tools that you know little about, is just as irresponsible and since the refusal to use the Ecollar it has gotten plenty of dogs killed it's cruel as well. 



JoanMcM said:


> If training is done properly at the beginning then the dog is 100% with or with out any collar on.


MANY people here adopt adult dogs from the shelter without any way of knowing if _"training was done properly at the beginning."_ And most people who start training as novices will make plenty of mistakes along the way. So it's only the very experienced who are capable of _"training ... properly [from] the beginning."_



JoanMcM said:


> If the dog is not 100% in any public setting the leash stays on. * What if there is a technical failure with the collar? Then you are up the creek.... *


ANOTHER bit of pozzie nonsense. The Ecollar is no different than any other tool. If the owner desires that his dog be able to work 'naked" (without the tool) it’s a simple matter to wean the dog off it. But since the Ecollar is THE ONLY TOOL that will allow the owner to save his dog in a worst case scenario, _ the dog is chasing a cat (or simply running towards a busy road) and is not obeying the recall commands, _ I advocate that people keep it on the dog, "for insurance." 



JoanMcM said:


> * So why do you feel that your dog requires you to use an ecollar? * What goal are you trying to achieve?


I seem to have missed the post where ANYONE said that their _"dog requires [them] to use an Ecollar."_ Can you direct me to it please? 



BARBIElovesSAILOR said:


> I don't know if it matters, but all the dogs I have had have been house pets. I haven't had to train dogs in bomb detection, k9 patrol, schutzhund, etc... Just sit, stay, down, come. * I didn't need an E collar for any of these things, and I am sure most people don't need e collars for basic commands either. If you do use an e collar for basic commands, I'd love to know your reasoning. * Thank you all for reading.


I have trained dogs for _"detection, K−9 patrol, SchH, etc."_ AND I also use the Ecollar for _"basic commands."_ I do so because it's the fastest, most reliable, and most humane tool/method extant. Few pet owners want to spend weeks learning the new (often very foreign) terms of Operant Conditioning. Ditto for the new theories and new methods, only to discover that they don't have high levels of reliability. Just in this thread we have at least one member who describes her trip through the pozzie methods and her failure with them. Then she tells us of her success with the Ecollar. This, and EVERY dog−related−forum has dozens of threads that start with something like, _"Help! Fluffy ran into the wood while chasing a deer and would not come back when I called!!" _ 

On forums devoted to discussions about the Ecollar, you NEVER see those kinds of discussions. Instead there are questions about "perfecting a heel" or "speeding up an already reliable recall."



JoanMcM said:


> Actually we did try out an e collar fence years ago. Seemed to make sense as the best tool at that time - set parameter that never changes. Warning then a pop if the dog goes to close.
> 
> We tried it out first before putting on the dog. Good thing we did. The collar was shocking nowhere s near the parameter without warning. Several phone calls with the manufacturer and the thing was still inconsistent. POC was sent back. I wonder how many dogs out there start displaying bizarre behavior and the owners never figure out the thing is malfunctioning.


RTFM is a good way to go through life. (For those not familiar with this − "Read The Freakin' Manual." One does not just put the IF (Invisible Fence) on a dog and release him into the yard. Even the cheap units available at Petco come with detailed instructions. 



JoanMcM said:


> * Numerous accounts of dogs that will * run through the shock anyway.


We have _"[n]umerous accounts of dogs that will"_ not recall when trained with the pozzie methods. AGAIN, you like to discuss tools/methods you don't care for when they're improperly used but NEVER discuss the tools/methods that you favor when that occurs with them. 



JoanMcM said:


> So how is it after months or years of consistent shock collar use these dogs still are not boundary trained?


Oddly, the versions stories of Invisible Fences becoming disabled that I hear, have the dog STILL staying inside the boundary line. 



JoanMcM said:


> Or worse cases of dogs that become aggressive because they are 'trained' that when they see stimulus it will cause a shock? Could it be they were just CONDITIONED to avoid shock and NEVER got an understanding of property boundary? Yep.


Now we're back to RTFM. If those instructions are followed, dogs get the _"understanding of property boundary."_ 



JoanMcM said:


> ah....so you avoid the point I was making and so I know you got it. Good person!


This from the same _"Good person"_ who conveniently avoided my point that you know little about Ecollars? Pot−Kettle−Black? 



