# ART: "lots of energy expended re CM/DW, what about pervasive shock-collar use?"



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Lots of energy expended on Dog Whisperer, what about the pervasiveness of Shock Collar use? « Responsible Dog ~ Its all about dogs

Quote: 
_"The authors, Schilder and van der Borg (2004), concluded three negative effects from the use of e-stimulus devices 
(shock collars). They are as follows:
1. This type of training is stressful
2. Dogs are feeling pain
3. Dogs learn to associate the collar with shock and the presence of the handler / owner!"_


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

Yes, but Cesar's on TV and portrayed as a prophet.

When I see NYPD service dogs on TV, their training is rewards based, and their confidence is built up; they are also family pets for the handlers! One called Aragorn, was both patroll & search & rescue.

If shock collar usage is pervasive there, they are keeping it off camera, presumably to avoid a public outcry?

As it is, it seems lobbying for legislation is the only effective response to shock collars, as the practioners appear to disregard findings of studies, and are using the same tactics as Climate Change Denialists, trying to discredit the science & ignoring clear evidence of problems.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

YouTube - Donelda Guy - Britain's Got Talent 2011 Audition


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

Unavailable in my country


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> Lots of energy expended on Dog Whisperer, what about the pervasiveness of Shock Collar use? « Responsible Dog ~ It's all about dogs
> 
> Quote:
> _"The authors, Schilder and van der Borg (2004), concluded three negative effects from the use of e-stimulus devices
> ...


Steven R. Lindsay discusses this study in volume three of his "Handbook of Applied Dog Behavior and Training." Here are some of his comments on it. Emphasis is mine



> *Most scientific evidence supports the notion that the cessation of aversive ES in the context of escape/avoidance training is more likely to enhance social attraction, promote feelings of safety, and calm a dog rather than make a dog afraid or apprehensive ... Instead of instilling social aversion and anxiety as suggested by the authors, competent electronic training may actually promote social attachment, reward, and safety, With the behavior- contingent cessation or avoidance of ES, dogs experience immediate emotional relief that subsequently merges into a state of progressive relaxation incompatible with social aversion and fear *
> 
> Evidently, many of the shocks delivered by the handlers were far from traumatic experiences, since the authors had to double-check with them to confirm the actual number of shocks received by the dogs.
> 
> From the foregoing description, it appears that ES was applied in a manner that met controllability standards, further *making the attribution of stress and welfare harm resulting from electronic training seem more like an unfounded accusation than a scientific conclusion *


He continues for quite a while. Making two additional points.



> 1. The social behaviors that the authors used to judge that the dogs were under stress are ambiguous, and are displayed by dogs in a variety of situations, only some of which involve high levels of stress. *There is zero scientific evidence that these indicators mean what the authors claim they mean. *
> 
> 2. The authors made no attempt to blind themselves to the experimental and control groups. Unlike the Tuskegee studies, they weren't measuring cortisol levels in the saliva and/or blood - they were subjectively interpreting behavior. And they _knew_ which dogs were being subjected to which training protocol, when they were doing the interpretation.


He continues:



> Despite the presence of obvious negative convictions towards dog training in general and electronic training in particular, *the researchers took no measures to blind themselves to experimental and control groups, *raising reasonable concerns about experimenter bias entering into the data collection process and post hoc treatments, which should necessarily be regarded as tainted and suspect.
> 
> The authors suggest that a goal of their study was to determine the short-term and long-term effects of shocks, yet they fail to provide any data relevant to the determination of long-term effects.
> 
> ...


This was an intentionally deceptive study, designed to reach predetermined conclusions that couldn't have supported the findings that it reached even if it had been competently done.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Lou Castle said:


> This was an intentionally deceptive study, designed to reach predetermined conclusions that couldn't have supported
> the findings that it reached even if it had been competently done.


* if U told me it was dark at midnight, i'd go outside to check. 

* there are hundreds of other studies that support the take-home message that shock as a training-tool is more 
stressful, has greater potential for fallout, & those side-effects tend to be more severe than any side-FX of pos-R - 
AKA positive-reinforcement, reward-based training, or whatever other label one might prefer.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Someone else made this point, but as far as I am concerned, it does not even matter if the evidence showed that electric shock collars actually DID train dogs because for me, inhumane methods are not an option.

However, from what I have read the majority of scientific studies seem to show that they don't work longterm and/or cause other problems. There is a paucity of evidence which shows otherwise.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> * if U told me it was dark at midnight, i'd go outside to check.


And you'd discover that you're just as wrong as you are in citing this study. It's widely known as the most flawed Ecollar study ever done.



leashedForLife said:


> * there are hundreds of other studies that support the take-home message that shock as a training-tool is more stressful, has greater potential for fallout, & those side-effects tend to be more severe than any side-FX of pos-R - AKA positive-reinforcement, reward-based training, or whatever other label one might prefer.


There are just as many studies that show that this is NOT the case. If you'd care to cite them one or two at a time I'd be happy to point out their fallacies or show, as I just did, where others have.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> Someone else made this point, but as far as I am concerned, it does not even matter if the evidence showed that electric shock collars actually DID train dogs because for me, inhumane methods are not an option.


"Humanity" and "inhumanity" is just an opinion. Since you've never seen my work or any dogs that I've trained, you opinion is based on air. The Rescue organization I gave a seminar for thought they were GREAT! They purchased some Ecollars and are using them to train dogs in their care before they adopt them out to give them some reliable OB.



Old Shep said:


> However, from what I have read the majority of scientific studies seem to show that they don't work longterm


Gonna have to call "nonsense" on this. But since you make the claim, please present those studies. I'd LOVE to see them. I've trained MANY dogs with Ecollars that I followed until they passed, including several of my own. NOT ONE OF THEM had their training "not work long-term."



Old Shep said:


> and/or cause other problems. There is a paucity of evidence which shows otherwise.


Show us those studies please. I've probably seen most of them and as I just did with this one, have put the lie to them.


----------



## Jasper's Bloke (Oct 30, 2009)

Lou Castle said:


> "Humanity" and "inhumanity" is just an opinion. Since you've never seen my work or any dogs that I've trained, you opinion is based on air. The Rescue organization I gave a seminar for thought they were GREAT! They purchased some Ecollars and are using them to train dogs in their care before they adopt them out to give them some reliable OB.


You are quite right Lou, it is down to a matter of opinion but that doesn't mean to say that yours is right and everyone elses is wrong. I am not surprised that the rescue you worked for were happy to use them as there seems to be a huge difference in attitude to these devices between the UK and the USA, just as there are with many other things.

At the end of the day you can trade scientific studies with Terry until the cows come home but the simple fact is that no matter what evidence is presented people will always have their own perception of whether this method is right or wrong, and after all, perception is reality.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

Jasper's Bloke said:


> You are quite right Lou, it is down to a matter of opinion but that doesn't mean to say that yours is right and everyone elses is wrong.


Quite true. But I feel that since my opinion is based on my personal experience of having put Ecollars on over 3,000 dogs that my opinion has something behind it. I'd bet that most of the opinions of others in these discussions are based on such things as conjecture, hearsay, rumor and fear. NONE of these people have seen my work! Our relative experience should be should be taken into account when these folks are trying to influence others.



Jasper's Bloke said:


> I am not surprised that the rescue you worked for were happy to use them as there seems to be a huge difference in attitude to these devices between the UK and the USA, just as there are with many other things.


I agree. But the dogs still need to be trained.



Jasper's Bloke said:


> At the end of the day you can trade scientific studies with Terry until the cows come home but the simple fact is that no matter what evidence is presented people will always have their own perception of whether this method is right or wrong, and after all, perception is reality.


The statement that "perception is reality" is I think, a sign of an unscientific mind that is more controlled by emotion than reason. It shows a lack common sense and the ability to think rationally. Unfortunately, it's becoming more and more common.


----------



## Jasper's Bloke (Oct 30, 2009)

Lou Castle said:


> The statement that "perception is reality" is I think, a sign of an unscientific mind that is more controlled by emotion than reason. It shows a lack common sense and the ability to think rationally. Unfortunately, it's becoming more and more common.


Science has nothing to do with it, this is a fact of life. Hundreds of years ago the greatest minds on the planet believed that the earth was flat and so the earth was flat. The scientific fact that it was of course not flat was neither here nor there, that was their perception of the world and therefore it was their reality. It does not matter what is true or not it only matters what people believe is true.

What is becoming more common is the attitude that dogs are 'a thing' to be owned and possessed and therefore should be bent, with force if required, to our will. The dog must do this and must not do that for the simple reason that we say so. Yes of course there are basic rules that must be obeyed for the safety of both people and animals but this goes far beyond that. There is a vast difference between teaching a dog not to bite and teaching it to sit or roll over.

I have said many times that I do not question the success, failure or effectiveness of shock collars (lets call them what they are shall we?) because for me the results are irrelevant as I believe (and therefore perceive, which subsequently becomes a fact) that the basic principles on which the method is based are unethical. I do try to remain objective and open minded but I am afraid that I refuse to be lectured on common sense by someone who cannot accept that they are wrong.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

Jasper's Bloke said:


> Science has nothing to do with it, this is a fact of life.


I'll disagree and you may see why in a moment.



Jasper's Bloke said:


> Hundreds of years ago the greatest minds on the planet believed that the earth was flat *and so the earth was flat. * [Emphasis Added]


The earth has never been flat. The fact that _"the greatest minds on the planet believed"_ that it was did not change a thing except their behavior. But not everyone believed it. At least one man is given credit for NOT believing it enough so that he risked his life on the fact that it was not. Five centuries later we still remember the name Christopher Columbus, and he's largely credited with discovering "the new world" and shaping the future exploration of other lands by most all of Europe. (Never mind that others were there first and that others had been visiting fairly regularly).



Jasper's Bloke said:


> The scientific fact that it was of course not flat was neither here nor there, that was their perception of the world and therefore it was their reality.


It was not everyone's reality. A few had the courage of their convictions to stand alone and then to try and convince others that they did not have all the answers. Starting to sound familiar?



Jasper's Bloke said:


> It does not matter what is true or not it only matters what people believe is true.


What people believe has no effect on reality. It may be *their truth * but that does not affect what is actually going on in the world. In your example, the earth did not care what people thought.

For decades I worked in law enforcement and met up with people for whom perception was reality. They believed that they were safe no matter how recklessly they lived and no matter how safe they really were. They didn't lock the doors of their homes or cars. They walked from the shopping mall to their cars with their head in the clouds, thinking of how much money they'd spent or their next errand and not paying attention to their surroundings. *Many of those people, came to be known as victims. *Crooks, who made their living by breaking into their homes or assaulting people at the mall took advantage of the way that they went about their lives. Sometime the only loss was money but sometimes they paid with their lives. When they became victims their world came crashing down around them. Some of them became so fearful that they could no longer leave their homes.

