# LouCastle vs Leerburg Method for Remote Collars?



## Sapakus

Hi,

After some research, i think my dog needs some remote collar training as he's getting a little stubborn and very testy... I did not want to jump into it without training myself, so I got myself the Leerburg training video... sounds good and i think i understand it well... I still havent started the training yet, just putting it on and off the dog so he gets use to the collar.

But recently I have some people here recommend LouCastle - who has a very different technique then Leerburg. I actually think Leerburg's method is better and makes more sense.... but would like some expert advice.

I appreciate all feedback!


----------



## hunterisgreat

I'm familiar with Leerburgs, and have read, reread, and triple read Lou's... and spoken to Lou extensively on the phone. I used Lou's methods and it worked perfectly.


----------



## GSDBESTK9

When I bought my first e-collars years ago I turned to Lou, he was extremely helpful and it worked out great!

Have never read/watched the Leerburg Method.


----------



## Clyde

I like Lou Castle's technique it teaches the dog how to turn the collar off at a super low level stim. Key part here is that it teaches the dog how to deal with the stress of the stim until the dog is successful. I just think this is so much more clear to the dog than the leerburg method.

From my understanding the Leerburg method is to use it as a correction say "no" or whatever your marker is first then stim. I might be wrong I only looked into his method so far and new I didn't like it.

But there is a huge thread debating these exact two methods I will try to find it.


----------



## Clyde

I think this is the debate I was thinking of....

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/training-theory-methods/171844-using-e-collar.html


----------



## Sapakus

yep, basically from my understanding, in Leerburg's method, you give a command, if dog doesn't comply, he gets a stim. in lou's method, he gets a stim and a command at the same time, and stim stops when dog complies.

in human prespective.... someone keeps slapping u until u comply, OR you get slapped if you dont comply... personally I like the later better, but i'm not sure if dogs feel the same way.


----------



## Sapakus

Also, just to add in the fact, he def. knows the commands, but he likes to challenge them.


----------



## NancyJ

My understanding is the stim level is much higher in the Leerburg method but I could be wrong. Lou uses VERY low stim ... enough for an ear twitch or a skin wrinkle...I stimmed my self at that level and it was mildly tingly. 

I have not done much ecollar training but I did use Lou's protocols for crittering and it worked beautifully.


----------



## Sapakus

jocoyn said:


> My understanding is the stim level is much higher in the Leerburg method but I could be wrong. Lou uses VERY low stim ... enough for an ear twitch or a skin wrinkle...I stimmed my self at that level and it was mildly tingly.
> 
> I have not done much ecollar training but I did use Lou's protocols for crittering and it worked beautifully.


Agreed, i did feel the same, therefore i was going to go with Leerburg's method but with a lower stim than he suggest.


----------



## NancyJ

I am not sure it will have the desired effect based on how Leerburgs method is described as a correction....

I will say that I went with Lou's method after I had a female intense on chasing chickens. The rooster we pulled out of her bloody spurred mouth did not deter her nor did the goat she chased through an electric cattle fence...goat went over, she went through and you could actually see her whole body twitch and then the chase resumed. We tried on our own to correct her with high stim while she was in drive. Later I learned that could REALLY backfire. Fortunately, she did not even notice the correction other than a quick yelp and resumed chasing.

Lou's crittering protocol worked wonders for us in just a few sessions....timing was the critical factor as the dog was not engaged in misbehaving but starting the behavior change...I was not part of the picture and she would self-correct later, even without the collar....It helped me fine tune reading the predatory sequence too.


----------



## Sapakus

ahhhhhhhhh for some reason I thought Leerburg's method was the recommended method. now i'm back to square one


----------



## NancyJ

Depends on who you talk with. 

Honestly if you are going to use ecollar training I would find someone good in your area and learn one on one in person


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

jocoyn said:


> Depends on who you talk with.
> 
> Honestly if you are going to use ecollar training I would find someone good in your area and learn one on one in person


I'm a big fan of Lou who's method is about TEACHING and training rather then merely correcting. He's also very available if you have questions via email plus a ton of his stuff is on line on his site. 

Home

I'm all about using the lowest level necessary when the dog can still think and LEARN to listen/behave. Rather than the old 'set them up to fail so you can shock the heck out of them as a correction' type of training method.

I also second the recommendation of training with someone familiar with the e-collar so it goes as well as possible.


----------



## Dr. Teeth

Using the e-collar...

I was the one that started the other Thread... 

After about 10 responses to my question - which is the correct method? it was about 50/50. So I started the way I had originally been taught and noticed that the dog was slightly confused. So I tried the alternate method giving the dog low stim during the command. 

Giving the stim during the command worked well to a point. I could see he was trying to comply but then he acted confused as to why he was being stimulated at all. As hard as I tried to be perfect on the button I couldn't. His training seemed to stall for a while. 

I switched back to correcting him as I would if he were on lead (correct after he fails to comply) at much lower stim levels and I have seen a huge improvement. I now have him at 40% or less and I get immediate attention. In a 30 minute training session he rarely gets more than 1 correction. I have also been able to use the vibrate function to bring him back to task as soft correction. I think he was initially going through a learning period and I know feel I'm doing what works best for him.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

Dr. Teeth said:


> Giving the stim during the command worked well to a point. I could see he was trying to comply but then he acted confused as to why he was being stimulated at all. As hard as I tried to be perfect on the button I couldn't. His training seemed to stall for a while.


*My understanding is that the dog has to already know the command before you start using the collar.*

Plus you need to have the leash on to be able to 'show' him how the collar works (i.e. when he turns and comes, the stimulation stops, so if you have to tug on the leash to turn him then he'll make that connection). 

Most of the time with ALL dog training we go to far too fast and confuse the dog. It seems to us they should 'get it' by now, and when they don't then it's the dogs fault. When the truth is usually we may have skipped a few small steps that would have made it clearer to THE DOG but as a human we didn't think were important and focused on other parts of the training. 

Just another reason I much prefer having a good trainer around when teaching something new. I may THINK I understand and am following the directions to a 'T' but at this point I know I rarely am. 

