Okay for Dogs, but Not Kids?

Honestly, if you're going to anthropomorphize, then it's understandable that you don't see a difference. We don't feed our children in metal bowls on the floor, put collars around their necks, or scratch their butts, either.

Comments like Bob's confuse me. I truly do not understand the logic in them.

For me it's all about choice. Dogs don't get to choose their fate on what home environment they go to, and I think that's where the confusion is for me when I hear comments like the above.

To date I have not met one dog (even genetically challenged ones) who I can with clear conscious say would actually choose to live in an environment where they learn by fear, intimidation, remote devices, pinch, shock, yanking, yelling, choking and any other "dominant based" training methods. Especially when the alternative is learning through games, treats, praise, cuddles, toys, life rewards for performing behaviours we'd like to see more of.

We're talking about learning, behavior modification, fear and pain. These things are quite similar across species. In fact, the principles of learning theory apply to all beings.

Whether talking about children, dogs, chickens, dolphins or chimps, using a shock collar does cause pain/discomfort or it wouldn't work. Shock collars DO work! They work by causing a sensation that the wearer wants to escape or avoid. If they didn't have an unpleasant effect, then they would be completely ineffective.

So, if the pain/fear/discomfort caused by a shock collar is abusive to a child, why is it okay for a dog? Are you saying that because they are not human their pain/discomfort/fear is less valid or non-existent?

While I personally prefer that dogs don't eat out of bowls, wear harnesses instead of collars and believe giving my humans back-scratches is the same as giving a dog a butt-scratch...none of these things has anything to do with the subject of my post.

The biggest thing you are missing is that there is a right and a wrong way to use an ecollar just as there is a right and a wrong way to punish a child. I will give you that many people have a dog that is behaving badly and they run out, buy an ecollar slap it on the dog and crank up the juice. These people are wrong. However, once a dog has been taught a task the ecollar, in the proper hands an ecollar becomes a tool that allows for a timely reminder that "I am still in ontrol and we do things my way." The ecollar does not have to be a painful burn. It can be used on mild stimulation, one that you or I can stand without pain, to be used as a reminder. If I am working a dog and it is doing wrong it is far better for me to make the correction right then so the dog knows what it did wrong. If I wait to correct the dog until it returns to me it now thinks it is being punished for coming back to me, something I do not want the dog to think.

Please do not condemn the use of an ecollar in experienced hands, instead strive to teach people the proper way to use them should they choose to do so.

BTW My dogs do not fear me. They love me and I love them we even share the same bed when traveling.

John Seroczynski, [snip]...

He was obviously talking about physical injury, as he explained that no shock collar today would burn a person or dog and would not cause any serious physical injury.

I disagree that an e-collar would not cause any "serious physical injury". I stood in my vet's office as she ranted about an e-collar doing damage... then retrieved a lovely adult yellow lab with two blackened burn holes, 1.5" deep in the dog's neck, for me to see.

The vet cursed, the owner cried and the dog ducked at every movement in the room.

I'm confident that used in the same way on a child/human, it would have the same results. Nothing anthropomorphic about the injury. You could see the damage done.

Donna
Put a springer in your step!

Holes in the dogs neck are not caused by the "burn" of a collar. They are caused by prolonged wearing of the collar and the prongs continously digging into the neck.

Every training tool (praise, food, crates, leashes, collars, etc.) has a “right way” and “wrong way” to use it. Using something improperly will certainly add ill effects. That being said, the fact of the matter is that certain tools are designed to cause pain/discomfort—this is why they DO work, as was already stated. If a skilled trainer (good timing, etc.) and a novice trainer are both using a shock collar, probably the skilled trainer won’t have to correct as often, but that does not change what the tool was designed for in the first place. A rifle in the hands of an experienced sharp shooter is still a rifle—a tool designed to cause harm. But the irony to this piece (for those who watched the video of it) is that people (such as the neighbor) are up in arms about the device being used on a human--rather than being concerned that the device is used at all (on any animal).

I have tried it on my body. (Innotek) It hurt like crazy at the lower levels. I couldn't make it to level four. (out of 10) It left red marks that went into strange looking bruises and finally blistered the skin a couple of days later. I assumed it would tingle or vibrate but it was like I held a paperclip in an electrical outlet.

While it might be true that the prongs do damage after prolonged use, the immediate affects on my hairless arm and leg illustrated that not even an expert can always get it right. At least with the type of collar I sampled.

Donna
Put a springer in your step!

You've explained it exactly Cindy. These collars are a strong aversive that provide an instant fix for people that are insensitive and to lazy to use a more friendly means of training. Learning is more efficient when the person or animal is not stressed, period.

We all know what they are and that e-collar is a fancy name for shock collar. We all know what they do and who uses them. I would never use them on my dogs. My dogs know I am in control and "pack leader" by my body posture, tone of voice and consistancy. There are always going to be hunam shortcuts to everything. It's too bad dogs get hurt in the process.

