The Shocking Truth

A Note From John (2/2010)

We believe in supporting local, regional and national canine organizations - especially if we feel they are promoting responsible dog ownership. Last year the IACP (International Association of Canine Professionals) suspended our membership because of the article below. Their letter of explanation stated that a member, or members, complained that we were unfairly criticizing professional dog trainers who opted to use shock collars in their dog training practices. We named no names and only published the information we uncovered. (Interestingly enough, no complaints were apparently received from gentle leader or clicker/food trainers. We have also written articles on these methods as well.)

The purpose of this article, as with most of the articles on our website, was meant only to educate dog owners. And, while we do not use shock collars, and obviously discourage their use, it will always be up to the individual owners to determine how they want to train their canine companions.

We offer alternative methods and this article as our reason for doing so. We believe in free speech and stand behind this article and the extensive research that went into it. We continue to support those organizations that dedicate themselves to the health and well-being of the beloved canine and who allow us to exercise our right to voice our opinion.

The article below is quite lengthy but worth reading if you are considering sending your dog away for training. I have supplied these quick links so you can jump to each section.

• Contemporary Dog Training
  • Other Current Trends in Dog Training - Certification
  • Web Video Demonstrations
• The Shocking Truth - Facts About Shock Collars
  • Max - Aggression Consult
  • Gracie - Fear Consult
  • Bo - Behavior Consult
  • Coco - Anxiety Consult
• Case Studies
  • Schilder & van der Borg
  • Polsky
  • Schalke et al.
• Malfunction and Injuries
  • Dog Injured by Shock Collar at Dallas Kennel
• Shock Collars Banned
• How You Can Choose the Right Dog Trainer
• Conclusion
• References

Contemporary Dog Training

Copyright 2009, 2010, 2011 - do not use, copy, reproduce or distribute any portion of this article without written permission

Lately I have been witnessing something that in my 20 plus years as a professional dog trainer I have never seen before; an increasing number of socially damaged dogs; young pups, adolescent dogs and even older dogs. I have received more phone calls in the past few years that are so alarming that, at first, I could not determine if it was a problem with over-breeding or just owners waiting too long to train their dogs. Increased aggression, excessive fear-based behaviors and anxiety were popping up in young dogs at such an alarming  rate that I was at a loss to determine the true source. I continue to this day to tackle these tough issues and provide constructive training programs designed to help keep owner and dog together.

I have to admit; as incidences of aggressive dogs becomes more commonplace it becomes even harder to deal with. As I began to dig deeper and ask more questions what I found out was astonishing. The truth became very clear - the growing and prevalent use of shock collar training.

When I first began training dogs, the shock collar (aka e-collar, remote trainer) was considered by professional and layman alike to be tantamount to torture. It was really only used for specific types of training such as field work/retrieving - never obedience. Manufacturers have now created more sophisticated and technologically advanced devices and the swift emergence of "contemporary" dog trainers believe they are no longer harmful. They want to be convinced. They need to use these collars that now shock, or " produce a static pulse stimulation or "aversive stimulus " at varying degrees of intensity and duration".

That is their spin - this is my experience: It appears that learning more in-depth knowledge of canine psychology, communication and natural instincts is just too much work for today's new dog trainer. Perhaps the education process itself might take too long for them to make a living. Just like everything else that has evolved within in our society during the last few decades, the focus in dog training is now geared toward  "faster", "instant" and "guaranteed quick" results.

I began to hear horror stories from my clients so I began to do some investigating. I found out that, more often-than-not, these clients had sent their dogs away to a canine professional for in-kennel training. They would call a trainer looking for information on dog training programs. The trainer would convince the prospective client that their dog would be better and more quickly trained at their boarding facility. What many clients were not told was that the training of their dog would involve the use of electronic shock collars.

An approach that in-home trainers were utilizing was the "Free Demo" or “Free Consultation” pitch. They would schedule an appointment and they always arrived shock collar in hand anxious to demonstrate it without the client even knowing that was their primary, if not only, method of training.

In my search for answers I wanted to know how many local dog trainers used shock collars. I was amazed to found out that approximately 40% of the dog training professionals in my area not only use electronic shock collars, but used them to the exclusion of all other training methods and equipment. I gathered this information from clients, other trainers who had worked with them and phone calls made directly to the companies themselves. My results are not scientific by any means, but I believe they are accurate enough to share.

Perhaps even more disconcerting to me is that these dog trainers are often being recommended by local veterinarians, rescue organizations and "humane" shelters - all reputable and caring businesses and organizations. I cannot say for sure if any of them even know that they are referring inexperienced trainers using shock devices. I don't even know if they view shock collars as inhumane. What I can say for sure is that caring dog owners want what is best for their dog and often rely on their veterinarian or local shelter's recommendation with the notion that these professionals should know what is best.

It is remarkable to me that the remaining trainers I researched were using methods that were completely opposite of the shock collar - Gentle Leader and/or clicker training with the use of food or toys as a reward. I have my problems with those methods as you might know by now but, I know these "gentler" methods will generally do no harm. Still, I do work with plenty of clients every month who have previously used these trainers and their gentle, reward-based approach but their results were inconsistent.

