shock collars

This forum is all about training and behavior. Everything from potty training to working titles!

Postby brooksybrooks1 » September 5th, 2007, 12:18 pm

well i think anytime you are doing 100% positive or 100% negative you encounter problems that could be avoided by having some healthy combination of the two instead. i used to do surprise rewards when tre did something right, and even that has problems, the dog spends time switching between focusing on the reward and the correct behavior because the reward could come randomly at any time during the behavior. i use a release command or a free command as a bridge between the reward and the behavior and a "good" as a reinforcement, like, "keep doing that and you'll be rewarded" and a "no" as in "keep doing that you will be getting further and further away from a reward and closer to a correction." this is recent for me, and literally all my training woes have started slowly disappearing. instead of random rewards or surprises, i let my dogs know that there is an absolute system in place where they control what level of rewards and corrections they get depending on their behaviors, and when they get them. i have, so far, found nothing better than this.
Jenna
User avatar
brooksybrooks1
Loyally Bully
 
Posts: 631
Location: Colorado

Postby TheRedQueen » September 5th, 2007, 12:57 pm

Most people think that positive trainers do nothing but praise and treat the dog all day. I do not use 100% positive training...no one does. (or they'd have a mess on their hands). There are negatives...everything has to balance out. But ill-timed corrections or even well timed ones don't always work...like speed traps, we just get better at avoiding them, but we haven't changed our ways. Dogs can be the same way...they'll behave on leash or with a certain collar on, but once it's off...all bets are off. They haven't changed their ways or learned what the "appropriate" behavior is. My negatives are usually in the form of taking something good away (negative punishment)...but occasionally in the form of positive punishment (I do give them sharp commands or "no"). So the positive training does have punishment...just not in the form of physical punishment.
"I don't have any idea if my dogs respect me or not, but they're greedy and I have their stuff." -- Patty Ruzzo

"Dogs don't want to control people. They want to control their own lives." --John Bradshaw
User avatar
TheRedQueen
I thought I lost my Wiener... but then I found him.
 
Posts: 7184
Location: Maryland

Postby mnp13 » September 5th, 2007, 1:54 pm

michelle, don't get mad at me.

I'm not, this kind of thing is just a pet peeve of mine.

i don't think i'm being rude or accusatory or out of line.

I don't think you are either.

also- for the general dog owning public, i think they are horrible. unless you are a professional or are trained by a very responsible professional, you WILL mess up your dog with one.

This goes for absolutely every training tool. I wasn't trained by anyone to use an e-collar and I sure as hell didn't follow the "training" method in the book (which was quite different than the way Katrina is describing). I used the collar in the exact same way that I use the prong collar, the dog just wasn't attached to me by a leash.

Every training tool has the possibility for abuse / misuse. You can screw up a dog with nothing more than a flat collar. You don't even have to use corrections to end up with a jerk...

i just don't like how free with them some people are, and how they don't realize the downfalls of using them like a shortcut or see what they are doing to their dogs.

According to some of the "pure positive" people, anything other than kisses and hugs is a short cut. It's all in your perception of what a shortcut is and what reasonable expectations are. In my opinion, taking a dog for a walk without it pulling your arm off is not unreasonable, however I was raked over the coals by someone because they felt using a prong to teach handler awareness was a shortcut and that it was not unreasonable for it to take a week or more before you could walk to the end of your driveway with your dog. (yes, literally.)

Can you use an e-collar as a shortcut? Sure, and I think it lends itself to that more than other methods, however shortcuts have serious downfalls, including compete dependance on the collar. All shortcuts have tradeoffs. All training methods have their pitfalls. My preferred training tool is the prong, but I have one dog that is 100% collar smart because I taught her to be that way. I didn't take the necessary steps to prevent that from happening, and now that I'm going to put her UD on, I have a long road ahead of me to get her past her "collar smart-ness."

so it is a correction then, just a nagging correction, like ivan talks about in his videos, only he uses a pinch collar.

I think so, but I think Ivan starts with a command, correct?

So using the boss example...if you have a big project due at the end of the week, and your boss said that you'd get a $100 bonus if you got it done in time...wouldn't that make you work even harder/faster, to work for that reward?

Yes, but what if there was no reward, but no punishment for not getting it done? Yes, lack of reward is a punishment, but it's not quite the same as your boss taking $100 from your paycheck. What if you didn't get it done, but you found out where he kept the $100 stashed and took it anyway? That's the equivilant of a dog performing a self-rewarding behavior instead of looking for your reward.

