poodlesplus

I did not carry in because there was no science or believable content in what was said mainly by Lou and Erny. There was so much crap i didn't know where to start. I have Lou's statement "forget Ohms law" enlarged ready to have a giggle at at work. It is like arguing that the earth is flat.You can't argue with insanity like that. You can just go away and have a laugh. I was a little sad because up to now, I had some respect for Lou.He might not train the way I do, but he does some interesting things. I also thought he told it mostly like it is . Apparently not. Personally i found it unbelievable that adult people want to piss with science so much. Never mind. I didn't take it at all personally. I just took it for what it was a bunch of crap from some very arrogant people who don't have the grace or good manners to admit when they are wrong. I know where not to come for for my dog training help.I wouldn't want to bother with trainers that are so suggestable that they fall for urban legends so quickly and readily. I would want someone a good deal more open minded and intellectually able. Look at my original statement. There was fact and there was opinion.I used the correct language to distingush between the two. I have no problem if bona fide trainers wish to argue about how and why to use a collar. I personally, don't like using e collars a lot. You might, that's your business. I said some statements close to that intent in my original statement. I want to know why that appears to be be such a threat to you? Why should you spend so much time denigrating those who don't? Aren't you that sure of yourself? You sure as hell act like it. If i made racist comments about forum participants would that be OK to?? Why then is my profession something to be laughed at??? What I do have problems with is so called trainers telling porkies about how they work, and then carrying it on. Just get it right. Now I will go away again,, and no doubt, you will have another good little bitch session, tell yourselves how good you are , and i don't know what. I do have this question. I am on holiday at the moment,writing some papers and i have trouble keeping up with the stuff you people write. Don't you have jobs or isn't the dog training going so hot?

Being right into tracking (which is worth doing if you are thinking of doing UD..) I like Enthusiastic Tracking by Sil Saunders. You will do no harm following him. I also like "Tracking Dog" by Glen Johnson very much.But you need to apply it carefully. You would track most dogs to a standstill if you followed it literally. There are many other classics on tracking to, but you need to sort out how you want to train your dog before hand. Pearsall's Scent is pretty good, so is Patterson's Tracking form the beginning if Schutzhund tracking is your thing. For theory I like Lindsay, Abrantes, Cognitive canine 11 is worth a look, good myth debunker, I also have been looking at other works on animal cognition too. The alex papers are extremely dry but worth reading to get the brain cells going. I read widely, both positive and not. I often buy books on spec, and the last lot had some real shallow publications. Don't buy "Natural Dog Training" unless you like a bit of a giggle. It is written very much like Jan Fennels stuff, you keep turning the pages hoping for some "meat", but in his case, you have to go for believing in telepathy as the primary method of communication between dog and man. I did give the parcel a good rattle, but couldn't find the crystal. Believe you me, his attempt at physics is abysmal. What I really want is a book to explain to me how to get myself and my poodle through Novice, open and UD with no nerves and no fails, for my eyesight on my left side to return, and a book to tell me how to do congruent body language, all on 30 seconds a day. I keep on showing my poodle my older dogs footprints, because despite the bad press i sometimes give him, he got through encouragement , novice , and open on two fails.I now realise that not every dog does his, and sort of forgot to let him know. :D It was illuminating to note how few dogs are getting through open these days.

Erny I attacked the ideas not you. For just one example the idea that any collar manufacter would actually make a product where the open circuit voltage is so high that arcing would occur is stupid. You went at me on the front foot so to speak . You didn't ask questions, you didn't seek to clarify. It is pretty hard to discuss in this enviroment. I could have made up some pictures to show you what i was on about ,but quite frankly I don't feel like being dragged over the coals by people who present as if they know it all anyway. Your original response was so hostile and just plain wrong, I couldn't see that doing it would really be of benefit to any one. It as if one of your lower class students who knows stuff all about dogs came at you.telling you how to handle dogs, You would be a bit bewildered, and wouldn't know where to start. It was a bit like that for me.I am as good as a claim to be, I am probably a little better. If you care to email me I am quite happy to provide credentials in a way that protects my identity.I also expcet you to reply with your credentials too... The convention in the professional world is that ideas are up for grabs, not peoples qualls, humanity, laughter at their profession. I just have to take it that several of you don't operate in a professional world as your behaviour wasn't so. I will very occassionally contribute. but I will abide by the forums formal and imformal rules. I realise that part of the informal rules are that there isn't really a lot of debate in a few areas, just people getting a bit hot under the collar huffing and puffing and spreading urban legends, who are pretty fragile on some of the technical details. I will leave these areas alone as i like a nice quiet life, and my precious time then gets detracted from training my dogs. I mean, it is pretty funny when the engineer leaves a discussion on some electrical details, and a couple of electrical neophytes carry on as if the know it all. I haven't a clue what this actually means, but it has stuff all to do about electricity. I personally think it is a reflection of a wider malaise in society that means that there are actually stuff all electrical engineers left,it has become a low status profession, and there is serious concern as to how to train enough engineers to keep existing plant going, let alone develop further "green" infrastructure. As for apologies, I would see you as a professional if you actually read what I have written, came back and said, look i am sorry, you are right on the elctrical bits, now lets get on with it. Instead you just seem to be bitcing away. Good on ya. There was some unfortunate comments made about my training methds.(Sort of my method or else) I do train in a mixed method club, as well as a R+ club. I came up with fairly trad training, it is not new to me. I don't impose my methods I just live for the day when my ability to practice my methods is not continously encroached on, or met with a

