Has anybody thought of or tried to use ecollar technology on a raptor?

[EAZFalconer]

The dog trainers have that down to a science where it is a means of communication and not punishment.

[kitana]

Well, like it or not, the ecollar is and always will be a form a punishment. Punishment means something that will stop a behavior from happening.

Punishment, in its milder and more severe forms, have been tried on almost every species that men laid their hands upon. However mildly they are, they can have bad side effects even when used "correctly" and there is always a technique available that doesn't use punishment and that will lead to the same results. That's the reason why most wild animal trainers use reward based training technics instead of punishment based ones, because they don't want to deal with the risks of nasty side-effects. Dogs are a very forgiving species, we can beat upon them, break their bones and make them bleed and they will come back to their torturer and lick their hands as if to ask forgiveness for whatever they did wrong. Most species aren't as forgiving however, thus the positive training.

[rkumetz]

It would be difficult to build a training collar that would be light and small enough to fit on a bird. That is reason 1 why it would not be a good idea.

The 2nd reason is that (as Audrey pointed out) dogs are social animals and birds of prey are not.

Yell at your dog and he puts his tail between his legs and tries to get you to like him again. He wants the alpha dog to be happy with him.

Do something like that to your bird and he is likely to slip you the middle talon so to speak and head for the hills.

There are some exceptions to this: Harris' tend to have some recognition of social hierarchy. I can grab my MHH to maintain equipment or even toss him out the window like a football but he shrugs it off and is landing on my shoulder 5 minutes later. As far as I can tell he just assumes
I am the alpha in the family group. Perhaps I am delusional but that is the conclusion I have reached.

[EAZFalconer]

It would be difficult to build a training collar that would be light and small enough to fit on a bird. That is reason 1 why it would not be a good idea.

The 2nd reason is that (as Audrey pointed out) dogs are social animals and birds of prey are not.

Yell at your dog and he puts his tail between his legs and tries to get you to like him again. He wants the alpha dog to be happy with him.

Do something like that to your bird and he is likely to slip you the middle talon so to speak and head for the hills.

There are some exceptions to this: Harris' tend to have some recognition of social hierarchy. I can grab my MHH to maintain equipment or even toss him out the window like a football but he shrugs it off and is landing on my shoulder 5 minutes later. As far as I can tell he just assumes
I am the alpha in the family group. Perhaps I am delusional but that is the conclusion I have reached.

With dogs, ecollar training is not associated with the trainer. The good trainers don't use voice commands at all in the field except for a command to heal and one to come here. Most of the ecollar training is done as a tickle and associated with check cord training but they do have higher settings that hurt that would be called punishment. But with the punishment, the dog associates it with the action not with the trainer.

[hawkerev]

Well, like it or not, the ecollar is and always will be a form a punishment. Punishment means something that will stop a behavior from happening.

Punishment, in its milder and more severe forms, have been tried on almost every species that men laid their hands upon. However mildly they are, they can have bad side effects even when used "correctly" and there is always a technique available that doesn't use punishment and that will lead to the same results. That's the reason why most wild animal trainers use reward based training technics instead of punishment based ones, because they don't want to deal with the risks of nasty side-effects. Dogs are a very forgiving species, we can beat upon them, break their bones and make them bleed and they will come back to their torturer and lick their hands as if to ask forgiveness for whatever they did wrong. Most species aren't as forgiving however, thus the positive training.

Have you ever ecollar trained a dog ?

[kitana]

Have you ever ecollar trained a dog ?

No, and I will never. I will never stop someone from doing so however, I respect people's decision on the matter. But my formation enables me to train behaviors without using aversives of any kind, so if I ever want to use an aversive, I'll take a few moments and think about a way to avoid it, and if I have to ask more knowledgable people with more experience than I have (read: professional animal trainers, usually zoo and marine mammals trainers, or dog clicker trainers) I'll do it. There is always a way around it, sometimes it's easily found, sometimes it needs more thoughts, but a large part of my job is to treat dogs submitted to punishment (no matter how mild they can all have side effects) and I won't take the chance to see these problems arise with my own animals, be they dogs or cats or hawks.

[TiercelR]

The neck is a very vulnerable area for a raptor, but maybe if the system is placed on the backpack along of the transmiter, so its weight will be well distributed, and its antenna do not will be pendant from the neck of the raptor as pass with both the neck-mounted transmiters and bells.

[outhawkn]

Well, like it or not, the ecollar is and always will be a form a punishment. Punishment means something that will stop a behavior from happening.

Punishment, in its milder and more severe forms, have been tried on almost every species that men laid their hands upon. However mildly they are, they can have bad side effects even when used "correctly" and there is always a technique available that doesn't use punishment and that will lead to the same results. That's the reason why most wild animal trainers use reward based training technics instead of punishment based ones, because they don't want to deal with the risks of nasty side-effects. Dogs are a very forgiving species, we can beat upon them, break their bones and make them bleed and they will come back to their torturer and lick their hands as if to ask forgiveness for whatever they did wrong. Most species aren't as forgiving however, thus the positive training.

You dont understand how to use it properly then.............

[kitana]

You dont understand how to use it properly then.............

No, I fully and thoroughly understand the use of an ecollar, probably even better than most who use it. I studied the principles at lenght. I could describe it to you in details in OC terms, as well as what happens in the brains biochemistry when the animal receives the shock (no matter how small the shock is), what pathways are modified for life after that and how it can go wrong, biochemically and thus behaviorally, even when the training is well done. I could also go on and on about what happens when humans are "trained" with an ecollar, which is frankly quite funny in a desperate kind of way (Julie Shaw from purdue University did this experiment if you want to know more). But I will never convince no one to stop using it, and no one will never convince me it is needed nor it can be used with a 100% safety margin, so I'll leave the discussion as it is for it not to be thrown off path.

To my eyes, the real questions are these:
1)What unwanted behavior do you want to modify using an ecollar?
2)What behavior would you want to see in place of the unwanted one?
3)How can this (or these) behaviors be modified with a similar result without the use of the ecollar.

[andy hall]

Here is my question and functional analysis about e-collar use

Did the unwanted behavior significantly reduce in frequency?
yes - then it is punishment
no - then it is abuse

I have used them and even sold them for a few years. Have not touched one in 13 years, and have a much higher success rate for training. The idea of using one for a bird is completely deplorable to me. There is no situation that I could see it being effective with a bird (or almost any animal for training purposes).

