# Wales bans e-collars; users face stiff fine.



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Full article here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ets-obedience-banned-Wales.html#ixzz0j8F0OGoi

-S


----------



## rappwizard (May 27, 2009)

A few of the pet law lists I'm on have been debating this information, pro and con.

It is rather interesting that the Kennel Club in England supports the ban and wants to see it in the rest of the British Isles. I don't think the AKC would do the same--different culture and philosophy on this side of the pond.

I do not like to see bans of any kind. I'm not saying these e-collars are misused, but why can't people be educated to use them correctly, or not need them at all, or as much?


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

It's unfortunate that it is an outright ban. There are many people who use the ecollar successfully and still have happy dogs. Granted--there are people who burn dogs, but should you really prevent someone from using a tool because they *might* misuse it or because you don't like it?


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

I wonder how they can have field competitions over there. On this forum, it seems like every serious field person says you can't possibly train a dog for field work without one.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

tippykayak said:


> I wonder how they can have field competitions over there. On this forum, it seems like every serious field person says you can't possibly train a dog for field work without one.


I don't think they're as hard-core serious about their field trial work. I want to say I've heard that, at least in some field competitions, they aren't using freshly-shot birds either. Can't recall where I heard that; I'd love to know if it's true or not.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

English field trials are very different from American field work. I don't know the details but I did talk to a flat coat breeder who had been to England with her dogs and she said the difficulty level was just incredibly reduced.

I do think it's a shame that a tool that is misused by some is being banned to all. Any tool can be misused. Look at all the obese dogs out there. Maybe there should be a ban on all treats and a restricted diet enforced to all because some don't understand how to keep a dog at a good weight.


----------



## rappwizard (May 27, 2009)

Did you also see some of the comments at the end of the article? E-collars are being banned, just as Tasers are being introduced for use by the police departments (!!!!)


----------



## Muddypaws (Apr 20, 2009)

fftopic: I would love to have a taser.... so many uses!! 


I am going to play devils advocate here - 

I am not familiar with field work but I have to ask, how did the orginal hunters/breeders teach the original retrievers? They didn't have e-collars and the field work was the real thing. There must be a way to teach with out e-collars.

Let me say that I don't really have an opinion but tools should not be banned because "some" people abuse them. These people should be punished (taser??).


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

Muddypaws said:


> I am not familiar with field work but I have to ask, how did the orginal hunters/breeders teach the original retrievers? They didn't have e-collars and the field work was the real thing. There must be a way to teach with out e-collars.


I have always heard that field training was much more brutal before e-collars. Of course I wasn't around then so that's just what I've read. But I would much rather give my dog a quick shock than repeated whippings.


----------



## Muddypaws (Apr 20, 2009)

Loisiana said:


> But I would much rather give my dog a quick shock than repeated whippings.


????? OMIGOD!!!!!!! Whippings???? How can you possibly train a dog with whippings??? Yes, an e-collar is much more humane. 

I would definitely taser anyone that whipped a dog.....


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

I admire "Amish" dogs the most. There are a few people running MH dogs without e collars, and my respect for them is mighty.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

I've always liked the Welsh.


----------



## Lisa_and_Willow. (Dec 18, 2007)

Emma&Tilly said:


> I've always liked the Welsh.


Haha! E-collars are put in the same boat as docking, declawing and ear cropping over here.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Muddypaws said:


> ????? OMIGOD!!!!!!! Whippings???? How can you possibly train a dog with whippings??? Yes, an e-collar is much more humane.
> 
> I would definitely taser anyone that whipped a dog.....


Yeah, if you read some of the old dog training books from the turn of the century, it becomes pretty clear that physical pain was considered a completely legitimate way of "teaching" a dog.

Heck, I have a retriever book from the seventies that recommends beating a dog with the free end of the leash until he cries out as a way of teaching him to stay.


----------



## IowaGold (Nov 3, 2009)

tippykayak said:


> Yeah, if you read some of the old dog training books from the turn of the century, it becomes pretty clear that physical pain was considered a completely legitimate way of "teaching" a dog.
> 
> Heck, I have a retriever book from the seventies that recommends beating a dog with the free end of the leash until he cries out as a way of teaching him to stay.


And shooting them with marbles and bird shot to teach them to listen at a distance.

I'd way rather use a collar to acheive higher levels of success than shoot my dog.

"Amish" does not equal positive or even nice. It simply means without electricity. Some of the "Amish" methods are actually much harsher than anything done with a collar.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

tippykayak said:


> Yeah, if you read some of the old dog training books from the turn of the century, it becomes pretty clear that physical pain was considered a completely legitimate way of "teaching" a dog.


But isn't that still the case when using e-collars? People that train with them must think that physical pain is acceptable during training...I know enough about them to know that the discomfort is what changes the behaviour.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

Emma&Tilly said:


> But isn't that still the case when using e-collars? People that train with them must think that physical pain is acceptable during training...I know enough about them to know that the discomfort is what changes the behaviour.


I think there's a huge difference between pain and discomfort. I find that the feeling of a shock isn't comfortable, but I wouldn't call it painful either.

Now when you start going up to the higher levels of intensity that might be considered painful. I have no idea since I haven't used that level on myself or my dogs.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

I suppose it depends on where you feel discomfort turns in to pain...I can't really judge as I have never felt the shock of a collar (never even seen one, infact I was quite suprised at the number that are supposedly in this country!) Does it just depend on what your dog responds to and you work from there?


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

Before you judge an e-collar I think you should at least feel it at various settings and watch someone who trains with it successfully, IMHO. I have felt one, and it does not hurt by any means at the low level. It IS a bit unpleasant/weird. Similar to when I brushed up against an electric goat fence--I was not 'shocked' but it did wake me up.

I have never used one, but I think it can be valuable depending on how you use it and can be kinder than other corrections given (Really, feel one at a low level--I think it can be less of a big deal than a strong collar pop). I've heard that field trainers that don't use them basically have to run out the several hundred yards to give a dog a correction that needs it and then run back. And timing is so important when it comes to training--if you timing is off your dog may not be getting the message you want sent.


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

Emma&Tilly said:


> I suppose it depends on where you feel discomfort turns in to pain...I can't really judge as I have never felt the shock of a collar (never even seen one, infact I was quite suprised at the number that are supposedly in this country!) Does it just depend on what your dog responds to and you work from there?


The way I understand it is that when shock collar first came out they were indeed on-size fits all and delivered quite a shock. A trainer I knew was very against them--but now they have much better collars with setting that don't really 'shock' the dog. This same trainer says it is a different playing field now with these collars and a good trainer.

I also understand that you start from the lowest level and work your way up to the absolute minimal setting that your dog responds to. And I think by respond--a simple flick of the ear when stimulated might be all that tells you that you are at a good setting.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

GoldenSail said:


> Before you judge an e-collar I think you should at least feel it at various settings and watch someone who trains with it successfully, IMHO.


This is true, and just what I said in my previous post, but I feel even though a human can try a collar round their neck on every setting possible (which I am sure would involve some pain!) what cannot be replicated is the situation in which you have no comprehension of what the pain is, when/where it is coming from. A dog doesn't have that luxury. To have absolutely no control over the sensation and when it may be coming (especially during the initial training, Im sure they catch on quick!) Just not something I would put my dog through, especially when dogs can be successfully trained without...I would rather say goodbye to the world of dogs than inflict any type of pain/discomfort/worry to a dog. Thats not what Im in dogs for!


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

One of my last posts on another educational forum was about the chain gang? I cannot remember if that was the term, but when I looked it up I thought, "Ugh!" Dogs teaching dogs. Parts of what I read really bothered me.

The only time I would use an e-collar is if I could not train my pet to stay safe. Like avoiding snakes...


