E-collars:
I don't know why the military doesn't allow e-collars, or who made that decision. I can take a guess that it was in response to improper use by uneducated handlers.
My philosophy on e-collars is the same as for any other piece of equipment. First, they are a tool. There is no tool that is inherently bad on it's own. Improper, unfair use of any tool can result in negative effects on the dog. Proper education and understanding of how that tool can be used is a responsibility the handler must take seriously.
For me, the e-collar is a method of communication. The dog must believe that it has the power to stop the stimulation, and it must understand why the stimulation occurs in the first place. Just slapping an e-collar on a dog and using it like a remote control prong is unfair.
I tend to make up my own mind on training methods. I have successfully implemented e-collar training on many dogs over many years with no negative effect on the dog that I can see. I was a bit unfair to my first e-collar dog, and have since learned a different way to utilize that tool. Are they going to ban newspapers? Lots of owners roll up a newspaper and beat the s#it out of their dogs. It's in the tool's use that the fault lies, not the tool itself.
Who is a legislator to tell me how to be fair to my dog? The only one who can answer that question is my dog.
Enzo:
It sounds like you have a good grasp on your relationship and how it got to be the way it is. Some dogs are a handful, and I like 'em that way. If you think you need more control, you probably do, but that can mean management as well as training.
There were situations with Fama that I knew were going to be met with aggression on her part, but the level of correction necessary to bring her out of it and back to me was going to be too strong for the situation, meaning it may compromise our ability to work, so I would control the situation when I couldn't have 100% control of the dog. I made sure everyone, including Fama, was safe, and either moved away from the stimulus, or had the stimulus removed. An example would be an angry territorial dog guarding a building, , or an argument between two people that escalated into violence.
We got to the point where she would no longer act aggressively in these situations, but she would never just leave them alone. There were always distractions that had to be worked through or around. I could down her off leash before she went up to that aggressive dog, and she would stay, but her mind was still on the dog and not on work. Not 100% control, but good enough for government work.
Fama:
I was her second handler. Her first was a contractor that deployed with her to Iraq, where she attacked someone in the back of a truck and got sent home. It was not her fault. She was paired up with 5 different handlers for short periods trying to find a match for her before she came to me.
Working dogs move on to new handlers far easier than handlers move on to new dogs. They just go with the flow and are happy to get out there and work. I'm sure her new handler will go through a period where she doesn't trust or respect him, but they will be fine. I am sure she will be more than happy to see me, but she's not laying in her kennel, pining away for SGT Winners
I am still in Hawaii right now, so I haven't seen her since March 31st, but I will be stopping by the kennels as soon as I get home. I will definitely be getting up to Julie's place as soon as I can, and if Fama's schedule is free, I will bring her up so you guys can meet her, and maybe see her in action. I think that would be fun for everybody. It depends on where she is with her new handler-in-training.