Andy

[rkumetz]

Here is my question and functional analysis about e-collar use

Did the unwanted behavior significantly reduce in frequency?
yes - then it is punishment
no - then it is abuse

I have used them and even sold them for a few years. Have not touched one in 13 years, and have a much higher success rate for training. The idea of using one for a bird is completely deplorable to me. There is no situation that I could see it being effective with a bird (or almost any animal for training purposes).

Andy

I agree with this. The collar is designed to provide negative stimulus when the animal presents some undesired behavior. It essentially works on the premise that dogs (being smarter than people) will adhere to the "if it hurts then don't do that" principle.

What sort negative behavior does one expect to counter with a collar?
Carrying? Not returning to the glove? With the exception of screaming I can't think of any behavior which might effectively be deterred using a negative stimuli such as a collar.

When we were kids we used to want to fill our fishing tackle boxes with all of the latest gadgets. My dad would remind us that if you don't know how to fish all the junk in the world is pretty much useless. Granted that is a simplification but at some point training boils down to establishing a relationship with your bird and learning to read it. Nobody would ever mistake me for someone who would miss the opportunity to build a better mousetrap but you always need to think whether or not what you are trying is a better mouse trap or a pet rock.

[outhawkn]

Here is my question and functional analysis about e-collar use

Did the unwanted behavior significantly reduce in frequency?
yes - then it is punishment
no - then it is abuse

I have used them and even sold them for a few years. Have not touched one in 13 years, and have a much higher success rate for training. The idea of using one for a bird is completely deplorable to me. There is no situation that I could see it being effective with a bird (or almost any animal for training purposes).

Andy

What if I'm using not to stop an un-wanted behavior but to produce a desired behavior?

[outhawkn]

No, I fully and thoroughly understand the use of an ecollar, probably even better than most who use it. I studied the principles at lenght. I could describe it to you in details in OC terms, as well as what happens in the brains biochemistry when the animal receives the shock (no matter how small the shock is), what pathways are modified for life after that and how it can go wrong, biochemically .

Your telling me that a stimulation so small that I cant feel it is going to adversely affect the dog biochemically...............
Could you point me to the research?

[Mandragen]

Exellent thread, although a controversial one, I agree with everything Audrey has said. There is an old school of training and a new school, this is definitely old school. Just like anything else it can be done effectively and without harm to the animal, but it's still punishment.

These might help...

http://www.psychology.uiowa.edu/faculty/wasserman/glossary/punishment.html#pp example

Punishment doesn't necessarily mean that you are hurting an animal, but a relationship using punishment as a training tool is definitely different than one using reinforcement. Think about what happens when you are driving down the road and you see a police car, to some certain extent you double check everything and make sure that you are doing the right thing out of fear of getting a ticket. Most people get nervous around them, which isn't exactly a fun thing. Most individuals' relationship with an officer is based upon punishment. You want to do the right thing for them but out of fear of punishment for doing the wrong thing.

Now think about the relationship you have with someone or something that is reinforcing. My Dad used to reward me for getting A's on my report card, however I was not punished for anything lower. I got straight A's because I wanted to be reinforced. I wasn't afraid of not getting them. How do you feel when you think about going to get ice cream, going to Best Buy, the mall, Disney World, Vegas... the same way as when having to go the the dentist or doctor?

[rkumetz]

What if I'm using not to stop an un-wanted behavior but to produce a desired behavior?

Can you please explain how one uses a negative stimuli to produce a desired behavior? A collar produces an unpleasant sensation that causes a dog to think something like: "hey- when I bark it is kind of unpleasant so I should probably not do that again". Which is similar to a sufficiently evolved human deciding it would not be good to touch the hot pot a 2nd time after having a negative sensation the first time.

I am not trying to flame anyone. I just can't see how this will work.

Splain............crazyy

[kitana]

Your telling me that a stimulation so small that I cant feel it is going to adversely affect the dog biochemically...............
Could you point me to the research?

If it's so small that you can't feel it, it won't affect the behavior at all. If it affects (stop) the behavior, it is therefore strong enough to be felt, and if it strong enough to be felt, it can have deep effects on the mental of the animal.

The resources about the side-effects of punishment are widely available, more than that they are widely vulgarized for regular people without a degree in psychology. If you look up Jesus Rosales-Ruiz research on poisoning the cue, and continue from there, you will be on your way to get a better understanding of punishment and reinforcement. Plus, many of the articles on this website (http://www.clickersolutions.com/articles/index.htm), although not all of them are from post-graduate researchers such as Jesus R-R, are bringing excellent infos to ones who want to understand. And finally if you are really interested, grab Temple Grandin's book "Animals in translation", it will blow you away, but it is not an easy read. It goes in depth about fears, consequences of punishment and fear, etc, but is still understandable by the general public.

[Mandragen]

What if I'm using not to stop an un-wanted behavior but to produce a desired behavior?

explain?

[outhawkn]

If it's so small that you can't feel it, it won't affect the behavior at all. If it affects (stop) the behavior, it is therefore strong enough to be felt, and if it strong enough to be felt, it can have deep effects on the mental of the animal.

The resources about the side-effects of punishment are widely available, more than that they are widely vulgarized for regular people without a degree in psychology. If you look up Jesus Rosales-Ruiz research on poisoning the cue, and continue from there, you will be on your way to get a better understanding of punishment and reinforcement. Plus, many of the articles on this website (http://www.clickersolutions.com/articles/index.htm), although not all of them are from post-graduate researchers such as Jesus R-R, are bringing excellent infos to ones who want to understand. And finally if you are really interested, grab Temple Grandin's book "Animals in translation", it will blow you away, but it is not an easy read. It goes in depth about fears, consequences of punishment and fear, etc, but is still understandable by the general public.

I might not have been clear about the way I worded a sentence. If the stimulation is so slight that I personally can't feel that level of stimulation with my fingers but the dog can feel it, I have a hard time believing thats going to do the dog damage....?

[Keith Denman]

You could rap the collar around the body under the wings. I think after a couple of shocks that the bird would figure out what is shocking it and when you go and try to put it on the bird would react negitively towards it. Just a thought.

[Mandragen]

If an individual can feel something, emotionally or physically, it has the potential to have an affect in some way, sometimes greatly. Take a slight breeze for example, sometimes so slight that you can barely feel it but can mean the world of difference if you are hot or cold.

The intensity of the stimulus to you doesn't carry any weight in this equation. It doesn't matter how you feel about it, or in this case don't feel. Someone can call me fat and I'll ask for another piece of that pie, but someone say that to another and it could cause them to take the easy way out.

