abed

That's one way to achieve it Fuzzy82 I agree You can reinforce all the good stuff, spare the dog learning consequence to misbehaviour then smartly manage the unreliability, but essentially that doesn't build a very obedient dog IMHO :D

I use an Ecollar in this instance as a remote leash or to gain the dog's attention as a diversion from the behaviour exhibited. My middle dog as an example as I know their behaviour well to speak with greater accuracy can instigate a scruff with my youngest with dominance gestures. He can exhibit this with my older one who is more submissive and doesn't react to a dominant gesture or walks away so we have never encountered fighting situation or anything close with these two. However, my youngest will rise to a challenge from my middle dog being the two we have to watch. My middle dog is a showline/working line mix GSD and is a bit over sharp with defence driven aggression. The youngest is a full working line GSD stable in temperament, not aggressive in the slightest unless provoked or challenged...........the younger one has the most correct temperament expected of a GSD. As a behavioural example, the younger one may be laying on the floor half asleep. The middle dog may walk into the room and stand near the young one and stare at him just out of the blue. The young one will look up at the middle dog where the middle dog will take a dominant stance, tail goes up, ears forward in a stare. The younger one gets up, his tail goes up and middle dog will begin to growl. So the situation at this point is two dogs facing each other, one growling and the other posturing as if ok, you want to fight, bring it on so to speak, but neither IMHO really want a fight and is bit more about who is going to back down and resolve the issue. This has escalated in the past into a couple of scraps, nothing serious other than noise and slobber, but we obviously don't need it escalating into something greater. In a challenging stance, obedience is out the window in voice command, but if you grab the middle dog and tell him "hey, knock it off, he resumes obedience and drop the notion and the younger dog will relax once the pressure is off and they are friends again, no grudges. If we grab the younger one, his aggression level escalates and he will growl which makes the middle dog growl more and the situation intensifies. The middle dog is the one we need to target to resolve the situation as he is quite handler submissive also. Corvus, you and Aidan are probably more indepth in behavioural science than I am as to what's happening from a psychological aspect but the symptoms are as I explained. Not having eyes in the back of head or an extender leash to interrupt a stand off, the Ecollar on the middle dog set at a meduim/high stim in nick provides a sharp stim of a millisecond duration, enough stim for his head to flick up when activated. On a stand off as I explained and for the most part typically we have 3 GSD's follwing us around from room to room as they do with the transmitter in pocket, if a standoff occurs, I would would be a NO command then a stim on the middle dog who would immediately drop the notion and look at me, where then I will call him to me and praise the recall and all is calm and relaxed. With consistancy in this method with then E collar, I guess it took 3 or 4 days and 10/12 stims to correct the behaviour and haven't had a standoff or scrap since Dec '09. I have also used the method with several other dog to dog aggression problems with the same success of varying techniques depending on the situation. The Ecollar essentially is used as an interrupter like a quick leash correction, "hey I am talking to you, knock that off and come here". With my dogs, I was able to monitor the situation and work at it effectively before a standoff and scruff developed into a serious fight, but the moment I have three in the backyard barking at fireworks, I need to address that..............where's my transmitter :D Happy new year guy's

Yes, I agree Miranda, nice informative post :D

Hi MissMaddy, I am not a fan of escape training with an Ecollar as IMHO it's unfair on the dog as it's essentially correcting the dog before the dog has the chance to obey a command. It's like to me as a collar correction with a leash simultaneously on a sit command each time which is not drive training, it's avoidance training as the motivator, but each to their own on that one???. Considering you are experienced with the Ecollar, I would nick the offending dog with high level stim after a NO command if eyeballing instigated an aggressive posture to teach the dog that the stim comes from you, and that behaviour is not tolorated. Working dogs are hard enough in most cases to understand punishment and boundaries without adverse effects. I have 3 entire male GSD's, a showline, a show/working mix and a working line who run together all day. I have had posturing and scruffs in the past with Ecollar training correcting the behaviour entirely. The working line dog although he is the least aggressive to instigate a fight, he is the most aggressive to finish one, so he is separated or crated without supervison like if we are not home. Using the Ecollar in escape training for aggressive postures on low stim can trigger a fight by drive agitation much like a prong collar and IMHO a stim needs to be sharp and fast to take drive away from the dog and cause a submission to the behaviour. It doesn't matter if the dog tucks it's tail and shuts down a bit and the importance is knowing the stim came from you on the basis if they want to start fights, they fight you and they loose as the consequence. There is nothing wrong with a dog fearing consequence from aggressive behaviour which is the only reliable method in rehabiliation of handler aggression where the consequence of failure for the handler is getting bitten. Bitches can be a pain in the butt and can hold grudges far more than males which probably adds to increased vigilance unfortunately.

