Cindy, The thread was started so you could write your EXCELLENT posts! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Lou, It's important to remember that like almost everything in life, dog temperament (as pertains to handler issues, hardness, bite thresholds, sharpness, etc.) describes a bell curve. The vast...VAST...majority of dogs DO NOT chew on their handler at the drop of a hat...so it's quite healthy for the dog to understand that you giveth, you taketh away, and you can also GIVETH... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

If you use an ecollar as an extended leash, and the dog has been properly conditioned, you should have a variety of words, voice escalation and body postures that you can resort to, if your dog decides to disobey WHILE NOT WEARING AN ECOLLAR.

If the behavior does it, your dog will know a very TEPID version of the word NO...and if he doesn't have an ecollar on, and the time for the correction that "should have been" passes...your dog will do what HE wants.

Communication with a dog should be RICH. There's a whole array of words, sounds, postures, gestures, that form part of the dog/handler team...with escape training they mean little...it's much more difficult to assist your dog through a complex problem...as only the command has real meaning.

I know how to get good reliability with escape training, but I think the reliability is better with the extended leash concept...and that the handler/dog bond is better preserved with the latter. Fair, timely, suggestive, adequate corrections serve to solidify this bond. As Jeff said recently, the correction should simply interrupt the undesired behavior, enabling the dog to restart his attempt at success.

I disagree that an ecollar plus escape training is "better" for novices...pushing a button is too easy, and many other areas of the dog/handler relationship are apt to be substandard to begin with.

Obviously, in both instances, the key issue is that the dog NOT KNOW THAT THE CORRECTION COMES FROM A SPECIFIC PIECE OF EQUIPMENT.

 Quote:

I am ALL for using positive methods but if you think you can establish yourself as the pack leader of a strong working dog without letting him know that the corrections that he WILL need for SOMEHTING don't come from you

I never said a word about using "positive methods" to establish myself as a pack leader. In fact, in my first post in this thread I referred folks to a method called yielding that has worked with every dog I've worked with.

 Quote:

then I am afraid you need to come and spend some time with a dog or two here! We have a Malinois named Nitro that would love to test your theory!

It's always amusing when someone invites me to try a technique on their dog confident in the knowledge that the dog will eat me for lunch. The few times that these challenges have been within a reasonable distance so that I showed up, my techniques worked. Of course, it wouldn't' work on your dog. It doesn't work in a few minutes but I have yet to try it on a dog that it didn't work with. And I've worked with some highly handler aggressive dogs and some very dominant dogs. It's very subtle and if you're used to exerting your presence with force, you won't think that it will work. This is a little like people who have been using high levels of stim on their dogs and so they think that low levels won't work.

 Quote:

The cool thing about pack behavior in dogs is that they fully accept and almost appreciate being "put in their place" if you have the proper relationship.

It's not necessary to "put any dog in his place" to dominate him. In the wild this rarely happens. If it did, dogs would have gone extinct from decimating their own ranks, eons ago. Most communication between dogs that has to do with establishing pecking order in the pack is done without violence, through "force of personality" only. I see no reason that violence is necessary all the time to establish pack order if the dogs manage without it.

 Quote:

You don't correct the dog to GAIN pack order but you use corrections in a firm, fair and consistent way if you wish to REMAIN the pack leader.

This is but one way to do it. And for a new handler who isn't going to be able to give a fair and just correction all the time, it's going to get him into trouble once in a while with a strong dog.

 Quote:

Dogs respect leadership, and a strong working dog is going to test you and the limits of that leadership. If you are not prepared to correct him appropriately then I am afraid you won't be the top dog for long.

It doesn't have to be done physically. It isn't done that way among dogs and it doesn't have to be done that way between humans and dogs.

 Quote:

If you watch 2 dogs work something out, the dominant dog will dole out a swift correction without any hesitation should the subordinate dog need it.

Perhaps we're talking about two different things. Can you describe how "the dominant dog will dole out a swift correction?"

