Can Electric Pulse Collars Be Used Humanely

[JulesP]

It is really hard to discuss training with +R only people because it turns into an emotive argument, and it is as though the only two options for training is handing over a reward to your dog or beating your dog into submission.

Really? Sorry but the so called balanced trainers on this board are just as hard to talk to.

Total lack of respect on all sides IMO.

And the poor +R people have been pretty much hounded off from putting their viewpoint across. The people I respect the most on here never say anything about training anymore because of this.

[Weasels]

So say a feral cat detection dog moving through scrub way out ahead of you. How do you use a clicker out there when sometimes you can't even see the dog? How do you make sure when the dog goes out of sight it will remember the lesson about snakes when it's so driven with it's nose planted in excitement?

Sorry, but how do you give a correction when you can't see the dog? Surely the principle is the same either way - teach the dog, train the dog, proof the dog. Once the dog is out doing the work it's too late for the clicker.

Total lack of respect on all sides IMO.

And the poor +R people have been pretty much hounded off from putting their viewpoint across. The people I respect the most on here never say anything about training anymore because of this.

*nod*

[huski]

Really? Sorry but the so called balanced trainers on this board are just as hard to talk to.

Total lack of respect on all sides IMO.

And the poor +R people have been pretty much hounded off from putting their viewpoint across. The people I respect the most on here never say anything about training anymore because of this.

Firstly, I don’t refer to myself a ‘balanced’ trainer.

Secondly, I don’t see where the lack of respect is from myself or other people in favour of the tool? It is only the people who have posted against e-collars that have become emotive in their arguments accusing anyone who is using them as abusive, inhumane etc. I think the posters in support of e-collars as a tool have responded really well considering they are being accused of mistreating dogs and not being educated enough as trainers etc.

This is and always has been a heated topic.

[JulesP]

So say a feral cat detection dog moving through scrub way out ahead of you. How do you use a clicker out there when sometimes you can't even see the dog?

You do realise that people who train feral cat detection dogs do actually use +R to teach this?

How do you make sure when the dog goes out of sight it will remember the lesson about snakes when it's so driven with it's nose planted in excitement?

This is not one of the problems with +R that -R seeks to solve and I would suggest that anyone who chooses to use an e-collar simply because the dog is excited and out of sight should not be training detection dogs.

Sensible post as always :)

[huski]

Don't assume what I do and don't know. I understand completely the operation of an e-collar. I've used them before - I have an educated opinion. Otherwise I would not have engaged in this debate.

You're the one referring to e-collar training as 'electrocuting' the dog, if you know that's not how the tool works, why say that

How is it a disservice to elevate the status of the dog?

It isn't just a disservice, but arrogance IMO, to assume dogs think and feel like we do. We are two entirely different species, dogs are amazing creatures and deserve to be treated as such. I don't love anything in the world more than I love my dogs, but they are dogs, not people, and should be treated and trained in a way that aligns best with their ability to learn.

[JulesP]

Really? Sorry but the so called balanced trainers on this board are just as hard to talk to.

Total lack of respect on all sides IMO.

And the poor +R people have been pretty much hounded off from putting their viewpoint across. The people I respect the most on here never say anything about training anymore because of this.

Firstly, I don’t refer to myself a ‘balanced’ trainer.

Secondly, I don’t see where the lack of respect is from myself or other people in favour of the tool? It is only the people who have posted against e-collars that have become emotive in their arguments accusing anyone who is using them as abusive, inhumane etc. I think the posters in support of e-collars as a tool have responded really well considering they are being accused of mistreating dogs and not being educated enough as trainers etc.

This is and always has been a heated topic.

I wasn't aware that you were actually a trainer.

[huski]

I wasn't aware that you were actually a trainer.

I thought you were aiming that comment at me, hence me saying I don't refer to myself that way?

But no need to get snarky...

Edited August 6, 2013 by huski

[shapeshifter]

I used to work for a guy that trained liberty horses, he used/uses a version of e-collars. They are brilliant and work quickly and efficiently. He has/had some of the best liberty horses in the world.

He was against all forms of animal violence in filming.

A small 'shock' in a 600kg animal is not going to do damage, it's an attention getter (yes not a word) for an immediate reaction rather than standing on the other side of the paddock and expecting them to obey a hand and voice command when they have no idea what you want.

