Pinch Collars

[poodlefan]

R&L:

I also think no-body can say what has been achieved with Zero can be "wrong" he was trained with a method that suited him and his owner and gave him a second chance at life, and a fulfilling good one. In this instance the owner, trainer and dog liked that method got it right and it worked - how can that be wrong??

I think people need to stop bickering and pushing their own agenda and think of the dogs

x 2

If a pinch collar is the difference between a dog being safely walked or never leaving the yard, then I say use the collar. I have seen one, I have had one on my arm and I have pulled it hard. It applies pressure, it does not pierce. Furthermore, it does not apply pressure unless it is actively engaged.

I've never used one and never hope to need one but if you own a powerful dog with ingrained pulling habits then not much else is going to work. Ask K9Pro about the 65+ kg dog that dragged its handler over 100m to attack another dog. It was wearing a halti at the time as prescribed by the trainer consulted.

You need to stand in the shoes of the owner before you decide whether is training method is "appropriate". I'd say a significant proportion of those who pass judgement on what they perceive as harsh training methods have never confronted the challenges some dogs create. Most dogs will never need anything like a pinch collar.

Its the person using the training tool that determines if its kind or cruel.

No one method of training works for all dogs. Try using click and treat to deal with an ingrained stock chaser. If the distraction is more rewarding to the dog than anything the handler can offer, then what????

[corvus]

So you use the click as a cue, not just as a marker. No different to training the recall to a whistle then except the whistle has a longer range.

I use it as an interruptor and a cue and a marker. It's good for short range. If I need longer range I have emergency recalls. The nice thing about clickers or markers is it doesn't take long to get a good conditioned response. It took about a year to get a good reliable recall through conditioning for Kivi. In contrast, I tried with the marker a couple of months after I introduced it in training and it was very effective then.

I am sorry Corvus, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion for a dog.

I just cannot fathom how using the clicker as three seperate things is conducive with training that is precise and clear to a dog. There are so many other things to use as a cue. For myself the clicker is a marker that is it. I do have a verbal "go on" signal but that is it. For a cue, such as "focus we are training" is a verbal word.

Hey, the web is full of people that adore the Look At That game for how effective it has been. The proof is, as you say, in the pudding. A clicker acts as an interruptor even in clicker training shaping sessions. That's why the click marks the end of the behaviour. And the first time a clicker is heard for a while, it acts as a cue that training is now occurring, regardless of where you are or what your intention was, unless you are in the habit of only clicking once or twice and then putting the clicker away. The LAT game and other similar uses for the clicker are not changing the meaning of a click. They are just acknowledging and exploiting the various meanings a click already has.

[Aidan]

There are a few people here who haven't used a prong collar but are making a lot of assumptions on how they are used

The problem with this thread is that it's only people who have used them who are making the assumptions.

I was fairly certain that you and Shell were not using them as described by others in this thread and your most recent post confirms it. Neither you or I rely on distraction or finding a "better"/"stronger" reinforcer, yet the assumption is that this is how it is done, and a whole bunch of other assumptions follow on from that.

[Aidan]

I also think no-body can say what has been achieved with Zero can be "wrong" he was trained with a method that suited him and his owner and gave him a second chance at life, and a fulfilling good one. In this instance the owner, trainer and dog liked that method got it right and it worked - how can that be wrong??

Who said that it was?

Hands up, did anyone think that I said that it was?

[MonElite]

And the first time a clicker is heard for a while, it acts as a cue that training is now occurring, regardless of where you are or what your intention was

hmmm strange statement.

My dogs know the trainign is about to start when I say a starting cue word (ready?)

[Steve K9Pro]

A: I was fairly certain that you and Shell were not using them as described by others in this thread and your most recent post confirms it. Neither you or I rely on distraction or finding a "better"/"stronger" reinforcer, yet the assumption is that this is how it is done, and a whole bunch of other assumptions follow on from that.

K9: Agreed Aidan, I almost was gonna type the ass u me thing, oops I did lol...

