I might get a lot of flak for this...

[Shetlander]

I will point out that just because something is illegal/could put you jail in one country it doesn't mean it is inherently wrong. It's illegal to have an elective neuter done in some countries.

And, moving away from dogs (avoiding the old discussion of crates), isn't it illegal for women to drive in Saudi Arabia?

[Maralynn]

 

And, moving away from dogs (avoiding the old discussion of crates), isn't it illegal for women to drive in Saudi Arabia?

I think so. Then there's the one child policy in China making it illegal to have more than one child.

[Jescano]

Jescano related how she used the vibration setting on an e-collar in certain aspects of training her dog. She said that she wore the collar herself, received the same correction she gave, and that the sensation was comparable to having a cell phone vibrate in her pocket. She used it as a way to touch her dog across a distance. She related that the dog was happy to work with her, showed continuing enthusiasm for having the collar put on, and became more responsive both with and without the collar following this training.

This is how I had wanted my post interpreted, I have still inflicted no pain on my dog with the ecollar. I think most people automatically think pain and shock when they think e-collar. If I was using an ecollar on vibrate to train a deaf dog, would that be abuse, or frowned upon?

 

I have since stopped using it, but only because the money spent on the ecollar needs to go towards having his tooth extracted, and he still listens better than he did before using the ecollar, and it's been about a month. He still likes performing tricks and doing things with me.

 

And like I said earlier, he was ALWAYS excited to put it on. Maybe he liked the vibration? (sarcasm) Maybe he enjoyed the extra freedom it allowed him? He definitely didn't associate it with pain. It was never used as a punishment.

 

I definitely agree that ecollars have the potential to cause real pain, like I said, I personally wouldn't want to go about a 6 on the shock, not that it would harm me, but it would hurt. And in the wrong hands it could easily be abused.

[Blackdawgs]

It may be a mistake to assume that dogs experience the sensation in the same manner that humans do. I think that everyone would agree that there are significant anatomical differences between a human arm (where these things are commonly tested) and a dog's neck. The other difference is that in the human tests, the "stim" is either self-administered or there is a buddy in full view that administers the "stim" with a warning.

 

The better test would be to put the collar around a human's neck and have said human go about his/her business while a buddy presses the button everytime our human dog does something that the buddy does not like. Ofcourse an adult or older child would still have advance notice that the "stim" was coming, but they wouldn't know when. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to see how long it took for our human dog to tire of this little game and remove the collar.

 

An even better test would be to put the collar on a toddler and take the kid to the mall. This will enable the todder to be "free" and the parent would be unburdened of physically controlling the kid and teaching kid manners in public. While the kid is running free, the parent can then "stim" the child for running too far, touching the merchanise, talking to strangers or stealing candy. To this child, who is too young to understand the game, the stim would seem to come from no where. In this scenerio, how long do you think that it would take another mall visitor to notice our little game and call the cops? And how do you think that Child Protective Services would react when the parent explained that she/he just wanted their kid to experience freedom in the mall?

[border_collie_crazy]

no flack from me, I own one for my terrier lol, without it I am pretty sure I would have beaten him to death by now. for a long time I outright HATED that dog with a passion, I tried to get ride of him but it turns out, everyone else hated him too. he was an awful, horrible dog that turned me into a screaming machine full of rage. (he was 4 years old when I got him and pretty set in his ways) I have run into people since then who lived near him in his previous home... they still recognize him 7 years later because they hated him so much. I finally resorted to an e-collar....his attitude has not suffered, he is still a little jerk who is very full of himself, but now he checks his behaviour..instead of running around barking his head off for an hour straight while dodging anyone who tries to stop him and doesn't give a hoot about food..he will run around barking, and I can yell "RUSTY!!" and he will stop and come to me and I can reward him.