No matter what, to teach and train (specially new behaviors) I no longer choose to use any method that has punishment for failure to do right as a consequence. To TEACH, I want my dog to be excited about training, wanting to learn from me, be excited about training sessions, and an active participant to try to figure out the behavior I want with their brain, not from an avoidance and punishment point of view.


----------



## Sapakus

jocoyn said:


> Depends on who you talk with.
> 
> Honestly if you are going to use ecollar training I would find someone good in your area and learn one on one in person


I would go that route, but its expensive, and I'm not in a position to spend that much on it.


----------



## Sapakus

Dr. Teeth said:


> I switched back to correcting him as I would if he were on lead (correct after he fails to comply) at much lower stim levels and I have seen a huge improvement. I now have him at 40% or less and I get immediate attention. In a 30 minute training session he rarely gets more than 1 correction. I have also been able to use the vibrate function to bring him back to task as soft correction. I think he was initially going through a learning period and I know feel I'm doing what works best for him.



That's exactly what I was thinking of doing!


----------



## Dr. Teeth

MaggieRoseLee said:


> *My understanding is that the dog has to already know the command before you start using the collar.*
> 
> .


I couldn't agree more. However, we are proving off lead which requires the dog to be off lead. When he feels the freedom, sometimes a good bolt after the nearest smell is more inticing than walking/running in random patterns at 1 year of age. Or a come command can still mean he'll take the long way even though we've done it a hundred times. 

My point was that you need to read how your dog is reacting, and with such an equal split in training methods, both are valid, it most likely comes down to which style the dog and trainer responds best to.


----------



## Clyde

Sapakus said:


> yep, basically from my understanding, in Leerburg's method, you give a command, if dog doesn't comply, he gets a stim. in lou's method, he gets a stim and a command at the same time, and stim stops when dog complies.
> 
> in human prespective.... someone keeps slapping u until u comply, OR you get slapped if you dont comply... personally I like the later better, but i'm not sure if dogs feel the same way.


The difference is you know what the slap means the dog does not yet know what the stim means.



Dr. Teeth said:


> Using the e-collar...
> 
> I was the one that started the other Thread...
> 
> After about 10 responses to my question - which is the correct method? it was about 50/50. So I started the way I had originally been taught and noticed that the dog was slightly confused. So I tried the alternate method giving the dog low stim during the command.
> 
> Giving the stim during the command worked well to a point. I could see he was trying to comply but then he acted confused as to why he was being stimulated at all. As hard as I tried to be perfect on the button I couldn't. His training seemed to stall for a while.
> 
> I switched back to correcting him as I would if he were on lead (correct after he fails to comply) at much lower stim levels and I have seen a huge improvement. I now have him at 40% or less and I get immediate attention. In a 30 minute training session he rarely gets more than 1 correction. I have also been able to use the vibrate function to bring him back to task as soft correction. I think he was initially going through a learning period and I know feel I'm doing what works best for him.





Dr. Teeth said:


> I couldn't agree more. However, we are proving off lead which requires the dog to be off lead. When he feels the freedom, sometimes a good bolt after the nearest smell is more inticing than walking/running in random patterns at 1 year of age. Or a come command can still mean he'll take the long way even though we've done it a hundred times.
> 
> My point was that you need to read how your dog is reacting, and with such an equal split in training methods, both are valid, it most likely comes down to which style the dog and trainer responds best to.


It sounds like your dog got confused about the stim because you didn't show him how to turn it off. This should always be done on a long line. With recall you call and stim at same time and reel your dog in if he needs the help. For some dogs the feeling of the stim will distract them enough at first to not recall so you have to remind them. Same for the sit. "Sit" and stim at same time and help your dog into the sit if needed so he can understand that following your direction turns the stim off.

Also if you tried the stim is like a leash correction on the first introduction of the ecollar I am not surprised your dog would be confused if you then tried to switch methods. 

In the end after introducing the ecollar the Lou Castle way I now call my dog and if he doesn't listen he gets a "correction" (nick). So after having gone through the teaching phase the ecollar is now used for the correction only if he doesn't comply.


----------



## muddypaw

I used the e collar when Shadow was in the landshark stage. We used a professional trainer to guide us for a month or so, and used the e collar to correct her when she did not immediately comply. That method worked really well. We also gave a correction when she was in the "pre-bite" mode - you could tell she was getting ready to do it, and we nipped it in the bud before she got the teeth on flesh. Whew. glad she learned and those days are over!


----------



## NancyJ

Sapakus said:


> I would go that route, but its expensive, and I'm not in a position to spend that much on it.


You can really mess up a dog with an ecollar. Why not use other methods? Actually I think to be good with an ecollar you have to be a BETTER trainer than with other methods. For me, it is simply a surgical tool in the box. I have only used it on one of my dogs for a specific issue.


----------



## LouCastle

It's not as if I have an opinion on this... ROFL. If you look critically at Mr. Frawley's video on the Ecollar, you'll see some horrible things. I have an article about it on my site, which BTW has just been completely redone. He isn't even capable of spelling the word "stim," correctly, but then he's famous for his misspellings. 

In any case, a couple of folks have already described the significant differences between our use of the Ecollar. I use the Ecollar to teach with and Mr. F. teaches the behaviors first with other methods. I use the stim at the level that the dog can first feel and he uses it at SIGNIFICANTLY higher levels. In his video he puts several dogs into avoidance, one a puppy, where he admits the stim level is too high, but then he continues to stim the poor puppy over and over, at the level that he just told us was "too high." 

One thing that you'll NEVER see is Mr. F. taking part in any discussion that's not on his board where he can control everything that is said! 

Many thanks to those who have mentioned my methods and their effectiveness in this discussion.


----------



## LouCastle

MaggieRoseLee said:


> My understanding is that the dog has to already know the command before you start using the collar.


As many times as we've had this discussion, one would think that you'd have learned that this is not necessary with modern methods. Older methods required this, and then the Ecollar was introduced to proof the known behaviors. The problem with this method is that the dog does not know what the stim means, or how to shut it off. My methods teach this so clearly, that the dogs learn it within minutes. 