----------



## Jo Ellen (Feb 25, 2007)

Is the shock of an e-collar the same as the shock from a collar that a dog wears when they have an invisible fence and they cross the boundary? If it is, it isn't painful. I've felt it myself. It's abrupt and alarming, but not painful ... not how I would define pain anyway.


----------



## Bender (Dec 30, 2008)

Jo Ellen said:


> Is the shock of an e-collar the same as the shock from a collar that a dog wears when they have an invisible fence and they cross the boundary? If it is, it isn't painful. I've felt it myself. It's abrupt and alarming, but not painful ... not how I would define pain anyway.


 
Again, depends on the setting. I don't tend to use the high settings at all, and now that we've worked it, I usually just use the beep as the first correction/warning and that's all that's needed for my guys. I don't think they've ever yelped apart from when I was training mr. jump the fence and take off who is fairly soft (and has not jumped the fence again either).

All aside, it is a TOOL. People can and will use and abuse whatever they have on hand if they think it's the right way to train. I was told for herding, to never walk by a sleeping dog without kicking them - teaches them respect. And if they don't listen when working they'll get a 'spanking' afterwards to teach obedience.:doh: Didn't use e-collars but I guess boots and sticks should be banned too.

Lana


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Bender said:


> I was told for herding, to never walk by a sleeping dog without kicking them - teaches them respect. And if they don't listen when working they'll get a 'spanking' afterwards to teach obedience.:doh: Didn't use e-collars but I guess boots and sticks should be banned too.
> 
> Lana


Geesh! Why do we treat animals like this? I don't get it sometimes. Why am I who I am? It would be so much easier to live my life if things like this didn't bother me so much.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

Bender said:


> .:doh: Didn't use e-collars but I guess boots and sticks should be banned too.
> 
> Lana


I think because an e-collars only aim IS to cause discomfort to a dog then that is why they are disliked so much in many countries. They simply would not work if they didn't cause a decent amount of discomfort to stop the undesirable behaviour. If you are hell bent on hurting a dog of course you need nothing more than your hand but a 'tool' which is designed to be painful is not given a good press over here!!


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

Bender said:


> I was told for herding, to never walk by a sleeping dog without kicking them - teaches them respect. And if they don't listen when working they'll get a 'spanking' afterwards to teach obedience.:doh:


I hope you gave whoever told you that a firm wallop round the head. That is despicable and nothing more than abuse.


----------



## Jo Ellen (Feb 25, 2007)

When Daisy and I first moved to Pennsylvania, she loved to chase the ducks, she was only a puppy then, around a year old. Someone told me I should beat her with a dead duck. I was mortified, they were very serious. First of all, where would I find a dead duck ?? Second, I can't imagine beating my dog at all, let alone using a dead duck to do it! But it made me wonder where this stuff comes from -- early bird hunting days?? But seriously, where is the logic or rationale in this? 

Well I never beat her with a dead duck of course, she grew up and ducks are of little interest to her now ... she prefers fish


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

I don't know much about ecollars, but I know that any training technique, positive or negative... is inhumane to a dog when it doesn't work and the dog is set up for failure. And when a technique does work....as long as it doesn't cause injury...then its humane. I know people call the prong and e-collar a "quick fix". But to me that is another way of saying it is successful and more humane then something that keeps a dog in limbo. 

All that said......My gut feeling is against using corrective/negative type techniques for dogs that are asked to go the extra mile and work incompetition for our hobbies or for our service. I just think the inate ability and drive should be there already or they shouldn't do it.


----------



## honeysmum (Dec 4, 2007)

I am so pleased to see e collars banned in Wales and hope they extend it to the whole of GB I know many many people that have field dogs (not just field trial competitions) and never has anyone of them used these collars they would consider it an easy and lazy route to train, nor do they beat them, they start training very young and use positive reinforcement why anyone needs to use them to get them to do the job is beyond my comprehension.

OT I know (but someone mentioned it) but Tasars are not carried by all our police force only trained individuals, likewise our police do not carry guns only armed force response teams do who all have to go for physiological tests and assessment but they still don't carry on a day to day basis thank goodness we don't need that here in the UK.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

honeysmum said:


> likewise our police do not carry guns only armed force response teams do who all have to go for physiological tests and assessment but they still don't carry on a day to day basis thank goodness we don't need that here in the UK.


Hear hear! I would hate to live in a country where anyone could get their hands on a gun, it can only exacerbate violence in society...if they carry a gun, we need a gun for protection, etc. How about NOBODY carry a gun!

I guess we look at guns in the same kind of way as an e-collar, it is a device primarily designed to cause pain. Maybe in a country used to guns the e-collar doesn't seem so bad, lol!


----------



## IowaGold (Nov 3, 2009)

I have no need of a gun for protection, but I live in the country. I NEED a gun to eliminate predators as I have poultry etc. Build a secure fence you say? Tell that to raccoons, possums, etc. I'm so glad I live in a country where I can acquire the firearm that I need. And I don't believe for a second that any criminal that really wants a gun can't find one to buy somewhere, no matter what country you live in.


----------



## MillysMom (Nov 5, 2008)

I don't understand how they could ban something like an e-collar that is totally appropriate to use in the correct hands, but allow things like polling to continue with horses. Polling is where someone stands at beside a jump and as the horse is mid air over the jump they lift the pole (usually bamboo) and hit the horse's front legs with it. It encourages the horse to jump tighter with their legs, and helps train them to not rub the rails, and to really use their body to jump. It's controversial, but I've sat on a few horses from Wales that had clearly been poled, and poled HARD. It's again, like the e-collar, a tool that in the correct hands is appropriate, but should not be over used and should only be used on animals capable of understanding what is being asked by them. It just seems much less humane to me than an e-collar. 

There are quite a few very well known lab trainers in my hometown, and all insist an e-collar is a must in training a top level hunter. I would never use an e-collar at this point of my dog education, because I don't think I know enough to appropriately use one, but they shouldn't be banned because a few people use them abusively. All almost all artificial aids have the potential to be abusive.

I wanted to know what an e-collar felt like when a friend was using one in training her dog, and I put it on and let her control the shock. It wasn't pleasant, or enjoyable, but it didn't hurt.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

tippykayak said:


> Yeah, if you read some of the old dog training books from the turn of the century, it becomes pretty clear that physical pain was considered a completely legitimate way of "teaching" a dog.
> 
> Heck, I have a retriever book from the seventies that recommends beating a dog with the free end of the leash until he cries out as a way of teaching him to stay.


PAH. If only it were strictly outdated. I have a clipping from a local paper, from last year, written by Jim Canino's current wife that talks about "spanking" a dog for nuisance barking. There's a line about making sure you strike the meaty part of the thigh, and don't worry, the dog will run away, but you have to keep following him.... :no: :no: The Caninos have a dog training school here in the Greater LA area and his daughter, Dany, is an AKC judge and dog trainer based in, I think, Florida.


----------



## Tanyac (Jun 18, 2008)

I'm glad the Ecollar has been banned, I hope they bring it in over the whole of the UK! I would never use a tool which uses fear to make a dog obey. I would never use a prong collar either. Both my dogs wear flat collars or rope slip leads as I spent time actually teaching them to walk properly. They don't pull at all on the lead but this didnt just happen, there aren't any magical quick fixes, it takes time and patience.

IMO the very best way to teach a dog is with kindness, patience and positive reinforcement. 

I will never be persuaded that any other way is the right way...

Sorry if you don't agree, just my opinion.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

IowaGold said:


> I have no need of a gun for protection, but I live in the country. I NEED a gun to eliminate predators as I have poultry etc.


Then if you lived in this country you would be entitled to apply for a firearm certificate, you would just need to prove you needed it and you were safe to have it. Our strict legislations would stop the likes of me having one, because I don't NEED one nor would it really be that safe in my hands!


