Choccielab Training Damage

[IJF]

Originally Posted by Mynona

Observations:

The people at Dogtra who write the training advice on the website are experts in the collar but not expert dog trainers - have I got that right? I believe people buying the collar would follow the training manual that comes with that collar if they bother to give the manual more than just a cursory skim through. Isn't that a little dangerous?

I have no idea who wrote the article. What I will say is that there are many ways to train (and trainers rarely agree on everything). I would also say that I personally would not expect driving advice in my car operating manual. Many e-collar manufacturers put in training DVDs witht their product - maybe they shouldn't bother. I know that I watched mine and then used it in what I believe to be a far better way...

A dog trainer using the collar has dogs that has marks on its neck from where the collar has come in contact (for whatever reason). Are these the 'experts' that folk want licenced to allow people to use e-collars should legislation be brought in to limit their use? If not, then who would people suggest is licenced?

Assuming a dog trainer did have a dog with neck sores (from whatever collar, flat, chain, e-collar), I would hope that he was not licenced by any authority and I personally would not deal with them. Medical issues aside, I think a trainer should be able to look after his/her dog...

[IJF]

Originally Posted by lakielady

Sounds like the beginning of a mental illness to me! Totally disproportionate response.

Tut tut. I assume you are trained and qualified to make that diagnosis over the internet?

[Denis_Carthy]

Mike Mouth MiLisCer@http://z9.invisionfree.com/dogrefuk/index.php?showtopic=24

P80


UNCONFIRMED

I have spent time in the states were E-collars are used routinely, having instructed at a Police K9 unit out there, they were suitably impressed that collars were not required, they stopped using them.

Mike Mouth
MiLisCer @http://z9.invisionfree.com/dogrefuk/index.php?showtopic=24

P86


UNCONFIRMED

I have won Police dog working trials, in the UK, Germany and the US.

Mike Mouth MiLisCer@http://z9.invisionfree.com/dogrefuk/index.php?showtopic=24

P163

UNCONFIRMED
And here is one of the many mails I have had form "Members" of these boards:

Hi
you don't know me from Adam

Mike Mouth
MiLisCer @http://z9.invisionfree.com/dogrefuk/index.php?showtopic=24

P163

unconfirmed

Oh and Rom - I no longer work in the field of protection dogs, my interest was never in them apart from on a professional basis whilst employed in that role.

.
.
.
.

Mike Mouth
MiLisCer @http://z9.invisionfree.com/dogrefuk/index.php?showtopic=24

P163


SELF CONFIRMED

Rom,
Anyone can write anything on the Internet! does not make it true - look at the amount of rubbish in this thread!

.

[Sanford]

Originally Posted by lakielady

Lol, like most cliches, the one about voting being banned if it changed anything is probably true!

Oh yes, spot on there Lakielady!

[Sanford]

Originally Posted by lakielady

I know Lynne Crook and I know she is NOT a commercial trainer. I think there is at best some confusion between Lynne and her daughter, at worst, malicious libel where she is concerned.

Thanks Lakielady for clearing that up
I never thought she was (a commercial trainer).

[Patience]

Originally Posted by Lou Castle

But no one has received a personal attack who didn't start one.

And, of course, in Lou-World that includes posting a link, in answer to someone else's question, to a website (in the particular instance I refer it was the Kennel Club) whose content you disagree with. That, apparently, constitutes a "personal attack" on you, even though you were not mentioned in either the post or the website!

[Sanford]

Originally Posted by Patience

And, of course, in Lou-World that includes posting a link, in answer to someone else's question, to a website (in the particular instance I refer it was the Kennel Club) whose content you disagree with. That, apparently, constitutes a "personal attack" on you, even though you were not mentioned in either the post or the website!

I remember that, Patience.

[Jackbox]

Originally Posted by Mynona

Observations:

The people at Dogtra who write the training advice on the website are experts in the collar but not expert dog trainers - have I got that right? I believe people buying the collar would follow the training manual that comes with that collar if they bother to give the manual more than just a cursory skim through. Isn't that a little dangerous?

A dog trainer using the collar has dogs that has marks on its neck from where the collar has come in contact (for whatever reason). Are these the 'experts' that folk want licenced to allow people to use e-collars should legislation be brought in to limit their use? If not, then who would people suggest is licenced?

.

The dog in question with the marks on its neck was a fine coated Xbreed, whether they be burn/irritation marks, it makes not difference , what it showed is the "ecollar was used incorrectly.



The ecollar will be used on a variety of breeds, small/ large , fine coated to dogs with heavy double coats......... I wonder if checked on a daily basis , looking through the hair, would you see the same, because I would guess , it would not be something one would think to look for.....

I have heard, (dont know if this is true) that hair will be shaved off thick coated dogs, so the contact points sits on the skin not the coat???

Also as you say, how many people actually read instructions with anything we buy, from flat packs, to new cameras, to ecollar, I would guess more dont than do!!

Yes "all" tools can be abused.........two wrongs cant make a right.