Erny

It is possible, Dougal, but impossible to tell you what or how without seeing your dog in the presence of other dogs. I think the critical thing here is that you concentrate on taking your dogs to places/in areas where dogs are likely to be on-lead rather than off-lead. Taking your dogs (if you don't already) to a reputable dog school (with instructors who have a good grounding knowledge of dog behaviour and communication) will serve not only as part of that purpose, but help you socialise her in a controlled environment, with other dogs. It is important that she doesn't learn that ALL dogs mean bad news. It is also important that IF your dog is mis-communicating in her body language to other dogs, that you help her learn the type of body posturing that will avoid harm rather than provoke it (IF that's what is happening). PS. I am a little uncertain of the contents of your post : I'm not sure if you are saying that one of your dogs has been attacked twice, or whether on the second ocassion you witnessed another dog target someone else's dog but not yours?? If your dog has been the recipient of unfavourable attentions by another dog only on the one occasion chances are there is nothing wrong in your dog's general communication skills. PSS. Silly other owner for socialising a dog with issues off-lead in the first place! Her dog needs leadership and structured and controlled exposure to other dogs - not the "go out and figure it out for yourself" type exposure it sounds like the owner is encouraging - that is only going to make it worse for her dog. Hope your dog is ok and well healed (physically and mentally) from the ordeal.

Certainly - unless people who recognise the disadvantages of those laws, and the hypocrisy towards "dog-welfare" it creates, start standing up and voicing objection from now on. So many people laid low and although grumbled at the (particularly Victorian) laws that are now in place, have not been continuously and/or instrumentally active in voicing those objections. The Government have counted on this - they would have known that there would be many enough who would not agree with the laws they have allowed to be created and imposed. But they rely on those 'grumbles' going away and not affecting them to any great extent. So - object with letters to your MP and to your State Minister for Agriculture. Object verbally, spread the news and encourage others to do likewise with letters. And if the Govt won't listen, make the noises that will let them know you'll show them your displeasure and disapproval with your "vote" cards at the next elections. After all .... the Government is put in there by us, presumably to Govern as we see is good and right. Democracy is supposed to be what our system of Government is about.

I like martingale collars (where they suit the dog) .... and although I like the ones with the buckle adjustment (as pictured above), I don't like that the buckle is aligned to the centre - right where the dog's windpipe is. Not sure why they don't align the buckle so that it is up close to the "D" ring where the chain runs through .

Thank you .... and I will (and am) . The submission is all but complete and ready to be 'heard'. In all seriousness, the only thing that is now lacking are voices ...... LOTS of voices . Terrorbull .... sorry for the slight hi-jack of your thread .

Then please ..... do something about it. Write to your MP at the very least (refer my previous post/s). Complacency is what the Government and the orgs who defame this tool rely on. That, and on a lot of words from people, but no action.

Because it is quieter and it means I can train at times that other people might prefer me not to.

There are different ways of using the e-collar, Tilly. It is not about waiting for the dog to be in attack mode when the collar is used, and not about high stims. This is why I mentioned "methodology" above. But again - as to what, where, when and the likely results for any one individual dog ..... a professional consult would be needed and the owner would need the tuition as well.

KismetKat .... I agree with Cosmolo. There are so many variables involved - including the dog's temperament, history of experience etc. etc. However, I have utilised the e-collar with some dogs, producing excellent results that were beyond the expectations of the owners. Every dog is different though so the lowest expectation should be improvement and the highest expectation should be realistic. A bit of a non-answer, but then the question you ask is a bit like asking "how long is a piece of string"? ETA: By my experience, if anything is going to do it, the e-collar will ..... paired with the appropriate methodology :D.

No - it doesn't matter provided, as you say, it produces the drive. If you have a choice though, pick a toy that is going to be easy enough for you to carry, hold and tug with. Once you build up drive though, you will probably find other toys you chose will trigger the drive you seek. Your "drive" toy should only be available for the "drive training" sessions. ETA: I personally would prefer a toy that doesn't squeak or make noises, but it really is about the toy your dog "chooses", not about what we choose.