I always knew that our methods were unique. But, what I never imagined was that they would remain so. I believe that commitment to the profession, the pets and their people, is vital to becoming effective and successful. The problem seems to be that this new “breed” of dog trainer claiming to use “progressive” methods, simply don't commit any time to actually learning about how dogs think and learn.

Could it be that they are just job seekers who figure because they love dogs, or have a passion for animals, that dog training can become their career? The pet industry has been somewhat recession proof. But, it takes so much more to even be just an average dog trainer. Loving children does not make one the best school teacher any more than having a passion for art will turn one into the next Picasso.
Back to Top

Other Current Trends in Training - Certification

The huge push lately is to look for a "certified" dog trainer.  However, an important thing to know is that the organizations that certify dog trainers will supply a certificate and title to any trainer who provides the requested materials* and fees**. Rarely,  in-person testing is performed and no proof of experience, education, background or criminal record is requested.

While most of these organizations say that they require continued education and training be acquired, there is just no way for them to govern it. Also, these organizations cannot monitor business or customer handling. What is most alarming to me is that should a trainer use inhumane methods, abuse dog's in their care, or not use due diligence with regard to the safety and supervision of their clients or dogs, they will still be a certified dog trainer. There is no inspection, monitoring or governing body that can discipline trainers or revoke their certification. So, unless the client knows which organization to complain to, abusive trainers will remain certified.

*Requested Materials - Most organizations offering dog trainer certification require the prospect to fill-out a questionnaire, or complete a written test, and supply a 15 to 45 minute VHS tape of them teaching a class or performing a training session.  Yes, I said VHS Tape. **Fee - Fees range anywhere from $45.00 to $150.00 annually. A few require an initial non-refundable processing fee.

Once these materials are received, they are reviewed by "examiners" who will decide, based upon the answers and viewing the trainer via VHS tape, if the trainer is deemed competent enough to be certified. These examiners are themselves members or principles of these organizations so it would be anyone's guess as to their own experience and level of expertise.

What this means to you is that you might be hiring a certified dog trainer who uses methods that can cause permanent injury to your dog. Certification does not guarantee your trainer has education or experience nor does it assure competency or trustworthiness. So my question is; what does certification promise or guarantee the client?

These organizations state in their policies that other certified trainers are not allowed to take a stance against another trainer's methods or use of training device. This is one of many reasons we will not seek certification until it is mandated by a local or state agency. My right to express my opinion is not allowed to be exercised if I want to be certified by these organizations. The fact that I am writing this article would give them reason to revoke my certification.

Experience, as well as the number of satisfied clients, are the best indicators of a well-educated and knowledgeable trainer. Your gut instincts are vital to the selection process as well. Titles and certification might seem impressive at first glance, but they are rarely a true gauge of the trainer’s successes and dependability.

I have always relied on referrals from clients and other pet professionals to confirm my qualifications. It is absolute, first-hand knowledge of who I am as a trainer, a person and a professional. The titles I have achieved would be helpful in your decision to use my services if you desire to achieve the same, but they truly don't offer much more than that.

As a matter of disclosure, I am currently a "member" of a few of these organizations, as are my employees. We pay the same fee the certified pet dog trainers do we just do not get to use the title CPDT. I pay my annual fees with the hope that financially supporting these organizations might one day lead to a true and meaningful certification process.

Back to Top

Web Video Demonstrations 

The dog training demo video is the latest fad. I am not sure how others see them but I believe they are quite educational if you look at them from a professional trainer's point-of-view. Every e-collar trainer tells you the dog is being trained on the lowest level. The extremely well-trained, responsive dogs they are showing in the video might very well be shocked at the lowest level now, but I assure you they were not during their initial training.

 The dogs are extremely driven by what is in the trainer's hand - almost to the point of obsession. They also tell you a dog does not feel pain the same way we humans do. The selling point is that the dog is not experiencing pain because they are only feeling a "vibration", "push" or "tap". I wonder how they could possibly know that since there is absolutely no scientific evidence to support that statement and yet so many believe them.

I want to mention too that every dog in every video is wearing a shock collar. Even though these trainers are exhibiting well-trained dogs, the training device is still on. Does this imply the dog will always be aware that a shock is imminent? If they fail a task will they be punished with a painful shock?

By the way, if you look up shock collar videos you will inevitably see dozens of them featuring young human males trying out shock collars on themselves, and on various parts of their bodies. While I don't recommend trying this, if you do view one or two you will definitely see how much pain shock collars cause -  even on the lowest settings.

Back to Top

The Shocking Truth - Facts About Shock Collars

I feel it is not sufficient for me to just merely point out the obvious. Shock collars are designed to cause pain and therefore compliance through pain; commonly described as "getting the dogs attention". And while many detractors simply use the term "inhumane", I won't. That portrayal does not say enough. Instead, I feel it is better for me to share my many years of experience in dealing with the results of the use of shock collars. I decided it was best for me to provide you with the outcome of a few of the hundreds of actual cases I have personally witnessed which have resulted in physical, psychological and social harm.

A beloved pet that has been ill-treated either psychologically or socially by the use of shock collar training is often subsequently lost to a shelter, a rescue or euthanasia. I have helped too many clients make the unfortunate decision of having to euthanize their beloved dog, or give the dog back to the breeder only to spend the rest of its life confined for its own safety or that of others.

