# A fresh understanding of e-collar training



## K9-Design

Good post. Like the last line.


----------



## Maxs Mom

Thanks Evan


----------



## EvanG

You're welcome. We are all beneficiaries of the progress in both tools and methods. It's healthy, I think, to take a good hard look at it now and then.

EvanG


----------



## Swampcollie

EvanG said:


> Low pressure + e-collar training
> 
> 
> The misperceptions will continue to exist as years go by, mostly unwarranted. But, as the saying goes, “The truth does not cease to exist because it is ignored”. Times, tools, and methods have changed – nearly all for the better. This popular way of training is so popular for the best of reasons; superior results with uniformity.


I have to agree. 

The evolution of dog work over the last twenty years has been simply amazing. Many gundogs today are taught advanced marking and blind retrieve concepts by their amateur owners that twenty years ago were only seen in competition retrievers. This has been made possible by the available training materials that are now designed for the do-it-yourselfer and the newer variable electronic collars that are more appropriate for the first time trainer. 




EvanG said:


> Detractors attempt to trivialize it with references to it, such as “the way”. All one need do to provide an alternative “way” is to use their chosen method, and produce equal or superior results. Believe me, the retriever world would follow. That’s how we got to _this_ point.


So many detractors have no experience at all with a modern electronic collar and are simply reacting to what they "intuitively" believe an electronic collar does. They envision coming in contact with electric cattle fences, spark plug wires, electro-shock therapy, or a high voltage power line. In reality the electronic collar is of course none of those things.


----------



## hotel4dogs

I wil be the first to admit I've made some mistakes with the e-collar, but even so, I love it, espeically as I'm getting better at using it correctly, and more secure in its use.
I have to say that Tito, in a sense, loves his e-collar too because it gives him a HUGE amount of freedom that he wouldn't otherwise have. He is always eager to have it put on, and when I leave it hanging on the door knob he will go over and nudge it to get me to put it on him.


----------



## Maxs Mom

Quinn gets happy when her collar (her jewelry) comes out, she knows it means fun. We had it on her long before we 'turned it on' so I don't know she associates it. I need to get it on Teddi more, I am still afraid of using it on her, she is so soft I don't want to mess up. Just rambling.


----------



## GoldenSail

I just think the ecollar is great because it improves timing which is so important with good dog training.


----------



## pwrstrk02

a big downfall is youtube vids of "kids" shocking themselves, and people that dont know about the new technology. of course it hurts when you turn it all the way up. still funny to watch though.


----------



## GoldenGrady

EvanG said:


> Low pressure + e-collar training
> 
> 
> But time _has_ passed, and with its passing an evolution has swept our sport. The physical functions – drills and concepts – remain largely unchanged. But the application of our training, and the ways our tools are applied by so many practitioners, as seen across the land, deserves some notice…and some respect.
> 
> EvanG


Evan, as always, thank you for sharing your ideas and philosophy.
I train alone 98% of the time and the proper use of the e-collar has enabled a level of progress for me that I believe would be impossible without it. I sought out the help of a professional trainer for collar conditoning and proper use. It has proved to be an invaluable tool for the correct timing of any corrections. A light correction I'm sure you'd agree is still a correction. My dog doesn't need to yelp to get the point. I don't see how it is much different than a quick tug on a choke chain. 
My dog gets jut as excited when he sees his leash. He knows the e-collar means we're about to do the things he lives for...


----------



## EvanG

GoldenGrady said:


> Evan, as always, thank you for sharing your ideas and philosophy.....
> My dog gets jut as excited when he sees his leash. He knows the e-collar means we're about to do the things he lives for...


When a dog reacts like that to having its collar put on you're doing things right. Once my dogs are through the conditioning processes of Basics, the e-collar gets used less and less. Our fully trained dogs sometimes go months without any corrections at all. They just know when that e-collar comes out, they're headed to the field to have fun!

Good job!

EvanG


----------



## Tombstone

Does anyone know of an instruction DVD for training collars? I just bought a collar and it didn't have instructions for use. We're going on vacation in a few months so I have time but I want to make sure that Morgan (9 months) comes when we call him.


----------



## EvanG

Tombstone said:


> Does anyone know of an instruction DVD for training collars? I just bought a collar and it didn't have instructions for use. We're going on vacation in a few months so I have time but I want to make sure that Morgan (9 months) comes when we call him.


The Smartwork Obedience DVD shows e-collar conditioning to "Here" (or "Come" if you prefer) in great detail.










$22.50 w/free shipping
Rush Creek Press online/The Smartwork System

EvanG


----------



## cubbysan

Are these e-collars used the same technology as the collars for an IF fence except with the remote?


----------



## EvanG

cubbysan said:


> Are these e-collars used the same technology as the collars for an IF fence except with the remote?


No. E-fences are cold burn punishment with no command given. E-collar stimulus is applied by the trainer, and timed to support commands that have previously been thoroughly taught to the dog. They are also widely variable in intensity, allowing the trainer to tailor the application to the individual dog in the moment.

EvanG


----------



## Lilliam

OK, I will discuss this and will begin by saying that I have not trained a retriever. Yet. My grandfather trained many, many dogs in his day, so that has been my only exposure to retrievers. His dogs were a wonder to watch. 

I have trained four border collies and I have been around many, many others. I have seen many training methods, and I have seen e-trained dogs. Based on my observation of those dogs, I never used an e-collar. My train of thought was simply that if my grandfather could train without an e-collar and have wonderful gun dogs, and if generations of shepherds have trained sheepdogs without e-collars, I can do it too.

This is my opinion and it will be unpopular. My apologies. Max is my first golden retriever, and I have no experience in the field. However, if I extrapolate what I have seen to my future, I can say I won't be using e-collars. If I never title Max, that's OK. But I think I'm no less able than my grandfather.


----------



## sammydog

Despite my brain telling me to take a deep breath and walk away, here I go...

For each person who uses an e-collar correctly, how many do you think misuse it? 

I cringe everytime I am in the petstore and I hear john-q public asking where to find a shock collar for their puppy who won't stop barking. I heard one just yesterday. I also remember reading a thread about someone who borrowed one to stop their dog from jumping. Easy enough, dog jumps, burn them, no more jumping... sigh...

I don't use e-collars... Many of my friends who do field do. I know many many good trainers who do. Even the people I know who I consider good fair trainers make mistakes with them. It just scares me when they come up in discussions like this spoken so highly of in a forum that is largely geared toward your normal pet dog owner... Yes, I know that this was posted in the field forum, but really, how many field people read this and don't know it already...

Running away now... :curtain:


----------



## GoldenSail

sammydog said:


> Despite my brain telling me to take a deep breath and walk away, here I go...
> 
> For each person who uses an e-collar correctly, how many do you think misuse it?
> 
> I cringe everytime I am in the petstore and I hear john-q public asking where to find a shock collar for their puppy who won't stop barking. I heard one just yesterday. I also remember reading a thread about someone who borrowed one to stop their dog from jumping. Easy enough, dog jumps, burn them, no more jumping... sigh...
> 
> I don't use e-collars... Many of my friends who do field do. I know many many good trainers who do. Even the people I know who I consider good fair trainers make mistakes with them. It just scares me when they come up in discussions like this spoken so highly of in a forum that is largely geared toward your normal pet dog owner... Yes, I know that this was posted in the field forum, but really, how many field people read this and don't know it already...
> 
> Running away now... :curtain:


No, I understand. While I made the choice to use one and don't regret it (my dog loves hers--must've done something right) I heavily discourage the public from using one, even when they see me with one. It really is a good communication tool for me that I don't use too often, but it does frighten me how some people use it and how it can easily be abused.


----------



## GoldenSail

Lilliam said:


> OK, I will discuss this and will begin by saying that I have not trained a retriever. Yet. My grandfather trained many, many dogs in his day, so that has been my only exposure to retrievers. His dogs were a wonder to watch.
> 
> I have trained four border collies and I have been around many, many others. I have seen many training methods, and I have seen e-trained dogs. Based on my observation of those dogs, I never used an e-collar. My train of thought was simply that if my grandfather could train without an e-collar and have wonderful gun dogs, and if generations of shepherds have trained sheepdogs without e-collars, I can do it too.
> 
> This is my opinion and it will be unpopular. My apologies. Max is my first golden retriever, and I have no experience in the field. However, if I extrapolate what I have seen to my future, I can say I won't be using e-collars. If I never title Max, that's OK. But I think I'm no less able than my grandfather.


