# Causing Pain to Get the Out



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

> NO amount of compulsion would get my dog to out consistently (including the remote collar strapped around his belly on it's maximum setting).


This comment was made by another poster in another thread. This is a fairly common way that people try and use the Ecollar. It's usually the "next step" in escalating the form of compulsion from one level to a higher level. I know people who have gone from this to a cattle prod. I've never had to do this and I think there's a problem in using a tool that was created to hurt 3/4 ton animals, to get them to move, on a dog. 

I'll suggest that using _just _compulsion is not the best way to get the out. Sometimes, as with this dog, it has no effect. Only rarely does it work perfectly. Sometimes it causes all sorts of problems that can take weeks to fix; such as a dog that won't leave his handler's side, one that becomes weak on the bite, or one that anticipates the out and releases prematurely. 

Many of us spend months training our dog to bite once as hard as he can and to hold on. Getting the dog to release the bite after months of building it up, by causing him pain is often counterproductive. Most properly trained dogs think that the decoy is causing any pain he gets during the fight. The best way to stop that pain is to "kill" the decoy, by biting him even harder. Not to release him. 

The Ecollar can be used on these dogs at very low levels of stim quite consistently giving results in 10-20 minutes. Once the dog catches on it's very easy to maintain. It's simply a matter of first showing the dog what the stim means. Not that it's just a novel way to cause pain. I've had dogs that instead of using the "maximum setting" worked on a 8-12 (of 127 levels). These dogs will release the bite in the middle of the fight, something that is essential to working a dog on the street. 

The Ecollar is a very subtle tool when used properly. Many people use it as a hammer and find that it doesn't work, or worse, that it causes more problems than it fixes.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

I´m teaching the out at the same time as i´m learning to hold on. It saves you troubles, and very early in training electric simulation.

With a puppy: biting on a sleeve, winning the sleeve, out the sleeve, and as a reward for the out biting again.

first times on the suit, grap dog by the collar, and help it with the out. when out..bite again for a good out. Than out command, if refused punnisment by prong collar, by give pulling_against_ the suit.

So in first instance no corrections. Later on if they understand, mild corrections. Only far advanced dogs, on a long distance, get e-simulations on a low stim. As a reminder :wink: 

This goes for the dogs who we have from puppyhood. Older dogs, who had several owners and always have won the battle, get (if they react on it) high stim, or are first being made very sensitive for electric by cattle driver and than on a low stim on the e-collar.


----------



## Stacia Porter (Apr 8, 2006)

I taught the out much the same way Selena describes. We used a ball and we would say aus, take the ball from his mouth, praise him, and then give it back again quckly and play with it. We also used other toys, the tug, and got lots of practice on household things he wasn't supposed to have his teeth on (in this case we'd say out, take the item if necessary, praise, and immediately hand him a toy). It wasn't long before he outted every time. This tranlated nicely to his bitework; we never had an issue. I have yet to need to correct him for not outing an object. This isn't to say that I never will need to...but so far so good.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Teaching the out to puppies before teaching the bite is a good idea. But few police K-9 handlers or trainers are able to do that. In the US most dogs are purchased with some sport training and are almost always older than 18 months. Some may even be as old as 3-4 years. 

The technique of first giving a dog a very high level stim, either from an Ecollar or from a cattle prod is one that has been "rediscovered." It's an "ancient" technique done by US field retriever trainers years ago. It's been abandoned by all the people who win the competitions. It's probably still done at some lower levels. The idea is to "scare" the dog and teach him to fear the stim. Then when you give a lower level stim, the dog associates it with the higher level that he got before and you get a more profound response. This really isn't using low level stim, at least not as I use the term. I use it throughout the training only going higher when the dog is distracted or when he deliberately disobeys a command. 

When the dog is distracted during the teaching phase of the work it's necessary to go higher because of the distraction. What he felt before, at the base level. he no longer feels at all. In this instance, going higher still goes to the level at which the dog first feels the stim; but now he's in a distracted state so the actual level (the number on the dial) will be higher, but it's still where he first feels it. 

I've never needed to use a cattle prod on a dog and question the dog training skill of someone who finds it necessary. I like dogs. I don't like hurting them, especially since it's not necessary. 

Training a dog using a toy as a reward is fine for sport work but I'm not a fan of doing it for real combat. It takes the dog out of a combat drive and puts him into a play drive. He's not as prepared for a re-attack from the suspect and comes to associate the bite with the play that follows.


----------



## Scott Dunmore (May 5, 2006)

So Lou, with the example of teaching an out from a decoy, do you find that you need to increase the dog's working level initially or do you teach the out at the same level of stim you would use for other obedience exercises? I would imagine that the act of being on a bite would be a massive distraction to most dogs and higher levels would be needed for the dog to feel it.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

Stacia Porter said:


> I taught the out much the same way Selena describes. We used a ball and we would say aus, take the ball from his mouth, praise him, and then give it back again quckly and play with it. We also used other toys, the tug, and got lots of practice on household things he wasn't supposed to have his teeth on (in this case we'd say out, take the item if necessary, praise, and immediately hand him a toy). It wasn't long before he outted every time. This tranlated nicely to his bitework; we never had an issue. I have yet to need to correct him for not outing an object. This isn't to say that I never will need to...but so far so good.


that worked very well for my first dog. he outted the ball very quickly before he was ever introduced to bite work. when doing the bitework, like was your experience, he outted very quickly. this has not been true for my current dog. he will out his toys in a fairly quick manner most of the time. bitework is a different story. when doing manwork, he has no interest in the ball. his outs on the ball have NOT translated to bitework.

lou, i used the e-collar on low stim levels for obedience, long before it was introduced for bitework. it was not some last ditch effort to cause pain as you have incorrectly assumed. while it is still entirely possible i have done something wrong according to YOUR use of the e-collar, i'm at a place where i can consistently get my dog to out without any other associated problems...


