THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE PRODUCTS

For some time, campaigners have been lobbying to have electronic training collars banned. Led by the Kennel Club, the campaign is built on emotive imagery, speculation, inaccurate information and tabloid style shock tactics.

Indeed, a senior vet on the Ethics and Welfare Committee of the British Veterinary Association has deemed the campaign “emotional and unscientific”.

You, as collar owners, know the real truth about electronic training collars, understanding the relief that they can provide.

Twisted science

More and more we see information about the use of electronic training collars sensationalised and presented out of context.

In their response to the Welsh Assembly Government’s 2007 consultation on electronic training collars, the Kennel Club distorted the conclusions of Steven Lindsay, a highly respected academic dog trainer. His historical discussion on high level electrical stimulation (HLES) was presented as though it were his last word on the subject when in fact it was an introductory, scene setting part of the chapter in his book on electronic training. They also presented a minor criticism he made about the standard of instructional materials as a final criticism of the whole idea of electronic training.

In fact, Steven Lindsay concluded that modern collars that deliver low level electrical stimulation (LLES) are a humane and useful aid to dog training. The Kennel Club campaign has to use propaganda techniques because the collars do what we say they do and improve lives and relationships between pets and owners.

t.COG^® have no need to twist or distort any research or findings. We have surveyed pet owners who use electronic training aids to hear first hand how the products are beneficial to their animals and the results are black and white.

Of course there are situations where a collar is not the right choice for a particular animal but these are few and far between and from two different surveys, 95% of collar owners are very happy with the results from their use of collars and the same proportion state that not only did the collar have no negative effects on the dog but that the dog is safer, calmer, happier and/or gets more exercise than before they had the collar.

71% in one survey state that they believe the collar has saved the life of the dog or cat whereas it might well have been killed on the road, shot by an irate farmer for worrying livestock or had to be euthanased because of intractable behaviour problems.

In the same survey 97% of responders reported that their pet was happy or neutral about the collar. This solid response data from actual users of the collars is far more convincing than the emotive and unsupported propaganda put out by the Kennel Club.

Click here to see the 2005-2007 ECMA survey results

Inappropriate science

In reviewing the science put forward as evidence against e-collars we found that many of the studies are very old, dating from long before electronic training collars came on the market. Others are based around obscure brain experiments, also often dating from the 1950s and 1960s. There were also hundreds of experiments done in the 1960s and 1970s which inflicted pain on dogs, rats and humans just to see what happened.

These experiments MUST be viewed in the correct context. Subjecting dogs to inescapable electric shocks until they just give up, apathetically letting the experimenter shock them at will, simply cannot be compared to the managed and controlled use of electronic training products.

In using the devices the owner is seeking to build a relationship that gives the dog more choice and more freedom of movement.

Common misconceptions

“If it didn’t hurt it wouldn’t work”

In actual fact, it is not necessary to hurt a dog to communicate with it using an electronic training collar. Modern collars are adjustable to the sensitivity of the dog, time out after a fixed number of seconds and if anything does go wrong they default to off.

Opponents to collars often claim that you can train any dog with positive reward. While a treat may work in the short term, for some more difficult dogs, this alone is simply not enough. A collar used in conjunction with a treat is a highly effective method of encouraging long lasting good behaviour.

History of electronic training collars

In the 1960s and 1970s, it became clear that the training devices had to be redesigned before they could be used to motivate desired responses instead of punishing undesired responses. Research was conducted to determine how electrical stimulation could be used safely to motivate correct behaviour. The sorts of reactions alleged by opponents of electronic training may have occurred with earlier, more primitive devices but are extremely unlikely to occur with the modern electronic training collar and the survey results described also indicate this.

t.COG^®’s mission is to tell the truth about electronic training products through real life owner experiences and proven, scientific fact.