Training with Shock Collars—Why You Should Just Say NO! 

Shock Collars are euphemistically called Electronic or E-collars or Remote Training Collars.  Some pet owners and novice trainers train with shock collars because they are not aware of what they can accomplish with pain-free methods or of the harm they may be doing to their dogs by shocking them. 

"Shock is not training - in the vast majority of cases it meets the criteria for abuse" says Dr. Karen Overall.

"We don't have to hurt dogs to train them."  -- Becky Schultz

Table of Contents

If you'd like to add your name to the growing list of professional dog trainers, behavior consultants, pet owners and others who are taking a stand against the use of remote/electronic/shock collars for training dogs and controlling their behavior, sign up here:     http://www.baddogsinc.com/noshockcollarcoalition.html

If you are a positive method trainer who wants to help foster gentle, painless and force free training, please join the Truly Dog Friendly Coalition: www.trulydogfriendly.com

If you are a hunter or field trainer wanting or willing to explore learning how to train without shock see this new book: www.positivegundogs.com

Introduction

To use shock as an effective dog training method you will need:

1. A thorough understanding of canine behavior.

2. A thorough understanding of learning theory.

3. Impeccable timing.

And if you have those three things, you don't need a shock collar. --Author unknown

This page contains both objective information and subjective opinions from a variety of sources about problems and fall out related to using remote/E collars  otherwise called electronic shock collars.  Since I strongly believe there is no necessity to shock either pets or working/performance dogs in order to train them, the information presented here is intended to support that contention.  If  you are looking for a balanced viewpoint that includes a rationale or apologist viewpoint for shocking dogs, they are all too easy to find, but you will have to look elsewhere.

Question: Aren’t Electronic (remote/shock) collars just like other training tools in that they can be used appropriately or inappropriately depending on the skill of the trainer?

Answer: Although I have seen dogs respond to shock by screaming, yelping, and jumping in the air.  I know that many trainers claim to use them at much lower stimulation levels that supposedly never produce that level of pain.  However, Electronic/remote/shock collars now on the market have multiple settings (some have as many as 36 settings), thus giving anyone who chooses to do so, the option to inflict much more pain than merely giving the dog a mild stimulation/shock.  Therefore, part of the difference between E/remote/shock collars and other training tools is that shock collars are purposefully designed to include the option of increasing the correction level from mild discomfort to severe pain.  

Here is my personal position on Electronic/remote/shock collar training:  Shock collars are not a training necessity.  However, in hunting and field trial circles, use of the collars is so pervasive that there is actual psychological pressure to conform and accept shocking dogs as standard practice.  Likewise, in spite of evidence to the contrary, some competition/performance trainers still believe they need to use shock to win and are able to rationalize causing their dogs pain and distress in order to meet their goals.  Some pet owners and novice trainers choose to use electronic/remote/shock collars because they are not aware of what they can accomplish with positive training methods and that they may be needlessly hurting their dogs by choosing to shock them instead.

My own deeply held belief is that it is never ethically or morally acceptable to shock dogs when it is possible to successfully use other painless training methods.

While in theory I can agree with those who say they would only use shock as a last ditch effort to save the dog’s life (for example in the case of a dog facing euthanasia for killing livestock) when no other method has worked, I have yet to hear of a real life example that holds water when critically analyzed. More often than not these cases involve an owner who mistakenly believes that shocking the dog is an easy magic bullet solution and who is therefore not willing to use other management and training alternatives that would in fact work and solve the problem. Therefore in practice I agree with Dr. Karen Overall that there is rarely sufficient reason to shock a dog for training or treatment.

This is especially true for reactive and aggressive dogs. Punishment is counter-productive when dealing with problems of reactivity or aggression. WHY—

1. Punishment increases stress.  Any increase in stress will generally tend to make the dog more rather than less aggressive.

2. Punishment can create a negative association in the dog's mind between the punishment and the object of the dog's fear/aggression.

3. By suppressing outward signs of reactivity without changing the underlying emotional state, punishment can produce a dog that strikes without warning.

4. It is very important for the dog to feel safe in the owner's presence.

And what about Electronic Invisible Fence Systems? This is what you won't hear from those who manufacture and sell IF Systems:

1. An E Fence won't keep your dog safe from other dogs that may wander onto your property.

2. An E fence won't keep your dog safe from predators such as coyotes.

3. An E fence won't keep your dog out of sight or safe from potential human thieves.

4. An E fence won't protect your dog from passersby who may decide to tease or torment the dog.

5. An E fence won't keep your dog from attacking other dogs, cats, or children who may wander onto your property.

6. Some dogs are willing to take the shock to jump the fence; determining an effective level of shock requires a trial and error process that can cause undue stress and pain for the dog.

7. The system can malfunction and if that happens, it can cause severe pain and injury to the dog.

Given these drawbacks, an E fence system should be a choice of last resort, and is never an appropriate choice for reactive/aggressive dogs.

I decided to add this page after one of my clients brought his dog to me for help with aggression problems that developed following trying to train the dog with a shock collar.  During our first session my client remarked that most of his buddies “really fry their dogs.”  So, this page is dedicated to all the dogs out there who are getting fried even as you read this.

