denis, I just have to say........what a load of c**p! I have had terriers and fostered lurchers, some of which have been badly abused and I got my first BC 5 1/2 years ago. I have since acquired 2 more. All three are different in their attitude, two are clicker responsive the first one isn't, two are strong willed and "full of it" the second one is sensitive and a bit of a worrier. I have fostered saluki cross lurchers and owned american pit bull terriers and jack russell terriers and NEVER had any problem calling any of them off ANYTHING they were chasing. I rescued a BC with all the problems described by your "friend" with her "virtual westie" he had the added "bonus" of actually seeking people out when we were on a walk and trying to drag them away from my direction. I have NEVER felt the need to use anything other than positive methods with ANY dog that I have owned. I do not believe that positive training methods cause the problems, it is owners that don't want to take the time to help their dogs that cause them. It took me 18 months to get my rescue collie any where near to a normal life and I lost him 6 months later to cancer, was it worth all that work only to lose him soon after? HELL YEAH!!! There are far to many people that watch television and believe that things can be sorted in a couple of weeks, when they aren't they turn to pratts like you and come up with fairytales about saving their dogs life I saved Ben's life, I took him from an owner that was beating him every day for fun even though I didn't want him and I had no idea a the time just what was happening to him, I just thought he was yet another neglected dog I saved the two pit bulls that I hauled from the canal in a bag with bricks in the bottom at approx 4 weeks of age, their two litter mates were already dead. I saved the terrier that I stole from travellers because their kids were using him as a football at only 5 weeks, I didn't feel the need to stick one of your collars on any of them to be able to say it either.

nuff said

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


I wish I had a quid for every time I have heard that vile scare tactic used on worried dog owners.

You have a few years to catch upon with me then

Military dog background here, and experience with the rehab of severely aggressive out of control pet and rescue dogs. Never had to zap any of them and never ever will.
E-devices are banned by the military in the UK btw, they are not allowed to be used on the dogs mainly because of problems with increased aggression as it happens, but also because good trainers simply dont need to use them anyway.

Observations. Only people afraid of dogs feel the need to use negative physical force of some kind to control them, imo.

Its easy - dog has a brain, dog annoys handler in some way, handler, not knowing how to get in the dogs thought processes, zaps dog. Dog being intelligent, learns that brutality causes pain and it better stop showing it has a mind of its own, thereby letting the handler believe they have outsmarted the dog. Though the dog has still outsmarted them by being intelligent enough to let them [ the handlers ], believe they have been clever with the collars remote cotrol.



I shall rephrase. I am extremely experienced in using techniques which are way more advanced than any E-collar could ever be. And yes I have done extensive research on the things which is why I have an informed opinion of why I would shut down every manufacturer of them in the world if I could, and would like to send users and sellers of them to work in Russian salt mines.

So use a vibrating collar to teach then, which does not involve pain or discomfort.

Oh peeerleeeaaassee. They do not extinguish them, they bury them, and when they resurface it will be in a big explosion.


Yes.



Absolute rubbish. No dog needs to be zapped to save its life. Yet again I hear the same tired old pro E-collar rhetoric :smt015

Its people like me, and Brierley, and many others, who actually know how to work with dogs properly and recognise that we need to earn their respect and confidence, [ sorry but yep, respect between dog and owner / handler / trainer, is a two way street ], especially the abused and severely problematic ones, who put right the kind of problems E-collars [ and other force training / dominance methods ] are the cause of.

Every word well said.

Fwiw, Colliemad, my respects to you :smt023

You are welcome to share my Troll soup

I don't understand the hostility about this at all. We are talking about using the Ecollar in ONLY one situation. When all other methods have been tried and failed. Even the rankest beginner trainer knows that not everything works on every dog. When they fail, owners should have options.

"Scare tactic?" this owner, and others have tried these methods and found that they didn't work for them. It might be that they were incompetent. It might be that the trainers that they consulted were incompetent. It might be that the method simply doesn't work for the dog. In any case they come to us, not the other way round, at the end of their rope, ready to take the dog to the vet to be PTS or to the pound. What "scare tactics" are you talking about?