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Scott Dunmore said:


> So Lou, with the example of teaching an out from a decoy, do you find that you need to increase the dog's working level initially or do you teach the out at the same level of stim you would use for other obedience exercises? I would imagine that the act of being on a bite would be a massive distraction to most dogs and higher levels would be needed for the dog to feel it.


Great question Scott. The short answer is "almost." 

Here's the nickel version of what I do. I use at least two decoys. I prefer three or four but it's hard to get that many all the time. I put them 60-70' apart and have the handler walk the dog back and forth between the two decoys, not going past the dog's "lunging distance." As he gets near each decoy the handler makes an about turn (a quick, pivoting turn) to his right, gives the dog a medium leash correction, and a "here" command. At the same time that the handler is giving the correction I'm pressing the continuous button at the lowest level of stim that the Ecollar can give. I slowly turn up the stim until I see some sign that the dog is feeling it, usually a brief "bounce" to his step at the turn. Then I back the level down a slight amount, usually one number (on the Dogtra scale). 

I'll continue to do this for a few minutes, maybe 20-30 stims. I'm coupling the stim with the leash correction and the dog quickly comes to learn that they're the same thing, a correction for being out of position. 

Then when I'm sure that the dog has coupled the two corrections I have the handler send his dog for a bite on one of the decoys. The decoy gives the dog an intense fight for 2 seconds then tones it down. If he can stand perfectly still and still keep the dog on the bite he does so. If the dog needs some movement or he'll fall off the bite, the decoy gives him some movement. It's important that the dog stay on the bite. After five seconds, the handler gives the dog the "here" command and I press the button, holding it down until the dog releases. For the most part I don't have to increase the stim. Sometimes I do but not by very much five levels is a lot. 

The handler guides the dog back to him with the leash and I release the button. The dog gets stim as soon as the command is given and until he heads towards the handler. The handler immediately begins walking towards the second decoy and when he gets close, sends the dog. This time he drops the leash as the dog leaves his side. What happened with the other decoy happens again and it's repeated several times. 

At some point the dog will run past the handler as he's gotten the idea that as soon as he releases one bite, he gets another one. When that happens the handler calls the dog, does an about turn and walks towards the other decoy. I'm pressing the button at the same time that the command comes from the handler. If the dog continues towards the "wrong" decoy I turn up the stim level. Same comment as before, rarely do I have to got up more than a few numbers on the dial. As soon as the dog turns away from the decoy to head back towards the handler, I stop stimming him. 

If the dog passes the handler to bite the "new" other decoy, he does an about turn, gives the command and I press the button. The dog learns that the bite is not automatic. It's not a reward for releasing the bite. As soon as he's steady on the here command he's given another bite. Now the handler is backing away from the dog during the bite until he's 30-40' away when he gives the command. He can stand in between them and direct his dog from one to the other. 

There's much more to it but this should give you an idea. 



Tim Martens said:


> lou, i used the e-collar on low stim levels for obedience, long before it was introduced for bitework. it was not some last ditch effort to cause pain as you have incorrectly assumed. while it is still entirely possible i have done something wrong according to YOUR use of the e-collar, i'm at a place where i can consistently get my dog to out without any other associated problems...


I didn't make any such assumption Tim. But in the end, no matter how much your dog was collar conditioned you resorted to turning it up to maximum level and placing it on a more sensitive part of his body than his neck to try and "hurt him" into releasing his bite. 

I'm glad that you're happy with your end result but I've had a lot of success in using the method described above. Of two dogs that I worked recently, one worked on an 8 and the other a 12 on the Dogtra collar (127 levels). Average is probably a 30. I've never been to the top of the scale unless someone else had used a cattle prod before I used my method, and I've never put the collar on the dog's abdomen for the purpose of giving it the ability to cause more pain than on his neck. 

I don't know if my use of the Ecollar is right or wrong, I only know that it gets results at low levels of stim that others tell me can't be done. Please don't take it personally that someone else can do something that you can't or haven't done. 

Using high levels of any form of compulsion can interfere with the work of a police dog in extremely subtle ways. Pets will shut down all behavior because of their generally lower levels of drive and that's usually very obvious. But PSD's can shut down so that many trainers and most handlers can't even see it. What happens is that the dog's focus shifts from his work to the handler. 

In a perfect world the dog would be 100% pure hunting animal. But that's not possible. We need some attention on us to direct the dog to areas that need to be searched, to call him away from danger and to call him off a bite. I think that about 10% focus on the handler and 90% on the work is a good balance. But if you apply too much compulsion form any source or with any method, you can get 90% focus on the handler and only 10% on the work. The handler has become a distraction to the work by his very presence. This will show up as the dog needing to be "deeper" into odor before he'll alert. The scent signature has to be stronger, usually meaning he's closer to source, before it gets past his distraction level. It's similar to turning up the dial on the Ecollar to get past a dog's distraction on something instead of obeying a command. Only now it's the scent that has to be stronger, not the stim. If you're hunting for a suspect this put him, and you, closer to him that if the dog wasn't distracted by the high level of compulsion. 

This stuff is all intertwined. Many trainers don't realize how much giving a dog a high level stim to get him to out can affect other areas of the work. They only see the behavior of the dog at that moment. The change in behavior can be very subtle but it can hurt the overall efficiency tremendously.