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

IowaGold said:


> And I don't believe for a second that any criminal that really wants a gun can't find one to buy somewhere, no matter what country you live in.


Exactly...thats the worrying thing!


----------



## honeysmum (Dec 4, 2007)

Millysmum polling is also baned in the UK and has been for many years I have owned and competed in the UK for 20 years with Horses and it has never been an acceptable practice anyone found to be polling a horse in the UK would not be eligible to compete and would have a possible life time ban,and face cruelty charges so I am wondering where you have read this please let me know your source of information.


----------



## 12687 (Feb 24, 2010)

Well why stop there?? I think all colars and leashes should be banned as well, they could be used incorrectly and therefore all of them should be banned. Choke collars and pinch collars are just hideous and could kill a dog if used incorrectly-way more damage done to dogs with those collars. Those of you with underground fences-well go tear them out and cross your fingers that your poor dog doesn't end up as road pizza. No more bitter apple spray either-it's cruel, just let your dog chew on all your furniture and too bad for you if he gets a blockage. NO more crates, it's mean and not fair to lock fido up, he should be allowed to run free. Sticks too, no more throwing sticks, you might hit your dog or poke his eye out. Where does it end? You chip away at personal freedoms and then you wonder how did we get to this point where the guberment is telling you how to train your dog? What breed you can get, what venue you can show in..........Well guess what folks many of the humane society/peta types want to do away with all purebred dogs-anyone who breeds is the devil according to many of these fruitloops. Where does it end? And for you who think Amish dogs are trained in positive manners? WRONG!!!! They rely on harsh physical corrections-I've seen it plenty and it's ugly. Cattle prods, kicking and whippings are just the tip of the iceberg for most 'amish' type training. 

Same old argument over and over and over and over.............


----------



## rappwizard (May 27, 2009)

pals said:


> Well why stop there?? I think all colars and leashes should be banned as well, they could be used incorrectly and therefore all of them should be banned. Choke collars and pinch collars are just hideous and could kill a dog if used incorrectly-way more damage done to dogs with those collars. Those of you with underground fences-well go tear them out and cross your fingers that your poor dog doesn't end up as road pizza. No more bitter apple spray either-it's cruel, just let your dog chew on all your furniture and too bad for you if he gets a blockage. NO more crates, it's mean and not fair to lock fido up, he should be allowed to run free. Sticks too, no more throwing sticks, you might hit your dog or poke his eye out. Where does it end? You chip away at personal freedoms and then you wonder how did we get to this point where the guberment is telling you how to train your dog? What breed you can get, what venue you can show in..........Well guess what folks many of the humane society/peta types want to do away with all purebred dogs-anyone who breeds is the devil according to many of these fruitloops. Where does it end? And for you who think Amish dogs are trained in positive manners? WRONG!!!! They rely on harsh physical corrections-I've seen it plenty and it's ugly. Cattle prods, kicking and whippings are just the tip of the iceberg for most 'amish' type training.
> 
> Same old argument over and over and over and over.............


PALS, I could not have said it better myself. Incrementalism is a very, very dangerous thing and it's taking away our freedom slowly and deliberately and we don't even realize it.


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

What is the line between "pain" and "discomfort"? How do we evaluate that with people? Very young kids? Animals? How accurate are our evaluations?

Was this ban for improved animal welfare or as an "animal rights agenda"? 

Can laws be put in place for improved welfare? [has anyone here read the paper that really pushed docking to be banned in Australia? It was all about welfare. Not about "animal rights."].

I think it's really frightening what can be done in the US in the name of training. I have close friends so sickened by what they saw at a big name seminar they were about to go report it to animal control. They then realized there were many representatives from the police department there, watching, and completely okay with what was happening. 

I really wish we had more leverage against what -can't- be done in the name of training. There's nothing appropriate about dogs being hung until they pass out, especially if it's on television. especially in the name of basic pet obedience training. and especially if it's kids who are supposed to implement it. There is absolutely no reason 8 year olds should be causing enough discomfort to make a puppy yelp. There is no reason a 10 year old should be laughing about the way a dog runs away or trembles when she holds out the nail clippers. I loose sleep over stuff like this. 

I'm obviously not a fan of electric collars, but I really don't think they should be sold in every available store, making them easy access and relatively affordable for everyone.


----------



## Bogey's Mom (Dec 23, 2008)

tippykayak said:


> Heck, I have a retriever book from the seventies that recommends beating a dog with the free end of the leash until he cries out as a way of teaching him to stay.


Really?! That'd sure make me want to stay. :doh:


----------



## 12687 (Feb 24, 2010)

The common demoninator is STUPID people who abuse animals, regardless of the tool they use. Hang a dog? Allow children to torture dogs? Kick a dog? Beat a dog? How incredibly sad. How is banning e-collars going to change any of this? 

As for gun issues and the UK:
just read this:
HOME > NEWS / SHOWBIZ > UK NEWS > _Violence soars by 44% in a decade_ 
*UK NEWS*


*VIOLENCE SOARS BY 44% IN A DECADE *











Violence has rocketed this past decade 
 

Tuesday March 9,2010 

*By Martyn Brown *









Have your say(14) 

LABOUR’S failure to get a grip on crime is exposed today by figures which show that violence is soaring on Britain’s streets.

Statistics reveal the number of violent offences has rocketed by 44 per cent in the last 10 years.

Crimes reported to the 43 police forces in England and Wales have jumped from 618,000 in 1998/9 – a year after Labour came to power – to 888,000 in 2008/09. That means nearly 2,500 acts of violence, including assault and GBH take place every day.

The damning figures – which use data from the Police Recorded Crime Statistics and take into effect the change in the way crime statistics are collated – come in the wake of a deepening political row over the level of violent crime in Britain. 

Last month the Conservatives were blasted by the official ­statistics watchdog for “fiddling” crime figures. Sir Michael Scholar, head of the UK Statistics ­Authority, said the Tories had “misled” the public by claiming violence was on the rise. 
He said the party failed to make clear that the definition of violent crime had been changed in 2002, making comparisons between the late 1990s and 2008/2009 unreliable. Labour claim the figure has fallen by 41 per cent.

However the new research, compiled by the House of Commons Library, reveals that violent crimes have shot up. 

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said yesterday: “This new analysis confirms that the level of violent crime actually reported to police officers in police stations up and down the country is much higher than it was a decade ago. 

“This just serves to underline the scale of the challenge the country faces in fixing our broken society.” The Conservatives argue that the British Crime Survey, used by the Government to measure crime trends, is not the way to analyse the figures because it excludes key offences such as murder and ­sexual offences.








SEARCH UK NEWS for: 


This means that violent crimes also excluded can include manslaughter, rape, bank, post office and jewellery shop robberies.

Last night a spokesman for Home Secretary Alan Johnson said: “Chris ­Grayling has tried to get cover for his use of dodgy crime statistics and has failed.

“As Sir Michael Scholar, head of the UK Statistics Authority, states, the British Crime Survey is widely regarded as the most accepted way to record levels of crime. This clearly shows a decrease in violence crimes of 41 per cent since 1997.”

:no: Again-it's not the tools, it is the people. Thanks very much but I'll keep my guns and take my chances against any criminal I may, heaven help me, ever encounter. I know how to use it and I won't hesitate to protect my family, my dogs and myself.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

pals said:


> Cattle prods, kicking and whippings are just the tip of the iceberg for most 'amish' type training.


This has not been my experience with so-called "Amish" trainers. They don't refer to themselves that way, but rather it's a term that others semi-derisively use, and those that I know are folks who prefer not to rely on that kind of negative stimuli at a distance. I don't know any true PO field trainers, but I do know of a couple who don't like to use e-collars and try not to rely on correction too much (so no beating, kicking, whipping, etc.)


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

rappwizard said:


> PALS, I could not have said it better myself. Incrementalism is a very, very dangerous thing and it's taking away our freedom slowly and deliberately and we don't even realize it.


