# Using an e-collar?



## JoelSilverman

This thread was started because of a previous thread in another forum I am in. There is a national dog training company that uses the e-collar (using stimulation) in their training of all behaviors. 

I wanted to talk a little about attitude, and the attitude that you have the ability to create when training is done the right way, at the right time, with the right behavior, with the right dog. 

It really is about personalities and the fact that all dogs are different. I believe that at times the e-collar can be more humane and effective than what you would have to physically do to correct some dogs using a chain collar. I did not always think this way. It was only in the past years did I see some of my friends who train dogs for the K9 unit of the police departments use it, and saw how it worked. Make no mistake, I think that the chain collar in the right hands as a great tool. But in some cases, there may be a dog that is so out of control, or so aggressive, it may very well be that the e-collar is the best answer. 

Having said that, the reason I would use this as a last resort is because there is something that the e-collar will not give you that training a dog with a reward will.... and that is attitude. 

This person spent 650.00 with this company training this dog. After watching the video, I will let you form your opinion, but watch the dog's attitude the last third of the clip using an e-collar.. not a lot of eye contact with the owner.. losing a bit of attitude.. and waiting for the stimulation. (this is a 4 month old Weimaraner being used with one of these.. something I would not recommend) : 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=du_mMDN7p74 

Watch my dog Foster's attitude.... (the tail, eye contact...body language.etc..) your dog will not look like this using an e-collar.. 

http://www.companionsforlife.net/Foster_Working.html 
http://www.companionsforlife.net/Foster_mailing_a_letter.html 


When you are training with the e-collar, you will not see a dog looking at you in anticipation of the cue, because the cue, which is paired with a stimulation comes from an inanimate place. I want the animal to look at me wagging his tail in anticipation of wanting to work. I don't want the dog to be wondering where the stimulation is coming from. The best dog trainers will tell you that when you are training a dog in a state of wanting to please you with that anticipation, training is so much easier, and so much more effective. 
* 
SOMETHING TO REMEMBER* 

*You cannot get that attitude from an e-collar, because instead of wanting to please you, they are only sitting because they know there will be a stimulation if not. Even if you use treats after the dog sits, you are still using stimulation to get the dog to sit.* 

I just wanted to mention this because my training method, along with so many in this forum, is based on building a positive relationship with the animal and creating attitude and drive. The e-collar does not do that. But again, I believe that are rare times where there is no other alternative, and if the person knows what they are doing, an e-collar can be an effective tool.

I wrote this for anyone thinking of using one of these. I appreciate your feedback.


----------



## bizzy

I have seen other cilps of that companys stuff and I haven't been real impressed. The thing is what you use to teach somthing in not always what you do to reinforce it. I would never use an ecollar to teach a puppy to sit or down but use it to reinfored a learned command at 10-20 yards out in the field may be a better application.I to work hard to build drive and enjoyment.


----------



## hotel4dogs

If a dog is 1000 yards away chasing a bird during a hunt I sincerely cannot think of a better option to get his attention. The way that's been explained to me, on a low setting, it truly is an attention getting device, not a correction. So I think that one cannot automatically say that e-collars are cruel or inhumane, only that they have certain uses that are valid. Which is exactly what Joel said.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo

hotel4dogs said:


> So I think that one cannot automatically say that e-collars are cruel or inhumane, only that they have certain uses that are valid. Which is exactly what Joel said.


I agree. I've never had to use one and for that I am grateful. If it were a matter of saving my dogs life and using an e-collar, I'd use it if I had to.


----------



## GoldenSail

I am no fan of the e-collar...having said that I don't condone its use in rare circumstances. The thing is, for every great trainer out there who knows how to use it correctly there are dozens upon hundreds more who don't or won't. 

As far as whether it is a good tool to use is going to vary--as you mentioned. What type of dog are you putting the collar on? Why? Most importantly, what is their response? What does everyone here consider good training? If the method works, is it good? I'll say not necessarily. If the method works but gives you a very stressed out, unhappy dog than it is a bad method, IMO.

I do have great respect for those trainers who are very careful and cautious about their use of the e-collar. They don't just throw one on a dog and start zapping--they actual condition them for it. I met a great pointer trainer who used it on his dogs, but only when they were older and only after they were conditioned to use it. The dogs loved their job and were not stressed out. I don't think this is the norm...