[Dutch]

In my opinion, Audrey is dead on. None of the historical falconry books record any methods for negative reinforcement.

Jack Mavro said, "Falconry is gently leading on."

J. Stoddart

[rocgwp]

What if I'm using not to stop an un-wanted behavior but to produce a desired behavior?

clapp This is precisely how I use an e-collar with my dogs. An e-collar is a tool I use for a short period of time in training. The e-collar is valuable in helping "generalize" a known cue and bring it under better stimulus control. George Hickox calls it contrast training and is a master at this. I don't know if I will explain it well, but here is the premise...

You use a CR (clicker) and rewards to teach a desired behavior. Once the dog is offering the behavior consistently you overlay a cue. At that point you begin only CRing and rewarding the behavior when the cue is given. When the dog will give the desired behavior on cue 80% of the time, you can move on to generalizing the cue. This is where the e-collar comes in. This also assumes you have gone through a process to teach the dog how to turn off the collar and that the dog has received some other form of negative reinforcement other than the collar (i.e. a bonker). You give the known cue to the dog. If the dog offers the behavior you click and reward. If the dog does not offer the behavior you give a different Marker Signal (One that will always precede the negative reinforcement) and the give the negative reinforcement. The trick to this working is the use of the Marker Signal preceding the negative. Because the dog understands the positive marker, they quickly understand the negative Marker Signal. Another key is that if the negative marker is given it is ALWAYS followed by a negative. Since a variable schedule reinforces a behavior (either positive or negative) you want to be consistent and always follow the Negative Marker with the negative. Otherwise, this is how a "collar wise" (or really "Correction wise") dogs is created.

What happens is the dog quickly learns that when the know cue is given, if it complies, it gets a reward. If not, it is notified with a Negative Marker and then a negative. The collar is used to teach the dog that if it does anything other than offer the desired cue, it will be given a negative. VERY quickly you see the dog offer the behavior when the first sound of the Negative Marker is given. The temptation is once the dog starts offering the behavior in response to the Negative Marker to not follow up with the actual negative. If you are consistent and give the negative anytime the Negative Marker is given, you will soon not need the negative or the negative marker. The dog will offer the behavior on cue in very demanding situations with lots of distractions.

This method works great. I've seen it work on very soft dogs and on very stubborn dogs. The e-collar is just a tool in one's training bag. It is a way to get a behavior very reliable in a relatively short period of time without putting a lot of force or pressure on the dog.

I should also mention that when I use the e-collar I use VERY LOW levels of stimulation. I go through a process of collar conditioning that teaches the dog how to turn off the collar and what the Negative Marker is. In 1-2 short sessions the dog is responding to stimulation so low that I am unable or barely able to feel it on my hands at that level. Once I took my my hardest headed wirehair through this process, he responded to a correction level of 10 out of 50 on my collar. I can't feel the stimulation on my hand until it gets to six. My current female wirehair that passed her NAVHDA Utility test with a 192 out of 204 possible points was trained with a correction level of 6.

[kitana]

I'm glad to see many people understand the downfalls of punishment.

First, stopping a behavior is punishment. If you add something aversive to stop the behavior, you are using positive punishment, positive in the mathematical sense (+). Ecollar is positive punishment, no matter how you word it or want to see it.

When you stop using the punishment, you are using negative reinforcement, negative in teh mathematical sense (-), you remove (-) an aversive as a reward. You can use negative reinforcement to reward a behavior: the dog bakrs, he gets zapped which stops the barking, thus it is a positive punishment, then as he stops barking yo stop zapping, earning the dog a negative (-) reinforcement for keeping quiet. So ecollar also brings negative reinforcement, that's the way it works.

Any positive punishment can lead to mental damage, and negative punishment (removing a reward) as well but it takes longer. It does not always happen, for if it did we would never ever use punishment, but the risk is high. What side effects can happen? The strain on the relationship is a very real one, as demonstrated by the policeman analogy. The creation of fears/shyness/agression is a very real one as well. One has to understand, before using any type or strenght of punishment, that animals will try to link the punishment to their environment way before they link it to their behavior. They will take a mental picture of the world around them as they get the punishment, and make associations, then decide later on how they will act toward the things that were in the pictures. They kind of decide that they were zapped because of the things that surrounded them, not because they acted wrong, so they may become fearful/shy of the things they saw in the picture, and even react agressively toward them later on. The fear pathways that are activated in the brain when the animal receives a punishment are impossible to erase; one can ease the fears, but they will come back under stress. And yes, the falconer can very well be part of the picture.

Finally, to be effective, punishment has to be timed perfectly at the precise moment when the animal thinks about acting "wrongly", up to the point where he starts acting. Punishing even a second after the act won't work. Moreover, punishment has to be strong enough not to be used more than once, max 3 times. So before to put the ecollar on an animal, you have to have perfect timing (try throwing a tennis ball in the air and zapping as it stops moving before going down, then zapping as it touches the ground... you'll see our timing is lousy!) and perfect strenght of stimuli to obtain teh desired response. Even when used perfectly, you could still end up with mental damage and unpleasant, long-lasting side-effects. And there is always a way to train the exact same behavior out or in an animal without the use of any aversive. Always.

Why do people like using punishment? A british study showed that, unbeknownst to the punisher, the pleasure pathways in the brain are strongly activated when the punisher delivers a punishment for a behavior he deemed wrong. Delivering a "deserved" punishment brings a very strong positive reinforcement to the punisher, regardless of the result of the punishment, weither it worked in preventing the occurence of the punished behavior or not. The pleasure pathways can then build shortcuts that will activate at a hairtrigger, thus being even more reinforcing. The neurotransmitters used in this pathway also have a very strong addictive effect, they act like a drug would act and one will want to experience the feeling again. Those are some reasons why we, as human beings, have the reflex to punish, not to reinforce, and we have to train ourselves to become positive trainers...

[kitana]

Jeff, I strongly suggest you read the research of Jesus Rosales-Ruiz about Poisoning the cue. He studied exactly the procedure you are speaking about and demonstrated the very potent negative side effects it has on the trainees, which were worst in some cases than when the behavior was trained using purely positive punishment/negative reinforcement.

[Tom Smith]

I have used the e collar to stop my dogs from attacking porcupines on several occasions and also I have stopped them from crossing busy highways on several occasions. I have stopped them from entering into pastures where cattle were being fed and the owners were the type that would shoot any dog present no questions asked.

