# Dog Trainer Challenge - Win £35k to Rehab A Sheep Killing Dog



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Has anyone seen the latest dog news on FB? A challenge for FF trainers to showcase their skills at rehabbing a sheep killing/worrying dog & win £35k (or something like that!).

I think it's set by Larry Krohn, Danny Wells & James Penrith (with some others). It's supposed to show that ecollars (as these trainers use) are useful tools which if used considerately can be very effective. There was a poll a while back where DEFRA invited people to decide on banning these tools & although most people voted against a ban they are still considering one .... so why waste money on a poll if they didn't like the answer?!

Anyway whilst in some ways I support their challenge I think the tone of it is awful & just again creating or highlighting divides in the dog training community. I also can't see how this can work safely, but as the details regarding the challenge gave not been fully disclosed yet it's not something I can comment on.

Anyway the text below is from Danny Wells (one of the trainers involved) FB page as well as a link to it:

"Despite all the facts and the people voting against it, the Government still plan to push forward with a ban on electronic training aids. Claiming that, purely positive training methods work just as well.
Well, if they do - both myself and @jamiepenrith are putting up £2500 each to any force free dog trainer who can successfully rehabilitate a proven livestock killer!
That's 5k to simply train a dog with your proven methods. You own it to Dog owners across the world"

Unleashed - Danny Wells Dog Training | Facebook

It's been really interesting reading everyone's opinions on this whether I agree with them or not.

Anyway, I think Jo-Rosie summed it up much better than I can so here is here reply to someone asking about it on her page:

"So…it needs to be said. And after about 1000 tags it's looks like I will be the one to bloody say it.
About this 35k predation challenge…
Recap. Danny Wells and James Penrith offered £2500 each to the #ffofo purely positive etc trainer who would take this challenge and train a dog who had previously killed livestock to be safe around running livestock when the handler is absent.
It sounds like a foolish task but it actually comes from a sensible place. During 2020 in the United Kingdom, farm animals worth £1.3million were attacked - which was a 10% increase from 2019. This year there has already been a 50% rise in livestock worrying with an increasing number of attacks being made when the dog is not with a handler (has escaped from the garden or ran off on a walk). Whilst the National Farmers Union are fighting to increase the penalties, the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs are looking to ban the ecollar - a tool used prolifically by a section of our dog training industry who work specifically with livestock cases.
The challenge was set I think mostly because Danny and James constantly battle positive trainers saying "our way is better", and having seen this ban become likely, are probably worried about the impact it would have on both their business but also on their clients and their dogs.
Firstly, thanks for the tags and messages. I'm glad so many of you think I'm that good and that so many of you would choose to seek me out to represent. I am afraid though I can't be your hero. Instead, what I can do is just be súper súper honest.
So. Let's make something clear, whilst I believe there is a fair amount of mutual respect between myself and the guys putting this challenge out - I don't agree with the tone the challenge has been set to. It's not been communicated like a fair&square with clear parameters and most importantly, considering these guys so often preach about livestock welfare - where is the previous life and emotional well-being of the livestock in all this? As far as I can see they're set a challenge for the positive trainers who have been vocal in the ban - knowing failure is likely - but to the cost of the livestock. I don't really get why clear criteria hasn't been set and safety guidelines put into place so as ensure the welfare of the livestock…
But that's not why I won't be taking part. I won't be taking part because I THINK I WOULD FAIL.
You see, and I've said it many many times before to the dismay and often hatred of other trainers around me - I believe training without aversives has its limitations. I still don't choose to train with aversive tools. I don't use anything to knowingly scare or shock or hurt my dog in training - it's not my bag. But after acknowledging this limitation of the methods I do use at a predation seminar I was promptly removed from about 10 different force free groups and called out for not being force free. I had a well known trainer in America try to persuade rescue workers not to attend my seminar (free for them) because I wasn't force free. Ive actually had my name banned from a couple of groups and even been thrown out of a conference due to my belief system. But that is why I won't be participating. Because I actually think these guys have banged the nail on the head with the precision of the limitation of this method.
I could do a good job of teaching heel work through sheep. And a down stay. And probably recall from sheep (although this is where the predatory nature of the dog will start to impact my chosen methods). You see - this isn't proof that the methods I use aren't useful, fantastic and smart; that they don't teach lifesaving, slick and successful behaviours. This isn't proof that dogs trained without aversives have no control or no manners. It's simply a show of a limitation - which I have no problem acknowledging. And thus I don't, without using aversive methods, think that I could train an ex sheep killer to be safe when entering and being in a field without an owner present and with free access to running sheep.
I actually do think there is a much smarter way to train this that the ecollar though - and that's with esheep. We need someone to design some super realistic toy sheep that give out an electric shock like a fence. That way, irrespective of the method used to train the dogs, we could have esheep walks set up where people could proof and test their training safely. These esheep could be put out solo in the context of sheep or even as a rouge closer sheep in a flock or as an 'escapee' sheep. That's how I would rather deal with it that with the ecollar - I think it would be way smarter…less reliant on timing too and on the skill of owner as well as more likely to build an association but there you go, I'm sure I'll be strung up for even thinking of this idea too.
Anyhoo…needless to say I'll be waiting with baited breath to see all of those who kicked me out of groups and shouted me down swarm to this challenge to prove their point and earn 35k…and if they do it then hats off to them - I was wrong. But I'll be removing the tag from now on and I hope you all understand why - it's not something I have any interest in being a part of (plus 35k isn't enough to get me back over to old blighty) xxx peace and love
## Added info for clarity and to reduce repetition:
1. POINT OF THE SPECIFICS OF THE CHALLENGE
I CAN understand the reason they have set up the challenge as is. Essentially we have the upcoming ban of ecollars at the same time as the stats that show that the incidents of sheep attacks in the UK has increased and that around 75% of those are by dogs who have escaped and are out of control without an owner. Thus it does make sense to test the notion that there are other ways to train sheep aversion otherwise if, like in many countries, the law changes to euthanise dogs immediately for sheep worrying then it could be argued the ban on ecollars without exemption would kill a fair few dogs.
2. BUT CANT ALL DOGS BE MANAGED
I wish!!! When I was a legal expert the main job I had was to prove that if/when management failed in the future provisions were put in place to ensure the dog couldnt or didnt participate in the dangerous behaviour again. The problem is that management fails: leads break or are pulled out of peoples hands, dogs run from much further than owners expect, sheep escape and cows pop up unexpected and dogs escape. Thats just a fact of life. I dont use these tools but I want to be straight with everyone as to why Im talking about it.
3. ALTERNITIVES
I do want to also suggest (aside from my esheep idea which I really do think is a good one - and yes, I think if we used sheered sheep coats we could replicate smell and within the right context we could fool a dog -) that perhaps electric fences might be taken off the obstruction list (so long as safety handles are clear and available for people to use within a path) and thus it would facilitate farmers being better able to safely contain livestock.
I hope this challenge - if nothing else, might help us come together as a community to try and think of some different solutions to this age old but increasingly problematic issue rather than just fighting pointlessly.
4. WHAT DID THEY DO BEFORE SHOCK COLLARS WITH SHEEP KILLERS
When I was growing up in and around sheep since I was 6 and we moved to a sheep farming community and I lived at the farm - if a dog was known as a sheep worrying kind of guy they would bang him in a pen with a few aggressive ewes and a ram. He would come out battered, bruised and begging for mercy. It worked but it was horrible for everyone concerned.
5. LASTLY - WHAT DO I KNOW ABOUT THE CHALLENGE
I dont know much but Ive heard it is set to be a comparison (a balanced trainer trains to the same standard and is tested too) and that the sample will be matched dogs of the same breed etc, drawn. I have also heard the trainer should have around up to 6 weeks to train the dog and would be able to train every day.
Its such a hard one. What Im most frustrated about is the tone of the challenge because its been set in a way that just widens the"us" and "them" idea instead of pulling us together to find a solution to a possible welfare issue. This challenge wont prove one type of training is superior to another - it won't teach us anything new about dogs. It might help people understand onevery specific limitation to training without aversive tools which is v rarely needed - but hopefully instead it will just make us come up with a better alternative. xx"

Epic read as I wanted to get as much info included but what does everyone think?


----------



## Ian246 (Oct 27, 2018)

There’s a simple answer: don’t let your dog run free amongst livestock; keep it on a lead, if that’s what’s needed. No sheep worrying, no ‘need’ for an ecollar. (That’s not aimed at you, Cleo38, just a general comment.)


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Ian246 said:


> There's a simple answer: don't let your dog run free amongst livestock; keep it on a lead, if that's what's needed. No sheep worrying, no 'need' for an ecollar. (That's not aimed at you, Cleo38, just a general comment.)


That's fine for walking through fields of livestock, but that's often not the scenario.
When I lived as a tenant on a farm which included a couple of hundred sheep, the only incidents were when dogs had escaped from their gardens and got into the sheep fields. I remember a neighbour's young boxer had cleared their garden fence and was chasing the sheep (belonging to my landlord's brother) - I told him and he had words with the boxer's owner; the fence was raised. Another lurcher type came off a housing estate half a mile or so away.
And when I had just Ziggy, I took her for a walk along a narrow strip of shore without taking a lead with me. There had never been any livestock on it before, but on the way back I found a flock had escaped from their field on the land above, and were crowded on the shore. It was quite hard work getting her to walk to heel through and around them, waiting for some to move to get a clear path. I'm sure that she would have chased them if on her own.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Ian246 said:


> There's a simple answer: don't let your dog run free amongst livestock; keep it on a lead, if that's what's needed. No sheep worrying, no 'need' for an ecollar. (That's not aimed at you, Cleo38, just a general comment.)


With an added make sure that your dog can't escape the garden.
As for this "challenge" it's just ridiculous willy waving...especially when they should know that an ecollar isn't 100% guaranteed either...there is one story of someones dog being trained to stop chasing their horses...the dog did indeed stop chasing the owners horses, instead he went next door to chase the neighbours horses instead  The limitations of this "challenge" is ridiculous and brushes over the welfare of the poor sheep - the only way to test the challenge is to leave a known sheep killer around sheep WITHOUT the owner or any guidance.

I loved reading Jo-Rosies post...she summed it up perfectly for mw so I'll leave it there!
I do find it very telling that the loudest amongst the FF community seem to be very quiet and nothing from either camp to show how it's done...soooo!!! #shutupandtrain


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Ian246 said:


> There's a simple answer: don't let your dog run free amongst livestock; keep it on a lead, if that's what's needed. No sheep worrying, no 'need' for an ecollar. (That's not aimed at you, Cleo38, just a general comment.)