The video I saw was very sad. The dog's face was clearly saying that she didn't want to be there, but was complying anyway. The video's description even said that this was one of the better one's where the dog was more attentive. 

Oooh, I LOVE Foster. You guys are amazing. It is clearly evident that he enjoys what he does.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo

I didn't watch the video. Couldn't...


----------



## Pointgold

Used properly (particularly in the field) e-collars can be a useful and valuable tool. I've seen plenty of dogs that have had an e-collar used who have wonderful attitudes. I do not believe, however, that they should be used to train basic obedience and manners, and especially not on puppies. I personally do not use them. People who tout using them this way want instant gratification. Having a puppy is a committment of time, and training must be a pleasant experience. 
But I will not paint e-collars with the broad brush of being bad, or even a last resort, as when used properly in the hands of a thoughtful trainers/handler, they actually can make a positive difference.


----------



## EvanG

JoelSilverman said:


> This thread was started because of a previous thread in another forum I am in. There is a national dog training company that uses the e-collar (using stimulation) in their training of all behaviors...
> 
> *SOMETHING TO REMEMBER*
> 
> *You cannot get that attitude from an e-collar, because instead of wanting to please you, they are only sitting because they know there will be a stimulation if not. Even if you use treats after the dog sits, you are still using stimulation to get the dog to sit.*


Actually, in a properly trained and conditioned dog the opposite is true. If a dog has had its trust violated, or confidence damaged in conjunction with e-collar use, the problem was the _trainer_, not the instrument.


JoelSilverman said:


> I just wanted to mention this because my training method, along with so many in this forum, is based on building a positive relationship with the animal and creating attitude and drive. The e-collar does not do that. But again, I believe that are rare times where there is no other alternative, and if the person knows what they are doing, an e-collar can be an effective tool.
> 
> I wrote this for anyone thinking of using one of these. I appreciate your feedback.


Pretty narrow assessment, Joel. But you're not alone. E-collars are a simply an implement of force or pressure. There are many others, such as a leash, choker, prong, heeling stick or crop, or an old standby; a rolled up newspaper. Any one of them can be properly used for their intended purpose, and can achieve terrific results without a loss of attitude or trust from the dog. They can also be misused to the extent that the opposite is achieved.

Welcome to the information age. That's good news for the open mind. If you desire to know how to train your retriever to perform high level field skills with consistency - even in the presence of significant distrations - the information is readily available. You do not have to experiment, or approach the use of perfectly humane and effective training tools without knowing the how's and why's.

Here's a start. 

*The Right Approach to Aversives in Retriever Training*

By Evan Graham

Among the best-recognized and most successful trainers whose work is for the development of performance retrievers, i.e. retrievers that hunt, or run AKC Field Trials and/or AKC or UKC Hunt Tests, the word “Aversive” is universally recognized as the physical tools used both for the formalizing of training, as well as implements of force or pressure in other applications. The use of pressure in training retrievers has more than one application, and is often misunderstood.

Before focusing on aversive tools, I think it would be helpful to clarify the role of force in the training and maintaining of trained skills for working dogs. Bearing in mind that a majority of the acts and skills we train for, as well as the ways in which we want our dogs to use them in the field, are _our_ idea, we must keep in mind that dogs will tend to resist many of them, just to varying degrees. While some dogs accept many aspects of training with little trouble, it seems nearly all of them have some area of retriever skills they don’t like as well as others. When we maintain an understanding of the unnatural aspects of these skills, we are more apt to have a healthy empathy as trainers.

Natural vs. Unnatural 

In order to appreciate the unnatural character of many standard retrieving skills, we should first get a clear idea of what dogs tend to do naturally. That’s the easy part. Functionally, retrievers chase after motion and honor their noses. Virtually all else that we desire of them is imposed upon them in some form of training.



