Leerburg Web Board

Leerburg Web Board
Leerburg Table of Contents

Rules of the Board

General Discussion >> General Dog Conversation

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | >> (show all)
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training -
      #4157584 - Mon Nov 14 2005 02:11 PM

Today I posted a new article I wrote titled THE THEORY OF CORRECTIONS IN DOG TRAINING - http://leerburg.com/corrections.htm I have never seen a book or training article that covered corrections in this detail - which was the reason for writing it.

I believe that new trainers - and so called professionals alike are going to learn soemthing froim this article. I hope it makes things clearer for trainers. The article is long - almost 23 typed pages



--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com

Edited by Ed Frawley (Mon Nov 14 2005 02:13 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Connie Sutherland
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Wed
Posts: 756
Loc: North-Central coast of Califor...
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157591 - Mon Nov 14 2005 03:44 PM

Quote:

Today I posted a new article I wrote titled THE THEORY OF CORRECTIONS IN DOG TRAINING - http://leerburg.com/corrections.htm




This was worth every second spent reading it.

I think many people (like me) will be looking for the book that's coming (mentioned in the "Pack Behavior Corrections" section).

It was great that the idea of "time outs" in the crate as "punishment" was outed for what it is, too.

Thank you from a pet trainer. People with pet dogs need this *at least* as much as people with working dogs, IMO!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Waylon Wendler
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 13
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157593 - Mon Nov 14 2005 04:18 PM

Great article........I own hunting dogs and none of that stuff is gonna make my dogs the greatest hunting dogs in the world. However, understanding behavior and proper training methods definately makes my life easier around the house and when handling the dogs during a hunt. I definately learned some things and expanded my knowledge on others. Thanks.

Waylon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Julia Tompson
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Sun
Posts: 170
Loc: Southern Maine
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Waylon Wendler]
      #4157600 - Mon Nov 14 2005 05:07 PM


Very well said Ed!!!! I love the fact that you provide sound solid understandable advice and can admit you have made mistakes in your own training yet have learned from them and have a better understanding of dogs as a result.

Can't wait till your DVD on aggressive dogs comes out.

I only wish I had found this site 3 years ago. Thank you Ed!

--------------------
Marsha’s Training Diary

Make a great day happen!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
david perlich

*

Reged: Thu
Posts: 170
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Julia Tompson]
      #4157601 - Mon Nov 14 2005 05:46 PM

every one who owns a dog or wants a dog needs to come and read just about every article on your site.

the top 2 are your ground work article and your corrections article.

very well put


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ingrid Schmelter



Reged: Tue
Posts: 8
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157613 - Tue Nov 15 2005 06:30 AM

Thank you Ed. I really wish I'd found this site sooner too. I had just brought home a 6 mth old shepherd from the pound, and she was wonderful, and horrible all at the same time. I can't tell you how many times I've been told that prong collars will ruin a dog, corrections will ruin a dog, etc. and I almost gave her away because I couldn't take her for walks by the time she was 8 months old, and she was a danger to our 3 cats.
Your theory of correction will be a help to people in my situation and their dogs. Pet dog trainers do not explain how to use corrections and agility trainers actively forbid it. I'm doing agility now, so I know.
I'll consider your article recommended reading.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Howard Knauf

***

Reged: Wed
Posts: 396
Loc: Central Florida
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ingrid Schmelter]
      #4157663 - Tue Nov 15 2005 10:54 PM

Ed,

Excellent article. My new handlers got a copy of it this evening during training. You could actually see their minds working as they read it. Very insightfull. You cant beat experience, eh? I am glad you shared this with us.

Howard

--------------------
"You Boys going to pull them pistols? Or whistle Dixie?"
Clint Eastwood-"The Outlaw Josey Wales"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Elaine Haynes
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Tue
Posts: 31
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Howard Knauf]
      #4157670 - Wed Nov 16 2005 04:15 AM

Excellent article, Ed. I've printed it out to add to my training information.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Andrew May
Leerburg Web Board User
***

Reged: Wed
Posts: 52
Loc: Newfoundland, Canada
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157673 - Wed Nov 16 2005 07:17 AM

Quote from corrections article:

"This damage occurs right at the spot where the chain slips through the ring on the collar. The entire force of the correction is applied to this one spot where as with a prong collar the force of the correction is applied around the entire circumference of the dogs neck. This has been proven through autopsies done in Germany on dogs that were trained their entire life with choke collars Vs dogs trained with prong collar."

I'm curious if anyone has actually found a copy of this study or any evidence that it is more than urban legend: ie where were autopsies conducted, etc.

for the record I do use a prong in a moderate fashion, and don't use a choke at all.

Reading this article and others I see that so often dog training (as opposed to the prong collar safety issue) boils down to experience, insight, intuition and is non-quantifiable.

I look forward to any books that may be in the works.

rgds andrew may


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Andrew May]
      #4157699 - Wed Nov 16 2005 01:41 PM

Andrew - run your own little experiment.

Put a metal choke chain around your mid thigh - put a prong on the other thigh. Have someone that DOES NOT LIKE YOU jerk the snot out of both collars.

Two days later you will see for yourself that the choke causes a lot more damage. Send us a photo of the bruising on your leg.

Maybe then you will be a little less smug about something you obviously don’t fully understand.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Kristen Cabe

*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 748
Loc: Asheville, North Carolina
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157701 - Wed Nov 16 2005 01:53 PM

Two days? Heck, it should be pretty clear within about 2 minutes! It pinches the CRAP out of your leg where the chain goes through the ring.

--------------------
PetIDtag.com Keep ID on your pet! Profits go to rescues in NC


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157703 - Wed Nov 16 2005 02:13 PM

Good one.. It could sound a bit weird, but a lot of the information you given us is well known in Slovakia. Well Ed I have never used any force, choke, electricity nor even yellig on my dogs.. I cant stand that, maybe I have been lucky so far with my pups..
I had only one incident with my dog when he growled while earing... that little sucker had a diet and a nice slap from me... that was the only thing. He never tried after that
I agree with you on most of the article... the rest also depends on the owner, trainer personality and aproach right from the beginning..
I learned a lot.. Thank you


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Dave Curtis

*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 80
Loc: Minnesota
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Andrew May]
      #4157705 - Wed Nov 16 2005 02:26 PM

Andrew,
Here is a reference that may get you closer to the actual study on chokes vs. prongs. http://www.cobankopegi.com/prong.html#AStudy

--------------------
Dave Curtis
Northstar SARDA
Da-JuKennel.com
curtisoms@aol.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Kristen Cabe

*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 748
Loc: Asheville, North Carolina
Re: Prong collar study [Re: Dave Curtis]
      #4157709 - Wed Nov 16 2005 03:26 PM

I've never been able to locate anything on the actual study, only references to it -- if it was even done.

--------------------
PetIDtag.com Keep ID on your pet! Profits go to rescues in NC


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Julia Tompson
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Sun
Posts: 170
Loc: Southern Maine
Re: Prong collar study [Re: Kristen Cabe]
      #4157710 - Wed Nov 16 2005 04:03 PM

It really doesn’t take rocket science to figure this one out. I like Ed’s suggestion of Andrew experimenting on his thigh and I hope he shares the results. I remember Ed mentioning issue in his Basic OB video and I figured someone out there would be compelled to give it a try.

Any raised hands out there?

I have to confess; when I bought the prong I tested in on my own thigh before I put it on my dog. I though the pain was more the acceptable. But then again… I was administering my own correction so I probably only gave myself a level 2 correction.

--------------------
Marsha’s Training Diary

Make a great day happen!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Al Curbow
Leerburg Web Board User
***

Reged: Thu
Posts: 105
Loc: northeast
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Andrew May]
      #4157715 - Wed Nov 16 2005 04:48 PM

Andrew, my opinion is i don't need a study to see, on a daily basis, with my dogs, that you don't have to give as hard a correction with a prong versus a choke. I've also found that it's easier to gauge the severity of the correction with a prong, so, that makes it easier on the dog, just my opinion, AL

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Andrew May
Leerburg Web Board User
***

Reged: Wed
Posts: 52
Loc: Newfoundland, Canada
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157719 - Wed Nov 16 2005 06:40 PM

Quote:

Andrew - run your own little experiment.