Beverly Hebert

Holly's Den

monty@hollysden.com

"Behavior Modification Training Guide for Reactive and Aggressive Dogs"

 http://www.hollysden.com/aggression_guide.htm

Statement by Karen Overall M.A., V.M.D., PhD,  Diplomate, American College of Veterinary Behavior

author of Clinical Behavioral Medicine for Small Animals

Use of Shock Collars-Tue Dec 6, 2005

There is never any reason for pets to be shocked as a part of therapy or treatment…There are now terrific scientific and research data that show the harm that shock collars can do behaviorally.  At the July 2005 International Veterinary Behavior Meeting, held in conjunction with the AVSAB and ACVB research meetings, data were presented by E. Schalke, J. Stichnoth, and R. Jones-Baade that documented these damaging effects (Stress symptoms caused by the use of electric training collars on dogs  (Canis familiaris) in everyday life situations.  Current Issues and Research  in Veterinary Behavioral Medicine, Papers presented at the 5^th Int’l IVBM. Purdue University Press, 2005:139-145.  [ISBN 987-1-55752-409-5; 1-558753-409- 8]).

This follows on the excellent work done by Dutch researchers, in cooperation with their working dog groups and trainers, that showed that working / patrol dogs were adversely affected by their ‘training’ with shock, long after the shock occurred (Schilder MBH, van der Borg JAM.  Training dogs with the help of the shock collar: short and long term behavioural effects.  Applied Animal Behaviour Science  2003;85:319-334).

Research meetings can be attended by anyone paying the fee, and most published work is available either in the public domain, from an organization, or from someone with a university library connection. 

There is no longer a reason for people to remain misinformed.  Let me make my opinion perfectly clear:  Shock is not training - in the vast majority of cases it meets the criteria for abuse.  In my patient population, dogs who have been ‘treated’ with shock have a much higher risk of an undesirable outcome (e.g., euthanasia) than dogs not subjected to shock, and I never recommend euthanasia.  In all situations where shock has been used there is some damage done, even if we cannot easily see it.  No pet owner needs to use this technique to achieve their goal. Dogs who cease to exhibit a problem behavior usually also cease to exhibit normal behaviors.  The only data available support the idea that shock is neither an effective nor suitable training tool.

That said, it’s time we replaced everyone’s personal mythologies and opinions with data and scientific thinking.  Such opportunities are now available, but are often not exploited.

For example, the statement: “ Major veterinary universities have tested E- collars since the mid 60’s when they were invented. No evidence of any damage, Physiological or psychological has ever been found.” is patently and wholly false.  For the evidence re: data - see above.  As for the initial statement - it’s WRONG.  It’s a MYTH. The specialty college (ACVB) even conducted a census a few years ago to see if we could find ANY truth to this and there was NONE.  We couldn’t get anyone to say that they had - or knew someone who had  - participated in such tests and studies. This pattern of behavioral  repetition is representative of the danger of myth, and also of the power of the scientific method.  Science tells you when you are wrong.  Myth allows you to steal credibility where none is earned.  That particular myth has damaged universities too long, and it has traded on the reputations of people who neither endorsed that decision, nor supported the finding, and it must stop…I have never thought we could get via electricity what we couldn’t get by advanced training and hard work. --Dr. Karen Overall

Return to Table of Contents

From the Horse’s Mouth

An Informal Interview With a Trainer Experienced with the Use of Electronic Remote/Shock Collars

 BH: Many shock collar trainers claim that they can use a stimulation setting/level on the transmitter that does not cause the dog any discomfort.  How does the trainer determine that the level of stimulation will be punishing enough to be effective without going too far and causing the dog undue pain?

Other Trainer: You GUESS! And you may be right, or you may have a trembling mass of dog urinating and defecating all over himself on the lowest setting. Granted, most times you will come pretty close…we don't talk about the times where you guess completely wrong. The softer the dogs, the more likely the chance they will be extremely sensitive…And guess what a truly dominant dog may do?  He knows where the leash pops come from - he knows where that other (shock) pain came from. I have seen it a couple of times that the dog whirled around to teach that human a lesson. In a group setting, another dog who just happens to be on the around may get the blame. You don't KNOW until you press the button. It is an educated guess, nothing more.

BH: How does the shock collar trainer avoid negative fall out from stressing the dog during this trial and error process of determining the optimal setting?

Other Trainer: Well, you pray and hope for the best before you try it for the first time. To be on the safe side you start a bit lower than you think you need to, and you have to keep the environment in mind. You can't avoid fall-out as long as you don't control 100% of your environment and even then you might run into that one ultra-sensitive dog.  You can minimize the potential for a wrong association, (what the shocked dog learns to fear/avoid) but you can't avoid it completely.  In a lab you control the environment. In life you don't. And this is where zapping can backfire.  That stranger or other dog or whatever is already a perceived bad thing. Now you add real physical pain to the mix and all the dog learns is to avoid and not to express his emotional state. One way to create a time bomb.

BH: Some E collar trainers tout their method as the best way to teach dogs basic obedience behaviors such as walking without pulling on leash.  Would you recommend using a shock collar to teach loose leash walking?

