Pressure Point Collar (aka Prong) Discussion Welcome

[leopuppy04]

Ok - normally this type of thread would have people clammering to have their say. Perhaps it is that time of night where many are leaving and making their way home from work ............... or maybe some have become shy?

Nobody wants to walk into the lions den. :p

I think Andy’s still looking for factual information

Seems no-one is opposed to the proper and appropriate use of the prong collar.

Why should they be - to me 'proper and appropriate' use means that the dog is not going to be harmed in any way - it isn't a question of whether or not you *agree* with the method or whether you would use it.

I'd rather see a dog properly trained and happy no matter what method than locked in the backyard, uncontrollable and no human interaction......

LOL - just my thoughts as always.

[Arya]

Okay, here's my bit. I think the prong collar, when a person is instructed on how to use it correctly, is by far the safest collar around to use on at least a big dog. I think it should be legalised. As mentioned on a previous thread before, the way the prong collar works means that it cannot be tightened past a certain point, unlike a regular check chain. In addition to this, because there is 'give' in it when it contracts as a check as being applied, it is much less likely to send a dog flying backwards (as I have seen unskilled trainers do with both a flat collar and regular check chain) than a flat collar. It is safer and far easier to use than a halti, that can get caught in a dog's mouth if not fitted exactly correctly, if a dog pulls backwards (I personally have seen this happen more than once) and if a dog gets away on a halti with a lead flying behind it, it can do serious neck damage if it accidentally stands on the lead and gives itself a hard check.

The appearance of the prong collar is a great aversive to people, but they need to look past this. Let's face it, there's a potential for abuse with any piece of training equipment from, at its most ridiculous, a soft collar made from material, right through to e-collars. Abuse occurs through lack of education of the handler, NOT the piece of equipment.

Prong collars deliver a quick, effective pinch to the dog in just the same way as a bitch would reprimand her pups. The dog understands this. The dog gets the message accordingly. The dog does not need constant checking with the collar and the message gets through a heck of a lot quicker than with a regular check chain, where it tightens up quickly when the dog lunges forward and provides no 'check' in the process. Just a choke.

Here's an example which I have also seen not long ago, regarding safety of the prong collar. I know of a dog who was a habitual puller and liked to leap about on a regular check chain. Very headstrong, even though owner constantly battled to train this dog. He was high drive, young, high action GSD. A really full on individual. This GSD would then, after training, be in some discomfort around the neck. This was shown by him constantly licking his lips and salivating slightly. Vet could find nothing wrong, however. Then swapped to a prong collar. Pressure alleviated around the neck, licking and salivating stopped. Much more humane. You could argue that training with other equipment would have fixed this problem and yes, eventually it would. But what damage done to the dog physically in the meantime?

For people who own high drive, full on dogs the prong collar whe used effectively can save months of heartache and produce a happy dog and owner team who don't look back. I'm all for it.

[jaybeece]

My thoughts on it are that it's an excellent and effective training tool which I'd be fare more comfortable using than a choker.

I've had a prong around my leg before (my brother had a go too) and we both agreed that it was a mild, but very clear correction. Because of the design there's even pressure applied with very little effort.

We then tried the choker and my response was "Well, no wonder the silly bugger never notices a correction!". Basically, due to the design, I only felt a correction in the area where the rings are and that was it. I also had to yank on it fairly hard to feel that at all, which meant there was a lot more force being used.

[Rom]

The only problem I have found with the prong collar was that it excluded us from many training clubs. Apart from that I would highly recommend the collar for a strong willed dog - with suitable instructions on use (of course).

This is a good reason why people who live in other states need to consider supporting Erny's proposed submission.

Since the ANKC is based in Vic, it must abide by the laws and ban the use of the collar for its affiliate clubs. This affects those clubs in every state that has an affiliation with the ANKC because in order to maintain that affiliation, the clubs in other states have to agree to abide by the rules of the ANKC.

When the subject of the prong come up with CCCQ, even though the CCCQ didn't have anything mentioned in its own rules in regards to prong use, they prohibit its use. They quote the Qld animal cruelty laws which also do not make mention of the prong....basically because it is not illegal in Qld.

However, because of this twist of affiliation, you will not be allowed to use the prong at ANKC affiliated clubs in other states even if you have sought the advice/training of an accredited behaviourist/trainer. A change in the VIC laws, I believe will help many from other states as well.

