What's /an/'s opinion on e-collars? Can they be useful

>>2201574

Yes, they work, just make sure there is an adjustment for the level of shock and read guides carefully on how to use them. Also, consistency is really important or it's just gonna be abusive. If it's not consistent, they won't make a connection.

That said, the one I used was a pain in the ass because the prongs would always lose skin contact after an hour. The means they shock wouldn't happen when I needed it. Which meant inconsistency. So I stopped using it. It was going to do more harm than good.

>>2201578
I want to use it for out door/off leash training so consistency is my goal for sure. And we're having issues with surfing the counter for food. She knows its wrong and so only does it when she thinks we can't see.

Any good guides out there you'd recommend? In addition, she's fairly long haired so is that likely to interfere with the connection to skin?

I watch a golden retriever for a family that had their dog trained on them for when they take her off leash to aid in recall (she barely needs it but it's good to have).
Their method is call the dog, if no response: beep the collar. It's really good for dogs that are already trained to be on an electric fence because they know that BEEP BEEP means they're doing something wrong.
I feel like it would be hard to use them to train a dog against counter surfing given how hard it would be to be consistent with them.

>>2201596
>she's fairly long haired so is that likely to interfere with the connection to skin

We have Great Pyrenees. Talk about long hair. When I put it on her, I had to sort of shift it back and forth a few times - imagine taking an eraser and wiggling it to get underneath the fur. Like that. So that both prongs had skin contact. We also had to put it on tighter than I was comfortable with.

Videos and guides I've seen have assured me that the fur shouldn't matter at all and it being tight was necessary. So, maybe I just had a bad experience.

We used ours because our dog loves picking up any stray towels or clothes left on the floor, which is tricky because we have a young kid that's a slob. We use it mainly to zap her when she went for the grab (which, as you said, she KNOWS not to do, she just doesn't give a fuck). She will politely 'drop' it and 'leave it' when asked, but that doesn't fix the problem.

We also used it to keep her from jumping on the bed. Which was a huge problem, since she's 120 pounds and really, really doesn't want to get off the bed.

The problem is when she makes a jump for the bed, or grab for a sock, and all the sudden the zapper isn't connecting. That's a lost opportunity for correction, and it teaches her "Oh, maybe this is okay, after all" and nullifies the previous shocks for the same behavior that actually went through.

Overall, we were under-whelmed by the experience because it didn't work when needed, everytime. Consistency is way too important when it comes to something that is going to make her very uncomfortable.

>>2201667
>I feel like it would be hard to use them to train a dog against counter surfing given how hard it would be to be consistent with them.
that's something I do worry about, I don't want to giver her mixed signals, especially with negative reinforcement
>>2201668
Thanks for the info, her fur def isn't as thick as a great pyr's/ >>2201668
>Consistency is way too important when it comes to something that is going to make her very uncomfortable.
That's how I feel, but I'm told it can be a great tool to speed up training. My girl is around a year and unfortunately we didn't get her when she was a pup so she's got bad habits

>>2201574
You better motherfucking test it on yourself first.

I can't stand people who use dissuasive tech like ecollars who are too cowardly to even understand what they're doing to their doggos.

But yeah, they do work, and they're very effective. My parents have three GSDs that they use an invisible fence with. I'm not the biggest fan of that system but it definitely worked. The dogs used to bark up and down the wire fence with the property over at the other dogs, but now because the invisible fence is about fifteen metres back they must not feel they can get close enough, so they don't even bother and just ignore him.

>>2201574
Excellent tools for training.

Don't listen to the soft haters that cry and mew about them "shocking" the animal.

>>2201781
>You better motherfucking test it on yourself first.
That was the plan. I'd hate to get a faulty one that's putting out too high a voltage and accidentally hurt my dog.

>>2201781
Go fuck yourself, pussy.

It's soft pieces of shit, like you, that get animals killed and euthanized because you think that teaching animals that there's detrimental consequences for disobedience in training is worse than the detrimental consequences they can suffer from disobedience in the real world, like ignoring a recall and getting hit by a car, or attacked by another animal, or biting a kid and getting euthanized.

You're a menace to dogs, animals, and society alike, and your genes should be purged from the pool.

>>2201789
What?

Please quote the exact passage in my post where I stated that dissuasive training should not be used.

If you can't do this, go fuck yourself. Or, at the very least, stop reading what you want to read and start reading what is actually fucking written.

If you are going to do something that is going to discomfort an animal you are training then you need to know the exact magnitude of that discomfort. Ergo, you should do it to yourself first. Don't use a shock collar if you're too much of a pathetic fucking girl to shock yourself with it first, just like you shouldn't just assume that because horses are big animals it's fine to beat them with the whip when, in fact, their skin is far thinner and more sensitive than our own.