Some examples of the standard skills are:

The Basic Obedience commands; i.e. “Here” (or “Come”), “Sit”, “Stay”, “Down”, “Kennel” and so on.
Steadiness to wing and shot
The Trained Retrieve, which involves fetching on command, holding the fetch object in a uniform manner, and readily dropping it as directed by the trainer/handler. 
In modern methods this also includes the developmental exercises and drills that teach a dog how to properly run Blind Retrieves.
Add to that all that goes into multiple Marked Retrieves and all variations of Diversion training (running marked retrieves in conjunction with blind retrieves).
If a retriever has ample natural prey drive, the last thing they want to be is steady. It is opposite of the nature of a dog that really wants to go. They don’t naturally want to wait for permission to retrieve what they just saw fall. This skill must be carefully trained, and constantly maintained.

Likewise, it’s certainly unnatural for a dog to be headed for a bird or bumper and then stop to a single whistle blast in preparation for being given a hand signal. All of that is clearly a set of manmade functions, and it takes time and considerable effort the put together in a high functioning state.

It’s truly marvelous what these dogs can be trained to do, and how well they can do it. Even more marvelous is they way they learn to become teammates with their owner/handlers in the process.

Teaching with Pressure, as opposed to Training with Pressure

A pervasive misunderstanding among dog lovers is that trainers who regularly use aversive instruments in their work must be using pressure as a teaching tool. “A dog that has to be forced to work is the wrong type of dog”, someone will say. Or, “You must be a pretty bad trainer if you have to shock your dog to get him to do what he’s bred for”, go the oft repeated accusations. I suppose it’s meant to reflect empathy for the dogs. But what it _really_ reflects is a lack of understanding of, and/or knowledge about the training process.
Aversive: Tending to avoid or causing avoidance of noxious or *punishing* stimulus
(per Webster’s)

This definition comes fairly close to describing what aversive tools do in certain parts of retriever training. But it surely needs clarifying. Let’s take a look at the training cycle.


*Teach*; the guiding of behavior and then rewarding it – the more passive stage
*Force*; the use of pressure to support previously taught behavior – the formalizing stage
*Reinforce*; structured exercises designed to support and uphold established skills and behavior – the maintenance stage
Aversives play a role in the formalizing stage of development, as well as both forcing and correcting certain behaviors. One of today’s favorite aversives for these purposes is the e-collar. It’s key advantages are timing, distance and broad variability. Other aversives, like heeling sticks, leashes, prong or choke collars and others, can be used with variations in amounts of pressure. But none can match the e-collar for distance or timing, with rare exception.

The flexibility issue is a key in adjusting the use of any aversive effectively for a variety of dogs without being overbearing about it. The e-collars of today can deliver stimulus in either a continuous or momentary manner, as well as a range of amounts (intensity) to suit the need and temperament of nearly any dog.

The key to aversive use

Essentially, we use pressure in dog training to change their behavior. As empathetic and effective trainers, we use amounts of pressure determined by the dog, and how we read the need in the moment. If a small amount achieves the change we seek, why use more?

If, however, a small amount of pressure does not result in the needed change, it can and should be increased to a point at which the dog shows an understanding of the requirement being made. He will show that in his changed behavior. A co-benefit in those situations is that most dogs will become so obedient as a result of pressure for one infraction that they become more conscientious about other tasks and behaviors.

With rare exception, most of today’s methods that involve the use of aversives as described here do not involve using those tools to do the teaching. Teaching for nearly all commands and skills is usually performed in more passive ways, so the dog learns clearly what act or acts should be performed as a result. This should be done again and again so that the dog demonstrates a clear understanding of each task before any aversives are used to raise performance standards to what we refer to as a formal level. 

A dog that has had his training formalized not only knows what to do, but will do it reliably, even when distracted, or is just not in the mood. And the trainer has a set of tools to reliably do this in a timely and temperate manner. That’s the right approach to the use of aversives in retriever training.

Work Smart!

I challenge anyone to watch my dogs work in the yard or the field, and tell me they are some of the happiest, most spirited and stylish dogs they have ever seen. Please take me up on this! It's far easier to criticize what you do not understand than to make the necessary effort to learn what is actually correct about it.

EvanG


----------



## Bender

I do use an e collar on my guys, as needed. But not as the sole source of 'reward' in that they don't get zapped if they do it right. Anytime they've had one on it's to refine something or help with proofing. Generally it's for off leash control so they're not taking off on their own agenda (hard to otherwise reason with a dog who takes off and then gets rewarded with someone else tossing a ball, garbage to get into or swimming after duckies when they don't come when called). They can however wear an e-collar and work with animation and drive - quite often I've had one on a dog and realized afterwards it wasn't turned on, because I hadn't used it that day.