JoanMcM said:


> * I still don t believe the perimeter ecollar fencing ever teaches anything other then avoid shock. * The dog never learns to stay in the yard when the thing malfunctions.


_"[T]he perimeter Ecollar fencing [N]EVER teaches [a dog] anything ..."_ But then, neither does the clicker, the treat or the tug toy. Teaching is on the owner, the rest is just tools. I suggest that you RTFM's about IF's. I've got many clients using them, whose dogs stay inside the boundary even when the collar is not on them, even if the current is turned off.


----------



## Chip18

Gwenhwyfair said:


> err.....O.K.
> 
> btw Chip, watch the quote syntax when embedding or doing multiple quotes. Your posts are hard to read as it is.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Have a good day. :sun:


PM Sent


----------



## Chip18

Baillif said:


> People with invisible e fences if they ever bothered to read the instructions that went with the kits would know there was about 2 weeks of boundary training involved using the flags that come with the fences.


That would cover my statement but...this is America, who reads instructions!


----------



## Chip18

Chip18 said:


> That would cover my statement but...this is America, who reads instructions!


Hey Lou covered my point! So RTFM, America


----------



## Baillif

I know right? Who would have thought the dog might pick it's own escape path to evade a stim if it wasn't taught one from the beginning? Weirdly this path seems to be through the fence half the time...hmm. How dare they not know exactly which way we want them to go without instruction.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Chip18 said:


> PM Sent


Really? I looked at PMs twice didn't get one from you?

Am I being a meanie? I hope not.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Lou. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: All of the above and I'd keep on.......  



LouCastle said:


> <snipped>
> ACTUALLY timing is MUCH MORE IMPORTANT with the so−called "kinder gentler methods" than with compulsion. Punishment works if it's applied within three seconds of the undesired behavior.
> 
> If you're three seconds behind your dog with a clicker or marker training, you'll be marking the wrong behavior. He'll be on to some new behavior and THAT'S what you'll be marking. It's not *just *that it's ineffective, you'll be teaching the dog the *wrong thing. *The reason that a clicker is used, rather than just saying "good dog," is that it marks the *precise *moment in time that the dog is "right." If that moment is three seconds too late, not only will he not learn what is desired but he will learn the wrong thing.
> 
> 
> 
> <snipped>.



*On the point above*. This is me, this is most average pet owners I know.

My timing stinks. (it's better now...) I didn't want to use a prong or e.collar because of it. The quandary was I became stuck. I wrote myself off as incapable of training my dog Smitty. Smitty was rescued, a self sufficient street dog for the first 1 1/2 years of his life, neglected and never really bonded with humans. An independent spirit who didn't care one whit if I was happy or had treats. He literally would refuse treats and turn his head if I praised him. For several *years* I gave up on him AND me. I didn't take him places and we didn't have any kind of bond or relationship.

Then I got Ilda, who went through some of those stages young GSDs go through and I knew I HAD to do something different. Enter IPO trainers and the use of tools like prong collars and e.collars. 

I got over my fear of being 'mean' or 'cruel' to my dogs. I learned how to properly use (in my case a prong) and it opened MANY doors for me and my dogs. 

Smitty is getting old now. Turns out he's pretty 'snappy' with OB and we could have had a LOT of fun had I not been what I now call "A disempowered dog owner". 

MANY people fail with the PO methods because of the timing issue. Many people give up (I kept Smitty) but a lot of those dogs end up in the shelter, untrained and unwanted.

Life is messy. Sometimes _I_ get corrected, wrongly too, sometimes we mess up with a prong or e.collar but it's part of the process of learning. One thing is for sure, it's much better then giving up and leaving the dog locked up in the yard, alone, day in and day out, or worse yet, in the shelter on the euth list.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

A thought or two about the e.fences.

I have a foot in both worlds, the world of people who really want to learn and become better trainers, like many, many of the people on this board.

The other foot is firmly in the world of people who don't really care or want to learn, the average Joe Schmoe dog owners. They want convenience and ease of use, push button tech.

Many people who get e.fences do so because they don't want to spend time or money on training or putting up a decent solid fence (**see note below). It's not so much RTFM as it is the e.fences are their own worst enemy marketing-wise. By their nature they cater to the 'I ain't got time to deal with it' crowd. We have an e.fence dog roaming our neighborhood daily right now. I've returned her to my neighbors up the street in the past. They don't even bother to check the collar to keep it charged up. Let alone read and apply instructions in a manual. I'll be blunt, it's not the reading of the manual that's the problem, it's the attitude. They are *that* lazy, to begin with.

