Pushing The Boundaries At A Certain Age?

[Erny]

I would seriously recommend to join the Adelaide Sportdog Club and train in Schutzhund obediance ...

I don't know any of the instructors at the Adelaide Sportdog Club (although I might have met one or two of them) and of course any club is only as good as its instructor/s, however I agree that Schutzhund training is an excellent training discipline - for both dog and handler.

[Red Fox]

Thanks for the link Diablo. I'll shoot you a PM shortly.

I actually have a very strong interest in Schutzhund, it is something I would love to train in in the future and appeals to me MUCH more than 'traditional' type obedience which seems to be very repetitive -though I thought a Ridgie would be the wrong breed for Schutzhund? I guess not

Unfortunately I'm 350kms out of Adelaide which makes it a bit difficult to commit to training there.

Kharn, I too have had that experience at obedience. I find that I have to have a good distance between us and the other dogs to get any form of focus out of Kei, otherwise it is just pointless. And given that a lot of the exercises involve being in very close range, ie weaving around the other dogs, it makes the whole experience extremely frustrating.

[Drumbeat]

That's why we got 'banned' SK.. there was just no point in being there at all. She was so unfocused with all the other dogs that it was just a complete waste of time and money for us. I perservered with her at homw without distractions and she has come good - kind of. LOL Good luck.. just rememeber - breathe, assertive, breathe.

Good grief, which school was that - I need to avoid it??

Edit - have just noticed it was in NSW not Perth - that's a relief

Edited October 4, 2009 by Drumbeat

[poodlefan]

Just one thing.. you may find it easier to deal with passing dogs if you keep moving past them at a distance.

I've seen people try the "sit" and it just seems to build the excitement. I think you may find it easier to get focus and control if you keep moving. It will also decrease the period of time the dog is close to you.

I'd try for focus on the move then stationary at a distance before trying for a sit close to a passing dog.

I can't believe a person with a challenging dog got asked to leave training - that' just plain wrong. OK, maybe some one on one first but being asked to leave doesn't help the handler or dog.

[Red Fox]

Just one thing.. you may find it easier to deal with passing dogs if you keep moving past them at a distance.

I've seen people try the "sit" and it just seems to build the excitement. I think you may find it easier to get focus and control if you keep moving. It will also decrease the period of time the dog is close to you.

I'd try for focus on the move then stationary at a distance before trying for a sit close to a passing dog.

I can't believe a person with a challenging dog got asked to leave training - that' just plain wrong. OK, maybe some one on one first but being asked to leave doesn't help the handler or dog.

Thanks PF. I do try and move away when I can and yes it does make things MUCH easier ;) .

The only time I ask for a sit is if Kei is pulling towards the other dog and I have no-where to go ie, if we're on a narrow path with the other dog coming towards us as was the case the other day or there is another dog walking in front of us in the same direction.

The reason i do this is I find that it's much easier for me to get him into a sit and keep his attention than to try and walk with him pulling on the leash. If he doesn't notice the other dog until last minute I try to keep his focus on me by either using food or my voice and just keep on walking which seems to work okay, but as you said it's when he can see the other dog coming and has time to build up the excitement that he really becomes a handful!

Some good news though- I have been using the check chain for the past couple of days and there is a definate improvement in his behaviour whilst he is wearing it.

Yesterday we encountered 4 small dogs running around on the lawns as we came around the corner (2 off leash!). Each time Kei gave any sign of lunging towards them I gave him a quick 'pop' on the chain followed by either a sit or heel command in a happy voice. It took a bit of patience and a few corrections but he got the idea fairly quickly and I was able to control him and regain his focus.

Though the check chain is very new to me and I still feel a little uncomfortable using it, it seems that a few corrections may be exactly what he needs at this time.

[Diablo]

Thanks for the link Diablo. I'll shoot you a PM shortly.

