|
NookieNotes -> RE: Shock collars (10/15/2015 12:27:32 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: longwayhome
quote:
ORIGINAL: NookieNotes
quote:
ORIGINAL: longwayhome
The use of shock collars on dogs is potentially physically and psychologically damaging. As such it is my belief that clearly constitutes animal cruelty. If someone feels they have a situation in which a shock collar is required they should be thinking very seriously about how they are managing the training and behaviour of the dog, the risks posed by that dog's behaviour and/or the risks inherent in the environment. Thinking that there is no alternative but to deliver an electric shock to an animal, who should never require it, says a lot about what kind of dog owner you are. Other posters have included statements about current shock collars not burning the dog, but the psychological effects of using this sort of control must be a cause for concern.
As someone who trained dogs for 22 years and worked in rescue and rehab, let me just tell you something.
You know not of which you speak.
I think we have an honest disagreement here.
You are of course quite correct in terms of my knowledge of the direct use of shock collars on dogs, because, as you can tell, I do not choose to use them. And this despite many years on my part of looking after and retraining, often mistreated, rescued dogs, and on the being involved along with my family when I was younger.
To be clear, I also did rescue and rehab for 8 years.
quote:
My issue with shock collar use on dogs is not those people such as you, who use them in a thoughtful manner, with an enlightened approach to the best interest of the dog. My concern is in two parts (1) that they are used inappropriately ion occasions and there is plenty of potential for that to happen, and (2) there are other ways to manage the situations you would be likely to use a shock collar in.
Agreed. But that's like saying that pain killers should not be used, because some people will abuse them...
quote:
I do not subscribe to the usual over the top, half researched stories of badly burned dogs and multiple dog deaths. However modified shock collars are used by certain groups in the UK for the inappropriate control of large, aggressive dogs (including those dogs who are illegal in the UK).
As an aside, the dogs illegal in the UK were legislated against in completely arbitrary ways. That's a fascinating story, and how I learned originally about the Dogo Argentino, my most recent beloved breed.
quote:
In terms of the proper use of shock collars to remind a dog of your presence, my view on distance training is that if I can't control a dog with my voice or a whistle, then I cannot safely control the dog at that distance.
Agreed. However, there are many times when a voice is not to be used at all. In hunting scenarios, for example. Or when the dog is not yet fully trained, but you need the training to test. Yes, I prefer the 100-foot lead options or whatnot... *smiles*
quote:
The ability to make a rescued racing dog, such as a greyhound, stop dead when you yell is life saving for the dog and often other people. The obvious remedies are further gradual, training, or keeping the dog always at a distance you are able to control them at (and for some dogs that will be not much further than you can grab them by stretching out).
Agreed.
quote:
In terms of the use of electric devices to modify animal behaviour, the Kennel Club, RSPCA and a number of other bodies are opposed to their use, indeed shock collars are illegal in parts of the UK, with fines having been administered to a man who used it to contain his dog, who ironically was found wandering along a nearby beach, collar intact. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-14181927 Even in an area such as cattle control the responsible UK government ministry discourages their use on the grounds of over-stimulation of the animals, and suggests a more thoughtful approach to understanding issues of cattle movement in most situations (a view shared by at least one livestock farmer I know).
Similar to the idea of banishing pain meds. Now, only criminals will have pain meds.
Or... dare I say, similar to legislating against certain breeds, because SOME BAD PEOPLE will misuse them.
The problem here is weak animal cruelty laws, not the e-collar.
quote:
Incidentally the penalty for a dog being out of control in the UK is an unlimited fine and up to 6 months in prison, where there are no consequences, 5 years, where another individual is hurt, and 14 years in the case of a death. If my dog was over 100 yards away from me and caused a vehicle collision, I wouldn't want to explain to a sceptical court that the dog normally responded to a very gentle electric stimulus, but in this case did not. The possibility of a dog being able to respond to me at a distance beyond them responding to my voice (and I am sure that a properly used shock collar may help) is attractive but not something I would want to rely on.
And I never would.
For the DOG'S sake, as much as my own. Same reason I get annoyed about people who never train their dogs not to chew. I don't care about their furniture. I care about the dog possibly swallowing wooden splinters or springs.
quote:
So to return to your original comment, you are right. I have not used a shock collar on a dog, and I don't doubt your sincerity and skill in training dogs using one. You would probably also dispute the evidence of some of the studies about stress, and having had a quick look at some of them recently, you would probably be right, in terms of the design of the research if nothing else.
Compared to you, I probably also have a very European approach to civil liberties, in that I think that enhancing liberty by preventing harm to a minority of dogs by constraining the liberty of a larger number of owners, who may use a collar effectively, is justified. That is the same reason why I oppose firearm ownership, despite living in a country subject to gun crime and terrorism. None of us use choke-chains any more despite their popularity in the seventies, not because they cannot be used effectively but because some people misused them. For that reason I will not use a shock collar, quite apart from it's dubious legality in the UK.
For me liberty includes freedom from harm, and that in some cases means the state being involved in preventing harm, not just prosecution of those who transcend.
I get that, and I respect it. However, I think that (AGAIN), it's better to punish offenders than everyone for potential offenses. The slippery slope and all...
quote:
I am aware that is a point of view which is open to many challenges, especially since I believe that people engaging in consensual BDSM (including the use of shock collars) should not be subject, within reason, to legal restrictions.
Finally with respect to human use, I would personally be cautious about a shock collar anywhere near someone's neck, unless the voltage and current were really low, but hopefully we are all capable adults and able to make our own decisions.
Exactly so! *smiles*
|
|
|
|