By the same token, not everything is a slippery slope, and there are times where the law really needs to come down someplace on a spectrum.

As another poster wrote, clearly hanging dogs as a "correction" is something that should be outlawed as abusive.

Perhaps an e-collar ban goes _too_ far, but I think the argument needs to be about degrees of punishment, not whether governments have a right to declare certain things illegal because they're abusive to animals. Clearly, _some_ things need to outlawed, perhaps not e-collars, but some things.


----------



## Tanyac (Jun 18, 2008)

I'm sure this ban in Wales has come about after extensive research into whether it is deemed cruel to use them. I do not see it as a loss of civil liberty that the Government has declared something perceived cruel is now banned... tail docking is also banned here (apart from working dogs) and was ear cropping ever routinely practiced in the UK? I haven't ever seen a dog with it's ears cropped... we also don't declaw our cats, something else routinely practiced elsewhere. Is it cruel? Probably. Is it a loss of my civil liberty that I am not allowed to maim my animal in order that it fits in with my notion of beauty or my lifestyle? Absolutley not.

Too many people see their dogs as "property" they don't treat them properly, over-humanise them and then wonder why their dog becomes unpredictable, destructive and doesn't listen to them the minute they get some freedom. 



 Do these people walk their dogs at least twice a day...? Probably not!
 Do these people get their wet weather gear on and head out into the pouring rain in freezing conditions for an hour or more because it's what their dogs need, then repeat the process later on in the day? Probably not!
 Do these people spend time in making their dogs socially acceptable, well trained and a pleasure to own? Probably not!
 Do the dogs owned by these people respond to their owners and are willing to please because they haven't been "forced" into compliance by harsh training methods? I doubt it!
 Do these people, when their dog needs to be "controlled" resort to "quick fix" methods in order to "train" their dogs? ....most probably!!
 
I am making no comments on where these kind of dog owners may live, in fact, I know personally people who don't care for their dogs at all, and it breaks my heart!

It all comes down to whether you train a dog by fear or whether your dogs listens and obeys you because he "wants" to. There is no better sight in my eyes that a beautiful Golden Retriever looking up to their owner with total attention with that blissful happy face that they often have. 

...and as for the comments made by some about whether our working Golden Retrievers are worked using live game, perhaps they should remember that gundogs are used routinely here in the UK for "picking up" on a live game shoot. I'm sure Lord Tweedmouth didn't have to rely on Ecollars back then, and I am certain I've never ever heard of them being used in gundog training here today. We have a couple of UK members who have much more personal experience than I, so I hope they will come here and comment.

No personal offence is meant by any of my comments but I do happen to feel strongly about this one!!!


----------



## 12687 (Feb 24, 2010)

tippykayak said:


> This has not been my experience with so-called "Amish" trainers. They don't refer to themselves that way, but rather it's a term that others semi-derisively use, and those that I know are folks who prefer not to rely on that kind of negative stimuli at a distance. I don't know any true PO field trainers, but I do know of a couple who don't like to use e-collars and try not to rely on correction too much (so no beating, kicking, whipping, etc.)


 
For the last 30 years I've been around field goldens-"Amish trained" was coined for training with old school methods. I live in an area with a huge Amish population and as a rule of thumb they are not kind to their dogs. It does not mean positive field training methods-perhaps someone is telling you that-but it is not the case. I have trained with people who don't use collars. Trust me when they march out in the field I'm cringing as are their dogs. There is a newer group that is using the positive approach, without pressure or complusion-I don't refer to them as Amish. When someone says Amish on RTF-all of us know that they are refering to old school methods, if they are wanting positive only methods they are not talking Amish. I don't know what the term is for that, but they need to be careful because if someone told me or any of my training partners they were Amish training-we would be wondering when they were planning on kicking their dog or beating on them.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

pals said:


> For the last 30 years I've been around field goldens-"Amish trained" was coined for training with old school methods. I live in an area with a huge Amish population and as a rule of thumb they are not kind to their dogs. It does not mean positive field training methods-perhaps someone is telling you that-but it is not the case. I have trained with people who don't use collars. Trust me when they march out in the field I'm cringing as are their dogs. There is a newer group that is using the positive approach, without pressure or complusion-I don't refer to them as Amish. When someone says Amish on RTF-all of us know that they are refering to old school methods, if they are wanting positive only methods they are not talking Amish. I don't know what the term is for that, but they need to be careful because if someone told me or any of my training partners they were Amish training-we would be wondering when they were planning on kicking their dog or beating on them.


Perhaps it's more regional than we think. I've heard a lot of negative things about the way the real Amish people train animals, but here in CT, where there aren't any (to my knowledge) Amish communities, it appears to be just slang for "no e-collar" and not to be much of a comment on how harsh the rest of the training is.

I should clarify simply that a couple of folks whom I know personally or know of personally who don't use e-collars are generally more positive-oriented and have been referred to as "Amish" in a not-so-kind way.

Or maybe I was misunderstanding and the people who were saying "Amish" were implying that the trainer was secretly much harsher than he or she appeared on the surface.


----------



## 12687 (Feb 24, 2010)

I just received an email from Lorie Jolly-she is having lessons geared towards the field training without pressure or compulsion. If someone is interested in field training with these methods visit Rosehill Retrievers on the web. Lorie has also written a book about using positive methods in the field.


----------



## LifeOfRiley (Nov 2, 2007)

rappwizard said:


> I do not like to see bans of any kind. I'm not saying these e-collars are misused, but why can't people be educated to use them correctly, or not need them at all, or as much?


I feel the same way. I know nothing about field trials, so I'm just talking about training in general. 

I don't like e-collars, but I'm not a fan of "bans", in general. And I think they're right to worry about shelters becoming overrun with unruly, untrained dogs unless they accompany this ban with education and make other methods more available, more affordable, etc.
Gunner could have been a perfect example of what could happen. With his nuissance barking, we could have easily found ourselves in a position where the management here would have said 'he has to go.' We didn't resort to the e-collar -- fortunately, we decided to try every other option we could think of and it seems that we'll be able to control it without one. But what if we hadn't? What if an e-collar was the last resort? If they were banned, it could easily cause a dog like Gunner to be separated from his family.

I know people who use e-collars and I know people who would never dream of it, no matter what. Both have happy, well-trained dogs so I think that education and application play a big role.


----------



## AmandaSmelser (Mar 22, 2010)

Like any other privilege that is deemed to be easily and consequentially abused (driver's/pilot's license, gun-ownership, travel passport/visa, SCUBA certification, etc.) the answer is not to impose an outright ban, but instead to regulate and permit to those who can demonstrate proficiency and responsibility for their use.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

It's funny the cultural differences you see on this forum...from what I have seen and read the overwhelming feeling is absolute delight about the ban in this country...I've just come from a general dog forum based in the UK and have read 7 pages of posts saying how marvellous the news is...it is viewed as a step forward in animal welfare rather than a step back in human rights...I have not seen one Brit even mention THEIR rights being taken away. It seems we do not view it that way at all. 



> Well why stop there?? I think all colars and leashes should be banned as well, they could be used incorrectly and therefore all of them should be banned. Choke collars and pinch collars are just hideous and could kill a dog if used incorrectly-way more damage done to dogs with those collars. Those of you with underground fences-well go tear them out and cross your fingers that your poor dog doesn't end up as road pizza. No more bitter apple spray either-it's cruel, just let your dog chew on all your furniture and too bad for you if he gets a blockage. NO more crates, it's mean and not fair to lock fido up, he should be allowed to run free. Sticks too, no more throwing sticks, you might hit your dog or poke his eye out. Where does it end?