MaggieRoseLee said:


> Plus you need to have the leash on to be able to 'show' him how the collar works (i.e. when he turns and comes, the stimulation stops, so if you have to tug on the leash to turn him then he'll make that connection).


Yep this is the essence of my use of the collar. The leash is used for gentle guidance so that the dog learns how to make the stim stop. But you're wrong about him making a connection between the stim and the trainer. Dogs trained with my methods think that it's their behavior that makes the stim start and stop. 



MaggieRoseLee said:


> No matter what, to teach and train (specially new behaviors) I no longer choose to use any method that has punishment for failure to do right as a consequence. To TEACH, I want my dog to be excited about training, wanting to learn from me, be excited about training sessions, and an active participant to try to figure out the behavior I want with their brain, not from an avoidance and punishment point of view.


All of these things occur with my methods of using the Ecollar.


----------



## LouCastle

Dr. Teeth said:


> Giving the stim during the command worked well to a point. I could see he was trying to comply but *then he acted confused as to why he was being stimulated at all. * As hard as I tried to be perfect on the button I couldn't. His training seemed to stall for a while. [Emphasis Added]


This is usually the result of Ecollar methods that don't specifically show the dog how to shut off the stim.


----------



## ayoitzrimz

Just another vote for LouCastle's methods. They work. Most of the time, the problem is timing and setting the stim level too high. If timing is off, the dog will never learn that his actions turn the stim off (or on). If the dog doesn't feel like he's in control he'll see the stim as a random occurrence and will just develop learned helplessness. If the level is too high, the dog will become hectic and not use his head (thus won't learn). Just my 2 cents and vote for Lou's methods.


----------



## Marnie

Why would you do a simultaneous command/stim? Since you never start using an e-collar until you know the dog understands what is expected of him, why stim him at the same time you give the command? Give the dog a second to respond before you hit the button. I respect Leerberg and given the choice between the two, would pick their advice. 

Perhaps I shouldn't say this, but I don't care much for Castle, personally. I would cross the street to avoid him and anything he promotes.


----------



## LouCastle

ayoitzrimz said:


> Just another vote for LouCastle's methods. They work. *Most of the time, the problem is timing and setting the stim level too high. If timing is off, the dog will never learn that his actions turn the stim off (or on). If the dog doesn't feel like he's in control he'll see the stim as a random occurrence and will just develop learned helplessness. If the level is too high, the dog will become hectic and not use his head (thus won't learn). *Just my 2 cents and vote for Lou's methods.


Thanks for the vote. I'd bet that in the portion of your post that I highlighted, you're not talking about my methods. They were developed specifically to combat these problems and some others as well. The problem of timing is taken care of by the fact that, in my method, things happen at the same time. For example, in the recall, the button is pressed at the same time that the dog is pulled towards the handler. It's released when the trainer's arm is fully extended after the pull. It's a bit like tapping your foot and clapping your hands in time to music. MOST people are capable of that. In Mr. F.'s method you have to see that the dog is not complying with the command, and THEN press the button. The longer the delay between the lack of compliance and the button press, the less communication with the dog. And since in Mr. F.'s method the dog is not guided into the desired behavior, you have to hope he guesses correctly as to what's expected of him. 

Watch the portion of his video where he's teaching the recall and you'll see a badly frightened and confused dog who has no idea of what is hurting him or how to make it stop. The poor dog is running from place to place and trying to hide under some bushes as he tries to figure it out! OTOH, with my method of using the Ecollar the dog is taught right from the start, how to make the discomfort stop. 

My method uses the stim at the level that the dog can just barely perceive, instead of, in Mr. F.'s method, the level that makes him jerk his head in response to the stim. If you ever see this head jerk with my methods, YOU'RE TOO HIGH in stim level. Mr. F. finds the level that the dog can first perceive and says, _"we're looking for a jerk of the head like maybe you would get with a pop of the leash." A leash pop physically moves the dog's head. A stim does not. That "jerk of the head" happens because muscles stimulated by higher levels of current, contract involuntarily. I'm FAR below that level._


----------



## NancyJ

Marnie said:


> Why would you do a simultaneous command/stim? Since you never start using an e-collar until you know the dog understands what is expected of him, why stim him at the same time you give the command? Give the dog a second to respond before you hit the button. I respect Leerberg and given the choice between the two, would pick their advice.
> 
> Perhaps I shouldn't say this, but I don't care much for Castle, personally. I would cross the street to avoid him and anything he promotes.


Well, Lou can answer for himself but it is an entirely DIFFERENT use of the collar - the stim is not being used as a correction. So you need to read up on how it works and what is different about it.

I think there are some good videos on Leerbug Video productions (particularly with other trainers) but some of the stuff he has put out there I would throw out the window. 

My only interaction with Lou was several patient hours with me on the phone, giving me advice, and not trying to sell me anything. So while he can be a polarizing character on forums (sorry, Lou), he seems like a helpful person in real life.


----------



## LouCastle

Marnie said:


> Why would you do a simultaneous command/stim? *Since you never start using an e-collar until you know the dog understands what is expected of him, why stim him at the same time you give the command? *


My methods don't require that the dog _"understands what is expected of him."_ My methods can be used on a dog that has never had a day of training in his life as well as one that knows the behaviors very well. My method teaches the dog what the stim means and how to shut it off, while doing it as you describe, often does not. Mr. F's methods do not. Instead he has the dog guess as to what is expected. 



Marnie said:


> Give the dog a second to respond before you hit the button. I respect Leerberg and given the choice between the two, would pick their advice.


Have you seen the video where Mr. F shows his method? I'd bet that you have not. One can clearly see the degree of pain, confusion and fear his methods induce. In fact, most people can't even tell when I'm on the button. At many seminars I've been working a dog for several minutes and then have been asked by audience members when I was going to start using the Ecollar. I'd been using it since the first moment I started working with the dog. If you prefer a method that will hurt, confuse and scare your dog, you're welcome to use Mr. F's methods. 



Marnie said:


> Perhaps I shouldn't say this, but I don't care much for Castle, personally. I would cross the street to avoid him and anything he promotes.