Then there were people who believed that they weren't safe no matter the actual crime rate or how many precautions they took against being victimized. They lived behind multiple layers of security, locked doors, high gates topped with razor ribbon, trained attack dogs, security guards, CC TV systems and the like. They were rarely victimized but they lived their lives in fear.

Then there were people who accepted the fact that they lived in a large urban area and that there were nefarious people about. They paid attention to their surroundings kept their doors locked and lived reasonable lives. They too were rarely victimized but they lived very happy lives. When they were victimized, they shrugged their shoulders, silently cursed their attackers (sometimes not so silently) hardened the target and went on living those happy lives.

The reality is that there are criminals about and they will prey first on the unprepared and unbelieving.



Jasper's Bloke said:


> What is becoming more common is the attitude that dogs are 'a thing' to be owned and possessed and therefore should be bent, with force if required, to our will.


This isn't anything new. Dogs at one period were thought to not have feelings of pain. They were dissected without sedation to explore what they looked like under their skin. But the fact is that dogs ARE possessions under the law pretty much everywhere. We have created a dangerous environment and then placed them into it. Training must be reliable enough to keep them safe.



Jasper's Bloke said:


> The dog must do this and must not do that for the simple reason that we say so.


Yep that's how it goes. There's a reason that they're called Obedience _*COMMANDS. *_ They're NOT called Obedience _REQUESTS. _ We, as guardians of their safety know best. If given complete freedom they'd happily slurp up bowlfuls of highly poisonous engine coolant. And so we have an obligation to them.



Jasper's Bloke said:


> I have said many times that I do not question the success, failure or effectiveness of shock collars (lets call them what they are shall we?)


Perhaps, based on the highway death rate we should call cars, "Cages of death?"



Jasper's Bloke said:


> because for me the results are irrelevant as I believe (and therefore perceive, which subsequently becomes a fact) that the basic principles on which the method is based are unethical.


You believe that causing minor discomfort to a dog is _"unethical?"_ If so then how do you feel about people who withhold a treat that's been offered? That causes some degree of discomfort. If it did not the dog would not sit. How about people who advocate not feeding a dog on the day he's going to meet with a trainer. That makes him more attentive, especially if treats are used but it causes him some degree of discomfort. I know of one trainer who teaches a recall with food. Her method involves not feeding the dog AT ALL until he responds to the treats she's using to lure him in. She freely admits that might take days. Obviously that causes, in some dogs, a great deal of discomfort.

So this leads reasonably to the question, how much discomfort is it OK to impose on a dog? Many people pretend that there's no discomfort in their training at all but that's because they want to pretend that all their work is "kind" and "gentle." But those are relative terms and the fact is that everyone uses punishment and everyone uses aversives. It's impossible to train a dog without them. Changing the language does not change what's going on.



Jasper's Bloke said:


> I do try to remain objective and open minded but I am afraid that I refuse to be lectured on common sense by someone who cannot accept that they are wrong.


Humor me please. Tell me as why you think that Ecollars are wrong. In that post *please tell me your understanding of how they are used. *I certainly do appreciate that you are able to remain polite and professional. So many are not.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

YouTube - Dog gets shocked

no-one home, dog climbs onto sofa... CC-TV.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - Dog gets shocked


So good you had to post it TWICE. LOL  of course your video does not show the use of an Ecollar.

Youtube  Dog gets shocked


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

YouTube - Sit Means Sit dog training aids the handicapped

watch the body-language - U can lower the volume or mute the sound.

YouTube - Dog Training: Teach Your Dog to Shut Doors Part 1 Clicker 
ditto - and part 2 - 
YouTube - Part 2 of Train Your Dog to Shut Doors using Targeting & the Clicker


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - Dog gets shocked
> 
> no-one home, dog climbs onto sofa... CC-TV.


my wireless connection was acting strangely, i could not see the first post. 
i removed it as soon as i was aware of the duplicate.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

YouTube - e-collar training - poor dog

this is an *advertisement* by this trainer; watch the dog's attitude, general demeanor & specific signals. 
what do U see?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - Sit Means Sit dog training aids the handicapped
> 
> watch the body-language - U can lower the volume or mute the sound.


Mr. Hassen is the PERFECT example of how NOT to use an Ecollar. Do a Google search with both our names and you'll find quite a few arguments I've had with him.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - e-collar training - poor dog
> 
> this is an *advertisement* by this trainer


*I don't think so. *What trainer would entitle an advertisement _"e-collar training - poor dog?"_ I think it's an excellent example of what can happen when too−high a stim level is being used. But even so, where is the dog voiding his bladder and his bowels? How about the flipping over backwards that we keep hearing about?

Here's some more good Ecollar work

Youtube  Retrieving a Credit Card


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

YouTube - Advice for Curbing Aggressive Dogs


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - Advice for Curbing Aggressive Dogs


Some people don't know that they don't know.

As stated in the video,


> Our expectations have changed. We expect dogs to be perfect.


This is a change? From when? I've always expected dogs to be perfect. A very few are naturally but most need some training.



> Melissa Bane (sp?) is an aggression expert ...


 By whose standards? And if this is the case why is the dog wearing a head halter and having her shove treat after treat down its throat?



> The main reason that people bring their dogs to a veterinary behaviorist is for aggression.


 Then the video shows what looks like a police dog being trained in bite work. I'd bet the farm that this dog has not been to see a veterinary behaviorist? He's SUPPOSED to bite. Why on earth would anyone include this in a video about problem aggression?



> Bane finds out what causes the aggression by interviewing the owner and then by giving the dog a physical exam.


 No mention made of blood screening. What about aggression caused by chemical imbalances?



> After we get a history, we go through a problem list and then make a diagnosis ... and then give the owners a treatment plan.


 Translation: we make an educated guess and then pretend we know what to do. Problem is, if the guess is wrong, the treatment will be wrong.



> Most aggression issues *can be avoided *


 Fairly common from this group. AVOID the issue. Again, this is management and it always breaks down.



> No dog loses their aggression entirely ...


Tell it to THESE DOGS. Still like this after four years.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

YouTube - Remote Collar Features

U can skip the verbal, watch the dog: it takes over 5-mins before his ears both rise. [approx 5:10, again 5:24] 
at 6:20 the dog gives himself permission to get out from between Ed's feet, & immediately body-parl changes. 
what do U see?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - Remote Collar Features
> 
> U can skip the verbal, watch the dog: it takes over 5-mins before his ears both rise. [approx 5:10, again 5:24]


First, the dog is lying directly under where the straps of the Ecollars and its lanyard are flopping around. THAT'S the reason for his ears lying down. He's not stimming the dog AT ALL during this video. * And you're wrong in your statement they the dog's ears don't rise before 5 minutes have elapsed. *They come up at 0:21, 0:23, 0:26, 1:16, 1:22, 1:32, 2:07, 2:20. And then I got bored.

There were many more "ear raises." Did you link the wrong video.

Again, isn't this supposed to be about aversives?



leashedForLife said:


> at 6:20 the dog gives himself permission to get out from between Ed's feet


You completely missed the fact that at 6:15 the dog catches the scent of something that interests him and THAT is the reason that he moves out from between Mr. Frawley's feet. He can be seen sniffing around for a few seconds. His ears are up because he's trying to find the source of that scent AND the straps and lanyard are no longer tickling his ears.


----------



## grandad (Apr 14, 2011)

I still remain open minded. I am willing to believe that technology has moved on and that the remote collar technology has moved on too. 
After all we now have 3D & HD TV, remote controls for our TV, Sat Nav, Mobile phones, iphones, Blue ray, ipods, Laptops etc etc, which we didnt have 30-40 years ago. 

I know they some of these collars can emit a beep to mark a behaviour/command (a beep, surely can't be inhumane, can it?) 
However, from a beep to the next level, is what? A vibration? then a stronger vibration, until you get into the area of electrical impulses. And going from the beep to the electrical impulse is what? 5 levels, 10 levels, 20.......


----------



## gladass (Jan 6, 2011)

Lou Castle said:


> NONE of these people have seen my work! .


And I for one would not like to see your work. Cruel imo


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

grandad said:


> I still remain open minded. I am willing to believe that technology has moved on and that the remote collar technology has moved on too.
> After all we now have 3D & HD TV, remote controls for our TV, Sat Nav, Mobile phones, iphones, Blue ray, ipods, Laptops etc etc, which we didnt have 30-40 years ago.


I love open minds! And you're right on target that technology has advanced tremendously. Why some people want to stay rooted in 50 year old technology is a mystery.



grandad said:


> I know they some of these collars can emit a beep to mark a behaviour/command (a beep, surely can't be inhumane, can it?)


I'm sure that someone will complain about it.



grandad said:


> However, from a beep to the next level, is what? A vibration? then a stronger vibration, until you get into the area of electrical impulses. And going from the beep to the electrical impulse is what? 5 levels, 10 levels, 20.......


There may be a unit that gives a beep, a vibe and then moves to stim but I'm not familiar with it. There is a relatively new brand on the market, Unleashed Technology, (I have no connection with the company) that offers a model that has vibe, a pause, and then either more vibe, or a stim (your choice depending on how you have it set and how you press the buttons). Lots of people like to use the vibe as a warning that comes before the stim. Some, however think it amounts to double commands which generally are not a good idea. During the teaching phase they may be useful however. UT offers 15 levels of stim and 15 levels of vibration. I think it's the only brand that has adjustable vibration and stim.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

gladass said:


> And I for one would not like to see your work. Cruel imo


NO ONE who HAS SEEN IT has ever agreed with your assessment. And there have been thousands.


----------



## gladass (Jan 6, 2011)

Lou Castle said:


> NO ONE who HAS SEEN IT has ever agreed with your assessment. And there have been thousands.


Lots of cruel people you know then imo


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

gladass said:


> Lots of cruel people you know then imo


LOL. They include people from all walks of life. Police K−9 handlers, SAR workers, pet owners, People who work in and run rescue groups. People who train dogs for the blind. People who train dogs for all kinds of service work, therapy dogs, dogs for the disabled, etc.

Surely of the thousands, if you were right in thinking that my work was cruel AT LEAST ONE OF THEM would have said something. But you won't find any such comment anywhere. Lots of people have gone looking for such comments on the Net. No one has ever found it. That's because it's not there. OTOH if you do a search for the name of another Ecollar trainer who I have argued with at length you'll find MANY such comments so it's not like people are afraid to speak up. PM me if you want his name.

