Has anybody got one of these Invisible Fences that stop dogs wandering from the premises and if so how do you find them.  The ones that emit warning signs if the dog goes near the boundary fence etc.
I am enquiring for  someone that has not got access to computer and would like to buy one for her dogs as she has a house with boundaries which cannot be seen.

PLEASE do not start  an arguement on whether these are cruel or not like the masterplus collars forum, I am just enquiring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am just asking whether these work or not and would you recommend them????

Many thanks.

Hi Bella! I know of only one person who's used one of these 'fences', and he says that although it works to keep his dog in (though he's never explained quite how the dog learns that the warning noise is to be avoided), it doesn't keep other animals out. Neighbouring dogs are at liberty to come onto his property and pick fights with his dog ...

There are two best makes, Petsafe and Innotek, they are in the market for the long haul.
I will PM a retailer and you can get any info from their helpline, the retailer gives a good support service. I cant see how to PM you so you can email me at,
davedee.zipido.com

Be warned it will not deter ALL dogs from escaping, depends on the dog and the temptation............

tohmee is right, they will not stop all dogs, thats my opinion not something I have experience of.

One of the problems that has been experienced by someone who had this type of fencing was that the one time his dog got out - going through the "shock" - it wouldn't/couldn't come back in again.

Margot

There are no problems with them coming back, they only work oned way, Chris Laurenson, ex head vet of the RSPCA, used a petsafe fence with his two dogs and one cat.

Out of the millions which are sold if one does not come back it would be the equivelent one jumping a fence or digging below and not jumping or digging its way back in again.

I thought the basis of these fences is discouragement? Therefore, if it works on the way out at a specific point, should the dog not be expecting it to work on the way in at that point? Is that not the point of the system? :)

My thoughts exactly, Chloe. If a dog has received a zap in a particular place it's always going to expect one if it goes there. As you say, that's the point.
:)

I know that the people concerned spent what I would consider silly money to put this type of fencing in, springer spaniel & labrador somehow got out - lab came back in, but it caused no end of problems in re-training the springer!

The fence was taken out about 8 weeks after it had been installed.

Margot

Personally I would not use one with my dogs because a little nano sec sensation would be ingnored if they wanted to get out, but if they did there is no reason it would stop them coming back in.

First there would be no beep and second its the combination of the whole which trains them in first place not just a specific spot. Training takes about a week before you turn on and expose them to a stimulus, they will respond to the beep anywhere but not respond to most will not simply respond to a spot,even if they did they would simply go in a few away from the spot, if they recognise it exactly from theopposite direction, which I doubt.

Apart from that if they do go through its quite simply because the stimulus does not work for that dog at that level, so it would not stop them going out or in at will, the surprise element is gone and its the combination of the pre-stim training and the surprise which makes them work in the first place.

>if they recognise it exactly from theopposite direction, which I doubt.

Dogs aren't so stupid they can't recognise a particular place (their garden gate, say, or even their owner's car, wherever it may be parked!) from different directions ...

If they cost silly money it seems to me to make more sense spending it on creating a securely fenced area where the dogs can exercise safely and with no danger of other dogs getting in.

But that wouldn't be a gimmick - would it ;)

as a general rule 'invisible fences'' only work on fifty percent of dogs....

Yes which then results in invisible dogs........................

LOL :D

Jeanigenie
Dogs aren't so stupid they can't recognise a particular place (their garden gate, say, or even their owner's car, wherever it may be parked!) from different directions ...

Davedee
It's the beep they are conditioned to once the flags come down and even if they did refuse to cross the exact spot they would simply come in a few feet up or down from the spot they went out of.

Even so I would never risk an invisible fence with my dogs if it was to stop them getting off the premises, it would not work with either of them and another reason I would not use for premises access is because other dogs can come in.

I think they have some use for some people who want to keep them off flower beds or something like that but as far as premises access goes, well other dogs coming in is enough to stop me, even if the fence stopped my own dogs, which it would not. I have read Kelly Mcoys post once before and she clearly knows what she is talking about 50% success is a very low rate.