In that video the pup didn't have a lot of attitude, but then the owner was very blah in his attitude too. No praise or happy voice and not much in the way of treats. He was also pretty inconsistant with commands and follow through. Feel bad for the dog, however in today's world people want instant results, so... robot dogs complete with remote control...:no:

Lana


----------



## Maggies mom

I use one here and there on mine, depending on what we are working on.... And like Bender a lot of times its not even turned on or its dead.


----------



## JoelSilverman

EvanG said:


> Actually, in a properly trained and conditioned dog the opposite is true. If a dog has had its trust violated, or confidence damaged in conjunction with e-collar use, the problem was the _trainer_, not the instrument.Pretty narrow assessment, Joel. But you're not alone. E-collars are a simply an implement of force or pressure. There are many others, such as a leash, choker, prong, heeling stick or crop, or an old standby; a rolled up newspaper. Any one of them can be properly used for their intended purpose, and can achieve terrific results without a loss of attitude or trust from the dog. They can also be misused to the extent that the opposite is achieved.
> 
> Welcome to the information age. That's good news for the open mind. If you desire to know how to train your retriever to perform high level field skills with consistency - even in the presence of significant distrations - the information is readily available. You do not have to experiment, or approach the use of perfectly humane and effective training tools without knowing the how's and why's.
> 
> Here's a start.
> 
> *The Right Approach to Aversives in Retriever Training*
> 
> By Evan Graham
> 
> Among the best-recognized and most successful trainers whose work is for the development of performance retrievers, i.e. retrievers that hunt, or run AKC Field Trials and/or AKC or UKC Hunt Tests, the word “Aversive” is universally recognized as the physical tools used both for the formalizing of training, as well as implements of force or pressure in other applications. The use of pressure in training retrievers has more than one application, and is often misunderstood.
> 
> Before focusing on aversive tools, I think it would be helpful to clarify the role of force in the training and maintaining of trained skills for working dogs. Bearing in mind that a majority of the acts and skills we train for, as well as the ways in which we want our dogs to use them in the field, are _our_ idea, we must keep in mind that dogs will tend to resist many of them, just to varying degrees. While some dogs accept many aspects of training with little trouble, it seems nearly all of them have some area of retriever skills they don’t like as well as others. When we maintain an understanding of the unnatural aspects of these skills, we are more apt to have a healthy empathy as trainers.
> 
> Natural vs. Unnatural
> 
> In order to appreciate the unnatural character of many standard retrieving skills, we should first get a clear idea of what dogs tend to do naturally. That’s the easy part. Functionally, retrievers chase after motion and honor their noses. Virtually all else that we desire of them is imposed upon them in some form of training.
> 
> 
> 
> Some examples of the standard skills are:
> 
> The Basic Obedience commands; i.e. “Here” (or “Come”), “Sit”, “Stay”, “Down”, “Kennel” and so on.
> Steadiness to wing and shot
> The Trained Retrieve, which involves fetching on command, holding the fetch object in a uniform manner, and readily dropping it as directed by the trainer/handler.
> In modern methods this also includes the developmental exercises and drills that teach a dog how to properly run Blind Retrieves.
> Add to that all that goes into multiple Marked Retrieves and all variations of Diversion training (running marked retrieves in conjunction with blind retrieves).
> If a retriever has ample natural prey drive, the last thing they want to be is steady. It is opposite of the nature of a dog that really wants to go. They don’t naturally want to wait for permission to retrieve what they just saw fall. This skill must be carefully trained, and constantly maintained.
> 