[Guest rhapsodical78]

The head-collar as a “positive” training-aid needs closer scrutiny. They may look ‘kinder’ to the uninitiated, but many dogs have suffered surface abrasions ranging from mild through to serious as a result of their use – even when fitted correctly. There is a very real potential for neck damage as the result of whiplash and as a result, their use is limiting. For many dogs merely the fitting of the head-collar is an aversive, whether being applied or not. This is not the truth for other styles of training equipment, such as the check-chain or pinch-collar. In the latter cases, when not being applied, the dog is comfortable and unimpeded, an essential in the training of dogs, who need to learn both the behaviours we want, as well as those that we do not.

I'm still learning lots and my opinions are changing in some areas. While I'm becoming more accepting of the fact that head collars do have a place in the training/management of some dogs, and for the benefit of some handlers, I still reserve some concerns about them for the following reasons and stick by my personal choice of the prong in my own situation:

1. After watching how the dog is effectively led/directed/controlled by the chin I did the following exercise on myself. I don't recommend that anyone do it mind you....

In a standing position, I did some shoulder shrugs and head rolling to make sure I was relaxed. I then placed two fingers on the side of my chin and 'flicked' my head to the side so that I ended up looking over my left shoulder. I heard crunches, grinds and cracks in my neck. I also developed a dull ache in the lower cervical vertebrae area. Now, I was completely prepared for this action, focused on what was about to happen and knew what was coming up. Dogs in Haltis/Gentle leaders are rarely as prepared for such an action. However the movement that the dog is subjected to is more of a compound angle in that it is both to the side and up.

2. The next is a hypothetical situation but I'm sure that it is one that we can all relate to.

Our action movie hero is stuck behind enemy lines without weapons. There is an armed sentry blocking his escape route to freedom. Under the cover of darkness our hero sneaks up behind the sentry and reaches over the sentries shoulder grabs him by the chin and in one smooth action twists his head to the side and up. In this way our hero effectively neutralises and disarms the sentry.

I agree that we don't see dogs that wear halties/gentle leaders suffering from broken necks nor immediate symptoms that they have sustained injury. However with the above in mind, I feel that injury may be much more likely than many supporters or users of these tools may know of and or accept. My fear/reservation pertains mainly to the effect that these sorts of stressors on the cervical vertebrae and soft tissues in the neck can have over time.

Also, in my time as an animal husbandry student at Gatton Ag College. I participated in a practical session in which bull calves of approx 3-400kgs weight were being castrated. The lecturer who weighed somewhere btn 90-100kgs was able to single handedly put these calves on the ground using the a similar movement. Standing on the left of the calf he reached over and grabbed the calfs right ear, held the calfs lower jaw with his other hand, twisted its head to the side and up, and simply walked backwards to lay the calf down. Given the difference in size and body mass of the dog in comparison to handlers, I feel that this action/movement of the neck is dangerous overkill.

3. This point is in regards to the principles of leverage which I believe is the main principle that allows the halti/gentle leader to give some handlers control of some dogs. This is from high school maths, so its a bit rusty.

A lever allows you to apply more force with less effort. There are four parts to a lever. The lever itself, the fulcrum, the load and the effort. In regards to a dog on lead wearing a halti/gentle leader the lead would be the lever, the dog would be the load, and the handler supplies the effort. The fulrum bears the force of both the load and the effort, but the question is in this scenario, where is the fulcrum?

Some might argue that the fulcrum is the point at which the lead connects to the halti/gentle leader and there is some evidence to support this. But there are many classes and styles of levers. Some levers have bends and/or articulating joins in them to help facilitate movement or increase force/decrease effort. With this in mind, my contention and fear is that the fulcrum is at the next possible point of movement which is the dogs neck....bearing the force of both the effort and the load.

The next thing to consider is that the longer the lever handle, the more force you can apply with less effort. So as Susan Clothier states in her articles smaller dogs may be at more risk of injury simply because there is more lead length between the handlers hand and the lead connection to the halti/gl.

4. When the subject of haltis/Gentle leaders come up in regards to the mention of possible injury, some will state that the Veterinarians who designed and market them have studied injuries suspected to have been caused by them and could draw no definitive conclusion that the injuries were indeed caused by the halti/gl. To my mind this can only be classed as opinion even though it is somewhat educated. Even if we could remove the fact that said veterinarians had a financial interest in the outcome of this opinion, to my knowledge, there is no information as to how the study was conducted. What were used as controls and blinds in comparison? To me the statement of these veterinarians leaves more questions to ask than what they managed to answer.