Other Trainer:  Having used the E-collar for avoidance training, (training dogs to shun snakes or not to chase cats or deer) which has more than enough potential pitfalls, the issue of loose leash walking is just not a big enough problem for me to be willing to deal with a much more complex can of worms…such as the clients being on their own to use it whenever and however they may see fit. I have to rely on them to take it off to prevent sores, to follow instructions so the dog does not become collar smart. 

BH:  OK, so what about the claims these trainers make that they can cure predatory chasing of other animals with the remote/shock collar?

Other Trainer: They don't cure poop. They just hope to put a strong enough lid on it. Like avoidance training might hold only so long when temptation and desire build up and then you need to refresh the pain and fear so they can override the desire to hunt...

Done properly, the dog will not become collar smart. That is always shitty work. If you have a collar smart dog you can make the e-collar a lifelong companion, give it enough time for the dog to forget, combine the collar with something else when that new piece of equipment (harness) is not being used, the dog thinks he is safe.  How the owner maintains control depends on the owner. Do they refresh at the very first hints that the dog is merely thinking about it or do they wait till the bad behavior is in full bloom? If they see it early, usually one session will put the lid back on.

If it was true that shock could CURE it, then any other means of physical punishment would also cure it. But it doesn’t. Can't, since you are only dealing with the outward symptoms and not the inner motivation. For a soft dog with less conflict/stress it may last a lifetime and seem a CURE, but in reality it is only a question of time and circumstances… I bet at that point the dog will be even more stressed because he is most likely to anticipate the shock. If you have a toothache and take strong enough drugs the pain will go away. Cure?  Marketing. Nothing but marketing. The modern human wants everything right now, without effort, with guaranteed results and preferably cheap. Fast food, weight loss, dog training. The modern human does not want the inconvenience of changing habits and lifestyles (even if temporary), does not want the inconvenience of investing time into weeks of training (how many drop out of an 8 week class?), the inconvenience of understanding basic dog behavior and basic learning theory. Smart marketing sells people what they want. It is primarily about selling.

BH:  Have you ever seen that being shocked actually increase the subject dog’s aggression toward other animals?

Other Trainer: Oddly, I have never experienced increased aggression towards cat, deer, sheep etc.  Strong avoidance yes. Increased aggression towards other dogs and humans I have seen numerous times. 

BH:  One shock collar trainer said that if she got a call about a German Shepherd that had just killed a cat, she sure wouldn’t show up with a clicker.  So, what happens when instead this trainer shows up with her shock collar?  

Other Trainer: I prefer my skin without additional holes and I would not bring my E-collar to the first appointment one way or another. I'd bring lots of paper, treats and a clicker just to evaluate the dog and create a relaxed atmosphere before I decide on anything. I think it is more than stupid and arrogant to walk in on your first appointment with cat blood still wet on the dog's muzzle, strap on the E-collar and go happily zapping away. It is plain unprofessional and just as dumb as her clicker example.  I hope she has enough insurance because sooner or later she will need it.

BH: One of the toughest things I face in working with dog- aggressive dogs is helping the owners figure out ways they can get their dog around other dogs in controlled situations to do the counter-conditioning/desensitizing work, while avoiding letting their dog practice aggressive behavior in uncontrolled situations...So... wouldn’t shock collar trainers also need to practice repeat set ups, just as I do,  in order to be sure that the dog’s avoidance response generalizes to more than one particular animal and situation?

Other Trainer:  Most likely.  One dog I worked using an E-collar on a cat killing issue had to go through several different looking cats before he was able to draw the conclusion that ALL cats are dangerous!   Plus you most likely need different locations. Like working “Sit” only in your kitchen doesn't help in Petsmart…I have used it for avoidance training on the highest setting--I never had complete success after one session.  Notice some people never leave the house without the E collar on the dog--Ah - you see that is exactly why they all claim they can fix it in one session.

BH: Yet the entire case that remote/shock collar proponents make for this training method/tool is based upon its supposed speediness, effectiveness and ease compared to positive training approaches!

Other Trainer: True, but do you really expect truth in advertising?  Isn’t plastic surgery easy, virtually pain free, with no complications or side effects, no risk of death or permanent disfigurement - and thousands of people are more than eager to part with their money. 

Statement on Training Dogs With Shock Collars by Cathy Toft, APDT #63420

I thought it might be helpful to discussions of shock collars to share with the group here that I trained for 2 years with Jim Dobbs who helped Tritonics to develop and test its shock collars. Before everyone recoils in shock (no pun intended) this was back in 1995. I had just been introduced to dog training and was horrified and dismayed at what I thought was stupid, illogical anthropomorphisms of traditional dog training.  When I tried to train my dogs to herd sheep, that was the last straw.  In my introduction to dog training, I was told to choke, hang, yell at, hit, and throw objects at my dog to train her.  There had to be a better way.  

