Shock collar? Need advice please.

[MikeP]

Ehhh…not too much far off as compared to setting up a long line with a bungy’ed prong used to negatively reinforce unacceptable behavior, especially if the Doberman is so hard, high strung with high prey drive that it chokes itself out or causes cervical vertebrae damage…at least with the ECollar, I am in control of the stim and not the frenzied Doberman- but I get and understand your mode of thinking here.

Appreciate the follow up and acknowledge your critique of my post. Hopefully my suggestion can be interpreted as not representative of choke in the literal sense of “ choking out” as I understand to mean — high level heavy hand correction causing loss of control of bladder and more …..and also occurrence of possible CV damage …..allow me to clarify intent.

I deliberately specified a bungee at the front end of the restraint. I liken that to the analogy of application of pumping the brakes to stop at high speed if not strapped in, then chances are nobody is going through the windshield — hence harmless. Compared to a hard stop such as a dog hitting the end of a restraint with no give. I don't see the critique presented as being related to resulting cervical damage and “choking-out” damage when contingent on the use of a bungee.
Furthermore the graduated escalating pinch sensation will occur in stages contingent on drive or lack-of and is self correcting when in high drive in messaging to the dog to back off before full-out choke occurs, akin to the analogy of hitting the windshield.

In that post you are responding to, I was more or less trying to paint a quick picture of its damn near impossible, extremely difficult, to break through the max’ed out prey drive and bring them down to real time- “even when hit with stim of 100”. Wasn’t bragging on that, I didn’t feel good doing it and the “many times” was prob 3x

Understood and furthermore admire your candid response and never interpreted as a brag.

I give you last word.

In the common bond of Dobermans ……Mikel

 

[Corky]

OMG the prey drive is there with Miss Charlie!
What we are doing….prong collar, on leash almost all the time.
We remove the prong and leash when Charlie settles in for naps and bedtime.
When I am in the room, the instant I see her stop and start “the look” (prey gaze) I immediately say “leave it” and either move her gaze away with my hands or the prong and leash, depends on proximity.
If she breaks gaze quickly she gets a silly voice good girl and a single treat.
These other little girl dogs have been with us for almost their entire lives. (Rescues)
Charlie’s the newcomer and I am very motivated to learn to do right by her.
Honestly, if it takes a shock to break gaze and prey mode, then it just does.
I guess my feeling is if a little shock (hopefully all it takes is a little) will snap her out faster than tugging the prong collar, then I’m willing to try it.
I so appreciate the candid non judgy question/answer we can have here!
I’m gonna keep reading and learning how to do right by Charlie!

 

[MikeP]

The second thing they learn is a recall to both command and whistle

That nugget of wisdom warrants . Hopefully others looking for off leash recall, or when in the vicinity of danger or attractive prey then an abrupt stop-in-your-tracks akin to PLATZ might benefit from employing gun dog training staple exercises in particular Lab and retriever training. For distance control then using a pea whistle penetrates the environment of highwinds, running water, crashing waves etc. etc. far more effective than voice over long distance of 200-300 yards is highly effective and easier on vocal cords lest gun dog trainers would put the idea to bed.

For anyone interested and not into French Ring or Mondio Ring where the judges whistle signals when to start and stop an exercise then an investigation into its gun dog use is worth a peek. Needless to write I do no Ring sport yet depend on a piercing pea whistle or mini-megaphone mega pea whistle for reasons outlined above. One sharp blast to stop/PLATZ ….two short staccato blasts for a HERE recall.

In the common bond of Dobermans ….Mikel

 

[Nordika]

Honestly, if it takes a shock to break gaze and prey mode, then it just does.

A dog often will associate the shock with what they are looking at, just fyi, it may have unintended consequences.

 

[Ravenbird]

A dog often will associate the shock with what they are looking at, just fyi, it may have unintended consequences.

I'm not sure which you think is "often", associating stimulation with looking or having unintended consequences, or both?

Used properly, the whole idea is that when the dog begins nefarious thoughts through staring that it is interrupted by an unpleasant stimulation rather than a pull on the leash (requires constant tethering, and when unleashed the behavior often returns), or vocal interruption (not very bothersome to a hard dog and does not tell the dog that certain behavior will cause unpleasant consequences). Dogs are intelligent and generally are quick to put 2 and 2 together and just stop the unwanted behavior, if every single time it becomes unpleasant rather than self-rewarding.

There are many of us here on this forum that have used or regularly used e-collars for training and/or as a safety feature for off leash hikes and I have yet to see a thread discussing unintended consequences. I know it happens, I'm not saying it can't, I've just never seen it personally.

 

[Nordika]

I'm not sure which you think is "often", associating stimulation with looking or having unintended consequences, or both?

Used properly, the whole idea is that when the dog begins nefarious thoughts through staring that it is interrupted by an unpleasant stimulation rather than a pull on the leash (requires constant tethering, and when unleashed the behavior often returns), or vocal interruption (not very bothersome to a hard dog and does not tell the dog that certain behavior will cause unpleasant consequences). Dogs are intelligent and generally are quick to put 2 and 2 together and just stop the unwanted behavior, if every single time it becomes unpleasant rather than self-rewarding.