For me, this is the core downfall of training with only a removal of a reward as a punishment. If the dog can self-reward - chase a cat, bark his head off, counter surf - then it may not care that it didn't get your reward. The more pig headed dogs really couldn't care less, and the day that correctionless behavior is put to the real test the dog may or may not pass and you could end up with a dead dog. Case in point - you could work your butt off to stop your dog from crittering, and then one day the dog just can't resist chasing the neighbor's cat, the pursuit goes into the neighbor's yard... and in New York it is legal to shoot a dog that is threatening your property, and cats are property. I don't feel this is an extreme example, and it has happened.

Am I saying that it doesn't work? No, not at all. It definately takes a lot longer and with some dogs can prove to be very unreliable (like any method.) It's just a different means to an end. And to give credit where it is due, unlike most trainers who work "your way" I don't feel like you are pulling the holier-than-thou routine.

Dogs can be the same way...they'll behave on leash or with a certain collar on, but once it's off...all bets are off.

That's called being collar smart, and it is a common training error. Though "(physical) correctionless" training avoids the dog being collar smart, a dog trained using those methods may become completely dependant on food rewards.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17234
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby TheRedQueen » September 5th, 2007, 2:19 pm

On September 05 2007, 12:54 PM, mnp13 wrote:
So using the boss example...if you have a big project due at the end of the week, and your boss said that you'd get a $100 bonus if you got it done in time...wouldn't that make you work even harder/faster, to work for that reward?

Yes, but what if there was no reward, but no punishment for not getting it done? Yes, lack of reward is a punishment, but it's not quite the same as your boss taking $100 from your paycheck. What if you didn't get it done, but you found out where he kept the $100 stashed and took it anyway? That's the equivilant of a dog performing a self-rewarding behavior instead of looking for your reward.

For me, this is the core downfall of training with only a removal of a reward as a punishment. If the dog can self-reward - chase a cat, bark his head off, counter surf - then it may not care that it didn't get your reward. The more pig headed dogs really couldn't care less, and the day that correctionless behavior is put to the real test the dog may or may not pass and you could end up with a dead dog. Case in point - you could work your butt off to stop your dog from crittering, and then one day the dog just can't resist chasing the neighbor's cat, the pursuit goes into the neighbor's yard... and in New York it is legal to shoot a dog that is threatening your property, and cats are property. I don't feel this is an extreme example, and it has happened.

Am I saying that it doesn't work? No, not at all. It definately takes a lot longer and with some dogs can prove to be very unreliable (like any method.) It's just a different means to an end. And to give credit where it is due, unlike most trainers who work "your way" I don't feel like you are pulling the holier-than-thou routine.


There is an inherent reward for doing your work on time...it's called earning a paycheck. We all work for something...most cases it's monetary reward. We look for jobs that pay better, and have the best benefits...rewards just like the dogs want. If we were not given a paycheck for our usual job, who would stick around? Even if you are volunteering, you get *something* out of it...one of the reasons that I volunteer with my dogs in the therapy organization I do (besides the good feeling) is that I get access to places that my dogs don't normally get to go into. That's a reward to me.

If you see my earlier post, positive trainers such as myself do use other punishments. I do use positive punishment with my dogs in some cases. Chasing the cat is one of them...I just don't use physical corrections/punishment. They get yelled at, or body blocked, etc. Then a time-out if needed. I *do* yell at my dogs, I am human, and I sometimes yell at them for no good reason. I am not perfect. ;)

Another example is in flyball training. In flyball, we do not use any correction collars for training, because none of them are allowed in the ring. No prongs, chokes, or even non aversive equipment such as head halters (it's all about the appearance to the public). Even leaving/entering the ring you can't use them. So we don't use them in training. Also, because we're teaching new things to these dogs-they don't encounter boxes or do box turns normally in the grand scheme of things. So we don't correct as we're training, because they don't know what they're doing....so it's praise/reward to build the skills and to build drive. We use restraint to build drive for running and for tugging...and if you ever see Sawyer (the Service Dog) on the lane lunging, barking and foaming at the mouth, you'd agree that the methods work. (other methods might also...not saying they don't).