I'll agree, you probably shouldn't have said this. Such personal attacks are usually inappropriate and add nothing to the discussion, except discord. Your personal feelings about me have nothing to do with this thread about how Ecollars are used. Please notice that your rudeness has not been returned.


----------



## LouCastle

jocoyn said:


> I think there are some good videos on Leerbug Video productions (particularly with other trainers)


When the Leerburg videos involve other trainers, they usually contain good information. When they have Mr. F. as the "expert," they usually fall far short. 



jocoyn said:


> but some of the stuff he has put out there I would throw out the window.


Mr. F., at one place on his forum describes his fix for fence fighting. This is where a couple of dogs, on opposite sides of a fence, are running back and forth, growling, barking, lunging, posturing, etc., basically doing everything they can think of to intimidate the other dog, but the fence prevents them from coming together. Neither dog is in any danger. Mr. F.'s method for stopping this, was to bash one of the dogs on the head with a shovel! When this had no effect, he did it again, and *then a third time, *before the dog he was hitting stopped. This is some of the stuff that I'd throw out the window. He does not seem to have an "abuse barometer." This "lack of a barometer" is shown on his Ecollar video too. 



jocoyn said:


> My only interaction with Lou was several patient hours with me on the phone, giving me advice, and not trying to sell me anything. So while he can be a polarizing character on forums (sorry, Lou), he seems like a helpful person in real life.


No need to apologize Nancy. I can be very abrasive on the Net. Usually it's when someone starts personal attacks as Marnie just did, or when they argue the usual nonsense against Ecollars, and then turn to the personal attack when they can't gain any ground. Lots of people are incapable of remaining polite and professional in Ecollar discussions. At times, usually after several personal attacks when requests to remain polite are ignored or rebuffed, I'll stoop to their level. Somehow, when I do this I'm the one who get accused of rudeness!? 

As to our phone conversation, often they happen when someone sends me an email asking a question about my methods, and to respond back with a full answer in email would take "forever." I usually invite them to call and handle their issue on the phone. If someone includes their phone number in such an email, often I'll call them. Good luck getting Mr. F. to do that. If he can't make a profit it from it, he's not interested. Nothing wrong with that, of course. Many people have the attitude that if you're not paying them, they aren't interested in giving you anything. This is my way of paying back to the K−9 community for all I've gotten from it.


----------



## hunterisgreat

jocoyn said:


> My only interaction with Lou was several patient hours with me on the phone, giving me advice, and not trying to sell me anything. So while he can be a polarizing character on forums (sorry, Lou), he seems like a helpful person in real life.


I'll second this. I've talked for hours on the phone with Lou. 

Just the other day, my uncle was shocked I downed my female when she tore after a feral cat in his yard. This is a result of ecollar training. The same female was also highly dog aggressive a year ago. We can now walk by a crated dog going berserk and only have a bit of tension on her part but complete self control on her part. Also a result of ecollar training (Lou's crittering article). 

Any my male, the ecollar is the only correction tool I can use during protection without sending him higher in fight drive. On a dogtra, in OB I am around 8-10 with both dogs, with my male during protection we are around 24-30 depending on the day. My female is usually worked only on a fur-saver during protection. The only time 127 (highest level) was ever used, was on my roommate, because he is a masochist lol.


----------



## _Crystal_

I just read Lou's whole website, and I have read Leerburgs before, and I do prefer Lou's by a mile. I find Leerburg's methods abusive, and just plain confusing for the animal. And seriously, a SHOVEL for FENCE FIGHTING? I've never heard of this, but that sounds just terrible. Why would you ever *consider* doing that to your poor dog? Whoever does this must be a really bad person, to even consider bashing your dog with a shovel, whether it be once or several times. That sickens me. Just. No. *shudder*


----------



## Syaoransbear

Leerburg. I want the dog to know he's in control of the stim coming on as well as it being turned off.


----------



## _Crystal_

Syaoransbear said:


> I want the dog to know he's in control of the stim coming on as well as it being turned off.


But you can do that with Lou's method as well. At least that is the message I perceived when I read Lou's website and tutorials.


----------



## LouCastle

_Crystal_ said:


> But you can do that with Lou's method as well. At least that is the message I perceived when I read Lou's website and tutorials.


You're right Crystal. My method teaches this from the start. It happens with low level stim which allows the dog to continue to think. Mr. F's methods use much higher levels of stim and since the dog is in pain, his ability to think, and to realize what is happening, is greatly reduced. You can get much faster results like this, but the dog is reacting out of fear of the pain that's being inflicted. Mr. F _ thinks _ that the dogs he trains with his method are learning that they are in charge of when the stim starts and stops, but he's sadly mistaken about this.


----------



## BritneyP

LouCastle said:


> My methods don't require that the dog _"understands what is expected of him."_ My methods can be used on a dog that has never had a day of training in his life as well as one that knows the behaviors very well. My method teaches the dog what the stim means and how to shut it off



Could you possibly briefly elaborate as to exactly HOW, out of the myriad of behaviors a dog could potentially perform, are they doing to finally stumble upon the "right" one that shuts the stim off?


I will admit that I am not a fan of negative reinforcement for teaching much of anything. I have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that I should choose to teach my dog how to sit by stimulating them with electricity for an undetermined amount of time until they finally decide to sit, instead of luring/motivating with food, proofing with distraction, introducing collar/leash corrections for non-compliance, then eventually pairing the e-collar with leash corrections.

I guess I subscribe to the "old school" methodology of ensuring my dog knows exactly what is being asked of them before I start correcting them for choosing not to do it.


----------



## LouCastle

BritneyP said:


> Could you possibly briefly elaborate as to exactly HOW, out of the myriad of behaviors a dog could potentially perform, are they doing to finally stumble upon the "right" one that shuts the stim off?


Sure can Britney, thanks for asking. In my protocols (HERE'S ONE, for example) the dog is guided with a leash (during the recall I use a retractable one) into the desired behavior. They don't have the opportunity to guess wrong. In the recall, I stim the dog at the level that he can first perceive, pull him towards me, and after he's taken a few steps towards me, stop the stim. They don't _"stumble upon the 'right' "_ behavior, they have no chance to make the wrong choice. 



