Skin irritation - common (see manufactuers manuals). Allergic reaction is quite common. Necrosis (deadening of the skin often over an underlying reaction to skin contact with the collar prongs). Burning (often denied, but vets report it as such and I have no reason to doubt them).

Physical aversives can work/appear to work - never denied it. We have no statistics, however, to say what percentage of dogs they work with and what percentage they don't. We know they don't always work - ask any trainer/behaviourist as most have dealt with the fall-out at one time or another and the fall-out is often devastating - in fact, far worse than the original problem. Of course, many would question how responsible it is to deliberately inflict physical pain/discomfort on an animal especially when the outcome of doing so is far from certain.

A complete ban would allow for reporting of dogs wearing such collars as they are obvious to spot so whilst not completely stopping them, it would diminish numbers considerably and serve to put many law abiding people off purchasing them in the first place.

The Companion Animal Welfare Council are looking into it, but it's a minefield. The biggest problem, of course, being that no one can agree what would constitute the minimum requirements for dog trainers and whether training methods should be taken into consideration. You think the e-collar debate is a 'biggie'? You ain't seen nothing yet


simply because there is no 'will' to do so in the places that matter. I believe, and please feel free anyone to correct me if I'm wrong, that in the office looking into the e-collar situation, not one of those in charge or the staff themselves are dog owners.

The problem of ethics and welfare surface again. The first calls from DEFRA for the current studies failed because no university could have possibly got the original proposals through their ethics committee - neither would they have wanted to. Who in their right minds would want to test the collars thoroughly and fully on dogs?? No one with any conscience, that's for sure.


I try very hard not to get into personality bashing although I will question and comment on what people post and the training method they adopt. The videos AP put on here (didn't look at them all, but did see the early ones showing the JRT) show an unhappy dog. I read the reported problems this dog presented when AP first got him and, to be honest, there are far kinder ways to address them that are very effective and don't keep the dog in a heightened state of tension. This I find sad.

Who is this arthur kent bloke michael mentioned?

KW - you just need to accept the fact that I have the basic right to an opinion of my own and that no matter how many times you post the same drivel in a different format, I will be keeping my opinion as is. Please do not continue to lower yourself over and over again by trying to imply that I am not understanding your point. I understand perfectly (as you know I do) I just did not agree with the manner (as I have repeated numerous times)

Please stop taking this thread OT (and wasting both of our times) for your own glory,point scoring game, of; 'I am right all the way'

You have wasted enough of my time, your time and other people who have subscribed to this thread.

I think of course there will be people who will use them wheter they are legal or not
but
reading the listings on ebay
'humane, safe, kind, effective, fast'
and on a couple of them they also boast you can work 2 collars off of the one handset - 'training' 2 dogs at once!!

If they were illegal they wouldnt be so easy to get hold of and people would be less tempted by this cheep magic cure

but
can i ask adam and michael
do you believe that they should be so simply and freely available to members of the public?
do you think there should be any restrictions/guidelines for their sale and use?
do you believe in the wrong hands they could have any negative impacts on dogs?

i thought you worried about going on....

i think you may be getting confused, Clair posted those pictures of her own free will.

you just agreed with what i have been saying thru your reply to my broken leg and pot hole analogy.

dont know what you mean KW, I'm not worried about anything but thanks for your concern

Back to topic; I have seen a dog trained by e-collar and it had the most ODD behaviour you have ever seen. Hard to even describe, but clearly phycologically distressed.

I think to make them illegal would make it less easy for people 'at thier wits end' without much of a clue to be drawn in but it will not get rid of them all unfortunatley. There are some people who shock dogs purley for fun (watching them in distress) These people surley cant abide by the law or have much respect for it? (with such low morals) however I do think its a good move.

As someone said, ebay listings etc wouldnt be there for a start.

I think that is a fair enough point.
Can you help me though, as i cannot remember.
Can you quote the piece of post where i discussed photos of dog burns from e collars by posted by other members?

Who posted the other photos, i havent seen them?

many thanks

Surely, skin irritation/reaction is just that - the operator becomes irrelevant. So, experienced e-collar trainer or not is not important.




Responsible caring owner first. PR. Consistent training. If needed, behavioural consultation/professional advice. Still got a problem, consider the aversive alternatives.

No statistics on that, but if that's how it was, I suspect not many would make it to the aversive stage, and fewer would be abandoned/PTS.



I believe it would drive their use underground, or, without being able to seek advice about using lead to more abandoned dogs - JMO.





Politics and self interest, whilst the dogs suffer and pay the price.


Difficult (ok - impossibe).



Pressure from owners for a quick result has been mentioned previously. I know of owners who have given up on their dogs, and dogs that have been put to sleep - all down to human failing.

I've said it before, but if using an e-collar avoids a dog being given up on, abandoned in the streets, put in a pound where many are PTS - it's a price I find acceptable. I know you disagree, but we'll just have to disagree....

You've worn me out

Thanks for the discussion.

Michael

michael, Who is arthur kent