Dogsey

Oooo sorry Myra! And yes, I guess Ben would not like him as he is male and black! However ... SOMETIMES he is OK with black dogs ... it is fascinating and one day I will be able to read what is causing Ben to kick off ... or not. I think the answer is going to be in the video camera ... filming and then slowing it right down. I have done this before with Hal, Ben's father, play fighting with his son Woody - Ben's half brother. It was like a ballet ... absolutely fascinating. The bite inhibition was amazing.

I guess the politically correct thing to say/do is bow out and say "You're right...too" and hopefully agree to disagree.

Musher ... I'm with you all the way on the dead horse theory!

Don't know about you though, but I'm a stubborn old cow and I don't like giving up and I don't like being beat! I am right because I can see the proof right in front of my eyes. The bonding that I now have with Ben I still cannot believe ... I guess that a lot of it is to do with the fact that I do not leave the house at 7 am every morning now, and not return until 7 or 8 pm at night, and that I am participating in the daily walking, not just at weekends. To a dog like Ben that has a huge importance. I even feed him sometimes, because before he had been fed by the time I returned home from work.

I sat with him on the sofa just now ... he has had ear mites which we have treated with a wonderful powder called Thornit ... amazing stuff. I gently was combing his kiss curls with his flea comb, and he just gave me a look and I knew that he did not want me to go on, so I stopped. He licked my nose and his expression softened and his ears went out to the side of his head ... his way of telling me all was now OK. He desperately needs a good groom, but he does not want to be groomed tonight. That's fine, he has told me and I understand.

Trouble is Musher I ain't very PC!! I was raised to be independent, to speak my mind ... not to be rude, to respect others and respect their views, but nonetheless speak my mind and stick up for what I believe in.

Having said all that I appreciate Chris sticking to HER guns because she believes passionately in what she is saying ... she is wrong of course ... but she is genuine in her wrong-ness!! And is perfectly entitled to say what she jolly well thinks. I for one am enjoying this debate immensely.

Musher, you are indeed beating a dead horse. People like Chris, while having as valid of an opinion as the next, are unwilling to accept that there can be more than one way of doing things.

They seem to have no concept of "the ends justify the means" and also, and this might really irritate some people, but they also refuse to admit that positive training isn't ALWAYS the most effective route.

I've been sent to one garbage article after another when I tell people I stop my dogs from growling at me. People have told me even more garbage, such as my dogs have shut down and fear me, that they will bite one day. Haha, that's false as hell, they don't even know my dogs. My dogs love and respect me and I do not have to fear that they will bite me.

I find it so arrogant to bash, bash, bash when things work and everyone comes out better for it. Ban the damn e collars, and ban all the other collars, too and watch as euthanasia rates climb as shelters fill as people give up their pets because someone was a bleeding heart instead of being practical.

Yes, I agree that the collars are misused and to rear a puppy properly, they are generally rubbish, but when used correctly, they don't hurt the dogs and can be the difference between a dog like Ben staying in his loving home or him dying in a shelter.

Unglue those feet from the ground and unplug your head from that cloud. I know that if this happened in America, so many dogs would die. They'd lose their homes because the owners would lose all control. Not fair when the owners are like Gnasher, which many of them are.

Nobody is asking you to agree with the use of the collars, just to give owners who use them a break and see the big picture. Having to wear a slightly uncomfortable device sometimes is better than dying. "But they could have used positive...(insert hot air here)".

Okay, yeah maybe they could have. What difference does it make now? Their dog is helped along the right path by the collar. Your positive blah won't reach them now, and you take that tool, and you're often risking the dogs life. The world will never be that pretty. The collars help many dogs stay in their homes.

If you think there is a way to successfully convert all these homes to positive only training, I encourage you to try. If you think banning these collars would do widespread good, go ahead. But then, some people, such as PETA, are fast to condemn a dog to death than have even any discomfort or strictness in the dogs life. As if everything in life is peachy keen.

Makes me physically ill. E collars may not be the best tools to use, but for people like Gnasher, good luck convincing them of that. I mean truly, good friggin' luck. They did what they thought was right and results speak for themselves. Again, good luck.

Three or four years ago, DEFRA commissioned an extensive study on the collars at a cost of over seven hundred thousand pounds.

The results are summarised here:

http://www.companionanimalpsychology...k-collars.html

It backs up the argument for banning - or maybe they are just all wrong or perhaps 'bleeding hearts'

Oh, look... another article! Let's have a read.

I have read through some of it. DEFRA is one group just like PETA is one group. Even the article admitted that many people did not use the collars in accordance to the manuals. This can ruin any tool, even those annoying pieces of positive crap they call clickers. Use it wrong render it useless or counterproductive.

As for videos etc. they had, don't see them linked in the article. You'd think if you were trying to prove something, you'd not go leaving things out. Looks like a bunch of text by a group against the collars to me. Kind of like here, but formatted better and by a more well known organization.

There are articles that back both sides of the argument and "studies" on both sides, as well. I stand by my statement, and you will stand by yours. That is fine. I don't think the collars need to be used in most cases, but for tough rescues, I'm willing to turn away in some cases. That's all.

I've never so much as considered one of these, much less used one. But I don't think all people who use them are bad and I think, especially in America that banning them would cause far more harm than good. Off to read the rest of the article now, it's fascinating indeed!

DEFRA is a little more than a group, Myra, they are a Government Department and are definitely not akin to PETA.

Why the sarcasm? Are scientific studies carried out independently for a Government Department not valid?

Hey ho

There is not a touch of sarcasm in that final statement. The fact that they are a governmental agency gives them MORE credibility? Okay, I admit the sarcasm in that one.

It's certainly a strong read and it makes great points, but in the end it's just a point of view.