There are financial consequences as well. Choosing the perfect companion dog these days can be a significant investment. Vet bills for health and wellness is on the rise and training fees can be lofty depending on the method you choose. I have found with most of the “board-and-train” facilities that the fees are often in the thousands; my research found the range to be approximately $2,000.00 to $10,000.00 depending on the specific program and length of training.

Although I could fill pages with stories of affected dogs and clients I have worked with, I will cite only a small sampling of actual cases. Client names will not be included and the dog’s names have been changed. To see it memorialized can be painful to the client and we continue to respect the confidentiality of all our clients.

Back to Top

Max - Aggression Consult

Max and his sister Millie were sent, at the tender age of 16 weeks, to a kennel facility for obedience training. Their owners were expecting a baby and wanted the dogs to be perfect once the baby arrived. After 6 weeks of in-kennel training the dogs (really still puppies) came home. The owners immediately noticed their behavior was not quite right. Neither dog seemed playful any longer and both seemed to be exhibiting different levels of anxiety. They consistently had tucked tails and pinned-back ears. Max was very aggressive especially around food.

He was particularly aggressive on-leash, around toys and with strangers as well. I asked the owners who the trainer was. I knew the trainer used shock collar methods so I asked them if they had been told that this type of training device might/would be used. They said they had never been informed. I asked them to show me what training collars the dogs came home with. Both had been supplied with prong collars. I considered putting the collars on the dogs but, not only were they of inferior quality, they were both so tight that the putting them on the dogs was not possible - not to mention it would be cruel to put cheap, painful training collars on these two wonderful pets.

Notes: I have worked with countless numbers of clients who had originally worked with this trainer/kennel facility. Except for this couple, all were aware, or had been made aware, that shock collars were used in the training of their pets. All have had some issues with mild to severe aggression or mild to severe anxiety. Interestingly enough, when we conducted our survey, we asked this trainer what type of training collars they used and their answers are below.

Taken from our surveyor's notes (unedited):

• Uses choke chains
• Positive reinforcements
• Only in EXTREME cases will they use shock collars, but that's not their method of training

It appears the trainer withheld or altered information as they stated they used choke chains yet both dogs came home with prong collars. Due to the observed behavior and body language these dogs were exhibiting, it is unlikely that positive reinforcement was really used in their training. Neither dog appeared confident and both dogs exhibited anxiety. These dogs were only 16 weeks old so it is hard to believe they could have been considered an "EXTREME case".

Several months prior to us working with Max and Millie, one of our trainers worked with a couple who had two older dogs who had been rescued from a local organization. I was present at the first session. The male was extremely aggressive to the point where even the owners were nervous handling him. He was wearing a remote e-collar that had been supplied to them by the previous trainer - the same trainer who had trained Max and Millie.

The first thing I recommended of course was to immediately remove the shock collar. He was instantly better. When placed back on a regular collar and leash, he became agitated and what is considered “leash aggressive” - another possible behavior exhibited by dogs trained using remote e-collars. The female was not aggressive but was extremely skittish and demonstrated a very low level of confidence. Although we continued to work diligently with them, the male only showed moderate improvement; he was truly damaged. The female did much better.

Back to Top

Gracie - Fear Consult

Gracie is a sweet dog but a breed that is very lively and energetic. The owner called a trainer to help her work with her "rambunctiousness". She was just looking for some basic obedience training so that Gracie would be better behaved around her small children.

The trainer came to her home to do a “Free Consultation”. He immediately showed the owner a remote electronic training collar that he claimed would help her control the dog off leash. The client was apprehensive and because of this he placed the collar on her arm and, at the lowest setting, activated the collar. He told her that this is all the dog would feel. She felt the stimulation was unpleasant but not necessarily painful and agreed to have him use the collar on Gracie.

As promised he started with the lowest setting to which Gracie had no response and continued behaving as she normally did. He continued to increase the "stimulation" until she did respond. Her owner told me that he went to such a level that Gracie screeched in pain, urinated and ran away. She reacted fearfully so quickly thereafter that the owner ordered him to remove the collar and leave.

When I began working with Gracie, using the leash and collar, although very apprehensive, she responded easily to my commands and was most responsive to my abundant verbal and physical praise. Her fear-based behaviors will take some time to modify. Our training program will be focused on building her confidence back to the level it was prior to the use of the remote shock collar.

Notes: I have also worked with many of this trainer's prior clients. All experienced the same type of consultation and similar result.

Taken from our surveyor's notes (unedited):

• Doesn't like to use leash training, but will if the owner wants to
• Uses remote shock collar
• Uses it to get dogs attention

These seem to be fairly standard answers from remote e-collar trainers. I stand by the leash law and consider leash training a fundamental must. This helps to educate owners with regard to our leash laws and the safety of their dog. I cannot imagine how this owner would have felt if Gracie had run into the street and been hit by a car.

