# E-collar vs no e collar training



## Gunssmoke3217 (Feb 12, 2013)

Hello all! I have a 5 month old BLF and my goal is to test and run trials at highest level possible. This is my first pup I am training alone and I have always wanted to train my pup old school -- low force. Ihave been working with trainers and 90 percent of them use e collars. There dogs respond very well to their training techniques. My questions are and i am fine with bias opinions. What are the positives and negatives of e collar. Can I compete at a high level non e collar? I want a happy retriever and some of the dogs in the past I have been around have not been happy retrievers probably due to misuse of e collar. ANY suggestions will be greatly appreciated!


----------



## grnhed (Jun 8, 2011)

I can use a pen and paper and put a letter in the mail, or I can grab my cell phone and send a text. I still have put the content in the letter or text before it is sent in order for the person to understand what I am sending them. In the end they get the message. One way just took a little longer, a little more patience and ended with the same results.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

If you love really really long odds then buy a Powerball ticket
You say you want to compete at the highest levels. If that is so then you need to use the ecollar

The unhappy dogs you saw in the past likely had bad trainers. They may have been collar or non collar trainers; but they were ,likely, bad trainers
Use the collar wisely. Find a good mentor {with a happy dog}to train with


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

"Can I compete at a high level non e collar?"

Compete as in being considered an actual threat to place in an all- age field trial? No.
Run the dog and qualify in AKC Master Hunter tests, yes if you are a very good (well above average) trainer.

Bert


----------



## Dallas2256 (Nov 9, 2012)

In the hands of a trainer that properly uses an ecollar, it's a wonderful tool. If you plan to use one do your research and you'll see what a great tool it can be.


----------



## PennyRetrievers (Mar 29, 2013)

I went through a similar dilema. I have a very high-powered BLF and she was a struggle to control sometimes. I agonized over whether or not to use the collar.

The problem is in your perception. Most people see the collar as cruel and unnecessary - but the reality of it is that it's a valuable tool, and no more dangerous to the dog than physical exertion, cold water, sharp sticks in the field, or any other obstacle that you two will encounter. The ecollar establishes boundaries and helps a dog to know the limits. It will better your relationship with your dog, because it will allow you to give him instant feedback, making expectations clearer, and giving the dog a much better chance at pleasing you.

I finally put the collar on the dog a few years ago, and I'll never go back. 
That being said, the ecollar is not a fix-all. It needs to be used responsibly, and introduced properly. Improper use of one of these things is the FASTEST way to ruin a dog. If you're not sure about how to introduce it and use it, find a pro who can help you, and learn as much as you can.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Gunssmoke3217 said:


> Hello all! I have a 5 month old BLF and my goal is to test and run trials at highest level possible. This is my first pup I am training alone and I have always wanted to train my pup old school -- low force. Ihave been working with trainers and 90 percent of them use e collars. There dogs respond very well to their training techniques. My questions are and i am fine with bias opinions. What are the positives and negatives of e collar. Can I compete at a high level non e collar? I want a happy retriever and some of the *dogs in the past I have been around have not been happy retrievers probably due to misuse of e collar. * ANY suggestions will be greatly appreciated!




Don't do this then ...I totally agree with PennyRetrieves...I have been using an e collar since the 70's and will never go back...If outlawed I'll quit training ..The control at a distance and instant communication is the purpose of the collar....A good mentor is worth their weight in gold....Steve S


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Regardless of collar or no collar if you are training your first puppy alone with aspirations of competing in field trials at the highest level plan on going through 3 or 5 dogs before you taste modest success. For highest level success maybe 10 dogs maybe never.
Find a mentor to train with who has accomplished what you desire several times over an stick to them like glue.
If you're contemplating going without e collar your chances of success will be near zero even if you train with the most knowledgeable folks.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

You want to drag race with nylon bias-ply tires or slicks?


----------



## Cooper (Jul 9, 2012)

I have seen non collar trained dogs do some pretty exciting work, like River Oaks Corky (highest point all age dog of all time), and many others. I think there is a misconception that non collar dogs can't compete with collar trained dogs. It might not be as convenient but it can be done. Everybody warns that the e-collar doesn't teach the dog and that it is just another tool and that is absolutely correct. The main ingredient to having a high performing dog is the capability of its trainer.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Cooper said:


> I have seen non collar trained dogs do some pretty exciting work, like River Oaks Corky (highest point all age dog of all time), and many others. I think there is a misconception that non collar dogs can't compete with collar trained dogs. It might not be as convenient but it can be done. Everybody warns that the e-collar doesn't teach the dog and that it is just another tool and that is absolutely correct. The main ingredient to having a high performing dog is the capability of its trainer.


Not to try and discredit Corky but an open of that era in time wouldn't make a good Q today....I ran Q's in the early 80's that Sr hunt test dogs of today are doing longer tougher marks and blinds....The distance and control of today makes them ( opens ) far more difficult and harder to train without a collar...Steve S


----------



## Dustin D (Jan 12, 2012)

Gunssmoke3217 said:


> Hello all! I have a 5 month old BLF and my goal is to test and run trials at highest level possible. This is my first pup I am training alone and I have always wanted to train my pup old school -- low force. Ihave been working with trainers and 90 percent of them use e collars. There dogs respond very well to their training techniques. My questions are and i am fine with bias opinions. What are the positives and negatives of e collar. Can I compete at a high level non e collar? I want a happy retriever and some of the dogs in the past I have been around have not been happy retrievers probably due to misuse of e collar. ANY suggestions will be greatly appreciated!


What training philosophy(program) are you following right now? 

I know many folks, who AFTER watching Bill Hillmann train with the collar, changed their mind about just how NOT cruel and how effective the collar really can be.

I always think about it like the hand on the back of my dogs neck. I DO NOT squeeze hard to inflict pain, just sort of direct him(enforce) with a firm grip one way or another after commands, which gives him confidence and assuredness in the command given.(He knows what I want)
 But with the collar, even at the farthest of distances, he knows my hand is still right there on the back of his neck ready to reinforce any command given. That’s just my mere way of looking at it to understand it. Hopefully it doesn’t confuse you.


Here's Chris Akin explaining the basic concept of why;






Also see TriTronics 1 & 2

Part 1;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KePCGgYVAyM

Part 2;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMgzUJ-k3ow


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

steve schreiner said:


> Not to try and discredit Corky but an open of that era in time wouldn't make a good Q today....I ran Q's in the early 80's that Sr hunt test dogs of today are doing longer tougher marks and blinds....The distance and control of today makes them ( opens ) far more difficult and harder to train without a collar...Steve S


With all due respect Steve that is absurd, Corky, Honcho, Rascal, Piper and Kate were great dogs and would dominate today the same way they did then
Your reference is like saying John Unitss or Jim Brown couldn't play in the NFL today
Distance is just that, doesn't mean the tests are tougher, the grounds back then had much more cover and the judges knew how to place birds correctly without using unrecognized distances


----------



## brsutton86 (Apr 19, 2013)

I was also debating whether to use the ecollar or not. I worked on heel for 3 weeks some days 2 sessions. She did great but was a step behind or a step forward often especially off check cord. After introducing the collar and 3 sessions of heel work she is now in position at all times off leash. It made a huge difference. Just make sure you follow a program to do it properly. I used duck dog basics it does a good job of explaining why and how to use it.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Here are my thoughts as to some simple pros and cons:

Pros
1) Todays collars are very flexable with fingertip control for "nick" versus "continuous", instant dial for intensity and a low, medium or high, with practice all is done in a fraction of a second.
2) The collar becomes a long distance extension of the whip stick or whiffle ball bat which is used in yard work.
3) Used properly dogs learn fast and with less pressure than the evil old days. This is especially helpful with some sensitive breeds which didn't hold up well to the old "in your face" heavy handed correction.

Cons
1) It takes prudence and training to use properly. It is very easy to create problems that can haunt your dog for life, such as creating a big banana around a gun by burning a dog when it goes back to an old fall. Dogs have a long memory for "hot spots". You have to be careful, then remember where you created a hot spot and understand how your dog deals with it.
2) Don't use a collar if you are prone to lose your temper. Nothing is worse than a dog sitting there screaming while you hold your finder down on the button out of anger.

John


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

BonMallari said:


> With all due respect Steve that is absurd, Corky, Honcho, Rascal, Piper and Kate were great dogs and would dominate today the same way they did then
> Your reference is like saying John Unitss or Jim Brown couldn't play in the NFL today
> Distance is just that, doesn't mean the tests are tougher, the grounds back then had much more cover and the judges knew how to place birds correctly without using unrecognized distances


Bon, I agree with you that the dogs you mention were great dogs in their day and would be great dogs today. If an exact clone of Corky were born today and landed at Handjem, Farmers, Ecketts, Rorems, Gonias or other great pro's I have no doubt he would be placing and winning trials in due time. However the title of the thread is E-collar vs non e-collar training. 

Trials of today have changed & gotten tougher in areas other than just distance. A more fitting question on this thread would be whether the great dogs of the past would be as competitive , and dominant in todays game if they were trained using the same tools, trainers and training techniques of their earlier era. Corky was kind of on the cusp of the intro to the ecollar, but the collar and its application have advanced by leaps and bounds since then.

I don't know the answer to my hypothetical question; but my guess would be that Corky would get through most 1st series, but would find each successive series progressively more difficult due to the limitations of the tools and training of his era. 

I'd be very interested to hear yours and others opinions


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

I have been using collars for 20+ years. A wise man told me when long before I got a collar that if you can't train a dog without a collar you cannot train one with a collar. 