Put a metal choke chain around your mid thigh - put a prong on the other thigh. Have someone that DOES NOT LIKE YOU jerk the snot out of both collars.

Two days later you will see for yourself that the choke causes a lot more damage. Send us a photo of the bruising on your leg.

Maybe then you will be a little less smug about something you obviously don’t fully understand.




****

Ed:
You cited the study. It seems like a good model, far better than the leg test. There are no vertebrae in a human leg and the bones and muscles are massive. The leg test is a helpful illustration, not an experiment.

Far more compelling to me is lack of evidence of harm caused by prong collars used training dogs, especially compared to harm that can be identifed as a result of choke collars. I presume you have lots of experience with many dogs trained with prong collars. You don't have autopsies but we have no evidence of harm.

In your basic obedience DVD you state that we should listen to you because you have experience and results, and because your methods are good for the human/dog relationship. I accept that as a reasonable basis to proceed, and in fact have had great results with your methods.

I find your own experience with prongs to be more compelling than a (so far unauthenticated) study.

The reason I use a prong is the absence of believable information indicating that it is harmful and its obvious value as a training aid.

I really liked the article and found it to be a very helpful piece. I thought that point had been well made in the previous posts.

I am cautious in accepting what dog trainers prescribe because it is always necessary to evaluate effectiveness of training methods in light of the type of relationship we desire with our dogs and to see "underneath" what is written. Dog training is not only empirical, but has to do with spirit and other intangibles. No more is this more true than with respect to corrections.

It will always be this way. That is good. It is clear that Ed understands this. it is the correct approach, in my opinion.

It's a great article with one questionable citation. The links cited in this thread do not bring us "closer" to the study although they give good reasons to consider using a prong. We have no journal reference, no identification of a university, professor, lab. no data to be reviewed. no evidence of peer review. nothing.

If it was me, I wouldn't cite this. that's not smug, that's the truth. AM


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jason Shipley
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Fri
Posts: 164
Loc: northern Illinois
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Andrew May]
      #4157720 - Wed Nov 16 2005 06:43 PM

You teach English 101 at the local community college don't you?

--------------------
You always get the dog you deserve...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Andrew May
Leerburg Web Board User
***

Reged: Wed
Posts: 52
Loc: Newfoundland, Canada
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jason Shipley]
      #4157723 - Wed Nov 16 2005 08:13 PM

Quote:

You teach English 101 at the local community college don't you?




if I did, I would have written a clearer first post on this thread!!. rgds andrew may


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Andrew May]
      #4157724 - Wed Nov 16 2005 08:59 PM

Hey the last two posts made me lauhgh - good ones guys

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lou Castle

***

Reged: Sun
Posts: 578
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157725 - Wed Nov 16 2005 09:34 PM

Interesting article Ed, thanks for writing it. A couple of points. I disagree with almost everything you've said about Ecollars but those disagreements have been covered in other discussions on your forum. We use the Ecollar in vastly different ways. It takes a big man to allow those who disagree with him do so in his own living room and I thank you for being a big man about our differences.

The following that I quote from the article is something that I've heard many times on many forums. When questioned about this "study" no one has ever been able to show a citation for its origin; not in any K-9 journal and not in any scientific journal. In trying to track it down it seems that it came from a statement made by a trainer at a seminar and she's never backed it up with a citation either. People have just assumed that it's true and repeated it so often that it's become accepted as true. Do you have a citation for it? I agree that chain collars will probably cause more damage than a pinch collar but I don't think that this "study" really exists.

"This has been proven through autopsies done in Germany on dogs that were trained their entire life with choke collars Vs dogs trained with prong collar."

And this bring up a question. Since both the chain collar and your "dominant dog collar" work identically, how is it that the dominant dog collar doesn't apply the "entire force of the correction . . . to this one spot" on the dog's neck and cause identical problems? I've always thought that the force of a chain collar was spread out around the dog's entire neck, rather than have it concentrated in just one spot. The bruising from the experiment you suggest (trying it on one's leg) will extend most of the way around the leg. I think that any damage that occurs does so because the force is concentrated in such a narrow area, the width of the chain. With a pinch collar the force is also spread out around the dog's neck but it's over an area that's 1/2" wide and it's not necessary to use anywhere near the same force to get a training effect with the pinch collar.

And just one final question. Throughout the article you use the word "stem" when referring to an Ecollar "stimulation." Everyone else that I know uses the word "stim" (as a derivative of the word "stimulation) when they make this reference. Is this a misspelling, are you doing something different or is this a regional thing?

--------------------
Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
www.loucastle.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daryl Ehret
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Mon
Posts: 19
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157745 - Thu Nov 17 2005 04:50 AM

The correctional technique I use, relating to the section "Pups and Corrections - the Beginning of Pack Behavior" involves rolling the pup on its back, making it stay in that position for some seconds, with eye contact and a firm tone. When you have an entire litter biting at your ankles, it can be pretty uncomfortable, and they seem to learn quickly this way with no chance of harm. Just make the body assume a submissive position, and the brain will follow.


ED'S COMMMENT BEING ADDED TO THIS POST:

Daryl - there is no question your method works (it's an ALPHA ROLL) but if you are raising working puppies this is crazy to do. I have bred over 350 litters and have never one time tried to take prey drive out of the litter. If you breed pets - well what can I say. It's certainly not something I would even do with pets.

There is a very fine line with working pups to keep the prey drive while at the same time teaching them to redirect from biting handlers to biting prey.

Edited by Ed Frawley (Thu Nov 17 2005 07:52 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Daryl Ehret]
      #4157749 - Thu Nov 17 2005 07:31 AM

Lou - one of the reasons I wrote this article is because of the numerous (and I mean numerous posts) you have put on my web board about ESCAPE TRAINING with an e-collar. I disagree with every post you have made concerning Escape Training with e-collars. Its old school backward training.

There is only one place that ESCAPE TRAINING (Avoidance training is a better term) with a remote trainer should be used and thats with animal aggression and the scenarios I describe in the article under avoidance training.

Modern dog training is built on motivating a dog to want to work for you. When its done correctly the dog will try and figure out what you want so it can obtain its drive goal. People should see our little Corgi pup that Cindy is working with try and figure out what she wants her to do. You can see the wheels going in her head.

This method of training produces a dog that can think for himself. He THINKS and becomes a PROBLEM SOLVER.

Escape training produces a dog that is guided into the correct behavior because it wants to avoid the STIM (or stem).

Lou - I strongly recommend that you start your own web discussion forum on your own web site about escape training because I am going to step in and stop it on my forum. In my opinion its a dis-service to allow what I consider abusive training methods to be touted "as the correct way to use e-collars"

I don’t know what your point is on the choke collars. Did you not read the post I entered on finding someone that does not like you to jerk a choke that’s put around your thigh?

If it’s so important to you to hold a piece of paper in your hand about this study - write Bernhard Flinks. Ask him about it. He discusses it in every one of his seminars.

In regard to the dominant dog collar - Loudid you read what I said? It seems not !!!!!! It seems that you argue just for the love of arguing.

A dominant dog collar is not used like a choke collar is used in obedience training. In obedience training handlers give the dog a POP with the leash (the level determines by the temperament of the dog). This POP is what causes the damage. (Lou I assume you understand that a dog should get a POP rather than a TUG for a correction?)

With a dominant dog collar there is never a POP - it’s used to quickly lift the dogs feet off the ground when it shows unwarranted aggression. A dominant dog collar is used to take the air away from a dog. It’s not used to POP the dog with a correction.

Lou - if you dealt with many behavioral problems you would understand the difference here. On the vast majority of dogs that have been allowed to become dominant these collars only need to be used a few times before the dog figures out that the handler is someone to be taken seriously.

