He is known for doing this on other boards. This subject is something he has been droning on about for quite a few years.

Taken from another website

"There are only two known families that show a trait for keeping pets -- two species of Great Apes and Man. It is a sad reflection on many UK dog owners that, of the two Families, Apes are more likely to have a better relationship with their pets than dog owners in the UK have with their dogs."

Copyright 2002; Denis Carthy. All Rights Reserved.

Is that because the apes don't use e-collars Denis?

Warning folks. I've been out all day while this thread has been going on. I replied to all the posts I thought needed a response. This is one of the longest posts I've ever written.

That's all I ask for. Rarely do I get it. Although every time this topic comes up several people make private enquiries and want to learn more.

I've seen many grossly overweight dogs that have been treat trained. That's a slow death for a dog.

With this topic I've found that people who have never even seen an Ecollar, much less used one themselves or even seen one used properly have the strongest feeling about them. They simply can't talk rationally about them. It's not necessary to do anything to get anyone's back up, except try and explain the truth behind them. They're convinced that the tool is cruel and inflicts pain no matter how it's used. These people have made up their minds and don't want to be confused with reality or the facts.

I've never done that. I don't even enter these conversations until and unless people start posting misinformation about the tool. They've already demonstrated that they don't know anything about it. Certainly they may be experts in other areas of dog training and they may have had great success there, but the comments that some of them make about Ecollars are not true. I don't think that I've ever had one of these discussions with someone that's actually used an Ecollar in the modern way.

That's fine with me. It's only when people describe the tool as cruel or too difficult to use by the average person that I get involved. People can use the tool to train to whatever level they like.

I think that all dogs need two bombproof commands. Bombproof means that the dog obeys with one command no matter what distance he is from the handler and no matter what the distraction is. One essential command is the recall. That calls the dog away from danger. The other is a stationary command, a sit or a down. That stop the dog when danger is between him and the handler.

I've said a couple of times that Ecollars aren't "necessary." But since anyone can use them and get good results in a very short time, they shouldn't be overlooked.

There are probably are very few problems that can't be overcome by an "expert" (whatever that means). But even a quick read of this forum will show you that many people have problems with their dog doing simple OB, barking when it's not appropriate, jumping up and chasing game. But not every board member has enough expertise (whatever that is) to apply the methods so that they get satisfactory results.

Over and over again I get clients coming to me who have, over the life of their pet, tried just about every training method/tool known to man and still don't have the simplest of behaviors.

What situation might that be?

How is this cruelty manifested?

Earlier I wrote: What if you got a dog that didn't respond to other methods?

How long would you "persevere?" One year? Two? Four? How long do you think it's reasonable to persevere?

Earlier I wrote: Would you put it to sleep rather than use an Ecollar?

What behavior would have you putting a dog to sleep before using an Ecollar on it?

These reports are always interesting for what they try to do and how they try and do it. On thing that I find fascinating in them is that they purport to be scientific studies (this one at least says that it's a "review of current literature) but they almost never are. They're citing others who are opposed to the Ecollar. This gives them an ever growing list of "experts" to cite. Other "experts" cite other "experts" and the list grows and grows with never any real science being reviewed, only the opinions of other "experts." Often those "experts" have no expertise and so it's just an opinion citing another opinion.

Look at the List of References. Most are just opinion pieces by other "experts." They're cited only because they agree with the agenda of this author. There's no science there.

Additionally I've never seen one of these "studies" that has looked at modern (low level stim) use of the tool. It's always high level stim use that is addressed. For example, " there is a real danger of an unwanted association being made between the shock and some coincidental stimuli (eg: the presence of the trainer, or context in which the shock occurs), other than the performance of the targeted unwanted behaviour, even when the two are temporally contiguous."

I've put Ecollars on well over 1,000 dogs. This has never happened. I've seen it happen and have written about it happening if high level stim is used, but it NEVER happens with low level stim.

I've given demos in front of good sides crowds of trainers and other people who know how to read dogs. I'm often asked "when are you going to start pressing the button?" Fact is I've been pressing it since I started working the dog. There's no fear, no yelping in pain, and no flipping over backwards. There's just a dog learning.

"To facilitate an association being made between the behaviour to be suppressed and the punishment, the timing of the punishment is vital."

