That's interesting. I read the article in a shooting magazine (I think) a couple of years ago. The way it was written suggested that dogs would approach coiled up snakes out of curiosity. I wish I still had a copy, because it raised more questions than it answered for me!

I still maintain that I would never use one, but that article did make me think.

Cesar Millan did an episode in which he taught one of his dogs - Daddy to avoid rattle snakes with the aid of an e-collar.

First of all a rattle snake was brought in in a wire cage to Cesar's pound see how many dogs were curious to get too close. Many did and would have died had the snake not been contained. How would a dog know the rattle snake was dangerous unless they've been taught?

It's not about teaching them they are dangerous, it's about teaching them what to do when they encounter one. Positive techniques can be used. The e-collar was unnecessary

Words from Lou Castle regarding Snake aversion training -

"THAT BEING SAID ... snake proofing requires the highest competence with the Ecollar from the trainer because it's done at the highest level of stim that an Ecollar has. The dog is trained that snakes can bite him from a distance and so he learns to completely avoid them. You want the dog to "literally run in fear" from the snake. It requires the best timing and the best knowledge of what you're doing with the tool. I saw one dog who, at the most inopportune moment, looked up from the snake, just as a butterfly flitted by. That dog now runs from BOTH snakes and butterflies. This is an example of the fallout that can occur with high stim level use of the tool. But it never happens with low level stim. It's just not important enough to the dog to have that much effect"

Just a little paragraph from one of the recent discussions he was involved in on another forum.

It's a commonly used tool in this kind of training.

Most who get bitten by snakes here is because they've stepped on them without seeing them!

I had the worst spider bite in January (brown recluse) aptly named because you'd hardly ever see one. Didn't even know I'd disturbed it or touched it. Not until the bite erupted into Mount Vesuvius within 12 hours!

Dogs get bitten by spiders too - I wonder how you could train a dog to avoid a spider that is small, inconspicuous in colour and HIDES in the undergrowth?

You give them a magnifying glass and wellington boot tang so they can see them and avoid stepping on them

Just catching up and read the last few posts re. snake avoidance etc.

A few weeks ago, I was out in the New Forest with my elderly BSD and other half. We were doing some bird watching and noticing a rather gorgeous young owl flapping about, we walked a little towards the area (it was in a valley and we were on the area above).

OH went on ahead, and I happened to look down and there literally at my and my dog's feet, was an adder

Thankfully it was quite sluggish. NO room for thought, I just grabbed my dog bodily and hurled her away... thankfully she trusts me enough to know that if I do a weird thing, it's usually OK

My point is that none of us, including the dog, even NOTICED the adder until we were literally on top of it. Even if my dog had been trained positively or using harsher avoidance, (no option for me, ever) she'd have still practically walked on top of it.

Wys
x

Yes we have had a few cases like that on the common, someone always get bitten every year and 99% of the time they stepped on the snake didn't even see it.

We used to get them coming onto our front path to bask which is how I found out ours were naturally scared of them.

Got quite proficient with a broom and shovel to move them to a more appropriate basking spot and discover my husband is quite snake phobic ! But we did a deal I take care of snake emergencies and he deals with spiders so far I have done quite well out of that one

That sums up sort of - the point I was trying to make - that most incidents occur because no one has noticed the reptile before it got rudely trodden on or kicked or whatever.

Have to say that you couldn't help but notice the one near me last year that was dangling from the hook on the end of the arm of a mobile crane on the farmland adjacent!

Everyone was talking about it. Well you don't see a snake on the arm of a crane every day do you?

Oh why didn't I keep that article?!

As I (hope) I made clear at the outset, I do not and never have used e-collars, but I'm still wondering about the snakes!

Is the evidence so far suggesting that:

(a) the practice of training hunting dogs to associate an unpleasant sensation with snakes is, for want of a better term, 'received wisdom' i.e. one of those 'you must do it like this' instructions passed down for generations that nobody has ever queried (a bit the old chestnut that bitches should be allowed one litter / if your puppy makes a puddle in the house, rub his nose in it etc)

or

(b) Notwithstanding the fact that a percentage of dogs will be killed or injured by accidently disturbing snakes each year; actively training the dog to make a decision to keep his distance from a coiled rattlesnake is still worthwhile because it could save the dog's life and unpleasant as it may seem, an e-collar works in more instances than it doesn't (and how do you measure that?!)

I can see there are other ways of training behaviours that mean the dog takes himself out of the way of a rattlesnake (although a coiled up, live thing that makes a rattle nose sounds like the ultimate fun game for some dogs) that use reward; but how reliable are they, when the dog is out working all day, doing a task that is not dependent upon any reward coming from the handler? (I know I've not explained that well!)

I'm not saying they aren't - because I don't know - because I have never done this kind of hunting in a rattlesnakey area. Is rattlesnake behaviour markedly different to other snakes? (I am guessing so, because of the rattle and the propensity to strike, rather than get out of the way)

I'm just fascinated to know why those who use this method are so adamant that it is the only reliable and worthwhile method. I know this does not make them 'right' and I'm not saying it does: but I am just curious as to why they might think that way.