Just suppose if a Politician or Judge suggested that to make it easier to maintain order in prisons, inmates be fitted with a device that if a prisoner tried to escape, become violent or be non compliant could deliver some negative consequence to the offender such as, oh I don’t know, let’s say, an electric shock? After all, it could be argued they are all convicted criminals; they didn’t have to be in prison but are there as a consequence of their own actions. Having arrived in prison they would not have to receive a shock from the equipment. They would have the rules and potential punishment explained to them. It would therefore be their fault and nobody else’s if they chose to be non compliant.
Just suppose that happened. Can’t you just hear the screams of indignation from groups such as ‘Liberty’ and ‘Amnesty International’, the smoke of righteous indignation rising from the letter pages of the newspapers? Hours of television time would be filled with documentaries on the subject. This would all happen at the first floating of the idea. God knows what would happen if it were ever actually put into action. But of course it won’t be will it? We’re a civilized country after all. We can all relax, particularly the violent criminals.
Why then, in this ‘civilized country’ is it considered acceptable to use such equipment on our dogs? I refer of course to the Electric Shock Collar that wonderful piece of equipment that you can use to say to your dog over great distances “Do what I want or I will hurt you. A lot!” It’s a good thing we’re a nation of dog lovers.
We shouldn’t criticize from a position of ignorance so it became important to obtain an example of this equipment so that it was possible to evaluate the thing at first hand. I had one donated to me by a dog owner who had been persuaded that the only way to correct a dog was with a shock collar. As a result I am able to share the delights of this piece of equipment with you.
First of all you may want to know, 'Did it work?' Well, if I tell you that the donor paid £195.00 for it, has now decided that it is not the way to go and has sent it to me free of charge that might be an indication of its training value. They could have easily sold this on ebay and recouped some of their money but had more integrity than to perpetuate the use of such cruel equipment.
So if this equipment is so bad why do people some of whom are obviously dog lovers buy it? Because they are at the end of their tether. They hit a problem that they can't seem to resolve, maybe they go to the usual 'Dog Training Club' for 'Obedience Training' and that doesn't work so they look for other options and, if they are very unlucky they will either find a 'Trainer' who will take the dog away for a period of time (at vast expense) and return it 'Trained' often by the use of such equipment as the shock collar or spiked collar plus of course a bit of brute force and bloody ignorance. You can usually spot this type pretty quickly because they won't want you anywhere near the training venue. They will tell you that your presence will distract the dog. The truth is it would seriously disturb the owner. Ask yourself 'What have they got to hide?' The owner might also see this equipment on the internet or be sold it by a 'Dog Training Expert' as a quick and easy fix.
The manufacturers of this sort of equipment are very coy in the description of their products. The one that I've been sent is described as a 'Remote Trainer'. Of course it's a bit of a giveaway when you open the packing and see the control unit has two buttons marked 'Trigger' and a power button which turns almost 360 degrees marked 'Intensity'. When I was a Police Officer we used to call things like that 'Clues'!
Let's open the packing. First of all, the control unit, an innocuous piece of equipment until you read the control instructions. Slightly larger than a mobile phone with a rechargeable battery. It of course has a charger unit supplied.
Next we have the 'Dummy' collar. The manufacturers recommend the dog wear this for four or five days before starting remedial training. The collar is worn so that the box is held against the dog’s throat with the electrodes making contact with the skin. If you have a hairy dog you are advised to trim the hair around the contact points to ensure better flow of power. Why don't we throw a bucket of water over the dog at the same time? That would really ensure a good contact. Of course the dummy is inert and only designed to get the dog used to having two pointed lumps of metal sticking into their throat all the time. I like the use of the word 'only' don't you?
Now we get to the action part, the live collar. When you are ready to start 'remedial training' then you remove the dummy collar and replace with the real thing. Hey! What's this? Another dial on the collar itself! It’s marked 1-5 what fun we're going to have trying out varying shock levels! Once the live collar is in place training commences. If the dog does anything that you don't like Zap!