I chose to train with the best trainer I could find because I knew what a potentially powerful method a shock collar is and how much damage it could do if you didn’t know what you were doing. I doubt that most people would be fortunate enough to have one of the best e-collar trainers arguably in the world only a few miles away and spend the effort I spent to learn from him.  By the way, I took much of what he taught me about dog training in general into my R+ (positive reinforcement) only training and depend on it to this day.  But my point here is that I learned from the best how to use P+ (positive punishment) and R- (negative reinforcement)  as  training tools. 

In a nutshell, if P+ were the only way to train a dog, I became of the opinion that a shock collar was the least objectionable P+ method. That's why I learned to use one.   If a shock collar is used correctly, it seemed far less inhumane than those other ways and far more effective, which was part of being less inhumane--the punishment (pain, fear) was brief, precise, and impersonal--it was precise in the sense of being precisely timed and precisely calibrated to the dog's pain threshold.

I abandoned that approach when I was introduced to the clicker two years later, because I found that method of training just as precise, far more humane, and when correctly used, far more effective.  Although *Bob Bailey states that he does rarely use punishment to train an animal, as I explain below, P+ is not a tool I would ever plan to use as the foundation of my training. 

What I took away from what I learned about training gun dogs and herding dogs is interesting in hindsight.  What I learned is that the shock collar works best (least bad) for dogs bred to have high pain thresholds and trained for instinctive work for which they have a strong drive, i.e., herding and hunting.  The dogs are willing to work through pain to do the work itself, which is highly reinforcing.  The shock collar works far less well or not at all for obedience and agility respectively.  The dogs that do best with shock collar training are those that figure out they can keep the collar from going on (i.e. trainer is skilled and timing is perfect).

With that hindsight and first hand experience, I can now look back at training with a shock collar, like your anonymous trainer, and say the following:

1.  When used correctly, shock collars are probably the least inhumane way to train with P+ as your foundation modality.

2. To learn to use a shock collar correctly is not easy.  It requires finding an expert to learn from and many months of learning how to use it.

3.  Therefore JQP cannot be trusted to use a shock collar correctly ever, and thus it is a cruel tool to place in the hands of the ignorant.

4.  If a person does know how to use a shock collar correctly, I would argue that even the most skilled trainer should never use it as a foundation training tool. Why?  Because no matter what your skill or modality of training, trainer error is part-and-parcel of training.  It's not that you're always a bad trainer...it's because training an animal always involves the unexpected and the unpredictable.  You need to read an animal absolutely correctly every time, you must think rapidly/instantly on your feet, you must always have a plan for whatever arises, and you must always have perfect timing.  These conditions make avoiding trainer error impossible   Bob Bailey has some comments about what method is "forgiving" but I'll just say here that if you are going to make regular training errors, using P+ ensures that your training will fail to produce reliable behavior far more than will training exclusively with R+. 

5.  On that note, P+ training of all kinds produces stress in animals (including humans). Individuals under stress at the very least cannot learn optimally.   Yes, all learning is stressful for dogs, even that induced with R+, but the level of stress and the quality of stress is quite different with shock collars.  Dogs being trained with a shock collar can become very shut down   I've seen them shake with fear.  Bob Bailey has distilled this problem for trainers with his usual brilliant simplicity and insight:   it's Pavlov on one shoulder, Skinner on the other. (You can hear more about this in his new DVD).  He says that if an animal is concerned about its very survival, it cannot learn.  We also refer to that as a dog being in a limbic state.  Shock collars alone are able to put dogs into limbic states, and in that state they are unable to learn with operant conditioning (in this case, the R- quadrant).

Therefore, I concluded that no matter what my level of skill in using a shock collar, and no matter how improved that method was over old fashioned jerking, hanging, yelling, shaking and hitting, any training using P+ is ultimately inhumane and ineffective if P+ and R- are your foundation modalities.  Bailey says that, although he uses P+ rarely, this is a method one never puts in the hands of a novice trainer.  P+ must be used only by the most skilled trainers and even then rarely, not as a foundation tool. 

For these reasons, because shock collars have the potential to inflict far more pain and fear in the hands of the ignorant and the ill-willed, the shock collar is even more cruel than the usual methods of traditional dog training when used by the vast majority of people. 

If my own experience in training with shock collars (back in the bad old day of traditional dog training) gives me any additional credibility, I think I have an obligation to use my experience and knowledge to ban their use by the public and average pet owners and dog trainers.

The following posts originally appeared on dog trainer discussion email lists and are reprinted here with permission of the authors:

A couple I know down the street just gave their 14 month old GSD to a guy (recommended by their vet!!!) for one week 1(former canine officer who purported to use "positive training" and "training to suit the dog's personality."). The dog came back "trained" for $950 plus a nice new electronic shock collar. Apparently, the owners were so "wowed" by the off-leash heeling past other dogs, cats, people etc. that they forgave the use of the collar! Since returning, the dog has attacked each of my dogs on two separate occasions and now has developed a full-blown people aggression problem - all those shocks while he looked at ME walking the dogs by and reacted. You can hear his yelps from one block to the next when he reacts, and then gets shocked because he won't and can't listen to their requests to quiet.

