Not logged inChampdogs Information Exchange
Forum Breeders Help Search Board Index Active Topics Login
Up Topic Dog Boards / Controversial Stuff / Using E collars as a training aid
1 2 3 4 Previous Next  
- By Adam P [gb] Date 06.04.11 15:26 GMT Edited 06.04.11 15:42 GMT
[deleted]
- By Adam P [gb] Date 06.04.11 17:59 GMT Edited 07.04.11 10:58 GMT
I have found them much more effective than any other training aid and they really level the field in terms of time/skill/breed type ect. Basically they allow you to train any dog to a pretty good standard within a short period of time! This includes diofficult breeds and those with behaviour problems.

There are two ways of using an e collar

Escape training

This involves teaching the behaviour with the collar, you give the command and stim at the same time, then guide the dog into the behaviour. When the dog starts doing/or does the right behaviour you release the stim praise and reward the dog and repeat.

With escape training you can create a strong response in a short period of time. This is because the direct nature of the negative reinforcement is highly motivational and because of the collar being on the dog and adjustable to its distraction level you can always motivated the dog immediatly!

An example of escape training

Recall, a simple enough behaviour but one that most people find hard to achieve with a degree of reliablity.
To train the recall simply put the dog on a long line or extending lead, have the collar on the dog set to the dog working level. Allow the dog to raom around, call the dog and stim at the same time. Guide the dog towards you with the lead and as he turns/moves to you stop stimming, immediatly praise the dog until it reaches you then reward the dog with a release command and food!
Repeat until the dog turns and runs back to you at the first call without any assitance from the lead.
You can then practise without the lead and in more distracting environments!

This will give you a 100% recall within a few training sessions!

Avoidance training

This means the dog learns to avoid the stim altogether by obeying the command.
The procedure is the same except when you call the dog the first time don't stim, if he ignores you call again and stim!

This approach can taker longer to establish a proper response as the dog may risk it more readily. However it does work well.

The dog also needs to know the command your giving it with avoidance training, with escape you can teach the behaviour from the start on a naive/untrained dog with the collar very easily!

Imo the most effective training starts as escape and then moves to avoidance.

Problem solving

Aggression

Aggression can be devided into two parts.

Predatory
Usually defined as chasing/attacking/killing other prey animals or vehicles, some dogs will direct it onto humans or other dogs though!

This behaviour is dealt with by recalling the dog everytime it attempts it! This breaks the habit as the dog learns that when it trys to chase/attack it has to do the total opposite (move back to the handler), this essentially reporograms the dog!
Other good reprograming is making the dog lay down around its prey (house cats for example) for long periods of time as this removes the chase/drive association. Its important that the down position is calm (over on the hip) as opposed to tense and ready to spring!
Heel is also a good incompatible behaviour for car chasers/lungers ect

You can also correct the dog whenever it fixates on the prey item and guide it into a better behaviour (looking away), this is good for working dogs who need to work loose at a distance from the handler around the prey item without chasing.

All of these techniques require the dog to be trained to respond to the collar/command first!

With some dogs simply correcting them during the chase (until they stop) is effective, however its better if they have prior experience of ''leave'' training with the collar first!

Always make sure the dog has alternative prey items available, such as tennis balls ect.

Social aggression

This is aggression to other dogs or people either through fear or dominance.

Once agian for this we use incompatible behaviours to stop the dog aggressing and make it act the way we want around the trigger persons/dogs!
Good behaviours for this include recall and heel as well as leave, however down is especially useful as it is a calm position and allows the dog to relax around the scary thing, with dominant dogs it makes them feel more submissive!

With fear/dominance you are looking to reprogram the dog into good behaviour around the triggers, this effectively counter conditions the dog on a far deeper level than treats/toys ect as it changes the dog from the inside out as opposed to the outside in!

Other issues

Sep anxiety

Basically we use incompatible behaviours again to reprogram the dog! In this case an ''place'' and down stay command are essential, you use these to make the dog go to and stay in a specific spot while you leave it (short periods at first) this reconditions the dog to be calm about being left.
A bark collar is also useful to stop the noisier dogs!
Obviously the dog will not remain in a down stay on its bed for the whole day your at work but by the process of classical conditioning it will come to associate being left with feeling calm (in its place) and will transfer that to when its loose in the crate or house.

Fear

I mean of spefice thing (noise/cars/floors), this is dealt with in two ways

Obedience

Essentially using the e collar and pre trained commands you make the dog confront its fears, you would recall the dog across a scary floor or through a doorway or make the dog do a stay instead of running away from the noise of the fireworks.
For the car simply train the dog to go on its bed on command then put that in the car and send it in!

Re conditioning

If the dog is scared of a shiny floor stim the dog when its off the floor, guide it onto the floor and then stop the stim! This makes the floor a comfortable space which re conditions the dog from inside out!
The same can be applied to cars for example.

You can also utilise npl in fear cases, in effect make the dog act how you want it to feel, so when it wants to run make it sit calmly, when it wants to hide make it move around with you and so on. Nlp is at the heart of most behaviour resolutions!

With fear issues you need to work the dog until it no longer displays any fear and you need to be the decision maker as this add confidence!

Other issues

These include chewing/jumping on furniture, digging holes stealing food and eating rubbish.

Initially you train a behaviour with the collar so the dog understands the fact it controls the collar, then you wait for the dog to do the ''wrong'' behaviour and use the collar until it stops! With reps the dog learns not to bother.
Make sure the dog has alternative outlets for chewing/digging ect.

How collars work!

E collar training is based around negative reinforcement.
to motivate and reward the dog.
Negative reinforcement basically means the removal of an unpleasent stimulus, in this case the very mild static of the collar!
Virtually all training uses negative reinforcement in some way, for example treat training creates mild stress by withholding the treat until the dog complies, this stress is unpleasent stimulus, when the dog complies it gets the treat and the stress stops!
Most species are trained/handled with direct negative reinforcement (removal of unpleasent stimulus) all the horse training is done with neg reinforcement (physical aversives in this case) the top show jumper/dreassage horse/cutting horse will have been trained with physical aversives as the unpleasent stimulus from first time it was haltered up to the top level stuff.
The training of variouse draft animals (horse/cattle/camels/ellies) is also done with direct negative reinforcement.
Some animals are trained with indirect negative rienforcement (treats) such as zoo animals, however the training is still negative reinforcement based as the animal seeks to elminate the unpleasent state of ''no treat''.

Nuts and bolts of using the collar

You want to think in terms of making the dog do the correct behaviour as opposed to stopping the unwanted behaviour, so apply pressure (stim) until the dog does the right behaviour, wether this is recalling or stopping chewing. This teaches the dog that changing his behaviour stops the stim and that he controls the stim, this makes the dog very much in control (in his head) and gets best results.
Always guide the beginner dog into the behaviour!

