Halti

[Cosmolo]

Agree with Erny- all of my dogs have been trained on correction chains and now wear a flat collar for everything except trial training for Cosmo. I find that normal collars/ martingale collars/ correction chains/ prongs tend to carry over more easily to off lead work than a headcollar simply because when the lead is loose, the dog would only feel that they have something around their neck as they would with a normal collar that they wear when in the backyard etc. Headcollars are an obvious feeling for the dog that they do not wear at other times so many dogs think the rules apply only on the headcollar. (i hope that makes sense)

A concern of mine with the headcollars is that IF the dog finds the headcollar uncomfortable (and if proper desnsitising has not been done- which it often isn't) the dog may still feel an aversive is being applied when the headcollar is loose- even if he is doing the right thing. I see alot of dogs who have worn headcollars without proper desensitising who are very confused, with elements of learned helplessness- ie the dog gives up doing anything because they feel they can't avoid the correction/ aversive.

As with all training equipment- headcollars can be great in the right hands and appalling in the wrong hands.

[poodlefan]

Much as I dislike halti's, I would always advise people to train in one with the dog in a flat collar and a double ended or two leads attached - one to the halti and one to the flat collar.

That way you can train a person to only use the halti to correct pulling and the dog is far less likely to learn to pull on the halti.

In addition, to never being used with a retractable lead, dogs should never be tied up by a lead attached to a halti IMHO. Keeping a flat (or martingale) collar on the dog at all times also encourages people to view the halti as a temporary control measure.

[leopuppy04]

Erny Said

My own experience has taught me that (in general) when a dog has been "trained" on a head collar, it has still been necessary to train (almost from the beginning) to a different style of collar. Whereas, when I've worked a dog on a (eg) chain/prong, there can be a more immediate carry-over effect to another type of collar (eg. martingale; flat).

Interesting. I have never found this when I used my head collar. He didn't give me any more attention etc, but it simply gave me more control in highly distracting environments (dog club for a 6mth old is VERY distracting *g*!). Perhaps because I worked him Off lead/flat collar elsewhere that this didn't ring true for me. I actually had more difficulty teaching Leo to 'Heel' with the lead on since all of our work is done off lead - to him, lead means arse off and be an idiot!!! Even now I have difficulty as he still goes wide on LAT.

Rom Said

In light of all of the above, do you think that the halti is appropriate in this situation: Competition obedience dog that has excellent loose leash skills, but is dog aggressive so handler uses halti for control where its difficult to control the proximity of other dogs ie, line up for vetting prior to competition?

In this situation yes I do. It gives the handler more control in a congested environment. The handler knows that they have more control so in turn feels more confident. Dogs feed off our emotions and since handler is feeling more confident then the dog picks up on that.... I think that it is fine. As for wearing it in the ring, no I don't believe they should be used. Obedience trials are about teamwork and IMO since no corrections are allowed in the ring I believe halters shouldn't be (not that they are) allowed either. As much as I like food also, I don't think that they should ever be allowed in the rings either as that doesn't allow the partnership between handler and dog fully develop.... i've gone OT I know!! LOL!

[Erny]

So (please correct me if I'm wrong), you think that a headcollar is a management tool since training is basically a process of allowing the dog to make choices and providing consequences for those choices, and because the headcollar doesn't allow the dog the chance to be wrong, it therefore prevents much true training from taking place? Is that right?

That's interesting, particularly because it's very similar to an argument I've heard a few times from clicker trainers - they believe that physically guiding a dog into position doesn't teach the dog anything, whereas keeping your hands off the dog and requiring him to think for himself how to earn the reward results in much more learning occuring.

I agree that there is a fine line between my definition of "management" tool and "training" tool. Also note that I am not saying that NO learning occurs under the influence of a head collar. But, because "opportunity" is considerably diminished by the leverage control and head collar provides, less "training" occurs (IMO), where all else is equal (ie environmental influences; training session time etc.), compared to other forms of collars.

The comparison of "guide, show, place" techniques is a little comparing "apples with oranges" as that technique is used mainly for passive exercises (whilst I was making reference to the dog learning lead etiquette), its purpose being to show the dog the behaviour that will achieve 'good things' from us.