And, in future, leave your fucking autism in the depths of Reddit where it belongs instead of blowing your cancerous load all over this board and then (inevitably) engaging in thirty teary fucking posts about how no, you actually weren't wrong, and I definitely did advocate a ban on dissuasive training, even though there is
l i t e r a l l y
nothing in my post taking any position on dissuasive training other than do it to yourself first, and that I don't like my parent's hidden fence.

Holy fuck, gas yourself.

Use them every day. I've tried both dogs' collars on myself - they're set at different levels, one dog is a lot more sensitive than the other.

The thing with e-collars is you're either using them to dissuade a behavior, or to encourage the dog to act. But if the dog doesn't know what he's supposed to do, then no amount of shocking him will make him obey. Because he doesn't know what you want.

With e-collars you've got to be really fair, and not everyone is. They're a tool that is easy to abuse.

>>2201807
Do you recommend a specific one? I'm wondering if a 330yd range is enough or if I should get a .5 mile one

>>2201801
>not only am I a gigantic walking vagina, but I have zero reading comprehension as well

>>2201781
>You better motherfucking test it on yourself first

This is how you know all the hippies that yell about it being animal abuse are full of shit. It's the same as licking a 9 volt battery. When you test it on yourself, it's the same tiny little jolt you feel, only you make it less or more. And you're like "That's it?"

As a side, test it on your NECK. Where the dog will be feeling it. You'd be surprised how different the strength is on your neck vs. your arm. A level-30 on my neck was about the same as a level-50 on my arm.

Of course they are incredibly useful and beneficial. There is essentially no other way to train a dog for off leash work that isn't a shock collar.

The positive-only training movement is so fucking morally bankrupt. They are smearing their propaganda all over the place to make people question the fundamental and correct dog training techniques that have worked for centuries. I am so glad that dog attacks are on the rise DUE TO POSITIVE ONLY TRAINING. Can't wait for people to wake up from their kool-aid and go back to the proven techniques of old.

>>2202018

Dog attacks aren't on the rise. The media just shows it more often because it makes great click-bait. And the attacks that do happen are caused by a lack of love/socialization. Training doesn't play a big role in the level of aggression a dog has. Positive reinforcement has nothing to do with it, either.

That said, I agree for the most part. In my experience, you use positive redirection with a punishment component. For example, reward the dog for getting off the couch on command, but scold them for getting on it in the first place. Step one is the reward, so they know what you expect of them. After about 20 of those, you can introduce the punishment component.

If you only reward them for getting off the couch, what's to stop them from getting on it in the first place? They're only being taught that getting off it earns a treat. Hell, to this day, my dog will pick up socks and bring them to me, then drop them for a treat. Because we never introduced the punishment component into that training - which was don't pick up the fucking sock in the first place.

>>2202018
>Of course they are incredibly useful and beneficial. There is essentially no other way to train a dog for off leash work that isn't a shock collar.

Light lines.

Dogs have been trained for off leash work long before E-collars were developed.

>>2202207
>Light lines.
Woefully ineffective.

Let me guess: You are one of these """"positive only""""" people with a dog that snarls at everyone that passes it and you just say he is friendly?

>>2202055
>Training doesn't play a big role in the level of aggression a dog has.

It absolutely does, as part of pack structure is training your dog when and when it can't use aggression. Unauthorized aggression is punished.

>>2202217
Absolutely this.

Dogs who are trained predominately positively are horrifically aggressive. Positive-only trainers are selling an incredibly dangerous snake oil. Teaching people that ti is wrong to punish their dog and attempting to claim pack leadership isn't true is damaging and DOES kill people.

>>2202217
>pack structure
flag on the field

>Unauthorized aggression is punished.
This comment has my sides in orbit. How do you punish a dog for showing aggression, exactly? How do you do that in a way that benefits everyone? Yell at the dog? Shock him? Kick him a few times? Deprive him of the resource he's protecting and further amplify the desire to protect the resource? Hit him with the roller skate he's irrationally afraid of?

Once a dog is showing aggression, it's pretty much too late. All you can do is avoid whatever is triggering that aggression. And don't give me that shit about "Well, Caesar rehabilitated ...(since you mentioned packs and all)" No, no he didn't, he used emergency measures to curb immediate aggression and did not fix the root of the problem. It always comes backs a week later - read some followups on those stories.