Collars have a number of levels (4 to 127) these levels relate to the jump between them not the strength, so a colalr with 127 is no stronger than a collar with 8, there is just smaller jumps. This allows you to adjust the level to each dog sensitivity!
ALways train with the first level the dog feels in that circumstance, this is indecated by a flick of the ears or a slightly look around. Up the levels as distractions get higher, lower them as distractions get lower, always watch the dog more than the remote for info about the level you need!

Getting a collar

As a general rule the more levels the better and the more range the better, contact suppliers with specif questions about your requirements.

I recomend at least 400 yrd range for slow low drive dogs and 800 yrd for most dogs and 1200 for high drive independant dogs, of course it really depends on how far you want the dog to range.
- By mastifflover Date 06.04.11 20:52 GMT Upvotes 1

> I have found them much more effective than any other training aid and they really level the field in terms of time/skill/breed type ect.


How many Mastiff  breeds have you trained with an e-collar and how was your relationship with the Mastiff afterwards - ie. would it trust you enough to handle it while injured for example after you have trained it with a 'stim'?

> For the car simply train the dog to go on its bed on command then put that in the car and send it in!


But we know that dogs do not generalise commands - eg. if you teach a dog to go to it's bed in the house (even if you move the bed into different rooms), you may still have to train the same command in different setting (in the garden, in the car) in order for the dog to know that 'bed' means go to the soft padded thing - nomatter where it is.
Your above method pays no attention to the ways dogs generalise things atall and it seems rather cruel to expext a dog to go to it's bed, when the bed is situated in a place it doesn't like.

If you put a hoard of cash in a tub of spiders, I would not put my hand in to get it, if you put an e-collar round my neck, put a hoard of cash in a tub of spiders and continued to zap me, I wouldn't be held responsible for my actions (I still would not put my hand in with the spiders)!!! However, a dog has no notion of what you expect it to do, it is simply confronted with a something it is frightened of (a car) and told to get to it's bed in the car (it may not even know what you are asking of it when you say 'bed' as you have given no indicatio of generalising the command) and is zapped untill it does so.. Poor dogs :( :( :(

> Good behaviours for this include recall and heel as well as leave, however down is especially useful as it is a calm position and allows the dog to relax around the scary thing, with dominant dogs it makes them feel more submissive!


So for a dog that is agressive to other dogs as it is afraid of them, you would force it (via the stim) into a 'down' - a postition that will make the dog feel under even more pressure. :( :( :( :(
Why not teach the dog it has the option of flight and remove it from the scary situation while working on a counter-conditioning programme of positive association?

All of your reasoning does make sense - the stim forces the dog to choose between the lessor of 2 evils, so in most cases will achieve the behaviour the owner wants in the short term, BUT it does so without giving any consideration to how the dog is feeling. The way a dog FEELS about anything, dictats how it behaves, in the long term - you take the time to make the dog feel good about anything and it will CHOOSE that beahviour.
All behaviours you teach with a 'stim' can be taught with rewards, all beahviour modification (getting over fear/aggression) can be done with rewards without the need to give pain/fear (the 'stim' only works becasue the dog fears it, otherwise it would not work as an aversive) .
Problems with aversive training - the dog learns to avoid the STIM - it does not learn to carry out the required beahviour to please itself. If you pair training with rewards and no aversive, you get a dog that trusts you and will CHOOSE the beahviours you have taught, becasue of positive association the beahviours actaully can become self-rewarding - the dog ENJOYS the beahviours.

The biggest motivation for a dog is rewarding it self/pleasing itself/making itself feel better :
it gets agressive with other dogs it fears as it wants to get the other dog to move away to make it feel better.
A dog pulls on a lead either becasue it enjoys pulling, or it wants to get to it's destination faster.
A dog steals food beacuse it wants the food.

As a dogs beahviour is dictated by what the dog WANTS, why do you feel the need to teach it with somethng it DOESN'T want (aversive) in favour of something it does (rewards)?
- By Adam P [gb] Date 07.04.11 11:08 GMT Edited 07.04.11 11:18 GMT
Mastiff lover

I have trained a fair few mastiff breeds/types with the collar, after the training are relationship was great, very friendly easy going ect. Certainly would have no worries about patching one up for example.

E collar training promotes trust and bonding.

Re car

Part of place training is generalisation (different parts of the house for example) the car would be the next step in that, it would also of course take care of the caar issue as well because the dog will have built up an association with the place as being comfy and so will see the car as comfy too!

Re dog aggression, initial work is done on moving away, see multi posts to nikita on the subject for example, the down is an add on.

THE  whole point of e collar training is to make the dog feel good about what he is doing. The reason e collars are more effective at training/retraining behaviours than food rewards ect is because it is doing this. One benefit is you do not put the dog in a state of conflict (food or other behaviour) the other behaviour is uncomfortable which stops the dog wanting to do it, this is way more powerful than trying to get the dog to change motivation.
- By mastifflover Date 07.04.11 12:23 GMT

> I have trained a fair few mastiff breeds/types with the collar, after the training are relationship was great, very friendly easy going ect. Certainly would have no worries about patching one up for example.


Wow, so you have dealt with breeds that have a natural dis-trust of strangers, subjected them to electric shocks and they would still allow you to handle them if they were injured??
You must know more about dogs than any breeder. All the research I put before getting a Mastiff consistently warned of using aversive methods as these dogs do not respond well atall to it - maybe you should get in touch with some of the long-standing mastiff breeders and specialist mastiff forums - you obviously know something that thier combined centuries of experience has never uncovered.

I'm sure you wont mind saying which Mastiff breeds you have trained and how many and the way you used the e-collar. (not any 'types' just pure-bred as 'type' only covers appearence, it means undefinded breed that looks a certain way and does not actually mean the dog has the temperment of a pure-bred.

>One benefit is you do not put the dog in a state of conflict (food or other behaviour


I am completely lost. You have just said you generalise a place command for bed (for example), and will put the bed in a car - when the dog is afraid of cars, in order to use 'obiedience' to get the dog in the car - how on earth is that NOT putting the dog in the state of conflict?? (and that is not even adding an e-collar into the equation).

> E collar training promotes trust and bonding.


