Banning of ecollars

[farmboy]

Hey,here's an idea. Starting on this forum,how about a ban on "backbenchers" in the House of Commons! That's what they are referred to,am I correct? More important business to attend to for the people,I would think.

[PrairieBoy]

We need a posting of a video of Maximus misbehaving so it goes viral.

When used properly, e-collars are just wireless leashes.

Hope this is not a re-election gimmick.

[Callthatagundog]

Unfortunately the Kennel Club is also very vocal in the banning of e-collars, along with that great bunch, the RSPCA. When I think of these two organisations uniting with our disgracefully self-serving MPs in order to make laws, I want to run screaming to the hills - just not any hills in GB!

It would be laughable if it wasn't so bloody serious - forget the EU, our own politicians are doing a damn fine job of erroding our way of life. Grrrrrrr....... Rant over!

For what its worth I agree with the previous comments. Ecollars have their place in the right hands at the right time and place.

I know its probably useless but I shall be writing to my MP at the weekend.

Sarah xx (somewhere in Hampshire, on a soap box!)

[Springfield Pointers]

I can understand the reasoning behind the need to ban e-collars. The world unfortunately is full of idiots who believe that these aids are the final answer to all their problems. They have absolutely zero idea on how to use them, nor do they have any idea about the implications - these folk use them in anger after trying everything else and are most times so ineffective with their methods of training that the dogs they own have some bad vices that they are unable to sort out. As such they turn a dog with a small (correctable) problem into a quivering mass of fear that knows not where or why the next unpleasant zap is coming from.

[Stacia]

Well said Springfield Pointers.

[NikkiD]

I can understand the reasoning behind the need to ban e-collars. The world unfortunately is full of idiots who believe that these aids are the final answer to all their problems. They have absolutely zero idea on how to use them, nor do they have any idea about the implications - these folk use them in anger after trying everything else and are most times so ineffective with their methods of training that the dogs they own have some bad vices that they are unable to sort out. As such they turn a dog with a small (correctable) problem into a quivering mass of fear that knows not where or why the next unpleasant zap is coming from.

ITA and this is the reason I personally support a ban

[goshawk]

As a foreigner, I am not in a position to support a ban or not, but I follow SP's reasoning in this.

What is much more frightening, is that a MP apparently derives his 'expertise' from the fact that he owns a JRT. It seems a general habit of most MP's: no idea what they are talking about. It's the same in NL.

Gr, Jan

[Bryn]

The whole problem is that legislation is aimed at the ignorant, incompetent and the downright evil, none of which will be affected by any amount of hand wringing legislation so the rest of us have our rights eroded. Although I bought an e-collar years ago I never needed to use it but could see some circumstances with some dogs where it could be a life saver.

[Nonehpets]

I completely share SP's point of view about how e-collars are misused by a few individuals (let's be very clear that is less than 1% of the UK population own an e-collar - and that is before we consider how many are in drawers never used like Bryn's) but is that an argument for banning them? I think not. We do not have a total ban on shotguns because some hooray henrys use them inappropriately - we have a licensing system.

Licensing may not be perfect, may be difficult to enforce in some cases but it is a reasonably effective way of preventing much of the misuse. Banning them would still require enforcement - firstly an amnesty to collect all those in existence in; then a method of detecting illegally held e-collars.

It is the same with the approach of muzzling all dogs in public places being mooted here - this is supposedly to stop dangerous dogs attacking people and other dogs - so in reality dogs would need to be permanently muzzled just in case they escape your private premises? I am in complete agreement that dogs which attack and injure people, domesticated animals and livestock need to be appropriately dealt with - such attacks cannot be tolerated but muzzling all dogs because a few dog owners are incompetent or careless is a gross over reaction.

I wouldn't mind so much if the country was awash with lots of spare money to waste on all this - as it is we face loss and reduction of front line services for people and our elected representatives think that these issues are more important.

Thanks for sharing the soapbox Sarah - anyone else want a turn?

Cathy

[Naj]

Re SP's comments, & while I don't disagree with him, the same could surely be said for some (many?) trainers using traditional aversive/compulsive methods who are equally capable of ruining dogs through inappropriate punishment/corrections or can only maintain obedience by keeping a dog cowed through harsh treatment.

It isn't the e-collar/aversives/punishments/rewards that are the problem. It is the person using them. They have sole responsibility for the welfare of the dog & direct control over the methods they choose to use in training them. And there are examples across the world of all such methods being used appropriately, effectively & humanely, as well as inappropriately, ineffectively & inhumanely. Unfortunately, to hear some people talking about their dogs you would think that they were talking of the enemy, & with this mind-set any punishment based method is open to abuse. Can anyone who has used traditional punishment/aversive methods honestly claim that they have never, hopefully in hindsight but sometimes in anger, overdone it on occasion? I know that I did when I used them, and not necessarily when I had used a harsh correction, but often with a relatively mild one. And, equally, I've made mistakes when using a 'collar', but I tried not to repeat either but to learn from them, & it didn't lead to the ruination of any dog. If I'd continued with a policy of using inappropriate levels of punishment/correction as a matter of routine then it would undoubtedly have been abusive, which is surely the distinction. Even so, I don't think the people who miss-use punishments/corrections see themselves as being abusive or cruel, otherwise they would surely stop. It's other people who are the judges on that. The measure of what's acceptable & what's not seems generally to come from 'outsiders' & peers, & not even they are in full agreement.

I used to be anti collar, simply because I was proud of my ability to fix any problem through traditional methods. Which was easy when I had dogs that hardly moved 20 yards from me & were always under close control. I now see them as another tool in the box. And while I don't use them routinely I know that I can sort out an awkward problem, (that would likely have taken much 'going back to basics', shakings & jerking to get a less reliable result with my old methods) very quickly with just a low level shock that I can hardly feel, or, more usually, by using the 'pager' (vibration) function, and without the dog losing any confidence in me or even associating the correction with me. So although I wouldn't like to see their routine use in day-to-day training, I do see them as a useful tool when all else fails. And for chronic problems of deer, sheep & cat chasing I don't believe there is a more effective solution, whatever methods you use.

The main problem I see in supporting a ban is that there could be consequential implications on the traditional training methods that most on here still use. If you look at the Government's Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs it is unequivocal that all dogs should be trained & trained by positive only methods. This is in support of the Welfare of Animals legislation so there are some shades of grey in it but my fear is that once you bring the spotlight to bear on the question of e-collars then it may well bring into light other methods of training for closer scrutiny.

Naj