This is true of high levels of stim because in extreme cases you can get learning for a lifetime occurring the first time that stim is applied. But, again, this doesn't happen with modern, low level stim use.

I could go on but you probably get the point. Let me know if you want more.

High level stim often has this effect. Low level stim does not.

Leo here's how it's done. It nothing as you imagine. I'm not sure if this forum allows links to dog training websites. I've read the rules but I'm not clear on this. If it's not allowed I beg the forgiveness of the moderators and have no problem with them editing it out. If they do so I hope they'll allow me to post it in another thread. It's fairly long.



Great question. The dog is not allowed off the leash until certain stages of the training are done. This is outlined in my articles. I've had batteries go dead in the middle of training many times, I've been using the tool for nearly two decades, it's gonna happen. For the most part I wasn't able to tell the difference. The dogs worked perfectly well even though stim wasn't being delivered. In the first part of the training the dog is escaping the stim by performing the movement. In the next phase he's completely avoiding it (no stim is delivered) by performing the movement.

As far as malfunctions, modern quality Ecollars are very reliable. If they go bad it's right away. If not they last for years. Modern Ecollars run on rechargeable batteries. They have lights that change color if they're running low. The units that I recommend have a 1/2 mile or one mile range. Gonna be hard to get out to that distance. I understand that in the UK there are laws regarding the range of these devices but it's still much further than most people let their dogs out.

The exact opposite is the case. Dogs trained with modern methods don't think that the stim is coming from the handler. They attribute it to their behavior. They quickly learn that when the discomfort starts (the button is pressed) they're doing something wrong (from the handler's point of view, dogs don't make value judgments as to right or wrong). When the stim stops the dog knows that he's done the right thing. He's not stimmed for coming back, he's stimmed for NOT coming back. As soon as he heads towards the handler he's rewarded because the button is released.

As long as you have it in your head that a dog is hurt by modern use of the tool, you won't get it. In fact, dogs are made to feel small amounts of discomfort which they attribute to their behavior, not to the handler. Most of my work is done with police dogs. I don't think anyone places their life in their dog's paws or vice versa more than that team. Since the dog thinks that the discomfort came from his own actions, and the handler is showing him how to make that discomfort stop, the bond is just as strong, if not stronger than with other methods.

Take a look at an article that the link I provided takes you to called "Simon's Story. You'll see how it works. The nickel version, Simon was a dog that came into rescue on a Monday. He was scheduled to be PTS on the next Friday. A friend of mine who had never before used an Ecollar except to stop game chasing, taught Simon to recall and sit with the Ecollar. On Wednesday he got a reprieve from the shelter director who saw how much progress he's made. He's since been adopted out and is living with a family.

If I'd only seen what you've seen then I'd probably feel much the same. BUT I'm telling you that there's another way to use the tool that is neither cruel nor abusive.

I've never condoned abuse in any form. I am advocating the proper use of a tool that you only know of using in what you consider to be an abusive fashion. I don't use it in the way that you're familiar with.

No dog in my care is ever "shock(ed) into submission."

Earlier I wrote: some dogs don't respond to those so called "gentler methods." At least not in the face of high level distractions or if they're highly driven animals.

It's not limited to one breed. It's usually those with high levels of drives, particularly prey drive. The drive that makes them chase game.

Teaching food refusal is not simple and it's life saving training. This is not food refusal for competition or for fun it's to save the life of a dog that is a target for being poisoned such as a police dog or a drug detector dog. In those cases and also for snakeproofing, another life saving form of training, I will use high levels of stim. I want those dogs to be afraid of food left in their yard or snakes that they encounter. If not, they may die. If you have some more reliable way to do it I'd love to hear it.

You won't get any excuses from me. You will get explanations as it's apparent you didn't read or understand the entire article.

If you have something better, please share it with us. But food refusal training or snakeproofing isn't what we're talking about here.

Just as there's no "shocking into submission" there's no "tickling into submission." Submission doesn't enter into this training at all.

Christine do you have something better to absolutely stop a dog from eating food he comes across in his environment? I'd love to hear about it.