(**I do understand some neighborhoods do have fencing restrictions so people don't have many options when it comes to fencing for dogs)


----------



## BARBIElovesSAILOR

Lou Castle:

Question: do you believe your methods and the use of an e collar are appropriate for everyone and every situation? Do you believe there are some scenarios where your methods or use of an e collar are not appropriate for training a canine? And if so what/when?

Thank you for your response


----------



## JoanMcM

Lou Castle:

I am a trainer where the dog is taught and does not 'figure' how to avoid pain as a method. I am not a 100% posititive trainer. I understand that negative reinforcement is rarely, if ever, needed. Frankly, the use of drives are so much more compelling for a dog rather then the use of pain or cookies for that matter.

Most times if you think your dog needs a correction and you video what the handler is doing, the handler is 99% of the time the one making the error. Dog cues off of handler. 

Websales do not permit such learning or teaching. Yes, I imagine you have a great number of customers who do not want to spend the time to learn how to train their dog. I imagine that suits you fine. You can dismiss 'pozzies' to rack up another customer and what you don't see does not bother you.


----------



## JoanMcM

Baillif said:


> You don't get what I was objecting to.
> 
> You claimed a dog couldn't learn to think when compulsion training is used. You were essentially claiming that a dog somehow was learning problem solving skills when faced with the problem of trying to obtain food or toy or some form of reinforcement and that wasn't the case with a dog trained by compulsion.
> 
> I objected specifically to that point because a dog is essentially using the same problem solving abilities when it is figuring out how to avoid or escape something unpleasant. There is no benefit to a dogs critical thinking ability (if they even have that) or to any kind of problem solving skill by using compulsion vs compulsion free methods. That isn't an opinion. That is scientific fact.
> 
> As an aside a dog will eventually test the boundaries of an invisible fence because the dog will see pictures of being able to cross that threshold a lot during its lifetime. If it malfunctions and the warning tone never occurs (some models use vibration) to indicate that the dog has reached the boundary and needs to turn back then they will continue on their path. The warning is usually far enough away from the consequence that the dog can test the warning but not necessarily face a consequence. If you left the flags up and got rid of the warning at some point the dog would just learn to avoid the flags and the areas in-between them and over time would be far less likely to test the boundary because it can't be done without being punished.
> 
> Also it is proof that punishment won't ever prevent a dog from trying some punished behavior ever again in it's lifetime. Part of the reason is that punishment while it reduces the chance of the likelyhood of a particular behavior it does not necessarily mean it will reduce that chance to zero. This is especially true for self reinforcing behaviors. If you are very consistent you can come pretty close to eliminating undesirable behaviors though.


Read your own post...it is excellent really...the dog has NOT LEARNED ANYTHING but to avoid the shock. The dog is not boundary *trained* which is what the owner wants.


----------



## David Winners

JoanMcM, 

What you describe is the dog figuring out how to get the reward. It's not like you show the dog a diagram and it learns the behavior. Through luring or capturing, you show the dog how to access the reward, from you.

The learning process is similar. The reward is withheld unless the dog completes the behavior, at which time positive reward reinforces the behavior.

With the e-collar, positive punishment is applied until the dog completes the behavior, at which time negative reward (stopping the stim) reinforces the behavior.

The big difference is that in the first example, you the trainer are a major part of the process. Without the imminent possibility of reward, the behavior becomes much less likely to be repeated. In the second example, the behavior of the dog creates the negative reinforcement, not the trainer. This creates a behavior that is more reliable.


About web sales,

There is no charge to view Lou's page or join his forum. He will answer your emails or forum posts at length for free. 



You say the dog hasn't learned to do anything but avoid shock in the premier training scenario, but it is not boundary trained. If the dog learns that reaching a particular spot in the yard creates discomfort, and that retreating to the safe spot in the yard relieves this discomfort, in other words avoiding shock, it is trained. 

I'm interested in how you would go about boundary training a dog with no compulsion in a way that was reliable without the trainer present.


