Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,779,335 times
Reputation: 7185
Advertisements
I'm reading a lot of misunderstanding and misrepresentation, some ignorance and a dash of what could only be fiction.
I can at least understand how someone who has read some of the new dog training guides and has had some success training a polite dog who is a good citizen on the leash, at the park and in the home could have an emotional response to the prospect of a training tool that is not only aversive in its nature but negatively reinforces unwanted behaviors or failure to promptly comply with known commands by delivering an electric shock. It sounds really scary and really terrible. Why-oh-why would anyone want to train their dog with such a torture device? They must be lazy, mean, bad people who don't deserve to have dogs (or anything alive). Understandable position, but really quite ignorant of the proper introduction and application of the e-collar.
If you need a well behaved dog who can do a few tricks, play flyball, some agility work or maybe do a bit of dock jumping then you do not need an e-collar and you would probably be an idiot to spend the money for a good one. The only application that really comes to mind for a companion dog is to produce reliable callback for dogs with problematic wanderlust who may be at risk of death by vehicular traffic.
Please understand that there are training scopes well beyond basic obedience, there are people who require their dogs to perform exceptionally complex tasks and handle extremely precisesly and there are purpose bred dogs with truly extreme energy levels, exercise requirements and pressure tolerances. In those cases, there is nothing "short" or "easy" (or "cheap" for that matter) about introducing and training with an e-collar. Aversive methods are warranted, probably necessary even, and the dogs not only tolerate them but flourish. I hope all of you have the opportunity to witness a field trial stake or hunt test at some point in your lives. It will be a veritable monument to just how wrong some assertions about so-called negative methods really are. You will witness a multitude of dogs who have lived their entire lives under force training yet all are intensely focused, happy, loving and well-loved dogs.
Driller, I generally value your input and respect your opinions but you seem to be telling me that you have never actually seen an e-collar used and you certainly haven't seen one used the right way. (Yes, there is a right way)
One of my dogs is a cadaver dog. On a recent search he was working offlead under a busy 4 lane highway overpass - no fence there. Reliability in those circumstances is absolutely a matter of life and death for both the dog and the car drivers. Many areas we have to work [around railroad tracks, streams, kudzu] are not condusive to working onlead and we are near dangerous vehicles.
I have used the ecollar using Lou Castle low stim techniques to proof the recall. He also wears a bark collar in the truck and it has relieved him of the duty to "protect" it from everyone who approaches. He is actually much calmer in the truck and I have seen no, zero, nada, adverse effects.
Dogs can overheated if they get worked up barking and we tried many approaches steadily over two years but this one worked the first time we tried it.
Hunters have used electronic collars for years and I daresay those are some of the happiest well adjusted dogs I have seen.
Please understand that there are training scopes well beyond basic obedience, there are people who require their dogs to perform exceptionally complex tasks and handle extremely precisesly and there are purpose bred dogs with truly extreme energy levels, exercise requirements and pressure tolerances. In those cases, there is nothing "short" or "easy" (or "cheap" for that matter) about introducing and training with an e-collar. Aversive methods are warranted, probably necessary even, and the dogs not only tolerate them but flourish. I hope all of you have the opportunity to witness a field trial stake or hunt test at some point in your lives. It will be a veritable monument to just how wrong some assertions about so-called negative methods really are. You will witness a multitude of dogs who have lived their entire lives under force training yet all are intensely focused, happy, loving and well-loved dogs.
i don't think that when shock collars are used in those situations, that the trainers are "lazy" or that the methods don't work. however, i am unconvinced that they are necessary.
i belong to a positive training e-mail list that includes people who train dogs for hunting, all kinds of trials, drug sniffing and other police work, rescue, schutzhund, protection, etc. all of these people manage to train their dogs to do all sorts of complex, precise tasks without using aversives. aversives might work, but so does positive reinforcement, and positive reinforcement when done by an able trainer, can produce just as much reliability as aversives.
when given the choice between hurting or scaring a dog and not doing it, when both methods work, i am going with not. never mind that a misapplied reward is much, much less harmful than a misapplied aversive. i don't approve of using aversives at all, but if they're going to be used, they need to be used by qualified trainers, not lay people who don't really know what they're doing.
and i'd hope at the very least that you'd discourage the use of shock collars for pet owners who just want a well-behaved dog who maybe does a few tricks, since you admit yourself that they're not necessary for that. and that is ultimately what this thread is about.
Well, you are right, the thread is about bark collars and the assumption has been made that if you have a dog that just LOVES be outside and LOVES to bark AND you are pulling your hair out AND have made valiant attempts to stop the behavior that you are a horrid person incapable of training a dog, if you resort to a bark collar.
That is the average suburban pet owner. I imagine for some dogs this choice may mean the difference between going to the pound and getting euthanized, having debarking surgery, or having a fine life. I would rather advise someone to get a quality bark collar - one that only shocks on vibrate AND repeated barking and one that has varying stim levels than just going out and buying something cheap at petsmart that may even shock the dog when another dog barks. The dog quickly learns they cannot bark while they are wearing the collar.
