# Electronic collar training



## cowgirllauralou

Has anyone used this method of training their Standard Poodle?

Thanks, Laura


----------



## JE-UK

IMO, they are abominations. 

There are far more effective training methods, ones that don't involve shocking the sh*t out of your dog. 

They've been banned in Wales, and I hope the ban soon extends to the rest of the UK.

Why do you ask?


----------



## cowgirllauralou

I've trained my last two dogs using this method, but neither of them were Poodles. The e-collars I've used were always low stimulation & at 1/100th of a second. Never have to shock the [email protected] out of the dog. Poodles seem to be so darn smart, they would seem to catch on even quicker than my GSD (may he rest in peace). I was hoping there were other Poodle owners who used this method to talk to.


----------



## Countryboy

We have owners *a married couple* in our group who use the e-collars on their three Partis. They swear by it. And I've seen it in action. 

A tap on the button will deliver a mild tingle to the neck of the dog who will immediately desist in whatever undesired behavior they're engaging in. *N'mind . . another coffee will hopefully restore my sense of grammar. :embarrassed: lol*

They don't use it for other training as far as I know. Their dogs are 'treated' thru Rally and Agility courses. 

...Frank...


----------



## Teffy

I've never used them, and honestly am closed to the idea. 

I grew up with a GSD, trained her myself when I was 11 years old. I taught her all the basic obedience commands and tricks and, heeling off leash. They are damned smart. Saying that, 4 years ago I got my first poodle and...IMO, though I am a big GSD fan and I was only a kid when I trained her, poodles are far smarter.

On top of that, they have softer temperaments and I don't know if this is something to consider, but they don't have a double coat like GSDs. Would the shock be felt more? I don't know. 

As long as you get a poodle from a good breeder that breeds for everything AND stable temperaments, you should be fine without it, you'll look like a superstar in obedience class.


----------



## Sookster

How I feel about them depends entirely on the technology involved (voltage vs static) and how they are used (training vs correction). I am totally opposed to using voltage based "shock" collars to shock a dog as a correction. However, I do train using remote electronic collars that use static technology (the exact same technology as a tens unit, for those of you who know what that is). We train, we don't correct with the collars, and they are used on absolutely the lowest level necessary to get the dogs attention. A tap on the remote causes a muscle contraction that serves a function similar to a tap on the shoulder, and is used solely for the purpose of focusing the dogs attention on the task at hand. Are there other methods of training that work? Yes. However, I find using remote collars to be one of the most effective tools for getting your dog to be completely and totally reliable off-leash, and they allow me to let my dog be off-leash and completely under control in situations where that otherwise may not be possible. For basic obedience training, I don't think that remote collars are necessary, and it is just personal preference in training methods. But used correctly, these collars are both safe and humane. I find the static collars to be much, much more effective and humane than traditional "training" (choke) and prong collars, and I believe they are more comfortable and humane than traditional "leash" training, which involves lots of "jerks" on the leash and leash corrections.

You are going to find varying opinions, some highly opposed and others who think it is a godsend. It will ultimately be for you to decide for yourself what you feel will be best for your dog. I can say that Nova has responded very well to remote training. I have seen a huge turn around in her attitude (she went from being pretty dull to being exuberant and outgoing) and confidence level since starting training with the remote. The results didn't take an eternity to obtain (as has been my experience with traditional leash and collar training) and she is exceptionally reliable, even in really distracting environments (which to me is the major flaw with using only clicker training; I feel it takes a really long time for the responses to be conditioned to a level where they are reliably produced, even amongst heavy distractions). 

So that is my two cents on it. Good luck finding a training method that works for you


----------



## CT Girl

I don't know enough about shock collars to be for or against. My gut says no. I honestly don't think you will need this. Swizzle loves to learn and to please. With this combination I don't think you should need to go to this extream.


----------



## JE-UK

IMO, the language used to describe how shock collars work is deceptive and self-delusional ... "tingle", "static", "stimulation". I don't know why, if people want to shock their dogs into submission, they should just say so. 

If there is no pain involved, why is the dog responding? Why would a dog respond to a "tap" from a shock collar and not from a whistle from the handler, if the "tap" is an attention-getter only?

There's some very interesting research that's been done on their use. I'll try and dig up the study, but in summary:

- 3 sets of dogs were used, one control group, one where the shock was applied at precisely the point the dog was engaging in the behaviour, and the third where the shock was applied a few seconds before or after (to mimic the hopeless timing of the usual pet owner).