Those are generally the situations I use the collar but I also would use it to discourage a dog from getting to familiar with a trained bird. For general training I very rarely use it all. I don't think it it as painful as it is a sensation and I usually test mine with the palm of my hand.

As far as using one for training a hawk, I don't think that the rules of reward and punishment work in the same way as a dog, no way. I can only think of one place I would use it and that is when a bird is about to alight on a power pole where electrocution is a possibility. The theory of the lesser of two evils might apply but I haven't had any problems along those lines, knock on wood, I don't see any reason to design an e collar that could be carried by a raptor. Now pigeons that could be a different story.... to keep mine off the neighbors house.

[rocgwp]

I'll look it up, but I think I've read it already. I'm always open to new ways of training and what is most effective. I'll look (I could be wrong here) but I didn't think his research studied the use of distinctly different Negative and Positive Marker signals used in conjunction with one another (i.e. a click for positive and beep for negative).

[JRedig]

I'd love to zap the sh*t out of my gos sometimes...but that really only has to do with a level of relief or satisfaction for myself...:Dtoungeout

An e-collar on a dog is just a tool in the tool box. If it works to achieve MY goals with the dog, that's fine for me. I've had many occasions in the field where my dog was out of vocal range and getting into trouble and the e-collar provides a way to communicate. How much experience do some of you have running say pointing dogs in open country? There are circumstances that arise that are WAY out of your control, if you mitigate for all of those, you'd never leave the house.

Why do these discussions always degrade into those of you with a very in depth understanding telling everyone else what's right and wrong? It's hard to want to read any of these topics...frus)

[Tom Smith]

I'd love to zap the sh*t out of my gos sometimes...but that really only has to do with a level of relief or satisfaction for myself...:Dtoungeout

An e-collar on a dog is just a tool in the tool box. If it works to achieve MY goals with the dog, that's fine for me. I've had many occasions in the field where my dog was out of vocal range and getting into trouble and the e-collar provides a way to communicate. How much experience do some of you have running say pointing dogs in open country? There are circumstances that arise that are WAY out of your control, if you mitigate for all of those, you'd never leave the house.

Why do these discussions always degrade into those of you with a very in depth understanding telling everyone else what's right and wrong? It's hard to want to read any of these topics...frus)

I agree

I have thought for a long time that just a two way radio with speaker attached to the collar could work for my dogs when they are out of shouting range to keep them out of trouble. Why shock them when one could just talk them out of what ever they are doing, or advise them to do something different. They have learned that certain profanity can have a dire result and are quick to pay attention that is when within shouting range.

[Mandragen]

I'd love to zap the sh*t out of my gos sometimes...but that really only has to do with a level of relief or satisfaction for myself...:Dtoungeout

An e-collar on a dog is just a tool in the tool box. If it works to achieve MY goals with the dog, that's fine for me. I've had many occasions in the field where my dog was out of vocal range and getting into trouble and the e-collar provides a way to communicate. How much experience do some of you have running say pointing dogs in open country? There are circumstances that arise that are WAY out of your control, if you mitigate for all of those, you'd never leave the house.

Why do these discussions always degrade into those of you with a very in depth understanding telling everyone else what's right and wrong? It's hard to want to read any of these topics...frus)

This is an excellent post for many reasons. First off, there are many individuals that I would love to shock as well, there is satisfaction there.

An e-collar is another tool, and I've stated in another thread that you can never had too many tools in your tool box when it comes to training. I don' thave any experience in running pointing dogs in open country, although it something that I would love to learn more about. Do I think it can be done without the collar, absolutely, but that's the difference in your training and mine. As far as circumstances that are way out of my control, I'm sure I've seen a few.

I don't think this discussion has degraded, it's still an excellent discussion. I also didn't see anyone telling anyone that what they were doing was wrong. I've used punishers with my dog, not the collar, but he get's a nice push off the couch when I catch him sleeping on it in the morning (he's not allowed on the couch). When riding horses it's as simple as using the reins, that simple tug or pressure is a punisher by definition. You get the horse to move by adding an unwanted pressure to get the desired response.

[RyanVZ]

Why do these discussions always degrade into those of you with a very in depth understanding telling everyone else what's right and wrong? It's hard to want to read any of these topics...frus)

I agree with you here Jeff. I consider myself "in the know" on this topic. Notice how a few were jumped all over and then no one else weighed in.

I have been professionally training animals long enough now to realize that it is an art, as much as a science. Shoot in the last year I've been informed by a psych professor, who is on this forum, that OC is out dated and discounted in a lot of psych these days in favor of more modern thoughts on learning. I use and have used "clicker training" techniques every single day for over 15 years now. I know the advantages and the disadvantages.

How many of those giving the advice though have had a dog running for the highway, full speed chasing a jack rabbit, with 30 mph hour winds and is a 1/4 mile away. How are you going to stop that dog? Yell at it, whistle, air horn, push it off the couch? The E-collar will stop that dog. There are practical applications for everything.

I got spanked as a kid. Not beaten but a swat on the butt and I turned out fine, with my kids they get rewards for good behavior and time outs, time ins, love and logic, etc and never a swat. Yet they do the same things I did as a kid, and get in trouble no more or no less.

The point is the longer I train animals, people, etc, the more new best-est training studies come out, and the more I realize that training comes down to what you are comfortable with and what works for you.

There will always be some that are good at training and some that aren't, and of the ones that are good; some are naturals and some must be taught.

So to answer the question of the thread....yes people have thought to use an e-collar on birds, I dont think anyone has actually done it. Its effectiveness on training birds I feel would be low. Dogs have been bred for thousands of years to bend to our will. Raptors are mainly working with us for an easy meal, a shock or two and they might just prefer to work a little harder to hunt on their own.

[outhawkn]

clapp This is precisely how I use an e-collar with my dogs. An e-collar is a tool I use for a short period of time in training. The e-collar is valuable in helping "generalize" a known cue and bring it under better stimulus control. George Hickox calls it contrast training and is a master at this. I don't know if I will explain it well, but here is the premise...