 Back to Top

Bo - Behavior Consult

Bo was a 5 month-old female German Shepherd Dog when she was sent off for in-kennel training for 4 weeks. The owner was told of the use of e-collar training but was assured only low stimulus would be used. The owner noticed severe behavioral changes upon Bo's return and she did not seem like the same dog. When I arrived and greeted Bo, she immediately dropped to the ground and urinated. She did not exhibit any puppy-like behaviors. When I tried to place her buckle collar on her in order to leash her up, she became extremely fear-aggressive.; Although some progress was made with Bo, she never regained the confident behavior that would allow her to be around people and other dogs. After too many incidences the owner had to make the painful decision to put her down.

Although I have worked with many of this trainer’s former clients in the past, I see fewer and fewer these days. I have been made aware that he rarely trains in this area any longer. However, trainers who have worked with/for this person continue to use the same methods and choice of training equipment. A former employee of ours, now associate, apprenticed with his company for a day many years ago and left in tears that day vowing to never return. We did not survey this company due to the information our associate was able to provide to us.

Notes: This associate also informed us of trainers who were working with him at the time. One of his former trainers is someone we surveyed and who continues to use use shock collar. This trainer almost always recommends his in-kennel training program.

 Back to Top

Coco - Anxiety Consult

Coco is a lovely and lively young lab owned by an older couple. Coco pulled so hard on the end of the leash that her owners could not safely walk her. She also, as many pups do, constantly jumped on them and nipped at their hands making it impossible for them to really enjoy her. Their daughter sought the services of a local trainer hoping to get Coco's behavior under control so that her parents could walk her.

The company they called offered “Free Demos” and so an appointment was made. When the trainer arrived she almost immediately pulled out the remote e-collar and told the client it was only used on the lowest setting. She let the customer try it first before placing it on her parent’s dog. The client said she felt just a "tap" and that it was not painful. She then agreed to let the trainer proceed. The client noticed that before the trainer placed the collar on Coco she adjusted the control upwards - then, for no reason shocked her.

The client did not tell me what command was given, or what Coco had done, or not done, to garner a corrective shock. However, the effect was enough that my client asked her to leave. Coco's response to being shocked was so severe it deeply disturbed the clients. She had yelped, flipped onto her back and urinated on herself. You can only imagine how her owners felt.

Notes: One of my trainers has worked with many of this trainer's prior clients. All experienced the same type of consultation and result.

 Taken from our surveyor's notes (unedited):

• Uses electronic remote collars
• Says its not strong and uses it on lowest amount
• Makes the owners try it first so they know what it feels like
• Just uses it to get dogs attention
• Eventually the goal is to have the dog respond to verbal commands

The trainer was truthful with the surveyor to some degree. She never mentioned she would change the setting before placing the collar on the dog. Every client my trainers have worked with who have used this trainer has stated that the level of shock was always increased to the point where their dog yelped.

I saw no permanent damage from the one time use of the remote e-collar. However, Coco, during our first few training sessions, was very apprehensive about having any collar placed around her neck. Her progress was terrific and she is a now wonderful and well- behaved companion.

 Back to Top

Case Studies

The studies below were conducted in Europe. I have only included excerpts here but you can find the full studies by searching the name of the study via the internet. I have also kept printed copies of each.

Schilder & van der Borg Study

Matthijs B.H. Schilder and Joanne A.M. van der Borg studied behavioral effects such as lowering body posture, high pitched yelps, barks, avoidance, redirection aggression and tongue flicking during guard dog training of German shepherds (Schilder & van der Borg 2004). The behaviors of 16 dogs that had been recently trained using shocks (S-dogs) were compared to the behaviors of 15 control dogs that received similar training but were disciplined with fairly harsh methods that did not include electric current. Data was collected only during training sessions and walks in the park during which no shocks were applied in order to study the post-training physiological differences of the two groups. The differences between shocked and control dogs were small but consistent: shocked dogs showed more stress-related behavior than control dogs on the training grounds as well as in the park, shocked dogs connected their handlers with getting shocks, and shocked dogs may connect orders given by their handlers with getting shocked. In the discussion subtitled “Is the welfare of shocked dogs impaired?” Schilder and Borg conclude their comments:

We also have shown that the training itself is stressful for both groups of dogs as compared to walking on the leash. [This] example is one of the many mistakes that were made during protection dog training: the command was followed by a shock so quickly that the dog was not able to prevent a shock. This leads to an unwanted conditioning: the dog has learned that getting a command predicts getting a shock. We hope a future comparison of German shepherd dogs trained in a more friendly way will bear out that indeed a friendly training regime leads to less signals of stress. We have not proved that the long-term welfare of the shocked dogs is hampered, but we have made clear that it is under serious threat (Schilder van der Borg, p. 332).

Proponents of remote collar training argue that this is a small study using the collar in a particularly aversive manner, however dramatic the results may seem. It is not illustrative of the way many remote collar trainers use the tool. However, the study has been influential in affecting the reputation of remote training regardless of the method with which the collar is used.

As recorded in the UK parliamentary record Hansard Rachel Casey and Emily Blackwell, who are both from the department of clinical veterinary science at the University of Bristol, have stated:

Given the wealth of peer reviewed research currently available on the physiological and behavioural effects of aversive stimuli, such as electrical shocks, on a range of different species, as well as the peer reviewed work done on dogs by Schilder et al, Beerda et al and Christiansen et al, we feel that there is a sufficiently robust scientific argument for the banning of the use of electronic shock collars in dog training.

