The Welsh Assembly has actually banned them from midnight tonight! News Item. :-) :-)

Good news! 

Now any idea if there are plans to ban them here in Oz?  (Note to self, must look that up!!).

Brilliant!

Yay!!  :)  We can do something right in Wales then!!  :)  :)

great news. lets hope the rest will follow this good move.

Great news and significant penalties too!

brilliant news.

Great news!  Why on earth it is not a complete UK ban yet I don't know, it is not as if it needs a test run.

Well done Wales - a shining beacon to the rest of the UK. :-)

It' about time that cruel training methods were outlawed and time, effort, praise and reward are the only option.

The Electronic Collar Manufacturers' Association said it feared the ban could lead to an influx of unmanageable pets into dog shelters.

Well I guess they are out of business what else can they say, and I guess those with dogs which were not trained correctly as pups will need to go to training classes and put the work in instead of shocking their animals into obediance, it's a hard life................

Unfortunatly I think it will cause more problems than it solves. Used properly there very humane and far less aversive to the dog than any other training tool, even compared to positive only training they cause lss stress by only motivating the dog slightly as opposed to having the dog desperate to get the treat or toy.

Lots of times you can't solve a prey drive type behaviour problem without them (certainly not in a realistic timescale). While many trainers ect will then say the dogs managment comes into it (keep on lead around stock) this just isn't fair on the dog in many cases and leads to other issues (destructivness due to lack of exercise). Rehoming is not an option as there just aren't that many homes available for every dog with a training problem. And even if the dog is rehomed to an area without livestock it may immediatly redirect the prey drive onto cats and be back in the same boat.

Ultimatly this will mean more dogs in rescue and more dogs put down. It will also lead to an increase in severe aversive methods for off lead control, certainly you can cure some dogs of their predatory aggression without e collars but the cure is usually emotionally devastating to the dog.

I believe many e collar users will continue using the collars in secret which will lead to them being used in the old style high level correction. Once again more stress than needs be for the dog.

In the past year I've seen what can be achieved with an e collar and have saved several dogs lives. I really think this ban is short sighted.

Adam

I diagree with you Adam. I don't think they are humane and most certainly want them banned. I have a rescue dog who can be iffy with some dogs and is very, very interested in livestock. I would never,ever use a shock collar on him in any circumstance whatsoever.

He does go off lead in areas where I have 360 degree vision and where I know we will not meet livestock but he spends a lot of his time on a long line for his own safety. He has a brilliant recall as long as there are no distractions but once he gets a scent he is off and deaf to the world. I have spent a couple of years trying to overcome this and now just accept that managing his behaviour rather than trying to alter it is what we both have to get used to. He has boundless energy and very rarely sits still - always on the go and ready for anything so I just have to ensure that he gets a good amount of exercise. I cannot train the terrier out of him and am unable to correct the behaviour problems I inherited with him.

Yes it would be great if he could run off lead all the time with my other dog but not if this involves giving him an electric shock each time his nose to the ground and he's off tracking. I have seen one of these collars being used on a dog and was horrified. The man with the dog was stopping it from coming over to my dogs - he didn't bother even calling the dog, had no lead with him and just zapped the dog who literally fell to the floor each time it was shocked - totally barbaric. I fail to see how hurting a dog can ever be considered a good thing to do.

Used properly there very humane and far less aversive to the dog than any other training tool, even compared to positive only training they cause lss stress by only motivating the dog slightly as opposed to having the dog desperate to get the treat or toy.

I have seen people struggle to get the timing of positive training methods correct - it doesn't help the training but the dog doesn't suffer - so dread to think what happens with those users who think the answer to every training problem is solved by zapping their dog and have no idea as to timing - a disaster waiting to happen let alone the distress caused to the animal.

Lots of times you can't solve a prey drive type behaviour problem without them

But isn't that a contradiction Adam? :-)

The dog is being trained and having it's behviour corrected, just with pain not reward.

If the prey drive is so strong, which I know in some breeds it is, then the over-powering need to chase would even over-ride the jolt of pain would it not? It shows that the dog will do as it is told if given a signal, that does not have to be pain, pain is a quick training route only. If a dog will only listen when given an electric jolt that is the fault of it's owner.