----------



## Scott Dunmore (May 5, 2006)

Thanks for the description, Lou.
Interesting that you say the average level that you are working the dogs on is around 30 for this exercise. I would say the majority of dogs I've worked in obedience with the collar have a working level of around 12-20. Would you say an increase of around 10-15 levels is typical for teaching an out, or are the levels you use for obedience lower than this?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Scott Dunmore said:


> Interesting that you say the average level that you are working the dogs on is around 30 for this exercise. I would say the majority of dogs I've worked in obedience with the collar have a working level of around 12-20. Would you say an increase of around 10-15 levels is typical for teaching an out, or are the levels you use for obedience lower than this?


This is with the new Dogtra 1700NCP. With the 1200NCP most dogs (and humans) first felt that at about a 20. With the 1700 it seems to be at a 27-30. I can't feel it until I get to a 37.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

lou...i'm just about tired of you by now. i have no doubt that you have a wealth of knowledge about dogs, but your condescending and arrogant presentation do nothing to prove your worth or support your methods.

allow me to shoot some holes through some of your self-serving BS....





Lou Castle said:


> But in the end, no matter how much your dog was collar conditioned you resorted to turning it up to maximum level and placing it on a more sensitive part of his body than his neck to try and "hurt him" into releasing his bite.


let's take a look at this logic. you say that the first level my dog shows an indication he is feeling the stim is causing him pain? isn't that the same level you use? i don't use a dogtra collar yet (but i will. it is far superior to one i use now), but a 2 or 3 worked great on my dog for obedience. it was the lowest level that he showed acknowledgment of it. by your own admission "What he felt before, at the base level. he no longer feels at all." so how is this causing pain? the level at which the dog perceives the stimulation and is not able or willing to ignore it is the proper level yes? and does this cause pain? because if it causes my dog pain, then it must cause yours pain. you can't have it both ways. the collar wasn't put on his flank to "cause more pain". that is a nice, dramatic way for you to try and prove your point, but unfortunately it just isn't true. since you're not into pain, i take it you don't use pinch or choke collars right? nothing but a flat collar and your trusty e-collar at level .001.



Lou Castle said:


> I've never put the collar on the dog's abdomen for the purpose of giving it the ability to cause more pain than on his neck.


 :roll: once again with the drama. it's a fact for me, that using it on the flank is much more reliable from a contact standpoint. when someone shaves their dog's neck so the collar can make better contact, are they doing it to "cause more pain"? i don't think so.



Lou Castle said:


> Please don't take it personally that someone else can do something that you can't or haven't done.


don't take it personally that you chose to start a whole new topic rather than post in the on going one to pass judgement on me and say that i am trying to cause my dog pain? gee, i don't know why anyone would take that personally.



Lou Castle said:


> Using high levels of any form of compulsion can interfere with the work of a police dog in extremely subtle ways. Pets will shut down all behavior because of their generally lower levels of drive and that's usually very obvious.


hmm. haven't had that problem.



Lou Castle said:


> But PSD's can shut down so that many trainers and most handlers can't even see it. What happens is that the dog's focus shifts from his work to the handler.


i thought the properly trained dog thought that the stim was coming from the decoy? hmm. more BS.



Lou Castle said:


> This will show up as the dog needing to be "deeper" into odor before he'll alert. The scent signature has to be stronger, usually meaning he's closer to source, before it gets past his distraction level. It's similar to turning up the dial on the Ecollar to get past a dog's distraction on something instead of obeying a command. Only now it's the scent that has to be stronger, not the stim. If you're hunting for a suspect this put him, and you, closer to him that if the dog wasn't distracted by the high level of compulsion.


so lemme get this straight. if you have to use a higher level on the stim collar to get the dog to out because he has much drive for the bite, his search work will go down (when he knows he is going to get a bite when he finds the guy)? yeah, that makes sense. :roll: .

as far as you go, i thought we had civil discussions in the past (fight drive topic), but i now see you are pretty much incapable of having an intellegent debate without resorting to personal attacks and outlandish accusations. good luck with your dogs in so cal, the mecca of law enforcement.

side note: i currently use an innotek collar. i have used it at it's maximum setting. on monday of this week, i used a dogtra 1100 for the first time. i conservatively put the dial half way up. it fried the hell out of my dog. the dogtra collar is MUCH more powerful than my innotek. maybe you're causing your dogs "pain" at 30....


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> *******MODERATOR NOTE*********
> 
> 
> How come this had to deteriorate like this?
> ...


OK........... backing up to this post from me asking for civility. 

The time-out is over. The *many* PMs about this reminded me that we all dislike threads being locked; I was trigger-happy.

But -- no more rude comments and no more personal attacks (whether blatant or thinly veiled!) -- I have my thesaurus and my dictionary here, and ya can't fool me! 

Threads are not supposed to be a fight between two members.

Thank you!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Maybe flashlights would be a better topic. I love the dang things.


----------



## Guest (May 22, 2006)

I thought the thesaurus was extinct. :? 

Jeff-me too. Second only to duct tape.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

I would have to say (tools & gadgets-wise) second only to custom knives. Something weird about it, don't feel like stabbing anyone or anything like that, but I really like them. But not the crazy fantasy type, just simple stuff.


----------



## Woody Taylor (Mar 28, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I would have to say (tools & gadgets-wise) second only to custom knives. Something weird about it, don't feel like stabbing anyone or anything like that, but I really like them. But not the crazy fantasy type, just simple stuff.


I hear you, even though I don't buy custom stuff anymore. Spyderco delicas or my old civilian or even the new steels on the leathermans are enough for me. And that is dog money these days, anyways.

And I like surefires. ;-)


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Tim Martens said:


> lou...i'm just about tired of you by now. i have no doubt that you have a wealth of knowledge about dogs, but your condescending and arrogant presentation do nothing to prove your worth or support your methods.