> Likewise, it’s certainly unnatural for a dog to be headed for a bird or bumper and then stop to a single whistle blast in preparation for being given a hand signal. All of that is clearly a set of manmade functions, and it takes time and considerable effort the put together in a high functioning state.
> 
> It’s truly marvelous what these dogs can be trained to do, and how well they can do it. Even more marvelous is they way they learn to become teammates with their owner/handlers in the process.
> 
> Teaching with Pressure, as opposed to Training with Pressure
> 
> A pervasive misunderstanding among dog lovers is that trainers who regularly use aversive instruments in their work must be using pressure as a teaching tool. “A dog that has to be forced to work is the wrong type of dog”, someone will say. Or, “You must be a pretty bad trainer if you have to shock your dog to get him to do what he’s bred for”, go the oft repeated accusations. I suppose it’s meant to reflect empathy for the dogs. But what it _really_ reflects is a lack of understanding of, and/or knowledge about the training process.
> Aversive: Tending to avoid or causing avoidance of noxious or *punishing* stimulus
> (per Webster’s)
> 
> This definition comes fairly close to describing what aversive tools do in certain parts of retriever training. But it surely needs clarifying. Let’s take a look at the training cycle.
> 
> 
> *Teach*; the guiding of behavior and then rewarding it – the more passive stage
> *Force*; the use of pressure to support previously taught behavior – the formalizing stage
> *Reinforce*; structured exercises designed to support and uphold established skills and behavior – the maintenance stage
> Aversives play a role in the formalizing stage of development, as well as both forcing and correcting certain behaviors. One of today’s favorite aversives for these purposes is the e-collar. It’s key advantages are timing, distance and broad variability. Other aversives, like heeling sticks, leashes, prong or choke collars and others, can be used with variations in amounts of pressure. But none can match the e-collar for distance or timing, with rare exception.
> 
> The flexibility issue is a key in adjusting the use of any aversive effectively for a variety of dogs without being overbearing about it. The e-collars of today can deliver stimulus in either a continuous or momentary manner, as well as a range of amounts (intensity) to suit the need and temperament of nearly any dog.
> 
> The key to aversive use
> 
> Essentially, we use pressure in dog training to change their behavior. As empathetic and effective trainers, we use amounts of pressure determined by the dog, and how we read the need in the moment. If a small amount achieves the change we seek, why use more?
> 
> If, however, a small amount of pressure does not result in the needed change, it can and should be increased to a point at which the dog shows an understanding of the requirement being made. He will show that in his changed behavior. A co-benefit in those situations is that most dogs will become so obedient as a result of pressure for one infraction that they become more conscientious about other tasks and behaviors.
> 
> With rare exception, most of today’s methods that involve the use of aversives as described here do not involve using those tools to do the teaching. Teaching for nearly all commands and skills is usually performed in more passive ways, so the dog learns clearly what act or acts should be performed as a result. This should be done again and again so that the dog demonstrates a clear understanding of each task before any aversives are used to raise performance standards to what we refer to as a formal level.
> 
> A dog that has had his training formalized not only knows what to do, but will do it reliably, even when distracted, or is just not in the mood. And the trainer has a set of tools to reliably do this in a timely and temperate manner. That’s the right approach to the use of aversives in retriever training.
> 
> Work Smart!
> 
> I challenge anyone to watch my dogs work in the yard or the field, and tell me they are some of the happiest, most spirited and stylish dogs they have ever seen. Please take me up on this! It's far easier to criticize what you do not understand than to make the necessary effort to learn what is actually correct about it.
> 
> EvanG