Many of us spend hours every day training, whistle and clicker are fantastic tools and dogs trained with these will stop in their tracks and obey the command taught if the hours of training have been put in. All domestic dogs today have been bred to work for us in various ways, to do that they need to be obediant, dogs with the highest of prey drives work for us all the time and are extremely obediant, a high prey drive does not make a squat of difference to training a dog at all.

People who use pain IMO are just darn lazy and can't be bothered to pick up a whistle or clicker and teach a dog from scratch. So yes, you are probably right, it will cause problems, I have no idea what the lazier owner/trainer will do? They will no doubt have to give up their dogs or keep them on lead, but that isn't the dogs fault, it just needs the right trainer, the truth is, many people who owns dog today just don't have a clue how to train them. :-(

They will no doubt have to give up their dogs or keep them on lead, but that isn't the dogs fault, it just needs the right trainer, the truth is, many people who owns dog today just don't have a clue how to train them.

Although I agree Carrington that there are a lot of owners out there who are like that I also believe that some dogs do have a very high prey instinct and that all the training in the world won't necessarily overcome that. I know I am not the best trainer and do have a rescue dog who is deaf to the world when his instincts take over. My other dog is very well trained - has his Gold GC award, does agility etc. My terrier rescue is the exact opposite :-) I have had him for nearly 3 years and he probably wouldn't pass the puppy course despite regular, kind, positive training ( I clicker train). He has a brilliant, instant recall except for when his terrier persona takes over and then nothing will penetrate through his focus on whatever has taken his attention.

He does spend a lot of his time on a long line - I just make sure I walk him enough to compensate for that. As I said previously I can't train the terrier out of him but I do manage his behaviour and would never, ever resort to a shock collar. I believe that there are some dogs whose natural instincts will take over what ever the training and I would never willingly put him in a situation where his safety and that of others would be compromised. I tried doing agility with him - he is usually wonderfully focussed on toys - but the excitement was too much for him and any dog running at the same time as him ( at the other end of the indoor school) would then become far more desirable than any toy or reward.

Sometimes owners just have to face up to the fact that sometimes a prey drive behaviour is an unalterable fact of life and we have to get on and deal with it through managing the behaviour :-) A shock collar doesn't manage or train - it punishes the dog.

> he didn't bother even calling the dog, had no lead with him and just zapped the dog who literally fell to the floor

That is so very wrong.  I am gobsmacked that there are still people that think it's accepteble to get a dog to obey by these methods.

E collars used at the appropriate level for the dog do not caue pain, they cause mild discomfort.

While many people are able to exercise their dogs adequatly without sufficent off lead control others are not, in these cases the dog will suffer. Other owners will not have the time to train for hours a day.

Using an e collar (with the right leve and training) allows you to improve the dogs quality of life vastly and also improve the owner dog relationship.

Properly introduced they do stop dogs chasing livestock, killing prey items and having a poor recall. All without pain. Because the dog's behaviour is so much better it's life improves and it has a better time or continues to be alive!

People who are unable to train without one will still use aversives (much harsher ones than an e collar) and other people will give their dogs up because the lack of exercise will make them difficult to live with as a result perfectly nice dogs will die for no reason.

BTW I have  terrier who is reliable off lead around anything and have just finished working with a malamute who killed three sheep and is now reliable off lead around them.

Adam

At the end of the day, hopefully they will be banned in Scotland, and England as well as Wales.

Lindsay
x

Then people will do much worse things to fix their dogs.

Adam

No, they'll learn to think outside the box, and train with their dog instead of against it.

In my experience they won't.

Adam

While many people are able to exercise their dogs adequatly without sufficent off lead control others are not, in these cases the dog will suffer. Other owners will not have the time to train for hours a day.

Using an e collar (with the right leve and training) allows you to improve the dogs quality of life vastly and also improve the owner dog relationship.

I don't train for hours a day - that in itself is counter productive for my dog as he loses interest.  If an owner does not have the time to exercise it's dog adequately then they shouldn't have the dog. Mental exercise is just as good at tiring a dog out, can be done little and often alongside regular outdoor exercise.

In my experience they won't.