You use a CR (clicker) and rewards to teach a desired behavior. Once the dog is offering the behavior consistently you overlay a cue. At that point you begin only CRing and rewarding the behavior when the cue is given. When the dog will give the desired behavior on cue 80% of the time, you can move on to generalizing the cue. This is where the e-collar comes in. This also assumes you have gone through a process to teach the dog how to turn off the collar and that the dog has received some other form of negative reinforcement other than the collar (i.e. a bonker). You give the known cue to the dog. If the dog offers the behavior you click and reward. If the dog does not offer the behavior you give a different Marker Signal (One that will always precede the negative reinforcement) and the give the negative reinforcement. The trick to this working is the use of the Marker Signal preceding the negative. Because the dog understands the positive marker, they quickly understand the negative Marker Signal. Another key is that if the negative marker is given it is ALWAYS followed by a negative. Since a variable schedule reinforces a behavior (either positive or negative) you want to be consistent and always follow the Negative Marker with the negative. Otherwise, this is how a "collar wise" (or really "Correction wise") dogs is created.

What happens is the dog quickly learns that when the know cue is given, if it complies, it gets a reward. If not, it is notified with a Negative Marker and then a negative. The collar is used to teach the dog that if it does anything other than offer the desired cue, it will be given a negative. VERY quickly you see the dog offer the behavior when the first sound of the Negative Marker is given. The temptation is once the dog starts offering the behavior in response to the Negative Marker to not follow up with the actual negative. If you are consistent and give the negative anytime the Negative Marker is given, you will soon not need the negative or the negative marker. The dog will offer the behavior on cue in very demanding situations with lots of distractions.

This method works great. I've seen it work on very soft dogs and on very stubborn dogs. The e-collar is just a tool in one's training bag. It is a way to get a behavior very reliable in a relatively short period of time without putting a lot of force or pressure on the dog.

I should also mention that when I use the e-collar I use VERY LOW levels of stimulation. I go through a process of collar conditioning that teaches the dog how to turn off the collar and what the Negative Marker is. In 1-2 short sessions the dog is responding to stimulation so low that I am unable or barely able to feel it on my hands at that level. Once I took my my hardest headed wirehair through this process, he responded to a correction level of 10 out of 50 on my collar. I can't feel the stimulation on my hand until it gets to six. My current female wirehair that passed her NAVHDA Utility test with a 192 out of 204 possible points was trained with a correction level of 6.

I agree and this is where I was going. I've attended Georges training seminars in the past and I personally dont see any damage being done to the dog. An example would be my dog gets up in the early morning and lies down in the sun. Ahhh... nice warm sun. Then the sun gets to hot so he moves to the shade. So with all this new age thinking the sun warmth was a punishment....


I'm glad to see many people understand the downfalls of punishment.

First, stopping a behavior is punishment. If you add something aversive to stop the behavior, you are using positive punishment, positive in the mathematical sense (+). Ecollar is positive punishment, no matter how you word it or want to see it.

When you stop using the punishment, you are using negative reinforcement, negative in teh mathematical sense (-), you remove (-) an aversive as a reward. You can use negative reinforcement to reward a behavior: the dog bakrs, he gets zapped which stops the barking, thus it is a positive punishment, then as he stops barking yo stop zapping, earning the dog a negative (-) reinforcement for keeping quiet. So ecollar also brings negative reinforcement, that's the way it works.

Any positive punishment can lead to mental damage, and negative punishment (removing a reward) as well but it takes longer. It does not always happen, for if it did we would never ever use punishment, but the risk is high. What side effects can happen? The strain on the relationship is a very real one, as demonstrated by the policeman analogy. The creation of fears/shyness/agression is a very real one as well. One has to understand, before using any type or strenght of punishment, that animals will try to link the punishment to their environment way before they link it to their behavior. They will take a mental picture of the world around them as they get the punishment, and make associations, then decide later on how they will act toward the things that were in the pictures. They kind of decide that they were zapped because of the things that surrounded them, not because they acted wrong, so they may become fearful/shy of the things they saw in the picture, and even react agressively toward them later on. The fear pathways that are activated in the brain when the animal receives a punishment are impossible to erase; one can ease the fears, but they will come back under stress. And yes, the falconer can very well be part of the picture.

Finally, to be effective, punishment has to be timed perfectly at the precise moment when the animal thinks about acting "wrongly", up to the point where he starts acting. Punishing even a second after the act won't work. Moreover, punishment has to be strong enough not to be used more than once, max 3 times. So before to put the ecollar on an animal, you have to have perfect timing (try throwing a tennis ball in the air and zapping as it stops moving before going down, then zapping as it touches the ground... you'll see our timing is lousy!) and perfect strenght of stimuli to obtain teh desired response. Even when used perfectly, you could still end up with mental damage and unpleasant, long-lasting side-effects. And there is always a way to train the exact same behavior out or in an animal without the use of any aversive. Always.

Why do people like using punishment? A british study showed that, unbeknownst to the punisher, the pleasure pathways in the brain are strongly activated when the punisher delivers a punishment for a behavior he deemed wrong. Delivering a "deserved" punishment brings a very strong positive reinforcement to the punisher, regardless of the result of the punishment, weither it worked in preventing the occurence of the punished behavior or not. The pleasure pathways can then build shortcuts that will activate at a hairtrigger, thus being even more reinforcing. The neurotransmitters used in this pathway also have a very strong addictive effect, they act like a drug would act and one will want to experience the feeling again. Those are some reasons why we, as human beings, have the reflex to punish, not to reinforce, and we have to train ourselves to become positive trainers...

I'm sorry and I'll leave this conversation before it gets too silly, but this is some far out ideas being thrown around as truth. G'day ya'll....

[Pedioecetes]

I use an ecollar to reach out to stop dangerous activity, such as chasing deer, antelope, livestock, jackrabbits, coyotes or to turn them back from a dangerous place like other hunters in the field, a road or just heading out and potentially going over a hill or ridge too far away from me for them to notice a command or whistle. I also setup all my dogs on porkies and skunks and shock them hard when they go in on them. Pulling a hundred quills out of a dog an hour away from a vet is no fun for the dog, or me. My local vet is a gal raised on a cattle ranch by a bird dog hunting father and her common sense advice and care of my dogs is wonderful. I live on a working farm where we have horses, cattle, chickens, etc. My dogs do chores with me and are familiar with all these critters in their lives, and quickly learn not to chase or harass them. Out on the wide open prairie, which is quite hilly where I live, there are lots of temptations and good bird dogs will all chase stuff that runs from them when they are young. A little electricity goes a long way out here and saves untold grief, PROPERLY USED. I don't use ecollars at all when training a dog, but they have one on every day in the hunting field. I would guess they get a "shot" a couple times a year on average, but I know those are times when they are definitely in danger, and nothing else will reach them. I think a big problem with ecollars are situations where the human is in a position of anger. It would be nice if all the circumstances we find ourselves in were perfect, but when they are not the ecollar can be of immense benefit. Like Tom Smith mentioned, I test the collar on my hand to see what it is capable of. My Tritronics Pro 100 gave me a huge surprise when I first got it and gave myself a 1/8th second "tap"!!!

