Would you say something?

DBB

fatmammycat wrote: »

I think it was Tyler Muto who recently wrote a piece that some purely positive trainers would rather see dogs put to sleep than 'suffer' some adverse training. It's that kind of nonsense that completely undermines +p training.

And it's that kind of nonsense assumption that many, many "traditional" trainers, and people like Muto who train dogs using prong collars and e-collars, who base their approach to training on supposition and hunches, spout to try to discredit "positive" trainers... There is no such thing as an entirely positive trainer. The difference is that "positive" trainers put great consideration and emphasis into the level of aversiveness that correction of unwanted behaviour has, and use forms of corrections that are deemed to be physically and psychologically non-harmful by human and animal behavioural scientists.
Muto bases his suppositions about dog training on the horsey equivalent used by the Parellis, which itself has been under fire by horse behavioural specialists due to ethical concerns for some years now... I know I've watched vids of the Parellis correcting unwanted equine behaviours which left me feeling as chilled and disbelieving as any episode of the Dog Whisperer.
I find the link you provide, presumably in support of your assertions about prong collars, almost amusing... The number of warnings, terms and conditions attached to using them reminds me of a Cesar Milan episode!

Mark Tapley

Rochelle wrote: »

I had to google prong collar as I never heard of them...wow...it's exactly what I'm looking for, my lad has the arm pulled off me when I take him walking.

Just ordered one there now, thanks OP.

I see from your posts you are trying to wind people up. Have you nothing better to do.

fatmammycat

DBB wrote: »

And it's that kind of nonsense assumption that many, many "traditional" trainers, and people like Muto who train dogs using prong collars and e-collars, who base their approach to training on supposition and hunches, spout to try to discredit "positive" trainers... There is no such thing as an entirely positive trainer. The difference is that "positive" trainers put great consideration and emphasis into the level of aversiveness that correction of unwanted behaviour has, and use forms of corrections that are deemed to be physically and psychologically non-harmful by human and animal behavioural scientists.
Muto bases his suppositions about dog training on the horsey equivalent used by the Parellis, which itself has been under fire by horse behavioural specialists due to ethical concerns for some years now... I know I've watched vids of the Parellis correcting unwanted equine behaviours which left me feeling as chilled and disbelieving as any episode of the Dog Whisperer.
I find the link you provide, presumably in support of your assertions about prong collars, almost amusing... The number of warnings, terms and conditions attached to using them reminds me of a Cesar Milan episode!

I don't base all my thinking on Tyler Muto, but on a number of trainers. And, as I've said from the start, from reading, listening and talking to people more experienced than I am I have formed my own conclusion. I respect the work positive trainers do, always have always will, use it myself, but I also fully understand that there is no one size fits all approach to dog training.
Anyway, I'm going in circles here. Out.

muddypaws

fatmammycat wrote: »

As I said, no one is TELLING you what way to train your dog. Train as you see fit, but be aware that other people train differently and it doesn't make them wrong. As for sneering at Muto, oh well, he's not for everyone, but I like his balanced approach and he has helped a lot of dogs who were heading for death's door.

So have I and other trainers, without having to resort to those aversive methods. We'll have to agree to disagree about what a balanced approach is.

Sorry that you think I was sneering, I thought that you wanted a discussion, you said earlier that people who are against aversive tools won't discuss. Maybe watch the link I posted, and then we have a chat about how stressed that dog is, and whether that really is the best way to train him/her? To me, stressing a dog out like while training is wrong, just as tying someone's arm behind their back to force them to use their right hand, because they are naturally left handed is wrong. Society has moved on from those kind of aversive methods with humans, I would like us to move away with animals as well.

andreac

Started watching that link muddypaws but had to turn it off, poor dog :-(

snoman

DBB wrote: »

There is no such thing as an entirely positive trainer. The difference is that "positive" trainers put great consideration and emphasis into the level of aversiveness that correction of unwanted behaviour has, and use forms of corrections that are deemed to be physically and psychologically non-harmful by human and animal behavioural scientists.

So how do positive trainers assess the level of aversiveness required, and what type of methods would they use?

DBB

fatmammycat wrote: »

I respect the work positive trainers do, always have always will, use it myself, but I also fully understand that there is no one size fits all approach to dog training.