I don't know why you think your choice is unpopular....and I totally respect you for your choice--I hope you respect those of us that do use one (carefully).

To add some perspective though, I bet your grandfather did not use a clicker when he trained his dogs either. Do you use one at all? Do you feel like it aids in training? In communication?

Of course you don't *need* an ecollar to train a dog, and I do have limited field experience. BUT--I feel like it is an effective training and communication tool when used properly. If you have seen bad responses from ecollars I am sorry--wish you could meet my dog who brings me hers on a daily basis because she knows she gets to go train and play!


----------



## Lilliam

GoldenSail said:


> I don't know why you think your choice is unpopular....and I totally respect you for your choice--I hope you respect those of us that do use one (carefully).
> 
> To add some perspective though, I bet your grandfather did not use a clicker when he trained his dogs either. Do you use one at all? Do you feel like it aids in training? In communication?
> 
> Of course you don't *need* an ecollar to train a dog, and I do have limited field experience. BUT--I feel like it is an effective training and communication tool when used properly. If you have seen bad responses from ecollars I am sorry--wish you could meet my dog who brings me hers on a daily basis because she knows she gets to go train and play!


Yah, you're right, my grandfather didn't use a clicker. I've used a clicker to teach basic commands or tricks, but not working commands. My approach is that no one method should be used exclusively over another and that's gotten me into heated discussions with clicker trainers who demand that a click must *always* be followed by a food reward and I don't use the clicker that way. I prefer intermitten positive reinforcement. I also am not a proponent of only positive reinforcement; there are times when a negative reinforcement is needed....example, if I hadn't correct my dogs when they foolishly went after an angry cow or rambouillet sheep, I could have ended up with a gravely injured dog. The only time I ever used an e-collar was during snake avoidance training, and I didn't like their reaction to the correction. However, that was a life or death situation and I had to use the harshest negative reinforcement imaginable. I went to a very respected person, so I was closely supervised. 

I've used my dogs' intinct to shape behaviours and then added a whistle to them. To use my sheepdogs, I'd explain it this way - I use my dogs' natural sense of balance to teach turns while I add whistles to commands, I've stepped into the "bubble" to stop forward motion and add whistle to that, I've used their sense of balance to block circling motion and added whistles to that, etc. My dogs have different whistles to walk up, stop, lie down, flank close left, flank close right, flank far left, flank far right, sharp left, sharp right (100 degree flank out), way out left, way out right, "there" which means turn into the stock, look back (you've left one behind or there are more behind, which are then followed by a flank whistle) etc....

Training field with Max will be a whole new world. I expect to make mistakes and I will try to do right by him, but I know that I will fail him. We may take longer to get there because of my inexperience, but we will, someday.


----------



## EvanG

sammydog said:


> Despite my brain telling me to take a deep breath and walk away, here I go...
> 
> *For each person who uses an e-collar correctly, how many do you think misuse it?*


Generally, the proportion of those who use it correctly against those who misuse it is roughly equal to those who use correctly or misuse any aversive tool. In other words, virtually anyone who ruins a dog with an e-collar would have ruined them with something else if they didn't have an e-collar. Abusive people do that, and they don't need any one tool to misuse on dogs.

Sadly (or not), there are no dog police. Nor is there an application process that determines who should have the right to lay hands on dogs with the express purpose of "training" them. If you are a person who loves dogs - cares about dogs - is concerned about applying methods and tools correctly, you aren't the problem. You will be like many who contact me and other pros to find out how to correctly go about training before starting.

If you are the kind of person who is focused only on a behavioral result, and are willing to do anything necessary to a dog to get it, you _*are*_ the problem, and you would mistreat dogs whether or not e-collars were ever invented.

In the hands of a caring trainer, and therefore an educated one, the modern e-collar is not only among the most efficient of tools, but is also among the most humane - due primarily to its user.

Again, no dog was ever ruined by an e-collar. Some have been ruined by reckless fools who were misusing them. That is not the fault of the tool.

EvanG


----------



## GoldenSail

Lilliam said:


> Training field with Max will be a whole new world. I expect to make mistakes and I will try to do right by him, but I know that I will fail him. We may take longer to get there because of my inexperience, but we will, someday.


Which is ok! I am a beginner too and if we don't go beyond Junior because of it--oh well! We are learning and will only get better with time and experience. You have to start somewhere. Enjoy the ride


----------



## Swampcollie

sammydog said:


> Despite my brain telling me to take a deep breath and walk away, here I go...
> 
> For each person who uses an e-collar correctly, how many do you think misuse it?


What is or isn't correct use depends greatly upon the opinion of the user. 
If the person isn't using my personel "preferred" training program, is it abuse? 

I prefer to watch the dogs and let them tell me whether or not they feel threatened or abused. 

Any training aid can be used to abuse a dog. Leashes, flat collars, halti's, gentle leaders, chain collars, harnesses, e-collars, etc. can all be used as tools of abuse. 
I believe there are far fewer e-collars being mis-applied than compared to other training aids like the halti or gentle leader. 

I see far more dogs displaying unhappy/abused posture and body language wearing gentle leaders and halti's than any other training aid.

The handler has much more to do with the equation than the tools.


----------



## hotel4dogs

Here we go on the e-collar debate again....to each their own.
But for me with Tito, who has been properly collar conditioned with the help of a pro, I love the e-collar.
He is a very high prey drive, high instinct dog. No matter how much I could possibly train him in any other manner other than the collar, I don't think I would ever feel comfortable trusting him in the field when he flushes a bird and takes off after it if the shot misses, or if it's a crippled pheasant running. Without the collar he'd be in the next county. 
If I had started training him for field at 8 weeks instead of over 3 years old, would it have been different? Maybe, maybe not. When that instinct clicks, his brain just runs out of his head.
Tito could not hunt if it weren't for the e-collar.


----------



## Swampcollie

hotel4dogs said:


> He is a very high prey drive, high instinct dog. No matter how much I could possibly train him in any other manner other than the collar, I don't think I would ever feel comfortable trusting him in the field when he flushes a bird and takes off after it if the shot misses, or if it's a crippled pheasant running. Without the collar he'd be in the next county.
> If I had started training him for field at 8 weeks instead of over 3 years old, would it have been different? Maybe, maybe not. When that instinct clicks, his brain just runs out of his head.
> Tito could not hunt if it weren't for the e-collar.


There in a nutshell is why field training employs aversives and why many of us use e-collars. 

When a dog has been hunting a bird for an extended period of time, it tends to lock in on making the find to the exclusion of all else. When the bird flushes all of the dogs' focus is on the bird. If the hunter misses and the bird flys away, the dog is often in hot pursuit and tightly focused on that bird to the exclusion of everything else. If the bird happens to cross a busy roadway (as they often do), there is a tragic outcome in the making if you can't reestablish control of the dog, and be quick about it.

The training and e-collar allow you to get the dogs' attention instantly and refocus it on you, and your commands.

A dog in the field is working without the safety of being in a ring, fenced yard or controlled play area. There are no walls or boundries to protect the dog. All you have to rely on for the dogs' safety is the training you've given it.


----------



## Lilliam

Please let me state again that I have no experience with field dogs myself, but plenty of personal experience with border collies. 

Border collies working sheep or any livestock are extremely focused on their work. The instinct and drive to herd is so high that it is common to run females in full season alongside intact males without loss of focus. I have experienced that myself, directly with my dog Dru and through watching Cassie's father and half brother working. I would say that the intensity of a border collie working is well known in all dog circles, even with handlers who don't work livestock but know of working dogs.

I can call off my dog or redirect my dog in an open level trial, which are typically anywhere from 450 to 500 yards or more, unfenced. The different whistles are the communication used between handler and dog. The first thing taught is a recall, and that's generally a single, high note. The dog learns, through training from the time he is six months old, that the high single note means "that'll do", leave what your're doing and come to me instantly. I can whistle my dog to do what is absolutely against his instinct, which is to leave the sheep he has brought to me, turn back, and go away from me to look for more, at the sound of a whistle.

I have seen retrievers, flushers and pointers work and it's as awe inspiring as a national level sheepdog trial. I will take what I have learned from very highly instinctive, driven, focused dogs and I will apply that to field work. It may be an experiment that may doom us to failure. Who knows. Perhaps I'm a romantic or harking back to an old tradition. But what I saw in my grandfather's dogs was a partnership and a desire to work borne on trust without the use of any aversive methods. He was my role model when it comes to many things, including dogs. I'll try the old ways.