Well .... I would suggest it (amongst other not so sensible laws) are on the cards. As I mentioned, Hugh Wirth has been speaking to Canberra for a while now. Some months ago, he put an editorial in the RSPCA News where he said he would like all the laws relating to Animal Welfare (which would include regs such as the Victorian ban on PPCollars) to be levelled across all States. Write to your MP's and also write to your Minister for Agriculture. I am not completely certain as to whether HW met with Canberra at a Federal level. I am trying to find this out and can only guess at this at the moment. At this stage of the game, I'd be addressing your letters to your State Government though. I did a letter for those who loathe to write .... you'll find it at doglaws.blogspot.com. It only relates to the PPCollar. You can use this or adapt your own :p. Numbers. It is about numbers. You .... WE .... need to make our individual voices heard. Those individual voices WILL become collective if we sing them often and loud enough ;). Orgs such as the RSPCA (Hugh Wirth) seem to have a "get out of gaol free" card when it comes to wanting and getting regulations, and I can tell you from my experience and from documents I have from Govt in relation to when the Victorian regulation came in to ban (and from my attempts to talk to govt now) the PPCollar, that they don't want to know about reasoning and don't base their decisions on evidence. The rules of Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness go out of the window, it seems, when it came to passing our current Victorian regulation. Democracy? It's supposed to be but to me it just seems to be one big fat farce. And the Victorian Labor Govt certainly set it up so that it can be. :cool: ETA: The Association of Pet Dog Trainers have also done a 'drive' by writing to Govt around Australia, telling them they don't consider the PPCollar nor e-collar to be dog friendly and expressing their disapproval. I imagine this has been read by Govt as being said on behalf of the APDT's members and from what I have read it certainly seems that this is what the APDT purports as well. My membership renewal with Association of Pet Dog Trainers has been refused because of the campaign I have been doing here in Victoria to have the current Victorian regulation re-addressed. The APDT didn't say anything about the check chain though. Nor the Head Collar, even though there is evidence of harm caused (albeit perhaps inadvertently) by it, yet not the PPCollar. Go figure . The Govt haven't.

Pressure Point Collars (aka "pinch" or "prong" collars) are ONLY banned from use in Victoria at the moment. There is no law which precludes them from use in NSW. But don't bank on it that will last forever, or even for much longer, as Hugh Wirth is on the rampage again and news has it he has been talking to Canberra with a view to having all laws made the same, throughout the whole of Australia. That will most likely mean that all other States will adopt the "banned from use" regulation we have here in Victoria for PPCollars, and that Victoria will adopt the "banned from use" regulation you have there in NSW for E-Collars. It will certainly make it easier for Hugh Wirth who will have influence (control?) over the whole of Australia with one fell swoop, instead of having to address every State individually when he wants to bring in laws (numerous of which are stupid and definitely NOT IMO in the interests of dog-welfare - more in the interests of $$$, I suspect) which address and affect dogs. I promise you ..... it is happening . ETA - Kavik is right. I don't think ANKC allow the use of PPCollars at any of their clubs or official events. And I believe that if you ask the RSPCA they'll tell you use of the collar is banned regardless of which State you are in. Those that say this either believe it themselves, or want you to think they are banned.

I agree with LM here. In so far as your opinion of the 'punishment' your OH put out in this instance, I don't think you're too soft either. In fact, I don't even think that what your OH did was a "punishment". For it to be a punishment the dog needs to perceive the action as an aversive for the undesirable action.

Not heard of this either and would need the trainer to provide a bit more explanation, if there is any, to make sure what was said hasn't been misunderstood.

I've read even just here on DOL where a number of people have had their PPCollars ceased at customs point. Cold comfort to know you're not alone, though .