On the upside, there is no successful safeguard for cats the mortality rate for cats being killed on roads or simply disappearing forever whenput into a garden is phenomenal, the invisible fence system is the best safeguard they have and has probably saved thousands of cats lives, they can also be used with other species.

Even so, if a poster wants information that's why they post and they should be given as much factual info as they can get, speculation is valid if a poster asks for speculation, this poster did not.

I'm not a big fan of the IF (Invisible Fences).  Some of the reasons have been pointed out and I agree with them.  They don't work on some dogs.  It depends on how badly the dog wants to get out.  If a highly prey driven dog spots a cat he's liable to start the chase and rip right through the "fence line" without even realizing that he's done so.  Because the fence will zap him if he tries to reenter, once the thrill and adrenaline of the chase have worn off, he won't be able to get back home. 

As has been pointed out they don't stop other animals from entering and one of them may drive your dog out, with the result that once the (being) chased has worn off, he can't get back in. 

The less expensive ones are built to low standards and that can cause problems. 

t

Hi Bella,

Static containment fencing is a training device, unlike a solid barrier.  It's not a foolproof solution and in my view it is an alternative to use only when solid fencing cannot be used.  

That said, I've used Invisible Fence and Freedom Fence and would recommend the latter.  It works on about 95% of dogs, not 50% or less.  It needs to be set up properly (which requires a large piece of property), the dog needs to be trained properly over a period of weeks, and the system needs to be properly maintained. 

The poster who said someone had several dogs and returned the system after 8 weeks sound to me like the dogs were not properly trained and/or the system was not used and set up correctly.  It's not true that if a dog gets out that it has to be retrained.  If the system is not working for some reason (line was cut, battery in collar dies) the dog will not hear the warning beep to alert it to the fence line and some dogs take this in the same way as, "the gate is open."  When the system is back in order, the dogs hear the warning beep and stay on the property, as they did before (which is exactly who the Westie and Yorkie duo on my street respond.) Some dogs also learn that the collar makes the fence work, if they are not wearing it they will also run off if they are of that frame of mind.  Some dogs also do not care about the shock they get from the collar if they ignore the warning beep, it's not a deterrent.  (Freedom Fence can be set so it only gives the beep with no shock.)

I've had two dogs that were completely reliable with this type of fencing.   Both of them could be trusted to stay within the boundary under any circumstances.   One of the two dogs I have now is amongst the 5% where this type of fencing is not completely reliable, regardless of training.  If he's in the front garden and he spots prey close at hand, he's off.  He sees nothing, hears nothing, feels nothing other than his drive to kill the wood pigeon or squirrel in his view.  This dog is a big wimp, frightens and imprints very easily.  I was concerned about using the fencing with him at all, but for whatever reason he is the least mindful and unconcerned about it of any of the three dogs I've trained to it.  The front garden is open, the back garden has various types of solid boundaries so he knows there is a limit to how far he can go to reach his quarry.  He never goes over the boundary line in my back garden and I've had it completely enclosed so he does not have access to the front garden. 

Net is I've had two dogs that were 100% reliable once they learned the property boundaries, neither actually needed (or need) to wear the collar.  One dog I've had is reliable about 98% of the time, which in my view probably equates to having a solid fence and once in a while someone leaves the gate open - which could leave any dog dead or injured if it runs into the road. In addition, other dogs can get onto the property.  So I'd go back to what I said at the top, which is that static containment fencing should only be used when it is not possible to use solid fencing.  

Under any circumstances, however, I think that static containment fencing is a better alternative than tying a dog to a lead or line to keep it on the property.  Not only does that often tend to create nuisance barkers, but it is impossible for the dog to defend itself or get away from an attacker.

Stacey

Most homes in the UK have fences and IMO that's the best way to go.
Keeping a dog in a larger area that cannot be so easily fenced may mean it can be stolen - it's simply not safe.
There is so much dog theft in the UK these days.

Lindsay
x

I think there is a general narrow perception as to what invisible fences can be used for - there is a vast variety of dogs and an equally vast variety of owners and situations, relevant to individual circumstances, where a static pulse fence can be both appropriate and beneficial.