Now that does not mean you don't need a collar to compete in FT's or that you can train a dog as well without a collar as you can with one. What it means is you must have the skills to train a dog in the first place. A collar is a tool and nothing more. In the right hands it is probably the best tool a trainer can have. In the wrong hands it could be the worst.
I would suggest the unhappy dogs you have seen were the result of a trainer who did not understand the advice above. I have never had a dog that was unhappy to put the collar on, in fact just the opposite.


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

BonMallari said:


> With all due respect Steve that is absurd, Corky, Honcho, Rascal, Piper and Kate were great dogs and would dominate today the same way they did then
> Your reference is like saying John Unitss or Jim Brown couldn't play in the NFL today
> Distance is just that, doesn't mean the tests are tougher, the grounds back then had much more cover and the judges knew how to place birds correctly without using unrecognized distances


Bon 
I agree. Great dogs in their day and had they been here today and had collar training they probably would have been equal to the great dogs of today.
Jim and Johnny U, I would give a maybe. Jim Brown would be better suited as a linebacker today and Johnny is borderline small at 6 foot for a QB today. Hard to pass over a line with loaded with 6 foot 6 giants. More than anything else the speed of todays players has passed them by.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

BonMallari said:


> With all due respect Steve that is absurd, Corky, Honcho, Rascal, Piper and Kate were great dogs and would dominate today the same way they did then
> Your reference is like saying John Unitss or Jim Brown couldn't play in the NFL today
> Distance is just that, doesn't mean the tests are tougher, the grounds back then had much more cover and the judges knew how to place birds correctly without using unrecognized distances


With all due respect is like saying "go jump in a lake." Fact is they were great dogs. However its not nearly the same game as it was 40 years ago. They were great at that game. How well they would do in today's game there is no way to tell. Could the Celtics of 60's beat the Lakers of the 80's or the Bulls of the 90's?

/Paul


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

BonMallari said:


> With all due respect Steve that is absurd, Corky, Honcho, Rascal, Piper and Kate were great dogs and would dominate today the same way they did then
> Your reference is like saying John Unitss or Jim Brown couldn't play in the NFL today
> Distance is just that, doesn't mean the tests are tougher, the grounds back then had much more cover and the judges knew how to place birds correctly without using unrecognized distances



I have seen an evolution of the test develop from over the early 80's and they have change a lot...How many retired guns did you see back then ..? What is the norm in the open now..? At one time a poison bird was just that ...never go back and pick it up ...easy to train for...Some are being ask to go back and get it now...The game and the way we train for it has changed...Pre collar days was a tough row to hoe for most open dogs...Control was always a big factor because of the limitations of tools at ones disposal and the ability to use them....One can not take anything away from those great dogs of those days...but ..if they were trained by the same methods as back then I doubt if they would be competitive in today's game ....Given the benefit of a good modern collar program they would probably still excel in the game...You still need the genetics those dogs carried to be a winner....No matter what the sport we can not compare apples and oranges...The great golfers of days gone by couldn't hold the light for the guys and big Bertha today ...But ,give them Bertha and now we are on equal ground...OR ..better yet give the guys today the ole persimmon sticks and see how they do...
Some one commented about not being able to train a dog first without the collar...In most programs today the commands or actions are first taught by some manual or luring (treat ) method..then the collar is over layered as a reinforcement tool...most do not teach with the collar, I believe...Steve S


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

badbullgator said:


> A wise man told me when long before I got a collar that if you can't train a dog without a collar you cannot train one with a collar.


A popular statement in the early e-collar days.
The wisdom of that statement lies in knowing how to break the components of a retrieve when "teaching" e-collar or not. 
E-collar training has gone through an evolution from the early days of remote punishment(60s) -creation of hot spots(70s)- avoidance(80s)-reinforcement(90s).....Today the real question is: Why not collar train? When you consider the methods we used pre-collar you would not even ask the question,
Collar training is easier on you and the dog no matter what level you are trying to reach. 

Tim


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Tim Carrion said:


> A popular statement in the early e-collar days.
> The wisdom of that statement lies in knowing how to break the components of a retrieve when "teaching" e-collar or not.
> E-collar training has gone through an evolution from the early days of remote punishment(60s) -creation of hot spots(70s)- avoidance(80s)-reinforcement(90s).....Today the real question is: Why not collar train? When you consider the methods we used pre-collar you would not even ask the question,
> Collar training is easier on you and the dog no matter what level you are trying to reach.
> ...


Tim 
that is pretty much my point, but if you cannot read a dog or understand the concepts you are trying to teach a collar will not help. I would never think of going Amish and would ask the same question.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Gunssmoke3217 said:


> Hello all! I have a 5 month old BLF and my goal is to test and run trials at highest level possible. This is my first pup I am training alone and I have always wanted to train my pup old school -- low force. Ihave been working with trainers and 90 percent of them use e collars. There dogs respond very well to their training techniques. My questions are and i am fine with bias opinions. What are the positives and negatives of e collar. *Can I compete at a high level non e collar? * I want a happy retriever and some of the dogs in the past I have been around have not been happy retrievers probably due to misuse of e collar. ANY suggestions will be greatly appreciated!


I consider myself positive while I train. Last resort would be the Ecollar. There is nothing wrong with the Ecollar except some who use it incorrectly. Do yourself a favor and have your dog correctly collar conditioned and force fetched. These are just some of tools you may need while you are trying to achieve teaching your dog! How you use them is the important thing! IMHO


----------



## Gunssmoke3217 (Feb 12, 2013)

Thank you everyone for the replies. This is some great information.

Another question....Is the e-collar just limited to training? Or can you use it to train out a bad behavior? ie: barking at neighbors dog. digging. jumping on people. whining in kennel or at line. etc


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Gunssmoke3217 said:


> Thank you everyone for the replies. This is some great information.
> 
> Another question....Is the e-collar just limited to training? Or can you use it to train out a bad behavior? ie: barking at neighbors dog. digging. jumping on people. whining in kennel or at line. etc


Do as you like, but generally the e-collar is best used to enforce commands the dog knows, rather than a bolt from the blue to 'break' some bad behavior (aka "cold burn"). As I see it, cold burns are a poor substitute for training.

Evan


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Gunssmoke3217 said:


> Hello all! I have a 5 month old BLF and my goal is to test and run trials at highest level possible. This is my first pup I am training alone and I have always wanted to train my pup old school -- low force. Ihave been working with trainers and 90 percent of them use e collars. There dogs respond very well to their training techniques. My questions are and i am fine with bias opinions. What are the positives and negatives of e collar. Can I compete at a high level non e collar? I want a happy retriever and *some of the dogs in the past I have been around have not been happy retrievers probably due to misuse of e collar*. ANY suggestions will be greatly appreciated!


If you're questioning the use of the collar in the first place, I question your qualification to make this statement. Fact is there are a lot of reasons a dog can be "unhappy", the collar being only one of those. An idiot who mistreats his dog with the collar most likely also does it with a heeling stick and his boot on occasion. Beyond that... they don't all drop out of the womb raring to retrieve. People try to make silk purses with sows ears pretty frequently from what I see. 

Go to an an Open, all age field trial sometime and take a look at the dogs. Most perform in such a manner as you would never know they ever had an e-collar on, yet they wear one every day in training. 

I deal with this misconception daily in my business and people are usually amazed when I bring my BLF out and show them how "happy" she is doing her work, regardless of the collar around her neck.

Done right the e-collar is nothing but a positive in retriever training, period, end of story.


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Evan said:


> Do as you like, but generally the e-collar is best used to enforce commands the dog knows, rather than a bolt from the blue to 'break' some bad behavior (aka "cold burn"). As I see it, cold burns are a poor substitute for training.
> 
> Evan


Amd a possible reason for the dogs he has seen.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Seems very likely!

Evan


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

Evan said:


> Do as you like, but generally the e-collar is best used to enforce commands the dog knows, rather than a bolt from the blue to 'break' some bad behavior (aka "cold burn"). As I see it, cold burns are a poor substitute for training.
> 
> Evan


So where does the bark collar come into the picture? That would be a "cold burn" when used in the kennel ?


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Shawn White said:


> So where does the bark collar come into the picture? That would be a "cold burn" when used in the kennel ?


That is the key reason why I do not use or recommend them. I don't own one, and won't.

Evan


----------



## Gunssmoke3217 (Feb 12, 2013)

Evan said:


> That is the key reason why I do not use or recommend them. I don't own one, and won't.
> 
> Evan



so the only time a collar should be used is strictly training purpose? Bark collar could be potentionally be a cold burn?


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Gunssmoke3217 said:


> Thank you everyone for the replies. This is some great information.
> 
> Another question....Is the e-collar just limited to training? Or can you use it to train out a bad behavior? ie: barking at neighbors dog. digging. jumping on people. whining in kennel or at line. etc


Barking, whining, teach and re-enforce QUIET command. Digging re-enforce here command. Jumping re-enforce sit command.

Trick is to have the dog expect a consistent chain of events when it does a certain action. If it barks and consistently hears "quiet" then gets nicked... pretty soon it will stop barking. If you call him with re-enforcement every time he digs, he will soon stop digging.

You have to put the negative consequence into context with a command but you can certainly make behaviors undesirable to the dog if you are there to consistently replace them with a desired behavior.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Gunssmoke3217 said:


> so the only time a collar should be used is strictly training purpose? Bark collar could be potentionally be a cold burn?


The e-collar is applied to either correct, or to compel (as in forcing previously taught behaviors). In my view bark collars only cold burn because there is no command given at the time stimulus arrives. So no command is reinforced by it. Dog barks = something bad happens. 