The collar was used the first few times, some of the really smart horses got it the first time and never had to have it used again, others would take a few times. I remember one really really smart horse that didn't need it at all.

I liken it to an electric fence, when you touch one does it do you any damage - no it doesn't, the e-collars and others work exactly the same way, no damage just a 'oh shit it's on, I won't do that again', most animals will react the same way.

[BlackJaq]

Ah, but stock electric fences are also cruel... At least to companion animals.. And not allowed to be used near dogs and cats in NSW (I don't know about other states)

[Weasels]

I still flinch before I touch any fence after being shocked by a 'leccy as a kid. And I can rationalise exactly what happened and why.

[Aidan3]

I liken it to an electric fence, when you touch one does it do you any damage - no it doesn't, the e-collars and others work exactly the same way, no damage just a 'oh shit it's on, I won't do that again', most animals will react the same way.

Like most analogies, you have to be careful how far you can take them. An electric fence has a clear contingency, the animal [usually] knows exactly what produced the shock and thus, how to avoid it in future. There are endless studies of what happens when the animal doesn't figure out quickly how to avoid the shock; and those symptoms range from transient distress to chronic anxiety and even depression.

When we're talking about a bark collar, or a remote collar used to train something with a very clear contingency (e.g kitchen counter surfing), the risk is low provided the trainer has good timing (and with an e-collar, you're marking not only the onset of response but the cessation of the response). Once you start to use the collar in more complex scenarios, the risks increase.

The risk of physical damage from the collar is negligible whether it's a 600kg horse or a 10kg dog, unless you leave it on for too long. I don't know if there has ever been a confirmed case where a collar has malfunctioned and caused electrical burns, the images I've seen have been of necrotic lesions which are not caused by shock.

[BlackJaq]

I touch mine regularly when I forget it is on and have had no ill effects.... I only use small portable units to contain horses and sheep though, not cattle strength. I guess you have to differentiate (and while the shocks are unpleasant, I have not found them to be painful as such)

ETA: Oh, this was in response to TheLBD

Edited August 6, 2013 by BlackJaq

[Weasels]

I touch mine regularly when I forget it is on and have had no ill effects.... I only use small portable units to contain horses and sheep though, not cattle strength. I guess you have to differentiate (and while the shocks are unpleasant, I have not found them to be painful as such)

ETA: Oh, this was in response to TheLBD

I got bitten by a cattle fence as a scrawny 10yo. It definitely hurt! We still use them, but I won't be letting my dogs or kids find out the hard way if I can help it

[corvus]

A lot of people are assuming here that because people disagree with them they must be ignorant. This is not necessarily the case. There are world class trainers with decades of experience with training in all sorts of difficult environments that do not use e-collars because they don't like them or don't see a need for them. There are internationally recognised experts in treating aggressive dogs who don't use them. Are they all ignorant? Some people are very well educated on this issue and yet somehow hold differing opinions to others that are very well educated on the issue. Imagine that.

I would be highly unlikely to let a professional trainer use an e-collar with my dogs. We all know what 'professional' means in this industry. Crap all. There are professional trainers out there creating more problems than they solve, like the one who made the mess Aidan is now cleaning up. I also remain unconvinced that for the majority of the pet owning public it is necessary to train snake avoidance. We spend more time in the bush than most in our area and are lucky if we see 3 snakes a year. I've never seen or experienced a snake looking for trouble. They get pissed off when trouble finds them. Our dogs have not much prey drive and good recalls. I'm more concerned about paralysis ticks than snakes. I'm more concerned about the road than either.

I don't think the chief question should be "Can electronic collars be used humanely?", rather we should be asking what is the likelihood of them being used humanely and how would we judge that? Really, go read the Blackwell studies. Some answers are presented to some pertinent questions about e-collar use that rarely get much consideration in these kinds of discussions.

[lovemesideways]

That's not at all what I base my theory on, its simply one piece of tangible evidence that these devices ARE misused EVERYDAY. I don't care how 'properly' you use your e-collar; the principle remains the same. It's aversive, just like a check chain and we now know, thanks to scientific literature, that these devices are no longer required in modern canine training. Anything you can do with an e-collar you can do utilising correct positive/progressive reinforcement techniques - without risking the side effects of aversive training.