I actually have a very strong interest in Schutzhund, it is something I would love to train in in the future and appeals to me MUCH more than 'traditional' type obedience which seems to be very repetitive -though I thought a Ridgie would be the wrong breed for Schutzhund? I guess not

Unfortunately I'm 350kms out of Adelaide which makes it a bit difficult to commit to training there.

Kharn, I too have had that experience at obedience. I find that I have to have a good distance between us and the other dogs to get any form of focus out of Kei, otherwise it is just pointless. And given that a lot of the exercises involve being in very close range, ie weaving around the other dogs, it makes the whole experience extremely frustrating.

Schutzhund training is open to any breed, but the Schutzhund obedience training which is the first stage of Schutzhund which must be passed before going onto further routines like the bite sleeve etc, provides an obedience foundation far exceeding anything that general obedience offers. A dog obedient enough to pass a Schutzhund BH, makes a mighty fine controlled pet of near faultless behaviour.

[Diablo]

Just one thing.. you may find it easier to deal with passing dogs if you keep moving past them at a distance.

I've seen people try the "sit" and it just seems to build the excitement. I think you may find it easier to get focus and control if you keep moving. It will also decrease the period of time the dog is close to you.

I'd try for focus on the move then stationary at a distance before trying for a sit close to a passing dog.

I can't believe a person with a challenging dog got asked to leave training - that' just plain wrong. OK, maybe some one on one first but being asked to leave doesn't help the handler or dog.

Thanks PF. I do try and move away when I can and yes it does make things MUCH easier .

The only time I ask for a sit is if Kei is pulling towards the other dog and I have no-where to go ie, if we're on a narrow path with the other dog coming towards us as was the case the other day or there is another dog walking in front of us in the same direction.

The reason i do this is I find that it's much easier for me to get him into a sit and keep his attention than to try and walk with him pulling on the leash. If he doesn't notice the other dog until last minute I try to keep his focus on me by either using food or my voice and just keep on walking which seems to work okay, but as you said it's when he can see the other dog coming and has time to build up the excitement that he really becomes a handful!

Some good news though- I have been using the check chain for the past couple of days and there is a definate improvement in his behaviour whilst he is wearing it.

Yesterday we encountered 4 small dogs running around on the lawns as we came around the corner (2 off leash!). Each time Kei gave any sign of lunging towards them I gave him a quick 'pop' on the chain followed by either a sit or heel command in a happy voice. It took a bit of patience and a few corrections but he got the idea fairly quickly and I was able to control him and regain his focus.

Though the check chain is very new to me and I still feel a little uncomfortable using it, it seems that a few corrections may be exactly what he needs at this time.

Negative reinforcement (corrective punishment) works like this: If for example a dog tears out the back door hearing the side gate rattle and in the process and drive in the dog to reach the side gate and have a good bark he runs head first into the pergola upright???. The dog bangs his head which didn't feel very nice and next time he tears out the back door, he will remember the pergola and won't run into it again learning from an unpleasant experience. The pergola didn't hit him or jump out infront of him, he ran into the pergola of his own accord which becomes his choice to run into the pergola again or avoid it.

A choker chain is the same thing where the dog has the choice to either walk along nicely or have a lunge and end up suffering a leash/choker correction. Because we are anchoring the leash doesn't mean that we did anything to dog, the dog by lunging did it to himself by choosing to lunge against your command of him to "leave it". The "leave it" command was given in the best interests of the dogs comfort level which he chose to ignor and therefore suffered the discomfort of reaching the end of the leash suddenly ending his forward motion. Leash corrections administered properly and fairly teaches the dog to listen to you. The dog learns that your commands result in nice things and feeling comfortable and running off on his own tangents results in things not so nice and comfortable.

We love our dogs and yanking them around by the neck is not what we are doing in leash corrections and chokers, we are merely anchoring the leash and the corrections occur by the dogs own incorrect choice of action

Edited October 4, 2009 by Diablo

[Aidan]

Negative reinforcement (corrective punishment) works like this: If for example a dog tears out the back door hearing the side gate rattle and in the process and drive in the dog to reach the side gate and have a good bark he runs head first into the pergola upright???. The dog bangs his head which didn't feel very nice and next time he tears out the back door, he will remember the pergola and won't run into it again learning from an unpleasant experience.