Obviously you have not seen the training DVD I did. Probably a waste of money for you – you are a little to close minded. In the DVD I explained that some people use STIM – some people use SHOCK – some people use STEM. It really does not matter what term one uses as long as its understood. It’s just like some people call these SHOCK COLLARS – some people call them E-Collars – some people call them REMOTE TRAINERS.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com

Edited by Ed Frawley (Thu Nov 17 2005 02:45 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157760 - Thu Nov 17 2005 11:04 AM

Well have been reading, looks like the prong, ecollar and whatever you can choke or hurt your dog with is popular here... I dont get it.
Are we talking about pups or already grown dogs with issues and messed up habits from previous owner?
I did not even know about the prong collar till this supposely great trainer in my country put it on my dog and when i saw what it did I told him..." one more time you put this on my dog I personally test it on your neck" I will never use it. And every time my dog did bite work on him I could see the hate comming out of his ears...
Am I unexperienced or what the heck? Maybe I have never gotten in to actually using it properly, but I have never had a need.
I think that each and every owner schould put it around their a** so they can relate.. maybe I am just uneducated.
Please dont take it wrong.. I am not saying that it is evil, byt it sure seams to me. It looks like somebody came up with that collar because they didnt know HOW...


Ed's comments edited in:

The point you miss is that every dog is different. If you have a soft temperament dog you dont need a prong. If you have a hard temperament dog you will be glad to have one. With that said - every training tool on the market can be abused. Dont blame to tool for the fool on ther end of the leash.

In the mean time I take offense at your smart A@# comment "looks like the prong, ecollar and whatever you can choke or hurt your dog with is popular here"

What an uterly stupid comment!!!!! I suggest you re-read the article. I suggest you also read what I said the reason for writing the article.

Edited by Ed Frawley (Thu Nov 17 2005 02:26 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ian McVey
Leerburg Web Board User
***

Reged: Thu
Posts: 70
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Martina C Wilson]
      #4157762 - Thu Nov 17 2005 11:21 AM

Well, although we've never put them around our a**, both my girlfriend and myself have put on properly adjusted prong collars and seen what it is like. Long story short, we did it because she was unsure about the collar and I just wanted to convince her it was not a medieveil torture device. She decided that she wouldnt do it unless I did it first. Anyway, it was more an experiment to see what a proper correction SHOULD feel like to the dog from this collar. I personally feel they are nicer than a choke (certainly being scruffed by a mouth full of teeth *something mom did when they were pups* is more naytural than having their airway partialy *or in some cases fully* blocked) and there are some dogs that absolutely need them. I don't reallt feel bad about it becuase a dog has a VERY short memory and is incapable of remembering at todays training session that yesterday it got pinched. Does it remember that it doesn't like what ahppenes when it doesnt sit on command? yes. Does it remember that its because I put a pinch collar on it at the beginning opf the sessiona nd then chose to use it 20 minutes into it? no. All in all, Im just sayong that in dog training (as in dog breeding, judging, heck, even grooming fancy poodle cuts) to each his own. Some methods work most of the time and most methods work some of the time. Every dog is differant and so is every owner. You can only makes decisions on what is best for your dog the same as everybody else. I respect the choice a dog owner makes reguarding his own dogs training and I expect the same courtesy from them reguarding my own dogs and my training. As an example, after our experiment, my girlfriend made the decision that the pinch collar was good for one of her dogs, uses it sometimes on the second and never on the third. I think she made responsible choices ireguarding each dog and thats all we can hope to do. I wish you the best of luck with your dog and I hope your trainer respects your decision and drops the subject.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ian McVey
Leerburg Web Board User
***

Reged: Thu
Posts: 70
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ian McVey]
      #4157763 - Thu Nov 17 2005 11:28 AM

Yikes, just read my own post anbd wanted to make one things ckear: I was talking about the improper use of choke collars being bad, not choke cpllars themselves and I certainly wasnt including ominant dog collars. I have two of Mr. Frawley's dominant dog collars and they have been lifesavers for controlling my dog aggressive dog as well as another trial members. We each thought we would never be able to take these dogs to group training untill getting these collars. Just wanted to clarify my point. I forgot one word and that nmade a huge differance!

Ian


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ian McVey]
      #4157768 - Thu Nov 17 2005 11:43 AM

Sounds reasonable... I've never used choke or prong nor electricity nothing.. I feel lucky.
Well But I also trained on daily bases so they remembered. I think.
Well Good luck to you too.. I never put down anybodys training system... I took me a while to develop my aproach and still learning. I just feel lucky that I have to only use two collar.. home one and out one.. leather choke, i never use.. I just like the option in "case". I think I am very calm person and for most people my dog seams boring.. But I like it that way...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jason Shipley
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Fri
Posts: 164
Loc: northern Illinois
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Martina C Wilson]
      #4157772 - Thu Nov 17 2005 12:00 PM

Martina,
I think you will find that Ed advocates the minimum amount of force necessary to communicate with the dog. The working dogs that many of us on this board train take a higher level of correction that your average family pet dog. We are also training to a higher level than what a family pet would be trained for. Take the time to explore all of Ed's articles and I think you will be surprised, the bulk of the training that most of us do is motivational training, giving corrections properly and in a fair timely manner that the dog can understand creates a framework for all of our interactions, the dog knows what is expected of him and is happier for it.

--------------------
You always get the dog you deserve...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jason Shipley]
      #4157774 - Thu Nov 17 2005 12:12 PM

Hallo Jason. I trained SVV, SPS and personal Protection as well as Police dogs.. Building search and field search.. I Have never had just a family pet... well I did his name was ding dong and not quiet sure what it was..
My first 5 years in the US i had to learn how to live here, I did not have time to train dogs... but some obedience for my friends.. Maybe my technique is old I will find out. I receantly purchased a pup and I will purchase another one Shortly from Slovakia... Just know those dogs, They have CZ/SVK/DDR working line.
I have no Idea what they will become, I am hoping one SAR and one SHutz-I just have to train myself first.. dont know shutz trials
My 3 mos pup is already following tha track 30 min old and maybe 10 meters long... no running and the other day I made a little curve-perfect following. This is going to be my SAR I hope.
I wil have to learn because I forgot a lot.
I just never ever used any force training..well not talking about spenking and raised voice... My 3 mos pup already knows NO and Dont... without any extra making him... and that little sh** tries. I love him


Ed's edited in comments:

This is not a thread about what dog we are going to get - its a thread about the article I wrote on the Theory of Corrections in Dog Training" - which from looking at your posts you need to study. Anyone who claims to train dogs the way you do has a lot to learn.

Edited by Ed Frawley (Thu Nov 17 2005 02:33 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jason Shipley]
      #4157775 - Thu Nov 17 2005 12:14 PM

Just to add... I dont think that prong is bad... I just think that it can be done without it.. that is all.
Call me old school if you want. I think that it can be used on dogs and work just fine no harm done... I just chose not to.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike J Schoonbrood
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Sat
Posts: 632
Loc: Orlando FL
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Martina C Wilson]
      #4157777 - Thu Nov 17 2005 12:42 PM

Quote:

Just to add... I dont think that prong is bad... I just think that it can be done without it.. that is all.
Call me old school if you want. I think that it can be used on dogs and work just fine no harm done... I just chose not to.




Isn't old school the complete opposite? When someone says old school I think of hardcore compulsion.

If you can work with my dog without a prong then more power to ya, but don't be surprised if he ignores you when his nose is buried in the grass Sure using food rewards is great, but no food = no listen.

--------------------
Meet Cujo | Cujo's Blog


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jenni Williams
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Thu
Posts: 98
Loc: Naperville, IL
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Mike J Schoonbrood]
      #4157781 - Thu Nov 17 2005 12:55 PM

Hi Mike,

I'm with ya on the prong thing; I welcome anyone to try to get my dog to even acknowledge their existance without one. I was leery of it at first-I mean, it just LOOKS CRUEL! But when you look at it next to a regular choke, well, at least it has a stopping point. The choke just keeps pinching, while the prong makes a point, and does it evenly. I tried every collar, and the prong is the only one that helps at all. Caleb will still ignore you while wearing a choke; he just gags and coughs more since he's having a tough time breathing. As soon as I slip the prong on him, though, he knows it's work time.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Mike J Schoonbrood]
      #4157782 - Thu Nov 17 2005 01:02 PM

I dont use any food rewards... the prong was not introduced in my home town till my dog reached age of 3 years old, I am not saying that my dog was like a wish to come true... but never ignored me.. did you get you pup older? i start train when the dog arrives to my house, heals by the age of 6 mos and listenes without the leash by 8 mos...
You are more than velcome to visit me I dont get it I am no miracle trainer, nor i have miracle dogs...
Must be the luck... I was told by a lot of people...
I will meet with you any time show you my dogs and even talk to you about a lot of different things in training..
I love to find people with new methods, keep educating myself.
Yes you are right old style was very forcefull... what I ment no new things like e collar or prong, or shock..
I used leash to correct my dog that was all. End tell you the truth.. we made mistakes while at trial.