Of course the instruction book gives no guidance how the equipment should be used. It does tell you that you can ‘correct’ (give him an electric shock against his throat) a dog up to one mile away. How you can see what the dog is doing at that distance is something I've not been able to workout. The blurb also says 'The natural choice for sporting dog enthusiasts who need deep penetration of woodland or undergrowth'. In both scenarios if the dog is unsighted, even leaving aside the obvious cruelty issues. How can you correct an animal without knowing what he's doing? He might even be on his way back to you when you shock him. A good move?
There have been many instances with this equipment where exactly the opposite result to that desired occurs e.g. using it to 'cure' poor recall. Dog doesn't recall at once, trigger pressed, dog shocked and panics, runs away. Or even less successful when being used to deal with chasing behaviour. When shocked the dog can interpret the cause of the pain to be the jogger, cyclist or other object of interest and attack their perceived tormentor. There have also been cases where the dog realises that the trainer is the cause of all the trauma and then..... Can I have a new trainer please? I've split this one.
The people who say it doesn't hurt suddenly find other important things to do when offered the chance to try it out for themselves. Have I tried it on myself? Yes. Will I be trying it again? No! Is it cruel? Of course it is. I find it difficult to understand that such evil equipment is on sale in the 21st century. It has no purpose other than to cause pain, except of course to make someone a lot of money.
There are other factors to be considered in the use of this equipment. The frequencies used in transmitting the 'correction' are shared with many of the other owners of similar collars. So, there you are out walking your dog who is now so worried about being shocked that he is doing nothing (like playing or just enjoying his walk) that might incur your wrath and involve further distress. Suddenly, another owner anywhere up to a mile away decides to 'correct' his dog and your dog gets a jolt as well. For what? He's already doing nothing through fear and he's still being shocked.
Having this sort of equipment around the house can lead to tragedy. What happens if very young children get hold of it and use it in 'play'? There was a case of child abuse reported in March 2007 from Spokane U.S.A. which resulted in a child's death. One of the favourite tools of abuse used by the offenders was an electric dog training collar.
There was an attempt in Parliament to ban this equipment but it didn’t get past the first reading. The reason for this was that it was a 'Private Members Bill' and very few of those go on to become law without the support of the Government of the day. That support was singularly lacking. It is strange that a Government that was so rabidly obsessive about banning fox hunting, a subject that evenly divided public opinion, can think that is acceptable to traumatize and torture domestic animals. Who do you know that thinks that torturing domestic pets is a ‘good thing’ or even just ‘acceptable.’
During the foxhunting debate I heard many arguments from both sides. Both the 'pros' and 'antis', good points were made by both. In the end a compromise solution was arrived at with many exceptions leaving both sides of the argument not really knowing whether they had won or lost. Hundreds of hours of parliamentary time were spent on not achieving a solution.
There were, whether you agree or not, some valid arguments put forward by the pro-hunting lobby in support of their case. I have yet to hear a remotely valid argument in favour of beating a dog, using electric shock treatment, gouging it's neck and throat with metal spikes, spraying it with noxious liquids, sounding air horns or using any of the other 'Advanced Training Equipment' on sale to 'Modify Behaviour'.
I have had a couple of justifications by users and suppliers addressed to me. One 'trainer' told me that they were a vital tool for real 'hands on' trainers if they were to achieve their aims!! He went on to tell me that if I'd ever had to deal with really aggressive dogs I'd soon change my mind. Apparently it's alright for me and all my tree hugging Dog Listener friends but if we had to live in the real world we'd soon change our minds.
I thought that through, maybe he's right?................Never dealt with an aggressive dog? Well of course only all those Police Dogs I've trained and worked over all those years. You wouldn't want to meet them if you'd been naughty! In the two months before I retired one offender tried to kill me with a 'Verey' flare pistol and another tried to rearrange my features with a machete. On both occasions the suspects, after a 'full and frank exchange of views' with my dog Jack, went to hospital. Jack and I went home to well earned tea and cakes. All of my dogs would put you in hospital if needed but most of the time they spent looking for missing children, mixing with the general public, normal patrol duties, doing school visits (have a look at the pictures on my website) and just enjoying being much loved family pets. How many times have I had to shout, bully, bluster, hit, or otherwise abuse my dogs? None. The traditionalist argues that to 'reach a standard', whatever that is, you have to 'keep on top of them and show them you're the master'. All I can offer in reply is the trophies I've been awarded and commendations received, not for competitions won but for operational Police work with my Dogs. I suppose you could say that was living in the real world?