I go the deal. I accept democratic decisions. I wont make any more naughty comments about things I know about. More important to tow the party line. What these people said was wrong. It was equivalent to saying that dogs have tails out of their mouths. How do you debate with that?? The mood was so adverse that all I could do was state that it was wrong. I can support my arguement, but I can't deal with people who do not even bother doing the most basic research and have the cheek to think they have. i can not get degrees for them. I can not condense my experience and knowledge on to a tight space. Despite that Here is where the legend of least resistance comes from (I think) When a lightning strike happens, a path gets formed where more elctricity flows than elsewhere. This causes ionisation to form which is associated with permanent cell chnages. in fact a form of carbon can be formed . This is obviously a path of very much least resistance. When an e collar is fitted and used, ionisation does not form (we sure as hell don't want that) so there are many paths that may be made from terminal to terminal. There is a minimum path, but there are many paths with equivalent resistance. Yes I am heavily R+, but accept the right of people to train there dogs as they see fit within broadly acceptable parameters. I am not a ban it type person. Read my original statement again . Now as my contribution is not required , i have listened to the posts ((fair enough this is democracy) I will leave you to it.

Look I haven't been here long, but it seems like some entrenched members have no idea of how to be in a forum. I offered some data from my own professional background and i gave it in as impartial a form as I could. The concepts i was talking about were at least equivalent to trying to give a one page summary of different types of reinforcement, pretty tricky. For my efforts I got personally attacked. My credentials were questioned , i was not given a fair go. I mentioned that i thought it was moving away from the Australian principles of a fair go. Believe you me technically I was right. some of the response are so off beam technically, that the people at work are free and clear of the technical D*****d title for weeks. I think that serious personal insults should be met with some kind of sin binning. Otherwise this is not a forum,it is just a rough house where those who type the longest use the most insulting language "win". There shouldn't be a winner, there should be a robust but polite exchange of views I know that in the normal dog world, i have no difficulty. I discuss issues with others in a polite but robust manner. We have a few laughs and talk tall stories about our dogs. We sometimes talk footy too. I don't want to take away what you do, but neither should you mine.I just wonder where these very harsh people come from and what their agenda is?

"'ve seen dogs jumped on, attacked and had a dog stick it's nose under my bitches bum in stays. Believe when I say breaking position is the least of your worries." My lab got molested by the same dog in two consecutive trials. In the second he got another stay. Used to shudder when i saw the dog and that was in open. In another , a smaller breed dog started hassling him before when went in the ring. I had to heel my dog into the ring while he was "attending " to this dog. Was interesting.I guess you could say he was face humping... I have a mini poodle who makes her debut in a fortnight. I would say that if i had anything that would give me a sleepless night dog wise, it would be what might happen to her in the stays from dogs that shall we say need a bit more training. To reduce her exposure, I am going straight into Novice. Do you check out for troublemakers before hand? Have you ever just said "no thanks" and dissapeared on the off chance? Have you ever broken your stay to get to your dog as another dog has broken? I am still not totally sure what I might do. What do you do?