Not too narrow of an assessment. As a matter of fact I think I am a lot more open minded about e-collars than many people are. But Evan, I was reading you post. I respect the way you do things even though I may not use the same ideas. Here is the difference between what you believe and what I believe in a nutshell.. You wrote *"essentially, we use pressure in dog training to change their behavior.*" We don't. You might. But I don't. That's the difference. As far as I am concerned the art to good dog training is putting the LEAST amount of pressure on an animal. Let me tell you it works.. and don't take my word... every trainer that I know uses this on the set.

Evan, I don't doubt that your dogs work great, and don't doubt that you can teach people to use an e-collar effectively. But what about the thousands of dog owners out there that don't have a person like you to teach them? What about the people that are clueless with an e-collar? If you watched that video of that 4 month old Weimaraner, look what the average person does with an e-collar.

I believe that there is a time an a place for tools in training. As I mentioned, it depends upon the time, the animal, and the training. In bite work with patrol dogs I have seen the e-collar be very effective, as well as hunting and field work as I mentioned. But in trying to help the new pet owner teach their dog to sit and stay, I just think there are other alternatives.


----------



## hotel4dogs

Geez Evan, where's the rest of the article??? This just whetted my appetite. Do you have a book published???




EvanG said:


> . a set of tools to reliably do this in a timely and temperate manner. That’s the right approach to the use of aversives in retriever training.
> 
> 
> Work Smart!
> 
> EvanG


----------



## hotel4dogs

I think there's the thing right there. You gentlemen train for totally different purposes.




JoelSilverman said:


> I believe that there is a time an a place for tools in training. As I mentioned, it depends upon the time, the animal, and the training. In bite work with patrol dogs I have seen the e-collar be very effective, as well as hunting and field work as I mentioned. But in trying to help the new pet owner teach their dog to sit and stay, I just think there are other alternatives.


----------



## EvanG

hotel4dogs said:


> Geez Evan, where's the rest of the article??? This just whetted my appetite. Do you have a book published???


Three books, actually. And eleven DVD's. We do, indeed, train dogs for different purposes. My specialty is training retrievers to be retrievers, and that involves functions that many retriever owners don't even realize their dogs are capable of. The level of performance can be stunning, and it can be done by first time trainers.

More later,
EvanG


----------



## hotel4dogs

Evan, will you post the titles of your books to the hunting part of the forum please?
thanks!




EvanG said:


> Three books, actually. And eleven DVD's. We do, indeed, train dogs for different purposes. My specialty is training retrievers to be retrievers, and that involves functions that many retriever owners don't even realize their dogs are capable of. The level of performance can be stunning, and it can be done by first time trainers.
> 
> More later,
> EvanG


----------



## EvanG

hotel4dogs said:


> Evan, will you post the titles of your books to the hunting part of the forum please?
> thanks!


Thanks, I'll do that. 

EvanG


----------



## EvanG

JoelSilverman said:


> Not too narrow of an assessment. As a matter of fact I think I am a lot more open minded about e-collars than many people are. But Evan, I was reading you post. I respect the way you do things even though I may not use the same ideas.


Joel,

By “narrow”, I mean the scope of use for the e-collar. From your original post:

*“It really is about personalities and the fact that all dogs are different. I believe that at times the e-collar can be more humane and effective than what you would have to physically do to correct some dogs using a chain collar. I did not always think this way. It was only in the past years did I see some of my friends who train dogs for the K9 unit of the police departments use it, and saw how it worked.*” 

So far, so good. 

*“Make no mistake, I think that the chain collar in the right hands as a great tool. But in some cases, there may be a dog that is so out of control, or so aggressive, it may very well be that the e-collar is the best answer.”* 

One of the more pervasive, yet incorrect notions about e-collars is that they are merely a course of last resort in solving problems in some tough or aggressive dog. That may be _a_ use. But it is patently incorrect to assert that it is _the_ use.


JoelSilverman said:


> Here is the difference between what you believe and what I believe in a nutshell.. You wrote *"essentially, we use pressure in dog training to change their behavior.*"


Yes, and that is a broad statement. We don’t use pressure to form behavior. Behavior formation (teaching) is done as passively as possible, and with an emphasis on praise and reward. That conditions, or forms behavior. That is what I categorize as the _teaching_ phase of the training cycle.

But it must be clarified at this point that the terms “force” and “pressure” do not imply an amount. We certainly use pressure to make a behavioral change. If the training cycle remains at the first level (teaching-only) we remain subject to their moods, how susceptible they are to being distracted, how they may react to weather conditions, etc. 

I train hunting dogs. These dogs perform demanding acts in demanding conditions. They must be more reliable than that. An all-positive dog is just fine, as long as he’s performing within an environment where the right behavior is connected to his perception of what is most rewarding. Often, when that same dog is in an environment with other dogs working, hunters duck calling, shooting, talking, and all the activities common to the kind of hunting retrievers take part in, compliance erodes quickly because giving in to any or all of those distractions seems more rewarding than performing some manmade/artificial behavior. 

A dog that has had his training formalized through the temperate application of pressure (in various forms), prior to any testing or hunting, will tend to be far more reliable. That’s because the formalizing process changes a couple things.


It makes it unrewarding to allow distractions to take precedence over obedience
By continuing to balance the appropriate use of the right type and amount of pressure with consistent and genuine praise, we elevate our dogs desire to perform trained tasks and skills, and provide them with a deeper commitment to see their job through.


JoelSilverman said:


> We don't. You might. But I don't. That's the difference.


