Erny

Is it? I did get the impression that tlc was referring to dogs being left alone with CC's on, even though not necessarily clear due to the "when not walking/training" comment. And I think a good number of people followed suit, but I got the feeling they too didn't mean that the CC can't be left on at all ever unless a lead is attached or the dog is under command. Seeing that's how people were responding is why I mentioned "not unsupervised". I will leave a CC on a dog in between times. I could give a multitude of examples of the times I'd do this. Could be when I've come home from a walk but we're going to do something else soon. Could be when I've gone to someone else's place or out somewhere for a run and letting dog off for a sniff around. And so on. If I'm watching it's not likely the dog will come to grief and I'm not that anal about removing the CC on those occasions. ETA: Sorry - don't mind me. Read all posts, Erny . Seems tlc was meaning "ever".

Check Chain only on when supervised.

Is this just for over night? .... already answered in previous post. How come no food or water? What does that do?

It looks like it. Yuck. Heebee Jeebee things they are. Hope all is ok Teekay and good on you for being vigilant enough to find it.

That's what I'm trying to do. Have I not written this very well, for that point to not be clear? I'll edit my post. Have put in more info than what is required anyway.

Cheers

Echo ..... can the above be quoted along with a request that it be affirmed in writing by the ANKC?

Apart from anything else, one might think it reasonable to expect this latest 'directive' in writing by way of response to our letters ??? I haven't received a response from either DogsVic nor ANKC as yet (to the letters I submitted in writing to them). But it is early days and if this "administrative error" has only just been detected (???) then I guess a response might feasibly be expected to be received by mid/late next week. Hopefully.

Well done . I agree - this is needed in writing. Can't fathom what "Administrative Error" would allow this to have gone as far as it did and for as long as it did .... but hey - it is the result at the end that counts. Well done to the Breed Clubs who contributed and to the individuals who make up those breed clubs .................. and also to the individuals who don't .

Also while I'm there .... this might be handy for some? Veterinary Medicines Adverse Experience Reporting

I'm searching through for something else at the moment, but stumbled on this link to "APVMA Position Statement". Thought I'd just link it here while I was at it, for anyone who would like to read up some more on it. APVMA Position Statement - Vaccinations It contains links to other reports/articles that provide a bit of reading and may provide some insight to those who seek the information.

If you google, it will come up with her website to give you her electorate address. From memory, I think her office is in Brighton. I'd just send her a copy of what you've already written .... but just add a couple of sentences to introduce it and to acknowledge that it is nothing that she can use to make a difference now, but to know that it of course increases our (your) concern for what we already suspected is likely to occur at some stage .... and that filing this for some future use may potentially be helpful down the track. I wouldn't. I wouldn't credit those sorts of people (who think and act as you describe) with the moral conscience required to worry about people watching. They'll just do what they do, but they'll do it with more careful stealth.

Actually - second thoughts. Should you write to the Council? Isn't that only going to have them being careful about what they say out loud? I'd rather they trip up over their laws and powers. It is the only way we're going to be able to get rid of them. Although elections are coming up. ETA: Oops! Staranais posted whilst I was still typing (and got distracted - so took a while to submit). We're on the same page, me thinks, Staranais .

And for what it is worth (as there is hearsay and also assumption involved in the relation), perhaps relate this to Sue Pennicuik who is the "Greens" politician who argued against the Bill in the Upper House. She wouldn't be able to do much with it, but perhaps if you put it in writing as you have done on DOL, it is one she'll be able to keep in her folder that might add up with others to be worth something later on. Sue remains interested in the affects of the laws in this Bill and has asked for 'stories' (factual of course and actual) that can evidence how the laws WILL be unfair (to person and/or dog) and how things won't run as seamlessly as the Labor Govt polly has promised.

Ok - so now I'm curious. Was your puzzle solved?

Don't necessarily agree with the 2nd half of Number 1, nor with Number 5. For some behaviours, I don't think there's an issue with the dog knowing the punishment is coming from the handler. In fact, sometimes I don't think it is a bad idea if the dog does.

It goes further than just being about aversions; suppressions; etc. Corvus. It goes to Pack - respect; trust; etc.

I'm inclined to agree - and I would not be using an e-collar for the purpose regardless.

:D That's all I have to say.

How long have you been trying to spike her interest into tug? I work with dogs who come in for B&T and they might initially take no notice in the tug. I use food or something else instead, but intermittently work with the tug (if it is suitable). Sometimes it can surprise you, if you don't give up too easily ..... and what wasn't apparent to you (or even necessarily to the dog) starts to grow and all of a sudden bloom. Some take a day or two. Some take days. Sometimes it can bloom towards the end of the dog's training stay at the kennels, but I still use it and encourage the dog's owners to keep going with it. In our classes, we use drive toy motivation exercises to assist with training. We've had clients and their dogs who show no interest and after some encouragement from us to keep trying, have had dogs 'blooming' into it come the 2nd or 3rd week's lesson. But again - you keep trying it, but flick/switch quickly to and from other reward systems that work.

I taught my previous girl (Kal - bhcs) left and right ("labor" and "liberal" respectively) by simply building word association as we turned ordinary street (or other) corners along our on-lead walks. This assisted for when we ventured into bike riding and I did find that it was very helpful. But she was such a compliant-ready-happy girl and not the least bit head-strong by comparison to what I have now, so it was easy.

That sounds great, TrinaJ. Please let us know how it goes .

My dog comes with me. No argument.

I'm somewhat inclined to agree with Echo. I think the topic deserves a "special meeting" of all the breed Clubs given its importance and urgency and I would have thought the working breed clubs would be the first to be on top of this.

E-Collars, or Remote Trainers (which can be e-collars or spray collars .... but in your instance seem to be e-collar types) can be and are VERY great training tools, IMO. BUT the tool doesn't make the tool great. It's the person at the other end who operates it, who makes it great (or not). Hhhhmmmm .... where to start? No - it is NOT as cruel as you think it is. In fact, it is not cruel at all. Does it have the potential to be cruel? Yes. But then so does anything and everything that we might apply/use on our dogs if we're really into abuse. Some people think that it is more likely for the e-collar to be abused. I tend not to think that way. The RSPCA do not endorse it. But then the RSPCA do a number of things that aren't necessarily deemed sensible. The RSPCA, in a court case they undertook against an e-collar manufacturer (Innotek) manufactured evidence purporting that a collar caused burn marks to a dog. In a subsequent court appeal the fabrication of this evidence by the RSPCA became apparent. The RSPCA have been on a witch hunt in an attempt to ban the use of the e-collar for many years. Just as they went on a hunt to ban the use of the PPCollar and in Victoria, succeeded in doing so. Even though there is no recorded evidence of harm from the use of a PPCollar. Even though Victoria is the only State in Australia and for that matter, the only place in the world where its use in training is banned. The RSPCA support the use of head-collars. Even though there IS evidence of harm from the use of those training restraints. So go figure on how the RSPCA thinks. There have been many discussions about the use of e-collars on DOL. I use the collar engaging "Negative Reinforcement" methodology. This permits me to use very low stimulation level. Good use of an e-collar in training can allow dogs to have a stretch of leg off-lead where they otherwise might not. They can also be an excellent tool when used well, to aid in the rehabilitation of 'troubled' dogs. The e-collar does not affect the muscular or skeletal structure of dogs, such as the other of our training restraints/tools can and do. I've never heard of the "Police Dog Training Society" ??? Where's that? What has suddenly sparked your interest in E-Collars, Micky Moo?