# More e-collar success stories.



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

Me and Maggie have been staying with my sister while I recover from surgery. She has a 7 year old Wheaten (Ray) who is a sweet wonderfull mostly well behaved dog who has never received any formal training and is exceptionally resistent to training now. His only serious problem is he completely ignores my sisters attempts to recall him when off-leash. My sister is a wonderfull dog owner but completely lacks the temperament for consistent dog training.

I have been suggesting to her for some time that she let me work with the e-collar as I have had good success with resolving issues such as fence jumping with some of my friends dogs.

She reluctantly agreed and we bought a Petsafe yard and park collar. I put the collar on Ray for about 4 hours a day for a week before doing any training in order to avoid him creating an association with the stimulation and the collar, did a couple sessions with a long line and then about 5 more 15 minute sessions off-leash. The collar is set up to give a 1 second warning tone before the stim, and the stim was set to level 2 (of 10). I probably only used the actual stim 4 or 5 times. Most times the tone alone was adequate.

Well Ray HATED it. He sulked and complied reluctantly when I trained him. Not good. However, when my sister calls him, he now bounds happily to her, and she is now comfortable training with tone only and he has come every time. He hasn't been tested yet with a serious distraction (small animal). She is ready for that and we will work on creating such distractions in a controlled environment.

As I had the collar I decided to try to use it to work on a pulling problem with my dog. Maggie pulls mightily when we walk with other dogs, requiring the use of an Easy Walk Harness.

Well I put the collar on her, determined the training stim level (level 3) and walked with her and(with my sister and Ray) on a flat collar. The instant the leash got tight I reversed direction abruptly and gave her a waring tone and a quick stim. After 3 or 4 times I used the warning tone only.

After only 20 minutes of this exercise she now walks on a loose leash without the e-collar no matter what dogs we are walking with.

E-collars, _*when used correctly and compassionately*_, are extremely effective training tools, especially for those of us who aren't naturally good at dog training.


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

I'm sorry, I simply can't accept them.


----------



## foxthegoldfish (Apr 15, 2008)

Im with Papilove, I just don't think they are needed, maybe as a last resort if you have exhausted trainers, behaviouralists, exercise, and every other trick in the book.
If your dog wont come back, keep it on a leash
If it jumps fences, keep it on a leash or supervised
There are many better solutions to problems


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

There are not always better solutions. I have a JRT who is obsessed with cats. She was ok when we had our cat Max because he was bigger but she always wanted to chase him catch him strattle him and lick him.

We brought home two kittens a few weeks ago and Maggie wanted to kill them she would get so excited and nip and bite at them. I tried treats and getting between them but she was so fixated on the kittens she didnt even hear me and if I tried to grab her collar she would snap at me.

So I bought the collar and used it. We have not used it for about a week now and she is fine with the kittens, she still gets excited but the most she does now is lick them...she doesnt even chase them. The kittens will even eat out of the same bowl as her and all is good


----------



## Deron_dog (Feb 21, 2009)

While I will never use an E-Coller myself, I just don't trust my own skills in being able to use one properly, I can't see all that great and may set something wrong and end up hurting one of my dogs. I will say I have seen and heard many success stories with using them.


----------



## chul3l3ies1126 (Aug 13, 2007)

KaseyT said:


> E-collars, _*when used correctly and compassionately*_, are extremely effective training tools


Completely agree KaseyT, congrats! They are indeed extremely effective and great training tools when used properly and with the help of a trained professional. 
Nessa


----------



## alphadoginthehouse (Jun 7, 2008)

NESSA!!!!   Where have you been? I was thinking about you the other day...can't remember why, but I was! How are the kids.

Sorry for the hijack Kasey. I have never used one but it sounds like the E-collar did the trick for you and your sister. Congratulations on your success!


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

I think there is so much miss-conception out there regarding these e-collars or shock collars as they were called. The collars today are NOT what they used to be in the 60's and 70's. For those ppl who simple say they "just can't accept it" .. in my opinion are being ignorant. Times have changed, technology has changed and so have remote collars. I challenge anyone to pick up a good quality collar and test it on different levels on your arm and see what it actually feels like.. its NOT electric shock therapy and i can guarantee that most of you will agree that its a SAFER and more compasionate form of training as compared to choke or prong collars. Its way WAY less painful then choke/prong collars. 

Now, having said that.. i fully understand that the potential for abuse is there and i highly advocate that nobody should be using these collars without proper training. My dog is 9 months old now. We did basic training with her from the time we got her and at 6 months we got a trainer who is fully qualified and graduated from e collar training program from Robin MacFarlane's school and took personal lessons from her. We learned what we needed to do and practiced and practiced. We still keep the e collar on Hannah when we go for walks/runs just in case, but can't recall the last time we had to use it. My puppy is 9 months and i walk/jog/ play fetch with her off leash in well distracted places and have never had any issues. I know i can trust my recalls and i know my dog understands what is expected of her. She has so much more freedom and room to have fun now then she did when we weren't sure if she'd come back to us and had to have her on leash. Now she heals off leash with us till we get to the park where she is allowed to run free off leash. She is great and we constantly get compliments on how well trained she is.


I'll advocate for e-collars anytime.. as long as the owners are responsible and have had proper training. I would never recommend anyone just go buy a remote callar and start training on their own. Its not that simple and one must know what they are doing.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I have known many dogs who were ruined by bad e-collar training...sadly, for hunting dogs this is usually the end of the road. But since at least 99% of hunting dogs are trained with e-collars, I guess most of them make it through OK, or there wouldn't be any hunting dogs left. I do think that for some training issues, they can be the right choice, though I don't agree with using them for routine training, like how they do it with hunting dogs. You need to really know how to use one, and I wouldn't trust myself to do it right.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

rippedcb said:


> in my opinion are being ignorant.


I advocate e-collars in the hands of professionals- but I do not personally use them and especially not for things like loose leash walking. That doesn't make me any more or less ignorant than you.


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

For the record I used mine on my arm/hand before my dog ever felt it...so I know what it feels like. And it was/is not used for anything other than the cats. Maggie is a good smart dog...she just chooses to ingnore me sometimes when she is focused LOL. We also have a bit of a problem with her taking off after quail outside, but we can deal with that by making a fenced in area and having her on leash 100% of the time. We could not live happy and peacefull (or safe) with her in the same room as the kittens


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> I have known many dogs who were ruined by bad e-collar training...sadly, for hunting dogs this is usually the end of the road. But since at least 99% of hunting dogs are trained with e-collars, I guess most of them make it through OK, or there wouldn't be any hunting dogs left. I do think that for some training issues, they can be the right choice, though I don't agree with using them for routine training, like how they do it with hunting dogs. You need to really know how to use one, and I wouldn't trust myself to do it right.


The statement that at least 99 percent of hunting dogs are trained with e collars is a pretty broad statement. Hunting dogs is a vast term and there are uses for e collars in some training situations with some types of hunting dogs. Many types of hunting dogs are trained without e collars. They are most common with pointing breeds. But many of those are trained largely or completely without e collars. 

That being said. I am not anti e collar. In the hands of someone that knows what they are doing, an e collar is a great training tool. In the hands of an inexperienced person or a trigger happy fool they can create a mess of a dog. 



Here is the thing.... Using positive re enforcement methods only is fine for pet owners with biddable and eager to please dogs. But all methods do not work with all dogs. If you only use a single training discipline you are one dimensional.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Hunting dogs is a vast term.


Yes, I should have said "retrieving dogs" because that's what "hunt'n dogs" are around here. I forget about '**** hounds, earth dogs, etc. because they just aren't common in the area.

I've never known a retriever trained without an e-collar. Not to say it couldn't be done, I'm sure it could be.....but when I looked into possibly training Willow to "hunt", none of the books that were at the library addressed training without an e-collar. So I gave up on the idea.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

rippedcb said:


> I think there is so much miss-conception out there regarding these e-collars or shock collars as they were called. The collars today are NOT what they used to be in the 60's and 70's. For those ppl who simple say they "just can't accept it" .. in my opinion are being ignorant. .


B....S.

Ive put several models on and jacked them up to the highest setting. I dated a K9 officer for a while and accompanied him several times to the training field where they use ecollars to out the dogs..

wont EVER put one on my dogs and umm..NO...im not ignorant for feeling that way. im rather tempted to call you ignorant for suggesting as much. but i wont.


----------



## alphadoginthehouse (Jun 7, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> im rather tempted to call you ignorant for suggesting as much. but i wont.


I think you just did...


----------



## infiniti (Mar 19, 2010)

rippedcb said:


> I think there is so much miss-conception out there regarding these e-collars or shock collars as they were called. The collars today are NOT what they used to be in the 60's and 70's. For those ppl who simple say they "just can't accept it" .. in my opinion are being ignorant. Times have changed, technology has changed and so have remote collars. I challenge anyone to pick up a good quality collar and test it on different levels on your arm and see what it actually feels like.. its NOT electric shock therapy and i can guarantee that most of you will agree that its a SAFER and more compasionate form of training as compared to choke or prong collars. Its way WAY less painful then choke/prong collars.
> 
> Now, having said that.. i fully understand that the potential for abuse is there and i highly advocate that nobody should be using these collars without proper training. My dog is 9 months old now. We did basic training with her from the time we got her and at 6 months we got a trainer who is fully qualified and graduated from e collar training program from Robin MacFarlane's school and took personal lessons from her. We learned what we needed to do and practiced and practiced. We still keep the e collar on Hannah when we go for walks/runs just in case, but can't recall the last time we had to use it. My puppy is 9 months and i walk/jog/ play fetch with her off leash in well distracted places and have never had any issues. I know i can trust my recalls and i know my dog understands what is expected of her. She has so much more freedom and room to have fun now then she did when we weren't sure if she'd come back to us and had to have her on leash. Now she heals off leash with us till we get to the park where she is allowed to run free off leash. She is great and we constantly get compliments on how well trained she is.
> 
> ...


Would YOU wear one? Let's say your spouse doesn't like the way you do things around the house and s/he is trying to train you to do things better. 

I don't know if you are male or female, but for example's sake, let's assume you are male and your wife is trying to train you to do things that are, for whatever reason, not in your nature (taking out the trash on the right night, putting the toilet seat down, putting your dishes in the dishwasher, mowing the lawn weekly).

Are you willing to wear an e-collar for several weeks so that she can "stim" you, let's say on level 3-4, in order to "remind" you to do these things she wants you to do?

Because I'm not. Everyone around here will tell you that I am the absolute worst on these forums for anthropomorphizing my dog, but if I won't subject myself to electrical shocks, there ain't no way I am subjecting my dog to them. I'm sure you will think that's a stupid comparison because people can talk and reason with one another, but I find that there are ways I can reason with my dog. And I had a boyfriend once that no amount of talking or reasoning could get any of that through his head.


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

infiniti said:


> Would YOU wear one? Let's say your spouse doesn't like the way you do things around the house and s/he is trying to train you to do things better.
> 
> I don't know if you are male or female, but for example's sake, let's assume you are male and your wife is trying to train you to do things that are, for whatever reason, not in your nature (taking out the trash on the right night, putting the toilet seat down, putting your dishes in the dishwasher, mowing the lawn weekly).
> 
> ...


I wouldnt wear one...but my husband is not my owner or my boss and I dont have to follow his commands. But I have smacked my childrens hands for touching dangerous things...and the shock of the collar was no worse than that.


----------



## Marsh Muppet (Nov 29, 2008)

infiniti said:


> Would YOU wear one? Let's say your spouse doesn't like the way you do things around the house and s/he is trying to train you to do things better.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Are you willing to wear an e-collar for several weeks so that she can "stim" you, let's say on level 3-4, in order to "remind" you to do these things she wants you to do?


It's a ridiculous comparison. Dogs are not human, and I can prove it. 

And for the record, I've voluntarily subjected myself to things many times worse than anything I'd put a dog through. Since dogs can't intelligently consent to training, or even understand what is in their own best interest, I treat them far more carefully. Just the same, non-compliance is not an option.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Non-compliance isn't an option for my dog either. I'm not going to put an e-collar on him just the same. Not necessary. I can "reason" with him and he can be corrected/redirected in other ways.

While I don't think e-collars are "evil" or whatever, my rejection of them has nothing to do with "ignorance" as once person in this thread suggested.

In fact, it is the knowledge of my dog that makes me reject them - he's already soft and responsive to my direction. I don't need anything more than that.


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

KBLover said:


> In fact, it is the knowledge of my dog that makes me reject them - he's already soft and responsive to my direction. I don't need anything more than that.


This is like my Bella she is always happy and willing to come to me and I am usually her main focus...there isnt much that I cant distract her from. She doesnt always sit or stay when asked but thats not an e collar issue IMO  and I would never use one on her...But she is NOT a prey driven dog at all...they are a whole different ball game LOL.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

My dog is a prey driven, dog aggressive pit bull. 

still not using an e collar.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Here is the thing.... Using positive re enforcement methods only is fine for pet owners with biddable and eager to please dogs. But all methods do not work with all dogs. If you only use a single training discipline you are one dimensional.


I'm confused how I was able to train multiple Huskies, nortorious for being the opposite of biddable and eager to please, using completely R+ methods then.

The only thing you need for R+ is something the dog is interested in. The thing they have to be interested in doesn't have to be you, or food. Seriously, if you have a retriever, golly, teach them with retrieve as a reward! If you have a hound, use scent. If you have a high prey drive dog, use premack. If you have a social butterfly dog, use premack. 

The limitation of R+ is that of imagination. It shocks me when someone is playing fetch with their dog at the dog park, with the dog completely focused on playing fetch, and telling me how he can't get the dog to sit outside. "He's too interested in the environment! He won't take treats! All I can do is use a prong!"

All the while, his dog, at the dog park, 40 dogs all around him playing, running, peeing, pooping, children screaming, cars whizzing by, adults talking, people eating and tossing out treats in the dog's immediate vinicity.. the dog STILL was not paying attention to all of that, completely devoted to fetch.

It blows my mind when people blame failings of R+ on their inability to see the obvious.

So no, you do not need a dog that's biddable or eager to please for R+ training. You just need a dog that is interested in SOMETHING. Anything at all. The only dogs I've seen that weren't, were usually completely fearful messes.

EDIT: FWIW Ollie (Husky) was trained using running as a reward. Kobe (Malamute) was trained using the Dog Park as a reward. The short time I had Nadia was trained using "paw" as a reward. Priscilla was trained using fetch, tug, food, affection, cuddles, play, water, socializing, potty, stinky smells, heck, licking my foot was a reward too.


----------



## infiniti (Mar 19, 2010)

My dog is prey-driven as well. She will never wear an e-collar.

I also don't like to say I "own" her. I just don't like that term at all. No more than I own my children. I say I HAVE a dog. I never say I OWN a dog.

