Defra consultation: Electric training collars for cats and dogs

In any event, even if we can put aside the ethics of using pain to communicate with our dogs, surely we can agree that it is far more humane to teach our dogs (or anyone, for that matter) what we do want, rather than what we don’t? Imagine a scenario where you were in a foreign land where you didn’t understand the culture or the language. Every time you made a wrong move you got a harsh word and a frown. No physical abuse, just a stern word. You’re there, not understanding what is wanted from you, and yet you’re told off for simple movements that come naturally.
Is that going to make you more or less likely to try new behaviours in the future? I don’t think we need to think too hard about that one, do we? Yes, the “undesirable” behaviours may be suppressed, but at what cost? When we then want to train a new behaviour, our subject is more reluctant to try it out, for fear of getting it wrong. Human or canine, it’s been shown time and again that the best way to learn (to promote continued learning alongside good mental health) is through encouragement and reinforcement rather than punishment. Punishment (by which I mean the technical term - reducing the likelihood of a behaviour (that you don’t want)) certainly can work to teach behaviours. No-one can argue with that. But what we can say is that subjects of any species who are trained through punishment are far less likely to offer novel behaviours in the future, which therefore inhibits the potential for future learning, and are also more likely to exhibit behavioural problems such as frustration and aggression. Which is really common sense when you consider how you would feel if put in a situation where you are being taught by being told “no” all the time.

 

It seems to me that restraining a dog on a leash is adverse. I certainly would not like being held or restrained by a collar around my neck.

Cooper thinks that being brushed is adverse. I will not hold her or restrain her when trying because I don't want to make it worse. Eventually I hope with enough treats to be able to convince her that it not a bad thing, but right now she is convinced it is evil.

I have never trimmed Cooper's nails because she does not like the look of clippers. I can hold her paws, as long as I don't have any clippers. Tilly tries to get away anytime I touch her paws, because we have clipped her nails, and she hates it.

Our first Lab was diabetic, and had to have insulin shots 2x per day as well as the occasional blood stick. While not a lot of pain, it certainly did not feel good, but we did it because we had to.

 

So you won't brush your dog or clip it's nails, because you think it's coercive but think it's ok to give them electric shocks. That makes no ration sense. Yes you had to give diabetic medication but that was a life or death thing, so you argument still is illogical. The electric shocks are given to teach with pain there is a great deal of difference I'm sad for you that you can't understand the difference

 

Actually I don't normally use e-collars, and seldom ever actually do a correction with them. When the dog do wear one, it is for Plan B, if they are about to get into a dangerous situation and recall does not work. Cooper has great recall normally, and Tilly doesn't stray far anyway but she is deaf. Neither of them have any car sense so I have to keep them close when we are near a road. Even then they don't usually have e-collars on.

I think everyone over estimates the pain. If it were my neck I would much rather feel a little tingle than hit the end of a leash, and yes I have shocked my self with them, actually many more times than the dogs.

 

That's the whole point you do it too yourself through choice,. Dogs have it enforced on them like slaves. I learned long ago you can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

 

Not one of these is an argument for using an e-collar.

Firstly, (and the word is "aversive", not "adverse"), yes, using a collar can be aversive, if it's not introduced properly. Yes, it can be used as a punisher. Giving lead jerks, for example, would be punishing. But introduced correctly, conditioning it so that the dog has a positive experience with it, then the collar itself has no reason to be aversive. Yes, of course, restraining your dog so that they can't do what they want is potentially punishing. It is used as a negative punisher all the time to reduce a dog's pulling. It doesn't have to be, though. For Luna, I trained her loose leash walking almost exclusively without a leash, using positive reinforcement so that, when the leash went on, there was no pulling, so no punishment. The leash is there to keep her safe in extraordinary circumstances, that's all.

Sometimes we have no choice in order to comply with laws or to keep our dogs safe that we have to use slightly aversive tools. That's what happens when we want dogs to live in our society. But there is a huge difference between using the minimally aversive method, and going out of your way to train with pain, (or the threat of it) which is what e-collars are designed to do. You surely can't think there is no difference between a regular collar and an e-collar just because a regular collar can be unpleasant? This is a straw man argument.

If being brushed is aversive to your dog, then don't brush your dog. They don't need to be brushed. Easy. This has nothing to do with e-collars.

Trimming nails is a matter of health if the nails don't wear themselves down enough. There are many methods to give the dog a choice in nail husbandry that don't involve clippers. If your dog hates the clippers then they were introduced too quickly and without proper counter-conditioning. This can be rectified with patience and without it being aversive if done correctly. Alternatively, training the dog to use a scratch board would have the same effect. Again, this has nothing to do with e-collars.

For the injections, that is a medical necessity and falls under the "minimally aversive" umbrella. If you want to do your best by your dog, you would do as the handlers in some zoos do, by teaching the dog through choice-based methods that they have control over having the injection. This has nothing to do with e-collars.

Fine, wear one yourself. You have that choice. Your dog doesn't.

Training through pain is unethical. You are not explaining to your dog what you want him or her to do, you are simply punishing them for doing something you don't want them to do. If you really think that it's not punishing then you have no reason to use it - you can use rewards instead. If you have the presence of thought to put it on in certain environments and not in others, then you know those environments are potentially dangerous - use management and training instead. Your dog will not be "hitting the end of a leash" if you train them to walk with you. If you put them on a harness, then there will be no pulling around the throat at all. Nope, there is no argument here for the use of training with electricity.