There are many of us here on this forum that have used or regularly used e-collars for training and/or as a safety feature for off leash hikes and I have yet to see a thread discussing unintended consequences. I know it happens, I'm not saying it can't, I've just never seen it personally.

I have and use e-collars, not for training, an e-collar teaches nothing. Used for correction i.e. reinforcement of commands the dog already knows. The dog must know what is being asked of it. It won't magically put 2 and 2 together, i.e. nefarious thoughts. If I call a dog and he/she chooses to blow me off for a squirrel, it's a correction for not coming when called. I have to teach my dogs not to eat anything off the ground, like poisonous mushrooms, rotting carcasses, etc. I first have to teach them not to eat food off the ground before I ever use an e-collar to reinforce that when they can't resist that tasty rotting salmon. Food drive is a natural drive and use of aversive must be applied judiciously. The same is true of prey drive, if all i did was shock my dogs when they ran after a squirrel, they wouldn't associate that with chasing a squirrel, they would associate it with the environment and become fearful of the environment.

The e-collar shock association refers to the unintended psychological link a dog forms between the electrical stimulation and its surroundings rather than its own behavior. Because dogs cannot logically deduce that a remote-controlled stimulus is a correction for a specific action, and (unintended consequences) they often associate the pain or discomfort with environmental cues present at that moment, such as other dogs, people, or specific locations.

This misassociation can lead to serious behavioral issues, including fear, anxiety, and aggression. For example, a dog shocked while looking at or reacting to another dog may learn to fear all dogs, or a dog shocked while looking at its owner may develop a mistrust of the handler, perceiving them as an unpredictable source of pain. These may also result in misdirected aggression: Dogs may attack triggers (like other pets) they incorrectly associate with the shock.

In the right hands on a properly trained dog, a e-collar can be a useful tool. In inexperienced hands with the idea that an e-collar is the magic bullet for lack of training, well...

 

[Coco Loco]

I'm not an expert and am only sharing what worked with my old girl. When we got Coco as a puppy we already had a mature cat, Tiki, who was the boss of the house. Coco was very interested in Tiki and wanted to chase her because she was a puppy.

She learned through consistent leave its and being on a leash in the house, that she could not chase Tiki or try to play with her. It took time for this to happen. Tiki also could retreat to the basement and Coco would not go down the stairs so it was a refuge for Tiki. They often sat at the stairs face to face which was kind of funny.

Coco learned that Tiki was off limits and was not to be chased or bothered in the house. Outside, Coco's prey drive kicked in with other cats she saw, bunnies and rabbits but never for her cat.

She deferred to Tiki throughout their lives together. If Tiki wanted to drink out of Coco's bowl or eat out of her dish, Coco sat down and waited for Tiki to finish. It was quite a sight to see because there was such a size difference in them.

When Coco was about 7, Tiki decided she didn't mind her as much and they often laid beside each other. I miss this the most about my old girls who are both at bridge now undoubtedly lying on a couch beside each other





So there is hope that with consistency, everyone can live harmoniously but it's on us to make that happen.

 

[MikeP]

A dog often will associate the shock with what they are looking at, just fyi, it may have unintended consequences.

Another opinion I share with @Nordika being a FYI that is very meaningful in the sense that @Corky's Miss Charlie already has some not so nice behavioural issues with the other two smaller dogs, and hence corrective stim levels to get attention if and when applied and if breaching the tolerable level resulting in producing 'unpleasantry' —> think intolerable tens machine sensation muscle involuntary contraction then that could easily trigger the ‘association' response to whatever is in the immediate vicinity — ie. the two smaller dogs — and create a whole new set of issues. It’s a 'damned if I do and damned if I don't' conundrum with the 50% possibility of going in either direction.

As an aside for @Corky ….An example I recently stumbled on was an e-collar dependent handler and her Lab. I casually asked why the continued need on what appeared to be an older dog. The response was that her dog was reactive to strangers and was always in use ….yet I never triggered a response and don't know if the e-collar stim was applied. Throughout conversation a group of 3 adults approached and the reactive behaviour— fear defence no escape aggression— erupted. No escape and leash restraint coupled with with continuous stim merely escalated the off the chart reactivity as the group approached. Convincingly demonstrated that in the wrong hands the futile the means. I offered unsolicited advice that flew over her head and soon realized what I offered was unwelcome as the behavior de-escalated as the group disappeared over the ridge. On I went on my merry way and pedalled up the incline out of site out of mind.

Used properly, the whole idea is that when the dog begins nefarious thoughts through staring that it is interrupted by an unpleasant stimulation rather than a pull on the leash (requires constant tethering, and when unleashed the behavior often returns), or vocal interruption (not very bothersome to a hard dog and does not tell the dog that certain behavior will cause unpleasant consequences).

A leash correction messages the dog the correction came from the hand at the far end of the leash and familiar voice 6 ft away, thereby association is readily related to those sources. As opposed to e-collar first time use. E-collar stim is a foreign unpleasant sensation thus association can be easily attributed to the immediate surroundings….hence the case in discussion and the two smaller dogs. The direction that the issue can take is 50-50 chance of improved behaviour and likewise 50-50 chance in increase of the unwanted behaviour with association of the immediate environment. In essence it is a roll of the dice as opposed to certainty of the hand on the leash and familiar voice from where the correction originated.

