When I got into training I chose to train without an e-collar because I didn't know what I was doing (was 16 and learning from reading books), and I had a terrible temper(I have it under control in my old age of 20. haha). I didn't want the power to hit that button when I got mad or frustrated... I wanted to have the time to calm down.

I have been in training for 4 years and I have 4 HRCH dogs and none of them have been on the electronic collar. I have started training younger dogs with it and I see the benefits to both.

 

for me personally , its the way that I was taught, by my brother and another mentor and I like the results that I have seen and been a part of...I respect and have been educated on other forms of dog training, but I will stick with what works best for me

and yes my brother does field trial his dogs and i think he has done quite well for himself using that method

 

for me personally , its the way that I was taught, by my brother and another mentor and I like the results that I have seen and been a part of...I respect and have been educated on other forms of dog training, but I will stick with what works best for me

and yes my brother does field trial his dogs and i think he has done quite well for himself using that method

Bon, do(es) your brother's FT dog(s) train with a pro?

 

I chose it because I couldn't make enough $$ sweeping dog poopie out of kennels to pay for a collar or a program..there were plenty of buggy whips, cattle prods and slingshots laying around though...(O.K. jusssst kiddin'..)...

I was against using Collars and Force Training for a while..especially when there was not much control over the signal..two settings..Off and ZAP!..saw a lot of "burn victims", but will train now with one as I've seen the advantages..but still will respect anyone who does, (and would train Amishly again), if the desire strikes me..
I've not run an HT' as of yet..

 

<- Old school traditionalist who likes Brown WW2 camo, Olt D2's, old pump shotguns and Tarrant, Morgan, Pershall and Walters.
Diff strokes for Diff folks regards,
Peake
________
IOLITE BUTANE SAFETY

 

First, I chose not to use a collar because of the introduction to collars I got, and also to fforce fetch

Although what I witnessed has proven not to be the rule, it is still normative, and there was enough there to turn me off. I've come to know the individuals involved since then, and they are good folks, but I won't go down the path they've chosen.

Secondly, as a novice, I committed not to even consider force/pressure training until I can train a dog without it.

As a final comment, the alternative to FF and e-collars is no longer whips, slingshots, birdshot, and running like a maniac out into the field to correct the dog.

The alternative is the intelligent application of learning theory, research into canine neuro-psychology, and behavioral psychology. The fact that a clear 'non force' path hasn't been discovered or proven does not IMHO justify the use of force to get a ribbon or a title just because it produces either.

Respectfully,

Chuck

 

..... snip
The alternative is the intelligent application of learning theory, research into canine neuro-psychology, and behavioral psychology. The fact that a clear 'non force' path hasn't been discovered or proven does not IMHO justify the use of force to get a ribbon or a title just because it produces either.

Respectfully,

Chuck

I know the OP asked for reasons folks choose to train Amish and did not invite a debate, but since the inevitable debate has resulted, I have to say the above remark is a condescending insult that implies the majority of good dog trainers do not apply "learning theory, research into canine neuro-psychology, and behavioral psychology" intelligently.

"Respectfully",

JS

 

..."intelligent application of learning theory, research into canine neuro-psychology, and behavioral psychology. .."

.....whether using an e-collar or not, actually..and for any type of dog training.

Edit!! Also, Respectfully,

Judy

 

Personal preferance and not confident in my timing. First dog no e collar MH QAA but I do force fetch. I have now seen the advantage to the collar and use it sparingly and only to correct and not teach. I see ecollar as an aide to get the dogs attention and to focus.

 

I also train without an e collar. Your responses reflect my own feelings.

Bon Mallari---My own guru is an old time field trialer whom I first met 30 years ago. I feel as you do.

Peake---Are you my long lost twin? My gear includes old style camo, Remington 870 (fixed choke) with bluing worn off, Olt L-22, and corduroy gunning hat (irreplaceable). My copy of Tarrant is signed by the author.