I wouldn't let them get that far, but that's my preference. Two dogs, both wearing collars, one handler, both remotes to hand... let's say a good blast is enough to break off the fight, then what? Sorry, I just wouldn't attempt it myself so I don't know how it pans out, nor would I want to find out (let alone suggest it to someone else). My own collar is a 2 dog system with one remote, but as I mentioned before, you need a good quality collar IMHO for any Ecollar training. Chasing dogs around in a scruff is hard to grab their back legs quickly and is not as easy as it sounds especially for smaller people with large dogs. The E will break the fight as you can only grab one dog by the back legs whilst the other remains loose and still at it. With a high output collar, the dogs will surrender in submission, not pretty, but nicer than ears missing and the necessity to race injured dogs to the vet or worse I guess. I don't understand which appears as a muzzle objection Aidan???. I am coming from the stance that even with conditioning and introducing known aggressors back into closer proximity, I muzzle them as insurance. I wouldn't regardless of the rehabilitation I thought I had achieved, allow them to run around together without precautions until I was confident that the training to curb the aggression was successful, and then would be strictly supervised.

Abed, it pays to remember that these dogs must live together day by day for the rest of their lives. If we're getting to the point where we would need to ramp up the stim to stop dogs eyeing each other off then we're doing something wrong and taking some unreasonable (IMHO) risks. You would want to be very confident that any punishments were well understood by the dog (and we don't know what the dog is thinking nor how many times the lesson will need to be repeated) and permanently remembered, or you're heading very fast down a one-way path. Ultimately we're trying to have the dogs comfortable together, and this is difficult to achieve when the only reason they don't fight today is fear of shock. In any case, I was referring to redirected aggression in the course of normal manners training. The sort you would do with low stim. If there is any uncertainty or tension (and there is always some if a dog is receiving a correction), add that to a bit of tension between two or more dogs, and you have a recipe for redirected aggression. So far, the dogs in question have not fought and I think it's best to keep it that way. Classical Conditioning occurs regardless of muzzle or restraint, and for most people is hard to spot until it's too late. To answer your question, on the now rare occasion that I need to break up a dog fight I grab them by the back legs. I've never been in a position where I've had e-collars on two dogs who were fighting because I would have no use for an e-collar in that situation. The opinion I gave was shared by others who have tried this. No doubt it depends on the temperament of the dog but you can be sure that if you say "it may or may not work for you" on an internet forum, someone is going to try it and fail. By then the damage is done. Aidan, if dogs are eyeballing each other with body language of a potentially aggressive stance wearing Ecollars, low stim is what agitates the dog that can easily trigger a fight and you either don't use the E or give a high stim nick. To give a low stim constant in that mindset is a good chance a fight will develop where I wouldn't take that chance personally. If there is aggression surfacing and you want to work the dogs a bit together in some training especially with an E, a muzzle is standard fitment from my box to prevent injury should a fight develop or any redirection that may occur in the process. An E collar will stop a fight faster than grabbing a dogs back legs, but would be better to knock the behaviour off before it reached that level.

As you have some experience with the e-collar I will assume you know that it is used either to reinforce behaviours (via -R, escape or avoidance) or to punish behaviours and what the difference is. I would suggest that if it has a place at all here, then it is as a reinforcer. I would not use it on one dog while in the company of another dog except under professional guidance. Most people are familiar with it's place in Operant Conditioning, but forget about Classical Conditioning. If you build an unpleasant association with another dog, that is a very damaging thing and hard to recover from. Any uncertainty (not exactly sure what to do, not thinking straight) or concern (feels like under threat, sympathetic nervous system response) can lead to re-directed aggression. Where you have another dog in the picture, that's usually where it ends up. "Rank" does not matter (the lowest dog will redirect to the highest and vice-versa). When two dogs commit to a fight, an e-collar is almost completely useless even if both dogs are wearing one. Regardless of one's personal philosophy when it comes to dog training, I would stick with positive reinforcement when training two or more dogs together. The associations formed are positive, and that is a good thing. In fact, I would be very judicious in my use of corrections when training dogs apart. Classical Conditioning is a very basic form of learning, we often overlook it, and it's hard to spot things like "dilated pupils" and other signs that our training has taken a wrong turn somewhere and a cue has become associated with an emotion that won't help the situation. You don't want to bring in baggage that will be amplified under tension when you have dogs together. I agree with Aidan on some points with ECollar redirected aggression which can occur when not using a high enough stimulation level or poor stimulation from a low quality collar, but redirection is generally based upon the temperament of the individual dog, the harder the dog, the more likelyhood of burning through a stimulation, but a softer dog will shut down in it's tracks with a good stim. Theory says as Aidan has explained, the Ecollar is met with caution dealing with aggression issues, but in reality I have seen only one dog burn through a stimulation for a short period and was an extremely hard and aggressive working line GSD. Having said that, I wouldn't practice with an Ecollar with aggression unless the dogs were either restrained or muzzled to see the effects of an aversive stimulation and preferably done with experienced supervision. Aidan, out of interest, your comment that an Ecollar is virtually useless when dogs have committed to a fight, is that from personal experience Ecollar training or something that you have been told or read???