- All three sets were taken in a closed van to the same (indoor) training location.

- All three sets had four or five rounds of training, where the shock collar groups were shocked for not recalling. 

- They measured salivary cortisol levels on all three groups (cortisol is a stress indicator)

- When they returned the dogs to the location 2 weeks later, no shock collars and no training sessions, just the same location, the cortisol levels in group two were triple the normal rate, and the third group had cortisol levels nearly 10 times higher, demonstrating extreme stress just by being the location where they'd been shocked 4 or 5 times before.

As a side note, the professional dog trainers brought in to take part in the actual trials were as upset and stressed as the dogs.

Again, just my opinion, but I think they are both barbaric and a lazy way to "train".


----------



## fjm

Agreed, JE - if it does not hurt, it has no impact on behaviour, and why on earth choose punishment based training when there are far better methods? A vibrating collar for a deaf dog is another matter, of course.


----------



## Sookster

JE-UK, I find it kind of offensive that you refer to me as "deceptive" and "delusional". I think we can keep this thread pleasant and educational, without being rude or disrespectful of each other. There are nearly as many different training methods out there as there are kinds of dog, and there are going to be differing opinions. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they are "delusional". 

In response to your remarks, there is nothing deceptive about comparing different types of electric current. It is something every person who attends public school learns about in an elementary school science class. Static electricity, the kind that makes your hair stand out on crisp winter days or that you feel when you scuff your feet on the floor then touch a door knob, is a completely different thing than the kind of electric current you experience if you stick your finger in an electrical outlet or grab hold of an electric fence. This is the difference in the types of electronic collars out there. The OP asked for opinions, and I want them to be aware that if they decide to go the electronic collar route, they need to do their research and be aware that there is more than one type of collar and more than one method of training with it. To the OP, I also suggest that if you decide to go the electronic collar route that you find a professional trainer who can help you learn to use it appropriately.

Those who know what a tens unit is know exactly what I am talking about when I say that the collar I use causes a "tingling" muscle contraction. A tens unit is a piece of medical equipment that is used to alleviate pain in people which back pain and women who are in labor during childbirth. The unit consists of patches that are placed directly on the areas that are painful, and the static stimulation causes a muscle contraction that increases blood flow to the area, reducing inflammation and pain. 

Can you whistle and get your dogs attention? Well, yes. And *whistling isn't painful yet it can still work*. How is that? The dog is conditioned to know what the whistle means. A collar doesn't have to be painful to be effective. I'm not sure why this logic is coming forward when so many other training methods use conditioned responses without inflicting pain. In early training, the dog is conditioned to understand what the collar means. Are there other ways? Of course there are, that is the art and beauty of dog training. Again, it is a matter of preference which one you decide to choose. 

I am very familiar with the study you mention. They are using high intensity shock collars as a correctional tool. This is one way that you can use electronic collars, and not the way that I suggest using them. I feel that any method of training that is correction/punishment based (whether it uses a shock collar, alpha rolling, grabbing your dogs scruff and yelling at/hitting them, choke collars and leash corrections, etc) is going to create a training environment that is stressful for the dog. I do use a remote collar, but it is 1) used as a neutral stimulus, not as a punishment and 2) a low-intensity static collar. So it is very different from the situation described in the study. And Nova is far from the stressed out dogs that this study resulted in.

In closing, it is completely and totally fine for you to disagree with me and to be against remote collars completely, in whatever form they come in. As I have now mentioned numerous times, there are a blue million training methods out there, and you have people that stand by each one with their life. However, please be civil in your comments. Share your opinions, but do it in a manner that that is respectful of the opinions of others, because we are all entitled to our opinions.


----------



## Princess Dollie

I had to look up tens unit and, to my surprise, have experienced one at the chiro (didn’t know that’s what it was called) for bursitis in my shoulder. That was the *most* relaxing “massage” that I’ve ever had!


----------



## Quossum

Very controversial topic. I know in some realms of dog training (field work, for example) the use of e-collars is very well accepted and even expected, to the extent that I've heard it said that a great field dog can't be obtained without one. (I'm sure there are field trainers out there who feel otherwise!) I've seen them very misused, and have heard some disastrous stories about them.