 Quote:

this can be a very subtle thing in the eyes of the dog, but may still constitute a correction. A verbal reprimand is a correction to my dogs! Do I want them to think this doesn't come from me?? I think not.

A verbal correction before one has established dominance probably won't be considered to be a correction by most strong dogs.

 Quote:

And Glenn, to answer your question about the food. I never just put a bowl of food down unless the dog not only sees me with it, he must do something to receive it. It may be sit or it may be something more complicated but only I say when it's ok to eat. I put the food down and then the dog must wait until I release him. It's pretty basic stuff and very important to the dog!

LOL. This is something that the "PP" (Pure positive) trainers advocate. I don't bother with it. I fill the bowl and put it down in front of the dog. He knows who controls the food; I don't need to make him perform some OB to get fed. There's nothing wrong with it but for a strong dog I don't think it establishes anything. The previously mentioned (and linked) article describes how I use food with a new (to me) dog.

 Quote:

If you use an ecollar as an extended leash, and the dog has been properly conditioned, you should have a variety of words, voice escalation and body postures that you can resort to, if your dog decides to disobey WHILE NOT WEARING AN ECOLLAR.

No matter what "variety of words, voice escalation and body postures" that you resort to, if you can't give a correction most dogs will soon learn that these things mean nothing.

 Quote:

Communication with a dog should be RICH. There's a whole array of words, sounds, postures, gestures, that form part of the dog/handler team...with escape training they mean little.

Why do I need a "whole array of words, sounds postures, gestures" if the dog obeys when given a command? But perhaps I'm not understanding your meaning. Could you clarify please?

 Quote:

it's much more difficult to assist your dog through a complex problem...as only the command has real meaning.

Again I need some clarification please. It seems to me that since the command has meaning, you can give the command and the dog will do what you want him to do.

 Quote:

I know how to get good reliability with escape training, but I think the reliability is better with the extended leash concept.

What are your definitions for "the extended leash concept" and "reliability?"

 Quote:

Fair, timely, suggestive, adequate corrections serve to solidify this bond.

Except that not everyone is capable of always delivering "fair, timely, suggestive, adequate corrections." It's far easier to give just the right level of stim with an Ecollar than it is with a leash and correction collar. If you're tired you have to move your hands faster. If you're off balance you have to take that into account. If you're using a thin leash with a lot of give, you have to take that into account. If you're using a choke chain and you normally use a pinch collar or if you've just stepped up to a pinch collar you have to take that into account. With an Ecollar all you have to take into account is "is the dial set correctly?"

 Quote:

I disagree that an ecollar plus escape training is "better" for novices.

I'm wondering how many novices you've trained to use an Ecollar with escape techniques. I've probably done it over 1,000 times with people who never before have used Ecollars. I've also worked with a similar number of people using leashes and collars. I've also trained many people who had complete failures with leashes and collars; most of them due to their lack of coordination, their lack of physical ability or their lack of the ability to get good hand speed, or to quickly release the leash after the correction. The people using Ecollars got far faster, far better, longer lasting results than the people with leashes did. So while your opinion may lean one way, the facts lean another.

 Quote:

pushing a button is too easy, and many other areas of the dog/handler relationship are apt to be substandard to begin with.

You, like many others want to make this generalization and it just isn't so. "Pushing a button" is hardly all there is to Ecollar training.

 Quote:

Obviously, in both instances, the key issue is that the dog NOT KNOW THAT THE CORRECTION COMES FROM A SPECIFIC PIECE OF EQUIPMENT.

When you snatch a leash and jerk the dog's head around, you're not fooling him one bit. He knows exactly what happened and who did it. When you press the button of an Ecollar transmitter the dog has no idea who did it; except that it's linked to his behavior.

No tool in the world can replace a good trainer, that´s the main thing to remember I guess, not even the E-collar <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

 Quote:

No tool in the world can replace a good trainer, that´s the main thing to remember I guess, not even the E-collar <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

No one has said anything that argues with this statement. You can take out the word "Ecollar" substitute any other tool extant in dog training, and it makes just as much sense. Odd, but I've never seen anyone else write this sentence except when they used the word "Ecollar." It's just a tool. NO TOOL has ever made anyone a good, or even a better, dog trainer. Any tool can be misused. Any tool can be abused. No tool is idiot proof to the right idiot.