Also, I'm not a hardass. It depends on the circumstance, but occasionally non-compliance is an option with my dog. She's not permitted to jump on people. She's not permitted to ignore my recall. She's not permitted to ignore me when I tell her to sit. But when we're playing in the yard and I tell her to go get her ball and she brings me her rope, I'm not sweating the small stuff. When I'm giving her a treat and I tell her to sit and she drops into a lay, It's no big deal to me. When we're laying in bed to go to sleep and she's lying on her pillows and I tell her to come cuddle with me and she doesn't, I let her be. I'm not a nazi.


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> My dog is a prey driven, dog aggressive pit bull.
> 
> still not using an e collar.


I dont think anyone asked you to. We did what worked for us and if there was another way that would have worked we would have done it, but to this point we didnt find anything...but we now have a JRT that lives in the house with the kittens and they are all safe.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

misty073 said:


> I dont think anyone asked you to. We did what worked for us and if there was another way that would have worked we would have done it, but to this point we didnt find anything...but we now have a JRT that lives in the house with the kittens and they are all safe.


wasnt my point...

the point is there seems to be a lot of people who think that a dog's prey drive and other "hard" behaviors are an automatic qualifier for an e collar. your post implied that and frankly its flat out not the truth.

either that or i must be some kind of SERIOUSLY anomalously gifted trainer...


im thinkin its probably the former.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Here is the thing.... Using positive re enforcement methods only is fine for pet owners with biddable and eager to please dogs. But all methods do not work with all dogs. If you only use a single training discipline you are one dimensional.


Then I guess I'm one dimensional.

Is working fine for Wally and I. I'm not going to e-collar him for the sake of gaining more dimensions. 

And 100% R+? I don't think anyone can do that even if they wanted to. You'd have to reward everything the dog did, whether you wanted it or not. Whether it was the correct response or not.

Purely positive is a myth, imo. The minute you redirect, use a NRM, or ignore when the dog is looking for a response, you're not in the R+ quadrant anymore.

Besides, isn't it also a myth that dogs are "eager to please"? More like they are "eager for the reward you have and want to get it"?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> My dog is a prey driven, dog aggressive pit bull.
> 
> still not using an e collar.


I wouldn't use an e collar for da. In fact it would be foolish and dangerous to do so.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I wouldn't use an e collar for da. In fact it would be foolish and dangerous to do so.


i wouldnt use an e collar on a hard dog. and i worked with quite a few.

there are TWO instances where i would use an e collar.

a. bite training

b. possibly hazard avoidance...and even then id be iffy.

worked with all kinds of crazy dogs...no e collar necessary..and yes im fully familiar with them now..still wont use them.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

We both tried the collar on our throats up to level 4 (of 10).

L 1 is a barely noticeable tickle. Neither dog feels it at all.
L 2 is an annoying tickle. Ray reacted to it the first time he felt it by simply lifting his head up. L2 is Rays training level. Maggie did not even notice L2.
L3 is an unpleasant, but not the least bit painful tickle/pulse. L3 is Maggie's training level.
L4 is a distinctly unpleasant, but not painful pulsing. The anticipation of it is much worse then the stim. Only we have experienced L4. Neither dog has, and wont unless they are about to run into danger.

As for professional training, I haven't had any for the simple reason that I haven't been able to find anyone who does it in Richmond. So I purchased this video:
http://leerburg.com/318.htm
and read every thing I could on the subject.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> i wouldnt use an e collar on a hard dog. and i worked with quite a few.
> 
> there are TWO instances where i would use an e collar.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't use one in bite training in fact imo it would be a BAD idea. 

The use of e collars has a place. As I said in another post. MOST folks can get through their entire life without on. But there are things they can do and do well. Problem is people walk into the local feed store, pet smart etc and go to zapping their dogs left and right. 

Hazard avoidance and some aspects of training pointing dogs are its best use. And you don't need it with all pointing dogs. I don't think you need them to train a retriever. 



JohnnyBandit said:


> Here is the thing.... Using positive re enforcement methods only is fine for pet owners with biddable and eager to please dogs. But all methods do not work with all dogs. If you only use a single training discipline you are one dimensional.


This statement had nothing to do with e collars. As I said in the same post. Most folks never have a need for an e collar. It was a statement on folks that state they are +R only trainers. I kind of agree with KB Lover. The concept of a 100% +R trainer tends to be somewhat of a myth. If you have ever given a leash correction, then you are not 100% +R.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I wouldn't use one in bite training in fact imo it would be a BAD idea.



the K9 handlers use them to get the dog to out when its in the zone and doesnt want to let go. i see that as a legit use.




> Hazard avoidance and some aspects of training pointing dogs are its best use. And you don't need it with all pointing dogs. I don't think you need them to train a retriever.


pointers and retrievers being my least favorite breeds..i dont know much about them or their training..dont really need to. 




> This statement had nothing to do with e collars. As I said in the same post. Most folks never have a need for an e collar. It was a statement on folks that state they are +R only trainers. I kind of agree with KB Lover. The concept of a 100% +R trainer tends to be somewhat of a myth. If you have ever given a leash correction, then you are not 100% +R.



AND AGAIn....when i say "positive trainer" and when most other positive trainers say it..what we mean is that the IDEAL is to avoid negative/aversives. its not saying WE ONLY USE POSITIVE LOOK AT OUT SHINY CLICKERS MWAHAHAHA!!! 

the appellation denotes an ideal. not a concrete statement...*sighs*


----------



## Marsh Muppet (Nov 29, 2008)

There is an obvious difference in philosophy. In the philosophical debate, there is no provably correct side. If you believe something is wrong, then it's wrong for you. You're entitled to _believe_ it's wrong for me too, but not caring is right for me. A fair percentage of the people with particularly firm opinions on the subject just don't know much about it and/or can't get past their feelings enough to view the subject at all rationally. That's true for both sides of it.

Please note that I did not say "all people with firm opinions". There are plenty of people (some on this board) whose opinions I respect, even if I do not agree with them.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

Marsh Muppet said:


> There is an obvious difference in philosophy. In the philosophical debate, there is no provably correct side. If you believe something is wrong, then it's wrong for you. You're entitled to _believe_ it's wrong for me too, but not caring is right for me. A fair percentage of the people with particularly firm opinions on the subject just don't know much about it and/or can't get past their feelings enough to view the subject at all rationally. That's true for both sides of it.
> 
> Please note that I did not say "all people with firm opinions". There are plenty of people (some on this board) whose opinions I respect, even if I do not agree with them.


..uhh...duh. the other forum i spend time on is a philosophy forum where we do nothing but bitch about the fact that nobody gets what you just said.

WHY THE CRAP does everybody think that by merely stating my OPINIONS that im trying to argue for some objective standard!!?!?!? jeebers. this is a forum. in any thread regarding these kinds of issues..with things like e collars especially..an alternative view SHOULD be expressed.

i aint talkin to yall...im talking to the nameless faces out there reading this trying to figure out what the heck to do about their dog.  *sigh*


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> AND AGAIn....when i say "positive trainer" and when most other positive trainers say it..what we mean is that the IDEAL is to avoid negative/aversives. its not saying WE ONLY USE POSITIVE LOOK AT OUT SHINY CLICKERS MWAHAHAHA!!!


Actually, a lot of times I've read/heard it actually means that they do not use "negative" consequences.

There seems to be negative = aversive so do not use aversives means that they don't use negative - therefore, they are all positive.

Except punishment is always a negative consequence (by definition) - so when they use P- they aren't all positive.

"Positive trainer" is a useless label, imo. At best, it only represents half of what the trainer does (+R/-P) and at worse, it's potentially misleading.

Non-aversive trainer makes more sense, imo. Aversive has an easier understood definition and it's easier (and more correct) to say "I don't use aversives when I train." Instead of "I'm a positive only trainer."


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

KBLover said:


> Actually, a lot of times I've read/heard it actually means that they do not use "negative" consequences.
> 
> There seems to be negative = aversive so do not use aversives means that they don't use negative.
> 
> ...


tomato..tomahtoe...bleh.


----------



## BradA1878 (Nov 28, 2009)

KaseyT said:


> E-collars, _*when used correctly and compassionately*_, are extremely effective training tools, especially for those of us who aren't naturally good at dog training.


I'm curious, how does one _compassionately_ shock a dog?


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> tomato..tomahtoe...bleh.


Maybe to you and me and others who know this stuff.

But to people who don't - maybe not.


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

> Originally Posted by KaseyT
> E-collars, when used correctly and compassionately, are extremely effective training tools, *especially for those of us who aren't naturally good at dog training.*


I have tried to stay out of this except to state my original pov for my part, but THIS statement (bolded) just blew me away and made me shiver.

I'm sorry Kasey T but NO training aid should EVER take the place of knowledge and reasonable training. This is exactly the case where e collars should NOT be used... in my opinion.


----------



## Miranda16 (Jan 17, 2010)

BradA1878 said:


> I'm curious, how does one _compassionately_ shock a dog?


hahaha i didnt even notice that .... very good point


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

BradA1878 said:


> I'm curious, how does one _compassionately_ shock a dog?





Papilove said:


> I have tried to stay out of this except to state my original pov for my part, but THIS statement (bolded) just blew me away and made me shiver.
> 
> I'm sorry Kasey T but NO training aid should EVER take the place of knowledge and reasonable training. This is exactly the case where e collars should NOT be used... in my opinion.


I was wondering why nobody was reacting to those lines. I figured it was because people finally caught on to the fact that Kasey is not much more than a troll. 

But looks like he caught some suckers again!


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

Papilove said:


> I have tried to stay out of this except to state my original pov for my part, but THIS statement (bolded) just blew me away and made me shiver.
> 
> I'm sorry Kasey T but NO training aid should EVER take the place of knowledge and reasonable training. This is exactly the case where e collars should NOT be used... in my opinion.


I have neither the timing, the voice, or the natural enthusiasm that dogs respond to. However and am very good at technical tasks and understanding technical processes and concepts that allow me to use an e-collar effectively, correctly, and compassionately, as well as the ability to understand exactly how and why they work.


----------



## Miranda16 (Jan 17, 2010)

KaseyT said:


> Clearly I have demonstrated that you are wrong. I'm am a perfect example.


oy vey ......


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

RBark said:


> I was wondering why nobody was reacting to those lines. I figured it was because people finally caught on to the fact that Kasey is not much more than a troll.


i didnt react because i cant see it. guess who's number one on my ignore list...


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> i didnt react because i cant see it. guess who's number one on my ignore list...


You know, in the 10 years I've been online, I've never done that... I guess it's time for THIS old dog to learn a new trick... ignore. LMAO


----------



## Miranda16 (Jan 17, 2010)

me too  (10 chars)


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

Miranda16 said:


> oy vey ......


Sorry, bad choice of words. It's late, it happens. Edit made.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> the K9 handlers use them to get the dog to out when its in the zone and doesnt want to let go. i see that as a legit use.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have heard of that method in bite work. IMO there are better ways. I have never used it or trained with anyone that has. 

That positive trainer statement was not directed at you Zim. But there are those that advocate ONLY +R methods.

I think there needs to be balance.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

RBark said:


> I was wondering why nobody was reacting to those lines. I figured it was because people finally caught on to the fact that Kasey is not much more than a troll.
> 
> But looks like he caught some suckers again!


Yea but sometimes it is fun to feed the trolls. But alas bad things usually happen. 

BTW I am not advocating using an e collar in general obedience situations. It is a specialized tool for specialized situations.


----------



## infiniti (Mar 19, 2010)

Papilove said:


> You know, in the 10 years I've been online, I've never done that... I guess it's time for THIS old dog to learn a new trick... ignore. LMAO


I tried the ignore list thing ... but the ones you need to ignore are usually the train wrecks that you can't help but want to watch.  I'm sorry, I can't resist!


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

infiniti said:


> I tried the ignore list thing ... but the ones you need to ignore are usually the train wrecks that you can't help but want to watch.  I'm sorry, I can't resist!


Its twisted fun...... I am going to get a mini Chocolate Labradoodle mount a laser on its head and take over the world.


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Its twisted fun...... I am going to get a mini Chocolate Labradoodle mount a laser on its head and take over the world.


ROTFLMAO

See, I don't need to read the trolls posts to have fun. I have you guys for the real laughs. That other BS isn't funny, it's aggravating. I'm too old to suffer fools.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I have heard of that method in bite work. IMO there are better ways. I have never used it or trained with anyone that has.


its how the cops around here train their dogs. id say its effective given that they function pretty nicely as working police dogs. 



> That positive trainer statement was not directed at you Zim. But there are those that advocate ONLY +R methods.
> 
> I think there needs to be balance.


i think for your average joe pet owner..avoidance of aversives is a really good idea. because most ARENT going to take training classes and just go out, pick up the equipment, start zapping and then run screaming to me to fix their dogs because im free..

there are dog owners and then there are dog people. sure preach balance if you want...to dog people...i dont. i preach comfort. as in...go with what suits your comfort and confidence levels AND what poses the least risk to the dog...that is the kind of balance i preach. 

like..you put an e collar on any of my dogs? im going to kick your arse. because im not comfortable training that way. it runs counter to moral and somewhat spiritual views i have. when talking training to those who dont know much about it...it's a two part equation dog + handler. both have to be taken into account and what you're preaching as balance? doesnt do that..so i see it as a flawed argument. 


Joe Blow dog owner doesnt need that kind of balance...they need to proceed with caution for the simple fact they are largely unaware.


----------



## infiniti (Mar 19, 2010)

Papilove said:


> ROTFLMAO
> 
> See, I don't need to read the trolls posts to have fun. I have you guys for the real laughs. That other BS isn't funny, it's aggravating. I'm too old to suffer fools.


Well, you're right, Papi ... the train wrecks, trolls or not, are rarely funny ... they are indeed aggravating. However, it drives me batty to see a thread title in the thread listings, click on it and not be able to read it because it's on my ignore list! LOL My curiosity just gets the better of me and I cannot resist reading the inane ramblings of said train wreck. I rarely comment in those threads, and pity the poor members who get caught up in the web of those posters who originated the thread. And I usually regret reading the thread in the first place, and later feel the need to vent, either in an anonymous thread of my own or in a PM. It's completely counter-productive.


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

infiniti said:


> Well, you're right, Papi ... the train wrecks, trolls or not, are rarely funny ... they are indeed aggravating. However, it drives me batty to see a thread title in the thread listings, click on it and not be able to read it because it's on my ignore list! LOL My curiosity just gets the better of me and I cannot resist reading the inane ramblings of said train wreck. I rarely comment in those threads, and pity the poor members who get caught up in the web of those posters who originated the thread. And I usually regret reading the thread in the first place, and later feel the need to vent, either in an anonymous thread of my own or in a PM. It's completely counter-productive.


I truly can see that being a problem. I'm trying the ignore thing and I'll see how long I can stand it.

The only reason I see for validating trolls and going through these argumentative threads, as others have said, is the chance that some new dog owner who truly wants to know about these things stumbles into a thread like this, and without any opposition, thinks that is the only train of thought on a subject.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> its how the cops around here train their dogs. id say its effective given that they function pretty nicely as working police dogs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No but Joe Blow can be taught leash corrections. Joe Blow has no business using an E-Collar. 