MAybe it is just the bond you can have with your dog... My dog trusted me 100% he even jumped of off a train while moving.. not fast but still moving. Things like that.
My friends at the club had told me many times that we had a very strong bond.. maybe that is the difference..
And I do know that there are dogs that are more stuborn and independent...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rashmi Kumar
Leerburg Web Board User
***

Reged: Sat
Posts: 186
Loc: NY
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157793 - Thu Nov 17 2005 03:20 PM

Ed,

What an excellent article.. It has been a long time since I have been on the site but everytime I log in, something new and of great importance get posted.

You should copy write this and publish it.

Regards,

Rashmi


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Martina C Wilson]
      #4157794 - Thu Nov 17 2005 03:31 PM

Hallo guys, I wrote something I did not mean before and I want to appologize to everyone...Sorry about that...
Ed Thanks for pointing it out
Sorry

Ed's Comments edited in:

It is really nice that you did this. Sometimes a language issue results in things being said in a way they were not meant. Glad we got this worked out.

Ed

Edited by Ed Frawley (Thu Nov 17 2005 05:56 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Debbie High

****

Reged: Fri
Posts: 212
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157808 - Thu Nov 17 2005 04:52 PM

Ed, Thanks so much for your very informative article! Watching your DVD, E-collar Training for Pet Owners, combined with this article has certainly given me more confidence with my corrections. I have a real hang-up about unfair corrections with my dogs!! Before I could use an ecollar or prong on my dog I had to try it on myself first. With both of these training aids it is basically up to the dog. They can pay attention with a correction that in nothing more than a reminder or they can make it really hard on themselves. With high-drive intense dogs you have to have control or at least with my dog I do!!


Informed fair owners certainly makes for happier dogs. I know how much you love dogs and I know that this is important to you. Since not all puppies go to professional trainers I commend you on your effort to at least give us some simple instructions!! Good job!!

Regards,
Debbie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Connie Sutherland
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Wed
Posts: 756
Loc: North-Central coast of Califor...
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Debbie High]
      #4157811 - Thu Nov 17 2005 05:03 PM

Quote:

....I have a real hang-up about unfair corrections with my dogs!! ....Informed fair owners certainly makes for happier dogs. ......I commend you on your effort to at least give us some simple instructions!! Good job!!.....Regards, Debbie




A brief addition to my posted appreciation of this article: Finally I understand the avoidance/escape training theory. I've been following the looooong posts about this method on the forum, but thought I might be missing some point.

Now I see that it is what I gathered it was, and I appreciate the article's clarity about it --- confirmation that it's not for me.

I learn more on this site and this forum than on all the others I follow, combined.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Baton Thaqi

***

Reged: Fri
Posts: 85
Loc: Worcester, MA
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157812 - Thu Nov 17 2005 05:13 PM

Thanks for the great article Ed,

I learned a lot of definitions that I did not know. (like escape training). The details and order that you follow on your article make it possible even to the least experienced in training dogs to understand.

I especially liked the e-collar training methods that you use.

Regards
Baton


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Petra Mumby
Leerburg Web Board User
****

Reged: Mon
Posts: 64
Loc: Ontario,Canada
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Martina C Wilson]
      #4157858 - Fri Nov 18 2005 09:36 AM

Martina, after reading your posts I'm really confused.
How the heck do you train your dog if you do not use food or corrections. but then I guess you do use corrections you have mentioned a couple of times you smack your dog. do you not feel this is cruel, I would think that a well executed correction with a prong with the proper force needed for the dog would be a more humane correction then hitting your dog. But then again that's just my opinion! I train 99% motivational (food, praise) but I also agree that a well placed correction at the right time is most definetly needed for fine tuning dogs behaviours at some point in their training. Please keep an open mind and don't judge prematurely!

Ed, great article!!! Something every dog owner should read!!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Petra Mumby]
      #4157865 - Fri Nov 18 2005 10:29 AM

Hi Petra, No I dont smack my dog... as matter of fact the only time we had a little missunderstanding was when he decided that he was not gonna share his food..
I use just the leash correction and voice.. I dont have to yell just raise my voice.. Ed called it softer dog I believe in the article.. I try to look for certain behavior already in a Puppy, like who is the boss, when and how and the fact I am always the first unless he has petmission. I have no experience in training with other collars.. or no collar but flat one. And the so called Trainers made my dog to squeel like a pig by putting on an ecollar.. was a horrible sight, But I believe one thing, If an owner knows how to use it, there should be no harm. I just never seen it used properly. And had luck with not needing it. But I will promise one thing to myself I will sure look into it more and educate myself and I wrote that before... I just tried to understand.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Petra Mumby
Leerburg Web Board User
****

Reged: Mon
Posts: 64
Loc: Ontario,Canada
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Martina C Wilson]
      #4157869 - Fri Nov 18 2005 11:24 AM

I'm sorry for your experience with a poor trainer who obviously didn't know how to use the E-coller correctly.
I wish you luck with your new pup, I'm in the process of raising two.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Petra Mumby]
      #4157871 - Fri Nov 18 2005 11:43 AM

Ohhh you got yourself a full house. well I am glad to have only one. Kind of rusty after 5 years not havin a dog.. just bossing around the neighbours doggies... and by the way... Dekuju ja to vim ze ten pan nebyl dobrej trener...
I think you will understand
Martina


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Valerie Tietz-Kelly
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Tue
Posts: 161
Loc: NJ, USA
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Martina C Wilson]
      #4157886 - Fri Nov 18 2005 02:17 PM

Hi All -

I just got back from my forth session with my trainer. It was a great session, although I thought I was going to have to loose my lunch I got so nervous. It was our first session introducing dogs! (my dog is an Am Stf with dog aggresion)As Ed descibes in his article I had severly underestimated the hardness of my dog...add her dog aggresion into the mix an the incorrect level of the correction and walla, my problem identified!!! The trainer brought out three GSDs, the first very mellow, my Lilly is heeling for the trainer ( the lead is loose), she gets close and lunges for the dog, he says leave it and pops once, she goes back and he repeats, the third time she is off her feet and gets a firm NO! She comes back to her feet and is glued to his side looking only at him, NO MATTER HOW CLOSE HE GETS TO THE OTHER DOG....WOW. He repeats the drill with a second GSD, younger and playful, this dog is jumping and frolicing near her, she goes for the dog, a leave it and a pop, she goes back and its up off her feet...FIRM NO. A third GSD comes out very playful and high energy...my Lilly will only look at the trainer...this dog actually comes up to her and sniffs her tushy....she just sits and looks at the trainer. He releases her from the sit and walks her to me and says this Sunday we will repeat the drill..but I will be the one on the other end of Lilly's leash.

I am so glad I read Ed's article before this session....it was much easier to identify where I have made the wrong turns...Thanks Ed, looking forward to the new DVD for dominant dogs!!!!

--------------------
Val


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Connie Sutherland
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Wed
Posts: 756
Loc: North-Central coast of Califor...
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Valerie Tietz-Kelly]
      #4157889 - Fri Nov 18 2005 02:56 PM

Quote:

...I am so glad I read Ed's article before this session....it was much easier to identify where I have made the wrong turns...Thanks Ed, looking forward to the new DVD for dominant dogs!!!!