And when we did drug raids, who would be the first guy through the door to deal with the dealer’s Pit bull? The Salvation Army, the Cats Protection League, The Traditional Trainer? No. Who then? Oh! That would be me then, the tree hugger.
For anyone who doesn't know me to call me a 'tree hugging pinko lefty' is laughable. If I had my way we'd still be sending convicts to Australia. Firstly to ease overcrowding in our prisons but mainly to get Australia back for beating us at cricket.
A manufacturer of electric collars justifies their use by saying that this equipment, "Makes for happier homes as the pet and owner develop a better relationship." Yeah, right! Maybe the dog’s eyes light up when it’s used!
Manufacturers of this equipment no longer call them electric collars but 'Electronic Training Aids'. Electronic sounds so much better than electric doesn't it? A bit like a canine ipod maybe? I've got an idea to appease all those in America opposed to the death penalty. Why don't they change the Electric Chair to the Electronic Chair? It would then be acceptable. The way I see it working is to strap the condemned person into the chair and then play them non stop Whitney Houston until they lose the will to live.
When the hunting debate was at its height one of the pro hunting sides’ main arguments was that it would cause many thousands of jobs to go, often in areas where unemployment was already high. The Governments response was "A few thousand jobs is a small price to pay to put an end to hunting." Now, one of the reasons politicians are putting forward for not banning this equipment is that it might cause unemployment. I would respond by saying "A few hundred jobs is a small price to pay to put an end to torturing animals." Perhaps even more valid is that to the best of my knowledge most, if not all of this equipment is not produced in the UK but imported. Still on the trail of people who think it's alright to be cruel to animals just to bend them to their wills I had a chance to view a training video for an electric shock collar.
I always thought that to sell a product or to train people you had to at least be able to pretend that you had some belief in the product. The salesman/instructor in this video brought a new meaning to the term wooden. It was like watching one of Harry Enfield's skits of the wartime public information films except it was not intentionally funny.
I did learn several things about this 'kind' way of training. The equipment is apparently so 'kind' and 'stress free' that you are advised to have your dog thoroughly checked by a vet before you use it. But I thought this equipment was harmless, so why do we need a vets visit?
Just as an aside they mention that the equipment should not be used on a dog that is in anyway nervous. But the equipment is 'stress free' surely that's just the sort of thing you need for a nervous dog? Or am I missing something here? I would hope that a vet with an ounce of integrity would have a full and frank exchange of views with any owner who asked if his dog was fit to be subjected to random electric shocks.
Of course the sales team would argue that the system comes with full instructions and indeed it does.
1) Call the dog in a normal way. If he does not respond at once
2) Tell him again in a STERN VOICE!!! If no instant response we get to the highly trained technical bit
3) Shout OI!!! And shock him.
Well, if he wasn't in need of a vet's care or nervous before this 'kind' training session I bet he will be now.
These items are being sold as a quick fix. The cheapest one that I could find cost well over £100 and I've found some costing around £550. Add to that the cost of the vets visit before the training session (and very possibly after) and you're talking big money. They also offer the services of an instructor, specially trained in the use of the equipment. If you have trouble traumatising your dog then they 'Know a Man Who Can'. I have no idea how much you would be charged for the use of that service.
Just think of how much real stress free help that money would buy. You'd have money left over, a clear conscience and a happy dog. One user of such equipment told me that the dogs do not feel it and in fact actually enjoy the sensation! If this person is prepared to spend £250 on something that doesn’t work then I’ve got a bridge that I want to sell him.
I don’t apologise for the use of emotive language such as torture, cruelty, trauma, bullying or any other words that might offend the users of this equipment because they are all accurate.