The answer
The trainers argue that it can be - under conditions they state just as firmly. Their accounting is lifetime, not moment: one trainer says they are not looking at the single rep but at every time the dog will ever feel the e-collar for the rest of his life, and want that cumulative total lower. Had he used the lowest perceptible level for three weeks, he says, he would have ended up going much higher anyway, slowly and with a stressed, frustrated dog; one clear moment gave clarity instead.
The owner-facing version is a speeding fine. If the fine for doing a hundred past a police officer is always ten dollars, someone who enjoys speeding just pays it. Kelton tells families that beeping or vibrating a dog who keeps harassing another dog is that ten-dollar fine: it stops the behaviour for the moment, and he keeps doing it twenty times a day. A consequence that is meaningful and always tied to that one act is meant to make the dog conclude it is not worth it - and done correctly, several trainers say, it comes close to single-event learning. Zeus's trainer tracks the curve aloud: a severe first consequence, a much smaller second, and on the third opportunity the dog left the other dog alone. Kane's trainer gives the everyday version to his owners: an excited dog who is not listening sometimes needs one clear event 'high enough to matter to them', and after that he listens a whole bunch. Reaper's gives the same picture as a traffic ticket: a few hard consequences, and 'they never do it again'. Oscar's trainer names it 'single or maybe just two or three event learning', set against 'a thousand' small confrontations that strain the relationship (watch 42:23), and Peque's handler hears the fine version with the numbers changed: five dollars every time keeps people speeding; five hundred does not (watch 15:51).
The conditions are what make it defensible, and they are stated on film. The higher level goes only on a command the dog demonstrably knows and is refusing; the same pressure on something he does not know 'is just gonna send him into a panic', so it is turned way down. Severity is budgeted by what the behaviour will cost the household the dog goes home to - going after other dogs is at the top because it ends in injury, the hospital, rehoming. Kelton (Reaper's trainer) says it in one line - 'how harshly you punish a thing depends on how bad the result could be for him and for everybody else' - and Hattie's, at a follow-up in her adoptive home after she went for the family's cat, weighs a really bad minute for the dog, 'however many times i have to do it', against what happens otherwise to everybody involved, the dog included. The correction ends in release and decompression. And making a dog afraid of a whole category of thing is named as a last resort, justified in one story only because the car-chasing dog had already been hit twice.
Said on film: the lifetime total, the ten-dollar fine, near-single-event learning, the known-command rule, severity by consequence, decompression after.
Angier K9 is a family-owned, play-based Board & Train serving Angier, Raleigh and the Triangle, with three full owner lessons.
What to do
If you find yourself correcting the same known behaviour over and over, the consequence is too small to change his decision. Use a calm, meaningful consequence tied to that one act - never on something he has not been taught - then release and move on, and watch whether the need falls. Do it without yelling or anger.
On film
he was doing that and then like you would tap any collar once and if that continued like every time you had to do that what would that indicate to you
using that same pressure for things that he doesn't know is just gonna send him into a panic, right? So I'm gonna turn it way down
have to freak out you don't have to be angry it's just pop right you say nope and you pop
What the trainers say
we're looking at all the reps that the dog ever does every time the dog ever feels the e-collar for the rest of its life we want to make that cumulative total lower
behavior and it would have taken forever and it would have been very stressful and frustrating for the dog. Instead, one moment of, oh, for Louie results in clarity
by utilizing this level on known commands that he's resisting very quickly I won't need to use this level ever again and I can use a much much lower level for reinforcement when needed
using that same pressure for things that he doesn't know is just gonna send him into a panic, right? So I'm gonna turn it way down
If they're driving, like, recklessly, say they're, like, hitting 100 miles an hour flying by you, a cop pulls them over, and it's the same fine every time, $10.
and it's always connected to that particular thing that he does that event he'll be like that's not worth it i do not want to do that again
The interesting thing is that if you do it correctly, you can get like pretty close to single event learning sometimes.
and so we just did like beeping or um we vibrated or and it worked okay and he stopped doing it but then he did he just keeps doing it though they just still do it like 20 times a day
to punish him nearly as severely as the first time, because I punished him severely the first time. He was immediately like, oh crap, I made a mistake. And then the last time that I gave the opportunity, he didn't even take it.