----------



## IowaGold

Lilliam, I'm curious, how does a shepherd teach the dog to come so reliably? What happens when the dog *doesn't* come (what does the shepherd do)?

From what I've read about pre-collar field training, the methods that many used to achieve compliance were far harsher than those used today with e-collars.


----------



## jackie_hubert

Can someone refer to me to a resource that explains the "correct way" of e-collar training? I'm curious to learn.


----------



## Lilliam

IowaGold said:


> Lilliam, I'm curious, how does a shepherd teach the dog to come so reliably? What happens when the dog *doesn't* come (what does the shepherd do)?
> 
> From what I've read about pre-collar field training, the methods that many used to achieve compliance were far harsher than those used today with e-collars.


It's only reliable because of the progression of the training. The main thing is not put him in a situation he can't handle so his confidence is not damaged.

Initially, the puppy is trained "that'll do" instead of come. From day one, it's taught when he getting really good things, like his dinner. From indoor to outdoor with a long line, to which you add the whistle. No treats as reinforcement - the bond is established that "that'll do" is always come to me, no matter what.

Initial training on stock happens on a round pen, with a long line if the puppy is too keen. From a round pen to a small enclosed area. By this time the puppy may be around twelve to eighteen months. The size of the enclosed area is increased little by little. When the dog reliably calls off stock he can begin competition, which is novice-novice (novice handler/novice dog) or pro-novice (advanced or open handler/novice dog. Once someone handles in open level he can never go back to novice.)

This level is in a small area with handlers at the periphery, with seasoned dogs. They are there to catch any livestock that is pushed too hard. Ramboillet or range ewes are used, depending on the level.

By the time the dog goes to pro-novice or open, which is the large trial in an open field from 450 to 500 yards, he has learned to recall off stock. After open field come the national level, at which I competed with Dru in Nursery. Never won. But it as great to participate. I was never of any consequence, I just did it because I love the dogs.

From beginning to open dog, it an take as long as three to four years. 
Nursery competition happens before the dog turns two and a half because he must be under three to compete at the Nationals. 

The training and the handling of a sheepdog is the same today as it was in the hills of Scotland and England. Same methods, same commands, same expectations. A trained dog in Scotland will know the same commands, lines, flanks, sheds, as he would here. The only thing that differs are the whistles.

As far as pre-collar field training, I don't know. The only field dogs I know were my grandfather's dogs and his friends', and I know he was never harsh or abusive, nor would he ever tolerate someone abusing an animal. He himself was put in jail once because he got into a fight with a man who was beating up a dog.

IowaGold - I don't know this trainer, but he discusses some of the things I've mentioned, and you can see some mistakes in handling a young dog. I know this is not the spirit of this thread, but you had asked how a yound dog is trained to recall.

http://www.herding-dog-training-border-collie-sheepdog-dvd.com/

here is the recall in a clinic


----------



## GoldenSail

Ok, so I don't have any experience with sheep dogs but I have seen some competitions with very good dogs, and some not very good dogs. The not very good dogs could get very nippy/bitey with the sheep which I imagine is not good--and I mean nippy in a--that dog wants to eat that sheep way--not a nip to herd. How do you positively manage that? Or do you just say herding is not a good vocation for that dog?


----------



## IowaGold

Lilliam said:


> It's only reliable because of the progression of the training. The main thing is not put him in a situation he can't handle so his confidence is not damaged.
> 
> Initially, the puppy is trained "that'll do" instead of come. From day one, it's taught when he getting really good things, like his dinner. From indoor to outdoor with a long line, to which you add the whistle. No treats as reinforcement - the bond is established that "that'll do" is always come to me, no matter what.
> 
> Initial training on stock happens on a round pen, with a long line if the puppy is too keen. From a round pen to a small enclosed area. By this time the puppy may be around twelve to eighteen months. The size of the enclosed area is increased little by little. When the dog reliably calls off stock he can begin competition, which is novice-novice (novice handler/novice dog) or pro-novice (advanced or open handler/novice dog. Once someone handles in open level he can never go back to novice.)
> 
> This level is in a small area with handlers at the periphery, with seasoned dogs. They are there to catch any livestock that is pushed too hard. Ramboillet or range ewes are used, depending on the level.
> 
> By the time the dog goes to pro-novice or open, which is the large trial in an open field from 450 to 500 yards, he has learned to recall off stock. After open field come the national level, at which I competed with Dru in Nursery. Never won. But it as great to participate. I was never of any consequence, I just did it because I love the dogs.
> 
> From beginning to open dog, it an take as long as three to four years.
> Nursery competition happens before the dog turns two and a half because he must be under three to compete at the Nationals.
> 
> The training and the handling of a sheepdog is the same today as it was in the hills of Scotland and England. Same methods, same commands, same expectations. A trained dog in Scotland will know the same commands, lines, flanks, sheds, as he would here. The only thing that differs are the whistles.
> 
> As far as pre-collar field training, I don't know. The only field dogs I know were my grandfather's dogs and his friends', and I know he was never harsh or abusive, nor would he ever tolerate someone abusing an animal. He himself was put in jail once because he got into a fight with a man who was beating up a dog.
> 
> IowaGold - I don't know this trainer, but he discusses some of the things I've mentioned, and you can see some mistakes in handling a young dog. I know this is not the spirit of this thread, but you had asked how a yound dog is trained to recall.


But what happens when they don't listen/obey "that'll do"? I can't believe that a dog never makes a mistake when they are learning.


----------



## Lilliam

GoldenSail said:


> Ok, so I don't have any experience with sheep dogs but I have seen some competitions with very good dogs, and some not very good dogs. The not very good dogs could get very nippy/bitey with the sheep which I imagine is not good--and I mean nippy in a--that dog wants to eat that sheep way--not a nip to herd. How do you positively manage that? Or do you just say herding is not a good vocation for that dog?


Biting stock is not good if it's unwarranted. Some handlers take all he bite out of a dog and then the dog can't defend itself. I manage my dog's bite and I put a command to it, so he knows when I ask him to bite I mean BITE. For example - a Rambouillet ewe who weighs over 350 lbs is challenging the dog, foot stomping, head down. At that point I am allowed to tell the dog "GRIP" and the dog is supposed to take one hit at the nose, which turns the sheep without hurting it. Sheep is not hurt and dog is not hurt. Or a cow won't go into a pen. I can tell a dog "GRIP" and he knows to take one hit at the hock, duck, and get out of the way. 

However, inappropriate biting is not allowed. Most dogs bit out of fear/lack of confidence or lack of discipline. In either case you simply go back to the last level where the dog was successful, even if it means all the way back to the round pen and re-establish the rules. 

Some dogs are simply not meant to be stockdogs. I've seen one GSD who was a schutzhund dog, and she was not able to turn that off around sheep. I've also seen Malanois who are just too bitey for stockwork.


----------



## Lilliam

IowaGold said:


> But what happens when they don't listen/obey "that'll do"? I can't believe that a dog never makes a mistake when they are learning.


Oh, of course that happens. But the early training on stock happens in close work, in a round pen or a small arena. The sheep can't get away.

That's when you turn the dog's instinct to your advantage. A handler holds a long wand which is an extension of his/her arm. That wand is used to block access to an area where the dog wants to go but you don't. Since most recall mistakes happen during early training, it happens in the round pen, which is a small round pen so that there are no corners for the sheep to crowd into. So....picture the sequence....sheep are running in a circle, dog behind. Handler is in the middle of the round pen. Handler extends his wand and walks into the area where the dog is about to run into as he follows the sheep. Because there is such a strong balance instinct in sheepdogs, the dog will stop when you block his path. At that point you block any motion, hands extended to either side, and simply say "that'll do" until the dog takes one step towards you, at which point you release all pressure and ask the dog to come to you, repeating that'll do, that'll do...

In the video below you can see a dog's first time outside a round pen. You can see it stopped succesfully a couple of times and one time where it just buzzed the handler.





 

With early training it's all applied/released pressure, using the dog's innate balancing instinct and desire to bring the sheep to you. Because he wants to bring you the sheep, as the sheep walk past you, you simply say "that'll do" and make the dog think he intended to come to you.

It's all a pressure/release pressure sheep/dog/human ballet, an opening and closing of doors, if you will.

Dogs are never taken out into an open field until they reliably call off he sheep. That's the reason for the different sized pens....you assist the dog to succeed by controlling the challenge of the exercise.

You also call the dog off she sheep several times during a training session, like the person below is doing. This lets them know that "that'll do" doesn't necessarily mean the end of fun.