----------



## JoanMcM

JoanMcM said:


> Lou Castle:
> 
> I am a trainer where the dog is taught and does not 'figure' how to avoid pain as a method. I am not a 100% posititive trainer. I understand that negative reinforcement is rarely, if ever, needed. Frankly, the use of drives are so much more compelling for a dog rather then the use of pain or cookies for that matter.
> 
> Most times if you think your dog needs a correction and you video what the handler is doing, the handler is 99% of the time the one making the error. Dog cues off of handler.
> 
> Websales do not permit such learning or teaching. Yes, I imagine you have a great number of customers who do not want to spend the time to learn how to train their dog. I imagine that suits you fine. You can dismiss 'pozzies' to rack up another customer and what you don't see does not bother you.


I am adding an addendum to my comment then I have to go to work and will converse with you all tomorrow. Addendum: Before you get to the 99% handler error....at the very beginning and unfortunately some experienced trainers miss this...99.9% of 'problems' are straight out bad husbandry...ie, the dog is not getting enough exercise, the dog is being fed too much crappy food, the dog has a health issue, etc.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

There you go again.  Imputing negative motives onto the person with an opposing POV.

Just in my area it is rife with trainers slamming those who use prongs OR e.collars to drum up business. That IS the marketing gimmick of today.

Vilifying them as cruel and greedy and those who use them as lazy so THEY can get more customers. Naturally no one working with animals wants to have their business slandered in such a manner.

Only recently have trainers and people like me _dared_ to push back on this meme. 

There really are a great number of customers who really do NOT have the time OR skill (timing) to futz around forever. I deal with them every day. I personally have saved dogs from being thrown into the pound by directing people to trainers I know in this area who are fair, humane but also willing to use the tools necessary to train and resolve problems day to day pet owners have with their dogs.






JoanMcM said:


> Lou Castle:
> 
> I am a trainer where the dog is taught and does not 'figure' how to avoid pain as a method. I am not a 100% posititive trainer. I understand that negative reinforcement is rarely, if ever, needed. Frankly, the use of drives are so much more compelling for a dog rather then the use of pain or cookies for that matter.
> 
> Most times if you think your dog needs a correction and you video what the handler is doing, the handler is 99% of the time the one making the error. Dog cues off of handler.
> 
> Websales do not permit such learning or teaching. Yes, I imagine you have a great number of customers who do not want to spend the time to learn how to train their dog. I imagine that suits you fine. You can dismiss 'pozzies' to rack up another customer and what you don't see does not bother you.


----------



## Chip18

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Really? I looked at PMs twice didn't get one from you?
> 
> Am I being a meanie? I hope not.


No prob..I'll try again later.


----------



## Baillif

JoanMcM said:


> Read your own post...it is excellent really...the dog has NOT LEARNED ANYTHING but to avoid the shock. The dog is not boundary *trained* which is what the owner wants.


The dog when it is boundary trained learns plenty more than that. When the training is done properly it learns that a warning or a stim will result if they go too close to the boundary flags. It also learns which direction it needs to escape if it is stimmed or hears or feels the warning tone or vibration. This kind of boundary training doesn't take long at all with an invisible fence if you know what you're doing.

Nothing in my post supports your ideas.

Just to nitpick.

When a dog is stimmed by a collar until it completes a desired behavior that is primarily under the realm of negative reinforcement. There is a positive punishment component to negative reinforcement (at the very beginning) but it is generally understood that under that circumstance it is negative reinforcement. Positive punishment in a purest sense occurs when a dog refuses or fails a known command or task is stimmed for it regardless of what they attempt to do to escape the behavior (including attempting to carry out the command again)


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Chip18 said:


> No prob..I'll try again later.


I'll send you one, then you can just reply and tell me all about it. I don't have you blocked or anything!


----------



## LouCastle

BARBIElovesSAILOR said:


> Lou Castle:
> 
> Question: do you believe your methods and the use of an e collar are appropriate for everyone and every situation? Do you believe there are some scenarios where your methods or use of an e collar are not appropriate for training a canine? And if so what/when?
> 
> Thank you for your response


Here are some situations where I would not recommend an Ecollar. 


If someone is not willing to spend the money to purchase a quality Ecollar. 
If someone is not willing to read and follow the simple instructions that are on my website. 
If someone does not have the coordination that allows them to tap a foot on the ground and to clap their hands together at the same time.