Please expand. How does applying an elecrtic shock to a dog build up trust? Do you actually mean that - with dogs that do not know YOU are the source of the pain, but come to understand you STOP the pain, they will gravitate to you as a safer thing than what they believe to be the source of the pain? If so, that is pretty cruel way to build up 'trust' :( :(

With reward-based training or any non-aversive training, trust is built up on the basis that the owner/trainer is only ever a source of good things and the owner/trainer will not allow the dog to be put in a position of pain or fear even if it would make the owner/trainer look like the good guy.
- By Adam P [gb] Date 07.04.11 13:49 GMT Edited 07.04.11 13:55 GMT
The collar builds trust by making you the comfy place to be. This is far deeper than the place were food happens as dogs will take risks for food (predators/scavengers), it reconditions the dog on a very basic level to human = comfort.

Being a source of good things doesn't build trust, it builds anticaption/association with good things that may look like trust (cause dog really likes the food) but not trust, this is why many dogs go to pieces when stressed and lose there training/trust in the owner because the stress knocks out the food drive which was the basis of the relationship.

I will give a mastiff example.

Blake 2 yr old neutered male bullmastiff, lunged at cars, dog and stranger aggressive, no recall and pulled. Did the basic e collar training to sort the pulling/recall out also did some manners type stuff (sit) for the lunging and aggression. Had the owner do a lot of socilising with him as she was now able to control him! He became a very easy dog that could be let off and play with other dogs, meet people ect no issues!

Prior to the e collar work he had a mild skin complaint that was tricky to treat as he disliked being touched (even by owner) were it was sore. Vet certainly couldn't examine it/apply topical treatment. This complaint continued during the e collar training but the owner was able to treat the sore spots and the vet was able to examine the dog properly and get on top of it. This allowed them to cure the skin complaint, which made him happier anyway, but he had the behaviour issues long before his skin became bad.

Re car dog has no conflict because bed = comfort as does were ever the bed is, so car = comfort.

Btw e collars don't cause pain, pain is counter productive.
- By mastifflover Date 07.04.11 14:01 GMT

> Re car dog has no conflict because bed = comfort as does were ever the bed is, so car = comfort.


BUt that is a contradiction.
You say if owner=food/good things, it does nothing to instill trust in the dog,
yet a dog can make the assumption that bed (good thing) in a car (bad thing) = cars are now good things?

Why will you allwo positive association to be an argument FOR aversive training, but not for reward-based training?
- By Adam P [gb] Date 07.04.11 15:51 GMT Edited 07.04.11 16:52 GMT
Its negative reinforcement association actually. Dog associates one place with comfort and thus the surrounding area, you can then move that place around to provide the dog with lots of comfort spots!

The idea of putting food in the car will create a dog that gets into the car to get the food, but as predators/scavengers dogs have evolved to eat/get food in risky situations! Ever seen a nature documentary with lions at a kill and jackals coming around for the leftovers? The jackal is risking it all to get the food, the same thing applies to the dog risking it for the food in the car.

With using the bed as a trained comfort spot you change the associations from car = uncomfy/fearful to car = comfy/not fearful!

Btw you mention pain in a post, e collars do not cause pain! just watch vids of dogs trained on them, is the dog in pain?
- By Nikita [ru] Date 07.04.11 16:59 GMT
If using an aversive is necessary to teach a dog to fully trust a human, please explain my youngest dog.

In her old home, she was unsure about a lot of things; the big one being having her harness or collar put on.  Her owners initially just ignored her rolling around in a submissive fashion and put it on anyway.  Then the trainer came along and advised them to spray her in the face every time she messed around.

In short order, she began showin teeth whenever anyone went near her harness or collar when it was on, or tried to put it on.

In the rest of her training, the rules were simple: do what I say, or I'll make you do it.

In very short order, she started nipping; big shows of teeth and a few dent-only light bites.  It was at that point that she came to me.

In 2 days, using food, I had taught her that she would not be hurt by the harness, the collar, or me; she was walking into the harness herself (and still rams her nose into it happily), and a previously unknown issue with having her feet touched (which resulted in big biteyness) disappeared.

I no longer use food to handle her, or put her harness on, and have not done so for over a month.

By your reasoning, she should now not trust me at all because there is no food, and she should be 'falling apart', being the sensitive dog that she is.

So why is it then that I can still handle her all over, she moves herself into her harness, does everything I ask with happy body language and flops against me of an evening for a cuddle?

Seems to me likes she trusts me - all thanks to a few bits of sausage.  What aversives did was utterly destroy her trust in her old owners resulting in her turning to aggression and, ultimately, coming to me.
- By Adam P [gb] Date 07.04.11 17:06 GMT Edited 07.04.11 20:00 GMT
Its not trust, she just associates those things with food!

It worked for you/her (which is good) but won't work for every dog.
- By Nikita [ru] Date 07.04.11 20:56 GMT
If she didn't trust me, she wouldn't allow me to do those things in the absence of food, especially over a month after I've stopped using it in those situations (and it was only used a couple of times to begin with  She knows she's not going to get any food for these things now.

If she didn't trust me, she also wouldn't allow me to do those things and be happy about it - her body language would clearly show that she was not happy and did not trust me.

And that is not what you believe is suppression of the emotional state - I've been a groomer for 7 years now, just stopped doing it, and believe me, if a dog doesn't trust you, it's obvious - and from personal experience, bloody painful if you don't take heed!

> Btw e collars don't cause pain, pain is counter productive.


That's how they work - they cause pain or, at best, major discomfort.  If they didn't, they wouldn't be aversive enough to have the strength of effect they do and you wouldn't see such a fast change in the dog's behaviour, and we wouldn't have seen some of the horrendous body language in your 'success' vids.  I'm guessing you've tried it on yourself which is why you state they don't cause pain - but can you speak for every dog?  Dogs have different pain thresholds, just like people - what might be a minor annoyance to one dog could be flipping painful to another.
- By mastifflover Date 07.04.11 22:16 GMT Upvotes 1

> Its not trust, she just associates those things with food!
>
> It worked for you/her (which is good) but won't work for every dog


It is the basis of Pavlovs classical conditioing - it works with ALL animals, including humans.

Food=good, Nikita= food therfore Nikita=good.

But you allready know about learning thoery, or you would not be using it yourself. The only difference is, you choose to use a BAD stimuli to 'correct' the dog (theach the dog to learn to avoid getting an electric shock), whereas reward-based training, teaches the dog to enjoy the beahviours we are teaching it, therfore it wants to do them, it also does not have to endure pain and/or fear in order to learn
- By Dakkobear [gb] Date 07.04.11 22:23 GMT Edited 07.04.11 23:00 GMT

> THE  whole point of e collar training is to make the dog feel good about what he is doing.