[EAZFalconer]

Negative stimuli are used on raptors. I read on this forum not too long ago about someone using chili peppers to get a bird to not take a certain prey species. It was claimed to work. What is the difference?

[Heatherg]

I have to admitt I have been watching this thread evolve, and waiting for the right moment to post....just wanted to see what was going to happen...i guess morbid curiosity.
I TOTALLY agree with Jeff and Jeff and Bill!!!! I have been working with and selling E-collars for awhile now. Like most have said they are a GREAT tool in ones tool box....when used APPROPRIATELY!!!!!!! I have seen the negative effects in dogs when they were not used correctly, but have also seen those same dogs come around and be VERY comfortable with the use of a collar. I can say that while working at a training kennel we worked with 100's of dogs that returned year after year, and never showed negative attitudes with the collar. My own personal dog for instance runs to me as soon as he sees the collar....he associates it with something FUN and GOOD!!!! Thats the way it was meant to work!!!!
I respect Audry and those others that have voiced their opinion of not wanting to use the e-collars, to each their own. But, I have come to see e-collars as an invaluable and versatile tool and wont be giving them up any time soon.
As to the actual reason for this thread....not on birds...not a good idea!

[BestBeagler]

Negative stimuli are used on raptors. I read on this forum not too long ago about someone using chili peppers to get a bird to not take a certain prey species. It was claimed to work. What is the difference?

Or how about it being used on an imprint that you want to release?

[rkumetz]

I have to admitt I have been watching this thread evolve, and waiting for the right moment to post....just wanted to see what was going to happen...i guess morbid curiosity.
I TOTALLY agree with Jeff and Jeff and Bill!!!! I have been working with and selling E-collars for awhile now. Like most have said they are a GREAT tool in ones tool box....when used APPROPRIATELY!!!!!!! I have seen the negative effects in dogs when they were not used correctly, but have also seen those same dogs come around and be VERY comfortable with the use of a collar. I can say that while working at a training kennel we worked with 100's of dogs that returned year after year, and never showed negative attitudes with the collar. My own personal dog for instance runs to me as soon as he sees the collar....he associates it with something FUN and GOOD!!!! Thats the way it was meant to work!!!!
I respect Audry and those others that have voiced their opinion of not wanting to use the e-collars, to each their own. But, I have come to see e-collars as an invaluable and versatile tool and wont be giving them up any time soon.
As to the actual reason for this thread....not on birds...not a good idea!

This post and a few earlier posts hit the point. The question was with regard to using a collar-like contraption on a bird not about using collars on dogs. Just because we disagree doesn't mean that the conversation has degraded. As long as we are not calling each other idiots and being juvenile some spirited debate is how new ideas are explored.

I completely agree that "zapping" your dog to avoid having him run over by a truck in the future is probably a good idea and in comparison to having your dog end up a tripod (or worse) a pretty humane idea as well.

But I still haven't seen an explanation of how to use a collar like device to motivate a falconry bird. ...........

[goshawkr]

Negative stimuli are used on raptors. I read on this forum not too long ago about someone using chili peppers to get a bird to not take a certain prey species. It was claimed to work. What is the difference?

Really? I dont doubt that makeing somthing distastefull will work to that end, but I do have serious doubts taht chili peppers would do the trick. My understanding is that birds completely lack the receptors to percieve capacian (the chemical that makes peppers "hot"). A pepper with enough capacian to cause a mamamal to choke and die wouldnt even be noticed by a bird.

[Mandragen]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin


Natural function
Capsaicin is present in large quantities in the placental tissue (which holds the seeds), the internal membranes and, to a lesser extent, the other fleshy parts of the fruits (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit) of plants in the genus Capsicum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsicum). The seeds themselves do not produce any capsaicin, although the highest concentration of capsaicin can be found in the white pith of the inner wall, where the seeds are attached.[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-20)
The seeds of Capsicum plants are predominantly dispersed by birds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird). Birds do not have the receptor to which capsaicin binds, so it does not function as an irritant for them. Chili pepper seeds consumed by birds pass through the digestive tract and can germinate later, but mammals have molars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molars), which destroy seeds and prevent them from germinating. Thus, natural selection may have led to increasing capsaicin production because it makes the plant less likely to be eaten by animals that do not help it reproduce.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-21) There is also evidence that capsaicin evolved as an anti-fungal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-fungal) agent,[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-totn-0) and capsaicinoids are broadly anti-microbial.[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-22)
In 2006, it was discovered that tarantula (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarantula) venom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venom) activates the same pathway of pain as is activated by capsaicin, the first demonstrated case of such a shared pathway in both plant and animal anti-mammal defense.[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-23)

Pest deterrent
Capsaicin is also used to deter mammalian pests. A common example is the use of ground-up or crushed dried chili pods in birdseed to deter squirrels,[51] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-50) since birds are unaffected by capsaicin. Another example is the use of chili peppers by the Elephant Pepper Development Trust (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_Pepper_Development_Trust) to improve crop security for rural communities in Africa.
Although hot chili pepper extract is commonly used as a component of household and garden insect repellent formulas, it is not clear that the capsaicinoid elements of the extract are responsible for its repellency.[52] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-pmid17090499-51)
There are manufacturers that do sell a capsaicin-based gel product that is reported to be a feral-pigeon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_pigeon) (Columba livia) deterrent from specific roosting and loafing areas. Some of these products do have an EPA label and NSF approval.

that last part looks interesting enough though...

