No Suzi! that's impossible don't you know!

ahh....I know - you do not have a high prey driven dog... !.

Thanks, all down to the dogs TBH, the high prey drive thing wasn't a problem as far as Mack was concerned (for once) he seemed to know to keep away, it was Meg who is just so nosy, who was the hardest to train.


Also, a sensible dog owner wouldn't let their dog roam around in a place where snakes are, you keep to trails, that isn't being cruel that is being a sensible owner.

Nope,

Yes, I state quite clearly and regularly that I wholeheartedly support training a dog first and foremost by the gentlest means necessary. I think it's a travesty sometimes that dogs who can walk to heel in any situation are forced to wear a collar. But I also accept, in reallity, not all dogs will do that and some dogs require additional equipment to train and manage.

My view then changes to the least physically imposing but safest equipment necessary to achieve the result. I agree with the Dogs Trust in part, a flat collar should be the first piece of equipment used. But I disagree that it's the only choice, they don't have that luxury in their recommendation mainly because if anything happens they would be held liable. They're not stupid, they also know a flat collar can cause injury, they're aware of police dogs that have had their necks broken with a flat collar, but they can't publically recommend anything else. Would you be suprised to know (certain nameless) members of the Dogs Trust use prong collars away from the organisation? Would you be suprised to know that (certain nameless) police trainers are prepared to use prong collars outside the force when publically they advocate only flat collars through pressure by the Dogs Trust? Since the Dogs Trust won't put a healthy dog down have you ever wondered what they do with the rescued pitbulls, and what equipment they have at their disposal if it's needed? That's a closely guarded secret and won't be confirmed if you ask them directly, but just have a guess. Do you know what the NYFD use to train their search and rescue dogs, admittedly not all, but some of them? Now are you going to imply none of these people are dog lovers and are too stupid to select the minimal and safest equipment necessary for thier dog? I know where they shop for it too........

I've never recommended a prong collar to a single owner ever as their first choice. From my experience with prong collars and headcollars though I rate a headcollar as more dangerous, probably a bias because I tend to see a lot of dogs and their owners struggling with headcollars, that's probably why they come to us in the first place. The hype and promises of easy walking with no stress or danger to the dog hasn't worked, and OMG a company selling these false hopes has made money from it. Trainers also recommend prongs, they're not all feckless idiots who can't train in more humane ways, they're professionals who will utilise a wide variety of skills and techniques if it's justified and necessary. There's already a thread about some terrible R+ trainers, and some trainers who probably just printed a certificate from the internet course they finished. Would you prefer a competent trainer who would be prepared to use a prong collar, or a poorly performing R+ trainer if you only had the choice of the two?

Amazingly enough we get a lot of comments commending the prong collars after the switch over, comments about how gentle they, comments about how happy the dog is now, comments slating headcollars as the worst invention and harmful to dogs. Seems people are prepared to try other methods first and have some reason why it's not working. Would you prefer their either give up, keep trying a failing method, or change their methods and adapt. No-one has ever given a guarantee R+ is 100% suitable or works for every dog so not everyone will need this equipment, a small percentage however will need to try an alternative, they come and find us, we don't go searching for them. Do you think if we try to screen customers and refuse to sell one unless they can prove a failed training reigeme it will stop them buying one?

So with that as a measure, do you have any idea how frustrating and insulting it is when the only experience a detractor has is a picture on a website and has a pop about "evil" collars then goes and gambles with wrenching their dogs neck? Though I was suposed to be the evil one? What's wrong with objectively learning about the equipment or physically seeing it in sensible use before making that judgement? We've already determined from some comments that information on t'internet about them is less than reliable and some will believe anything they read. Taken that I'm not overly bothered about selling them to anyone, don't recommend them for everyone, have a lot more experience of them than the next random website, I'm probably the most impartial person to give actual and factual information about them. In the meantime I'll still debate against the near blanket recommendation of headcollars even if a prong collar isn't the most suitable alternative and will assume the headcollar was a progression after a flat collar was found to be usuitable at that time.

Then again, being an evil torture device peddler trawling for customers it's only natural I'd say that, couldn't be any other reason.

regards,

Austin

It does lessen your argument - especially when you evade for so long the fact you are a seller of these things - you obviously knew it would make your position look weaker.

Wrong Austin , dog's don't require additional equipment , they need a decent trainer with time, patience and common sense and they certainly don't need sarcastic and pushy salesmen selling a quick fix with inappropriate painful equipment .

Take one red hot poker n stick it on the side of your neck or anywhere else n experience the pain! Would you be happy to do so or anyone else to do such? Go on try it! Would you do it to a 'naughty child' or someone with mental/physical disabilities? To make them adhere to what is percieved as correct/acceptable behaviour? If you are prepared to do such, put it on one of the internet sites n let's all see it(same for anyone else)! Is load of codswallop!

you make some pretty big assumptions that posters here have not seen prong collars being used.

Hmmm, that seemed to be incorporated by the method too. It did come up as a portion of the overall training technique but not a solution in its own right. Dogs were also taught to recognise the smell and sound of a harmful snake, what with those being more highly developed senses in a dog than sight to keep them out of harms way at the first indication. As some have mentioned, it didn't help much when the dog wandered near a snake hidden in long grass, so if the snake stays quiet and down wind it can go unoticed, but ultimately that's what snakes do and it's what makes them such efficient predators.

I'm still more convinced by their technique than yours.

Made an even bigger assumption they understood what they saw. What type did you see?