Dog Snapped At Baby, Help

[corvus]

Otherwise, why would you push to ban something from whence there is no reported evidence of harm yet support something where there is sufficient at least anecdotal evidence of harm. This is what the RSPCA have done.

Whoa there, Nellie. While there may be little evidence that prong collars "harm" dogs physically, there is evidence to suggest that dogs that are trained with P+ are more likely to show aggressive behaviour directed towards the handler than dogs that are not trained with P+. However you might like to think of a prong collar, they wouldn't work if they didn't constitute positive punishment. Those who have expressed concern about pairing punishment with children have, I think, their concerns grounded in a solid understanding of classical conditioning. Furthermore, there is no evidence that I am aware of that prong collars are a "kinder" tool than others available. If you know of such evidence, I would love to see it. There is also no evidence that head collars cause harm that I am aware of. Again, please enlighten me if you know otherwise. Head collars are used extensively in the treatment of anxiety and aggression problems if the literature on the matter is to be believed.

So I think that it is unfair to judge the RSPCA's campaign on the basis of "evidence of harm". There have been no studies on it that I know of, but I do think it is fair to consider it a tool designed to administer punishments and I do think there is potential to cause "emotional harm" with that, and let's not mention the potential to make aggressive behaviour worse, or even provoke it in the first place.

They are surely a valuable tool in the right circumstances, but not something to play around with. Doesn't quite warrant banning IMO, but that's neither here nor there.

[poodlefan]

Corvus:

There is also no evidence that head collars cause harm that I am aware of.

PM me your email addy and I'll provide you with a letter from one of Australia's leading chiropractic vets that says otherwise.

[huski]

So I think that it is unfair to judge the RSPCA's campaign on the basis of "evidence of harm". There have been no studies on it that I know of, but I do think it is fair to consider it a tool designed to administer punishments and I do think there is potential to cause "emotional harm" with that, and let's not mention the potential to make aggressive behaviour worse, or even provoke it in the first place.

Following your logic, how can the RSPCA justify banning prongs, but not other tools that also work on the concept of P+? Check chains, head collars, no-pull harnesses etc all work on the same principle as a prong.

[Erny]

Whoa there, Nellie. ... They are surely a valuable tool in the right circumstances, but not something to play around with. Doesn't quite warrant banning IMO, but that's neither here nor there.

Lol .... don't "Nellie" me, Corvus. Apart from the other points and questions posed by posters following your post Corvus, I would suggest to you that no tool is "something to play around with". But please don't let my comment here get in the way of the points that PF and Huski have both raised, each of which is also very valid. I have seen far better responses with far less correction from a PPCollar than I have seen from any other such as head collar, which the RSPCA very much support.

Edited January 27, 2011 by Erny

[poodlefan]

Ah yes the wonderful and benign headcollar.... that has aversive effects on many dogs whether they are pulling on the lead or not. Effective training method - not in my book.

A device that when first fitted sees many dogs clawing at their faces to try to remove it while folk tell you "he'll get used to it".

How "kind" is a device that I've seen poorly fitted so that it rests on the inside of dog's eyelids. Or used frequently enough to cause permanent indentations in a dog's face.

Then we attach an extendable lead to the this device that was never designed to exert constant pressure on the dog's head.

They have their uses but to see them advocated as "kinder" than an ordinary flat collar beggars belief.

Edited January 27, 2011 by poodlefan

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Ah yes the wonderful and benign headcollar.... that has aversive effects on many dogs whether they are pulling on the lead or not. Effective training method - not in my book.

A device that when first fitted sees many dogs clawing at their faces to try to remove it while folk tell you "he'll get used to it".

How "kind" is a device that I've seen poorly fitted so that it rests on the inside of dog's eyelids. Or used frequently enough to cause permanent indentations in a dog's face.

Then we attach an extendable lead to the this device that was never designed to exert constant pressure on the dog's head.

They have their uses but to see them advocated as "kinder" than an ordinary flat collar beggars belief.

i totally agree with this PF. i think head collars are cruel and dangerous especially when people can buy them without getting any instructions and they use them readily because they are seen as a "kind" tool

[percyk]

i have seen behaviour like this at a fellow dog owners house

lots of dogs and one dominant one who has started to snap at the next in the hierarchy if hes told off...like shooed out of the kitchen for instance or chastised for going near the garbage...hell roll his deputy

this is a dangerous situation...please seek advice and keep the dog away from your child...i think the child has no status and is being treated like a litter mate...an inferior one