Having said all of the above, I will still consider the halti/gentle leader as an appropriate tool under the right circumstances. But I'll only ever use it or suggest its use with all of the above firmly in mind. Unless of course, somebody out there more knowledgable than me would like to contribute to my education

ETA: And I believe the prong is still the best option for my dog since she has suffered a spinal injury that she continued to aggravate on other collars.

Great post.

Way back when head halters were fairly new my friend wanted to get one for her boxer because of his constant and sudden lunging to the end of the lead.

I took one look at the dog and pictured what would happen if her dog's head were jerked sideward with the amount of force the dog was using to lunge and advised her against it.

I think common sense would tell you that they're just not safe on some dogs.

[gillbear]

My original thoughts on prong collars were that they were a cruel, harmful device that would send me running off to the RSPCA to report the owner for cruelty and abuse. Absolutely disgusting.

Then.......... I opened my eyes and allowed someone to show me what a prong collar was really like and how it was used.

Amazing, as someone who now not only uses and owns a prong collar I cannot recommend them enough. Prong collars are a both humane and extremely effective tool.

The first dog that I used a prong on was an 18month old entire male Wolfhound cross, who was a foster dog taken from a local pound. Connor was a 50kg dog who was unsocialised, untrained and nervous of the world. Connors size and strength coupled with his nervous nature and lack of training meant that it was impossible for him to be walked and taken into new situations because he simply could not be safely controlled. Connors choices where simple, return him to the pound or get him a training collar that would be effective.

Connor had 10 minutes of training in the yard to initiate him to the collar and how it works in a distaction free environment and then off we went.......... the difference was amazing. Connor went from a dog needing two people struggling to walk him, to a dog under complete control with one hand on the leash. Because he had firm leadership Connor also immediately became more settled and confident.

Connor now lives with my mother, who is in her 60's. He is the perfect dog for her being an effective deterent to any tresspassers and a loving and trustworthy companion. They toddle off around the block for their regular walk with Connor's prong collar keeping them both safe.

My opinion, again, of prong collars are that they are a safe, effective and very humane tool. It is unfortunate that their harsh appearance gives the wrong impression to people who are ignorant of how they actually work.

[Tapferhund]

Spot on Gillbear !!!!!

[Kelpie-i]

I'm sure Erny will agree that there is some really good feedback and some great stories on this thread on the prong.

It think it worthy to mention that it was also due to the unfortunate mis-use of the tool ie. sharpening of tips etc by moronic idiots which assisted in bringing on it's ban.

[Erny]

I'm sure Erny will agree that there is some really good feedback and some great stories on this thread on the prong.

Absolutely I do. Although it would be good if those stories could be emailed to me (see other current "prong thread" I started).

Although I still intend to print this thread off when it has had all the time it needs, it really was intended to be one of those threads where 'both sides of the fence' could argue it out about what they see as the 'good, bad and ugly' of the prong. It seems no-one from that 'other side of fence' has anything to say.

This is not intended to goad for an argument - one of the purposes of this thread is to show the government that the complete submission is not a one-sided view and that opposing views have been invited.

If someone does post here with an opposing view on the prong, please keep it nice and conversational guys ..... it's the 'discussion' that will comprise the educational side of things. Nothing else.

In the meantime, if you want to post stories here that's fine. But individual emails will service the submission better.

If you have posted a story here but don't mind about emailing, feel free to "cut and paste" and send it to me at [email protected]

Thanks for your interest, everyone.

It think it worthy to mention that it was also due to the unfortunate mis-use of the tool ie. sharpening of tips etc by moronic idiots which assisted in bringing on it's ban.

And what I don't understand about this is that ANYONE who really wanted to cause damage/inflict cruelty to their dog can (unfortunately and sadly) do so easily. A ban on the prong doesn't prevent that. But the ban does prevent the use of an otherwise very good training tool.

Edited July 1, 2007 by Erny

[Tapferhund]

I have already said that I am all for the prong but I can see why people would be against this great training tool ,as some, because of their lack of knowledge in dog training , can and do abuse it . In recent weeks I have witnessed this by people who instead of training their dog/s properly .....giving their dogs clear direction and boundries through obedience, prefer to let the prong collar do it for them in over use of correction . You can see the dogs have 'no idea' of WHY they keep getting corrected and they have no idea of what is wanted or expected from them, so they keep making the same 'mistakes'(?) only to be corrected again.

It's giving me the sh*ts actually !