Lisa Signorelli

Providence, RI

I am Jan's Engineer she mentioned in a previous post.  "Ground" refers to the return path for the electricity. We normally diagram circuits as if the electricity originates through the Positive terminal, then through the wire to the load, then returns through the ground wire to the negative terminal. This works for flashlights, dog collars, Budweiser signs, and Nuclear power plants. Electricity flows through a circuit to accomplish the task that we

request of it.   Shock collars use the dog's skin for part of the circuit.

In the collars, there are two terminals that contact the animal's skin.  When the circuit is activated, One terminal is energized.  The "load" is the animal's flesh, and the other terminal provides the ground: return path.  Note that even though the two terminals on the collar are only a few centimeters apart, the electricity follows the path of least resistance.  If the skin is dry and nonconductive, the voltage in the collar is high enough so that the electricity can

spark through the skin into moist, conductive tissue underneath. This tissue is full of nerve endings and quite sensitive.   Repetitive zaps in the same place can leave a burn, although the damage from an individual zap is quite small, but real.  When I tried the anti-barking shock collar, it left darkened patches on my skin where the electrodes had been in contact....and it hurt. I am heckuva bigger energy absorber than a bichon. 

Jim Casey

Return to Table of Contents

“What Timmy Never Did to Lassie” and "In Search of Soulful Coherence"

These are the titles of Chapters 17 and 18 in Bones Would Rain From the Sky by Suzanne Clothier. who has given me permission to talk about these chapters provided that I clearly identify her as  "a trainer who believes that shock collars can be used in a humane fashion on the very rare occasions for which they are truly appropriate."  Suzanne further describes herself as "Long a champion of balanced, fair and kind training,"  She summed up the result of our brief email exchanges by saying: "I think we agree on some major points here, and disagree on others."

In spite of our disagreements, if I could, I would make Suzanne's book required reading for all dog trainers and dog owners, especially chapters 17 & 18.  So, although I can't duplicate Suzanne's moving prose without violating copyrights, or begin to do justice to the complexity of thought and feeling contained in these pages, here is a very brief synopsis, including a few quotes, of some of what was contained in those chapters that made such an unforgettable impression on my own mind and heart:

See the Dog

1. The late Vicki Hearne was a dog trainer, author, professor and poet who (like Suzanne Clothier) had a God-given talent for painting word pictures, and used it to write a well received book describing her training interactions with her dog Salty.  These interactions included witty descriptions of how she responded to Salty's love of digging holes by filling the holes with water and holding Salty's head under the water.  Suzanne both quotes and paraphrases some of Hearne's descriptions--then goes on to offer a series of probing comments and questions:

If a child did something like this, might we not see that as a red flag that the child needed professional help? What happens on our journey from childhood to adulthood that changes us from children who were taught to be gentle and kind to our dogs, into men and women willing to tolerate violence, unable to recognize cruelty when we see it with our own eyes?  At what point did we put on blinders and stop being able to "See the dog?"

Philosophy Vs. Practice:  There is a a profound incongruence in dog training circles between the philosophy of kind treatment that gets so much lip service versus what is accepted and justified in practice --choking, hitting, jerking, pinching, dragging, gagging, biting--(obviously, I would add, shocking dogs to this list). SC points out that traditionally dogs with enough spirit to resist such treatment have only earned much harsher punishments that may even include hanging/helicoptering --a technique that can result in serious injury or death.

"In our minds, we can pity Black Beauty Beauty, be moved to tears by the poetry in a dog's soul, and yet still ask the question, 'How hard do you hit the dog'?"

"Add a catchy phrase and a cute gimmick and no will notice the dog's ears flattening on his head in apprehension...smile and chuckle while snapping the dog's collar harshly, drop some celebrity names, and maybe quote a philosopher, and it's a safe bet no one will notice the dog's tail wagging anxiously between his thighs...the emperor not only has new clothes, he may also be working on a new career as a dog trainer."

2.The Influence of Authority Figures: This section recounts the results of a famous  psychological study conducted by Stanley Milgram to test the willingness of the human subjects, students at Yale University, to follow orders to inflict an increasing level of pain on others.

The student subjects who were actually being studied were (falsely) told that they were participating in an experiment about the effects of punishment on memory and learning.

Their assigned job was to deliver an electric shock for any wrong answers by one of the people in the other group during sessions in which they believed these others were having their memories tested; unknown to them, the people in this second group were actually actors.

What made this study famous were the unexpected results: More than 60% of the Yale students were willing to follow the directions of the scientist they believed to be in charge, and to keep increasing the level of shock they delivered to the people in the other group--up to 450 volts -- in spite of what they believed to be the real "protests, pleas and screams" from their victims!   Even more chilling was that the results of this study were subsequently repeated and upheld in several follow up studies.  Although there was a rather wide spectrum of feelings displayed by the shockers, from minimal concern to great anxiety and weeping about the fate of those being shocked, apparently very few possessed the integrity and inner resources to defy authority.

3. Dealing with Guilt and Following Our Own Inner Lights: And finally, words of comfort for those of us with our own regrets about the past and how we can seek and find our own better selves.