You are of course welcome to your opinion. But everyone should know that it's not based on any facts, just your opinion that the use of the tool is cruel. That's a logically unsound position. Tools are inanimate objects. They're neither nice nor cruel until they're picked up and used (or misused).


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> LOL. They include people from all walks of life. Police K−9 handlers, SAR workers, pet owners, People who work in and run rescue groups. People who train dogs for the blind. People who train dogs for all kinds of service work, therapy dogs, dogs for the disabled, etc.
> 
> Surely of the thousands, if you were right in thinking that my work was cruel AT LEAST ONE OF THEM would have said something. But you won't find any such comment anywhere. Lots of people have gone looking for such comments on the Net. No one has ever found it. That's because it's not there. OTOH if you do a search for the name of another Ecollar trainer who I have argued with at length you'll find MANY such comments so it's not like people are afraid to speak up. PM me if you want his name.
> 
> You are of course welcome to your opinion. But everyone should know that it's not based on any facts, just your opinion that the use of the tool is cruel. That's a logically unsound position. Tools are inanimate objects. They're neither nice nor cruel until they're picked up and used (or misused).


so do you feel any responsibility for any numptys you might mentor who go onto use the device to excess?

one in particular springs to mind and you seem to overlook his blatent cruelty, hmmm so seems not


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> so do you feel any responsibility for any numptys you might mentor who go onto use the device to excess?


I don't train any _"numptys."_ I haven't seen any of the trainers who use the so−called "kinder gentler methods" taking responsibility for their failures and they are legion. I don't see them taking any responsibility for their part in creating grossly overweight dogs because the _"numptys"_ don't cut back on their food to balance the treats they train with. I don't see any of them taking responsibility for the dogs that are trained with toys who suffer injuries as a result of that play.



noushka05 said:


> one in particular springs to mind and you seem to overlook his blatent cruelty, hmmm so seems not


Name him. And tells us of his _"blatant cruelty"_ Failure to do this and I'll have to call BS.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Reply # zzz


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Lou Castle said:


> Some people don't know that they don't know.
> 
> By whose standards? And if this is the case why is the dog wearing a head halter and having her shove treat after treat down its throat?
> 
> ...


The woman has is an animal behaviourist...do you just disagree with the whole science behind behaviour modification? I'm not saying that she is a good trainer, but I am guessing she's quite good since she's in her position.

Since when was taking a guess wrong? Do you know exactly, 100% what's happening with a dog's behaviour? It's impossible. Educated guesses are generally how animal behaviour works. We can be 99% sure of many things, but I don't think it is possible to be 100% sure.

The lady was probably using the dog's meal food in training...that's not stuffing treats down its throat, surely? The dog has to eat, why not use it in training? We can build positive associations with other dogs going by, gain control of our dog and all the time the dog enjoys it. :thumbsup:

I am not completely against e-collars, now I've looked into it a bit more and read your posts Lou. But I still think that punishments, when needed (e.g. a dog breaks a SIT-STAY) can be miniscule and instructive, (e.g. saying SIT and running up to the dog to make them perform the command). They learn very quickly this way too and there's no need for stim. What's more, the dog receives a clear, instructive, constructive punishment, so that they know exactly what they should be doing. Not just being stimmed or shouted at, so they know simply 'This is wrong'. Instead, they learn 'What I did was wrong, and *this* is what I should be doing'. I think it really speeds up training.
But I agree, e-collars are not always about shocking (when used properly) and can be used as a no reward marker, like saying 'No' or 'Ah-ah'.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> Name him. And tells us of his _"blatant cruelty"_ Failure to do this and I'll have to call BS.


NOPE!.... ive no need to


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - Advice for Curbing Aggressive Dogs


for those who missed or ignored the intro: 
Melissa Bain, DVM, is a veterinary behaviorist at Univ of Calif, in Davis, California - AKA 'UC-Davis' in casual chat.

board-certification is an extra specialty tacked on *after* completing the vet-medicine curriculum - 
vet-opthalmology, vet-cardiology, etc; there are 18 recognized vet-specialties accredited by a Board. 
Recognized veterinary specialty organizations



> American College of Veterinary Behaviorists
> Dr. Bonnie V. Beaver, Executive Director
> Texas A&M University
> Department of Small Animal Medicine & Surgery
> ...


here is Dr Bain on the College of Vet-Behaviorists' diplomates list: 


> Melissa Bain
> DVM, DACVB, MS
> University of California-School of Veterinary Medicine
> Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital
> ...


which can be confirmed here - 
Find a Board Certified Veterinary Behaviorist « ACVB


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Vivki Magnus is a trainer, & i have her permission to share her experience at a shock-collar seminar. 
this was on Sat, May 8, 2004; as many other pos-R trainers have been, she was invited to observe.


> I attended a No Limitations e-collar seminar last Saturday, and wanted to share my observations,
> hopefully try to share them without editorial comment so that people can draw their own conclusions.
> I have tried to note where my expectations for the seminar and the actual seminar diverged; I have also
> tried to describe my observations of the dogs without emotion.
> ...


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

leashedForLife said:


> Vivki Magnus is a trainer, & i have her permission to share her experience at a shock-collar seminar.
> this was on Sat, May 8, 2004; as many other pos-R trainers have been, she was invited to observe.


Sickening!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

leashedForLife said:


> Vivki Magnus is a trainer, & i have her permission to share her experience at a shock-collar seminar.
> this was on Sat, May 8, 2004; as many other pos-R trainers have been, she was invited to observe.


OMG!!


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

Rottiefan said:


> The woman has is an animal behaviourist...do you just disagree with the whole science behind behaviour modification? I'm not saying that she is a good trainer, but I am guessing she's quite good since she's in her position.


No I don't disagree with the science. I do disagree with the entire school of thought that says, 'no matter what the results we must stay with the so−called "kinder gentler methods.' " When they work they're fine. But when they don't there are many who blame the person applying them, saying that they're not doing it right of they haven't kept at it long enough. I've never seen them admit that maybe the person/method just isn't a good fit, that the dog's issue is too severe or tell anyone "how long is long enough" to know that it's not going to work. Usually they think they're dealing with severe problems when in truth they've probably never even seen one. I can't tell you how many times that I've rehabilitated dogs with little effort that others had recommended be killed.



Rottiefan said:


> Since when was taking a guess wrong?


It's not. Taking a wrong guess is wrong. But many times I've seen these guesses be wrong. Those who favor the so−called "kinder gentler methods" never seem to respond when I point this out. You may have seen those of us who use aversives get slammed for "treating the symptoms" and/or "suppressing all behavior" when the fact is that these things only happen when aversives are used improperly. In another thread we were talking about stopping a dog from jumping and I was told that one MUST know the reason for this before even attempting to fix it. Fact is the reason for this is obvious and it's easy to stop but I've come across people who think they have to spend weeks fixing this so that they're "kind to the dog." Meanwhile the family is traumatized, their clothing is destroyed, they can't have guests over or the dog has to locked away when they do.

I came across one family who's behaviorist told them to "turn their back on the dog" (you may have seen this advice given before) and that when he realized that he wasn't going to be rewarded by the attention, he would stop jumping up. They were told that the behavior would go extinct. It was a hot summer day in Los Angeles and the entire family Mom, Dad, two kids were wearing shorts. They were ALL scratched up from knee to ankle. One of the kids had developed an infection from the dog's scratching so severe that she had to be hospitalized for IV antibiotics. Yet their behaviorist did not change his advice! I'm all for being kind to the dog but I went to their house and fixed the problem in about 15 minutes merely by bumping the dog off balance with my knee when he jumped up. Then I had them do the same thing. The problem was solved in less than half an hour. They'd been working on this for weeks and it had cost them a lot of money with the behaviorist and more at the ER.



Rottiefan said:


> Do you know exactly, 100% what's happening with a dog's behaviour? It's impossible. Educated guesses are generally how animal behaviour works. We can be 99% sure of many things, but I don't think it is possible to be 100% sure.


I agree. But most of the time dogs are doing things for the same reason. It's not that one dog jumps up because he want face to face contact and another one does it because he likes the view, they're driven by the same instincts and do it for the same reasons. We don't need to spend years in psychotherapy trying to figure out this dog's motivations and yet sometimes that's what behaviorists do. If the owner has unlimited funds and unlimited time and the issue is not one of safety and the owner is willing to spend the time that's fine with me. But that's extremely rare. Most owners are going to spend what they think is a reasonable period of time and money (an ONLY they can decide what that is) before they decide to replace Fluffy with a dog that's less of a problem. Then Fluffy goes to the pound or worse .

You can respond to the effect, "Well then they shouldn't own a dog in the first place" if you like. But the reality is that they do and if they want another one, they will.



Rottiefan said:


> The lady was probably using the dog's meal food in training...that's not stuffing treats down its throat, surely?


I think you're "assuming facts not in evidence." There's no indication one way or the other. In the complete absence of any evidence, I prefer to stay in, "I don't know." Whether it's his regular meal or not, I define "stuffing" as offering another treat either while the dog still has the previous one in his mouth or immediately after the dog swallows the one it's got.



Rottiefan said:


> The dog has to eat, why not use it in training?


No problem if it's done judiciously. But It's not going to happen off the training field every time that a problem arises. Yes, I know that we're developing a habit but the problem is that trying to use only one phase of OC does not teach the dog what NOT to do.



Rottiefan said:


> We can build positive associations with other dogs going by, gain control of our dog and all the time the dog enjoys it.


If the issue is one of fear and most "aggression" is fear−based, then this solution may work. But if it's one of dominance or true aggression it won't. These are usually the dogs that I've seen behaviorists recommend be killed. The "shoving treats" methods just isn't going to work on those issues. My method, using the Ecollar works for all kinds of aggression and does not, as some like to say, inhibit any other behavior.



Rottiefan said:


> I am not completely against e-collars, now I've looked into it a bit more and read your posts Lou.


That's all I ask. If you are happy using whatever methods you favor (as long as they're humane, of course) and they give results then I'm happy. But when it does not give the results you desire I think it's wrong of people to tell you to just keep at it for years.



Rottiefan said:


> But I still think that punishments, when needed (e.g. a dog breaks a SIT-STAY) can be miniscule and instructive, (e.g. saying SIT and running up to the dog to make them perform the command).


I agree. Punishments should be delivered at the level that's right for the dog. For some a disapproving look may be sufficient, for others that will have no effect. It's only necessary to reach the dog's threshold of discomfort, not to exceed it. That's one reason that I prefer the Ecollar. It's adjustability allows me to find the threshold with great precision.