Again they shouldn't have a dog then. My life is so much more complicated since our terrier came to live with us but it was our choice to have him, he is my responsibility and I am solely responsible for his welfare and as such I have to make sure his needs are catered for and if this makes life more difficult then it's tough - he was born a terrier, he had a terrible start to his life, he ended up in rescue, we took him on and none of this was his fault. During his first year with us my husband died from a very cruel disease so it was not an easy time for any of us, dogs included, but it didn't mean I could just discard him because he made life hard and yes it would be great if he could be trusted around livestock as I walk in rural areas but he isn't and I manage his behaviour accordingly. We live in a throw away society where quick fixes are the order of the day - and sadly a lot of people treat their dogs in the same way.

>In my experience they won't.

The people who would even consider resorting to 'worse things' are exactly the sort who shouldn't be allowed an e-collar in the first place; their mental attitude is totally wrong for dog training.

although i had agreed with an e collar user saying better a quick mild shock(used inrecall)than a dead dog under a bus,when i actually saw one used on a dog(level of shock tried out on my hand by trainer first),well,it was horrible.No way can I condone that.But as we all know,they will still be used,illegal or not.

If an owner finds it necessary to use one of these torture collars, how can you guarantee that the shock level will be correct. How do you know that if the dog does not learn quick enough that the "owner" will not put the level up and up. What if the "owner" has had a bad day, how do you know that they will not take it out on the poor dog with this collar, or worse still that one of the "owners " own children do not take the dog out without understanding the collar use. There are too many "what ifs" and I too feel that these horrible training tools should be banned as there are too many opportunities for misuse.

Hareley I agree with you in princple but the reality is people will have a dog in some circumstances, even if it's not ideal.
The e collar can then make it ideal (or at least acceptable) by providing the dog with a better life.

Also some circumstances (country homes) are ideal for a dog if his prey drive is controllable off lead. In this case the e collar allows the owners to have a suitable dog and the dog to have a suitable home.

All collars I've ever used come with advice about the correct level and instructions for finding it, any tool can be used abusivly and many other approaches are alot more harmful than e collars

Adam

> The e collar can then make it ideal (or at least acceptable) by providing the dog with a better life.

I haven't commented further thus far, as I've already been involved on another forum regarding the shock collar ban.  I too am surprised at just how many people do think that this is an acceptable training method.
Each to their own I suppose.
But I would just like to comment on the above sentence (quoted).
Perhaps someone would like to explain to the rather sad and miserable year old labrador that lives near me how this collar is making his life better?
He became a rampant barker, and sadly, rather than the owner taking the time to train him positively not to bark at the slightest noise, they thought it a good idea to install a shock collar.
The dog no longer barks, for sure.  He now sits and whimpers and whines every time he goes to bark because of the shock he receives.  Not a better life in my eyes.  Just lazy owners.

Hareley I agree with you in princple but the reality is people will have a dog in some circumstances, even if it's not ideal.
The e collar can then make it ideal (or at least acceptable) by providing the dog with a better life.

But I don't, and never will, believe that a dog's life is enhanced through receiving an electric shock if it's behaviour is not of a level that is acceptable to it's owners. I don't believe that we have the right to inflict pain on any animal because it is easier to do so than to train through positive methods or manage the behaviour if it is impossible to alter it

Also some circumstances (country homes) are ideal for a dog if his prey drive is controllable off lead. In this case the e collar allows the owners to have a suitable dog and the dog to have a suitable home

Again I don't agree that any home, be it rural or urban, is an ideal home if a dog has to receive electric shocks in order for it to fit in with it's owners lifestyle. If you have a dog with a prey drive such as those you have mentioned in your previous posts you have to ensure that it is never in a postion to be able to come into contact with livestock by managing that dog's behaviour and not by using an e collar to punish the dog. I would not deem the dog who is trained by punishment to have a suitable home at all.

All collars I've ever used come with advice about the correct level and instructions for finding it, any tool can be used abusivly and many other approaches are alot more harmful than e collars

I would assume from your above statement that you do agree that e collars cause harm - I personally don't believe that physical abuse should ever be a part of training a dog no matter what form it takes.