Hundreds of thousands of owners with adequately fenced gardens will not give up their entire garden to the dog. They cherish their gardens and simply will not have a dog wandering around it unattended, and messing up their flowerbeds or whatever.

Effectively this means a dog is confined to the house when there is garden space it could go into if it wanted, providing it kept away from borders or whatever. Placing an invisible boundary fence around areas of the garden which the owner does not want the dog to go onto is an excellent option, the dog benefits with freedom it otherwise would not have and there is no owner/dog stress or conflict because of destroyed flower beds, borders etc.

Then there are properties where planing permission for an area some people want to put a fence up is denied - council properties in particular are highly prone to what they can and cannot do with visible fences -so again a dog is confined to staying inside a house when it could extend its freedom to the garden as well.

There are also hundreds of thousands of owners who cannot or will not build a visible fence (invisible fences are much cheaper) and turn their dog out into an open garden anyway. Some dogs stay around the premises and others just wander out onto the streets, an invisible fence is ideal for those people and keeps the dog safer than without one.

There are millions of these fences sold world wide, they have been available in UK for about 14 years as well as imports, if there were any significant issues with them above and beyond any other confinement system it would have been shown by now. Having said that.

Yes, people can get in to steal dogs in gardens which have an invisible boundary fence and they can do the same in gardens which have no invisible boundary fence, a low fence or criss cross wire fence. I would not put my dogs behind one because they would ignore it but millions have and are using them with great success.

Finally, I think there is too much emphasis on one species when invisible boundary fences is put forwards as a topic. They are, as far as I can imagine, an immense beneficial safety system for cats.

There are more cats which wander of never to be seen again or lying on a road dead than any other domestic pet. Static pulse fences are the only realistic confinement system to keep them in and safe. They are also used with species such as pet Pot Bellied Pigs etc.

>They are, as far as I can imagine, an immense beneficial safety system for cats.

You're only guessing, then - you don't have actual experience with this, do you? Actually, collars have been proven to cause very nasty injuries to cats, so it's often advised (by people who know about these things ;) ) that they shouldn't be used.

Stacey is one of the few people who's actually had personal experience with this sort of fence - I'd respect her opinion.
:)

Lindsay,

Unfortunately in my area solid fencing is not a deterrent to dog thiefs.  Dogs have been stolen whilst they were on a lead and on a walk with their owners.  They have been stolen from locked cars, with windows rolled up, whilst the owner popped into a shop for a few minutes. One poodle was in its fenced garden, the thief got over the fence and then noticed that there was another poodle in the house - so he broke into the house to steal the other dog.

Basically all you can do is never leave your dog unattended or out of eyesight and hope that you never meat a thief brazen enough to snatch your dog diretly from you.  These people are thieves - they do not respect others property or boundaries, solid or otherwise.   Until the police start doing something about dog theft nothing is going to change -- and I suspect dog theft is way down on their list of priorities.

Stacey

Jeanigeni
You're only guessing, then - you don't have actual experience with this, do you?

Davedee
In terms of cat deaths and losses by accidents when wandering away from their premises and cats leaving the home premises and never returning alive it is guesswork on my part based on the following and other anecdotal observations.

Part 1. Risk factors:
1. I have seen a large number of cats dead on roads over a lifetime, probably in the region of 2 per month in the London area. I ran over one myself.
2. I have known quite a few cat owners and they are simply  allowed out, often through a cat flap, without owner attendance. Once they are out they go off anywhere, they can climb just about anything natural and squeeze under tiny little spaces without problem.
3. In the area I live there are very few months in the year which do not have at least 2 LOST posters on trees and lampposts for different cats. Around Oct to mid Nov, fireworks time, there are usually about the same amount up for dogs lost due to firework fright, that seems to have been reduced last year because there were very few out of season fireworks by comparison.
4. Compared to dogs almost all cats are seriously independent of their human owners. I have heard stories of cats being taken to live in other parts of the UK and finding their own way back, they are territorial lovers more than people lovers. I don't know how true the stories are about them travelling 100's of miles back to an old home but the stories seem constant so I guess there is some truth in it.
5. From those and other factors I guess, purely on a common sense basis (not scientific) that cats wander at large, unsupervised, and at very high risk - I have no evidence to support that and yes, sure, it's guesswork, an astute observation on your part,.