Rottiefan said:


> But I agree, e-collars are not always about shocking (when used properly) and can be used as a no reward marker, like saying 'No' or 'Ah-ah'.


There seems to be quite a few here, at least one has been very obvious in stating so, who don't believe this can be done, in spite of the fact that there are some doing it.

It always amazes me when I go onto a new forum and start talking about low level stim, as only causing minor discomfort, and I'm greeted by people who probably have never even seen a modern Ecollar, much less used one, who tell me that the only way an Ecollar can work is for it to cause pain. The problem is that they only know about the tool as it's used in an old−fashioned punishment−only mode and they refuse to admit that there might be another way. Often a few members get rude and nasty and call names. I wonder how they can claim to be so kind to their dogs and then treat another person in that fashion?!


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

Earlier Noushka wrote,


> one [person who uses the Ecollar to excess] in particular springs to mind and you seem to overlook his blatent cruelty


And I responded,


> Name him. And tells us of his _"blatant cruelty"_ Failure to do this and I'll have to call BS.


Noushka now replies


noushka05 said:


> NOPE!.... ive no need to


Then your accusation means nothing. So easy to make such a claim and it seems that it's so hard to back it up with facts. As promised, I call BS on you and this accusation.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> for those who missed or ignored the intro: Melissa Bain, DVM, is a veterinary behaviorist at Univ of Calif, in Davis, California - AKA 'UC-Davis' in casual chat.


I doubt that anyone missed Dr. Bain's qualifications. That makes her educated. It does not provide her with knowledge about topics that were not covered in her classes (I've never heard of any such courses that cover modern use of the Ecollar) and it does not mean that she's always right. And, of course, it's just plain ol' stupid to think that it means that her methods will work on every dog. I wonder how many times she's recommended death for dogs that don't respond to her methods ? I know that I've come across MANY behaviorists who have made this recommendation only to have me rehabilitate those dogs.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> Vivki [NOTE: her name is Vicki] Magnus is a trainer, & i have her permission to share her experience at a shock-collar seminar. this was on Sat, May 8, 2004; as many other pos-R trainers have been, she was invited to observe.


Vicki Magnus wrote


> I attended a No Limitations e-collar seminar last Saturday, and wanted to share my observations, hopefully try to share them without editorial comment so that people can draw their own conclusions. I have tried to note where my expectations for the seminar and the actual seminar diverged; I have also tried to describe my observations of the dogs without emotion.To that end I decided to call what happens when the human hits the remote "button", as this is the word Fred used in calling out to owners: "button, button, button". "Button" is what happens when one pushes the button on the remote and sends power to the unit on the dog's neck.
> 
> Expectation Number One:
> This would be a dog training seminar.Actual Seminar:Unadulterated conditioning, (classical and operant)
> ...


I know Vicki and she sent this to me as an email soon after she attended the No Limitations Seminar. She also sent this message to at least one forum. *In a post that came just after this initial comment Vicki wrote,  " ...[T]his is only about No Limitations, not an indictment of ecollars." * Too bad that leashForLife missed this gem. Vicki and I discussed my use of the Ecollar and she thinks it's fine. I joined Vicki in her feelings About Mr. Hassen and I spent quite a bit of time slamming him on that forum. We agree that Mr. Hassen is a monster.

This forum does not allow linking to other forums so if you want to see those exchanges ask in PM's.

Why leashedForLife thinks that showing crap Ecollar training would have any effect on anyone with half a brain is a mystery. There are crap trainers using all methods and all tools. The Ecollar is not going to miraculously make anyone a good trainer any more than a clicker is.


----------



## LuvMyDog_Worldwide (Apr 1, 2011)

Lou Castle said:


> It always amazes me when I go onto a new forum and start talking about low level stim, as only causing minor discomfort, and I'm greeted by people who probably have never even seen a modern Ecollar, much less used one, who tell me that the only way an Ecollar can work is for it to cause pain. The problem is that they only know about the tool as it's used in an old−fashioned punishment−only mode and they refuse to admit that there might be another way. Often a few members get rude and nasty and call names. I wonder how they can claim to be so kind to their dogs and then treat another person in that fashion?!


Bet you also wish you had a penny for every person that's said "if it doesn;t hurt why not use it on yourself....." without considering you may actually have done so already, many times?

I've never once recommended to anyone on a forum to use a prong collar, but as you're doing in this thread I encourage them to actually do some research and find the facts before making wild emotive stataments about "pain" and "cruelty" of a training tool based on a picture or video taken out of context, or by reading a website full of garbled misinformation that doesn't hold up to reason or scruitiny by another unqualified detractor. Some of these get very upset when you mention bribery with treats (cos it's not bribery, and I'm doing it wrong....) or headcollars being dangerous (because I'm not fitting or using it properly, but it's completely safe how they do it). It's actually quite amusing to go back to some of the forums months later to see people with the exact same problem using the exact same methods that my grandad would have sorted out in 5 seconds with a rolled up copy of the Bolton Evening News (don't ever remember one of his dogs becoming fear aggressive against a cruel training tool and mauling a paperboy...)

I actually found it quite disturbing being bullied off boards, banned, having my username changed, insulted, abused and accused of all sorts of underhanded motives by aparently rational adults when all I've ever done is questioned someones "expert" knowledge about certain training tools they advocate or detest in favour of another tool that works on the same principal. Dogs, ey? 

You might change the phrase earlier in the thread to "don't want to know they don't know what they don't know", but they know enough.......

regards,

Austin


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

YouTube - Cleo Greeting At Door

2 below are board-&-train

YouTube - Magnum Board and Train | German Shepherd Dog.m4v

YouTube - BellaBoardTrainMobileFormat.m4v


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Lou Castle said:


> I came across one family who's behaviorist told them to "turn their back on the dog" (you may have seen this advice given before) and that when he realized that he wasn't going to be rewarded by the attention, he would stop jumping up. They were told that the behavior would go extinct. It was a hot summer day in Los Angeles and the entire family Mom, Dad, two kids were wearing shorts. They were ALL scratched up from knee to ankle. One of the kids had developed an infection from the dog's scratching so severe that she had to be hospitalized for IV antibiotics. Yet their behaviorist did not change his advice! I'm all for being kind to the dog but I went to their house and fixed the problem in about 15 minutes merely by bumping the dog off balance with my knee when he jumped up. Then I had them do the same thing. The problem was solved in less than half an hour. They'd been working on this for weeks and it had cost them a lot of money with the behaviorist and more at the ER.
> I have solved jumping problems many times before. My preferred method is just simply teaching a dog to SIT and putting UP on cue. Putting a problem behaviour on cue is actually a great way of solving behavioural problems. I love a good hug from a dog but on my terms.
> 
> Whether it's his regular meal or not, I define "stuffing" as offering another treat either while the dog still has the previous one in his mouth or immediately after the dog swallows the one it's got.
> ...


I would have to accuse you Lou of bunching R+ techniques and trainers into all one basket. Just because one method doesn't work, does not mean that there is no R+ that will work. We just need to find out what the is motivated by and how they best learn.

Just as aversives have a huge range or applications, functions, levels of discomfort and pain, R+ have many different applications too. But it really takes creativity and enthusiasm at times, which is why some still have a problem with R+. They don't _*want*_ to praise the dog or give them a treat as they are so focused on the bad, and are obsessed with telling the dog that it's done wrong. I can't stand people like this, it's such a one-dimensional view of things.


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

LuvMyDog_Worldwide said:


> *I've never once recommended to anyone on a forum to use a prong collar, but as you're doing in this thread I encourage them to actually do some research and find the facts before making wild emotive stataments about "pain" and "cruelty" of a training tool based on a picture or video taken out of context*, or by reading a website full of garbled misinformation that doesn't hold up to reason or scruitiny by another unqualified detractor. Some of these get very upset when you mention bribery with treats (cos it's not bribery, and I'm doing it wrong....) or headcollars being dangerous (because I'm not fitting or using it properly, but it's completely safe how they do it). It's actually quite amusing to go back to some of the forums months later to see people with the exact same problem using the exact same methods that my grandad would have sorted out in 5 seconds with a rolled up copy of the Bolton Evening News (don't ever remember one of his dogs becoming fear aggressive against a cruel training tool and mauling a paperboy...)
> 
> I actually found it quite disturbing being bullied off boards, banned, having my username changed, insulted, abused and accused of all sorts of underhanded motives by aparently rational adults when all I've ever done is questioned someones "expert" knowledge about certain training tools they advocate or detest in favour of another tool that works on the same principal. Dogs, ey?
> 
> ...


Austin, I have never actually seen you post any research advocating the use of prong collars and why they do not cause pain or discomfort to a dog. I have though read quite a few against them. As I said to you on another thread, please indulge us in these studies.


----------



## LuvMyDog_Worldwide (Apr 1, 2011)

Lou Castle said:


> I don't train any _"numptys."_ I haven't seen any of the trainers who use the so−called "kinder gentler methods" taking responsibility for their failures and they are legion. I don't see them taking any responsibility for their part in creating grossly overweight dogs because the _"numptys"_ don't cut back on their food to balance the treats they train with. I don't see any of them taking responsibility for the dogs that are trained with toys who suffer injuries as a result of that play.


I'm not an advocate of shock collars in general and rarely get drawn into debate or opinion of them, but I've seen two really compelling situations for their use that I'd struggle to think of a better alternative for the end result and in the time taken.

1) Rattlesnakes and dogs.... I see this as having almost no margin of error and a shock collar is more like a natural deterent, sharp overwhelming unpleasant result of going near the snake, that's why evolution made it poisonous, and bitey, and that's why animals that might want to eat it stay away. Yet I was shot down by R+ supporters who advocated finding a high enough value reward.........and no indication of how long it would take or guarantees of success. Bet if no-one were around to reward the dog and it was bitten they's soon shrug off the responsibility!!

2) A cattle dog that chased trucks off the ranch... acually, it'd been hit a few times by cars and still kept on (bit stupid...) but the owner didn't want the dog going under a wheel and needed the habit breaking. Again, all you need to do is to find a high enough value reward and train recall.......before or after the attempt to find the reward failed and the R+ crown are shirking responsibility again? Obviously the answer was "keep the dog in the house", "watch it wherever it goes", and "you shouldn't have a dog...", which are all classic old chestnuts and would fix everything....