Plus it sounds like you did your homework in finding a good trainer, too.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Valerie Tietz-Kelly
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Tue
Posts: 161
Loc: NJ, USA
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Connie Sutherland]
      #4157901 - Fri Nov 18 2005 05:56 PM

Connie -

I have got to admit I am very nervous about Sunday, I hope I can remember everything I have been taught, I hope I don't mess this up. Man I wish I was back in grad school studying for my final.....how does one prepare for this???? This guy made it look so easy, maybe I should let him do it alone one more time before I try....where is Will, I need a good swift kick in the butt...I think

--------------------
Val


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Old earth dog Bob Scott

****

Reged: Fri
Posts: 1994
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Valerie Tietz-Kelly]
      #4157915 - Fri Nov 18 2005 08:25 PM

Not meaning to hijack Ed's post.
Valerie. Rember one important thing about true dog aggression. You may very well be able to control this problem but that doesn't make it go away. Always be on your toes.

--------------------
old dogs LOVE to learn new tricks


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Phil Cross
Leerburg Web Board User


Reged: Thu
Posts: 34
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157929 - Sat Nov 19 2005 12:43 AM

Another great article. How can you give this info away for free? Just on question...When giving the correction with the agressive dog collar, how long is the correction?(how long should you choke him)Thanks

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Valerie Tietz-Kelly
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Tue
Posts: 161
Loc: NJ, USA
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Old earth dog Bob Scott]
      #4157931 - Sat Nov 19 2005 01:20 AM

Quote:

Not meaning to hijack Ed's post.
Valerie. Rember one important thing about true dog aggression. You may very well be able to control this problem but that doesn't make it go away. Always be on your toes.




Your point resonates with me for sure, my Lil is what she is...a Pit Bull and ya can't change that!!!!Thanks

--------------------
Val


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Valerie Tietz-Kelly]
      #4157951 - Sat Nov 19 2005 08:15 AM

Phil, The answer to how long to lift a dog with the Dominant Dog Collar ( http://leerburg.com/746.htm )is that it depends on the dog. Most people who have normal slightly dominant dogs just nheed to have their front feet lifted for 2 or 3 seconds (just enough to show it that you are someone of a higher rank to be taken seriosuly)

Dogs with very serious handler aggression problems need a different protocol that I wont go into here. These dogs need to have front and back feet lifted off the ground until they pass out. Keep in mind that these are extremely dangerous dogs. This should only be done by a professional who fully understands the protocol and the maintence training. It should never a pet owner.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Judith Alta



Reged: Wed
Posts: 4
Loc: Southwest Michigan
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4157974 - Sat Nov 19 2005 01:57 PM

In defense of Lou Castle.

I have attended two ecollar seminars. The first by a man who had little knowledge of dogs and worked each dog in the exact same manner as every other dog. He also worked with the ecollar set at the highest level at which the dog did not vocalize.

At this seminar I watched this man make mincemeat of a sweet coonhound mix.

One year later I watched Lou, also with an ecollar, put that same sweet dog back together again.

I have watched Lou, using the ecollar, gently, and without yanking the dogs off their feet, teach them that dog agression is not the thing to do. You can find the details on his website ( http://www.loucastle.com/ ).

Lou is knowledgeable about dogs and trains each dog as an individual, working dogs on the ecollar at the lowest level they will acknowledge.

I also have "known" Lou for some years on email lists, and I don't know of anyone whose methods I'd rather use.

I own a very DOMINANT, hard-headed, work-bred dog. But without the ecollar, and Lou's help, he would have gone back to the breeder soom after his first birthday. Oski will be six next month and I would never part with him. Thanks to the ecollar and Lou Castle.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Judith Alta]
      #4158012 - Sat Nov 19 2005 08:59 PM

Judith - I am not sure what your point is? Did I miss something? or is this a case of you not reading exactly what I said? This is your first post on my web board. I suggest that you go back and re-read my article on corrections. Then read the posts I have made in this threat.

Lou has 574 posts on my board. His method of training is escape training (ET) also called avoidance training. ET has been around for 25 years. Lou did not invent ET. He simply uses that method to train dogs. In 574 posts he has done an excellent job of explaining his training methods.

I have written one article on what I consider a better way to train and you get defensive about Lou. I don’t dislike Lou. Fact is I have never met him. I have allowed him to make hundreds of posts about a method of training I have never agreed with.

If you read my article you will find that I said “escape training works.” It’s a very quick method to train a dogs. That’s why the vast majority of professional dog trainers train their client dogs with ET. With this said ET does nothing to build the bond with the handler and dog.

The fact is ET is old school training - 25 year old school training. My methods are a better way to train. My article is not an attack on Lou Castle (as you allude it is). My article simply explains why ET is old school and why my methods are a better way to train with a remote trainer.

In closing I have some serious questions why ANYONE would allow another trainer to take their dog and put a remote collar on it at a seminar. I too have seen many cases of abuse in this kind of scenario. This is crazy.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jenni Williams
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Thu
Posts: 98
Loc: Naperville, IL
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4158014 - Sat Nov 19 2005 09:13 PM

While we're on ecollars-any particular manufacturer that's better than another? I need varying levels for 2 very different size dogs. I'd rather have Ed's opinion or someone else experienced than take the store clerk's word for which will work best.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Judith Alta



Reged: Wed
Posts: 4
Loc: Southwest Michigan
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4158015 - Sat Nov 19 2005 09:45 PM

Ed,

Part of the reason I posted was to give an example of what I have seen Lou do with the ecollar. It is far more than a punishment tool. And, properly used, it DOES help build a tight bond between dog and handler.

You are missing the boat if you think the ecollar is only for harsh corrections when needed. The ecollar is one of the safest and gentlest methods of teaching a dog anything that there is.

You seem to approve of jerking dogs off their feet and stringing them up until they cannot breathe. Granted, the occasions you mention are extreme, but, in my opinion, such methods should only be used after all other methods have failed.

There is no reason not to turn a dog over to a competant ecollar trainer. In my case the first trainer I mentioned never got his hands on my transmitter. There is no way I would entrust my dog to such a person.

On the other hand I would have no qualms about handing my transmitter to Lou. Because I was somewhat knowledgable about the ecollar he did not take my transmitter. I used it under his direction.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jenni Williams]
      #4158016 - Sat Nov 19 2005 09:52 PM

There are several quality brands of collars (Dogtra, Innotek and Tri Tronic) Stick with them. There are cheaper brands but they dont have the quality. The cheaper collars do not produce the consistency of stimulation. When a collar sends out a inconsitent stem this is in effect sending a confusing signal to the dog. In my opinions its not worht the gamble just to save a few bucks.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Valerie Tietz-Kelly
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Tue
Posts: 161
Loc: NJ, USA
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4158018 - Sat Nov 19 2005 10:27 PM

Judith -

You seem to approve of jerking dogs off their feet and stringing them up until they cannot breathe. Granted, the occasions you mention are extreme, but, in my opinion, such methods should only be used after all other methods have failed.

Or unless you have a dog like mine.....I am a complete rookie when it comes to this business, but I am a person that does an awful lot of research. In dealing with my dog I cannot find a reputable Pit trainer or breeder that advocates the use of an ecollar. I cannot get anyone to explain this in any great detail but I have been stongly steered towards the method I bolded above, and I have to say when done properly, it was very effective, my dog recovered very quickly and she learned her dog aggression was not appropriate at that time. Again I am a rookie, but I saw first hand how effective this method was and thank goodness for that, just my observations..........

--------------------
Val


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
REINIER Geel

***

Reged: Sun
Posts: 171
Loc: South Africa
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Valerie Tietz-Kelly]
      #4158033 - Sun Nov 20 2005 04:46 AM

Ed, this is a very good article. Two thumbs up. You can bet your last dollar it will be copied. I suggest you put it in a booklet, with some picks, of how to, so that people can buy it, and distribute it at classes.

--------------------
R.H. Geel. Author: of "K9 Unit Management".


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Judith Alta



Reged: Wed
Posts: 4
Loc: Southwest Michigan
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Valerie Tietz-Kelly]
      #4158041 - Sun Nov 20 2005 08:50 AM

Valerie,

Here is an excellent article on what can be done with an aggressive dog with the ecollar.

http://loucastle.com/simon.htm

As someone said, with a Pit Bull, especially one that has been bred for fighting, one will always have to be on the alert for agressive behavior.