"The moment we begin to look at our past using a light we acquired only recently, things get distorted.  We can only accept responsibility for what we know; it is unfair to look back and assign our then-unknowing selves responsibility for what we did not understand...but we are deeply accountable for what we do know...the line between knowing and not knowing looks sharp and crisp only from a distance...up close there is a blurring that occurs...not yet a knowing but more a prickling in the soul...seek these pricklings, hunt for them, coax them out of hiding, do not fear these but honor them."

Return to Table of Contents

The Use of Shock Collars in the Training of Humans

Shock Collars as Used in Competition Obedience: Some competition obedience trainers use shock collar training to perfect their dogs’ performance.  To avoid having the dog learn to be “collar smart” they always pair the E-collar (in practice) with whatever collar they are going to use in competition—that way the dog will assume that the competition collar is the one that is doing the zapping. Dogs test the prong like some horses test an electric fence… that's when you don't have a trained dog--you have the illusion of one, says Gitta Vaughn.. who suggests that a better quicker way to reach those performance goals would be to start with the E collar on the owner/handler. This short piece of satire (below) on  is dedicated to all the competition trainers who shock their dogs to get better ring scores.

Shock Training for Humans

By Gitta Vaughn

If the E-collar is such a miracle tool in creating reliability and flawlessness - then why don't we use it to train humans?  Maybe we could speed up the training process if we used two collars, one for the dog, and one for owner/trainer to zap them for their handling errors until they are perfect as a team!  You might be able to cure the owner's mistakes in one setting!  What about sports coaches… they could certainly improve performance with the use well-timed electric stimulations. But why stop there? There are so many professions where we would want perfection. Do you really want to get on an airplane with a pilot who has not been trained to be absolutely reliable? Or have a surgeon cut on your anatomy with the lack of final proofing with electric shock?  Bus drivers, police officers, paramedics--the list is endless. Just make sure you sell it as stimulating e-touch feedback communication.  Put a trademark on it and on off you go!  Somehow I suspect if it wasn't theoretical for the humans involved, there would be far fewer converts so eager anymore to subject their dogs to some meaningful communication.

Trainer and Husband Try Out Shock Collar

Hi,  I am Angelica Steinker. Dog trainer and agility obsessed. :-)

I thought I would tell this story: I bought an old shock collar from a client who used it to "fix" her dog aggressive dog. It did not "work." So we traded because I really wanted to shock myself to see how much it hurts and so on. The shock collar is an expensive model. I forgot the brand. Anyway, I put it on one and shocked myself. Mild discomfort. Nothing I would be willing to subject my dog to but nothing horrible. On two it hurt so much I wimpped out from turning it up any higher. It goes to 9.

After the level two shock my arm continued to twitch even though the shock was no longer turned on. That was interesting and made me wonder about the "correction" being timed properly.

Next my husband shocked himself. My husband is a "normal" person he loves the dogs but is not obsessed. He does not know much about dog training and he never works our dogs. On level one he felt almost nothing. Two was mildly uncomfortable on three he said, "people are sick as hell."

angelica

Angelica Steinker

Courteous Canine, Inc. Dog School

Lutz, FL

Shock Collar Abuse and Accident -Trainer's Eye Witness Account

A local trainer was doing shock collar demos at a pet expo where my club was doing clicker and agility demos. She was using her 5 month old Jack Russell Terrier (JRT) as the demo dog.

The puppy got out of her crate when this trainer left her booth, and ran loose around the expo.  A friend of mine caught the puppy and was carrying it around looking for the trainer.  My friend noticed that the puppy shook hard in her arms intermittently. my friend then noticed that when the puppy shook, the red light on her collar was on. The trainer was trying to find her puppy by shocking it as a cue to recall.

The next year, at the same pet expo, we had another shock training demo. after the demo, the trainer was taking his two GSD's outside and the collar broke on one of them. the entire audience saw this happen.

The collar was burning the dog and would not turn off. the dog was screaming at the top of its lungs and bolted for the open exit door. The trainer was shouting at him to SIT! SIT! while he was trying to turn off the collar with his remote, and he couldn’t turn it off. The dog was screaming and running. and the other German Shepherd was in a total panic because he was off leash and was trying to stay in heel position with the trainer who was running after the other dog. This trainer had walked his dogs all around the expo off-leash and would shock them if they got out of position.  Finally the trainer caught up to the screaming dog and grabbed the collar and literally ripped it off the dog's neck while continuing to  yell SIT!

I realized I was crying and holding my Sheltie/Border collie/Jack Russell Snap, who only weighs 20 pounds, really tight against my chest as if to protect him. and I yelled really loud, "I guess electricity doesn't always work to train dogs! That's a shock!"  A bunch of people laughed.

Later I was mortified that I lost it and behaved unprofessionally. But the image of those two Shepherds is burned into my mind, many months later. my heart is beating faster as I relive this, actually.

Leslie McDevitt

Erdenheim PA

E Collars and Snake-Breaking

Trainer # 1:  "An e-collar is the only method I've ever seen that reliably teaches a dog to avoid snakes."

Trainer Gabriella Ravani:   E-collar snake breaking DOES NOT provide magical lifesaving results!   I know personally of 3 cases where it failed.   In fact, in 2 of the 3 failures -- it failed miserably.

