Jump to content

Ecollar Gurus?


 Share

Recommended Posts

I've got a question for any of the ecollar gurus on the forum. I've always been led to believe that ecollars are harmless unless misused or abused, and that they cannot cause burns or other physical injury.

On that note, has anyone seen this photo before (page 9)?

http://www.advocatesforanimals.org.uk/pdf/...hockcollars.pdf

And apparently the same case is also discussed in this article/vet letter:

http://members.aol.com/ukaim/

Is it genuine? Was it really caused by a malfunctioning ecollar? If it is genuine, does anyone know the circumstances?

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Am :thumbsup:

Call me skeptical. I'm not suggesting to wave the story aside, but on looking at the photo on both links, I'm not sure how 'dressed up' it is or isn't.

One other thing, while I was pondering this, that struck me was (in the second link) it is reported that originally Rufus wouldn't allow his collar off, but when the owner did get to take it off, he noticed the injury.

Going by the look of the injury as shown in the photo, wouldn't that have been quite noticable well before the collar got to come off? Giving benefit of the doubt, perhaps it wasn't as noticeable, assuming Rufus' coat has since been trimmed away. But in the same photo of Rufus in the first link, I was looking at it and thinking the wound appeared to have been possibly enhanced by way of photograph manipulation?????

The other thing that I pondered about was where this 'wound' extends to. It seems to gravitate upwards of Rufus' neck. Now, if it were a malfunction and the battery acid (which in an e-collar would be the only chemical leakage possible????) did in fact leak, I could imagine it leaking downwards, but not upwards and under the collar????

I don't know ..... I am a bit dubious and would like to know more on the authenticity of the author and origins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Erny! :thumbsup:

I'm sceptical too, and I too wondered if the photo was doctored.

I also wondered if perhaps either the injury was in fact genuine but wasn't caused by an ecollar, or whether the ecollar malfunctioned because it was misused? I find it hard to believe that a properly used ecollar could cause that type of injury.

But I'm kind of hoping someone will have some concrete proof either way.

Edited by Amhailte
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen scabs on dogs necks that wear antibarking collars for long periods of time, but it was nothing major.

The damage on the labs collar looks severe and it shows as it it is where not only the receiver was but also the strap. Seems a bit weird to me as well.

Edited to add - Im not a guru.

Edited by myszka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

K9: I haved seen that pic before, this is not caused by the stimulous produced by the collar but when the battery failed the acid leaked out of a poor quality collar & caused this injury. This was part of a discussion forum I am on a few years ago..

I have fitted hundreds of dogs with e collars & seen many more thousands trained with zero injuries.

There is a complete story of a fellow that fitted his dog with a containment system collar & then penned the dog so that there was no safe area. The collar was left on so long it to malfunctioned, it may be the same picture, the one in this article has been cropped.

Again this is miss use not correct use.

Dogs that have collars left on many hours of the day can end up developing soares, these are known as Pressure Necrosis, the same condition as bed soares.

Again, instructions require that you move the collar around & restrict the humber of hours he collar is on.

The last section of how it would be illegal to fit the collar to a child is a nice one, it would also be illegal to feed that child dog food, so maybe dog food should be banned...

Yet another beat up :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does say in the PDF file "Rufus, a young Labrador puppy, about to undergo veterinary treatment for electric and/or chemical burns caused by an electric collar that malfunctioned when it got wet. The hole burned into his flesh by the electric collar’s metal contacts (metal prongs), which can be seen on the left of the electronic device on the collar in this photograph.20"

It couldn't be electrical burns all the way around because leather wouldn't conduct electricty. I could believe deep holes and any other metal contact areas being burned but not all the way around. Although, I too am not a guru. :thumbsup:

In fact, the vet letter doesn't blame it on electrical burn at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it said that the malfunction of the collar caused "first, second and third degree chemical and thermal burns".

I wasn't sure whether "thermal burns" meant that the collar burned the dog, or if those can happen via battery acid? You're right that the vet letter definately does mention battery acid burns, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with K9 about the e-collars on children angle, how interesting that in discussions about e-collars AR groups are so keen to draw a comparison b/t dogs and human children, but when discussing compulsory de-sexing of animals, they don't want to have a bar of any such comparisons :thumbsup:

Also either those are very old photographs or the collars they have in the UK are very different to those available in the USA and Oz.

