Just a quick point. If someone is going to 'try' a shock collar...they should put it on their own neck and have someone else activate it when they are not expecting it. Sit and have a brew, with someone with the remote elsewhere...and be zapped when they do not know it's going to happen or the level at which the shock is coming at. If it isn't tested that way, it isn't a fair test...

As I sit here pondering this....in Karen Pryor's 'Don't Shoot The Dog' she describes a trainers game whereby you have a group of observers and one trainer with a whistle and one PERSON to be the trainee. (As I am sure lots of people on here know but bear with me!) The group decide what the trainer has to train...could be switching on a light or sitting on a specific chair. The trainee comes into the room and the trainer whistles them whenever they move towards the training aim..so a step to the chair etc. After each early whistle they are sent back to the doorway. It apparently never takes long to train.

Perhaps...this could be done with people who want to train using an ecollar. For each step wrong, they are zapped? I wonder how long it would take to teach a wanted behaviour..and at what cost to the person who could end up a quivering wreck. Actually...it is such a barbaric method that you could probably be arrested for doing it with people...perhaps use that as an example for the lady though?

I fear someone so insensitive as to consider torture to train an animal will only believe what they want. However - here`s a bit of info.....

Polsky study

Polsky discusses the effect of shock collar-based fencing on the behavior of dogs, citing incidents in which dogs exposed to this type of containment committed severe aggressive attacks on humans on or near the boundary of the fence system.(Polsky 2000) As suggested by other research, dogs may make inappropriate associations between shock and other experiences. In every incident, the dog was within the "shock zone" and all fences were working; the dogs must then have received a shock. Four of the five dogs were not subject to threatening behavior by the victims prior to the attack. None of the dogs gave any kind of warning prior to biting, and all bit their victims repeatedly and seriously in the head, face, back and neck.

The analysis suggests that the dogs' aggression was caused by the shock. There are several unknown factors to the cases, including the training used to introduce the dog to the fence, the amount of time the dog spent outside unsupervised, and what level of shock intensity the dogs received. However, the reaction of the dogs, and especially the severity of the attacks, was inconsistent with their past behavior. Polsky concluded a "possible interpretation in terms of unconditioned aggression as a result of a dog having received electronic shock and avoidance-motivated aggression mediated through fear reduction toward human stimuli."
Polsky, R.H. (2000), "Can aggression be elicited through electronic pet containment systems", Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 3: 345–357, doi:10.1207/S15327604JAWS0304_6 .

Schalke et al. study
Schalke et al.'s study sought to investigate whether stress is caused by the use of electronic collars, in an attempt to evaluate their impact on animal welfare. (Schalke et al. 2007) Heart rate and saliva cortisol were used to determine the stress levels in three groups of dogs: those who received a shock whenever they performed a specific behavior; those who received a shock when they did not obey a command; and those who received random shocks. The first group did not show a significant rise in cortisol levels; the other two groups did show a significant rise, with the third group showing the highest level of cortisol.

From this the researchers concluded that the dogs who could clearly associate the shock with their action, and as a result were able to predict and control whether they received a shock, did not suffer from considerable or persistent stress. The evidence of increased stress in the other groups was felt to support earlier findings that poor timing and/or inappropriate use of a shock collar puts the dog at high risk of severe and ongoing stress. They conclude that "the general use of electronic shock collars is not consistent with animal welfare."
Schalke, E.; Stichnoth, J.; Ott, S.; Jones-Baade, R. (2007), "Clinical signs caused by the use of electric training collars on dogs in everyday life situations", Applied Animal Behaviour Science 105: 369, doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2006.11.002 .