Lydia McCarthy Playful Pooches and Parents Dog Training 513-939-dogs

I'm very sympathetic to concerns about shock collars, but I have a real problem with equating a man willfully torturing a 3-year-old (chasing him with it 'cause it made him laugh) to what trainers are out there doing. Like most of the posters commenting on this thread, I haved moral and philosophical objections to training that relies on pain or fear, but I've noticed that there's something about shock that provokes a visceral reaction in people that is often way out of proportion to what's actually going on. I've seen shock collars used in ways that are clearly abusive by both members of the general public who just purchased one and by trainers. Some of the worst abuse I've seen is in on-line promotional videos for professional trainers, so I understand the revulsion. It's a horrific thing to see, but it's not the whole picture.

I've also seen trainers who teach the dog what they want before using the collar, have well-developed protocols for avoiding fallout, and use levels of "stim" that really are more of an annoyance than anything else. I have no interest in training this way. It doesn't mesh with my values. That doesn't make it evil. There are lots of folks out there using these collars to effectively train dogs in ways that enhance the human/animal bond, expand dogs' freedom, and keep dogs in their homes. Would I prefer that these dogs were being trained with positive methods? Absolutely. It's a long way, however, from that position to painting any use of the collars as abuse. From what I've seen, a lot of people are using shock collars in ways that are a huge improvement over leash corrections in terms of precision, severity of correction, and the use (or not) of intimidation by the handler. Focusing on the tool, however, leads some of us to react to these folks with far more outrage that we do to those who use leash corrections in what I consider a far less humane manner.

I don't know what collar you tested Donna, but I've used a few of them on myself and even the Innotek collar that was the first one I tried almost 15 years ago had nothing like the effects you described. That collar - which was a sledge hammer compared to what these folks are using today - had 4 levels. When I applied the collar to my palm, I literally could not feel it at all on the first 2 levels. Applied to my thigh, I could barely detect the first level and felt a little tingle on the second. Applied to my neck, I got a tingle on the fist level and a slightly uncomfortable jolt on the second. The third level was slightly unpleasant on my hand, made me jump on my thigh, and really hurt on my neck. The highest level got the jump on my hand, was painful on my thigh, and was extremely unpleasant on my neck. None of it ever left a mark.

I don't think that blanket statements about tools or methods are almost ever helpful. There are a lot of really bad things being done with shock collars, but there are also a lot of dogs being trained effectively and more or less humanely with them. I have problems with the way those dogs are being trained and much bigger worries about the potential for abuse by clients who misunderstand lessons or just get frustrated. Still, I think it's important to try and take my emotions out of that and take an honest look at what's actually going on before judging.

I don't think that blanket statements about tools or methods are almost ever helpful.

That's why I always try to write from first hand experience. I try most things on myself prior to giving to my dogs. The e-collar was quickly stored in a drawer.

I understand from speaking with some hunters that many use the e-collar because of distance correction. I've taken some springers into foster care (owners said that they wouldn't hunt) who have had the e-collar used on them and have found it a long and arduous task to rebuild trust in the dog.

That's my personal experience.
Donna

Put a springer in your step!

for a well-written, non-emotional response. I do want to mention that emotional arguments don't belong to one side or the other in this debate. I see a lot of emotion being used to defend the use of shock collars, too. Just bringing up the subject brings on a wave of defensiveness.

I don't for a second believe that anyone who uses a shock collar doesn't love their dog or is purposely trying to be cruel. Likewise, I know people who love their children very much, but choose to spank them as a form of discipline.

However, the social question remains, why use something that causes pain/discomfort/fear/avoidance if you don't have to? If you wouldn't shock a child, why is it okay for a dog? If you wouldn't spank an employee, why is it okay to spank a child? I think these are important things to think about when we're making decisions about our actions.

As far as hunting goes, since it was mentioned, there are other choices. I'd urge anyone who hunts or does field trials to take a look at POSITIVE GUN DOGS - CLICKER TRAINING FOR SPORTING BREEDS by Jim Barry, Mary Emmen, & Susan Smith (http://www.dogwise.com/itemdetails.cfm?ID=DHR230).

I don't think that most dog owners who use shock collars have the intent to be cruel or cause harm to their dogs. I think it's sometimes a matter of not knowing there are alternatives and other times it's just a continuation of socially accepted practices and tradition.

So, my hope would be that proponents of shock collars would also remove their emotions from the argument and "take an honest look at what's actually going on."

Thanks, again!

Why in an attempt to keep emotion out of it does it still come down "have the intent to be cruel or cause harm"? This implies that even though I don't mean to be I am still a cruel mean human being.

I invite anyone that cares to open their eyes to come watch a training day where I use an e-collar.