Remote collar trainers who are most on the progressive edge of using e collars were not under consideration in the above case, and would argue that a robust case that does not include using low level stimulation, proper introduction of and training of commands regardless of whether a collar is used or not, and take into account the breadth of flexibility in modern collars is not very robust.

 Back to Top

Polsky Study

Polsky discusses the effect of shock collar-based fencing on the behaviour of dogs, citing five incidents in which dogs exposed to this type of containment then went on to become aggressive (Polsky 2000). The implication was that in each case the dog had received a shock when approaching people in the perimeter zone and were then shocked. As suggested by other research, dogs may make inappropriate associations between shock and other experiences. In all cases, the dog was positioned directly within the signal field and therefore must have received a shock. In all but one case, no threatening action was performed by the victim toward the dog. In all cases, the dogs gave no warning prior to the attack and there was repeated biting of all victims, resulting in serious injuries to head, face, back and neck.

Polsky believes the analyzed cases suggest that these dogs became aggressive because of the electronic containment system. What is not known is the type of training the dog received when introduced to the containment system, if the dogs spent a lot of time outside unsupervised and at what shock level the collars were set. However, this clearly exposes a limitation of this form of pet containment. In all cases, the victims were in or near the signal field and each received several serious bites. Polsky also states "In the absence of more thorough and accurate behavioral histories on each dog, the small sample size, and the specifics of the dogs behavior at the time of the attack, the implication that shock was associated with, or the cause of, the dog's attack remains tenuous".

 Back to Top

Schalke et al. Study

Schalke et al.'s study sought to investigate whether any stress is caused by the use of electric shock collars and in this way to contribute to their evaluation with respect to animal welfare (Schalke et al. 2007).

In this study heart rate and saliva cortisol were used to determine the stress levels in 14 laboratory-bred Beagles. For seven months the dogs were trained daily in three separate experimental groups. Group A (Aversion) received an electric pulse when the dogs touched a rabbit dummy attached to a motion device (the prey). Group H (Here) received the electric pulse when they did not obey a previously trained recall command while hunting. Group R (Random) received the electric pulse randomly, unpredictably and out of context. After the seven months of experimental training, the dogs’ heart rates and cortisol levels were tested in a variety of hunting situations: for the first 5 days the dogs were allowed to hunt unimpeded; for the next 5 days the dogs were impeded by a leash; for the last 7 days the electric training collars were brought back and the dogs were separated into their groups and treated as described previously. The data revealed that Group A did not show a significant rise in salivary cortisol levels, but Groups H and R did show significant increases, with Group R as the greatest increase in salivary cortisol levels. When the Beagles were tested 4 weeks later, the results remained the same. Schalke et al. summarized the conclusion of their study:

This led to the conclusion that animals, which were able to clearly associate the electric stimulus with their action, i.e. touching the prey, and consequently were able to predict and control the stressor, did not show considerable or persistent stress indicators (Schalke et al. 2007, p. 370). The results of the Schalke et al. study are consistent with several of its contemporaries:

This corresponds with the result of the post-test and Polsky’s (1994) statement that a lack of timing and/or electric shock that lasts too long causes a fear of the environment/of people in dogs.

The results are consistent with Feddersen-Petersen and Teutsch (1999) as well as Grauvogl (1991) who found that poor timing i.e. the impossibility to associate electric shock and stimulus leads to insecurity and extreme states of anxiety (Schalke et al. 2007, p. 379). The use of shock collars and their impact on the welfare of dogs:

A review of the current literature Emily Blackwell and Rachel Casey Department of Clinical Veterinary Science University of Bristol (These are excerpts - the full study can be found at: http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/Satellite?blobcol=urlblob&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobtable=RSPCABlob&blobwhere=1138718966544&ssbinary=true)

Unintended associations due to poor trainer timing, or the chance association with another, random, stimulus, occurs as frequently with reward based training as it does with punishment techniques. However, with all avoidance learning, responses are likely to be long lasting and resistant to extinction and counter conditioning compared to positive reinforcement methods (Brush, 1957; Solomon et al., 1953). The difficulty in correcting errors when using aversive methods is significant considering the 4 opportunities for unintended associations, and the potential development of fears for the reasons mentioned above.

A further problem with the use of aversive stimuli, and shock collars in particular, is achieving the optimum level of pain/discomfort to suppress the target behaviour. Starting with a low intensity shock and gradually increasing to find the level required is not effective as animals can habituate to aversive stimuli. To effectively suppress a behaviour, the initial level of punishment needs to be sufficient to suppress the behaviour and avoid immediate reappearance. There are ethical concerns with this approach as there is no way of knowing in advance how intense the initial punishment should be for each individual animal. Given that there is some indication that high levels of stress may influence a dog’s ability to learn (Bodariou, 2005; Walker et al., 1997; Mendl, 1999), any punishment that is too severe may also result in a stress response that impedes learning.

