This is a placeholder text
Group text
by workingdogz on 15 February 2013 - 20:02
Ummmmmm 
chicken with goat cheese and other good stuff.
And CAKE
Back to work for me, break's over
chicken with goat cheese and other good stuff.And CAKE
Back to work for me, break's over
by gsdstudent on 15 February 2013 - 20:02
i am on a diet and all this talk of food is making me angry. So back to the arguement because I did pay for the 5 minute experience. I think electric collar training is better now than 30 years ago. whoops wrong room.
by Slamdunc on 15 February 2013 - 22:02
Your time is up!
you will have to pay again if you want to stay.
you will have to pay again if you want to stay.
by beetree on 15 February 2013 - 23:02
Well, I present this, in gsdstudent's, well, berry defense! All-fruit must feel the effort, the neverending struggle to preserve oneself !
....Oops, I forgot to mention, there are raspberries in the middle of my chocolate cake.
I am sure Slamdunc knew that much.
About your skills with breasts, pounding, rolling, holding it all together-- your dish looks scrumptious in the end. And you are a saucier; more precision from practice, or just plain raw talent? Awesome.
....Oops, I forgot to mention, there are raspberries in the middle of my chocolate cake.
I am sure Slamdunc knew that much.
About your skills with breasts, pounding, rolling, holding it all together-- your dish looks scrumptious in the end. And you are a saucier; more precision from practice, or just plain raw talent? Awesome.
by johan77 on 16 February 2013 - 01:02
Plenty of dogs are trained without e-collars with good results, for service or different type of sports, I would be very surprised if all those people who says they train without e-collars are lying and do different when no one can see. If mario does or not I don´t know, but as he says in the article, the e-collar is only a minor part and on low current, so why would it be so surprising if a good trainer can do well without an e-collar? The majority of people who uses an e-collar is not close to the results mario can show I suppose, so obviously what form of collar someone uses is not the most important thing. Judging precision so hard that e-collar is the only way( if this really is true) is also a strange development, aren´t we then focusing more on the trainer than the dog´s quality?
by Slamdunc on 16 February 2013 - 02:02
Johan,
I agree with your statement and while I use an E collar, the majority of my K-9 unit does not. Three handlers in my unit (myself being one) work their dogs on the SWAT team as well, the other handlers simply work dual purpose Patrol /Detection K-9's. A few get very nice results with out an E collar and overall the unit does an excellent job. Some of the dogs are "handler soft" and an E collar would not fit well with these handlers and their dogs. A few are very good handlers and although they have E collars they rarely use them. We do a lot of big demos some for thousands of people and it is always my dog for the Obedience portion as he is the happiest, highest drive dog for OB. Primarily, that is his temperament but also his training. The difference between my dog and the others is readily apparent in the drive and up beat nature of the dog. Of our unit roughly half is GSD's and the other half is Malinois and Dutch Shepherds, all are excellent dogs. My GSD enjoys OB far more than the other dogs and I have achieved things with him the other handlers have not. Part of this is training, part is technique, part is our relationship and a large part is genetics. I work very well with this dog and he responds.
The use of an E collar is up to the handler. When a handler comes to the unit he is issued several pieces of equipment, from leashes, long lines. muzzle, collars, bullet proof vest for the K-9, an E collar along with other items. The handler chooses to use the E collar or not. The training I do is geared to get the best from each individual dog with the equipment they wear on the street. Most do not use an E collar and I have been around long enough to know how to problem solve and correct with each dog and the equipment it has on. This thread was started with an obvious bias against E collars and went downhill rather quickly. I for one, do not judge a dog or handler based on equipment used but on results. If I saw a dog with bells on getting great results I'd want to see that dog's trainer and how they train and I might be ordering some bells to try it out.
I agree with your statement and while I use an E collar, the majority of my K-9 unit does not. Three handlers in my unit (myself being one) work their dogs on the SWAT team as well, the other handlers simply work dual purpose Patrol /Detection K-9's. A few get very nice results with out an E collar and overall the unit does an excellent job. Some of the dogs are "handler soft" and an E collar would not fit well with these handlers and their dogs. A few are very good handlers and although they have E collars they rarely use them. We do a lot of big demos some for thousands of people and it is always my dog for the Obedience portion as he is the happiest, highest drive dog for OB. Primarily, that is his temperament but also his training. The difference between my dog and the others is readily apparent in the drive and up beat nature of the dog. Of our unit roughly half is GSD's and the other half is Malinois and Dutch Shepherds, all are excellent dogs. My GSD enjoys OB far more than the other dogs and I have achieved things with him the other handlers have not. Part of this is training, part is technique, part is our relationship and a large part is genetics. I work very well with this dog and he responds.