I have never used an e-collar in a training session with a client. And I won't use one in front of client. 

I have "fixed" some dogs that the owners tried to train with e collars. And I am not free. ( I actually do about as much stuff for free as I do for pay. Mostly folks with shelter and rescue dogs.) In fact I am expensive and only train part time. If a customer irritates me or I don't like their attitude, they can go find someone else. I have that luxury because I do dog training because I enjoy it. It is not my primary source of income. 

I mostly use mine for snake avoidance and poison proofing. With my own dogs and at times for others. I don't mess with bird dogs any more but I learned the techniques of using an e collar in bird dog training. The main purpose I find it useful in pointers is controlling how far the dog ranges in front of you when it is working. 

If someone thinks it is a good idea to use an e-collar for teaching obedience commands and general household stuff, they need to sign up for training at petsmart or where ever. You can do more damage than good. 

I will say E collars are not as drastic as most folks think. They will get your attention but I would not use the word painful. They can be fun. Mine have seen more use at parties than they have on dogs. But what can I say. I am a bit of a hold my beer and watch this kind of guy.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

This thread is a train wreck because I made one dumb sentence and fixed it as soon as it was pointed out? 

As for you folks announcing I am on you ignore list.
a) No one who is actually ignoring a poster ever announces it.
b) The sole reason for announcing a poster is on an ignore is to hurt/insult the poster you are not actually ignoring.

If you folks want to make this thread about me instead of the subject, be my guest. It does nothing but double the view count.

I'm an proud of what I was able to accomplish in just a few weeks with 2 dogs. Hopefully someone out there will benefit from my experience.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

infiniti said:


> Well, you're right, Papi ... the train wrecks, trolls or not, are rarely funny ... they are indeed aggravating. However, it drives me batty to see a thread title in the thread listings, click on it and not be able to read it because it's on my ignore list! LOL My curiosity just gets the better of me and I cannot resist reading the inane ramblings of said train wreck. I rarely comment in those threads, and pity the poor members who get caught up in the web of those posters who originated the thread. And I usually regret reading the thread in the first place, and later feel the need to vent, either in an anonymous thread of my own or in a PM. It's completely counter-productive.


How is it you have managed to have me on your ignore list and be my personal stalker on this forum at the same time?


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> No but Joe Blow can be taught leash corrections. Joe Blow has no business using an E-Collar.
> 
> I have never used an e-collar in a training session with a client. And I won't use one in front of client.
> 
> ...


i didnt think it was painful....i didnt think suspension was all that painful either..

the objection to them is not founded in the idea that they are painful...but rather _stressful_. there's a difference


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> B....S.
> Ive put several models on and jacked them up to the highest setting. wont EVER put one on my dogs and umm..NO...im not ignorant for feeling that way. im rather tempted to call you ignorant for suggesting as much. but i wont.


Lol... easy there tiger.. take a deep breath  Maybe i should've been more clear. WHen i said "being ignorant" what i meant was majority of people will have opinions about these without having any first hand experience with them. I didn't mean to call anyone ignorant.. sorry if it came across that way. Anyways, zimandtakandgrrandmimi.. e-collars aren't what they used to be. I had the same perception until i ran into a trainer using it. I questioned it and she educated me.

PS: You aren't supposed to jack them up to the highest setting 

You will notice i said in my post.. i'd advocate for them but not without professional training. You will notice, i said the potential for abuse is quite high and they are not right for everyone, but in the hands of a qulified trainer who knows what they are doing, they are a great tool. A knife is a dangerious object, but used properly its not dangerous and very useful. As you said it yourself:


> its how the cops around here train their dogs. id say its effective given that they function pretty nicely as working police dogs.


This is what i said in my original post:


> I'll advocate for e-collars anytime.. as long as the owners are responsible and have had proper training. I would never recommend anyone just go buy a remote callar and start training on their own. Its not that simple and one must know what they are doing.





> don't know if you are male or female, but for example's sake, let's assume you are male and your wife is trying to train you to do things that are, for whatever reason, not in your nature (taking out the trash on the right night, putting the toilet seat down, putting your dishes in the dishwasher, mowing the lawn weekly). Are you willing to wear an e-collar for several weeks so that she can "stim" you, let's say on level 3-4, in order to "remind" you to do these things she wants you to do?


Infinity.. I'm a male and i'm not sure what to say to your comparision.. except my gf would kick my ass if i didn't take my dishes to the dishwasher . My dog is my life.. I'd NEVER EVER do anything that will hurt my dog. Notice how i said remote collars have come a long way..? they are not what they used to be. Just to give you an example: when i got my remote collar not only did i try it on myself first but also on my partner. My remote collar.. which is not one of those cheaply made inconsistant pieces of crap.. it cost me nearly $400 and has settings from level 1 to 137 (i think its 137). When we tried it on ourselves, we started with setting 1 (going up by a few at a time) and i didn't feel a thing until we got into 40's.. in the 50's it was starting to tickle and in the 70's -80's is when i'd say, okay, i can feel that and don't wanna go any higher. Now, to give you a perspective.. the highest i've *ever* used it on my dog was at setting 42. Typically we used it anywhere from 10 - 20. My dog has never yelped or cried when i'v used the stim. The new training theories behind using remote collars isn't to "hurt" the dog, but rather "remind" them. I personally found remote collar more compasionate tool then using prong or choke collar. 

I still believe, in the hands of a trained person, remote collars are a great tool


----------



## infiniti (Mar 19, 2010)

KaseyT said:


> How is it you have managed to have me on your ignore list and be my personal stalker on this forum at the same time?


Either you don't read well, or you don't comprehend well. I have NO ONE on my ignore list. 

As for being your personal stalker, don't flatter yourself. I do not seek you out. I actually find you reprehensible. I believe you, for the most part, seek to antagonize people here, and find reasons to argue and cause dissension among the masses. 

This thread, for example --- you are fully aware that the overwhelming majority of members here are against pain-inducing training methods, and you knew that this would be a controversial thread. However, you are a member and you most certainly are entitled to your opinion and you have every right to voice said opinion. But I am of my entitled opinion that part of your motive, not necessarily all, was to incite controversy among the members.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

I said I'd never use an e-collar.

After Strauss charged over a fence after a rabbit and we had already exhausted every other method of getting him to stop, I e-collared him. It was my very last resort.

I got to see the work of all my training put into action one day when we were out on the college campus (which is near a VERY busy road) and he saw a rabbit before I did, and yanked the leash out of my hands. There was no way I was going to catch him and all I had to use to get him to stop was my voice.

All I needed was "NO! PLATZ!" and he hit the dirt.

6 months before that, I would have had a dead dog.

Used correctly, I'm all for e-collars. Saved my dog's life.


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

Xeph said:


> I said I'd never use an e-collar.
> 
> After Strauss charged over a fence after a rabbit and we had already exhausted every other method of getting him to stop, I e-collared him. It was my very last resort.
> 
> ...


This was basically us to but she wasnt taking off she was going beserk with the kittens. We used the e-collar to reinforce "leave it" she knew the command but was completely ignoring us. We didnt use the collar because she was going near the kittens...we wanted her to go near them and like them not be afraid of them...it was when she was getting rough and biting them and was told "leave it" and even though we didnt use it for anything else it has almost solved her plastic chewing as well...well not solved it but when I say "leave it" now with that too she drops what she is chewing or at least doesnt run with it


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

rippedcb said:


> Lol... easy there tiger.. take a deep breath  Maybe i should've been more clear. WHen i said "being ignorant" what i meant was majority of people will have opinions about these without having any first hand experience with them. I didn't mean to call anyone ignorant.. sorry if it came across that way. Anyways, zimandtakandgrrandmimi.. e-collars aren't what they used to be. I had the same perception until i ran into a trainer using it. I questioned it and she educated me.


Call me Zim. the Zim portion of the name is me. the rest are representative of my beasties. 

i dont like them due to the stress they induce. to me that's counterproductive. yes you can't ONLY use R+ all the time. but stress is not only an emotional state, it's a physical state. induce too much stress in a dog and it can come back and bite you in arse...sometimes literally speaking and other times, financially speaking. If i had no other recourse but an e collar...you can bet your patoot id be at the vet having every test under the sun performed to eliminate the possibility of exacerbating any existing physical condition. not to mention the risk of screwing the dog up mentally. 



> PS: You aren't supposed to jack them up to the highest setting


i jacked it up to the highest setting _when it was on me._



> You will notice i said in my post.. i'd advocate for them but not without professional training. You will notice, i said the potential for abuse is quite high and they are not right for everyone, but in the hands of a qulified trainer who knows what they are doing, they are a great tool. A knife is a dangerious object, but used properly its not dangerous and very useful


i dont mention them at all on forums or even in real life training scenarios unless someone brings it up. i wont either unless its ABSOLUTELY necessary and its MY collar(yes i have one). because i wont be showing anyone how to use one if there's any chance that they can use it for the first six months without me present. mostly because people can go "oh of course..ill be careful" and then run out and get all zap happy. no thank you. Ive had to deal with waaaaaaaaay too much negative fallout from e collar abuse. fallout that has included children being viciously mauled by an overly stressed out dog while he was being zapped(no i cant call it a "correction" under those circumstances.)



> Infinity.. I'm a male and i'm not sure what to say to your comparision.. except my gf would kick my ass if i didn't take my dishes to the dishwasher . My dog is my life.. I'd NEVER EVER do anything that will hurt my dog. Notice how i said remote collars have come a long way..? they are not what they used to be. Just to give you an example: when i got my remote collar not only did i try it on myself first but also on my partner. My remote collar.. which is not one of those cheaply made inconsistant pieces of crap.. it cost me nearly $400 and has settings from level 1 to 137 (i think its 137). When we tried it on ourselves, we started with setting 1 (going up by a few at a time) and i didn't feel a thing until we got into 40's.. in the 50's it was starting to tickle and in the 70's -80's is when i'd say, okay, i can feel that and don't wanna go any higher. Now, to give you a perspective.. the highest i've *ever* used it on my dog was at setting 42. Typically we used it anywhere from 10 - 20. My dog has never yelped or cried when i'v used the stim. The new training theories behind using remote collars isn't to "hurt" the dog, but rather "remind" them. I personally found remote collar more compasionate tool then using prong or choke collar.
> 
> I still believe, in the hands of a trained person, remote collars are a great tool


the atomic bomb was a great tool for ending a war. 

and why the HECK are there *137!!!* settings?!?!?! you call that BETTER than the old collars? hmmm.....


----------



## Elana55 (Jan 7, 2008)

Another one of "these" threads.. discussing the E Collar and its Morality etc. etc. 

I applaud anyone who can get the job done to their satisfaction and use no aversives. Ever. Good for you. Good for your dog. 

I find it interesting that one of the most philisophical R+ proponents DOES (by their own admission) use an E Collar on a husky to get a recall when said Husky is off leash on a hike.  BTW I do not think this is wrong or morally "bad." Recall is that important. 

I think all tools have a place in the tool box. You can use what you need when you need them. At one end of the spectrum is food. I have stepped largely away from food as a primary motivator. At the other end of the spectrum is the E collar. Another application I step away from. Step away does not mean NEVER use.. it means if I need it I WILL use it but I will cease its use ASAP. 

HOWEVER, if a dog is heck bent to kill cats, chase rabbits with no recall and you need to get the behavior to stop NOW for the safety of other animals or safety of the dog.. I have NO problem with using an e collar. Probably easier on the dog than a variety of other aversive methods and way easier than a dead dog or dead other pets.. or a horse through a fence.. whatever. 

I do agree with this:


> *JohnnyBandit *_wrote: _Here is the thing.... Using positive re enforcement methods only is fine for pet owners with biddable and eager to please dogs. But all methods do not work with all dogs. If you only use a single training discipline you are one dimensional.


I would only add that if you can use only one discipline and get the job done and you are happy.. go for it. If you are going to do more, you need to expand your views.

anyway.. have fun.. carry on. These threads are always largely entertaining.


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

Hey Zim,
Thanks for the reply... Ok, i just double checked on the dogtra website.. its not 137.. its only 127  And yes, i consider that better then the old collars.. not only because i have much more control on the level of stim and can gradually increase it in the increments of 1, but also because these new collars are much more consistent.

I didn't know you were a trainer and i can see why you would'nt want to encourage a average dog owner to use these. The potential for abuse is there, but in right hands... it can be a great tool.



> i jacked it up to the highest setting when it was on me.


I figured that much 
If you go to the beach.. would you let your kid get in the water up to ankle high?? well... the ocean itself is quite deep.. i'm sure your kid will be safe as long as he stays near the beach...

Having said all of this, i can understand where you are coming from. One can easily ruin a perfectly good dog for life if not used correctly.

Also, i'm new to this forum and didn't know that this thread was likely started just to get reaction out of people. If i did, i wouldn't have participated.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

> I find it interesting that one of the most philisophical R+ proponents DOES (by their own admission) use an E Collar on a husky to get a recall when said Husky is off leash on a hike. BTW I do not think this is wrong or morally "bad." Recall is that important.


That is only 10% of the story, however. 

I did not pick up a e-collar for any of the reasons in this thread. I did not pick it up to fix easily fixed problems, nor did I use it because it's "better", nor did I use it as a replacement for understanding of behavior, and it was not used for:



> I have neither the timing, the voice, or the natural enthusiasm that dogs respond to. However and am very good at technical tasks and understanding technical processes and concepts that allow me to use an e-collar effectively, correctly, and compassionately, as well as the ability to understand exactly how and why they work.


If someone has the "understanding of technical process and concept" that allows them to use a e-collar effectively, then they have the "understanding of technical process and concept" to use R+ effectively. Consequently, Kasey possesses neither the understanding of process nor concept to use it.

One needs neither timing, voice (hello, deaf guy! voices can't get worse than mine), nor natural enthusaism to use R+ training.

I never said, ever, there was no circumstance ever to use a e-collar. But people fooling themselves that there was nothing else but the e-collar is just that, fooling themselves. There is ALWAYS something else, even in my case with Kobe.

The person who used the e-collar to stop the dog from attacking kittens? There's a million things to deal with that. What she really meant is she was not willing to put any effort into it, and resorted to shocking the dog because she chose to bring home kittens.

So that's the dog paying the price for the owner's decision.

Sorry but, there are plenty of good reasons to use a e-collar. None of them were mentioned in this thread.


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

RBark said:


> Sorry but, there are plenty of good reasons to use a e-collar. None of them were mentioned in this thread.


Lets hear a few...


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Elana55 said:


> I would only add that if you can use only one discipline and get the job done and you are happy.. go for it. If you are going to do more, you need to expand your views.


I think the view depends on the dog.

I can believe in e-collars all day. I believe in all four quadrants of OC, but why would I use P+/R- on a dog like Wally?

I'm not going to "well-round" myself to use a method that shouldn't be used on a dog like him. Why risk bringing up the fearful tendencies again for the sake of my own well-roundedness? Why risk killing his enthusiasm (and yes, it doesn't take much correction to do that and put him in appeasement mode, not learning mode) My first concern is not the number of dimensions I have - it's Wally.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

rippedcb said:


> Lets hear a few...


