An Observation And A Question

[Staff'n'Toller]

Agree with LP and PF and also should say that I was shown in a workshop by another trainer how you can teach the dog that they are in control of the aversive and how they can manipulate it, that's the way I fit them now.

[Tonymc]

Headcollars ar something I would never use on a dog.They might be useful perhaps to throw at the crows.

The headcollars for dog's is a process repeated in many areas of life, not just the dog world.I have seen the same process carried out in horses,agriculture, business and so on.What process is that?Maybe its better stating it as lack of process.People see somebodyelse using something and blindly accept that its the way to go.Because Fred down the Street is using a Headcollar, it must be the way to go,thinks Bill.Bill never questions is this approach specie's appropriate?Bill due to lack of indepth knowledge never recognises the discomfort his dog is displaying when wearing the Headcollar.

The whole headcollar thing has its origins in somebody seeing a Horse being controlled by a Headcollar.The illogical lightbulb went on in their Head, "We could use the same thing on Dogs" and further still " we can market this and make some money"

No thought was given that a Horse is a prey animal and responds as such and that a Dog is a predator and responds as such.No thought was given that a Dog thinks,behaves,responds and see's the world totally differently to a Horse.No thought was given to the physical differences between the two Animals.

A good comparision would be me taking this course of action.We all know Camels are controlled by a nosepeg.The nosepeg has proven to be effective,sustainable and suitable for the Camel.So along I come and think,Horses are directed and controlled by a bit and why not do the same to a Camel.I will get a bit made up and then market it as a new U-Beaut revolutionary tool!!!!

So I totally disregard when trying a bit on a Camel that the Animal protests and is in discomfort.I totally disregard the physical difference between a Horse and a Camel.I then invent my marketing propaganda and away I go.I pick my mark initially by targeting Camel owner's who are of average knowledge and that combined with my spiel, see's my new tool hit the Market.People start seeing Joe Blogs using my tool on his Camel.Joe blogs either is unaware the tool is not appropriate for his Camel or doe's not want to admit he is wrong.So others see him using my Tool and they buy one,never questioning whether it is the right way to go or even applicable at all!!!! Tony

[poodlefan]

Tony MC:

No thought was given that a Horse is a prey animal and responds as such and that a Dog is a predator and responds as such.No thought was given that a Dog thinks,behaves,responds and see's the world totally differently to a Horse.No thought was given to the physical differences between the two Animals.

One weighs hundreds of kilos. The other doesn't.

When you fit a halter on a horse, the noseband rests on bone and nowhere near the horse's eyes. Standard fitting advice is that you have to be able to fit your hand between any part of the halter and the horses head. The lead rope generally falls from the bottom of the halter and at a point that is higher than the lead hand. So the guidance comes from below the horses head.

So now we have a device fitted tightly right up near the dogs eyes, a very nerve rich area, more often than not with the lead hand being used above the animals head and with the person leading the animal usually heavier than it is.

Oh yes, it's just like a horse halter. :D

[Cosmolo]

Don't have a problem with correctly fitted and used headcollars- so i'm not anti HC's! It just puzzles me that 2 tools where negative R can be used with both are thought of in such vastly different lights.

S&T- a HC can create shutting down, frustration and learned helplessness too?

Edited October 2, 2008 by Cosmolo

[Diva]

Thanks for the replies- propaganda has a huge part to play in so many facets of life!

I would love to hear from anyone who would use a headcollar, but not an e collar- no flaming- would just like your perspective.

Personally Cosmolo, I'd prefer not to use either. I think both have their uses but neither are ideal for your average pet owner and both have considerable potential for misuse.

Ditto here. I'd use an e-collar for a stock chasing dog if getting the behaviour under control was essential to the dog's future. But I'd prefer to avoid both really.

[Erny]

Ditto here. I'd use an e-collar for a stock chasing dog if getting the behaviour under control was essential to the dog's future. But I'd prefer to avoid both really.

Diva - assuming you know, or if you don't, that you were taught, how to use the e-collar utilising the principals of negative reinforcement at low stim level, is there a particular reason why you would prefer to avoid the use of an e-collar?

Genuine question. :D

[Staff'n'Toller]

Don't have a problem with correctly fitted and used headcollars- so i'm not anti HC's! It just puzzles me that 2 tools where negative R can be used with both are thought of in such vastly different lights.