Evan


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

steve schreiner said:


> I have seen an evolution of the test develop from over the early 80's and they have change a lot...How many retired guns did you see back then ..? What is the norm in the open now..? At one time a poison bird was just that ...never go back and pick it up ...easy to train for...Some are being ask to go back and get it now...The game and the way we train for it has changed...Pre collar days was a tough row to hoe for most open dogs...Control was always a big factor because of the limitations of tools at ones disposal and the ability to use them....One can not take anything away from those great dogs of those days...but ..if they were trained by the same methods as back then I doubt if they would be competitive in today's game ....Given the benefit of a good modern collar program they would probably still excel in the game...You still need the genetics those dogs carried to be a winner....No matter what the sport we can not compare apples and oranges...The great golfers of days gone by couldn't hold the light for the guys and big Bertha today ...But ,give them Bertha and now we are on equal ground...OR ..better yet give the guys today the ole persimmon sticks and see how they do...
> Some one commented about not being able to train a dog first without the collar...In most programs today the commands or actions are first taught by some manual or luring (treat ) method..then the collar is over layered as a reinforcement tool...most do not teach with the collar, I believe...Steve S


Just the opposite Steve I have been attending FT since '72 , if the trainers of yesteryear had the variable frequency transmitter not only would many of the great dogs had longer careers because so many were ruined because the collar had two settings on /off
The dogs of yesteryear had so much heat applied to them by heavy handed trainers that many finally gave up, quit going and were retired
A great example was a spectacular dog named Evergreen Binx , he had so much heat put on him by John Honore and Mr Crow that he froze on giving up the bird and was retired because of it
The early E collar trainers didn't know how to lighten up, their solution was just the opposite by ratcheting it up and then labeling the dog as soft and telling the owner that their dog couldn't cut the mustard
Some of the old time owners would then just send the next candidate to the trainer in hopes of producing the next FC


----------



## rboudet (Jun 29, 2004)

You pretty much said the same thing as Steve Shreiner.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

The collar of today is a asset to a trainer, it's variable and can be used, when used to correctly, to take almost any dog to their potential level, a potential level that most of the time could not be reliablely reached without the collar. I think the quote that you need to know how to train a dog without a collar before you can train one with it, is dated. The collars of yester-year were not a tool most would want to use, it took a certain style of dog to handle the only on-off, different color plugs (hot-hotter), the same type of dog that could handle the old-school no collar methods, that were employed at the time. Old school non-collar methods for top preforming FT dogs, are not what most people would choose to employ today (they could be quite brutal). We lost a lot of potential stars in those days, who were too sensitive, soft and weak, to handle that training style, dogs that would've been washed out but can shine with the variable stimulation of newer collars. Why would you need to learn to train these type of dog without a collar? The collar as a tool has made training, so much easier. Why would I need to learn to use a type-writer, before I learned how to properly use a computer?


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

Evan said:


> That is the key reason why I do not use or recommend them. I don't own one, and won't.
> 
> Evan


I disagree with this. I use a bark collar on noisy dogs when they are in their crates while I am working another dog. I've used it on pups as young as ~3 months old and have gotten them quiet. Especially, when I am working another dog and leaving that one in her crate. The bark collar is straight punishment and is very consistent, much more consistent than I could be. Using a bark collar for a couple/few weeks when they are young gets them in the habit of staying quiet.

On pups I have used a bark collar on in their crates, I have found no problems when I later collar conditioned them. Follow the directions, start low and work your way up to a level that keeps the dog quiet over a few days.

Bark collars do not work, I'm saying do not use them when the dog is working on the line or running. I've had them go off when the dog hits water and they'll go off when the dog is breathing hard running for a mark.


----------



## Rozet (Jul 4, 2012)

With all due respect, had Jim Brown and Johnny played today, they would have had the opportunity to train and learn from the training techniques the athletes have access to today. Then or now they would have been great.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Why would you need to learn to train these type of dog without a collar? The collar as a tool has made training, so much easier. Why would I need to learn to use a type-writer, before I learned how to properly use a computer?


Well said.

Evan


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Rozet said:


> With all due respect, had Jim Brown and Johnny played today, they would have had the opportunity to train and learn from the training techniques the athletes have access to today. Then or now they would have been great.


Good point. However, at least in Brown's case, one of his biggest talents was being 6' 2" and 230 pounds, or as big as a lot of linemen in his day. He certainly would not enjoy nearly the same physical advantage in today's NFL.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

The whole "cold burn" concept is very useful for extinction of certain behaviors, however RTF is no place to be advocating for it. Bark collars are a really simple, consistent and easy way to extinct a behavior. It's very easy for the dog to make the association between the action n consequence and its very consistent if used regularly. 

An electric perimeter fence is no different and again very effective with no change in collar use for conditioned behaviors. 

In my obedience business I use a product called a tattle tale to sound an alarm when a dog touches the kitchen counter, then make a remote correction from another room. Extremely effective...


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

DarrinGreene said:


> The whole "cold burn" concept is very useful for extinction of certain behaviors, however RTF is no place to be advocating for it. Bark collars are a really simple, consistent and easy way to extinct a behavior. It's very easy for the dog to make the association between the action n consequence and its very consistent if used regularly.
> 
> An electric perimeter fence is no different and again very effective with no change in collar use for conditioned behaviors.
> 
> ...


----------



## jd6400 (Feb 23, 2009)

BonMallari said:


> Just the opposite Steve I have been attending FT since '72 , if the trainers of yesteryear had the variable frequency transmitter not only would many of the great dogs had longer careers because so many were ruined because the collar had two settings on /off
> The dogs of yesteryear had so much heat applied to them by heavy handed trainers that many finally gave up, quit going and were retired
> A great example was a spectacular dog named Evergreen Binx , he had so much heat put on him by John Honore and Mr Crow that he froze on giving up the bird and was retired because of it
> The early E collar trainers didn't know how to lighten up, their solution was just the opposite by ratcheting it up and then labeling the dog as soft and telling the owner that their dog couldn't cut the mustard
> Some of the old time owners would then just send the next candidate to the trainer in hopes of producing the next FC


Bon,those were great times for us,we would get the "softy`s" dad would turn some around and some just couldn`t be rehabbed.Not gonna mention names or dogs....but a lot has changed since then!!!!! Jim


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

Rozet said:


> With all due respect, had Jim Brown and Johnny played today, they would have had the opportunity to train and learn from the training techniques the athletes have access to today. Then or now they would have been great.


So from that you may extrapolate that Jimmy Brown playing his _*best*_ sport - lacrosse - would've been like River Oaks Corky running a Jr. hunt test.

To further digress - and I know Mr. Atkinson will forgive me - this article about the great and loyal Jim Brown was just dynamite about one of the most complex human beings and maybe the best athlete the world has ever seen.

MG


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Howard N said:


> I disagree with this. I use a bark collar on noisy dogs when they are in their crates while I am working another dog.


Howard,

I'm not taking issue with the fact that bark collars "work". I'm only stating my own position, inasmuch as they deliver what was being asked about; a cold burn. And I don't like cold burn training. No argument that the application can deliver results. And I would not assert that because I don't like cold burns that you or anyone else should not use a bark collar. But I do suggest there are more humane ways to train, even if they're less convenient.

Evan


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> I do suggest there are more humane ways to train,


Why would you play the humane card about bark collars? What is more humane than an immediate correction to an undesired action? Follow the directions, low intensity at first and grade into enough correction to keep the dog quiet.

A few weeks of wearing a collar where the dog controls whether or not he gets a correction sounds much more humane to me than a lifetime of nagging.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

Howard N said:


> Why would you play the humane card about bark collars? What is more humane than an immediate correction to an undesired action? Follow the directions, low intensity at first and grade into enough correction to keep the dog quiet.
> 
> A few weeks of wearing a collar where the dog controls whether or not he gets a correction sounds much more humane to me than a lifetime of nagging.


We use bark collars.
Agree with Howard.


----------



## Dustin D (Jan 12, 2012)

Well congratulations Gunsmoke. You've created an EPIC Topic 

I'm glad though b/c I've always thrown the Bark Collar idea out the window b/c I always thought between that and the e-collar he'd just get confused and would then associate the very similar stimulation of the bark collar with that of the e-collar.


So;
-Zap from the Bark Collar and he is supposed to STOP doing what he's doing(barking)
Now;
-Zap from the E-collar in FTP and ...... will he STOP doing what he was doing?

I mean, it just seems like it would confuse the dog.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Shawn White said:


> DarrinGreene said:
> 
> 
> > The whole "cold burn" concept is very useful for extinction of certain behaviors, however RTF is no place to be advocating for it. Bark collars are a really simple, consistent and easy way to extinct a behavior. It's very easy for the dog to make the association between the action n consequence and its very consistent if used regularly.
> ...


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Dustin D said:


> Well congratulations Gunsmoke. You've created an EPIC Topic
> 
> I'm glad though b/c I've always thrown the Bark Collar idea out the window b/c I always thought between that and the e-collar he'd just get confused and would then associate the very similar stimulation of the bark collar with that of the e-collar.
> 
> ...


There are literally thousands of examples out there that prove it does no such thing.

Dog training 101... dogs associate actions with consequences. bark = collar is a very simple one...


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> So;
> -Zap from the Bark Collar and he is supposed to STOP doing what he's doing(barking)
> Now;
> -Zap from the E-collar in FTP and ...... will he STOP doing what he was doing?
> ...