I also notice that careless recommendations are usually made from the other side of a keyboard with no background knowledge of history, environment, ability or previous levels of training when sometimes the person recommending should just voice their opinion as opinion and not fact, because you know full well they're completely distanced from the responsibility if it goes wrong and have their excuses lined up beforehand.

regards,

Austin


----------



## LuvMyDog_Worldwide (Apr 1, 2011)

Rottiefan said:


> Austin, I have never actually seen you post any research advocating the use of prong collars and why they do not cause pain or discomfort to a dog. I have though read quite a few against them. As I said to you on another thread, please indulge us in these studies.


Nope, you won't and never will. Do you believe or understand every study you read?

Let's imagine I put one on a dog and didn't get the reaction any of the 'anti' studies say, would that invalidate their research or just make me one of the included statistics? Nope, I much prefer the notion of seeing is believing, actual use vs an academic with an essay predesigned to "prove"...what exactly? There are so few objective studies, they make good reading to scrutinise the ideas, but not one has ever made a firm conclusion that couldn't be discredited, I don't need to indulge in academic bias and nonsense to justify my own experiences. They're secure enough, thank you.

regards,

Austin


----------



## LuvMyDog_Worldwide (Apr 1, 2011)

Rottiefan said:


> But it really takes creativity and enthusiasm at times, which is why some still have a problem with R+. They don't _*want*_ to praise the dog or give them a treat as they are so focused on the bad, and are obsessed with telling the dog that it's done wrong. I can't stand people like this, it's such a one-dimensional view of things.


Like this statement you mean? I'd doubt anyone uses 100% aversive techniques, it's so impractical as to be a laughable notion. On the other hand, using balanced techniques i.e. aversive and positive together relies heavily on giving praise. Who's to say the praise isn't the reward, does it have to be a food or a toy?

Just think about this....where's the treat for a working sheepdog?

regards,

Austin


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Rottiefan said:


> I would have to accuse you Lou of bunching R+ techniques and trainers into all one basket.
> Just because one [B-Mod] method doesn't work, does not mean that there is no R+ that will [re-teach greetings].


definitely - 
YouTube - #1 Layla - modifying 'dog jumping up' behavior-session #1 of 6

Layla is an extremely-social, friendly Golden - who has hurt several adults pretty badly, since she does not 'only' 
jump-up,  she kinda tackles people - very hard-hitting dog!

this is part 1 of a 6-week video-log; there are actually 7 videos, since 2 were filmed on the same day. 
she made terrific progress, despite her training coinciding with the fall/winter holidays in the USA, 
& her owner suffered a wicked case of the flu for about 10-days, which meant No Homework that week. 
but she didn't forget, & she did not backslide, & she was not allowed to practice her habit: 
management is critical during B-Mod.

* no dog-toes were trodden on 
* no human-knee bumped, pushed, hit, etc, her k9-chest 
* no scolding, pushing, smacking [however gentle] 
* no startling to make the dog jump back or freeze at a distance

for all the links in one place, see 
Pet Forums Community - View Single Post - dog body-language - and why it matters so much...


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Rottiefan said:


> Austin, I have never actually seen you post any research advocating the use of prong collars
> and why they do not cause pain or discomfort to a dog. I have though read quite a few against them. As I said to you
> on another thread, please indulge us in these studies.


*please* do this on the other thread, *Not* this one? 
i would like to stay on-topic re shock-collar training - any posts on this thread re prong-collars, 
i will ask the mods/Admin to move to the original prong-collar thread. 
the original-poster can easily copy & paste the post to move it themselves, & save the mods the work.

thanks so much! :001_smile:


----------



## arlow (Apr 20, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> Vivki Magnus is a trainer, & i have her permission to share her experience at a shock-collar seminar.
> this was on Sat, May 8, 2004; as many other pos-R trainers have been, she was invited to observe.


Leashed, 30 seconds of googling Vicki Magnus turned up this:



> For those looking to learn about using an e-collar I can't say enough good things about Martin. I feel comfortable in saying that each of the trainers there had very different training styles and all of us learned how to incorporate the e-collar into our own training......
> 
> Vicki Magnus
> Professional Dog trainer and Attorney


So it would seem, despite her negative experience with Fred Hassen, she' not opposed to ecollars in general.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

STUDY: physiological effects of shock-collars [sponsored by a manufacturer of same]
http://www.petsafe.net/outreach/white_paper.pdf

STUDY: possible link between electronic confinement/shock fence systems & aggressive behavior:
Can Aggression in Dogs Be Elicited Through the Use of Electronic Pet Containment Systems? - Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

arlow said:


> ...it would seem, despite her negative experience..., [she's] not opposed to e-collars in general.


that's an undated testimonial, arlow - i've no idea when it was written, which date may differ from when it was posted. 
does this cast doubts on the previous post? does it refute it? i don't think so.

Martin Deeley was a member of the USA-apdt previously, but left to co-found the IACP.

Ms Magnus also had a disagreement with the USA-apdt - 
Maryland IP Litigation 2008: Lawsuit Summaries : Maryland Intellectual Property Law Blog 
however, they reconciled, & she is once again a member & posts on the trainer's list.

here is her post on clicker-training, from Karen Pryor's website - 
What People Are Saying about Karen Pryor Clickertraining | Karen Pryor Clickertraining
posted Aug. 1, 2006; over 2-years after the shock-seminar: 


> _"I found on your website a post from Sue Ailsby, an account of training a Golden who was just bouncing off the walls.
> Sue kept clicking and working and the dog "let out a yowl" and danced and around and Sue said it was like the moment
> in The Miracle Worker where Helen realized those hand shapes were communication. It was just stunning,
> a 'eureka, I get it' moment of a dog making a cognitive connection.
> ...


thus it should be obvious that she uses clicker-training, which can be used to teach - not only to *correct* 
AKA punish or reduce or redirect or stop or extinguish, or any other similar term. *the lowest-stress use of shock 
is to proof an already-fluent cue & behavior pair - * i do not & will not use shock, but research indicates 
that's the least-stressful variation of its use in training.

and again, this testimonial is undated - i don't know when it was written, only when it was posted [Aug-2006]. 
In the case of the 'e-touch' post, i know neither date [send or post].

one picture can be perceived in two ways:
Young Woman or Old Woman

the Gestalt theory holds that a 'neutral observation', i-e, completely objective, does not exist:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/5122/kuhn2b.html

so while we can do our best to be logical & objective, *in a quantum universe, mere observation changes 
the results which are observed - * as we all know from the study of light, it can be particles or waves, depending 
upon how one designs the measuring apparatus for the experiment. My perception of dogs trained via shock 
is that they experience more stress - i'd love to have a baseline study of dogs before training, resting, 
then *during* training with traditional, pos-R & shock-collar - all 3; then see how long it took for cortisol 
to return to resting levels in the dogs.

since i don't have access to salivary cortisol, i use my eyes, ears & hands - pulse & respiration, drool, pupil size, 
posture, gait, body signals, lag, etc - to assess the dog i see, whether that's a photo, video, or flesh.


----------



## arlow (Apr 20, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> does this cast doubts on the previous post? does it refute it? i don't think so.


No, of course not. But it does illustrate that her objection was not to ecollars in general, but to Fred Hassen's methods. Of course her explicit statement to that effect also illustrates the point. I'm sure we could find clicker trainers criticizing other clicker trainers' methods. Would that discredit clicker training in general?


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

arlow said:


> I'm sure we could find clicker trainers criticizing other clicker trainers' methods.


case in point - 
YouTube - Clicker Trained Horse Remembers after 7 years! 
Shawna does *not* reward for every click - & of course, there is much commentary.  
many folks feel a 1:1 ratio of clicks & treats is absolute & unvarying; the *only* exception is errors: 
_if U click in the WRONG place AKA for the wrong behavior, there is no treat._ 
since handler-error [clicking what we don't want] should be low, this should have no damaging effects. 


arlow said:


> Would that discredit clicker training in general?


clicker AKA marker training [whistle, click, flash, vibe, thumbs-up...] is so adaptable, i think there is room 
for many small differences within the process; the primary does not change, *desired behavior is rewarded.*


----------



## LuvMyDog_Worldwide (Apr 1, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> case in point -
> YouTube - Clicker Trained Horse Remembers after 7 years!
> Shawna does *not* reward for every click - & of course, there is much commentary.
> many folks feel a 1:1 ratio of clicks & treats is absolute & unvarying; the *only* exception is errors:
> ...


*sigh*

_B. F. Skinners entire system is based on operant conditioning. The organism is in the process of operating on the environment, which in ordinary terms means it is bouncing around its world, doing what it does. During this operating, the organism encounters a special kind of stimulus, called a reinforcing stimulus, or simply a reinforcer. This special stimulus has the effect of increasing the operant -- that is, the behavior occurring just before the reinforcer. This is operant conditioning: the behavior is followed by a consequence, and the nature of the consequence modifies the organisms tendency to repeat the behavior in the future.

Imagine a rat in a cage. This is a special cage (called, in fact, a Skinner box) that has a bar or pedal on one wall that, when pressed, causes a little mechanism to release a food pellet into the cage. The rat is bouncing around the cage, doing whatever it is rats do, when he accidentally presses the bar and -- hey, presto! -- a food pellet falls into the cage! The operant is the behavior just prior to the reinforcer, which is the food pellet, of course. In no time at all, the rat is furiously peddling away at the bar, hoarding his pile of pellets in the corner of the cage.

A behavior followed by a reinforcing stimulus results in an increased probability of that behavior occurring in the future.

What if you dont give the rat any more pellets? Apparently, hes no fool, and after a few futile attempts, he stops his bar-pressing behavior. This is called extinction of the operant behavior.

A behavior no longer followed by the reinforcing stimulus results in a decreased probability of that behavior occurring in the future.

Now, if you were to turn the pellet machine back on, so that pressing the bar again provides the rat with pellets, the behavior of bar-pushing will pop right back into existence, much more quickly than it took for the rat to learn the behavior the first time. This is because the return of the reinforcer takes place in the context of a reinforcement history that goes all the way back to the very first time the rat was reinforced for pushing on the bar!

Schedules of reinforcement

Skinner likes to tell about how he accidentally -- i.e. operantly -- came across his various discoveries. For example, he talks about running low on food pellets in the middle of a study. Now, these were the days before Purina rat chow and the like, so Skinner had to make his own rat pellets, a slow and tedious task. So he decided to reduce the number of reinforcements he gave his rats for whatever behavior he was trying to condition, and, lo and behold, the rats kept up their operant behaviors, and at a stable rate, no less. This is how Skinner discovered schedules of reinforcement!

Continuous reinforcement is the original scenario: Every time that the rat does the behavior (such as pedal-pushing), he gets a rat goodie.