S&T- a HC can create shutting down, frustration and learned helplessness too?

Of course it can, I certainly wouldn't disagree with that.

I took exception to the statement that a low level stim causes no harm. :D

Mel.

[Diva]

Ditto here. I'd use an e-collar for a stock chasing dog if getting the behaviour under control was essential to the dog's future. But I'd prefer to avoid both really.

Diva - assuming you know, or if you don't, that you were taught, how to use the e-collar utilising the principals of negative reinforcement at low stim level, is there a particular reason why you would prefer to avoid the use of an e-collar?

Genuine question. :D

Because I'm not sure I could apply those principles without straying into P+. I understand how it's supposed to be applied as R-, but not sure that my very touch sensitive primary breed would experience it as the theory suggests they should. I'm not totally against P+ either, but only when the consequences of uninterrupted behaviour truly warrant. Perhaps if I had a less physically sensitive breed I'd have formed a different view.

I'd be reluctant to recommend an e-collar to others because I don't trust most people's instinct to punish. P+ is so much the default reaction for many when faced with a difficult behaviour problem that I'd want to be very sure of the supervision they'd get in using it, or that they were really, really committed to using it right, or that the alternatives for the dog were dire - or probably all three. I don't rule it out of court, but I'd prefer to avoid.

[Rusky]

There is something which causes me to get upset, it is people buying halters and no pull harness without anyone to assist them in the use and fitting. I know all about the DVD but is unheeded in most cases and not understood by the majority of people who can pop into any store and buy these things. I must watch it again see if anything has changed.

I see a huge number of people rocking up with their dogs being abused on the end of a halti and similarly with no pull harness. The general thing they say is that they bought it and it doesn't work...well it did at first now they don't. So you see a poor dog with a super tight harness or a head collar too tight or too loose with a jumping pony lookalike on the end of the lead.

The dogs are very grateful when I remove these things. My preferance is always a flat collar

I do fit haltis and sporn, I demonstrate use,they aren't right for all dogs. I insist they are not used for socialisation and play, simply to assist the dog to learn the loose leash walking combined with a flat collar loose leash walking excercise.... To give the handler a breather and to be able to reward correctly for not pulling.

One chap arrived first day at class with a sporn, headcollar and choker on his dog all tied to the same lead :D

Walking down the street I see dogs being abused who are wearing head collars. They don't even fit all dogs. I am a fan of them but I wish their use was restricted. They should only be used very short term.

The only comment I have about E or other types of collars that I don't use is that the objective should be to remove it as early as possible once the desired behaviour is trained.

[Erny]

The only comment I have about E or other types of collars that I don't use is that the objective should be to remove it as early as possible once the desired behaviour is trained.

I agree with the other of your comments in your post, Rusky. I have seen similar in relation to head-collar use .... although never with chain, HC and harness all attached together simultaneously. I have seen and where needed have used HC's with a CC .... but in these instances I fit the CC larger than would normally be required so that it is not activated when the lead is applied. The CC is only there in case the head collar 'gives'.

In relation to the above comment - as far as it relates to the e-collar - the dog can still wear the collar without it having or needing to be used, so it needn't be specifically removed (save for the usual prescribed periods) for any great benefit to the dog. Naturally, the objective is that the dog 'train' so that the stimulation is used and needed less and less until not at all. One example springs to mind for me and that is a client I have assisted with problematic prey drive that was being exhibited by her dog towards other dogs. For 6 months before I saw her she had been unable to permit her dog free run off-lead. We met up for a beach walk with our dogs the other day. Her dog was off lead and wore the e-collar but its use was unnecessary .... and that was even with other off lead (and somewhat rude) dogs being there. In fact she laughingly commented that she was glad she didn't need to apply a stim as it had been so long since she had that she was concerned she'd be a bit 'rusty' on it. Her dog is happy and jaunty; doesn't bother with other dogs and recalls reliably, willingly and with pleasure. It was great to see. She continues with the wearing of the e-collar in certain places/areas where she is not completely certain it won't be needed - just as a fail safe, so to speak.

Edited October 2, 2008 by Erny

[Seita]

Personally - for a dog that constantly pulls it's owners around - that dog can do quite a lot of damage to their windpipe - for me - a halter is a better option.