In MY experience that's not the way it works. I think you are comparing apples to oranges here. Probably they are two different situations to the dog.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Howard N said:


> Why would you play the humane card about bark collars? What is more humane than an immediate correction to an undesired action? Follow the directions, low intensity at first and grade into enough correction to keep the dog quiet.
> 
> A few weeks of wearing a collar where the dog controls whether or not he gets a correction sounds much more humane to me than a lifetime of nagging.


That cuts like 8 chapters out of the book, doesn't it? JK Evan.


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

DarrinGreene said:


> Shawn White said:
> 
> 
> > It can be an e-collar correction or a pinch collar correction if the client has the dog dragging a lead around as I instruct them to.
> ...


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Shawn White said:


> DarrinGreene said:
> 
> 
> > My reason for asking ...Before I even knew about training programs ,if I had a barker, hound or lab .I would put the collar on them and stand quietley inside and if the barked /nick ...basically a manual bark collar . . I would be working in the garage all day with the transmitter around my neck on a lanyard. (Sometimes "work "meant having several beers  The tattle tail reminded me of that.
> ...


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

cakaiser said:


> We use bark collars.
> Agree with Howard.


Very effective on my pup!!! Don't know what I would have done without it. Only a $35 pet bark collar.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Howard N said:


> Why would you play the humane card about bark collars? What is more humane than an immediate correction to an undesired action? Follow the directions, low intensity at first and grade into enough correction to keep the dog quiet.


Because that's the distinction I have made for many years about cold burns. Compare the stylish dog that develops a slow sit to whistle, and is corrected with a nick. The command was a toot of the whistle, which he was carefully conditioned to equate with the verbal command "sit". That was conditioned for reinforcement with both a heeling stick and an e-collar. "Toot"/nick is instantly understood because of that conditioning AND because he knows clearly what to do in response to the nick because it was paired with that well-known command. That's fair.

Contrast that with an impulse from a bark collar. No command is given, so the dog is left to figure out how to make it go away. Some do that quickly. Others don't. But I don't think it's nearly as fair as how we make e-collar corrections on conditioned dogs to support known commands. The cold burn idea will get results. It's not for _me_, however.

Evan


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> Do as you like, but generally the e-collar is best used to enforce commands the dog knows, rather than a bolt from the blue to 'break' some bad behavior (aka "cold burn"). As I see it, cold burns are a poor substitute for training.


Let me make sure I understand what you mean

A stimulation of any sort without a command is a poor substitute for training.

Pete


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> So;
> -Zap from the Bark Collar and he is supposed to STOP doing what he's doing(barking)
> Now;
> -Zap from the E-collar in FTP and ...... will he STOP doing what he was doing?
> ...


It only confuses the dog if the trainer is a confusing trainer

pete


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Pete said:


> Let me make sure I understand what you mean
> 
> A stimulation of any sort without a command is a poor substitute for training.
> 
> Pete


A stimulation with no accompanying information is not training. It's a cold burn; pressure applied in hope the dog will figure out how to avoid it. Does that sound like training?

Evan


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> A stimulation with no accompanying information is not training. It's a cold burn; pressure applied in hope the dog will figure out how to avoid it. Does that sound like training?


Evan
I mean no disrespect ,,but that is an absurd and archaic and almost neophyte point of view,, especially coming from a renown professional retriever trainer.

what do you mean "in hope the dog will figure it out" they figure it out extremely fast,,even the not so somewhat gifted. I was very surprised to read that from you. There is a beautiful world outside the box.

Pete


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Pete said:


> Evan
> I mean no disrespect ,,but that is an absurd and archaic and almost neophyte point of view,, especially coming from a renown professional retriever trainer.
> 
> what do you mean "in hope the dog will figure it out" they figure it out extremely fast,,even the not so somewhat gifted. I was very surprised to read that from you. There is a beautiful world outside the box.
> ...


Pete,

I'm not new to bark collars. A pro I worked for years ago was pretty big on them. They don't all 'figure it out' as quickly as one would hope. I can't imagine why this principle eludes you. How can you equate a cold burn with a conditioned correction tied to a known command. Bark collars are far from new, nor are cold burns as a methodology. I would not have evolved my method had I not moved outside the traditional 'box'.

Evan


----------



## labguy (Jan 17, 2006)

There is no question that bark collars are effective. They absolutely are.

The question for me is "is it fair to the dog".

I used to use a bark collar and got quick and easy results but now I'm in the camp of teaching the "quiet" command first and then enforcing with a correction if necessary. It takes longer and involves patience and consistency but is very effective..................even with a dog of lesser intelligence.

This topic was discussed at some length a short time ago. http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?90571-Barking

Bark collars work very well just by following the instructions on the package but I'm with Evan in that a cold burn (putting a bark collar on without prior conditioning) is not fair to the dog. 

I haven't needed a bark collar on any of my dogs in years. They know what "quiet" means.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> I'm not new to bark collars. A pro I worked for years ago was pretty big on them. They don't all 'figure it out' as quickly as one would hope. I can't imagine why this principle eludes you. How can you equate a cold burn with a conditioned correction tied to a known command. Bark collars are far from new, nor are cold burns as a methodology. I would not have evolved my method had I not moved outside the traditional 'box'.


I consider you ultra traditional,,,from what you post,,, definitely nothing wrong with that,,,great for teaching new people too.

but your view of cold burn is coming from an old traditional stereo type,,, because your work books are popular and many trainers follow your work book ,,,I felt it necessary to mention that dog training has come a long way and some negative stereotypes of the past such a the dangers of cold burns,,,have been revamped to produce a very happy stylish dog when being cold burned in which they fully understand what is going on and rush to comply without a spoken word. And it works great for other retriever related behaviors as well as pet behaviors that we want to eliminate. So avoidance and obedience and the dog is able to decipher which of the behaviors is appropriate within the context without a command. To me thats a dog that understands its responsibility within multiple contexts. As with anything we do,,we should use knowledge and wisdom if we want the best result.
pete


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> I used to use a bark collar and got quick and easy results but now I'm in the camp of teaching the "quiet" command first and then enforcing with a correction if necessary. It takes longer and involves patience and consistency but is very effective..................even with a dog of lesser intelligence.


How well does it work when you're parked 50 yards from the line and out in the field throwing a bird? Some pups settle right down and are quiet and others are not. Use the bark collar on the yappers, it does not screw up their collar training.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Evan said:


> Pete,
> 
> I'm not new to bark collars. A pro I worked for years ago was pretty big on them. They don't all 'figure it out' as quickly as one would hope. I can't imagine why this principle eludes you. How can you equate a cold burn with a conditioned correction tied to a known command. Bark collars are far from new, nor are cold burns as a methodology. I would not have evolved my method had I not moved outside the traditional 'box'.
> 
> Evan


 The "BOX" you ought to consider stepping out of is the cubicle that your computer is in.
Itg is pretty hard to keep up with advancements in retriever training when you spend the majority of your time on the computer as opposed to outside working with dogs.
Bark collars work quite well and dogs figure them out quickly. Theyu give correction consistently & instantaneously for every minute they are on. Timing of correction is very important. Nobody can stay up 24 hrs every day to make sure the dog is bein gf corrected.

Arent you also the guy whose "program" says to strap a collar on a 3 or 4 month old puppy who is still a baby and has had no FF or pressure conditioning and burns them on the here command while restraining them? Is that your version of fair?

Believe Pete!! It is a beautiful world outside of the box. Training dogs cannot be done on the computer, it is a hands on process


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Evan said:


> Because that's the distinction I have made for many years about cold burns. Compare the stylish dog that develops a slow sit to whistle, and is corrected with a nick. The command was a toot of the whistle, which he was carefully conditioned to equate with the verbal command "sit". That was conditioned for reinforcement with both a heeling stick and an e-collar. "Toot"/nick is instantly understood because of that conditioning AND because he knows clearly what to do in response to the nick because it was paired with that well-known command. That's fair.
> 
> Contrast that with an impulse from a bark collar. No command is given, so the dog is left to figure out how to make it go away. Some do that quickly. Others don't. But I don't think it's nearly as fair as how we make e-collar corrections on conditioned dogs to support known commands. The cold burn idea will get results. It's not for _me_, however.
> 
> Evan


I apologize in advance for bringing in another "topic" but this example leaves me so very confused especially since it comes from a professional that advocates FF. 

So it's fair to pinch the ear BEFORE ANY ACTION BY THE DOG and "the dog is left to figure out how to make it go away" with no prior conditioning but it's not a good idea to IMMEDIATELY correct a dog FOLLOWING AN ACTION (barking) because they weren't conditioned to it?


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

gdluck said:


> I apologize in advance for bringing in another "topic" but this example leaves me so very confused especially since it comes from a professional that advocates FF.
> 
> So it's fair to pinch the ear BEFORE ANY ACTION BY THE DOG and "the dog is left to figure out how to make it go away" with no prior conditioning but it's not a good idea to IMMEDIATELY correct a dog FOLLOWING AN ACTION (barking) because they weren't conditioned to it?


No problem. If this confuses you, there is some information missing. Hope I can help. The act of forcing "Fetch" (aka 'Force Fetch') is different from most skill building, inasmuch as it is force taught. That's not strictly true, of course, because we do (in my method) condition pups to fetch passively when they're young, and encourage holding, long before they are forced/compelled to during formal Basics. So, when we begin applying pressure with the 'fetch' command, it's not a bolt from the blue, but rather compulsion to comply with an act previously taught.

Also, there is a verbal command given along with the pressure, which there is not in the case of cold burns. In addition, we physically guide the dog to fetch & hold, so the dog is not "left to figure out how to make it go away". We show them that every step of the way. I think the confusion is that you appear to equate compulsion with correction. FF is not correction; it's compulsion.