To save the dog's life or enrich his life in things he finds innately rewarding when all other means of humane training are exhausted.

I know many people are going to really twist the meaning of "enriching his life" to one that serves their excuses, however.


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

RBark said:


> To save the dog's life or enrich his life in things he finds innately rewarding when all other means of humane training are exhausted.


Both of these were mentioned in the thread.
Quoting Xeph:


> said I'd never use an e-collar.
> 
> After Strauss charged over a fence after a rabbit and we had already exhausted every other method of getting him to stop, I e-collared him. It was my very last resort.
> 
> ...


Enriching dog's life.. was mentioned by me in my very first post. The reason i got e-collar was to have consistent/confident recalls.. so i can go running/hiking/walking and have my dog off leash and give her all the freedom she wants because now i can be sure and confident that she WILL respond to my recalls where before remote training.. i couldn't have been 100% confident.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

rippedcb said:


> Both of these were mentioned in the thread.
> Quoting Xeph:
> 
> 
> Enriching dog's life.. was mentioned by me in my very first post. The reason i got e-collar was to have consistent/confident recalls.. so i can go running/hiking/walking and have my dog off leash and give her all the freedom she wants because now i can be sure and confident that she WILL respond to my recalls where before remote training.. i couldn't have been 100% confident.


You are ignoring half of my statement. So I'm going to re-state it.



> To save the dog's life or enrich his life in things he finds innately rewarding *when all other means of humane training are exhausted.*


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

RBark said:


> The person who used the e-collar to stop the dog from attacking kittens? There's a million things to deal with that. What she really meant is she was not willing to put any effort into it, and resorted to shocking the dog because she chose to bring home kittens.
> 
> So that's the dog paying the price for the owner's decision.
> 
> Sorry but, there are plenty of good reasons to use a e-collar. None of them were mentioned in this thread.


I am pretty sure there are not a million ways to deal with our problem, and I posted on it and tried the advice that was given to me with regards to our dog and cats. We have had Maggie for over a year and have not been able to get her to leave the cat alone. So you dont know what effort we put into it, and to say I am not willing to put in any effort??? I resorted to Shocking my dog because I didnt know when we brought the kittens home she would try to kill them, she never tried to kill our other cat we had before we got her, she just used to chase it and pin it down and lick it. If I removed the kittens it had no bearing on her the next time they were around...and if I removed her...well, she would go nuts if I tried to pick her up or grab her collar and growl and snap at us, so we did what we had to. But in all reality I am not overly concerned with your opinion or any one else who is against using the e collar. I was commenting with the OP who also used one and it worked. I now have a calmer dog who does not chase or try to kill my kittens, infact they now will eat from the same dish, drink from the same water bowl, lay in the same bed and play calmly and safely because my dog doesnt get into that crazed hyper mode when they are around so if thats my dog paying the price...then thats not bad in my eyes...do I regret using it...NO...would I do it again...most definatly.


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

RBark said:


> You are ignoring half of my statement. So I'm going to re-state it.


I'm sorry, but you are not making a valid arguement. You stated:


> Sorry but, there are plenty of good reasons to use a e-collar. None of them were mentioned in this thread.


I asked you to state the reasons.. and you mentioned 2 of them and i showed you precisely where these 2 reasons were mentioned in this perticular thread.

Yet after i pointed out these reasons.. they were all of a sudden NOT VALID? because you are so sure that we didn't do EVERYTHING that we could have before using the e-collar... right? in that case, you are suggesting that these perticular problems *could and should *have been solved without using remote collars?? in that case.. u just invalidated your own reasons.. because they are ignoring "half of your statement"

so i ask again: please justify this comment:
QUOTE]Sorry but, there are plenty of good reasons to use a e-collar. None of them were mentioned in this thread. [/QUOTE]


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

misty073 said:


> I am pretty sure there are not a million ways to deal with our problem, and I posted on it and tried the advice that was given to me with regards to our dog and cats. We have had Maggie for over a year and have not been able to get her to leave the cat alone. So you dont know what effort we put into it, and to say I am not willing to put in any effort??? I resorted to Shocking my dog because I didnt know when we brought the kittens home she would try to kill them, she never tried to kill our other cat we had before we got her, she just used to chase it and pin it down and lick it. If I removed the kittens it had no bearing on her the next time they were around...and if I removed her...well, she would go nuts if I tried to pick her up or grab her collar and growl and snap at us, so we did what we had to. But in all reality I am not overly concerned with your opinion or any one else who is against using the e collar. I was commenting with the OP who also used one and it worked. I now have a calmer dog who does not chase or try to kill my kittens, infact they now will eat from the same dish, drink from the same water bowl, lay in the same bed and play calmly and safely because my dog doesnt get into that crazed hyper mode when they are around so if thats my dog paying the price...then thats not bad in my eyes...do I regret using it...NO...would I do it again...most definatly.


The one who tried to help you with the kittens was me.

You have had your kittens for a whopping month and half.



> I posted on it and tried the advice that was given to me with regards to our dog and cats.


So I'm going to quote you my advice again.



> *It took approximately 6 months to fully socialize my rescue Husky with cats. That's the time span you are looking at in this training process. *Expecting progress in days or weeks (as in, lasting progress, not short term improvement that e-collars tend to give) is going to set you up for disappointment. Reframe your mindset to a monthly basis, and measure her improvement from the beginning of the month to the end of the month.


Since you have had the kittens for less than 2 months, it is clear you did not follow any of the advice you were given.

I stand by my statement.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

rippedcb said:


> I'm sorry, but you are not making a valid arguement. You stated:
> 
> 
> I asked you to state the reasons.. and you mentioned 2 of them and i showed you precisely where these 2 reasons were mentioned in this perticular thread.
> ...


[/QUOTE]

You seem to think that it has to meet at least one of my criteria. Incorrect. It has to meet ALL three of the criteria. It has to save the dog's life, it has to enrich the dog's life, and it has to be done after all humane methods were exhausted. Meeting 1 out of 3, like the two examples you gave, does make it invalid.

So no, I have to validate nothing. Yes, I am suggesting those particular problems should and could have been solved without the use of e-collars.


----------



## Foyerhawk (May 7, 2009)

I agree Kasey. I've never needed one but I would use one if necessary, especially for off leash control.


----------



## Foyerhawk (May 7, 2009)

To me a dog that cannot run off leash in forests and beaches has lacking quality of life- he certainly does in my pack since all the others get to run every day, and he would have to stay leashed or stay home. So, if I ever meet the so called untrainable dog some day, I might consider using an E-collar to train a reliable recall in the woods.


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

RBark said:


> The one who tried to help you with the kittens was me.
> 
> You have had your kittens for a whopping month and half.
> 
> ...


I asked for more information on this post and you didnt answer. I didnt have 6 months to get her to like the kittens she was hell bent on attacking them. And again I will say these are not the first cats we had, we had another cat and didnt have any luck in a year of having both of them. 

I have other posts as well where this was talked about so it wasnt just your post helping http://www.dogforums.com/2-general-dog-forum/75680-maggie-driving-me-nuts.html
http://www.dogforums.com/2-general-dog-forum/72223-anyone-cured-cat-obsessed.html

and we already had the e collar when you posted your info, I didnt get a response back and the collar was working.


----------



## mightymal (Sep 23, 2009)

I love my e-collar. We use it on our drivey malinois, who three strictly +R trainers gave up on. And we only use it for two reasons:

1. To go hiking at the Dunes. She can be off leash, play frisbee, and be totally happy while I can rest easy knowing that she will not take off if a deer crosses her path. We did months upon months of recall training with her on a long line and the one thing we could not break through was her drive to chase. If she did chase wildlife or livestock in our area, she would be shot. E-collar on, she gets to experience freedom that she would not otherwise have. 

2. To keep our cats safe. We had the cats first, and our malinois was adopted to be saved from death. Because of her intense prey drive, it does not take much to set her off. We tried working with her for a year on leaving the cats alone...then she caught one of them in the blink of an eye, right in front of me. E-collar was ordered that day because I cannot risk that she would kill one of our cats; call me lazy, but I do not have the time nor am I willing to risk the cats' safety to make sure she is 100% proofed with only +R methods. 

Prior to our younger malinois, I wouldn't have thought there was a place for e-collars. But I have to say that not only was I wrong, but my dog is HAPPY to see the e-collar come out. Tail-wagging, butt-wiggling, put-that-on-me-so-we-can-go-outside excited; she knows that the e-collar means it is time to go do something REALLY fun. I know it has enriched her life and I'm glad I invested in a higher end system to use for years to come.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

misty073 said:


> I asked for more information on this post and you didnt answer. I didnt have 6 months to get her to like the kittens she was hell bent on attacking them. And again I will say these are not the first cats we had, we had another cat and didnt have any luck in a year of having both of them.
> 
> I have other posts as well where this was talked about so it wasnt just your post helping http://www.dogforums.com/2-general-dog-forum/75680-maggie-driving-me-nuts.html
> http://www.dogforums.com/2-general-dog-forum/72223-anyone-cured-cat-obsessed.html
> ...


I just read the other two threads and none of them support your case. You keep trying to imply you worked at it for a year but in those threads you just started trying to follow the advice. Everyone in both threads have said it was going to take many months, and the earliest thread you posted is 3 months ago (you started the e-collar 1 1/2 months ago).

So whether it's my advice, other people's advice, your trainer's advice... you tried none of them for the duration people told you to work on it for. Heck, I see in those threads you tried some of the methods for one DAY and gave up.

Regardless, apologies for not responding to your reply. I must have forgotten.

EDIT: And yes, you did have 6 months. You chose not to have 6 months.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> You seem to think that it has to meet at least one of my criteria. Incorrect. It has to meet ALL three of the criteria. It has to save the dog's life, it has to enrich the dog's life, and it has to be done after all humane methods were exhausted. Meeting 1 out of 3, like the two examples you gave, does make it invalid.


Uhhh, how does my dog NOT being dead not meet all three of your criteria?

My dog's life was saved
His life was enriched because he can be off lead sans e-collar and can be called off small critters, which was not possible before
We tried premacking, clicker training, other aversives, etc before I resorted to the e-collar.

I fail to see how an e-collar was inappropriate in my situation.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

Xeph said:


> Uhhh, how does my dog NOT being dead not meet all three of your criteria?
> 
> My dog's life was saved
> His life was enriched because he can be off lead sans e-collar and can be called off small critters, which was not possible before
> ...


Because you did not name what methods you have done previous to using the e-collar.

I did not say it was inappropriate in your situation either. I said none of the posts in this thread met the criteria, and at the time of the posting, it was true.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

Gotta love semantics 

Could have just asked what methods were used


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

Xeph said:


> Gotta love semantics
> 
> Could have just asked what methods were used


I'm not trying to use semantics. If I were responding to you, I would have asked. But I was speaking in generalities, not to any one person in particular. I can't be bothered to find out how every person in the forum trained their dog before they used a e-collar. 

What I do know is, most people don't properly use R+ methods before they use a e-collar. Most of them give up in the face of obvious solutions. *points at Kasey as a perfect example of this*


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

KaseyT said:


> E-collars, _*when used correctly and compassionately*_, are extremely effective training tools, especially for those of us who aren't naturally good at dog training.


I agree with this. I've never used an e-collar much, but as I've posted before, a customer of mine with working field dogs was kind enough to give me e-collar 101 information. I wasn't nuts about them before, but he showed me that they CAN be used correctly and humanely. ANY tool can be misused. 
I've never trained with an e-collar, and I don't need one for my dog(s). I can't see myself using one to teach pretty heeling or straight fronts, but if I had a dog who had a dangerous behavior and it was a last ditch effort (ei: snake proofing), I would do it in a heartbeat. 
FTR, the tool I see misused the most is the headcollar, and it's supposed to be one of the "humane" tools. Ironic


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

there's no such thing as compassionate use of pain. 

that's a pretty ridiculous phrase.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

JohnnyBandit said:


> The statement that at least 99 percent of hunting dogs are trained with e collars is a pretty broad statement. Hunting dogs is a vast term and there are uses for e collars in some training situations with some types of hunting dogs. Many types of hunting dogs are trained without e collars. They are most common with pointing breeds. But many of those are trained largely or completely without e collars.
> 
> That being said. I am not anti e collar. In the hands of someone that knows what they are doing, an e collar is a great training tool. In the hands of an inexperienced person or a trigger happy fool they can create a mess of a dog.
> 
> ...



Needs repeating 
Tag has done so well with PR. He's soft, very biddable, very focused and HIGHLY food motivated. He has recieved only a handful of corrections in his 13 months of life. He's easy, and he makes me look really, really good 
Auz, who isn't soft, isn't biddable in the way *I* describe it, and isn't extremely focused and forgets about food the second a distraction comes around....he was a challenge. CU helped him a LOT. I don't tend to add P+ to the equation for fancy stuff (pretty heeling, straight sits, etc), only to real-life stuff. 
I get really irritated with people who claim they are purely positive trainers. I would go on my normal rant about how I totally disagree with that statement, but I'm trying to write a post...not a novel 
Not to hijack a dog thread, but I had a horse who would practically kill himself trying his best for me. He was awesome. All he really wanted was a pat on the side when we were done; he was very "eager to please" and very soft. If he made a mistake, he would try again until he got it right. Very rarely did he get P+. My next horse was far from biddable; he didn't care what I wanted. He gawked, he bucked, kicked, wouldn't be caught in the pasture, etc. Using ALL 4 quadrants (even though I had no clue what they were back then) wasn't about making him a nice show horse, it was about making him safe to be around.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Elana55 said:


> Another one of "these" threads.. discussing the E Collar and its Morality etc. etc.
> 
> I applaud anyone who can get the job done to their satisfaction and use no aversives. Ever. Good for you. Good for your dog.
> 
> ...



Well, you totally said it better than I attempted to say it  Pretty much sums up my feelings on the e-collar. Not my tool of choice, but if it were needed for a life or death situation, it would find its way into my toolbox. Like, yesterday.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

needs repeating:

just because a dog isnt biddable doesnt not mean aversion is a necessity.


i cant believe im really that good at training with positive motivation. i dont believe it. im still a relative noob at training in the grand scheme of things. Ive worked with many dogs that people said "put that monster down before he kills someone"...and never needed to outright punish or use physical aversion. I know what a hard dog is like. i spent the last few months meeting police dogs. Ive dealt with some hard snappy man aggressive rescues too. 

i dunno...


----------



## JessieLove09 (Mar 27, 2010)

I would never use an e-collar. There are much more effective ways to train a dog than to send an electric shock into them. I have been electrocuted and so was my dad(he and his sister touched an electric fence when they were younger.) it is not a good feeling.

I agree with Zim.


