Has dog training actually improved. - Page 10

Workingdogz, I consider my girl as one of my very best dogs, ever, bar none.....I have had several before - maybe I hit it lucky when I got her, since her nerves are rock solid, no spookiness in any way shape or form. The estate is totally proofed when she is on the prowl, with nothing, absolutely nothing, escaping her rigorous scrutiny.   Very disciminative and can quickly assess a threat from a non-threat. Athletic like a wildcat - can run up a sheer 150 ft incline and can run down too - effortlessly !  Calm with kids.  Like all dogs, she has her faults too.....she is a killer when it comes to  livestock,  and I guess this trait is coming from her grand-father Navar.  I am trying to train that habit out of her, but I don't get too many situations where I can work with more cows/cats/goats/rabbits etc., to proof her - reliably - from indulging in her habit of going for them....working on it !  There is not a crate in existence that can hold her in....figures out in 2 minutes flat, on how to get out of ANY crate (even a new one that she has never been in before).

Has dog training improved?   Yes!  The need for dog training evaluations is still very important. I like to compare human traits or habits to dogs. In my own experience I always knew my mother thought I was bright, because she called me sun. lol   We must not get overly excited about some ones own evalation of a dog he or she owns or bred. A peer review is necessary. The person above who raves about their own methods and their own dog,  is missing the point. I for one believe anyone who can not stop their dog from chasing and killing another animal should go back to training ASAP. It is not a yard stick of  positive drive or ability.  I have witnessed many extremely mediocre dogs who kill live stock. Lets all be good ambassidors  for the breed and sport. The protection phase of IPO is an example of controling prey drives. Prey is very controlable and it is a drive where the dog can learn and be taught to modify behavior.

Just to refer to the fellow above, I guess you missed the word "reliably" in my above post.  Yes, she has/had that trait but I have trained that out of her, and from my overall observation (body language), I can see that she is still tempted (by the livestock) but has learned to control her urge, as long as I am around.  However, I personally want to expose her to as many of such situations as possible, to proof her thoroughly to make her 100% reliable (even when I am not present to control her) but don't have too many opportunities to do so, in the place where I am currently located.

FYI red are my rebuttal answers. 

 My post was not about if e collar is proper  or not or if it is abusive or not. I do not like the e collar system but I would never say that it is abusive if used properly. BUT THAT IS BESIDES THE POINT WHICH I WAS MAKING! I was merely describing how collar  works in order to show that   just because you are using  effective tool that you are not necessarily  better trainers or that your training ability  is better or subsequently that when the results are  more precise that your training method is better that you are better trainer.   Same as a surgeon which uses sharp scalpel is not necessarily good surgeon. This was not discussion about e collars per se which is what Jim made it to be. But for the sake of the clarity I will answer his rebuttals to me. 

 Hans1.As we all know or should know, the results do not justify the  means. 
   Brain of just about any creature is most afraid of lack of oxygen and electric shock. Everything else in dog's life is put on back burner when electric shock is delivered or potentially can be delivered. Nothing else matter.   Nada.

Jim:Ok, so according to this a choke collar should never be put on any dog. Because nothing would matter to a dog once it is deprived of oxygen?  I would say this goes against the principle of oppositional reflex which is also employed by skilled trainers.   Any one that has been involved with sport or working dogs has at one time or another seen a choke collar used and a dog deprived of oxygen.  I'm not recommending this but have seen enough dogs recover instantly with no lasting affects or a "fear" of the slip or choke collar.  Next E Collars; low level stimulation can be used to increase drive and increase a behavior.  I suppose that would be in direct conflict with everything else in a dog's life being put on the back burner?  Since an e collar can be used by a skilled person to increase drive I don't think the dog has such a severe aversion to it as Hans describes.   

 
  Hans: Jim you completely misunderstood ( as usually) my point. I  am not condemning e collar I am just describing how it works. I agree . Choker = causes lack of  oxygen in small or big way. E collar causes  electric impulse to the brain in small or big way. I am not saying here that choker is better then  e collar or vice versa. That would be different discussion.   Both are methods of inducing negative stimulus which dog  tries to avoid. I am not discussing in any shape or form  merits of any method using it. 
 
Hans:E collar is capable to deliver 10 000 Volts +/-. Comparatively  stun gun delivers upwards of 50 000 V. There is minimal amperage delivered, thus there is usually no physical damage or effect to speak of. However psychological effect is superbly and - extremely high. The highest possible effect delivered by mechanical means that is.  Yes  I know the argument,  that trainers do not use highest level on their shock collar. However please keep in mind that even very mild level electric stimulus as it is called by users of such device,  is to be avoided at all cost by any organism.  

Jim: This has not been my experience at all.  I place an ecollar on my dog every day and have never had any undesirable effects or my dog being less driven or happy in his work.  Let's compare a stun gun or "TASER" to an E Collar..... read the rest in Jims post. 
 