 
And this is what it looks like after years of training. This is the highest level, but only the qualifying round. I was trying to find the 2010 Finals, with Alasdair MacRae, my teacher. Couldn't find one.





 
Lastly, here is cattle work.


----------



## hotel4dogs

Thanks Lilliam, that was fascinating!
I'll be very interested to see your progress with field training, because I think some of the inherent differences between field and herding are huge. One of the biggest is probably that we don't (not saying we shouldn't) train for 3 or 4 years before letting the dogs go after the birds. There is nothing like going after a live bird, or chasing down a cripple, to keep the dog's attitude and confidence up so we encourage it from early on. Also just by the nature of what we are doing (the dog has to learn to remember where a bird went down 100 or more yards away from early on) we can't work in small round pens with them. It appears in the videos that a lot of what you are doing is fenced; the people here who do herding work totally in fenced areas; we don't have that in the field work. From the get-go we are working in unfenced areas. Good luck with the pup, and be sure to keep us posted on how it's going!


----------



## Lilliam

Thank you! It will be an entirely different world for me, and just like Zeke had to teach me all I was doing wrong so that I could train Cassie, Dru and Billy properly, I'm afraid I'll make many mistakes with Max. 
My goals for Max are obedience, CGC, therapy and field. I think I would also like to try to show him. I'm as green about showing as I am about field work, so poor Max will have to bring me along. I think he's beautiful, but I'm biased, of course, and there's no telling whether what I see is true. 
Yes, there are many differences between gun dogs and sheepdogs. But did you know there were bird dogs in border collies? That's where they get their characteristic crouch and stand when they work, very similar to the pointers I grew up with. 
I know it's a different world. Different breeds, different mindset, different methods. I'm not in a hurry for field work, I like to take a lot of time to let dogs mature mentally before I put them through the rigours of advanced training. The training that happens with young sheepdogs is set by the dog, not me. I expect that it will be the same with Max. Somewhere I have this fantasy of a grey muzzled Max coming straight to me and bringing me a duck and depositing it in my hand....someday it will happen. He's seven months now, we have time.


----------



## hotel4dogs

I can't begin to list the mistakes I've made with Tito. Dogs are amazing, they teach us so much. 
As far as showing, see if you can locate a CCA event in your area. It would be very interesting, you will get 3 unbiased, professional opinions on Max's structure (10 physical attributes) as well as temperament. It might help you decide whether or not a show career is in his future.
Some gun dogs also point, more so labs than goldens. My Tito points small game, but not birds. His tail is not straight up, but otherwise it's a full point. Some labs are bred for their pointing ability! 
And did YOU know......the "casting" that you see in field work is taken directly from herding work? I've read a great book on the history of field trials and hunt tests, and it said that someone (sorry, forget who) adopted and adapted the hand signals from herding to the retriever world, and opened up a whole new world of skills!
Also, the Utility level in competition obedience comes directly from field work, too, especially in UKC!




Lilliam said:


> Thank you! It will be an entirely different world for me, and just like Zeke had to teach me all I was doing wrong so that I could train Cassie, Dru and Billy properly, I'm afraid I'll make many mistakes with Max.
> My goals for Max are obedience, CGC, therapy and field. I think I would also like to try to show him. I'm as green about showing as I am about field work, so poor Max will have to bring me along. I think he's beautiful, but I'm biased, of course, and there's no telling whether what I see is true.
> Yes, there are many differences between gun dogs and sheepdogs. But did you know there were bird dogs in border collies? That's where they get their characteristic crouch and stand when they work, very similar to the pointers I grew up with.
> I know it's a different world. Different breeds, different mindset, different methods. I'm not in a hurry for field work, I like to take a lot of time to let dogs mature mentally before I put them through the rigours of advanced training. The training that happens with young sheepdogs is set by the dog, not me. I expect that it will be the same with Max. Somewhere I have this fantasy of a grey muzzled Max coming straight to me and bringing me a duck and depositing it in my hand....someday it will happen. He's seven months now, we have time.


----------



## Lilliam

YES!!!n I know about the casting! What I don't know (haven't seen) is whether whistles are applied to redirect dogs once they're cast out. I would FREAK if I heard whistles on a field that resemble my whistles!!! Also, I've always wondered....if there is a lot of cover, in Fall, the dog's coat may be hard to see, so if you want to widen out a dog, are you allowed? Reason I'm asking, in herding you can redirect a dog if he's coming too tightly on the sheep but the black and white color of the dog against the white on the sheep makes them easier to spot. You do take a hit in points on a redirect. Is is similar in field?


----------



## AKGOLD

Maxs Mom said:


> Quinn gets happy when her collar (her jewelry) comes out, she knows it means fun. We had it on her long before we 'turned it on' so I don't know she associates it. I need to get it on Teddi more, I am still afraid of using it on her, she is so soft I don't want to mess up. Just rambling.



This is the same reaction Piper has to her E-collar. When she comes out of the dog box, her first reaction is to look for the collar, whether we are hunting or it is for training. Not that she doesn't know what a Hunt Test is, she happily walks to the line half the time in a business like trance and the other half like she is a pup.


Regrettably as Evan has previously noted we still have detractors of the great tool that has allowed for greater success today as a beginner trainer than previously existed. Hopefully as the use of E-collars continues to evolve, they will be seen in a better light.


----------



## EvanG

"The process of education is a transformation from cock-sure ignorance to thoughtful uncertainty" ~ Dr. Kendall McNabney

Sadly, that transformation simply does not occur in some people. That means many will cling to ignorance of sound e-collar training in spite of the facts, rather than because of them.

How wonderful to see so many who are willing to learn and grow! Makes for happy, fulfilled dogs!

EvanG


----------



## hotel4dogs

Evan, can you answer Lilliam's question (see post #37)? I didn't know the answers!


----------



## EvanG

I hope I've understood the question correctly. In retriever fieldwork we use the whistle for two commands; "Here" (or "Come") & "Sit" (or 'stop'). Directional changes are done via hand signals, aka "casting". I'm not aware of any credible retriever trainer who uses whistle commands as directional cues, as herding dogs do.









 
EvanG


----------



## K9-Design

Lilliam said:


> YES!!!n I know about the casting! What I don't know (haven't seen) is whether whistles are applied to redirect dogs once they're cast out. I would FREAK if I heard whistles on a field that resemble my whistles!!!


Generally, no. Although whistles are a vital part of a handling retriever, their use is actually pretty straight forward. One whistle blast means SIT, two or three blasts in a row means come in. In retriever handling, if the dog is not going straight to the downed bird, he is sat with the whistle, then "Cast" with arm signals toward the bird. At that point the dog is expected to take a straight line in the direction he is cast; if not he will be stopped with the whistle and cast again. The dog is not given more information while running, he has been trained to take the cast and run straight on his own.



> Also, I've always wondered....if there is a lot of cover, in Fall, the dog's coat may be hard to see, so if you want to widen out a dog, are you allowed? Reason I'm asking, in herding you can redirect a dog if he's coming too tightly on the sheep but the black and white color of the dog against the white on the sheep makes them easier to spot. You do take a hit in points on a redirect. Is is similar in field?


I have no idea what you're talking about here, so I think the answer is no 
Good dog training is good dog training. But please don't try to draw too many parallels to retriever training and herding. You're doing yourself a disservice in trying to re-invent the wheel.


----------



## Lilliam

Thank you for your response. I couldn't help but notice your comments on post #39.

I happen to believe in Skinner's operant conditioning approach, and prefer a positive reinforcement approach. In his quadrants of operant conditioning, I prefer to use. A positive reinforcement/negative punishment method. 

I don't believe that there is any one way that is applicable in any training, and disagreement with a method is not necessarily "cock-sure ignorance." What I'm personally sure of is what I've seen, what I've experienced and what I am willing to do with my dog. If using old methods which do not employ negative reinforcements means that Max and I take longer than someone who uses it, that's fine by me. I'm not in a hurry.

I used negative reinforcement in training snake avoidance because it was for the dogs' safety. It was more powerful than citronella or any possible positive punishment method I might have used. I personally choose not to use it in training. That is not close-mindedness, it is a thoughtful choice based on personal experience and observations.


----------



## K9-Design

Oy --- when Skinner's black box quadrants come out is when I zone out.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Train dogs not theories.
Welcome to retriever training, find yourself a good group and if you find someone who's dogs you like, how they work, do what they have done.


----------



## Lilliam

LOL!!!! I was a psych major as an undergrad! I LOVE Skinner!!!!