I think when you end up trying to create competitive triggers, you end up playing the either / or game. I never find this a good way of training, say we look at the recall for example.

People who have a dog that has a high value for other dogs, want to recall their dog away from playing with other dogs, its either come to the owner or play with the dogs.

The dog chooses to play on, the owner gets angry.

On this day of training, it was never going to be about the recall or not complying with the recall command, it is more to do with the value the owner has vs the value the other dogs have.

Once someone has that situation, I would rather run a controlled recall on a line and release the dog to play with other dogs as the reinforcment for the recall.

Then it isnt either or, its win win.

I dont think when treating aggression in the early steps, it is really any different, its not save yourself through aggression (and get corrected) or do what I say (and dont get corrected).

I think that is a lose / lose situation.

[Quickasyoucan]

I am starting to think that that there must be one really bad "trainer" out there somewhere who just recommends putting every troublesome dog to sleep that they meet. I don't know where this "trainer" is but I think that rather than throwing around PP or correction based, I would rather call them "incompetent".

I believe sometimes PTS is the only option but I bet that it is a very rare option for good trainers and a considered decision based on owner ability as well as dog's issues. Yet again only last week I hear of someone who was told their 18 month old spaniel was beyond repair, no "why don't you get a second opinion", "can I refer you to someone else", just "put the dog down".

Sorry this is off topic slightly, back on topic, I have a prong used under supervsion of K9 pro to rehabilitate my prey driven (well skateboard driven) stafford x. And guess what it worked. Like Shell I could have waived a steak under my dog's face but once he saw a skateboard, thought he heard a skateboard, or was in an area where he knew there might be skateboards he couldn't have given a stuff about food, or me... We now walk on a martingale. I had 4.5 years of my arms being pulled out of my socket and have now had 2 years of loose leash walking, I know which I prefer.

IMO A good trainer/behaviourist uses what is right for the dog. For the record I have recommended other people to Steve (K9Pro) to whom he has said a prong collar is not the appropriate tool for their dog (even though they might have wanted one). It's not just slap a prong on and bob's your uncle. It is about working out what is right for the dog and the owner with the issues and capabilities that they have.

[Kavik]

I don't do either, I don't think distracting the dog is any way of teaching it to be comfortable around a trigger for aggression, so I want the dog to know the other dog is there, know what it looks like, know what its doing and to come to terms with that.

I didn't use a prong collar to distract Zero away from other dogs, nothing of the sort, nor was he corrected for lunging, misbehaving or being aggressive, he was taught (in the absence of other dogs and any distractions) impulse control.

He was taught a target behaviour, to walk on a loose leash and seek guidance from his handler, his Mum, Shell.

Dog aggression is a strong trigger for anxiety in people, regardless of the size of the dog, a person's loved pet that is displaying uncontrolled aggression can really turn on a number of horrible fears and phobias in people and the longer the aggression persists, the more likely this will end up as a managed behaviour rather than a cured one, in both human and dog.

I have certainly found teaching the dog to deal with the fact that there is another dog there, and that that is alright, has made a HUGE difference to my dog aggressive dog. I have used a different method to K9Pro (I used the method from Click to Calm: Healing the Aggressive Dog).

When Zoe was younger I boarded her with my GSDs breeder who I trusted to help me to fix her aggression issues. They used correction/praise method. It worked well for them, they were able to have her around other dogs and even sniff another dog, but I was not able to keep that up, I still got too stressed/anxious taking her around other dogs using that method and she reverted to showing aggression again. I found for me using a clicker has helped immensely as she knows look at other dog, look at me = click/treat and this morning we went past two other dogs no problem, one of the other dogs was even growling at her but she was perfect. It has allowed me to trust her and our training and I am no longer as stressed, and this is so important. Unless you have had an aggressive dog I don't think you can really know the stress and anxiety it can cause.

Edited September 15, 2010 by Kavik

[lovemesideways]

So you use the click as a cue, not just as a marker. No different to training the recall to a whistle then except the whistle has a longer range.