Technically this example is positive punishment. It is a punishing consequence (suppresses behaviour), not a reinforcing consequence (increases or maintains behaviour). I bring this up because if the OP is going to use a check chain or prong then the difference between +P and -R should be well understood first, particularly if dealing with a reactive dog.

A good example of negative reinforcement happening naturally is a typical reactive dog. The dog experiences some stress or anxiety upon seeing another dog, barks, and the other dog goes away OR the handler takes them away from the situation. Either way barking at other dogs (or lunging etc) is reinforced.

Of course this raises the question - what might be the effect of attempting to correct this with a punisher? It pays to be aware of all possible outcomes, then you at least have a shot at throwing the odds in your favour:

1. you might punish barking and lunging, mission accomplished

2. you might further increase stress (classical conditioning), mission failed

3. it might have no effect, the negative reinforcement of the other dog leaving might overshadow the attempted correction, mission failed

4. you might use the tool incorrectly and increase reactive behaviour, mission failed

You are advocating the right approach though, and that is to seek competent help in a supportive environment.

A choker chain is the same thing where the dog has the choice to either walk along nicely or have a lunge and end up suffering a leash/choker correction. Because we are anchoring the leash doesn't mean that we did anything to dog, the dog by lunging did it to himself by choosing to lunge against your command of him to "leave it". The "leave it" command was given in the best interests of the dogs comfort level which he chose to ignor

I'm not condemning the use of check chains, but I don't buy this argument. As we all discover the first time we try to train a dog, they don't understand english very well. They do understand reward and punishment pretty well though, and if you're going to use the latter, don't pretend you didn't make the choice to do so and blame the dog. If you put a check chain on a dog, YOU alone are responsible for what happens next.

[Miss Monster]

I actually have a very strong interest in Schutzhund, it is something I would love to train in in the future and appeals to me MUCH more than 'traditional' type obedience which seems to be very repetitive -though I thought a Ridgie would be the wrong breed for Schutzhund? I guess not

I think a Ridgie is the wrong breed for normal obediance because they hate the repetition, might look into Schutzhund myself.

I'm going to the K9 force seminar in November up here because Monster is still awful on lead and at recall and not getting better (he's 2 now and still has puppy brain). I had great success with the prong but he grew out of it then my ex & I split up and I didn't have him for 6 months - so now he's back to square one. I'll be asking Steve for some more links to start again. It was the only time I felt completely comfortable walking him and Meisha at the same time because I knew he couldn't use his body weight against the collar like he does with others.

Good luck with Kei.

[Diablo]

Negative reinforcement (corrective punishment) works like this: If for example a dog tears out the back door hearing the side gate rattle and in the process and drive in the dog to reach the side gate and have a good bark he runs head first into the pergola upright???. The dog bangs his head which didn't feel very nice and next time he tears out the back door, he will remember the pergola and won't run into it again learning from an unpleasant experience.

Technically this example is positive punishment. It is a punishing consequence (suppresses behaviour), not a reinforcing consequence (increases or maintains behaviour). I bring this up because if the OP is going to use a check chain or prong then the difference between +P and -R should be well understood first, particularly if dealing with a reactive dog.

A good example of negative reinforcement happening naturally is a typical reactive dog. The dog experiences some stress or anxiety upon seeing another dog, barks, and the other dog goes away OR the handler takes them away from the situation. Either way barking at other dogs (or lunging etc) is reinforced.