----------



## EvanG

Lilliam,

I'm sorry you chose to internalize my post. It was in response to AKGOLD's thoughtful post regarding modern e-collar methodology, and was not aimed at anything you've expressed.


AKGOLD said:


> Regrettably as Evan has previously noted we still have detractors of the great tool that has allowed for greater success today as a beginner trainer than previously existed. Hopefully as the use of E-collars continues to evolve, they will be seen in a better light.


As a retired RN, my psych studies acqainted me with Skinner also. But I've found canine mental processes to be substantially different from how humans learn and react. I wish you all the luck in developing your dog because the more successful you are, the more successful your dog will be.

EvanG


----------



## Lilliam

Then please accept my apology if I reached an incorrect conclusion.

I'm admittedly out of my depth when it comes to retrievers and field work. I am, as I always do, taking a measured approach to something new while mindful of what I've learned. 

I agree that not all animals, man included, display the same behaviours as response to the same stimulus; however, operant conditioning takes off where Pavlovian classical conditioning left off and serves to model the modern approaches to training and, of course, the clicker as a training tool. I would never use the clicker with a working dog to teach working behaviours, but I do use it for baby, baby puppies and to teach beginning commands or tricks. Actually, I agee with Ian Dunbar's thinking that once a behaviour is modeled or captured it is unnecessary to continue the clicker. I happen to like the idea of having as few tools as possible during training; if I can get my point across with two dirty fingers in my mouth so much the better.....no matter how much dirt I may have on them! 

In any case, not to belabor a point. Thank you for the good wishes. By the time Max and I are ready for our field tests I will be close to retirement, I'm sure. But that's OK - no big hurry.


----------



## sterregold

Lilliam,
Here is a blog you may want to read written by Lindsay Ridgeway who has been trying to train dogs without e-collar or other aversives as were used in the pre-collar days. He's now managed to get to SH on both dogs but it has been a slow and deliberate process.
Field Training Test Series: January 2011

It will take you longer to get there. No doubt. My girl was running AKC JH at the same time as his boy Laddie, in 2008. Laddie has WAY more "work" in his pedigree than she does (his father is an FC AFC), and I am admittedly an amateur trainer who is still learning the finer nuances of this sport. My Breeze got her SH the next summer (Sept 2009, a year to the date after she got her AKC JH and had had a litter of pups in there, too!) and he got his in July 2010. 

Personally, I use the e-collar and find it a valuable tool which provides clear communication when used properly. It is not the only tool, though, and keeping training balanced is important. Behaviours are taught and shaped, attrition is used etc, but in this positive punishment is a practicality. In the end, as I hunter, I need my dogs to do multiples and blinds reliably, and cannot wait years for them to be reliable and skilled enough to go into the field.


----------



## EvanG

To those of you who are experienced with the e-collar, haven't you found it interesting that once you've gotten good Basics in your dog, and have moved into Transition, that you are actually using the collar very little? Our fully-trained Lab, "Bitsy", trains regularly and only needs a correction once or twice in a 2-3 months span. I have found this to be more the rule than the exception among those training via similar methodology.

EvanG


----------



## hotel4dogs

the only time I have to hit Tito with the e-collar, it seems, is when a bird takes off and he decides to go after the bird and ignore the come-in whistle. Otherwise, he wears it but I *almost* never use it.


----------



## sterregold

EvanG said:


> To those of you who are experienced with the e-collar, haven't you found it interesting that once you've gotten good Basics in your dog, and have moved into Transition, that you are actually using the collar very little? Our fully-trained Lab, "Bitsy", trains regularly and only needs a correction once or twice in a 2-3 months span. I have found this to be more the rule than the exception among those training via similar methodology.
> 
> EvanG


I would agree with that observation. About the only time Breeze gets a correction now is for a repeated cast refusal. Usually attrition does the trick, and when she gets a correction it can be weeks and weeks before she disobeys persistently enough to warrant one again.


----------



## Lilliam

Han


sterregold said:


> Lilliam,
> Here is a blog you may want to read written by Lindsay Ridgeway who has been trying to train dogs without e-collar or other aversives as were used in the pre-collar days. He's now managed to get to SH on both dogs but it has been a slow and deliberate process.
> Field Training Test Series: January 2011
> 
> It will take you longer to get there. No doubt. My girl was running AKC JH at the same time as his boy Laddie, in 2008. Laddie has WAY more "work" in his pedigree than she does (his father is an FC AFC), and I am admittedly an amateur trainer who is still learning the finer nuances of this sport. My Breeze got her SH the next summer (Sept 2009, a year to the date after she got her AKC JH and had had a litter of pups in there, too!) and he got his in July 2010.
> 
> Personally, I use the e-collar and find it a valuable tool which provides clear communication when used properly. It is not the only tool, though, and keeping training balanced is important. Behaviours are taught and shaped, attrition is used etc, but in this positive punishment is a practicality. In the end, as I hunter, I need my dogs to do multiples and blinds reliably, and cannot wait years for them to be reliable and skilled enough to go into the field.


Thank you so much for the link! I'll definitely read it - and thank you for the information.
It's really funny - my husband's family all love boats, and the all power boats. My husband and I are the only ones who sail. Every holiday dinner the power boat/sailboat discussion comes up. They want to get somewhere quickly so they can do X. We always have to explain that for us, it's all about getting there.

I've said before - I'm in no hurry. I want to do this for a couple of reasons....to pay respect to my grandfather and the sport he loved along with his philosophies which he ultimately handed me, and to respect the breed. Max is a gun dog, he has field in his background, so we will do what his genes say he should do. If Abuelo was able to train his dogs without an e-collar and if I went to the national sheepdog competition with a nursery dog without using an e-collar, Max and I can do field without using it. And if we don't title, that's OK. We will have trained in it and he would have done the work his breed specifies.

There is no one method or tool to get something done. I can't believe that training with an e-collar is the only way to train field. You use what works for you. Slow and steady partnering without the use of aversives works for me.


----------



## tippykayak

K9-Design said:


> Oy --- when Skinner's black box quadrants come out is when I zone out.
> ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
> Train dogs not theories.


I get the point I think you're trying to make about the complexity of hands-on training, and I'm not a radical Skinnerist by any stretch of the imagination. Trying to cram everything into a quadrant can be wholly counterproductive. Real world training, particularly with animals as intelligent and emotionally connected as dogs, does not always fit in the box.

The way we'll become better trainers is partly by hands on experience and collaboration with successful trainers, yes. However, the field of dog training has moved forwards significantly in the last century, both in terms of its ethics and its effectiveness, and a large part of that is due to advances in behavioral science and animal psychology.

Skinner is useful, for example, because at the very least, the simplicity of his classification of stimuli and behavior helps us to think about what we do in a new way. It doesn't mean that everything that can be fit into the positive punishment box is automatically bad or abusive (unless you're a fundamentalist Skinnerian), but it does provide healthy perspective and potentially great insights.

Theory has an important place in making us better trainers and in improving training effectiveness and ethics. I think there needs to be a balance between a practical application of things that obviously work and theories about things that might work even better.




BTW-Skinner's use of the term "black box" and the divisions of reinforcement and punishment aren't the same thing.


----------



## tippykayak

My mixed feelings about e-collars are probably well known to most folks in the thread, so I have no desire to reopen any kind of debate about e-collar=evil.

So I'll say something positive about it: no matter your beliefs about the usefulness of punishment and aversive stimuli, the modern day e-collar is a lot more humane than some of the things I've heard and read folks used to do to train field dogs.


----------



## tippykayak

sterregold said:


> Lilliam,
> Here is a blog you may want to read written by Lindsay Ridgeway who has been trying to train dogs without e-collar or other aversives as were used in the pre-collar days. He's now managed to get to SH on both dogs but it has been a slow and deliberate process.


I do personally know an MH dog that was trained without the e-collar (though not completely without aversives). It's certainly possible, though I can't comment as to how long it would have taken with an e-collar.


----------



## EvanG

Lilliam said:


> There is no one method or tool to get something done. I can't believe that training with an e-collar is the only way to train field.


That has never been the issue in discussions of e-collars, and aversives in general. There is no way that is the only way. But there are better ways to do anything. One of the things that time and experience provides is data to use in improving what we do, and how we do it. That is how progress is made in any field. 

All anyone may reasonably assert about modern training methods is that they have become more effective and efficient for a wider variety of dogs. Not only is the training achieved more expeditiously, but also with a much greater degree of precision in the field.

