Denis Carthy Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 (edited) For Steve & E Collar users. Hi Steve and e-collars users. Can you please answer an online question as regards the Aus laws and E-Collars. I am involved in a post on a UK site, one of our crank, radical canine extremists who has never seen an e-collar, knows nothing about e-collars and is telling us all about e-collars etc is claiming the they are banned in Australia. Can some of you users please tell me what the laws are in various states there so I can refer to your answerers, my question includes anti barks. Thanks all. Denis Carthy London UK. Edited September 3, 2006 by Denis Carthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 (edited) Hi Dennis. This is for Victoria. Don't know about other States. Direct quote from the Act. "Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Regulations 1997 7E. Use of certain electronic collars prohibited. (1) A person must not use an electronic dog training collar that can impart an electric shock on a dog or any other animal except in the circumstances in sub-regulation (2). Penalty: 5 penalty units. (2) Sub-regulation (1) does not apply to a person who uses an electronic dog training collar on a dog - (a) if a veterinary practitioner has examined the physical health and temperament of the dog and reasonably believes that the dog is suitable to have an electronic dog training collar used on it; and (b) the person is - (i) a veterinary practitioner; or (ii) acting on the instructions of a veterinary practiitioner; or (iii) a qualified dog trainer (with the meaning of regulation 13(2) of the Domestic (Feral and Nuisance) Animals Regulations 1996); or (iv) acting under the supervision of a qualified dog trainer (within the meaning of regulation 13(2) of the Domestic (Feral and Nuisance) Animals Regulations 1996." Don't understand why they made Vets the primary people qualified to assess the dog's temperament as being (or not being) suitable for use with an e-collar. In my experience, the Vets I've spoken with when seeking permission have had no idea how an e-collar worked or how it could be detrimental on dogs with unsuitable temperaments ..... or what temperament would be determined as unsuitable. Not saying this to run Vets down. They do what they do - ie the medical side of things. I (and people like me) do what we do - ie the behaviour side of things. Edited September 3, 2006 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonElite Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 what is the exact meaning of (iii) a qualified trainer .....etc What qualifications are required? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 3, 2006 Author Share Posted September 3, 2006 Erny (ii) acting on the instructions of a veterinary practiitioner; or Denis Hi Erny, thanks for that-can I ask, in practice does the above line mean you get a prescription from the vet, who then gives a couple of simple instructions and off you go with the e-collar? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 3, 2006 Author Share Posted September 3, 2006 Myszka Whats the situation where you are? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 Erny(ii) acting on the instructions of a veterinary practiitioner; or Denis Hi Erny, thanks for that-can I ask, in practice does the above line mean you get a prescription from the vet, who then gives a couple of simple instructions and off you go with the e-collar? Thanks. That's the way I'd read it, Denis. But I'm not a lawyer. Notice it doesn't say "acting under the supervision of a veterinary practitioner, like it does for "qualified dog trainer". Nor does it suggest you have to have anything in writing from the Vet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonElite Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 Im a volounteer instructor at the club. Does it make me qualified? I underwent a course at the club, the person doing it has done the Delta course. What am I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kavik Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 I've done the NDTF course - am I 'qualified' in this case or do you need something else for qualification for ecollars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 3, 2006 Author Share Posted September 3, 2006 (edited) Seems a bit vague - we have no laws on them and no laws will be unless they show sound scientific evidence which the extremists were told to produce about 3 years ago. Our gov has tendered out for scientific evaluation of all known papers on them but they have to have names of collars, years of manufacture, they would only be valid if used correctly. The extremists are AR activists now we have ample evidence that they they are persuing the route to eliminate domestic dogs from public ownership. In the training area any lively dog is to much of a nightmare to own because of training flaws and record numbers are ending up in rescues and last year in at least 105,000 were PTS after getting lost and owner was untraceable, obviously dogs which have no recall should allways be considered as being in a life threatening situation. I recently trained one dogs owners who were going to have to PTS the dog and on 3 of four sites the owner posted the dog would have ended up euthenased if they