And again, this common misconception that positive trainers have a "one size fits all" approach. Simply not true. All good "positive" trainers have a lot of alternatives in their stash of techniques, and are trained to evaluate and critique ALL forms of training, choosing preferred options based on having been trained in finding the balance between learning theory, and ethical dog handling.
"Positive" trainers are not robots, you'll rarely find two who'll use precisely the same techniques. But the one thing that they all embrace, is to do no harm.
Using unnecessary aversion, just as Muto is doing in that video, is unacceptable.
What he, an untrained, hunch-based trainer calls the dog "getting his own way", is actually pretty much the complete opposite. It's called Learned Helplessness. Look it up... Not nice. And that's why hunch trainers like him who use aversive gear are so dangerous... They misdiagnose problems, which means that they have to force their "cure" on the dog.

snoman

DBB wrote: »

And again, this common misconception that positive trainers have a "one size fits all" approach. Simply not true. All good "positive" trainers have a lot of alternatives in their stash of techniques, and are trained to evaluate and critique ALL forms of training, choosing preferred options based on having been trained in finding the balance between learning theory, and ethical dog handling.
"Positive" trainers are not robots, you'll rarely find two who'll use precisely the same techniques. But the one thing that they all embrace, is to do no harm.
Using unnecessary aversion, just as Muto is doing in that video, is unacceptable.
What he, an untrained, hunch-based trainer calls the dog "getting his own way", is actually pretty much the complete opposite. It's called Learned Helplessness. Look it up... Not nice. And that's why hunch trainers like him who use aversive gear are so dangerous... They misdiagnose problems, which means that they have to force their "cure" on the dog.

So is it that 'positive' trainers may use aversiveness techniques, but that because they have been trained they would understand the best method and type to use in each situation, and that these would be specific to each trainer?

Raminahobbin

andreac wrote: »

Started watching that link muddypaws but had to turn it off, poor dog :-(

Me too

The poor thing looks so stressed and confused

DBB

snoman wrote: »

So how do positive trainers assess the level of aversiveness required, and what type of methods would they use?

The first thing a "positive" trainer won't use is physical pain or discomfort. They will assess each dog whilst they're working with them to appraise the level of psychological stress the dog may be feeling, and keep it below an acceptable level by taking the dog away from the stressor(s), and finding another way to expose the dog to stressful things in a slower, more gradual, less stressful way.
Whilst a small amount of stress can promote learning, too much stress is the direct enemy of learning, and so trying to continue to teach an over-stressed dog is (a) ineffective, and (b) cruel. Each dog has different levels of tolerance, just like we do, which is why good trainers will adapt to suit each dog.
How do we know a dog is becoming too stressed? There's a suite of signs, many of which are nicely illustrated in the video the muddypaws linked to, such as heavy panting, bulging eyes, glancing repeatedly at the trainer, learned helplessness... But to a positive trainer, these show that the dog has gone considerably further into the stress zone than a positive trainer should allow.
For me, it's when the dog starts to lose concentration, and can't be readily lured back to concentrate on his training using something he loves, like food, or a toy, because he's concentrating too hard on his more immediate problem... Proximity to the stressor. Once the dog has got to this stage, which compared to the above is mild, the learning we want him to do is grinding to a halt, and training needs to stop until a more acceptable alternative is found.
So, when dealing with serious emotional problems, a program of slowly desensitising the dog to the stressor(s) is used (called systematic desensitisation), alongside use of positive reinforcement for nice, calm behaviours (called counter-conditioning and response substitution). No punishment should be used for dogs with serious emotional issues as they've enough to be stressed about as it is, it's a long slog to do it humanely, but is without doubt the most effective.
For unwanted behaviours such as attention-seeking stuff, or chewing, mouthing, barking and a whole range of other problems that are not rooted in serious emotional imbalance, then withholding treasured resources is great (particularly for attention-seeking behaviours), and for more serious breaches, calmly executed Time-Outs are excellent.
Of course, all need to be used with consistency and patience, all too often people try these things for a few days, then soften their resolve and allow bad habits to creep back in.
So, to summarise!
For emotional, behavioural problems, you're usually looking at Systematic Desensitisation, Counter Conditioning and Response Substitution.
For more every day breaches of boundaries and naughtiness, it's controlling the reward until desired behaviour happens, and Time-Outs.
Oftentimes, depending on the severity or motivation behind the behaviour, the trainer can use a combination of all of these to address an unwanted behaviour.
These are listed by human (and animal) behavioural scientists as being acceptably humane methods to effectively correct unwanted behaviours.
I hope that answers your question!

DBB

snoman wrote: »

So is it that 'positive' trainers may use aversiveness techniques, but that because they have been trained they would understand the best method and type to use in each situation, and that these would be specific to each trainer?