he was doing that and then like you would tap any collar once and if that continued like every time you had to do that what would that indicate to you what would be the next step to turn it up make it worse right because he clearly knows what to do he's not doing it
And in my experience, doing it that way and going for pretty long creates a pretty dang close to single event learning.
and I will penalizing pretty severely for this if you go back to this dog because that's his number one thing that is going to mess up their home life
thinking about overall welfare for the dog right but also there's a bigger picture overall welfare
in the service of clarity for the dog if I think about their lifespan well we very quickly get
like frustration, like every time somebody comes over for like five years, which is what happens to almost every dog on the planet, or a really clear no a few times.
that's where the authority happens right but then right after that you want decompression
And now that I got a good rep out of her, right? I got to give it a little bit of a bigger punishment to make sure that I made the criteria really distinct.
road that's a last resort thing like ideally you don't want to make a dog scared of a whole thing
And how harshly you punish a thing depends on how bad the result could be for him and for everybody else, right?
i'm like do i i want to like let my dog die potentially or like seriously injure a person and put them in the hospital or just like have them go one a few times and then like they never do it again
so for me it's like um when i look at total outcome and i look at okay like what is the like what are like the two things i'm weighing out like either i make the dog feel really bad temporarily or all this really bad stuff happens for everybody involved including the dog i'm like i'm gonna make the dog really unhappy for that minute yeah okay however many times i have to do it
like if they're super excited and they're like, oh, and they're not listening, sometimes just like one, like clear, high enough to matter to them level, like negative reinforcement event. Then they're like, oh, and then like, after that they listen a whole bunch.
literally never do it again after like one or two times so it's like single or maybe just two or three event learning instead of it being you have to do something mean to him yeah a thousand times
How it looks, dog by dog
Louie
The accounting and its safety rail, in one park session narrated with a junior staff member shadowing. The number to minimise is the dog's lifetime total of pressure; a higher level on known commands he is resisting means that level is soon never needed again. The same pressure on what he does not know would cause panic, so within the session the level is raised for sit and turned way down for down.
On film
we're looking at all the reps that the dog ever does every time the dog ever feels the e-collar for the rest of its life we want to make that cumulative total lower
However, if I had used it on the lowest perceptible level for the next three weeks, I would have ended up having to go to a much higher level
using that same pressure for things that he doesn't know is just gonna send him into a panic, right? So I'm gonna turn it way down
now if you move from escape to avoidance too quickly that can become a major issue right because now you've put a a lot of pressure on the dog to do something that they are unclear on
Zeus
The curve tracked out loud. For going at the resident dog, a severe first consequence; the second opportunity needed much less; on the third he left her alone. At the go-home, the rule for the owner: a correction you have to repeat every time for something he clearly knows is telling you it was too small.
On film
to punish him nearly as severely as the first time, because I punished him severely the first time. He was immediately like, oh crap, I made a mistake. And then the last time that I gave the opportunity, he didn't even take it.
not going to pay but for something like that i want him to think oh my god that was the worst idea ever i never that was a terrible idea
he was doing that and then like you would tap any collar once and if that continued like every time you had to do that what would that indicate to you what would be the next step to turn it up make it worse right because he clearly knows what to do he's not doing it
Not that bad. It looks like we are gonna have to Make it a little worse for you if we wanted to be reliable buddy You do not like going into the down for some reason.
Sputnik
A home visit to a three-dog household where one dog harasses the others. The trainer waits for the behaviour, delivers one strong correction followed by firm, disappointed social pressure, and explains the ten-dollar fine. At the later go-home the owners are told the everyday version: nope and a pop, no yelling, no anger, liberally applied.
On film
If they're driving, like, recklessly, say they're, like, hitting 100 miles an hour flying by you, a cop pulls them over, and it's the same fine every time, $10.
well it stopped the behavior right then um so it's like oh that's but that's a ten dollar fine
and it's always connected to that particular thing that he does that event he'll be like that's not worth it i do not want to do that again
if you don't make it bad enough and you don't have to yell you don't have to scream you don't
Murphy
The same analogy delivered almost word for word to another household the next night, with the failure it describes: owners who did not want to use stimulation, beeped or vibrated instead, and got a dog who stopped for the moment and kept doing it twenty times a day.