 

I stopped using the e-collar with my dogs after experiencing one dog in particular who was quite overly sensitive to collar stimulation. I had trained six dogs using an e-collar prior to this one, but his reaction to it broke my heart. I just knew there had to be a better way (for him and me). After continuing on with his training without the collar, I found I liked training that way. Takes a little longer sometimes, but in the end I'm much happier with my accomplishment.

I often wonder if effective e-collar use over the years has changed how we view "trainability" in our dogs. I realize that responsible collar use demands that we "teach" first without the collar and use the collar to "correct", but does anyone think that the ability to instantly correct behavior has allowed certain trainablity traits to slip through the cracks?

 

My initial reasoning to train w/o an e-collar (or force fetch) comes with somewhat of an old-school approach. I felt that as a duckhunter , I should not be required to spend my money on expensive training tools in order to train a steady, reliable retriever. While my involvement with my retrievers has changed somewhat (I've now become active in both HRC & BLRA hunt tests and trials), my basic philosophy has not changed at all.

At this time, I own two retrievers. One is a 2.5 year old British-bred bitch that has been trained using only British methods. She's at the far-end of a Seasoned-level HRC dog, and we also compete at BLRA events (British-style trials). While an extremely hard-charging dog, she certainly is on the soft side. My second (a 19 month-old male) is 3/4 American-bred, from several respectable American FT lines. The latter dog forced me to change my training methods, as he did not respond favorably to my standard British techniques. He's been through FF, CC, and I have come to the conclusion that an e-collar is the right tool for this particular dog. That being said, I still hate the fact that I am now bound to the transmitter for the remainder of this dogs hunting and Hunt Test career. Again, that's just me.

Choosing to train without a collar does have it's negatives. Timing corrections cannot be matched to those using a collar. I also agree that it takes longer to train concepts without a collar. The bonus is that you do not need to have a collar on your dog for it to respond to your commands.

 

My initial reasoning to train w/o an e-collar (or force fetch) comes with somewhat of an old-school approach. I felt that as a duckhunter , I should not be required to spend my money on expensive training tools in order to train a steady, reliable retriever. While my involvement with my retrievers has changed somewhat (I've now become active in both HRC & BLRA hunt tests and trials), my basic philosophy has not changed at all.

At this time, I own two retrievers. One is a 2.5 year old British-bred bitch that has been trained using only British methods. She's at the far-end of a Seasoned-level HRC dog, and we also compete at BLRA events (British-style trials). While an extremely hard-charging dog, she certainly is on the soft side. My second (a 19 month-old male) is 3/4 American-bred, from several respectable American FT lines. The latter dog forced me to change my training methods, as he did not respond favorably to my standard British techniques. He's been through FF, CC, and I have come to the conclusion that an e-collar is the right tool for this particular dog. That being said, I still hate the fact that I am now bound to the transmitter for the remainder of this dogs hunting and Hunt Test career. Again, that's just me.

Choosing to train without a collar does have it's negatives. Timing corrections cannot be matched to those using a collar. I also agree that it takes longer to train concepts without a collar. The bonus is that you do not need to have a collar on your dog for it to respond to your commands.

Kirk, what's the difference between BLRA and AGD?

 

I don't FT and haven't messed with HT since mid 80's, however I hunt a bunch. I enjoy the training and bonding with the dog and I am not on a time schedule so the slower approach without a collar appeals to me. Not bashing the collar users, their success speaks volumes. Different strokes for different folk.

It is similar to the same reasoning that I use a recurve bow to hunt with, a humpback autoloader, no electronic decoys and a nice chessie to share them sunrises with. Life is like a good single malt, sip it, savor and enjoy the end comes too soon not to enjoy every little bit of it.

 

Chris, we're making a few changes in the structure of the two organizations. No difference in rules, just putting more emphasis on the BLRA at this point.

Wished you could have made it to Union City last weekend. The degree of difficulty keeps rising, as does the competition. Some outstanding dog work to be seen!