Tim I'm sorry if you took anything I say as condescending or arrogant. I mean no offense. 

Earlier I wrote:


> But in the end, no matter how much your dog was collar conditioned you resorted to turning it up to maximum level and placing it on a more sensitive part of his body than his neck to try and "hurt him" into releasing his bite.





Tim Martens said:


> let's take a look at this logic. you say that the first level my dog shows an indication he is feeling the stim is causing him pain?


I'm talking about how, at sometime during your attempt to use compulsion to get your dog to out, you turned the Ecollar up to the maximum level and placed it on his "belly" (your word). I'm not talking about your previous training, only the out work. 



Tim Martens said:


> a 2 or 3 worked great on my dog for obedience. it was the lowest level that he showed acknowledgment of it. by your own admission "What he felt before, at the base level. he no longer feels at all." so how is this causing pain?


I'm only talking about when you turned the Ecollar all the way up and placed it on his "belly" to get him to stop biting. There's a huge step between his OB level, and the top of the scale. 



Tim Martens said:


> if it causes my dog pain, then it must cause yours pain.


A level that causes one dog pain may not be felt at all by another dog. In any case I've never used the maximum level on an Ecollar to get a dog to out (except for a very few dogs that had been "trained" with a cattle prod, and then only for a few seconds) and I've never placed one on a dog's "belly" to cause him more pain. 



Tim Martens said:


> the collar wasn't put on his flank to "cause more pain". that is a nice, dramatic way for you to try and prove your point, but unfortunately it just isn't true.


OK. Please tell us what your purpose was in putting it on his "belly?" Originally you said "belly" but now you say "flank." Were you doing POC training? Did you want him to move to one side or the other? I don't think that was what you were trying to train. I think you put it there to cause more discomfort than on his neck. The skin there is much thinner, it's not muscled as thickly and the tolerance to discomfort is much lower there. 



Tim Martens said:


> since you're not into pain, i take it you don't use pinch or choke collars right? nothing but a flat collar and your trusty e-collar at level .001.


Tim there's a difference between "causing pain" and causing "discomfort." An Ecollar set on it's highest level causes pain, even if it doesn't get the dog to release his bite. Pain is a continuum. At the highest level one might say "I can't stand that another second!" and at the lowest level, one might say, "It's chilly I think I need a sweater." A dog yelps, jumps, perhaps even flips over backwards when he's at rest and gets a maximum level Ecollar stim. When he gets a stim at the level he first feels it, he scratches as if bitten by a flea, looks at the ground, tries to look at his neck, flicks his ear or blinks. 

Earlier I wrote:


> I've never put the collar on a dog's "belly" for the purpose of giving it the ability to cause more pain than on his neck.





Tim Martens said:


> it's a fact for me, that using it on the flank is much more reliable from a contact standpoint.


Tim this came up during a discussion of using compulsion. You mentioned it in showing us that your dog didn't respond to even the highest level of compulsion. Why else would you write that you used the "maximum setting" and "strapped (it) around his belly." There was no mention of "contact problems." Is anyone else having a hard time accepting this explanation as to why the Ecollar was placed on the dog's belly? 



Tim Martens said:


> when someone shaves their dog's neck so the collar can make better contact, are they doing it to "cause more pain"? i don't think so.


Nearly two decades of using Ecollars, mostly on GSD's never once had to shave a dog's neck. The most I've ever had to do was to use some thinning shears to thin out the dog's fur a bit. 



Tim Martens said:


> you chose to start a whole new topic rather than post in the on going one


The original topic was "Compulsion training vs. food and reward training." This thread has nothing to do with using food or reward training. I thought about posting it there but then realized it was a different topic. So I started a new one. 

Earlier I wrote:


> Using high levels of any form of compulsion can interfere with the work of a police dog in extremely subtle ways. Pets will shut down all behavior because of their generally lower levels of drive and that's usually very obvious.





Tim Martens said:


> hmm. haven't had that problem.


Maybe you have and maybe you haven't. It's very subtle and unless you do quantitative tests you probably won't notice it. But it's there. And it can place you , the dog and your b/u team in danger. 

Earlier I wrote:


> But PSD's can shut down so that many trainers and most handlers can't even see it. What happens is that the dog's focus shifts from his work to the handler.


Earlier I wrote:


> This will show up as the dog needing to be "deeper" into odor before he'll alert. The scent signature has to be stronger, usually meaning he's closer to source, before it gets past his distraction level. It's similar to turning up the dial on the Ecollar to get past a dog's distraction on something instead of obeying a command. Only now it's the scent that has to be stronger, not the stim. If you're hunting for a suspect this put him, and you, closer to him that if the dog wasn't distracted by the high level of compulsion.





Tim Martens said:


> so lemme get this straight. if you have to use a higher level on the stim collar to get the dog to out


When I use a higher level of stim it's to *just *overcome the dog's level of distraction. I go to *just enough *stim to get him to feel it. That's not what you were doing with your "remote collar strapped around his belly on it's maximum setting." I creep up on the stim level from his working level (where he first feels it) to get the dog's attention. You went right to the maximum setting. 



Tim Martens said:


> his search work will go down (when he knows he is going to get a bite when he finds the guy)?


I said nothing about "his search work (going) down." If he's paying more attention to you because of your use of high levels of compulsion, than he was before their use, then he can't be paying as much attention to his work as he would be if you were using lower levels of compulsion. I said he'll have to be in stronger scent for it to overcome the distraction of the handler. 



Tim Martens said:


> yeah, that makes sense.


Every time I've explained this concept to a group of dog handlers and then asked if anyone disagreed, not one ever has. But perhaps it's this medium and perhaps I didn't explain it as well as I have in the past. 