Of course this raises the question - what might be the effect of attempting to correct this with a punisher? It pays to be aware of all possible outcomes, then you at least have a shot at throwing the odds in your favour:

1. you might punish barking and lunging, mission accomplished

2. you might further increase stress (classical conditioning), mission failed

3. it might have no effect, the negative reinforcement of the other dog leaving might overshadow the attempted correction, mission failed

4. you might use the tool incorrectly and increase reactive behaviour, mission failed

You are advocating the right approach though, and that is to seek competent help in a supportive environment.

A choker chain is the same thing where the dog has the choice to either walk along nicely or have a lunge and end up suffering a leash/choker correction. Because we are anchoring the leash doesn't mean that we did anything to dog, the dog by lunging did it to himself by choosing to lunge against your command of him to "leave it". The "leave it" command was given in the best interests of the dogs comfort level which he chose to ignor

I'm not condemning the use of check chains, but I don't buy this argument. As we all discover the first time we try to train a dog, they don't understand english very well. They do understand reward and punishment pretty well though, and if you're going to use the latter, don't pretend you didn't make the choice to do so and blame the dog. If you put a check chain on a dog, YOU alone are responsible for what happens next.

Aidan,

To clarify matters, I openly admit to being an "old school" trainer primarily experienced with GSD's and I am not by any means up with modern training methods, however, a leash and collar is a training tool and once training is accomplished, I can throw the leash away with 100% unleashed reliability in the dog. The joke in my younger days was that I didn't own a leash which back then, unleashed control sorted the men from the boys in training ability generating the wow factor of who had the best dog control as you could imagine

Training is a balance of both positive and negative experiences for the dog to learn, neither all of one method or the other works effectively, it's a balance of both. People are becoming brainwashed with totally positive methods and what I am pointing out to people who are reluctant to use a leash and choker is another angle to ease their minds a little. The dog "always" has the choice to reach the end of the leash or to stay put by your side as commanded. It's not as if you have commanded the dog to run knowingly that he will soon be strung up on the choker when reaching the end of the leash is it???.

[Aidan]

The dog "always" has the choice to reach the end of the leash or to stay put by your side as commanded. It's not as if you have commanded the dog to run knowingly that he will soon be strung up on the choker when reaching the end of the leash is it???.

I read a great article today where the author brought up the example of a ringing telephone. He asked us (the readers) to imagine we were sitting down in a comfy chair about to enjoy our favourite beverage at the end of a busy day when all of a sudden the telephone rings.

The ringing phone is an irritation and the only way to stop it is to get up and answer it. We have been conditioned since our very first experiences with telephones to get up and answer a telephone, almost no matter what we are doing! We don't stop and think - "I wonder if that telephone call is important", we just get up and answer it. It's usually a telemarketer, or a survey, but we still get up and answer it. Very few people of my generation or older have been able to condition themselves to screen telephone calls, even with the technology these days making it easier to do so. The younger generations are even worse, some of them can't even seem to sit through a job interview without responding to a text message!

Dogs become conditioned to do certain things. The dog who can experience relief by making other dogs go away will keep doing that, he is conditioned to do it. The point I am trying to make is that he isn't making a decision to be DISOBEDIENT, he is doing what has worked in the past. He is doing what he has been conditioned to do.

You may not have commanded him to run to the end of the line, but you KNEW that he would do it and that he would be corrected for it. Otherwise, why would you do it? If you want to put a check chain on him, then you are aiming to condition him to take a different approach. The only person making a decision about whether or not he wears the collar is YOU. That is a fact. All sorts of opinion might follow on from there, but the fact is you put the collar on the dog in an attempt to condition him to do something other than lunge.

When we start telling ourselves that the dog is making the DECISION to be disobedient, we are just making an attempt to justify our behaviour and avoid any responsibility for what happens next. When it all goes well, we congratulate ourselves, and when it doesn't - we can blame the dog!

We also start to convince ourselves that certain levels of correction are OK because "the dog is making the decision to do it to himself". If a dog hits the end of the leash so hard that he flips over, or collapses his trachea - is that his fault? Or was he just doing what he was conditioned to do and what we had failed to correct because all we had was a hammer and everything started looking like a nail?