 

Kirk,

If the focus is moving more towered BLRA, is that going to cause any change in the eligibility of non-labs like, say, a Boykin?

Matt

 

It takes longer to train w/o the E-collar but I believe the dog is happier-No force. I trained puppy this way up to and almost until he had his Seasoned title. And I am going to train my next dog w/o a E-collar.

I can however see advantages to training the dog w/ collar when doing blinds at distances. I ended up using the collar for proper sits way out in the field. Timing w/ corrections was the key for me to start with the collar. He was cc as a puppy after being taught alot of obedience.

Even now I run marks w/o the collar.

I can't understand why we train with the collar on all the time when in a test we are not allowed to use the collar. A smart dog must figure out if it is not on???

 

just wondering why you think it takes longer to train without an E-collar..because I dont think time is relevant when it comes to training a dog. the time it takes is the time it takes and some dogs learn quicker and some dont, some never do, but I think its not specific to one method of training as opposed to another......I do agree with your statement that a dog runs happier, but thats a broad generality..not an absolute


as for your ending statement..thats usually what starts arguments around here so I will leave it alone ;-)

 

Matt, don't worry...we're happy to include Boykins, Chessies, Goldens, Springers, whatever you like. No limitations on breed whatsoever. The trial format is still exactly the same.

 

Kirk,

That's how I understood the rules. Just wanted to make sure it hadn't changed.

Thanks.

 

OK ,so no one responded that is competitive in field trials that trains amish.

 

Bon just typed his brother does. Brother does not post, only Bon.



.

 

Jay,
I guess not, everyone that competes in American Field Trials uses the Rex Carr method. It has to be so ingrained, that the test favor that type of training. I would surmise that if a traditional trainer stepped to the line. The scrutiny would be to high, even if the Judge tried to be fair, they would Judge tighter.
Most people who train "amish" train hunting dogs or hunt test. I use to train this way, but after working with Martin Deeley, I have started using an e-collar.
Tony

 

It takes longer to train w/o the E-collar but I believe the dog is happier-No force

What makes you think they aren't happy? I've never had a depressed, fearful, anxious, or tentative e-collar trained dog. They are usually intelligent enough not to need multiple repetitions or corrections so you don't need the collar often. We were just discussing that they are so happy when they see the collar come out, you would practically have to give them an overdose of sedatives to get them down.

As far as being successful with the collar, everyone has their own interpretation of what success is. I think with the National coming up next week, those are the dogs I look to as successful. If your passion is field trialing, you will be using an e collar to be competitive with e-collar trained dogs.

 

I think that your comment shows a lot of wisdom due to experience. I have a problem watching people train with an e collar who obviously don't have your knowledge. It seems to me that the dogs are carrying a burden, falter at an area where they have been corrected, and produce a behavior that is contrary to what is trained for. Example--dog picks up bumper in cover, doesn't come out or respond to whistle, gets corrected and then runs to someone else in the field. Dog refuses to return to handler. Dog now refuses to retrieve at all for the rest of this session. (Real incident.)

I certainly could not do better because I don't know how to use the e collar. Unfortunately, about 80% of the people in my training group use the e collar and I am convinced that they don't know what they are doing.

I am not critical of the e collar. By starting this thread I was really curious as to which methods are popular for each venue. Judging by the number of responses, I get the feeling that an overwhelming majority train with an e collar in all venues.

 

I think that your comment shows a lot of wisdom due to experience. I have a problem watching people train with an e collar who obviously don't have your knowledge. It seems to me that the dogs are carrying a burden, falter at an area where they have been corrected, and produce a behavior that is contrary to what is trained for. Example--dog picks up bumper in cover, doesn't come out or respond to whistle, gets corrected and then runs to someone else in the field. Dog refuses to return to handler. Dog now refuses to retrieve at all for the rest of this session. (Real incident.)