I think one of the trainers pointed out that in most cases the owner wasn't present as the dog had either escaped form home/car/etc or had run off (either chasing something else or whatever) then come across the sheep.

This was always my fear with my Roxy in her chasing days. Whilst she had never shown any interest in sheep I had concern that if she was in a heightened state of arousal after chasing wildlife (deer were her faves unfortunately) then if she came across livestock then she would.

I find this challenge interesting although as I said I think it could have been put out in a much much better way) as when i sough help from many force free trainers (& I hate that terminology btw!) I was told that of course Roxy could be 'cured' but not with an ecollar as it was in humane, would ruin my relationship with her, was abusive, etc. I did so much training, went on courses, read books, changed my methods, etc yet I knew Roxy would chase given a chance.

In the end I went to see the trainer I see now for IGP who did use ecollars occasionally for this 'problem' but he wasn't an expert (by his own admission). He was the only one who told me that he didn't believe Roxy could be cured but could be managed much better. Because she was a stressy dog he didn't advise using an ecollar but gave me a much better insight in to her behaviour & how to build on my relationship with her. I never looked back after that .....

Having said that I now know people who do use them & are very experienced so would definitely consider one now if either of my dogs showed any desire to start chasing the local wildlife. I think I should have that choice & do not see why some trainers can have such a huge influence on laws regarding these tools. The study that is often referred to about the 'ineffective' use of ecollars is terrible & should never be held up as 'proof' as it is so flawed.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

StormyThai said:


> With an added make sure that your dog can't escape the garden.
> As for this "challenge" it's just ridiculous willy waving...especially when they should know that an ecollar isn't 100% guaranteed either...there is one story of someones dog being trained to stop chasing their horses...the dog did indeed stop chasing the owners horses, instead he went next door to chase the neighbours horses instead  The limitations of this "challenge" is ridiculous and brushes over the welfare of the poor sheep - the only way to test the challenge is to leave a known sheep killer around sheep WITHOUT the owner or any guidance.
> 
> I loved reading Jo-Rosies post...she summed it up perfectly for mw so I'll leave it there!
> I do find it very telling that the loudest amongst the FF community seem to be very quiet and nothing from either camp to show how it's done...soooo!!! #shutupandtrain


Again I see their point, I think the challenge is ill thought our & definitely a dick waving contest in some ways 

But ..... In all my time of trying to address Roxy's chasing not one FF trainer was honest with me. All of them told me that if I kept attending their classes (& spending a bloody fortune on this!) then she would be cured or I wasn't doing the exercises correctly or go somewhere to train where there isn't any wildlife (really?!) .... not one of these trainers could prove to me that they had cured dogs & one even admitted that her own dogs chased 

I am so interested in a few of these FF trainers who are very vocal in their methodology yet have not responded to this. I agree that maybe it's the tone that some people don't want to get involved with it but at the same time I think discussions should be had as it is an important issue.

And I think when it comes to training, I love this ..... (stolen from The Canine Paradigm Discussion Group)


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

I think the e-sheep is a better idea.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

I am not sure how you could ever guarantee a dog was 'trained' not to chase sheep when no one was present. Even if a known chaser ended up fairly solid what happens if a sheep runs in front of the dog or the whole flock spook and run. How do you set it up to test it. The dog will know it is a set up and know there are people watching. I have nothing against the use of e collars when used for a genuine reason and with good timing - and with a dog that is not nervous but I dont see how this could work.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Link to FB with some of the trainers .... (1) Facebook

Text accompanying the video:

"Dog Trainers - A milestone for the industry
This is a REAL offer for skilled dog trainers
Currently at £38,000 ($52K USD) & growing, this is open to any credible, professional Force Free dog trainer.
The UK government is planning to ban the use of electric collars, despite their effectiveness in stopping dogs from attacking livestock. They've stated that Force Free (positive reinforcement based) training is as, or more effective without these tools, but this is not substantiated by the literature.
Can't afford the flight? Don't worry, Jonas Black has pledged to pay for it."


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Blitz said:


> I am not sure how you could ever guarantee a dog was 'trained' not to chase sheep when no one was present. Even if a known chaser ended up fairly solid what happens if a sheep runs in front of the dog or the whole flock spook and run. How do you set it up to test it. The dog will know it is a set up and know there are people watching. I have nothing against the use of e collars when used for a genuine reason and with good timing - and with a dog that is not nervous but I dont see how this could work.


Exactly! And dogs become collar aware so the dog would always have to wear the collar & even then am sure it would figure out pretty quickly that if the owner wasn't present it could do what it wanted.

As much as I don't like the way this has been presented I can sort of understand the frustration at some parts of the dog industry (& I mean on both sides) as there is such limited discussions between groups. Just because some people prefer to use tools does not mean they don't also use food/toys to train & are great trainers, & just because some people don't use certain tools does not mean they are pink & fluffy & their dogs are out of control.

I suppose with the almost certain ban of these collars it might mean more dogs are PTS (might!) & although I have seen these collars horribly misused I have also seen them used very effectively


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Lurcherlad said:


> I think the e-sheep is a better idea.


oh yes, a brilliant idea.


----------



## Twiggy (Jun 24, 2010)

Blitz said:


> I am not sure how you could ever guarantee a dog was 'trained' not to chase sheep when no one was present. Even if a known chaser ended up fairly solid what happens if a sheep runs in front of the dog or the whole flock spook and run. How do you set it up to test it. The dog will know it is a set up and know there are people watching. I have nothing against the use of e collars when used for a genuine reason and with good timing - and with a dog that is not nervous but I dont see how this could work.


We had a whole flock of sheep run through the obedience rings at Woburn Show one year (held in the grounds of Woburn Estate). As far as I can recollect none of the dogs chased the sheep but my sister's collie, plus another dog and handler who were trained in sheep work, managed to get them back in their field.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Twiggy said:


> We had a whole flock of sheep run through the obedience rings at Woburn Show one year (held in the grounds of Woburn Estate). As far as I can recollect none of the dogs chased the sheep but my sister's collie, plus another dog and handler who were trained in sheep work, managed to get them back in their field.


Wow, I'll bet that was amazing to watch!

I think it does depend on context & the emotional state of the dog. Roxy would never have bothered sheep (they didn't move in an exciting way as the deer did) but I have no doubt that if she was in a high state of arousal on encountering sheep then chances are she would have.

I have no worries with Archer at all, he simply isn't interested. Too ear;y to tell with Kato yet. he's not bene interested in any sheep we've seen so far but he's a very environmentally aware dog. really likes to take everything in whereas Archer barely notices the environment when he's out


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Someone I know used an e-collar on her dog to stop him chasing livestock. She lived near a town so the normal walks didn’t encounter livestock, but they liked to go into the countryside at the weekends and the dog would have to spend the entire walk on a lead in case of coming across animals in the fields. He could spot livestock in fields way off in the distance and would just go and nothing would stop him.
She was the type of person that really trained her dogs and did all sorts of extras like scent work and tracking. She went to trainers to try and stop the animal chasing and they did try putting him in with a ewe with a lamb and despite getting butted all over the place it didn’t stop him wanting to chase, I suspect he didn’t connect the two - a sheep in an enclosed pen and a flock of sheep roaming round a field.
In the end she decided to give an e-collar a try. The trainer showed he how to use it properly and then went out to a field of sheep to see what would happen. The collar gave a warning beep which was used twice, then if the dog still continued, then the shock was used. The dog stopped dead, then went to chase again. A beep followed up by a shock stopped him and he responded to calls to come back. After that he stopped chasing at the beep sound and eventually stopped altogether.
He only every had to be shocked once more during his life, but he always had to be wearing the collar as he knew what it did. They forgot once and he was off like a rocket once again.
I would have to be very pushed to consider using an e-collar, but I can understand why it was used in this case. The owner was trained properly in its use and didn’t abuse the dog with it. She only used it after all other avenues were explored.


----------



## Twiggy (Jun 24, 2010)

Cleo38 said:


> Wow, I'll bet that was amazing to watch!
> 
> I think it does depend on context & the emotional state of the dog. Roxy would never have bothered sheep (they didn't move in an exciting way as the deer did) but I have no doubt that if she was in a high state of arousal on encountering sheep then chances are she would have.
> 
> I have no worries with Archer at all, he simply isn't interested. Too ear;y to tell with Kato yet. he's not bene interested in any sheep we've seen so far but he's a very environmentally aware dog. really likes to take everything in whereas Archer barely notices the environment when he's out


It happened so quickly I don't think many of the dogs realised what they were. Quite lucky my sister was working Sammie (who competed in trials) at the time.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Twiggy said:


> It happened so quickly I don't think many of the dogs realised what they were. Quite lucky my sister was working Sammie (who competed in trials) at the time.


I remember when Archer was little & we were practicing a sit/stay at a distance. All of a sudden a herd of about 8 roe deer came racing a cross the field just meters from him. Despite them being so close he didn't even look at them as he knew I had his ball (his true love!) .... Roxy would have been off


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Well I was all excited about earning 35K until I read "without the owner present" yeah... got me there. 
As most of you know, Bates came to us as a confirmed chicken killer and killed several other smaller furries in his time. I got him to where he could recall of a live chase and he was safe around livestock as long as I was there. But if I'm not there, all bets are off.
Lunar was a confirmed goat killer, he was feeding himself for those months (years?) he was running feral. Once he had regular groceries at home he was fine but I don't doubt for a minute he would hunt what he could if he got hungry again.
Breez used to run behind the bush hog and catch the critters it stirred up. In her heyday she could chase down a rabbit and kill it before it had a chance to scream. She too could call off a live chase but I would never have trusted her if I wasn't there. 

Of the three, Breez would have responded well to ecollar training. The other two I don't think an ecollar would have made any difference. 
And that's what too many people don't want to admit. When ecollars work, they work really well, it doesn't have to be horrible for the dog, and people who use them aren't all monsters. 

Here's the thing. Dogs are as varied as us humans are and are motivated differently. 
Breez was a dog with a strong sense of bodily preservation. If something hurt, she wasn't going to do it again. Just like some humans, if something was unpleasant they're done with it. I'm not that type of human. Example: I ate spoiled melon yesterday. I ate more than one bite. The first bite was terrible but I tried another just to be sure, and then one more from a different part of the container. Because I'm not easily deterred from food. If that had been a food I don't like I would have stopped, but I really like melon and I kept looking for a bite that tasted okay. And if you're rolling your eyes at me about my stupidity, ask yourself how many times you've burned the roof of your mouth eating pizza because you couldn't wait for it to cool off.