On film
Is they have a situation like this. I tell them, hey, do this. And I come back and they're like, well, we didn't feel like we wanted to use shock or it felt mean.
a common mistake and it's just a but if you think about it that's just like the ten dollar fine
Rocko
At the owner lesson the stakes are named - dog fights end in injury and the hospital.
On film
and I will penalizing pretty severely for this if you go back to this dog because that's his number one thing that is going to mess up their home life
you can't get in dog fights right yeah that's how you get severely injured and have to go to the hospital
Baxter
At a private lesson: welfare is judged over the dog's life and includes the family and community. Hence erring slightly high rather than low - too low teaches nothing, too high can be backed down - and short-term stress accepted for clarity over the lifespan.
On film
thinking about overall welfare for the dog right but also there's a bigger picture overall welfare
I accidentally go slightly too high and they vocalize or something like that well it's effective
in the service of clarity for the dog if I think about their lifespan well we very quickly get
Thor
Collected for a refresher, a tough, high-arousal dog who blows off small corrections. The trainer weighs five years of frustration every time someone comes over against a really clear no a few times, and says people make that calculation for humans all the time. At the go-home Kelton adds that without the collar the penalty still has to happen - social pressure, spatial pressure - because otherwise 'it'll mess his life up'.
On film
like frustration, like every time somebody comes over for like five years, which is what happens to almost every dog on the planet, or a really clear no a few times.
if if he doesn't have this on you you still need to penalize him just do it a different way
Yeah, cause it'll mess his life up.
Marvin (Giant Schnauzer)
The authority event, kept for problems that destroy cooperation: nope, a pop, spatial and social pressure until the dog visibly gives in - and then, at once, decompression and cheerful work. The trainer says it is possible without damage because cooperation and fulfilment came first.
On film
that's where the authority happens right but then right after that you want decompression
and so the reason that that's possible is because we had cooperation and fulfillment together first um and then i introduced authority
Nash
For reactivity: one long, strong consequence at the choice point, claimed in the trainer's experience to come pretty close to single-event learning that holds a week later.
On film
And in my experience, doing it that way and going for pretty long creates a pretty dang close to single event learning.
Where they do not repeat it.
Phoebe (the Rottweiler)
After a good heel rep, one deliberately bigger correction to make the criterion distinct, then release to run.
On film
And now that I got a good rep out of her, right? I got to give it a little bit of a bigger punishment to make sure that I made the criteria really distinct.
Deuce
The upper bound. Connor tells Deuce's owners about a car-chasing Doberman corrected until he was afraid of the road, and marks it as a last resort: you do not want a dog afraid of a whole category of thing, unless the alternative is worse - that dog had already been hit twice.
On film
road that's a last resort thing like ideally you don't want to make a dog scared of a whole thing
but when it's like be scared of the street or the dog had been hit like twice already i think so it
Hattie
Hattie (new in this update; adopted after her program). At a follow-up lesson in her new home, after she went after the family's cat, the trainer lays out the accounting for the adopters. She cannot be told what is at stake - her place in the home, the family's feelings, the cat's safety - so she has to learn it, and he weighs the two outcomes: make her feel really bad for a minute, however many times it takes, or let something really bad happen to everybody involved, the dog included. He predicts she will be fine afterwards - back on the couch, petted - and will simply look at the cat and decide it is not worth it, and plans to deliver the first consequence himself at a supervised meeting, because a first one done well 'darn near takes care of' it. He supports this with a story about another program dog, Piglet: four supervised tests with a cat, the e-collar used on the first two, and on the last two she just avoided the cat.