 Hans: This is not a matter of your experience but it is a matter of the measurable fact by voltmeter. E collars operate in 0V-10 000V +/-range. Your analogy with garden hose and fire hose is lacking understanding of how electricity works you are describing difference between voltage which is pressure garden hose and amperage which is volume fire hose.  Taser does not have high amperage but just higher voltage delivered in impulses.  It is a pulse energy which is similar to brain energy and confuses the signals of the brain and causes paralysis. It has nothing to do with the volume of energy delivered. If volume would be high it would kill the person. But is does not. Same as e collar does not. 
 
Hans:Try to lick a 9 V battery and see how many times you will be willing to submit your self to that mild stimulus.  

Jim:Licking a 9V battery is really a minimal stim and I could do that all day.  I have tested my E collar and on low it is very similar to licking a 9V battery.  No discomfort, just a reminder. 
 
Hans:OK so we agree there. 
 
Hans: Thus yes, electric shock ( or stimulus ) AT ANY LEVEL is very-most effective stimulus we know in order to coerce desired behavior  in one way or another, from any creature. Non is better, stronger, more powerful. None.  

Jim:I would disagree,  a prong or choke can be stronger and more devastating it depends on the animal and it's reaction.
 
HansI disagree and say that I  think that if used in abusive manner they are both damaging and if not used in damaging abusive manner they are not damaging. 
 
Hans: There are also other issues of using e collars besides the brain's total absorption with avoidance of e shocks or even minld stimulus. Namely  the association between the highest shock delivered accidently or intentionally with even mildest of  "stimulus" - as it is often called.  Such an association is very strong and often severe and it is permanent. Thus dog getting even mildest stimulus associates it then with severe 10 000 V shock if he/she ever got it before. I would venture to say that if not all then most dogs trained with e collar were subject to very high shock at one time or another.  

Jim:My dog has never shown avoidance to the E collar or stopped working or even come out of drive.  He has never even been "squashed" in his temperament.  "Mild" stim has never been an issue and the dog does not have any association to a higher level correction.  My dog has also worn a prong and been corrected on that collar, he does not associate a "pop" with a hard correction. 
 
 
 Hans: If you think that dog who got shock on high level or gets shocks on different levels randomly or incrementally  is then  not associating low level with potentially higher level  then maybe I should say that perhaps it is you and not me ( as you so boldly said)  who should not use e collar, but I will not, because that would be silly.  
Prager Hans
 

Back to the OP I will say  that these days the methods of training are more refined, but general understanding of training dog by general public and of many-majority of  dog trainers is thwarted by PC  BS .
Common sense is lacking in comparison to olden days I am sure. There are exceptions of course, butmore often then not people are caught in a box of a training method and gimmick and will  often force a round peg through square hole because they learned this or that  in a book or  video or seminar forgetting that training is a fluid  situation which can not be put into rigid schematic. 
Homo unius libri (Latin, meaning "man of one book") ascribed to Thomas Aquinas  and subsequent:
Cave hominem unius libri.  Beware the man of one book .
Or as Mark Twain ( I think) said: Most I am afraid is a man who read just one book.
Which I believe is now more the case then in times in past. 

Some may find this interesting, it was passed on to us:

 

Applied Animal Behaviour Science  Volume 105, Issue 4, July 2007, Pages 369–380  Veterinary Behavioural Medicine  E. Schalkea, , , J. Stichnotha, S. Otta, R. Jones-Baadeb  a Department of Animal Welfare and Behaviour, Veterinary School of Hannover, Buenteweg 2, 30559 Hannover, Germany  b Clemensstrasse 123, 80796 Muenchen, Germany  Abstract  The use of electric shock collars for training dogs is the subject of considerable controversy. Supporters claim that they are a reliable means of eliminating self-rewarding behaviour and that they can be used over greater distances and with less risk of stress and injury than mechanical devices, such as choke chains. Opponents cite the risk of incorrect or abusive use and temptation to use electric training collars without thought or time given to alternative training methods, regardless of the fact that their use may be associated with pain and fear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether any stress is caused by the use of electric shock collars or not and in this way to contribute to their evaluation with respect to animal welfare.  Fourteen laboratory-bred Beagles were used to ensure standardised breeding, raising and training. Heart rate and saliva cortisol were used as stress parameters. The research project lasted for 7 months, during which each dog was trained for 1.5 h per day. To exclude circadian deviations of salivary cortisol values, each individual was allocated a rigid timeslot. Training as well as the experiments themselves were conducted in a secluded storage building to exclude the influence of external stressors.  Three experimental groups were used. Group A (Aversion) received the electric shock when the dogs touched the prey—a rabbit dummy fixed to a motion device. Group H (Here) received the electric shock when they did not obey a previously trained recall command during hunting. Animals of group R (Random) received the electric shock arbitrarily, i.e. the shock was administered unpredictably and out of context.  The main experiment lasted for 17 days. All animals were allowed to hunt unimpeded for the first 5 days. For the next 5 days the dogs were stopped from hunting by a leash. Every day, the stress parameters were determined. These values were compared with the values that were obtained during the use of the electric training collars. The collars were used over a period of 7 days as described previously. After 4 weeks the dogs were brought back into the research area without receiving an electric pulse.  Group A did not show a significant rise in salivary cortisol levels, while group R and group H did show a significant rise. When the animals were reintroduced to the research area after 4 weeks, the results remained the same.  This led to the conclusion that animals, which were able to clearly associate the electric stimulus with their action, i.e. touching the prey, and consequently were able to predict and control the stressor, did not show considerable or persistent stress indicators.

