Counter-poison dog training?

[treeman]

M I did not take your post as a attack against me, ( least I hope so).
Those porcupines, - there is a creature I feel sorry for, i release them from Gin Traps and bring home till better and then release again.

Probably checking out the bitches on the street.

https://photouploads.com/images/f0b632.jpg
https://photouploads.com/images/f150c6.jpg
https://photouploads.com/images/a7a0b3.jpg
https://photouploads.com/images/74badd.jpg
https://photouploads.com/images/cd4209.jpg
https://photouploads.com/images/d866a1.jpg
https://photouploads.com/images/d6fd91.jpg

[h0stag3]

Will it penetrate an eye, is what I asked. See, numerous times I have felt that I wanted to use "remote justice" on one of my dogs, or a dog tearing my garbage bags or whatnot. This remote justice being a paintball gun.

Which, I can shoot very very well. Accurate, I mean.

Two things stopped me. Firstly, is it right? My answer is no. Secondly, a paintball is quite large, but it will take out an eye. Is THAT worth the risk? No, too.

It is appreciated by some to post your mistakes online, but then you must be prepared for the ensuing roasting by the "bleeding hearts". You must also be prepared to realise that you can't say that bullfighting is wrong and that you are such an animal rights activist etc etc, but shooting a dog with a pellet gun which could take out an eye is OK.

See where I am heading with this? You can post thousands of happy family dog photos on "Gunbook", but if you continue you might just chicken out on telling us that your dog was blinded by his "training" one day.

Sent from my YD201 using Tapatalk

[Taranis]

I think it's time you get an ecollar for training. Shooting a dog with anything is just not on.

Electric shocks in the food and shooting with pellet guns???? I can't believe what I'm reading.

[SSP]

As for this being inhumane. I think you are over reacting somewhat. If this was inhumane then the very act of rigging up the fence in the first stage to keep them off of the patio should be reported forthwith to the SPCA.
After a couple of experimental wet nose encounters the dogs no longer had any interest in going on to the patio even if the one dog was mainly responding to the other dog's reluctance. After one week I disconnected the device and after about two I took away the wire fencing completely. Up until my GF moved house over a period of about 5 years neither dog could be persuaded to come onto the patio.

The two tactics are distinguishable. Using the fence, and I presume that it was purpose built and not an energiser designed for residential fences, to deny access to and promote avoidance of, an area is one thing. Actively baiting a dog to a punishment is another altogether. Nevermind the issues with the electrode being a choking hazard, causing physical injury to the dogs mouth or teeth. What if the dog swallows it?

Frankly, it is a lazy and ineffective approach to the problem.

Based on this I think it safe in my case to deduce that the possibility may exist that in my case at least the dogs have responded favourably to this kind of conditioning.

Except that on your version it didn't work with the female.

You said that a tactic only has to be successful once and the dog will use it constantly. I have found that this works both ways.

You misinterpret, and I suspect deliberately. If the dog is successful, in other words it is rewarded by its behavior with food (or other things) then it will continue to use that tactic.

Did you read the Leerburg article?

Of interest is that the Dutch KNPV has been using food refusal in their testing for around 100 years. They are also known for fairly harsh treatment of dogs as their sport is very physically demanding. If this tactic worked - they would probably use it. They don't.

Successful dog training takes work and effort. Their are no quick and easy solutions, especially none that you can set up and leave unattended.

Older dogs train purely by implied displeasure.

Crap.

They should be banned --but yea what would a self confessed animal abuser know.

Do you not see the irony? You complain about GFSA type arguments and you raise one yourself. Why should they be banned just because they are capable of being abused?

My dogs are alive in a dangerous environment, what is your suggested methods ?

You obviously didn't bother to read the article.