Dog dude pretty well has it all, but forgot to tell you that with a lab, you should have it made in the shade. And the thumbs up is a good way to be. You need to look after your mental side. Relax know inside that you have the best dog there, and you are confident in him/her. One little tip with labs, a lot of people heel labs way toooo slow. Don't change this now, but a good way of keeping your dogs interest is just go a fraction quicker than normal, which means that your slow pace is quicker than normal which means that nose will stay of the ground. The main thing is to enjoy yourself, have the dog enjoy themselves and get some more silverware for one of the best breeds on earth

Thats what I was thinking.. But I wish that they had've put next to it "For office use only" or something! I can just see it now.. Ms Laura Hall's Associate Thisis Sparta CCD.... *daydream* It's the dream to get a title one day.. Watch your dreams!. At the beginning of this year, i was out tracking with my young dog, and my old dog (13 1/2 year lab) kicked up a stink. So I thought well, you old sod, I will give you a track. He did a very complicated track very well. I had stopped tracking him some time ago due to my very poor health, and had retired him. I laughingly said to my wife "wouldn't it be funny if he gets Tch? if any dog deserves it he does, he was really awesome". Well, he got track 3 4 5 in a row, had a slight hiccup and is now going for his Tch this weekend. Along the way I had a day with three pass cards when my poodle got TD in a day after a track on, and he got track three. Judges started saying nice things about my handling instead of slagging it and I learnt to relax tracking. I was so relaxed that when we did our first Tch track, he was having a slight munch at the start, i couldn't have cared less, because I had full confidence that he woud find the track. He has never missed so why worry now? I hope it spills on to obedience. BTW he really perked up with the tracking and attention too.

I have adressed the intro element. I do not have my own website. I am employed in a satisfactory situation, and have no need to pubicise my self. . Since I am here Lou, you have gone like a dam politicain, and again haven't adressed the technical issues. Torrents of words don't make up for your lack of correct content. Here it is again just basic application of ohms theory "Current flow is proportional to the resistance of the path.Not all the current flows through the path of least resistance in this case. The path between terminals does take a fair bit of the current, but an arc (part of circle NOT an electrical arc) drawn at twice the distance between the will have approximately 1/2 the current etc.It is just as well it does that as nerve involvement and hence sensation could be problematic. " So if this is not true , show me how the tissue between the terminals is some how lower resistance than the tissue around it??? "Ohms law " does describe how current flows regardless of whether the item is a donkey or a dog. When correctly used, it makes nonsense of your statement about "taking the path of least resistance" You obviously just don't understand some simple basic science. You are just plain stinking wrong. I invite you to study the text book (Resnick and Halliday Fundamentals of Physics) followed by some good old math (Advanced Engineering Maths by Kryseig) followed by some basic stuff on fields. I find it laughable that you keep to this entrenched positon and tell me again that the current just goes between the points it doesn't. I work with these things calculate these every day. I am at least as much an expert on fields as you claim to be on dog training. Thanks for the insult about my degree Lou. That is so gracious and open minded of you. The old statement about cars and collars and technology doesn't always hold. I can think of 3 or 4 smart moves that would be cost neutral that would vastly improve e collars. But i will keep these ideas to myself thank you very much I guess you are a dog trainer, not an engineer. Never mind. I will have to leave the rest of the DOL fratenity to sort it out. You have managed to cross the line from presenting some misguided ideas, to going through with the completely stupid. Good one

What I have learn't from this little excursion I feel that a good number of you don't give a dam about the facts, and don't actually argue the facts but argue the person I feel that many of you seem perplexed by complex situations and want simple answers and don't listen to people who might have something important to say if it doesn't agree with you. That to me makes the beginning of dam poor dog training. I don't like to spend all my time thinking about adversives, but when i do I like to get the basics right. You didn't bother finding out about me or checking the facts out (again). There are a few people who know me on the forum. I have been an engineer for a long time, I have a pretty senior job and am regarded quite highly at it.. I deal with safety issues daily. I am also quite a capable dog trainer,( i regard myself as an apprentice) I am just a mug that helps others and does it for nothing. I guess if you don't want to accept an engineers word on basic electricity, then you wouldn't want to accept your own words on dog training then. I have supported my claims. They were pretty basic. I can't just point you to a sentence,nothing is that simple, you need to read a fair chunk of material. So I will go over them 1) Current applied between two terminals in a material that is essentialy the same density and restistivity travels over many paths and that significant current flows over these different paths 2) The pulses of an electric fence are narrow and have lots of let go time look up the brochure or hang on to one 3) The current per unit of voltage on a fence circuit is much lower that on an e collar circuit.. There is a whole different model for this.. You can look this up 4) You need a very large open circuit voltgage to get arcing,and no collar manufacturer would do this. Again look it up. You need to consider where the breakdown path on the collar would be, but usually it is over the surface.of the collar. It is in the 10's of thousands of volts. 5) The collar voltages vary a lot. They do. To some extent what is important for percieved shock is the original level of the voltage, and the current that flows and the duration of that current. This depends on the design of the collar, and the collar's "internal impedance". I delibrately didn't state what the open circuit voltage might be as it is sometimes sensationalised, and draws away from the main arguement, Effectively, other than engineer types like me it is a parameter of little importance. 6) We looked at the two modes. I personally made no distinction about whether they were paired or not. The rest i was careful to state as opinion. I tried to give a moderate scientific view, and what i got in reponse was a very immoderate biased view with occassional personal insults One of the things I love about Australia is the idea of a fair go. Well shame, didn't see one here. I don't ask that they be banned, I don't suggest that you don't personally use them, my goodness how are you going to react to a more emotional less scientific approach??? Your PR skills need a bit of polishing. That wil be my last post on this subject. There really isn't anything else for me to say.