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

RBark said:


> I just read the other two threads and none of them support your case. You keep trying to imply you worked at it for a year but in those threads you just started trying to follow the advice. Everyone in both threads have said it was going to take many months, and the earliest thread you posted is 3 months ago (you started the e-collar 1 1/2 months ago).
> 
> So whether it's my advice, other people's advice, your trainer's advice... you tried none of them for the duration people told you to work on it for. Heck, I see in those threads you tried some of the methods for one DAY and gave up.
> 
> ...



Did you miss the part where I said in that post we had been trying for a Year??? I for some reason can not find any previous posts prior to my last 500 but I doubt this is the first I have posted on the subject...and this is not the only place I go to for dog advice...I also have real live friends, we hired a trainer once too and that was a disaster...I am not willing to shell out money till I find a good one. I have also searched the internet for advice.

So your saying I tried for a day then what???just let the dog chase the cat??? not likely. We have constantly removed her from the cat, tried leashing her in the house, tried treats...I mentioned before I can not find a treat or reward that is more rewarding than cats.

Yes I guess I chose not to have the 6 months because I already knew how she was with our other cat and knew she was worse with the kittens...if what we had tried wouldnt work with our cat...I wasnt going to try again with the kittens.

Anyways I guess what it comes down to is you have your opinon of them and I have mine. An e collar is not illegal to use so if this is what worked for us then we have every right to use one.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

I have manged to stay off this but was very amused by the Quote below.



> the atomic bomb was a great tool for ending a war.
> 
> and why the HECK are there 137!!! settings?!?!?! you call that BETTER than the old collars? hmmm.....


I've never heard of or seen one that had 137 setting which actually would be 132 more than necessary. I've used the old butt-kicking Tri Tronics that had one setting (full bore) that could knock a dog down etc and a much newer model that has I believe 5 to 8 settings tops. In almost 50 yrs of training used maybe on 10 dogs that all other things tried just failed. All bird dogs in competition that had some problems that needed fixing to get the job done. 

I don't advise e-collar use at all cause most people can't rub their bellies and spit at the same time and it would be dog abuse. 

I have been lurking and was just gonna stay away from this but the 137 e-collar settings just blew my mind. I'm gone.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> I can't be bothered to find out how every person in the forum trained their dog before they used a e-collar.


Then you shouldn't be saying somebody else's post doesn't meet your criteria if you're not willing to ask about it more in depth. That assumption isn't fair and it's insulting to those that have used the equipment correctly.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

rippedcb said:


> PS: You aren't supposed to jack them up to the highest setting


So why DO they go so high? Because I guarantee you, most people who go out to Campbell Supply and buy an e-collar DO jack it up to the highest setting, because, if level 3 works, level 127 (or whatever) will work BETTER, right?


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

Willowy said:


> So why DO they go so high? Because I guarantee you, most people who go out to Campbell Supply and buy an e-collar DO jack it up to the highest setting, because, if level 3 works, level 127 (or whatever) will work BETTER, right?


I wondered this too, we thought maybe for bigger dogs with lots of fur? But the contacts still have to touch the skin. Ours goes to 7 (I think), it did not go past 2 when we used it...I tried 3 on myself as well, but 2 worked.


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

Papilove said:


> I have tried to stay out of this except to state my original pov for my part, but THIS statement (bolded) just blew me away and made me shiver.
> 
> I'm sorry Kasey T but NO training aid should EVER take the place of knowledge and reasonable training. This is exactly the case where e collars should NOT be used... in my opinion.



100% agree with this. If you are not a good dog trainer, you have no right using a shock collar on a dog. Timing is everything with an e-collar. 

That said, In the right hands, on the right dog, at the right time. I think e-collars are effective tools. Quite a few people on this forum use them. I know a whole lot of really good homes the do mostly positive training that still use the collar on occasion for certain things.

Personally, I think you should have to pass a test to purchase one and I think you should be able to be charged for animal cruelty for over using them. Don't worry folks, I know that won't happen so no need to jump down my throat.


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

Xeph said:


> Then you shouldn't be saying somebody else's post doesn't meet your criteria if you're not willing to ask about it more in depth. That assumption isn't fair and it's insulting to those that have used the equipment correctly.


Exactly...



> I've never heard of or seen one that had 137 setting which actually would be 132 more than necessary. I've used the old butt-kicking Tri Tronics that had one setting (full bore) that could knock a dog down etc and a much newer model that has I believe 5 to 8 settings tops. In almost 50 yrs of training used maybe on 10 dogs that all other things tried just failed. All bird dogs in competition that had some problems that needed fixing to get the job done.
> 
> I don't advise e-collar use at all cause most people can't rub their bellies and spit at the same time and it would be dog abuse.
> 
> I have been lurking and was just gonna stay away from this but the 137 e-collar settings just blew my mind. I'm gone.


here: http://www.gundogsonline.com/dog-training-collars/dogtra/dogtra-1900-ncp-field-series.html


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> And.. of course you're gone..


wvasko actually has a lot of good input, but from what I've seen he really just doesn't like to involve himself in unnecessary confrontation. I find him quite nice to have around


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

Wvasko's not gone...he's just a cool Sith. i can be down with the Sith and with the Jedi. 

He knows i respect him totally and he's the exception to the rule that nobody is touching any of my pooches with an aversive..


----------



## alphadoginthehouse (Jun 7, 2008)

Xeph said:


> wvasko actually has a lot of good input, but from what I've seen he really just doesn't like to involve himself in unnecessary confrontation. I find him quite nice to have around


I couldn't agree more. When he speaks, it is usually something worth listening to or good for a giggle!


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

He's the kind of guy I could totally see making an absolutely ridiculous comment but saying it with a straight face....like Niles from Frasier. It's something you're meant to laugh at but the delivery is just so straightlaced you're kind of confused.

Love that stuff.


----------



## Marsh Muppet (Nov 29, 2008)

Willowy said:


> So why DO they go so high?


Because there are some dogs with such a high threshold, that it would be necessary to discourage deer chasing, stock running, snake molesting, and etc.



Willowy said:


> Because I guarantee you, most people who go out to Campbell Supply and buy an e-collar DO jack it up to the highest setting, because, if level 3 works, level 127 (or whatever) will work BETTER, right?


You think that's true, but you don't know it. In my (admittedly limited) experience, not using a _high enough_ setting is as common a mistake as turning the dial up too high. Repeated, nagging, ineffective corrections will stress a dog more than the small number of effective ones that successfully incentivise a dog to change a behavior.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

Xeph said:


> Then you shouldn't be saying somebody else's post doesn't meet your criteria if you're not willing to ask about it more in depth. That assumption isn't fair and it's insulting to those that have used the equipment correctly.


Again, I was making a general post, not a post directed at anyone. You have defined what you did previous to a e-collar, but unsurprisingly, no one else did. I use a e-collar, so I'm unsure why anyone would think I have some kind of high horse to ride and insult people on.

Most people will tell me that they have tried absolutely EVERYTHING before they used a e-collar. Amusingly enough, they don't usually tell you what they tried. 

Nor are they usually open to the idea that they may have not tried for long enough, or were training incorrectly.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

rippedcb said:


> Exactly...
> 
> 
> here: http://www.gundogsonline.com/dog-training-collars/dogtra/dogtra-1900-ncp-field-series.html
> ...


Tri-Tronics Upland Special G3® EXP® $519.00
•	Field Series
•	Training Collar
•	Up to 1 Mile Range
•	Expandable Up to 3 Bird Dogs
•	18 Momentary & 6 Continuous Stimulation Levels
•	2-1/2" Fixed Transmitter Antenna
•	FREE! Original Roy Gonia Special Orange Whistle

Well you got to buy a collar that does the job properly, I never liked the cheap stuff. I even got a free whistle. (Gonia)

The Dog-Tra 127 settings are just a dimmer dial like I have on my kitchen light. If the time comes that a collar must be used it is usually an extreme case and my old arthritic fingers trying to dial just won't work, I just want a button to press. Besides all the other old school trainers would laugh at me if I showed up with a Dog-Tra and they would not let me play in anymore doggy games.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

Tri Tronics Sport Basic G3 Dog Training Collar features:

* 10 levels each of continuous and momentary stimulation
* “Buzz” activated with a separate button
* All-new ergonomic transmitter
* Train up to three dogs from the same transmitter (purchase extra receivers separately)
* Field “marry” new receivers to you transmitter easily to expand up to 3 dogs
* Two easy dials select your dog and set your intensity
* Fully functional multi-dog system.
* Half mile range
* Integrated antenna is only 1-1/2”
* Waterproof
* Long and short contact points for all coat types
* Rechargeable collar (charger and cradle included)
* Charge indicator the receiver
* 2-hour charging
* 9-volt replaceable battery (included) in the transmitter
* DVD included
* 2 year warranty

this is the one i have. granted it was a hand me down and i only used it when i got to work with my ex boyfriend's police dog...so far..


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

wvasko said:


> Besides all the other old school trainers would laugh at me if I showed up with a Dog-Tra and they would not let me play in anymore doggy games.



Its the whistle that made you buy that one.. be honest..


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

If you have to use one Tri-Tronics is the way to go as it's the Cadillac/Porsche of collars. In my opinion.

Yes the whistle had a lot to do with it, I cannot tell a lie.


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

Zim.. if u didn't get the whistle with it.. its not good enough :lol
Alright i'm done with this thread. You guys have a great night, its time for me to go home. Such a productive day i had today at work


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

well damn i dumped him before he passed on the whistle...grr....

that thing is probably going to stay in the closet. i have it because i wanted to make a point of learning how they are used.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

I'll buy it from ya xD


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

JessieLove09 said:


> I would never use an e-collar. There are much more effective ways to train a dog than to send an electric shock into them. I have been electrocuted and so was my dad(he and his sister touched an electric fence when they were younger.) it is not a good feeling.
> 
> I agree with Zim.


It is not the same feeling as being hit with an electric fence.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> It is not the same feeling as being hit with an electric fence.


I should say not x.x


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> It is not the same feeling as being hit with an electric fence.


it made me go into a scratching fit. like involuntary. felt like i was being attacked by a swarm of itch inducing insects. 

course i did leave it on continuous for like five minutes....

(dont ask. )


----------



## JessieLove09 (Mar 27, 2010)

JohnnyBandit said:


> It is not the same feeling as being hit with an electric fence.


I know but being electrocuted is not fun!


----------



## Marsh Muppet (Nov 29, 2008)

I'll admit that I've done *The Dance.*


----------



## JessieLove09 (Mar 27, 2010)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> it made me go into a scratching fit. like involuntary. felt like i was being attacked by a swarm of itch inducing insects.
> 
> course i did leave it on continuous for like five minutes....
> 
> (dont ask. )


Thats what mine felt like, but it wasn't as crazy.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

wvasko said:


> I have manged to stay off this but was very amused by the Quote below.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Luke..... Luke..... I am your father....


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Marsh Muppet said:


> You think that's true, but you don't know it.


Fiiiiiinnnneee...... p)

All the people I've known who just ran down to the store and bought one did that. My grandpa, my parents' neighbors, the girl who brings her dog to run with mine (well, he dad bought the thing). The neighbor's dog got so scared from the collar she wouldn't go outside anymore. They dumped her at the shelter, of course. My grandpa gave it up because his dog wouldn't walk with the collar on after being zapped. At least he was a doofy Lab and recovered reasonably well (still a scaredy-cat his entire life, though). The other dog seems to be OK but I don't know what he gets zapped for. I think for barking, although it's a push-button collar, not a bark sensor collar.


----------



## My Dog Bishop (Sep 27, 2009)

I have to admit that I am considering getting e-collars for my dogs as a fail-safe. I love the outdoors and camping, and there are a lot of rattlesnakes, pronghorn antelope, and mule deer where I like to camp. 

I talked to my trainer and to a behavioralist about them, and they both are extremely apprehensive about them, only because they know that most people do not and will not use them correctly. They do advocate them under the proper education and usage. For me, this would strictly be a fail-safe in case either one of my dogs decides it can take on a rattlesnake, antelope, deer, or otherwise. The ones that were mentioned to me to look into were Sportdog and Dogtra. Before I go in that direction, I would consult both the trainer and the behavioralist, and learn all I could about them.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

I don't know what kind of collars people are thinking of here when they use terms such as "electrocuted" and imply pain. The one I use at the levels I use it range to a barely noticeable tickle to and annoying tickle, and 90% the time I use only a tone. After 3 weeks the dog responds almost perfectly to voice command only, only requiring the tone or a or occasionally a light stim when he strongly distracted.

What is happening is the recall is being hard wired into Rays brain through _successful_ reputation. That's what training is all about. In my sisters case, there is no other practicable means of achieving that _successful_ repetition. Traditional method would have resulted in too many failed attempts. Maybe it wouldn't for you, but it would for her.

Not only is Ray now recallable by voice command with or without the collar, something in 7 years he has never done, both dogs are now much more responsive to all basic commands, such as sitting before crossing a road and long down stays or sit stays with distractions, with or without the collar.

Every day for 3 year my sister has taken Ray on a 5 mile offleash walk through the local trails. It is an enormously important part of her and Rays life, and right now Ray is now far less likely to run into a dangerous situation than he was just a month ago.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

> I don't know what kind of collars people are thinking of here when they use terms such as "electrocuted" and imply pain.


Exactly why do you think they work? The electricity goes to the brain and re-wires the brain's response to certain commands and tricks it into sending electrical signals down the wrong nerve so they run towards you not away from you? We're going into sci-fi territory here!

That was a rhetorical question. It works because they want to avoid the pain. If it was not painful they would not try to avoid it. How YOU feel the collar is different from how your dog feels the collar.


----------



## -Maxine- (Jun 8, 2010)

RBark said:


> How YOU feel the collar is different from how your dog feels the collar.


Indeed. People say "But I first tested the collar around my wrist/arm."
HA! Why don't you try it around your own neck? That hurts a lot more!


----------



## Cracker (May 25, 2009)

Using R- training, which the ecollars do in most cases, is training with avoidance. The animal works to avoid the aversive, so therefore it has to BE AVERSIVE. Whether it is highly aversive (painful) or simply highly irritating, it is still aversive. It works. Sure it does. But is it ethical? I'm really not so sure about that. I can see using it under the circumstances that Rbark has mentioned, after all other methods have been PROPERLY APPLIED and attempted for a reasonable period of time.

Using an ecollar or other forms of R-/P+ to TEACH basic obedience behaviours without the above codocil, is in my mind a cruel form of teaching. I am not comfortable with that.
It is also lazy, unimaginative training that removes the pleasure of learning success from both the trainer and the dog.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

RBark said:


> The electricity goes to the brain and re-wires the brain's response to certain commands and tricks it into sending electrical signals down the wrong nerve so they run towards you not away from you? We're going into sci-fi territory here!


No it doesn't. The electricity does not go to the brain. It penetrates only the surface level of the skin. and as I said, 90% of the time I use the warning tone only which the dogs associate with the stim and therefore respond to avoid with the same effect.

The rewiring of the brain comes from repetition of a response to a voice command.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

-Maxine- said:


> Indeed. People say "But I first tested the collar around my wrist/arm."
> HA! Why don't you try it around your own neck? That hurts a lot more!