For the most part, as far as pet dogs are concerned, I lean away from their use except in life-or-death situations--de-snaking, for example. That said, I've also seen an e-collar used to get an inveterate crate-barker to stop, and it was effective. Though that's not a life-or-death situation, no doubt anyone crated next to that dog in the future will be grateful. (This owner is an experienced trainer and tried a lot of other methods, but non-stop barking is so self-reinforcing and hard to correct with the owner not present...)

I'm sure e-collars are effective, very effective if used absolutely correctly. But even the mildest shock collar is an aversive, and ideally I prefer to train without applying aversives. When / if an aversive is absolutely necessary, I would rather it be the withdrawing of my attention, not the addition of an uncomfortable stimulus. The ear-pinch retrieve is another example of a very effective aversive, in which a trainer applies an unpleasant stimulus to a dog in order to train the dog to do something. Does it work? Sure. Quicker than a purely positive retrieve? Heck, yeah. But at what cost? 

I inflict unpleasant sensations upon my dog all the time: I take her to the vet to get a shot, I give her baths and blow-dry her with a high-velocity drier (which she hates), I put her away in the utility room when I leave the house--just leaving a pack animal alone for hours at a time is an unhappy thing for her, I'm sure. Since there are so many unpleasant things I have to do to her, I choose not to do unpleasant things to her during training. 

I hadn't heard about this static e-collar that Sookster mentions. Does it truly cause no pain, like the vibrating collar for deaf dogs that fjm mentions? If it produces a sensation like static electricity, like touching your car door after getting out on a cold day, then I would still call that an aversive, albeit a mild one. (Well, for me it would be a major aversive, as I find the jolt of static electricity one of the worst sensations ever! Not as bad as getting slapped, mind you, but still...!) If it truly is like a "tap on the shoulder," well, I don't know. Would that be equivalent to a kind of long-distance attention-getting mild leash pop? 'Cause I don't like leash pops. I'd have to put the collar against my own neck and feel it before I'd even think of using it on my dog.

Definitely food for thought, but I come down on the side of "No."

--Q


----------



## Sookster

To answer your question, Quossom, the collar I use (there are other models, this is just one in particular that is manufactured by SportDog) has 8 levels. Most humans cannot even feel the lowest levels (I feel it on level 2, but cannot feel level 1; some people can't feel it until level 3), and most dogs work on these levels (for example, Nova works on level 1 and 2 98% of the time). The higher levels, 7 and 8, can be uncomfortable. These are the levels that I would say feel similar to what you feel if you touch the car door on a winter day and get a static shock. Your typical underground fence collar or "bark" collar's lowest setting is several times more uncomfortable/intense than this collar's highest level. I have personally never met a dog that works any higher than a 4 or 5 (when I say "works" I mean that this is the level that the dog "feels" the collar). As far as a comparison to a long distance leash pop... maybe kind of but not really? If it were used as a correction, then yes I think you could probably use that as a comparison. But with the method that I use, the collar is not used as a correctional tool. This also makes timing slightly less critical, making it easier for your average pet owner to use correctly. During the very first training session when working with a new dog, the first thing that I do is teach timing to the dog's owner. I do this by "wearing" the collar myself and having them pretend I am the dog and give me commands as they would the dog, using the remote, in order for them to practice their timing. Only once they have the timing down is the collar transferred to the dog. It isn't meant to be an aversive, but used incorrectly (on too high of a level for a given dog, used as a correction, etc) it could probably become an aversive. This is why I recommend getting the help of a professional trainer if someone decides to go this route. 

I do agree that your average pet dog can be trained perfectly well without the remote collar, though. Sonya, my other standard, has never worn a remote collar and behaves almost as well as Nova (she is also still very puppy-like even at a year old, and I attribute her mischievousness to that rather than lack of remote collar training). It is definitely not the only nor the best way to train every dog. Most people that come to us for training come after trying other trainers in the area with limited or no success. We deal with a lot of dogs with separation anxiety, general anxiety issues such as crate barking, aggression towards humans or dogs, resource guarding, etc. The remote can be very helpful in overcoming these types of issues as you mentioned in your post. 

Hope this helps answer some of your questions


----------



## JE-UK

Sookster said:


> JE-UK, I find it kind of offensive that you refer to me as "deceptive" and "delusional". I think we can keep this thread pleasant and educational, without being rude or disrespectful of each other. There are nearly as many different training methods out there as there are kinds of dog, and there are going to be differing opinions. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they are "delusional".