But...here's the big BUT. If we encounter aggression on the lanes during practice, we bring out the punishment. Because the behavior often crops up when the dog is running and away from the handler, we all step in to help. We line up with foam pool noodles to smack the ground with, we occasionally have squirt guns or water buckets, and we all stomp and yell at the dogs. Because this behavior cannot be ignored (even I as a positive trainer know this) we turn to punishment for it. However, we don't use e collars, because the dog needs to be trustworthy no matter what it's wearing (and the collars are illegal in tournaments). If the dog cannot stop the behavior with such punishment, then the dog can't play flyball.

We have an AmStaff on the team that is highly DA. She chewed up and spit out one of her owner's other dogs a month or so ago (an old sheltie that required pins in it's legs to recover). This dog has been trained on a buckle collar only, and can play flyball. Do we make sure it only runs with dogs that won't challenge her, etc. Yep. Her owner has control over her in flyball...(at home is another story)...and I trust her and her dog.
"I don't have any idea if my dogs respect me or not, but they're greedy and I have their stuff." -- Patty Ruzzo

"Dogs don't want to control people. They want to control their own lives." --John Bradshaw
User avatar
TheRedQueen
I thought I lost my Wiener... but then I found him.
 
Posts: 7184
Location: Maryland

Postby katiek0417 » September 5th, 2007, 2:37 pm

On September 05 2007, 11:03 AM, TheRedQueen wrote:
On September 05 2007, 10:51 AM, katiek0417 wrote:
On September 05 2007, 10:17 AM, brooksybrooks1 wrote:so katie, when you say motivational, you mean you're using it for a correction just like you would do with a leash, you don't mean you are shocking the dog as a "stimulation" before or as you tell them to do something, right?


It's NOT a correction. A correction is a quick event. A pop with the prong collar...takes a second...a hard correction with the e-collar takes a second....

This is ongoing until she does what I want. Right now we're just "shaping" the behaviors...letting her know that the discomfort goes away as soon as she does what I want...once she fully understands that, we'll start putting in the commands. So, she gets command, and as she does, the tapping will start...sooner she does what I say, the sooner the tapping stops...

Think about it this way:

Let's say you have a job where you constantly have tasks that must be done. Your boss continuously nags you about whether you've finished the task. Is the nagging painful and quick? or is it ongoing and frustrating, and a pain in the a$$? For most people, it's the second thing. So, you finally finish the task, and your boss stops nagging you. Ahhh, relief. A good thing. The following week, your boss gives you another task. You remember that the last time you put it off, your boss started nagging you, which was annoying. So, this time, you get it done much faster. You were MOTIVATED to do the task because you wanted to avoid being nagged...

Same concepts, except a dog doesn't understand when you sit there and verbally nag them, right? So, you need to use another method to nag them...that's really all you're using the e-collar for...a nag...to get them to do something, and to get them to do it faster...


I prefer to motivate in other ways...I'm not sure how this nagging way works for any dog well.

So using the boss example...if you have a big project due at the end of the week, and your boss said that you'd get a $100 bonus if you got it done in time...wouldn't that make you work even harder/faster, to work for that reward? I'd prefer that to being nagged all week, and working hard just to avoid the nagging. Eventually I'd probably quit (as my sister did when she had a bad nagging type job like that with Boy Scouts)...and find a better job. Why put up with nagging at all? But if I got random rewards (the first case would be bribery) that I didn't expect...I'd work pretty darn hard, with the idea that I might get something good.

How many people speed in their cars? I've gotten speeding tickets many times over the years...and yet it doesn't stop me from speeding. That I have to slow down for cops on the road, doesn't stop me. I just get better at avoiding punishement (spotting cops on the road). But I tell you what...if we got random pull-overs to be given $$$ for driving well, I'd slow down! If speed cameras got pictures of my car, just so they could send me a check for driving slower...I'd be all about driving slower!


What about for the dog who is headstrong and would rather do it his/her way?

Treats, play, etc don't work for some dogs. Alternatively, different people have different methods. I have seen this method work very well for people. As long as it's used correctly. I mainly use positive reinforcement with my dogs...but I've tried using PR with Sacha...and even if she gets the tastiest of treats, she would still rather blow me off sometimes...not all the time. But sometimes. And on a trial field, she can't blow me off...b/c if she does, she doesn't title.

Your example of a $100 bonus is great...But guess what? I know plenty of ADHD students who don't care about the incentives of extra credit for doing something early (or even on time). So, is positive reinforcement doing them any good? No. So, you find other methods. I'm extremely ADHD...money doesn't work for me...but my boss nagging me makes me get things done. Why? Because I don't want to hear it. Even if she offered me money, I really wouldn't care...why? I don't need it. I don't want it...so, is it motivating me? No. In the same way, she's not going to fire me b/c it's really not up to her (not my immediate boss, anyway). So, again, no repercussions...but hearing her nag me is like fingernails on blackboard.