After I said that I'd been training dogs for 27 years, It's good to know how you tell if a dog trainer is any good. You just ask how many years he's been training! Of course he might have been doing the same thing over and over, rather than learning about new methods and tools. That might change the equation a bit.

Police background here.

Me too.

Me neither. Your use of the word "zap" tells me that in spite of your gazillion years of experience you still only know ONE WAY of using an Ecollar. I doubt that you've seen modern ones and it's obvious that you know nothing of modern techniques. I'd suggest that instead of adopting the attitude that you have all the answers, that you open your mind and learn something new.

This comment also tells me that they don't know anything about modern use of the tool either. When low level stim is used, there's no increased aggression.

No one "needs" an Ecollar. We trained dogs for thousand of years before they came along. But they're here now and people are going to use them. I think the best thing at this point is education. That will ensure that those who use them do so with the least negative impact on their dogs.

But I guess all the dogs that I've saved from being PTS will be disappointed to learn that I'm not a "good trainer." I guess all the people who have attended my seminars will be disappointed as well, as will all the police departments that I work with.

One thing at a time. I've already said that I'm not afraid of the dogs that I work with. Second, what's your definition of "negative physical force?" I'm working at the level where the dog barely can perceive the stim. It's about the same level of discomfort as a "flea bite." I wonder about someone who jumps to such conclusions based only the another trainer's tool of choice, never having seen their work.

There's that word "zap" again. Not something I do.

Please stop with the emotional personal attacks. In any case, pain is a continuum, ranging from "I can't stand that for another second" to, "It's chilly I think I need a sweater." It's uncomfortable, rather than painful I work at the latter level. You obviously have no idea of how to do that. Since there's no pain, only a few seconds of discomfort there's also no brutality.

Most of my work is done with police service and SAR dogs. Those dogs certainly need a mind of their own, and when my methods are used, they do.

Your comments are indicative of the use of high level stim. That causes pain, not discomfort. No animal learns well when he's in pain and that's why I don't do that.

Depends on your definition of "advanced."

Your "extensive research" has led you down the wrong road. There hasn't been any research done that involved low level stim. You may be an expert at "old school" use of the Ecollar but you don't know anything about how it's best used today.

Well that's a fine fantasy, but that's all it is. Pandora's Box is open and the Ecollar is out. Best thing at this stage is education. Some people are going to disregard your feelings and opinion because they've tried those methods and not been able to get them to work. Some problems can be fatal in short order for dogs, chasing cars, not recalling, chasing stock. I have no problem in trying those methods but when they don't work, they don't work. Owners need to have some option at that point.

ROFL. Most dogs that I know of find the vibration to be FAR more uncomfortable than the level of stim where they first feel it. I understand that you know nothing about techniques that use that level of stim. PM me and I'll be happy to share.

After I wrote, I'll be happy to refer you to two success stories where other methods failed and the Ecollar worked. Both of these cases occurred years ago and both dogs are living happy full lives. How long before you think the problems will surface? For one of the dogs it's been about 4 years, for the other about 5.

I agree, that's why I don't do it.

No I think this is NEW Ecollar rhetoric. It's not the use of the Ecollar that you're familiar with and the sooner you realize that, the faster we can make progress.

When I work with a police dog the bond between him and his handler is one of trust and respect. The handler often literally, places his life in the dog's paws. The dog is often sent into dangerous situations, not ones that he doesn't know about all the time either.

The other group I work with a lot is SAR dogs. Those handlers place themselves in the dog's paws, just as much but in a different way.

Both groups need a bond of trust and respect and they get it.

Of course it's a two way street. I've never said anything different!

Ecollars used properly have nothing to do with dominance. I have no doubt that's how YOU used them or have seen them used. But it's not what I do. Please don't assume things that you don't know.

If they stoop to people like you, they have not tried all other methods. Anyone scraping the barrel has simply not been looking hard enough for proper help.


The scare tactics that people like you throw around by claiming only your way can save a dogs life, which all right thinking people know is complete tripe.

I hardly think using the word `training` is apt in your case.