Jeanigeni
Actually, collars have been proven to cause very nasty injuries to cats, so it's often advised (by people who know about these things ;-) ) that they shouldn't be used.

Davedee
Oh dear Jeanigeni. No sooner do I have a growing, glowing admiration of your astute observations that I had used guesswork based on a number of observations (aformentioned) than you thwart my initial enthusiasm for your post with the above.

Functionality.
. Invisible fence systems - Anti-bark collar - Remote training systems all work all work with exactly the same electrical pulse system and no, my knowledge of this system is extensive and not guesswork.

My knowledge of brands of invisible boundary fences is limited, my interest in fences is minimal. My knowledge of  the safety of established reputable brands of static pulse collar systems is extensive and it is the brand which is the judgement criteria on the safety of any of the static pulse systems.

If the manufacturer of any of the three systems belongs to ECMA whichever type of impulse system is bought is 100% safe if used within the manufacturers instructions. All ECMA accredited manufacturers units, of any type or purpose, purchased retail within the European Union are CE mark safety tested and  conform to all European safety standards.

The reason my admiration dwindled to your otherwise excellent post is because the people who have fed you the stories about 'injuries' conform to what we all know to be false stories and I am surprised a lady of your obvious clarity of thought did not as them for the appropriate information in order to support the credibilty of their stories.

Safety.

1. The fingerprints which identifies the stories, told you by unknown persons and which in good faith you have relayed, are false in their entirety. False stories are immediately identified because they all have several common flaws, which avoid the liable laws. The fables given to you have all the inherent components which are the hallmark of fabrications.
2. They never name the make, model or year of manufacture of the unit which means no liable has occurred and no manufacturer can find out if the collars were years old or sold yesterday.
3. Anyone who had a true story would not be liable by naming the manufacturer, in fact they could sue for damages for the vets bill and other losses. By not naming the manufacturer no manufacturer can make any statement or sue (which I know they would) anyone for making false statements about their product.
4. The stories never state which retailer sold the product, if they returned the goods to the retailer and if the retailer accepted the reasons for return of the goods. If any injury is claimed to have occurred the retailer would ask for a veterinary report and get in touch with the manufacture.
5. If  evidence were offered to the manufacturer and there was the slightest suspicion by an ECMA accredited manufacturer that there was a safety problem with their products they would almost certainly take immediate action to investigate it thoroughly.
6. The people who told you what appear to be fairy tales would or should have been in touch with their local trading standards dept to investigate, however, they would have to show them medical evidence and make a statement probably under caution. If they lied they would have criminal charges against them by that dept. You have made no mention that your fable tellers did any such thing.
7. The story tellers did not mention the nature of the injuries? Did the cats tails drop off ? were there any leg amputations because of the collars? What was written on the veterinary report ? Without any description of the injuries and a veterinary report by a named vet checks cannot be made.
8. Rather than carry on with around another 20 points, I will keep those in 'reserve'. Can you please get back to these people and ask them to name the make, model and year of manufacture of the units, who were the retailers of the units and were the local trading standards informed of the incidents in which, quote: "collars have been proven to cause very nasty injuries to cats"
8. Once you have that information please post it here, we await.

In fact the safety of all ECMA units is impeccable. The Kennel Club claim to have done extensive research over a 9 year period and they have not found one single case or one scrap of scientific evidence against them at all.

The kennel club research has given all ECMA accredited collars the best result for safety of any training aid there has ever been, they have researched no other training aid and to isolate one training out of dozens over a 9 year period and come up with nothing at all which maintained any credibility makes static impulse units the best and safest training aid of all time, e.g. how many dogs have been killed because they refuse a recall for a treat? how many dogs have jumped fences and been killed?

The kennel club, in its research project, called on vets in 2003 to report any injuries caused by any of the static impulse units, this call for safety check was published in all the  popular veterinary journals and the Kennel Club did not get one single case of any injury, non-of your mysterious cats came to light after this nation-wide call.