Bates and Lunar were not that type of dog either. Bates simply didn't care if something hurt or was unpleasant. He was the kind of dog who said "Oh shit that hurt" and then gritted his teeth and pushed on. Lunar learned to avoid the unpleasant but still get what he wanted. 
And when you think about true predators, it makes sense. The wolf who's easily deterred from a chase by a hoof or horn isn't going to live very long. They learn to either not care or take care, or both. 

A dog who is highly motivated to chase can *usually* be highly motivated to do other things that might trump the chase. And if you can do that, you don't need aversives. 
A dog who is easily deterred even from something they like (like Breez was) is also going to be easily deterred from wanting to work with you. So while the ecollar could work really well, it could also back-fire and you could lose motivation for you - don't think for a minute dogs don't know who's making that shock happen, no matter how slick you think you're being about it. 

And I still don't know how even when an ecollar is a good choice for that dog/owner pair, how you could make it work when the owner is not present. I'm willing to learn though. If for no other reason than it might give me good insight in to how to do it without an ecollar as well. 

I'm definitely tired of this divide in training. Why can't we just champion good training? Good training is good training and we would be so much more productive learning from each other instead of trying to best eachother and tear each other down.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> A dog who is highly motivated to chase can *usually* be highly motivated to do other things that might trump the chase. And if you can do that, you don't need aversives.





O2.0 said:


> I'm definitely tired of this divide in training. Why can't we just champion good training? Good training is good training and we would be so much more productive learning from each other instead of trying to best eachother and tear each other down.


I agree with most of your points but the top one is something that I still can't really say I find is true (based purely on dogs I have met btw & I am not a dog trainer!). I train with some very high drive, high prey orientated dogs. Dogs who are ball obsessed, etc as high toy motivation in training is very desirable in dog sports yet some of these dogs would still chase wildlife if they can.

My Archer, again another high drive, high prey orientated dog does not.chase & never has. I worked really hard on this but if I am truly honest I do not think it is all down to my training. I think it's a combination of training, genetics, timing (maybe he was so unaware of his environment initially he didn't notice wildlife in a developmental stage), & bloody luck!

I am nowhere near as skilled as some trainers I see yet they are not able to stop their dogs from chasing & will either manage it or some will use an ecollar to resolve it.

An d the bottom statement ....... yes! Good training is good training, I watch alot of Ivan Balabanov's stuff (he uses an ecollar) & love his training videos & the relationship he has with his dogs. He is observant, considerate, fair & very in tune with them which IMO makes up a great trainer.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

Siskin said:


> Someone I know used an e-collar on her dog to stop him chasing livestock. She lived near a town so the normal walks didn't encounter livestock, but they liked to go into the countryside at the weekends and the dog would have to spend the entire walk on a lead in case of coming across animals in the fields. He could spot livestock in fields way off in the distance and would just go and nothing would stop him.
> She was the type of person that really trained her dogs and did all sorts of extras like scent work and tracking. She went to trainers to try and stop the animal chasing and they did try putting him in with a ewe with a lamb and despite getting butted all over the place it didn't stop him wanting to chase, I suspect he didn't connect the two - a sheep in an enclosed pen and a flock of sheep roaming round a field.
> In the end she decided to give an e-collar a try. The trainer showed he how to use it properly and then went out to a field of sheep to see what would happen. The collar gave a warning beep which was used twice, then if the dog still continued, then the shock was used. The dog stopped dead, then went to chase again. A beep followed up by a shock stopped him and he responded to calls to come back. After that he stopped chasing at the beep sound and eventually stopped altogether.
> He only every had to be shocked once more during his life, but he always had to be wearing the collar as he knew what it did. They forgot once and he was off like a rocket once again.
> I would have to be very pushed to consider using an e-collar, but I can understand why it was used in this case. The owner was trained properly in its use and didn't abuse the dog with it. She only used it after all other avenues were explored.


But in the wrong hands …..

That's the issue.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Lurcherlad said:


> But in the wrong hands …..
> 
> That's the issue.


But then I think the sort of person who would misuse them & not consider (or care about) the dog would be abusive/unskilled as a trainer anyway. I HATE seeing people giving heavy lead correction. It makes my stomach turn as the damage that can be done to a dog's neck is immense yet some people don't have a problem with that yet a stimulus from an ecollar is seen as inhumane.

I don't know what the answer is but IMO education is much better than banning things, people will still use them but just won't be honest about them. At a recent seminar with Trevor Cooper he seemed to think that although the law will prevent the use of these collars it wont be illegal to buy them.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Cleo38 said:


> I agree with most of your points but the top one is something that I still can't really say I find is true (based purely on dogs I have met btw & I am not a dog trainer!). I train with some very high drive, high prey orientated dogs. Dogs who are ball obsessed, etc as high toy motivation in training is very desirable in dog sports yet some of these dogs would still chase wildlife if they can.


I guess I should have said, dogs who are already easy to motivate, it's easier to redirect that motivation. 
For me at least it's easier to work with a really drivey dog than a more "I don't really care" dog. Lunar was not high drive at all. It took me over a year to get even a semblance of a recall on him. If he were committed to chasing I don't think I could have done anything about it. With an ecollar either. He would have told me to f-off and that would have been it. 
Penny OTOH is pretty drivey and it hasn't been hard to get her excited about coming to me. She will still take off after things, but she is also quick to come back to me pumped and excited to 'tell' me about her chase. That's a lot easier to work with IMO.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> I guess I should have said, dogs who are already easy to motivate, it's easier to redirect that motivation.
> For me at least it's easier to work with a really drivey dog than a more "I don't really care" dog. Lunar was not high drive at all. It took me over a year to get even a semblance of a recall on him. If he were committed to chasing I don't think I could have done anything about it. With an ecollar either. He would have told me to f-off and that would have been it.
> Penny OTOH is pretty drivey and it hasn't been hard to get her excited about coming to me. She will still take off after things, but she is also quick to come back to me pumped and excited to 'tell' me about her chase. That's a lot easier to work with IMO.


Oh 100%!!! Archer is super motivated. Everything is amazing, everything is a toy, he loves being with me, loves training, he was born wanting to work with me...... Kato is the complete opposite!   

With Kato I have had to work so bloody hard to gain any interest. I think he might have been a cat in a previous life as some days he will be super motivated by a toy so the next day I get very excited & get the toy out which he then looks at like I'm waving a sh*t at him!!! He has been a very independent pup since day 1 (most of his litter went in to the police which they are very suited to, far more so than sport). He has never needed me like Archer has & I have had to completely re-think my training with him.

But I still think even super motivated dogs there is this switch almost where if it has been triggered is so difficult to ever turn off or modify. And I mean by good trainers not by me.

With Kato I am working hard on the premise that he will be a chaser (his dad is with deer ..... it's Roxy all over again!!! :Jawdrop). I am working hard on this & trying to be really thoughtful about scenarios & set ups. he's been great so far but because of this independent streak I will always have to work harder than with Archer.

Some days I feel like :Banghead:Banghead:Banghead:Bawling:Bawling:Bawling with him but when we do have a really good session it's an amazing feeling


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Cleo38 said:


> But I still think even super motivated dogs there is this switch almost where if it has been triggered is so difficult to ever turn off or modify. And I mean by good trainers not by me.


My last two chasers I didn't have the luxury of starting them out as puppies. I think if I had had Bates as a puppy he would be like Archer, all about me and not interested in the environment, but he had nearly a year of figuring out ways to entertain himself and yes, once that's there, it never goes away. He was very biddable and trainable but I never undid his desire to kill things. In fact one time, he was on a leash, right next to me, and a bunny crossed the path right in front of us. He chomped that bunny before I even knew what had happened. By the time I figured out what had happened and said drop, the bunny was dead. He happily dropped as soon as I said it but there is no way I could have stopped him. Obviously he smelled the bunny was there and was ready for him. I'm not clever enough to train for that. Another time he killed a skunk, while on leash, and barely broke stride. 

Penny hasn't killed anything that I know of but she is a committed chaser. I know I've mentioned "Hunting Together" and I really rate it. Right now we're at the point that on her own she will break the chase and come back to me which is further than I ever got with Bates. With him I always had to call him back otherwise he would keep going either until he caught and killed or the prey got away.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> My last two chasers I didn't have the luxury of starting them out as puppies. I think if I had had Bates as a puppy he would be like Archer, all about me and not interested in the environment, but he had nearly a year of figuring out ways to entertain himself and yes, once that's there, it never goes away. He was very biddable and trainable but I never undid his desire to kill things. In fact one time, he was on a leash, right next to me, and a bunny crossed the path right in front of us. He chomped that bunny before I even knew what had happened. By the time I figured out what had happened and said drop, the bunny was dead. He happily dropped as soon as I said it but there is no way I could have stopped him. Obviously he smelled the bunny was there and was ready for him. I'm not clever enough to train for that. Another time he killed a skunk, while on leash, and barely broke stride.
> 
> Penny hasn't killed anything that I know of but she is a committed chaser. I know I've mentioned "Hunting Together" and I really rate it. Right now we're at the point that on her own she will break the chase and come back to me which is further than I ever got with Bates. With him I always had to call him back otherwise he would keep going either until he caught and killed or the prey got away.


I must get that book as I think it sounds like it would be very beneficial to me & Kato. He loves us working together when out; splashing in puddles, digging up mole hills, running through long grass, etc, Some of my friends with young dogs of the same age have amazing obedience already yet Kato & I are still mucking about ..... such different dogs & different considerations. As frustrating as it can be domes days I love it, I love trying to find out what makes him tick, I love having to re-think thins. Hard work but rewarding when it comes good.

It will be interesting to see how some trainers looks at this. Funny how some are very vocal & now very quiet! The image I posted as funny as it is does have a point (for me anyway). So many people are quick to spout off, criticize others, tell them they are wrong & insist they are right, some hide behind their degrees, etc & never actually do much practical dog training so ... show me your dog!


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Cleo38 said:


> Oh 100%!!! Archer is super motivated. Everything is amazing, everything is a toy, he loves being with me, loves training, he was born wanting to work with me...... Kato is the complete opposite!
> 
> *With Kato I have had to work so bloody hard to gain any interest*. I think he might have been a cat in a previous life as some days he will be super motivated by a toy so the next day I get very excited & get the toy out which he then looks at like I'm waving a sh*t at him!!! He has been a very independent pup since day 1 (most of his litter went in to the police which they are very suited to, far more so than sport). He has never needed me like Archer has & I have had to completely re-think my training with him.
> 
> ...