I'm not sure if this is attempted humour, sarcasm or what but it is a little silly to say the least. Although I would be more than happy to see a ban on prong and choke chains...again, devices MADE to cause discomfort in the name of training...they are not commonly used here, people are just generally kinder in their training it seems. Funnily enough dogs do not run amock here, dogs get a great deal of freedom and socialisation. Only today I was sat eating lunch in a pub with my two dogs and 4 other dogs, sat beautifully at their owners feet...3 didn't even need a lead on. Well trained, happy dogs...thats the aim isn't it. How it is achieved DOES matter to most dog lovers...it can be achieved without the use of shocking a dog around its neck so MOST are more than delighted to see a ban.


----------



## 12687 (Feb 24, 2010)

You think it's silly I think it's sad. 

Over here I'm thrilled that I still have personal freedoms to make choices I deem fit for my family and my dogs. Just because you have a viseral reaction to a training tool doesn't make it a horrible thing. That's your opinion and you are entitled to it, just as I'm entitled to mine. Yes stupid people can use the e collar wrong-they also abuse pinch collars and the list goes on and on. It won't be long and the UK will be outlawing hunting period. So than I guess there is really no point in having a retriever now is there? 

God Bless the USA- I'm so thankful I can still say that.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

pals said:


> You think it's silly I think it's sad.


No, I actually said it is silly to suggest that the government will ban sticks...and collars...and leads as some kind of 'slippery slope' argument. Clearly I don't need to explain what their uses are and why it would be ridiculous to say they could possibly be banned. A shock collar is entirely different and even when used properly it still causes discomfort and possibly pain to a dog...that is the way it has to be for it to work. That is why it is banned.

It is illegal to dock tails, it is illegal to crop ears, it is illegal to declaw cats and now it is illegal to shock a dog around its neck. That is for the welfare of animals, not rights of humans. There is a running theme...causing unnecessary pain to domestic animals is disliked in this country. So people cannot choose to use a device that causes pain...I can live with that!


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

RedDogs said:


> I really wish we had more leverage against what -can't- be done in the name of training. There's nothing appropriate about dogs being hung until they pass out, especially if it's on television. especially in the name of basic pet obedience training. and especially if it's kids who are supposed to implement it. There is absolutely no reason 8 year olds should be causing enough discomfort to make a puppy yelp. There is no reason a 10 year old should be laughing about the way a dog runs away or trembles when she holds out the nail clippers. I loose sleep over stuff like this.


Well shoot, we better go out and ban the use of nail clippers than because some 10-year old might terrorize dog with them. Dogs will be much better off with grotesquely long nails than the chance that an 10-year old will abuse nail clippers! 

So right, IMHO what needs to be addressed is what is abuse now what tool is abuse. I think it is one thing to fine a trainer who is using an ecollar and the dog's tail is tucked, ears are down, and is crying. A completely different story when the dog's ears are up and his tail's wagging like crazy because he can't wait to go get a bird. I've seen both.


----------



## Tanyac (Jun 18, 2008)

Emma&Tilly said:


> It's funny the cultural differences you see on this forum...from what I have seen and read the overwhelming feeling is absolute delight about the ban in this country...I've just come from a general dog forum based in the UK and have read 7 pages of posts saying how marvellous the news is...it is viewed as a step forward in animal welfare rather than a step back in human rights...I have not seen one Brit even mention THEIR rights being taken away. It seems we do not view it that way at all.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if this is attempted humour, sarcasm or what but it is a little silly to say the least. Although I would be more than happy to see a ban on prong and choke chains...again, devices MADE to cause discomfort in the name of training...they are not commonly used here, people are just generally kinder in their training it seems. Funnily enough dogs do not run amock here, dogs get a great deal of freedom and socialisation. Only today I was sat eating lunch in a pub with my two dogs and 4 other dogs, sat beautifully at their owners feet...3 didn't even need a lead on. Well trained, happy dogs...thats the aim isn't it. How it is achieved DOES matter to most dog lovers...it can be achieved without the use of shocking a dog around its neck so MOST are more than delighted to see a ban.


You're right Emma, dogs generally do have a lot of freedom here. I'm glad we can exercise our dogs in such a variety of great places, and our dogs are so well socialised on the whole.

I agree with everything you said!

This debate doesn't need to get personal (I feel it may be heading this way) it's about the ECollar being banned here. As you said Emma, I haven't heard any negative comments here either, perhaps a ban would be resisted more in places where it is used more commonly.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

tanyac said:


> This debate doesn't need to get personal (I feel it may be heading this way) it's about the ECollar being banned here. As you said Emma, I haven't heard any negative comments here either, *perhaps a ban would be resisted more in places where it is used more commonly.*


That's a really good point. Since ecollars are part and parcel with modern retriever training in the US, the thought of banning them is taking a step backwards in our opinion. But if nobody uses them in the UK, there are fewer to fight for them and resist the opposition. 
I absolutely understand the reaction against ecollars from those who either never see their use or have only witnessed them used incorrectly, which IS very dramatic. On the flip side they can be used with finesse and in that manner are an absolutely marvelous training tool and the best way to communicate to the dog in many instances during field training, and other valid training scenarios. This is not a black and white issue but clearly the Welsh government has made it black and white.


----------



## Tanyac (Jun 18, 2008)

K9-Design said:


> That's a really good point. Since ecollars are part and parcel with modern retriever training in the US, the thought of banning them is taking a step backwards in our opinion. But if nobody uses them in the UK, there are fewer to fight for them and resist the opposition.
> I absolutely understand the reaction against ecollars from those who either never see their use or have only witnessed them used incorrectly, which IS very dramatic. On the flip side they can be used with finesse and in that manner are an absolutely marvelous training tool and the best way to communicate to the dog in many instances during field training, and other valid training scenarios. This is not a black and white issue but clearly the Welsh government has made it black and white.


I feel to debate a subject as subjective as this obviously is must be a good thing. For some to take it to another level is not helpful in my opinion. Everyone has their own opinion, and to have a successful debate all those concerned must listen and consider other people's views.

What's the point of debating otherwise?

As for the ECollar, let those who have success using it carry on doing so, as for myself, I'll never use one, even if it stays legal here.


----------



## Lisa_and_Willow. (Dec 18, 2007)

I have never seen an ecollar nor met a dog who has been trained by one. I know you can get them but it is not something you see in a regular pet store. A popular dog magazine that I have read for over 14 years has a complete ban from advertising any product from companies that also supply ecollars and that has been their policy for years.

I would be happy if they were banned here. It is a tool that is designed to hurt dogs and reguardless of the amount of pain or the sucess of the training I can't support it.


----------



## annef (Feb 23, 2008)

I, for one, am delighted they have banned E collars. No self respecting field trial person would use them to train in the UK.The dogs work on freshly shot birds (not dummies which are working tests) and are steady at all times or are out of the trial. My Mother made up a FT champion and bred several others and E collars were never used- the dogs were biddable, trainable and easy to live with. I live just down the road from one of our top FT judges , he trains the dogs gently and gets great results and would never use an e collar. Breeding for biddable trainable dogs is the answer. Annef


----------



## perdie (Oct 30, 2008)

Loisiana said:


> English field trials are very different from American field work. I don't know the details.....
> Exactly, you dont know the details so,sadly, this kind of response only serves to cause frustration.
> I do think it's a shame that a tool that is misused by some is being banned to all. Any tool can be misused. Look at all the obese dogs out there.
> Where? Wales? England?roflmao pot kettle black


----------



## 12687 (Feb 24, 2010)

Well I think a ban on the ecollar is a big mistake. The majority of people who have never personally seen an ecollar used, witnessed US trials, or actually trained a field dog..........think that because I use an ecollar my dogs are miserable and abused. Nothing could be further from the truth-but hey continue this great debate. Let's state this again for posterity sake: The tool is not the problem, how it is used is the problem.