Barking and Shock Collars
The risks of using an electric shock to modify behaviour extend to the treatment of other behaviour problems in dogs such as barking. Dogs learn by association - when using a shock collar there is always a risk that the dog may associate the shock with something other than the behaviour that people are trying to stop. For instance, if a shock is administered for barking, there is a danger that the dog might associate a nearby child with the pain of the shock, rather than its own barking. This could lead to the dog developing distrust or even fear of children. Another significant risk with the use of shock collars is that rather than linking the shock to the wrong thing, a dog may not be able to link the shock to anything at all! This often results in the dog becoming totally confused, anxious and stressed as it repeatedly suffers the pain of the electric shock for no apparent reason.
APBC report
http://www.apbc.org.uk/articles/shockcollars

No articals or ref points to offer but my opinion.

When i first took Barney to training classes we spoke about e-collers. A loverly lady with a very busy springer was at her wits end as her dog loved to chase wildlife, she had been advised by a gundog man to use a e-coller 'sort the dog out'.
Our trainer was very upset with this advice so decided to bring one into class, we all had the chance to experiance the feeling of the shock if we wanted to.
I was really intrested so decided to give it a shot on the lowest setting on my hand - it was really quite sore and could feel the shock travel up my arm and the pain lasted for a few mins. I must added the lady with the chasing dog decided this was something she would NOT be using on her dog!

I really hope your friend thinks twice about those nasty e-collers.

This is also very good, it's the APBC response to one of the consultations and details problems that have occurred with dogs and owners after using the collars.

Basically, they are kind of, ecollar Case Histories.

http://www.apbc.org.uk/sites/default...nsultation.pdf

Scroll down to the Appendix.

Sad to think that one dog died as a result of use, and countless others suffered and dog/owner relationships were messed up due to these devices. And horrible to read about the poor deaf dog

Wys
x

Dont forget to tell her to use on the highest level on herself first.


Brilliant idea.

I hated the sensation of the collar on the LOWEST level (not mine or my dogs, I should add), so I dread to think what it feels like any higher. It was very unpleasant.

Before we got Tilly, her previous owner had used a shock collar on her, because she has no recall and he thought that by zapping her when she didn't come back would make her come back? If anything, it made her worse, she started to associate coming back with being zapped, so no has no recall and started to run further away, and completely ignores me when I call her name. To solve this problem, I bought a lunge line, and a harness (because she pulls like a train, again through no training as a puppy), and just walk miles with her to give her a good walk.

From people that I have spoken to about shock collars, most of the results say that haven't worked, and the dog actually got worse.

It was suggested that I use one on Blade, because when I got him, he chased sheep. I didn't use one, and found other ways of getting around the issue, and I've had him out on the hill with sheep running past him, and he's not at all bothered about chasing them anymore.

Not really useful advise, just my experiences with dogs that have been zapped with a shock collar!

x

I have used an e collar - and when used correctly it is an awesome tool. Modern e collars are capable of going to extremely low levels, levels so low that we cant detect them and the dog will interprate the stimulation as a fly landing on it, or they will turn around out of confusion, once they have been shown how the stimulation works, they can relate to it and it just becomes a prompt for behaviours.

You can have rock solid recalls unlike a lot of dogs out there that cause a bit of mayhem and then decide to go back to their owners.

For people who try e collars on themselves at the lowest level - you should not be able to feel it!! As far hurting your arm for few minutes after - I find this amazing - you must have been using some ancient relic.

I know some people really use them in the wrong way - to shock a dog on too high a setting to teach it a lesson, this I do not agree with, but for dogs with high prey drive who have no interest in treats when a rabbit is on the horizon, they do have a place in the set of tools needed to achieve results.

My 2p

Poor dog. I hope you've managed to persuade your friend not to use it.

If she went ahead with using it, I'm afraid she would certainly no longer be my friend after that.

Don't want your "2p" thanks! If you're pro shock collars take it to a pro shock collar thread. Ta.

Well she's not said anymore about it, I think I've ranted that much about it she's given up. Either that or she's done it anyway and not told me.

I do find it very difficult to swallow tbh and she's gone right down in my estimations that's for sure.

Might email her those articles again I think.