We have competition to thank for much of this development. Only the best dogs with the best training and handling prevail. At some point a competitor must realize the wisdom in the old saying "If you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always got." Because the bar has continually risen over the years in dogs involved in selective field breedings, we have all benefitted by have ever-better pups to bring up as we each see fit.

As long as we take good care of our dogs, and enjoy our chosen pursuits, who cares if any individual has different goals? Good luck, and have fun!

EvanG


----------



## Lilliam

Innovation is always a good thing. New methods and new tools *should* be tried, but not all should mandatorily and necessarily adopted. Equally important to looking at new methods or tools is asking why they should be used over something else. If after exposure to it and questioning it one finds that it meets with one's philosophies and approaches, then it's good to try them. If not, then use an alternative. If that alternative is the way things used to be, so be it. Just because a method or a tool is old it should not be discounted if it meets with a person's preferred approach or if it is effective. 

My choice for my dog is to train as I saw dogs trained in the past. Not because I don't want to try something new, but rather because this tool does not offer something that is of value to me. There has been a lot of discussion on this thread as to how much time would be saved through using this tool. Time is of no consequence to me. I am under no deadline. I choose to enjoy the voyage as much as the destination.

Thank you for the discussion. It's been interesting.


----------



## K9-Design

tippykayak said:


> I get the point I think you're trying to make about the complexity of hands-on training, and I'm not a radical Skinnerist by any stretch of the imagination. Trying to cram everything into a quadrant can be wholly counterproductive. Real world training, particularly with animals as intelligent and emotionally connected as dogs, does not always fit in the box.
> 
> The way we'll become better trainers is partly by hands on experience and collaboration with successful trainers, yes. However, the field of dog training has moved forwards significantly in the last century, both in terms of its ethics and its effectiveness, and a large part of that is due to advances in behavioral science and animal psychology.
> 
> Skinner is useful, for example, because at the very least, the simplicity of his classification of stimuli and behavior helps us to think about what we do in a new way. It doesn't mean that everything that can be fit into the positive punishment box is automatically bad or abusive (unless you're a fundamentalist Skinnerian), but it does provide healthy perspective and potentially great insights.
> 
> Theory has an important place in making us better trainers and in improving training effectiveness and ethics. I think there needs to be a balance between a practical application of things that obviously work and theories about things that might work even better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW-Skinner's use of the term "black box" and the divisions of reinforcement and punishment aren't the same thing.


No problemo and really I agree -- understanding of the operant conditioning quadrants is extraordinarily useful in dog training. But much like footwork in obedience, or any of the statistics classes I was forced to take as an undergrad, I personally zone out the second I hear anything about it! LOL

Lilliam -- do you have a field training group you are working with? Has your pup been on birds yet?


----------



## Lilliam

K9-Design said:


> Lilliam -- do you have a field training group you are working with? Has your pup been on birds yet?


No to both. My main focus right now is getting him ready for Star puppy. Then I'll begin prepping for Obedience as a discipline, CGC certification, therapy certification, and then field.

I see him very interested in the geese at my in-laws' place at the bay. He freezes when he sees them and stares very, very intently. When they move he wants to move with them. Luckily we're generally on the deck so he can't take any steps forward without walking into the railing, since I don't want to correct him for looking at the geese.

I've used home sessions to teach him to pick up something when asked and then to sit and give them to me. It's some of the games we've been playing just to get him used to listening when I ask him to pick up something. I remember the egg game, and we've been playing that. Generally he's been pretty good with it!!!!

He's seven months old and I have some goals I want to reach before I hit field. The most critical thing for me is that I want him to be well into a consistent recall before I ask anything of him in the field, and there are times when he comes back to me a bit more slowly than I like. I know that in an instinct/obedience tug of war the instinct takes over, so I want to do some long line work with him to get him ready. And I still haven't trained a recall whistle.


----------



## hotel4dogs

When I started doing open and utility level obedience with Tito, the trainers all told me that I would have to "ear pinch" and/or "force fetch" him to get anywhere with it. It was not something I was willing to do for the obedience ring, which is a game we play strictly for me. 
I stuck to my guns, and refused to ear pinch or FF him.
I am quite proud to say that I took him to his UDX by the time he was 3-1/2 without ever forcing him, no ear pinch, and *mostly positive* training methods. 
I felt opposed to using the FF and e-collar in field, too....until the first day I saw my dog go after a bird. I did a 180 degree change of heart. I feel I didn't truly *know* Tito until I saw him in the field. At that point I realized that, at least with this particular dog, if I wanted to get anywhere with him I was going to have to use the e-collar. Field is HIS game, but he has to learn the safety rules.
And so we collar conditioned him, and I am so glad that I did. As Evan said, I almost never use it, in fact, it's used only when he makes a conscious decision to ignore a command (and go after a bird I've called him off of).
But to Lilliam, to each their own. I believe I know just how you are feeling, because that's how I felt about training Tito in obedience. You have to do what you feel is right for you, and for your particular dog, no matter what anyone else says. Best of luck with it, and we'll look forward to hearing your progress reports!


----------



## Lilliam

Or lack of progress, as it may be!!! LOL!!! Thank you for the kind words. 
You'll be hearing about all the other disciplines before field, but I plan to get there before I have to go to the field in a wheelchair....


----------



## GoldenSail

Lilliam--while you may want to wait with field training I think getting him some bird experience while he's young would be invaluable. I chose to enter the field game as a newbie when Scout was closer to a year and had some initial difficulty getting her on birds (she loves them now). I think if she had been introduced at an earlier age things would have gone smoother. It certainly is easy to give up over something like that.

And yes, I know Tito loved birds as an older dog but we don't all own a Tito


----------



## Lilliam

OK - you've got my attention. That's interesting....

What do you mean? How would he get experience without training?


----------



## winewinn

There is so much value in using e-collars when used correctly. Our dogs _enjoy_ putting them on because they associate this with something fun (going hunting or chasing bumpers).


----------



## Swampcollie

EvanG said:


> To those of you who are experienced with the e-collar, haven't you found it interesting that once you've gotten good Basics in your dog, and have moved into Transition, that you are actually using the collar very little? Our fully-trained Lab, "Bitsy", trains regularly and only needs a correction once or twice in a 2-3 months span. I have found this to be more the rule than the exception among those training via similar methodology.
> 
> EvanG


I agree. 

I rarely have to use the collar once into transition. By this point the basic lessons have been learned. I usually only use the collar to correct when the dog has flipped me the paw.


----------



## GoldenSail

Lilliam said:


> OK - you've got my attention. That's interesting....
> 
> What do you mean? How would he get experience without training?


Well, I imagine there would be some but nothing formal. Take him to a field training day sponsored by a local club, clip on a long line, and throw him a bird. Get him interested and picking up the bird. You don't really need to be formal about it, just make sure he can't practice running off with it (long line)


----------



## Ljilly28

sammydog said:


> Despite my brain telling me to take a deep breath and walk away, here I go...
> 
> For each person who uses an e-collar correctly, how many do you think misuse it?
> 
> I cringe everytime I am in the petstore and I hear john-q public asking where to find a shock collar for their puppy who won't stop barking. I heard one just yesterday. I also remember reading a thread about someone who borrowed one to stop their dog from jumping. Easy enough, dog jumps, burn them, no more jumping... sigh...
> 
> I don't use e-collars... Many of my friends who do field do. I know many many good trainers who do. Even the people I know who I consider good fair trainers make mistakes with them. It just scares me when they come up in discussions like this spoken so highly of in a forum that is largely geared toward your normal pet dog owner... Yes, I know that this was posted in the field forum, but really, how many field people read this and don't know it already...
> 
> Running away now... :curtain:



I agree with this post in tone and content.


----------



## EvanG

Ljilly28 said:


> I agree with this post in tone and content.


Do you also cringe when you see someone buy a leash, or choker, or heeling stick? How about about a rolled up newspaper. All are improperly used on dogs every day, and far more commonly than e-collars because of sheer usage ratio. Only a small percentage of trainers, overall, use e-collars. 

Competence in the use of tools is directly linked to the individual, rather than the tool. As I've said for decades, if someone ruins a dog with an e-collar, they would have ruined them with something else had they not had one. Abusive trainers do that - regardless of any specific training tool.

Ignorance can be fixed. Stupid is forever. But there is no application process for people who want to train dogs. Philosophically, I sometimes wish there were. But then who would choose the people in charge? Our best hope, as well as our dog's best hope, is more and _better_ information.