It seems that the Kennel Club do not agree - anyone even thinking about using one of the devices should read this report first, specifically:
Electric shock collars cause pain and anxiety:
Studies into the use of electric shock collars have shown that this is a stressful and painful method
of controlling a dog's behaviour.1 Electric shock collars produce physiological effects - a dog's body
will respond to a shock in the same way that it would to a real injury (increased heart rate and
cortisol levels), even if no physical harm has been incurred.2 This leads to visible signs of stress and
behavioural responses associated with fear, such as yelping, cowering, defecating and urinating.3 A
study conducted by Tsevtkov et al. also suggests that conditioning a dog in this way causes
chemical changes that contribute towards intense anxiety disorders, including posttraumatic stress
disorder.4

I really don't think that this equates to making any animal feel good about what he is doing.

You can also have a read of report . Would you call this a good training method:
Schilder and colleagues (2004) compared the behaviour of dogs trained using shock
collars with a control group of dogs, during both free walking in a park and training
sessions. They found that in both situations the dogs previously trained using shock
collars showed more behaviours associated with stress than dogs trained in similar
way, but without shock collars. They concluded that the dogs associated the presence
of the handler with the aversive shock, as they were showing fearful behaviour even
when free walked in a different context.


The BSAVA is in agreement see here specifically: . Shocks received during training may not only be acutely stressful, painful and frightening for the animal but also may produce long term adverse effects on behavioural and emotional responses

Once you have read the reports watch the video's here, showing a man being shocked by a collar available from a pet store; write to your MP using the letter given here;

Let's get these barbaric devices banned once and for all and put the people who purport them to be be a training method out of business once and for all.
- By Dorf [gb] Date 08.04.11 17:20 GMT
Let's get these barbaric devices banned

They can't, the Welsh got them banned on a legal technicality i.e. they had 3 consultations. DEFRA and the Scots are only interested in robust scientific evidence, the UK studies will be finished this year. A senior Scots government member arranged to watch the collars in use, so they know what they 'really' are, he was delighted with them. Another senior Scots gov member commented that they were well aware of extreme animal rights activities. Ulster were never really interested in collar issues, they let all parties have a consultation and took no action.

In the current study on collars the collars are being used by ECMA approved trainers, i.e. Electronic Collar Manufactures Association approved.
.
- By Harley Date 08.04.11 19:15 GMT

> In the current study on collars the collars are being used by ECMA approved trainers, i.e. Electronic Collar Manufactures Association approved.
>


Not so sure that would count as an unbiased study then?
- By Dorf [gb] Date 08.04.11 20:19 GMT Edited 08.04.11 20:27 GMT
Not so sure that would count as an unbiased study then?

Do you mean you think the government contractors are biased? You mean Proffessor Mills (Lincoln) & Dr Rachel Casey (Bristol) who are the contractors, yours is an interesting & unusual interpretation of e-collars in proper use.

Prof Mills is on written record as recomending DEFRA to ban collars during the AWA consultations, Dr Casey is on record of making her own claims in 2003 that were directly opposite to manufactuers instructions, see peer reveiw video below which includes Tri Tronics instructions for tone use & a download link the record of her statements of fact to MPs in 2003 (opposite to the instructions).

Dr Rachel Casey, Peer Reveiw Tone Use On E-Collars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehZl6QCDYwY
.
- By Dakkobear [gb] Date 08.04.11 20:39 GMT

> A senior Scots government member arranged to watch the collars in use, so they know what they 'really' are, he was delighted with them.


Who was this? Would LOVE to get in touch with him to ask why he thought this.

> the Scots are only interested in robust scientific evidence


Given we have elections next month it would be worth asking any candidates who come to your door what their views on these devices are.

> In the current study on collars the collars are being used by ECMA approved trainers, i.e. Electronic Collar Manufactures Association approved.
>


Is this the Defra/lincoln University study?
- By Dorf [gb] Date 08.04.11 20:53 GMT Edited 09.04.11 09:54 GMT

>Is this the Defra/lincoln University study?


Yes.

>It seems that the Kennel Club do not agree


I can not believe you are using the KC as reference - KC is the only breed registration club in the whole of Europe not to have a mandatory fit for breeding test for all working breeds, the consequences, unknown in europe, the self explanatory consequences are outlined in the new thread below & need no further comment from me.

No fit for breeding test discussion

admin edit: topic branched
- By Nikita [ru] Date 09.04.11 15:55 GMT
I fail to see the relevance of your KC comment - what has the absence of a fit for breeding test got to do with their stance on the use of e-collars?
- By Adam P [gb] Date 09.04.11 18:53 GMT
KC are basically against e collars to distract from their own failings!

Adam
- By Dakkobear [gb] Date 09.04.11 20:27 GMT

> KC is the only breed registration club in the whole of Europe not to have a mandatory fit for breeding test for all working breeds


What has this to do with anything about using e-collars?

Can you name the MSP's you were referring to earlier too please as I would like to contact them to get them to explain their views?
- By Dill [gb] Date 10.04.11 12:53 GMT
In the current study on collars the collars are being used by ECMA approved trainers, i.e. Electronic Collar Manufactures Association approved.

This is all very well. 

But the majority of people buying one of these devices to use on their dog will not have been trained to use it, it is also likely that they will not read the material concerning it's use either - people rarely read instructions if they 'think' they know how something works, they even fail to read instructions if they don't know how to use the device.  (How many people confess to not having read the instructions on using their DVD machine yet still can't use it properly?  Luckily this only affects them ;) )  And even if they read the instructions there's a world of difference in putting it into practise - Otherwise there would be little call for dog trainers - everyone would be reading the puppy/training books which would teach them how to train their pup/dog.

Then there are the sadists/ignorant who think that the more pain the better and are buying the device as hitting the dog with a newspaper or stick etc. hasn't worked :(  

Anyone remember Milgram?

So even if the use of these devices is considered 'safe' in the hands of 'professional' people -and that's ignoring the apparent stress evidenced in the dogs' behaviour which contradicts what advocates say - that doesn't mean that they would be 'safe' for just anyone to use.  
- By Adam P [gb] Date 12.04.11 11:59 GMT Edited 12.04.11 12:49 GMT
I think having instruction on how to train with the collar is helpful but not needed to ensure a good result. I have met many many people who have used collars off there own backs and been reasonably successful with them, certainly to the extent they can now control the dog sufficently. Not one of these people has ever over stimmed the dog or used the stim in anger ect.
The thing with collars is they are very easy to use and because they are remote the emotion is taken out of it. They also work so well that a lot of the frustration of a badly behaved dog is taken away!

Ime a lot of people using collars are usually educated people with plenty of brains! Often they are experienced dog owners who have come to realise the limits of regular training techniques and are now after a better approach.

If someone wants to abuse a dog its a lot easier to use a stick than a 150£ collar!
- By Nikita [ru] Date 12.04.11 12:25 GMT Edited 12.04.11 12:51 GMT

> But the majority of people buying one of these devices to use on their dog will not have been trained to use it


That's what concerns me the most, and is something I said quite a few times previously.

