These are beautifully hand carved collars custom made specifically for Basenjis.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=271110778466
Electric Collar
-
I believe modern e-collars are just fine. Punishment (unpleasant stuff after the fact) IMO is a nono, e- or otherwise.
With positive punishment and negative reinforcement the lines can get blurry. e.g. livestock and electric fence. Touching the fence gives a nasty sensation, so could be considered punishment for touching the fence, or since the nasty sensation goes away when the animal ceases to touch the fence, could be considered negative reinforcement. Either way the goal of containing the animal in the field is achieved. Using a low level sensation that goes away when the desired action is performed is negative reinforcement, and is how the e-collar is most often used in training. Using it at whatever level after the dog has refused a command could certainly be considered punishment, albeit mild. Breaking up a chase by using a high level could clearly be considered punishment, but again, as soon as the desired response (beginning to return to the handler) is achieved the sensation goes away, so it could be also be considered negative reinforcement. Clear as mud, yes? Since positive punishment decreases the likelihood of an action recurring, it is likely the most appropriate label in both of these cases, i.e. the subject is less likely to touch the fence or chase the forbidden game.
I think we get too caught up in labels. "Punishment" in operant conditioning simply means something that decreases the likelihood of an action being repeated. Reinforcement means increasing the likelihood of the action being repeated. You don't get to choose whether something is reinforcing or punishing, the dog does. His actions will tell you how your training is being perceived. Since dogs don't read the training books, we don't always get the responses we are expecting!
-
Clear enough!
Anyway, to confuse matters even more: I found an experienced e-collar trainer on the internet who stopped using the negative reinforcement method (stimulus goes away with desired behaviour a.k.a. escape training) because he found it sets the dog up for failure and hurts the relationship. I cannot comment on it from my own experience but there you go. In the end, as you say, the dog will show, what's what and what's fine. -
In the end, as you say, the dog will show, what's what and what's fine.
The dog will always tell you when you are on the right track. Not just with obeying your commands, but with how accepting he is of your methods. I had to be very careful with my moods and body language when I worked with my Border Collie. A sharp look from me (without anything verbal being exchanged) was a severe reprimand to him. Playful physical roughhousing, OTOH, was just fine! He was an extremely sensitive dog, and would work his heart out for my approval. Basenjis, by contrast, don't usually care too much about your feelings in the matter. They certainly understand disapproval, but consider it your problem, not theirs!
In some respects, it makes them easier to deal with.Training methods need to be tailored to the individual. What works with one may not with the next. If you are making progress and your dog is happy, that tells you all you need to know. There is an old joke that is very true: The only thing two dog trainers can agree on is that the third one is doing it wrong!
-
Still will never agree with use of a shock collar… to each it own... but there are better ways... IMO. I would have to say as a breeder that if someone wanted one of my pups and indicated that they would use this... I would be hard pressed to ever place a pup of mine with them. My opinion, my choice
-
My opinion, my choice
Absolutely! And if I was a breeder I would have to think long and hard about placing a pup with someone who went to work and left their dog alone in a crate. Everyone has their point of view, and I don't need to convince anyone to share mine. Of course, once the dog has left your hands it is very difficult to police what is done with it. Many end up in happy situations, a few certainly do not, and from no fault of the breeder. My bottom line with any training method is to observe the dog and draw my conclusions from what I see. Not every dog will respond in the same way to the same method, and being adaptable is the hallmark of a good trainer, IMO.
-
Hi everyone, this week it is one month we have been walking our basenji with an e-collar. So what are the results? First week was tough to get him used to it. We bought the model "Quality Easypet EP-380R 1000m Waterproof Rechargeable Remote Dog Training Collar" which provides several levels of sound, vibration and electric charge. Sound didn't work and currently we use the vibration mode for the recall and also to warn him that we wish him to stay close while off the leach. Whenever he runs away towards a cat, rabbit, fox we apply the vibration and normally (in 8 out every 10 times) he returns half-way through. The reason being he knows well by now that if he doesn't respond to the vibration command and insists running away anyway towards "his prey", he will get the electric charge as a conseuqence. We use at the lowest level 1 out of 100 and it is enough to have Ozzy regreting his decision and returning to us immedietly for a good welcoming recognition. If we consider the electric charge cases then we get 10/10. So the bottom line is it works perfectly for us, I strongly recommend it. There are just 2 scenarions which the collar is not effective: thunders and fireworks. In both cases Ozzy normally dashes back home or seeks for the closer shelter possible. Guess we cannot win them all
but overall I would like to thank all the great input I got from all of you on this topic, I am very happy with the decision to go for the collar and we are delighted with the results. Let's please keep in contact! -
I am very happy with this outcome. I'm always hesitant to recommend e-collars, not because they don't work…..they do.....but because people are impatient and often will not do the proper training that gives good results and they end up with a confused and frightened dog. Done properly, the dog understands that he controls the correction, so it is all good.