I didnt ask actually, you volunteered it.

She [ as it happens ] has not been doing the same thing over and over, she has evolved her methods and improved on them and incorporated other peoples methods which are suitable [ as in not harmful to the dogs mind and body ].
So no cigar for you there.


You already claimed that :smt015



re your claim that you dont zap. I dont believe you.


At any level, electricity is sent to the dog. Thats zapping. Anything less would be vibration therefore why use anything but a vibrating collar ? Because they dont inflict zaps thats why.

Like the one I looked at two weeks ago....

I think everyone who knows me on this forum would take my word over yours. I know the range of uses they are designed for. I also know that no good trainer would ever need to use one nor would consider using one.


Where people like you are concerned there is one very simple answer which everyone knows but as youngsters read this forum I wont use the two most apt words.

I suggest you consider the phrase `if it aint broke, dont fix it`. In other words I dont need your devices thanks, I know far better ways to help dogs.



No wonder your posts are so long when yo just keep repeating yourself.

When NO E-stim is used there is opportunity to build trust and confidence. But you wouldnt understand about that it seems.


So why dont you listen to your own words there - the only ones which have come from you that are based in reality.

Because they want quick fixes and dont understand that they are nothing but gaffer tape which rots after a while.

I agree but you are not willing to learn.

Or they can see through your rubbish and never use them at all.

Nah, you havent saved any dogs, you have just made more work for people to clear up after you later on.

They already knew that the moment you put an E-collar on them.

And this suprises you ??

You said it....

And I`ve lready said I dont believe you. Move on already !

Thats one definition of it.

And flea bites hurt, and itch, and nag, and can end up driving a dog nuts when it can get no relief from it. And you cant see how its negative ? Sheesh

The fact that you use them is more than enough to go on.

And I still dont believe you no matter how many times you drone on repeating it.

Sure - when you retire and promise never to go near a dog again.

Is that from a christmas cracker ? Fortune cookie ? I`d send them back as a bad batch if I were you.

Why do you want to make a dog uncomfortable to obey you ? I`d rather a dog do something because it wants to.

I dont NEED to do that.

Ah right, silly me, so you put an E Collar on a dog once and once only, and cause a few seconds of discomfort once only and thats it, doggy is all fixed. No repetitiveness about it, of course.
Give me a break

E-collars are also banned from any use on UK SAR dogs as well. How come UK dogs dont have handlers resorting to E-collars yet are superbly trained ? Ah, probably because their trainers actually understand how to work with dogs.

They wont be thinking anything polite about you thats for sure.

Get real. Discomfort is just one description of a pain level and its still negative force through ignorance.


Sorry, was it too big a word for you ? I`ll use a different one then :B-e-t-t-e-r.


You have no idea what research I have done so please dont pretend to with your silly `nyah nyah ` type comments

I think the same was said about the Atom bomb.

Well start listening then !

Were you looking in a mirror when you typed that ?

And the use of a lead hasnt occured to you ?????


Now you really are showing yourself up.

I think not.

How long is a piece of string ? The one thing thats guaranteed is that when dogs subjected to negative `training` blow, they pay with their lives.


[/quote]I agree, that's why I don't do it. [/quote]

[ re zapping ] and I STILL dont believe you.


Nope, I assure you, I`ve heard the exact same rubbish for years.

The sooner you get your head out from its whiffy dark place and realise no one here buys your parrotted claptrap the sooner we can make progress.
The best progress would be you retiring.
To a nice island somewhere.
With no dogs living on it preferably.
And no internet access there would be a bonus.



I know what police dogs do thanks.

I know what they do as well funnily enough. And I know that UK SAR handlers consider the use of E Collars on SAR dogs elsewhere to be abhorrent. Thats why they dont allow their use here.

In your deluded dreams perhaps.


You say it every time you press the button.

What part of my responses have not make it crystal clear that I do not believe in using dominance methods of dogs ?

I know you cause at minimum, discomfort, [ by your own admission ]. There is no other reason for that than to dominate and force dogs to do as you say, otherwise you would bin your contraptions and learn how to train properly.