For argument's sake, let's say that a trainer has absolutely phenomenal timing which allows them to have success with these devices.

Unfortunately, not only will the vast, vast majority of people using these things not have been trained to use them, but their timing will be atrocious - that amounts to a SERIOUS welfare issue.  The biggest challenge I face with owners regardless of the issue being address is timing - I can get them to understand pretty quickly what it is we're doing, why, and how; but getting their timing up to scratch is something that a lot of them struggle with.  Fortunately, positive reinforcement is very forgiving of this and the dogs still learn well, albeit a bit slower than they possibly could - but with such a major aversive as a shock collar, the potential consequences of the average dog owner using them doesn't bear thinking about.
- By ceejay Date 12.04.11 12:52 GMT Edited 12.04.11 13:00 GMT
Check out the Western Mail this morning.  Interesting case - the first person to be taken to court for using an e-collar - he has pleaded guilty.  It was a bit of a shock for me because I know of this man and even somewhere in the depths of my memory I knew from a mutual friend that he was having problems with his dog being an escape artist.  The dog was found on the beach wearing the collar and taken to the Dog's Trust.  The collar was supposed to be triggered by a boundary fence but obviously it wasn't working - or someone had left a gate open.  Alledgedly this is not the first time the dog has been found loose wearing the collar.  The case has been adjourned until April 18th.   He must have been desperate to use an e-collar and I suppose many will say that it is no different to using an electric fence for farm animals.  Boundaries are often limited in height because of local planning rules.  What can someone do in this situation I wonder?

admin: note - If you wish to discuss the legal case in question please use this thread
- By Pookin [gb] Date 12.04.11 13:56 GMT Edited 12.04.11 15:37 GMT

>What can someone do in this situation I wonder?


Buy a tether or supervise in the garden?
- By mastifflover Date 12.04.11 14:05 GMT

>.....he was having problems with his dog being an escape artist........ Boundaries are often limited in height because of local planning rules.  What can someone do in this situation I wonder?


My last dog was an escape artist, he was 4 years old when we got him and was very good at escaping :eek: When we first got him, we couldn't increase the height of our boundries, we lived in a 1st floor flat and the garden to this was obviously down-stairs at ground-level. I had a new-born baby at the time, so supervising the dog in the garden was not always possible, as I'd often have to rush back upstairs to tend to baby. So we got a long-line, attached to a steak in the middle of the garden so he could safely be left in the garden without being able to escape. We never left him for extended periods on his own in the garden, but being teathered to the steak meant if I had to dash off upstairs I knew the dog would still be there when I'd sorted baby and came back down to the dog.

Once we moved to the house we are in now, we put up 6ft fencing around the garden, so could do away with the steak-out line. Unfortunately he bolted out of the front door and got run-over by a car - (amazingly he survived), but from then on all doors in the house had to be locked which would remind us to make sure the dog shut away safely before any main-door was opened (he'd bolt out of no-where, through your legs and be gone like a shot). On top of this we had the dog neutured (he would try to escape looking for bitches), which did help things.

If you want to put in management stratagies there are plenty available that do not invlove aversive methods, however, they take time & effort to keep up. The electric fence is a way for people to rid thierselfs of the responsibility and effort to contain thier dog(s), IMO.
- By Dorf [gb] Date 12.04.11 14:13 GMT Edited 13.04.11 06:23 GMT
the potential consequences of the average dog owner using them doesn't bear thinking about.

I have just gone over this video of a class of 8 in close proximity to each other with all owners & dogs learning off lead with major distractions as safety training. I can't see where they are all going wrong.

Training Class of 8, foundation off lead training (app 3rd week)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tRLthYRYsY

but with such a major aversive as a shock collar

Shock collars have been obsolete since 1998 in US, here some limited use e-collars went on sale here around that time and the first high spec e-collars went on sale here in 2003. Shock collars were mainly used by gundog users to stop dogs when they refused to stop during a chase, shock collars could not be used like e-collars & they had a different purpose.
- By Harley Date 12.04.11 14:45 GMT

> Ime a lot of people using collars are usually educated people with plenty of brains!


Just because one is educated and has brains doesn't mean you have impeccable timing. Clicker training needs good timing and a lot of educated, brainy people don't have the timing to clicker train effectively so what chance they would be any better with an electric collar.

Earlier this year I met someone using an ecollar - didn't realise straight away that this was what was being used. I was walking towards him, one of my dogs on lead and the other off lead when I heard him yelling at his dog to lie down. Thinking that maybe his dog wasn't too friendly I put my dog back on lead and stood and waited for the man to get his dog but he just kept yelling "down" in a constant stream of words. The dog then yelped and did lie down but the man was still a fair way away from the dog - I waited for him to go and get his dog but he didn't bother so I carried on walking towards them. The dog started to get up and he yelled "down" , dog whimpered and lay back down again. I walked in a big loop around the dog so as to not encroach upon it's space and thus walked a distance away from the man as well.

Once we were past I heard him calling the dog's name so turned round to see if the dog was coming towards me and my dogs but the dog was still in a down. He was called several times and each time he started to get up he would flinch and lie back down again. It was only  when I looked back again from the gate that I noticed he had a remote in his hand and was using this to "train" his dog - it appeared he was calling the dog to him but zapping it when it tried to obey as the dog would start to rise and then lie down again - or maybe the dog was too worried to try and get up properly from the down that had been achieved by use of the collar. Either way the man obviously had no idea what he was doing and had one very stressed and confused dog. Very sad and very cruel.
- By Adam P [gb] Date 12.04.11 15:35 GMT Edited 12.04.11 15:39 GMT
I don't think you need spot on timing tbh, certainly not as good with a clicker! If you can basically give a command and press a button at the same time your timing is good enough!
- By MsTemeraire Date 12.04.11 19:47 GMT Edited 12.04.11 20:28 GMT

> Ime a lot of people using collars are usually educated people with plenty of brains!


It's nothing to do with brains, it's about hand-eye coordination!
- By Nikita [ru] Date 13.04.11 08:20 GMT

> I don't think you need spot on timing tbh, certainly not as good with a clicker! If you can basically give a command and press a button at the same time your timing is good enough!


Not necessarily.  Dogs move very fast and with something as aversive as an ecollar, it only takes a split second of wrong timing for a major and potentially lifelong seriously negative association to be made with the wrong thing (e.g. shocking the dog for running off when the dog has stopped to meet another dog, child, person etc).

Poor timing with a clicker can reward the wrong thing but it's a heck of a lot more forgiving and easier to fix than the unintended association of something with an electric shock.