 

years ago and tried it on Happy to see if it would help her random fits of barking at nothing..it didn't...it didn't make her the slightest bit nervous, it just made her curious as to what was causing the sensation, ie she would start barking at nothing, i would stim her, she would immediately stop and search the room..confused upon finding nothing she would then walk into another room in the house and start barking at nothing, I would stim, and she would then do a careful search of the room... it was kind of hilarious, but I never put it on her again, since it obviously was not effective for her lol

[Jescano]

But its not being used to punish the dog for doing something it doesn't know is wrong, it's reminding the dog that just because you're not on a leash and that bush smells mighty fine, doesn't mean you can ignore me telling you to come. And as mentioned in my first post, the word no is attached to the "stim." Just like a "click" or "yes" is attached to a treat.

The better test would be to put the collar around a human's neck and have said human go about his/her business while a buddy presses the button everytime our human dog does something that the buddy does not like. Ofcourse an adult or older child would still have advance notice that the "stim" was coming, but they wouldn't know when. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to see how long it took for our human dog to tire of this little game and remove the collar.

I wouldn't mind playing a game like that as long as I knew what the rules were and the person shocking didn't make up any rules along the way. It wouldn't be fair if the person or dog didn't first know the rules.

 

 

I've seen him get kicked by a cow, something comparable to a cell vibration is not hurting him.

[Eileen Stein]

It may be a mistake to assume that dogs experience the sensation in the same manner that humans do. I think that everyone would agree that there are significant anatomical differences between a human arm (where these things are commonly tested) and a dog's neck. The other difference is that in the human tests, the "stim" is either self-administered or there is a buddy in full view that administers the "stim" with a warning.

 

The better test would be to put the collar around a human's neck and have said human go about his/her business while a buddy presses the button everytime our human dog does something that the buddy does not like. Ofcourse an adult or older child would still have advance notice that the "stim" was coming, but they wouldn't know when. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to see how long it took for our human dog to tire of this little game and remove the collar.

 

An even better test would be to put the collar on a toddler and take the kid to the mall. This will enable the todder to be "free" and the parent would be unburdened of physically controlling the kid and teaching kid manners in public. While the kid is running free, the parent can then "stim" the child for running too far, touching the merchanise, talking to strangers or stealing candy. To this child, who is too young to understand the game, the stim would seem to come from no where. In this scenerio, how long do you think that it would take another mall visitor to notice our little game and call the cops? And how do you think that Child Protective Services would react when the parent explained that she/he just wanted their kid to experience freedom in the mall?

 

Blackdawgs, did you even read what Jescano wrote? She didn't press the button every time the dog did something she didn't like. She used it only for disobedience of two specific commands that the dog already knew and had heard clearly. She also associated it with the word "No," so a dog of any intelligence at all would quickly learn that his failure to obey would result in the word "No" from his person, followed closely by the vibration. It did not "seem to come from nowhere."

 

Your point that dogs don't necessarily experience the sensation in the same manner humans do is a good one. That's why the best way of determining what the dog is feeling is by observing how the dog reacts to the collar and to training with the collar, in addition to administering the vibration to oneself.

[Maralynn]

Many dogs find head collars highly aversive. Yet there are videos by reward based trainers on conditioning a dog to a head collar. I don't get the disconnect between "dogs may find a vibration aversive so it must be avoided" and "dogs may find headcollars aversive so they must be properly conditioned to them". And why can't a dog be notified in advance of a vibration - recall command trained, recall command given, dog blows it off, it is followed up by a verbal correction and vibrating "tap"?

[geonni banner]

Many dogs find head collars highly aversive. Yet there are videos by reward based trainers on conditioning a dog to a head collar. I don't get the disconnect between "dogs may find a vibration aversive so it must be avoided" and "dogs may find headcollars aversive so they must be properly conditioned to them". And why can't a dog be notified in advance of a vibration - recall command trained, recall command given, dog blows it off, it is followed up by a verbal correction and vibrating "tap"?

Bingo.

 

I know a lot of dogs who are terrified of vacuum cleaners. Mine isn't. This is the dog that was terrified of just about everything when I got her. Whenever I vacuum my apartment I vacuum the dog. She sort of hangs around where I'm vacuuming until I do. She seems to like it. Go figure. In re: the "hugging thread," she likes to be squeezed really hard too. Would I use an e-collar on this dog? Probably not. She is unpredictably spooked by novel stimuli. But would I use one if I owned my neighbor's Jack Russell Terrier? In a heartbeat. He is afraid of nothing, and would take on a polar bear if he could get at it. And he wouldn't notice he'd been killed until somebody buried him.