Edited July 1, 2007 by Tapferhund

[Arya]

I have already said that I am all for the prong but I can see why people would be against this great training tool ,as some, because of their lack of knowledge in dog training , can and do abuse it . In recent weeks I have witnessed this by people who instead of training their dog/s properly .....giving their dogs clear direction and boundries through obedience, prefer to let the prong collar do it for them in over use of correction . You can see the dogs have 'no idea' of WHY they keep getting corrected and they have no idea of what is wanted or expected from them, so they keep making the same 'mistakes'(?) only to be corrected again.

It's giving me the sh*ts actually !

I have witnessed the same thing Tapferhund I have seen it with regular check chains too. I actually never have seen either of these training tools truly abused until recently. I saw instances of each and it does lead me to believe that if prongs could be legalised again, and allowed at VCA trials etc. then any instances of misuse could be noted quickly. I must say abuse I saw took place at non-VCA clubs and they were NOT, I repeat NOT Schutzhund clubs. I have seen them used by Schutzhund people correctly and responsibly as I feel that good Schutzhund clubs give proper instruction on these valuable tools.

It upsets me too. Poor dogs having great tools misused on them

[Erny]

Arya and Tapferhund ..... I agree that ANY piece of equipment needs to be used properly for it not to be abused. I often see head-collars being used incorrectly as well, and this makes me cringe.

But, without denying that use of any equipment needs to be applied properly, I'd like to say there is something I have noted (generally speaking) and that is that I have seen far less abuse of the prong because (again, generally speaking) the dogs are more responsive to the prong and this leads to the handler using it less - or at least less intensively. I often see quite the opposite with the head-collar or the check chain.

In turn for the dogs' increased responsiveness, it opens a wider window of opportunity for the dog to receive praise more often for more respectful and obedient behaviour. Again, I have often seen quite the opposite with the head-collar or the check chain.

Edited July 2, 2007 by Erny

[Arya]

Arya and Tapferhund ..... I agree that ANY piece of equipment needs to be used properly for it not to be abused. I often see head-collars being used incorrectly as well, and this makes me cringe.

But, without denying that use of any equipment needs to be applied properly, I'd like to say there is something I have noted (generally speaking) and that is that I have seen far less abuse of the prong because (again, generally speaking) the dogs are more responsive to the prong and this leads to the handler using it less - or at least less intensively. I often see quite the opposite with the head-collar or the check chain.

In turn for the dogs' increased responsiveness, it opens a wider window of opportunity for the dog to receive praise more often for more respectful and obedient behaviour. Again, I have often seen quite the opposite with the head-collar or the check chain.

I must agree that I've seen abuse of the head collar too - inadvertant abuse mostly where it's fitted incorrectly and the head collar is causing discomfort, as well as being dangerous. However, if the level of cxn applied with a prong or check chain is wrong (and I guess this applies to the head collar too) it's useless and damaging. I've seen a too weak correction and poor timing on a prong cause big time redirected aggression. I've also seen multiple, multiple unnecessary cxns done on a prong to the point where a dog was neck shy in the way sometimes a horse is head shy. I've seen a dog come close to having a nasty accident when the bottom part of a head collar that was fitted incorrectly slipped into its mouth when it was pulling backwards and the handler didn't even notice it had happeend. I've also recently seen a dog corrected so hard on a regular check chain that it flew back through the air and landed on its side. This was supposed to correct big time fear aggression. The dog had been sent out on to the end of a two metre lead with a handler that wasn't its owner who should have known better. It was exposed to a large number of dogs around it and when it aggressed it received a HUGE cxn backwards. The cxn didn't work (imho was never going to work because of the root cause of the dogs problem) so it was done again.... and again... and again for a total of six times til I was almost crying at what I saw because the dog's neck was cut and bleeding. Disgusting. I guess the absolute bottom line is, every bit of equipment we put on a dog or other animal from a soft puppy collar to a prong has the potential for abuse by humans really. It's not so much that this means the equipment should be banned but that far more education should be instituted to prevent this sort of thing occurring.

[Rom]

Arya:

I've also recently seen a dog corrected so hard on a regular check chain that it flew back through the air and landed on its side. This was supposed to correct big time fear aggression. The dog had been sent out on to the end of a two metre lead with a handler that wasn't its owner who should have known better. It was exposed to a large number of dogs around it and when it aggressed it received a HUGE cxn backwards. The cxn didn't work (imho was never going to work because of the root cause of the dogs problem) so it was done again.... and again... and again for a total of six times til I was almost crying at what I saw because the dog's neck was cut and bleeding.

;) That would have definitely been a case for a cruelty report IMHO. Things like that make me sooo angry, and for that very reason I believe that check chains are too freely available as well.