Any behavioural text worth its weight states that timing is crucial in the use of punishment as the repurcussions for poor timing can be profound.  Oddly enough I've yet to read one that says the same for positive reinforcement, regardless of how it's applied.
- By Dorf [gb] Date 13.04.11 08:53 GMT Edited 13.04.11 21:34 GMT
If you want to put in management stratagies there are plenty available that do not invlove aversive methods

This post is relevant to many of your posts and your seeming (based on the content of your writeings ) complete misunderstanding of aversives in learning, driving lessons are a common and easy to understand example of extensive aversive learning, the instructor is teaching the learner avoidance behaviour through threats of aversive repercussions if they do not perform a very, very narrow spectrum of drvining on public roads protocols. As the learner becomes more competant by avoiding (avoidance behaviour) inappropriate driving behaviours which could cause a punishment, the greater the freedoms of unaccompanied, full license driving become.

It's an uncontroversial fact in psychology that all human learned behaviour is avoidance behaviour, it is learned by experience of exposure to aversive stimuli of some kind that the individual itself experiences as aversive.

No human can understand what pain or fear is until they experience pain or fear of something caused by their own behaviour. Once pain or fear are experienced as a consequence of any behavioural action the person then avoids the behaviour which causes the pain or fear thereby improving the quality of life and ensuring safe freedom to interact with its environment. The sooner they learn specific avoidance the wider their freedoms and quality of life become.

All land mammals experience painful stimuli in and as an integral & extensive part of the learning process, Skinner wrote, animals learn through experience of environmental stimuli experiences not intellect. Live examples video, video contains blood & yelps but demonstrates the freedom from pain & fear by avoidance behaviour of learned aversive painful or fear triggering stimuli giving it the freedom and pleasure to interact with its environment due previous learned experience of aversive stimuli.

Ref
B F Skinner, Behaviour of organisms 1938
.
- By Dorf [gb] Date 13.04.11 10:36 GMT Edited 13.04.11 10:39 GMT
If you want to put in management stratagies there are plenty available that do not invlove aversive methods

But in another post a couple of days ago you desribed your experience as "dragging me all accross the park to get to a rottie", that description was of a significantly restricted & confined dog trying to get away from a physical aversive restraint i.e. collar and lead aversives, so why were you using a physical aversive restraint if you prefer one of the "plenty available that do not invlove aversive methods"?
.
- By Dorf [gb] Date 13.04.11 16:05 GMT Edited 13.04.11 16:10 GMT
Nikita wrote Any behavioural text worth its weight states that timing is crucial in the use of punishment as the repurcussions for poor timing can be profound.

Dorf response-Well everyone I have read on here, except Adam Palmer & me, attempts to use negative punishment as a base for their training. 

Nikita wrote Oddly enough I've yet to read one that says the same for positive reinforcement, regardless of how it's applied.

Dorf response-Maybe you have been reading/read commercial dog trainers articles which are sales talk. Again your terminology is by the founder of modern behaviourism, this is what he said from B F Skinner, 'How To Train Animals' 1951.

Skinner wrote -To be effective a reinforcement must be given almost simultaneously with the desired behavior; a delay of even one second destroys much of the effect

Dorf response-So if your trying to overcome a predatory fighting dogs behaviour just highlighted & get the timeing wrong the reinforcing of non aggression is destroyed & it would simply run off and maybe kill another dog because what the human thought was a reinforcer did not meet the reinforcement protocols needed to reinforce predatory aggression extinction.
.
- By Adam P [gb] Date 13.04.11 17:15 GMT Edited 13.04.11 21:42 GMT
The stim is associated with the command, its also very mild. This leads to two things.

A, the dog already has a long association with the command and stim, this will predate any new associations.

B, the stim is so mild that it won't cause any negative effects. Its just a slight tingle  so not aversive enough to classically condition dog = bad.
Suggesting that it is is like suggesting that everytime a dog puts pressure on his lead or doesn't get a treat around other dogs your creating immediate negative lifelong associations!

Btw e collars are neg reward not punishment, those scientific texts (use the term loosely) are refering to major positive punishment.
- By colliecrew [gb] Date 13.04.11 19:03 GMT Edited 13.04.11 21:42 GMT
Basic question - why would you feel the need to use a training method which inflicts pain when it can be successfully accomplished without?

Would you rather have a Manager who bullied you and intimidated you into carrying out your job or one who positively reinforced your work and with whom you had an equal working relationship?

I wouldn't anticipate that anyone would choose the former. Not when the latter can achieve the same, if not better, results.
- By Dakkobear [gb] Date 13.04.11 21:03 GMT

> DEFRA and the Scots are only interested in robust scientific evidence, the UK studies will be finished this year. A senior Scots government member arranged to watch the collars in use, so they know what they 'really' are, he was delighted with them. Another senior Scots gov member commented that they were well aware of extreme animal rights activities.


Dorf, you still haven't specified who these MSP's are. Since you are stating that one was 'delighted' with them, I would like to know who it was.
Thanks
- By mastifflover Date 13.04.11 23:36 GMT

>But in another post a couple of days ago you desribed your experience as "dragging me all accross the park to get to a rottie", that description was of a significantly restricted & confined dog trying to > get away from a physical aversive restraint


'significantly restrained' are you serious??? My dog is a 14stone mastiff, he weighs 4 & half stone more than me - stating that me holding his lead is 'signifiacant restraint' is like saying that a Chi, teathered to a potato is under 'significant restraint'!

> collar and lead aversives, so why were you using a physical aversive restraint if you prefer one of the "plenty available that do not invlove aversive methods"?


Please explain to me how my dog considers his lead to be an AVERSIVE????
An averisve is somthing the dog does not like, my dog loves his lead - it means walks, it means treats. Pulling me to get to his buddy whilst he is on the lead equals 'great fun - there is my buddy'.

A lead is a physical restraint, holding a lead that is attatched to a dog is using the lead as a physical restraint - like holding a childs hand is physically restraining the child.

I am starting to think that 'aversive' means something completely different to you & I..........
- By mastifflover Date 13.04.11 23:42 GMT

>Nikita said: Any behavioural text worth its weight states that timing is crucial in the use of punishment as the repurcussions for poor timing can be profound


>Dorf quoted SKinner: To be effective a reinforcement must be given almost simultaneously with the desired behavior; a delay of even one second destroys much of the effect (ie. timing is crucial)


>Dorf response-So if your trying to overcome a predatory fighting dogs behaviour just highlighted & get the timeing wrong the reinforcing of non aggression is destroyed & it would simply run off and maybe kill another dog because what the human thought was a reinforcer did not meet the reinforcement protocols needed to reinforce predatory aggression extinction.


