The E-collar can, if you first get instruction,be used to encourage the dog.The stim. is a reward ( if you will) as would be food. Its fast and powerfull way to train. but you must know what you are doing. If your interested email me direct. or PM
Ron

sharon g wrote: Do many trainers use the e-collar to send the dog to the decoy? For PP and PSD training, is it better for the dog to be motivated by the actions of the decoy, or by the command of the handler?

LC: Those who use the Ecollar to "drive" the dog for a bite almost universally start from a forced retrieve. In that case the dog thinks that the sleeve is nothing more than a big retrieving dummy. Just about any dog can be taught this, no matter what his level and balance of drives are. It's acceptable for sport work but not for anything that's real.

Sharon g wrote: So is it beneficial for the dog to rely strictly on the handler's direction?

LC: It's not only beneficial, it's essential.

Sharon g wrote: What should be the primary motivation for the dog in his training? I've heard the philosophy that comes from strict obedience, where the handler wants to acquire power over the dog through the use of the e-collar. I know this philosophy has its place, but is this philosophy beneficial in "protection/police" training in the deployment of a dog?

LC: If the dog is used only for personal protection there are few situations where independent thought by the dog is required. That's not the case with police service dogs (PSD's) though. They frequently are required to think through problems for themselves. As for "acquir(ing) power over the dog" there are far better ways to do that than with the Ecollar.

Ron Bryant wrote: Of this I am sure. To use an electrical charge to get a dog to do something, as apposed to stop doing something, is totaly counter productive.

LC: Gotta disagree here. But maybe it's just semantics. Isn't getting a dog to stop doing something also getting him to do something? For example, I don't teach an out, I teach the dog to recall. When he does, by the laws of physics, he can no longer continue to bite.

Ron Bryant wrote: It should also be noted that you do not use the collar to teach. Or at least that is not what it was ment to be used for.You teach a command first. Then when you are sure the dog knows what you want, you use the collar to proof, to get faster responses and to stop the dog from doing a unwanted response.

LC: Gotta disagree again and here I know it's not semantics. I use the tool to teach all sorts of behaviors. If you'd like to see some of my articles on this go to Linda Guidry's website.

http://www.finographics.com/schutzhund/obedience/ecollarwork.html

Ron Bryant wrote: My back ground is in hunting, and I,ve seen so many people just sit and burn dogs untill they comply. Your right it is old school but Ive seen so many misuse then(e-collars) Ive seen some "PROS" hook up a trials dog to a 12 volt car battery with alagator clips.To break there will.

LC: What you've described here is not Ecollar training. It's abuse.

L.C
I have seen the light.Whent to a seminar sat in ah.
Going to another next month.

Ron

Frankly, if you have to use compulsion to drive the dog to bite, I would find another dog.

V.C. You are so right. I ask people about that.
Why would you let a decoy beat the hell out of your dog to get it into def. to train? Why not get a dog that is suited for it?
They all say the same. I love this dog. I cant get rid of it to get another!
But if they love it that much, how can they sit there and watch what has to be done to train in defense.
I dont understand there reasoning.
Ron

With rewards, if the reward overides everything in the environment (like bitework should) then it is very possible to teach with just or mostly reward. Reward being the consequence to compliance. I can see correcting the dog before the bite (not a punishing correction according to context, in other words: not a correction that will inhibit the dog from biting) to classically condition a different attitude/response towards correction. It teaches them to be more resilient (come back in drive) a lot faster after a correction. Some people purposely prong their dogs in the bitework to condition this resiliency.