Evan


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Evan said:


> Howard,
> 
> I'm not taking issue with the fact that bark collars "work". I'm only stating my own position, inasmuch as they deliver what was being asked about; a cold burn. And I don't like cold burn training. No argument that the application can deliver results. And I would not assert that because I don't like cold burns that you or anyone else should not use a bark collar. But I do suggest there are more humane ways to train, even if they're less convenient.
> 
> Evan


This ones a GEM. I got to add this. actually this is an entirely new thread...............................


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

mjh345 said:


> Arent you also the guy whose "program" says to strap a collar on a 3 or 4 month old puppy who is still a baby and has had no FF or pressure conditioning and burns them on the here command while restraining them? Is that your version of fair?


Not that anything you have to say deserves redress, but that is yet another misconstruction of my material, which is nauseatingly typical of _you_. The program first 'teaches' the command "Here" passively through operant conditioning (new-fangledy dog training stuff...you know; real cutting edge). Then, at around 4 months, the pup does numerous repetitions of the "Here" command supported by training ropes that are used simply to guide an efficient sequence before any e-collar pressure is applied. Low level stimulus is then added into the exercise only in an amount sufficient to give the trainer a reinforcement tool in the field. Pressure conditioning comes later. Not that you had any genuine interest in what was right in the first place.

Evan


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Evan said:


> Not that anything you have to say deserves redress, but that is yet another misconstruction of my material, which is nauseatingly typical of _you_. The program first 'teaches' the command "Here" passively through operant conditioning (new-fangledy dog training stuff...you know; real cutting edge). Then, at around 4 months, the pup does numerous repetitions of the "Here" command supported by training ropes that are used simply to guide an efficient sequence before any e-collar pressure is applied. Low level stimulus is then added into the exercise only in an amount sufficient to give the trainer a reinforcement tool in the field. Pressure conditioning comes later. Not that you had any genuine interest in what was right in the first place.Evan


MY MY. Arent you the gentleman that advocates decorum and class in internet conduct?
Yet anytime your credentials or system is questioned you get snarky or call names. I would think it would be better to address the issues and try to belie the opposing party with facts tom support your cause.

But what do I know; you seemingly are the ultimate arbiter of everything including class.

Maybe you ought to market a video on how to comport oneself with CLASS. 

I remember in college some of the fraternity guys would joke about freeloaders at party's and say they felt that the best tasting beer was FREE beer. I wonder if that analogy would apply to other things such as sweet breakfast toppings

Have a nice day Evan, Im gonna go play with my dogs; LIVE & IN PERSON

Evan[/QUOTE]


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> o problem. If this confuses you, there is some information missing. Hope I can help. The act of forcing "Fetch" (aka 'Force Fetch') is different from most skill building, inasmuch as it is force taught. That's not strictly true, of course, because we do (in my method) condition pups to fetch passively when they're young, and encourage holding, long before they are forced/compelled to during formal Basics. So, when we begin applying pressure with the 'fetch' command, it's not a bolt from the blue, but rather compulsion to comply with an act previously taught.
> 
> Also, there is a verbal command given along with the pressure, which there is not in the case of cold burns. In addition, we physically guide the dog to fetch & hold, so the dog is not "left to figure out how to make it go away". We show them that every step of the way. I think the confusion is that you appear to equate compulsion with correction. FF is not correction; it's compulsion.


I think its would be fair for you to say that in" my program I do not teach stimulation without a command",,,,but it does a disservice to people who are driven to learn as much as they can about dogs and enjoy all the cool training stuff you can do with them. And how to segway into cold burns and speed up the process with a happy response.

Your work books are great Evan and I recommend them to many people ,,,and I think you have done great good in helping people learn about training retrievers,,,,but there is way more to dog training than your material,,,and poo pooing cold burns stifles advancement in techniques,,,the new cold burns are nothing like the old cold burns and aren't even related in application,,,, any way I just wanted to put that out there so people had room to grow in their pursuit of dog training.
Pete


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Evan said:


> No problem. If this confuses you, there is some information missing. Hope I can help. The act of forcing "Fetch" (aka 'Force Fetch') is different from most skill building, inasmuch as it is force taught. That's not strictly true, of course, because we do (in my method) condition pups to fetch passively when they're young, and encourage holding, long before they are forced/compelled to during formal Basics. So, when we begin applying pressure with the 'fetch' command, it's not a bolt from the blue, but rather compulsion to comply with an act previously taught.
> 
> Also, there is a verbal command given along with the pressure, which there is not in the case of cold burns. In addition, we physically guide the dog to fetch & hold, so the dog is not "left to figure out how to make it go away". We show them that every step of the way. I think the confusion is that you appear to equate compulsion with correction. FF is not correction; it's compulsion.
> 
> Evan


Well to be honest Evan up until I read your last several posts I had an open mind to FF. Now that I read the ones I quoted in previous post and this response I feel comfortable in saying that you can wrap that justification of FF BS in any colorful perfumed paper you want but it's still BS. And for the first time I will say I believe FF is unfair.

"passively condition to "fetch"" - standing in place, restrained, on a table NOT previously taught. "fetch" command NOT previously taught. A dog naturally sits, they are also passively taught to return to us but I bet you would find it unfair to strap on that collar, stimulating, and say sit while pressing on their bottom or as you just defended, pulling them toward you.

Adjoining an unknown verbal command to the pressure means, justifies, or teaches SQUAT. The verbal command does not assist in the learning in the immediate situation as it is given simultaneously with the pinch, not preceding or following it. It is strictly a "marker" that the dog can use in the FUTURE, AFTER it figures it out. If anything, the dog learns that the folding back of the ear is the real cue. And with FF, just as you stated with the bark collar "they don't all figure it out an quickly as one would hope"

The bark collar effectively teaches the way a dog learns, action-result and that result is timed much closer and consistently than you can do with a heeling stick. And remember what you say about consistency? The association of a verbal commands is a "human" tool. Dogs learned many things from their origins in the wild and there was no one there tying in verbal commands.

Again, off topic. I will sleep well knowing that the fetch portion of FF is effective, but unfair.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

gdluck said:


> Again, off topic. I will sleep well knowing that the fetch portion of FF is effective, but unfair.


The TERMS used are the problem with FF as we know it today, not the process itself. If you'll put a choke chain or a pinch collar on a dog, whack it with a stick, or even use a flat collar and lead, you should be able to wrap your head around so called "force fetch". The word FORCE first and foremost leads the reader to believe it is something different than what it really is. You can't FORCE a dog to do anything any more than you can actually force a human. You can compel a dog, and a human in several ways... But you can't force a living organism to do anything.

So in FF we're not "forcing" a dog to do anything. We are using aversive stimulus to re-enforce a command/behavior chain. I don't know about anyone else but I teach what the word "fetch" means before I re-enforce it, as I do with any and all commands I plan to use aversive pressure for. It's no different than sit or heel or here... I personally skip "hold" and lump it all into fetch in much the way we skip "stay" and lump it into "sit". Fetch means get it and hold it until I tell you to release it. I think this simplifies a command that we're ultimately going to use very infrequently down the line to begin with.

Once the dog knows fetch, pressure is applied A SPLIT SECOND before the command is given and held there until the command is performed. It's no different at all than a pinch collar re-enforcement nor a flat collar re-enforcement really. It's something the dog doesn't like, applied until he performs a command and then immediately released. This makes the behavior more likely and ultimately it becomes very reliable as a result of this strong form of re-enforcement. Look up operant conditioning if you're confused about this. 

Now then... I thought pinching a dogs ear until it screamed then shoving a bumper in it's mouth was pretty arcane a few years ago when I did my first dog too... So I modified the process to make myself feel better by teaching fetch first and it has worked out great for me over a bunch of dogs since then. 

So I would remind you of this... people's interpretation and application of a given set of terms or processes can vary pretty widely. The process called FF is hardly unfair if applied in a thoughtful manner with prior teaching in place.

The words we use and the name of the process kinda stink if you ask me.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

gdluck said:


> Well to be honest Evan up until I read your last several posts I had an open mind to FF. Now that I read the ones I quoted in previous post and this response I feel comfortable in saying that you can wrap that justification of FF BS in any colorful perfumed paper you want but it's still BS. And for the first time I will say I believe FF is unfair.


Well, gdluck, I don’t know how you do things before or after starting FF, so I won’t criticize it. It appears very clear that you don’t know how I do things, so it might work better if you asked instead of railing on what you don’t know. More to come.


gdluck said:


> "passively condition to "fetch"" - standing in place, restrained, on a table NOT previously taught. "fetch" command NOT previously taught.


I rarely use a table, and when I do it’s not with the dog restrained, other than by hand in the same way I do it on the ground; 3 fingers looped under the collar strap while holding the ear flap between my thumb & forefinger. The cue “Fetch” is something we teach previously to this, as well as “Hold”. But they are only passively conditioned. That makes the command and function sequence something the dog does know in advance. Perhaps you don’t do this?


gdluck said:


> A dog naturally sits, they are also passively taught to return to us but I bet you would find it unfair to strap on that collar, stimulating, and say sit while pressing on their bottom or as you just defended, pulling them toward you.


By the time I begin FF my dogs have been formally trained in “Sit” above all else. I don’t rely on “natural” sit because it’s likely to be unstable. Most of my force work is done with the dog sitting on the ground with me sitting beside him on a bucket. As to sitting during the CC of “Here”, no commands are given during that session other than “Here”. Sit is not required. And “Here” will have been previously taught. But your observations so far concern me a bit about how you go about things.


gdluck said:


> Adjoining an *unknown verbal command* to the pressure means, justifies, or teaches SQUAT.