Sacha was very much screwed up b/c I didn't know how to train a dog. She does what she wants, when she wants b/c she has in the past, and has gotten away with it. And no matter how consistent we try to be with her, she looks miserable all the time...we wanted to try a different method...so, we did...and she's happy. And she works better than she ever has. So, why is there a problem. I am simply stating why this method works for some people. If you don't want to use this method (or an e-collar, in general), then don't. But don't assume that the method won't work. The fact is this (and I can actually provide publications on this) that using all four consequences in any learning setting leads to the BEST learning.

I recently tried to use the method for a forced retrieve on TJ...it didn't work. At least not with the original design (the simple nag didn't work)...we used a continuous stimulation until he held the object, but the stimulation was very high. We told him to "bring," when we said it, we hit him with a high level of electric, did it hurt, yes. As soon as he held the object, we stopped the pain. He learned by picking up the object, he got REWARDED by having the pain stop.

Jenna, IT IS NOT A CORRECTION.

Let me repost what I have posted several times in the past (and remember, I teach this stuff to my students this way...and I got my MS and PhD with a subspecialty of learning):

Positive reinforcement: giving of something good to increase the likelihood of the behavior.
Negative reinforcement: removal of something bad to increase the likelihood of a behavior.
Positive punishment (corrections): giving of something bad to decrease a behavior.
Negative punishment: removal of something good to decrease a behavior.

Punishment will always DECREASE the likelihood of a behavior.
Reinforcement will always INCREASE the likelihood of a behavior.

One way dogs can be taught to down: pressure right above the shoulders. Not enough to hurt, just pressure. The dog goes down to release the pressure. When the dog is down, the pressure is completely gone. You say "down" start pressure, when dog gets down, you release. Next time you say "down" the dog is more likely to get down faster. INCREASE behavior. I didn't punish the dog for going down. I didn't even punish him for NOT going down...I just made it more likely that he was going to choose to do it on his own when I told him to. Why, because, as I said before, the removal of the discomfort become a reward in and of itself.
"Rumor has it, compulsion is evil."

Katrina
Sacha CGC - Dumb Lab
Nisha CGC, PDC, PSA TC, PSA 1 - Crazy Malinois
Drusilla SLUT- Pet
Nemo - Dual-Purpose Narcotics
Cy TC, PSA 1, PSA 2, 2009 PSA Level 3 National Champion
Axo - Psycho Puppy
Rocky - RIP My Baby Boy
User avatar
katiek0417
pointy ear hoarder
 
Posts: 6280
Location: Glen Burnie, MD

Postby TheRedQueen » September 5th, 2007, 3:09 pm

Treats, play, etc don't work for some dogs. Alternatively, different people have different methods. I have seen this method work very well for people. As long as it's used correctly. I mainly use positive reinforcement with my dogs...but I've tried using PR with Sacha...and even if she gets the tastiest of treats, she would still rather blow me off sometimes...not all the time. But sometimes. And on a trial field, she can't blow me off...b/c if she does, she doesn't title.


Sure, they're dogs, and they will sometimes blow you off. Just like people. And sometimes the distraction can be so much that they just can't respond appropriately. (Just like ignoring someone calling your name if you're involved in a good book...you're not doing it on purpose, it's just that your brain is focused on one thing). I make sure that my dogs learn (before going off leash or competing) that paying attention to me, and not blowing me off is a good thing. I compete also, and if my guys don't pay attention or do their own thing in flyball...it means that not only do I suffer, but the rest of the team suffers too (lack of points, etc). So it's in my best interest to train my dogs well for competition. In flyball, that's using positive reinforcement mainly.

Your example of a $100 bonus is great...But guess what? I know plenty of ADHD students who don't care about the incentives of extra credit for doing something early (or even on time). So, is positive reinforcement doing them any good? No. So, you find other methods. I'm extremely ADHD...money doesn't work for me...but my boss nagging me makes me get things done. Why? Because I don't want to hear it. Even if she offered me money, I really wouldn't care...why? I don't need it. I don't want it...so, is it motivating me? No. In the same way, she's not going to fire me b/c it's really not up to her (not my immediate boss, anyway). So, again, no repercussions...but hearing her nag me is like fingernails on blackboard.