Thats why you let a professional do it. The point is not just to zap the living daylights out of a dog the point is to use it as a tool to help you stop the dog doing a dangerous thing through pulling it out of prey drive and teaching it that the option of chasing bad object is a massive no no, BUT you have to also show the dog what the right thing is to do. I agree with consulting a person who is experienced with ECollar training and use a good quality collar. Stimulation level is difficult to set dependant on the dog's drive level at the time a stimulation is required where it can easily be not high enough and has no effect or too high and the dog either shuts down, loops into a fearful panic or the harder dogs can switch into violent defence aggression and makes the situation worse. ECollar training in not easy to grasp quickly and is quite technical compared with other training tools, definitely not a tool to mess around without professional instruction

I think perhaps it is the job of the trainer to ask the clients what their goals are, and help them to meet those goals. It is sad if the owner wants the dog to learn not to pull, and the trainer just sticks it into a management device and doesn't address the client's goal. To me, that's a bad trainer. But for some clients, perhaps their goal is just to make the walk manageable with no more fuss or time or effort than absolutely necessary. For those clients, perhaps a management tool is the right choice. I don't know that people commonly hire a trainer or go to obedience classes to just manage behaviour as the people who's interests are behaviour management only from my experience are the one's that trainers and obedience classes rarely see???, I guess there are exceptions, but most attend classes or hire trainers because they have an interest in learning more advanced skills than the average owner who's dog takes them for a walk. If someone's problem is that their dog pulls on the leash and their goal is to stop it, I teach them accordingly how to achieve that training the dog.

I think that IS a valid reason. If it's the difference between a dog getting walked and a dog not getting walked, I think that is a valid reason to use those tools and make it easier. There's a difference between the ability to teach someone how to train their dog to LLW and the ability and willingness of the person to actually follow those instructions consistently. Amen to that. Anything that sees a dog get walked (as opposed to never leaving the yard) is a good thing IMO. Of course that sad thing is that its really not that difficult to train a dog to walk on a loose lead with the right method. It's even easier if you start pups off that way. You are saying Poodlefan, that a lunging dog walked on a Halti with it's head snapped around violently is a good thing???............sorry, I don't share that perspective and would rather see that dog in the backyard until the owner is taught properly how to handle the dog. I'm not speaking for PF, but I think it is hard to weigh up what is ultimately best for a dog we don't really know. What saddens me is seeing dogs that don't know how to be dogs and are frightened of the world in general because they rarely leave the yard. To me, that is a ticking time bomb. The chances of it developing serious behavioural problems are, I believe, high. Fear is behind most aggression problems. What happens if it bites someone? Can we rely on a person that couldn't be bothered to train the dog to walk on a loose leash to get professional help with an aggression problem? Say that dog gets walked on some sort of no-pull device instead. There are several to choose from, so maybe it doesn't end up on a head collar. If it does end up on a head collar, maybe it's one of those dogs that respond well to it and it lives happily ever after. Maybe it sometimes gets excited and lunges on the head collar and its head gets snapped around. Still, it's not sitting in the yard being a ticking time bomb. I can live with that. If it's doing this a lot, then I would rather it went on a no-pull harness than go and sit in the yard until the owner somehow magically procures the skills to handle the dog. If we pretend for a moment that it's even our business, to me there are several steps that have to go wrong before a dog being walked on a head collar is not better off than a dog not being walked at all. I wouldn't argue that there might be circumstances where a dog on a head collar (or a check chain or prong collar) is worse off than a dog not being walked at all, but I think we're talking about a minority, and there are still potential ways to solve that problem with a tool better suited before the owner has to learn to handle the dog without any management tools. So, I don't think it's a very realistic comparison. If you want to rant about head collars, we have all been there and done that and I think most of us have our misgivings. But this isn't a discussion exclusively about head collars as far as I'm aware. I am talking about trainers recommending management tools over teaching proper skills. The petshop or the next door neighbour may recommend a management tool which often happens, but when trainers or obedience instructors do that is what I have a problem with because I believe dog owners who seek assistance from a trainer are looking for something better than that???. I don't think it's good instruction to recommend a tool of restraint as the problem is in the dog which needs addressing. Pulling dogs IMHO need to be taught not to pull, not just stuck on a tool to make the pulling less invasive where I think a trainer has an obligation to provide instruction that improves the dog's instincts and behaviour. The tool whatever is chosen, is a means to achieve a result, not as means to lessen the effects of poor behaviour is the way I see it Merry Christmas Corvus, can't say I always understand your posts, bit techo for me sometimes, but I enjoy reading your concepts ;)