Sure you do. Every time you use your leash to guide a dog, or to compel them to come when they are not complying, you are using pressure – to change behavior. As I said, the words “pressure” and “force” don’t imply an amount. I don’t know how serious your training gets, guard dog work, or anything where the acts the dogs perform become important. But a hunting dog quickly becomes a hindrance to a hunt if they don’t obey reliably.


JoelSilverman said:


> As far as I am concerned the art to good dog training is putting the LEAST amount of pressure on an animal. Let me tell you it works.. and don't take my word... every trainer that I know uses this on the set.


I have no doubt. However, we aren’t using our terms quite the same way. We begin teaching our dogs prior to the use of any force. But that’s _teaching_, and teaching is only one component of the training cycle.

Teach
Force 
Reinforce

Complete that cycle, and you will have produced a trained dog. We are discussing Golden Retrievers here at the Golden Retriever Forum. That’s what brought me here. I think far too many people have come to think of these animals as more of a Golden Dog, than as a Golden Retriever. Before they became show dogs they were hunters, and very good ones. Thankfully, some still are. 


JoelSilverman said:


> Evan, I don't doubt that your dogs work great, and don't doubt that you can teach people to use an e-collar effectively. But what about the thousands of dog owners out there that don't have a person like you to teach them? What about the people that are clueless with an e-collar? If you watched that video of that 4 month old Weimaraner, look what the average person does with an e-collar.


I did watch it, Joel. That guy had a willing little dog that was convincing him that he was actually doing it right. Kind of sad, but there are no dog police, if you know what I mean! He was not using it correctly, and you could readily see it in his dog.

But, for those who cannot train with me, or someone else who is competent in the use of aversives, there are numerous very high quality books and video courses available. These not only show their use, but also explain the principles involved. I give 6-8 seminars each year across the continent. But most of my business is DVD’s and personal consultations. No one in this day of readily available information has need to use tools or techniques in ignorance.


JoelSilverman said:


> I believe that there is a time an a place for tools in training. As I mentioned, it depends upon the time, the animal, and the training. In bite work with patrol dogs I have seen the e-collar be very effective, as well as hunting and field work as I mentioned. But in trying to help the new pet owner teach their dog to sit and stay, I just think there are other alternatives.


As mentioned earlier, we don’t teach with aversives. Like you, we teach passively, and with an emphasis on consistent praise and reward. More to come!

EvanG


----------



## EvanG

JoelSilverman said:


> Not too narrow of an assessment. As a matter of fact I think I am a lot more open minded about e-collars than many people are. But Evan, I was reading you post. I respect the way you do things even though I may not use the same ideas.


Joel,

By “narrow”, I mean the scope of use for the e-collar. From your original post:

*“It really is about personalities and the fact that all dogs are different. I believe that at times the e-collar can be more humane and effective than what you would have to physically do to correct some dogs using a chain collar. I did not always think this way. It was only in the past years did I see some of my friends who train dogs for the K9 unit of the police departments use it, and saw how it worked.*” 

So far, so good. 

*“Make no mistake, I think that the chain collar in the right hands as a great tool. But in some cases, there may be a dog that is so out of control, or so aggressive, it may very well be that the e-collar is the best answer.”* 

One of the more pervasive, yet incorrect notions about e-collars is that they are merely a course of last resort in solving problems in some tough or aggressive dog. That may be _a_ use. But it is patently incorrect to assert that it is _the_ use.


JoelSilverman said:


> Here is the difference between what you believe and what I believe in a nutshell.. You wrote *"essentially, we use pressure in dog training to change their behavior.*"


Yes, and that is a broad statement. We don’t use pressure to form behavior. Behavior formation (teaching) is done as passively as possible, and with an emphasis on praise and reward. That conditions, or forms behavior. That is what I categorize as the _teaching_ phase of the training cycle.

But it must be clarified at this point that the terms “force” and “pressure” do not imply an amount. We certainly use pressure to make a behavioral change. If the training cycle remains at the first level (teaching-only) we remain subject to their moods, how susceptible they are to being distracted, how they may react to weather conditions, etc. 