The dumb thing about scenario's such as above is that if a cxn was warranted (speaking in general terms as opposed to fear aggression in particular), why would you use a tool where you need to give a level of correction that rips a dog off its feet? Why would you not select a more appropriate tool for that dog in that situation? Its the lack of understanding in these issues that actually in a fashion serve to promote abuse of any given training tool. I find that the lack of understanding can continue is abhorent, I don't understand why the powers that be can ban one tool, but allow the above to go on unchecked.

I know its off topic, but this is the very reason why I believe that all people who train/instruct other people with their dogs should have to pass some sort of accreditation...regardless of whether they are volunteers or not. But I have heard of something similar being suggested to a handler of an aggressive dog at my club...thank Dog somebody stepped in and showed them an althernate way that took into account the dogs mind/beliefs in the situation.

As an aside, I visited a club recently where PP methods are promoted, however because the grounds that they were using were not fenced and close to a busy road, they insist that dogs wear check chains, martingales or haltis so that there is less chance of an accident because dogs were less likely to slip a collar. What you see there is a bunch of people using leads like they are steering wheels instead of a line of communication, so the collars are always tight regardless of whether or not the dog is doing the right thing. Talk about mixed messages.

[Erny]

A *bump* if you will.

[Staranais]

But, without denying that use of any equipment needs to be applied properly, I'd like to say there is something I have noted (generally speaking) and that is that I have seen far less abuse of the prong because (again, generally speaking) the dogs are more responsive to the prong and this leads to the handler using it less - or at least less intensively.

I have also observed that head collars and check chains tend to be abused more than prong collars, but have a different theory as to why this happens!

At least around here, any fool can go to any pet store or supermarket and pick up a head collar or check chain over the counter. Choke chains and head collars are cheap, easily available, and you don't have to jump through any hoops to get them. So although some very knowledgeable people use these two tools, there are also a lot of ignorant people who buy them too, with no idea how to safely and humanely use them.

On the other hand, in NZ, prong collars aren't easily available. Only people who are interested in dog training tend to know what a prong is, let alone go to the trouble of ordering one from overseas. Hence the people you see using prongs tend to have at least some idea what they are doing, and be less likely to abuse a dog through sheer laziness or ignorance.

That's my theory anyway.

[Alpha]

I was introduced to the use of a prong collar about 14 years ago by a very well known and respected instructor. At the time our then 2 year old ACD had never been trained for anything and a walk entailed you being dragged about by this 22kg raging male hormone. I started obedience work and was told by one instructor that my dog would be better off dead as he was dog aggressive. This was not strictly true as my mentor was later to prove to me that it was only a particular type of dog whom he was aggressive towards and it more than likely related to being attacked as a pup by the same type of dog. That information in hand, we worked on his attention to me which was fine if he was not bored, we worked in short, rewarding spurts with exercises he was able to accomplish and lots of rewards. He was still head strong and reluctant to heel....over several months we tried many avenues; inclusive of a fixed collar in lieu of the then mandatory correction chain. We also tried a "halti" both with it connected tot he correction chain and without. Being determined to enter the obedience ring but with a recalcitrant heeler ...it was suggested we use a prong collar. I was shown the collar one afternoon at a training session which only a few of us attended, we were told how it worked and that it was not always along term solution, we were also told it was illegal, we all tried the collar around our own wrists to confirm that it did not hurt or injure. I was and always will be grateful for the information,training and advice I so freely got at the session ( and in later years it was reconfirmed at a K9 training session).

I used a prong collar with great success over a decade ago, I only had to use it about 10 days ; I forget because the joy I got from being able to enter a trail ring 2 months later out weighed any thing before that. Even now with the myriad of training products, styles,methodologies and advice available I would still utilize such an aid again if the need arose and was needed.

[Guest Willow]

ok, I am responding to this because Erny asked for opinions from both sides of the fence, and since no one has been brave enough to post an opposing opinion (yet) I thought I would go first......please respect me for this, as it can take a fair bit of courage to stand up and voice an opinion that is obviously very different from the majority, and I feel I have made myself vulnerable as a result (Daniel in the Lion's Den springs to mind!!!)

I have read everyone's posts, and let me say first off that while I don't agree with a lot of the opinions on the thread, I don't doubt for a second that you all love your dogs. Otherwise you would not be on DOL in the first place.

I am opposed to the use of prong collars, check chains & haltis.

My reasoning is that I think it can be more effective to get inside a dogs head, and get it to do what you request that way, than to use physical correction tools to correct a behaviour.