'Staranais' date='23rd Dec 2010 - 09:42 PM' post='5041273'] That is "exactly" my point which I have seen too many times to be comfortable with that type of instruction.

I think that IS a valid reason. If it's the difference between a dog getting walked and a dog not getting walked, I think that is a valid reason to use those tools and make it easier. There's a difference between the ability to teach someone how to train their dog to LLW and the ability and willingness of the person to actually follow those instructions consistently. Amen to that. Anything that sees a dog get walked (as opposed to never leaving the yard) is a good thing IMO. Of course that sad thing is that its really not that difficult to train a dog to walk on a loose lead with the right method. It's even easier if you start pups off that way. You are saying Poodlefan, that a lunging dog walked on a Halti with it's head snapped around violently is a good thing???............sorry, I don't share that perspective and would rather see that dog in the backyard until the owner is taught properly how to handle the dog.

I think that IS a valid reason. If it's the difference between a dog getting walked and a dog not getting walked, I think that is a valid reason to use those tools and make it easier. There's a difference between the ability to teach someone how to train their dog to LLW and the ability and willingness of the person to actually follow those instructions consistently. I don't think a dog being walked or not is a trainers responsibility to become involved in as we are hired to teach training skills which should IMHO be a trainers priority, not if a dog is being walked or not. I would prefer to see a dog not walked at all than one abused with incorrect use of training tools and walked daily under those circumstances. Unless there is a "valid" reason like someone mentioned their dog had windpipe weakness and used a harness or an owner was incapacitated, but I am not going to run with a halti used on a GSD from a healthy 23 year old 6 foot young guy on the basis that the dog behaves better, when the guy is more than capable to learn how to train and handle the dog properly, but there are some trainers who will run with this scenario which I think is wrong.

Many people just accept poor behaviour often and use what ever tool makes a walk the most comfortable. The amount of times I have heard "my dog is a puller" and they accept this as that's the way the dog is as if they drew the short straw with that particular dog:confused: It annoys me to see trainers or instructors recommend tools like harnesses and haltis for no valid reason other than making things easier. For a trainer or instructor you would hope their priority would be to teach their pupils how to train their dog properly or recommend a training tool, not a management alternative for the life of the dog. I have 3 GSD's who all wear a flat collar, the middle one was a rescue at 18 months and trained on a prong collar, the other two were trained from pups and have only worn flat collars.

A check chain is a correction tool TC001, it's not designed for the dog to lean into it for it to tighten up. The check chain is designed for a sharp on off application so before the dog reaches the end of the leash whilst the leash is still loose, you correct with a sharp tug on the leash and let it off. The jolting action is what alerts the dog to alter it's path, not pulling forwards on the choker until the dog coughs and splutters. The same as direction change, you change direction before the leash is tight which applies a sudden jolt and done correctly, the dog will follow. awesome advice Abed! many thanks. We went for a little walk this morning, the sharp tug & release works well. Excellent To further condition that, you can then reward the dog when he has responded to the check train correction with a random treat, but always verbal praise when he complies, "good boy" in a happy voice. When he does begin to surge ahead just prior to a leash correction a firm "NO" works well and he will learn that a correction comes next if he doesn't comply. You will find done with consistancy that corrections will not be neccessary as the dog learns the behaviour you want from him