Yes, I know this is an old topic - this pro or con of e-collar use. I think it's useful each time it comes up because the pervasive myths continue. Each such discussion is another opportunity to dispell them. And each time is a chance for any trainer to review thier own motives for using _*any*_ aversives. If there is anything that should justifiably evoke a reflexive cringe, it should be the sight of a human who is unwilling to learn what to do, and/or how to do it before being allowed to impose their will on a dog. A point to ponder.

EvanG


----------



## sterregold

GoldenSail said:


> Well, I imagine there would be some but nothing formal. Take him to a field training day sponsored by a local club, clip on a long line, and throw him a bird. Get him interested and picking up the bird. You don't really need to be formal about it, just make sure he can't practice running off with it (long line)


Absolutely--get exposure to birds while the dog is still young so he recognizes them and loves them! My pups have wings in the whelping box, and get to chase pigeons before they go home--it is part of how I test them to see who has desire and courage. My own 13w.o. pup goes to picnic trials and training days so that she gets to hear gunfire in a controlled way and watch the big dogs working (she gets jealous!) and is getting simple retrieves now with appealing retrieve objects. We stretched her out to about 40 yards yesterday. I also work at putting in the foundation for for skills she will need, like good obedience (recall, sit, heel), praise for a good natural hold to cultivate that, and go on walks where pup gets to encounter lots of natrual haxards like ditches and rocks, brush piles so that they learn to be confident in navigating the terrain they will encounter in formal training and testing.


----------



## jealous1

I have just finished reading this thread as I am very interested in various training methods due to the many dog personalities I have come across through our rescue work. Until introduced to goldens about four years ago my exposure to dogs was only of the small breeds; my husband's exposure was to hunting dogs growing up. He has taught me alot over the past couple of years regarding how to work with these wonderful dogs using mostly positive reinforcement, the occasional negative reinforcement, and always open to listening to other training methods. 

What I do want to say without commenting on any of the above mentioned training methods is that this has been one of the most enjoyable threads I have read in a long time as it did not dissolve into negative back-and-forth responses. Thank each of you who have taken the time to respond in the manner that you have in this thread--you have done a great service to those of us who are not the normal "field work" readers/posters and I hope y'all continue to post in this same manner. 

(BTW, I always love reading about Tito and his accomplishments; hope to be reading more about Max's.)


----------



## tippykayak

EvanG said:


> Do you also cringe when you see someone buy a leash, or choker, or heeling stick? How about about a rolled up newspaper. All are improperly used on dogs every day, and far more commonly than e-collars because of sheer usage ratio. Only a small percentage of trainers, overall, use e-collars.


By my reading of that post, it wasn't the purchase of the tool that was cringed at. It was the idea of using the tool to eliminate a common problem behavior that would not best be fixed with a shock. It's the mentality that if the dog is doing something you do not like, you simply pair that undesired behavior with a painful stimulus and the dog will learn to stop.

A leash, a collar, a newspaper, and even a heeling stick can do all kinds of things not related to behavior extinction through aversive stimulus. Even a choke collar won't necessarily be used for collar corrections. An e-collar is designed to deliver a shock or a warning to pair with the shock so you can stop shocking at some point. It doesn't do anything else. So yes, it's different. It has no non-aversive function.

Now, the kind of e-collar use being described by field trainers and the kind used by families to eliminate problem behaviors is REALLY different. I don't cringe when I see a field trainer put an e-collar on a dog, and I don't think that's what the OP meant. I do cringe when I hear a person at the pet store saying she's going to get her dog to stop going on the couch by using an e-collar, and I cringe when I see somebody yelling at a dog to stop doing something. For the record, I also cringe when I see somebody rewarding a dog counterproductively.



EvanG said:


> Competence in the use of tools is directly linked to the individual, rather than the tool. As I've said for decades, if someone ruins a dog with an e-collar, they would have ruined them with something else had they not had one. Abusive trainers do that - regardless of any specific training tool.


Yes, but not all tools are created equal. If somebody goes to cut a switch or fills a shotgun with birdshot, I think we can safely say that they're using a dog training tool that's cringeworthy. When it comes to the e-collar, there's room for a lot of discussion, but some tools really do lend themselves to abuse in the wrong hands while others are harder to abuse. You can abuse a dog with treats, for sure, but it's a lot harder than abusing a dog with a shock.




EvanG said:


> Yes, I know this is an old topic - this pro or con of e-collar use. I think it's useful each time it comes up because the pervasive myths continue. Each such discussion is another opportunity to dispell them. And each time is a chance for any trainer to review thier own motives for using _*any*_ aversives. If there is anything that should justifiably evoke a reflexive cringe, it should be the sight of a human who is unwilling to learn what to do, and/or how to do it before being allowed to impose their will on a dog. A point to ponder.
> 
> EvanG


I left this piece in just so I could say that I agree wholeheartedly with you that it's important that we dispel myths and assumptions, and that every opportunities for trainers to really look at themselves is a good one.


----------



## K9-Design

I'll tell you what keeps more "pet people" from using ecollars -- thankfully -- is the STICKER SHOCK 
Pun intended.
If they won't spend $100 on an obedience class or private lesson from a trainer -- they sure as hell aren't going to spend $300+ on an ecollar (and that's the LOW end).


----------



## GoldenSail

K9-Design said:


> I'll tell you what keeps more "pet people" from using ecollars -- thankfully -- is the STICKER SHOCK
> Pun intended.
> If they won't spend $100 on an obedience class or private lesson from a trainer -- they sure as hell aren't going to spend $300+ on an ecollar (and that's the LOW end).


Except you can buy a really crappy one from Walmart for around $100....


----------



## EvanG

tippykayak said:


> It was the idea of using the tool to eliminate a common problem behavior that would not best be fixed with a shock. It's the mentality that if the dog is doing something you do not like, you simply pair that undesired behavior with a painful stimulus and the dog will learn to stop.


I cringe at that notion as well. And it has nothing to do with the proper use of the tool. I agree that more information is needed by anyone considering such an application.

The point I continue to make is that it is not the tool, but rather the misuse of it that needs to be corrected, and that is an aspect of training directly linked to the human, not the tool. I think as we go along we'll find more to agree on than disagree. That's why these discussions are useful. 


tippykayak said:


> A leash, a collar, a newspaper, and even a heeling stick can do all kinds of things not related to behavior extinction through aversive stimulus. Even a choke collar won't necessarily be used for collar corrections.


But within the context of our discussion, all of them _are_. We're only comparing one to another in ways that they can be correctly used for good, or incorrectly used for harm, aren't we? What we don't seem to have covered adequately yet is the correct use of e-stimulus, and aversives in general.


tippykayak said:


> An e-collar is designed to deliver a shock or a warning to pair with the shock so you can stop shocking at some point. It doesn't do anything else. So yes, it's different. It has no non-aversive function.


There are actually a _couple_ of ways I agree with you on this. In most modern methods for e-collar use in fieldwork, especially in mine, it must be acknowledged that the trainer (not the dog) is in charge of when stimulus is used, at what level, and for how long. But, because we use aversives to deliver pressure we really need to be clear about why we use pressure at all.

The sole reason for the use of pressure in my method is to change behavior. That's it. It must also be mentioned here that the words "pressure" and "force" don't imply an amount. Many people have a knee-jerk reaction to those terms being used in connection with dog training, and appear to assume they mean brutality. I know you realize that. But it's worth mentioning for those who may not.

The other point of agreement I have with your post is that we seek to use the e-collar less and less as we go along. When we succeed at that, we succeed as trainers. We seek to turn off stimulus - not only in the moment, but forever. That's idealistic, of course because it's determined by the dog and its willingness to make an effort to conform with trained standards.


tippykayak said:


> Now, the kind of e-collar use being described by field trainers and the kind used by families to eliminate problem behaviors is REALLY different. I don't cringe when I see a field trainer put an e-collar on a dog, and I don't think that's what the OP meant.


And again we agree.


tippykayak said:


> I do cringe when I hear a person at the pet store saying she's going to get her dog to stop going on the couch by using an e-collar, and I cringe when I see somebody yelling at a dog to stop doing something. For the record, I also cringe when I see somebody rewarding a dog counterproductively.


Holy smoke! We're agreeing all over the place!:--big_grin:




tippykayak said:


> Yes, but not all tools are created equal.