Case in point. During bitework years and years ago I was working with my personal very resilient high drive Dobe of old vom Forell/v.Maerchengarten lineage. A great dog until he wasn't as a result of the advent of e-collar and its promoted value, consequently I errantly fell into the trap of dependency on E-collar stim negative reinforcement to OUT/OUS the bite. It worked to get a reluctant compliant out as the association of voice with applied stim pointed to me as the source. That transferred to a once bite sleeve crazy and reliable dumbbell retrieve Doberman over the 1 meter hurdle to a Doberman expressing immediate avoidance of both and a long arduous road back to what once was, and me now the source associated with the negative reinforcement positive punishment combo. That was eventually resolved via positive reinforcement and negative punishment. E-collar and heavy hand compulsory measures led to 4 pearly whites advancement up the leash to the inevitable easy to determine source. Been there done it. Ironically was the embarrassing victim on display with a dog with a locked bite on the source at the end of the leash. Embarrassingly in front of fellow handlers at the local working dog facility of hear-say unjustified bad rap on The Working Dog Forum who are associated with HERE and HERE and catering to clientele beyond sport and Sch as it was known back in the day. Hence my aversion to employing E-collar positive punishment negative reinforcement.

All the preamble points directly to the old trainer adage of “Train the dog at the end of the leash with measures the dog favourably responds to. I leave it there….

In the common bond of Dobermans …..Mikel

 

[BGpa]

I have and use e-collars, not for training, an e-collar teaches nothing. Used for correction i.e. reinforcement of commands the dog already knows. The dog must know what is being asked of it. It won't magically put 2 and 2 together, i.e. nefarious thoughts. If I call a dog and he/she chooses to blow me off for a squirrel, it's a correction for not coming when called. I have to teach my dogs not to eat anything off the ground, like poisonous mushrooms, rotting carcasses, etc. I first have to teach them not to eat food off the ground before I ever use an e-collar to reinforce that when they can't resist that tasty rotting salmon. Food drive is a natural drive and use of aversive must be applied judiciously. The same is true of prey drive, if all i did was shock my dogs when they ran after a squirrel, they wouldn't associate that with chasing a squirrel, they would associate it with the environment and become fearful of the environment.

The e-collar shock association refers to the unintended psychological link a dog forms between the electrical stimulation and its surroundings rather than its own behavior. Because dogs cannot logically deduce that a remote-controlled stimulus is a correction for a specific action, and (unintended consequences) they often associate the pain or discomfort with environmental cues present at that moment, such as other dogs, people, or specific locations.

This misassociation can lead to serious behavioral issues, including fear, anxiety, and aggression. For example, a dog shocked while looking at or reacting to another dog may learn to fear all dogs, or a dog shocked while looking at its owner may develop a mistrust of the handler, perceiving them as an unpredictable source of pain. These may also result in misdirected aggression: Dogs may attack triggers (like other pets) they incorrectly associate with the shock.

In the right hands on a properly trained dog, a e-collar can be a useful tool. In inexperienced hands with the idea that an e-collar is the magic bullet for lack of training, well...

Thank you, @Nordika
I agree with both you and @Ravenbird

My understanding is:
The dog needs to know whats expected, and reinforced positively, with demonstrated reliability before a correction for failure to comply is fair/useful.

In my case the ecollar was not used to teach a loose heal, off leash recall, but only to break the focus of whatever got the dog past the threshold of listening...and back in compliance.

And as a rate but useful hammer of god (out of nowhere to break the habit of eating something dangerous, a snake, a dead lobster, wood chips...

And an insurance policy on off leash- used once on enforce the recall on Bonnie wanting to run up to a coyote to play/investigate.

Could also be for stopping a run across the busy street to check out something important she has decided needs her approval...
---
I got some early ecollar introduction training by an LEO training school, but as Bonnie was a bit too young at that time (and my gut instinct was that she AND I both needed to understand the basics better first)...so I put that off until later. I was fortunate to get some good advice from @MikeP
On how and why, plus introduction to Balabanov and Ellis. I also watched Cabral interview Krohn and read his book on yank and crank back in the day, and how to do it different now, specifically:

Michael Ellis has an excellent discussion on e-collar use, pro's and con's, including why to be careful in application to avoid creating "suspicious beliefs".

https://michaelellisschool.com/webinars/

I've read somewhere that dogs can "generalize" from the unintended association created mistakenly by e-collar, to future triggers on that same association.

If that rises to a fear with defense aggression then a dog could come back up the leash if overwhelmed, correct?

So, again: be careful on jumping to ecollar before you have been well trained on positive, and I'd start with a prong on long line first, to build the recall before ecollar.

https://michaelellisschool.com/webinars/

PS: If you get on the email list and buy a webinar before its released you can watch it over and over.