Tim Martens said:


> side note: i currently use an innotek collar. i have used it at it's maximum setting. on monday of this week, i used a dogtra 1100 for the first time. i conservatively put the dial half way up. it fried the hell out of my dog. the dogtra collar is MUCH more powerful than my innotek.


Is there some reason why you didn't simply start at the zero setting and turn it up slowly while watching the dog's reaction to it? I wouldn't call what you did "conservative." That dial goes from 0-100. Halfway would be a 50. That's 30 numbers above where I work with that collar. Given that even a small amount of movement of the dial (1/16") means a LOT on the collar end, you're at a *much *higher level that I would use for just about anything. 



Tim Martens said:


> maybe you're causing your dogs "pain" at 30....


A 30 on one Ecollar may not be the same as on another. I'd never put an unknown (to me) Ecollar on a dog and set it half way up. I always start at the lowest setting that the Ecollar afforded and go up from there. 

In any case it's easy to tell when a dog is subjected to "sudden onset pain" at a high level as would be the case with an Ecollar set on its "maximum setting." They jump, they yelp, they sometimes flip over backwards. Dogs that I'm working, scratch, as if bitten by a flea, blink, flick an ear or look at the ground. 

If you're thinking about getting an 1100NC for your work I'd suggest either of two other models; the 1600NCP or the 1700NCP. Both of those transmitters are waterproof, the 1100 isn't. LE tend to be out in all sorts of ugly weather and if the TX is waterproof, that's one less thing to worry about. You can see them both at www.dogtra.com. Don't pay retail. There are plenty of dealers around offering discounts. 



Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I would have to say (tools & gadgets-wise) second only to custom knives. Something weird about it, don't feel like stabbing anyone or anything like that, but I really like them. But not the crazy fantasy type, just simple stuff.


I collect custom knives (Phill Hartsfield is my favorite maker) and l love flashlights too. LOL. "One flashlight is none. Two flashlights are one. (Surefire Institute saying).


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

your way of quoting takes too long so i'll just reply point by point.

1) i took it as condescending and arrogant because that's how it was meant.

2) do you really think i went from a level 2 or 3 on the neck during OB to 15 on the belly/flank (the box is on the belly area and the strap goes around the flank. didn't think that was that hard of a concept to grasp)? you don't think i went upto 4,5,6,7, etc? 

3) you keep saying that putting it on the belly "causes him *MORE* pain". a quick grammar lesson for you. more adj. Comparative of many, much. a. Greater in number: a hall with more seats. *b. Greater in size, amount, extent, or degree: more land, more support, more pain. * . therefor when you keep saying that it causes more pain, you are in fact saying that your method causes pain.

4) yes, initially the collar was put on the belly/flank because the dog was more sensitive to it. through using it there, i found i like it's reliability much more. i've never had it "not register" there. i've never had to re-adjust it, or wet it, or shave the dog like you do (or thin it out as you say :roll: ).

5) ah yes. my dog has developed problems from not using the e-collar to your satisfaction. funny thing is, only you are qualified to see it. what a joke. more snake oil, just like "fight drive". the "if you don't believe in it, you just haven't seen it" theory. 

6) you use a higher level of stim to just overcome the dog's level of distraction and go just enough stim to get him to feel it? WOW. what a novel frickin concept. what do think the rest of us are doing? did you think just all of a sudden one day out the blue, i went from working the dog at 2 or 3 for OB to 15 on the belly all in one shot? don't know if i've driven this home enough for you, so i'll do it once more for the reading impaired. I GRADUALLY WENT UP FROM LEVEL 3 ON THE NECK, TO 15 ON THE NECK (TRYING EACH SETTING SEVERAL TIMES), THEN TO 3 ON THE BELLY, THEN UPTO 15 ON THE BELLY (TRYING EACH SETTING SEVERAL TIMES). is that clear enough for you. i sure hope that clears that up. it is interesting to note that even 15 on the belly was not 100% successful. it wasn't until i began giving a bite on recall EVERY time that consistency came.

7) a little tidbit you failed to mention about my last post. you said that a well trained dog thinks the remote correction comes from the agitator. then you go on to say that too much correction will cause the dog to be handler focused. tell us how that works...

8) i thought i was going conservative when i only put the dogtra at 50%. again, i'm used to maximum setting on my innotek. i didn't realize the dogtra had so much more juice, but i guess you're pretty much looking for anything to criticize me for at this point.

9) even corrections at the highest level aren't that much more dramatic than a good prong correction. you've never heard a dog yelp from a good prong correction? some will yelp with just a light correction, some will never yelp. why do you think that is? tolerance maybe? hmmmm.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

So, Tim.....what about the flashlights and the knives???? :lol: 

I have seen many dogs worked with the E-collar basically right in front of the dogs....um.....area. Pain would describe this pretty good. As far as where the dog thinks that this is coming from, if you are not using a marker, well you are not doing something right. 

I have no problem whatsoever using pain in certain situations. In others, you get a fight response. Many times the only way to figure this out, is to screw it up, back up, and re-think. (No expert help around)

Lou, I have talked to you on the phone, and enjoyed my conversation with you. I read a lot of what you where saying the same way Tim did. I have had people fuss over things they saw me do with my dogs one time, because the dog was being a jerk. That is the only way that they see me training a dog. I still have to hear about this. 

Tim, you make some very valid points, but one smartass per forum, and I currently am hogging that spot


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> .......Tim, you make some very valid points, but one smartass per forum, and I currently am hogging that spot


And you are the best......no argument here! :lol: :lol:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT


It was the first day of school and a new student named Pedro Martinez,
the son of a Mexican restaurateur, entered the fourth grade.