On film
but you can't tell her right she has to learn right you can't tell her
so for me it's like um when i look at total outcome and i look at okay like what is the like what are like the two things i'm weighing out like either i make the dog feel really bad temporarily or all this really bad stuff happens for everybody involved including the dog i'm like i'm gonna make the dog really unhappy for that minute yeah okay however many times i have to do it
and you know what the dog would be fine later on they'll come crawl on the couch yeah you'll pet them and they won't they they won't think about it twice later the only thing they'll do is they'll look at the cat and go not worth it
and the benefit of doing that is that if you've already laid that groundwork and then i do that first one for you that first one a lot of times like darn near takes care of
i actually tested it with the cat and i know i did four total tests but the first two i used the e-collar because she went for it the last two she wouldn't do anything she just avoided
Kane
With the owners handling Kane on recall at home, the trainer gives the everyday version: an excited dog who is not listening sometimes needs one clear negative-reinforcement event at a level high enough to matter to him, after which he listens a whole bunch.
On film
like if they're super excited and they're like, oh, and they're not listening, sometimes just like one, like clear, high enough to matter to them level, like negative reinforcement event. Then they're like, oh, and then like, after that they listen a whole bunch.
Reaper
Reaper (new in this update). At his first in-program owner lesson, in a park, the trainer gives the scaling rule in one sentence - how harshly you punish depends on how bad the result could be for the dog and everybody else - and admits he does not like hearing the dog's yelp. For a big, powerful dog, he says, the alternative pathway can end in a seriously injured person, a hospital, or the dog's death, so 'a few times and then like they never do it again' is the kinder trade. Reaper, he points out, looks fine now and will make a better choice next time; the analogy he gives the owners is traffic tickets.
On film
And how harshly you punish a thing depends on how bad the result could be for him and for everybody else, right?
I don't like hearing that noise, because I know, like, hey, like, that probably hurt a little bit, right? I don't like it.
understood why people are sometimes unwilling or hesitant to punish their dog when for a big powerful dog like that the alternative pathway leads to in many cases like death
i'm like do i i want to like let my dog die potentially or like seriously injure a person and put them in the hospital or just like have them go one a few times and then like they never do it again
and like look he looks fine now he doesn't care now he's just gonna make a better choice next time right
it's kind of like if you were to like why do they give people like traffic tickets
Callie
On Callie's second day of loose-leash walking the handler reports that two or three tune-ups weren't hard enough to have any effect, so the next one is made to count; in another clip the reasoning is given aloud - a nice hard pop and she'll learn, and then you don't have to do it so often.
On film
So, I gave her like two tune-ups, or three I think, but they weren't hard enough or strong enough, so it didn't really make an effect on her.
give her a nice hard pop she'll learn and then you don't ever have to do that
Louie
Answering online critics who call e-collar work abuse, Louie's trainer puts the comparison the way this page does: would you rather the dog hurt somebody and be put down - which is more inhumane?
On film
is what i felt would you rather have the dog hurt somebody and put the dog down right eventually
eventually maybe something happens right what's more inhumane yeah i take a dog and go man i don't
Oscar
For Oscar getting on the bed and picking up dead frogs, the trainer tells the family it has to be an event, not a quick 'get off the bed'. In very many cases, he says, dogs never do it again after one or two - 'single or maybe just two or three event learning' - instead of a thousand small confrontations that strain the relationship; the one time is more aversive, and then they learn it.
On film
just a quick like hey get off the bed it has to be like an event okay where it's
literally never do it again after like one or two times so it's like single or
maybe just two or three event learning instead of it being you have to do
constant confrontation and then it makes a strain on the relationship between you
Peque (PK)
When a squirrel outcompetes everything the handler can offer, the trainer tells Peque's handler, the only side of the equation left is the fine - and gives the speeding-fine version: a five-dollar fine every time for doing a hundred keeps people speeding; a five-hundred-dollar one does not.
On film
right and so then you only have the other side of the equation which is to fine it's a fine
hundred miles an hour and like a 30 is they pull you over they say hey and they give you a five
and they got money pay five dollars all day there's no problem right if it fine never changes
Rocky
After a correction on Rocky set higher than the family had ever used, the trainer admits the instinct not to go too high and answers it with the total-welfare question - the owner, the biker, the jogger and Rocky - and says a momentary aversive that is clearly marked, even if accidentally too high, still has a good effect.