I also believe that people do not have an automatic right to own a dog. A dog is not a commodity, it is a living, breathing animal and should be treated with kindness and respect and this will never be the case if one has to resort to punishment in order to control a dog's behaviour.

Noisy LAB.

Of course that isn't a good solution but would the owners have used a better method if e collar wasn't available to them. I doubt it, they would probably have done something worse. Also just because he whines instead of barks doesn't mean he's unhappy.

Harley

The shock is not painful nore is it harmful. Training will always involve an element of punishment (with holding a treat until dog obeys is negative punishment) IN my experience e collar useage and training is so mild most owners don't know when I'm using the collar and because the approach is all about reinforcing the correct behaviour (by stopping the sensation) the dog recieves lots of reinforcment. The dogs life is improved beyond a doubt and the relationship is improved by associating the owner with an additional reinforcer.

People should not have an automatic right to a dog but the dog should have an automatic right to a quality of life, which e collars can provide.

Adam

> The shock is not painful nore is it harmful

So would you use it on a recalcitrant child who persistently disobeys?    Can you keep your hand/arm on something that is giving you pain for 15 or 20 seconds?

>reinforcing the correct behaviour (by stopping the sensation) the dog recieves lots of reinforcment.

Oh dear. Another dinosaur who believes that the cessation of pain or discomfort is the same as a reward for the dog. It isn't.

Loki's mum

It doesn't cause pain, mild discomfort only when set at the right level

Negative reinforcemnt is what this is. Wether you define that as reward is up to you.

Adam

> Also just because he whines instead of barks doesn't mean he's unhappy.

I've seen the dog, you haven't.  So I respectfully say to you I know that the dog is unhappy.  His whole body language and demeanour tells me so.

Adam Palmer said
Negative reinforcemnt is what this is.
No. it is not negative reinforcement. Adding an aversive stimulus to reduce a behaviour is positive punishment. Don't try to make it more acceptable by mis-using the terms.

speaking as someone who used to have a dog that was extremely prey driven, if the shock collar causes as little discomfort as you say then it would be totally ineffective used to prevent stock/ animal chasing.  My dog would become completely fixated if she saw a  small animal and would not respond to anything. you could yank her lead, tap her on the head throw her ball right at her and she would not even notice. She was completely oblivious to everything. Back then I wasn't so aware of positive training and tried rattle bottles and a jerking her with a choke chain :(  She didn't feel anything when obsessing about prey.

The only way a shock collar might have worked would be if it caused a considerable amount of pain to get through to her. if a gadget can cause this amount of discomfort to an animal then it is extremely likely to be abused by people who don't know what they are doing, setting it up to high and shocking their dogs too hard.

As it was she had a good quality of life. I kept her on a lead around any small animals. I walked her on playing fields where I could see what was coming. I chanelled her chase instinct towards balls and frisbys, but this took time.

So the collar punishes the behaviour you don't want and stopping the "discomfort" is the reward for the dog complying?

Makes perfect sense then - next time my dog starts to bark I must remember to punish him and only stop that punishment when the "discomfort" is so great that he stops barking to get away from that discomfort. Now all I have to do is choose what sort of punishment I give him and ensure he receives enough punishment to make him be too frightened of ever barking again.

Great - I always wanted a dog that was scared of me and cowed into obedience, I can forget all about the years I have spent building up his trust in me following his experiences in his previous home, I don't need to put so much effort into his training now, I can forget about all the positive experiences I have given him and just make sure that he understands that I can cause him great "discomfort" whenever he does something that displeases me.

Thank you - now I know where I have been going wrong all these years - I truly believed that my dogs were meant to trust me and find my company a pleasant experience but you have made me see the error of my ways.

One thing I don't quite understand is if the collars are only meant to cause "light discomfort" why aren't they limited to that level which you deem reasonable. Why are they made so that the level of discomfort can be raised to a level which is definitely painful - as was the one I saw being used on a dog a couple of months ago. That dog was stopped dead in it's tracks and fell to the floor - it didn't lie down it fell down- and I can guarantee that dog was feeling something very painful. Still it made it easy for it's owner so I guess that's what counts.

> It doesn't cause pain, mild discomfort only when set at the right level. Negative reinforcemnt is what this is. Wether you define that as reward is up to you.