Case #1:   A friend in one of my agility classes, who is also a client of my puppy kindergarten classes…took her Jack Russell Terrier to e-collar snake aversion training - one week later, hubby took 2 of their dogs to work with him and let them out to run in a field near his job -- Dottie the JRT was frolicking, yelped,  obviously bitten by rattler and despite an immediate trip to the nearest vet, Dottie died.

Case #2:   An agility student of mine took her JRT to the same e-collar snake aversion training (it was a seminar, the individuals in Case #1 & Case #2 are friends and went together).   Her female didn't learn that snakes were dangerous-- instead her dog learned that being in groups of people and their dogs is painful!   This dog is now ruined for agility and can no longer run in agility trials, the park like setting and crowd of people and dogs were too similar to the aversion seminar setting, resulting in a dog who is a shivering wreck on the agility field.    Her owner no longer enters her in trials, which is so sad as the dog still really loves class and is very talented.   Owner is heartbroken as she feels she has damaged her dog for life.

Case #3: Obedience client with a Lab who likes to hike the local trails.   Dog attended the aversion training, freaked out dramatically when zapped (should I say "stimmed" for those who like to pretend electric shocks don't hurt?) for looking at the snake. This dog was traumatized enough at the first station (there are 3 - sight, smell & rattle) and never registered the sound or smell at the following stations (no one knew this, the master "dog reader" never seemed to notice that all learning had stopped with the first shock).   A couple of months later, the client is hiking the canyon trails and her dog starts rooting around the bushes in earnest, she goes to check out what he is so interested in and what does she see not 5 feet away (where the dog was not looking) but a large rattler -- her dog didn't know to avoid the smell and could've easily been bitten if his owner hadn't gone in his direction, seen the snake & gotten them both out of there.   

I live in So Cal where the rattlesnakes are predicted to be worse this year due to our rainy winter.   I review with all of my clients their options (management, training, vaccine) and always mention that THERE IS NO 100% in any training and nothing replaces vigilance around long grass, bushes & brush, a solid recall and a short leash on trails.

Gabriella Ravani

Great Dogs Training & Education

San Diego, CA

Return to Table of Contents

About Invisible Fencing Systems

Trainer 1

I have been doing in-the-home client training for almost 20 years.  I have been doing aggressive behavior cases for about 10 years.  Here are a few of the negative experiences my clients have had with this equipment:

1. Nice Labrador retriever male about 3 years old.  Loved to greet the children as they passed his yard on the way home from school.  He bit a little girl in the face.  In the corner of the yard near the boundary.  After a complete history and observing the dog, it certainly seemed likely that he wanted to be petted by the girl, got shocked and associated the shock with the girl...The family that owned this really nice Lab, loved the way he interacted with their 18 mo. old son.  Lucky they called me in...Dog got to stay alive and in the home.

2. Normal male Viszla adult with housetraining issues--dog refused to go outside after being shocked with this equipment.  Dog was probably put down, because owner did not believe his expensive equipment intended to give his dog more freedom could be causing the problem. Blamed the dog.

3. Normal male Chessy, bout 3 yrs. old, no history of prior aggression, bit the female owner's best female friend.  The owner was using inside boundaries that shocked the dog if he tried to enter rooms that were off limits.  Both owners were doctors with an expensive home on a golf course...husband was worried about liability issues.  Husband and wife would fight over the dog...after many visits and lots of expense, I believe I convinced them not to let the dog outside (where they also had an outside system) without supervision.  Believe they continued to follow my advice and dog got to stay alive and in the home.

My attitude has been that if the owner has this equipment and it has caused no harm, I will not tell them to stop using it.

I would never recommend this equipment because of the risk...We can't always have what we want in life--dogs appearing to run free without adult supervision and still be safe.

Trainer 2

I have seen at least 2 lovely, apparently very stable dogs, end up with serious aggression problems that I believe were totally and solely the result of their confinement in an electronic containment system.  Different owners--one a Golden retriever, the other an Airedale.  We salvaged the Golden; the Airedale was ultimately euthanized.

Pat Miller, CPDT, CDBC
Peaceable Paws, LLC
PO Box 3146
Hagerstown, MD 21741
301-582-9420
www.peaceablepaws.com
Author of "The Power of Positive Dog Training," and "Positive Perspectives"
Member IPDTA, ABMA, IAABC
Member APDT, #1238P, exp 12/06

Trainer 3

Trainer 4

This morning I saw the usual prominent ad in the Houston Chronicle lifestyle section for invisible fences. 

It reminded me of three experiences that people close to me have had with them.

1. The first of these experiences occurred with our next door neighbors during the time we were living in a north Chicago suburb (years before I became a dog trainer).  Our block backed up to a golf course and the next door neighbors whose property adjoined the golf course got a beautiful white Samoyed male pup for Christmas. Rather than choosing a wrought iron fence they installed an invisible fence.  Soon the pup grew into an adolescent and every day we heard him give a yelp/scream as he bounded out of the fence to freedom.  He loved romping on the golf course and sometime ran up and stole balls.  The end of the story is that the dog disappeared and when we asked about him, the neighbors said they had found a home for him with a farmer somewhere.