Apologies if you were offended; I was careful to characterise the language as disceptive, not you. If you reread, you'll see I was commenting on the community of people who choose to use shock collars, not directing criticism to you personally. Differences of opinion are healthy, especially as regards training dogs. However, I would prefer it if proponents of aversive, pain-based training methods would just be honest about using punishment, rather than run the risk of misleading pet owners who casually read these forums that such methods are pain- and risk-free.

Shock collar manufacturers are particularly guilty of putting a pretty (and deceptive) face on outdated, ineffective and cruel methods in order to sell their products. 

There can't be any such thing as a static collar; it's a term co-opted by the shock collar vendors specifically to mislead. Static is defined as "Electric charge that has accumulated on an object. Static electricity is often created when two objects that are not good electrical conductors are rubbed together, and electrons from one of the objects rub off onto the other."

(Pause while I give myself a giggle by imagining a complicated MacGyver-type collar that involves a tiny motor that rubs a small bit of rubber over a small bit of carpet.)



Sookster said:


> I do use a remote collar, but it is 1) used as a neutral stimulus, not as a punishment and 2) a low-intensity static collar. So it is very different from the situation described in the study. And Nova is far from the stressed out dogs that this study resulted in.


Again, no intention to offend, but there is no such thing as a neutral stimulus. Even if it's unpleasant, rather than painful, it is still an aversive. And see above for comments on "static". If it has a battery, it isn't static electricity.

I'm glas your dog is fine with your approach. One of the overwhelming gifts dogs give us is the forgiveness for the rotten things we do to them. The fact that lots of dogs have, over decades, managed not to be permanently damaged by being trained with this method is not an argument for continuing to risk damaging future dogs. How easy is it, when the inevitable training frustrations occur, to dial that collar up to painful levels? 

There's an interesting study here on use of shock collars in training police dogs in the Netherlands, with a specific emphasis on trying to see if there were long term effects. A particularly heart-breaking comment "One of our study dogs still behaved as though it received shocks during protection work
although the last shock was delivered 1.5 years before!"

I don't understand your defense of them, to be honest.

If you aren't using the collar at a painful setting, for punishment training, then why use it at all? Again, how is it any more different than using a whistle for a distance "heads up" indicator? And if you are using it to inflict a pain correction, why not just say so? 

It seems contradictory to defend a tool specifically designed to inflict pain at a distance as something that is okay because it is possible to set it at a non-painful setting. 

I used to hear lots of defense of horrific spade bits in horses, using the same logic. According to conventional wisdom, they were only to be used on well-trained horses (who didn't need them) by well-trained riders (who also didn't need them) with sensitive hands. Invariably they ended up in the mouths of untrained horses with heavy-handed riders, which is the best way I know to ruin a horse's mouth in the shortest period of time.

I can just about get on board with the use of shock collars as an absolute last-resort training method, where the only alternative is death for the dog. But those situations are rare.

Sorry for ranting on. Part of the strength of my feeling on this is a result of guilt. I have never used a shock collar, but I've certainly, in the past, used training methods I am now ashamed of. I feel great regret for some of my past dogs. I don't think I was ever actively cruel, but I certainly would like a do-over.


----------



## Princess Dollie

I’m sorry. My subtlety seems to have gotten lost in the keyboard somewhere.

This is why I usually don’t respond to these types of threads. I have a training philosophy that I’m quite happy with so I don’t solicit (much, see http://www.poodleforum.com/23-general-training-obedience/12013-how-do-you-train-retrieve-flat-over-high-jump.html ) nor offer my opinion. Now that we are in the thick of Obed training, when I do need assistance, I tend to trust my local colleagues that I can see face-to-face.

However, I have had personal experience with a tens unit which I’m not sure any of the other posters have. The way this unit works is that it interacts with your muscles in that it contracts them and then allows them to loosen. The end result is NOT pain. At the worst, it is an eerily pleasant feeling.

I get this Rube Goldberg image in my mind of a mechanical hand on a stick that comes out of the back of the collar when the remote is pushed and taps the dog on the head. Would you consider that aversive? I don’t think I would. But would you consider it necessary? Again, I don’t think I would. Poodles are darn smart.

Thank-you, Sookster, for the informative posts. Actually, I may research this further. If it works the way I think it does, I would purchase this collar – for myself. I could use a neck rub……


----------