But it is not unknown. That is an important element.


gdluck said:


> The verbal command does not assist in the learning in the immediate situation as it is given simultaneously with the pinch, not preceding or following it. It is strictly a "marker" that the dog can use in the FUTURE, AFTER it figures it out. If anything, the dog learns that the folding back of the ear is the real cue. And with FF, just as you stated with the bark collar "they don't all figure it out an quickly as one would hope"


All of that assumes no pre-teaching of the command to fetch. That may be your approach. It is not mine.


gdluck said:


> The bark collar effectively teaches the way a dog learns, action-result and that result is timed much closer and consistently than you can do with a heeling stick.


The bark collar provides no information. Nor does it guide behavior. It therefore teaches nothing, any more than an electric fence teaches a man not to pee on it. If the man learns the right thing from the experience, he can at least be thankful that his autonomic nervous system is intact. It relies on an autonomic response. As I said earlier, they will get results. I just don’t care for how they do it.


gdluck said:


> And remember what you say about consistency? The association of a verbal commands is a "human" tool. Dogs learned many things from their origins in the wild and there was no one there tying in verbal commands.


Yes, we need “human tools” because that’s what we are, and the commands and functions we train dogs for are of human invention. If not, there would be no need to train them. The pairing of verbal commands with guided acts is the training mechanism I use. Pressure formalizes those commands, and stabilizes them.


gdluck said:


> Again, off topic. I will sleep well knowing that the fetch portion of FF is effective, but unfair.


Pleasant dreams. If you like I can PM you a video of how Fetch & Hold are pre-taught.

Evan


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Darrin, your approach is awesome and I would have no issue with that procedure. The fact that you TEACH fetch before applying the pressure is the key. Evans program and many other traditional FF programs do not take that approach. As far as I know, and I am not completely familiar with it, the Hillman program is the only one that TEACHES fetch. Reaching just a bit further with your approach I wonder if it is really necessary to perform the ear pinch vs. just reinforcing it with the stick and or e-collar.

However, as I was told in the past by the "all knowing", your procedure is not as effective, will not have the same result and therefore you will not obtain all the benefits and performance of a traditional FF dog. You will not be able to compete at the higher levels. Again, it's not me that's saying this. They may be right. I don't have the experience or desire to compete at the higher level so I could never prove that wrong.

We have really gotten away from the OP. I would enjoy reading/learning from another thread contuning this, though focusing on the justifications of FF and the unfairness of the bark collar as presented by Evan. Actually, that's not true. Further discussion will do nothing to change my mind on the fairness of traditional FF. Evans bark collar arguments solidified it for me.

Evan, I mean none of this as an attack on you or your program. I only question the rational and justifications especially in consideration with our understanding on how dogs learn. My skills in expressing thoughts clearly in writing has never been a strong point of mine as evidenced by all your responses above.

BTW, I have smartworks. Please point out to me where in the program the command and action "FETCH" is taught BEFORE FF. I must have missed it.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

gdluck said:


> Darrin, your approach is awesome and I would have no issue with that procedure. The fact that you TEACH fetch before applying the pressure is the key. Evans program and many other traditional FF programs do not take that approach...BTW, I have smartworks. Please point out to me where in the program the command and action "FETCH" is taught BEFORE FF. I must have missed it.


The Puppy Program DVD. The video I've offered to PM you includes the clip directly from it.

Evan


----------



## huntinwithlabs (Nov 15, 2011)

"any more than an electric fence teaches a man not to pee on it"



I think this is my favorite quote of the day......... :lol:


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Evan said:


> The Puppy Program DVD. The video I've offered to PM you includes the clip directly from it.
> 
> Evan


I have smartwork volume 1 2nd edition purchased 8 years ago. No mention of FETCH in Chapter 3 starter program for puppies. No where until FF then only after the pinch. When did your puppy program get published?


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

labguy said:


> There is no question that bark collars are effective. They absolutely are.
> 
> The question for me is "is it fair to the dog".
> 
> ...


I would love it if the "quiet" command really worked. For some dogs bark is their way and they don't stop. I have other dogs and can't yet be in two places at once. So I use the bark collar right or wrong to some. It has been effective b/c leaving my other dog to correct the barker with the "quiet" command is not a feasible practice. That "quiet" command did not grow on him! In fact it meant nothing to him. He needed more and to be consistent. I also find having the dog bark while others work their dogs is annoying. JMHO


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

gdluck said:


> However, as I was told in the past by the "all knowing", your procedure is not as effective, will not have the same result and therefore you will not obtain all the benefits and performance of a traditional FF dog. You will not be able to compete at the higher levels. Again, it's not me that's saying this. They may be right. I don't have the experience or desire to compete at the higher level so I could never prove that wrong.


I'll be honest and tell you I haven't done nearly enough dogs to have that argument with someone. I don't think it makes a whole lot of sense but sometimes with a dog things don't...

Whether or not you need to ear pinch, it appears to me anyhow, depends on how much of a mouth issue you have with a given dog. It would seem as though you could skip that step but I have tried it with one dog and it wouldn't have worked. I needed physical control of her head and to be right there to help her understand she needed a "quiet" mouth, meaning no rolling or chomping. I'll try and skip it again with my next dog and we'll see what happens there. It seem to me logically that you shouldn't have to do it unless it's to solve a particular issue. You should be ale to re-enforce the command with other means. 

One notable thing is that there are a lot of uses of "force" in the dog world. Shutzund people "force" fetch their dogs. Believe me, they aren't grabbing a collar and ear for that since they may end up shredded as a result. It's done a different way than most retriever people do it but it's the same thing... negative re-enforcement of the fetch command. Dogs are "forced" on the track command and all sorts of other behaviors it different sports. It's incredibly effective in creating reliability if done correctly.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

gdluck said:


> I have smartwork volume 1 2nd edition purchased 8 years ago. No mention of FETCH in Chapter 3 starter program for puppies. No where until FF then only after the pinch. When did your puppy program get published?


Smartwork volume one was my first book. It descended from a journal I started a long time ago, and grew into the SmartFetch book because there are everlasting questions about that process - even now, no matter what program a trainer might be following, or trainer they've learned from. Then came Smartwork II. I could not afford to produce it all at once, so the DVD's came along one at a time. I wanted detail and easy-to-follow explanation. The Puppy Program is only about 2 years old, and is our most popular single DVD.

I planned originally to put the whole thing out at once, but was cost prohibitive.

Evan


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

So you have only made reference to TEACHING fetch in your training material 2 years ago?


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

gdluck said:


> So you have only made reference to TEACHING fetch in your training material 2 years ago?


I realized when writing the Puppy Program section that it would be too hard to explain all the puppy stuff in a chapter, and that I would eventually have to devote time to a video on it. So I gave what I thought was a solid outline, explained my feelings in general, and moved on to Basics. The opening line in the Puppy chapter is "I feel that most people do too much with puppies, rather too little. Because of this I’ll make a few guiding comments, voice some do’s and don’ts, and move on."

I realize that there are many cases in which an owner has done far too little with a pup, and then sent them on to a trainer. That's only one of many reasons why I didn't elaborate on the puppy material in the book.

Evan


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

So it was so cost prohibitive that you could not include even a paragraph to mention introducing the "fetch" command but a whole chapter on FF itself. Then a DVD on FF. Surely you had a segment in your FF DVD that stressed the importance of introducing the "fetch" command before the formal FF process was done correct?


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

gdluck said:


> So it was so cost prohibitive that you could not include even a paragraph to mention introducing the "fetch" command but a whole chapter on FF itself. Then a DVD on FF. Surely you had a segment in your FF DVD that stressed the importance of introducing the "fetch" command before the formal FF process was done correct?


And then another detail. And then another detail. Have you ever tried to do this? It goes on forever. Like I said, the whole thing was an entity in journal form, and then was organized into individual parts. It was ultimately intended to be one complete package, and now it is.

Have you seen the SmartFetch DVD?

Evan


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Oh I completely understand. Minor details. Sorry, I'm done. The parfume is burning my eyes


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

Someone correct me if I'm wrong. I haven't seen Hillman, but...
Didn't his stuff come out about 4-5 years ago??


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

gdluck, have you ever trained a retriever to even an AKC senior hunter level?

The way you talk, you come across like a know it all in a junior hunter gallery.

Is there any credibility in anything you say?


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Howard, to be fair to you I will admit I deleted my last post just prior to your post. I deleted cause I don't want to argue about this. I don't pretend to know it all I merely pointed out an inconsistency. You don't have to be a competitive player to read it and see it. 

Oh, the answer to your question is in a previous post of mine. you just have to read it.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

I love it. I finally have Evan proving that you can't train a dog from videos. I always state it's because dogs are unique and u have to read them. Apparently it's just cost prohibitive. I have read the cold burn discussion with interest. I can see how a bark collar is construed as a cold burn because there is no command. I ask how is an unknown command such as sit taught to a young dog? What is the difference between no command and an unknown command? The very act of teaching involves new unknown commands and those often involve a correction. Teaching right and wrong almost always does

/Paul


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

gdluck, Now that you have found a procedure that you like (Darrins), will you implement it? I have found videoing my training sessions helps me a lot. I get to see what I am doing right and what's being done wrong. I learn a lot from viewing my videos as the tape doesn't lie. Plus I post them on RTF to get constructive feedback. 

Maybe you could do this also.