Take your time, you have much to learn.
Really, take as long as you need.
Somewhere other than here preferably.

I have a couple of things to say...
HOORAH for the voice of reason and welcome welcome welcome to the debate Patch!!!!! May I share your troll soup please...this is how your posts made me feel...:smt038 :smt038 :smt038 :smt026 :smt026 :smt026
Fantastic posts Patch, well done you and I couldn't possibbly agree more, same goes for you Collie Mad.
Lou you seem to have this need to patronise and aggravate to keep these ecollar debates going. That tells me you really feel the need to justify yourself and the use of these barbaric devices.
Your main point seems to be, you should go try one or come and see me use one then you'll know it's okay...as I've said before many times and on countless threads, I have no need to constantly see things in order to know they are wrong...they just are and nothing changes that. As has been said any zap is a zap...not a tickle, not a vibration, a zap...end of. There is no need EVER to do that to a dog. It's cruel. It's pointless. It's needless.
ARGHHHHHHHH. Look I'm back in the htread.
Signing off now. Pointless. No doubt i'll be quoted into oblivion...again...:smt015 :smt015 :smt015

I'll share the troll soup too

Well I don’t have time to add to any posts for quite a while, so, this short one will do.

What you people who are promoting the commercial product you call ‘positive training’ are not addressing here are the facts of life in the commercial dog training field. Namely, taking into account almost no pet dog owner in the UK had even heard of an e-collar in the UK in 2000 let alone knew what one was.

Taking that and other factors into account the obvious issue is, why are pet dog owners turning away from the commercial product known as positive training and adding an e-collar as a training aid and how are you going to persuade people to regain confidence in positive training now e-collars have got a tightening grip?. Consider that a question to all, some FACTS below:

By 2000 the commercial monopoly of the pet dog training industry was almost exclusively the product known as 'Positive Training' and run by APDT. E collar dealers were no more than a handful of around 3or 4 rising to 5 in 2002.

Even in 2002 almost no one knew what an e- training collar was, some had heard of and were beginning to use the static anti barks, others had boundary fences, only 850 of those were sold in financial year 2002.

By July last year 750,000 static electro pulse collars had been sold in total in UK by retailers trading within the UK, that figure excludes imports from USA, which are almost certainly as many again, it also excludes imports from Europe but I have never followed that market so I have no idea.

By about Nov/Dec 2005 the % increase in sales and consequent use was averaging 60/70% on the previous year 2004, that comes from several significant sized retailers selling all types of remotes and that growth rate has maintained itself, as opposed to a blip, which all products are prone to from time to time.

In the year 2002 there 5 significant retailers operating in the UK, by June/July last year there just over 50 significant retailers operating in the UK, they have all expanded in size and sales, the largest expansion has been 2004-2005.

Don’t forget APDT banned itself from using e-collars as long ago as 1993 – that is 5 years BEFORE the first modern collar was invented, the consequence is that NO ONE in APDT knows anything about any modern e-collar, they banned themselves from learning as well as using.

I suppose another more obvious question is, what improvements to the product 'positive training' are you going to make in order for it to surive as a commercialy viable product much beyond this next 5/6 years? I mean shout all you want, make as many unsubstantiated claims and remarks you want, the facts on the ground are the 'real' e-collar is recieving not only acceptance but is gaining in sales every week, so what improvements are you going to make your product more usefull and pet dog/owner freindly and competitive with wider methods of training?

Also at
http://www.dogsey.com/showthread.php?t=37415&page=7

You certainly can Lou, but looking at the intention of the item always gives the clue. The light bulb, intended purpose, to give light. Electric chair, intended purpose, to kill. E-collar, intended purpose, to provide something to be avoided.

I'll go with the intended purpose and avoid it. It's worked form me so far

Dogtra is your choice of collar, yes?

http://www.dogtra.com/

Note, this site advocates initial basic training with choke and pinch collars then move on to the e-collar to advance the training until the dog goes into 'avoidance'

How can any of this be viewed in a 'positive' light Lou??

This is from the Dogtra site, the collar that you advocate as being oh so positive. Sorry, it doesn't wash