I also challenge any to tell me they have NEVER EVER caused their dog discomfort in trying to change a behaviour pattern. Remember discomfort comes in many forms.

It always amazes me comments like this "I've taken some springers into foster care (owners said that they wouldn't hunt) who have had the e-collar used on them", I would assume you have also gotten dogs in with the same problem that haven't had a collar on them??

Perhaps looking at the whole picture rather then only seeing the BAD cases would open some eyes.

The choice of whether or not to use the ecollar, aka shock collar (so confused, use to work in a vet's office and ecollar meant elizabethian collar), is judged as a moral issue by many because of their feelings on the subject. Yet to look at things without personal bias is the only way to truly deal with the issue on whether or not to use the ecollar. The average pet owner who turns to this device is DESPERATE to stop certain behaviors from their dog like running into the street, barking all day/night (they usually turn to bark collars after receiving police visits/notices from their building management), etc. Most average pet owners turn to these devices already stressed, emotionally wrought and frustrated. What is our job here? Are you suppose to judge these people or try to help them? How about educating people on the pros and cons of such devices from an impartial attitude so we don't make these people defensive and even more upset then they are? How many of us don't like the USE of ecollars but haven't done the research to calmly tell people why these collars may not be the best choice?
Let's face it these collars do work to get most people the desired result. Our society is based on a "right now" attitude and shock collars work to give them that result. However... do we educate people on how ecollars can aggreivate aggressive issues? How electric fences become something the dog can ignore if what they desire is worth that initial shock but they won't come BACK into the yard? How about dog's who mental stability won't handle the correction? How many of use ask the people to get a full vet check up (including heart, liver and kidney, even in young dogs) to ensure no physical condition may be affected by the use of such collars?
To all you professinal trainers that use the collar.. can you argue the fact that the ecollar is EASILY misused when in untrained hands? That the average person with no understanding of learning theory can cause harm with the use of the collar? How about the new pet owner that wants to put a pinch collar on a 8 week old chihuahua? It's not about bashing your choice to use it but the ease with which people can purchase any of these collars without consulting a trainer or even working with a trainer is scary to me. Let's face it there are still plenty of people out there that view animals as something for them to use as they please with no respect given to the animal.
Whether or not its your choice to use the collar is an individual choice but it is ALL our responsibilty to educate the public on the pros AND cons of using correction devices. To act as if the ecollar can not cause harm to the dog is naive. Not every tool for training is being used in professional hands and even professionals mess up once in awhile. We are the voice for the animals and it is our job to make sure they are heard.
Lastly to address the physcial harm that may happen. Ecollars are still an electrically device that can malfunction (are you telling me you never have problems with cell phones, computers, tvs, ipods, laptops, etc.) Any mechanical/electronic device is manufactured and can have problems. There are still plenty of vets out there that see the burn marks from such devices. Is it common now a days, NO, but it can still happen. Also remember that since there is no regulation/control on the purchase and use of such devices that anyone, to the naive pet owner to those that take delight in hurting animals, can misuse these devices.

and the question is... those of us who don't like correction devices... How do we educate and change things? Verbally attacking people who choose to use them is still an attack. Maybe our style of letting the dog have choices, of giving the dog choices, should apply to humans. Perhaps as voices for the dogs, we should be as forgiving and understanding as they are, and simply keep asking instead of "yelling" at the people.

Blessed Be
Crystal Franklin, CPDT

Ken, you questioned if we had ever fostered dogs with the same problem (as the failed hunters who were trained with an e-collar). You claimed to be amazed that these dogs come into foster care with different problems. All dogs are individuals and assessed prior to entering the program for an individual training program.

Again, I'm speaking from personal experience. While we strive to get history on all dogs who are fostered in rescue, sometimes we don't even get their call names. That said, the dogs which we rehabilitated with a known history with the use of an e-collar, appeared to have low confidence. They were hand shy and timid when given a command... little eye contact, turning of heads, frozen in corners and lots of calming signals. The handler did not use the tool correctly and did harm to the dog.

I feel confident that you would agree that zapping the dog continually has no value.

I read your entry on the Retriever blog.

Donna
Put a springer in your step!

I won't get into the whole shock collar debate, suffice it to say I don't like em and won't use em.

Though I have to say I am amazed that Bob thought the point of this blog entry was only anthropomorphism and therefore, I assume, not worthy of discussion.

If having empathy for a being with a mind, a soul and most(if not all) of the same senses, feelings and needs as we have is anthropomorphism then I'm guilty of that. There is no such thing as "just a dog"..I don't treat my dog like she was a human being, but I do not assume that because she is of a different species she doesn't deserve respect or empathy or that she is "lesser" because she walks on four legs and has different outlets for her instincts than I do.

Maggi Burtt
Tailspin Petworx