It doesn't "hurt" at all.



KaseyT said:


> We both tried the collar on our throats up to level 4 (of 10).
> 
> L 1 is a barely noticeable tickle. Neither dog feels it at all.
> L 2 is an annoying tickle. Ray reacted to it the first time he felt it by simply lifting his head up. L2 is Rays training level. Maggie did not even notice L2.
> ...


----------



## Marsh Muppet (Nov 29, 2008)

Cracker said:


> The animal works to avoid the aversive, so therefore it has to BE AVERSIVE. Whether it is highly aversive (painful) or simply highly irritating, it is still aversive. It works. Sure it does. *But is it ethical?*


I think so. As long as the dog is able to predict the cause (behavior) and effect (electrical stim), and has been taught how to avoid the correction. I reject the precept that compulsion is only ethically allowable if everything else has been tried and failed. Seriously, I find the concept extremely aversive, and it causes me great mental anguish. So stop saying that. (*Teasing*)

I'm always curious about what's the basis for speculation that a dog's nervous system is so radically different from our own, that what is to us a minor irritation is experienced by the dog as searing pain?


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

Marsh Muppet said:


> I think so. As long as the dog is able to predict the cause (behavior) and effect (electrical stim), and has been taught how to avoid the correction. I reject the precept that compulsion is only ethically allowable if everything else has been tried and failed. Seriously, I find the concept extremely aversive, and it causes me great mental anguish. So stop saying that. (*Teasing*)
> 
> I'm always curious about what's the basis for speculation that a dog's nervous system is so radically different from our own, that what is to us a minor irritation is experienced by the dog as searing pain?


The difference here (I believe) is that dogs initially do not understand what is going on, so the 'pain' or irritation, or sudden "shock" (pardon the pun) of the shock is unfair. You can place that collar on a human (some would do better with shock training I think) and tell them, look, if you do this, "this" (buzzzzzzzz) is going to happen. Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh, okay, well I'll work really hard to avoid doing this, cause I don't like "this" (buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz) "Hey, stop that!" (hehe)

A dog has to repeatedly DO "this" and experience the shock and work in his little mind to figure out what the he!! is causing THIS (buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz).


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

Marsh Muppet said:


> I think so. As long as the dog is able to predict the cause (behavior) and effect (electrical stim), and has been taught how to avoid the correction. I reject the precept that compulsion is only ethically allowable if everything else has been tried and failed. Seriously, I find the concept extremely aversive, and it causes me great mental anguish. So stop saying that. (*Teasing*)
> 
> I'm always curious about what's the basis for speculation that a dog's nervous system is so radically different from our own, that what is to us a minor irritation is experienced by the dog as searing pain?


MINOR irritation?? uhhhh...what have you been smoking..i can go put it on again and try to tell you as its happening but i wouldnt call the higher setting a MINOR irritation. O_O


and waiting until all else is tried is the only ethically viable situation. im going to be honest..the idea of a mindset that employs arbitrary compulsion makes me SICK to my STOMACH..you who else does that? rapists and spousal abusers.

im sure you're a nice guy or whatever but the thought of such things is ethically vomitous. i cant really sugar coat it anymore.


----------



## infiniti (Mar 19, 2010)

> The difference here (I believe) is that dogs initially do not understand what is going on, so the 'pain' or irritation, or sudden "shock" (pardon the pun) of the shock is unfair. You can place that collar on a human (some would do better with shock training I think) and tell them, look, if you do this, "this" (buzzzzzzzz) is going to happen. Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh, okay, well I'll work really hard to avoid doing this, cause I don't like "this" (buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz) "Hey, stop that!"
> 
> A dog has to repeatedly DO "this" and experience the shock and work in his little mind to figure out what the he!! is causing THIS (buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz).


My x-bf handed me a cigarette lighter about a year ago to light my cigarette. It was a square, silver lighter that I had never seen before. As soon as I pressed the button to ignite it, a jolting shock went through my entire hand and up through my arm. It was completely unexpected and it freaked me the hell out. It was slightly painful, moreso irritating and uncomfortable, but most of all it was completely unexpected and totally caught me off guard and scared the crap out of me.  

It was a "trick" lighter. Kind of like those hand buzzers we used to see on tv when comedians would shake hands with some unsuspecting guy and shock the hell out of him. 

So, yes, you can put an e-collar on a human and tell them that they will get a shock now and again, and they will be forewarned and be able to anticipate the sensation and be able to prepare for it. The difference is that a dog doesn't know when to anticipate when he will get the shock, can't prepare, and is like me when I got the shock from the lighter. It's the unexpected jolt that is the worst of it. Couple that with someone who uses it improperly on a more painful setting and it's a disaster waiting to happen, IMO.

I just think that there are way better methods of training basic commands in most situations than resorting to an e-collar. When it's a matter of life or death and as a last resort, then I can see doing it, responsibly and under strict adherence. But certainly not in simple circumstances like leash training.

You know ... my dog sucks on a leash, so we're working on that, without an e-collar. She doesn't like cats (well, she does - but not in the same way I do ), so I don't bring cats home. Sometimes in life there are adjustments to be made, without the use of aversive, pain-inducing methods.


----------



## Marsh Muppet (Nov 29, 2008)

Papilove said:


> The difference here (I believe) is that dogs initially do not understand what is going on, so the 'pain' or irritation, or sudden "shock" (pardon the pun) of the shock is unfair....
> 
> A dog has to repeatedly DO "this" and experience the shock and work in his little mind to figure out what the he!! is causing THIS (buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz).


An electric training collar is not the opposite of a clicker. That is to say, one wouldn't fairly zap an animal until it randomly discovers--through trial and error--the behavior that doesn't result in a "shock".



zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> MINOR irritation?? uhhhh...what have you been smoking..i can go put it on again and try to tell you as its happening but i wouldnt call the higher setting a MINOR irritation. O_O


There are setting below the highest one.



zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> im going to be honest..the idea of a mindset that employs arbitrary compulsion makes me SICK to my STOMACH..*you who else does that? rapists and spousal abusers.*


OMG! You forgot NAZIS!!

Hyperventilate much?


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

KaseyT said:


> No it doesn't. The electricity does not go to the brain. It penetrates only the surface level of the skin. and as I said, 90% of the time I use the warning tone only which the dogs associate with the stim and therefore respond to avoid with the same effect.
> 
> The rewiring of the brain comes from repetition of a response to a voice command.


My sarcasm went way over your head, didn't it?



KaseyT said:


> It doesn't "hurt" at all.


Again, if it does not hurt, why is the dog trying to avoid it? I choke out my dog, and he bounces back to play with me. I slap him across the head, and he play bows and tries to incite me for more. Other dogs bite his tail, his legs, his neck, steamroll him, throw him to the ground, and he bounces back for more.

But he avoids the e-collar on Level 2.

So either it is painful, or it is re-wiring his brain. Since we know it's not re-wiring his brain, it has to be painful.

You can deny it all you want but, until you can tell me exactly why he is avoiding a e-collar stim that doesn't bother him, then you're just deluding yourself to make yourself feel better about using a e-collar.



Marsh Muppet said:


> I think so. As long as the dog is able to predict the cause (behavior) and effect (electrical stim), and has been taught how to avoid the correction. I reject the precept that compulsion is only ethically allowable if everything else has been tried and failed. Seriously, I find the concept extremely aversive, and it causes me great mental anguish. So stop saying that. (*Teasing*)
> 
> I'm always curious about what's the basis for speculation that a dog's nervous system is so radically different from our own, that what is to us a minor irritation is experienced by the dog as searing pain?


I'm always curious what's the basis for speculation that a dog's nervous system is so similar to ours.

My dog, on a regular off leash hike, has cracked open his paws until it's bleeding. He has gotten thorns stuck into his skin, but the joy of running doesn't make him so much as notice these things. He's sprained his leg when stepping into a crack, he's been stung by something (bee, i guess), and none of those deterred him.

But a L2 stim does stop him in his tracks and turns him towards me.

Fact is, we don't know what the dog feels with a stim. We DO know that dogs are, as a survival mechanism, experts at hiding pain. We DO know that dogs respond to the stim because it is aversive and they want to avoid it. Exactly how much information do you need to see that it is pain?


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Cracker said:


> Using R- training, which the ecollars do in most cases, is training with avoidance. The animal works to avoid the aversive, so therefore it has to BE AVERSIVE. Whether it is highly aversive (painful) or simply highly irritating, it is still aversive. It works. Sure it does. But is it ethical? I'm really not so sure about that. I can see using it under the circumstances that Rbark has mentioned, after all other methods have been PROPERLY APPLIED and attempted for a reasonable period of time.
> 
> Using an ecollar or other forms of R-/P+ to TEACH basic obedience behaviours without the above codocil, is in my mind a cruel form of teaching. I am not comfortable with that.
> It is also lazy, unimaginative training that removes the pleasure of learning success from both the trainer and the dog.



To me, it's not so much ethical (I believe the use of anything in a non-abusive way is ethical), but I don't like the idea that it doesn't teach creativity.

I guess that's why I'm a fan of shaping even over other R+ methods. I could have used compulsion on Wally. It's probably what he was used to considering how he nearly spazzed at the thought of just TRYING something, even if it might not be right.

But I thought it would be better if he learned how to do it on his own while also fostering a trial and error approach to training, which as served us well. 

Given Marsh's statement that you shouldn't stim the animal until it figures out what to do, I would imagine that e-collars aren't designed to develop creativity and problem solving skills. That's fine, and in some cases I'm sure you DON'T want creativity in the learning process, but I think, like Cracker, that watching a dog try to figure it out and start to understand he's getting closer to the right answer (or that he is giving the right answer, but needs to give it in a better way - push harder, paw faster, etc, something I wouldn't begin to know how to compel him to do - e-collar or otherwise) that is something I love seeing and drawing out of him.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

RBark said:


> My sarcasm went way over your head, didn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He finds the sensation unpleasant, the same way he would find the sensation of the buzzer from this collar unpleasant:
http://www.mightypets.com/unleashed-technology/gentle-trainer.html#GT_1
which does not shock at all, just buzzes annoyingly.

Had I known of it's existence I could have used it just as successfully.

The other facts that I have repeated numerous times and you continue to ignore is that fact that he responds to the tone only as if it were the stim, and the the training level of the stim is the lowest level that he gives any indication that he even notices it. One level lower and he is not even aware of it.


----------



## Elana55 (Jan 7, 2008)

I will jump on and then be gone again but this paragraph contradicts itself. 



> *RBark*_stated_My dog, on a regular off leash hike, has cracked open his paws until it's bleeding. He has gotten thorns stuck into his skin, but the joy of running doesn't make him so much as notice these things. He's sprained his leg when stepping into a crack, he's been stung by something (bee, i guess), and none of those deterred him.
> 
> But a L2 stim does stop him in his tracks and turns him towards me.
> 
> Fact is, we don't know what the dog feels with a stim. We DO know that dogs are, as a survival mechanism, experts at hiding pain. We DO know that dogs respond to the stim because it is aversive and they want to avoid it. Exactly how much information do you need to see that it is pain?


Unless you believe that cracked and bleeding paws, bee stings, sprains etc are not painful, then the rest makes no sense. 

The low level aversive of a shock collar likely does not cause PAIN but some other feeling altogether that gets the dog's attention. IF it ONLY caused PAIN the dog would not stop in his tracks for the stim as he does not stop in his tracks for other things we KNOW to be painful. 

IOW's pain is pain is pain, regardless of how it is received.

Just sayin' 

OK folks.. Carry on and I apologize to RBark because we have an agreement to not respond to each other.. just this seemed quite contradictory and has me guessing that the E collar stim is a sensation at low setting that is NOT pain but perhaps some other sensation. Perhaps numbing? Buzzing? I bet it is entirely surprising (and that is what stops the dog) and not pain (at least not on that setting). 

This thread is very entertaining.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

KaseyT said:


> He finds the sensation unpleasant, the same way he would find the sensation of the buzzer from this collar unpleasant:
> http://www.mightypets.com/unleashed-technology/gentle-trainer.html#GT_1
> which does not shock at all, just buzzes annoyingly.
> 
> ...


Um, the vibrating ones are actually worse than the electric ones. So that does not help your argument any.

And no, I'm not ignoring the fact he responds to tone. Duh, of course he does. If you possessed the "technical knowledge and understanding" to use a e-collar, I would not have to explain such a common-sense thing to you.

He's responding to it because he has a history of aversion to it. Don't you know Pavlov? Blow into someone's eye a second after you click a button repeatedly. Then every time you click, they will brace themselves for the aversive, even if none come. 

So he is responding because he has a history of pain associated with it. The fact you are now only using the shock as a intermittent punishment is only strengthening his aversion to the tone. The fear of pain becomes as painful as the pain itself. The only reason you keep trying to say "discomfort" is because you want to feel better about it.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

Elana55 said:


> I will jump on and then be gone again but this paragraph contradicts itself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It is only contradictory if you want to believe that the L2 shock is less painful than those other things.

So yes, it does make sense. It's just your bias distorting my statement.


----------



## Marsh Muppet (Nov 29, 2008)

RBark said:


> I'm always curious what's the basis for speculation that a dog's nervous system is so similar to ours.


Since they react similarly to pain and pleasure, and mental distractions tend to generally mitigate pain and discomfort responses, in the same way they function in us, I see no reason to conclude otherwise. Unless you want to send the discussion down the epistemological road, in which case I agree that we can never truly know anything.

I mean, can you prove that you are not just a brain in a jar, having various neurological structures stimulated by alien scientist, to induce hallucinations of an imaginary world of their creation, and that none of what you see around you is even real? I thought not.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

Marsh Muppet said:


> Since they react similarly to pain and pleasure, and mental distractions tend to generally mitigate pain and discomfort responses, in the same way they function in us, I see no reason to conclude otherwise. Unless you want to send the discussion down the epistemological road, in which case I agree that we can never truly know anything.
> 
> I mean, can you prove that you are not just a brain in a jar, having various neurological structures stimulated by alien scientist, to induce hallucinations of an imaginary world of their creation, and that none of what you see around you is even real? I thought not.


Strawman argument. 

The point is that the whole "I tried it on myself and it wasn't bad!" is an invalid argument. I've been electrocuted with far worse than a e-collar and "it wasn't too bad". But someone half my weight and with less pain tolerance would find that a lot worse than "wasn't too bad."

A 350LB guy who's drank hardcore since he was 15 might be able to drink 15 beers and not be the slightest buzzed. A 100lb woman who has never drank in her life might die. 

Guessing what's painful and what's not painful for the dog based on *our* reaction to it does us no good. What we can do is guess based on how our dog reacts to it. They find it aversive, that much is clear. How aversive? We don't know. Hence, it is a last resort after all other means of training have been exhausted.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

RBark said:


> Um, the vibrating ones are actually worse than the electric ones. So that does not help your argument any.


You base this on what?