I havent followed this FB link but anyone can learn more by a little searching.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10156821729593465

 

[Nordika]

I'm going to go out on a limb here, you can't teach a dog to sit by saying 'sit' and shocking the dog. Just as you can't teach a dog to "leave it" by saying those magical words and applying the magical e-collar stim. The dog isn't going to understand what is wanted. Akin to a person speaking a foreign language telling you to do something in a language you don't understand and shocking you, or choking with a yank and crank, when you don't comply or respond. No matter your intelligence level, you are not likely to put 2 and 2 together if you don't understand the meaning of the words. The dog must completely understand what you want them to do. If you have properly taught the dog a "leave it" command, you should be able to put some delicious grilled chicken or your dogs favorite liver bits on a plate, or the dogs favorite toy, on the floor in front of the dog, and command to leave it, and the dog leaves it be because it knows what the command means. When you have that compliance over and over again, then you can say the dog knows what you want with that command. Only then should you proof that compliance with aversive correction beyond a voice correction. Basically what you are trying to achieve is impulse control. If the dog is on leash and prong collar full-time, is constantly being corrected, it's far more likely the dog doesn't understand the commands being given.

@Corky instead of correcting the dog for a behavior you don't want, and possibly something the dog doesn't understand, try turning it around by asking the dog for what you believe the dog truly does understand. Come, sit, down, place, whatever you absolutely know 100 % that the dog understands how to comply.

How I train my high drive puppies to leave animals alone: I teach them a "watch me" command. Whenever the puppy gives me eye contact it gets paid, once I have a lot of engagement, I will add the verbal cue. When the puppy understands the verbal cue, I will give that cue in the protected presence of prey, like my chickens behind a fence. Once I have engagement with the eyes, we can play, train, etc. with just positive reinforcements and the puppy is learning impulse control with the safety of the other animals in mind. I can then move on to just leash and collar without a barrier, we continue to train the same way, always using "watch me" if the eyes divert from me. Train, train, train, then I have the puppy help during feeding the chickens, collecting eggs, etc. If the puppy becomes prey driven, I cue to watch me, always training until the pup can sit and watch the chickens eating, running, flying with impulse control. With prey drive, you must have impulse control BEFORE there is ever physical access!

People are going to do whatever they want to do. People only take advice on options if they actually want other options. That's my two cents and I'm out of the convo.

 

[Ravenbird]

I'm going to go out on a limb here, you can't teach a dog to sit by saying 'sit' and shocking the dog. Just as you can't teach a dog to "leave it" by saying those magical words and applying the magical e-collar stim. The dog isn't going to understand what is wanted. Akin to a person speaking a foreign language telling you to do something in a language you don't understand and shocking you, or choking with a yank and crank, when you don't comply or respond. No matter your intelligence level, you are not likely to put 2 and 2 together if you don't understand the meaning of the words. The dog must completely understand what you want them to do. If you have properly taught the dog a "leave it" command, you should be able to put some delicious grilled chicken or your dogs favorite liver bits on a plate, or the dogs favorite toy, on the floor in front of the dog, and command to leave it, and the dog leaves it be because it knows what the command means. When you have that compliance over and over again, then you can say the dog knows what you want with that command. Only then should you proof that compliance with aversive correction beyond a voice correction. Basically what you are trying to achieve is impulse control. If the dog is on leash and prong collar full-time, is constantly being corrected, it's far more likely the dog doesn't understand the commands being given.

@Corky instead of correcting the dog for a behavior you don't want, and possibly something the dog doesn't understand, try turning it around by asking the dog for what you believe the dog truly does understand. Come, sit, down, place, whatever you absolutely know 100 % that the dog understands how to comply.

How I train my high drive puppies to leave animals alone: I teach them a "watch me" command. Whenever the puppy gives me eye contact it gets paid, once I have a lot of engagement, I will add the verbal cue. When the puppy understands the verbal cue, I will give that cue in the protected presence of prey, like my chickens behind a fence. Once I have engagement with the eyes, we can play, train, etc. with just positive reinforcements and the puppy is learning impulse control with the safety of the other animals in mind. I can then move on to just leash and collar without a barrier, we continue to train the same way, always using "watch me" if the eyes divert from me. Train, train, train, then I have the puppy help during feeding the chickens, collecting eggs, etc. If the puppy becomes prey driven, I cue to watch me, always training until the pup can sit and watch the chickens eating, running, flying with impulse control. With prey drive, you must have impulse control BEFORE there is ever physical access!

People are going to do whatever they want to do. People only take advice on options if they actually want other options. That's my two cents and I'm out of the convo.

I agree with this 100% as basic methods to train all dogs! I never needed nor even dreamed of owning a prong or an e-collar in my life until my current dog. Many people use the e-collar as a training aid for heeling, teaching sit etc etc, I am not that person. I've heard some horror stories about some training programs that are downright abusive with the e-collar. I don't believe every puppy should be sold with an e-collar to have on hand just in case. I DO believe that more dogs have been helped and saved from shelters and euthanasia by educating owners when and how to use corrections properly.

All I'm saying is that when a dog cannot be controlled by what I call normal basic training and they are a danger to other animals, people or themselves by their actions and willful disobedience, a correction of some kind is needed to make it clear to the dog that the behavior is non-negotiable. Some dogs know exactly what you're asking verbally and refuse to comply, especially in their adolescent years, testing your patience and pushing back constantly. Is the handler at fault for not being skilled enough to teach 100% compliance to verbal commands? Maybe. Could Ellis or Ivan take that dog and turn it around with play? I'm sure they could. But they have years of experience that the average pet owner can't begin to fathom.

