It depends on what you see as cruelty though doesnt it Ailsa, because if as a last resort it can save a life, then IMO its worth it.

I cant comment on the why's and wherefores, I am NOT pro e-collar in any sense at all, but I can see that they may be useful in some circumstances, although saying that I doubt I will ever be in a position to need one.
Dawn.

I really disagree--is it cruel to strap a person down or put them in restraints? Yes, if they're a normal person minding their own business; NO if they're severely self-harming or violent towards others. As I said, I'm not an expert on dogs but I can completely imagine that there are some who need more intense intervention than others. I find it sad that a site like this, by opposing any discussion of e-collars, would close off a source of information for dog owners whose friends and family are telling them to just "put the dog down and get another one that isn't damaged goods" (!!!!!) to learn that there might be hope even for very serious, ingrained behaviours from very neglected or abused dogs. I completely have a "don't try this at home" attitude--e collars need to be used with the UTMOST care and a real professional instructing you every step of the way. But people should know about them because I promise you there are lots of normal pet owners out there who will be putting dogs down rather than investing thousands of pounds/dollars in long-term training that may or may not work. Wouldn't it be logical to have a free-flow of information, with everyone posting their experiences, and let people make their own informed decisions?

CTH

The argument that these things can be life saving devices doesn't wash too well with me, especially in this country.
One time they are hailed as life savers is with sheep chasing dogs that are saved from being shot by farmers because they don't chase with a collar on. Well, the life saving, non cruel option is to have them on a lead, just like the law says you should.
Another argument for using them was offered on here not long ago, for police or army dogs who may be subjected to 'attmepted' muder, by baited food being thrown into their outside areas. Simple. Never let them out unattended and always check the area thoroughly before they are let out. No need to zap.
The other argument for using them has been cited on here, on this thread. A dog has behaviourla problems, owner gives up trying different methods and sticks an ecollar on a dog, who is probably, by the sound of it showing fearful behaviour. Not sure nayone who cares about dogs could condone that, certainly no-one who cared about dogs would ever suggest putting it to sleep.
The final argument is irrelevant for this country, that is to make the dog avoid snakes. Personally, I think there are other ways of doing it, indeed I know people that have trained their pet dogs to avoid snakes in high risk areas without having to use an ecollar. Since it isn't an issue in this country and none of us are too experienced in it, we can only say in this country they should be banned, it's up to other countries to assess their own risks and debate the whole idea of using them.
I have yet to hear of any situation where the use of an ecollar is acceptable or humane. These things do not save lives they make them miserable. They are the lazy trainers way of getting a seemingly quick result. Barbaric in my opinion.
I have heard so many debates on this now but I've yet to hear of any time where these things have saved a dogs life, where other, more humane methods wouldn't have worked...

I cna't believe you are using restrining a mentally ill person to using an ecollar on a dog...the similarity is what exactly??????????????? Sorry I'm blown away by that. I don't think mentally ill people should be subjected to electric shock treatment...

Dogsey does allow the freeflowing of ideas and has done soooo many times over this, Az is just saying if Dogsey sided with the other dog agencies (APDT, Dogs Trust, Hearing Dogs, Kennel Club the list goes on) then, the freeflow of debate and ideas on this would cease. to be honest, not a bad thing as we get nowhere, how can you move on if the training method being discussed is outdated and barbaric?

Sadly, dogs are PTS for behaviourla problems, but many vets won't do it now ( although yes many still will), but in my opinion, you took on a problem dog and it's up to you to treat it well, it's had enough done to it in the past by the sound of it.
My son, as a 1 year old, didn't undertsand language too well, when I said 'don't touch that oven or you will be burnt' he didn't get it...I removed him from the danger...smae principle with dog training, an ecollar method would have me smack him or press his hands onto the oven. Barbaric and cruel.
Sorry if i sound harsh on you CTH but you are new to this debate and we have been here beofre...a lot....

Off topic or chat posts merged:

I think your all mad :lol:

:smt043 :smt043 :smt043 ;-)

So do I Nat :lol: :lol:
Dawn.

-end-

Bowing out again now as we're getting nowhere ( again!) Have to say though, been given food for thought this time....

Cth1013
As I said, I'm not an expert on dogs

Denis
I disagree, you are the only poster on this board apart from me who knows anything at all about e-collars.

Yes Ailsa I agree with you, off to bed for this one for me.
Dawn.

eRaz
so not only do you lose a platform to try and 'win-over', debate your point but in one swoop

Clob
Again totally inaccurate – I started no debate and there is no debate, how can anyone debate whether its good thing or a bad thing to save dogs lives or kill them, to me that’s not debateable.

What you are not doing is what most pet owners reading this would do quite naturally is to read the main posters first post, Cth1013. The vast majority of them will identify immediately their own position and very close similarities, Cth1013 and the results of the commercial product ‘positive training’ are almost invariable.

Any rational average intelligent person can also see that there are several posters here, who, if Cth1013 had not been put in touch with me, would contribute to having this little sweet dog killed. No pet dog lover on here or anywhere else would identify with those whose wish it is to kill this dog and others.

Its all in this post, plain for all to see. Anyone sitting back and reading Cth1013 first and other posts can see that and people can also see those on here who would end up contributing to this dogs death.

I am the trainer, I know all the circumstances and everyone can see that as well, those supporting 'positive training' supprt the life threatening results brought about by positive training, which, as I have pointed out, is a product, not a method of training.

People will scratch their heads in bewilderment at the rationality of some posts here and those who posted them, but the posts they will question are not Cth1013 posts or mine.

To repeat, one other thing is totaly certain, many many people here will identify with Cth1013's position before I was contacted. They are the important ones, many off them will also wonder why there are deliberate attempts to suppress information by those who know absolutely nothing about e-collars.

Lets face it this is either an information board or a board which only allows indoctrination of pet owners by excessive use of the term 'postive training' who have no experience of dogs, the term has no meaning in dog training methods.

If its a method that works when the owner is not around....whoever is doing it will make a fortune in California. Seriously, I know quite a few people...different trainers, behaviourists etc that have tried all kinds of methods but nothing is guaranteed while the dog is unattended.