Remote training collars

I must say that I am no expert, but have a healthy regard for those who understand dog body language.
This sounds quite innocuous, but.....
I am interested in this context of the stories of "shut down" dogs with harnesses and thunder jackets. On the surface we think they are just "calming the dog", but what is the difference between this and being shut down?
How do we know what these collars are really doing to the dogs that wear them? Including the tone and vibrate options.

 

I also refer back to my earlier question of whether the people using these collars are also using force fetch. I understand these are two separate "training" issues, but I don't believe for a second that someone who is prepared to use a force fetch method would even pause to consider that the fact they may be causing their dog mild to moderate (to extreme) pain is of any consequence.

 

Just shock collars were made unlawful in Wales - the painful ones.

Defra (that's a Government department in the UK) spent nearly £0.5m on a study of shock collars. It's true that objective measures of stress were not observed in all dogs, but the study concluded that even within the supposedly 'benign' ranges specified by the manufactures, and used exactly in accordance with the user manuals, shock collars had a negative impact on the welfare of dogs. The study can be found by following the links to the UK kennel club, posted by Fiona above.

One stat is that "1 in 3 dogs yelp at the first use of electric shock collar and 1 in 4 yelp at subsequent uses (Defra commissioned study AW1402, 2013)". This is not 'misuse' of a shock collar. It is the use of the shock collar as the makers intend it to be used.

Yelping, and vocalising, is defined as a symptom of 'severe pain' by most (many orthopedic) studies I've looked at, so it's pretty reasonable to suspect that the dogs that weren't yelping were still in some state of stress....

 

I have never seen a dog with an e-collar that "looked beaten and intimidated" I'm sure there must be some, but there are dogs that look beaten and intimidated who don't have e-collars. On the few occasions I've used the shock on our dogs, they come running back tails wagging, and are expecting a treat. I don't know if they are "collar smart" but they are happy when we get out a collar since they know it might mean they are going for a walk. (We sometimes leave them on inside, just to get used to the idea of wearing them), FWIW, I have the new Dogtra ARC collars, and the vibrate mode seems to be ineffective on both our dogs. On the older 200NCP the vibrate did get their attention was usually all that was required, but the vibration on the new smaller ARC collars in not as strong, and neither dog seems to even notice it.

All of the e-collar instructions I've seen say that you use the lowest setting possible. If the dog vocalizes or even looks very startled, the level is too high.

Recently our Nordic Patrol was involved in a search for a Golden Retriever that had been cross country skiing with his family all day. He stayed close by them, until the end of the day when he suddenly took of and would not come back to them. They felt he just wanted to play some more and was not ready to quit. He was eventually found three days later just as a big storm was coming in. He was cold and hungry but otherwise OK. He was obviously not as well trained as he should have been, but it seems like an e-collar would have been a good back up at that point. Garmin has one with GPS tracking that would have been really nice at that point.

 

..

This is a separate issue. A good level of training is important for a dogs safety. But your assumption that this can only be achieved through punishment is incorrect.

 

Just googled 'force fetch' as I had no idea what everyone was talking about. I'm struggling to understand how people can be publicly advertising that they purposely hurt their dog in order to train them??

"I will pinch the ear flap on the dog and hold the dowel in front of him. If he yelps, bites or barks, the dowel is placed in his mouth and the pressure instantly released from the ear." (http://www.versatiledogs.com/ask/ret8.html)

I don't understand how this is different to someone saying "when your dog disobeys you, hit them across the head hard enough to make them yelp". Where is the distinction between "training" and animal cruelty?

According to Australia's RSPCA, animal cruelty includes (but not limited to
"Animal cruelty can take many different forms. It includes overt and intentional acts of violence towards animals" (http://www.rspca.org.au/animal-cruelty/what-animal-cruelty)

Hmm.. Sounds pretty similar to some of these "training methods"...

 

Normal dog equipment, like flat collars, can certainly be abused and used in a way that causes pain. But even though there are many other ways to abuse a dog this doesn't mean we should see shock collars as acceptable.

 

"This is a separate issue. A good level of training is important for a dogs safety. But your assumption that this can only be achieved through punishment is incorrect."

I never suggested that a good level of training could only be achieved though punishment. I see many well trained dogs that have never worn an e-collar.

I still believe e-collars are a viable alternative, and not cruel when used correctly. As you pointed out they are much more common in the US and especially with Hunting Trial and Field Trial training.

 

Even dogs that are beaten and abused will wag their tails at the human who beat and abused them - often in submission, aiming to please, in order not to be beaten and abused some more. It's true the humans that own those dogs see 'happy dogs'. I don't though. (I'm not suggesting anyone beats their dog, for the avoidance of doubt, just making a point about humans seeing what they want to see).

It requires quite a high tolerance to cognitive dissonance to reconcile this to believing a device isn't harmful, though, doesn't it? That is, it requires an attitude that the level of pain just below which a dog will display obvious signs of pain and distress is somehow "ok"....."oops, that one made my dog yelp out in pain, better turn it down a notch". In my view, that's no way to train a dog.

 

For those that are interested there is a campaign in Canada to ban shock collars, just seen it on the Positive Gundogs FB I'm not sure if it is OK to post this here but it seems pretty relevant to the current discussions, and happy for the Mods to,edit
/remove as they see appropriate

https://petitions.parl.gc.ca/en/Petition/Sign/e-1
"We’re lobbying the Canadian government to ban the use of shock collars for training animals. Our goal is to reach 30,000 e-signatures by April 2nd, 2016.

*Since Dogs Can’t Sign Petitions, We Humans are Going to Have to Step In.*

Here's what we need YOU to do:
1. Sign the petition www.bit.ly/banshockcollars
2. Record your dog’s best (or worst) trick. Get creative!
Introduce your pet like this: “This is Fido. He didn’t need a shock collar to learn this trick!”
3. Post your video to Facebook or Instagram and challenge 3 friends to complete the challenge in 48 hours. Tag it with ‪#‎BanShockCollars‬.

Now go forth, furry-friend allies - and make history!""