BritneyP said:


> I will admit that I am not a fan of negative reinforcement for teaching much of anything. I have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that I should choose to teach my dog how to sit by stimulating them with electricity for an undetermined amount of time until they finally decide to sit


What you describe, _"stimulating them with electricity * for an undetermined amount of time *until they finally decide to sit"_ is NOT how it's done. In the sit the dog is guided into the sit with hand and leash pressure while being stimmed. It's shut off when his butt hits the ground. The stim, again, at the level that the dog can first perceive, lasts for about a second. I'm not sure why people make such statements when the protocols are available for them read to with, but a click. The SIT PROTOCOL IS HERE. 



BritneyP said:


> I guess I subscribe to the "old school" methodology of ensuring my dog knows exactly what is being asked of them before I start correcting them for choosing not to do it.


If you'll consider that there's another way to use an Ecollar than as a _"correction"_ perhaps this will become clear. Instead think of it as "pressure." The pressure is applied, the dog is guided into the behavior, and then the pressure is removed.


----------



## BritneyP

LouCastle said:


> The stim, again, at the level that the dog can first perceive, lasts for about a second.



Thank you for taking the time to elaborate, Lou! 


In regards to the above statement, doesn't the process of determining "the level the dog can first perceive" involve applying the unpleasant stimulation (that the dog will eventually be trying to avoid) when the dog is not acting inappropriately at all? Thus, potential making an association that new learning = unpleasant stimulation?


I realize there is a certain amount of guiding into a position, but to me, that is still not actually teaching the dog the behavior you are looking for. Asking a dog to sit is a pretty specific behavior. I have seen negative reinforcement trainers refer to the plethora of different behaviors a dog will go through before they figure out which one shuts the stim off as, "exploring behaviors".. is this not something you do? 

I do prefer to use leash, correction collar and e-collar as forms of positive punishment, but I also believe I have set my dogs up for success before introducing them because I know they have a very clear understanding of what is being asked of them because it has been taught through motivation and repitition.

If a dog that has been taught behaviors through R- chooses not to comply at some point down the road, how do you go about punishing or "correcting" for non-compliance? Are rewards ever incorporated into R- or is the reward itself simply the act of removing the unpleasant stimulation?


----------



## LouCastle

BritneyP said:


> In regards to the above statement, doesn't the process of determining "the level the dog can first perceive" involve applying the unpleasant stimulation (that the dog will eventually be trying to avoid) when the dog is not acting inappropriately at all? Thus, potential making an association that new learning = unpleasant stimulation?


It's done by putting the Ecollar on the dog with it set at "0." Then it's turned up one number at a time until the dog shows some sign that he feels it. Commonly that's an ear flick or a look at the ground, as if the dog had been bitten by a bug. While it is an unpleasant feeling, it's so minor that it doesn't cause any significant reaction. HERE'S SOME VIDEO of a dog that is feeling his first stim. You can see that how little stress or discomfort there is in this. That process of finding the dog's working level (where he first feels the stim) is DESCRIBED IN DETAIL HERE 



BritneyP said:


> I realize there is a certain amount of guiding into a position, but to me, that is still not actually teaching the dog the behavior you are looking for.


The method makes use of two extremely powerful tools in dog training; self motivation and self discovery. The dog is motivated to find a way to make the discomfort stop, and he's shown how he can do it. Through a series of repetitions he discovers for himself how to make it stop. 



BritneyP said:


> Asking a dog to sit is a pretty specific behavior. I have seen negative reinforcement trainers refer to the plethora of different behaviors a dog will go through before they figure out which one shuts the stim off as, "exploring behaviors".. is this not something you do?


No it's not. It makes no sense to me to wait for a dog to guess what I want from him. Instead I guide him into the proper behavior. Again self motivation and self discovery are at work. The dog is motivated to make the discomfort stop and they are shown that completing the movement is what does that. 



BritneyP said:


> I do prefer to use leash, correction collar and e-collar as forms of positive punishment, but I also believe I have set my dogs up for success before introducing them because I know they have a very clear understanding of what is being asked of them because it has been taught through motivation and repitition.


Nothing at all wrong with that. In fact, that's the most common way that Ecollars are used in the US. I just prefer another way. I think it's less stressful on the dog and gives better, meaning longer lasting, and more reliable results. I don't require that anyone change or that they accept my methods. I just ask that they realize that there's more than one way to skin a cat. Many people who used to use your way of doing it have tried my methods and some prefer them. I have no doubt that some have tried it and gone back to the way they used to do it too. As long as they're happy and they get bombproof results. 



BritneyP said:


> If a dog that has been taught behaviors through R- chooses not to comply at some point down the road, how do you go about punishing or "correcting" for non-compliance?


Stim at the level that the dog can first perceive, is used for the teaching phase of training. That can be continued, at the same level, through the process of weaning the dog off the collar. At some point, it will become clear that the dog knows what the command means, and that he knows how to shut the stim off. Once that happens, the dog can be corrected at slightly higher levels for noncompliance. The dog will tell you what level he needs, just as he does with leash corrections. 



BritneyP said:


> Are rewards ever incorporated into R- or is the reward itself simply the act of removing the unpleasant stimulation?


That depends on the dog and what I'm training. For pet work, I incorporate rewards in various forms as the dogs need them. I rarely train OB just for the sake of OB. I train mostly police and SAR dogs these days and set up training so that they can satisfy their drives as part of the training. Everything is done with an eye towards how it affects the search work. There's nothing wrong with using rewards, whatever the dog prefers, toys, treats, praise, bumping, etc., but I try to let the reward be "fulfilling the drive."


----------



## Olivers mama

LouCastle said:


> ...set up training so that they can satisfy their drives as part of the training. Everything is done with an eye towards how it affects the search work. There's nothing wrong with using rewards, whatever the dog prefers, toys, treats, praise, bumping, etc., but I try to let the reward be "fulfilling the drive."