I would rather teach someone the proper way to use the e-collar to fix a problem than to watch that owner become frustrated and defeated because they can't teach a dog perfect response to voice commands and end up with a beloved pet mauled or killed and then giving up the dog to a shelter for someone else to fix or euthanize.

 

[Ravenbird]

Michael Ellis has an excellent discussion on e-collar use, pro's and con's, including why to be careful in application to avoid creating "suspicious beliefs".

Like you, I highly recommend Michael Ellis. Which brings me back to the point that if these collars are destroying more dogs lives than making them better, someone of this stature would not be recommending them for help in training. He would be emphasizing it as a last resort. After learning how to use one properly, and also using it on my bare wrist before ever putting it on my dog, it is just like any other tool: use it for the wrong reasons or used improperly it can definitely cause more problems. Just because people have been stabbed to death with a kitchen knife doesn't mean that you shouldn't have one and learn to use it for its intended purpose.

 

[Nordika]

I agree with this 100% as basic methods to train all dogs! I never needed nor even dreamed of owning a prong or an e-collar in my life until my current dog. Many people use the e-collar as a training aid for heeling, teaching sit etc etc, I am not that person. I've heard some horror stories about some training programs that are downright abusive with the e-collar. I don't believe every puppy should be sold with an e-collar to have on hand just in case. I DO believe that more dogs have been helped and saved from shelters and euthanasia by educating owners when and how to use corrections properly.

All I'm saying is that when a dog cannot be controlled by what I call normal basic training and they are a danger to other animals, people or themselves by their actions and willful disobedience, a correction of some kind is needed to make it clear to the dog that the behavior is non-negotiable. Some dogs know exactly what you're asking verbally and refuse to comply, especially in their adolescent years, testing your patience and pushing back constantly. Is the handler at fault for not being skilled enough to teach 100% compliance to verbal commands? Maybe. Could Ellis or Ivan take that dog and turn it around with play? I'm sure they could. But they have years of experience that the average pet owner can't begin to fathom.

I would rather teach someone the proper way to use the e-collar to fix a problem than to watch that owner become frustrated and defeated because they can't teach a dog perfect response to voice commands and end up with a beloved pet mauled or killed and then giving up the dog to a shelter for someone else to fix or euthanize.

I think you're being argumentative for the sake of it. I am not force free or positive only trainer. So try to understand what I am saying. Teaching a dog to sit, however you get there, compulsion: pushing the rear down while pulling up on the collar. Luring: luring the dog into position with a treat, shaping...etc. you are Teaching the dog that position in association with the sit command. However many repetitions it takes to make that connection is up to the individual dog. This is one of the easiest commands to teach and most often the first thing an owner teaches their dog. An ecollar stimulation cannot teach the dog a body position. You can't just shock it until it's in a sit position, and no idiot is going to try to do that. Ecollars are not intended to do that. Once a dog KNOWS the sit command means sit and refuses to obey, then a physical correction can be used, whether that's a pop of a leash with flat collar, prong collar, or a stim from an ecollar, for me, depends on the age, I do not use prongs or ecollar on a puppy less than 6 months of age.

A leave it command is not a simple body position that can be taught easily, it's a more difficult concept to teach and more difficult concept for the dog to understand. My point is that the OP is using this command to stop the dog from fixation on other dogs and using prong collar corrections. It's not working. I personally wouldn't use that command for this problem, but, besides that, I don't think the dog actually knows this command. If instead you use a command that you 100% know that the dog knows, an easy command such as "sit" could be used, if the dog doesn't obey, a correction is justified because the dog knows. I did not say the dog must obey voice command with 100% compliance, the dog must know what is required in order to comply. Personally if this was my dog(s), I would use a recall, and likely use a whistle because they are taught to recall that way, and it doesn't have intonation that voice does(they can't tell if I am happy or pissed off that way ), it's simple and gets attention easier and my dogs KNOW what "come" means. Non compliance to that would justify a correction, the level of which, would depend on the circumstances and tools being used. And as i said previously, I would not allow the dog the freedom and physical access to the older dogs in this scenario so threat of injury to the other dogs would not be a possibility and I would use a leash and likely a prong on a 1 year old. I am very careful how and when to use an ecollar correction. I would not use when the dog is fixated on another dog, because unintended consequences do happen in such cases, and this has been my experience. I think it would be a very bad idea to jump to ecollar correction on this dog in the scenario that has been presented. That's not saying a prong collar or ecollar should not ever be used ffs

 

[MikeP]

you can't teach a dog to sit by saying 'sit' and shocking the dog. Just as you can't teach a dog to "leave it" by saying those magical words and applying the magical e-collar stim.

Teaching a dog to sit, however you get there, compulsion: pushing the rear down while pulling up on the collar. Luring: luring the dog into position with a treat, shaping...etc. you are Teaching the dog that position in association with the sit command. However many repetitions it takes to make that connection is up to the individual dog. This is one of the easiest commands to teach and most often the first thing an owner teaches their dog. An ecollar stimulation cannot teach the dog a body position. You can't just shock it until it's in a sit position, and no idiot is going to try to do that. Ecollars are not intended to do that. Once a dog KNOWS the sit command means sit and refuses to obey, then a physical correction can be used, whether that's a pop of a leash with flat collar, prong collar, or a stim from an ecollar, for me, depends on the age, I do not use prongs or ecollar on a puppy less than 6 months of age.