I've found that the common reasons that the anti Ecollar crowd gives, a fearful dog, a shy dog, an aggressive dog, etc., are actually dogs that benefit tremendously from proper use of the Ecollar. Due to the remote nature of the stimulation, such dogs do not associate the discomfort as coming from the trainer/owner and so, there's no conflict as there is with many other tools, including those using treats, toys, etc. I've come across dogs that bite their owners if they're not given the treat or the toy! 

Some have told me that their dog has a medical condition such as epilepsy or a heart condition and that they've successfully trained their dog with an Ecollar using my methods. I think that they provide less stress than many tools/methods and so are perfect for these dogs. 

If you have some specific situation in mind, please bring it to the discussion.


----------



## LouCastle

JoanMcM said:


> Lou Castle:
> 
> I am a trainer where the dog is taught and does not 'figure' how to avoid pain as a method.


Please tell us specifically what tools/methods you use. So far, in this discussion, you've been very general and broad. Since "pain" is a continuum that ranges from, "I'm a little uncomfortable" to "I can't stand that for another second!" I'd bet that your methods use "pain" as well. 



JoanMcM said:


> I am not a 100% posititive trainer.


Even those who claim that they ARE _"100% positive trainer"_ are not. Fact is, it's IMPOSSIBLE to train a dog with only positive methods. Some have even gone so far as to make up new terminology to conceal what they are doing and so that they can claim that they are not using punishment. 



JoanMcM said:


> I understand that negative reinforcement is rarely, if ever, needed.


If you'll tell us, in detail, how you train a dog to sit, I bet that I can show that you are using negative reinforcement, and probably positive punishment, as well. 



JoanMcM said:


> Frankly, the use of drives are so much more compelling for a dog rather then the use of pain or cookies for that matter.


Please tell us more of this 'drive training system' that you use. 



JoanMcM said:


> Websales do not permit such learning or teaching. Yes, I imagine you have a great number of customers who do not want to spend the time to learn how to train their dog. I imagine that suits you fine. You can dismiss 'pozzies' to rack up another customer and what you don't see does not bother you.


_"Websales?"_ There's nothing to purchase on my site. No Ecollars, no classes, no toys, no gimmicks. It's all free. I do advertise that I do seminars and private lessons, but there's no "click to buy" anything, anywhere. There are about 50 words that "sell" my training, and about 50,000 that teach how to use an Ecollar. Additionally I write here, and elsewhere, quite a bit answering specific questions about use of the tool. I also do so in private emails. Often when there's too much to discuss in email I invite the person to call me. I've spent a couple of hours with folks on this forum in these conversations, all for free. I donate my time at many of my seminars as long as my expenses are met. That's the case with almost all of my work for non-profit organizations. Wondering, how much of your work is done for free? 

Contrary to your statement, those who use the site to assist them in learning to use an Ecollar learn quite a bit about how a dog learns and how to train their dog. 

I dismiss pozzies when they come across as you have, self−righteous, preachy, judgmental, and telling others that they are doing it wrong, when they have no idea of what others actually do. I almost never barge into their discussions, telling them they're doing it wrong. I wish they would pay us balanced trainers the same courtesy.


----------



## LouCastle

David Winners said:


> JoanMcM,
> 
> About web sales,
> 
> There is no charge to view Lou's page or join his forum. He will answer your emails or forum posts at length for free.


As I mentioned briefly in my last post, I also invite phone calls if the issue would take too long to discuss in email. 



David Winners said:


> I'm interested in how you would go about boundary training a dog with no compulsion in a way that was reliable without the trainer present.


I’m very interested in this too David. I hope Joan answers our questions. But given that she's avoided several of mine already, I don't hold out much hope.


----------



## LouCastle

JoanMcM said:


> I am adding an addendum to my comment then I have to go to work and will converse with you all tomorrow. Addendum: Before you get to the 99% handler error....at the very beginning and unfortunately some experienced trainers miss this... * 99.9% of 'problems' are straight out bad husbandry...ie, the dog is not getting enough exercise, the dog is being fed too much crappy food, the dog has a health issue, etc. *


I think that most "problems" arise because DWDWDWD ("Dogs Wanna Do, What Dogs Wanna Do"). Dogs have their own agendas, drives and instincts, that are different from ours. Due to these differences, their actions sometimes may be at odds with what we want them to do. It's simply a matter of showing the dog that doing what we want, is to his advantage. If we can get him to believe that it's in * his * best interest to do this, we're gold. 