As long as I have people PMing me for advice I must make sense to someone. Something that a lot of people don't seem to realise is how often someone with an advanced degree has to explain what they are doing to people that haven't even a basic background in the topic. I lost count of the number of times I had explained my project to people that know nothing about cognition, learning theory, dogs, affective state, or animal behaviour sometime about a month before I started the PhD. I don't know why everyone else participates in online forums, but for me it's mostly academic. Exchanging ideas with people that share your interests. I know who I'm talking to when I start sounding like a text book. But do you know why people who PM me do? Because they say I sound like I know what I'm talking about and they are too scared to ask the forum in general. There's a balance in everything, obviously, and different things are important to different people. Do I have a need to help people that are more impressed by someone whose signature says they are a professional trainer than someone who sometimes talks theory? No. The pros are welcome to them. But if someone likes to hear the theory and asks me for it, I'm more than happy to try to explain it. It's not so different to choosing trainers or behaviourists, I guess. I find trainers that know the theory avoid talking about it, but if I draw it out of them they get really excited. I will always be comforted by someone I can talk theory with. It makes me think I'm in good hands. They know at least as much as I do! The APDT conference had several trainers that knew the theory intimitately and talked a lot about effective ways to apply it. There's a reason why they are at the top of their field. Wouldn't it be fair to say that even trainers experienced in behaviour modification would learn something beneficial and increase their understanding and treatment applications more efficiently if they did the course in animal behaviour sciences???. I don't believe that the mainstream trainers who work with behaviour that haven't completed advanced studies have nothing more to learn on the subject.

I can think of a few working line GSD's that might change your mind about old school training Huski Not jumping on the leash as the OP described, that's old school abuse, but hard dogs don't mind a good correction and will often pull them into line instantly and solve a problem that other methods can take weeks to condition. Some working dogs will give you the finger on the basis that strength and power over the handler is fun for the dog, they will seriously laugh at you trying to manage them sometimes. Trainers don't correct these types of dogs, use prong collars and Ecollars to be old school, some dogs need that type of training as it's the only foundation work they respect But I'm not implying that 'old school' means giving a correction. I'm talking about the old fashioned obedience classes that march people and their dogs up and down the paddock for an hour. The exact same kind of training that will tell people on the first night to line their dogs up at heel position, step off and give the dog a leash correction as soon as they walk in front of them. THAT is old fashioned training and we know better nowadays which is why none of the top triallers I know use train their competition dogs in those kinds of classes. I am NOT saying using corrections or check chains or prongs or e-collars are old fashioned/old school at all. But I am awfully tired of you pedalling out the same old arguments in each thread, aren't you bored yet??? Paddock bashing is not the context of the thread Huski, it's about old school aversives eg. stepping on the leash for a drop as the OP described???. However, those old training classes still produce good pet obedience when done properly although it's a bit boring. They are not training competition dogs and the people who join these classes are usually beginners learning basic leash handling skills.

I can think of a few working line GSD's that might change your mind about old school training Huski Not jumping on the leash as the OP described, that's old school abuse, but hard dogs don't mind a good correction and will often pull them into line instantly and solve a problem that other methods can take weeks to condition. Some working dogs will give you the finger on the basis that strength and power over the handler is fun for the dog, they will seriously laugh at you trying to manage them sometimes. Trainers don't correct these types of dogs, use prong collars and Ecollars to be old school, some dogs need that type of training as it's the only foundation work they respect

A check chain is a correction tool TC001, it's not designed for the dog to lean into it for it to tighten up. The check chain is designed for a sharp on off application so before the dog reaches the end of the leash whilst the leash is still loose, you correct with a sharp tug on the leash and let it off. The jolting action is what alerts the dog to alter it's path, not pulling forwards on the choker until the dog coughs and splutters. The same as direction change, you change direction before the leash is tight which applies a sudden jolt and done correctly, the dog will follow.

I always think of a behaviourist as someone specialising in the treatment of strange behaviour where the dog doesn't respond well to normal training practices, perhaps a dog that is exceptionally timid, fear aggressive, compulsive tail chasers that type of condition where there is a fine line between the wrong methods being used to treat the dog having high potential to cause further detriment if the dog isn't assessed correctly. I couldn't call myself a behaviourist as I wouldn't train a dog in working disciplines that displayed unusual behaviour and therefore have little experience in that area. Having said that, I have trained working breeds that behaviourists had previously treated for a particular behaviour unseccessfully that they couldn't have been more wrong in their assessment and treatment plan???. If trainers are honest about their experience levels and have track record of working with behaviour issues successfully I don't see that presenting a problem, but I guess there are always the one's who will over sensationalise their abilty and experience to make their business sound better which could be a worry

Are we saying that it's good for the dog training industry for anyone to call themselves a behaviourist on their own self assessment which is the message I am getting reading this thread???.

Good question???

Just out of interest, what difference would it make? It makes a lot of difference in treating the behaviour to know the cause of the reactivity. Lashing out in aggression to minor stimulation is an unusual GSD behaviour unless the dog is suffering from trauma or is extremely short on nerve stability perhaps

Sounds more like a fear response...........is the dog from a registered breeding or a BYB out of interest???

Prong collars are a piece of equipment that manages behaviour. Misuse of equipment is always a possibility Corvus