----------



## fostermom (Sep 6, 2007)

Emma&Tilly said:


> It's funny the cultural differences you see on this forum...from what I have seen and read the overwhelming feeling is absolute delight about the ban in this country...I've just come from a general dog forum based in the UK and have read 7 pages of posts saying how marvellous the news is...it is viewed as a step forward in animal welfare rather than a step back in human rights...I have not seen one Brit even mention THEIR rights being taken away. It seems we do not view it that way at all.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if this is attempted humour, sarcasm or what but it is a little silly to say the least. Although I would be more than happy to see a ban on prong and choke chains...again, devices MADE to cause discomfort in the name of training...they are not commonly used here, people are just generally kinder in their training it seems. Funnily enough dogs do not run amock here, dogs get a great deal of freedom and socialisation. Only today I was sat eating lunch in a pub with my two dogs and 4 other dogs, sat beautifully at their owners feet...3 didn't even need a lead on. Well trained, happy dogs...thats the aim isn't it. How it is achieved DOES matter to most dog lovers...it can be achieved without the use of shocking a dog around its neck so MOST are more than delighted to see a ban.



I wish we could be as progressive as you all are in the UK when it comes to the treatment (and training methods) of pets.


----------



## perdie (Oct 30, 2008)

I think many of those opposed to the e-collar assume the owner/trainer is lazy and would rather use short cuts than put the work in...just a thought
I dont live in Wales so the ban doesnt affect me, I dont feel the need to use an e-collar either so again it doesnt affect me. 
I personally think a licence of some sort with proper training/testing would have been more appropriate


----------



## perdie (Oct 30, 2008)

GoldenSail said:


> It's unfortunate that it is an outright ban. There are many people who use the ecollar successfully and still have happy dogs. Granted--there are people who burn dogs, but should you really prevent someone from using a tool because they *might* misuse it or because you don't like it?


No you shouldnt, I dont agree with e collars in 99.9% of cases but I do feel appropriate licensing and testing wouldve been a better option. But which goverment wants to spend the money setting up that kind of program?


----------



## perdie (Oct 30, 2008)

rappwizard said:


> Did you also see some of the comments at the end of the article? E-collars are being banned, just as Tasers are being introduced for use by the police departments (!!!!)


I dont see the connection? Are you saying police officers cant be trusted with tasers but the average dog owner can be trusted with the doggy equivalent?surely not?!roflmao


----------



## honeysmum (Dec 4, 2007)

I find it very odd that so many are so concerned about the ban of e collars in a part of the United Kingdom but it is not by anyone living here is it a case of where the UK lead the USA may follow


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

annef said:


> I, for one, am delighted they have banned E collars. No self respecting field trial person would use them to train in the UK.The dogs work on freshly shot birds (not dummies which are working tests) and are steady at all times or are out of the trial. My Mother made up a FT champion and bred several others and E collars were never used- the dogs were biddable, trainable and easy to live with. I live just down the road from one of our top FT judges , he trains the dogs gently and gets great results and would never use an e collar. Breeding for biddable trainable dogs is the answer. Annef


What a great post and that is just what I hoped happened in the gundog world (in the UK!)...I have never taken part in any gundog training but often watch gundogs working at game shows and such like and it always seemed like the dogs worked because they were bred to do it and lived for it.


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

honeysmum said:


> I find it very odd that so many are so concerned about the ban of e collars in a part of the United Kingdom but it is not by anyone living here is it a case of where the UK lead the USA may follow


I often wish! I do think we're way behind some of Europe and Australia when it comes to welfare, in regards to both companion animals and livestock.


----------



## rappwizard (May 27, 2009)

perdie said:


> I dont see the connection? Are you saying police officers cant be trusted with tasers but the average dog owner can be trusted with the doggy equivalent?surely not?!roflmao


Well, Wales just said that doggy owners can't be trusted to use something like a taser, but the police can be trusted to use such an electric instrument. Why does the police possess logic that the average dog owner doesn't possess? People are people, aren't they?


----------



## honeysmum (Dec 4, 2007)

Wales is a separate country to England although part of the UK, e collars have been baned in Wales hopefully the rest of the UK will follow, where has it been said Tazars are to be used by Police Officers in Wales, I would add that the thinking seems to be in the US its okay to use e collars on dogs but not Tazars on people Hmmm people make their own choices good or bad so are aware of the consequences ho hum different strokes for different folks I guess.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

Emma&Tilly said:


> It's funny the cultural differences you see on this forum...from what I have seen and read the overwhelming feeling is absolute delight about the ban in this country...I've just come from a general dog forum based in the UK and have read 7 pages of posts saying how marvellous the news is...it is viewed as a step forward in animal welfare rather than a step back in human rights...I have not seen one Brit even mention THEIR rights being taken away. It seems we do not view it that way at all. .


 



Emma&Tilly said:


> Although I would be more than happy to see a ban on prong and choke chains...again, devices MADE to cause discomfort in the name of training...they are not commonly used here, people are just generally kinder in their training it seems. .


When a person in the UK chooses to use the prong and it is banned....these people are having their right to decide the best option for their dog taken away from them by people who don't know anything about their dog or situation.....or the prong for that matter. 

So I imagine that people who don't use prongs in the UK are quite satisfied that they live in a free society.


----------



## fostermom (Sep 6, 2007)

Lucky's mom said:


> When a person in the UK chooses to use the prong and it is banned....these people are having their right to decide the best option for their dog taken away from them by people who don't know anything about their dog or situation.....or the prong for that matter.
> 
> So I imagine that people who don't use prongs in the UK are quite satisfied that they live in a free society.


Actually, it's not the best option being taken away, just one of the easier options. 

I have used a prong and am so happy to have other options now. Of course, if I had a better training background when I was using the prongs, I would have never used them in the first place.


----------



## rappwizard (May 27, 2009)

I'm in Florida, where tasers are legal--I'm sure some of you will remember this bit of political history during the John Kerry presidential campaign at the University Of Florida.

Now the country of Wales can join Florida in saying "Don't taze me bro!"






BTW, the inventor of the Taser owns a big-time show dog, an affenpinscher, and the dog's call name is, of course, Taser.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

fostermom said:


> Actually, it's not the best option being taken away, just one of the easier options.


I'm not sure what that means...."easier option". 

I've seen thread after thread of dogs running from the gentle leader, spending their entire walk in discomfort and the owners gritting their teeth as their distraught dog gets "accustomed" to it. That sounds hard. Where Lucky leaps into his prong collar, can't wait to get going and smiles and tail wags throughout the entire walk. I think its good that Lucky has it easy.

Yet the gentle leader isn't banned. I think I want to ban it. What would all the gentle leader people...who have had success with it.... think about that?? They would be offended and they would feel their right to choose the best option has been taken away.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Lucky's mom said:


> I'm not sure what that means...."easier option".
> 
> I've seen thread after thread of dogs running from the gentle leader, spending their entire walk in discomfort and the owners gritting their teeth as their distraught dog gets "accustomed" to it. That sounds hard. Where Lucky leaps into his prong collar, can't wait to get going and smiles and tail wags throughout the entire walk. I think its good that Lucky has it easy.
> 
> Yet the gentle leader isn't banned. I think I want to ban it. What would all the gentle leader people...who have had success with it.... think about that?? They would be offended and they would feel their right to choose the best option has been taken away.


Thanks -- you said what I was thinking in a much *better* way


----------



## IowaGold (Nov 3, 2009)

Lucky's mom said:


> I'm not sure what that means...."easier option".
> 
> I've seen thread after thread of dogs running from the gentle leader, spending their entire walk in discomfort and the owners gritting their teeth as their distraught dog gets "accustomed" to it. That sounds hard. Where Lucky leaps into his prong collar, can't wait to get going and smiles and tail wags throughout the entire walk. I think its good that Lucky has it easy.
> 
> Yet the gentle leader isn't banned. I think I want to ban it. What would all the gentle leader people...who have had success with it.... think about that?? They would be offended and they would feel their right to choose the best option has been taken away.