Want to see a "poor dog." Picture a dog dying a horrible painful death because he'd eaten some poisoned food that someone threw into his backyard. Picture a dog dying from internal bleeding from eating gopher poison he'd found in a park. Far better for him to three times in his life to have sustained a high level, short duration of pain. It's a bit like getting a shot to prevent polio. It hurts like heck but in the long run, saves lives.

That probably works very well in your kitchen or your back yard. But try this. Roll up a bit of hamburger into a ball and toss it into your back yard. Wear gloves so you don't put your scent on it. Now release your "trained to eat only on a specific command" dog into the back yard and leave him there for an hour. See if the ball of hamburger is still there. If it is, try not feeding your dog for a few days. Now imagine that someone else has placed that ball of meat in your yard and it contained rat poison. Still feel 100% confident in your training? If you do you're either fooling yourself, lying or are the next "top dog trainer in the world." If you can do that then your services will be in demand all over the world. Be prepared to get rich!

What do you tell members of this board who are trying these method and not getting results? How long should they expect, for example, a reliable recall to take?

No one in this thread has said that they "shock a dog into compliance?" It's not how the training is done.

No one who know how this works has said that any dog is "afraid of the consequences." That also is not how the training is done.

Earlier I wrote: Actually that's EXACTLY what a dog feels, a tingling sensation, when an Ecollar is used properly. The most common response is that the dog sits and scratches as if a flea is biting him.

That's exactly what I'm telling you. You think you know how this tool is used but you don't. This is not meant to be rude, you just don't know that you don't know. You think I'd wait until your dog is chasing something and then I'd push the button. That's not how it's done. I suggest that you read my article on "Crittering and Dog to Dog Aggression" before you make such statements.

This is a perfect example of what I've been saying. You folks don't know about modern use of the tool. In fact I've stopped a couple of hundred dogs from chasing all kinds of game, from mice to moose. Much of this work has been done with police dog and SAR dogs.

I'm not selling anything. But I see no reason to allow people to spread their misconceptions and thereby prevent people who haven't succeeded with other methods from using it if they are interested. You folks seem "hell bent" on spreading the myths and misconceptions.

The article hasn't been pulled. The one on Dr. P's website has been up for years. The other site was put up and the article updated about a year ago or so.

Please don't misquote me in an effort to further you end. The dog is not teased with food. It's simply placed in his environment where he can find it. This is extremely misleading.

You're quite wrong. The dog becomes afraid of food in his back yard but is free to eat from his bowl.

I've never done food refusal training on any of my dogs. I've never felt the need. But some people do. If you have a better method, please let us see it. Of course you're not required to have something better and I don't expect that you would. I was just hoping.

What mental suffering? The dog learns to avoid any food that he finds on the ground. I happen to think that’s better than an agonizing death from eating poisoned food.

Actually they do. I regularly help about a dozen police officers in the UK with their Ecollars. They don't do it where they can be seen because of the political climate, but they are in use. Sometimes with some dogs other methods don't work.

I can guarantee that he's not using them as I advocate.

No you're wrong. You're only familiar with what you know. You don't know how I use the tool. For some insight go read the articles.

I've heard this before and faced a couple of friendly challenges. I've always gotten more reliable results faster.

Of course. I trained a police dog that didn't need an Ecollar stim for two years. His performance was perfect, one command = one response at every distance from his handler, no matter what the distraction.

You're reading is only sidetracking the conversation.

That's not what I do or advocate.

Also not something I do or advocate.

Oh nonsense. A dog that acts afraid on the field will have these characteristics quickly seen by a judge and he'll be marked down for it. "Painful stimulation" is not something I do or advocate.

He's trained the dog to eat from a specific bowl. The dog will eat from that bowl.

The same thing is done if any form of training was done "wrongly?" You go back and fix on the problem.

The owner isn't near during this training.

It looks like you're one of those people who want to decide what other people can read. I guess I value freedom of speech much more than you do. Now I understand better. In any case, if the article wasn't there, people with no knowledge would try it anyway. And they'd take longer and cause the dog even more pain. You seem to have missed the fact that I say quite clearly that this is very difficult and usually completely unnecessary.

No it does not. It says that this is a form of aversion training which is very common with the Ecollar.

I'd agree with harsh but not cruel or abusive. If you consider the alternative, a dog dying because he ate some poisoned food in his back yard or the park, I'd say that it's justifiable.