The teacher said, "Let's begin by reviewing some American history.
"Who said 'Give me Liberty, or give me Death?'"
She saw a sea of blank faces, except for Pedro, who had his hand up.

"Patrick Henry, 1775."

"Very good!" apprised the teacher. "Now, who said, "Government of the
people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth?"

Again, no response except from Pedro: "Abraham Lincoln, 1863."

The teacher snapped at the class, "Class, you should be ashamed! Pedro,
who is new to our country,
knows more about its history than you do!"

She heard a loud whisper: "Screw the Mexicans!"
"Who said that?" she demanded.

Pedro put his hand up. "Jim Bowie, 1836."
At that point, a student in the back said, "I'm gonna puke." 

The teacher
glared and asked, "All right! Now, who said that?"

Again, Pedro answered, "George Bush to the Japanese Prime Minister, 1991."

Now furious, another student yelled, "Oh yeah? Suck this!"

Pedro jumped out of his chair waving his hand and shouting to the teacher,
"Bill Clinton to Monica Lewinsky, 1997!"

Now, with almost a mob hysteria, teacher said,
"You little shit. If you say anything else, I'll kill you!"

Pedro frantically yelled at the top of his voice,
"Gary Condit to Chandra Levy, 2001."

The teacher fainted, and as the class gathered around her on the floor,
someone said, "Oh shit, we're in BIG trouble now!"

Pedro whispered, "Saddam Hussein, 2003."

Finally someone throws an eraser at Pedro,
someone shouted "Duck!"
Teacher asked "Who said that?

Pedro: Dick Cheney 2006


I stole this off of Chicagolands board. :twisted: :twisted:


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Tim Martens said:


> 1) i took it as condescending and arrogant because that's how it was meant.


If I meant it that way I would not have apologized. Again, I'm sorry that you took it that way. It wasn't meant that way. 



Tim Martens said:


> 2) do you really think i went from a level 2 or 3 on the neck during OB to 15 on the belly/flank (the box is on the belly area and the strap goes around the flank. didn't think that was that hard of a concept to grasp)? you don't think i went upto 4,5,6,7, etc?


That's what you say now. It's not what you wrote then. Actually what you describe can result in exactly what you got. The dog can feel the pain ramping up and he just prepares himself for it a little at a time. A knowledgeable Ecollar trainer will see this happening and will jump levels. Or he could use it as I described and not wind up anywhere near the maximum stim. 



Tim Martens said:


> 3) you keep saying that putting it on the belly "causes him *MORE* pain".


Yes, it does. The skin is thinner, it's not as heavily muscled and it's a more sensitive area of the dog. 



Tim Martens said:


> when you keep saying that it causes more pain, you are in fact saying that your method causes pain.


No Tim. I'm saying that when *you *put the Ecollar on *your *dog's belly it cause him more pain than when you put it on his neck. My statement has nothing to do with what I do. It's a statement about the relative sensitivity of the neck as compared to the belly. When I put a collar on a dog's belly I *drop *the stim level, not go up as you did. 



Tim Martens said:


> 4) yes, initially the collar was put on the belly/flank because the dog was more sensitive to it. through using it there


All this time denying that the belly is more sensitive and you now admit it? LOL. 



Tim Martens said:


> i found i like it's reliability much more.


Fine by me. But you should be reducing the stim level by as much as 50% if you do this. You didn't do that. You wound up at the highest level of stim that your Ecollar affords. Also let me suggest thinning shears to reduce the fur on the dog's neck and the SCG (Surface Contact Grid) that also assists with this problem. 



Tim Martens said:


> i've never had it "not register" there. i've never had to re-adjust it, or wet it, or shave the dog like you do (or thin it out as you say .


Tim you're the one who brought up the topic of shaving a dog's neck, not me. There's a vast difference between shaving (as you said) and thinning (as I said). Shaving exposes bare skin and can be seen from 20' away. Thinning removes every third hair and is virtually undetectable. 



Tim Martens said:


> 5) ah yes. my dog has developed problems from not using the e-collar to your satisfaction. funny thing is, only you are qualified to see it.


I wrote, "PSD's can shut down so that *many *trainers and *most *handlers can't even see it." I never said that I'm the only one qualified to see it. I also said that unless you did quantitative tests you probably wouldn't discover it. Do you do those regularly? 



Tim Martens said:


> what a joke.


Tim it's comments like this that will cause the moderators to close down a topic, delete your posts and remove you from the board. There's no reason to act like this. Please stop. 



Tim Martens said:


> more snake oil, just like "fight drive". the "if you don't believe in it, you just haven't seen it" theory.


Tim have you ever heard of the International Congress of Police K-9's? It's the largest organization of police dog handlers in the world, headquartered in Germany. They have described over 30 drives and "character traits." Among them, Fight drive. You're not required to believe in fight drive. Your beliefs don't affect me in the slightest. 



Tim Martens said:


> 6) you use a higher level of stim to just overcome the dog's level of distraction and go just enough stim to get him to feel it? WOW. what a novel frickin concept. what do think the rest of us are doing?


I think it's obvious what, at least, *you *are doing. If the way you did it worked, you'd never have ended up at the maximum level that your Ecollar affords in trying to get your dog to out. And that attempt, as you told us, failed. I've used my method on a couple of hundred police dogs. Not once has it failed to give a clean out. And I've never used the maximum stim level, except as noted. And I've never had to put the Ecollar on a dog's belly. 



Tim Martens said:


> did you think just all of a sudden one day out the blue, i went from working the dog at 2 or 3 for OB to 15 on the belly all in one shot?