Just like with training the dogs, you have to figure out what motivates someone. We play a training game where we use the clicker and train each other. We use candy as a reward. The trainer that works with me in class is also a friend, and we usually demo the game first. She knows not to give me chocolate, because I won't eat it, and more likely than not will just throw it on the floor for good measure. I prefer the package of Sweet-tarts. So while $100 would definitely motivate me, because I'm poor, it's not going to necessarily motivate someone who has lots of money. Donald Trump will not care about earning $100, so you have to figure out what would motivate him. (I have not a clue what would do that? Pretty blonde girl? A new hairstylist?)

I am simply stating why this method works for some people. If you don't want to use this method (or an e-collar, in general), then don't. But don't assume that the method won't work.


I don't believe that I've stated *anywhere* that these methods don't work. The beginning of this post was asking for opinions, and that's what I gave, with examples of why I don't like E-collar/shock collars, and how I've seen them not work. I never said that they unconditionally DON'T work, I just gave some examples of bad e-collar work, and stated that I have yet to see them in the right hands with the dogs behaving nicely. That's what *I* have seen. Then I've explained why I use positive methods...and how they're not *all* positive. I never told anyone to NOT use one, just gave reasons that I don't use them.

One way dogs can be taught to down: pressure right above the shoulders. Not enough to hurt, just pressure. The dog goes down to release the pressure. When the dog is down, the pressure is completely gone. You say "down" start pressure, when dog gets down, you release. Next time you say "down" the dog is more likely to get down faster. INCREASE behavior. I didn't punish the dog for going down. I didn't even punish him for NOT going down...I just made it more likely that he was going to choose to do it on his own when I told him to. Why, because, as I said before, the removal of the discomfort become a reward in and of itself.


And if that works for you, fine. I've never said that people shouldn't use compulsion methods...never ever. I just state why I don't and what I use. So to teach Score to down, I captured the behavior with the clicker and treats. He offered a down, I clicked and treated. Off leash, in a room full of other puppies (we were in puppy class at the time), when he was about 10 weeks old. Over time, he's been rewarded for offering the behavior in other venues (flyball tournament by the noisy/busy lanes, in stores, by busy roads, etc.) Then I put a command to the behavior, and rewarded for doing it on command. I now have a 6 month old dog that will drop into a down anywhere, anytime on the first command. He thinks it's a game, and knows that it's fun...so why not play! If you want to use pressure to get the down, that's great...I know it works, because I used to use those methods. I just chose to go a different route with my current dogs, and I'm happy with what I'm getting. If you're happy with what you're getting...great! I'm happy for you too. ;)
"I don't have any idea if my dogs respect me or not, but they're greedy and I have their stuff." -- Patty Ruzzo

"Dogs don't want to control people. They want to control their own lives." --John Bradshaw
User avatar
TheRedQueen
I thought I lost my Wiener... but then I found him.
 
Posts: 7184
Location: Maryland

Postby brooksybrooks1 » September 5th, 2007, 3:17 pm

katie- sorry, i'm not trying to insult your intelligence or tell you what you're doing. i guess it's semantics, i know what you mean, i'm just still trying to figure out if you are shocking before or after you give the command, or if you only start doing it if they don't immediately do as you ask.

michelle- yes, ivan starts with a command.

redqueen- getting squirted at or having thrown water on you IS a physical correction, just a low level one, and one where the handler isn't attached to the dog in some form or another. the noodles sound more like they are a distraction, to quickly break the dog's attention from whatever naughty mindset it was in, than a punishment, or at least that's how i would perceive it, that is unless you are hitting the actual dog with it, which it doesn't sound like you are. i wish the world worked in a way where i always or even randomly got patted on the back and rewarded for doing things right and only prevented from or occasionally yelled at for doing things wrong, but unfortunately that's not the case, as we all know! that would be so awesome, to get pulled over and given a check! i think there's a reason things don't work like that in the real world, so i'm not gonna have my dogs live in a world like that either. i'de really like to SEE your methods and how your dogs consistently perform, i think it would settle a lot of this everybody trying to type out their training philosophies. however, i will say that in this facility where there are obviously lots of different methods being used, if you're seeing dogs that are yanking on their pinch collars after class and what not, it's being taught incorrectly or the students aren't following the advice of the trainer, because when trained properly that shouldn't ever be the case, and has not been my experience with it. the same goes for E COLLARS, like it or not, they work when used a certain way, and if they aren't working, they aren't using them effectively. that being said, just because any one particular method "works" doesn't mean it's good.
Jenna
User avatar
brooksybrooks1
Loyally Bully
 