I am not surprised at the response to thunder and fireworks. He is obviously extremely motivated to get away from both, and his fear drives him to ignore the collar. Dogs with fear of thunder will often go to extreme lengths, even injuring themselves, to escape it.
-
I still believe that using an E-Collar is not appropriate… to each their own, but again I would never place a puppy with a family that would even consider using one. Just my opinion and I have had lots and lots of experience with the breed.
-
My bottom line with any training method is to observe the dog and draw my conclusions from what I see. Not every dog will respond in the same way to the same method, and being adaptable is the hallmark of a good trainer, IMO.
I don't know much, but I have learned to never say "never". I've seen trainers do amazing work with deaf dogs, using e-collars set to vibration mode as a physical signalling device.
-
There is a world of difference between an e-collar as a vibration tool ONLY, and every using it for negative feelings (shock). I don't think anyone has said they don't work. Of course they do. If I put a shock collar on my exhusband I bet I could train him to put down the toilet seat and a billion tasks. Or your child. The issue is whether it is best, or even good. That you even tried with something the dog is AFRAID OF (thunder/fireworks) makes me very sad. Your having a dog who is already stressed and frightened and you use an e-collar on that behavior isn't something even most e-collar supporters would agree with. Like Pat, I'd never place a dog with someone who uses one. I will be glad when we join European countries and ban them.
-
If I put a shock collar on my exhusband I bet I could train him to put down the toilet seat and a billion tasks. Or your child.
O.K. I am not going to reiterate what I have said many times before, but I do get tired of this particular argument. You would not put your husband or child in a crate, either. Let's at least be fair about that.
-
O.K. I am not going to reiterate what I have said many times before, but I do get tired of this particular argument. You would not put your husband or child in a crate, either. Let's at least be fair about that.
Right.
I know I'm new here, and am running the risk of alienating myself for having strong opinions, but hey… life is about honesty.
If the choice is between keeping a dog crated 22/7 and judicious use of an E-collar, or prong collar, or choke chain for training purposes, I'm on the side of life outside the box. I'm pro-choice in most things, and not ballsy enough to believe that I know the One True Way about anything, so I would most definitely not vote in favor of banning training tools that happen not to be in my personal toolbox.There is a world of difference between an e-collar as a vibration tool ONLY, and every using it for negative feelings (shock)
But, you know, those aren't the only two choices. The low levels of stimulation feel like a finger tapping on your skin, or a static discharge off a skirt. I've gotten static discharges off my car door handle worse than what most people use as a physical signal. The trainers I know who utilize these tools use them as "touch" signals, which includes completely non-painful low levels. Some dogs don't take in information with their ears when they're in a state of excitement. Adding a "touch" sensation can be a great way to re-direct attention back to the handler. There is no "negative" feeling involved with this.
I do know at least one dog whose life was saved with an e-collar used for "aversion" purposes. He's a hunting dog who started running cattle at about two years old. That happens one time, witnessed by the livestock's owner, and the dog will be shot, regardless of the dog owner's opinion. The first time the dog started running a cow with the collar on, the dog got jolted hard enough to knock him off his feet. He got up, tested the conditions of what triggered a shock two more times, then he went running back to the trail pack and never again expressed interest in chasing livestock. If his choices were between experiencing a non-lethal shock a couple times, and getting to live a life running in the woods, doing what you were put on planet Earth to do, or being shot or kenneled the rest of your life, I'm pretty sure the dog would vote for the transitory discomfort.
-
Mixie, strong opinions are fine, really. We don't have to agree.