I have coupled the two quotes as they are IMO the gist of the discussion to lay-off e-collar in a young pup/untrained dog until a wanted behaviour is initially learned and then and only then should compulsion be used if compliance is not attained. Hopefully @Corky is still following input from both sides of the discussion to determine the route to address the issues that were initially presented.

For the purpose of anyone on the sidelines with similar issues as the OP that prompted input then in particular interest is the topic of Luring: luring the dog into position with a treat, shaping...etc from the above quote.

Why so??? …Just about every phase of obedience that the handler/trainer attempts to instruct is in-built and is a behaviour that the dog already knows how to do and merely needs word association to make the connection — hence the concept of shaping.The objective then is to visually capture the precise moment with verbal cue to suit the behaviour that the wanted behaviour is expressed and then +positive-reinforced with food or toy hence shaped. Regarding food then requirement is high value aroma attracting food to heighten and keep drive and interest. I load a bait pouch with dime sized nuked in the microwave, slices of chicken hot dog preferably preservatives free if that even exists. Emphasis on hi-value — last night's whatever leftover from diner. Quantity as to the number of food reward is key. 10 mini pieces as opposed to 1/4 of a wolfed down hot dog impacts behaviour better when used as +reinforcement. Even that dime size slice can be divided into 2 or 3 pieces with the objective that we want food drive to remain at peak therefore without satiation we maintain drive and hi interest to perform. Include the occasional jackpot of 4 or 5 morsels to +positive reinforce an exceptionally good 'performance' related to the behaviour being sought. Drill that message in via the food, relentlessly with numerous 2-3 minute mini sessions day in day out — conditioning is proofed and autonomous behaviour occurs via classical conditioning akin to the salivating dog at the sound of a bell.

Next up is luring using same food ideas aforementioned. The difference being, the closed hand holding the food is the lure to attract 100% attention to follow that hand. Think of the implications. Every basic obedience command can be +positive reinforced without ever putting a hand or a leash— gawd forebid the sacrilege of using a pinch or e-collar at this formative learning period that need not be muddied by compulsion. That all leads to when should compulsion be introduced. ONLY when the 6 month old to juvenile dog that has been trained/conditioned/proofed and by now weaned off of the continuous use of food or toy reward — decides to balk and non- comply.

Behaviours such as HERE/ recall, PLATZ/down and SITZ/sit ( pronounced seats) sonically carry a more impactful demanding message to comply. A pea whistle incorporated into the mix is a requisite for clear messaging those 3 fore mentioned verbal cues at both close range or viewable long distance of 100-200-300 yards.

Sarah Prelle nails down and makes clear the understanding of when, why and where to apply ….if still interested then take a peek at Sarah Prelle — Luring and Sarah Prelle—Luring & Shaping

With all the input offered by everyone in this thread, hopefully a real solution can be found. The problem arises when people jump on the bandwagon of popularity and rely on compulsion instead of first building a strong foundation based on positive reinforcement for what you want rather than negative reinforcement for what you don’t want.This all fits within the theory of operant conditioning. When viewed through an anthropomorphic lens, and projected onto human behaviour, the question becomes: What actually produces motivation and genuine desire? The answer is clear.

In the common bond of Dobermans ….Mikel

 

[Nordika]

I have coupled the two quotes as they are IMO the gist of the discussion to lay-off e-collar in a young pup/untrained dog until a wanted behaviour is initially learned and then and only then should compulsion be used if compliance is not attained. Hopefully @Corky is still following input from both sides of the discussion to determine the route to address the issues that were initially presented.

For the purpose of anyone on the sidelines with similar issues as the OP that prompted input then in particular interest is the topic of Luring: luring the dog into position with a treat, shaping...etc from the above quote.

Why so??? …Just about every phase of obedience that the handler/trainer attempts to instruct is in-built and is a behaviour that the dog already knows how to do and merely needs word association to make the connection — hence the concept of shaping.The objective then is to visually capture the precise moment with verbal cue to suit the behaviour that the wanted behaviour is expressed and then +positive-reinforced with food or toy hence shaped. Regarding food then requirement is high value aroma attracting food to heighten and keep drive and interest. I load a bait pouch with dime sized nuked in the microwave, slices of chicken hot dog preferably preservatives free if that even exists. Emphasis on hi-value — last night's whatever leftover from diner. Quantity as to the number of food reward is key. 10 mini pieces as opposed to 1/4 of a wolfed down hot dog impacts behaviour better when used as +reinforcement. Even that dime size slice can be divided into 2 or 3 pieces with the objective that we want food drive to remain at peak therefore without satiation we maintain drive and hi interest to perform. Include the occasional jackpot of 4 or 5 morsels to +positive reinforce an exceptionally good 'performance' related to the behaviour being sought. Drill that message in via the food, relentlessly with numerous 2-3 minute mini sessions day in day out — conditioning is proofed and autonomous behaviour occurs via classical conditioning akin to the salivating dog at the sound of a bell.