This is EXACTLY what I want & PRECISELY what Ziva needs, IMO. Thus, the indecision on which collar to buy. After 1 1/2 years of "professional" trainers, treats & praise up the ying-yang, we now have a 3-yr-old Rescue that has decided - in the last 8-10 months - not to do ANYthing she's told With treats or a raised voice, the job gets done. Without 1 of those 2...well, she'd flip me off if she was ambi-paw-drous. And now the snapping - at me, not hubby. Won't tolerate a dog biting me, but don't know how to stop it without tossing her into next week. Angry? You bet.

But a police K9 handler-friend has worked with her twice (so far) & agreed she needs training that goes beyond the 'Nice Guy' pat on the head. That she is clearly blowing us off. (If they postpone my chemo again this weekend, he's coming back this weekend to work her more. He mentioned Lou's methods & the ecollar.) He said she is clearly blowing us off. She's "only" a pet, but I want more from her training.

You guys have given me some direction, for which I am TREMENDOUSLY thankful!


----------



## gmcenroe

Lou Castle seems to be very good at e-collar methods of training. I am not sure of Leerburg's methods. The Michael Ellis videos on e-collar training are also very good, the video is about 3 hours long. best is to work with a real life trainer so you can adjust training methods to you and your dog..


----------



## Witz

I began using Lou's approach to proof our recall and it has worked as described. We are now entering the medium to large distraction phase and it has been a pleasure to see, that with such low application of stim, what results we are getting. The key was starting out at ground zero with introducing the method. Even though he knew what was expected when given the command, he would not always comply. We have also used it for his heeling and all of his surging is just about gone. 

I should also note that we are doing Schutzhund training and my approach is much more motivational with his toy as the reward and there has been no conflict in what is expected. I use different commands for every day vs formal training and there has been no confusion. In two short weeks the changes are noteworthy.


----------



## stephanie.jackson

My GSD is 11 months old and has been reactive to other dogs since he was about 5 months old. We've been trying the whole positive reinforcement thing and it wasn't really working. I contacted a local behaviorist and she and I will be meeting up here in the next two weeks or so. She uses the e-collar (something I've never tried before) and recommended the Dogtra 300 series. It's in the mail, so just waiting on that. 
However, when we talked on the phone, it sounds like she uses Lou's method. All that was really discussed when I mentioned my apprehension to a shock collar was that it is such a low level of stimulation that he will hardly know what it is or where it's coming from. 

My main question is has anyone ever had success using the e-collar for dog to dog aggression using this method? I am pretty sure it's just fear aggression but I am not a behaviorist so who knows until she meets him. And Lou, if you could answer, my dog is a WUSS. Lol I hate to admit it but he's a big softy and any kind of discomfort he usually makes a huge scene about it (whines, running in circles, ect.). Would the E-collar be too much for him? He's such a sweetheart and great with everything else but the dog problem. I don't want to ruin him though.
I read up on Leerburg's technique and it seems a little... wayyy out there. I'd just like to know that there is some hope for my pup and that these methods aren't too over the top for him. Thanks! Sorry if it's a little too off topic.


----------



## LouCastle

stephanie.jackson said:


> My main question is has anyone ever had success using the e-collar for dog to dog aggression using this method? I am pretty sure it's just fear aggression but I am not a behaviorist so who knows until she meets him. And Lou, if you could answer, my dog is a WUSS. Lol I hate to admit it but he's a big softy and any kind of discomfort he usually makes a huge scene about it (whines, running in circles, ect.). Would the E-collar be too much for him? He's such a sweetheart and great with everything else but the dog problem. I don't want to ruin him though.


There are no guarantees with aggression. Most dog to dog aggression is fear-based. Mr. F. attacks that directly by blasting the dog with the highest levels that an Ecollar has. That is so ugly that he can't even show it on his DVD. He just talks about it. I attack the issue from another direction, instead of trying to take it on head-on. 

I teach the dog to look away from the other dog. You can't be aggressive towards a dog that you can't look at. CLICK HERE for the protocol. I have never had this fail. That is not to say that it always will work, just that it has always worked for me. There's some video at the end of the protocol that shows two dogs playing. One of them used to be aggressive towards the other. No one has ever been able to tell which dog was the aggressive one, with any confidence. This is an extraordinary outcome and it would be a mistake for everyone to think that they can get this sort of result. All I ask is that the aggressive dog cease his aggressiveness. I don't require that he frolic and play with other dogs, just don't try to kill them anymore. 

As far as your dog being a wuss, the Ecollar is perfect for dogs like this. The Ecollar can be adjusted so low that no dog can feel it. That means that you can then turn it up a little at a time, until he does feel it.


----------



## stephanie.jackson

Once he warms up to the dog, which about 75% of them he eventually does after several minutes of walking by them and slowly inching towards them, then having the other dogs owner letting him stiff their dog from behind, he will start playing all over the place with them. It's just that is such a controlled environment and so unrealistic in day to day life that I need to help correct that.
I can tell he enjoys dogs. He has a lot of doggy buddies (lol) but it's the strange ones that he is weary of. 
I will be training with her in the first week or so of March and will get back to you on the results. I have read almost your entire website just recently but I am not too confident in my ability to handle such a touchy issue with him on my own.


----------



## LouCastle

stephanie.jackson said:


> .. I am not too confident in my ability to handle such a touchy issue with him on my own.


Stephanie you're not alone in this. Because most people have an unpleasant personal experience with electricity, having been shocked at some point in their lives, they're afraid of it. Since one name for the tool is "shock collar," they think it will be the same. And so, it's quite natural to be afraid. To reassure you that you're not alone, here are some comments from some others who felt as you do. CLICK HERE


----------



## Chance&Reno

LouCastle said:


