Patch
I dont get a lot out of talking to people who have been brainwashed.

Clob-Denis Carthy
Hardly, if you read her first post you will find she did 9 months of positive training, (costing quite a bit of money and no refund for the failure) and the only references she found around the net were ‘positive methods’ (which are in fact punishment based).

Someone on an aggression list somewhere refered her to me and also suggested an e-collar, that took 3 weeks. Any sensible person would say 9 months of practical positive training failure and 3 weeks of practical training success with me cannot fall into the category of ‘e-collar brainwashing’, most would say it is the other way around, if anyone has any doubts read all the training posts on this board.

Patch
The only thing I would want to ask her is where the dog came from so I could let them know whats happening to the dog and to tell them what I think of them for homing a such a dog with someone who had never had one before let alone one with an aggression issue.

Clob-Denis Carthy
There is no need to because you have had a similar emergency on this board starting at about the same time I started training the Westie owner.

I would say you should contact the rescue of the springer dog below. Both owner and dog are in DIRE trouble with positive training (negative results) and have been since they posted here, then again, who are you to dictate to any rescue, your just anonymous.

springergirl 10-07-2006, 01:45 PM
've been advised by my trainer to start clicker training with sam (my rescue springer).
http://www.dogsey.com/showthread.php...rescue+clicker

springergirl - 16-07-2006, 08:38 AM
t the moment i feel like ringing the rescue place up to take him back.
http://www.dogsey.com/showthread.php...ghlight=rescue

Springergirl - 17-08-2006, 08:09 AM
by the time we got home my hands were red raw and i'm sure sam's neck must have been sore too with all the pulling!! i felt like leaving him tied up to the lamp post i was that mad
http://www.dogsey.com/showthread.php?t=41637

cth1013 - 18-07-2006, 09:43 PM
Positive only v. e-collar training-one story

QUOTE: The limitations of simply using positive reinforcement for environmental safety and legal requirement obedience training (recalling the dog from chases in any situation which puts the dog at risk or just because you want a recall) is that it only works with very quiet dogs from puberty onwards, (7-8-9 months the changes start ) once puberty arrives if your dog is not a quiet type it will not respond to obedience commands if it has something better to do. END QUOTE

Blimey, no wonder you guys resort to e-collars. You really don't have any idea whatsoever about how to reliably train a dog without the use of physical punishment/reinforcement do you??

E collars are of course used on high zap, it's just that the ones who recommend them neglect to admit it. If you go on private lists, or on an Ecollar forum, you hear it all.

Of course they can go on very low levels - but they can also reach up to level 100, some of them. I think this debate is so much blah blah blah now. It's one thing having an opinion, quite another working a forum in tandem and bringing up old posts and so on. That speaks "agenda" to me.

This topic, the use of Ecollars and specifically ONLY after all other methods have failed, never fails to bring out the worst in people. This time is no different.

I'm sure that people will notice that Patch's entire post is emotional and there's not an intelligent response to any of my points. No logic, not one cogent argument why an Ecollar should not be used in this situation.

The OP consulted at least two trainers and spent at least 100 pounds. How long do you think this should go on? She wrote This is not a dog whose misbehavior is chewing up the furniture or digging holes in the garden. It's a dog that is dangerous. Some want to laugh that off due to his size but even they'll admit that if he bit someone his owners might be sued to put him to sleep.

Strong language from someone who's never seen a dog that I've trained, has never seen me work and has probably never even heard of low level stim work until this moment.

The owner even joined a list devoted to solving aggression problems on the Internet looking for help. Most of the suggestions were to use "positive methods." She tried them. They didn't work.

I haven't thrown anything like a "scare tactic" around. If you think I have please quote me.

Often people don't have anything logical or reasonable to say in this conversation. Particularly when they have no experience of using modern versions of the tool with modern methods. And so they turn to personal attacks. I guess they think that this will carry the day. But it doesn't. It just makes them look weak and shows that they can't present a logical argument.

And yet she's has no idea of how a modern Ecollar can be used. Her only idea is how older versions of the tool were used.

It's typical of your side of this discussion to at some point accuse the other side of lying. Here's something I've written dozens, perhaps hundreds of times, "You want to work the dog at the lowest level of stimulation that he can perceive." That's not a "zap." It's described by people who feel it (the lowest level of stim that they perceive) as a "buzz" or a "tingle."

There are a couple of reasons why the vibration mode isn't used. It's because the vibration level isn't adjustable. I've already pointed out that many dogs find the vibration to be much more uncomfortable than the first level of stim that they feel. I've seen many dogs scream in terror the first time that they feel the vibration. The most common response from a dog who's felt stim for the first time, at the level where he can first feel it, is to sit an scratch. It looks exactly like he's scratching from a flea biting him.

When a dog is distracted, he'll no longer even feel that level of stim. He may be so distracted that he also won't feel the vibration and the level of vibration can't be changed. The stim level can be slowly turned up until the dog again, just barely perceives it in his excited state.

When I wrote, You responded, Please tell us how "looking at one" gives you any insight into how it's used. Also please tell us the make and model of the Ecollar that you "looked" at. I'm having a hard time believing that you know anything about low level stim use.

I don't know that you have any more or less credibility than I do, except that I'm on what is generally the unpopular side of this discussion. But just because something is unpopular doesn't make it wrong. Since I'm the one who's being polite and professional in response to your rather rude personal attacks, you may be wrong as to who people believe.

Perhaps if you could give us some reasons why this tool should not be used to save a dog's life when other methods have failed you'd do better.

Very nice indeed! Very logical. Very well thought out. I always wonder about folks who claim to be so kind to dogs yet attack humans so viciously! Do you think that this kind of statement is winning any points for your side of this discussion?

I believe you! This isn't written for you. It's written for people who have tried your methods and had them fail.

I've already covered this when I discussed the bond between a police K-9 handler and his dog and the same between a SAR handler and his dog. One builds trust by being a fair and just leader, not by shoving treats at a dog.

Earlier I wrote: Actually Ecollar training occurs faster and lasts far longer than other methods. There are many instances of dogs learning from ONE repetition.

Earlier I wrote: Here's a difference between us. I know all about your methods and I use them when it's appropriate, depending on what I'm training. But you know NOTHING of my methods. You're the one needing educating.

But I'm really referring to people who have failed with your methods being educated in the proper use of a tool that they may turn to in their desperation. THEY'RE the ones needing the education. Of course, if you're a professional dog trainer you should know about using low level stim, if only to find out what it is so that you can intelligently warn people to avoid it! At this stage your warnings don't have any credibility. Perhaps if you'd try logic and reason instead of personal attacks.

As a thinking human being you know that people are at times going to get desperate and try all sorts of things to "fix" problems they're having with their dogs. First they'll try your methods, they'll hire "professionals" and take their advice. When that doesn't work, they'll turn to other professionals until they lose all faith in them. In this case the OP then turned to an Internet list devoted to canine aggression. More of your methods were suggested and she tried them. None of them worked. Realizing that she was running out of options she turned to an Ecollar. She was lucky that she found someone who actually knew how to use it, otherwise she'd probably have cause her dog unneeded suffering and possibly made the problem worse. Instead her problems were quickly solved with minimum impact on the dog.

Here's a dog that was highly aggressive towards both animals and humans. Her owner had tried all sorts of "positive methods" over a period of two years and none of them stopped the problem. She wrote
This dog's owner was also "at the end of her tether" This was a GSD a dog capable of inflicting serious damage to other dogs or to humans. So she asked me to work with the dog. As I'm advocating here, she'd tried other methods had them fail and only turned to the Ecollar as a last resort.

Ten days later I got this email
About a week later she wrote
Please read that last sentence again, "Roma has a new life."

It's been about 5-6 years since I worked with this dog. None of her original problems have resurfaced. That dog's life was saved!

When someone uses the Ecollar who knows what they're doing the things you fear don't happen. I want more people to learn how to use a tool that can save their dogs' life.

Earlier I asked for your definition of "negative physical force?". Rather than respond you evaded my question. Is there some reason for this?

Earlier I used the analogy that a stim as I use it is at the same level of discomfort as a flea bite.

You responded, One flea bite does none of these things. Dogs can easily get "relief" from the stim from an Ecollar. The training teaches them how to do this.

Earlier I wrote: And you now respond with I guess then you'll continue. It's just a clear demonstration that you have nothing logical or reasonable to add to this discussion. You probably think that you'll provoke me into responding as you've done. Sorry I'm too professional to lower myself to your level. I'll just keep pointing out to the readers how ineffective you are. You can't (or won't) answer the simplest of questions. You know nothing about modern use of a modern tool and all you've got is insults! LOL.

Earlier I wrote: I've already said that this isn't written to help you solve your problems. You want us to believe that your methods always work. They don't. No method works for every dog every time. The OP is proof of that and I'm sure that there are others reading this who realize the truth. When they fail, people should have one more option before putting their dogs to sleep or taking them to a shelter.

Earlier I wrote: Of course there is repetition, as with any method of dog training, but still the work is done at the level where the dog barely perceives it. Still only a few seconds of discomfort. Still no brutality.

This isn't something that I've ever heard. Who has done this blanket banning? Please state your source for this statement.

I doubt that you've seen every SAR dog in the UK and so you have no idea if they're all "superbly trained." I'd bet that like everywhere there are some good and some not so good. I judged a SAR competition in the UK a few years back. Not every dog was "superbly trained" and there was quite a bit of interest in the Ecollar from some handlers. But that's not what's being discussed here.

Yes, discomfort is "just one description of a pain level" and that's exactly what I've written. But it's such a low level that when distracted most dogs won't even feel it. In fact many dogs ignore all sorts of PAIN, not discomfort, but real pain, when they're highly distracted.

I'm still waiting for your definition of "negative force."

Earlier I wrote: I missed the "nyah nyah" comment that you say I made. Can you point it out?

But it makes absolutely no difference what research you have done. There isn't any that's addresses how I use the Ecollar. But let's stop bickering about this. Please post links to the studies that you've based your opinions on.

Earlier I wrote: Yes it was. And notice that nations that have the bomb have studied it in depth. Notice that countries that don't have it, want it. It's out there. It can be used to destroy the world. It needs to be studied and understood. So does the Ecollar.

Earlier I wrote: I wonder why you stay so deep in denial? The first post on this topic is one such story. I gave another one about a dog named Roma. I'm told that there are over 1.5 million Ecollars in the UK. People need to be educated as to how to best use them. What you write here will keep them in ignorance and the dogs will suffer.

Earlier I wrote: Of course it has. But not everyone is going to walk their dogs on leash all the time. I'd bet that at least once a day in the UK a dog who didn't recall is run over and killed or injured by a car he chased or ran in front of. Having a dog on a leash is management and management isn't training. Leashes break. Collars break. They sometimes are pulled over the dog's head. Leashes are pulled from owner's hands. Dogs dash out of open doors. Have these accidents not "occurred to you?????"

Earlier I wrote: I'm sorry that you're not aware of this. I'm sorry that you know nothing about low level stim, but this is simply the truth. I'd suggest that you ask people who have used both, vibration and low level stim.

Earlier I invited you to PM me so that I could direct you to some sites where you could learn about low level stim.

Fine by me. Your mind seems locked shut, and because of that I doubt that you'd be able to learn anything anyway. It's apparent that you seem to think that you already know everything. Sad really. The truth is that you don't, no one does.

Earlier I wrote asking how long before an Ecollar trained dog's problems will resurface Instead of simply answering how long you think it would take you evaded and avoided giving a straight answer. Why is that?

You have yet to define "negative training" so your statement really has no meaning. It's safe to assume that you include Ecollar work in that definition though. It's been 4-5 years since I worked with Roma. I last heard about her a year ago. She's doing fine. Simons is another dog that was worked using my methods and was saved from being PTS. That was in 2002. Last I heard was about 6-8 months ago (four years later) and he's doing fine as well. The horror that you imagine, that you're trying to get people to believe, simply doesn't happen with low level stim.

Earlier I wrote: I doubt you've been hearing about low level stim used as I advocate ever before. You've already demonstrated that you know nothing about it.

I'm pretty sure that you don't speak for the entire forum. It's obvious that you don't speak for the OP.

If this was true then you'd know that a strong bond is necessary between the K-9 and the handler. You say that can't be done with an Ecollar. Using it the way that you know how to use it, I'd agree. But that's not what I do.