Next up is luring using same food ideas aforementioned. The difference being, the closed hand holding the food is the lure to attract 100% attention to follow that hand. Think of the implications. Every basic obedience command can be +positive reinforced without ever putting a hand or a leash— gawd forebid the sacrilege of using a pinch or e-collar at this formative learning period that need not be muddied by compulsion. That all leads to when should compulsion be introduced. ONLY when the 6 month old to juvenile dog that has been trained/conditioned/proofed and by now weaned off of the continuous use of food or toy reward — decides to balk and non- comply.

Behaviours such as HERE/ recall, PLATZ/down and SITZ/sit ( pronounced seats) sonically carry a more impactful demanding message to comply. A pea whistle incorporated into the mix is a requisite for clear messaging those 3 fore mentioned verbal cues at both close range or viewable long distance of 100-200-300 yards.

Sarah Prelle nails down and makes clear the understanding of when, why and where to apply ….if still interested then take a peek at Sarah Prelle — Luring and Sarah Prelle—Luring & Shaping

With all the input offered by everyone in this thread, hopefully a real solution can be found. The problem arises when people jump on the bandwagon of popularity and rely on compulsion instead of first building a strong foundation based on positive reinforcement for what you want rather than negative reinforcement for what you don’t want.This all fits within the theory of operant conditioning. When viewed through an anthropomorphic lens, and projected onto human behaviour, the question becomes: What actually produces motivation and genuine desire? The answer is clear.

In the common bond of Dobermans ….Mikel

Very well articulated, thank you.

I am not a professional trainer, I am an owner/trainer. I've used many methods of training throughout my 50+ years of training dogs, so I use a combination of methods and tools. I have used silent whistle, pea whistle, and shepherds whistle. I prefer the Logan Shepherds whistle because I have always had multiple dogs, it gives me so much variation, so each dog had its own sounds/commands.

A 4 month old Catahoula with a house rabbit.



Here's 4 dogs, no collars or leashes, on a sit/stay in the forest. Only 2 of them are high prey drive, only one of them was very independent and not a velcro dog (should be obvious in the photo) This is my goal in training, to have the freedom to be canines and enjoy all that entails, but to always defer to me, when, where, and what they do.



And my human and dog aggressive boy, in the conformation show ring.

 

[Ddski5]

I deliberately specified a bungee at the front end of the restraint. I liken that to the analogy of application of pumping the brakes to stop at high speed if not strapped in, then chances are nobody is going through the windshield — hence harmless. Compared to a hard stop such as a dog hitting the end of a restraint with no give. I don't see the critique presented as being related to resulting cervical damage and “choking-out” damage when contingent on the use of a bungee.
Furthermore the graduated escalating pinch sensation will occur in stages contingent on drive or lack-of and is self correcting when in high drive in messaging to the dog to back off before full-out choke occurs, akin to the analogy of hitting the windshield.

I truly understand your statement here and I have done this outside of a dog park with one that was highly reactive and also at a park with lots of squirrels and geese. Your analogy of a car pumping brakes is a very good example…but in my situation, the brakes were being pumped but the engine (his prey drive or reactivity) is still going at full RPMs, long line- seat belt. Then as I relieved pressure, the engine is still tacked out. I could sit there all day long with treats and verbal cues but he was so jacked up that he escalated into a zone in which he didn’t hear me or even recognize my presence. Continued use in this manner sets the environment for harm in his control not mine. Use of an ECollar, in an appropriate manner, allowed me to redirect his attention to me thus breaking his focus and looking to me for direction. One would argue the point that I was asking too much of him in a chaotic environment and he just wasn’t ready for the progression. Ehhh…can’t tell you how many times I backed off into a more stable environment and then worked back up into it- it didn’t work. Yeah, one could also argue the point that I was not the skilled experienced trainer that you are…and I was doing it incorrectly but when we both utilized the ECollar to break his intensity from ramping up and then look to me for direction, it worked much better. He learned to look to me rather than react on primitive impulses. Did he become collar wise? Sure he did, but I came to terms with who he was and what I felt he needed to live a more free life without always being tethered to a leash. We got to where I could walk him in a fully filled soccer complex or an open bird sanctuary and I had 100% full confidence he would not bolt from my side. From the continued use of the ECollar and my full awareness of his mannerisms, I was able to level down off the electrical stim and use verbal cues followed with vibration stim, if necessary. No, there was never a time I felt confident having him out and about without the ECollar- he just was not that kind of a Doberman. Now my other, Freyja is a different story….But still, the ECollar worked with the Doberman I had in front of me.

I don’t have to have the last word…I am just trying to explain that the ECollar is a great tool. Yes, in the wrong hands, it is can be used too early for yesterday’s results when patience, consistency, persistence, daily training, knowledge and experience should prevail first.

It worked for us and made his life and my life significantly better.

Hopefully others looking for off leash recall, or when in the vicinity of danger or attractive prey then an abrupt stop-in-your-tracks akin to PLATZ might benefit from employing gun dog training staple exercises in particular Lab and retriever training. For distance control then using a pea whistle penetrates the environment of highwinds, running water, crashing waves etc. etc. far more effective than voice over long distance of 200-300 yards is highly effective and easier on vocal cords lest gun dog trainers would put the idea to bed.