 

Hans, I agree...

aaykays post are exactly what you described here:


"Back to the OP I will say  that these days the methods of training are more refined, but general understanding of training dog by general public and of many-majority of  dog trainers is thwarted by PC  BS"



aaykay... more I read about your female less I believe you! The novels are pointless, unless you have something to show...Talk is cheap! And you sure talk A LOT!

not trying to insult you, just giving you little bit of an insight of the effect your post have on people.

Gsdstudent, excellent post.  

Workingdogz, I have read that article before and it is very interesting.   Thanks for posting that, it is nice when topics are backed by facts and not just heresay.   

Hans, we can disagree.   In regards to your rebuttal I have no desire to continue this debate or argue with you.  I certainly do not want to spend my time copying and  pasting retorts.  I find to many contradictions to continue any further.  

Back to the OP, yes dog training has evolved a lot over the past 20 years.  I know my training has evolved and my techniques have improved.  I have several tools in my tool box and tailor there use to the individual dog and the exercise being taught.  Those that actually get out and work their dogs and are judged easily recognize the importance of staying current with new theories and training techniques.  

gsdstudent wrote:
<snip>

Has dog training improved?   Yes!  The need for dog training evaluations is still very important. I like to compare human traits or habits to dogs. In my own experience I always knew my mother thought I was bright, because she called me sun. lol   We must not get overly excited about some ones own evalation of a dog he or she owns or bred. A peer review is necessary.

 "Yes!!"??? Based on what? On your unhealthy high self esteem?  I do not know how many years you want to go back in order to compare.  To those who are so sure, so adamant in saying that training improved I would like to ask; how long have you been around dogs? How old are you? How many dogs you worked with? I am 60 or will be in a 3 weeks  and I am looking at training of dogs almost all my life.  The psychological laws are the same  and defined for 50-100 years. What are you basing you ability to say that training now improved.   Because  there are well trained dogs with electric collars?  Have you seen dogs trained 50 or 40 years ago? Have you seen the old type of ZVV3 performance?  Even SchH is more and more pussyfied and less demanding. Why?  Because training methods are better? Because "training improved?" Give me a physical brake!! 
One of the characteristic dog trainer needs is patience .  Patience these days  is a rare commodity. People expect me to answer e mail in 10 minutes after it's reception these days and  are pissed because I sometimes  answer e mails after 2 days. People are cutting you off in traffic beating on their head and showing finger in disbelieve and anger when you are driving within a speed limit because nobody drive in a speed limit.   People eat  food in McDonald's,which is bad for them I mind you, only because it is fast. They feed shit dog food in shiny bag instead cook meat because it is convenient. People are pissed in line if it has 3 people in front of them.  Today the speed  substitutes quality in  just about every part of life including dog training.  Success of electric collar training is the  result for only that reason.  There is only fraction of 1% of trainers who use the collar properly and with a patience after they went thought hundreds of repetitions in foundation work. . E collar is an epitome of lack of patience for 99% of "training" with it.
Next is knowledge?
Who reads books (I mean TEXT  books)  these days? Show me a video they say, but make sure that it is not longer then 3 minutes and , OH yeah it must be fun to watch. Do not forget that!
Can you answer these questions?
What is the difference between negative reinforcement and punishment? What is positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment?   What is classical conditioning, habituation,...... What is inductive training in comparison to compulsive training.  Does positive mean pleasant and negative unpleasant? If you said yes to that one then you are wrong!
  Be honest with your self can you answer these questions without help of Google? Or I be easy on you. Have you ever knew the answer to these questions. Have you ever heard of positive punishment?   Well back then it was much more known what it is now , I assure you.   Well if you are trainer of dogs and claiming that training knowledge is generally better today then 50 or more years ago, then I am here to tell you that you are dead wrong. 
Today school system conditions it's students that they are special and that there  is nothing wrong when they fail and  instead of giving them failing grade or tell, them that thay lost a game, they give them smiley face for trying. 
Aaaanyway do not  get me started. Or I'll go for another chapter or even a book. 
Prager Hans