Posts: 631
Location: Colorado

Postby brooksybrooks1 » September 5th, 2007, 3:24 pm

p.s.: these threads get so touchy! :slap: i don't think anybody is trying to tell anybody else that their method is THE method or that other methods don't work. Redqueen was right, this post was started with intentions of hearing people's opinions and weighing in on them, that's still all i want when i ask those questions. i'm just trying to understand it, pros and cons, etc. so i don't think there's any need for anyone to be defensive about their training methods.... :|
Jenna
User avatar
brooksybrooks1
Loyally Bully
 
Posts: 631
Location: Colorado

Postby TheRedQueen » September 5th, 2007, 3:35 pm

redqueen- getting squirted at or having thrown water on you IS a physical correction, just a low level one, and one where the handler isn't attached to the dog in some form or another. the noodles sound more like they are a distraction, to quickly break the dog's attention from whatever naughty mindset it was in, than a punishment, or at least that's how i would perceive it, that is unless you are hitting the actual dog with it, which it doesn't sound like you are. i wish the world worked in a way where i always or even randomly got patted on the back and rewarded for doing things right and only prevented from or occasionally yelled at for doing things wrong, but unfortunately that's not the case, as we all know! that would be so awesome, to get pulled over and given a check! i think there's a reason things don't work like that in the real world, so i'm not gonna have my dogs live in a world like that either. i'de really like to SEE your methods and how your dogs consistently perform, i think it would settle a lot of this everybody trying to type out their training philosophies. however, i will say that in this facility where there are obviously lots of different methods being used, if you're seeing dogs that are yanking on their pinch collars after class and what not, it's being taught incorrectly or the students aren't following the advice of the trainer, because when trained properly that shouldn't ever be the case, and has not been my experience with it. the same goes for E COLLARS, like it or not, they work when used a certain way, and if they aren't working, they aren't using them effectively. that being said, just because any one particular method "works" doesn't mean it's good.


Sure, I did type that wrong...it is a physical punishment to be hit with water...my mistake. I meant it as, there are no collar corrections because the dog is away from the handler, and nothing that cause the dog more than minor discomfort (and that's if they don't like water). The noodles being beaten in their face is a punishment, just as yelling at them is. We're not trying to distract them with the noodles, we're trying to make a scary thing happen if you try to go after the other dog...so it is an aversive. Do some dogs not find it so scary? Sure, that's why we have multiple methods, and sometimes we have to give up on the dog and tell their handler to find another sport for them.

And I know the world doesn't work in all positive ways...but I try to make it such for my dogs, because I control their world as much as I can. I try to prevent bad things from happening to them, or to get them to trust me in bad situations so they know I will take care of it. But isn't it nice to get a present "just because" someone thought of you, or get praised by a boss, etc? Just because bad things happen in life, doesn't mean we shouldn't *try* to be more positive in our dealings with people as well as dogs.
"I don't have any idea if my dogs respect me or not, but they're greedy and I have their stuff." -- Patty Ruzzo

"Dogs don't want to control people. They want to control their own lives." --John Bradshaw
User avatar
TheRedQueen
I thought I lost my Wiener... but then I found him.
 
Posts: 7184
Location: Maryland

Postby TheRedQueen » September 5th, 2007, 3:38 pm

On September 05 2007, 2:24 PM, brooksybrooks1 wrote:p.s.: these threads get so touchy! :slap: i don't think anybody is trying to tell anybody else that their method is THE method or that other methods don't work. Redqueen was right, this post was started with intentions of hearing people's opinions and weighing in on them, that's still all i want when i ask those questions. i'm just trying to understand it, pros and cons, etc. so i don't think there's any need for anyone to be defensive about their training methods.... :|


Hear hear!

Don't worry, I love talking about training...whether anyone agrees with me or not. I don't get offended easily. :mindblowing: And I love hearing the other points of view, whether I agree or not. ;)
"I don't have any idea if my dogs respect me or not, but they're greedy and I have their stuff." -- Patty Ruzzo

"Dogs don't want to control people. They want to control their own lives." --John Bradshaw
User avatar
TheRedQueen
I thought I lost my Wiener... but then I found him.
 