On film
We feel bad about things. Yeah. Um, but I, that's why it's always helpful. Like I try to keep the
total picture in mind. What's the total welfare question. Um, and so that total welfare question
if it's clearly marked even if it's too high accidentally say as an example for the situation
Why it works
Three mechanisms are stated. (1) A small, unchanging consequence becomes a price the dog is willing to pay, so it suppresses in the moment without changing the decision (the ten-dollar fine; Sputnik, Murphy). (2) A consequence meaningful enough and always tied to the one act leads the dog to conclude it is not worth doing, approaching single-event learning, after which much lower levels suffice (Sputnik, Nash, Louie). (3) Creeping up from the lowest level for weeks is slower, more frustrating and ends at a higher level anyway (Louie). The safety conditions are part of the mechanism: pressure a dog cannot escape because he does not know the answer produces panic, confusion and suspicious associations (Louie). Two September lessons add the same accounting from the household side: severity is set by how bad the result could be for the dog and everyone else (Reaper), and a bad minute for the dog is weighed against the total outcome for everyone, the dog included (Hattie). They also restate (2) in plain words: one clear event 'high enough to matter' and the dog 'listen[s] a whole bunch' afterwards (Kane).
On film
a common mistake and it's just a but if you think about it that's just like the ten dollar fine
and it's always connected to that particular thing that he does that event he'll be like that's not worth it i do not want to do that again
However, if I had used it on the lowest perceptible level for the next three weeks, I would have ended up having to go to a much higher level
now if you move from escape to avoidance too quickly that can become a major issue right because now you've put a a lot of pressure on the dog to do something that they are unclear on
And how harshly you punish a thing depends on how bad the result could be for him and for everybody else, right?
so for me it's like um when i look at total outcome and i look at okay like what is the like what are like the two things i'm weighing out like either i make the dog feel really bad temporarily or all this really bad stuff happens for everybody involved including the dog i'm like i'm gonna make the dog really unhappy for that minute yeah okay however many times i have to do it
like if they're super excited and they're like, oh, and they're not listening, sometimes just like one, like clear, high enough to matter to them level, like negative reinforcement event. Then they're like, oh, and then like, after that they listen a whole bunch.
Inferred
The September evidence adds two short sequences of the same kind: a story told at Hattie's lesson about another dog who stopped going for a cat after two corrected tests (watch 40:25), and Reaper looking fine minutes later (watch 57:45).
Where the trainers differ
Start high or start low?
One view
Err slightly high: too low teaches nothing and prolongs the dog's total exposure (Baxter, Louie).
On film
I accidentally go slightly too high and they vocalize or something like that well it's effective
like if they're super excited and they're like, oh, and they're not listening, sometimes just like one, like clear, high enough to matter to them level, like negative reinforcement event. Then they're like, oh, and then like, after that they listen a whole bunch.
Another view
Turn it way down for anything the dog does not yet know; pressure without an exit produces panic (Louie, the same session).
On film
using that same pressure for things that he doesn't know is just gonna send him into a panic, right? So I'm gonna turn it way down
How to read it
The record separates these by stage - high pressure only on a known, refused command.
Beep or vibrate as the owner's correction
One view
A beep or vibrate that the dog tolerates is a ten-dollar fine and fails (Kelton, Murphy and Sputnik).
On film
and so we just did like beeping or um we vibrated or and it worked okay and he stopped doing it
Another view
Owners' own reluctance, voiced on film: it felt mean. The trainer acknowledges it hurts to watch.
On film
makes it hurts my heart makes me feel bad but at the same time like this is a world of a difference
I don't like hearing that noise, because I know, like, hey, like, that probably hurt a little bit, right? I don't like it.
Does a hard correction make a dog afraid of the whole thing?
One view
It can, and that is a last resort justified only against a worse outcome (Connor, Deuce).
On film
road that's a last resort thing like ideally you don't want to make a dog scared of a whole thing
Another view
Tied to one act and followed by decompression, it is claimed not to damage the relationship (Marvin).
On film
and so the reason that that's possible is because we had cooperation and fulfillment together first um and then i introduced authority
and you know what the dog would be fine later on they'll come crawl on the couch yeah you'll pet them and they won't they they won't think about it twice later the only thing they'll do is they'll look at the cat and go not worth it
and like look he looks fine now he doesn't care now he's just gonna make a better choice next time right
Common owner mistakes
- Using a consequence the dog is happy to pay - repeated beeps or vibrations - for a behaviour that will wreck the household.