What are you getting at Dorf? You've quoted Skinner in response to Nikita, but Skinners quote only backs-up what Nikita has allready said :confused: What is your point? Are you saying that your quote from Skinner (whom which you appear to base all you quotes and base your training principals on) is wrong and that timing is irrelevent?
- By mastifflover Date 14.04.11 00:08 GMT

> Btw e collars are neg reward not punishment, those scientific texts (use the term loosely) are refering to major positive punishment.


Do you mean negative reinforcement?

Something Good can start or be presented, = Positive Reinforcement
Something Good can end or be taken away, = Negative Punishment
Something Bad can start or be presented,  = Positive Punishment 
Something Bad can end or be taken away,  = Negative Reinforcement 

> the stim is so mild that it won't cause any negative effects


It has to be strong enough for the dog to NOT LIKE IT, or it would have no use.

Bad things (which most of us will stick the label 'punishement' on in general English language terms) can be a 'reinforcement' or a 'punishment', just as good things can be a 'punishement'.

This is how you and Dorf are trying to fool everybody, playing word games. YES, with=holding a treat from a dog can be TERMED 'negative punishemnet' but it does not mean you do BAD THINGS to the dog, it means it doesn't get a biccy! Zapping a dog with elecrtic can be TERMED negative 'reinforcement', but it does not mean it's a 'nice thing'.

Stop playing games with the terminology.
- By Dorf [gb] Date 14.04.11 05:21 GMT Edited 14.04.11 05:33 GMT
Dorf, you still haven't specified who these MSP's are. Since you are stating that one was 'delighted' with them, I would like to know who it was.
Thanks


If you PM your real name, address & phone number I'll call you and consider it, you'll need to explain first to me & then to them your experience of your e-collar use & not just the non e-collar literate stuff you write on here.

Your a bit late anyway (surprised you don't known that), that was when the consultations were going on in 07 & they concluded in 07, still Dakkobear, I'm sure they will be interested in anything new you can offer them. Their policy after the consultations remained the same as before i.e. unless there is robust scinetific evidence against them they are not interested. Since then the Schalke Hackbarth 09 study which was robust showed the results below and proved what we all know, the negative punishment base which most promote on here is both ineffective & raised cortisol (stress) levels to almost significant.

What I suspect you will be able to obtain obtain is that depts policy which I have just repeated (robust study), it was online on their site, the person whose name undersigned it was Lockheed or Lockwood, something like that (I think Lockheed), I think he was the then minister of their DEFRA equivilent dept, if not the minister himself then close to that position.

Anyway Dakkobear just pass your verifiable real name, number and address and I'll see. By the way do you have any vids of your dog in such situations as unpredictable, unexpected random chases & recalls at distance, aggressive incidents etc, anything like that will help to influence my final formal decision, those things on the abundance of instruction on vids & those submitting to the consultations did influence the Scots.

I'll give you some help which might influence them, below are the ECMA sales figs from 2008-2010, they work out at app 75,000 PA, not bad since e-collars post date commercial positive training, facts influence the Scots & they allready have a lot of facts, your subbmission of the last published sales figs wil influence your credibilty with them, go for it, I did.

2008 - 350,000 owners of electronic collars in the UK
http://tinyurl.com/58sqhu

2010 - Around 500,000 electric collars are in use in the UK, including some 20,000 in Wales.
http://tinyurl.com/ygho8af

.
- By Nikita [ru] Date 14.04.11 07:21 GMT
Dorf - you know full well I was referring to the use of positive punishment.

And while negative punishment does form part of a lot of training, at the most it is usually applied as withholding a treat for a very short time - not exactly traumatic.  Positive reinforcement, however, is by far the mainstay of modern methods, regardless of how you personally perceive what you are reading (or how you want to twist it to suit your own ends).

Re. the timing of a reward - as I said, if the timing is off then it may reward the wrong thing but this is vastly more fixable than a shock applied at the wrong time.

Your example is just ridiculous - one mistimed reward is not going to teach the dog that killing another dog is the right thing to do.  To use your quote, "a delay of even one second destroys much of the effect".  That does not say that a slight mistime of a reward will send the entire behaviour to hell - it just says that that particular reward will have no effect.  Entirely different thing.  It may stop progress for a very little while (we're talkign minutes at most), but that's all it will do.  As I said before many of the owners I work with have timing issues - and many of the owners I work with have dogs with FA to other dogs.  We have mistimed rewards in the first session or two while they get to grips with things, and you know what?  They still go on to successfully rehab around other dogs, play, interact and so on.  Conversely however I have seen plenty of dogs who have had positive punishment applied and everything has been made on hell of a lot worse - poor timing and increased stress.

Adam - how do you know that it's only a very mild 'stim' for every dog?  I've said before - and I notice you didn't reply, at least not that I've seen - that every dog has a different pain threshold and skin sensitivity.  What may be very mild for you, and for dog A, may be incredibly painful and stressful for dog B.  The same is true of people - one person trying the collar will find it a slight tingle, the next will cry out in pain.

You're also making an assumption that the dog has a long experience with the collar and the shock - perhaps in your sessions they do.  But out in the world, an awful lot of people who have bought a collar to stop some sort of behavioural issue do not take the time to let the dog adjust - they just pop it on and start pressing that button.  That's when you see risks of dogs developing severe negative associations, because this horrendous shock (and a lot of owners don't start it at the very lowest setting, either - the button may remove emotion from the shock, but it doesn't take the anger and frustration away from the owner, or the desire for a quick fix) suddenly comes from nowhere while the dog is focused on something.  It takes really very little in a situation like that to cause such an association.

It doesn't matter what you do in your particular sessions, or what your theory is, or what setting you use your own collars on - it's what the general public does that's the problem and that's when damage is done.  Although the dogs in the videos you post - especially that poor collie - suggest that damage is being done whoever is pressing the button.

Lastly - when that button is pressed, you are adding an aversive to the situation - positive punishment.  The shock may then go on to be applied as NR, but it always begins as PP no matter how you do it.
- By Dorf [gb] Date 14.04.11 10:36 GMT Edited 14.04.11 10:42 GMT
'significantly restrained' are you serious??? My dog is a 14stone mastiff, he weighs 4 & half stone more than me

Yes its significant and on top of that it seems it's long term which means its dangerous aversive. The pressure of the aversive restraint is not balanced throughout the dogs entire body, as you seem to suggest, its localised to the neck. I say 'long term' because I saw one of your posts around last July/summer describing him pulling you all over the park, some of this will be jerking, either the dog jerking himself or you attempting to jerk him back to stop it.

If you had learned how to stop this by use of an e-collar all this high risk behaviour would not be happening, prevention of specifics is within e-collar capability.