As per my post above, they will use mild aversion, because it's pretty much impossible to stop a dog continuing with an unwanted behaviour without giving him some sense of "damn... I shouldn't have tried that".
The world isn't always a perfectly positive place, for animals to learn not to do something, they've got to learn that doing it brings no reward, or a mildly aversive consequence. As Prof Peter Neville of COAPE says, "into each life, a little sh1t must fall" :-)
The critical thing is that the level of aversion used does not stress the dog beyond his capacity to learn quickly. This is vital, and it is the difference between positive trainers and traditional trainers.
As a general rule, the aversion used by positive trainers is to temporarily deprive the dog of something he wants. However, if any technique used in doing so was to cause the dog stress, it should be stopped and a less stressful alternative found for that dog. Any aversion must, must, must be supported by reinforcement when the dog gets it right... It's vital. Traditional trainers tend to use this as a crutch to make using serious aversives okay and call themselves "positive trainers", but I've said it here before... A real "positive" trainer is differentiated from others by the way they deal with unwanted behaviours.
As I said above, the acceptable, ethical techniques to be used as aversives are well-documented, and positive trainers shouldn't stray from them.

Irishchick

andreac wrote: »

Started watching that link muddypaws but had to turn it off, poor dog :-(

Same. It's clear to see that he is stressed / afraid.

sillysmiles

OK I got up to 2 mins 50 in that video. As soon as the dog moved towards him, why didn't he encourage/reward?

Surely, what he was trying to do he could have done without a prong collar?

Whispered

I honestly think that when people try to disparage force free trainers with "oh well I'm not a one size fits all trainer" it shows a gap in their understanding of how these trainers work. I think the best trainers are always changing their methods and learning new ways of doing things because no two scenarios are exactly the same.

On the other hand, there is no doubt that an aversive can work, but at what cost to the dog (and potentially other people/pets) if things go badly wrong?

Ashbx

I think the OP should stay out of it to be honest. If they are genuinely concerned, call the DSPCA and let them deal with it. I personally would never use a prong collar however, I would NEVER judge someone who does! OP, you don't know what this dog is like! My dog (who is a border terrier) is one of the worst pullers I have come across. I have tried haltis, harnesses, different collars, training techniques, calming the dog before I leave, backpacks...the list is endless but not once have I had a walk with her where she doesn't pull!!

If prong collars were cruel, pet shops wouldn't sell them....end of story! If used correctly, these collars can be very useful and work very effectively! If someone approached me to tell me not to use a certain collar or harness or whatever the case may be, I would thank them for their opinion (just to be nice) but also ignore it. If you saw a woman who had a young daughter wearing extremely high heels for example, would you go to the mother and tell her that he daughter shouldn't be wearing those heels?....I think not. I do completely understand where you are coming from but I also think you don't know the full story about this dog walker and I think you should keep your opinion to yourself in this instance.

DBB

Ashbx wrote: »

If prong collars were cruel, pet shops wouldn't sell them....end of story! If used correctly, these collars can be very useful and work very effectively!

Hmmm, with all due respect ashbx, your assumption that pet shops wouldn't sell prong collars if they were cruel is very naive.
Pet shops sell choke chains.
Pet shops sell electric shock collars.
Both pieces of gear have been condemned by most of the world's animal welfare groups and dog behavioural groups.
The evidence against them is pretty overwhelming, so much so that e-collars are banned in some countries.
I think it's more relevant to go with what the findings of science and research tell us about the actual level of cruelty, rather than rely on (often) poorly trained shop staff who are there to take your money from you.

Some pet shops sell puppies. This is a practise condemned by all animal welfare groups and behavioural groups worldwide.

Pet shops sell chew treats which dogs have died after eating because they're just not safe. Pet shops sell high-sugar, high-fat dog treats that are bad for dogs' health.

Pet shops sell goldfish in tiny plastic bowls. You'll not find an expert fish keeper who will tell you that this is anything other than cruel.

Many pet shops are indiscriminate about the smallies they sell: guinea pigs, rabbits, hamsters etc, they're sold to whoever pays the money, and we see regular reports here of pregnant animals being sold to unwary buyers, rabbits being sold as guinea pig companions, sociable animals being sold in solitude....the list goes on.

Pet shops sell reptiles to people who have no clue how to look after them.

Pet shops sell birds and reptiles that will probably outlive the purchaser, and in the case of some birds, require a huge commitment to keep them psychologically healthy... But again, you pay your money, you get your bird, no questions asked.