I feel your frustration. I've resigned myself to the fact that Echo is a chaser & she is highly unlikely to ever be a dog I can walk offlead, although stopping her lunging at cars has been a good boost for me as she was a bugger for it.

I'm finding it very hard to make myself interesting enough to gain & keep her attention when we're out, I do wonder how much she was actually exposed to in her first 6 months to make even a leaf dropping in front of us more exciting than me, the Holy Purveyor of Treats!

I do hold out some hope though as Rogue used to be very interested in sheep (& everything else) but she can walk past the field of them near us now & doesn't even glance at them, she comes in for a close heel (she's onlead anyway but allowed free rein on its full length during that bit of the walk) as she knows that's what's expected of her.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

*Thinks of the cats around here. Thinks of Milly. Thinks of open door and me not being there to stop her.*

Yeah. That wouldn't end well for the cats.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

simplysardonic said:


> I feel your frustration. I've resigned myself to the fact that Echo is a chaser & she is highly unlikely to ever be a dog I can walk offlead, although stopping her lunging at cars has been a good boost for me as she was a bugger for it.
> 
> I'm finding it very hard to make myself interesting enough to gain & keep her attention when we're out, I do wonder how much she was actually exposed to in her first 6 months to make even a leaf dropping in front of us more exciting than me, the Holy Purveyor of Treats!
> 
> I do hold out some hope though as Rogue used to be very interested in sheep (& everything else) but she can walk past the field of them near us now & doesn't even glance at them, she comes in for a close heel (she's onlead anyway but allowed free rein on its full length during that bit of the walk) as she knows that's what's expected of her.


I don't know but Kato was exposed to lots & he is still very interested. He likes to know what's going on in his surroundings & then will work. He is very confident so it's not due to stress but he likes to check things out. Archer couldn't give a stuff; as long as I am there with his ball then we could be anywhere.

With Kato we used to do alot of focus stuff but I have eased off massively lately & let him be more independent now. With some stuff he knows; eye contact then we can both run other to the object of interest & investigate but sometimes not & he has to learn to cope .Although focus & engagement are important to me I sort of felt I was trying to make him be something he wasn't if that makes sense. Now I am doing more scentwork stuff where he is working more independently & he loves this so am going to purse this more than formal obedience exercises..

He's just been great. Some training over the local leisure centre where there are lots of rowdy school kids. He watched them but then we do some focus work, then he can watch again.

He's just so very different to Archer & I have to accept that & adjust accordingly.


----------



## Rottsmum (Aug 26, 2011)

Interesting debate, I've been over on FB reading the comments. I agree with @Blitz , whilst I am all for positive, reward based training, I do think that there are certain circumstances where e-collars have their place.

My dad got a dog a few years ago from the Dogs trust, a mixed breed JRT x Staff by the look of him who had a habit of dashing at traffic and other dogs. He had been in and out of the DT 3 times because of this because he nearly killed himself and caused accidents multiple times, not to mention the distress to whoever was walking him and the owners of the other dogs/ drivers. He also chased livestock and was nearly shot a couple of times and as they lived in a rural location surrounded by fields of sheep this was far from ideal.

My dad and his partner spent a fortune on behaviour modification to no avail and ended up living with a Fort Knox type environment and seriously considered returning him to the rescue. Eventually a local person that they knew who trained gundogs suggested an E-collar and offered to assist them with it's use and it worked. I can honestly say that the dog now has a better quality of life because of it and he doesn't need to have the collar on all the time. I think if used correctly with correct timing they can be a useful tool in situations where it's a life or death situation.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

It might have been posted here previously ut here is the study that DEFRA has referred to regarding the proposed ban. The argument is that this study is seriously flawed (IMO it is) yet is considered conclusive 'proof' that these collars cause stress & are ineffective:

Frontiers | Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars vs. a Focus on Positive Reinforcement | Veterinary Science (frontiersin.org)

Another study which I have added a link to as Jo-Rosie discusses this in detail on her FB page (I will add her text below as some don't have access to FB) which is very interesting & I thought others may not have seen this:

The Welfare Consequences and Efficacy of Training Pet Dogs with Remote Electronic Training Collars in Comparison to Reward Based Training (nih.gov)

"So here is the comment you guys all wanted me to share...
It's hard to review evidence when you have a particular bias and as someone who DOES NOT use shock collars it's super important I combat my bias against them by being especially critical and playing devils advocate when I review research with these kinds of conveyed outcomes.
The study is an analysis of videos from another study carried out in 2010 published in 2014 where 63 dogs were trained to recall and to sit. (This can be found here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4153538/#__ffn_sectitle - and a full review of this and a couple of other relevant studies will be undertaken and added as an update to Learning Theory module in The Puppy Lab shortly).
Group one trained by ecollar trainers. Group 2 was trained by the ecollar trainers but not using ecollars. Group 3 was APDT trainers opposed to the ecollar. Dogs came in for livestock chasing OR basic recall OR dog-dog aggression.
They tested over 5 days and used data from day 1, 3 and 5.
They measured:
- How many times the trainer said sit or come per session
- How many hand signals were given per session
- How many times a lead signal (tug on the line) was given session
- How many times the dog responded to the first signal
- How many times the dog responded to multiple signals within 10s
- How many times the dog didn't obey within 10s
- How quickly the dogs responded when they did respond first time
And a few other things.
There are small 'typo' like examples of bias within the sample which are worthy of note only in that the bias seems to go one way and not the other - for example 85.7% of the dogs in group 1 had chasing issues whereas only 76% of the group 3 had chasing issues. Dogs who only had poor recall without chasing issues only represented 4.8% of group 1 but dogs who didn't have very good recall but also didn't have chasing issues represented 14.2% of group 3. Additionally 9.5% of group 1 was made up of dogs with dog aggression whereas there was only 4.8% of these dogs in group 3.
Essentially I'm sure we would all agree dog aggression and chasing are significantly more harder issue to tackle than poor recall. Group 3 thus certainly seemed to have an easier training cohort than Group 1.
Additionally there were clear environmental bias too and again, this went against Groups 1 and 2. Infact there are so many problems with the environmental set up that variables which could have effected the behaviour of the dogs and the training outcomes are pretty overwhelming to anyone who has actually trained in severe weather conditions will tell you.
Group 1 and 2 was carried out at the height of winter in Scotland on a working farm with sheep and penned chickens. The weather was so severe the dogs had to be moved to a NEW environment in the farms yard with new animals or recently transported sheep and chickens in the yard. Group 3 training was held at a training centre with good weather in the field with sheep and chickens penned. We ALL understand the effect of temperature as well as rain on our dogs and on our training. But moreover changing the environment or targets in a livestock case is a massive change and would have huge implications on a training program especially as the dogs only go two 15 minute sessions 2x a day. Changing your training location or livestock in a livestock chasing case should only happen during the later proofing stage of training after the animals have established the behaviour well. Would you be happy if you were being compared to Group 3 and you were the trainer of Group 1?
Group 1 (ecollar trainers) also were asked not to use the sound device in the experiment. In the preliminary study a method used was to train a conditioned avoidance response (if you don't know this method please see The Learning Theory module in The Puppy Lab). Without the sound arguably this method would not be as effective. The sound on the collar can be invaluable with this method of ecollar training as it relies on the dog using the sound cue to learn to avoid the ecollar. They allowed Group 3 to train as they usually would without restriction.
A HUGE problem with this experiment was also the lack of goal consistency. Let me explain. Let's say me and you are both being compared on our ability to modify the behaviour of two sheep chasing Malinois. I train my Malinois to come back when I say come if he is on a long line 2m from me. You train your Malinois to move around the field without chasing the livestock so that eventually the Malinois can exist around the sheep without chasing them and without the need for a recall. Which training outcome is more useful in a livestock chasing case case? There was no goal setting in this experiment. That means that by the metrics used in this study, the training of my dog who can come away from sheep at a distance when asked would be considered much more effective than your dog who can now be around sheep off lead. This shows a lack of understanding regarding the way the ecollar is used in many livestock chasing cases. One of the reasons that ecollar trainers tout their efficacy in these cases is that the dogs can be trained to exist around the livestock without training and so recall becomes unnecessary. With this in mind this experimental design does not test the ecollar on the merits for which trainers suggest in these cases at all.
Even when you remove this and, let's say that the researchers specifically told the trainers what they were being compared on (which they weren't as this data was collected off the back of a different study down a decade ago).
Let's say we were both told "we are rating both groups on their ability to teach the dogs to recall on the word 'come'".
So we go and train our dogs. My dog gets to the point by day 5 where I'm allowing him to walk right up and around the sheep. I call and my dog stands right next to the sheep and stops...makes the decision to listen to me and he recalls from the group of sheep. His long line is dropped and he's a fair distance from me during this.
On the other hand you've conditioned your verbal cue and your dog comes when you say come away from the livestock. You're not close to the sheep yet although the dog does manage around the chickens at a distance with you holding the long line. In your day 5 training you're practicing holding the long line with the dog 10m from the chicken. You allow your dog to look at the chickens for a second, then recall. The dog turns and comes to you straight away.
Whose training has been more effective? My dog whose recalling off sheep with the line dropped or yours whose recalling at a distance from chickens while you hold the line?
In this experiment variables such as exposure to the prey in the chasing cases or exposure and distance from dogs in dog aggression were not in anyway taken into consideration. In that way the experience would have been more valid if they had just trained dogs recall totally away from livestock - except this wouldn't have tested ecollar trainers who would have possibly used the same techniques as the +R cases for that.
With that in mind it's a bit like comparing you and that trainer you don't like down the road and suggesting that he is better at training loose lead walking than you because the dogs he trained gave more eye contact in a training session. Or because they sat more. It's a shame but without giving the goal of training any consideration and without measuring metrics that relate to successful training in this context AND without actually looking at the systems the trainers are using to train the recall it's impossible to gain any interesting insight from this 2020 study.
Additionally the majority of modern shock collar trainers I know or train with (I train protection and I train 'positively' without shock or prong but I have and do train alongside and am friends with others who don't) would usually training train the initial phase of training just using treats anyway. And this brings me to the most important illustration this research draws. Lack of application. This appears to stem from a narrow or lack of practical experience from the researchers or inclusion of research method analysis delivered by people with practical experience and understanding of research methods but also of training methods. This is an example of researchers delivering seemingly simple and good research without the input of anyone who actually understands the actual training upon their methods of research.
I don't like outdated or ineffective or cruel training methods. But I really don't like invalid scientific studies painted and put out as though we've learnt something new or useful.
Ps) I would massively love it if you could tag me or SOCs in any shares so I can respond to scrutiny (of scrutiny)
Pps) As an industry let us unite on two things: Firstly, science needs to be scrutinised if we are to be evidence-based professionals, which we should all commit to being. Secondly, skilled training will lead to better trained dogs and less ethical and welfare concerns than shit training. Full stop. Let's unite on that, let's all try and be evidence-based and commit to becoming skilful - everything else should be debated over a pint at the pub..."