----------



## Rozet (Jul 4, 2012)

Evan, thank you. You have more hands on dog training experience than many of us combined. So glad you also learned how to use a computer= Smart works delivers on its own merit. Bruce


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

I think the dog training dvds by: Lardy, Graham, Hillman, Rick S, Mertens, Voigt, Rorem and others have been a great assistance in training retrievers. It has allowed many to train their own dogs that otherwise couldn't afford a professional trainer. Likewise I think the written articles by Lardy, the Retrievers ONLINE articles and others are a great aid.

Lardy's training videos progressed in stages too. The first VHS tapes were (in hind sight) lacking. But at the time they were made it was some of the best available.

Prior to these folks we had to depend on the books by Richard Wolters, James Lamb Free, D.L. Walters and others. In hindsight these books are way lacking. But not at the time they were published.

I follow Lardy and don't have a dog in this fight but I wanted to express my opinion.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Wayne Nutt said:


> gdluck, Now that you have found a procedure that you like (Darrins), will you implement it? I have found videoing my training sessions helps me a lot. I get to see what I am doing right and what's being done wrong. I learn a lot from viewing my videos as the tape doesn't lie. Plus I post them on RTF to get constructive feedback.
> 
> Maybe you could do this also.


LOL Wayne if he saw me out in the yard tonight with two kongs teasing a dog into delivering to hand while teaching the fetch command... He probably wouldn't... The neighbors came by with their boxer (that I trained) and look at me like "why are you acting like a clown?"


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Rozet said:


> Evan, thank you. You have more hands on dog training experience than many of us combined. So glad you also learned how to use a computer= Smart works delivers on its own merit. Bruce


Thanks Bruce. I hope all is going well with you & your dog. No matter how many times someone says you can't learn how to train a dog from books or videos, it's still wrong, and there are dozens of good examples. Here's a current one.








This is "Caesar" SHR Brentwood Gem’s One Too Many MH WCX (QAA). Owned, trained and handled by Hope Roberts, who learned from books and videos, and honed her skills through working with her own dogs. Caesar is shown with his 2 Qualifying wins - both within the last 30 days. Not bad, eh? In the picture on the left is Caesar with his first Qual win 2 weeks ago. On the right is Caesar with his 2nd Qual win from yesterday. There are people all over who are enjoying success in various measures by carefully following one of the good programs available, as Wayne pointed out.

Speaking of Wayne, it looks like he's learned quite a bit on his own! I'm enjoying those videos Wayne. Keep up the good work!

Evan


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

ROFL - ROFL

/Paul


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

No matter how many times someone says you can't learn how to train a dog from books or videos, it's still wrong, and there are dozens of good 
Examples. 
Evan[/QUOTE]

Very bold statement Evan.

And there are hundreds of bad examples. Just look at the forum and you'll see question after question of folks not understanding how to train from books and dvds including yours.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Shawn White said:


> *No matter how many times someone says you can't learn how to train a dog from books or videos, it's still wrong,* and there are dozens of good
> Examples.
> Evan


Very bold statement Evan.

And there are hundreds of bad examples. Just look at the forum and you'll see question after question of folks not understanding how to train from books and dvds including yours.[/QUOTE]



I have to disagree with your statement ...The only way to learn to train dogs is by a hands on method...You have to get out there and run dogs...At least that is what Rex said....Steve S


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Steve,

If you really believe people just become effective trainers by walking out in a field with a dog, having acquired no baseline of information first, and that books & videos are of no value, why would anyone care what Rex said? Or D.L., or any other trainer? You just take your dog out to the field, and somehow you'll know what to do? Are you really saying that?

Evan


----------



## Jennifer Henion (Jan 1, 2012)

But Shawn, the 90% of the forum is made up of people asking questions about training or handling. The OPs who don't make it obvious, immediately get this question: "What program are you following?"

If they aren't following one, what's the first thing most people recommend? "You follow a proven program."

The whole argument about whether one learns to train from books and videos is weak. There are always two steps to becoming proficient at anything. First is to research the topic and learn how others were successful (READ THE INSTRUCTIONS or in this case Study A Proven Program). Second is to go put it into practice and learn on your own that nothing in life ever is exactly like what it says in the instructions.


----------



## JS (Oct 27, 2003)

Can one learn to train dogs by reading/viewing instructive material? Absolutely NOT.

Are instructional training materials of value? Absolutely YES!

What Jennifer said.

JS


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

JS said:


> Can one learn to train dogs by reading/viewing instructive material? Absolutely NOT.
> 
> Are instructional training materials of value? Absolutely YES!
> 
> ...


I agree also , the point of my post was missed ...continue on.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Evan said:


> Steve,
> 
> If you really believe people just become effective trainers by walking out in a field with a dog, having acquired no baseline of information first, and that books & videos are of no value, why would anyone care what Rex said? Or D.L., or any other trainer? You just take your dog out to the field, and somehow you'll know what to do? Are you really saying that?
> 
> Evan


And you missed my point ...OR ,I didn't communicate it clearly enough ...No matter how many books or video's you watch , you still have to get out there and do the work ...Books and video's are instructional manuals to follow ...I have never seen a car repaired by the owner reading the shop manual ...They had to get dirty...The acquiring of information and the application of that information is two different parts of life...Steve S


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

No just watch the video. No more info needed

henion, people ask what program to know what methods have been applied to the dog, mostly inapropiatly 

/paul


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Jennifer Henion said:


> But Shawn, the 90% of the forum is made up of people asking questions about training or handling. The OPs who don't make it obvious, immediately get this question: "What program are you following?"
> 
> If they aren't following one, what's the first thing most people recommend? "You follow a proven program."
> 
> The whole argument about whether one learns to train from books and videos is weak. There are always two steps to becoming proficient at anything. First is to research the topic and learn how others were successful (READ THE INSTRUCTIONS or in this case Study A Proven Program). Second is to go put it into practice and learn on your own that nothing in life ever is exactly like what it says in the instructions.


That is correct Jennifer. And that is all I assert. The old phrase "practice makes perfect" is flawed. "Perfect practice makes perfect" is much closer to being true. A trainer with no baseline of information to go on, no matter how much practice, will not tend to do as well as a trainer with a sound knowledge base putting in the same amount of time in practice. And that is all I'm saying. It just seems too obvious to me.

Evan


----------



## Dustin D (Jan 12, 2012)

steve schreiner said:


> And you missed my point ...OR ,I didn't communicate it clearly enough ...No matter how many books or video's you watch , you still have to get out there and do the work ...Books and video's are instructional manuals to follow ...I have never seen a car repaired by the owner reading the shop manual ...They had to get dirty...The acquiring of information and the application of that information is two different parts of life...Steve S


Trying to keep up, who here said it and where was it said? Looking back three pages I don't see anyone suggesting anything different.

It seems that if you apply that same mechanic logic to the Bark Collar, it would contradict the very training philosophy you are claiming to have.

Except at greater odds. The dog gets (no) owner’s manual(information) or instruction(information). Just stimulation.

So far the only justification I've read in (this) topic for the Bark Collars effectiveness is, "It just works". With not everyone subscribing to it working all the time and in some cases not working at all.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Jennifer Henion said:


> But Shawn, the 90% of the forum is made up of people asking questions about training or handling. The OPs who don't make it obvious, immediately get this question: "What program are you following?"
> 
> If they aren't following one, what's the first thing most people recommend? "You follow a proven program."


Guilty as charged Jennifer.
But there's a reason for the madness-

Guy, (newbie), states he's having trouble with collar FETCH.

He starts FF' with some training material that, (in it's progression), you don't CC' the dog untill you're finished with initial Force, (ear pinch). But the fella' decides to go with different training material after he's pinched an ear, (for whatever reason).
And THAT particular training program has you CC' the dog before you ever pinch an ear. But he misses that part and creates the biggest cluster- (you know what ;-)) in the world.


----------



## rboudet (Jun 29, 2004)

Dustin D said:


> Trying to keep up, who here said it and where was it said? Looking back three pages I don't see anyone suggesting anything different.
> 
> It seems that if you apply that same mechanic logic to the Bark Collar, it would contradict the very training philosophy you are claiming to have.
> 
> ...


Its no different than touching a hot stove. You learn real quick not to do it again.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Dustin D said:


> Trying to keep up, who here said it and where was it said? Looking back three pages I don't see anyone suggesting anything different.
> 
> It seems that if you apply that same mechanic logic to the Bark Collar, it would contradict the very training philosophy you are claiming to have.
> 
> ...


Now I'm really lost...I don't recall anything about a bark collar...Or and I just slow on the down load..? When it come to dogs learning how to operate in their environment they natural repeat things that are pleasant and avoid things that are unpleasant ...Like the example of a child or adult sometimes ,the hand on the hot stove ...If you go out and make a manual correction for barking in the middle of the night the dog will hopefully learn to not bark because of the reaction it brings...You just gave them some information...We are lazy people ...the bark collar does it automatically and we don't have to go out ...The use of a bark collar doesn't give the owner the ability to yell quiet or some other command to stop the barking at other times though...there is no association with the verbal like there is when we go out and make a physical correction...I would rather push the button and yell quiet my self but I do own 6 of them too....Steve S 

There has been only one dog that I know of that could read the owners manual and he got thrown off the train on the way home because he was going to rat out how bad he had been mistreated and the owner's affair with the wider Brown ....poor ole Blue...May he rest in peace....have a good day.....


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Dustin D said:


> Trying to keep up, who here said it and where was it said? Looking back three pages I don't see anyone suggesting anything different.
> 
> It seems that if you apply that same mechanic logic to the Bark Collar, it would contradict the very training philosophy you are claiming to have.
> 
> ...