>>2202222
>Dogs who are trained predominately positively are horrifically aggressive.
What evidence has convinced you of that? Dogs trained with solely positive reinforcement are undisciplined and do not respect their owners. They think of them as friends on equal footing. This is minor problem in the grand scheme of things, but it doesn't cause aggression, only disobedience.

A dog being aggressive is caused by other things, like irrational fears of bicycles and worry about when their next meal will be. This has nothing to do with training, and everything to do with the environment they're raised in (and people/dogs they're raised with).

>>2201821
I've got a pair of 400 yard ones, and that's always been enough.

Like, what sort of weird training are you going to be doing beyond 300 yards? Not much except extreme distance stays.

And if you're hiking, anything can happen 300 yards away, you should be keeping even a dog off leash quite close.

Just keep the dog in sight and don't let it go tearing off away from you, and 330 yards should be fine.

>>2202242
>How do you punish a dog for showing aggression, exactly?

It depends on the circumstances, but there's always signs of aggression before they get in a fight, and that's the time to correct them, not after. How? Simple, by using a correction at the appropriate level for the aggression displayed. This can be something as simple as a voice correction, a touch correction, a jerk on the choke chain, a high stim touch with an E-collar, or something as drastic as choking the dog off from air by raising him off the ground with a leash.

>Once a dog is showing aggression, it's pretty much too late.

That's why you anticipate potential issues, and train accordingly, and also why you correct them on the spot, and conduct follow up training. Your dog will indeed obey you if he respects you as a leader, and you teach him what is and isn't appropriate behavior.

>A dog being aggressive is caused by...

Poor training. The overwhelming majority of aggression issues are caused by idiot owners that don't know about, understand, or accept the fact, that dogs are pack animals that exist in a hierarchy, and that hierarchy determines who has access to resources within the pack. Things like food, toys, territory inside and out of the house, other pack members, are all resources to a dog, and the way they defend those resources from less assertive and lower ranking pack members is through aggression....unless the leader shows them that it's not acceptable.

This is why kids, and owners, get bit for doing shit like trying to take a toy, getting close to food, or trying to pull a dog off the furniture. The dog doesn't respect that family member as an equal, and is simply doing what comes natural, using aggression, to correct the behavior of the human for daring to interfere with its resource.

>>2202242
>This is minor problem in the grand scheme of things, but it doesn't cause aggression, only disobedience.

This is a major problem for the dog, and other people alike. Without that respect as a leader, the dog is more inclined to disobey, which means it will ignore recalls and run into cars, bicycles, kids, other dogs, all of which could result in detrimental consequences to all involved.

Without respect for the owner as a leader, the dog may very well take it upon itself to use aggression to defend what it feels are its resources, which includes the owner itself.

Any training that doesn't teach the dog that there's detrimental, if not painful, consequences to disobedience is a disservice to the dog, and people alike.

>>2202407

No, disobedience is still a minor problem compared to aggression and such. He never said it wasn't a problem. But, let's keep some perspective here.

If your dog ever has the opportunity to run in front of a car after a failed recall, you've fucked up pretty bad in basic dog care to start with. The dog should have never had the opportunity to position itself in front of a car. That's YOUR fault, not the failed recall.

>>2202888
>No, disobedience is still a minor problem compared to aggression and such.

Unwarranted and unjustified aggression IS disobedience.

>If your dog ever has the opportunity to run in front of a car after a failed recall, you've fucked up pretty bad

Don't tell me, tell that to the millions of pet owners that can't even walk their dogs on a leash, let alone off leash.

>>2202014
>same as locking a 9volt battery
Bull
Fucking
Shit

I had one that had settings from 1-99
Setting 1 was like shorting out a 120v wall socket.

>>2205016
>Setting 1 was like shorting out a 120v wall socket.
How do you know how that feels?

>>2205016
You either had a fucked up e-collar, or are a lying piece of shit.

YouTube Zak George and kikopup.

Problem fucking solved.

>>2202217
Pack mentality only existed in zoos with wolves being forced into unnatural situations idiot. Read a fucking article once in a while, wolves run in FAMILY orientated groups, and dogs have long since been separated from wolves even if you still wanted to use that stupid argument.

>>2205121
This. You can't become the alpha male by being dominant and aggressive and shit, you're either the literal dad of most of the pack or not.

Protip: these things are great fun at the zoo. Put one on an elephant's trunk while it's cranked way the hell up.

>>2205322
Are you trying to get killed?

>>2205121
>>2205273


Listen to this dude talk about hierarchy in dogs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dcdpl4H2glo

Key points...
1. There is always ONE lead dog in the pack.
2. He will ALWAYS have first access to resources.
3. He became the lead dog by being the most assertive and capable of backing up his assertion with force.