What the heck? Getting the terminolgy about what it does/doesn't do, is irrelevant.

Shock collars work by causing discomfort or pain - you decide which when you have worn one! - when 99% of trainers nowadays strive towards methods that cause no pain or discomfort. Nobody is going to come on here and say belting your dog with a baseball bat is an acceptable method of training; belting your dog with an electric shock is no different.

If it tickles it's not going to work.
If it hurts it may work....
...but that's the antithesis of modern dog training methods - plenty of studies to show dogs can learn to ignore the pain and carry on regardless.

As a child I used to get walloped & shouted at all the time. Then I would get put in a corner and told to think about what I had done. Half the time I had no idea what I'd done!!! If I ever asked, I was told "I should know." No, it's not automatic and I didn't get a thunderbolt of understanding after sitting in a corner for 2 hours, but I did learn to lie, and pretend I knew, and learned to say sorry without knowing what I was apologising for.

All it taught me was to mistrust and fear my parents, when they should have been gently showing me the right way to do things or at the least explaining what I should have done right. There were times when I was too scared to breathe in case it was wrong.

Strikes me that using an e-collar is a bit like that - remote punishment, expecting the dog to know what it's done wrong at that moment. How can anyone be sure it doesn't associate that punishment with its owners? It could be emotionally sitting in a corner for a lifetime trying to figure out what it's done wrong, and not understanding. End result you think a dog is behaving, but really it's too darn scared to even put a foot out in case it's the wrong foot, and retreats into a shell. "Learned helplessness" they call it, and I was there myself as a child....

Would never wish that on another living creature.

I agree with Adam that e collars are an effective training tool. 

The Lab owners appear to be mis-using the collar and they are in fact causing the collar to punish their dog due to its inappropriate use.

when 99% of trainers nowadays strive towards methods that cause no pain or discomfort.

There seems to be a blurring of meaning when statements such as this are used.  It is my experience of dog training using PR methods that it is the humans that feel no pain and discomfort.  The dogs that I have witnessed at such classes are confused, unhappy or streets ahead of their handlers. 

IMO both e collars and PR training need to be used by people with training and experience of the equipment and/or PR method and who have also put in time and effort  to learn what is common sense of a pack animal and how and where it differs from the common sense of the human biped. 

>It doesn't cause pain, mild discomfort only when set at the right level

I wonder how often it would be used if the handler got an equally-uncomfortable shock each time one was administered to the dog.

What it comes down to is whether one wants a dog to choose to obey through the fearful expectation of pain/discomfort, or the eager expectation of pleasure.

I know which one I choose.

It doesn't cause pain, mild discomfort only when set at the right level
As a said before, how can you guarantee that the correct level is used, You can't, so any amount of torture can be used on these animals

Now all I have to do is choose what sort of punishment I give him and ensure he receives enough punishment to make him be too frightened of ever barking again.


So without e collars, as mentioned by Harley we can use any method, chunks of wood, rocks, chains, a boot. I don't think so - I have spent a lifetime healing the mental wounds these methods have caused in dogs, and believe me, many have suffered for the rest of their lives with the fear of reprisal.
If these collars were set to just a tingle then they would not work, they have to cause pain to make any difference and it is the pain that causes lifelong misery for these dogs

The cessation of discomfort (stopping hitting the donkey with the stick) is not the same as rewarding (giving the donkey a carrot). Therefore cessation of the shock is not the same as a reward for desired behaviour.

I doubt it, they would probably have done something worse.

Sorry, but I'm just wondering what kind of people do worse to a dog than a shock collar, maybe people who resort to cruelty just shouldn't be allowed near a dog, maybe instead of giving people like this the option of a shock collar the RSPCA should be called to rescue the dogs instead.

If your argument for a shock collar is that the people you deal with may do worse, then are you not failing the dogs in not reporting such people?

I don't believe shock collars are a kind or useful method in this day and age. They are now used for basic training which says a lot about the people who use them, I think! I mean, using a shock collar for teaching a Sit!!! Ridiculous.