If you want to know how and why a bark collar works please refer to BF Skinner's work on Operant Conditioning, specifically the Positive Punishment part... Then go read and try to understand Pavlov's theory of how dogs anticipate events in a predictable, consistent chain.

No human interaction needed...

Bark = punishment

Consistently applied it doesn't take long for the dog to make the association and stop the behavior. Eventually the behavior will become extinct. 

Carr/Lardy/Rorem and all the others are great step by step processes for teaching a retriever the skills they need to become proficient. A basic understanding of Classical and Operant conditioning is required in order to understand how and why these processes actually work. 

I do things with dogs all of the time that have nothing to do with retrievers, mainly problem solving with pets. It all comes back to some chain of events the dog has become conditioned to respond to in a certain manner. Re-condition a new (acceptable) behavior as a reaction to that stimulus and whala! you're the dog whisperer!


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Swampbilly said:


> Guilty as charged Jennifer.
> But there's a reason for the madness-
> 
> Guy, (newbie), states he's having trouble with collar FETCH.
> ...


and had he studied the basic theories of operant conditioning... he would never have had this problem to begin with... 

The tools used to introduce pressure are irrelevant in most cases. Normally we use a pinch collar on sit before we even pinch an ear, but no one seems to ever put this all together... Pressure application really beings in "formal obedience" as I recall most programs. Some people don't pinch an ear at all but rather back tie the dog and apply pressure with a pinch collar in force fetching, before overlaying the e-collar. Others do a toe hitch. Still others go straight to the e-collar. Some use a whip or a heeling stick in there somewhere... There are several ways but it's all about the same thing...

It doesn't matter what tool you start with as long as you make sure the dog learns to turn off pressure by performing a command in response to trainer direction.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

DarrinGreene said:


> and had he studied the basic theories of operant conditioning... he would never have had this problem to begin with...
> 
> The tools used to introduce pressure are irrelevant in most cases. Normally we use a pinch collar on sit before we even pinch an ear, but no one seems to ever put this all together... Pressure application really beings in "formal obedience" as I recall most programs. Some people don't pinch an ear at all but rather back tie the dog and apply pressure with a pinch collar in force fetching, before overlaying the e-collar. Others do a toe hitch. Still others go straight to the e-collar. Some use a whip or a heeling stick in there somewhere... There are several ways but it's all about the same thing...
> 
> It doesn't matter what tool you start with as long as you make sure the dog learns to turn off pressure by performing a command in response to trainer direction.


Enjoyed your post Darrin-
Lots of Ways to Train a Dawg 

Something about using collar pressure before the dog understands pressure, (before ear pinch), that made me feel melancholy about it for quite some time, but have since learned more.

Kinda' funny-
Don't recall anyone ever mentioning a Pinch collar, a HEELING Stick, or a Toe Hitch shut a dog down from being overwhelmed with pressure. Not that it's not ever happened, but know I've never heard anyone ever mention it.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Swampbilly said:


> Kinda' funny-
> Don't recall anyone ever mentioning a Pinch collar, a HEELING Stick, or a Toe Hitch shut a dog down from being overwhelmed with pressure. Not that it's not ever happened, but know I've never heard anyone ever mention it.


No matter the method, you can misuse any of those tools and produce bad results. You can cower a dog with a rolled up newspaper. It pays to have some knowledge about it going in.

Evan


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

I think a lot of us are saying the same things but in different ways.

Just like graduating law school and passing the bar did NOT mean I was actually ready to practice law, I could not have practiced law without at least the vocabulary I learned in law school because I would not have known what anybody was talking about. I did have to actually get out there and practice to learn how to do it.

The obvious analogy is that reading the Lardy articles and watching a video umpteen times does not make you a dog trainer, but it sure puts you miles ahead when you start actually trying to train one because you might have a prayer of understanding the conversations. If you had told me a couple years ago that I needed to work on my dog's push/pull mechanics, but not to the point of causing a bugging issue, all while watching out for popping at an area of dragback, I would have looked at you like an alien.

As with anything from law to medicine to building houses, it takes a baseline of knowledge to even get started on the road to being a craftsman.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Evan said:


> No matter the method, you can misuse any of those tools and produce bad results. You can cower a dog with a rolled up newspaper. It pays to have some knowledge about it going in.
> 
> Evan


Absolutely Mr. Graham.
For me, a cold burn really shouldn't be considered any different, it can go either way.

Although the method works for barking, de-snaking(?), and pehaps e-fences, I'm just not a big fan. 
But-
It _works_. But it "works" for those dogs that are otherwise self-employed in the moment.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Swampbilly said:


> Kinda' funny-
> Don't recall anyone ever mentioning a Pinch collar, a HEELING Stick, or a Toe Hitch shut a dog down from being overwhelmed with pressure. Not that it's not ever happened, but know I've never heard anyone ever mention it.


No doubt when pressure is applied manually a layman is much more likely to ratchet it back before it causes a problem, unlike pushing a button on a 6 when it needs to be a 2.

BTW I find it much easier to teach someone (human) how to apply and turn off pressure using a pinch collar, since I can see exactly what they are doing and it's a manual process for them. I rarely, if ever start right out with an e-collar, unless it's my personal dog and even then I have found that using a manual method first smooths the transition to the e-collar out immensely.

Just me and what I've been doing here recently. Only thing for sure is that it will change as I get more and more dogs...


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

DarrinGreene said:


> No doubt when pressure is applied manually a layman is much more likely to ratchet it back before it causes a problem, unlike pushing a button on a 6 when it needs to be a 2.
> 
> BTW I find it much easier to teach someone (human) how to apply and turn off pressure using a pinch collar, since I can see exactly what they are doing and it's a manual process for them. I rarely, if ever start right out with an e-collar, unless it's my personal dog and even then I have found that using a manual method first smooths the transition to the e-collar out immensely.
> 
> Just me and what I've been doing here recently. Only thing for sure is that it will change as I get more and more dogs...


You are right about that ...Most will back off the pressure when it is being applied manually before the dog shuts down ...But ,when using the collar it is too easy to push that button vs swing that stick or jerk that lead...Too high a stimulus one time is all it takes with the collar and up jumps the devil....Steve S


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

steve schreiner said:


> You are right about that ...Most will back off the pressure when it is being applied manually before the dog shuts down ...But ,when using the collar it is too easy to push that button vs swing that stick or jerk that lead...Too high a stimulus one time is all it takes with the collar and up jumps the devil....Steve S


Could not agree more (and with Darrin's comment). Think much is learned by the astute trainer ahead of, or in conjunction with, collar use. 

And I KNOW/WITNESSED/SEEN/AM SURE that some newer folks to the training process feel less 'guilty' using the collar than the stick, chain or voice therefore avoiding them when in fact should be facing the reaction coming from another form.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

HNTFSH said:


> Could not agree more (and with Darrin's comment). Think much is learned by the astute trainer ahead of, or in conjunction with, collar use.
> 
> And I KNOW/WITNESSED/SEEN/AM SURE that some newer folks to the training process feel less 'guilty' using the collar than the stick, chain or voice therefore avoiding them when in fact should be facing the reaction coming from another form.


Glad to see you're still on this side of the dirt!:razz:


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Swampbilly said:


> Enjoyed your post Darrin-
> Lots of Ways to Train a Dawg
> 
> Something about using collar pressure before the dog understands pressure, (before ear pinch), that made me feel melancholy about it for quite some time, but have since learned more.
> ...


Then you missed the point of post #90

/Paul


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Then you missed the point of post #90
> 
> /Paul


Went back and read it Gundog. Believe I get your point, (and if I didn't more than likely because it's too early in the a.m. for what working brain cells I've got left this morning to mass together ;-))

For me, a "correction" from a bark collar, (no command at all), leaves a dog initially with nothing to associate the pressure with except- _itself_. It does eventually however, learn to stop the vocalization and associates the collar pressure _with_ barking. 

But then that same dog has no command to associate that behavior with..as in SIT! Hush!, Quiet!

Think those collars have some advanages as well as disadvantages.
Adavantages as in not having to get up at 2:30am to correct your dog, (and waking up some neighbors for some folks), because the dog is barking at deer that meandered in the yard.
For, me the disadvantages being I'd rather have a say in the matter, and if the dog becomes vocal, (for whatever reason afield or anywhere else in situations where the collar is off ), I want a learned command in place to re-enforce, like Quiet!, Shut Up!, No! Sit! 
Besides-
There's only really enough room on the dogs' neck for one collar, lol


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Swampbilly said:


> Went back and read it Gundog. Believe I get your point, (and if I didn't more than likely because it's too early in the a.m. for what working brain cells I've got left this morning to mass together ;-))
> 
> For me, a "correction" from a bark collar, (no command at all), leaves a dog initially with nothing to associate the pressure with except- _itself_. It does eventually however, learn to stop the vocalization and associates the collar pressure _with_ barking.
> 
> ...


Some days there just is not enough coffee to get me going. Thank god for Bailey's...

/Paul


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Swampbilly said:


> Glad to see you're still on this side of the dirt!:razz:


Thanks Swamp. The dirt always seems to get closer though!!


----------



## hotel4dogs (Aug 2, 2010)

I refer only to pet dogs, but I have observed here at the pet hotel that dogs become "collar wise" to bark collars very readily. 
I've had a few clients who use bark collars at home, and then here when the collar is off, the dogs see it as free license to bark endlessly. The clients verify that that's true, if the collar is off the dog tends to bark even more than they did before using the collar at all.
Limited experience with it. Just a personal observation.


----------