There are some exceptions, but by and large most pet shops are there to make money. What products they sell to achieve a profit is incidental.
To make assumptions like this causes an awful lot of problems across life in many different ways... I would be very careful about making any assumptions of high ethical standards from any business that is driven by profit.

And again the "when used correctly, prong collars work" argument. Why on earth would anyone want to hurt their dog unnecessarily? To simply say "they work", and conveniently ignore the fact that they can't work without causing pain, is absolutely no justification to use them, in this day and age.

tk123

Ashbx wrote: »

If prong collars were cruel, pet shops wouldn't sell them....end of story! .

What pet shop in Ireland have you seen them for sale in?

Ashbx

DBB wrote: »

Hmmm, with all due respect ashbx, your assumption that pet shops wouldn't sell prong collars if they were cruel is very naive.
Pet shops sell choke chains.
Pet shops sell electric shock collars.
Both pieces of gear have been condemned by most of the world's animal welfare groups and dog behavioural groups.
The evidence against them is pretty overwhelming, so much so that e-collars are banned in some countries.
I think it's more relevant to go with what the findings of science and research tell us about the actual level of cruelty, rather than rely on (often) poorly trained shop staff who are there to take your money from you.

Some pet shops sell puppies. This is a practise condemned by all animal welfare groups and behavioural groups worldwide.

Pet shops sell chew treats which dogs have died after eating because they're just not safe. Pet shops sell high-sugar, high-fat dog treats that are bad for dogs' health.

Pet shops sell goldfish in tiny plastic bowls. You'll not find an expert fish keeper who will tell you that this is anything other than cruel.

Many pet shops are indiscriminate about the smallies they sell: guinea pigs, rabbits, hamsters etc, they're sold to whoever pays the money, and we see regular reports here of pregnant animals being sold to unwary buyers, rabbits being sold as guinea pig companions, sociable animals being sold in solitude....the list goes on.

Pet shops sell reptiles to people who have no clue how to look after them.

Pet shops sell birds and reptiles that will probably outlive the purchaser, and in the case of some birds, require a huge commitment to keep them psychologically healthy... But again, you pay your money, you get your bird, no questions asked.

There are some exceptions, but by and large most pet shops are there to make money. What products they sell to achieve a profit is incidental.
To make assumptions like this causes an awful lot of problems across life in many different ways... I would be very careful about making any assumptions of high ethical standards from any business that is driven by profit.

And again the "when used correctly, prong collars work" argument. Why on earth would anyone want to hurt their dog unnecessarily? To simply say "they work", and conveniently ignore the fact that they can't work without causing pain, is absolutely no justification to use them, in this day and age.

Ha, ok point taken! As it happens, I did work in a small family owned petshop for 4 years so I do know a thing or two about pet shops and how they are run. I, for the reasons you mentioned above, do not shop in the likes of Maxi Zoo or Petstop. I shop in small local pet shops. When I worked in the petshop (where I still shop by the way), we were always told to ask the potential customer questions about the animal they were buying. So I think you are now being the naïve one....not all petshops are the same. But this is besides the point!

My "assumptions" do not come from "any business that is driven by profit". For years, I witnessed a very close friend using a prong collar....and still does! I don't agree with it and I would never use one on any of my dogs but it works whether you agree with the method or not! And they have their valid reasons why they use them!

I am not hear to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of prong collars. That's a whole other thread! The OP asked should they say something. And personally, I don't think she should because the OP does not know this owners situation and its only fair if she keeps her opinions to herself.

Ashbx

tk123 wrote: »

What pet shop in Ireland have you seen them for sale in?

I dont know a particular shop because I have no intention of buying one so never looked into it but one small search on google and its pretty apparent you can get them pretty damn easy!!

jimf

I have springers who are feckers for pulling if allowed to develop the habit
I find a very simple solution is to get somebody to walk in front of them and take their ground thus forcing them to walk beside me it requires no intervention from me just a lead long enough to allow a little slack

its probably one of the easiest bad habits to allow a dog develop

tk123

Ashbx wrote: »

I dont know a particular shop because I have no intention of buying one so never looked into it but one small search on google and its pretty apparent you can get them pretty damn easy!!

My point being that they're not afaik as I know sold in pet shops because they're socially unacceptable. Certainly not any pet shops I know of in Dublin or on any of the websites I used.

