You don't have any correct information Scarter given that the indepth government study is still being done. Posts like yours are dangrous in my opinion,you sound like you have a clue...when actually you don't. There could be someone out there researching this stuff that thinks 'well theres an big government study saying ecollars are ok so I'll go and get one for my dog and then he'll come back'.

Link to the study Scarter please.....

There have been studies done on this here is a link to studies that have found shock collars & fencing has a negative impact on dogs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_collar#Polsky_study
this is an extensive site on his credentials
http://www.dogexpert.com/Background%...olskyHome.html
Australia is also introducing laws on the use of these, so if there was no problem with them, why are they becoming restricted???
this is a disclaimer attached to a containment system, with regards to the laws in place and the reviews been undertaken http://www.hiddenfence.com.au/disclaimer.html
Sorry ATD I know you don't want a debate, but it comes down to it being an acceptable form of containment. I couldn't do it even to keep the peace at home, there are other options such as others have offered, there are negatives to them but none in comparision to using these other methods.
Wire mesh fencing could be an option perhaps.

I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with the infomation that has been given , and am now kind of opting out on the arguement as I have decided that I do not know enough about the subject material......
However.....I think it is unfair to class anothers 'opinion' as dangerous- it is just that- Scarter has an opinion as do you, and we do not really know whos- if either- is 'right'.

Everyone is entitled to post thier thoughts and if people choose to read into that and be influenced then that is their own choice and it should not mean that people should be told not to post their opinions.

The OP asked for opinions- and that this not turn into a slanging match- I think this should be respected.

I would like to add that I totally agree with Rambles point that any research should be backed up by a link for evidence through, and until it is it should be regarded as 'opinion' rather than 'fact'........

I really can't find it - linky please!

My mind was made up when I saw an electric shock collar being used. Short-term effects: dog yelped and recoiled, long-term effects: dog became unpredictable and training wasn't affected positively. I don't jump to conclusions and make decisions flippantly usually, but where electric shocks and dogs are concerned, I do!

People keep on with the "if you'd actually seen one used.." thing, but I have, and I do not like what I see, and have yet to see some decent results that couldn't have been trained another way! I have collected enough information on which to base my decisions.

The shock has to be unpleasant in some way, otherwise the effect is not a negative marker. Some collars do have a milder setting that seems to be used as a 'reminder' rather than the actual negative marker - did you try the 'normal' setting on your neck, the setting you'd actually be 'training' with? You may have a very thick-skinned neck if it appears to only tickle - do your dogs share the same neck? Are their necks more or less sensitive? Would this tickle be unpleasant enough for the dog to respond to?

I can see what you mean about wanting your dogs to be able to enjoy running free offlead. However, what if their carefree exploring was punctuated by shocks out of the blue - do they stop enjoying exploring? Do they stop being 'carefree'? If they really cannot be trained to recall reliably, why not just find a fenced field? I just fail to see how you'd be doing them much of a favour.

I can see how a dog would be able to comprehend a single boundary line as a result of being shocked a few times - as long as it was marked visually in some way. However, you refer to a field - is it completely unfenced? A dog cannot possibly draw a line in it's mind around a field as a result of a couple of shocks. First of all, the periphery would need to be clearly marked visually - a hedge prhaps. But then, would the dog associate all hedges with shocking? It might undergo stress when even seeing a hedge? If the perimeter of the field is not marked, and you rely solely on shocking to determine the boundary, you would need to administer a lot of shocks in order for the boundary to be recognised - is this acceptable? Are you allowing your dogs freedom of one sort while taking away the freedom of being allowed to enjoy being outside, completely carefree?

But are they?

Whilst I agree that freedom of speech is important, this is a forum for dog lovers. What if one member believed that dog was a suitable food source and posted about eating dog? Would you want to be faced with those kind of posts when you come to look at a dog forum? Probably not, but you can't say their opinion is wrong. Same with dog fighters, puppy farmers or people who punch their dog over the head when it does something wrong - these people might still refer to themselves as 'dog lovers', but are their views suitable to be aired on a dog lovers' forum?

However, it's hugely important to have differing views on a forum, so then there's the question of how much the status quo is allowed to be upset - it's subjective. So either, you allow opinions of any sort, or someone decides that the forum is more representative of one type of dog owner, and some subjects are deemed unsuitable.

It's a nasty old grey area and I wouldn't like to be the one who decides what's acceptable and what's not (and for the record, I'm not putting Scarter's views into the same category as dog fighters etc., I'm just trying to point out that you have to make a decision whether to allow complete freedom of speech or draw a line somewhere!). This is a general comment and not regarding Scarter's views.

But, this is why you are supposed to link to studies you refer to - if you say one thing is backed up by extensive research and it isn't, you are misleading people, and this could be construed as dangerous.

can I ask what you mean by open up the fence? I take it you now have your grass area seperated from the patio?

to be fair though, your dog was injured at the boundaries not so long ago when you pulled him from the gate, so clearly the training alone is not 100%
not that im for the use of electric fencing, Im not, I hate the stuff, have been stung a few times myself when in places that use it for horses.

I do love the fence in Patches photo, wouldnt mind some of that myself, its looks fabby. I cant see anyone objecting to such a nice looking fence,.

I understand your point here- but i still think that anyone should be abe to post their opinion........
Firstly - it gives others a great chance to change their opinion or oppose it....
Secondly- even when you oppose an opinion it usually raises other issues which can be helpful .....

Quite frankly I would welcome any dog fighters brave enough to post opinons on here! I would LOVE it!!

If people do not post what can seem 'undesirable' opinions, we cannot argue against the case- thus the issue goes unaddressed.........

There are people who use shick collars, prongs, choke chains, hitting a dog with a rolled up newspaper, kicking a dog, yelling at the dog, jerking the leash
They all say their methods are not cruel to the dog and that it gives positive results - just cos someone says it dosent mean its true

Thanks for the offer Scarter but I am training Mia with a solid recal - I also make sure I call her back to do something fun with me so coming back to me is more rewarding than going doing the other thing - I have actually had to train a command for my two to go off and play as working with me is becoming more fun - a proper recal shoudlnt be 'awww mummm I was having fun' - cos then of course they get fed up of it - it should be more that working with you is fun, you send them away regretfully cos the wonderful working with you is over - and then you call them back for the fun to begin again
Yes it will take time to acheive
I also do all this training in areas away from sheep and then build up the distractions. One day Mias recal will be good enough to call her off sheep - but I will prob never find out as i dont need to walk her in areas where there are sheep without being on a lead

Yep...opinions are great and yes, people should be able to post their opinions...BUT to post an OPINION and then say is is backed up by an indepth government report is actually putting your opinion over as a FACT. It is saying this is my opinion...but since it is backed up by all this evidence it is a FACT, when in reality there is no such evidence, that's why it is dangerous. People will come on and think it is true...when it is an opinion...just that...an opinion. There is no indepth government study because that study is still being done.
Scarter's posts are always well written and intelligent...therein lies the danger..it sounds feasible, yet there is no link to support what Scarter says.
As I said above, yet you slated my initial post which essentially said the same thing. I have no problem with opinions...but when said opinions are put across as being fact I think that is dangerous when dealing with a subject matter as contentious as this one.

That's what I was trying to say. Thanks.