Besides, GLs can cause severe neck damage if used improperly!

If one saw/understood what US high level field dogs must be taught, no one would call using an e-collar the easy way out! There is nothing fast or easy about the precision required in high level field training. Using the e-collar allows you to correct your dog instantly at great distances (they can literally be hundreds of yards away on a blind retrieve). There is no other good way to correct a dog instantly at such distances (hence why old timers used slingshots and bird shot). And we all know how effective delayed corrections are.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

IowaGold said:


> Besides, GLs can cause severe neck damage if used improperly!
> 
> If one saw/understood what US high level field dogs must be taught, no one would call using an e-collar the easy way out! There is nothing fast or easy about the precision required in high level field training. Using the e-collar allows you to correct your dog instantly at great distances (they can literally be hundreds of yards away on a blind retrieve). There is no other good way to correct a dog instantly at such distances (hence why old timers used slingshots and bird shot). And we all know how effective delayed corrections are.


Ah yes but then here comes the litany of "Well I would never force my dog to do such a thing in the first place."

This is one argument that goes around and around and around. Different strokes for different folks and thankfully we still have the option to choose what we want to do.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

K9-Design said:


> Ah yes but then here comes the litany of "Well I would never force my dog to do such a thing in the first place."


Ah see...I said that earlier. But Iowa Gold made a point to me that teaching a dog from a far distance (such as field work) is much different then teaching a dog in a sport where you are close enough to quickly get them a treat to give direction (agility). The e-collar gives you communication from a distance. Even the most driven dog, that loves the feild work would need communication.

Perhaps this is why agility trainers tend to disdain the ecollar...it really isn't necessary for that sport and not even a consideration. My comment isn't meant badly...just a thought that suddenly came to mind.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Lucky's mom said:


> Ah see...I said that earlier. But Iowa Gold made a point to me that teaching a dog from a far distance (such as field work) is much different then teaching a dog in a sport where you are close enough to quickly get them a treat to give direction (agility). The e-collar gives you communication from a distance. Even the most driven dog, that loves the feild work would need communication.
> 
> Perhaps this is why agility trainers tend to disdain the ecollar...it really isn't necessary for that sport and not even a consideration. My comment isn't meant badly...just a thought that suddenly came to mind.



Exactly. I don't use a collar in obedience because you are no more than 30 feet away from the dog. And -- in obedience YOU are the one providing access to the motivators (food, play, etc). In field work the dog is WAY away from you, out of even shouting distance, and guess what -- that motivator is OUT THERE and completely out of the handler's reach. Also -- the single most valuable thing with the collar in my opinion -- it removes all emotion from the correction. The correction is not coming from YOU. Someone else mentioned this earlier in the thread, as in, the correction is totally and arbitrarily random to the dog. Well -- that is the good part. Yes, the first time it is totally random and arbitrary. But when the correction happens each time dog does behavior X -- it takes about twice before the dog puts them together and it's no longer random. It is, however, void of emotion from the handler...there is no anger, frustration, disappointment, etc, from the handler -- the dog can separate the correction from any emotional response from the handler.


----------



## annef (Feb 23, 2008)

Our FT bred dog stops on a whistle and is trained to stop 150 yards away (and much further) and take direction and we have never used an e collar and never would. Training starts close to the dog and gradully longer distances are introduced. If a dog needs correctly that far away then it is back to basics and retrain. Annef


----------



## perdie (Oct 30, 2008)

rappwizard said:


> Well, Wales just said that doggy owners can't be trusted to use something like a taser, but the police can be trusted to use such an electric instrument. Why does the police possess logic that the average dog owner doesn't possess? People are people, aren't they?


Hmmmm maybe because theyre highly trained and are entrusted with our welfare and safety?! Certainly 'people are people' but we're also individuals and logic isnt always a quality possessed by everyone, or rather one persons logic isnt always anothers you only need watch the news to understand that!


----------



## Tanyac (Jun 18, 2008)

annef said:


> Our FT bred dog stops on a whistle and is trained to stop 150 yards away (and much further) and take direction and we have never used an e collar and never would. Training starts close to the dog and gradully longer distances are introduced. If a dog needs correctly that far away then it is back to basics and retrain. Annef


Thank you Anne for commenting on this thread, good to hear from someone who can speak from personal experience with the working dogs in the UK!

As for using other "props" to make our dogs easier to walk, such as halti's and prong collars, how about a good old fashioned "flat" collar? What about taking time out to teach our puppies/dogs how to walk properly without pulling? I have recently been walking 3 retrievers together on flat collars. No problem!

I'm not looking down at others who are struggling with their dogs, but trust me, it didn't happen overnight, I had to work really hard initially to teach them to walk this way. I'm also no expert but decided pretty early on I needed to find a method which worked. It involved calm reward based and consistent methods. It makes life a whole lot easier!!


----------



## fostermom (Sep 6, 2007)

Lucky's mom said:


> I'm not sure what that means...."easier option".
> 
> I've seen thread after thread of dogs running from the gentle leader, spending their entire walk in discomfort and the owners gritting their teeth as their distraught dog gets "accustomed" to it. That sounds hard. Where Lucky leaps into his prong collar, can't wait to get going and smiles and tail wags throughout the entire walk. I think its good that Lucky has it easy.
> 
> Yet the gentle leader isn't banned. I think I want to ban it. What would all the gentle leader people...who have had success with it.... think about that?? They would be offended and they would feel their right to choose the best option has been taken away.


Actually, I don't use the gentle leader either. I tried it on Jasmine, who unfortunately has had to be my guinea pig when it comes to training methods. She hated it and would lie down on walks when I used it. Almost 3 years ago, I switched to the Easy Walk harness and I also use a Sporn harness on her.

I use the Easy Walk harnesses because they make things easier for me when I am walking three dogs. They are my shortcut. They just don't happen to cause discomfort in the process. 

Both of my goldens could be walked on flat collars with no problem, but I choose to use the harnesses for their safety and mine.


----------



## rappwizard (May 27, 2009)

perdie said:


> Hmmmm maybe because theyre highly trained and are entrusted with our welfare and safety?! Certainly 'people are people' but we're also individuals and logic isnt always a quality possessed by everyone, or rather one persons logic isnt always anothers you only need watch the news to understand that!


Yep, just like the cops in the video I posted. 

I read somewhere that there are perhaps 20,000 ecollars in use in Wales; I suspect with the number of dog owners in your country, that's not a large percentage of the population. What a shame that with all the problems in that I'm sure your country faces (as ours) your politicians had to spend time on this. Why focus on a situation facing 20,000 when you need to focus on jobs, the economy, infrastructure, that face millions and impact their welfare.


----------



## marsh mop (Mar 13, 2009)

The website www.martindeeley.com has a some very good articles on e-collars and the use of e-collars. Mr. Deeley is a very well respected trainer in the U.S. and the U.K.. I am amazed so many have such a strong opinion on something they have no understanding of.
JB


----------



## honeysmum (Dec 4, 2007)

I believe that it was the Welsh National Assembly that bought in the ban it would have had nothing to do with the central Government of the UK Wales is part of the UK but is a separate Country to England.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

Just out of interest how are sheep dogs trained so highly without the use of e-collars if long distance work is difficult without one? I am a geek and rather enjoy watching 'One man and his dog' (a sheepdog trials TV programme, yes, sad I know!) and would hazard a guess at saying they are not trained with e-collars. I know it is off topic but its got me wondering now! I CAN understand _why_ they are used at long distances and I have learnt that US gundog training is different to UK gundog training but I am sure BOTH have to be taught at long distances (as with sheepdogs) so how do some countries get along fine without them used in training but others depend on them so much in their training? Is it THAT different?