Posts: 7184
Location: Maryland

Postby katiek0417 » September 5th, 2007, 4:12 pm

On September 05 2007, 2:17 PM, brooksybrooks1 wrote:katie- sorry, i'm not trying to insult your intelligence or tell you what you're doing. i guess it's semantics, i know what you mean, i'm just still trying to figure out if you are shocking before or after you give the command, or if you only start doing it if they don't immediately do as you ask.


While you're teaching it: command, immediately start tapping, remove tapping when behavior is performed....when a dog gets really good, they'll start doing what you want AS you get the command out of your mouth (so the tapping never begins)...

Once the dog has been doing it, you can test the obedience without the immediate tapping...but might find that you have to go back to it (if it's not solid enough)...

Does that make sense?

RedQueen, I understand what you're saying...which is why I said that different methods work for different dogs. However, as I said, i have seen very good results when people trained in these methods use them properly... That's all
"Rumor has it, compulsion is evil."

Katrina
Sacha CGC - Dumb Lab
Nisha CGC, PDC, PSA TC, PSA 1 - Crazy Malinois
Drusilla SLUT- Pet
Nemo - Dual-Purpose Narcotics
Cy TC, PSA 1, PSA 2, 2009 PSA Level 3 National Champion
Axo - Psycho Puppy
Rocky - RIP My Baby Boy
User avatar
katiek0417
pointy ear hoarder
 
Posts: 6280
Location: Glen Burnie, MD

Postby Wyldmoonwoman » September 5th, 2007, 7:05 pm

I happen to own a dog that does not respond with pure positive reinforcement and ever since I learned to use corrections her behavior improved immensely. I tried for months to get my dog to walk on a flat collar with treats and praise and had absolutely no success, so I went to a choke collar and she would strangle herself, then I tried the halti and she learned she could tighten her neck muscles and defeat the purpose, when I went to the prong, a couple good hard jerks got the message across and she walks beautifully now, she does not like being corrected and that was the part of the training that I .

I read the kohler book after trying pure positive training and started to incorporate some of the techniques in the book and saw even more improvement when I add a correction to the positive reinforcement...teach the command in a positive manner, correct for not following the command. I see an e-collar as a way to administer a correction in the same way that I would use a prong collar in a remote situation, ie off leash and have been researching getting one to proof off leash recall.

I learned alot from this thread and think that an e-collar is an option to proof a learned behavior.
"If I were not a man, I would like to be a bird. As I am a man, I do the next best thing, and ride a bicycle." -- Rev. Maltie, a cyclist in the late 1800s
User avatar
Wyldmoonwoman
Full of Bully
 
Posts: 2029
Location: Upstate, NY

Postby katiek0417 » September 5th, 2007, 8:16 pm

On September 05 2007, 6:05 PM, Wyldmoonwoman wrote:I happen to own a dog that does not respond with pure positive reinforcement and ever since I learned to use corrections her behavior improved immensely. I tried for months to get my dog to walk on a flat collar with treats and praise and had absolutely no success, so I went to a choke collar and she would strangle herself, then I tried the halti and she learned she could tighten her neck muscles and defeat the purpose, when I went to the prong, a couple good hard jerks got the message across and she walks beautifully now, she does not like being corrected and that was the part of the training that I .

I read the kohler book after trying pure positive training and started to incorporate some of the techniques in the book and saw even more improvement when I add a correction to the positive reinforcement...teach the command in a positive manner, correct for not following the command. I see an e-collar as a way to administer a correction in the same way that I would use a prong collar in a remote situation, ie off leash and have been researching getting one to proof off leash recall.

I learned alot from this thread and think that an e-collar is an option to proof a learned behavior.


Excellent post...but please do yourself a favor, and find an experienced trainer to teach her how to use it correctly!!!
"Rumor has it, compulsion is evil."

Katrina
Sacha CGC - Dumb Lab
Nisha CGC, PDC, PSA TC, PSA 1 - Crazy Malinois
Drusilla SLUT- Pet
Nemo - Dual-Purpose Narcotics
Cy TC, PSA 1, PSA 2, 2009 PSA Level 3 National Champion
Axo - Psycho Puppy
Rocky - RIP My Baby Boy
User avatar
katiek0417
pointy ear hoarder
 
Posts: 6280
Location: Glen Burnie, MD

Postby Wyldmoonwoman » September 5th, 2007, 9:50 pm

On September 05 2007, 8:16 PM, katiek0417 wrote:[
Excellent post...but please do yourself a favor, and find an experienced trainer to teach her how to use it correctly!!!