I use it as an interruptor and a cue and a marker. It's good for short range. If I need longer range I have emergency recalls. The nice thing about clickers or markers is it doesn't take long to get a good conditioned response. It took about a year to get a good reliable recall through conditioning for Kivi. In contrast, I tried with the marker a couple of months after I introduced it in training and it was very effective then.

I am sorry Corvus, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion for a dog.

I just cannot fathom how using the clicker as three seperate things is conducive with training that is precise and clear to a dog. There are so many other things to use as a cue. For myself the clicker is a marker that is it. I do have a verbal "go on" signal but that is it. For a cue, such as "focus we are training" is a verbal word.

Hey, the web is full of people that adore the Look At That game for how effective it has been. The proof is, as you say, in the pudding. A clicker acts as an interruptor even in clicker training shaping sessions. That's why the click marks the end of the behaviour. And the first time a clicker is heard for a while, it acts as a cue that training is now occurring, regardless of where you are or what your intention was, unless you are in the habit of only clicking once or twice and then putting the clicker away. The LAT game and other similar uses for the clicker are not changing the meaning of a click. They are just acknowledging and exploiting the various meanings a click already has.

I don't see how a clicker is an interrupter?

When I think interrupter, I think something you do to stop or interrupt a behaviour. Like if you have a dog that is about to start lunging at another dog, and you make a big loud stupid noise and turn around to walk the other way. That noise and spin interrupts the lunging behaviour.

I played the "look at that" game with riddick. A click was never a way to interrupt him looking at something. It was a way for me to mark what I wanted him to do. Which was go towards people and to want to go towards people. I then put the behaviour on cue "Go say Hi!". So it became, I would see a person, "Riddick, go say hi!" Riddick would go towards them. Click and then reward.

Maybe I'm just confused, can someone explain it better for me?

[Nekhbet]

IMO A good trainer/behaviourist uses what is right for the dog. For the record I have recommended other people to Steve (K9Pro) to whom he has said a prong collar is not the appropriate tool for their dog (even though they might have wanted one). It's not just slap a prong on and bob's your uncle. It is about working out what is right for the dog and the owner with the issues and capabilities that they have.

that goes for any piece of equipment out there.

What I dont understand is when people go 'I would have preferred to use positive only but we had to use corrections' and make it sound like the dog is being tortured in the process. You are using a positive method - you are actively teaching the dog what is right and wrong in a manner directly proportional to its behaviour and making a difference. I dont see how anyone can get any more 'positive' then that. Corrections that hurt or cause detrimental behaviour to come from it are wrong, and hence not training the dog but simply causing it confusion and unneccesary pain.

Prong collars are not for every dog out there just like haltis aren't, flat collars aren't, harnesses aren't etc. I dont see them as a last resort tool, frankly they should be the first tool for some animals that need training. I agree with Malsrock, the tool that helps the dog and owner learn the fastest are what you should aim for. I dont see it as a 'shortcut' or 'copping out' because I dont chose to plug away at an ineffectual method that wont produce permanent results. No dog training is instant, but a dog can be calmed and controlled to enable learning quickly then whats the problem?

[MonElite]

I don't see how a clicker is an interrupter?

When I think interrupter, I think something you do to stop or interrupt a behaviour. Like if you have a dog that is about to start lunging at another dog, and you make a big loud stupid noise and turn around to walk the other way. That noise and spin interrupts the lunging behaviour.

I dont get it either corvus. In the scenario above how would a dog know its an interupter not a marker.

Agro dog looking at the other dog just about to lunge and you click? That could be very dangerous marking the totally wrong behavious!

[malsrock]

'K9Pro' date='15th Sep 2010 - 10:53 AM' post='4813764']

I didn't use a prong collar to distract Zero away from other dogs, nothing of the sort, nor was he corrected for lunging, misbehaving or being aggressive, he was taught (in the absence of other dogs and any distractions) impulse control.