My only wish is that I had bought one earlier. A lot of folks with working dogs use them because it is often easy for those dogs to get revved up.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,779,335 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by groar
and i'd hope at the very least that you'd discourage the use of shock collars for pet owners who just want a well-behaved dog who maybe does a few tricks, since you admit yourself that they're not necessary for that. and that is ultimately what this thread is about.
I most definitely would. If you do not have a legitimate need, don't do it. Someone who has all the good intentions in the world but doesn't know what they are doing can ruin a dog with an e-collar and I think it is a black mark on your soul that is judged at the gates if you do something to lose the trust of the most loyal creature on the planet.
EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by groar
i belong to a positive training e-mail list that includes people who train dogs for hunting, all kinds of trials, drug sniffing and other police work, rescue, schutzhund, protection, etc. all of these people manage to train their dogs to do all sorts of complex, precise tasks without using aversives. aversives might work, but so does positive reinforcement, and positive reinforcement when done by an able trainer, can produce just as much reliability as aversives.
As an afterthought, you have to incorporate a lot of reward and positive interaction into any training regimine or you get no dog. The reward aspect for a job well done is what really cements the training in the dog's head. If you do it right, the job itself becomes the reward.
Last edited by jimboburnsy; 12-01-2009 at 08:48 AM..
..you are a horrid person incapable of training a dog, if you resort to a bark collar.
My only wish is that I had bought one earlier. A lot of folks with working dogs use them because it is often easy for those dogs to get revved up.
I don't see anyone making that assumption about you personally, granny.
The majority of these posts and the subsequent comments were referring to people using a shock collar to basically just shut a dog up. That is certainly what I was referring to. This thread was about using shock collars on pets - which is exactly what groar referenced.
I have worked with people who've had cadaver dogs and have seen how cadaver dogs are trained. I have seen attack dogs during intensive training and in the field, working. One of my former supervisors, with whom I was friends, raised, trained and owned several French spaniels (I think that's what they were called; very sweet dogs!). He hunted with them.
Not one of those trainers and handlers used a shock collar. Their methods of control were mostly vocal. Their level of vocal intensity was geared toward the personality of the dog and their relationship with that dog.
Heck yes, granny, I'd rather see a handler use a shock collar on a working dog than see it dead, either by running into traffic or having a pet put down because the neighbors complained. I just don't think it should be the first, second or third resort...
...people who train dogs for hunting, all kinds of trials, drug sniffing and other police work, rescue, schutzhund, protection, etc. all of these people manage to train their dogs to do all sorts of complex, precise tasks without using aversives.
and i'd hope at the very least that you'd discourage the use of shock collars for pet owners who just want a well-behaved dog who maybe does a few tricks, since you admit yourself that they're not necessary for that. and that is ultimately what this thread is about.
Very well put, groar. Thank you for reinforcing the point that this thread is ultimately about the use of shock collars on pets. It should help to prevent any misunderstandings and misrepresentations of other's posts.
I am not taking it personally because I know my dogs have not been traumatized by this one bit - I am saying that the theme of this thread has been to categorize the collars and the people who use them as torture devices in the hands of evil torturers and assume they are all lazy swine who would not have barking dogs if they knew squat about dog training.
Yet, several have reported success on this thread with these collars. Ask them - are their dogs a fundamental part of their life and are they traumatized by wearing the collars? Have you consistently (a big word in dog training) tried other approaches?
I would like a penny for every dollar I have spent working with a behaviorist on this issue and the countless efforts using less "offensive" techniques [the only real suggestion offered by anybody other than to use citronella which, in my mind actually is cruel]
Ok lets see - teach the dog to bark so you can teach it to be quiet - yep they quiet on command, no problem.
Ok click/treat when they are in the yard and not barking - slowly extending out the time - yep and while I had success with ONE dog crate barking in the truck this way and knew how to do it - not so for the other two and not so for the one that yard barks
Ok just sit on the tailgate and ignore the dog-extinguish the behavior - yep it works but passerby walking past the truck don't come sit on my tailgate.
Have people come up to the truck and give the dog a treat when it is quiet - oh yeah the dog figured that one out real quick and would bark just to get them to the truck so he could be quiet and get his treat.
Bring the dog in - yep it works but I really feel I should be able to put my dogs outside for 30 minutes and not have to be out there with them every minute they are outside; I spend plenty of other time with them.
Oh and FWIW the only electronic collar training I have done with my dogs other than using a bark collar is to proof the recall. The rest has all been motivational training.
So instead of berating folks for doing this how about presenting some real solutions that have worked without using the bark collar?
I haven't read all the responses and maybe missed the posts that you felt were berating but the title of this thread is "Shock Collars, Laugh Out Loud..."
Apparently, based on the title, the OP thinks that Shock collars and the pain that is caused by them is a laughing matter. It's a good thing that people are speaking out against them... IMO.
I had a boss once who kept his Rottweiler in a Shock collar at all times and used it constantly to correct the dog. That dog just happened to develop cancer in a gland in his neck, right under where the shock collar was. That may have been a coincidence -- maybe not.
What I do know is that the dog was not a bad dog and he could have been trained easily by other means. Instead, everytime he did anything that the owner thought was wrong...the poor dog received a shock.
I wonder what the dog really learned from all those shocks?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