Ed's edited comment:

This article has been mentioned a number of times on this web board. There are other ways that work better.

Edited by Ed Frawley (Sun Nov 20 2005 08:54 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: REINIER Geel]
      #4158043 - Sun Nov 20 2005 08:52 AM

Judith - you have now made three posts on my web board. You came here with a huge CHIP ON YOUR SHOULDER!! Your posts are filled with ridiculous statements. I am having a difficult time convincing myself not to block you from the board. Either change your attitude or go away.

For the second time I suggest you read my article. You have skimmed the article and absorbed very little.

The purpose for the article is to explain the various kinds of corrections used in dog training. It was not to list the kinds of corrections I use in training. In regard to a "Level 10 leash correction" if you took the time to read you would have seen that I said that it was very seldom needed. I suggest you not put words in my mouth.

Did you miss the part where I said using a "dominant dog collar" is a LAST RESORT? Did you miss the part where I explained that this method is used on dogs that the owners were considering euthanizing the dog if their aggression problems were not solved?

Once again how many ways do I have to say this article is not about Lou Castle. This article is about the Theory of Corrections in Dogs.

My advice to you Judith is to walk away from this because you seem to be on a mission and your next post will be your last if it’s filled with the kind of garbage in your last two.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com

Edited by Ed Frawley (Sun Nov 20 2005 10:56 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Al Curbow
Leerburg Web Board User
***

Reged: Thu
Posts: 105
Loc: northeast
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Judith Alta]
      #4158054 - Sun Nov 20 2005 10:57 AM

Judith, i purchased the leerburg ecollar dvd, and nowhere in it does it say that "the ecollar is only for harsh corrections when needed", nothing could be further from the truth. Have you seen the dvd? You know, i was thinking about the "missing the boat" comment, and thought it was disrespecful at the very least. I don't know Ed Frawly, but i do know that without the knowledge i've gotten from the dvds i've purchased, and all the articles i've read,and the information from this discussion forum, i wouldn't be living with 3 well behaved gsds, that's the bottom line, AL

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jenni Williams
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Thu
Posts: 98
Loc: Naperville, IL
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Judith Alta]
      #4158055 - Sun Nov 20 2005 11:30 AM

Quote:

With a pit bull, especially one that has been bred for fighting...




Uh, does anyone know of a pit bull that WASN'T bred for fighting? Call me stupid, but I was under the impression that that's what the breed was developed for over years and years.(And I have done a fair amount of research on them and their origins). Judith, you make it sound like a breeder says to a dam, "Now, bitch, I need you to whelp puppies for fighting this time, not pulling a cart or playing Santa Claus, like last time I bred you."

Pit bulls get a somewhat deserved reputation for being dog aggressive, but I think a lot of accidents happen because people aren't as careful with other breeds of animal aggressive dogs as they are with pits. When a pit is involved in a fight, he almost always takes the blame, deserved or not. Pits are highly intelligent, and in my experience (foster care, sometimes over a year) they are just as capable of learning and respecting a hierarchy. One 100lb foster I had always let my chihuahua eat first. The one time the chihuahua wasn't home at mealtime, he left a little circle of food in the bowl, after I had to tell him repeatedly it was ok to eat. They absolutely need to be taught that dog aggression is not going to be tolerated, and they need to be taught in a language that they understand, the way another dog, or their mothers would teach them. And they WILL learn this way-they are very eager to please humans, in most cases. You may think Ed's method is harsh, but you have to consider the mentality of the dog. That dog is going to end up dead, usually after it's killed another dog, unless dealt with. Really, Ed's methods are potentially saving this dog's life.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Judith Alta



Reged: Wed
Posts: 4
Loc: Southwest Michigan
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jenni Williams]
      #4158066 - Sun Nov 20 2005 02:44 PM

Why use abusive methods to cure dog agression when other methods, namely the ecollar, are available?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Will RambeauModerator

***

Reged: Sat
Posts: 2977
Loc: Southern U.S.
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Judith Alta]
      #4158067 - Sun Nov 20 2005 03:40 PM

Judith,
Are you just not reading what Ed is saying?

Ed said:
"Did you miss the part where I said using a "dominant dog collar" is a LAST RESORT? Did you miss the part where I explained that this method is used on dogs that the owners were considering euthanizing the dog if their aggression problems were not solved?"


Typing a reply to a statment that you apparently didn't read one word of doesn't do much to advance your views......

--------------------
http://www.k9conceptsofgeorgia.com/

http://www.capitalcanine.com/


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jenni Williams
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Thu
Posts: 98
Loc: Naperville, IL
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Judith Alta]
      #4158070 - Sun Nov 20 2005 04:09 PM

Judith, you don't think that an ecollar, improperly used, can be abusive? Dogs don't correct each other with ecollars; they let one another know they've stepped out of line in ways much more similar to Ed's methods. And, by the way, where did Ed ever say that the ecollars are bad? If you read these posts more carefully, without pre-conceived ideas, I think you'd realize that nobody here is advocating abuse.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jenni Williams]
      #4158073 - Sun Nov 20 2005 04:23 PM

Judith wont be gracing my web board any longer. She has nothing to offer other than pig headedness, a closed mind, stupidity and her own misguided agenda. Kind of reminds me of my ex-wives.

You have nothing to offer this board other than a sour negative attitude.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com

Edited by Ed Frawley (Sun Nov 20 2005 07:03 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jenni Williams
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Thu
Posts: 98
Loc: Naperville, IL
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4158075 - Sun Nov 20 2005 04:32 PM

What do you want to bet she has at least a few ex-husbands? She's certainly bitter about something...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Janelle Story
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Wed
Posts: 60
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4158080 - Sun Nov 20 2005 05:30 PM

Thank God. In only 4 posts she was able to show her true colors. Some people only argue for the sake of arguing without the requisite knowledge and "good sense" to back up their statements. I think she is one of those people.
I can respect people's opinions when offered in the appropriate manner and with some degree of understanding of the topic being discussed. I say "good-bye" and "good riddance."


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Valerie Tietz-Kelly
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Tue
Posts: 161
Loc: NJ, USA
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Janelle Story]
      #4158083 - Sun Nov 20 2005 05:56 PM

I DID IT, I DID IT.....I am so happy with my Lilly. She listened TO ME!!!! We did the three GSD drill again today. I messed up the first pass as I let the lead go tight therefore I was not able to get the proper level of correction or shall I say pop. But there was a ton of experience on the other end of the GSD leash...so no harm. But once I got the right slack, the confidence and the correct correction method and level, I only had to take her up one time!!!! Oh My Gosh....you should have seen her look at me...like she was asking, Did I do Good Mom...when released from the sit after the dog encounter she just wagged her tail and followed me around in her little Pit Bull prance so proud of her self. Everyone you just cannot know how happy I am, Ed as Jenni said you have been a big part of saving this little dogs life, she was so viscous around other dogs when I first emailed you I really thought the only solution to keep other folks pets safe from her was to put her down. Jenni you are so right about my baby she just loves to please me, and now she is starting to respect me as well. I never thought I could care for a little dog the way I do her having been a cat person all my life....but she and her brother coming out of their crates when I get home from work, tails wagging a just wanting to give me doggy kisses is a feeling I probably don't need to describe to any one here. Any way her and I have a new start....we still have 3 more sessions with an option for more, but what a great feeling. Ed you will always be the man in my book!!!!!

I have to post this because I am so proud of this little girl....Thanks everyone!!!!

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b130/MyDawgs/sassnlilly005.jpg

Val and Lilly!!!!

--------------------
Val


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Connie Sutherland
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Wed
Posts: 756
Loc: North-Central coast of Califor...
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Valerie Tietz-Kelly]
      #4158088 - Sun Nov 20 2005 06:47 PM

Quote:

I DID IT, I DID IT.....I am so happy with my Lilly. She listened TO ME!!!! ..... Ed you will always be the man in my book!!!!!




You should be proud of yourself and your dog and your research and your willingness to learn........and you ARE! EXCELLENT! I sure would be!!