He was taught a target behaviour, to walk on a loose leash and seek guidance from his handler, his Mum, Shell.

Hi K9pro,

I don't quite understand your meaning of impulse control, but wasn't corrected for lunging on the prong. When the dog had the impulse to lunge wearing a prong, unless you dropped the leash, the prong would have applied an aversive and consequently a correction as such on the basis of learning that pulling or lunging towards another dog doesn't feel nice around the neck, so the dog re-think's it's choices, otherwise you could have achieved the same result on a flat collar if the aversive action of the prong wasn't a relevent factor in rehabilitiation.

Fiona

[Quickasyoucan]

K9: First I wanted to say Shell, you rock!

You came to me with a "Red Zone" dog that was so confused, lost and frightened, you turned his life around... :D

Dog aggression is a strong trigger for anxiety in people, regardless of the size of the dog, a person's loved pet that is displaying uncontrolled aggression can really turn on a number of horrible fears and phobias in people and the longer the aggression persists, the more likely this will end up as a managed behaviour rather than a cured one, in both human and dog.

I can focus on only what is best for the dog and leave people to fend for themselves with their fears and anxieties, but I will leave it to you to guess how that turns out for the dog.

Should people have more patience, trust or faith? Probably but right now they don't or they are scared, and if they don't see a way to get a handle on things, often in the first session, they euthanize the dog.

We can all rave about how wrong that is, but it goes on every day anyway.

This is something I think is such a key factor too you see threads on here where people won't go out won't walk their dogs for fear of what might happen.

I have had at least 2 friends who have become so anxious about their dogs perceived aggression towards other dogs that when you talk to them it is as if it is 100% guaranteed every time they step outside the door something will happen. People get scared to walk their dogs at all or they end up walking them at 4.00 am or midnight to avoid meeting anyone.

And of course, given that animals sense fear, it can become a self-fullfilling prophecy, the more anxious they are the more, likely that anxiety is to travel down the lead and the less likely that you are to be a strong leader.

I think training tools, like the prong, used under supervision, can give people back some sense of control, lessen the anxiety and that cannot but be positive in terms of the person-dog relationship.

[bedazzledx2]

The reliability is there if you train it right....can be done with a clicker.

It's a different circumstance when training a dog from scratch than for instance correcting behavioural issue as the OP has shared with us, and it depends also on the individual dog too I think.

For the sake of argument, what really depends on the individual dog? What I'm getting at is a prong might be too strong for some dogs and just right for others, but what of the effectiveness of the aim behind using a prong, assuming it is to suppress behaviour? Suppressing behaviour is a sound approach if that's what is desired, and choosing to use a tool is no different to me deciding what reward I will use, except if I use a reward that is too hot it will be easier to fix than if I use a punishment that is too strong. If the prong is to be used as an interruptor, isn't the approach of interrupting the behaviour equally effective regardless of whether a prong is used or a clicker, for example?

Providing they respond to the interruptor I don't think it matters what it is, but not all dogs will respond to an non physical interruptor all the time. Say the dog responds to a clicker as an interruptor most of the time anticipating a treat reward which is fine, except when they don't respond seeing a cat dart across the road..........chasing the cat is a more valuable reward than the treat and the reliability isn't there.

Fiona

[bedazzledx2]

How about teaching an alternative behaviour? ie..see a distraction, focus on me. Lots of ways to teach this before the need for a correction should ever come into the picture.

If a dogs drive around other dogs is stronger then the drive for food common sense would say a correction is needed in this case no if's or buts.

I think that with my girl sometimes, the consequence of losing something is far worse for her than the consequence of getting a correction. If she really wants the tug, she does not deal well with losing the chance to get it. Same with downing before we start tracking, she learned pretty quickly that dogs that don't down, don't track. So sometimes I think, if you can control the dog's access to the reinforcer (which is quite often true in daily life), then that can be a more powerful & memorable consequence for the dog than correcting the dog.