The Swedish study on long term damage from this kind of physical restraint aversive is believed to be serious, 400 dogs were involved in the study and that is a significant number of dogs to establish co-relations, anyway its your dog so up to you what you do (if anything) about it but at least read the Swedish study on it so you are better informed.

Hallgren - Back Problems in dogs 1991.
Result
63% of the dogs had back problems at the time of the examination. There was no significant difference between males and females.
The problems were located in this manner:

* Lumbar (lower back): 72.33%
* Thoracic (upper back): 67.19%
* Cervical (neck): 26.87%
This total is more than 100% because some dogs had injuries in more than one location.


Free download
Pulling  hazards:
http://tinyurl.com/62fqx7s
.
- By LJS Date 14.04.11 10:47 GMT Edited 14.04.11 11:24 GMT
Dorf why not just give the name of the MSP, it is not a difficult question to answer ? Instead you write a page of what is totally deflecting from the question.
- By Crespin Date 14.04.11 11:56 GMT

> I don't think you need spot on timing tbh, certainly not as good with a clicker! If you can basically give a command and press a button at the same time your timing is good enough!


So you arent even giving the dog time to react the command?  You are just zapping straight away?  That seems a little unfair.  If a mom asked a child to clean its room but at the same time as making this request smacked him across the face that would be ok in your eyes? 
- By Adam P [gb] Date 14.04.11 12:01 GMT Edited 14.04.11 15:49 GMT
Nikita

E collars have adjustable levels. Dog a may feel it on 3 dog b on 4 ect.
You just use the level appopriate to the dog your training!

The average person I have seen using e collars in the real world also does not have the problems you mention.
- By mastifflover Date 14.04.11 12:06 GMT

> Yes its significant and on top of that it seems it's long term which means its dangerous aversive. The pressure of the aversive restraint is not balanced throughout the dogs entire body, as you seem to suggest, its localised to the neck.


He wears a chest harness.............................

> I saw one of your posts around last July/summer describing him pulling you all over the park


I don't go to a park.

If you'd like a more detailed explanation of why I was 'pulled all over' I'll happily give it to you.

Buster spots his buddy a rottie - no need to say anything as he will wait patiently for his buddy to approach.
Rottie steams towards us and launches himself at me (he is rather friendly and is on a flexi-lead), Buster gets excited now as rottie is right in his face,
Buster does a play-bow, Rottie does a play-bow,
Rottie gets even more wound up and runs a loop around my legs (passing on Busters side, between me & Buster). I now have have flexi-lead wrapped around my legs with a rottie attatched to one end - it's making it difficult to stand and rottie is still trying to run in circles and jump all over Buster.
Rottie jumps through my legs, landing on his back, legs on the air. Buster then also jumps through my legs to play with rottie. buster is 32" at the shoulder so with his girth is it impossible to keep both feet on the floor.
I am now on 1 foot, flexi-lead wrapped around my legs, 1 rottie & 1 mastiff beetween my legs and Buster does a play-bow. I get nudged around, I'm staggering for a footing, I am being pulled around by leads (at this point Busters lead has now gone through my legs too).

Rotties owner & I am trying to untangle the leads from each other, from my legs and the the dogs legs (rotties body is also tangled in Buster lead). Rotties owner is a bit reluctant to get a grip on the leads as we are strangers and the leads are firmly wrapped around the top of my thigh (I am a woman). The leads were in such a tangle that the only way to untangle them was to take Busters lead off him (shockingly, with all the fun he is having and a Rottie bouncing all over him & my rubbish training ability, he will sit patiently with me holding onto his collar while I sort his lead out, but I do have to give him 2 verbal reminders to 'wait nice' and to not respond to the play-invitations from the rottie)
With 2 large dogs playing on-lead, yes I did get pulled & pushed around a lot and had a rather fetching 9" bruise around my thigh too, from one of the leads.

As that is all rather a lot of waffle and completey distracts from any post it is said in, the easiest recount of the event is "Buster pulled me all over". My bad for not being more detailed in the first instance.

> If you had learned how to stop this by use of an e-collar all this high risk behaviour would not be happening,


I can stop all of this by stepping out of the way when the ROTTIE tries to jump through my legs - no need to zap my dog and by avoiding that high-level of excitement I have taught Buster to be much calmer & more responsive to me while interacting with the Rottie - and all I used was well timed CHEESE :-D
- By mastifflover Date 14.04.11 12:48 GMT

> the stim is so mild that it won't cause any negative effects. Its just a slight tingle  so not aversive enough to classically condition dog


After the great attempts at Dorf to deflect the debate from "using E-collars as a training ais" to "why mastifflovers methods are aversive" It think it's about time we got back on track.

I am struggling to understand your above statement. E-collars are heavily promoted as perfect for predatory chasing. I can't understand how a 'slight tingle' would do anything in such a situation?

My little cat (about 4 or 5lb in weight) has a thing for chasing and catching bees and wasps. She has been stung several times, twice in the lip and a few times on the paw, however she will STILL chase & catch them (and try to eat them if I don't stop her). Granted, the pain she has recieved from being stung will make her a little more cautious in batting them - she will sit and wait for a guaranteed hit before walloping them (rather than several wallops in the hope that one will connect), but she will still try to get them.

I can not understand how a dog (that will predatory chase) will pay any attention to a 'slight tingle' when faced with an animal to chase.

Please could you exaplin HOW you'd use the e-collar and what it is the 'stim' represents to the dog.

Also, if the 'stim' is akin to a 'slight tingle' why anybody should invest so much money to buy a device that emits electric shocks, when they could simply tickle thier dog with the end of a finger, or use a virating collar (that ONLY vibrates and does NOT give a shock and are available for a fraction of the price of an e-collar)?
- By freelancerukuk [cz] Date 14.04.11 13:56 GMT
Dorf, you still haven't specified who these MSP's are. Since you are stating that one was 'delighted' with them, I would like to know who it was.
Thanks


Dorf, in reply to your response to the question above, I would ask, why, if the information is so highly confidential, you have chosen to use it as some kind of evidence of high level support for e-collars? Has this MSP asked you to screen people on his her behalf? I am trying to make sense of your need to quiz the questioner on their experience of e-collars, before you reveal the full extent of information you have already chosen to put into the public domain. It does all seem a bit smoke and mirrors.

You refer again to Schalke. I would observe that the Hackbarth paper raises its own questions about the methodology of the study and therefore the results. It is an interesting result but not not as robust as you seem to suggest.
Up Topic Dog Boards / Controversial Stuff / Using E collars as a training aid
1 2 3 4 Previous Next  

Powered by mwForum 2.29.6 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill

About Us - Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy