|
Location: West sussex
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,464
|
09-12-2010, 11:12 AM
Originally Posted by Adam Palmer 
E collar is easier to use, but thats the point, easier training results are better, happier dog!
Adam
Do you have any bad habits adam? Im sure you do as most people do..maybe you should try wearing two e collars around your neck and get someone to zap you every time you partake in this bad habit...im sure it wont hurt and you will learn quickly!
|
Location: Australia
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,032
|
09-12-2010, 11:52 AM
Originally Posted by Adam Palmer
E collar is easier to use, but thats the point, easier training results are better, happier dog!
Adam
easier to use = easier training result
easier training results = numpty owners are happy as it cost less money for hiring you
less money for hiring you = you can claim quick results
claiming quick results = you spreading the word faster of e-collars
As for "happier dog" you never acknowledged the fact that I had a JRT that had the same/similar problem as yours and was at risk of pts when dumped at the pound, I was able to teach her pretty quick how to chase a ball, and when walking off lead, she went to chase a cat, I called her, she came off the chase straight away, sometimes it is about curbing their instinct to chase, dogs get bored and can then find their own amusement, as I believe was the case of the JRT.
Your happiness is to gloat of your accomplishment, indirectly avoid questions that don't suit you, or shut down your arguement of the pro's of e-collars.
This thread has gone around and around, yet you convince no one of your beliefs, as they are unfounded and changing and the best you can do is quote a pro ecollar site
It has come down to theories now
the last step will be philosophy as then no one can be wrong
|
Location: Fife, UK
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,695
|
09-12-2010, 12:55 PM
Sounds to me, correct me if I'm wrong, that AP has no feelings for dogs other than that he can bully them into walking right by him in a field of sheep (which is illegal) or take them to a park with no training and get them to recall, thus enabling him to stand there and beat his chest like a neanderthol....and have novice dog owners look and say 'oh your dogs so well trained' without knowing just how little he knows and how little feeling he has for dogs (after all he has stated more than once that E-collars are just easier for the owner than the dogs benefit...) and ignorant to the anxiety in the dogs...(AP beats chest with enthusiasm and then starts the talk about his fees)
Sorry Adam, I never joined Dogsey to describe people like that but this is the impression you are leaving people with. For someone who is a dog trainer you dont seem to want to learn about it...
|
|
Location: Wiltshire UK
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,404
|
|
|
Location: Fife, UK
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,695
|
09-12-2010, 12:59 PM
Originally Posted by smokeybear
walking right by him in a field of sheep (which is illegal)
Is it?
Taken from shooting uk
First, though the owner of a dog worrying sheep is committing a criminal offence, the law creating this offence does not empower the farmer to shoot the dog. These days a farmer who shoots someone’s marauding dog is quite likely to be charged with criminal damage. If he is, then his defence will be likely to show he has reasonable excuse as he was protecting his sheep, which are his property. The farmer would have a similar defence to a civil action taken against him for shooting an offending dog.
He would also need to have notified the police within 48 hours of the shooting.
As to using a rifle to shoot a dog, it must be appreciated that a dog is not vermin, as vermin is, by definition, wild. Therefore, a rifle conditioned only for the shooting of vermin or pests would not be conditioned to shoot a dog, unless the certificate had printed on it (as some do) an additional condition authorising the holder to use the rifle for the shooting of animals for the protection of other animals
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,723
|
09-12-2010, 04:31 PM
Originally Posted by Rambler
....... He wants to think and he wants to learn. He is eager and enthusiastic.
My other dog is an ex working dog. ...She has, undoubtedly, been 'punished' in some way for doing the wrong thing and that has been the method used to train her in her first five years...the result is a dog that doesn't think. It has taken us 18months for her to be willing to be carrying something in her mouth when she is anywhere near us.
My point is....using positive methods one of my dogs is a thinker and problem solver and as happy as a happy thing can be. My other dog, same breed, has been trained using other methods and as a result had shut down and would not think, making her exceptionally difficult to train (but where there is a will and a pack of cheese, there is a way, I have all the time in the world for her). Using an ecollar is a punishment, it hurts (otherwise it wouldn't work, let's not quibble over that one) and thus the dog will stop thinking and doing what it thinks is right...making it actually harder to train in the long run.
Personally I want my dog to be a happy dog, not a shut down, scared animal.
and that is prob the problem with many people as well - they dont want a smart dog, they dont want a dog that problem solves, they dont want to realise they might not be as smart as their dogs - I for one DO want a smart dog who makes me laugh every dayand I think people who think their dogs are well behaived - just because they DONT do things - as wrong - thats not well behaived - thats no behaviour - please go and buy a stuffed toy
Originally Posted by smokeybear
Oh dear Adam............
First of all I have not trained ANY dogs not to kill sheep, neither has anyone else!
I have not trained dogs not to kill sheep because not all sheep chasers/worriers are sheep killers.