Ashbx

jimf wrote: »

I have springers who are feckers for pulling if allowed to develop the habit
I find a very simple solution is to get somebody to walk in front of them and take their ground thus forcing them to walk beside me it requires no intervention from me just a lead long enough to allow a little slack

its probably one of the easiest bad habits to allow a dog develop

This sounds like a good idea. Just curious, does it fix the problem once the person is no longer walking infront of them? Or do they just go back to pulling again? I have found many solutions which unfortunately have only been temporary!

jimf

yes it has worked very well for me but it was always at the lead training stage so no bad habit had developed

I cant honestly say how it would work on a dog with an established pulling problem as ive never tried it

maybe try it yourself and see does it help

its one of my pet hates to see people chucking at a dog to try and control it

Ashbx

tk123 wrote: »

My point being that they're not afaik as I know sold in pet shops because they're socially unacceptable. Certainly not any pet shops I know of in Dublin or on any of the websites I used.

I must rub people up the wrong way on this website for some reason!

My opinion about prong collars is EXACTLY the same as yours and DBB's so I really don't understand what the problem is! Yes, I do think they are cruel and would never personally use them but the OP does not know this dog walkers situation so my advice is no, say nothing to the man and leave him be!

Ashbx

jimf wrote: »

yes it has worked very well for me but it was always at the lead training stage so no bad habit had developed

I cant honestly say how it would work on a dog with an established pulling problem as ive never tried it

maybe try it yourself and see does it help

its one of my pet hates to see people chucking at a dog to try and control it

I will indeed. At the moment, I use a combination of a halti, a mikki harness and a backpack depending on where I am bringing her. None of them stop her from pulling but all of them ease the effects on my poor arm!

borderlinemeath

Ashbx wrote: »

When I worked in the petshop (where I still shop by the way), we were always told to ask the potential customer questions about the animal they were buying. So I think you are now being the naïve one....not all petshops are the same.

Are there ethically run, not for profit pet shops? Because I don't know of any. I worked in retail for nearly 2 decades, for the last 3 in the nursery business which is a minefield when it comes to products that are considered controversial and divide opinion with customers and peer review groups - but that's a whole other forum. At the end of the day, any staff member worth their salt can ask questions but if the product is on the shelf to be sold, they would be disciplined or even fired for refusing to sell it or even discouraging the sale based on their own opinion.

My "assumptions" do not come from "any business that is driven by profit". For years, I witnessed a very close friend using a prong collar....and still does! I don't agree with it and I would never use one on any of my dogs but it works whether you agree with the method or not! And they have their valid reasons why they use them!

Nobody on this thread has said that they don't work. It's how they work that is the problem. Would you be as happy to stand by and say nothing if your friend had a child and pinched the child every time they ran forward? Is to inflict pain and discomfort for the wrong response considered a valid reason?

I am not hear to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of prong collars. That's a whole other thread! The OP asked should they say something. And personally, I don't think she should because the OP does not know this owners situation and its only fair if she keeps her opinions to herself.

I deal with lots of dogs that are pullers. I have had a golden retriever pull so hard that he broke my walking belt and a lab pull and jump so forcefully he broke the buckle on a lead. With both dogs I then started to use a forward attach harness on them and the difference was night and day. I always give my opinions to dog owners that are finding their dog pulling a problem, and the solutions that I offer always work. There is absolutely no harm in approaching the person with the intention of starting a friendly conversation and recommending something different than the painful equipment they are using.

DBB

Ashbx wrote: »

I must rub people up the wrong way on this website for some reason!

It's nothing personal, but if you come out and say "prong collars aren't cruel", then in the next breath say you wouldn't use them yourself, it just comes across like you're contradicting yourself.
Something similar happened on a training thread lately.
If they're not cruel, as you have stated, and if they work, as you have stated, sure stick one on your own dog. If you're not prepared to do that because you think they're cruel or would hurt her, then why post saying they're not cruel?
If anyone, not just you, posts stuff which promotes or misinforms about the use of gear that much greater minds than mine have deemed unethical, via research and evidence, then I'll state my case. But it's not because I think you're rubbing me up the wrong way :-)

Whispered

Ashbx what training have you tried? I ask because for years we tried a number of methods, while using a front connection harness. He was getting there and with the management tool wasn't able to pull me off my feet anymore but he was still always at the end of the lead. Then an absolutely excellent trainer tweaked my technique and within a week he was miles better. I've thought LLW pretty successfully to other dogs, but it was so entrenched in my boy it took an outsider to look at what was happening to correct it.