Could the injuries in the photo be caused by a e-collar or e-collar battery? I guess anything is possible? All I can say is that when living in the USA I trained with large groups of people in which everybody had at least one e-collar, well over 100 people in the 4 years I was in the USA. I saw some e-collars used in what I consider to be an abusive fashion (jst as I've seen leads, hands, feet etc used in an abusive fashion) and I never, ever saw anything that looked remotely like that!! In fact I never saw anything beyond sores at the point of probe contact, but as K9 has already mentioned, those a pressure point sores caused by misusing the e-collars, and nothing to do with electrical stimulation.

Why when these type of reports are put together isn’t there are balanced presentation of the facts, the pros and cons of the issue? OK e-collars are not perfect, but have the saved numerous, difficult to train dogs from being PTS when other training methods have failed. You bet they have. I’m always sceptical of such biased accounts, how can you believe anything they say when they are so one sided and outcome driven? For all I know some idiot could have deliberately poured acid onto that poor dog then blamed it on a faulty e-collar to support their case to ban them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

E collars are the more extreme end of training. They are for use ONLY with experienced professionals.

Like any training tool they are NOT made to be left on the animal for long periods. I dont even let my dogs run round the backyard with a flat collar let alone something like this when I am not around for long periods. It is a tool that has the capacity to hurt the dog, then again so does a flea collar pulled to tight, or a check chain left on for weeks on end.

Anyone who leaves a training tool on for days or weeks on end without checking the equipment or giving the dog a rest needs a kick up the ass for being cruel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting :thumbsup: I know, but there seems to be a public perception that e-collar trainers are continually "frying" their dogs, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. The vast majority (99%) of training is done with level of stimulation that is JUST perceptible to the dog, certainly less then even a mild check chain correction. The only time I have used more stimulation was in an attempt to save the dog's life, namely snake proofing.

The value of an e-collar lies not in its ability to deliver a powerful correction (I could deliver a more powerful/painful correction with the toe of my boot if I so desired) but to deliver a precise correction over great distances. Dogs that are 200 meters away (as working gundogs regularly are) can be corrected within (literally) a second of a transgression. I would go so far as to say that these mild and precisely timed e-collar corrections enable dogs to learn faster and with far less discomfort than other methods of training.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

E collars are the more extreme end of training. They are for use ONLY with experienced professionals.

Like any training tool they are NOT made to be left on the animal for long periods. I dont even let my dogs run round the backyard with a flat collar let alone something like this when I am not around for long periods. It is a tool that has the capacity to hurt the dog, then again so does a flea collar pulled to tight, or a check chain left on for weeks on end.

Anyone who leaves a training tool on for days or weeks on end without checking the equipment or giving the dog a rest needs a kick up the ass for being cruel.

But this was a containment system e-collar, they are supposed to be left on 24/7, aren't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But this was a containment system e-collar, they are supposed to be left on 24/7, aren't they?

Although I understand them and their use, I admit to not having had need to use/apply one myself. However I suspect you would find manufacturer's instructions recommend the collar be removed after (eg) 12 hours, the main use of the containment system to be when the owners are not around.

Can anyone with a containment system back me up on this (or contradict me) please?

Edited by Erny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He he he! Am I the only one that had a giggle when the article mentioned that on a 1-100 level collar none of the people could stand the pain on level 20 and 35??!! Ummmmm how bad was it on level 1 I wonder??Or ummmm say level 2?? Why would you crank it up to 20 and then shock yourself? :cry: I think that just proves that in inexperienced hands (The people testing it) then it is not a good training tool! For anyone with half a brain it works pretty darn well for the trainer AND the dog!!! :cry::)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The story and the letter from the vet dont match up in regards to 'rufus' breed

The story says Rufus is a collie X but the letter from the vet states he is a labrador retriever :cry:

I know of a dog that has wounds on her neck because of an ecollar, needless to say they are no where near that horrific ! The dog has now been sent to the guard dog training place in sydney :cry: but thats not the point. She was constantly shocked because the fence was just a wire one and they live on a corner block so she has full view of people walking past and would push the boundaries with the collar. Silly girl still didnt stop going near the fence though :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...