had their way, I know the name of one, Christine Brierley, but also it seems to have been going on sometime. The link below is to one of what will become a network of reference sites where even the APDT UK founder shows signs of mental problems or deliberate attempts to persuade owners to kill their dogs, thanks to the pet owners I trained we now have ample evidence that it is seriouse problem. Any further information on your states position is welcome, thanks again. APDT UK, killing pet owners dogs links: http://z9.invisionfree.com/Dog_History_UK/...?act=SC&c=1 http://www.free4um.com/dogcasesuk/viewforum.php?f=2 http://www.dogsey.com/showthread.php?t=39874 History of E- Collars UK-USA www.freewebs.com/deniscarthy Edited September 3, 2006 by Denis Carthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 K9: Hey Dennis, good to hear from you, the laws here are a little bit grey ish... What I believe is: QLD no restrictions TAS no restrictions WA No restrictions VIC by use of a trainer or with vets permission... NSW, cant find any legislation but a vets letter has always been the way to use a remote, not sure that is the case any longer. Containment system legal with 1.5 m fence. SA & NT Illegal. Very hard to find much in written form & if I cant find it written I wouldnt bet on it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Jones Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ACT 1979 - SECT 16 Certain electrical devices not to be used upon animals 16 Certain electrical devices not to be used upon animals (1) In this section: "electrical device" means a device of a type prescribed by the regulations. "sell" includes: (a) auction or exchange, (b) offer, expose, supply or receive for sale, and © send, forward or deliver for sale or on sale. (2) A person shall not: (a) use an electrical device upon an animal, (b) sell any electrical device, or © have in his or her possession or custody any electrical device. Maximum penalty: 250 penalty units in the case of a corporation and 50 penalty units or imprisonment for 6 months, or both, in the case of an individual. (3) Nothing in subsection (2) prevents a person from: (a) using an electrical device upon an animal belonging to a prescribed species, or (b) selling or having in his or her possession or custody an electrical device for use upon an animal belonging to a prescribed species. PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ACT 1979 - SECT 4 Definitions 4 Definitions (1) In this Act, except in so far as the context or subject-matter otherwise indicates or requires: "animal" means: (a) a member of a vertebrate species including any: (i) amphibian, or (ii) bird, or (iii) fish, or (iv) mammal (other than a human being), or (v) reptile, or (b) a crustacean but only when at a building or place (such as a restaurant) where food is prepared or offered for consumption by retail sale in the building or place. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/con.../poctaa1979360/ may be of interest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAX Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 Erny(ii) acting on the instructions of a veterinary practiitioner; or Denis Hi Erny, thanks for that-can I ask, in practice does the above line mean you get a prescription from the vet, who then gives a couple of simple instructions and off you go with the e-collar? Thanks. The purchaser needs to provide the letter from the vet to the supplier before they can supply in NSW if dealing directly with the the company, the vet does not give training advise. The vet apparently is to make sure that other training methods have been investigated first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 K9: the vet is supposed to state that the dog is healthy also, but this is the exact details that is hard to find... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 What I believe is: ... VIC by use of a trainer or with vets permission... Slight correction, if I may.. "and" with vet's permission. Not "or". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 4, 2006 Author Share Posted September 4, 2006 (edited) Hi Steve real nice to see you again on this great site..I'm glad to see these bits abd peices of laws are not really bad over there, I thought they were not banned glad to hear it. I would not like to interpret some of them though. I notice Innotek, which I think you use quite a bit there?? have a new range out I'd like any feedback on it you can give. Is Innotek the most popular collar there? Seems a while since I posted here and technology has gone so much further in such a short time, I saw the new Innoteks on a couple of US sites but they are not seen much here. Thanks for letting me put the links Steve, caused quite a bit of bleating from our cranks & extremists, I was told to edit my refs, sure thats just me . Sorry to hear about Steve Erwine, it's just coming through our news, popular guy here really new his stuff. Anyway thanks so much for clearing your situation up for us, they kicked the extremists to the kerb here and there are no laws on them. Regards Denis Carthy. London Edited September 4, 2006 by Denis Carthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 DC: I'm glad to see these bits abd peices of laws are not really bad over there, I thought they were not banned glad to hear it. I would not like to interpret some of them though. K9: The only law Im happy with is in Victoria, use under instruction from a trainer or vet... Not happy with free use nor happy with them being banned... DC: I notice Innotek, which I think you use quite a bit there?? have a new range out I'd like any feedback on it you can give. Is Innotek the most popular collar there? Seems a while since I posted here and technology has gone so much further in such a short time, I saw the new Innoteks on a couple of US sites but they are not seen much here. K9: yep thats the Field Pro, its a great collar, I am taking pre orders for them, they should arrive here any day... Hope things improve for you over there Dennis... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Australdi Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Having had experience of a council issued citronella collar...and seeing it resultant malfunction....I'm personally opposed to e-collars! when Daim's was an adolecent, he went through a barking stage...mind you this was exacerbatted by a new yappy dog next door, contant harrasment from neighbours and my immaturity & work commitments at the time....after seeing the effect of the collar going off for the slightestnoise he made (even a low growl) I threw it back at the council & gave then a piece of my mind...especially since my dog was being blamed for another dog's barking! (my dog was "recorded" barking when he was over 20kms away at dog traINING!!!!) I instituted a regime of positive training for non-barking at non-threats & the problem was resolved within weeks!....my dog became one that would not bark unless provoked, or a threat present..and each bark had it's different timbre....so I could tell what the actual trigger was...this was far more effective than any collar! ...and as an added benefit, i could distinguish between an actual threat to simple aggravation...Non-threatening alerts were responded to by "thank you" but "stand down"...real threat barks were investigated with actual investigative resposnse & praise for "good boy"!....result was a dog that barked, only when a threat was either undetermined or real...exactly what I wanted! Even though I've been guilty of being persuaded to using collars as a training method..in my own humble experience...they are a poor & lazy substitute for "real" training! ..just adding my 2 cents worth Aus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonElite Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 (edited) emmmmm the ecollar (as in a remote training collar) is nothing like an antibarking collar or the citronella collar. The ecollar "goes off" (on more ON) only when the handler presses the stim button not when the dog performs some sort of an action. Its human acitvated, not dog activated. Edited September 12, 2006 by myszka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haven Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Having had experience of a council issued citronella collar...and seeing it resultant malfunction....I'm personally opposed to e-collars!when Daim's was an adolecent, he went through a barking stage...mind you this was exacerbatted by a new yappy dog next door, contant harrasment from neighbours and my immaturity & work commitments at the time....after seeing the effect of the collar going off for the slightestnoise he made (even a low growl) I threw it back at the council & gave then a piece of my mind...especially since my dog was being blamed for another dog's barking! (my dog was "recorded" barking when he was over 20kms away at dog traINING!!!!) I instituted a regime of positive training for non-barking at non-threats & the problem was resolved within weeks!....my dog became one that would not bark unless provoked, or a threat present..and each bark had it's different timbre....so I could tell what the actual trigger was...this was far more effective than any collar! ...and as an added benefit, i could distinguish between an actual threat to simple aggravation...Non-threatening alerts were responded to by "thank you" but "stand down"...real threat barks were investigated with actual investigative resposnse & praise for "good boy"!....result was a dog that barked, only when a threat was either undetermined or real...exactly what I wanted! Even though I've been guilty of being persuaded to using collars as a training method..in my own humble experience...they are a poor & lazy substitute for "real" training! ..just adding my 2 cents worth :D Aus So one experience with a malfunctioning citronella collar leads you to believe that all ecollars are bad......mkay Research and experience for the win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Australdi Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 So one experience with a malfunctioning citronella collar leads you to believe that all ecollars are bad......mkayResearch and experience for the win no....but I had success within 3 weeks of traditional training...not exactly that hard! :D ...and I will be the first to admit that it was my LAZINESS and my immersment in the corporate world, that made me neglect my dog's actual behaviour & needs thank St Patrick that I learn't from my youthful mistakes :D Aus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now