Ummm ... the difference to the dog being?? I don't understand the point of your trainer in the instance you describe 4 Paws. If I understand you correctly, one collar is webbing, the other is leather with a chain (the chain is not the part that makes any connection with the dog). Either way it is still a 'correction' (and the same/similar correction, at that). So I don't understand why your trainer would suggest a soft martingale is ok but a leather one with chain (or for that matter, a leather 'limited slip' with chain) is not. Perhaps I have misunderstood your post?

I'm sorry Monah - There's only so much help that can be given over the internet and these are the sort of questions that really can't be answered without knowing and seeing your girl.

There is a strong chance that any purchase of this item will be confiscated by customs. ;)

But KateyKK .... if the nose strap is so loose, all you're really walking him on is the martingale collar component anyway.

A martingale (as we know them) doesn't have a nose-band, so no, it doesn't have that leverage. On the infin8, if the noseband is very loose so that the martingale section of the collar is the one that is activated rather than the noseband, then there would be little to no leverage between where the head joins the upper vertibrae of the spinal cord. But if the nose-band is so loose that this the case, there would be no need for the nose-strap at all, unless you are using it in the "weaning off the head collar" stages of training. And if Scrimp doesn't pull, perhaps this is why you are using the Infin8??

I have one of these (for discussion/demonstration purposes) and am familiar with them and their design. However I haven't needed to use them. In a thread from some time ago, Poodlefan has pointed out that whilst the sideways leverage is alleviated as a result of the design, the leverage angle still remains, although from a different point (ie downwards, with the axis being on the uppermost vertibrae that joins the head to the neck). As to how much leverage is applied there would much depend on how the head collar is fitted to the dog (ie how loose/firm the nose strap is compared with the neck/martingale strap). So whilst the "leverage" issue isn't as obvious, it shouldn't be assumed that there is no leverage action affecting the skeletal structure of the dog at all. I know of no damage caused as a result of the Infin8 though. Although not that many people who I meet actually use one.

Thank you ..... I only wish I had the same faith in the Government. They are 'closed ears' at the moment, and don't even wish to discuss it. :p . This is why the petition (especially the Victorian one by Victorian residents) is so important at this stage. Refer : doglaws.blogspot.com I'm still pursuing it though. After all, our government is supposed to be based in democracy. I'd like to see them evidence at least that.

Yes - I am working on trying to have the current Victorian regulations changed. Getting our current Government (who regulated for the current ban in the first place) to even agree to listen and see the evidence and information in the submission I have to hand is the biggest hurdle I have at the moment, and is the reason I need all those who recognise the benefits of the PPCollar (Pressure Point Collar), to be writing to their MP's etc. etc. I guess if they refuse to even discuss it, all we can do is let our voting send a message at the next election. But that's another story. Jessca - I am trying to change the regulation from "total ban" to "restricted use" ..... which basically means that use of the PPCollar be condoned and permitted ONLY under the supervision of a qualified instructor. Mind you ..... I think Head Collars and Check Chains should be listed with the same restriction. In the meantime, you do need to observe that the PPCollar (aka "prong" collar) is banned from being used in Victoria. Even though it's proper use may well be in the best welfare interests for your dog. This is what gets my goat.

Because it is possible that some dogs will pair the sound of the chain with the correction. Not that I use this 'pairing' to any great degree, but it can be handy for very soft and/or nervous/sensitive dogs. I think to, because I'm used to it. Make sure that the buckle component does not rest on the dog's throat/windpipe once fitted, though.

Apart from what I've mentioned above (ie the pressure of the correction is dispersed more evenly), IMO the martingale has more available correction than what the "limited slip" collar (pictured) would have. I'd still go for the martingale, although I prefer the ones with the chain (for the part that forms the triangle).

Martingales are "limited slip". As opposed to something such as a check chain or for that matter, a head collar, which are infinite in so far as how much they could tighten. ETA : Ok ... sorry, I was in my "technical" mind mode. I think by "limited slip" you mean collars that are similar in fashion to check chain styles, but that can only 'check' to a certain point? I would prefer the martingale because IMO the pressure applied is more evenly dispersed.