DEFRA asked the kennel club to give them scientific evidence of adverse effects of static impulse units. As expected, a clean bill of health, not one studies which withstood even the slightest superficial scrutiny. I applaud the Kennel Club for its 9 year long 'study' , the 'study' and KC 'research' has boosted pet owners confidence and sales are rocketing.

Now, when your ready jeanigenie, I would love to find out which manufacturer, retailer and veterinary practices were involved in these "proven to cause very nasty injuries to cats"

I have a very clear recollection of a cat collar injury on Animal Hospital, the poor creature had managed to hook its leg through the collar and, perhaps too frightened and in pain to return home, had sustained a horrendous erosion under its airpit.  I remember it was thought that it's eventual recovery was miraculous.  Of course the collar in that instance was elasticated as this is what is recommended to prevent strangulation in the event of a fall from a tree catching the collar for instance.  I presume collars for invisiable fencing would have to be elasticated for the same reason and as there is an expected consumable element to these you would hope that they would be very cheap! :)

But with a boundary fence collar its a case of which risk is greater, an ordinary collar does not save cats lives, a boundary fence collar will not save every life it is used to protect but I would say they would significantly save far more cats lives than any other known safety aid for them.

I have known one person whose was driving toi the park with her two dogs, she had left collar and lead on one of them in the back of an estate, whilst driving to the park the dog got cought up somehow and it was strangled. I was told about another guy, he left his spanniel in  car with a collar on, somehow that got caught up and that dog died. I never leave a collar on my dogs in the car.

But the dangers are not inherent in any of the collars mentioned. I don't think leaving a collar on a dog in car is ever safe.

DD, re your points 6 and 7: I'm afraid it's no fairy-tale at all; the 'story-tellers' were RSPCA vets showing the injuries (yes, leg amputations were among them) on television. This is why it's recommended that cats only wear 'quick-release' collars if any, and to rely on microchip for ID purposes. (See Cats Protection leaflet - these are the sort of people I refer to who 'know about these things' ;) I suggest you contact them if you're seriously interested about the safety of these collars you recommend.)

As you know so much about these systems (or you surely wouldn't be advising others about them) can you assure cat lovers that the collars associated are indeed quick-release?

Jeangenie,

I don't have cats (allergic to them) so I am not familiar with quick release collars.  Do you know if the same type of collar would work for dogs?  I am just wondering if they would release if the dog was on a lead and pulled. 

I had a friend years ago who left her GSD in her backgarden for a short time. She came home and found the dog dead, hanging by its collar from the six foot high fence.   The dog must have jumped up against the fence and the collar caught on it.  That could not happen if the collar had been a quick release one - nor would the other deaths have happened mentioned by the other poster.  Curious why quick release collars are not available for dogs.  The pet industry seems to assume only cats can injure or kill themselves because of collars.

By the way, there is no reason why the receiving device on whatever collar is supplied by the manufacturer can't be used on another type of collar.  I switched collars for one of my own dogs, since I wanted to be able to tell one dog's collar from the others and both collars were black, it took me about a minute.  It would be much better if the manufacturer offered different collars, quick release absolutely for cats.  Barring that, to make sure purchasers understood they could use another collar of their choice. 

Stacey

A quick release collar would not work for dogs for the reasons you have pointed out, any tug on the lead would pull them off!  I never leave collars on my dogs when they are about the house or garden or in the car as I don't feel it is safe to leave them on when unsupervised.  Cat release collars are usually elasticated or snap on a little pressure so if a cat is up a tree for instance and catches on a branch it either releases or the cat can wriggle its head out.  The collar is then either lost up the tree or in the undergrowth beneath which is why cat collars need to be regarded as disposable and preferably very cheap.   I really don't see how that can be applied to a collar with the electronics necessary for a electric fencing system.

Stacey
I am not familiar with quick release collars.  Do you know if the same type of collar would work for dogs?  I am just wondering if they would release if the dog was on a lead and pulled.