The fixed ratio schedule was the first one Skinner discovered: If the rat presses the pedal three times, say, he gets a goodie. Or five times. Or twenty times. Or x times. There is a fixed ratio between behaviors and reinforcers: 3 to 1, 5 to 1, 20 to 1, etc. This is a little like piece rate in the clothing manufacturing industry: You get paid so much for so many shirts.

The fixed interval schedule uses a timing device of some sort. If the rat presses the bar at least once during a particular stretch of time (say 20 seconds), then he gets a goodie. If he fails to do so, he doesnt get a goodie. But even if he hits that bar a hundred times during that 20 seconds, he still only gets one goodie! One strange thing that happens is that the rats tend to pace themselves: They slow down the rate of their behavior right after the reinforcer, and speed up when the time for it gets close.

Skinner also looked at variable schedules. Variable ratio means you change the x each time -- first it takes 3 presses to get a goodie, then 10, then 1, then 7 and so on. Variable interval means you keep changing the time period -- first 20 seconds, then 5, then 35, then 10 and so on.

In both cases, it keeps the rats on their rat toes. With the variable interval schedule, they no longer pace themselves, because they can no longer establish a rhythm between behavior and reward. Most importantly, these schedules are very resistant to extinction. It makes sense, if you think about it. If you havent gotten a reinforcer for a while, well, it could just be that you are at a particularly bad ratio or interval! Just one more bar press, maybe thisll be the one!_

And that's the basis of arguments between clicker trainers. It's not on YouTube so some of us wouldn't know how to find it.......

regards,

Austin


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - Cleo Greeting At Door


Remember what I said about other vids from leashedForLife no being on topic. This one isn't either. Lol.



leashedForLife said:


> 2 below are board-&-train
> 
> YouTube - Magnum Board and Train | German Shepherd Dog.m4v


This is an interesting video on several levels. Perhaps leashedForLife wants us to think that this dog was trained with the so−called "kinder gentler methods." We really don't know because no training is ever shown and there's no indication of it anywhere on the vid. But I'll make that assumption because that's been her position from the start. But if so, I think that the heeling shown is a good reason NOT TO USE THEM. It's VERY sloppy. 
1:36 the dog forges. 
1:48 he lags. 
2:06 he forges. 
2:11 he forges so that he's almost a full body length out of position. 
2:18 the handler does an about turn and the dog is out of position by well over a body length! 2:30+ The dog's automatic sits at are verrrrry slow.

Then the video switches to a training class with other dogs being worked. At 3:20 we see a small white dog being corrected with a leash. AVERSIVES ARE SHOWN BEING USED!

3:58 the video shows us the dog greeting another dog and owner. The dog is displaying overt signs of avoidance and stress. His OB is also quite bad, indicating stress. He sits but nowhere near the correction position, instead he's as far away as he can get from the other dog and still be near a heel position. He purposefully LOOKS AWAY from the other dog and NEVER even glances at him. Classic avoidance!

4:10 the dog is shown on a down-stay while other dogs are worked around him. Look at the dog's ears while this is going on. CLASSIC STRESS! 
4:31 a small white dog is white around. Notice that the leash on this other dog is tight the whole time. 
4:43 the dog rears up as he's trying to get to another dog in the class. At 4:45 he's given a leash correction AN AVERSIVE to get his attention off that dog and back onto the handler.

Then there are some stills that show us nothing to do wit hthis topic. Then at 5:41 the dog is shown alongside a jogging handler. AGAIN, if this is the sort of result that we should aspire to, that these methods give us, I pity anyone who trains like this. The heeling is HORRIBLE. 
5:42 he's nearly 2' wide. 
5:44 he's lagging and as the scene fades out he's nearly 2' behind the handler. 
5:51 the handler slows and the dog is forging by nearly 1'.

There's more but this is getting boring and redundant.



leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - BellaBoardTrainMobileFormat.m4v


I didn't watch the second video, it's from the same trainer and there's no reason to believe that the work is going to be any better.

Want to see some GREAT heeling and other field work from a trainer who uses Ecollars? CLICK HERE


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

Earlier I wrote,


> If the issue is one of fear and most "aggression" is fear−based, then this solution may work. But if it's one of dominance or true aggression it won't. These are usually the dogs that I've seen behaviorists recommend be killed. The "shoving treats" methods just isn't going to work on those issues. My method, using the Ecollar works for all kinds of aggression and does not, as some like to say, inhibit any other behavior.


Rottiefan responds.


Rottiefan said:


> Sorry, but true aggression or 'dominance' aggression is an outdated theory.


What is outdated is the theory that dogs are constantly at war. Dominance affects every interaction between dogs and between dogs and humans. Usually aggression isn't necessary since most dogs are able to read body language very well.



Rottiefan said:


> Dogs don't show aggression to try and climb the social ladder.


They don't need to _"show aggression"_ to do this. A simple look, a glance, or an ear flick will say all that needs to be said. It's only when the subtle signs are ignored or challenged that aggression may occur.



Rottiefan said:


> The fact that people attribute dominance in interactions between dogs that don't know each other is too ridiculous for words.


Quite rarely it's dominance. Usually it's fear. People who don't know this really don't know much about such dogs. I spend most of my time with such dogs.



Rottiefan said:


> I would have to accuse you Lou of bunching R+ techniques and trainers into all one basket.


Isn't that what all of the anti−Ecollar folks here have done to those of us who use Ecollars?



Rottiefan said:


> Just because one method doesn't work, does not mean that there is no R+ that will work. We just need to find out what the is motivated by and how they best learn.


Fair enough. How many of these techniques and for how long a period of time do you think that an owner should try?



Rottiefan said:


> Just as aversives have a huge range or applications, functions, levels of discomfort and pain, R+ have many different applications too. *But it really takes creativity and enthusiasm at times * [Emphasis Added]


Something that many pet owners lack.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

Rottiefan said:


> Austin, I have never actually seen you post any research advocating the use of prong collars and why they do not cause pain or discomfort to a dog. I have though read quite a few against them. As I said to you on another thread, please indulge us in these studies.


The burden to show studies lies with those who claim that a pinch collar must cause pain or discomfort to show us such studies, not the other way round. It's ALWAYS been this way. The burden is on people who say that something exists or that something is happening.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

LuvMyDog_Worldwide said:


> I'd doubt anyone uses 100% aversive techniques, it's so impractical as to be a laughable notion.


It's not just _"impractical,"_ it's *impossible. * Just as it's impossible to train without them.



LuvMyDog_Worldwide said:


> On the other hand, using balanced techniques i.e. aversive and positive together relies heavily on giving praise. Who's to say the praise isn't the reward, does it have to be a food or a toy?


I know many dogs that are more motivated by praise than by food or a toy.



LuvMyDog_Worldwide said:


> Just think about this....where's the treat for a working sheepdog?


Ah now you're getting into one of my favorite topics. Using drive in training. The reward is that the dog gets to fulfill it's drive. Same as for a dog that loves to hunt, loves to bite, loves to chase a ball.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> definitely - YouTube - #1 Layla - modifying 'dog jumping up' behavior-session #1 of 6
> 
> Layla is an extremely-social, friendly Golden - who has hurt several adults pretty badly, since she does not 'only' jump-up,  she kinda tackles people - very hard-hitting dog!


Notice that even with two experienced trainers working on this issue at only 17 seconds into the video, they make a mistake. How many times will the average pet owner (whatever that means) make this mistake (or one like it), setting training back each time?

Jumping ahead to  Video #6, the last in this series we see the dog out on the street when suddenly a bunch of people appear, some (maybe all) of whom are known to the dog and lo and behold she does not jump. Now notice that the owner is holding the dog's attention by SHOVING TREATS DOWN IT'S THROAT. And this is after SIX WEEKS OF TRAINING. If you folks consider that a "trained dog" ...........



leashedForLife said:


> * no dog-toes were trodden on * no human-knee bumped, pushed, hit, etc, her k9-chest * no scolding, pushing, smacking [however gentle] * no startling to make the dog jump back or freeze at a distance


* But there are PLENTY OF AVERSIVES being used. *


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> STUDY: physiological effects of shock-collars [sponsored by a manufacturer of same] http://www.petsafe.net/outreach/white_paper.pdf


Your link is dead. At least it does not work for me. I've obtained permission to put the whitepaper on my website. CLICK HERE

It says such things as (Emphases in the following quotes are mine)


> In 2003 a team led by Janet Steiss, D.V.M, PhD, of the Tuskegee University College of Veterinary Medicine, conducted a 4-week study of adult shelter dogs physiological and behavioral responses to bark control collars.
> 
> Dogs were randomly assigned to either an electronic collar or the control group.
> 
> ...


And



> We recognize that older products were often unreliable and difficult to use humanely. But *we feel that new technology employed by responsible manufacturers has led to products that can be and are being used safely and effectively to preserve the safety and well-being of many dogs and strengthen the bond with their human companions. *− Randall Lockwood, PhD, Vice President for Research and Educational Outreach, The Humane Society of the United States.


And



> A team of Norwegian researchers conducted a two year study of the effect of electronic training devices on 114 hunting dogs, specifically breeds which exhibited a strong instinctive drive to kill sheep. A group of dogs was given a sheep confrontation test in the first year: they received an electronic stimulation for predatory behavior if they wandered within two meters of a sheep.
> 
> In the second year of identical testing on the same group, the dogs showed weakened, delayed, and hesitant behavior, indicating that a) learning had taken place; and b) behavior modification learned previously was retained by the dogs over a relatively long period of time. * Only one of the 114 dogs that received electronic stimulations the first year required it the second year. *


How many times have we been told that Ecollars are only a _"quick fix?"_



> The researchers F.O. Christiansen, M. Bakken and B.O. Braastad, concluded that *aversive conditioning with the use of electonic dog collars may be an efficient method for reducing the probability of a dog chasing or attacking grazing sheep. And from a psychological standpoint, the dogs owners reported no negative effect on the dogs behavior during the year ensuing electronic treatment. *


There's also a graph shows the relative power output of common electrical devices including the Ecollar, tummy exercisers, fence chargers and defibrillators.