He's still hard work, like we are still constantly training while walking but I was shocked at the difference a little change here and there made.

Whispered

I'm posting this here as I guess it is relevant to the discussion above on the repercussions of harsher corrections. I know it is different from the use of prong collars but goes a little way to show why I think going down the route of "correcting" behaviour in an aversive way is not a good thing.

Phoe is very ill at the moment. He is in the vets on a drip and we are very concerned. Last night he vomited grass, no cause for concern there. Then overnight he vomited again and pooed on the floor, again not initially too alarming. When I opened the door, he ran up the back and hid under a bush. He hadn't come back by the time I cleaned the floor.

Phoe is a lazy toileter and if the weather is bad enough he will have a pee in the house. Had I gone down the road of correcting that, I may well have assumed that he was feeling worried about the poo and was hiding to avoid being told off. As it is, he has never had fear of approaching me, no matter what the situation. So I knew within a few mins I had to call into work and get him to the vet ASAP. I'm not saying that people who correct their dogs would have missed it, but I would have. The way the house is set up when I work, he didn't have to come in before I left. Two vomits wouldn't usually concern me. I absolutely would have assumed he was trying to stay away from me because he was worried.

I'm sure there are loads of other scenarios where the outcome would be different if I used harsh corrections, but I living this one at the moment and it just crossed my mind, so I thought I'd mention it.

Ashbx

Whispered wrote: »

I'm posting this here as I guess it is relevant to the discussion above on the repercussions of harsher corrections. I know it is different from the use of prong collars but goes a little way to show why I think going down the route of "correcting" behaviour in an aversive way is not a good thing.

Phoe is very ill at the moment. He is in the vets on a drip and we are very concerned. Last night he vomited grass, no cause for concern there. Then overnight he vomited again and pooed on the floor, again not initially too alarming. When I opened the door, he ran up the back and hid under a bush. He hadn't come back by the time I cleaned the floor.

Phoe is a lazy toileter and if the weather is bad enough he will have a pee in the house. Had I gone down the road of correcting that, I may well have assumed that he was feeling worried about the poo and was hiding to avoid being told off. As it is, he has never had fear of approaching me, no matter what the situation. So I knew within a few mins I had to call into work and get him to the vet ASAP. I'm not saying that people who correct their dogs would have missed it, but I would have. The way the house is set up when I work, he didn't have to come in before I left. Two vomits wouldn't usually concern me. I absolutely would have assumed he was trying to stay away from me because he was worried.

I'm sure there are loads of other scenarios where the outcome would be different if I used harsh corrections, but I living this one at the moment and it just crossed my mind, so I thought I'd mention it.

Hi Whispered, sorry to here about Phoe. I do hope he gets better soon! (Is this short for Phoebe by any chance? I have a border collie called Phoebe too!).

With regards to your post yesterday (which I didn't see - I apologise!), I first used a standard head collar but it kept slipping of Chips nose (she's a border terrier so has a very small snout). So I moved to a normal harness, and as people said above, it just made her pull harder. So I moved to a halti harness, still didn't help. At this point I joined a training class and tried their techniques (guiding her with food, stopping when she pulls, crossing the road when she pulls, getting her calm before leaving the house) but none of these worked. So I purchased a backpack. The backpack is great and I do recommend it to anyone who's dogs pull. Saying that, I still use a harness while using the backpack but she is a lot more focused on her walks and twice as tired when we come back! I got a halti head collar then which I do think is excellent but my dog lunges and barks like mad whenever a motorbike passes, when she is wearing her halti, she spins around, gets caught up and I would be worried she would do some serious damage to her neck, so don't use this one all the time. I then got one on one trainer to the house, and that didn't work. So the last thing I got is a Mikki don't pull harness and to be honest, its the best I found so far. It tightens on her front legs when she pulls so it pulls her front legs up (if that makes any sense) and stops her pulling. She definitely still pulls but it just doesn't hurt/frustrate me as much. After reading this post, I have looked up getting a harness that closes at the front as a few people seem to have suggested it. We'll see how we get on with that one....fingers crossed its the one!!

I tend not to use corrections when training my dogs anyway. When correcting while training, you need to be extremely quick in order for your dog to understand exactly what you want from them. You need to catch them in the act and correct immediately. Most of Chips bad behaviour (which is very rare thankfully) happens when im not in the house! For walking, if I correct Chip by a sharp tug on the leash, she doesn't stop pulling and I just end up getting frustrated so I have steered clear of that altogether!

Best of luck to Phoe!