> There are no guarantees with aggression. Most dog to dog aggression is fear-based. Mr. F. attacks that directly by blasting the dog with the highest levels that an Ecollar has. That is so ugly that he can't even show it on his DVD. He just talks about it. I attack the issue from another direction, instead of trying to take it on head-on.
> 
> I teach the dog to look away from the other dog. You can't be aggressive towards a dog that you can't look at. CLICK HERE for the protocol. I have never had this fail. That is not to say that it always will work, just that it has always worked for me. There's some video at the end of the protocol that shows two dogs playing. One of them used to be aggressive towards the other. No one has ever been able to tell which dog was the aggressive one, with any confidence. This is an extraordinary outcome and it would be a mistake for everyone to think that they can get this sort of result. All I ask is that the aggressive dog cease his aggressiveness. I don't require that he frolic and play with other dogs, just don't try to kill them anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I worked my 9 yr old out of his dog aggression issues using a strictly positive methods coupled with walking a way and a blind fold.
> 
> He had been dropped on my porch in the middle of the night when he was 8 1/2 years old and was highly aggressive towards other dogs. The person's thought was if they left him with me, they wouldn't have to euthanize him. I used a clicker, Hotdogs, and a blindfold. I taught him to redirect towards me and good things will always happen. He learned that dogs bring yummy treats and he learned to settled down. Amazing what you can do with 3 simple things, patience, and leadership. Chance was 120 lbs and had killed 3 little fluffy dogs before I had him. Chance had zero confidence and was scared as after his initial home, he was bounced around Craigslist 8 times in a 2 month period. Unfortunately for him, his original family decided to use an E-collar, Prong Collar, and Choke all at the same time, on an extender leash. This made him highly reactive because he was being tripple corrected everytime he pulled on the leash. They used these tools the worst way possible. So the E-collar was NEVER an option. He would freak out at the mere sight of it.
> Thankfully the people who left him, left his rabies tag on. I hired a PI to track him back to his breeder in Florida and find out what his life was like. I found out some useful information. THis info helped me fix him. After 6 months of redirecting, he ended up super dog friendly. He collected many girlfriends and played with all sizes and breeds of other dogs. We had a weekly standing playdate with 12 other dogs, off leash. He lived his last 2 years playing with his best friends and meeting new dogs, daily.
> Chance was visually reactive. He wouldn't lunge or try and bite if he heard or smelled a dog, only if he saw one. I used the blindfold to teach him to trust and follow. We did leashwork without the use of his eyes and he learned to follow me without using his eyes. He got to the point that he would see a dog, look up at me and ask permission. If i told him it was "fine", he would walk right up, greet and initiate play. Chance would break off play and come check in with me, all excited, showing me how good he was being.
> I fell madly in love with him and had a very heavy emotional connection with him after taking the journey with him. I found out that no matter how old a dog is, he will always want to do the right thing, IF you show him what the right thing is. RIP Chance
> 
> Would you believe I consulted different "dog professionals" to find out what to do to help him. 2 vet behaviorists, 3 veterinarians, 4 other trainers, 1 military dog handler, 2 retired state police handlers, 2 GSD breeders and 4 rescue orgs all told me to put him down as I can't help him. UNBELIEVABLE! Glad i didn't listen
Click to expand...


----------



## LouCastle

Chance&Reno said:


> Would you believe I consulted different "dog professionals" to find out what to do to help him. 2 vet behaviorists, 3 veterinarians, 4 other trainers, 1 military dog handler, 2 retired state police handlers, 2 GSD breeders and 4 rescue orgs all told me to put him down as I can't help him. UNBELIEVABLE! Glad i didn't listen


I've never told an owner to put down a dog. I've also never had the protocol fail to stop dog to dog aggression. Here's some video of an extraordinary result. I doubt that most people will get this degree of "loss of aggression" but I only need for the aggressive dog to stop his aggression. 

Dog to Dog Aggression - YouTube


----------



## Kovacik76

Just to clarify, Leerburg also uses very low stim, the LouCastle is a version of avoidance training. Don't get me wrong, it gives very fast results just like the old school "yank an crank", but isn't very fair for the dog because he has been corrected without even having a command to do anything yet. In the end you will have a dog that doesn't really respect you as a leader and doesn't really want to be around you. We used to use avoidance and yank an crank when I was getting my k9 trainer and handler classes, it got results and we could get out a lot more dogs to police departments, but they are nowhere near quality of training that you get with a method similar to leerburg. My two gsd's now are perfect examples since the one trained old school will do whatever I want, and my leerburg style gad will also but the difference is my leerburg style enjoys any exercise or training we do.


----------



## LouCastle

Kovacik76 said:


> Just to clarify, Leerburg also uses very low stim


 
Since the term "low stim" is completely relative, let's go into more detail here. I work at the level of stim that the dog first perceives. *I start from zero *and slowly go up one number at a time until the dog shows some sign that he feels the stim. * Mr. F starts his search for the proper level at about a 20. * In his video we see the dog sniff the ground, a common sign that the dog has felt the stim. That's where I'd start working with this dog. But Mr. F says, _"There's nothing there. She felt it but she didn't know what it was!"_ Of course she doesn't know what it is – this is the start of training. She's not going to know what a higher level stim is either! 

After Mr. F tightens the strap (he's made the classic newbie mistake – having it too loose) he again presses the button. This time, because he's now got good contact, the dog displays the OBVIOUS signs of a too-high stim level. Her head jerks, she runs behind his leg with her tail tucked. The caption "stimulation here" comes on. Mr. Frawley says, "In the beginning that would be the level that we would want to start to work this dog on when she wasn't faced with a lot of distraction." NONSENSE! This level is obviously too high. 

So while you may claim that Mr. F _"uses very low stim,"_ what he shows on his video is way too high for this dog. 




Kovacik76 said:


> the LouCastle is a version of avoidance training.


 
Sorry Kovacik, but you've gotten this wrong. It's ESCAPE training. It would seem that, on this at least, you've following the teachings of Mr. F. He also doesn't not understand that there's a vast difference. In escape training the dog is shown how to ESCAPE the discomfort of the stim by performing a behavior. 

In AVOIDANCE training, the dog has progressed to such a degree of reliability that a command is given but no stim accompanies or follows it. The dog completely AVOIDS the stim. Mr. F really doesn’t understand either concept as he so clearly demonstrated during many of our exchanges on his forum. But if you watch the video of his latest super-trainer, Michael Ellis, (who is very good BTW) Mr. Ellis agrees with me on these definitions. Both you and Mr. F have this completely wrong. Anyone who looks at the definitions of the words "escape" and "avoidance" will see this. 




Kovacik76 said:


> Don't get me wrong, it gives very fast results just like the old school "yank an crank", but isn't very fair for the dog because he has been corrected without even having a command to do anything yet.