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

fostermom said:


> Actually, I don't use the gentle leader either. I tried it on Jasmine, who unfortunately has had to be my guinea pig when it comes to training methods. She hated it and would lie down on walks when I used it. Almost 3 years ago, I switched to the Easy Walk harness and I also use a Sporn harness on her.
> 
> I use the Easy Walk harnesses because they make things easier for me when I am walking three dogs. They are my shortcut. They just don't happen to cause discomfort in the process.
> 
> Both of my goldens could be walked on flat collars with no problem, but I choose to use the harnesses for their safety and mine.


I think its fine that you have tools and techniques that work perfectly well for you. And I do seem to remember that you said you had a dog that pulled on the prong regardless. I can understand you not wanting to use it....I wouldn't either if my dog seemed uncomfortable or if he pulled.

My point is that people shouldn't impose their views on others...especially when the evidence is there that many dogs are benefitted with the Prong.

I wouldn't use the gentle leader either....but it was hyped up to me by people wanting an alternative to the "inhumane" prong. 

Pure reward training was not effective for Lucky on his walks. If you go back five years on this forum you will find my attempts *through the years* at trying to control a dog that weighed more then me and had nothing between his ears when excited. 

I can tell you that I spent significant time training with positive techniques. Then there was the "Stop and Go" technique. The power walk techique. The treat as you go for good behavior technique. Clicker training. After years of that I get aggravated when someone preaches about how reward training is always more effective and the only alternative. 

The prong was pleasent for both of us....and now I don't use it anymore _because I don't have too_. Lucky learns by repetition. The more he does a good behavior the more it is ingrained. The prong accomplished that and positive reward training entirely failed to acheive consistant good behavior. The real pain of the prong was within my fingers when I tried to get it on.....


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

tippykayak said:


> Perhaps it's more regional than we think. I've heard a lot of negative things about the way the real Amish people train animals, but here in CT, where there aren't any (to my knowledge) Amish communities, it appears to be just slang for "no e-collar" and not to be much of a comment on how harsh the rest of the training is.
> 
> I should clarify simply that a couple of folks whom I know personally or know of personally who don't use e-collars are generally more positive-oriented and have been referred to as "Amish" in a not-so-kind way.
> 
> Or maybe I was misunderstanding and the people who were saying "Amish" were implying that the trainer was secretly much harsher than he or she appeared on the surface.


Brian is definitely right about this. The CPDT pet dog trainers who use clickers/positive methods have coopted the term 'Amish" to mean field training that is "no electricity". There's a good breeder here in my state running two 9 year old siblings in MH who uses very positive methods and no ecollar, hitting, kicking, or "old school" methods. She is often referred to as 'amish". I can only think that Brian must be right in thinking it is regional parlance.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

tanyac said:


> As for using other "props" to make our dogs easier to walk, such as halti's and prong collars, how about a good old fashioned "flat" collar? What about taking time out to teach our puppies/dogs how to walk properly without pulling? I have recently been walking 3 retrievers together on flat collars. No problem!


I agree with this comment by Tanya completely. While I'm on the fence about other people using e collars for field trials, I think prong collars and e collars are pretty suspicious in the hands of average pet owners. I teach CGC and Companion dog classes, and most clients do not have the skills to use these tools humanely. Worried, damaged, and fearful dogs result. Selling cheap e collars at Walmart just isnt kind. There are so many inviting methods for teaching most dogs to walk politely on a flat buckle collar.

For soul-searching about e collars in field training/ hunt tests, I feel the way I do about jumping horses over 8 feet in the Olympics and world cups or running two year old horses in the triple crown- ambivalent. Who is it for to push animals to extremes in the name of sports? Do field trials need to be so difficult that a dog cannot be trained for them without electronic feedback?


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Lucky's mom said:


> Lucky learns by repetition. The more he does a good behavior the more it is ingrained.


While I don't 100% agree with you about the use of a prong, I did want to highlight this part of what you said, since I think it's a very wise comment on dog training.

Solid behavior is achieved through habit created by repetition. Each failed repetition (the dog doesn't follow through on a command, follows through on an undesired behavior, executes a behavior incorrectly) works against the habit, while each successful execution (especially when paired with external reinforcement like praise, life reward, or food) ingrains the habit.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Ljilly28 said:


> I agree with this comment by Tanya completely. While I'm on the fence about other people using e collars for field trials, I think prong collars and e collars are pretty suspicious in the hands of average pet owners. I teach CGC and Companion dog classes, and most clients do not have the skills to use these tools humanely. Worried, damaged, and fearful dogs result. Selling cheap e collars at Walmart just isnt kind. There are so many inviting methods for teaching most dogs to walk politely on a flat buckle collar.
> 
> For soul-searching about e collars in field training/ hunt tests, I feel the way I do about jumping horses over 8 feet in the Olympics and world cups or running two year old horses in the triple crown- ambivalent. Who is it for to push animals to extremes in the name of sports? Do field trials need to be so difficult that a dog cannot be trained for them without electronic feedback?


I've said it many times on this forum, but the one time I've been bitten by a fearful dog, it was because a family had used an e-collar in a fashion that bordered on abuse. They shocked the dog repeatedly as a way of saying "no" when he jumped on company, stole food, or did anything else they didn't like.

They were well-intentioned people, but they thought it would give them a control of the dog they lacked. What it did instead was confuse the dog and create a dangerous situation where he become so sensitive about his neck that he bit me when I made a quick move to grab his collar. He was so scared that he made quite a mess of my thumbnail.

I took the e-collar off the dog, and with one week and about 500 treats, I had him reliably doing basic household obedience (come, sit, down, stay, leave it, etc.). I'm not saying that to prove that I'm some kind of amazing trainer, because I'm not. I say it because it's strong evidence to me about the power of good communication, teamwork, and positive reinforcement; it also says something about how biddable the average Golden really is. 

Positively-based training is not rocket science, but it does take practice, timing, and a real sense of how to use treats as reinforcers, not lures or motivators. Families would be much happier with their dogs if they learned how to reinforce and communicate properly, and if they went to classes together and really listened to what their CPDT/APDT trainers are trying to show them.

I like classes, so I attend them fairly regularly, and pretty much every time I've seen an owner say "this doesn't work," the person isn't executing their part of the task properly, and if the problem persists, it's because the human isn't listening to the trainer. The dog is usually the stronger member of the partnership when it comes to consistency.

I know when my dogs "make a mistake" in practice, I can always trace it back to a bad piece of communication or an incomplete piece of training on my part. I think it's a hard thing for us to learn to blame ourselves and not our dogs, but it's an important part of taking responsibility for any problems a dog has.

While I'm still ambivalent about "nicking" a dog at a distance in order to achieve handling precision, it's a whole world away from using an e-collar as a negative reinforcer for basic obedience. I'm not sure an all-out ban is really the solution, since if a person is going to abuse a dog physically, they don't need a shock collar to do it. They could just as easily whip the dog or choke it.

Abuse isn't the fault of the equipment, and while e-collars aren't for me and my dogs, taking them away from _everyone_ doesn't sit right with me.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

tippykayak said:


> While I don't 100% agree with you about the use of a prong, I did want to highlight this part of what you said, since I think it's a very wise comment on dog training.
> 
> Solid behavior is achieved through habit created by repetition. Each failed repetition (the dog doesn't follow through on a command, follows through on an undesired behavior, executes a behavior incorrectly) works against the habit, while each successful execution (especially when paired with external reinforcement like praise, life reward, or food) ingrains the habit.


Ah we agree on _something_. I am tickled. I will agree even further and say that when rewarding accomplishes the job of molding the preferred behavior and eliminating bad behavior...based on my experiences with Lucky....its a more deeply ingrained behavior.

Purely positive was extremely successful in keeping Lucky from jumping and mauling people...


----------