 

If an e-collar on vibrate mode is no more "painful" that a cell phone on vibrate mode, then how is it abusive? Would the people who show the whites of their eyes and freak out every time an e-collar is mentioned still be so uptight if the collar only worked on vibrating mode? If not, why criticize the OP for doing what she did?

[Root Beer]

 

Not every country has the same casual acceptance as appears to be the case in the US that anything goes in dog training as long as it works.

 

 

Now, don't go lumping us all into one mindset. There are plenty of trainers in the US who do not have a casual attitude toward use of electric shock to train a dog. And there are plenty of trainers who do not hold "it works" as the only criteria worthy of consideration when making training decisions.

[teresaserrano]

I don't necessarily classify tools as evil. I classify people as bad or just plain stupid. Shocking a dog eveytime he's doing something wrong without the dog even knowing what he did is just plain stupid, ignorant and sometimes evil, if the person actually understands what they are doing.

 

But that's not what Jescano was talking about, and it was certainly not what I was talking about. I find it a bit childish to imediatly assume and jump to extremist conclusions just because we have slightly different views. And yes, I do mean slightly different, for as far as I can tell everybody on this forum has a deep love for their dogs, a deep comittment towards building a strong bond with them and mutual trust and good flow of communication. That's what unites us in spite of different views. And that's what makes our differences slight, because even if we do this and that different and think different about the other thing, we are all striving for the same goal. And that's what really matters, in a world where most dogs (those who actually do have a yard) don't ever leave that yard because their owners can't even be bothered to walk them.

 

So, when I say I would like to understand a bit better how e-collars work, it obviously doesn't mean that I would go around stupidly shocking dogs. That's simplistic and reductive. It's because I don't cry witch just because it's pollitically correct.

 

And I'm certainly old enough to be able to have actual thinking processes, without having to resort to accepting what others say as THE TRUTH, just because many have said it.

[d112358]

There's a local morning show near me that occasionally features things like 'shock collar trivia', which involve the use of an e-collar on people. There's a lot of cursing and yelping during those segments.

 

I think the use of vibrating collar to get a dog's attention is fine, and probably perfect for recall with a deaf dog. But I would prefer to use a dedicated device for that rather than one that has the ability for electronic stimulation, just so you don't accidentally zap him.

[Jescano]

I think it's quite obvious that the people who don't think ecollars can work, or are wiling to look at it with an open mind, will change their minds.

 

There's a local morning show near me that occasionally features things like 'shock collar trivia', which involve the use of an e-collar on people. There's a lot of cursing and yelping during those segments.

Then they are not using the guidelines of only using the amount of stimulation needed to get a reaction. It's not meant to make a dog feel pain.

 

I think that's what people don't seem to understand. You're supposed to start at the lowest level of stimulation in order to get a reaction...

[d112358]

I think it's quite obvious that the people who don't think ecollars can work, or are wiling to look at it with an open mind, will change their minds.

 

Then they are not using the guidelines of only using the amount of stimulation needed to get a reaction. It's not meant to make a dog feel pain.

 

I think that's what people don't seem to understand. You're supposed to start at the lowest level of stimulation in order to get a reaction...

 

In a perfect world, that's all people would use it for. But that's not how it's used in practice, and there isn't a lot of handler feedback that makes giving a max level shock look any different than causing the collar to vibrate, so if something gets messed up with a setting you do run the risk of giving an inadvertent hard correction.

 

If the e-collars automatically reset to vibrate every time you used them and you had to manually dial every time to get a harder level of correction, it would be a safer tool. People would still use it to abuse animals, but they would do it intentionally instead of inadvertently.

[Jescano]

It's not the collar that is the issue, It's the person using it. That is my point. The ecollar is not inherently bad. Anyone can use any training device to abuse a dog.