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

KaseyT said:


> You base this on?


Having actually used it on Kobe.


----------



## Elana55 (Jan 7, 2008)

Uhh.. no one writing here has been "electrocuted...." 

(Merriam Webster Online dictionary)

*Main Entry: elec·tro·cute *
Pronunciation: \i-ˈlek-trə-ˌkyüt\
Function: transitive verb 
Inflected Form(s): elec·tro·cut·ed; elec·tro·cut·ing
Etymology: electr- + -cute (as in execute)
Date: 1889
*1 : to execute (a criminal) by electricity
2 : to kill by electric shock*
— elec·tro·cu·tion \-ˌlek-trə-ˈkyü-shən\ noun 

Just sayin'!


----------



## Darkmoon (Mar 12, 2007)

RBark said:


> It is only contradictory if you want to believe that the L2 shock is less painful than those other things.
> 
> So yes, it does make sense. It's just your bias distorting my statement.


Um... The reactions from the e-collar aren't always from pain from the shock.

Nubs is a pretty out going dog, but if walks across something that is different feeling or something touches him and it causes a weird feeling it stops him in his tracks. The vacuum comes to mind. It doesn't hurt him if it touches him, but the feeling of the vibrations will grab his attention away from anything else.

Static shocks are the same way with us. Most of them give you a small jolt that makes you stop in your tracks and go "WTH was that?". Some times they hurt and you walk around for a bit with a numb hand, but for the most part, they shock you enough to get you to stop what you are doing for a second and you go about your way.

I think e-collars are fine to use when used correctly. I'd be more then willing to use one on Nubs for extra reassurance off lead. I have seen them used incorrectly, and watched a dog (already a very VERY soft dog) fall to the ground trembling when the warning buzzer went off. Yes if your dog is THAT scared of it, you are using it incorrectly. A e-collar shouldn't be used in a way that causes a lot of pain to a dog. It should be used in a manor like the pinch collar is used. Short, quick movements, just to get the dogs attention then reward for that attention.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

RBark said:


> Having actually used it on Kobe.


So you are making a general statement about all dogs which defies reason and logic based on your perceived experience with one dog? 

Let see some actual published evedence that a vibrating collar, used throughout the world for deaf dogs, is more unpleasant or painful than electrical stimulation.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

Elana55 said:


> Uhh.. no one writing here has been "electrocuted...."
> 
> (Merriam Webster Online dictionary)
> 
> ...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech

"A figure of speech is a use of a word that diverges from its normal meaning, or a phrase with a specialized meaning not based on the literal meaning of the words in it such as a metaphor, simile, or personification. Figures of speech often provide emphasis, freshness of expression, or clarity."

Just sayin'!



Darkmoon said:


> Um... The reactions from the e-collar aren't always from pain from the shock.
> 
> Nubs is a pretty out going dog, but if walks across something that is different feeling or something touches him and it causes a weird feeling it stops him in his tracks. The vacuum comes to mind. It doesn't hurt him if it touches him, but the feeling of the vibrations will grab his attention away from anything else.
> 
> ...


I am aware of that. That is how your dog reacts to stimulus. But it's not meant to be used like the pinch collar is used. There are some aspects that are similar but that's about it.



KaseyT said:


> So you are making a general statement about all dogs which defies reason and logic based on your perceived experience with one dog?
> 
> Let see some actual published evedence that a vibrating collar, used throughout the world for deaf dogs, is more unpleasant or painful than electrical stimulation.


I really should not have to state the obvious as to why it is used with deaf dogs regardless of it's aversion. It's a life-saving method.

And um, if you honestly think I'm going to pull up some evidence for you, of all people, then you're fooling yourself. You have never, ever, pulled up any evidence, ever, for anything you've said, in the history your time here on DF, even in the face of a dozen people pulling up scientific articles. So please, don't make me laugh.


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

For those of you that still keep on associating words like "pain" "electrocuted' "shock".. i'm really glad you are not using these e-collars and i really hope that you never will. It is obvious that you still aren't understanding the basic principle behind e-collar training. And its obvious that your not even open to listening to what others are trying to tell you. E-collar training is not supposed to be ANY of these things. I understand that it may have been like that 20yrs ago.. thats is not how it is now. 

E-collars are a tool.. a great tool in the hands of a person who knows how to use them and understands the theory and resoning behind it. I admit.. they can be easily abused (just like anything else on this planet) by someone who doesn't understand what they are doing. Everyone should get professional advice/lessons/training before using them. But don't dismiss the fact that they are still a great training tool and when used properly they are safer and less damaging and less painful then many other tools (prong/pinch/choke collars just to name a few) which are so readly accepted.

If you don't understand it.. don't diss it.. do a bit more reading on it. Here is something to get you started:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/tsuro/_articles/Intro_ecollar.html
http://www.loucastle.com/myth.htm

Google Robin Macfarlane.. you tube her video's.. learn something new today


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

rippedcb said:


> For those of you that still keep on associating words like "pain" "electrocuted' "shock".. i'm really glad you are not using these e-collars and i really hope that you never will. It is obvious that you still aren't understanding the basic principle behind e-collar training. And its obvious that your not even open to listening to what others are trying to tell you. E-collar training is not supposed to be ANY of these things. I understand that it may have been like that 20yrs ago.. thats is not how it is now.
> 
> E-collars are a tool.. a great tool in the hands of a person who knows how to use them and understands the theory and resoning behind it. I admit.. they can be easily abused (just like anything else on this planet) by someone who doesn't understand what they are doing. Everyone should get professional advice/lessons/training before using them. But don't dismiss the fact that they are still a great training tool and when used properly they are safer and less damaging and less painful then many other tools (prong/pinch/choke collars just to name a few) which are so readly accepted.
> 
> ...



To be perfectly honest, I don't intend on reading up on it... however. 

Consider the name 'e' collar. It gets that 'e' from somewhere... what is it? Hum.... elementary, no, european... no... ELECTRICITY, THAT'S IT..

When you push that button there is an electric charge

that equals shock in whatever capacity you dial it up to. It may be mild, but do not say anyone who uses terms like shock are 'wrong'. That is exactly what it is.

Now, those proponents who use them may wish to avert the spotlight away from such a negative term, and I can understand that, but a rose is a rose, and a shock is a shock, no matter what you call it.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

rippedcb said:


> For those of you that still keep on associating words like "pain" "electrocuted' "shock".. i'm really glad you are not using these e-collars and i really hope that you never will. It is obvious that you still aren't understanding the basic principle behind e-collar training. And its obvious that your not even open to listening to what others are trying to tell you. E-collar training is not supposed to be ANY of these things. I understand that it may have been like that 20yrs ago.. thats is not how it is now.
> 
> E-collars are a tool.. a great tool in the hands of a person who knows how to use them and understands the theory and resoning behind it. I admit.. they can be easily abused (just like anything else on this planet) by someone who doesn't understand what they are doing. Everyone should get professional advice/lessons/training before using them. But don't dismiss the fact that they are still a great training tool and when used properly they are safer and less damaging and less painful then many other tools (prong/pinch/choke collars just to name a few) which are so readly accepted.
> 
> ...


I do call it shock, electrocuting, and pain. And I do use a e-collar. It is beyond me why others don't see the obvious as to why it works. Why do you think a choke collar works? A prong collar? A newspaper smack on the butt? A punch to the face?

They are avoiding SOMETHING. You can tell yourself it's them avoiding the lovely smell of roses all day long if you want, but that doesn't make it true. Using a e-collar IS teaching by pain avoidance. They don't do things in order to avoid the shock.

And it IS a electrical shock. Duh. Thinking it's anything but a electrical shock is deluding yourself. It's not a "tingle". It's not a "itch". It's a electrical shock. It has two metal fittings on it, and it sends electricity from one end to the other end, creating a shock. How can anyone using a e-collar possibly not know that?

The only thing you are right about is that it's a tool in the bag that can be used if needed. Case in point, I use it despite being a R+ trainer. But seriously, I know giving treats work because they like noms. I know praise works because they do happy dances when they get praise, I know belly rubs work because they ask for belly rubs. I know all of these things because they are seeking out something they find rewarding. 

And on the opposite end of the spectrum I know e-collars work. I know prongs work. I know choke collars work. I know all of that because they are all designed to be an aversive, and since they are averse to it, it must be an aversive. 

This ain't rocket science.



> But don't dismiss the fact that they are still a great training tool and when used properly they are safer and *less damaging and less painful* then many other tools (prong/pinch/choke collars just to name a few) which are so readly accepted.


So it is less painful, but not painless? So you do know it is pain that makes them avoid the shock? Why are you deluding yourself by calling it anything but?

I've never dismissed it's use as a training tool. I've dismissed it's use as a first, second, third, or fourth resort. Because it is an tool that inflicts pain, it should be the final resort, just like choke and prong collars.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

Lou Castle has been on this forum Ripped...and frankly after that i wont listen to a dizzy damn thing he's got to say..

and Marsh..i think its that i really dont like you, dont like the way you sneer at positive and i dont like your rationale. I find it abhorrent.

Im done. lovin that ignore lmao..ripped if you want to chat about it..you can pm me..or about pits...


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

Papilove said:


> To be perfectly honest, I don't intend on reading up on it... however.
> 
> Consider the name 'e' collar. It gets that 'e' from somewhere... what is it? Hum.... elementary, no, european... no... ELECTRICITY, THAT'S IT..
> 
> ...


Yes its electricity.. but like everything in this world.. its relative. How rich are you?? .. its relative to how rich your neighbours are. How fat are you? its relative to how fat your family and friends are.. (oh.. i'm not calling you fat.. lol)

But yes, its electricity.. but at such a low level that its not supposed to be "painful" its not supposed to be "electrocuted" its not supposed to be "electric shock".. Alcohol CAN kill me... but in low doses.. i enjoy it with my friends 

Anyways.. to each their own. I know i use it.. I love it.. and i love my dog to death and i would NEVER do anything to hurt her. Infact, because of remote collars i have been able to give her much more freedom in her life. 

Point accepted, that some of you may be cesar millan's dad/mom/guru and taught him everything he knows and can train your dog to make you coffee in the morning and bring it to your bed at 6am without using any type of aversion but not all of us can and those people use different tools.. Sorry i'm not as good a trainer as you are.. but don't say that i'm hurting my dog.. because i'm *NOT*.. i consider that ignoranence.. See my point??


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

rippedcb said:


> Yes its electricity.. but like everything in this world.. its relative. How rich are you?? .. its relative to how rich your neighbours are. How fat are you? its relative to how fat your family and friends are.. (oh.. i'm not calling you fat.. lol)
> 
> But yes, its electricity.. but at such a low level that its not supposed to be "painful" its not supposed to be "electrocuted" its not supposed to be "electric shock".. Alcohol CAN kill me... but in low doses.. i enjoy it with my friends
> 
> ...


Yes everything's relative. What may not hurt you may hurt your dog. Since the only response your dog can give you is to avoid the shock, he clearly finds it aversive. So the question is, how painful is it? Well, we don't know that. You're willing to risk your dog's comfort on your unwillingness to learn and try new things, I am not.

I'm also unsure why you liken Cesar Millan to R+ trainers. Cesar Millan is a P+ trainer like many e-collar users.

I will re-state. If you have the technical understanding to use a e-collar, you also have the technical understanding to use a clicker. If you do not have one, you do not have the other. Both of them require timing, one requires you to time the punishment, the other requires you to time the reward. Both of them requires management. Just like you wouldn't send a dog to the middle of the forest the first time you use a e-collar, you wouldn't send a dog to the middle of the forest the first time you use a clicker.

So you are just making excuses to use a e-collar. Reward based training is not rocket science. "he did something right, click and give treat" viola! He came to me, click and give treat" congratulations, you master trainer, you.


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

rippedcb said:


> Yes its electricity.. but like everything in this world.. its relative. How rich are you?? .. its relative to how rich your neighbours are. How fat are you? its relative to how fat your family and friends are.. (oh.. i'm not calling you fat.. lol)
> 
> But yes, its electricity.. but at such a low level that its not supposed to be "painful" its not supposed to be "electrocuted" its not supposed to be "electric shock".. Alcohol CAN kill me... but in low doses.. i enjoy it with my friends
> 
> ...



The thing was, in my post you answered here, I never once said it was a 'bad' training method. No I wouldn't use it. Yes I know some do. My biggest probem with ecollars is that ANYONE can use them, and that 90% of the people that buy them won't really know how to use them, or why to use them. Period. I think they are a tool. I think they are detrimental in the wrong hands... clickers aren't likely to cause any real damage if used wrong (I don't do clickers either).

My post there, however, merely stated that your complaint about verbage such as "shock" etc is incorrect. You make an incorrect statement and it devalues your entire argument because people then feel like you either don't know what you're talking about, or you will say 'anything' to turn opinion in your favor, even if it doesn't make sense.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

RBark said:


> Reward based training is not rocket science. "he did something right, click and give treat" viola! He came to me, click and give treat" congratulations, you master trainer, you.


Yay, I'm a master trainer!

Where's my tv show?


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

KBLover said:


> Yay, I'm a master trainer!
> 
> Where's my tv show?


It's in queue right after my next TV series, "Shoot the Dog! How to ensure your dog never makes a mistake again!"

It's pretty simple. Dog pees in house? Shoot it! Problem solved!

Dog tries to lick your face to show dominance? Shoot it! Your authority will never be challenged again!

I know, it's so genius right!!!


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

RBark said:


> It's in queue right after my next TV series, "Shoot the Dog! How to ensure your dog never makes a mistake again!"
> 
> It's pretty simple. Dog pees in house? Shoot it! Problem solved!
> 
> ...


Will also solve the over population problem. So what if it causes a little pain, it's only temporary. LOL


THE ABOVE POST IS PURELY TONGUE IN CHEEK AND IS NOT MEANT TO INCITE RIOTS, OR PETA. LOL


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

RBark said:


> Reward based training is not rocket science. "he did something right, click and give treat" viola! He came to me, click and give treat" congratulations, you master trainer, you.



I have asked this before but I will ask again...what do you do when you cant find a reward as rewarding as the behavior?? Its not that its rocket science some dogs are not always interested in treats so whats the alternative?


----------



## rippedcb (Jun 3, 2010)

Papilove said:


> The thing was, in my post you answered here, I never once said it was a 'bad' training method. No I wouldn't use it. Yes I know some do. My biggest probem with ecollars is that ANYONE can use them, and that 90% of the people that buy them won't really know how to use them, or why to use them. Period. I think they are a tool. I think they are detrimental in the wrong hands... clickers aren't likely to cause any real damage if used wrong (I don't do clickers either)..


I agree 100% with that statement and if you go back to my very first post on this topic (1st page) you will notice that i stressed that NOBODY should be using these without proper training and understanding of basic principles of e-collar training. But i can not tolerate others putting me in the same catagory as


> 90% of the people that buy them won't really know how to use them


 Thats not correct. Please read all of my posts if you want, you will not find a single post condoning using these without proper training.. BTW same goes for prong collars and choke collars and anything that can potentially hurt a dog. I can not tolerate others claiming that i'm hurting my dog by using these.. because i'm not.. its simple as that


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

misty073 said:


> I have asked this before but I will ask again...what do you do when you cant find a reward as rewarding as the behavior?? Its not that its rocket science some dogs are not always interested in treats so whats the alternative?