Angela Stockdale has a very good page on her website discussing the behaviour of dogs around livestock and this behaviour can be observed with dogs who chase cats, rabbits, birds etc etc
Behaviour modification using desensitisation and counter conditioning is all that is required in the vast majority of cases, for those dogs who really want to kill sheep NO electric collar is sufficient, but I doubt if you have actually encountered any such dogs, there are, thank goodness, extremely rare.
For those dogs allegedly "cured" by the use of the e collar, 99% of dogs do not need this (they just need time and patience and actual "training") and for the rest all they have LEARNED is that if they chase sheep, they get punished, it does NOT reduce the desire for this small minority and means that if they do NOT wear the collars at all times, and get regularly punished (which also generally means escalation ie adding another collar etc) they are not TRAINED not to kill sheep!
Environmental management is the best method of "training" ie keep dog on lead or home it where it will not encounter them!
As for OC not being scientific fact! Hello!
OC has been conducted for over 80 years (to our knowledge) and is a PROVEN technique both in and out of the lab with practically any species that has a CNS and repeatable (one of the measure of scientific evidence) by even novices at OC.
Two collars - for somebody who actually trains using these I find it interesting that you cannot or will not explain to those on this thread why this method is used.
I will tell you, (I know because I have spent time with Bart Bellon, unlike AP and other internationally famous trainers who understand their use).
This is not to say I condone or support this nor that all of the other trainers do, but in order to decide whether or not to use something it is necessary I believe to understand the concept.
The reason that two collars were/are used is because some smart dogs can avoid being shocked by flaxing their neck muscles away from the contact points.
Therefore people would put two collars on a dog, with a contact point of one on the left hand side of the neck and the contact point of the other on the right.
This has now been superseded and over come by the collar being attached via an elastic bungee so avoidance is not possible.
The practice of placing collars at various parts of the body becomes necessary (in the view of the practitioners) when they have a dog that goes through the pain.
In practice (from direct and indirect observation) it is because dogs have been taken "over the edge" and spend most of their time in panic and confusion.
Further to the above, AP has no peer(s) (other than the 1/2 who are his "mentors" who can attest to the efficacy of his training on a scale over and above the very small number victims he has at his disposal. Nor has he demonstrated his prowess in any public arena.
But as I said before, the longer he is occupied on the pc, the less time can be spent in experimenting on dogs and their hapless owners.
I know there are LOTS of people on here who have saved dogs at least as 'bad' as the ones these negitive trainers 'fix' but they dont need to stand up and shout it, and not only are these dogs 'saved' they also do not undergo the trauma of the punishment training and there is no danger that the behaviour is just supressed
To look at a simple training trick that people traine if different ways
a 'leave it'
If that is taught with punishment then the dog still wants what he was told to leave, and will not leave it when the owner is out of sight
If a leave it is taught using positive methods the actual OBJECT the dog has been asked to leave becomes the trigger to leave it, the dog actually ENJOYS the object being there and not touching it because that has been rewarding to it, regardless of if the handler is there or not
so extrapolate this to sheep
The collar does not reduce the desire to chase the sheep - it just makes the dog fear what will happen if he does chase - so the fear is greater than the desire
However if you properly countercondition a different behaviour upon seeing sheep then the actual presence of sheep becomes a trigger for the dog to do something really rewarding then the dog is happy, sees the sheep as a happy thing
or you can desensitise the dog to sheep so they are no more interesting than trees
as I have done with Mia - she just dosent care about sheep any more and can walk past a field without any interest in them at all, it wasnt punished, we just socalised her to sheep
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,497
|
09-12-2010, 05:47 PM
a manufacturer says not to try on oneself if a pacemaker is fitted,
QUOTE]
Because the radio signal has the potential of interfereing with a pacemaker, as it does with model airplanes etc - it's a liabilty thing.
Adam
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,497
|
09-12-2010, 05:49 PM
Originally Posted by Krusewalker
this is why you dont answer questions properly adam.
for example, someone uses the 3 words "working with dogs", and you see 3 completely different words and have a separate conversation.
also, note its called learning theory.
Adam
|
Location: UK
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 709
|
09-12-2010, 06:01 PM
Originally Posted by Ben Mcfuzzylugs
However if you properly countercondition a different behaviour upon seeing sheep then the actual presence of sheep becomes a trigger for the dog to do something really rewarding then the dog is happy, sees the sheep as a happy thing
Sadly, not always possible in my experience, not with every single dog.
I will give money to anyone who can desensitise my girl. from sheep using any method that is not aversive based. I Haven't used an aversive or ecollar on her and nor will I ever, as I don't need her to be desensitised to sheep, as I can keep her on a lead and away from sheep. But If someone could do it, Id pay top money, just to see it.
I have desensitized many dogs from sheep and other things using positive reward based training and it is possible with many many dogs. Most dogs even. But, I believe, not ALL dogs. Am willing to be happy to be proved wrong.
I have my own sheep that can be used and any dog training facility you need in terms of set up. Will travel to you if you have sheep and that is easier?