I've already asked for the authority on this. Somehow I don't think you'll be able to find one. You may find a group here and there that has banned them but I doubt that there's any such blanket ban for all of the UK.

Ecollars as I use them have nothing to do with a "dominance method." The fact that you keep making such a reference shows that you don't have a clue as to how I use the tool.

It's really a shame that all you can do is to personally attack me. I'll just continue to point out that you do it because you don't have a cogent, logical, reasonable argument to put forth as to why Ecollars shouldn't be used as a final resort to save a dog's life.

why is it lou you can not accept our points of view on the e collar?
you like them and use them on dogs we don't it is as simple as that.
you can post anything you like it won't change the way we feel about them.

It's really a shame that this forum permits and even encourages such posts as Patch's and this one. No logic, no reason, just lots of name calling and personal attacks.

I find it interesting that you find my post "patronizing and aggravating" but say HOORAH to Patch's post which was little but a prolonged personal attack on me. It would seem that since you're on the same side of this discussion, that makes it OK.

Still waiting for something of substance to support this opinion. Why is it that almost universally people, who have actually used the devices as I advocate know that your opinion isn't the truth, but just as universally, people who haven't used the tool don't know this?

It's quite obvious that this is NOT my position, at least not on this forum. It's painfully obvious to anyone who can read critically that my position is to try all other methods to fix your dogs misbehavior. THEN try some more. ONLY when you've given up all hope that they'll work, THEN AND ONLY THEN should one consider an Ecollar. And when doing so, I suggest that my methods will work with a minimum impact on the dog. Certainly much less than being put to sleep.

Yes, some things are wrong. Murder, stealing, rape, being rude LOL, cruelty to dogs. The list goes on but that will suffice for now. You'd be hard pressed to find someone in a modern country to disagree with this list. As to the last item on that list, there's a pretty big gap between your opinion and mine as to what constitutes cruelty. Don't you think it's possible that I'm talking about something that's different from what you imagine? Or do you imagine that we're all animal abusers delighting in torturing dogs?

If this was true how could I regularly appear in front of people who love their dogs and get away with it. Certainly someone, at least one person would have taken their dog away while I was working him, yet that's never happened. Instead, when I'm working a dog people often ask when I'm going to start using the Ecollar. Each time I'd been doing so for about ten minutes but they couldn't even tell that I was pressing the button. Animal cruelty is pretty easy to spot when it involves the sudden onset of pain, as would an Ecollar if it was being used cruelly. You could hear a dog screaming blocks away. Yet people who are watching me closely can't even tell when I've pressed the button.

How do you put this together with your charges of barbarism?

The word "zap" means a high level stim. Low level stim is a "tickle." At least that's the effect it has on children. How can that be, by any stretch of anyone's imagination "barbaric?" A vibration is just that, it's also not a "zap."

Well then please tell us what you'd have the OP or anyone else who finds that these methods aren't working do? I'd love to hear how you or Patch would have handled that dog. Please share.

Because dogs are dying. Because sometimes your methods fail. If there's nothing else, then dogs go back to rescue, get rehomed, or they're killed.

I like dogs. I think they're worth the trouble to keep them alive.

Leo I'm pretty sure that you don't speak for the thousands of other members on this forum. I know that you don't speak for Ms. Halberstrom.

Why don't you tell us what you'd do with Ms. Halberstrom's dog? Perhaps there is another forum member who could benefit from it.

Dogtra consists of people who manufacture Ecollars, market them and take and then ship orders. They're not dog trainers. What they describe is the "industry standard" which they adhere to in order to avoid being sued.

Dogs are save from being killed.

I've never said that the Ecollar is "positive." I've said repeatedly that it's an animate object that doesn't do anything except sit on a shelf. Like ANY OTHER TOOL, it's how it's used that's at issue.

Of course there are people who use them in that fashion. Whenever I hear of it I say that it's not necessary.

This has absolutely no meaning. 100 what? Some go to 5. Some go to 11. Some go to 18. Some go to 127. This is a bit like the ads for laundry detergent that say "BETTER, MORE POWERFUL. "

Thanks for noticing. My agenda here is to save dog's lives.