Why do you all have such a problem with dominance in dog and wolf packs? Do you think that physical force is the ONLY way to express dominance or something? Its' not.

Even Dunbar downplays the role of the alpha dog, and the dominance he, and his subordinates expressed, to gain their rank in the pack, but the fact remains that dominance absolutely plays a key role in canine behavior, always has, and always will.

File: images-6.jpg (5KB, 224x225px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 224x225px

>>2206539
That's not what they are talking about anon. Dominence is definitely there, just not in the way that so many people like to see it, but rather in the way that you have to be dominent to your child in order to do what's best for them. Ceasar does not use the most up to date methods that have been accepted and proven to work, and because of his constant analogy to wolf packs and being pack leader, it misleads people and defeats the whole purpose of why a dog was domesticated and bred in the first place-to be a tool and companion for us.

The dog was bred and developed to LOOK to his handler for cues and signals for what we want it to do, NOT to lay down on the ground submissively and become a statue or push down what it's actually feeling. Dogs can only communicate to us through body language, so denying it it's right to communicate (telling the dog it's not allowed to growl, show teeth, snap as warnings), teaches it that it must not warn us if it's feeling scared or possessive of something. It then skips straight to snapping or biting because it learned it is not allowed to speak.

Even when Ceasar is at his best in his training, it is still a poor excuse for work that has already been proven effective and the whole reason we developed dogs.

Take these trained protection dogs for example if you don't understand what I'm talking about:

https://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=mDaMdkrDXKE

These guys have to used the best, up to date training knowledge on their dogs because they cannot risk otherwise, and their methods are almost a complete opposite of what Ceasar teaches.

So in short, it's not the phrase or the word Dominance that's the problem-its the misleading, uninformed, and often abused method behind it. Too many people treat it like they treat religion; as an excuse to abuse something or someone.

>>2206539
Social hierarchy in dogs is similar to that of a family. Ergo, dogs will look up to you, the parent.

>>2206547
>Dominence is definitely there, just not in the way that so many people like to see it

Exactly. People are projecting their own insecurities on their dogs, and misrepresenting what "dominance" means, and INCORRECTLY associating it with "abuse".

>Ceasar does not use the most up to date methods

Like what? Positive reinforcement? That's not new. It's been used since man first started training falcons about 2,000 years ago. There is NOTHING new in the training world. Skinner, Pavlov, and all the rest of the behaviorists simply made note of what people have been doing for thousands of years.

As for Mexican dude, he doesn't use "clicker training" because he's not trying to teach tricks, he's trying to fix pack structure problems that the owners created out of their ignorance. Dog's communicate with body language, vocalizations, and physical contact, and that's exactly what Mexican dude does, and what he tries to teach dumb ass owners.

>Take these trained protection dogs for example...

Bite training uses aversives to not only intentionally frustrate the dog, but also to punish the dog for failure to obey. The reason this approach is used is due to the fact that the act of biting itself is far more rewarding than any food or praise the handler can bestow, so it's necessary to use an aversive that the dog will be motivated to avoid, more than he's motivated to bite.

>>2206552
Unless it's a dog park, where they fight for leadership....or a feral pack, where they do the same.

>>2206580
>Bite training uses aversives to not only intentionally frustrate the dog, but also to punish the dog for failure to obey.

None of that is happening in that video which makes me think you didn't watch it.

And dogs are not supposed to fight in dog parks; dogs parks are meant for other friendly dogs to come and play and have a good time. In our dog park people are asked to get their dogs out if they cannot leave other dogs alone, and if any act aggressive past a warning bark/snap to get away, then we are allowed to get the police involved if the owners refuse to get them out. If we didn't do this then the park would be ruined because no one would feel secure bringing their dogs their.

>>2206643
>None of that is happening in that video which makes me think you didn't watch it.

I don't need to watch it, because I've participated in protection training. Whether it's schutzhund, ring sport, PSA, or police work, the bite itself is the dogs reward for behavior, and that bite is far more rewarding than any piece of kibble or tidbit anybody is ever going to offer, which is why they don't use that approach, and use aversives to teach things like the out, bark and hold, re-attacks, etc...

>And dogs are not supposed to fight in dog parks..

They're not supposed to resource guard, be dog / leash / people reactive, pull on a leash during a walk, ignore their owners commands, and a myriad of other things, but they do, and the number one reason they do all these shitty things is a failure to establish pack structure in the family.

>>2201828
>n-n-no anon t-that's not what i said

boy did he call it