It was mentioned in an earlier post that in one case, as soon as the prong collar ceased to be used, the dog reverted to it's original behaviour. This is why I beleieve some tools only correct the behaviour in the moment, rather than changing the dogs way of thinking....I would prefer to use "canine language" to persuade a dog to do what I wish, of it's own free will, following my instructions because it beleives I am a strong & trustworthy leader.

I am a great beleiver in Jan Fennells "Amichien Bonding" method.

I'm sure a lot of you will think I am nuts ("Bloody soft" and "Crazy Hippy" are two comments that come to mind). This is fine, but I felt I would be letting myself down if I didn't stand up & be counted.

[Staranais]

I don't think you're crazy, and I'm not going to flame.

Having said that, though, I do have to say that most people here believe in all the things you do (which reading between the lines of your post would seem to include analysing dog behaviour, presumably using plenty of reward, instilling good pack structure using protocols including "Amichien" - am I right?). The difference is that many people here also use correction collars when appropriate or helpful.

So I guess I just wanted to point out that it's not necessarily a case of people using one or the other. Most people here do try to be strong leaders, and do use a lot of reward. It's just that sometimes, for some dogs, these things aren't enough by themselves. I'd love it if I could get my dog to obey me 100% just because he respects me (and believe me, he does respect me), but unfortunately that just ain't going to happen. And I imagine many other dogs would be similar - particularly dogs that are high drive, or very cocky, or very aggressive. Not all dogs respond well to all training methods or techniques.

I also have to say that I personally don't really understand the school of thought that says that physical punishment is somehow "worse" than things like denying the dog attention, denying him rewards, denying him food or affection, etc. Both types of punishment are still punishment, and both types can be frustrating or upsetting to the dog if insensitively used. I mean, that's why they work as punishment. If ignoring your dog didn't make him upset, then it wouldn't work as punishment. If it's OK to use one type of punishment, then why is it not OK to use the other, as long as both types are carefully and humanely used? (In fact, I personally believe that physical punishment can sometimes be more humane than simply denying a dog stuff, since in some cases prompt physical corrections can be easier for dogs to understand, reducing the potential for stress, and creating an opportunity to reward the correct behaviour. But that's neither here nor there).

Just my 2 cents. I guess it all comes down to, I don't mind what tools or methods anyone uses to train their dog, as long as the training isn't physically or mentally abusive to the dog. And I'd like people to give me the same courtesy when I go to train my dog. As long as he's looking happy and obedient (which he is), don't try to outlaw the methods or tools that I'm using.

I just wanted to edit this to add - I'm not sure what sort of experience you have working with really tough dogs, Willow, I couldn't work that out from your post. But after thinking, I just wanted to add that even if pet owners are banned from using prong collars or other correction tools, I personally find it really terrible that professional trainers aren't allowed to do so in some states. People who end up with problem dogs on their hands often need to go to a professional for help, and I believe that for the sake of the dogs, a professional trainer must have all the available tools at their disposal. Even if 99% of dogs can be cured with leadership and a positive-only regime, professional trainers need access to the means to help the other 1% of troubled animals that end up in their clinic. As someone who has been told by more than one positive-only trainer that my dog couldn't be saved and should be kept away from other dogs for life, only to see a vast improvement after I started using toy rewards with corrections, I hate the idea that trainers could be prevented from rehabilitating dogs like mine by being banned from using certain tools. So although I do respect your decision not to use any correction collars on the dogs you train, I would encourage you to think about supporting legislation that allowed well qualified professional trainers to use these tools with the permission of a veterinarian. JMO.

Edited July 7, 2007 by Amhailte

[Erny]

Hi Willow . And thank you for coming here. Please know that your opinion is as valued as anyone elses' is and has been in this thread. IMO, it's all about opening minds to both sides of the equation and looking at the bigger picture.

I agree that behavioural modification is about "getting inside the dog's head" .... in other words, working at an emotional level rather than just the resultant apparent behaviour level.

But a power chain can be used to halt a behaviour that might otherwise have become an ingrained habitual one. Once achieving that 'halt', the dog is often more open to learning other ways. Obviously what is done and when depends on what the behaviour issue is - or more particularly the cause.

Whatever a behavioural issue is, application of correction only (regardless of the equipment style being used) is NOT by itself going to fix it, but I have seen many many cases where it's made the start that is required.

Although my post serves to counter yours, its intent is discussional only. Please don't be afraid or embarressed to counter my counter :D :D ....... Your return will be welcome - thank you for venturing in and having the courage to be the first.