What a great feeling it is when you work with a good trainer (and study a great web site) and really learn. And I feel sure that you have also learned what OED Bob so wisely pointed out: "You may very well be able to control this problem but that doesn't make it go away. Always be on your toes."

Congratulations! You done good!!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Dege
Leerburg Web Board User
****

Reged: Thu
Posts: 8
Loc: Minnesota
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4158136 - Mon Nov 21 2005 10:30 AM

Quote:

The fact is ET is old school training - 25 year old school training.


There are, in my mind, two distinct stages that are often confused.

1. Teaching the dog what you want him to do.
2. Convincing the dog to do what you want when you want him to do it.

Ed, from what I've seen, believes that aversives - corrections - have their place in stage two. Lou I'm sure agrees. (I know more than a few from the purely positive crowd who disagree - but that's another rant for another time.)

Ed seems to think that using aversives in stage 1 is inappropriate or counterproductive. Lou disagrees.

Using excessively intense or improperly timed aversives can be enormously destructive, in any stage of training. I'd be surprised if either Ed or Lou disagreed with that.

Escape training has been around a long time - far longer than e-collars have been on the market. Many gun dog trainers have long used the ear pinch for teaching retrieves. It has worked well on many dogs. Dogs who became happy, well-adjusted, and effective working dogs.

Why have so many trainers used it?

Timing.

Most reinforcers can't provide instantaneous timing information.

When a trainer pinches a new dog's ear, he releases the pinch at the instant the dog opens his mouth to take the dummy. The dog learns the association that opening his mouth makes the uncomfortable sensation go away.

Giving a dog a stim on the e-collar, then releasing it the moment the dog begins to move towards the handler, gives the dog information about exactly what it was that he was doing that was correct. To a degree that rewards and praises do not.

Or did not.

What is new is the growing realization of the effectiveness of reward markers. I generally disagree with the purely positive crowd on a great many issues, but they've been popularizing the use of reward markers, and that's been a great benefit.

By conditioning a dog to a reward markers, you can provide the precise timing that escape training provides, while using rewards instead of aversives. The click, or the short happy "yes!" indicates to the dog exactly what he was doing right.

It's a very effective method for stage 1 - and it's a joyous one to behold and participate in. Watching a dog enthusiastically offer behaviors, actively and happily working with you to figure out what it is that you want is an unforgettable experience.

But I'd by no means consider someone who was using escape training to be abusive.

Truth is I think sometimes we forget one of the fundamental principles - it's the dog who decides what's positive and negative.

Is a stim stressful to the dog? Yes. And too much stress can make it impossible for a dog to learn.

Or rather, some levels of stim are stressful to the dog, and what level that is depends upon the dog and the circumstances. And how much stress is too much also depends upon the dog.

But a lot of dogs find offering behaviors and not having them rewarded to be stressful. My own dog will, when he's trying to learn something new, run through everything I've ever taught him, sometimes, just on the off chance that one of them will earn a reward. It's a sure sign that he's getting too stressed - too frustrated.

He, at least, seems to learn faster with a certain level of frustration. If he never fails, he's not learning. But if he's gone too long between successes, he stops trying. I have to watch him carefully. And we always start with things I know he will succeed at, so he's enthusiastic to start, and end with things I know he will succeed at, so he's eager to do it again the next time.

If you're not paying attention, it's easy enough to put too much stress on a dog with escape conditioning. But you can do exactly the same with reward markers.

You have to watch the dog.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jenni Williams
Leerburg Web Board User
**

Reged: Thu
Posts: 98
Loc: Naperville, IL
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Valerie Tietz-Kelly]
      #4158137 - Mon Nov 21 2005 10:31 AM

Valerie, That's great! It's so refreshing to hear of someone who actually bothered to try to change a pit bull's behavior, instead of chalking the behavior up to the breed, and advancing the overall negative reputation. They are GREAT dogs-intelligent, very affectionate, and usually willing to learn, if it will please their human. If more people took the time to do this, these poor dogs might have a fighting chance. You make me want another one!!!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Martina C Wilson
Leerburg Web Board User
*

Reged: Wed
Posts: 61
Loc: Northern US
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4158139 - Mon Nov 21 2005 10:37 AM

Well Ed, this Saturday I took my friends Doberman pup to training meeting. (She drowe me crazy :all over the place and nowhere to be found) I did put the oprong on her and I just prayed that I wont kill her with it or something.
She pulled once twice and than she got all confused and for the firs time in a long time her look was: ok i am listening now.
Thanks.. I hope I learn with her...
I did only couple of exercises and put her back in a crate.
I will do my best with it.. I did not pulled nor did anything harmfull to her.. I also was pretty unsure about myself..
I agree that I have a lot to learn... but my first try was good.. I am proud of us .


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
TracyRoche
Leerburg Web Board User
***

Reged: Thu
Posts: 126
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jeff Dege]
      #4158147 - Mon Nov 21 2005 11:37 AM

Jeff,
I see you've been lurking since Sept, and this was your first post. Two thumbs up!
T

--------------------
Tracy Roche
VA


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lou Castle

***

Reged: Sun
Posts: 578
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Ed Frawley]
      #4158231 - Tue Nov 22 2005 06:46 AM

Ed wrote: "In my opinion its a dis-service to allow what I consider abusive training methods to be touted 'as the correct way to use e-collars.' "

Ed, you're article certainly wasn't about me but this bit of your post certainly was aimed directly at me. In my response to your article I congratulated you on being big enough to allow people who disagree with you to post on your forum. It now looks as if that was a bit premature.

One of the most vile criticisms that someone can level towards a dog trainer is that the tool or method that he uses is abusive, as you've done with me. Since you've never seen me train any dogs and since you've probably never even seen any dogs that I've trained it's completely out of place for you to make such a statement. Perhaps "escape training" as you use the term is abusive. But as I do the work, it's not, not by any stretch of anyone's imagination. It's nearly identical with the Ecollar work that's done by the Dobbs Training Center, Martin Deely, LAPD, LASD, the US Secret Service, Utah State Police K-9 School and hundreds, if not thousands, more. Of nearly 600 posts on this forum, (and that doesn't include the hundreds on the "old" forum) most of them about Ecollars, this is the first time that anyone has said that they consider what I do to be "abusive." I expected better from you.

Across the country people use the same terms differently, I'll suggest that's what's at the bottom of our difference in the use of the terms "escape" and "avoidance" training. As you use them, Ed, they're the same. In your article you mention the defining book of Ecollar terms, by Daniel Tortora. Then you proceed to say that "escape" and "avoidance" are the same thing. Tortora doesn't think so, neither do I, and neither do the vast majority of those who are fluent in Ecollars. "Escape" and "avoidance" as those terms are used in Ecollars are vastly different from one another and different from the way that you use them.

You keep calling my methods "old school" when in fact the leash and collar were used for centuries before Ecollars came along. If anything is "old school," it's the leash and collar. There's nothing wrong with being "old school," except that, to you, the term is pejorative. The technique used to "interrupt a dog's breathing" has been done far longer than either of us have been around by knowledgeable trainers who work with aggressive or dominant dogs everywhere.

I've never claimed to have invented escape training, something that you've alluded to in a post to someone else. There's nothing new about it. It's one thing that's working when a dog learns not to display aggression after having his breathing "interrupted" as you advocate. He "escapes" the discomfort by stopping that action. He "avoids" it in the future by not showing aggression again. Those are two different things that a dog learns. One is occurring during the learning phase and the other is occurring after the learning has occurred. That's how Tortora defines the terms and how I do as well. They're clearly not the same.

I've done over nearly thirty seminars around the US and in Europe. I've appeared before hundreds of people, many of them experienced handlers and trainers and no one who's seen the work has ever called it "abusive."

Thanks Judith for talking about what you've seen, rather than some people, who "assume" how something is done and what its effects are. Judith's point was that my methods are not, in spite of your comments, abusive. She's seen it, you haven't. That's all she was talking about, not the rest of your article.