Again I agree. Each one has a balance of strengths and weaknesses. That balance determines the potential it has for efficiency. But for any tool, its efficiency potential must be balanced with a consideration for its potential harm. As a highly efficient tool, the e-collar carries a high potential for harm, and that, once again, puts a burden on the trainer to learn its proper use, and to discipline themselves not to use it in anger. Of course to an only slightly lesser extent, this applies to heeling sticks and other tools. It's not the tool. It's the person using it that determines the good or harm it produces.


tippykayak said:


> If somebody goes to cut a switch or fills a shotgun with birdshot, I think we can safely say that they're using a dog training tool that's cringeworthy. When it comes to the e-collar, there's room for a lot of discussion, but some tools really do lend themselves to abuse in the wrong hands while others are harder to abuse. You can abuse a dog with treats, for sure, but it's a lot harder than abusing a dog with a shock.


Once again, I fully agree. How a trainer uses any of these things determines the good or bad outcome. The riskier the tool, the truer this is. But it's ultimately *never* the tool that harmed the dog, is it?


tippykayak said:


> I left this piece in just so I could say that I agree wholeheartedly with you that it's important that we dispel myths and assumptions, and that every opportunities for trainers to really look at themselves is a good one.


One of the finest tools any trainer can possess is a mirror.

EvanG


----------



## hotel4dogs

And that is a fantastic line that should be etched in stone somewhere.



EvanG said:


> ?One of the finest tools any trainer can possess is a mirror.
> 
> EvanG


----------



## tippykayak

GoldenSail said:


> Except you can buy a really crappy one from Walmart for around $100....


The cheapest I was able to find in an online search was $30.


----------



## tippykayak

Evan, I'm not going to quote and break up your previous post to agree individually with what you've said, but I did want to say that I appreciated the positive tone of the discussion and that I definitely do agree with you that it is ultimately the individual that is the source of mistraining and abuse, not the tool.

I think the most interesting point of our agreement is the concept that an aversive tool carries the high possibility of causing harm to the dog's behavior and is more rife with the potential for abuse, though it is not the source of the abuse itself.

I do believe that aversives can have a positive role in training, and I use them myself (though for a multitude of reasons I've cited in other threads, I'm unlikely to put an e-collar on my dogs). I sometimes question whether I could get the same or better results with more creativity and less aversiveness, and I see that as a good trend for trainers in general.


----------



## Ljilly28

You see most great or even good retrievers mainly trained with CC and FF, but I really admire it when trainers are so talented they can achieve that MH without those aversives, or even a SH. Two women in my training group are cross over trainers and no longer use E collars. One finished her MH last summer and one finished SH at the RI national. I like that they are innovated and engaged in a thoughtful process of what best fits not only their goldens but their own ethical ideas about relating to their dogs. It is great to learn from them. JVB had a cool article in the GR News about why her Elysian dogs can be trained without E collars.


----------



## MarieP

Ljilly28 said:


> You see most great or even good retrievers mainly trained with CC and FF, but I really admire it when trainers are so talented they can achieve that MH without those aversives, or even a SH. Two women in my training group are cross over trainers and no longer use E collars. One finished her MH last summer and one finished SH at the RI national. I like that they are innovated and engaged in a thoughtful process of what best fits not only their goldens but their own ethical ideas about relating to their dogs. It is great to learn from them. JVB had a cool article in the GR News about why her Elysian dogs can be trained without E collars.


Really? You, as a moderator, should know that we have already beat this horse over and over and over. And our little hunt and field forum created a whole new rule about rudeness. I really don't think that we need to go back again to a post from 2010. You are just poking the fire, and I really don't find that fair. Thats great that these trainers don't use CC and FF. But I don't think that makes them more or less talented as trainers. It just makes them different.


----------



## Ljilly28

Please direct your post at the topic, not at me.


----------



## GoldenSail

I also don't understand why a mod would re-visit an old thread related to the topic of a recently closed thread that temporarily banned a forum member only to state the same opinion that was expressed in the last thread.


----------



## Pointgold

Wow. 

This forum is really going to get interesting. 

Freedom of speech with consequences, as the saying goes.


----------



## HiTideGoldens

I really don't think this topic needs to be brought up again considering the results of the last thread....especially in a thread that's almost a year old... JMO


----------



## DNL2448

I would like, just once, for someone who has a current MH or AFC/FC trained with no FF or CC come on this forum and explain their philosophy. Not only would it be a darned interesting discussion, but it would also give credability to the "other" side of the debate. Instead of the "it can be done, but I have not done it" rhetoric, we would be able to have a fruitful discussion and possibly be able to learn from one who HAS done it.


----------



## akgolden

GoldenSail said:


> I also don't understand why a mod would re-visit an old thread related to the topic of a recently closed thread that temporarily banned a forum member only to state the same opinion that was expressed in the last thread.


This. I am an Admin on a couple other forums (not dog related but an Admin is an Admin). As a mod you are suppose to keep things civil. Reopening a thread that was closed to stir the pot is an abuse of power and uncalled for IMO.


DNL2448 said:


> I would like, just once, for someone who has a current MH or AFC/FC trained with no FF or CC come on this forum and explain their philosophy. Not only would it be a darned interesting discussion, but it would also give credability to the "other" side of the debate. Instead of the "it can be done, but I have not done it" rhetoric, we would be able to have a fruitful discussion and possibly be able to learn from one who HAS done it.


I agree. I am tired of people saying they don't agree with a certain method and say another is better but they themselves don't practice it or have any supporting facts to back up their statements.


----------



## Ljilly28

That is an awesome idea. I will ask Judy is she would consider doing this. She is not much of an internet person, but she is enthusiastic about mentoring people so maybe she would consider a one time visit online. She has a wonderful MH golden, and three labs who she trained without FF/CC.


----------



## DNL2448

Ljilly28 said:


> That is an awesome idea. I will ask Judy is she would consider doing this. She is not much of an internet person, but she is enthusiastic about mentoring people so maybe she would consider a one time visit online. She has a wonderful MH golden, and three labs who she trained without FF/CC.


I, for one, would love to have dialog with her, and anyone else who has done it. I think it would be a GREAT discussion.


----------



## Ljilly28

I apologize for reopening the thread. Someone nicely PM'd asked me for a comment on Evan's thread, and I did not realize he had a new one. It was not to stir the pot but just a mistake as I was rushing between teaching puppy class and CGC. Try not to mind read and infer negative motives to people you do not know. Again, either address the topic, or ignore the thread.


----------



## sammydog

Ljilly28 said:


> That is an awesome idea. I will ask Judy is she would consider doing this. She is not much of an internet person, but she is enthusiastic about mentoring people so maybe she would consider a one time visit online. She has a wonderful MH golden, and three labs who she trained without FF/CC.


I would be interested too! You are very fortunate to have someone in your training group like that!


----------



## akgolden

Ljilly28 said:


> I apologize for reopening the thread. Someone nicely PM'd asked me for a comment on Evan's thread, and I did not realize he had a new one. It was not to stir the pot but just a mistake as I was rushing between teaching puppy class and CGC. Try not to mind read and infer negative motives to people you do not know. Again, either address the topic, or ignore the thread.


I apologize for jumping to conclusions. Really looking forward to your friends coming in and hearing a different view


----------



## GoldenSail

Ljilly28 said:


> I apologize for reopening the thread. Someone nicely PM'd asked me for a comment on Evan's thread, and I did not realize he had a new one.


THANK YOU! I would LOVE to hear from your friend, too.


----------



## luvgld7

This topic, and many of the same opinions, has been covered extensively on a thread now closed. 

What I would like to see, as I think many others would, is a NEW THREAD, from those actually doing field work who feel they have been successful without e-collars or force fetch. It would add something new to the discussion and I think most would be happy to see that.

Ann
Dallas


----------



## gdgli

DNL2448 said:


> I would like, just once, for someone who has a current MH or AFC/FC trained with no FF or CC come on this forum and explain their philosophy. Not only would it be a darned interesting discussion, but it would also give credability to the "other" side of the debate. Instead of the "it can be done, but I have not done it" rhetoric, we would be able to have a fruitful discussion and possibly be able to learn from one who HAS done it.


A friend of mine recently put a MH on her dog, Adirondac's Bella Allegra. She did not force fetch (I don't count the ear pinch in obedience class) and she does not own an e collar. She ran her dog in a Qualifying stakes two weeks after earning her MH. Her not being called back for the fourth series was questionable (trust my opinion). It's too bad she doesn't do forums. I think she trains this way because our mentor trains that way. Our mentor is an old time field trialer, FT judge, HT judge and hunt tester. I wish she would come on to this forum just to discuss her philosophy.

I also train without an e collar but I do force fetch. My success, well we are still in training.


----------