The paper concludes with this


> Despite increased efforts by national and grassroots organizations to slow the growth of the unwanted animal population, the fact remains that a large percentage of dogs in shelters or roaming city streets are without a home because they failed to integrate successfully into family life. Veterinarians who proactively address behavioral issues with dog owners can help make significant reductions in the number of dogs that are sheltered or euthanized. * This paper indicates that the appropriate use of modern electronic training devices is a valuable tool for the majority of behavioral and containment issues that frustrate dog owners. *





leashedForLife said:


> STUDY: possible link between electronic confinement/shock fence systems & aggressive behavior: Can Aggression in Dogs Be Elicited Through the Use of Electronic Pet Containment Systems? - Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science


This requires registration and payment to read the study. I've read it before and *the method of obtaining honest data is extremely questionable. *The abstract tells us _" Data were collected from legal documents filed in personal injury lawsuits. Analysis of the findings show that all dogs lacked a marked history of aggressive responding, all were adult males."_

A pet owner who's being sued because his dog bit someone is not likely to be honest about previous incidents of aggression because they know that it will affect the outcome of a lawsuit.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> that's an undated testimonial, arlow  i've no idea when it was written, which date may differ from when it was posted. does this cast doubts on the previous post? does it refute it? i don't think so.


This certainly refutes it. The message that you posted from Vicki Magnus appears on another forum on 5-16-04. On 5-17-04, only ONE DAY LATER she wrote, * " ... this is only about No Limitations, not an indictment of ecollars." * 

That same day she also wrote, _"I have had some other ecollar trainers reach out to me and talk about how to actually train with an ecollar; I'll be visiting as many of them as I can."_ I was one of the "other trainers" that spoke with Vicki.

It's obvious that she DOES NOT oppose the proper use of Ecollars. But since you know her from another list it should be an easy job for you to ask her directly.

Vicki wrote this after attending Martin Deeley's "E-touch Course."


> This week I had the great privilege of attending Martin Deeley 's E- Touch Workshop. Martin is the most gifted trainer I have ever seen work a dog or teach a human, and through his wonderful tutelage *I got to see what an elegant communication tool the e-collar can be for training dogs. What I learned this week has forever changed my own training. *
> 
> Of course I can not do Martin's teaching justice here, but I can share that my big concern was understanding how the dog learns what the stim means. Martin clearly answered that question, (and all other questions), short explanations for the students who quickly grasped the concepts, more detailed and slower explanations for the much slower student (three guesses who that was).
> 
> ...


*

Vicki has also furthered her learning about the Ecollar when she attended the International School For Dog Trainers. She wrote,



I had such a wonderful time with Martin and I'd very much like to attend another E-Touch course  with Gina as well, no doubt in my mind

I could spend years with them and learn something new every day.

Vicki Magnus
Waldorf, Maryland [Emphasis Added]

Click to expand...




leashedForLife said:



here is her post on clicker-training, from Karen Pryor's website - What People Are Saying about Karen Pryor Clickertraining | Karen Pryor Clickertraining posted Aug. 1, 2006; over 2-years after the shock-seminar:

thus it should be obvious that she uses clicker-training,

Click to expand...

I don't recall anyone saying that Vicki does not use clickers. Has anyone? leashedForLife can you show us such a post? But it's just as obvious that she does not dislike Ecollars.



leashedForLife said:



but research indicates that's the least-stressful variation of its use in training.

Click to expand...

I've never seen such research. Can you show us some links that support this statement?



leashedForLife said:



since i don't have access to salivary cortisol, i use my eyes, ears & hands - pulse & respiration, drool, pupil size, posture, gait, body signals, lag, etc - to assess the dog i see, whether that's a photo, video, or flesh.

Click to expand...

Yamean like in your review of the Ecollar video showing the JRT feeling his first stim, where you told us of the many signs of stress the dog was feeling from the stim BEFORE the stim had been applied? Is that what you're referring to?

Or maybe it's the video from Ed Frawley where you insinuated that the dog's ears were down because of the aversive that had been used in his training? The one where it's clear that his ears were down because the strap and the lanyard were tickling his ears. BTW That's the same video where you completely missed that the dog moved from between Mr. Frawley's legs because he picked up a scent coming from off screen.*


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

YouTube - The Stinky Blog: The No Bark Collar

think Stinky will love his crate, after this?... [what will he classically associate with the crate? 
security? comfort? relaxation? a frozen stuffed Kong? a food-puzzle or chew-toy?... *Nope.*]


----------



## LuvMyDog_Worldwide (Apr 1, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - The Stinky Blog: The No Bark Collar
> 
> think Stinky will love his crate, after this?... [what will he classically associate with the crate?
> security? comfort? relaxation? a frozen stuffed Kong? a food-puzzle or chew-toy?... *Nope.*]


Does having a nervous handler affect the dogs behavior Terry? How do you explain this:

YouTube - What&#39;s New Scooby-Doo - Best Chase Scenes

It must be true, it is on YouTube after all....

regards,

Austin


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

YouTube - How to Use a Remote Collar Teddy's Story

with or without sound - Ur choice; or once each way. I recommend muted first, then with sound.


----------



## LuvMyDog_Worldwide (Apr 1, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - How to Use a Remote Collar Teddy's Story
> 
> with or without sound - Ur choice; or once each way. I recommend muted first, then with sound.


I recommend putting on the Wizard of Oz and muting the sound, then playing The Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon in sync. Do you actually have any original views? Maybe your own theory, in context, somewhere? Never been tempted to rely on your own ability to train a dog and share the experience? Full of talk, but no substance.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Shock Collars - The Shocking Truth | Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - The Stinky Blog: The No Bark Collar
> 
> think Stinky will love his crate, after this?... [what will he classically associate with the crate? security? comfort? relaxation? a frozen stuffed Kong? a food-puzzle or chew-toy?... *Nope.*]


The fact is that you have no idea if Stinky will make ANY of these associations, yet you pretend that you do! Because of the precise timing of the bark collar, dogs RARELY make the false associations you claim will happen. But since you seem to think that these things will happen please post a follow−up video that shows any of the things happening that you assert might.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> YouTube - How to Use a Remote Collar Teddy's Story


Thanks for posting this video. I was just about to. As you can see and as the video says, at about 1:40 she gets to the first level of stim that the dog can feel. You can clearly see him void his bladder and his bowels. Oh wait. No, you can't.

Notice that at about 1:50 (actually about five minutes into the session) you can still see that the dog is frantic and that he's pulling REALLY hard on the leash as he's walked about. Oh wait. No, you can't.

Notice that throughout the training session the dog is so intimidated and scared that you can see that his tail is tucked tightly against his belly. Oh wait. No, you can't.

At about 2:27 the video moves to the second session where she's combining treats and the Ecollar. Oh wait, I thought you couldn't do that!? The trainer has an Ecollar monitor (a noisemaker that tells you when she's pressing the button). His bladder and his bowel had been emptied earlier so if she didn't have that noisemaker you really couldn't tell. ROFL.

At 3:40 she moves into the dog's third session of the day. She walks him up to the same place near the kennel as before when he displayed the aggression and you can see that his aggression has become EVEN WORSE. Oh wait. No, it hasn't.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> Shock Collars - The Shocking Truth | Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors


Posting opinions from MORE people who don't understand modern use of modern Ecollars doesn't help your case; it hurts it. Do you have anything to say yourself or are _the next 7K _of your post going to be links?


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Articles: Why I REALLY Hate Electronic Shock (Invisible) Fences by Pamela Dennison at Positive Motivation Dog Training!


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> Articles: Why I REALLY Hate Electronic Shock (Invisible) Fences by Pamela Dennison at Positive Motivation Dog Training!


This article states,


> You have an electric fence and you dont see any outward sign that there is a problem. However, a cat wanders into your yard and while your dog respects the electric shock fence and stays in the yard, you come home to find a dead cat. *(Displaced aggression from the electric shock fence.) * [Emphasis Added]


Never mind that dogs have been chasing and killing cats since both were on the planet, this author KNOWS that it happened due to _"displaced aggression from the electric shock fence."_

This article also contains this bit of nonsense.


> You bring your dog inside and his electric collar is still on. Your dog walks past the microwave or other such appliance. *There have been cases where appliances have set the collars to shock the dogs. *[Emphasis Added]


It's an urban legend. Let's see if someone can show us either a firsthand experience or a link to a firsthand experience where this has happened.

More drivel and attempts to influence by fear. For some reason I thought that leashedForLife was above that. Now I know better.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Signs of Stress in Companion Animals


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> Signs of Stress in Companion Animals[/url]


This article says that these are signs of stress in dogs. Yet we all know that they are NOT NECESSARILY signs of stress. My comments are in blue.



> Panting and salivating
> Most dogs pant and salivate after exercise
> 
> Pacing
> ...


This list is quite incomplete. There are many other things that dog do that _may be _ signs of stress. Like this list they may also be signs of other things.

As Lindsay said about a study that used such signs as measure of stress levels in the dogs in the stud, *"The social behaviors that [are] used to judge that the dogs were under stress are ambiguous, and are displayed by dogs in a variety of situations, only some of which involve ... stress." *


----------



## Jasper's Bloke (Oct 30, 2009)

Lou Castle said:


> too stupid to even comment on


Would anyone like a nice cup of PG Tips? One lump or two?


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Dairy Cattle - Stray Voltage Problems in Livestock Production

In a dairy barn, '*stray voltage*' affects profitability of the herd, health & behavior of the cattle [mastitis-rates rise, 
water- & food-intake drops, milk-production falls & there are other indicators of stress: tail-sucking, fights, etc]. 
Stray Voltage has a threshold sensitivity of 0.4 to 2.4 volts & current as low as 1.0 to 6.0-mA AC-current 
[mA= MILLI-Amps - the scale is 1/1000-Amp, extremely tiny.]

This level of voltage & current is typically below any human-perception - sensitivity varies, but the lower end 
of what is perceptible by cattle is not human-perceptible.

Why do we [conveniently] assume that what we humans feel is what *dogs* feel? If cattle feel voltage 
& amperage we do not & cannot, isn't it *handy* that canines supposedly feel what we humans feel? 
IMO this is purely self-serving assumption, & dogs being stoic makes it a risky assumption.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> Dairy Cattle - Stray Voltage Problems in Livestock Production
> 
> In a dairy barn, '*stray voltage*' affects profitability of the herd, health & behavior of the cattle [mastitis-rates rise, water- & food-intake drops, milk-production falls & there are other indicators of stress: tail-sucking, fights, etc]. Stray Voltage has a threshold sensitivity of 0.4 to 2.4 volts & current as low as 1.0 to 6.0-mA AC-current [mA= MILLI-Amps - the scale is 1/1000-Amp, extremely tiny.]


I find hysterical the lengths some people will go to try and discredit Ecollars. This article on Stray Voltage affecting dairy cattle has nothing to do with Ecollars. The article tells us that "stray voltage" comes from _"Small electrical potentials or voltages between metal stabling and equipment, and floor surfaces."_

This kind of false logic pervades MANY arguments made against Ecollars, even if they have NOTHING to do with the situations under discussion. This is an example of a flawed argument that on its face may appear logical if one isn't thinking clearly. Here's another example Electricity can kill. Ecollars use electricity. Therefore, Ecollars can kill!