I may think you are batpoop crazy or you me.. but you'll find as long as folks don't make it personal, we can debate almost everything. (well except neglect/abuse/puppymilling & irresponsible breeding– those would not go well). I adore eeeefarm. I think she's great. Just because I strongly feel shock collars as basic (ie other than life threatening issues like rock eating and snakes) are abusive doesn't change that. -
Agreed DebraDownSouth… hopefully people with read the differnce of opinions and come to the right conclusion... I too strongly feel that shock collars are abusive... as is irresponsible breeding. And people should reconize the debate between.... before making a conclusion. There are too many that think something like a shock collar is the "QUICK FIX".. It is not
-
Agreed DebraDownSouth… hopefully people with read the differnce of opinions and come to the right conclusion... I too strongly feel that shock collars are abusive... as is irresponsible breeding. And people should reconize the debate between.... before making a conclusion. There are too many that think something like a shock collar is the "QUICK FIX".. It is not
I agree. The main problem we seem to be having is not that there's a difference of opinion, it's that there seems to be little respect for difference in this space. For example, we discuss the myriad and complex ways different trainers may use e-collars which often do not involve any aversive experience, and tanza refuses to hear anything but "abuse". That's not a reasoned discussion.
-
There are too many that think something like a shock collar is the "QUICK FIX".. It is not
And there are too many who think a crate is a great substitute for training that might prove to be a bit challenging. Those of us who chose the training route have dogs that are reliable in the house and don't have to be confined whenever they are unsupervised. And no, I don't use an e-collar to teach house manners!
-
I do love this forum and the information it has provided me but do feel sometimes things get a little heated and people get defensive. I love all the different opinions about different topics and will come here to find different methods to solve any problem I have. Just wish people would understand their opinion is not always other peoples opinion and give a little understanding that different training methods work for other people and their dogs. No one way is the right way. Would be sad if we only ended up with one sided opinions on topics which leaves people with no choice in methods to use because people feel unwelcome to express their opinion. That's my opinion.
Jolanda and Kaiser
-
I agree. The main problem we seem to be having is not that there's a difference of opinion, it's that there seems to be little respect for difference in this space. For example, we discuss the myriad and complex ways different trainers may use e-collars which often do not involve any aversive experience, and tanza refuses to hear anything but "abuse". That's not a reasoned discussion.
Sorry, so here we go.. a civil talk and someone makes it a personal jab. If you said to me or any anti-shock person that you would ONLY use a vibrating/sound never a SHOCK, then fine. But you know and I know that you do and have used more than vibration.
Here is the problem I guess. You seem to think that Tanza and I must AGREE shocking a dog is okay for there to be respect. Shocking a dog is abusive and unnecessary in almost every case on earth. You know how i can prove it? Study after study showing over and over that dogs can be trained without them as thoroughly as with. Even hunting dogs. In countries where they are banned, and for centuries before they were developed. There is a huge difference between me respecting that you can make your own choices, that you can decide for a quick easy fix in spite of overwhelming research and information from canine behaviorists and trainers, and me having to say I think it is okay. It is disingenuous for you to pretend that her or my issue is with a collar used for noise or a vibration. And just because you can zap a dog and teach them that the noise/vibration are a warning for what comes next doesn't mean you didn't use the zap to get there.
So, let me be really clear… using a collar ever on more than vibration level is, to me, simply abusive except in cases where expedience is critical (such as a rock eating dog, bee chaser, snake areas). And honestly, it is like spanking children. It isn't abusive enough for me to think a parent should lose custody or be publicly ridiculed. But I know in my heart that children can absolutely be raised without spanking and dogs can be raised without hitting or shocking or pain. No one should have the right to ever hit another human being, even if that human being is your child. No one has to cause a dog pain to train it. So like spanking, I see shock collars as bad training, lazy training or simply uninformed .. but I won't call it okay or good just to make nice.
For you to attack Pat because she feels strongly about the topic as not respecting isn't okay to me. You can respect without agreeing. In fact, with something like an e-collar, there isn't much wiggle room. Either you see them as abusive or you see them as okay at least basically. If you can't respect our view that to us they are abusive, then how do you expect respect that you do something WE think is abusive? It goes both ways.
-
And there are too many who think a crate is a great substitute for training that might prove to be a bit challenging. Those of us who chose the training route have dogs that are reliable in the house and don't have to be confined whenever they are unsupervised. And no, I don't use an e-collar to teach house manners!