Dogs also have no say in where we take them for walk. They don't get to decide that peeing or pooping in the house is OK. They don't decide what food to eat, what animals is OK to chase or much else. This is the way of the world.

I don't think that you have the authority to speak for every other member of this forum.

Mine too. At least half the time I'm out people will make a comment like, "I wish my dogs were that good." I always respond, "They can be!

Every animal on this planet avoids discomfort and seek comfort. Your dogs will respond as others do.

I'm sure that's the case when you try it. I've heard this repeatedly from people who bring their dogs to me to train. I've always proven them completely wrong. They're quite happy when I do.

I'm quite sure that used as may have been done, as the Ecollar is commonly used, that's been the result. I'm just as sure that if my methods were used they would do precisely as they were being trained to do and they would not become fearful.

My dogs want to be with me too. According to you folks that shouldn't be the case.

That may be the case. But many dogs find chasing game to be much more fun and more interesting than their owners. It may just last for a few moments, but that's long enough to get them shot by a farmer or run over by a car.

I rarely get into that side of the discussion because it's not something that pet owners need to know and many, like yourself, find it dull. But when people who should know better start using the terms improperly in an effort to impress folks with their knowledge, it needs to be pointed out.

I think it's best if they do but, I agree it's not necessary. This is something that I've said many times in these threads. But when I say it I get slammed. You'll probably be applauded. LOL.

Neither of us started this conversation or turned it towards Ecollars. Neither of us entered the conversation until misconceptions started to be posted as facts.

I love this comment. Here's one difference between you and I. I've used just about every tool and method extant in dog training. You haven't. Having tried all those methods and devices I've decided that the best one, it's the fastest, it's the safest, it's the most humane I've settled on the Ecollar for much of my work. I've put Ecollars on well over 1,000 dogs. I know the effects and dangers, you folks don't. this is not to be rude or disrespectful. There are other ways of using the tool than you folks know. I have never understood why people refuse to admit that they don't know all about Ecollars. Especially when most of you have never even seen one.

This is purposefully rude and disrespectful. You've never seen any dog that either Clobb or I have trained. Please stop passing judgment based on something you know nothing about.

Not sure what this has to do with this thread. But since you brought this up, I've trained a 100 pound human-and-dog-aggressive Rott to walk at a heel with his owner who is in a wheelchair. I trained a pit bull to do the same with her owner, a woman who is confined to a walker.

Ecollars are a tool that will work with any dog regardless of size or breed. They will work if there is a real need to start with as well.

Me too.

We understand that you can't understand it. And BTW calling an Ecollar a "negative method" is a misnomer. This is a value judgment and the reason that we got into the conversation about OC.

No one has said that you should shave your dog's coat. In fact quite the opposite was stated.

I've never had to shave a dog's coat. I don’t know why you bring it up.

My police dog, trained with an Ecollar also visited hospitals.

I wouldn't. Just this week I got a call from someone on the east coast of the US. He wanted to know if an Ecollar was the right tool for his 18 month old dog (sorry I forget the breed. I told him to look into an OB class at a park near him. I didn’t recommend the Ecollar. If people want to go that way, I'm happy to help. If people have tried other methods and haven't been satisfied with their results, I'm happy to help.

If that was the case then I'd have started many topics with that thought in mind. I didn't enter this conversation until myths and misconceptions started being spread as facts.

Ecollars only emit very small voltages and miniscule amounts of current. The current travels from one contact post to the other. It goes nowhere near the heart. If this was a problem there's be dozens of studies done by those who oppose Ecollars saying so. If you can find even one, I'll be happy to read it.

Perfect evidence that abuse isn't in the tool but in the user.

Great question! Because they don't know or won't admit that they can be used in a completely humane manner. I don't like high level stim use and have written extensively against it. But low level use is safe, humane and fast. And I'm told that these attempts at banning were tried last legislative session and failed. I'm told that those attempts are failing this legislative session as well.

Some people have a monetary interest in having them banned. They give quick results and a trainer isn't necessary. That puts some trainers out of business or at least, will cut into their income.