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

It is very frustrating when the general public get hold of an idea stemming from a flawed study to hold up as their undeniable truth...the only thing that should come from these studies is that it needs to be studied more, with larger sample sizes and fair testing.
But when you desperately want to find something to back up your opinion then it is possible, especially when many people don't know how to read a study and hold science up as the be all and end all - science changes with new evidence and better studies...unfortunately people only tend to follow the opinion that they agree with


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

StormyThai said:


> It is very frustrating when the general public get hold of an idea stemming from a flawed study to hold up as their undeniable truth...the only thing that should come from these studies is that it needs to be studied more, with larger sample sizes and fair testing.
> But when you desperately want to find something to back up your opinion then it is possible, especially when many people don't know how to read a study and hold science up as the be all and end all - science changes with new evidence and better studies...unfortunately people only tend to follow the opinion that they agree with


Exactly & that's why I thought that JR's post was very informative.

Ivan Balabanov also discussed the DEFRA study on a live a while ago which was interesting.


----------



## amplecrumlin (Oct 16, 2017)

The way that the challenge has been issued, implies that e-collars are 100% effective in 100% of cases, and totally proven, but I find it hard to believe that.

It has certainly made me a lot more curious about the details of how they are used - can anyone provide a comprehensive explanation of protocols? All I can find is either "they are barbaric and must be banned",
or "they aren't aversive, I don't even feel it when I put the collar on myself".

They aren't a tool that I ever expect to use, but they are something that I would like to understand.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

amplecrumlin said:


> The way that the challenge has been issued, implies that e-collars are 100% effective in 100% of cases, and totally proven, but I find it hard to believe that.
> 
> It has certainly made me a lot more curious about the details of how they are used - can anyone provide a comprehensive explanation of protocols? All I can find is either "they are barbaric and must be banned",
> or "they aren't aversive, I don't even feel it when I put the collar on myself".
> ...


There so many ways different trainers use ecollars from NePoPo (for formal obedience) to managing predatory chasing.

I am just about to go to bed but Ivan Balabanov had an interesting conversation with an eollcar trainer Larry krohn which is worth listening to (although quite a long one) but although Ivan grills him at times he never really answers how he uses one .... but then he will probably release a video of this for $200 

Training Without Conflict™ Podcast BONUS EPISODE: Ivan Balabanov and Larry Krohn E-Collar Debate - YouTube

There is probably some good content on The Canine Paradigm podcasts :

The Canine Paradigm - The Canine Paradigm

But then as an alternative Denise Fenzi is taking part in an online debate with an ecollar trainer (she doesn't use them) tomorrow which am really looking forward to listening to:

(1) Denise Fenzi | Facebook


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Not sure if anyone saw the discussion with Denise Fenzi regarding e-collar use in dog training but here is the link to it if anyone is interested .....Nino Drowaert on Instagram: "Positive training vs ecollar training live discussion"


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Cleo38 said:


> Not sure if anyone saw the discussion with Denise Fenzi regarding e-collar use in dog training but here is the link to it if anyone is interested .....Nino Drowaert on Instagram: "Positive training vs ecollar training live discussion"


I watched a little of it last night. 
Honestly, I thought Denise sounded sane, calm and totally reasonable and Nino kept trying to "yeah but" everything. It was good, but not as productive as I had hoped. Granted I didn't watch the whole thing, I'll try to finish tonight, maybe it got better


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> I watched a little of it last night.
> Honestly, I thought Denise sounded sane, calm and totally reasonable and Nino kept trying to "yeah but" everything. It was good, but not as productive as I had hoped. Granted I didn't watch the whole thing, I'll try to finish tonight, maybe it got better


I agree. I think he was interrupting alot & using analogies that maybe weren't completely relevant or correct ... but then maybe he isn't as well versed in this sort of media as she is (I honestly don't know much about him).

What I do think was good was the fact that two trainers were able to have a discussion about a very emotive tool in a reasonable way. Hopefully this will be the start!

I first started listening to Pat Stuart (of The Canine Paradigm) after hearing him on Nick Benger's podcast who is force-free (or that sort of thing. Pat has trained with Bart Bellon & uses NePoPo which is not my type of training at all but I found him interesting & engaging. So much so that I was booked on his course regarding this training system but it was cancelled due to Covid.

Edited to add: I think Nick got a lot of stick from regular subscribers to his podcast for talking to someone who did use certain tools despite it being really good listen. both men were considerate of each other yet did challenge as well which made for a good listen ... but some people didn't feel that any air space should be given to people who didn't conform to their way of thinking which i think was a great shame.


----------



## amplecrumlin (Oct 16, 2017)

Cleo38 said:


> There so many ways different trainers use ecollars from NePoPo (for formal obedience) to managing predatory chasing.
> 
> I am just about to go to bed but Ivan Balabanov had an interesting conversation with an eollcar trainer Larry krohn which is worth listening to (although quite a long one) but although Ivan grills him at times he never really answers how he uses one .... but then he will probably release a video of this for $200
> 
> ...


Thanks for the links; I did listen to the Drowaerts/Fenzi one, but it didn't really answer my questions about specifically how why and when that trainer uses an e-collar.
I wonder if a more formal debate format, with a clear motion, would be useful - it may be a less emotive way for the trainers to explain the use.

Clearly there are people who cannot justify their use under any circumstances, but all the rest cover a wide spectrum, from "they aren't aversive, when I use them" through "they can be aversive and it is justified on rare occasions" and "yes they are aversive but only very slightly, and learning with them can increase the animal's resilience, focus, problem-solving, and therefore confidence".
Then even among pro-collar trainers, the collar is only one factor, the other variables would include but are not limited to, the individual dog, the individual trainer, and the training goal.

I watched the first few minutes of the Balabanov/Krohn conversation then watched some of Krohn's clips on YouTube, I started with an open mind but was very discouraged when I watched his first session with a very sweet and compliant little poodle cross - it seemed like he was taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Personally, I'd be more open to e-collars if they weren't given such disingenuous names as "the mini educator" ; names like that make me feel like someone is going out of their way to be misleading.

Sorry, very long rambling post, I just wanted to acknowledge that you posted the links..


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

amplecrumlin said:


> Clearly there are people who cannot justify their use under any circumstances, but all the rest cover a wide spectrum, from "they aren't aversive, when I use them" through "they can be aversive and it is justified on rare occasions" and "yes they are aversive but only very slightly, and learning with them can increase the animal's resilience, focus, problem-solving, and therefore confidence".


In fairness the second that someone suggests that electronic stim collars are not aversive is the second that I switch off (I don't have the energy to argue these days)...for one....it's the dog that decides -always- and secondly if the stim collar was not aversive to that particular dog then it wouldn't work - and I'm only talking of electric stim here and not vibrate or beep collars because whilst they can be aversive to some dogs, they don't need or have to work as an aversive to have the desired effect.

Whilst I would not use an e-collar in the name of training, I am not totally against them, nor do I think that they are the spawn of Satan that some would like us to believe but if they do work they are an aversive tool...no if, ands or buts 

It's a shame that dog trainers can't sit down and have a reasoned debate about all this...but unfortunately it is a very emotive subject and both camps are not able to keep emotion out of it...if you watch Drowaerts body language they are defensive from the get go and are constantly interrupting to change the goal posts, look in the comments and you have the fans backing up their own trainer....people don't want to change their minds on the tools that they use especially if it is their business.
People can't even agree within their own factions, let alone have a reasoned conversation with someone from the opposing side


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

amplecrumlin said:


> Thanks for the links; I did listen to the Drowaerts/Fenzi one, but it didn't really answer my questions about specifically how why and when that trainer uses an e-collar.
> I wonder if a more formal debate format, with a clear motion, would be useful - it may be a less emotive way for the trainers to explain the use.
> 
> Clearly there are people who cannot justify their use under any circumstances, but all the rest cover a wide spectrum, from "they aren't aversive, when I use them" through "they can be aversive and it is justified on rare occasions" and "yes they are aversive but only very slightly, and learning with them can increase the animal's resilience, focus, problem-solving, and therefore confidence".
> ...


I agree, I think Larry Krohn has some interesting points but am still not convinced the tool is actually 'needed' in many of the examples. I'll try & find some more stuff you might be interested in. I really want Ivan to discuss how he uses it in depth but again I think this will be a pay per view only (which are never cheap!) as I honestly think he would be worth listening to. I was trying to find the podcast where he discuss (in detail) how a trainer uses an ecollar as he had criticised her on his FB (without naming her) but then apologised & interviewed her. Her really grilled her & it was interesting (even tho I might not have agreed with all ger points) but it seems to have disappeared which is a shame. All the clips I have seen of Ivan's dogs they look drivemn, committed to their work but also they obviously have a reat relationshiop with him. When i have watched his videos it is those small moments that i really like & he stresses they are so impoartnat

I've watched Pat Stuart (who was a student with Bart Bellon using the NePoPo system) & is he is interesting to listen to & does discuss how he uses ecollars on his Patreon site. Unfortunately I can't post the links as you have to pay to watch (although he's not in the same league as Ivan) & I like watching his training with his Mali. Which is odd as I don't particularly like Bart Bellon's dogs as they seem far too stressed & robotic for my liking. Whilst he is very interesting to listen to I can't actually find any training clips that I like.

Michael Ellis also uses them, I'll have to have more of a watch of his clips as I like his training & his explanations

(65) Remote Collar Training with Michael Ellis - YouTube

Mini educator .., maybe misleading but in some ways if it is a 'tool to aid learning' then maybe it is correct. Names are always going to be consumer friendly really. the Gentle Leader (head collar) isn't really that either!

I don't know I think that as dog owners we need to be more aware of our choices & our skillset rather than constantly complaining about our dogs.