I believe your intentions are good, but I just can't swallow that whole "the dog corrected himself" line because it doesn't stand up to scrutiny and a lot of harm has been done under that banner. The purely positive crowd are a reaction to this sort of thinking. I became one when I just couldn't swallow it any longer. There are many ironies here, but perhaps the biggest is now the tide is turning the other way! Look at the people in this thread who have been displaced from PP classes!

[Diablo]

'Aidan' date='5th Oct 2009 - 05:28 PM' post='4026968'

Dogs become conditioned to do certain things. The dog who can experience relief by making other dogs go away will keep doing that, he is conditioned to do it. The point I am trying to make is that he isn't making a decision to be DISOBEDIENT, he is doing what has worked in the past. He is doing what he has been conditioned to do.

Aidan,

To understand the leash and choker correction methods, you first must understand the full training process and not focus upon certain aspects without digesting the "whole" system.

Firstly the dog is "not" conditioned to lunge at all. The dog is conditioned to listen to me and follow my lead from the first day of training. The dog is taught various commands in a distraction free environment and learns the commands in a bullet proof fashion prior to distractions being added into the program. The dog then has learned the command and has done it over 100 times or more. For example, the dog is conditioned to know what "leave it" means. When introducing a distraction and keeping in mind the dog's conditioning is to listen to me, the choice to ignor the "leave it" command which is a command that the dog knows and obeys to pursue a distraction is disobedience, 100% pure disobedience that will result in correction and the dog swiftly gets the message what's required of him. The exercise of correction revolves around the dog learning that his choice to ignor known commands doesn't work like putting your hand in the fire it will get burned.

As far as trachea injury and all that over exaggerated bulldust in support of clickers and treats, on a 6 foot leash there is nowhere near the momentum in correction to harm the dog, "fact", that approach is an unfounded mistruth. Sure dogs have sustained injuries with chokers and have died being hooked on fences etc etc, but not from leash corrections adminstered properly I can swear to that. Corrections are "only" administered to the disobedience of commands that the dog knows and understands.

Edited October 5, 2009 by Diablo

[Aidan]

Firstly the dog is "not" conditioned to lunge at all. The dog is conditioned to listen to me and follow my lead from the first day of training.

But the problem is we're not talking about your dog. We're talking about someone else's dog who has been conditioned, inadvertently, to lunge to the end of the leash when confronted by another dog.

Let me make it clear, I am not arguing against your methods. Although I do things differently, I'm not arrogant enough to want to dictate to others how they do things or deny that their methods are valid or effective. My argument is against the claim that the dog is choosing to be "disobedient" and is "correcting himself".

If you do things your way, by the time he gets to a threshold with another dog, he has two conditioned behaviours - stay on a loose leash and shut up, or run to the end of the leash lunging and barking. If he does the latter, my argument is that it isn't disobedience, it is that one layer of conditioning was stronger than the other. You effectively acknowledge this when you don't just jump in and ask too much of the dog early on. At what point do you get to decide that the dog is being disobedient, rather than just not being ready?

And this is why I make the argument. When the trainer becomes arrogant enough to decide that the dog is being disobedient, a great many misunderstandings occur that do not encourage good, effective training. Some skilled trainers can avoid this, people who get their advice over the internet might not.

[corvus]

Aidan points out most of the reasons why I like reward-based training and don't like to use punishment if I can help it. I think potential damage is always going to be worse with punishments than with rewards. The worst you do with rewards is rewarding the wrong thing. This can be rectified in most cases by stopping that and rewarding the right thing instead, at least in my experience. The worst you can do with punishments is much harder to rectify later. I like methods that are resilient to mistakes, because I make a lot of mistakes. I do not think I am a particularly dreadful trainer. I think that most people make mistakes.

To be fair, I think there are times when prong collars may be a suitable tool. Like for the Boxer that tried to attack my mother's dog, for example, and was so big compared to his handler that he just dragged her along for the ride.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only person on this board by any means that assumes that if my dog is not performing, I'm not paying well enough.