"As always - yes, footwork generally is my issue wink.gif. I did notice that some of my turns weren't 'crisp' enough and a bit 'over-compensated'..... we are working on that one laugh.gif what do you mean about the short/ slow paces?" One of the ways of letting leo know (and stop him going wide) is to slow down for 2 paces (not so noticeable you get pinged) , I reckon this will just about fix his problems. He is quite a big dog and needs time to get around. Here's how. Hear the judges signal, turn your body towards where you are going to go, early, and then do .one slower short pace body towards the corner, next step sort of "throw" the foot towards the corner then go around the corner. The best foot step diagrams is in Morgan Spector's book. Watch how you do it "naturally". You will do a body twist quite early. Most dogs really pick up on the body twist and love it!! Probably leaning towards the corner would be taken as "pushing the friendship" rules wise. You can help him understand the new cue by seeing what he does when you twist you body while standing still. Great cue for agility too. Most judges expect you to take a bit of time and space to get round a corner.Good handling means helping your dog through using the rules to look good despite both of your limitations. I have found that my little one loves flip finishes. I use them as motivational tools when we are doing open stuff. She gets to do them if she does an excercise really well. She really looks forward to them. I taught her by free shaping a jump to touch my hand., then a twist, then a sit. Took less time than the continental. It might be worth considering to help leo get through long ring routines if he finds it enjoyable. Some bigger dogs don't in which case it is not worth doing. Also, he might get really cramped on a continental finish and you might need to work out different starting places for him, or a wider arc. I would not get my Lab to do a continental, but might have thought about a flip if he was sound. As I have a small dog, I do not do a traditional finish. Small dogs get lost visually behind your legs while this happens!!

Lou I liked your web site. it didn't promise the earth, and was down to earth.It showed me that e collars are probably slower to teach a recall than good old R+, a recall lead,and a good deep voice. Thats the experience of my students in any case.You see I don't leave recall training in real situations to chance. Sorry about the quoting etc. I don't spend all my time on forums. You will just have to put up with what i wrote in any case. Again the technical data and terms you use are generally wrong. For example If you read a good basic text book like Resnick and Halliday it will explain ohms law, and also give you a basic equation for restistivity . If you were a super bright first year student, you might be able to deduce what I said from these two facts. What then helps is to get some maths skills, and get to solve what are called static 3D fields. Saying current follows the path of least resisitance is a bit like saying that antibiotics work by killing of the nasty bugs. It is an over simplification. I guesss thats why I went off and did an EE degree. Ohms law and these notes hold for dogs too. I know that the electrical facts in my note are 100% correct. I have checked, them over and had them checked. They aren't open to debate, unlike a lot of dog training they are just plain old boring scientific fact. Current flow is proportional to the resistance of the path.Not all the current flows through the path of least resistance in this case. The path between terminals does take a fair bit of the current, but an arc (part of circle NOT an electrical arc) drawn at twice the distance between the will have approximately 1/2 the current etc.It is just as well it does that as nerve involvement and hence sensation could be problematic.These kind of fields are actually suprisingly hard to solve. I did find the data hard to get. But at the end of the day, you have to look at what happens and the long term effects. Two points I touched on, but don't want to labour as I don't have the time. I am not a professional dog trainer and can't stop to involve myself as much as some of the trainers can. Unfortunately the attitude of this forum sucks. I gave sound technical data. i gave sound technical replies. I used and contributed my skills and abilities.I had a "professinal" dog trainer (Erny) suggest an open cirucuit voltage so high that arcing would happen. I suggest that rather than waste my time she check out what she said.. If that is how she operates, then i am not at all impressed. i had the usual candidates jump on the usual band wagons. I did see some highly emotive arguement about e collars and clickers that personally made me laugh. Good one. Still chuckling. I am still wondering how any instructor in any dog class worth their salt would let a dog be treated so insanely that it got overweight and died!.Is this another urban legend???? Then the one about IEC and breeds... give me a break..Some of us are human too! Then the detail about dog's impedance, it is still a topic of debate. We can barely agree on what the human body model is. Guess how much research has been done on dogs? There are several models. One for face to ground shocks, one for terminal to terminal shocks, another for flank to ground shocks. There is a strong frequency and voltage dependency. Engineers know that it is all a bit of a simplification. It is a bit like "the path of least resistance stunt" I don't mean to denigrate the fine engineers that work for the e collar companies, but I don't think thy generally attract MIT's finest and best. The technical challenges aren't that enormous and the ones that exist don't seem to be met. You would think that after all these years that the size would be really reduced and some kind of better terminal would have been developed. I wonder what the ratio of R+D to marketing expenditure is? Interesting Sorry about the spelling mistakes. You see last week I is a salesman and now I am an ENgimineer.