Davdee
If I understand Jeaniegenies quick release post properly and what she means by quick release collars you more than likely are familiar with them.

If she means what I think she means the GSD would have died anyway-they don't release themselves - which seems to be what you think they do. They have plastic spring clips which slide into the slots at each side of the fastener buckle. To get the collar off you press them together and just pull, in contrast to undoing a buckle type collar.

If a dog or cat gets caught with one its no difference at all. The  same quick release system is used on most things these days, if you have a backpack,  Stacey, those clips are the same. I have a quick release collar here.

As Stacey says the receiver on all types of static pulse units ( anti bark -invisible fences- remote e-training collars )  can be taken off and put on any collar they fit. With the training collars you can punch holes in it and fit a tracker as well, instead of having two collars one for tracking and one for training.

The above is if I understand whats meant by quick release collars-please give a description if I am thinking of something else.

Isobell
Cat release collars are usually elasticated or snap on a little pressure so if a cat is up a tree for instance and catches on a branch it either releases or the cat can wriggle its head out.

davedee
I undestand now, they are not what I was thinking of and I am not familiar with them in any way. Providing you get the right width you could put the reciever unit on one.

That is one type of quick release collar it just means the collar can be removed by the owner quicker than an old fashioned buckle but the quick release collars used on cats actually break open when a certain level of pull is applied, certainly less than the cats weight, or they are elastic and have enough width when stretched to allow the cat to wriggle out for the reasons I have described in the post above.

Isabel
the quick release collars used on cats actually break open when a certain level of pull is applied,

Davedee
Yes they sound like a geat idea.

But totally inapplicable to an electronic system.

Jeanigenie
I suggest you contact them if you're seriously interested about the safety of these collars you recommend.)

Davedee
I did not recommend invisible fences for either dogs or cats - I did say:

"But with a boundary fence collar its a case of which risk is greater, an ordinary collar does not save cats lives, a boundary fence collar will not save every life it is used to protect but I would say they would significantly save far more cats lives than any other known safety aid for them."

Davdee
I recommend remote e-training collars am specialist in that field I am not a specialist with invisible fences and the RSPCA knows nothing about either except its ex head vet, Chris Laurenson, was using a petsafe invisible fence system when he was with them in 2002., with his two dogs and one cat.

Isabell
But totally inapplicable to an electronic system.

davdee
why?

Davedee

Why on earth do you make your posts so absolutely incomprehensible??? 

You may have some valid points to make, but because of the way that you copy and paste other posts into your comments makes for very hard reading.   It is not a recognised method of argument.

Please try responding to a point without doing this - you might get a more positive feedback.

Margot

Because depending on how adventurous your cat is you are going to loose your expensive bit of electronics on a regular basis when the collar is released and either left up the tree or lost in the undergrowth.

Lokis mum
You may have some valid points to make, but because of the way that you copy and paste

davedee
Which copy and pasts? do you mean like the way I have copy quoted you above?
if thats what you mean I do because the majority of text what people write, including me,are more illustrative than the actual nucleous of whats being said so I isolate close to the nucleous of what someone has said.

Does anyone else feel the way I copy and past statements is confusing? 

Hi Davedee :)

>Does anyone else feel the way I copy and past statements is confusing?<

If you used the method above it would be easier to follow.  Unfortunately by using the same format as the body of your response it makes it very difficult to keep track - particularly on lengthy or in depth discussions.

Teri ;)

Edited to add that if you copy from a post, add > before pasting and < after - it then shows as grey text 

Ive just tried that on this post and it hasn't worked,

I have tried a couple of things before now and I think something is not working on my Navigator-is everyone else using explorer?I

You didn't add the > < symbols ;)  or at least they didn't show up ....

Teri

I saw your effort before your edited it Davedee and you did not add the all important > at the start of the quote, try again, I've never known it not work.

>Edited to add that if you copy from a post, add > before pasting and < after - it then shows as grey text 

You don't even need the < after, although perhaps for aesthetic reasons.......... :)

I'm very appearance conscious Isabel :P

>I'm very appearance conscious Isabel <

there lets try this

Ok got it thanks

Good :D

Margot