[Erny]

To be fair, I think there are times when prong collars may be a suitable tool. Like for the Boxer that tried to attack my mother's dog, for example, and was so big compared to his handler that he just dragged her along for the ride.

The thing is that with some dogs and some owners, they are so into the "positive" without any balance that their dogs can reach the stage such as the above. These dogs may then require a higher level of correction than they otherwise might have needed had "positive" been balanced out with "consequence/correction" in the first place, and the dog might not have escalated to learnt behaviour of (eg) aggression which of course in itself can be complex.

I'm not saying this is the case for your mother's dog, but I am using it as an example. Many of the problematic dogs I am called upon to assist with have got to the stage they have due to the lack of balance in terms of positive and discipline, even if that comes in the form of a well placed physical correction.

So I disagree with the argument of 'mistakes caused by using only positive can always be fixed'. It's actually not rare that they can (indirectly or otherwise) lead to more extreme behaviours that aren't so easy to remedy.

Edited October 6, 2009 by Erny

[Staranais]

To be fair, I think there are times when prong collars may be a suitable tool. Like for the Boxer that tried to attack my mother's dog, for example, and was so big compared to his handler that he just dragged her along for the ride.

The thing is that with some dogs and some owners, they are so into the "positive" without any balance that their dogs can reach the stage such as the above. These dogs may then require a higher level of correction than they otherwise might have needed had "positive" been balanced out with "consequence/correction" in the first place, and the dog might not have escalated to learnt behaviour of (eg) aggression which of course in itself can be complex.

I'm not saying this is the case for your mother's dog, but I am using it as an example. Many of the problematic dogs I am called upon to assist with have got to the stage they have due to the lack of balance in terms of positive and discipline, even if that comes in the form of a well placed physical correction.

So I disagree with the argument of 'mistakes caused by using only positive can always be fixed'. It's actually not rare that they can (indirectly or otherwise) lead to more extreme behaviours that aren't so easy to remedy.

And I'd disagree that potential damage to the dog is always going to be worse with punishments than with rewards. Yeah, maybe for our own personal dogs.

But the worst that can happen to a dog when reward is inappropriately used is that the dog makes no progress or gets worse, the handler gets frustrated, and if they don't know or are discouraged from researching any other options to control the dog, then the owner can give up, and the dog can end up at the pound or PTS.

Sure, none of us Dolers would do that. We'd research other options. We'd try other methods. We'd hire a professional trainer. But IMO we aren't necessarily representative of the general public, who often just want a well behaved dog as soon as possible and with the minimum of effort, and will simply not keep a badly behaved dog, or who will not put more effort into training than perhaps one season at the local obedience school.

The potential damage to a dog can sometimes be just as bad from poorly used reward as from poorly used punishment, since the real issue can be that the training is ineffective, and many owners will not persist indefinitely with an unruly dog without seeing progress.

Sure, it's an "extreme" case that doesn't apply to most dogs. It's also a case that's close to my heart, since it could very very easily have happened to my last dog, if someone less persistant had adopted him and taken him along to the first obedience school we attended together.

Irrelevant to the OP, of course, since I'm sure she'll persist with her dog no matter what method she picks.

[Red Fox]

Irrelevant to the OP, of course, since I'm sure she'll persist with her dog no matter what method she picks.

Thanks Staranais There is no doubt that I will persist with Kei's training until I find a method that works for him.

As a first time dog owner positive based training is really appealing -no stress to the dog and less chance of making an irreversable mistake has been rammed down my throat since the day we started puppy school. I have constantly been told that check chains are cruel (and prongs are the DEVIL!!) and a head halter is a much safer option for a big dog (at obedience and puppy classes, not here at DOL). I don't agree with this at all and had to really stand my ground on this issue at obedience.