Definitely...I am not one of those sit means sit.com people and would hate to do damage and undo all of our hard work!
"If I were not a man, I would like to be a bird. As I am a man, I do the next best thing, and ride a bicycle." -- Rev. Maltie, a cyclist in the late 1800s
User avatar
Wyldmoonwoman
Full of Bully
 
Posts: 2029
Location: Upstate, NY

Postby brooksybrooks1 » September 6th, 2007, 1:57 pm

it's sad because his students are STRONG supporters of his work, but they don't realize what they are missing out on, they are just impressed with his dogs robotic obedience
Jenna
User avatar
brooksybrooks1
Loyally Bully
 
Posts: 631
Location: Colorado

Postby katiek0417 » September 6th, 2007, 1:59 pm

On September 06 2007, 12:57 PM, brooksybrooks1 wrote:it's sad because his students are STRONG supporters of his work, but they don't realize what they are missing out on, they are just impressed with his dogs robotic obedience


Well, a big part of his problems stem from the fact that when he takes the e-collar off his dogs, they look awful...he relies on them TOO MUCH!!!
"Rumor has it, compulsion is evil."

Katrina
Sacha CGC - Dumb Lab
Nisha CGC, PDC, PSA TC, PSA 1 - Crazy Malinois
Drusilla SLUT- Pet
Nemo - Dual-Purpose Narcotics
Cy TC, PSA 1, PSA 2, 2009 PSA Level 3 National Champion
Axo - Psycho Puppy
Rocky - RIP My Baby Boy
User avatar
katiek0417
pointy ear hoarder
 
Posts: 6280
Location: Glen Burnie, MD

Postby babyreba » September 6th, 2007, 5:17 pm

OK, so since the SMS methods were introduced to this thread, I have to ask if anyone knows: What is the deal with using the 2 e-collars at once on the dogs? I've watched a bunch of his vids, and in some he's got two collars around the dog's neck and in others he's got one on the neck and one strapped to the dog's belly.

Is there some kind of training philosophy where this is common? Or is this unique to his training technique?
User avatar
babyreba
Supremely Bully
 
Posts: 1132

Postby TheRedQueen » September 6th, 2007, 5:34 pm

On September 06 2007, 4:17 PM, babyreba wrote:OK, so since the SMS methods were introduced to this thread, I have to ask if anyone knows: What is the deal with using the 2 e-collars at once on the dogs? I've watched a bunch of his vids, and in some he's got two collars around the dog's neck and in others he's got one on the neck and one strapped to the dog's belly.

Is there some kind of training philosophy where this is common? Or is this unique to his training technique?


From what I've heard...this guy is not the only one to employ more than one shock collar. A woman trainer got in trouble this past year for using two on client's dogs...one on the neck and one on the groin (to shock there too). I've heard of hunters doing the same thing on hunting dogs. It seems like overkill and abuse to me, because I know *my* groin area is *much* more sensitive than my neck...I can't imagine a guy strapping on on his d*** to try it out.

Edited to add articles on the trainer's arrest:
http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/s ... gtraining/

http://cbs2chicago.com/investigations/l ... 23238.html
"I don't have any idea if my dogs respect me or not, but they're greedy and I have their stuff." -- Patty Ruzzo

"Dogs don't want to control people. They want to control their own lives." --John Bradshaw
User avatar
TheRedQueen
I thought I lost my Wiener... but then I found him.
 
Posts: 7184
Location: Maryland

Postby amazincc » September 6th, 2007, 6:24 pm

Don't some people also put on dummy-collars to keep a dog from getting ... collar-smart, is it? Or are we talking about this one particular trainer using two real ones?
User avatar
amazincc
Jessica & Mick
 
Posts: 9814
Location: Holding them both in my heart.

Postby TheRedQueen » September 6th, 2007, 8:46 pm

On September 06 2007, 5:24 PM, amazincc wrote:Don't some people also put on dummy-collars to keep a dog from getting ... collar-smart, is it? Or are we talking about this one particular trainer using two real ones?


The trainer in the article was using at least two live collars on dogs (including a bichon frise...what could that dog be doing that it required TWO e-collars?). I don't know about the other trainer being referred to in the post.
"I don't have any idea if my dogs respect me or not, but they're greedy and I have their stuff." -- Patty Ruzzo

"Dogs don't want to control people. They want to control their own lives." --John Bradshaw
User avatar
TheRedQueen
I thought I lost my Wiener... but then I found him.
 
Posts: 7184
Location: Maryland

PreviousNext

Return to Training & Behavior

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]