When I'm at the dog park with Kobe, way back when I got him, he would ignore me when there. If I approached him, he'd run away. So I waited, and waited, and waited. Three hours later, he was tired, and walked in my general area. I walked up to him, gave him a quick pet, and walked away. I repeated this many times, over the course of a month. 

He slowly felt that my approaching him is not a threat to his time with the dogs at the dog park. Eventually I would hold him for a second, then release him. This would be built up by the second, over the course of another month. Nowdays I can recall him to me, grab him, and hold him for 10 minutes, then release him back to play.

I never used treats, and as you can see, I used no clear rewards. The reason it worked is called Premack's Principle. His reward is being able to do the thing he finds rewarding. 

This is also one of the several things I used to teach my two Huskies to enjoy the company of cats. When I first got Ollie, oh gosh, he was a nightmare. They said he was cat friendly, and it took all my strength to hold him down (60lb dog that pulls me on a bike daily) and keep him from my cat.

The solution was to be far enough away from the cat that he can hear her, smell her, but not close enough to react. If I could not get far enough away, I would have to hold on to him until he relaxes. Once he relaxes, he was rewarded by getting to be another foot closer. 

Eventually he learned that he got to be closer to the cat merely by remaining calm. Getting within biting distance of the cat was a entirely another beast, and one I took many months and millimeters to work on. He's no JRT, he could have killed my kitten before I could move my hand to stop him. So I did not have the luxury a small dog owner would have to speed up this process. He could also kill a cat before I can hit a e-collar correction, so I would never, ever use a e-collar for this purpose. 

His reinforcement the whole time... was being closer to the cat. Eventually he was calm enough to use treats but, at the start, he would not take any treats.


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

Again rippedcb, I did not say YOU condoned untrained use of them. I did not say 90% of the people YOU instructed to use them were unknowledgeable, or anything like that. I said:

90% of the people that buy them (ecollars) won't know what they are doing.

I stand by that.

90% of the people that walk into the store where anyone can grab one, or go to an online source where anyone can buy them, will not know how to use them. They are likely one of the most misused training items in existence. IMO (understand that IMO means IN MY OPINION).


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

misty073 said:


> I have asked this before but I will ask again...what do you do when you cant find a reward as rewarding as the behavior?? Its not that its rocket science some dogs are not always interested in treats so whats the alternative?


Premack is my answer (not that I have to worry about it because bread > ALL for Wally)

You want to do that. Do this for me first.

Then, have it buddy!

Actually, I used Premack to get him to look at me before peeing (so I can call him off someone's flowers, or to keep going because he just peed 20 seconds ago, etc. Yeah, I know, I could use a leash and pull him off, but where's the creativity in that?  )


Of course, RBark beat me to it. One day I'll learn to read to the end of these things


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

RBark said:


> I do call it shock, electrocuting, and pain.


It is certainly not "electrocuting".

Electrocution is the stopping of life (determined by a stopped heart) by any type of electric shock.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

KaseyT said:


> It is certainly not "electrocuting".
> 
> Electrocution is the stopping of life (determined by a stopped heart) by any type of electric shock.


When all else fails, pick out the most inane thing?



RBark 10 posts ago said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech
> 
> "A figure of speech is a use of a word that diverges from its normal meaning, or a phrase with a specialized meaning not based on the literal meaning of the words in it such as a metaphor, simile, or personification. Figures of speech often provide emphasis, freshness of expression, or clarity."
> 
> Just sayin'!


Going to add some more too. Zapping, stimming, electricifying, electric charge, positive and negative electric attraction okay maybe I can't do this one, I don't know enough science! What else... static shock, sparking....


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

electric shock
(redirected from electrocute)
Also found in: Dictionary/thesaurus, Legal, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia, Hutchinson	0.01 sec.
Sponsored links
Electrocute at Amazon
Low prices on new & used music. Qualified orders over $25 ship free
Amazon.com/music
Electrocute
Find Electrocute and other Hard to Find Products.
www.smarter.com
electric shock,
a traumatic physical state caused by the passage of electric current through the body. It usually involves accidental contact with exposed parts of electric circuits in home appliances and domestic power supplies but may also result from lightning or contact with high-voltage wires. *The resultant damage depends on the intensity of the electric current, the type of current, and the duration and the frequency of current flow. Alternating current (AC), direct current (DC), and mixed current cause different kinds and degrees of damage*. High-frequency current produces more heat than low-frequency current and can cause burns, coagulation, and necrosis of affected body parts. Low-frequency current can burn tissues if the area of contact is small and concentrated. Severe electric shock commonly causes unconsciousness, respiratory paralysis, muscle contractions, bone fractures, and cardiac disorders. Even passage of small electric currents through the heart can cause fibrillation. About 1000 persons in the United States die from electric shock each year. Treatment may involve such measures as cardiopulmonary resuscitation, defibrillation, and IV administration of electrolytes to help stabilize vital functions. See also cardiogenic shock, hypovolemic shock.
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/electrocute
***************************************************************
Electrocution is the application of electricity. To kill by electrocution is to apply electricity until dead. The term electrocution has become synonymous with death, but that is not its root definition.

Electrocution results in a shock. How severe depends on the amount of voltage, time involved, and source.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

This is ludicrous, while I have never used the term electrocuting I have used the term fry-em and yes it is painful and for me used as a last resort. I don't care how you honey-coat it. It is painful and not to be used lightly. I keep hearing about the very light stims and I still say that if 2 people hold the probes while the very light stims are being applied one may feel just a buzz while the other can get a painful experience. I'm just sayin'...


----------



## Elana55 (Jan 7, 2008)

RBark said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech
> 
> "A figure of speech is a use of a word that diverges from its normal meaning, or a phrase with a specialized meaning not based on the literal meaning of the words in it such as a metaphor, simile, or personification. Figures of speech often provide emphasis, freshness of expression, or clarity."
> 
> Just sayin'!


Main Entry: *over·state *
Pronunciation: \-ˈstāt\
Function: transitive verb 
Date: 1803
: to state in too strong terms : exaggerate 


Main Entry: *ex·ag·ger·ate *
Pronunciation: \ig-ˈza-jə-ˌrāt\
Function: verb 
Inflected Form(s): ex·ag·ger·at·ed; ex·ag·ger·at·ing
Etymology: Latin exaggeratus, past participle of exaggerare, literally, to heap up, from ex- + agger heap, from aggerere to carry toward, from ad- + gerere to carry
Date: 1613
transitive verb
1 : to enlarge beyond bounds or the truth : overstate <a friend exaggerates a man's virtues — Joseph Addison>
2 : to enlarge or increase especially beyond the normal : overemphasize
intransitive verb
: to make an overstatement



Papilove said:


> Consider the name 'e' collar. It gets that 'e' from somewhere... what is it? Hum.... elementary, no, european... no... ELECTRICITY, THAT'S IT..


Actually NOT. It is "Electronic" and that INCLUDES collars that do not deliver a shock but also deliver a buzz and, in some cases, only a hum. 

Now I am going to say this and if it makes me a bad person, oh well. This is the internet. I don't know most of you and probably never will, so here goes. 

Sometimes there is a situation where the dog needs to be trained and trained NOW. Every day the dog is NOT trained and you are fooling around trying different stuff, there is something in danger. This may be the dog who is in danger or it may be another pet in the house who is in danger or it may be livestock in danger that pays your way to feed yourself and the dogs. 

In those cases, I do not want to be my dog's pal, his equal or anything of the kind. I want the dog to cease and desist the behavior. Period. End of story. I want the behavior stopped before the dog is hurt or killed, or another animal is hurt or killed. Every day I fool around is another day when something can happen and I can lose the dog or another pet.

To that end I want to EXPEDITE the cessation of the behavior. PERIOD. I do not care if it enriches the dogs life. If the dog does not cease and desist the behavior the dog or another animal is going to DIE. If that happens NO ONE is going to have an enriched life. 

IF an Electronic collar will get the job done, then I am on it. Of coures I will have tried other things but ultimately _time is of the essance._ If the behavior cessation can be had quickly and efficiently with a zap, then zap it is. 

Here is the time I used an Electronic Collar. I had a dog that loved to eat Afterbirth. I tried what I tried to keep her out of it and she would not "leave it." One day this dog got into a cow and her afterbirth while the cow was still cleaning.. (lying down pushing out the placenta after delivering a healthy calf) and as a result the dog ate part of the Cow's vulva. I LOST the cow. This was only her second calf and she was a very very good cow. This was YEARS ago and the dog had been tied while I could not watch her but had gotten loose. It was an "accident" but I KNEW this dog was highly attracted to this item (most dogs are). I had no time to leave myself open ot any more risks. 

I got an Innotek collar and the next time a cow calved I set the dog up. I was watching her and she did not know it. As she reached for the afterbirth I nailed her. I did not fool with mulitple settings. It was set on High. 

I never had to use the collar again and when a cow calved that dog did not just leave the area, she left the barn or the field. 

IF I had not been able to alter her behavior, she would have been PTS. Then I would have had TWO dead animals. I had five cows or more calving every month of the year so there was no time to fiddle with this. 

BTW the dog was 3 years old and she went on to live another 10.5 years and she was a wonderful cattle dog and later a hearing dog for my Father. She lived a long and rich life beyond what most dogs EVER get to experience. 

You can criticise me from now to doomsday but what is done is done and the past is passed. Ultimately the dog lived a long time as a very happy dog. 

I think killing her would have been worse than zapping her. Killing her would have been a travesty. It would not have been kind as she was young and vital at the time. That dog was a Very Very good dog. 

So this is how I see it. I bought the dog. I paid for her food. I took her to the vet. I paid for the house she lived in with us. She was my property as well as my buddy. I broke no laws and life went on. 

Maybe a wonderful and clever trainer could have fixed this as quickly a different way. Maybe it could have backfired on me big time. I do not know. I do not care. I got it done.


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

You know I knew someone was going to say that... electric, electricity, electronic... semantics. All caused by electricity running through it.


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

One thing I have wondered through this thread why is that pretty much all over this board people say that dogs have a high pain tolerance and dont show pain alot...yet through out this thread it has been said how painful the collar is, and even if it doesnt hurt us...it could be hurting the dog.


I know one thing if we are playing with maggie and give her a swat on her butt she likes it and comes back for more...if I gave her a swat on the butt unexpectedly (when I want her to move or something...same goes for grabbing her collar) lighter she she jumps and looks startled and will shy away in either case the reaction is different and neither hurt her.


----------



## misty073 (Mar 31, 2009)

oh and since everyone is bringing up the electricity thing...when I brought our collar home my husband was against it. I had to convince him to try it on his arm and when he did (he even held the button) he threw it...I started to laugh and asked him if it hurt him that bad and he said no it just startled him because he is an electrician. After he read up on it and tried it on himself and we used it he is not against it...and he knows more about electricity than probably most of the members here.


Edited to add*** and he has probably been zapped more times than most of the members here.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

misty073 said:


> One thing I have wondered through this thread why is that pretty much all over this board people say that dogs have a high pain tolerance and dont show pain alot...yet through out this thread it has been said how painful the collar is, and even if it doesnt hurt us...it could be hurting the dog.


Because if dogs are adept at hiding/minimizing the expression of how much pain they are in, it doesn't mean they feel no pain/discomfort.

I could pull Wally's hair, right now, as hard as I can. He may or may not yelp. Does that mean if he doesn't yelp that he's not feeling any pain and wish I would stop ripping his hair out?

Now if I gripped your hair and pulled as hard as I could, you might "yelp" asap and try to get away, fight me off, etc.

Same idea, imo.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Elana55 said:


> Sometimes there is a situation where the dog needs to be trained and trained NOW. Every day the dog is NOT trained and you are fooling around trying different stuff, there is something in danger. This may be the dog who is in danger or it may be another pet in the house who is in danger or it may be livestock in danger that pays your way to feed yourself and the dogs.
> 
> In those cases, I do not want to be my dog's pal, his equal or anything of the kind. I want the dog to cease and desist the behavior. Period. End of story. I want the behavior stopped before the dog is hurt or killed, or another animal is hurt or killed. Every day I fool around is another day when something can happen and I can lose the dog or another pet.
> 
> ...



I think that's one situation where it would be considered "acceptable" (so to speak) to use an e-collar. I've read where folks here have used it to warn their dogs off rattlesnakes or the like (dog in danger) 

It's a difference between this and making him sit before I put his dinner down or to stop barking, etc, and I think that's where the "line" (again, so to speak) is. 

I mean, using an e-collar to teach Wally how to close the cabinet door and to teach Wally not to sniff a rattlesnake - kind of a different ballgame.


*just for the record, I've never used one or had someone use one on him. I don't think it's needed on soft dogs like him.


----------



## RBark (Sep 10, 2007)

Elana55 said:


> Main Entry: *over·state *
> Pronunciation: \-ˈstāt\
> Function: transitive verb
> Date: 1803
> ...


.............. Um, you're making it real obvious you're just trying to get on my nerves. Might wanna tone that down a bit. Don't want to be too obvious, ya know.




> Actually NOT. It is "Electronic" and that INCLUDES collars that do not deliver a shock but also deliver a buzz and, in some cases, only a hum.
> 
> Now I am going to say this and if it makes me a bad person, oh well. This is the internet. I don't know most of you and probably never will, so here goes.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure who you are arguing with here, but it certainly is not me.

I will re-state. I think e-collars can be used for life-saving or life-enriching things after all other humane methods have been exhausted.

If lack of time forced the humane means to be exhausted, then it is what it is. If physical disability forces it to be exhausted (i.e. deaf dogs using vibrating collars) then that is what it is. 

Using it to save the life of a dog that will be PTS otherwise... *thumbs up*

Using it to save a dog from being hit by a car.. *thumbs up*

So if there's someone you're debating with in this thread maybe you could point them out for clarity.


----------



## JessieLove09 (Mar 27, 2010)

I just want to add, I will never use an e-collar because I have had success with other training methods and continue to use those.

I am done.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> One thing I have wondered through this thread why is that pretty much all over this board people say that dogs have a high pain tolerance and dont show pain alot...yet through out this thread it has been said how painful the collar is, and even if it doesnt hurt us...it could be hurting the dog.


Misty
I've found that dogs are pretty much like us with the pain thing, some high, some low and all the variables in between.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> Sometimes there is a situation where the dog needs to be trained and trained NOW. Every day the dog is NOT trained and you are fooling around trying different stuff, there is something in danger. This may be the dog who is in danger or it may be another pet in the house who is in danger or it may be livestock in danger that pays your way to feed yourself and the dogs.


Agree 100% and it's a tough decision, as I said earlier not for the faint of heart.


----------