The use of an E collar is up to the handler. When a handler comes to the unit he is issued several pieces of equipment, from leashes, long lines. muzzle, collars, bullet proof vest for the K-9, an E collar along with other items. The handler chooses to use the E collar or not. The training I do is geared to get the best from each individual dog with the equipment they wear on the street. Most do not use an E collar and I have been around long enough to know how to problem solve and correct with each dog and the equipment it has on. This thread was started with an obvious bias against E collars and went downhill rather quickly. I for one, do not judge a dog or handler based on equipment used but on results. If I saw a dog with bells on getting great results I'd want to see that dog's trainer and how they train and I might be ordering some bells to try it out.
by Nans gsd on 16 February 2013 - 02:02
Slamdunc: Please write a training book and put me first on the list to purchase., please, please please. Nan
by Slamdunc on 16 February 2013 - 02:02
LMAO at Nan! Thanks you are way to kind! 
by Prager on 16 February 2013 - 16:02
Jim your approach:
If I could not physically catch the dog, the field was to large or the dog is too fast and I'm to slow then I may tell the dog "down." Before I do this, I will look at the dog and read it's body language. If I get the feeling the dog may not recall, I won't call it I will tell it "down" and stay. I will approach the dog and praise and pet and reward the dog for the down. If I do call the dog and it ignores me, my voice will change and I will order "down." I will then go to the dog, bite my tongue find my happy place on the walk over and praise and pet the dog for downing correctly.
Yes that is what you read in some text books and it seems to be the proper choice
but the problem with this approach is:
1. Yes you rewarded the dog for down, but you did not communicate to the dog negative for not comming.
2. Dogs are master manipuplators and with this appraoch smart dog sooner and dumb dog later will just about invariably learn reliably, that he/she can get away with not comming and does not need to come when comamnded for as long as he wants since there are no negative consequences to it - that is as long as he downs when comanded afterwards and does not let his trainer to catch him before the command down is given. (!!!) That is a very bad proposition.
It is akin of thief not getting punished because he returned the stolen goods, or boy who kept braking windows and is now running away from his father expects not to get punished when he let his father catch him and on top of it the father will give him $20 reward because the boy finally complied and alowed the father to cath him.
That approach generates future problems and makes not coming situation worse exponentially.
Prager Hans
If I could not physically catch the dog, the field was to large or the dog is too fast and I'm to slow then I may tell the dog "down." Before I do this, I will look at the dog and read it's body language. If I get the feeling the dog may not recall, I won't call it I will tell it "down" and stay. I will approach the dog and praise and pet and reward the dog for the down. If I do call the dog and it ignores me, my voice will change and I will order "down." I will then go to the dog, bite my tongue find my happy place on the walk over and praise and pet the dog for downing correctly.
Yes that is what you read in some text books and it seems to be the proper choice
but the problem with this approach is:
1. Yes you rewarded the dog for down, but you did not communicate to the dog negative for not comming.
2. Dogs are master manipuplators and with this appraoch smart dog sooner and dumb dog later will just about invariably learn reliably, that he/she can get away with not comming and does not need to come when comamnded for as long as he wants since there are no negative consequences to it - that is as long as he downs when comanded afterwards and does not let his trainer to catch him before the command down is given. (!!!) That is a very bad proposition.
It is akin of thief not getting punished because he returned the stolen goods, or boy who kept braking windows and is now running away from his father expects not to get punished when he let his father catch him and on top of it the father will give him $20 reward because the boy finally complied and alowed the father to cath him.
That approach generates future problems and makes not coming situation worse exponentially.
Prager Hans
by Prager on 16 February 2013 - 17:02
Jim: I for one, do not judge a dog or handler based on equipment used but on results.
That is a scary thought!!!!! I think know what you mean and I hope that you have misspoken, but you should choose your words more wisely.
Again: I do not agree with Machiavelli and firmly believe that end results do not justify the means.
Prager Hans
That is a scary thought!!!!! I think know what you mean and I hope that you have misspoken, but you should choose your words more wisely.
Again: I do not agree with Machiavelli and firmly believe that end results do not justify the means.
Prager Hans
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top