2. The second experience happened to another family member.  She had an adopted Border collie mix and when they moved to an area in Virginia where most of the yards are fenceless, they installed an invisible fence.  One day a repairman came on their property and the dog gave him a serious bite on the leg.  He called local law enforcement and threatened a law suit.  Of course after that, they knew to confine the dog if they were expecting company, but that didn’t solve the problem of what to do if someone unexpectedly came into their yard while the dog was outside.

3. The third experience happened when my sister-in-law’s very gentle and mellow Great Dane accidentally got out and wandered inside someone’s invisible fence where he was attacked and almost killed by two dogs wearing E collars.  He required both extensive emergency surgery and many weeks of special care before he recovered from his injuries.

These three incidents illustrate very real and obvious problems and risks associated with this type of containment system.   In the Holly’s Den “Behavior Modification Training Guide for Reactive and Aggressive Dogs,” I specifically warn that invisible fences are never an appropriate choice for reactive/aggressive dogs. 

Beverly Hebert

Holly's Den

Return to Table of Contents

Position Statement: UK Association of Pet Dog Trainers

The Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT), the UK's largest professional pet dog training body, is joining the fight to have the use of electric shock collars banned...

The APDT has a very strict code of conduct for its members, ensuring that dogs are trained only in a positive and humane way. Electric shock collars are totally at odds with this code, training dogs using pain and fear...The APDT

acknowledges that there is no behaviour or training problem in dogs that is best dealt with by delivering an electric shock into a dog's neck. All problems are best solved using up-to-date reward-based training methods and responsible dog ownership - following the APDT's motto of "kind, fair and effective". The APDT further recognizes that not only are these collars inhumane, but their use can give rise to far more serious problems than the ones originally being treated - often causing serious aggression or debilitating fearful behaviors...For further information  contact: Carolyn Menteith, APDT Media Officer on 01932 872069

Meanwhile, back in the USA--Mixed Messages from the APDT

The APDT's past president has stated that the APDT, as an educational organization, has neither the right nor the means to police or regulate members.   From a practical standpoint, we all recognize that the APDT has limited enforcement power in private matters, but if the organization uses that as an excuse to refuse to regulate public organizational practices and policies such as the calendar listings, list promotional announcements, conference speakers, and the promotion of pain based methods on the apdt-e-list, etc. then how can it claim to be dedicated to promoting/advocating dog-friendly training? This is analogous to an education organization whose stated mission is to promote child-friendly training or racial tolerance, allowing members who espouse shocking children or using violence against minorities to use the organization to proselytize their viewpoints. A statement that the organization does not necessarily endorse the events or activities on the calendar listings does nothing to absolve an organization of ethical responsibility for providing free marketing/advertising for practices that are abhorrent, and that in this case cause a great many dogs to experience a great deal of pain.  The real suffering of real animals is what makes this issue more than just another philosophical dispute.

To illustrate, here is a short excerpt taken from an article on the web site of Adam Katz in which Katz responds with advice to someone who has started training with an E collar after reading his book:

"Owner Inadvertently Misusing His Electronic Collar"

[DAVID:]  Well, seems the connection was not all there on the test, and after a run out to catch the Frisbee and about half way back Dave says, "Belle sit" and she proceeds on her usual "I can go 10 feet before I actually sit (which is actually a down, but I'll get to that in a second)" and Dave hits the button on the remote, and Belle screams out in pain (seems the connection is much better now), does almost a complete back flip, drops the Frisbee and runs for the door" I let her inside and she heads for the darkest most remote place she can find.

I singled out this particular paragraph because the picture it paints of what Belle must have felt to do “almost a complete back flip”  made a deep impression on my mind.  To read the complete article, use this link: http://www.dogproblems.com/art30.htm

Return to Table of Contents

 Links

No Shock Collar Coalition

http://www.baddogsinc.com/noshockcollarcoalition.html

The Dutch Study

http://www.ust.is/media/ljosmyndir/dyralif/Trainingdogswithshockcollar.pdf

Abstract

Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science

(doi:10.1207/S15327604JAWS0304_6)

Can Aggression in Dogs Be Elicited Through the Use of Electronic Pet Containment Systems?

http://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327604JAWS0304_6;jsessionid=nFup

Pressure Necrosis/Burns from E collar used with Invisible Fence System

http://experts.about.com/q/Ask-Veterinarian-700/Pressure-Necrosis.htm

http://www.greenacreskennel.com/pages/Articles/ART_No_Shock_Collars_Train_with_Your_Brain_Not_Pain.html

From the San Francisco SPCA:

www.sfspca.org/behavior/dog_library/choke.pdf

From the Association of Pet Behavior Counsellors:

http://www.apbc.org.uk/article2.htm

"Short Circuit" , by Candy Kennedy from a series of articles were published in either the Working Border Collie or the American Border Collie Magazine. http://www.abcollie.com/articles/art17.html

*This is a subjective article reflecting the author's personal opinions about why using shock collars to train Border collies is harmful to the individual dog, the relationship between dog and owner, and to the future of the breed.

http://www.ipdta.org/Research%20Findings.html#Shock_Equipment_