[goshawkr]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin


Natural function
Capsaicin is present in large quantities in the placental tissue (which holds the seeds), the internal membranes and, to a lesser extent, the other fleshy parts of the fruits (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit) of plants in the genus Capsicum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsicum). The seeds themselves do not produce any capsaicin, although the highest concentration of capsaicin can be found in the white pith of the inner wall, where the seeds are attached.[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-20)
The seeds of Capsicum plants are predominantly dispersed by birds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird). Birds do not have the receptor to which capsaicin binds, so it does not function as an irritant for them. Chili pepper seeds consumed by birds pass through the digestive tract and can germinate later, but mammals have molars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molars), which destroy seeds and prevent them from germinating. Thus, natural selection may have led to increasing capsaicin production because it makes the plant less likely to be eaten by animals that do not help it reproduce.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-21) There is also evidence that capsaicin evolved as an anti-fungal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-fungal) agent,[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-totn-0) and capsaicinoids are broadly anti-microbial.[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-22)
In 2006, it was discovered that tarantula (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarantula) venom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venom) activates the same pathway of pain as is activated by capsaicin, the first demonstrated case of such a shared pathway in both plant and animal anti-mammal defense.[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-23)

Pest deterrent
Capsaicin is also used to deter mammalian pests. A common example is the use of ground-up or crushed dried chili pods in birdseed to deter squirrels,[51] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-50) since birds are unaffected by capsaicin. Another example is the use of chili peppers by the Elephant Pepper Development Trust (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_Pepper_Development_Trust) to improve crop security for rural communities in Africa.
Although hot chili pepper extract is commonly used as a component of household and garden insect repellent formulas, it is not clear that the capsaicinoid elements of the extract are responsible for its repellency.[52] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#cite_note-pmid17090499-51)
There are manufacturers that do sell a capsaicin-based gel product that is reported to be a feral-pigeon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_pigeon) (Columba livia) deterrent from specific roosting and loafing areas. Some of these products do have an EPA label and NSF approval.

that last part looks interesting enough though...

Yes it does. Now it leads the skeptic in me to wonder if it works, or if its hype. There are no end of products sold with very convincing labeling that are completely uneffective.

Its also possible that the example mentioned of putting chilis on a hawks food detered it from catching that item again because the hawk thought it tasted foul, but my scientific skepticism needs some coaxing to swallow it.

I certainly believe that a falconer swore by its effectiveness - just have my doubts that it actually was.

[Mandragen]

Yes it does. Now it leads the skeptic in me to wonder if it works, or if its hype. There are no end of products sold with very convincing labeling that are completely uneffective.

Its also possible that the example mentioned of putting chilis on a hawks food detered it from catching that item again because the hawk thought it tasted foul, but my scientific skepticism needs some coaxing to swallow it.

I certainly believe that a falconer swore by its effectiveness - just have my doubts that it actually was.

I'm with you there

[Tom Smith]

I'm with you there

Not to get to far off topic here but we were just removing an air conditioner for winterization when we found a huge Lady Bug roost and they have an unpleasant smell and I understand that they taste really bad to birds, so I wonder if a potent made from an extract of Lady Bugs could be a bird deterrent and effective on say feral pigeons or starlings in a feed lot providing that they aren't also toxic. Maybe they could achieve the same effect in discouraging a raptor of pursuing a particular quarry if that was desirable.

Some of my birds have quit certain quarries on having tasted them. Like magpies must have an unpleasant taste, but I have seen wild hawks eating them but not to often and my own birds have turned them down after a bite or two. (back when they were unprotected)

[goshawkr]

I'm glad to see many people understand the downfalls of punishment.

I'd also like to point out that many people would also point out the downfalls of using positive reinforcement - and there are MANY if its not properly used. For example, its very easy for your subject to become "spoiled" where it will not perform without being bribed.

Its pretty common to view training using aversives/punishment as being "ignorant" or "backwards", especially be adherants to positive methods like OC. Thats a gross mistake. Thats not to say that they are not fraught with problems, were never misused, etc etc. But they did NOT arrise out of ignorance.



Finally, to be effective, punishment has to be timed perfectly at the precise moment when the animal thinks about acting "wrongly", up to the point where he starts acting.

Timing is important. Just as important with punishement as it is with using a reward, and for exaclty the same reasons. The real trick with both punishment and with reward is getting the subject to draw the link between the stimulant being delivered (reward/punishment) and the reason for that being delivered.

When my daughter gets out of line, I can sit her down and have a detailed discussion as to why I am taking her cell phone away, and she will make the link. I can also tell her why I am giving her a bonus with her allowance this week.

With my hawk/dog - all I can do is give the stimulant (positive or negative) and hope they make the link. I can often deliever while they are thinking about acting adn before they actually do act, but that dosnt assure they will link cause and effect.

Also, its quite possible for the link to be made even if you completely miss your timing, but the odds go way down. This is equally true of punishment as it is of reward.



And there is always a way to train the exact same behavior out or in an animal without the use of any aversive. Always.

While that may absolutely be true, the ammount of effort it takes to get the message through via positive means may be overwhelming whereas just a simple "slap" of punishment may get the point across loud and clear in an instant.


Why do people like using punishment? A british study showed that, unbeknownst to the punisher, the pleasure pathways in the brain are strongly activated when the punisher delivers a punishment for a behavior he deemed wrong. Delivering a "deserved" punishment brings a very strong positive reinforcement to the punisher, regardless of the result of the punishment, weither it worked in preventing the occurence of the punished behavior or not. The pleasure pathways can then build shortcuts that will activate at a hairtrigger, thus being even more reinforcing. The neurotransmitters used in this pathway also have a very strong addictive effect, they act like a drug would act and one will want to experience the feeling again. Those are some reasons why we, as human beings, have the reflex to punish, not to reinforce, and we have to train ourselves to become positive trainers...

I believe there is something really deep seated here - something we shaer with other species, even those that we view as "non social", including raptors.

I have seen dogs "punish" dogs that they thought were getting away with something, that they thought were acting "wrong." Sadly, its gunna be a tough one to demonstrate experimentally.

Regardless - your right on the money here Audrey. We Do have some strong biological urges to punish, and they are heavily reinforced. Its important to remember to temper that.

I think thats one reason why shock collars have gotten such a bad rap - its so very easy to over use them, and very rewarding (for the biological reasons you mentioned) to do so.

[keitht]

I use and have used e-collars for many years and would not want to be without one. Like almost anything, they can easily be misused. What many people do not realize is that dogs have to be trained to an e-collar. The e-collars that I use have the vibrate function and I can tell you that a dog that is trained well to the collar can be controlled with nothing more than the vibrate function. My dogs will stop doing whatever it is they are doing and head straight for me for instruction anytime they detect the vibration. That to me seems much more humane than the many dogs I have seen with owners who scream and loose their tempers because their dog will not do as the owner wanted. To my eye, these dogs and their owners seem out of control. An e-collar is not the only way to achieve the goal, but it is an excellent way if one chooses to do it right.

I have an old long retired bird dog that went deaf years ago. I also have an old retired e-collar that nothing works on but the vibrate function. I put the worn out collar on the worn out dog and after the old dog has had its run and feels the vibrate, it runs on back home for its meal.