 Quote:

 Quote:

No tool in the world can replace a good trainer, that´s the main thing to remember I guess, not even the E-collar <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

No one has said anything that argues with this statement. You can take out the word "Ecollar" substitute any other tool extant in dog training, and it makes just as much sense. Odd, but I've never seen anyone else write this sentence except when they used the word "Ecollar." It's just a tool. NO TOOL has ever made anyone a good, or even a better, dog trainer. Any tool can be misused. Any tool can be abused. No tool is idiot proof to the right idiot.

This is getting old... it's not a discussion anymore. It's Lou contradicting every word that anyone posts on this topic....

I am not doubting Lou's success in the dogs that he has worked with but I don't appreciate the undermining of every comment that people on this board are contributing to the discussion. Even when he is not arguing with a post he stil has to quote it and write something about it!!

Even if Lou's "methods" or ideas are valid and work, the presentation of them is not very palatable to me. Posting in a condescending manner will get you no where with me. (maybe this isn't your intent but it's how I perceive it) I am always looking for more info and knowledge to help me in my journey of having a better relationship with my dog but reading all the blah blah blah after every single comment that people makes gets old....

time to go to training with my dog, maybe a good idea for a few others out there too!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Lou, your point has been made. Lets leave this. I agree 100%with Cindy here. We agree to disagree.

Speaking as someone who knows very little about training in general, and ecollar work in particular, I have to say that discussions like these are some of the most valuable that I read here. Lou puts up a spirited defense for everything he believes in - I admire that a lot, and the same goes for Cindy. I'm sure the banter seems repetitive and argumentative to you guys, since you've had these discussions probably a hundred times, but it's a very useful read to someone like me.

Just my opinion - and I'm looking forward to getting a copy of Ed's video on ecollar work.

 Quote:

This is getting old... it's not a discussion anymore. It's Lou contradicting every word that anyone posts on this topic.

Well, this I will contradict. I didn't disagree with Stigg wrote; I merely expanded on what he wrote. He limited his comment to the Ecollar and I expanded it to include any and all tools. No tool will make anyone a good trainer and I've never said anything different.

 Quote:

I am not doubting Lou's success in the dogs that he has worked with but I don't appreciate the undermining of every comment that people on this board are contributing to the discussion. Even when he is not arguing with a post he stil has to quote it and write something about it!!

I'm only disagreeing with those who disagree with me. I merely stated my opinion. You and one or two others disagreed with me. Why is it OK that you disagree with what I wrote, but when I disagree with you, you get an attitude? I'm the one here who probably has more experience with the tool under discussion, and so my experiences are likely to be different from those who only use it as an extended leash.

 Quote:

Even if Lou's "methods" or ideas are valid and work, the presentation of them is not very palatable to me.

I'm sorry that you don't care for my style of writing. Many others do and have said so.

 Quote:

Posting in a condescending manner will get you no where with me. (maybe this isn't your intent but it's how I perceive it)

Nothing of the sort was intended. Sorry if you took it that way. But I failed to see any condescension. Perhaps you can point it out to me privately. I'm always looking to improve my training and how I come across in print, as well.

 Quote:

I am always looking for more info and knowledge to help me in my journey of having a better relationship with my dog but reading all the blah blah blah after every single comment that people makes gets old....

I'm sorry that you don't care for my style of responding to what people write. I think it's the best way to address their comments. I don't intend to change unless ordered to do so by a moderator.

 Quote:

time to go to training with my dog, maybe a good idea for a few others out there too!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

A few paragraphs back you referred to your perception that my writing was condescending. Now you write this, ending it with a "smirking" face. A good case of the pot calling the kettle black! While I've clearly stated that your perception was not what I intended, it's quite clear that you intended to irritate with this comment. I wonder why people do this?

Oops, sorry Ed. I didn't see your post asking that the conversation be stopped before I responded to Cindy.