This is something that gets to me. A head collar puts pressure across the nose which most know is a very sensitive area, how is that any different from a collar that put pressure on the windpipe. If someone were to use an e-collar there would be no pressure at all, just low level stim which would in no way harm the dog. I think there are a lot of misconceptions over many training tools but if we're going to stop using one tool because is can damage a part of the dog how are we fixing the problem by using a tool that can cause just as much harm to another part of the dog?

A mis-timed stim or misused E collar can create shutting down, frustration and learned helplessness. Just because it's not outwardly apparent physical harm, doesn't mean it is not harmful at all.

This is swaying off topic of the original post, but everyone needs to put head collar use into some sort of perspective IMO. I would rather positively introduce a head collar over a number of weeks to a dog that is NOT getting walked at all because the owner is unable/unwilling to do so. I would rather see a dog happily wearing a head collar with some amount of aversive in there for pulling (balanced with R+ for correct walking behaviour) getting OUT of it's backyard each day and being mentally stimulated than not at all.

Each case needs to be analysed in its individual situation in regards to owner and dog. The head collar (nor the E collar) for that matter is not something you can make blanket statements on in regards to training because every dog and owner is different!!

Mel.

I'm not against head collars a such and am sure there are people out there that due use them appropriately, it's just the fact that there are thousands of others out there that aren't using them correctly. I was meerly commenting on someone else's comment that the head collar causes less harm to the dog than a dog pulling on a flat collar and wanted to point out that the head collar has as much if not more potential to cause harm.

I too would rather see a dog out on a head collar and being walked than not being walked at all, but IMO there are better tools and training methods that neither require a head halter nor a flat/check chain. I'm not sure that I'd want to train loose lead walking with an e-collar either but as this discussion is about halters and e-collar I'm trying to keep on topic.

I definitely agree with you in that every case is different but when discussing these two tools it's easy to see which one is more readily available and therefore has a higher amount of misuse associated with it, hence my 'blanket' statement.

[Rusky]

I have seen and where needed have used HC's with a CC .... but in these instances I fit the CC larger than would normally be required so that it is not activated when the lead is applied. The CC is only there in case the head collar 'gives'.

I use a rope which is made by a chap here. If the headcollar fails there is safety collar. The guy I spoke of was not using it that way and the chain was very tight. He is coming along now, there is a language barrier.

Just wondering does the e collar work in water? I never really thought about it before. I guesss they must as dogs love to run in rivers and the ocean. Point taken that the collar is just switched off.

[MonElite]

Just wondering does the e collar work in water?

they are waterproof (well some models are) and the stim runs between two probes, regrdless if its on dry land or in water - as it travels between probes along dogs skin

[Deleted]

deleted

Edited June 14, 2010 by Deleted

[Erny]

I also know that e-collars are not suitable for most dogs. I know if I put the collar on my little princess Rei, she would be absolutely devestated and would most likely become very depressed. I think they are only suitable for dogs such as my Kuma, who are very happy and outgoing, and not at all shy or worriesome. It is brilliant for him, and I don't regret my purchase of it for a second. It definately helps to increase his quality of life.

Glad that your dog has gained the benefits from the use of e-collar training, Kazzie. It is great to be able to permit them to run free off-lead knowing you retain control when control is needed.

But I wouldn't agree with your wording of "most" that I've highlighted in the sentence above. I'm not sure what method you're using for your e-collar training, but using -R at low stim levels ("low" is measured by the dog's reaction but is also generally pretty much what it means via the dial) in my experience the e-collar is suitable for most dogs, although not for some.

ETA: But apologies to Cosmolo as it seems this is straying off topic just a tad. I don't really qualify to give a proper answer to this thread, as it calls for those who WOULD use a head collar but WOULDN'T use an e-collar, to comment.

Edited October 3, 2008 by Erny

[Deleted]

deleted

Edited June 14, 2010 by Deleted

[Erny]

I agree that A LOT of people could probably find it useful in the same way as I have. Just the thought of people using it incorrectly and on the wrong sort of dogs scares me.

I know what you mean. I have the same shuddering thoughts and feelings when it comes to Head Collars - all the more so because they are portrayed to and received by the public as being "kind", so they often don't have a clue to the damage they can cause their dogs.

Edited October 3, 2008 by Erny

[Deleted]

deleted

Edited June 14, 2010 by Deleted