If there were any problems of this nature with Ecollars there'd be scientific studies done that show it. As always the burden to show something lies with the person making the claim that it exists.



leashedForLife said:


> Why do we [conveniently] assume that what we humans feel is what *dogs* feel? If cattle feel voltage & amperage we do not & cannot, isn't it *handy* that canines supposedly feel what we humans feel?


I love that the anti's pose so many straw man arguments. While some are fooled, most people can see right through them. LeashedForLife if you think that one of us has _"assumed that what we humans feel is what dogs feel."_ please show us those posts. We have made analogies but NO ONE has said or even hinted that what we humans feel is what dogs feel. We all know that when a dog feels pain that starts suddenly they do the same thing as every other animal on the planet. They move away from it as quickly as they can and they sometimes vocalize. I've posted many videos that show dogs being stimmed and often you can't tell when it's happening. When you can, as with the JRT feeling his first stim, he looks at the ground.

There have been dozens of studies done on Ecollars NOT ONE OF THEM has EVER shown the slightest bit of physical or mental damage that's due to the current from an Ecollar. Some of them hint at it even though their own studies do not support such a conclusion but not one of them has reached such a finding.


----------



## Guest (Apr 26, 2011)

Lou Castle said:


> I find hysterical the lengths some people will go to try and discredit Ecollars. This article on Stray Voltage affecting dairy cattle has nothing to do with Ecollars. The article tells us that "stray voltage" comes from _"Small electrical potentials or voltages between metal stabling and equipment, and floor surfaces."_
> 
> This kind of false logic pervades MANY arguments made against Ecollars, even if they have NOTHING to do with the situations under discussion. This is an example of a flawed argument that on its face may appear logical if one isn't thinking clearly. Here's another example Electricity can kill. Ecollars use electricity. Therefore, Ecollars can kill!
> 
> ...


Oh Dear! you do have a big ego don't you just! were you in the LAPD by any chance?


----------



## Corinthian (Oct 13, 2009)

Lou Castle said:


> I find hysterical the lengths some people will go to try and discredit Ecollars.


More hysterical, in a Pagliacci sort of way, is the length lazy trainers will go to justify their use of pain and their pain inducing tools.


----------



## Guest (Apr 26, 2011)

Lou Castle said:


> Posting opinions from MORE people who don't understand modern use of modern Ecollars doesn't help your case; it hurts it. Do you have anything to say yourself or are _the next 7K _of your post going to be links?


Leashed for life could teach you a thing or two about dog behaviour! You shoud take the time to read some of her posts! you may learn something!


----------



## Guest (Apr 26, 2011)

Corinthian said:


> More hysterical, in a Pagliacci sort of way, is the length lazy trainers will go to justify their use of pain and their pain inducing tools.


Genuine trainers may be insulted being compared to the likes of this one!


----------



## NicoleW (Aug 28, 2010)

It's a good job Duke is perfect


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

I have just spent half an hour with my newfie, Joshua, all 11 stone of him, sitting across my lap and having cuddles and kisses. The very idea of putting some barbaric collar on him that would give him a shock makes me shudder. Why would anyone want to destroy that trust he has in me?

I know Ferdie has his spirited ways, and that is more my fault than his, but he still walks nicely on a leash, sits and stays when he is told, never moves far away from me when we are out. He is 3 stone heavier than me, yet I can walk both of them round the streets with no fear that they are going to pull me over if they see another dog.

Yes, he is a counter surfer and an appalling thief, but I would rather put up with his little ways than hurt him. He certainly could be better trained, but not that way.


----------



## NicoleW (Aug 28, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Leashed for life could teach you a thing or two about dog behaviour! You shoud take the time to read some of her posts! you may learn something!


Leashed for life is a girl?!?!


----------



## Guest (Apr 26, 2011)

newfiesmum said:


> Yes, he is a counter surfer and an appalling thief, but I would rather put up with his little ways than hurt him. He certainly could be better trained, but not that way.


Same problems here mate! but at least they have NOT been zombiefied! they still retain their spirit!

These men who use these collars have not trained their dogs! They have violated them! Wouldn't spit on them if they were on fire myself! They are scum!


----------



## Guest (Apr 26, 2011)

NicoleW said:


> Leashed for life is a girl?!?!


Em! she were last time I looked
Her name is Terry!


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

NicoleW said:


> Leashed for life is a girl?!?!


Yes, it took me a while as well.


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

NicoleW said:


> Leashed for life is a girl?!?!


Hehe, it only clicked for me recently too!

I wonder what Terry has to say about this?


----------



## bird (Apr 2, 2009)

Corinthian said:


> More hysterical, in a Pagliacci sort of way, is the length lazy trainers will go to justify their use of pain and their pain inducing tools.


Exactamundo.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Leashed for life could teach you a thing or two about dog behaviour!
> You shoud take the time to read some of her posts! you may learn something!


aww, shucks, D-T...  thank U kindly, that's very sweet. i'm blushing! 
i just got in...


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Rottiefan said:


> I wonder what Terry has to say about this?


not much, most likely, :lol: my ignore-list has EXPLODED, i think it's 3x the size in just 2 days, ye gods - 
amazing. So 2/3 of the thread is invisible.  Saves my blood-pressure spiking, doncha know...


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Wouldn't spit on them if they were on fire myself!


:lol: :lol: made me laugh! i never heard that one before, GREAT image, thanks, D-T... tears in my eyes, oh my.


----------



## Guest (Apr 26, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> aww, shucks, D-T...  thank U kindly, that's very sweet. i'm blushing!
> i just got in...


you are welcome good lady!
Hate to see a good person with a great knowledge of canine behavior being shreeded by these amatuars!


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

NicoleW said:


> Leashed for life is a girl?!?!


:lol: sheesh, i KNOW it was a year or more ago, we had a chat about my gender... 
yes, i'm female, & i do know the difference, i grew-up on a farm; the birds & the bees chat? 
 it's a bit late, when U've been midwife to half-a-dozen species & record the sire, dam & date bred, 
to be having 'the talk' at 14 or 15-YO.

oh, & it's been over 30-years since i was a 'girl'.  woman, female, bitch, auntie - all of the above.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Oh Dear! you do have a big ego don't you just!


Nope. How is pointing out logically flawed arguments indicative of a "big ego?"



DoubleTrouble said:


> were you in the LAPD by any chance?


Nope.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

Corinthian said:


> More hysterical, in a Pagliacci sort of way, is the length lazy trainers will go to justify their use of pain and their pain inducing tools.


MORE rudeness and name calling. ANOTHER logically flawed argument. How typical of the anti−Ecollar crowd! ROFL

And BTW my methods don't use pain OR pain−inducing tools no matter how many times you say it.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Leashed for life could teach you a thing or two about dog behaviour!


I'm sure she could and I'd love to learn. But instead of having a conversation all she's doing is posting link after link of opinion pieces, MOST of which contain more misinformation, some of them outright lies.



DoubleTrouble said:


> You shoud take the time to read some of her posts! you may learn something!


*I'd LOVE to learn something. * I've read every one of her posts. Nothing new there.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

newfiesmum said:


> I have just spent half an hour with my newfie, Joshua, all 11 stone of him, sitting across my lap and having cuddles and kisses. The very idea of putting some barbaric collar on him that would give him a shock makes me shudder. Why would anyone want to destroy that trust he has in me?


Using an Ecollar *as you know how * there's no doubt that it's use might destroy your bond. But using it as I do, would INCREASE that bond. My clients tell me that their dogs have bonded with them better than ever before.



newfiesmum said:


> Yes, he is a counter surfer and an appalling thief, but I would rather put up with his little ways than hurt him. He certainly could be better trained, but not that way.


His _"little ways"_ may kill him someday.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 18, 2011)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Same problems here mate! but at least they have NOT been zombiefied! they still retain their spirit!


TELL ME WHERE THE ZOMBIE IS PLEASE.



DoubleTrouble said:


> These men who use these collars have not trained their dogs! They have violated them!


THIS DOG SURE LOOKS TRAINED TO ME Notice his joy and exuberance. Can you show me where the ZOMBIE is in this video please?

OTOH, HERE'S SOME REALLY GOOD CLICKER WORK And this is the dog's FOURTH LESSON! Notice how good a time the dog is having. Now compare it to the Ecollar work shown in the video just above.



DoubleTrouble said:


> Wouldn't spit on them if they were on fire myself! They are scum!


LOVE the name calling. Another illogical argument. You folks are only mediocre on the personal attacks compared to some other forums I've been on. But nice try! All you do with this is turn people against you. Keep it up.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

.

The long term zombiefying effects of ELECTRIC SHOCK COLLARS. The Zombie arises.

YouTube - E-Collar Trained Dog. Multiple Game Chase Recalls, Emergency Recall, Aggressive Incident Recall etc

.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

What to Look For in a Dog Trainer | Wooftown

notice the choke-chain, & more, it's a fine gauge: more slicing into skin, pulling hairs, etc, = more *ouch!*

thankfully, the copy is excellent. :thumbup: notice there is No Mention recommending shock-collars? 
or indeed, anything to cause pain, or the use of confrontation, coercion or flooding? 
the author didn't 'forget' them; they are not recommended because they are often counterproductive.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

How to Use a Remote Trainer for a Dog | eHow.com

BTW if U are on Facebook, there is an interesting discussion appended to this video-page.


----------



## Corinthian (Oct 13, 2009)

Lou Castle said:


> MORE rudeness and name calling. ANOTHER logically flawed argument. How typical of the anti−Ecollar crowd! ROFL
> 
> And BTW my methods don't use pain OR pain−inducing tools no matter how many times you say it.


What bothers me about people like you is the cowardice and intellectual dishonesty. You paint these techniques with euphemisms, minimizing, and lying about what you do. At least if you could admit to yourself that the stim from the e-collar hurts we could start having an honest discussion.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Corinthian said:


> You paint these techniques with euphemisms, minimizing, and lying about what you do.
> At least if you could admit to yourself that the stim from the e-collar hurts we could start having an honest discussion.


if it felt _"good"_ it would not be used as it is; the timing itself reveals the application.

one does not STIM *a-k-a* shock the dog after s/he does what we want... so it is not a reward. 
the button is pushed when the dog does something we do Not want - chases a bunny vs hunts up the bumper, 
barks at the passerby from the yard, etc.


----------