I'm going to call bullshit. In theory maybe you can train everything with positives. The problem is, reality gets in the way. I can't predict what will happen, I can't control the whole world, and I for one am not willing or trusting enough to manage a dog for years, because that's how long it may take (if ever) to progress as far as you would by adding in a simple aversive.

I can see from your use of "progressive reinforcement" that there is sadly no use discussing. I honestly hope that you never end up owning the wrong dog that you wont be able to train with your progressive reinforcement, thats not a heartache I would wish on anyone. Next time you're in Sydney, you're MORE than welcome to come and see for yourself my poor poor dogs who have suffered the horror of aversives occasionally. You can meet the dog who would flip out at even hearing a cat meow (frothing at the mouth), she and the cat now spoon on their bed and play biteyface.

So you believe in +R training only then??

Yes. I've only seen negative outcomes from dogs that are struck, screamed at, intimidated, collar corrected, and/or electrocuted. Short term interruptions of unwanted behaviour, yep absolutely belting or similar will stop a dog doing what its doing. Long term outcomes, a resounding no and more often than not a modification in the animal's behaviour that results in the next step in the aggression continuum being taken. We should all know on here that a canine will pair negative environmental stimuli a lot easier than that of positive, unfortunately. Sometimes it only takes one exposure.

Because all aversives are obviously the equivalent of abusing a dog by hitting them or screaming at them. What a limited way to view things.

You really do speak a lot, do you perhaps have any real results to show? Would love to see something, videos of dogs with such severe behaviour problems that you have fixed with progressive reinforcement? After all, I could do loads of research into swimming for example, but if I've never even been in a pool, then theres not much weight to what I say.

How is it a disservice to elevate the status of the dog?

It isn't just a disservice, but arrogance IMO, to assume dogs think and feel like we do. We are two entirely different species, dogs are amazing creatures and deserve to be treated as such. I don't love anything in the world more than I love my dogs, but they are dogs, not people, and should be treated and trained in a way that aligns best with their ability to learn.

110% agree. I love my dogs more than anything. How insulting for a dog to call them a child and treat them as such. I certainly wouldn't let a toddler race off after birds or body slam their friends.

Really? Sorry but the so called balanced trainers on this board are just as hard to talk to.

Total lack of respect on all sides IMO.

And the poor +R people have been pretty much hounded off from putting their viewpoint across. The people I respect the most on here never say anything about training anymore because of this.

Firstly, I don’t refer to myself a ‘balanced’ trainer.

Secondly, I don’t see where the lack of respect is from myself or other people in favour of the tool? It is only the people who have posted against e-collars that have become emotive in their arguments accusing anyone who is using them as abusive, inhumane etc. I think the posters in support of e-collars as a tool have responded really well considering they are being accused of mistreating dogs and not being educated enough as trainers etc.

This is and always has been a heated topic.

I wasn't aware that you were actually a trainer.

Lets see, bring out your dogs and Huski can bring out hers. Wonder whose will be better.....

Edited August 6, 2013 by lovemesideways

[huski]

A lot of people are assuming here that because people disagree with them they must be ignorant.

I think you can choose not to use one and that isn't ignorant, I think it becomes ignorance when things like "you are electrocuting the dog" and "it is inhumane" and "every dog and owner can train anything just with +R" are said.

Edited August 6, 2013 by huski

[corvus]

"Put your chicken on the table", for anyone who has done a chicken camp. ;)

[corvus]

It is possible to confuse passion and emotive language for ignorance, as well. It's like confusing arousal with drive. ;)

[huski]

It is possible to confuse passion and emotive language for ignorance, as well. It's like confusing arousal with drive. ;)

Well there's no confusing your passive aggressive post there, Corvus :laugh:

[Agility Dogs]

Lets see, bring out your dogs and Huski can bring out hers. Wonder whose will be better.....

Ooooooh........cool. Something new to argue over. What does 'better' mean!

IMO if a dog can cope with the methods that it's handler chooses to use, the methods are suitable in the environment they are being used in, achieve the desired results and the dog is happy in its work then it can't be a bad thing. (FTR, the agility clubs I choose to train at do not allow P+, that doesn't mean I don't use it away from the club when it is appropriate - like at sheep herding.)