 

You can strangle a dog with a flat nylon collar and leash but everyone still encourages the use of those.

 

The ecollar is not an evil tool, it's just a tool.

 

Is my dog permanently damaged? No.

Does my dog have a fear of collars? No.

Did he ever yelp or cry out when stimulated? No.

Does my dog listen to commands better? Yes.

Even after a month of not having an ecollar on.

 

It's the people who can not control themselves, not the collar itself, that are bad.

[Shetlander]

It's the people who can not control themselves, not the collar itself, that are bad.

Yes, that is a very big problem with electronic collars. People who don't know understand how to train, using a device they don't understand how to use = poor dogs.

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Doggers,

 

I am pleased to agree with Ms. Shetlander. I believe an ecollar (shock collar) is only less dangerous than the tool it initially replaced (the #9 correction). I wish they couldn't be sold without evidence of training in their use. Even properly used, they establish a degree of human control that bothers me: the dog cannot escape the most brutish trainer. Ecollars change the balance of power and greatly reduce the dog's negotiating position.

 

There are people who'd value that; not me. Fairness is central to the relationship I want with my dogs.

 

I've seen sheepdogs ruined by ecollar training. (I should add that I've seen Border Collies ruined by treat training.)

 

I have twice used and can imagine using an ecollar again - to break a persistent, dangerous habit. But my timing is very much better than the average pet owner's and I've been instructed in ecollar use.

 

While very good trainers can use any tools; the poorest trainers can destroy a dog's mind with any method, any tool or any belief system.

 

I don't think our debate properly concerns working dogs: if you want to trial retrievers, get a mentor, buy a collar. If you want to compete in agility trials, get a mentor, buy a treat bag, if you want to train a sheepdog, get a mentor, buy a trained dog. Properly, we're talking about average pet owners training their own pet dog. When such a person comes to me, I ask around. I'd send him/her to Kristine (+R) because I've seen Kristine train. I'd send him/her to Trisha McConnell (modified +R) because I've seen her train. I'd send him/her to Tony Ancheta (Koehler method) and a good many others who use Koehler elements in their training. Many accomplished pet dog trainers use the ecollar as one tool among many. There are a very few who train with the ecollar exclusively and I wouldn't refer to any of them.

 

Donald McCaig

[medic09]

Well, I thought putting down my reviewing endogenous and synthetic catecholamines in treating cardiac failure vs septic shock would lead to some light reading here on the boards.

 

Personally, I largely agree with Donald McCaig's stated positions here. The biggest problem with electronic collars, in my opinion, is the ease of misuse at the dog's expense. If a handler is trained, it becomes another potentially useful tool if needed.

 

The assertion of moral stands here has already been pointed out as specious. Clearly we have some differing notions of morality here, although I suspect we would more likely agree about the extremes. I know people who thinking hitching up a draft horse is cruel. I don't. And as sensitive as I am to my animals, and as much as my particular religious beliefs oblige me to treat animals with due consideration; they are still my animals and not people. The morality of the issues may not be the same, although outwardly similar. It has already been pointed out that we shouldn't confuse law and morality. There is no necessary connection between legislation and morality.

 

I would like to know how many countries actually have a complete legal ban on electronic collars? I know Wales banned them, and heavily fined someone for using one. I know Quebec has a ban, but it is vaguely enough worded to arguably allow for appropriate use. Australia has a ban, but it allows for them in the context of electronic fences. Who else? In any case, that doesn't make the American barbarians (in this case).

 

There was also a blanket assertion that SAR dogs, MWDs, etc. are trained without use of electronic collars; so it must not be necessary or maybe it's even immoral. I must challenge the validity of that implied claim. For one thing, working dogs are sorted during their training. The dogs that don't respond sufficiently well and quickly enough to their training are often dropped from the program. And if a suitable home isn't found pretty quickly (in the case of MWDs or LE dogs), they're sent off to a shelter. If a suitable home isn't found then - well, we know what sometimes happens then. But the relevant point is that electronic collars aren't used because the dogs are carefully selected. The ones that don't conform are discarded in one way or another. On the other hand, civilian dog owners will often/usually prefer to keep their dog and try to work with it. Sometimes, the electronic collar is one of their tools. I have to point out, too, that as a former SAR dog handler I can attest that we had mentors and handlers who occasionally (rarely) used electronic collars. And of course, there are many hunting dogs in NA, mostly retrievers, who've been trained with them. Maybe that's just due to NA barbarism. From my personal observation, many of those handlers/trainers are very good to their dogs overall.