Other drawbacks of the use of punishment or negative reinforcement in training dogs include the risk of eliciting aggression, or reinforcing a fearful or phobic response. Although some authors have advocated the use of shock collars in the treatment of certain types of aggression in dogs (Borchelt and Voith, 1996, Tortora, 1982d), as pain is a primary eliciting stimulus for aggression (Johson, 1972) and given that pain caused by an electric shock is a well documented stimulus for aggression in a wide variety of species (Heacock et al., 1975; Hutchinson, 1973), it is clear that the potential exists for a dog to respond aggressively to a nearby person (Polsky, 1983). Indeed when electrical stimulation has been used for ‘snake proofing’ (teaching a dog to leave snakes alone), some dogs have been found to attack the snake rather than withdraw (Tortora, 1982c). The suggestion that shock collars are used to kidnap-proof dogs, by training them to avoid strangers offering treats if their owner is not present (Tortora, 1982c) must surely carry the same risk of defensive aggression towards people. In cases of inter-dog aggression, shock collars will potentiate aggression if used when the dogs are fighting (Tortora, 1982c), and case histories suggest that aggression is enhanced if used on dogs showing signs of fear or defensive aggression at the sight of other dogs.

Back to Top

Malfunction and Injuries

It has been widely experienced that shock collars can and do malfunction. It is also logical to believe that misuse, poor use and excessive use of electronic shock will occur. Dogs will suffer and owners will have to live with the consequences. For these reasons alone banning shock collars should be considered worldwide.

I searched the internet for any physical injuries that had been caused by the use of any electronic dog training device. There were quite a few but I chose this one because it was backed-up by a photo of the injury itself. I do caution you that the photo is graphic and disturbing.

Read another article on kennel training shock collar injury

Dog Injured By Bark Collar At Dallas Kennel, 2007

by Brooke Richie DALLAS (CBS 11 News)

One North Texas family says when they went away on vacation, the kennel they paid to take care of their dog used a collar that delivers a shock to a dog when it barks.

While Sutton the Dog's owners were in Hawaii, she stayed at the Park Cities Obedience School and Dog Daycare in Dallas. "This dog's a real rambunctious player and barks a lot, barks almost constantly," said Phillip Marr, the owner of the dog daycare.

When Sutton returned home, her neck was dotted with puncture wounds. "I thought she'd been attacked by another dog or something, because she had three open wounds and her neck was burned from ear to ear," said Sutton's owner, Mandy Parker.

Sutton's other owner is a CBS Network sales employee who brought these injuries to our attention. The Parkers' concern turned to anger when they learned the wounds were from a bark collar.

"We've never put a shock collar on Sutton, and we would never allow someone else to," said Mandy.

Marr admits that the collar was probably left on too long. But he calls the bark collars "a pretty accepted thing in all dog training. I've never known very many people that didn't use them. Almost everyone uses them for an excessive barker."

He said the injuries were "a terrible accident… It actually worked around to the side of the head, and in all his rough play and rolling around, got too much pressure on the side of his neck and actually put the marks on the side of his neck."

We sent these pictures to Dr. Bonnie Beaver, a professor of small animal medicine and surgery at Texas A&M's College of Veterinary Medicine. She says the brown spots on Sutton, "suggest that the collar had been on for a while... perhaps longer than a day." Beaver calls bark collars "inhumane" and says, "They should never be used."

In fact, 15 kennels in North Texas said they never use bark collars.

Lisa Praeger, training director at Country Acres Kennels, says they never should be.

"That is absolute abuse and ridiculous," she said. "That punishment does not justify the crime under any circumstance." "If they did not have that specifically stated in their boarding released, that they do use anti-bark collars, then I think it's an inappropriate act," said veterinarian Erica Erickson.
Marr says he will change his boarding release to include permission to use bark collars. The American Boarding Kennels Association says there's a lesson here. A pet owner should always ask before they board. Sutton's owners now know better.

"We'll definitely research that before we ever board her again," said Mandy.

Park Cities Obedience School and Dog Daycare did take Sutton to the vet when they noticed her injuries. They also paid for the vet bill and the boarding.

 But Sutton's owners say they will never go back there.
 (CBS 11 News)

 Note: I recently worked with a couple whose 1 year old male lab was placed on an electronic bark collar by their previous trainer. The first day I met with them I could not even place a buckle collar or leash on the dog because of the oozing sores present on his neck. It made me physically ill. This collar never stopped the dog from barking.

 Back to Top

Shock Collars Banned

The use of shock collars has been banned and is illegal in Denmark, Germany, Switzerland, Slovenia, Austria and many parts of Australia. By the end of 2011, Parliament will hopefully pass a new animal welfare bill which will prohibit the use of shock collars in the United Kingdom. (Wales banned them in early 2010.) Supporting this bill are the Kennel Club (the British equivalent of the AKC), the Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), The Dogs Trust and Blue Cross (three animal welfare organizations), UK Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT), the Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors (APBC), The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association, Association of Chief Police Officers, The Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, and the UK Armed Forces.

When will U.S. shelters, organizations, rescues and others speak out and ban their use here? (I spoke out and they banned me.)

Back to Top

How You Can Choose the Right Dog Trainer

Always keep in mind that the choice is yours. As your dog's guardian you can choose whatever method or program you feel is appropriate for you and your dog. If you must have your dog trained in-kennel, please know that there are questions you can ask prior to hiring your dog trainer that can help you make the right decision.