[Look i don't know where to start. There is so much wrong with your reply. i don't have all the time in the world, I did research this document and I am professionally qualified to comment on the terminology. Most of your reply is electrically incorrect. I stated that I had no desire to get involved beyond that. Just one iillustration. When we talk about an electric circuit , we talk about the "open circuit" voltage being loaded by an impedance consisting of the internal impedance of the generator and the load impedance. Of course the open circuit voltage is not going to be so dam high you get arcing, but the open circuit voltgae and the internal impedance will vary from manufacuturer to manufacturer to get a partivcular shock. What would be great is for you to actually research this matter, establish the required open circuit voltage to get arcing on an e collar, and realise what an electrically silly thing you have proposed. Well the rest of your response is on a similar vein. One thing I do agree with is what lindsay said about stims versus shocks. I go with the IEC version though, Lindsay is a dog trainer par excellent, the IEC has many thousands of electrical engineers consulting via their member countries. My guess is that they know a thing or two. No more from me, I normally charge for more advice!!

Erny : First, an exerpt from his aforementioned book in some basic explanation of terminology : SL : "Specifically, the term "electrical stimulus" (or stim) "has been selected to replace the word shock. ... There are several reasons for this decision. First, at low levels, the term shock is hardly fitting to describe the effects produced by electronic training collars, since there is virtually no effect beyond a pulsing tingling or tickling sensation on the surface of the skin. Second, the word shock is loaded with biased connotations, images of convulsive spasms and burns, and implications associated with extreme physical pain, emotional trauma, physiological collapse, and laboratory abuses." PP : The normal open circuit voltage, current, vary enormously between manufacturers. SL : "Because e-collars are designed to limit arcing, both electrodes of the stimulator need to make close contact with the skin to establish a closed circuit." Erny : It would seem from this then, that an open circuit would be achieved only when the collar is fitted incorrectly, and I would catagorise this occurrence as "mis-use" of the tool in question. SL : "When discussing the effects of ES, some care should be exercised not to confuse electrical categories or phenomena. A common error is to equate voltage with current. Electrical potential or voltage is relative and depends on the electromotive difference between two points, whereas current refers to the amount of electrical charge or amperes flowing between those points over some period." Erny : I don't think I could begin to explain in layman's terms the correlation and effect of voltage as to current so I won't begin. But it does appear from the above that there is more to the value of "voltage" than what the ordinary person would first think and that "current" often is not even considered by many when debating or considering the real effect/affect of the e-collar. Stephen also writes about "pulse" and "waveform" which also has a bearing in the energy that makes up the "stim". PP : "Low stim" is no magic either, it is just a lower setting that you might or might not use on your dog. Erny : I don't think anyone claimed "low stim" as magic ..... you're right, it is as it says. But for those unfamiliar it does to imagine "low stims" as often barely detectable and might be as mild as to cause the dog to blink. The debate in relation to e-collars, apart from them not being the treacherous tool some might otherwise think, is that used properly (as ALL equipment and tools - both physical and emotionally applied should be) it can be seen as being kinder to the dog both in a physical and emotional sense compared with other tools and I would argue, even some perceived "purely positive" (loose term) methodologies. PP : The level of percieved shock is extremely variable, and needs to be adjusted according to the humidity, dog's excercise level, callous formation around the shock application sites to name just a few variables. Erny : This is why knowing the dog's 'working level' of stim is important, as well as whether the coat is wet etc. etc. PP : A shock itself is not neccessarily a big deal, but it is important to realise that shocks are adversives. Dogs might or might not percieve them as a greater or less adversives than humans as they have no knowledge of electric shock. Erny : This was an interesting thought. But then I don't think I was unduley distressed as a very young child when I received my first ever electric "shock" when closing a car door one day. Can't say I understood "electric shocks" at