I train hunting dogs. These dogs perform demanding acts in demanding conditions. They must be more reliable than that. An all-positive dog is just fine, as long as he’s performing within an environment where the right behavior is connected to his perception of what is most rewarding. Often, when that same dog is in an environment with other dogs working, hunters duck calling, shooting, talking, and all the activities common to the kind of hunting retrievers take part in, compliance erodes quickly because giving in to any or all of those distractions seems more rewarding than performing some manmade/artificial behavior. 

A dog that has had his training formalized through the temperate application of pressure (in various forms), prior to any testing or hunting, will tend to be far more reliable. That’s because the formalizing process changes a couple things.


It makes it unrewarding to allow distractions to take precedence over obedience
By continuing to balance the appropriate use of the right type and amount of pressure with consistent and genuine praise, we elevate our dogs desire to perform trained tasks and skills, and provide them with a deeper commitment to see their job through.


JoelSilverman said:


> We don't. You might. But I don't. That's the difference.


Sure you do. Every time you use your leash to guide a dog, or to compel them to come when they are not complying, you are using pressure – to change behavior. As I said, the words “pressure” and “force” don’t imply an amount. I don’t know how serious your training gets, guard dog work, or anything where the acts the dogs perform become important. But a hunting dog quickly becomes a hindrance to a hunt if they don’t obey reliably.


JoelSilverman said:


> As far as I am concerned the art to good dog training is putting the LEAST amount of pressure on an animal. Let me tell you it works.. and don't take my word... every trainer that I know uses this on the set.


I have no doubt. However, we aren’t using our terms quite the same way. We begin teaching our dogs prior to the use of any force. But that’s _teaching_, and teaching is only one component of the training cycle.

Teach
Force 
Reinforce

Complete that cycle, and you will have produced a trained dog. We are discussing Golden Retrievers here at the Golden Retriever Forum. That’s what brought me here. I think far too many people have come to think of these animals as more of a Golden Dog, than as a Golden Retriever. Before they became show dogs they were hunters, and very good ones. Thankfully, some still are. 


JoelSilverman said:


> Evan, I don't doubt that your dogs work great, and don't doubt that you can teach people to use an e-collar effectively. But what about the thousands of dog owners out there that don't have a person like you to teach them? What about the people that are clueless with an e-collar? If you watched that video of that 4 month old Weimaraner, look what the average person does with an e-collar.


I did watch it, Joel. That guy had a willing little dog that was convincing him that he was actually doing it right. Kind of sad, but there are no dog police, if you know what I mean! He was not using it correctly, and you could readily see it in his dog.

But, for those who cannot train with me, or someone else who is competent in the use of aversives, there are numerous very high quality books and video courses available. These not only show their use, but also explain the principles involved. I give 6-8 seminars each year across the continent. But most of my business is DVD’s and personal consultations. No one in this day of readily available information has need to use tools or techniques in ignorance.


JoelSilverman said:


> I believe that there is a time an a place for tools in training. As I mentioned, it depends upon the time, the animal, and the training. In bite work with patrol dogs I have seen the e-collar be very effective, as well as hunting and field work as I mentioned. But in trying to help the new pet owner teach their dog to sit and stay, I just think there are other alternatives.


As mentioned earlier, we don’t teach with aversives. Like you, we teach passively, and with an emphasis on consistent praise and reward. More to come!

EvanG


----------



## rubyrose

*e collars*

Dear Maggie's mom, cute photo! I have a 15 month old golden named Ruby Rose who is a real handful ( I am 66 ) and she is 82 pounds , the biggest in the litter! She is the sweetest thing on earth and my husband and I are retired so as to raise her correctly . She is overly excitable with people even though she has been through 5 dog classes and is going to another class soon. Our biggest worry with her is that she eats mushrooms and has been lightly poisoned about 4 or 5 times. She has done this since she was a small pup and there fore even though we have 8 forest acres she is mostly on a leash. I am constantly in touch with the vet (who breeds goldens ) and I never leave home without peroxide to make her throw up. (I have it in every car) The vet tech who also has one of her siblings says that her dog grew out of it, but I am not so sure Ruby will. (By the way when trying to eradicate them I picked 121 pounds of them!!!!) A person at my dog class , not my trainer said That maybe I should try an e collar, I (if I dare use it ) would only use it to vibrate and with mushrooms , not training. What do some of you think?? help Kathy


----------