I certainly could not do better because I don't know how to use the e collar. Unfortunately, about 80% of the people in my training group use the e collar and I am convinced that they don't know what they are doing.

I am not critical of the e collar. By starting this thread I was really curious as to which methods are popular for each venue. Judging by the number of responses, I get the feeling that an overwhelming majority train with an e collar in all venues.

The collar would not be used for this reason. For one, this sounds like the dog would be a young dog that probably is not even CC. It's all about them being happy about retrieving. Yes, I agree, if people don't know what they are doing they shouldn't be burning. Faltering at an area they are corrected is because it has become a hot spot and the dog didn't understand the correction. The dog needs to first understand the "yes", and then when they are corrected, they respond in a positive manner because they understand. Many times we bring them back a little and then handle them to show them what is correct which is called attrition, which is a tool the amish also use. If they know the rules, then they only get corrected for blatant refusals. This is of course if they are through basics and transition and handling.

 

My above post is in response to Erins Edge.

 

I got interested in positive training thru search and rescue training. When building a dog program for a search and rescue organization about 8 years ago, I found that using my traditional compulsion training model, it took me about 18 months to train a green handler/trainer and dog to the operational level. The process was to buy a started young Labrador gundog, place him with a green handler and teach the handler to train his dog.
I thought 18 months was way too long and looked around for a training model that was easier and faster for people to learn.

The marine mammal training model was the leading edge. The dog form of that is clicker training, which I learned and taught the team by taking the team to a seminar and by bringing in some experts for coaching. We got the handler/dog training process down to 6 months. The training model is easier for people to learn and the processes worked faster than those of the traditional compulsion training model.

Having just read several 100-year-old training books, I have learned that in general, we are training retrievers today basically the same way we have been doing it for over 100 years except we are harder on them today than a hundred years ago.

There have been some dramatic advances in animal training over the past 30 to 40 years. Two of the central figures have been BF Skinner with operant conditioning and Konrad Lorenz with his work on instinctive behaviors. These new principles have been widely adopted in the world of zoo animals and marine mammals. The world of horse training is rapidly adopting them as well. They work equally well with dogs and allow the trainer to use much less force. Additionally, they work faster than compulsion. However, just like any training model, you have to learn the proper way to use the principles before you can produce a good product.

 

I try to stay out of these kind of discussions, as they sometimes go South...I'll crawl out on a limb..I think there's always good points to be heard on both sides of the fence. There's Lots of Ways to Train Dogs..I believe if we look at it from a Goal perspective it gets easier to understand. Trialers/Trainers running Derby Dogs/Trialing/Test with 20-30 dogs in the mix simply do not have the time to train in a Non Force regimen..You'd never get the dogs trained to compete in the neccessary required time frame..They'd starve to death if this was their sole income.. We should respect their accomplishments, as there are some great dogs running out there .

Folks in Non- Force have Goals as well,..and traditional training values as well..This is very respectful...I trained this way for a long time, and I can relate....Can a guy/gal train a great dog in Pos-re.?..youbetchyurarse they can,.. I just believe it boils down to the Goals and expectations an individual sets with dogs..Some folks like to drive the Porche' to work..somefolks are happy with their reliable Pontiac..Shouldn't be a problem as long as you get to your awaited destination..........Your Goal..

 

But the collar improves timing at a distance,,and if you can improve timing at a distance you improve the lines of communication.


Pete

...And hence' my biggest reason for turning over a new leaf, moreso than a stylish desireable..I luv my P.F. Flyers, but my secret decoder ring is worn out now...Making corrections at a distance was an attribute that couldn't go unrecognized for me..Good for me.. the dog,...;-)and my Goals...

 

Pete--- I am critical of the people, not the method. They are training with a tool that they don't know how to use. And you hit the nail on the head. These people are definitely incompetent.

Erins Edge---You have expressed my feelings. I admit to not knowing how to use the collar. I was able to form an opinion that is exactly what you are talking about.

Swampbilly---I feel the same way. BTW, I respect all successes.