That's the way it sounded. In any case, what you did, didn't work. 



Tim Martens said:


> don't know if i've driven this home enough for you, so i'll do it once more for the reading impaired.


More uncalled-for rudeness. Please stop. 



Tim Martens said:


> I GRADUALLY WENT UP FROM LEVEL 3 ON THE NECK, TO 15 ON THE NECK (TRYING EACH SETTING SEVERAL TIMES), THEN TO 3 ON THE BELLY, THEN UPTO 15 ON THE BELLY (TRYING EACH SETTING SEVERAL TIMES).


If this is what you did, then this is part of your problem. Giving the dog several stims at "each setting" allows him to acclimatize to that level and prepare himself for the next. 



Tim Martens said:


> is that clear enough for you. i sure hope that clears that up. it is interesting to note that even 15 on the belly was not 100% successful. it wasn't until i began giving a bite on recall EVERY time that consistency came.


Glad that what you finally did worked for you. How long did all this take? I get a clean out from a decoy in the middle of a fight in about 10-20 minutes. Will your dog release his bite on a decoy who continues to fight when you're 40' away and out of his sight? 



Tim Martens said:


> 7) a little tidbit you failed to mention about my last post. you said that a well trained dog thinks the remote correction comes from the agitator. then you go on to say that too much correction will cause the dog to be handler focused. tell us how that works.


What I said was that a "properly trained dog" thinks that the pain he gets during a fight comes from the decoy. I don't consider people who use the Ecollar as you describe to be engaging in proper training. I'd suggest that you join the Ecollar training Plus list on Yahoo and describe what you did by going up the scale one step at a time, giving several stims at each level, allowing the dog to acclimatize to each level. There are many knowledgeable Ecollar users there and, since you seem to have a problem with me, perhaps one of them can assist you. 



Tim Martens said:


> 8) i thought i was going conservative when i only put the dogtra at 50%.


I agree that you "_thought (you were) going conservative" _. But the fact is that you weren't. Like picking up a strange gun, if you don't know how it works, ask someone. Don't guess. This time all you did was "fry" your dog quite unnecessarily. 



Tim Martens said:


> i didn't realize the dogtra had so much more juice, but i guess you're pretty much looking for anything to criticize me for at this point.


I really don't have to look. You're supplying this information yourself. 



Tim Martens said:


> 9) even corrections at the highest level aren't that much more dramatic than a good prong correction.


I couldn't disagree more. Have you *EVER *had lifetime one-repetition-learning occur from a correction with a prong collar? If you have, you're the only one. I've snake proofed dogs that learned for their lifetime to avoid poisonous snakes with ONE Ecollar stim at a high level. A prong collar is nowhere near what an Ecollar can accomplish. 



Tim Martens said:


> you've never heard a dog yelp from a good prong correction?


Yes, I have. I've often had dogs yelp from surprise as well. 



Tim Martens said:


> some will yelp with just a light correction, some will never yelp. why do you think that is? tolerance maybe? hmmmm.


Perhaps but it can also be any of a number of other things such as surprise, pain, just a verbal dog, or a protest. There are probably more. 

I'm sorry but I won't be able to respond for a while. I'm leaving to teach a seminar in Texas and don't know when I'll have access to the Net again.


----------



## Guest (May 22, 2006)

:roll: You win, Jeff. :lol: 

Tim, please forgive me this indiscretion....but...  : I can understand (to a point) why you were offended by Lou's original post. It seemed to you that he started it to "pick" on you. The thread where it was written was a different subject, so he started a new thread. I can see both sides of this, however, he's been at least decent, and you just get more and more... like an angry chihuahua. I use chihuahua purposely  ; I have some respect for an angry Widget, yet he's really not nearly as effective in accomplishing his goal when he gets like this. He gets his point across much better when he acts decently :lol: . See what I mean? Lou, unless I am really obtuse, has not personally attacked you. Disagreed w/your methods, absolutely. But you're such a proponent of "free speech" that I should think this would be just fine with you. I think you're being hypersensitive; the ecollar is not strapped on *your*, um, flank....so relax! Lou is an explanatory kind of a guy :wink: ; I think your discussion was interesting and informative until you took something out of context and got upset. Again, sorry for the invasion, but once in a while I just see something that I can't help but step in on. Call me pushy :lol: . I'm sure I've been called worse  !


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni Williams said:


> Tim, please forgive me this indiscretion....but...  : I can understand (to a point) why you were offended by Lou's original post. It seemed to you that he started it to "pick" on you.


jenni, "pick on me" doesn't really describe what happened from my view. attacked is a more accurate description. it's pretty obvious to me now that uncle lou isn't a very eloquent man and maybe that is where some or most of his message gets lost in translation. i would only ask this of you. how would you feel if someone assaulted your training philosophy by telling you that the point of it was only to "cause your dog more pain". all the while not admitting that their own philosophy caused a similar "pain"?



Jenni Williams said:


> The thread where it was written was a different subject, so he started a new thread. I can see both sides of this, however, he's been at least decent, and you just get more and more... like an angry chihuahua.


i don't at all consider his behavior "decent". he fired the first shot. i responded in kind.