I highly recommend you schedule an appointment at your home and view the dog trainer in action. Have them personally handle your dog in your presence and demonstrate what methods they will employ and what equipment they will be using.  Another recommendation I would suggest is that your in-kennel dog trainer provide you with a written guarantee NOT to use an electronic shock collar on your dog. I also suggest you find out if the trainer provides protection training services. If they do, an important question to then ask is if there will be protection dogs in training present during your dog’s stay.

The reason this is very important is because your dog will most likely be exposed to these dogs and the environment in which these dogs are "agitated". Simply put, your dog may experience anxiety, stress or direct contact with an aggressive dog under those circumstances.

Phone Consultation - A skilled and knowledgeable trainer will ask you a lot of questions about you and your dog prior to recommending a training program. You too should follow-up with questions of your own. Any trainer who seems hurried or uninterested in what you have to say should not be considered for hire. If the trainer immediately recommends in-kennel training, be concerned. Unless this is your first choice and you have conveyed that to the trainer, he or she should get to know your situation and concerns prior to recommending any program. If you choose in-kennel training, ask in-depth questions about the program itself.

• Here are some questions you may consider asking:
• Where will your dog be during the day or during the evening and when not actually being trained?
• What commands are being taught and by what methods?
• What training equipment is being used?
• Do you use a remote e-collar?
• Do you recommend/use electronic shock "Bark" collars?
• How many hours of actual training will occur?
• Will playtime with other dogs be involved?
• Exercise?
• Can you supply your dog's own food (A MUST - do not compromise)
• What follow-up training is included?

Training Fees - These vary as you can imagine. The most expensive program does not usually mean that the trainer is the best. Usually, but not always, experience dictates the trainer's fee so the least expensive can sometimes mean the least experienced. Choose a program and trainer that fits your needs and your budget. It needs to be a good fit all-around in order for you to feel you are getting your money's worth. You should know if you are purchasing the best training program available for you and your dog.

If the dog trainer offers financing all I can say is that dog training should be made affordable to any owner seeking help. A loan should never be necessary. A real concern of mine lately has been that many clients have shared with me the dog training fees that they have been quoted. There appears to be a trend with some trainers to charge folks in more affluent zip codes a higher fee. Board-and-train facilities seem to charge rates that are made up on the spot with no apparent consistency. I would ask any owner to be very diligent in verifying fees so ask for references and call. Many customers might share the financial details of their training package. It never hurts to ask.

Recently a client of ours called a local trainer to inquire about services and pricing.  The owner of the company pushed in-kennel training and quoted a price that the client expressed he thought was too much. The client commented that he was going to shop around. The owner of the dog training company sarcastically replied "Good luck with that!" It is my opinion that since it is your dog, and your checkbook, you not only have the right but an obligation to find the trainer and pricing that is right for you. A dog trainer that is this unprofessional should never be considered.

As I mentioned before, many new or inexperienced trainers, and especially those who use electronic shock collars, offer “Free Consultations” or “Free Demonstrations”. While sometimes they will demonstrate the use of a shock collar on your dog, if you permit it, more often than not they will bring their own dog to use as an example of their training program.

The only thing I can say about the demos I have seen is that these dogs always appear to be overly-stressed, extremely anxious and somewhat robotic in their response to their trainer’s directives. It is probably best described as more of an obsessive behavior and an inability to relax in the presence of the trainer. At first glance this may seem impressive, especially if you are dealing with some frustrating behavior from your own dog. Believe me when I tell you that the personality of the dog you are observing has been completely altered. Would you want to take the chance, as unfortunately too many owners have, of receiving back a dog that has had its uniqueness diminished and innate spirit forever broken?

Back to Top

Conclusion

It was difficult to find U.S. based articles or even opinions with regard to the use of shock collars - pro or con. The pro-stance literature I find emanates mostly from sites of the dog trainers who use them. Some forums have participants who favor their use though it is quite apparent no other methods were tried. The vast majority of trainers and forum proponents were men. This fact was supported in one of the European studies.

All of the video demonstrations I have viewed involved male handlers as well. Of the hundreds of veterinarian sites I visited, few if any were willing to comment negatively on the use of electronic training devices. Those who had any apparent supportive comment at all took no real definitive stance one way or another. When they rarely did advocate their use, they never provided their reasoning.

Although the studies I did find, review and provide as part of this article were from Europe, I found them interesting and compelling but still incomplete. Mistakes and omissions were obviously apparent and I hope they will be considered in future research studies. So much more needs to be done with regard to electronic shock collars. Yet, as you can see, many countries have banned their use - mostly European. I believe this is very telling.

What I had to rely on the most was my own familiarity and experiences. Without exception, horror stories, sad tales and heartbreaking results are what I know. As one client recently put it "the first thing I noticed when my dog was returned to me was the life and spirit he once exhibited appeared snuffed out." This client, as you can imagine was devastated and will most likely always harbor feelings of guilt and pain.

As a society we have taken up the cause to protect our pets in every way possible. Our pets have been elevated, and rightfully so, to highly respected and deeply loved members of our families. We feed them better than ever, we spend our hard-earned money to house them, train them, keep them healthy and even properly clothe them. We love them so much that we cannot bear to lose them. We even have the technology to clone our dear pets. We keep their ashes on our bookshelves, and remember them fondly in best-selling books and classic paintings. Our dogs are vital to our existence as a gentle and moral society. Yet, we allow them to suffer at the hands of un-learned "professionals" needing to dominate a species they feel superior to.