Yes!!! This would be fantastic if it works…but akin the ECollar to a stronger tap on the shoulder than a whistle. A “hey buddy, stop what you are doing and listen to me”.

And one doesn’t have to knock them off their feet with 100 stim, though that’s what I initially presented. Again, I was trying to paint the picture that if I allowed him to max out into his frenzy, there was nothing that would pull him out. Rags avg setting was btw 30-34 with the available instant option of vibration first. The ECollar Mini-Educator has the ability to electrical stim, vibratory stim, or the audible beep. He never would recognize the beep.

Not trying to insult your intelligence here, I am sure you are aware of this. Just stating for the lurker looking to learn.

 

[BGpa]

"Tap on the shoulder" is a great description of my use.
Break hyperfocus, and
Look at me and what I am telling you.

 

[Ddski5]

I have and use e-collars, not for training, an e-collar teaches nothing. Used for correction i.e. reinforcement of commands the dog already knows. The dog must know what is being asked of it. It won't magically put 2 and 2 together, i.e. nefarious thoughts. If I call a dog and he/she chooses to blow me off for a squirrel, it's a correction for not coming when called. I have to teach my dogs not to eat anything off the ground, like poisonous mushrooms, rotting carcasses, etc. I first have to teach them not to eat food off the ground before I ever use an e-collar to reinforce that when they can't resist that tasty rotting salmon. Food drive is a natural drive and use of aversive must be applied judiciously.

I do agree with your point that a dog must know what’s being asked of them before being corrected with an ECollar or else they would not know why they are being corrected. That’s why it should not be used at a young age. But is a good tool to use when they know what you are asking, looks at you and then chooses to do what they want.

The same is true of prey drive, if all i did was shock my dogs when they ran after a squirrel, they wouldn't associate that with chasing a squirrel, they would associate it with the environment and become fearful of the environment.

Disagree. With the correct command given first, they will associate the stim with the unwanted action they are doing. If done correctly, the command is given first for the desired action. Then if the dog hears you and understands…and still chooses to disobey, then the corrective stim is given for the appropriate adherence.
The issue with prey drive is if they get caught up in the primitive frenzy…it’s damn hard to pull them out, must catch it and correct it while they are still lucid to audible commands.

The e-collar shock association refers to the unintended psychological link a dog forms between the electrical stimulation and its surroundings rather than its own behavior. Because dogs cannot logically deduce that a remote-controlled stimulus is a correction for a specific action, and (unintended consequences) they often associate the pain or discomfort with environmental cues present at that moment, such as other dogs, people, or specific locations.

Disagree.

This misassociation can lead to serious behavioral issues, including fear, anxiety, and aggression. For example, a dog shocked while looking at or reacting to another dog may learn to fear all dogs, or a dog shocked while looking at its owner may develop a mistrust of the handler, perceiving them as an unpredictable source of pain. These may also result in misdirected aggression: Dogs may attack triggers (like other pets) they incorrectly associate with the shock.

In the right hands on a properly trained dog, a e-collar can be a useful tool. In inexperienced hands with the idea that an e-collar is the magic bullet for lack of training, well...

100% agree with.

 

[Ddski5]

All I'm saying is that when a dog cannot be controlled by what I call normal basic training and they are a danger to other animals, people or themselves by their actions and willful disobedience, a correction of some kind is needed to make it clear to the dog that the behavior is non-negotiable. Some dogs know exactly what you're asking verbally and refuse to comply, especially in their adolescent years, testing your patience and pushing back constantly. Is the handler at fault for not being skilled enough to teach 100% compliance to verbal commands? Maybe. Could Ellis or Ivan take that dog and turn it around with play? I'm sure they could. But they have years of experience that the average pet owner can't begin to fathom.

I would rather teach someone the proper way to use the e-collar to fix a problem than to watch that owner become frustrated and defeated because they can't teach a dog perfect response to voice commands and end up with a beloved pet mauled or killed and then giving up the dog to a shelter for someone else to fix or euthanize.

Precisely…

Now in Corky’s situation-
She should absolutely make sure she has put in the time, consistency, persistence, energy, training, research with both basic and intermediate obedience. To me, that should be a given and I often see many an OP bring problems to the forum without having put in the necessities.

It is imperative that Charlie must understand the command given, the warranted action requested vs the unwarranted action produced. Without this, use of the ECollar is exactly what causes the misassociation as @Nordika describes.

 

[Nordika]

Disagree. With the correct command given first, they will associate the stim with the unwanted action they are doing. If done correctly, the command is given

Please re-read what I said. If ALL I did was shock the dog (no command given) and if you were to give a command that the dog doesn't know or understand, same thing.

An example of misassociation: My dog gets shocked while looking at his beloved goats, that he loved, watched over and played with, it flipped a switch in that dogs brain. Afterwards, he decided the goats MUST die. Unintended consequences, and I was not successful at turning that around. After 1 year of micromanaging, we rehomed the goats for their own safety. Which is why I caution how and when an ecollar is used. This was a very hard dog, that wouldn't even flinch at 100 stim.