What about for something that they will never be allowed to have? eg. never being allowed to pick up food off the floor while on lead, or never being able to greet other dogs while on the lead.

You can't get rid of all the food on the pavement and you can't tell other people not to walk their dogs LOL

In this case would you apply a correction or would you distract or is it something that depends on the individual dog?

(just out of interest, I already have instructions on what to do with my own dog in this case )

[Nekhbet]

How about teaching an alternative behaviour? ie..see a distraction, focus on me. Lots of ways to teach this before the need for a correction should ever come into the picture.

it's not always feasable to do it this way, particularly when some dogs are so habitually explosive in their reactions. The owners still need a way to get the dog to settle before they implement the redirection of attention back to them. Also some owners give you time limits and ultimatums.

[OSoSwift]

I also think no-body can say what has been achieved with Zero can be "wrong" he was trained with a method that suited him and his owner and gave him a second chance at life, and a fulfilling good one. In this instance the owner, trainer and dog liked that method got it right and it worked - how can that be wrong??

Who said that it was?

Hands up, did anyone think that I said that it was?

Sorry Aidan I wasn't meaning you at all I think you may have taken this the wrong way.

The bit I was thinking of when I wrote this was this bit

Always remember Shell, with Steve's help you rehabilitated Zero's behaviour and actually got the job done with excellent results Regardless of method, you acheived the result, not the others who believe you did it wrong. Actually achieveing the result and thinking you can are two different things

Edited September 15, 2010 by Rommi n Lewis

[Aidan]

The bit I was thinking of when I wrote this was this bit

Always remember Shell, with Steve's help you rehabilitated Zero's behaviour and actually got the job done with excellent results Regardless of method, you acheived the result, not the others who believe you did it wrong. Actually achieveing the result and thinking you can are two different things

Cool

[OSoSwift]

I don't see how a clicker is an interrupter?

When I think interrupter, I think something you do to stop or interrupt a behaviour. Like if you have a dog that is about to start lunging at another dog, and you make a big loud stupid noise and turn around to walk the other way. That noise and spin interrupts the lunging behaviour.

I dont get it either corvus. In the scenario above how would a dog know its an interupter not a marker.

Agro dog looking at the other dog just about to lunge and you click? That could be very dangerous marking the totally wrong behavious!

That is my thinking as well. Click means mark, means treat. I am only going to mark what I want to reinforce and reward. I think to use it as an interruptor is a bit dangerous as to the dog, you could be marking and reinforcing something that could come back to bite you on the bum later. I wonder also if it will, over time, reduce the "power" of the clicker when rewarding what you do want? Probably not, but got me thinking.

[corvus]

I don't see how a clicker is an interrupter?

When I think interrupter, I think something you do to stop or interrupt a behaviour. Like if you have a dog that is about to start lunging at another dog, and you make a big loud stupid noise and turn around to walk the other way. That noise and spin interrupts the lunging behaviour.

I dont get it either corvus. In the scenario above how would a dog know its an interupter not a marker.

Agro dog looking at the other dog just about to lunge and you click? That could be very dangerous marking the totally wrong behavious!

That is my thinking as well. Click means mark, means treat. I am only going to mark what I want to reinforce and reward. I think to use it as an interruptor is a bit dangerous as to the dog, you could be marking and reinforcing something that could come back to bite you on the bum later. I wonder also if it will, over time, reduce the "power" of the clicker when rewarding what you do want? Probably not, but got me thinking.

I think it would be better to read Leslie McDevitt's description of it, seeing as it's her method. The idea is you use it under threshold to mark a behaviour you're going to ask for again in a moment anyway, and then the dog automatically turns away from the object of interest to get the treat from you. You wouldn't click when the dog was lunging or carrying on. The only thing you are marking is looking, but it simultaneously interrupts that looking because the dog turns back to you for a treat. You're then rewarding them for attending to you, so the only behaviours you're likely to increase are looking at a trigger and then looking back to you.

I am thoroughly confused by this thread. What actually are prong collars being used for? What does it do to teach impulse control?