I can understand, although do not agree with, higher levels of shock for big problems (but do not agree they are the only way) but I definitely disagree with them being used on low, persistent, continuous levels (still causing pain or "discomfort" as supporters love to say) but with the dog  having to work out how to avoid the pain. Ach, it makes me angry, to be frank. What sort of person would want to do that??!

Anyway, all this is academic because I do think they will be banned completely, and then those using them can be punished with a nice fine  or more ;)

Lindsay
x

Ultimatly this will mean more dogs in rescue and more dogs put down.

Why do dog supporters of shock collars always use this excuse when banning shock collars is debated, surely what they mean is "Ultimately it will mean more dogs in rescue and more dogs put down because there will be one less seemingly magic fix for them to try before giving up"

Dogs don't get put in to rescue or put down because shock collars weren't available, they get put there because their owners don't have the motivation, the skill or the wit to train or find an experienced, effective dog trainer.

Having spoken to a number of real experts on the use of shock collars, it is apparent that most so called experts using shock collars are actually using them incorrectly, the shock collar is an aversive method, causing discomfort on lower settings defeats the object of the collar and can cause the dog to become conditioned to the pain from it, the collar is designed to deliver a painful aversive shock not a 'tingle', the lower settings are simply there to make the collar seem more acceptable to the general public.

Incidently the real experts won't use a shock collar because of the extreme shock that needs to be given to be aversive.

Ethically and morally I can't see the difference between using a shock collar and giving your dog a kick in the head if it gets something it doesn't understand wrong, the fault as always lies with the handler who isn't able to teach effectively.

Here, here, Robert K.

There's material on youtube where people have them around their necks and looking at their reactions it definitely isn't a slight shock! 

> I have seen people struggle to get the timing of positive training methods correct - it doesn't help the training but the dog doesn't suffer - so dread to think what happens with those users who think the answer to every training problem is solved by zapping their dog and have no idea as to timing - a disaster waiting to happen let alone the distress caused to the animal.

Also, there is no guarantee that the dog will make the required association.

I remeber as a teenager, my sister & I were walking our dogs over fields. My sister was ahead of me and thought the cattle fence was turned off (we could normally tell when it was on by the humming sound), she still crawled under the fence carefully, but her shoulder clipped it. She yelled out in shock and accused me of lobbing an apple at her!!

This is a human being with the ability to rationalise in a way a dog never could, but in that instant, following the sudden shock, her mind made the connection of me hitting her with an apple, not of her catching herself on an electric fence. It is only because she is a human that I was able to persuade her that I never even had an apple with me, it was the fence that had hurt her.

I do remember a debate on here regarding e-collars and I thought it was OK for them to be used when training dogs to stay away from snakes (obv. not in the UK). However after seeing massive effects of reward based training on my own dog, implemented by myself (who is not an experienced traininer), I can see how a good, experienced trainer could use reward-based methods to acomplish whatever they want from a dog, especially when you keep in mind that opperant conditioning is based on the fact an animal is only ever acting for it's reward (ie, prey-drive is about the animal getting the rewrad of prey), so it seems silly to ignore such a higly motivational thing (reward) in order to teach a dog that it shouldn't be doing something rewarding.

She yelled out in shock and accused me of lobbing an apple at her!!

I agree Mastifflover. A few years ago my GSD was running offlead and touched an electric fence that I was not aware was on, she actually screamed. I realised that it was the metal buckle part of her leather collar that had caused the pain. She was still shaking an hour later and looks of "how could you" that she was giving me really hurt me, and no matter how many cuddles I gave her I still felt guilty.
How you could do this on purpose I really don't know.

> A few years ago my GSD was running offlead and touched an electric fence that I was not aware was on, she actually screamed. I realised that it was the metal buckle part of her leather collar that had caused the pain. She was still shaking an hour later and looks of "how could you" that she was giving me really hurt me, and no matter how many cuddles I gave her I still felt guilty.

Ahh poor girl, there is just no way of letting them know that you didn't cause the pain is there :(
It's such a real problem with aversive methods you just can't predict the association the dog will make.

The way e collars work is by negative reinforcment. The dog is trained using the first sensation he feels the collar on, his reaction to this sensation will be to look at the ground or cock his ears. Nothing more!