 
Sorry again, Kovacik, but you're wrong again. It's NOT a correction. Look up the definition of the word and you'll see that again, you're wrong. In this case, discomfort is applied at the level of stim that the dog can just barely perceive (FAR below what Mr. F uses) and then the dog is guided into the desired behavior. Then the stim is shut off. Corrections don't come until much later in the training. 




Kovacik76 said:


> In the end you will have a dog that doesn't really respect you as a leader and doesn't really want to be around you.


 
More nonsense. Watch the dog that Mr. F is training in the video as she hides behind his leg, simpering and displaying obvious signs of submission. Watch as another dog tries several behaviors in an effort to make the pain stop by running away, hiding under some brush and then finally running towards him. Yeah, Mr. F's method REALLY makes the dog respect him and want to be around him. lol

My method teaches the dog in a very clear way that my mere presence (or that of the person doing the training) brings comfort. When the dog is away from me he's uncomfortable, but as soon as he starts to move towards me, the discomfort if removed. Soon the dog is staying by my side. He's learned that he's comfortable as long as he stays there. 




Kovacik76 said:


> We used to use avoidance and yank an crank when I was getting my k9 trainer and handler classes, it got results and we could get out a lot more dogs to police departments, but they are nowhere near quality of training that you get with a method similar to leerburg.


 
Mr. F's methods work in conflict with the dog's drives and instincts. Mine work with them, making them much more suited to the sort of search work that police dogs are needed for. His methods FORCE behavior using higher levels of stim. Mine work with, rather than against, the dogs genetics. 




Kovacik76 said:


> My two gsd's now are perfect examples since the one trained old school will do whatever I want, and my leerburg style gad will also but the difference is my leerburg style enjoys any exercise or training we do.


 
If the training method has been used properly, no matter what it is, you should have a dog that _"enjoys any exercise or training that [you] do."_ The fact that you seem to be saying that only one of your dogs enjoys working with you, tells us quite a bit. Is it just a coincidence that your first post on this forum slams me (attempts to anyway, but like Mr. F you really don't know the appropriate terms) and tries to boost Mr. F, or is it just my suspicious ex-cop mind? 

I do a complete review of Mr. F's video on my website but it's not a pretty picture. If anyone wants the link, just PM me.


----------



## codmaster

Kovacik76 said:


> Just to clarify, Leerburg also uses very low stim, the LouCastle is a version of avoidance training. Don't get me wrong, it gives very fast results just like the old school "yank an crank", but isn't very fair for the dog because he has been corrected without even having a command to do anything yet. In the end you will have a dog that doesn't really respect you as a leader and doesn't really want to be around you. We used to use avoidance and yank an crank when I was getting my k9 trainer and handler classes, it got results and we could get out a lot more dogs to police departments, but they are nowhere near quality of training that you get with a method similar to leerburg. My two gsd's now are perfect examples since the one trained old school will do whatever I want, and my leerburg style gad will also but the difference is my leerburg style enjoys any exercise or training we do.


*I am a little curious as to how did you become such an expert in "the Castle" method? you sound like you are very familiar with this method.*

*How many dogs and what type have you trained many dogs using this method? And what have you used the castle method to train the dogs in?*


----------



## LouCastle

I just got off the phone after speaking with Kovacik76. Our apparent disagreement came from two sources. The first is that he wasn't talking about Mr. F's use of an Ecollar. He was talking about Mike Ellis' use of an Ecollar. Mr. Ellis is Mr. F's "trainer of the moment" and the star of many of his videos. Mr. Ellis is, from what I've seen (never been in his presence, only seen some videos) quite good. I thought that Kovacik76 was referring to the Leerburg video on Ecollars, not the videos of Mr. Ellis' work. 

Another source came from a computer glitch at Kovacik76's end. He was only able to read the first two pages of this thread. He didn't see the posts where I went into more detail as to how I use the Ecollar and so he feared that I was advocating that new users could just put on the Ecollar and start pressing buttons for misbehavior. That conceren drove him to write as he did. After he sent his post something cleared and he was able to read the rest of the thread. When he did, he realized that what he had written was not the best expression of his feelings. He went looking for the delete button but this forum does not allow the member to delete their posts. 

Kovacik76 told me that he is a certified Master Trainer Police K−9 trainer for the state of West Virginia. About 20 dogs that he's had a hand in training, are working the street throughout the state. He apparently has the best of intentions. He trained under a guy who used what he thought was too much force, too heavy corrections with both leash and correction collars and the Ecollar. Instead of just knuckling under as most have done, Kovacik76 had the integrity to walk away from that trainer. That's pretty hard to do. I have lots of respect for him for doing that. 

Just one more thing. I have to give Kovacik76 the credit for this new friendship. He sent me both a PM and an Email in which he asked me to send him my phone number so we could talk. I did, he called, and now we have a much better understanding of where we stand.


----------



## Lotus99

LouCastle said:


> Sorry Kovacik, but you've gotten this wrong. It's ESCAPE training. It would seem that, on this at least, you've following the teachings of Mr. F. He also doesn't not understand that there's a vast difference. In escape training the dog is shown how to ESCAPE the discomfort of the stim by performing a behavior.
> 
> In AVOIDANCE training, the dog has progressed to such a degree of reliability that a command is given but no stim accompanies or follows it. The dog completely AVOIDS the stim. Mr. F really doesn’t understand either concept as he so clearly demonstrated during many of our exchanges on his forum. But if you watch the video of his latest super-trainer, Michael Ellis, (who is very good BTW) Mr. Ellis agrees with me on these definitions. Both you and Mr. F have this completely wrong. Anyone who looks at the definitions of the words "escape" and "avoidance" will see this.


Sorry to bring back up an old post, but I'm reading everything I can on this topic, and came across this... 

The video you refer to is the one below I believe, and I thought I'd link it here if anyone else wants to hear it directly, as I found the practical examples he uses to describe escape vs. avoidance helpful in understanding the two concepts.

Here's the video:

Michael Ellis on Escape Avoidance Training - YouTube
.
.
.


----------