----------



## amplecrumlin (Oct 16, 2017)

StormyThai said:


> In fairness the second that someone suggests that electronic stim collars are not aversive is the second that I switch off (I don't have the energy to argue these days)...for one....it's the dog that decides -always- and secondly if the stim collar was not aversive to that particular dog then it wouldn't work - and I'm only talking of electric stim here and not vibrate or beep collars because whilst they can be aversive to some dogs, they don't need or have to work as an aversive to have the desired effect.


To rehabilitate a sheep killer - where this thread started - yes, I think it's a stretch to imagine that that could be achieved without using the collar as an aversive.
The questions are whether it is reliable, whether it's justified, and what the alternatives are.

I can accept, on the other hand, that an e-collar stim is not aversive per se. As you pointed out, the dog decides that, and in the few clips I have watched, the dog appeared to notice "something" but not be distressed by it.
Can we even agree on a definition of aversive, anyway? I find the TV programme Mrs Brown's Boys aversive, does that count?

(Thank you, moderator, for editing this post so that it reads correctly )


----------



## amplecrumlin (Oct 16, 2017)

I also agree that Drowaerts seemed defensive, but he was by definition defending his use of something. 
I don't really understand what he hoped to achieve, he set himself up in a difficult position. He was hardly going to convert anyone by having a talk with someone who was familiar with the tool but chooses not to use it. He'd have achieved more by explaining why he chooses to add this element in addition to everything that Fenzi does.

One of the problems is that the e-collar refusers have the certainty of "just say no", whereas those who use them have many more nuances, they are all shades of grey and don't have a unified argument.

The philosopher David Hume said that truth springs from arguments amongst friends, maybe that was Drowaert's hope in initiating the talk.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

amplecrumlin said:


> Can we even agree on a definition of aversive, anyway?.


In psychology, the definition of aversives, are unpleasant stimuli that induce changes in behaviour via negative reinforcement or positive punishment.

I'm not against e-collars at all - they clearly have their place and I wouldn't want to see them banned.
However, if the individual dog did not find them aversive then they wouldn't work to stop an undesirable behaviour...the fact that a collar needs to be conditioned could suggest that the dog finds them aversive from the get go.
But this is just talking about stopping undesirable behaviour and the only way to stop an undesirable behaviour with the addition of a collar is to add something that the dog finds aversive (+P) or to take something away that the dog finds aversive (-R) if neither of those things happen then the undesirable behaviour (in this instance sheep chasing and killing) continues on unchecked.

It can be justified...aversion training for the scent of Kiwi's for example is very effective and can give that dog so much more freedom (due to the level of aversive that is needed for this many would argue that even then it isn't justified) but these are dogs without a history of rewarding themselves with a chase and kill.
It can be reliable but I would argue that even an ecollar trained dog would struggle in a field full of sheep without the owner there to offer directions, especially when they already have a history of that reward.

E-collars don't have to be used as punishment, but for many people that is all they are used for.
Again...not against the collars at all, and I only popped in to comment how I find people that try to claim that the collar isn't an aversive tool are brushing over the fact of how they actually work


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

amplecrumlin said:


> To rehabilitate a sheep killer - where this thread started - yes, I think it's a stretch to imagine that that could be achieved without using the collar as an aversive.
> The questions are whether it is reliable, whether it's justified, and what the alternatives are.
> 
> I can accept, on the other hand, that an e-collar stim is not aversive per se. As you pointed out, the dog decides that, and in the few clips I have watched, the dog appeared to notice "something" but not be distressed by it.
> ...


Jesus, I would rather have an ecollar whacked up to maximum than be made to sit through an episode of Mrs Brown's Boys!!!!


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

amplecrumlin said:


> To rehabilitate a sheep killer - where this thread started - yes, I think it's a stretch to imagine that that could be achieved without using the collar as an aversive.
> The questions are whether it is reliable, whether it's justified, and what the alternatives are.


The answer that no one seems prepared to say/admit is - it depends! 
Some dogs, yes, I do think an e-collar could be an excellent tool and I have seen it used successfully. A friend who had a deer chasing rhodesian used "the hand of god" method, zapped her dog twice when he was about 3 years old and never needed it again for the rest of his life. No fall-out behaviors either. The dog was an agility dog, loved to run continued to compete, be a happy pet, and lots of long hikes in the woods without worrying about losing him to a deer chase. She is a clicker trainer, does not use aversives in other contexts and always felt like she had to keep that little bit quiet which says a lot about how tribal the dog community can be  
But yeah, the dog was a perfect candidate - totally sound temperament, confident dog, high prey drive, but also cared enough about the zap to not want to experience it again.

Some dogs don't care enough about the zap to stop. 
Some dogs will make weird associations with being zapped and might not connect the punishment to the behavior. 
Some dogs are far too sensitive to be able to handle being zapped without behavior fall-out too.

Steve White's rules of punishment always apply. And you have to know your dog extremely well because you only get one chance to get it right. 
Too much and you risk all sorts of fall-out, too little and you get a punishment callous. And too many attempts, the dog knows what's coming and the punishment doesn't work.

There are all sorts of variables. If e-collars were the panacea their proponents say they are, we would see a lot more of them. But they're not. And it's an expensive mistake to make both financially and the cost to what it might do to your dog and your relationship with him.



Cleo38 said:


> I don't know I think that as dog owners we need to be more aware of our choices & our skillset rather than constantly complaining about our dogs.


Absolutely!!!
If I hear one more person complain about their 'stupid' dog or their 'stubborn' dog, or their __ insert undesirable trait of choice.

It's that growth mindset vs fixed mindset thing. If all you see is a stubborn dog, you're stuck. But if you see a need to get more creative about motivating your dog, then you grow and learn together.


----------



## amplecrumlin (Oct 16, 2017)

Stormy Thai, I think we are "arguing" the same thing - I can't see how an e-collar could be used to prevent sheep chasing unless it was used as an aversive. And my tentative belief is that that, with caveats, can be justified.

In other contexts, I can see how an e-collar could be used to deliver a neutral stimulus, and might be a useful tool for dogs who don't respond reliably to audible or visual cues. That might be because of a sensory anomaly, or just an individual sensory hierarchy. 
Again I currently think that that could be justified, with caveats.

As I understand it (and this is stuff that I never thought about until a few days ago and might completely misunderstand), some trainers use a continuous neutral stimulus paired with a known cue. The dog learns the principle that when they respond to the cue, the stim immediately stops. 
The stimulus wasn't aversive, but that specific learning now gives the trainer the option of giving stronger and potentially aversive stims, which the dog knows how to turn off. New behaviours are always taught in a reward-based way, but the trainer now has a way to "encourage" prompt compliance.
My tentative feeling on this is that it is becoming difficult to justify.


----------



## amplecrumlin (Oct 16, 2017)

O2.0, thanks for the examples of variables that need to be considered, and unwanted consequences that can happen. I did think that it would take some trial and error to find the best level and timing for an individual dog, and of course that is an impossible luxury. So much depends on the trainer's experience and judgement, and lessons learned on other dogs .

It seems to me that there is a big pachyderm in the parlour; surely there are enough trainers in the world, of all persuasions, to be able to document the cases they have worked with, what they did, and how well it worked. The challenge as issued is just feeding the existing gladiatorial attitude, when it could instead be looking for common ground and success stories.


----------



## amplecrumlin (Oct 16, 2017)

Cleo38, thanks again for those links, but I'm now being spammed constantly by Ivan B encouraging me to sign up for his revolutionary $8,000 accreditation! (to be fair, if money was no object, I might be curious enough to bite).


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

amplecrumlin said:


> As I understand it (and this is stuff that I never thought about until a few days ago and might completely misunderstand), some trainers use a continuous neutral stimulus paired with a known cue. The dog learns the principle that when they respond to the cue, the stim immediately stops.
> The stimulus wasn't aversive, but that specific learning now gives the trainer the option of giving stronger and potentially aversive stims, which the dog knows how to turn off. New behaviours are always taught in a reward-based way, but the trainer now has a way to "encourage" prompt compliance.
> My tentative feeling on this is that it is becoming difficult to justify.


This is simply negative reinforcement. Reinforcing a behavior by removing an unpleasant stimulus. 
It's the same principle used with a bit and bridle in horse riding. You pull on the rein until the horse moves and then immediately release the rein pressure. Done right, a horse learns to respond to the tiniest flick of your finger on the rein. It's a perfectly valid way to train.

In ecollar speak, you use a 'stim' that is enough for the dog to notice and the dog learns to 'turn it off' through compliance. In recall you would start with a dog on the longline, teach them with the long line that returning to the owner makes the stim turn off. Again, done right, you need just the subtlest of cues which is technically not aversive. However the piece that is often overlooked in negative reinforcement is that you have to start with something that is unpleasant enough that the dog/horse is motivated to make it stop. The motivation is to make that stimulus go away. As opposed to the motivation being to gain something good (positive reinforcement).


----------



## amplecrumlin (Oct 16, 2017)

It does seem plausible that some individuals are born easier to motivate with a tiny stick than a massive carrot. Others could quickly become like that. 

It's easy to see how some people would have no problem in using what works best for immediate results


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

amplecrumlin said:


> It does seem plausible that some individuals are born easier to motivate with a tiny stick than a massive carrot. Others could quickly become like that.


The way I see it, all animals with a CNS are motivated by both the stick and carrot.
The thing about negative reinforcement is that it's reliant on a punisher, and dogs desensitize to punishers easily. That's why you get horses with hard mouths and dogs who pull through prong collars.

Rewards don't have the same thing where they lose power over time and use. We know this because the dog who gets excited for car rides will continue to enjoy car rides his whole life. The dog who jumps up excited for the dinner bowl continues to be excited about it his whole life. Rewards don't lose their strength like punishers do.

I mean, yes, you can poison rewards and cause them to lose value, but unlike punishers, they don't lose value with every day use. Where you have to be judicious about correcting a dog so that they don't develop a punishment callous, the same doesn't apply to rewards. I can use food rewards every day the entire life of a dog and they don't get less rewarding though normal use.

The other thing you can do with rewards is build up drive for them and make them even more valuable for the dog. Making a punisher more punishing is not quite the same thing...