You then train the dog to do or not to do things by using the cessation of the sensation as the reinforcer. So with predatory aggression you use the collar at the first level he feels when the dog looks at prey, gentle pull him away so he stops looking and the instant he stops looking stop the sensation. You may have to start off at a big distance (100yrds) from prey and with the prey contained, but you will rapidly move closer to the prey until the dog can be right next to it and will ignore it.
This does too things A, it stops predatory chasing of that prey item. B, it means the dog no longer cares aboput that prey item which allows him to be much more motivated by your rewards (toys treats ect). This lack of interest in inappropriate prey items will radically improve the dogs lifestyle. Think how much more fun the dog has running freely off lead than on a long line. All achieved with the mildest possible sesation.
Note many people when feeling their equivilant sensation say it tingles or tickles.

Adam 

Out of interest Adam are you a professional dog trainer and if so how long have you been training dogs for? Do you use other methods of training before you opt for an e collar or is that the only method of training that you use?

This does too things A, it stops predatory chasing of that prey item.

Would you have to go through the same procedure with the e collar for different species of prey that a dog might chase. My terrier will chase anything that runs/flies/flutters etc so would you have to shock him for every type of animal that he would chase? Having already been stung by a bee it it hasn't stopped him from catching others and getting stung again. A mild sensation would not even register with him so what level of "sensation" would you administer to him and what level would you deem to be too great to administer?

> Note many people when feeling their equivilant sensation say it tingles or tickles.

I can't understand why a dog with a high prey drive (for example) would suddenly decide chasing prey was not fun just by feeling a tickle around its neck?

My dog is motivated by food, he used to steal food off the counter (including a block of cheese out of my hand while I was cutting - quickly swallowed after one chomp it ).

A tickle would not stop him from stealing cheese and definately would not stop him from wanting to steal the cheese (ohhh, he really has a thing for cheese!!).

A mild pain would not stop him from stealing food, it would have to be something that really hurt him - a lot - or frightened the living daylights out of him in order for him to stop while in the process of stealing food.

Stopping him from stealing food before he has actually began the act of stealing is much easier (so much easier to pre-emp & distract than to try to stop the behaviour once it is happening), but that is not the time that negative enforcement is used is it. The negative enforcement must be timed to be a result of the unwanted behaviour in order for it to work (the idea being the dog associates the 'shock' with the unwanted behaviour & therefore decides not to do that behaviour) . Rather than wait for the unwanted behaviour, wouldn't it be better to use distraction & lures to train for the behaviour you want ?

What I do know is I can use his intense desire for food, as a lure & reward for not stealing it in the first place. Proccess = calm, patient owner & a happy, focused dog. Result = dog that is happy to lay on the floor & not steal food off the counter, becasue he has been taught that it is even more rewarding to lay & wait than it is to steal :)

ETA, if you don't think a cheese obsession (LOL) could be as intense as prey-drive, then you haven't seen an English Mastiff knock grown adults flying in order to help himself to a cheese sarnie :-D

> <br />The Lab owners appear to be mis-using the collar and they are in fact causing the collar to punish their dog due to its inappropriate use.<br />

Exactly!
So if these collars were indeed banned in my state, then the owners would be more likely to find some other method to train their dog. 

> A mild pain would not stop him from stealing food, it would have to be something that really hurt him - a lot - or frightened the living daylights out of him in order for him to stop while in the process of stealing food.

I've just thought of an example of this happening :(

I had given Buster a ceramic bowl to lick (had a bit of tuna in), he must of knocked the bowl and spooked himself as he came running out of the kitchen in a bit of a pancik just after I heard the bowl clatter accross the floor. Since then he will not eat anything from a ceramic bowl unless I am holding it. You could put a ceramic bowl of freshly cooked beef in front of him, but unless somebody is holding it he will refuse to eat form it.

It's very sad to see as it is plainly a fear of the bowl that is causing the problem, not that he nolonger wants the contents of the bowl. This has to be the same as a dog that has leanrt not to chase livestock via an e-colloar - it's not that they nolonger want to chase, it's that they fear chasing.

>it's not that they nolonger want to chase, it's that they fear chasing.

And what sort of person wants their dog to live in fear?