Jenni Williams said:


> Lou, unless I am really obtuse, has not personally attacked you. Disagreed w/your methods, absolutely. But you're such a proponent of "free speech" that I should think this would be just fine with you. I think you're being hypersensitive; the ecollar is not strapped on *your*, um, flank....so relax! Lou is an explanatory kind of a guy :wink: ; I think your discussion was interesting and informative until you took something out of context and got upset. Again, sorry for the invasion, but once in a while I just see something that I can't help but step in on. Call me pushy :lol: . I'm sure I've been called worse  !


i really have NO problem whatsoever discussion training methods. that's why i'm here. to learn. for as many people as lou has taught, i would have thought that his teaching methods would be a bit more refined. you can call me hypersensitive. that's your opinion, however i think your point of view on this might be a bit skewed. while i don't doubt that you have a strong bond with your dogs, i would only ask you to look at how we use our dogs. i probably spend more time with my dog than i do with my family. between training, driving around with him in the patrol car, and deployments. i have never owned a dog before getting my first PSD, so i cannot compare the pet bond to the PSD bond, i can only relay what i've been told by others that have. there's something about putting your safety in the hands of the dog that makes it much more than an owner/pet relationship, or so i've been told. now imagine that, and then look at what has been said. that the only point of my e-collar training is to cause my partner "more pain".

there are an infinate number of ways lou could have chosen to disagree without going there. "hypersensitive"? i don't believe i am. there was nothing to take "out of context". that phrase really has no place in this discussion as his entire post is there to be read.

and i don't think it's an "invasion". this is a public thread on a public board and you are certainly entitled to offer your opinion. i would just ask that you try and look beyond what has been written and try to put yourself in my shoes. as it is, i'm not going to respond to lou anymore. it's really pointless. he refuses to answer some of my questions about his own comments/methods and to continue, at this point, would be counter productive. lou will continue to do what works for him and i will do the same. while i am ALWAYS open to new ideas, it is difficult to filter through personal attacks to see the ideas. that's all it would have taken. something like "ok, that's how you do it....here's how i do it". lou replaced those periods with attacks and inaccurate assumptions...


----------



## Guest (May 22, 2006)

Tim, I get why you were offended. Your perception of the type of relationship I have with my dog(s) isn't relevant here at all. You don't know anything at all about my dogs (well, except my angry chihuahua, I guess :lol: ) or what I do with them, or how they were/are trained. I wasn't attacking or even discussing your bond/relationship w/yours. My only point was that even if you were 100% right, you were the one coming across as antagonistic, and THAT was skewing the way your posts were perceived. Your message was getting lost in angry sarcasm. That's it. Really. I wasn't delving into who was right or wrong; I've never seen either of your training methods in person. Lou's posts came off as more explanatory than anything else, but that's because I was not personally involved, as you were. Just saying that if you didn't take the posts personally, then you might not see why you were offended, and therefore sarcastic, which may lead to your being viewed as an angry chihuahua. I'd say you're sharp .


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni Williams said:


> Just saying that if you didn't take the posts personally, then you might not see why you were offended,


talk about irrelevant. that's like saying if the sky wasn't blue, then you might not see that it wasn't blue. :? 



Tim Martens said:


> while i don't doubt that you have a strong bond with your dogs





Jenni Williams said:


> You don't know anything at all about my dogs (well, except my angry chihuahua, I guess ) or what I do with them, or how they were/are trained


i'm sorry if my assumption was wrong...


----------



## Guest (May 22, 2006)

> talk about irrelevant. that's like saying if the sky wasn't blue, then you might not see that it wasn't blue.


Tim, obviously, you misunderstood what I meant here. I was using "you" to mean "someone" or "anyone." If someone were to read Lou's post, as I did, who was not personally involved (ie, the person who made the original comment under scrutiny), then THAT person would NOT SEE WHY IT WAS OFFENSIVE, because, THAT person was not the one being "attacked". *I* didn't take it as an attack because *I* didn't know who had posted that, or if it was even on this forum. My point is that YOU were offended because he quoted YOU, and you felt attacked. It's easy to feel that way when it's YOUR quote used to open a new thread. I'm saying that it's easier to see it as mere discussion when it's NOT YOUR quote. Hence the understood, but IMO, unnecessary, hypersensitivity. See?


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

whatever....i'm done with this thread...


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Tim Martens said:


> for as many people as lou has taught, i would have thought that his teaching methods would be a bit more refined.


When it comes to the matter of the safety of police officers I don't have time to pussy foot around a subject. I'd have thought that since you're in LE that you'd take it as I meant it. Apparently I was wrong. 



Tim Martens said:


> i have never owned a dog before getting my first PSD, so i cannot compare the pet bond to the PSD bond, i can only relay what i've been told by others that have. there's something about putting your safety in the hands of the dog that makes it much more than an owner/pet relationship, or so i've been told. now imagine that, and then look at what has been said. that the only point of my e-collar training is to cause my partner "more pain".


I'm not sure what this has to do with either the topic or what Jenni wrote. Since you realize that your life is in your dog's hands (paws) I'd have thought that you'd be interested in how to make your work better. 



Tim Martens said:


> he refuses to answer some of my questions about his own comments/methods


I'm on a wifi signal right now at a campground and it keeps fading so I can't research the thread thoroughly. But I'm pretty sure that I've answered any real questions that you've asked me. If I've missed any, point them out and I'll be happy to respond. 



Tim Martens said:


> and to continue, at this point, would be counter productive. lou will continue to do what works for him and i will do the same.


The problem is that you'll continue to use the Ecollar, as you have in other areas of your work and it won't be successful. You'll probably cause further damage to your dog's work. I'd suggest that you either develop a thicker skin, there's lots of people who won't take this and will simply dismiss you, or stop taking everything personally. I'm making effort after effort to communicate and you keep being rude. You're on your first dog and I've worked with many. 

I don't know where you learned to use an Ecollar, but at least one of the things you did would NOT be done by someone who was knowledgeable in how to use the tool. 

AGAIN I'm sorry if you have been offended by anything I've written. 

Please let me know what questions I haven't answered. If I failed to do so it was either because I didn't see them or thought they were rhetorical


----------