Ecollars are a much easier target than check chains. In the UK very few people have seen either modern Ecollars or modern use of that tool. So when the anti's talk about cruelty, dogs screaming in pain or cruelty people can identify with those statements. Most people have a personal experience with electricity, an unpleasant one. They've been shocked and imagine that the stim from an Ecollar is the same. It's not, something I demonstrate quite frequently. The most common description I get from people who feel it is that it's a "buzz" or a "tingle."

First off this is not an Ecollar, it's an "invisible fence" tool. They're not the same thing. It's not a lie but a good deal of misinformation. I've spoken to this vet and she now states that she can't identify the burns as from the electricity that an Ecollar produces. She never could. She now states that it's either chemical burns from the batteries that got wet (the owner left the dog out in the rain in spite of instructions on the collar not to get it wet) and they leaked. Or it's "moist necrosis" from having the collar on the dog for too long a period of time so that the contact points caused a friction burn.

That vet now prescribes invisible fences and Ecollars for her clients when she thinks they're appropriate.

This is the opinion of someone who opposes the use of the tool. There's no scientific evidence to support it.

Also no scientific evidence to support this statement either.

This can occur with high levels of stim. They don't occur with low level stim.

This can occur. It can also occur with other types of collars that are left on too long. I've seen it with a plain buckle collar.

This is another "study" that is so highly flawed that it's worthless. One problem is as I stated earlier, the "experts" cite in their references the statements of other "experts." They're just citing each other's opinions. Sorry but that has no real value. I have more criticisms but this post is one of the longest that I've ever written already.

There's absolutely no case of a dog ever being "shocked to death by an Ecollar" no matter what the setting.

Please Leo, don't guess. This isn't true at all.

This IS NOT TRUE. Defibrillators put out thousands of volts and lots of current. Ecollars put out 3-25 volts (when measured with a load) and the current is miniscule.

Such statements are one reason that I joined this conversation. Please don't make statements like this. Or if you insist on doing so, please support them with facts.

Uncllou - thank you for taking the time to address various queries and concerns point-by-piont.



The situation is ... snake-proofing

I can control where my dogs go and what they do off the property by keeping them on leads. However, all our native snakes are venomous and they do come into the garden and onto the rest of the property. Without restricting all freedom of movement it is impossible to keep the dogs compeletly safe from them.

I understand that to snake-proof a dog there must be a 'set-up' snake in a cage/enclosure, and immaculate timing and high level stimulation are required in using the device?

I have no experience of e-collars and would not dream of undertaking such an exercise myself.

ETA - What bothers me about e-collars is that, despite written instructions, some people tend to the idea that 'if a little is good then a lot must be better'. I think, as with choke chains and prong collars, it is necessary that the use of such devices should be demonstrated by someone who is experienced and know exactly what they are doing.

uncllou - thanx for the replies will read them more fully later, have only skimmed at the mo, but they appear to stick to the points raised and be polite which is all we were after from clob yesterday. We can hardly have a discussion when no informative answers are given.

Shadow Boxer
The situation is ... snake-proofing
|
I have no experience of e-collars and would not dream of undertaking such an exercise myself.

Clob
Yes your in a very high risk situation there.

You have a world class A1 + crown jewel e-trainer trainer there, Steve K9, do you know him or of him? he has a web site if you cant find it you'll get him on Dogzonline.

– also because of his Oz experience of your situation he will be able to give any potential failings or weak points, which are equally as important as the strong points. Good Luck.

Yes, I know of Steve K9 and his excellent reputation - but he is many many miles away from me, He is the sort of trainer I would trust with my dogs' well-being, but I wouldn't undertake to 'snake-proof' even with his written instructions - I would want him to personally guide me as it is a delicate situation and I would not wish to make even the smallest mistake.

Unclllou I think you have missed my point (although you will argue you have not as I imagine you like the last word) in that you come on forums and give the impression that electric collars are always used with low stimulations when you yourself use the highest level there is and recommend it to others.

I think it would have been better from the start if you had said the broader picture rather than misled people. And yes before you jump on that, I do believe we were misled by you omitting some of the facts.