 

I honestly thought this topic nearly taboo here; so I'm glad to see it came up and is getting a good airing. I think this will prove to be somewhat enlightening as I shut up and go back to lurking this thread.

[brndlbc]

medic09 wrote: "I would like to know how many countries actually have a complete legal ban on electronic collars?"

 

And of those countries, how many have banned bits and spurs when riding horses? When used improperly, a bit and set of spurs can and will cause equal pain...

[teresaserrano]

I completely agree with Mr. McCaig and medic09.

 

When I said I would consider learning more about how e-collars work, I forgot to add that I haven't just arrived to the dog world.

 

Not that I know much. There's a whole world to learn. And although I've had dogs all my life, I only arrived at the studiyng of dog behaviour and training 6 years ago. But that has become my life, apart from working. I have an increasingly large library on the subject, with representations from all points of view. I've attended and continue to attend many seminars and workshops on dog behaviour, dog training, tricks and dog sports, given by people with the most varioius beliefs regarding dog training. I took a 1 year course on dog training and subsequently help with the beginners classes where I train. I'm always trying to learn more. And that's why I'd be interested to learn, from an experienced mentor I respected, if and how an e-collar might be usefull in helping with some specific problems.

 

My dog doesn't have problems I can't quickly and easily solve. to tell the truth, she doesn't have problems period. Which is probably due to her having a fantastic character and being well raised, with a good balance of discipline, freedom and fun. Both nature and nurture are working well here. But she's not representative of all dogs in all situations.

 

By the way, I believe the "american" comentary was directed at me. But I'm portuguese.

[Shetlander]

By the way, I believe the "american" comentary was directed at me. But I'm portuguese.

 

Funny!

[Journey]

 

If military, police, service, gun dogs and SAR dogs etc can be trained without using shock collars, as they are elsewhere despite what you may be told by some, then I really don't see an excuse for their existence. What is unique about a pet dog that requires such treatment compared with the challenges faced by those dogs that work for a living?..

Can you tell me the fail rate of the types of dogs and their work you listed above? What happens to the wash outs? The challenge to the pet dog owners is that it could result in a dead family pet that blew off a recall. The E collar is just another tool. Not *all* dogs need it but those that do may live another day because their owner cared and researched.

[Jescano]

Can you tell me the fail rate of the types of dogs and their work you listed above? What happens to the wash outs? The challenge to the pet dog owners is that it could result in a dead family pet that blew off a recall. The E collar is just another tool. Not *all* dogs need it but those that do may live another day because their owner cared and researched.

There was also a blanket assertion that SAR dogs, MWDs, etc. are trained without use of electronic collars; so it must not be necessary or maybe it's even immoral. I must challenge the validity of that implied claim. For one thing, working dogs are sorted during their training. The dogs that don't respond sufficiently well and quickly enough to their training are often dropped from the program. And if a suitable home isn't found pretty quickly (in the case of MWDs or LE dogs), they're sent off to a shelter. If a suitable home isn't found then - well, we know what sometimes happens then. But the relevant point is that electronic collars aren't used because the dogs are carefully selected. The ones that don't conform are discarded in one way or another. On the other hand, civilian dog owners will often/usually prefer to keep their dog and try to work with it. Sometimes, the electronic collar is one of their tools. I have to point out, too, that as a former SAR dog handler I can attest that we had mentors and handlers who occasionally (rarely) used electronic collars. And of course, there are many hunting dogs in NA, mostly retrievers, who've been trained with them. Maybe that's just due to NA barbarism. From my personal observation, many of those handlers/trainers are very good to their dogs overall.