After using the check chain for around a week now and seeing a huge improvement in Kei's behaviour I've realised that he is the type of dog who is going to need a little bit of re-enforcement and correction to be the best that he can be.

Obviously we still have a long way to go and a lot to learn but I believe that we will get there

[Nekhbet]

good for you SK, that is the secret. Don't have a closed mind (and I know it's hard to try and branch out when you're a newby) but if you simply use some logic you will go far.

horses for courses. Not every dog needs a check chain but then again not every dog can be well mannered quickly and efficiently without one. They're not about abuse they're sort of more like the mother who tells her child 'if you run with your shoelace untied you'll trip and hurt yourself' .. kid wont listen, mother lets them learn the hard way and they soon learn faster that you better do it or there's a consequence!

Actually if corrections are applied properly there is no stress, in fact there can be a decrease in the anxiety of the dog. I use corrections in suppression work when applicable and after a couple through check chains or dd collars the dog is a calmer, happier and more relaxed individual.

hope your boy behaves himself!

[Red Fox]

Thanks Nekhbet

I must admit that I was a little reluctant to use the check chain. You need only google it to see how many horror stories/scare tactics there are out there

Trachea damage scares the hell out of me, as does simply damaging the relationship I have with my dog. So I did make sure that I was shown how to fit and use the chain correctly by someone with a fair amount of experience before I even attempted to walk him on it.

Aidan- Thanks for all the info you have provided in this thread. I've put a lot of effort into teaching Kei to walk on a loose leash with a flat/martingale collar and I would never put him on a check chain if I didn't have that foundation there first. I've also taken care to build up distractions gradually when using the check chain, at this stage I would never take him into an area (for example an obedience class) where I thought that he would exceed his threshold and cause himself damage by lunging on the end of the leash. I would also never correct him (or allow him to correct himself) for not following a command that he didn't understand.

Yes, it is possible that he has been inadvertently conditioned to lunge to the end of the leash on seeing another dog. It's something that i have tried to avoid though and one of the reasons why we stopped attending obedience for the time being.

Today Kei is having a sedation to have some stiches removed so cannot have any food. Normally I take treats out with me 'just in case' but obviously that wasn't going to happen today so i took him out with the check chain alone and only pats and praise to re-enforce his good behaviour.

I'm proud to say that even though we came across 4 other dogs- the first pulling and lunging on its lead towards him from the opposite side of the road (small breed), the second bouncing around behind a fence near the walkway, the third (a little dog) jumping up and sitting on the brick fence of his yard as we walked past(!) and the last, a Goldie, sitting calmly next to his owner as we passed by not even a metre away from us- we passed them all with no major incidents ;)

I only had to give him a light correction (maybe a 3 on a scale of 10) followed by a heel command when he pulled toward the first little dog, he showed a little interest in the dog behind the fence but no pulling and completely ignored the other two. To say I'm happy with that is an understatement

The chain might not be a cure all for everybody, and I can't say that I'm entirely comfortable using it yet. But by seeing such a huge improvement in such a short period of time with very low level corrections my confidence in using it is growing and I believe that this is making things less stressful for both me and my dog.

Would I feel more comfortable using a prong collar? Well yes, after a fair bit of research I do feel that they are a safer option. But until I can find someone to fit one correctly and show me how to use it I will stick to the chain.

There seems to be a lot of debate around between purely possitive trainers and those that use a balance of corrections and rewards. I'm fast learninig that the second option is going to be more suitable for me. It's also the way I parent too. If I only rewarded my 10 year old when he did something that I liked and ignored him when he broke the rules I would have a truely unruly child. But I wouldn't smack him around the head for not being able to do something that he didn't understand either

[Kelpie-i]

Dogs are not these complicated beings with 2 brains, infact they are very simple creatures with equally simple thought processes...so simple that us humans complicate matters for them by trying to look too deeply into the "why" and "what".

It's not rocket science SK, balance is the key for absolutely everything in life.

Good luck with your boy!!