Perhaps when I get too old and worn the kids will put the vibrate collar on me and let me have a nice walk outside every now and then.

Hawks are very different from dogs and will not respond in the same way to the same stimuli.

[Icantmove]

Possible transformer deterrent? Just a thought ...

[RyanVZ]

Hypothetically, shocking a bird to stop screaming or prevent landing could work. Birds of prey definitely understand punishment. Fledgling Peregrines fly around begging from their parents. This is tolerated for a time but eventually the parents decide they are done caring for their babies and will stoop them knocking the snot outta those juvies until they are quiet or leave. If a young eagle wonders into the territory of an adult pair, they are not very nice in how they get rid of that intruder. Hawks will crab and harass one another until one gives up it's prey and flies off.

Most of these punishments result in the bird flying away or off though, not something that we want our birds to do. I'm not advocating punishment as a training method for birds of prey, and I do not use use it, shoot I don't even man birds, but I do take into consideration that animals, including raptors, do use punishment as a form of leaning in the wild. There are many ways to do things, falconry is a great example of that. 10 different falconers can do things 10 different ways and all have healthy birds, catch the same amount of the same quarry, great manners, quiet, perfect birds. The biggest problem is that all 10 of those falconers think that their way is best. toungeout

[andy hall]

Hypothetically, shocking a bird to stop screaming or prevent landing could work. Birds of prey definitely understand punishment.

Gosh Ryan, and I thought they were totally different than every other creature on Earth, lol toungeout:D

Andy

[Mandragen]

I use and have used e-collars for many years and would not want to be without one. Like almost anything, they can easily be misused. What many people do not realize is that dogs have to be trained to an e-collar. The e-collars that I use have the vibrate function and I can tell you that a dog that is trained well to the collar can be controlled with nothing more than the vibrate function. My dogs will stop doing whatever it is they are doing and head straight for me for instruction anytime they detect the vibration. That to me seems much more humane than the many dogs I have seen with owners who scream and loose their tempers because their dog will not do as the owner wanted. To my eye, these dogs and their owners seem out of control. An e-collar is not the only way to achieve the goal, but it is an excellent way if one chooses to do it right.

I have an old long retired bird dog that went deaf years ago. I also have an old retired e-collar that nothing works on but the vibrate function. I put the worn out collar on the worn out dog and after the old dog has had its run and feels the vibrate, it runs on back home for its meal.

Perhaps when I get too old and worn the kids will put the vibrate collar on me and let me have a nice walk outside every now and then.

Hawks are very different from dogs and will not respond in the same way to the same stimuli.

This is an excellent example Keith! You have simply trained a recall, and sounds like something that I might actually try. Maybe I can get Heather to give me a discount on one of her e-collars! clapp

[Pedioecetes]

Keith,
Very well put. I have maintained for a long time that a little electricity well used goes a long way. I never give my dogs commands in the field other than to call them in. I am amazed how many dog people keep a constant barrage of loud commands going while working their dogs. I suspect a lot of those dogs are not allowed to do their assigned jobs by their own wisdom. The ecollar with the vibrate or tone buttons are the best communication tool for in the field hawking. Where I live the country is wide open and the game gets very jumpy and wild. To me the sound of the prairie is wrecked by shouting, and sometimes angry dog handlers. I have used Gordon Setters since the mid-eighties and they just fit in with what I do. Even here I see no point in a dog hunting as far away as it can get, a hundred yards of range by a dog that always wants to know where you are works just fine. Even when they know the game the ecollar keeps them honest and works in silence.

[gratefool1]

When i was a kid in school, I would get a bit buried in the subject of the moment, especially math. The teacher may have moved on to something else, but I was still deeply concentrating on my math text. She would come up behind me, smile and gently tap me on the shoulder and say "Ab, we are moving on to social studies now. It is time to put up the math book and open up social studies."

I didn't see the tap as a punishment, just a way of gently getting my attention so that I could get back on track with the rest of class.

Now if I had been one of the disruptive kids, I am sure something more akin to punishment might have been used, but it wasn't. So I guess what I am saying is that maybe not all tactile stimulation to correct behavior need necessarily be construed as "punishment".

[EAZFalconer]

http://i776.photobucket.com/albums/yy48/Cobus_photos/utf-8BSU1HLTIwMTExMjAzLTAwNzgyLmpwZw.jpg

I love my collar. So many uses.:D

[wilkiesc]

I have been professionally training animals long enough now to realize that it is an art, as much as a science. Shoot in the last year I've been informed by a psych professor, who is on this forum, that OC is out dated and discounted in a lot of psych these days in favor of more modern thoughts on learning.

I am not a psych professional and certainly cannot contradict a professor of psychology, but I can definitely add that OC is still utilized in neurobiology. I agree with most of what Kitana said based on neurobiological pathways. I do think that there is one useful tidbit that I can add to this great topic - some critique is necessary for a "healthy" system. Criticism is necessary to continue improving knowledge and technology. I am not saying that there is a better method. Quite honestly, I do not know. But remember that these critiques may some day end up benefiting your bird.

I think that becoming educated in the respective area and making sensical decisions based on what you have learned is still the best practice. Considering these critiques can only strengthen and improve your knowledge in the area, right? If, after all of that you feel the same way, continue using what you think is best.

The latter part of the post was in reference to the people that grew frustrated with the discussion. I don't know how to quote from different posts in one reply. Apologies.

[grimmy440]

in my mind, birds of pray are much more intelligent, and more capable of reason, than dogs. unless you are going to leave the ecollar or ebackpack on at all times, the bird could come to associate you attaching it with the negative stemuli. it may even become severe enough that you couldn't attach telemetry or any other equipment.
just some food for thought

[awleaphart]

I use them on my Feist,
They work well on a dog. Some have a beep for the page. The one I have vibrate. Im training a new dog right now and only use the vibrate on the collar and it has been working great. I main use it for the Come here command. After about 6 months you don't even need the collar any more.
Anthony

[Captain Gizmo]

Dogs and hairless monkeys are pack animals. A combination of negative and positive reinforcement works in a social context. Humans have a fair instinctive understanding of the workings of the dog mind. Even with pack animals behaviors ingrained by positive reinforcement have a slower extinction rate than behaviors generated with negative reinforcement.

Hawks are essentially solitary animals. They have enough forward planning capability to recognize a cue signalling a delayed reward from a behavior. Their ability to link a negative reinforcement is very limited. By and large the negative reinforcement must be very immediate and have no social context to be effective.