In the UK we have no need to teach our pets food refusal or proof against snakes. We have one poisonous snake the adder, yes it can kill but most dogs recover and no-one proofs against it. I've seen several but never had a dog bitten although we walk in areas full of them, it's a case for the adder of being aware, what time of year etc

Maybe one day my dog wil get bitten, I hope not, ( a friend's dog did a few years ago) but I'd never consider putting an electric collar on in our country, the risk is not high enough. The trauma of using a collar on a very high level is much worse than a bit of swelling, pain and a vet visit which may never happen.

The fact remains that you recommend the very highest level for food refusal. I knew you'd justify it, I guess you must live in a place that has people throwing poisoned food over all the time, and maybe dogs are out in gardens all thetime?

The food refusal could have surely been trained on a lower level. What if someone did use a high leve on the 0-100 collars, that is abuse whatever the reason unclllou.

THe food refusal exercise was more for police officers and their dogs. I cannot seriously imagine most people are concerned about poisoned food.

Out of interest, do you ever recommend high levels of stimulation on modern collars for situations that are not "life and death"?

I can't imagine you using one and not using it on high levels at times for normal training.

You mention Simon - I've spoken to shelter people who have had dogs trained with electric collars and the dogs are worse (this is in US and in the UK) and it's taken months of reward based training (don't split hairs please here, you know what i mean!) to get them right again.

You will deny this or say that the collars werent being used correctly - my point is that the very fact that collars are out there means that puppies are being housetrained with them, dogs are being punished for things they don't understand, and people who are not good at training are attempting to use them. so yes, some dogs are in shelters who have had problems made worse by use of the collars, it is a fact. Happens.

It's true that many dogs are abused with the collars - they are the one tool more than any toher open to severe abuse. Abuse is easy with an electric collar, it's harder with a boot or a stick. That takes aim and effort and the owner may get bitten.

As for recall off with manwork etc I've seen articles written which say precisely what I've said, maybe you are not the only expert on these tools! Of course the dogs run back to avoid punishment, I've seen the dogs on video go into the ring and have low tail carriage and stressed features, they perk up during the manwork due to adrenalin and towards the end are happier. But some of them going in are far from happpy.

At the end of the day, plenty of dogs are being abused with the collars. You may not like to admit it, and sa "all tools can be misused, they are not using it correctly" but that's not the point..if the collars are available dogs will suffer. Period.

RE the gundogs, I'm not talking about competition, I'm talking about being out on a shoot (I guess they call it) and yes it does happen.

I get the impression you know a lot of this (eg the gundog problem) but that you just don't care to admit it happens.

Finally, most pet owners love to train their dogs - of course there are problems, but working through them can be enjoyable and fulfilling. We don't expect to have children without problems, and dogs are no different. Same with friends, family.

We none of us are service dog handlers, some of us are more experienced trainers than others, but the idea of using a low level stimulation to make a dog sit when it works out how to turn it off is still horrendous. I've seen manufacturers videos and the dogs are confused and unhappy when subjected to this.

Advanced trainers in this country can get excellent obedience without these collars, in agility, field and working trials and obedience. If we can do it, why bother with a collar that is open to abuse?

I reckon they will be banned - some countries have already banned them. They have been bannned for a reason. Hoooray!!

As for the police you train - is this via email or what? I suggest you put your money where your mouth is and tell us more. There are records of when the last electric collar was used in the UK in the police force, and prison services. Perhaps those records are not now correct. I think you are just saying that for effect, however if it is true then you will need to convince.

It may take time but the UK will get there. Electric collars will be banned, and when they are I for one will celebrate

There's lots I'd like to reply to in all the above quote but honestly don't have the time.

I also can't do the correct quote things so it would be too confusing.

Needless to say I stand by everything I've said. You may disagree but that doesn't make you right.

However just 2 minor things:

Somewhere you mention that I haven't seen any dogs trained by you or Clod. How do you know that? As you don't know me, you can't make that statement!

Secondly and lastly, re the use of the collar in food refusal training, in the article it says:

"This is a common use of the training collar" and goes on to state "aversion training with a twist" I did read it correctly but to me that indicates the collar is used often for this, not sure what you were meaning otherwise so not sure why you mentioned it.

Two very patient men here, given the critisising they are having thrown at them!

As a matter of interest, knowing that the misuse of choke chains, collars and harnesses have all caused the deaths of dogs, have there been any recorded deaths due to the misuse of an Ecollar?
dawn