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

amplecrumlin said:


> some people would have no problem in using what works best for immediate results


@O2.0 has already mentioned -R so I won't repeat...I quoted this bit because IME the vast majority of people want quick fixes (especially the APO), they just want the undesirable behaviour to stop so that they can get on with their day. 
If you have one trainer saying that I can "fix" that for you in a few sessions by popping this collar on (greatly simplified I know) and another saying that we need months of training doing X, Y and Z and you will probably always need to manage that dog (a sheep killer for example), it is understandable why some people go for the quick "fix"

Honestly my main issue with e-collars is that any average Joe can walk into a pet shop and buy one without an ounce of understanding of what they have bought. I feel I need to repeat that I don't and wouldn't use an e-collar.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

amplecrumlin said:


> Cleo38, thanks again for those links, but I'm now being spammed constantly by Ivan B encouraging me to sign up for his revolutionary $8,000 accreditation! (to be fair, if money was no object, I might be curious enough to bite).


Hahahaha! He never misses an opportunity! If I had the money I would but no way do I have that sort of money to spend on dog training courses ... or anything else tbh!


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

I haven't listened to this episode yet but usually enjoy their stuff but the latest episode discusses the use of tool in training so might be of interest to some ...... Episode 195: A world without tools - The Canine Paradigm


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Cleo38 said:


> I haven't listened to this episode yet but usually enjoy their stuff but the latest episode discusses the use of tool in training so might be of interest to some ...... Episode 195: A world without tools - The Canine Paradigm


Adding to my list!  I've listened to them before and enjoyed the podcast.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Cleo38 said:


> I haven't listened to this episode yet but usually enjoy their stuff but the latest episode discusses the use of tool in training so might be of interest to some ...... Episode 195: A world without tools - The Canine Paradigm


That was an interesting discussion...I'm still sat here laughing at "arsehole full of splinters" :Hilarious


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

StormyThai said:


> That was an interesting discussion...I'm still sat here laughing at "arsehole full of splinters" :Hilarious


Hahahaha! I've not listened to it yet but definitely will tomorrow if just to hear that


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

What a shame that there is such a divide in the dog training community. Some people (from both "FF" and "balanced") sides seem so closed off and unwilling to listen or learn from others with differing views. Their way is right and that's that.

It doesn't matter how many years you've been training dogs, how many books you've read, how many courses you've attended, there is always something new to learn.

I practice reward-based training and as an IMDT member I have signed up to a code of ethics, which includes the fact that I do not promote positive punishment methods. However, I have several good friends who do use P+ and I talk to them from time to time about certain issues and cases. How would they handle this situation? What have they done previously? It is interesting to me to get a varied set of views. Doesn't mean I would use their methods, but it can just help sometimes to give me a different spin on things.

I agree that this project just seems like a lot of willy waving. Whilst I kind of get the aim, to me the most obvious solution to the issue of dogs escaping gardens and killing sheep is for people to make their gardens more secure, or not allow their dogs out in their garden unattended. I don't believe any amount of aversive training will stop some dogs. I once watched my friend's dog go after a herd of deer. A few of the deer stood up for themselves and one booted the dog. The dog then turned around and continued to chase them.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Sairy said:


> the most obvious solution to the issue of dogs escaping gardens and killing sheep is for people to make their gardens more secure, or not allow their dogs out in their garden unattended. I don't believe any amount of aversive training will stop some dogs.


Well said. I would add any kind of training - averisve or not. 
The other thing no one seems to want to say is that sometimes training - however well you do it, no matter what methods, doesn't work. Dogs are not robots that if you just figure out the right code to use to program them they're going to respond. 
Dogs are complex creatures driven by instincts and years of selection for aptitude in certain areas. When you breed a dog to chase and kill for centuries and then decide that oh wait, but not *this* animal, it's no wonder the training doesn't always work.

These training 'challenges' are never about something like turning a bloodhound in to a herding dog, which everyone can agree is not something the bloodhound is ever going to be good at, but when you try something equally ridiculous like 'hey let's take this salukiXgreyhound and teach him not to chase small things that move fast' everyone starts willy waving with their training methods.

That's not to say you couldn't teach a bloodhound something like treiball or maybe to encourage one or two sheep in to a pen they don't mind getting in to, it would be a lot of work and at the end I doubt the dog or owner would be very excited with the new skill. 
In the same way, go ahead and teach that salukiXgrey a great recall, it will probably be a lot more enjoyable to everyone than trying to teach a bloodhound to herd. But also have a leash, and don't put the sighthound with a great recall in a field of rabbits and wonder where your training went wrong when he doesn't come.


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

Sairy said:


> I agree that this project just seems like a lot of willy waving. Whilst I kind of get the aim, to me the most obvious solution to the issue of dogs escaping gardens and killing sheep is for people to make their gardens more secure, or not allow their dogs out in their garden unattended. I don't believe any amount of aversive training will stop some dogs. I once watched my friend's dog go after a herd of deer. A few of the deer stood up for themselves and one booted the dog. The dog then turned around and continued to chase them.





O2.0 said:


> These training 'challenges' are never about something like turning a bloodhound in to a herding dog, which everyone can agree is not something the bloodhound is ever going to be good at, but when you try something equally ridiculous like 'hey let's take this salukiXgreyhound and teach him not to chase small things that move fast' everyone starts willy waving with their training methods.
> ....
> In the same way, go ahead and teach that salukiXgrey a great recall, it will probably be a lot more enjoyable to everyone than trying to teach a bloodhound to herd. But also have a leash, and don't put the sighthound with a great recall in a field of rabbits and wonder where your training went wrong when he doesn't come.


This exactly. I just don't understand the point of trying to teach a known livestock killer to be around livestock unattended apart from proving you can. There is literally no point IMO. 
I refer to my lurcher's night-time exploits of badger fighting. I know full well that despite the injuries caused to him by the badger, he would 100% have gone back out that evening after having a GA and stitches and had another go if he was given the chance. He's the type that with an e-collar if he was in full hunting mode you would have to shock him to the point of paralysis to stop him chasing. I do think that with an e-collar used properly and slowly over time he would choose not to chase, but I don't have a need to stop him chasing as he doesn't (usually ) get the chance to get up to that kind of hunting. Sure he will chase rabbits around our field, but if you have rewards on you he will come back easily and engage with you instead. The badger was an unexpected blip.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

StormyThai said:


> That was an interesting discussion...I'm still sat here laughing at "arsehole full of splinters" :Hilarious


Just finished listening, some really good points made. So many people seem to think there are two groups: the FF trainers or the balanced ones when in reality (as discussed) there is a blend between the groups.

Many people I know despite using 'tools' are mainly R+ trainers. They regularly use reinforcements with very little P+ in comparison. As I said before some people aren't particularly great at the P+ delivery & should do better for their dogs. but some are very good at this & very skilled at following up the punishment with a reinforcer.

I trained with someone at the weekend who has been to the IGP world championships with his dogs & uses an ecollar for obedience training. His dogs were very engaged, very focused, driven, great relationship with him, etc. He & his dogs enjoy the training so what's the problem?

I also think it's interesting to think what a group who is so adamant that certain tools should be banned want to gain? is it really for animals welfare purposes & if so then surely there are so many other areas that they can make more a of a difference. Also are these trainers who are so very vocal ( & the ones probably targeted by the challenge) going to offer a viable alternative? I know for a fact that some of them can't


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

It was a heavily biased discussion, but that wasn't a surprise as both people talking use e-collars, but I found myself agreeing with a lot of what they said.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

StormyThai said:


> It was a heavily biased discussion, but that wasn't a surprise as both people talking use e-collars, but I found myself agreeing with a lot of what they said.


Yes, definitely. But I think some people seem to think those who do use certain tools in their training just use them but it's simply not as B&W as that. Most people in IGP use pinch collars (in a variety of ways) but at the core of all the training is the relationship/engagement between handler & dog. It's not all P+ as some seem to think.

I suppose I just don't understand what banning certain tools will achieve. Many people will still use them anyway (although more discreetly & some not with any guidance) or will punish their dog in other ways. There are so many things wrong with how we treat animals & I just don't think banning certain things means they will lead better lives.


----------



## JoseyJo (Oct 5, 2021)

Cleo38 said:


> Yes, definitely. But I think some people seem to think those who do use certain tools in their training just use them but it's simply not as B&W as that. Most people in IGP use pinch collars (in a variety of ways) but at the core of all the training is the relationship/engagement between handler & dog. It's not all P+ as some seem to think.
> 
> I suppose I just don't understand what banning certain tools will achieve. Many people will still use them anyway (although more discreetly & some not with any guidance) or will punish their dog in other ways. There are so many things wrong with how we treat animals & I just don't think banning certain things means they will lead better lives.


Hello
I'm new to this forum and this thread caught my eye - I wondered what people thought about spray collars? We used one to great effect (many years ago) with our rescue springer spaniel who was lead aggressive - he was on the lead most of the time because he'd never been trained in recall. We only had to use the spray action (along with the warning beep) a few times, then just the beep and he soon became a lovely, calm dog, meaning we could stop using it. I hated the idea of electric collars so the spray collar seemed a kind alternative as it's just a puff of air under their chin. I think training methods have moved on since then but for us at the time, this was a godsend! We now have another rescue springer with behavioural issues so will be posting for advice in due course …..


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

JoseyJo said:


> Hello
> I'm new to this forum and this thread caught my eye - I wondered what people thought about spray collars? We used one to great effect (many years ago) with our rescue springer spaniel who was lead aggressive - he was on the lead most of the time because he'd never been trained in recall. We only had to use the spray action (along with the warning beep) a few times, then just the beep and he soon became a lovely, calm dog, meaning we could stop using it. I hated the idea of electric collars so the spray collar seemed a kind alternative as it's just a puff of air under their chin. I think training methods have moved on since then but for us at the time, this was a godsend! We now have another rescue springer with behavioural issues so will be posting for advice in due course …..


I'm not sure about the type of collar you've described, but I know of some people who have used collars that spray citronella, which IMO is way worse than a "shock" collar. A small shock is quick and over with straight away whereas if you spray citronella the smell will linger for a good while afterwards. Couple that with how sensitive a dog's nose is and I would consider this to be cruel and unnecessary.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Sairy said:


> I'm not sure about the type of collar you've described, but I know of some people who have used collars that spray citronella, which IMO is way worse than a "shock" collar. A small shock is quick and over with straight away whereas if you spray citronella the smell will linger for a good while afterwards. Couple that with how sensitive a dog's nose is and I would consider this to be cruel and unnecessary.


I agree, with citronella collars the punishment goes on way past when the behaviour occurred so IMO very unfair on the dog as well as unkind considering how sensitive their noses are


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Finished the podcast and found myself nodding a lot. 
The bit about the spaniel and displacement behavior, I was about to say they didn't know any more than the titled behaviorist if they weren't there, so I was glad to hear the other guy mention that we view everything the dog does through the lens of our own biases and experiences. 