Not sure who you are targeting with that since I don't know anyone with working brain cells on this forum who thinks crates are a SUBSTITUTE for training, challenging or not.
As for training to be loose in the house, bully for you.. your dogs are a minority of basenjis. However, I do agree. For people able to puppy/basenji proof their home, who don't live with others who might put the dogs in danger, I think it is great to work at them being loose. I personally have never owned a dog until the basenjis who needed crating after puppyhood.
But considering my household, and that they sleep up to 17 hours a day normally, I'd darn sure rather put in a crate when I go out than risk their lives and pat myself on the back for not having to crate. In fact Arwen can be left alone in my bedroom… except she will pee on my bed. No thanks. Of course, I am almost always home so they are rarely in a crate. And no, I don't have to use an e-collar to train my dogs anything every-- not Rottweilers, not chows, not basenjis, not feral rescues, none. Not in schutzhund, not in obedience. So I'll trade you my no e-collar but crate when not home over your don't crate but use an e-collar any time, Shirley. Your dig was uncalled for, no matter who you were directing it at.
-
Your dig was uncalled for, no matter who you were directing it at.
My "dig" was simply stating my opinion of what is abusive. To me, hours spent locked in a crate is far, far more abusive than causing a brief uncomfortable sensation, or even a degree of pain when the trade off is time spent in freedom, running loose in a field or down the beach. I base my opinion on observation. At best, crated dogs are resigned to their fate. At worst, they are terribly distressed, often for hours at a time. That is true abuse! A fleeting painful sensation is part of life for just about any animal. Treading on thistles or getting a thorn in the paw is more painful than a brief electric shock (and I am calling it what it is). Like any training device, an electronic collar can be used abusively. Like any training device, an electronic collar can be used to give direction, dialed to a light sensation that does not approach pain, and of course it can be used strongly in case of need. Look at the dog and he will tell you if it is abuse. Perry absolutely knows that the collar is the source of the sensation…...proof of that is his attitude to commands given when he is wearing it and when he is not.......but when I call him over, holding the collar in my hands, he has no hesitation or resistance to having it put on. If I do issue a correction (yes, mild shock sensation, just a tingle) when he is out loose, he retains his composure and complies with whatever request he had been ignoring (most often "leave it", a very important command since you don't want your dog ingesting something nasty). He continues happily with no sign of distress. Nobody viewing his reaction would consider him an abused dog,
As far as crates being some kind of necessity, well, nobody used to use them when I was a kid. I didn't own a crate when I got my first Basenji, and still didn't own one when I got my second, but I did acquire one to assist with house training, and have used them briefly with the succeeding dogs until I felt they were trustworthy. My goal has always been to dispense with crates as quickly as possible, even without the added incentive of adopting a dog that was very crate averse. You will note that although I consider crates abusive, I do use them when necessity dictates. E-collars can be used the same way........when you want the dog to be loose and need the dog to be safe. A "necessary evil" if you like.
Sure, dogs can be trained to be reliable off leash without an e-collar, as all of my dogs have been, including my first Basenji. However, as is often stated on this forum, it is hard to get to that point of complete off leash reliability with a Basenji (although I have done it), and with some it probably is an unachievable goal. Hence, the backup safety of the collar. This has nothing to do with wanting a "quick fix", and I resent the implication. What is wanted is a way to keep my dog reliably safe. I took the time to teach him about the collar, so that he would understand it and not fear it. His attitude tells me that I have been successful in teaching him, and I can live with that.
Just a further note. People hear the word "shock" and are appalled. They really need to experience the sensation to know what is being proposed. Most "studies" (do check who commissioned them and what their motives may have been) use full on, high level shocks to obtain their results. I don't know of any (please point me in the right direction if there are some) that have looked at very low level electronic stimulation, so let's not compare apples and oranges. The "working level" I use on my dog is just barely discernible to me, and if I dial it any lower he doesn't react at all and neither do I. It's a tingle, a bit unpleasant, so you do wish it would go away, but it is annoying rather than painful. No doubt, a high level shock hurts! But I don't use that except in an emergency.......dog is chasing a cat or squirrel or whatever towards a road.......and again, although painful the sensation is brief! The dog reacts in the moment, and it is forgotten immediately thereafter. If he associates it with chasing something he should not chase, so much the better. He is now listening to me and returns unharmed instead of pursuing that critter into a danger zone.