that very early age and whilst I might have been more surprised by it than I would be now, to my knowledge it has not left me with any permanent 'mis-givings'. Also not forgetting the principals of learning which are simply about consequences in correllation with the behaviour occuring immediately beforehand. PP : It is likely that a behavourist perspecitive might give some insight. I.E think of another paralell adversive that could produce the same change in behavior and make your decisons accordingly. I sometimes suggest that if it stops a chronic behaviour in a dog, it might be equivalent to knocking a "mature age" male of his bar stool while drinking an ale. Erny : Actually, the e-collar has the great advantage of exactly the opposite. IE Used properly, the dog will pair the e-collar stim directly to the behaviour being exhibited at the time of delivery, rather than pairing the same to the human. Learning is therefore very quick and there is less liklihood of possible break-down of the bond between dog and handler. If someone knocked me (btw, I'm not a 'male' and wish I could ascribe to not being of a "mature age" :D) off my bar stool, I would not correlate it with me drinking an ale or sitting on the stool, but I would correlate it with the person who knocked me. The other advantage of the e-collar stim compared with other traditional punishments is that the force of the latter may be poorly regulated and that its timing can be even more difficult to establish. PP : Here are some inaccuracies that come up time and time again. "The current goes from one terminal to the next " no it doesn't, it goes everywhere!!! The basic realtionship is that I=V/R. well the R changes gradually as you draw arcs away from the terminals. Can it involve the brain? I don't know. It depends on what the restivity of a path through the brain is compared to a path through muscle and skin tissue. SL : "... Kouwenhoven and Milnor (1958) demonstrated that exremely brief low-energy (-.0001 to 2.4J) high voltage shocks of 40,000 V in anestheetised dogs could not induce ventricular fibrillation, cardiac arrest, or "any other untoward effect" ". (If I am understanding what is written, I think 2.4J is twice the amount of peak 'voltage' from the e-collar, but don't quote me on that, because I'm confused by all this e-speak :D.) PP : "Some how electric fences give a worse kind of shock because the dog is standing on "Mother earth", and the shock travels through the central nervous system" ... It is interesting to note that if a dog makes contact with an electric fence, a couple of different things do happen. The first is that generally the shock path is of much higher resistance than an e collar becuase of the pads of the paws.(They are generally hard and calloused) So that the shock current per volts is much lower. Erny : I don't have the technical knowledge to discuss this. But I will say that I have had the experience of knowing the difference between catching a 'shock' from an electric fence and a 'stim' from an e-collar. I know which one I'd prefer ....... you can have the electric fence. :D PP : No, just not true. What happens is that the path of the shock is the least resistance path. This is generally through muscle tissue. Erny : But from what I read, the current, voltage, pulse and waveform all need to be taken into account? Used properly and with sensitivity towards the dog, I doubt the stim levels reach muscle depth. Instead they travel from one contact point through the skin to the other. To my understanding, anyway. PP : The second is that the shock pulse is very narrow, and the dog has plenty of "let go" time, and thirdly the dog controls the release of the shock from the fence by moving. It is generallaly apparent to the dog where the shock comes from. Erny : This is covered above, where mention of the "pairing affect" is discussed. PP : And that brings me to three key issues. It is very easy to give an e collar shock to a dog. It is very easy to get the timing wrong, and hence the dog loses controllability. Like any adversive, it can have unintended side effects. Erny : As can any punishment be that a physical or emotional one. With the e-collar however, the dog-owner does not require as much co-ordination skill and with that said, I can imagine it easier to achieve more accurate timing than otherwise. Of course, like with any aversive application, tuition for the dog-owner is always a recommendation. Furthermore, it is the training that provides the pathway to the dog understanding that it does have "controllability". PP : I really don't want to comment any further on e collars. What I have said technically is correct, and I have used correct language, stating what are facts and what are not. It would be great if others could do the same. I have no desire to take part in a politician type battle, just a sane calm discussion based on fact. Erny :