This has * EXACTLY NOTHING * to do with _"exercise, food or health."_ You can exercise a dog until he's exhausted and in an hour he'll be ready to tear up your pillows. You can feed him the cheapest, _or the best, _dog food extant and it will have no effect on his training, if effective methods are used. A dog that is sick (within reason, of course) can still sit on command. This is not to say that these things are not important, in fact they are vital to the dog's health and well being. Good care is a sign of a responsible pet owner. * But they have NOTHING to do with training. * Exercising a dog so that he's in the best shape of his life, feeding him the best diet that exists, and making sure that he gets the best vet treatment possible, won't get him trained.


----------



## SuperG

LouCastle said:


> If you have some specific situation in mind, please bring it to the discussion.


I have a specific situation...2 1/2 year old GSD intact bitch...reactive to other dogs while leashed. I have made some reasonable progress over the past year but far from our goal of being able to go anywhere and everywhere allowable. I started off at local dog training classes which employed the desensitizing and counter conditioning methods...all positive and feel good stuff. What I did find of interest was when the owner of this outfit offered to handle my dog for a bit and demonstrate...the owner did okay and then proceeded to close the distance between some other dogs in the class...and in a heartbeat my dog went over threshold which was met with the lady hanging my dog on her prong...she looked at me and said " she has a real hair trigger doesn't she?" so much for the all positive...personally I didn't mind but it seemed to be a bit of testimony on the owner's behalf about DS/CC....kind of made me laugh.

Anyway, a couple of forum members have directed me to build focus with my dog and utilize the benefits from this focus towards the DA problem...this instruction has helped the most as I continue it today. However, whether it is because I grow impatient or want to explore any and all methods to correct this problem, I politely ask you if this particular situation can be remedied by an e-collar if properly used?

SuperG


----------



## LouCastle

SuperG said:


> I have a specific situation...2 1/2 year old GSD intact bitch...reactive to other dogs while leashed. I have made some reasonable progress over the past year but far from our goal of being able to go anywhere and everywhere allowable. I started off at local dog training classes which employed the desensitizing and counter conditioning methods...all positive and feel good stuff. What I did find of interest was when the owner of this outfit offered to handle my dog for a bit and demonstrate...the owner did okay and then proceeded to close the distance between some other dogs in the class...and in a heartbeat my dog went over threshold which was met with the lady hanging my dog on her prong...she looked at me and said " she has a real hair trigger doesn't she?" * so much for the all positive... * personally I didn't mind but it seemed to be a bit of testimony on the owner's behalf about DS/CC....kind of made me laugh.


I laugh too, but not in a good way. The hypocrisy of some of these folks is astounding. 



SuperG said:


> Anyway, a couple of forum members have directed me to build focus with my dog and utilize the benefits from this focus towards the DA problem...this instruction has helped the most as I continue it today. However, whether it is because I grow impatient or want to explore any and all methods to correct this problem, [/b] I politely ask you if this particular situation can be remedied by an e-collar if properly used? [/b]
> 
> SuperG


I can't give you any guarantees, there's no such thing in dog training. But here are a few addendum to that comment. I have personally done the crittering/dog to dog aggression protocol, over 200 times. It failed one time. That was when the owner refused to do some work at home that was necessary to change the dog's environment. It's a long story but suffice it to say that the dog was practicing the wrong thing on a daily basis. No amount of training will overcome that. 

Basically, the protocol teaches the dog to turn his head and look away from the other dog. It's impossible to be aggressive towards something that you cannot look at. First, you have to understand that MOST dog to do aggression is fear based. There are very few truly aggressive dogs out there and there's no reason to believe that your dog is one of them. Your description of his behavior speaks to fear, not aggression. 

Second, when this "looking away" becomes a habit, some dogs learn that there was nothing to fear in the first place and they become friendly towards dogs they used to be aggressive towards. But many dogs just stop the display that's intended to show the other dog how big and tough he is, in an effort to keep the other dog from approaching any closer. I don't require that dogs trained with this protocol "frolic and play" with other dogs, just that they don't harm them. This has been the case with every dog that I've done the protocol with, with the one exception that I mentioned. 

Here's some video that an owner sent me after using the protocol on her dog. This is an extraordinary result and more than anyone should expect. As I said, most dogs just shut off the displays of aggression. No one has ever been able to definitively tell me which dog was the one that was formerly aggressive!


----------



## SuperG

Appreciate the straightforward response.....


SuperG


----------