Hundreds of people have let me put Ecollars on their dogs at seminars and during private training sessions because my reputation as a fair and just trainer and as humane and gentle is widely known. I'm not recently "born again," as some people. Many of the more experienced trainers here, many of them your moderators, have habitually referred people to me and my website when questions about Ecollars have arisen. They didn't seem to find my methods abusive and neither did you until now. Nearly 600 posts on your forum and only a few weeks ago did I discover that you disagreed with how I use the tool. That's fine and anyone is free to disagree, doesn't bother me in the slightest. But anyone who calls my methods "abusive" as you've done is either badly informed or uninformed. It's ignorant to call a method or tool "abusive." Abuse isn't inherent in a tool or a method, it's all in how it's used.


Ed's comments:

Lou - all this from the guy who writes on his web site ( http://www.loucastle.com/sit.htm)in an article on training a dog to sit " What’s happening is that the dog has come to understand what’s expected of him and is trying to shut off the stimulation a little faster. CONGRATULATIONS! You’ve just stepped into “escape training” which is just about as close to magic as we get in dog training! "



The point you miss is that I wrote "I have never met you." In addition I said that "this is not about Lou Castle" - its about ESCAPE TRAINING - which just happens to be the method you chose to use.

As far as I am concerned - escape training is old school training. Maybe abusive is the wrong word - OLD SCHOOL CERTAINLY IS NOT. Lou if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then its a duck - maybe a magic duck.

You are right - I chose to keep my mouth shut about ESCAPE TRAINING - for 574 posts - and Lou it was not easy and those days are over.

The last time I looked I have never seen anywhere that the organizations you mentions (Dobbs Training Center, Martin Deely (never hgeard of him), LAPD, LASD, the US Secret Service, Utah State Police K-9 School) were known as experts in the field of e-collar training. Maybe your experts - not mine.

The fact is Jim Dobbs (as nice as he is) was one of the people who promoted escape training in this country.

I remember when Jim (with a serious face) said that he felt that he could train a Schutzhund dogs to bite a sleeve through Escape training. Basically saying that the dog would be stemmed (stim) until he is got on the sleeve. (boy I would liike to have seen that grip)

I have that idea right up there with back tieing a dog to a fence and beating the crap out of him until he bites. That was how things were done back in the 50's- remmber th 50's Lou? I do!!

Dont put words in my mouth - I never heard of David Tortora until you wrote this post. So dont tell me that I mention his book in my article - WHAT BOOK? With this said if he has a book that contains the concepts I wrote about I would probably say he is a pretty good dog trainer.

I made it very clear that you did not invent escape training. The fact is EAR PINCHES, TOE PINCHES were used as escape training until e-collars came along. I am sure you are familiar with this.

Lou - you never read what I said about dominant dog collars - why does this not surprise me - the dogs are never corrected without first getting a voice correction of "NO" and there is a space in time for them to comply. If they respond to a voice correction of "NO- nothing happens.

This is different than escape training where they get stimulation with NO forwarning until they comply. So my advise is to read first Lou and then ask yourself if there is a possibility that you may learn something. But then you have blinders on.

This all comes from the guy who writes on his web site that escape training is MAGIC. Right Lou - Magic. Sorry I call it old school training and it works for you because you fall into the catagory of a proffesional trainer where time is money. Read my philosophy on dog trainers and you will see exactly why I dont recommend people send their dogs to most professional trainers.



--------------------
Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
www.loucastle.com

Edited by Ed Frawley (Tue Nov 22 2005 08:14 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Dillard

****

Reged: Mon
Posts: 108
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Lou Castle]
      #4158237 - Tue Nov 22 2005 09:52 AM

Lou,

As you know, I've been following your and Ed's discussions (debate?) on e-collar training for some time. You've both done an excellent job of defending your ideas. The word "abuse" is maybe too strong, but I do see where Ed is coming from. Perhaps I would modify Ed's comment to say that escape training can easily be abusive in the wrong hands. The problem that I've had in accepting escape training is that it requires a very skillful handler to pull off, even with a mature, well-grounded dog (pun intended). For that reason, I've come to believe that Ed's methods are the correct ones for the vast majority of the people visiting his site, including myself. From reading your posts and articles, I actually think you'd agree with that.

My question to you, then, is do you have any issues with Ed's method?

--------------------
Kade vom Leerburg (Mika)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Dillard

****

Reged: Mon
Posts: 108
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jeff Dillard]
      #4158239 - Tue Nov 22 2005 09:59 AM

Let me add that the word "abuse" is a loaded one, since it typically implies intent, which we know is not what Ed is saying. In reality, of course, abuse can be unintentional, and that is what I'm referring to in my post.

--------------------
Kade vom Leerburg (Mika)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jeff oehlsen

**

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1031
Loc: Colorado
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jeff Dillard]
      #4158242 - Tue Nov 22 2005 10:29 AM

People without common sense, can and will abuse any method. Idiots are everywhere!

--------------------
My dog is smarter than me. This makes for interesting training.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Dillard

****

Reged: Mon
Posts: 108
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: jeff oehlsen]
      #4158245 - Tue Nov 22 2005 10:54 AM

True, but even really smart people can have trouble with escape training since it requires absolute precision timing to get the dog to figure out what's going on. Otherwise, the dog's just wandering around getting stimmed/stemmed. That's where the "abuse" comes in - the fact that the dog's getting punished before it's figured out what's going on - and it's indeed an "old school" philosophy of training.

I don't think that Lou or other skilled trainers are abusive in any way with this training, but when I tried it myself, the label applied .

--------------------
Kade vom Leerburg (Mika)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Josh Lewis - New England K-9

***

Reged: Thu
Posts: 13
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Jeff Dillard]
      #4158285 - Tue Nov 22 2005 05:43 PM

I just wanted to jump in here for just a few moments. I think the greatest problem may be the use of the terms and the ideas behind them. Like many things we fight over the terms and may be looking at the same exact behaviors and in fact may even agree with the method and outcome even if we fight over the terms used. It’s no different than terms like prey, fight, defense etc.

In terms of the point at hand, I train ecollars almost exactly like Lou.. I’ve also taught with many of the same trainers/depts. he has. I’ve trained with LAPD, LASO, LV Metro, US Secret Service and numerous others that for the most part are all teaching what is now being call “abusive escape” training. I’ve NEVER seen any of these depts. do anything abusive, nor would I expect it. I’ve never even seen one of their dogs vocalize let alone be abused. In fact they are some of the most advanced, pro-active and experienced K-9 Units in the country. Their dogs all search well, don’t cling to handlers, are not shut down, are not fearful or any of the other behaviors that come from poor/abusive training with a ecollar or any other tool.

In Lou’s defense, I’ve taught I think 6 different seminars where we were both invited instructors. Mind you we did not “book” them, we just happen to both be invited to the same venue. I’ve NEVER seen Lou do anything close to what anyone could call abusive. His methods are fair, clear to the dogs and handlers. He puts the working ability of the dogs ahead of anything else. He uses the lowest stim levels the dog can respond to and never just stims a dog to get a reaction. If you don’t agree with the idea of what you consider “escape” training that’s fine and well, everyone has their own likes and dislikes. To say that Lou’s methods are abusive are in my opinion are off base.

--------------------
Josh Lewis
www.newenglandk-9.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed FrawleyAdministrator

****

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1396
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - [Re: Josh Lewis - New England K-9]
      #4158289 - Tue Nov 22 2005 07:21 PM

Josh - you are right - maybe abusive is the wrong word to use - OLD SCHOOL is better. In mymopinion there are better more effective ways that new handlers and trainers can learn and use.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com

Edited by Ed Frawley (Tue Nov 22 2005 08:38 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | >> (show all)



Extra information
2 registered and 14 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Will Rambeau, Cindy Easton Rhodes, Patrick Hennigan, Robert VanCamp, Deanna Thompson, Kevin Sheldahl, Ed Frawley, Kelly At Leerburg 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 3914

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us Leerburg.com

*
UBB.threads™ 6.5.1.1

Generated in 0.075 seconds in which 0.016 seconds were spent on a total of 11 queries. Zlib compression disabled.


Copyright © 2005 Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved.
By accessing any information within Leerburg.com, you agree to abide by the
Leerburg.com Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.