I did want to touch on the part about having made a decision about how you're going to train your dog before the dog is even in your home.
It made me think about Penny and how I just *knew* I was going to clicker train her. Her very first clicker session was a disaster. She's so sensitive to metallic noises and reverberated noises and a clicker inside was a total fail for her.

I remember watching videos about what to do if your dog is scared of the clicker, how to desensitize - hell I remember advising people about what to do if their dog doesn't like a clicker. 
I have worked to get several dogs who were unsure of the clicker happy with it, but not Penny. Clearly I'm not that good. But at the same time, how hard to you want to work at getting a tool to work if it's not the best tool for that dog? 
And how different would the emotional reaction be if instead of clicker I had said e-collar? 

Some people are that adamant that ecollars work on every dog that they would persist in using one even when it's clearly not working for that dog. But the same with some types of extreme R+ training - some dogs really do need to be told "yeah, we're not doing that" with some form of positive punishment.
I still think clickers are better for some things than a verbal marker, particularly with dogs who move really fast (Penny ) but that's just not an option for us. So I have to get creative and better at the other tools at my disposal. And that's not a bad thing. 

And here's where that podcast makes a great point. What if you're married to a tool or married to *not* using a tool, and you end up with a dog for whom that tool is never going to work or that tool is exactly what would work best? It's really worth having an open mind because you can paint yourself in to a corner otherwise.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> Finished the podcast and found myself nodding a lot.
> The bit about the spaniel and displacement behavior, I was about to say they didn't know any more than the titled behaviorist if they weren't there, so I was glad to hear the other guy mention that we view everything the dog does through the lens of our own biases and experiences.
> 
> I did want to touch on the part about having made a decision about how you're going to train your dog before the dog is even in your home.
> ...


Yep, so true about deciding a training plan before the dog is home. This was so me with Kato!!! My initial training plan has been well & truly binned 

I have been to so many training seminars/workshops about play & encouraging dogs who aren't particularly interested by cheering them on .... Kato hates that!

I was going to be more 'hands off' with Kato & allow him to make far more choices ..... nope! He isn't as motivated by training as Archer so would always chose to b*gger off & do his own thing. No matter what i try to do I am competing against the environment which was never an issue with Archer. I have to be mindful of this & use it more within my training & make it clear to Kato when he is doing something I don't want him to do.

I use a long line all the time now, whereas I never did with Archer. He was offlead all the time as he wanted to be with me so much.

Funny that I used to be so adamant about training & what works yet the more I learn the more I realise it is never B&W ... if it was it would be so much easier


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

@Cleo38 your post reminded me of this meme


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> @Cleo38 your post reminded me of this meme
> 
> View attachment 477607


Hahahaha! That is spot on 

I was talking about the difference in my dogs at the weekend & said that Archer makes me look like the handler I want to be but Kato shows me for the handler I really am


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Just wanted to add, regarding the 'tools' discussion on the podcast, I do think there is value in teaching a dog to turn off pressure. This is something some of the more extreme R+ trainers seem to miss. Done well, it can really be confidence boosting for the dog to understand that their behavior can make unpleasant things stop. 

And it doesn't have to be tools based either. One of the things I did with Penny was teach her what to do when the kids got overwhelming. I'm talking 30ish young and older teens all squee-ing over the cute "pup" and getting pushy about who gets to interact with her. 
Initially I would simply go in to the mosh-pit and remove her. That progressed to me watching her and she learned to make eye contact with me and I would call her over. This did two things, told the kids to back off so she could come to me, and gave her an 'escape.' These days she is comfortable enough to go in the middle of a crush of kids, and if it gets too much she just comes to find me. She'll either jump up on me to tell me she needs a break, or she'll just hang out closer to me long enough to give herself a break. But the key is, she knows she can make the overwhelming thing stop which ended up really boosting her confidence. 

In some R+ circles, the feeling is I should not be allowing her to get stressed at all. Not put her in a situation she has to 'escape' from at all. But the confidence she gets from knowing she has power over what happens to her is worth the little bit of stress she experiences before getting herself out. 

So I do get the power of teaching a dog to "turn the pressure off" with an ecollar, prong, etc. and how it can build a dog's confidence. Done well of course. It can also go wrong if you don't have good timing or are confusing in how you communicate with the dog. And I've seen a lot of that also.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> Just wanted to add, regarding the 'tools' discussion on the podcast, I do think there is value in teaching a dog to turn off pressure. This is something some of the more extreme R+ trainers seem to miss. Done well, it can really be confidence boosting for the dog to understand that their behavior can make unpleasant things stop.
> 
> And it doesn't have to be tools based either. One of the things I did with Penny was teach her what to do when the kids got overwhelming. I'm talking 30ish young and older teens all squee-ing over the cute "pup" and getting pushy about who gets to interact with her.
> Initially I would simply go in to the mosh-pit and remove her. That progressed to me watching her and she learned to make eye contact with me and I would call her over. This did two things, told the kids to back off so she could come to me, and gave her an 'escape.' These days she is comfortable enough to go in the middle of a crush of kids, and if it gets too much she just comes to find me. She'll either jump up on me to tell me she needs a break, or she'll just hang out closer to me long enough to give herself a break. But the key is, she knows she can make the overwhelming thing stop which ended up really boosting her confidence.
> ...


And that where very skilled helpers can build dogs in protection training (IGP). Some people really don't understand the complexity of this phase & the subtle exercises. I've watched some great helpers & seen dogs really grow in confidence as they learn how to activate the helper, how to switch off the pressure, etc. it is so interesting. I still remember Archers very first session where my trainer made some noises then came out of the blind, We had already watched the older dogs so when he saw the helper appear he really barked .... my trainer then ran away & Archer was pumped really wanting to go after him! He was so full of himself as we came off the filed, was a really lovely moment

But unfortunately this is also an area where so many dogs are pushed to far in defense by people who don't know what they are doing or how to read dogs. This is horrible to watch


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

It is a fine line, pushing the dog and letting them be successful and building up their confidence, vs. pushing too far. But for the most part if you have any skill at all reading dogs, you realize imediately when you've gone too far and you stop and back up. 
But yes, some people really don't have any skill in that aspect and it can get ugly 

Now I'm listening to the Dave Kroyer podcast with Canine Paradigm  I love Dave Kroyer, he definitely has fun with his dogs - and life in general


----------



## JoseyJo (Oct 5, 2021)

Sairy said:


> I'm not sure about the type of collar you've described, but I know of some people who have used collars that spray citronella, which IMO is way worse than a "shock" collar. A small shock is quick and over with straight away whereas if you spray citronella the smell will linger for a good while afterwards. Couple that with how sensitive a dog's nose is and I would consider this to be cruel and unnecessary.


It wasn't the citronella version, it was literally just a puff of air! It didn't seem to traumatise my dog and acted more as a 'distraction' and I only needed to use it a handful of times …… agree that citronella would be too overpowering for a dog's nose which is why I didn't opt for that.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

JoseyJo said:


> It wasn't the citronella version, it was literally just a puff of air! It didn't seem to traumatise my dog and acted more as a 'distraction' and I only needed to use it a handful of times …… agree that citronella would be too overpowering for a dog's nose which is why I didn't opt for that.


What issues are you having that you're considering an e-collar?


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> It is a fine line, pushing the dog and letting them be successful and building up their confidence, vs. pushing too far. But for the most part if you have any skill at all reading dogs, you realize imediately when you've gone too far and you stop and back up.
> But yes, some people really don't have any skill in that aspect and it can get ugly
> 
> Now I'm listening to the Dave Kroyer podcast with Canine Paradigm  I love Dave Kroyer, he definitely has fun with his dogs - and life in general


I'll have to listen to that later today, I do like him


----------



## JoseyJo (Oct 5, 2021)

O2.0 said:


> What issues are you having that you're considering an e-collar?


I'm not actually considering an e collar - the thread title just caught my eye and reminded me of the spray collar I used many years ago.
My current dog, a 7 year old rescue springer, was attacked recently by a large black lab (not too badly as the owner hauled it off fairly quickly) and since then he's 'seen off' 3 dogs - by that I mean, as a dog has retreated after some normal interaction, my dog has randomly barked and lunged at the other dogs back. He's stopped as soon as I've commanded him to 'leave' and it's not escalated and he's not actually bitten - it's more like he's 'mouthed' the other dogs back. Obviously it's mortifying and I immediately clip his lead on and check that the other dog is ok. I have employed the services of a dog trainer/behaviourist and am working on ways to deal with this. Forums like this are also useful to read about others experiences and solutions!

But this is probably something for another thread!!


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

JoseyJo said:


> I'm not actually considering an e collar - the thread title just caught my eye and reminded me of the spray collar I used many years ago.
> My current dog, a 7 year old rescue springer, was attacked recently by a large black lab (not too badly as the owner hauled it off fairly quickly) and since then he's 'seen off' 3 dogs - by that I mean, as a dog has retreated after some normal interaction, my dog has randomly barked and lunged at the other dogs back. He's stopped as soon as I've commanded him to 'leave' and it's not escalated and he's not actually bitten - it's more like he's 'mouthed' the other dogs back. Obviously it's mortifying and I immediately clip his lead on and check that the other dog is ok. I have employed the services of a dog trainer/behaviourist and am working on ways to deal with this. Forums like this are also useful to read about others experiences and solutions!
> 
> But this is probably something for another thread!!


Definitely create a thread as am sure you will get lots of useful advice


----------



## CheddarS (Dec 13, 2011)

Really interesting topic as my old boy will attack sheep and any thing else that runs so we manage with a lead. I honestly don’t think an E collar would stop him, he doesn’t do pain and when the adrenaline is running he is numb. Electric fences have little effect as the chase/kill has a huge high for him…


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Well it's not livestock, and Penny isn't exactly livestock killing size, but in part due to my error she has decided that chasing runners and biting feet is a blast. 
Yesterday was our first attempt at remedying the problem. I gave my runners a flirt pole to run with. What was it that smokeybear used to say, don't change the behavior, change the target or something like that? Well the flirt pole worked a treat. Added bonus, the flirt pole is attached to a human who can stop running and be boring when I call her off. We can slowly build this up to calling off during the chase. 

Of course none of this addresses the dog not chasing when I'm not around, but I still think that's a ridiculous parameter as dogs here in the US are not allowed to be running 'at large' (without an owner) at all.


----------