I agree that the dog's learning curve is greater when it responds by thinking for itself and of course, marking the desired behaviour (whether that be by way of "clicker" or "verbal marker"). But the "training" process can sometimes begin much faster if the dog's behaviour is "managed" initially. The use of hands on the dog can be compared, I guess, to the control of a head collar to a degree, but I tend to find weaning off from "hands" to "collar" much quicker than say weaning off from "head-collar" to "collar", quite possibly because (a) the weaning off from hands to no-hands can be achieved more incrementally and with more accurate timing than that of a collar and (b) handlers tend to attempt to wean off more quickly than they do with a dog wearing a head collar.

I don't agree that "Guide, Show, Place" doesn't teach the dog anything. Used in the early teaching phase is does show the dog what action is required. But it also teaches the dog to be handled by humans and this stands them in good stead for other applications where handling is required. (One Example: manipulation into positions when on the Vet table). In this respect, it is different to the use of a head collar as the head collar does not familiarise the dog to physical handling.

Edited December 5, 2006 by Erny

[haven]

If the guide/show/place method doesn't teach a dog anything, I'm curious as to how Loki learned to bow in just one repetition. Come to think of it, I don't know how he learned anything seeing as that is the primary method I used to train him and he has passed out of advanced and knows about 25 tricks

[Staranais]

I agree that the dog's learning curve is greater when it responds by thinking for itself and of course, marking the desired behaviour (whether that be by way of "clicker" or "verbal marker"). But the "training" process can sometimes begin much faster if the dog's behaviour is "managed" initially. The use of hands on the dog can be compared, I guess, to the control of a head collar to a degree, but I tend to find weaning off from "hands" to "collar" much quicker than say weaning off from "head-collar" to "collar", quite possibly because (a) the weaning off from hands to no-hands can be achieved more incrementally and with more accurate timing than that of a collar and (b) handlers tend to attempt to wean off more quickly than they do with a dog wearing a head collar.

I must admit that is the main use I can think of for a head collar, the idea of controlling the dog's head, and therefore it's focus. I remember when I first started taking my dog aggressive staffy boy to training school, the only way I could get his focus off other dogs when they caught his attention was physically picking him up and turning him around to break his line of sight - using a halti to turn his head towards me might have been easier, I guess! Perhaps I could even have put that headturn on cue. Hind sight is 20/20!

In any case, I personally haven't been that impressed with the headcollar for a number of reasons (primarily the way that most dogs seem to dislike wearing them, and the fact that it's almost impossible to keep a dog from becoming "collar smart" with a headcollar on). And I do agree that, like choke chains, most people do seem to merely use them for management. All I'm saying is that I don't see why you couldn't use them for training in certain circumstances. I think that most training tools (including extending leashes!) can be used for training or for management, it depends more on the intent of the user than on the tool.

I don't agree that "Guide, Show, Place" doesn't teach the dog anything. Used in the early teaching phase is does show the dog what action is required. But it also teaches the dog to be handled by humans and this stands them in good stead for other applications where handling is required.

I don't agree with the idea that either, but it's an argument I've heard quite often from clicker type trainers - the idea that if the dog is being physically assisted or controlled by the trainer, it just isn't learning. Perhaps it holds true for dogs with certain temperaments? I really don't know, and it's probably off topic - sorry!

Edited December 5, 2006 by Amhailte

[leopuppy04]

I don't agree with the idea that either, but it's an argument I've heard quite often from clicker type trainers - the idea that if the dog is being physically assisted or controlled by the trainer, it just isn't learning. Perhaps it holds true for dogs with certain temperaments? I really don't know, and it's probably off topic - sorry!

LOL as a 'clicker type' trainer I don't see how others can say that the dog isn't learning through 'guide show place' coz otherwise Haven must have the smartest dog around, and every training club that trains with Guide show place would never advance anywhere! LOL - of course learning goes on :laugh:.... I think it is just, as always preference for the method of training and what works best for them. As for me.... I prefer luring and 'shaping' but that doesn't mean other methods don't work!!! Don't worry Amhailte - i've heard it too, and it always makes me smile like a whole lot of other 'dog theories'.