On film
and so we just did like beeping or um we vibrated or and it worked okay and he stopped doing it but then he did he just keeps doing it though they just still do it like 20 times a day
Murphy · Watch at 1:02:03 ↗ - Repeating the same small correction every time for something the dog clearly knows.
On film
he was doing that and then like you would tap any collar once and if that continued like every time you had to do that what would that indicate to you
Zeus · Watch at 1:24:44 ↗ - Yelling or getting angry instead of delivering a calm, meaningful consequence.
On film
if you don't make it bad enough and you don't have to yell you don't have to scream you don't
Sputnik · Watch at 28:51 ↗ - Skipping the consequence when the collar is not on.
On film
if if he doesn't have this on you you still need to penalize him just do it a different way
Thor · Watch at 3:18 ↗
Questions owners ask
Isn't a lot of gentle corrections kinder than one hard one?
The trainers argue it depends on the total. One says the goal is to make the lifetime sum of what the dog feels lower; weeks at the lowest level would have ended at a higher level anyway, with a frustrated dog. Kelton's version: a ten-dollar fine never stops someone who enjoys speeding.
On film
we're looking at all the reps that the dog ever does every time the dog ever feels the e-collar for the rest of its life we want to make that cumulative total lower
a common mistake and it's just a but if you think about it that's just like the ten dollar fine
When would a trainer never use a hard correction?
On anything the dog does not yet know. The same trainer who uses a higher level on a refused sit turns it way down for a down the dog is still learning, because pressure he cannot escape sends him into a panic.
On film
using that same pressure for things that he doesn't know is just gonna send him into a panic, right? So I'm gonna turn it way down
How do trainers decide how serious a correction should be?
By what the behaviour will cost the household the dog goes home to. Going after other dogs is at the top because it ends in injury or the hospital; a minor fault gets far less. Kelton (Reaper's trainer) puts it as a rule: how harshly you punish depends on how bad the result could be for the dog and everybody else; Hattie's applies it to a dog who went after the family cat in her new home.
On film
and I will penalizing pretty severely for this if you go back to this dog because that's his number one thing that is going to mess up their home life
And how harshly you punish a thing depends on how bad the result could be for him and for everybody else, right?
so for me it's like um when i look at total outcome and i look at okay like what is the like what are like the two things i'm weighing out like either i make the dog feel really bad temporarily or all this really bad stuff happens for everybody involved including the dog i'm like i'm gonna make the dog really unhappy for that minute yeah okay however many times i have to do it
How do I know it worked?
The requirement falls. Zeus's trainer tracks it aloud: the second opportunity needed much less, and on the third the dog did not take it. If you have to repeat the same correction every time, it was too small. At Hattie's follow-up the trainer tells a story about another program dog tested with a cat four times: the e-collar was needed on the first two, and on the last two she simply avoided the cat.
On film
And then the last time that I gave the opportunity, he didn't even take it.
i actually tested it with the cat and i know i did four total tests but the first two i used the e-collar because she went for it the last two she wouldn't do anything she just avoided
The lesson
The goal
The owner understands why a meaningful, well-timed consequence on a known behaviour can mean less total pressure, and the conditions that make it fair.
Learn first
- The level is not a number
- Contingent, avoidable, and the right size
- A life that gets smaller, and the bargain
- Stop before you shut him down
The drill
As run on film: the handler waits for the actual behaviour (a known act - harassing the other dog, going at the resident dog) rather than correcting in anticipation; delivers one meaningful consequence tied to that act, with the social follow-up ('don't do that'); then releases and decompresses. The next opportunity is offered deliberately and the requirement is tracked: it should fall.
Watch out for
- A tolerated consequence repeated all day (Murphy 62:03).
- Pressure on an untaught command (Louie 20:37).
- Anger or yelling (Sputnik 28:51).
Check yourself
Does he know this, is he refusing it, and is it serious enough to spend real pressure on - and after, is the requirement falling?