It is all so unnecessary. The canine wants only to please us and live productively and harmoniously by our side. All of this can be easily achieved when you get to know the dog - any dog. I am lucky and blessed to have the honor to do just that every day. I can only hope that I am a better man, husband, father, friend and human being because of this privilege. I vow to continue my quest to never cause harm to or break the spirit of any dog I have been allowed to work with. For this reason I am compelled to provide a voice for the dog - human's best friend - and this is best accomplished by educating the dedicated and loving dog owners who reach out to me every day.
 
If you have had an experience like those I have described, please feel free to call me - perhaps I can help. Before you do, I highly encourage you to contact the person, place or business that recommended that trainer to you. Tell them about your experience and how you feel. Leave your comments on the many resources available on the internet so that others can know what your experiences were. You can also contact your local Animal Control and ASPCA. You, too, can provide a voice for the dog and help other dedicated owners to avoid placing their dogs in the hands of a trainer who might harm them.
Back to Top

References from various shock collar studies

Beerda, B (1997) Stress and Well-being in Dogs. Ponsen and Looijen BV, Netherlands Bodnariu, A. (2005) The effects of stress on cognitive abilities in kennelled dogs. MSc Thesis : The University of Edinburgh, Royal School of Veterinary Studies, Division of Animal Health & Welfare, Easter Bush Veterinary Centre, Easter Bush, Roslin EH25 9RG Borchelt, P.L. and Voith, V.L. (1996) Dominance Aggression in dogs. In: V.L. Voith and P.L. Borchelt (Eds) Readings in Companion Animal Behaviour. Trenton, NJ: Veterinary Learning Systems. Bolles, R.C. (1970) Species specific defense reactions and avoidance learning. Psychological Review  32-48. Brush, F.R. (1957) Effects of shock intensity on the acquisition and extinction of an avoidance response in dogs. Journal of Comp Physiol Psychol  547-552 Christiansen, FO, Bakken M and Braastad BO (2001). Behavioural changes and aversive conditioning in hunting dogs by the second-year confrontation with domestic sheep. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 131-143. Dess, N.K., Linwick, D., Patterson, J. (1983) Immediate and proactive effects of controllability and predictability on plasma cortisol responses to shock in dogs. Behavior Neuroscience 1005-1016. Association,  225-229 Heacock, D., Thurber, S, and Vale, D. (1975) Shock-elicited aggression by human subjects. Journal of Social Psychology,  55-59. Houser V.P. and Pare, W.P. (1974) Long-term conditioned fear modification in the dog as measured by changes in urinary 11 hydrocorticosteroids, heart rate and behaviour. Pavlovian J Biol Sci 85-96 Hutchinson, R. (1973) The environmental causes of aggression. In J.K. Cole & D.D. Jensen (Eds) Nebraska symposium on Motivation: Vol 20 pp155-181. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Johson, R.L. (1972) Aggression in man and animals, Saunders, Philadelphia. Juarb Diaz, S.V.and Houpt, K.A. (1996) Comparison of two anti-barking collars for treatment of nuisance barking. Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association, 231-235 Lindsay (2005) Handbook of Applied Dog Behaviour and Training: Volume 3: Procedures and Protocols. Blackwell Publishing, Iowa, USA.  Mendl, M., 1999. Performing under pressure: stress and cognitive function. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 221-244 Overmier, J.B. and Seligman, M.E.P. (1967) Effects of inescapable shock upon subsequent escape and avoidance responding. J Comp Physiol Psychol  28-33 Overmier, J.B. and Wiekiewicz, (1983) On unpredictability as a causal factor in “learned helplessness”. Learning and Motivation  324-337 Polsky, R.H. (1983) Factors influencing aggressive behaviour in dogs. California Veterinarian Polsky RH (1994). Electronic shock collars – are they worth the risks? Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association,  463-468. Reid, P.J. (1996) Excel-erated Learning. James & Kenneth Publishers, Herts, UK. Schalke, E., Stichnoth, J. and Jones-Baade, R. (2005) Stress symptoms caused by the use of electric training collars on dogs (Canis Familiaris) in everyday life situations. Current Issues and Research in Veterinary Behavioural Medicine: Papers presented at the 5th International Veterinary Behaviour meeting. Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, Indiana. Schilder MBH and van der Borg JAM (2004). Training dogs with the help of the shock collar: short and long term behavioural effects. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 319-334. Seksel, K. (1999) Comments on collars policy: No. Aust Vet Journal  78 Seligman M E P (1975) Helplessness: depression, development and death New York: W H Freeman Seligman M E P and Groves, D. (1970) Non transient learned helplessness. Psychonom Sci  191-192. Seligman, M.E.P. and Maier, S.F. (1967) Failure to escape traumatic shock. J Exp Psychol  1-9. Tortora, D.F. (1982a). Understanding Electronic Dog Training Part 1. Canine Practice,  17-22 Tortora, D.F. (1982b). Understanding Electronic Dog Training Part 2. Canine Practice 31-35 Tortora, D.F. (1982c). Understanding Electronic Dog Training Part 3. Canine Practice  8-17 Tortora, D.F. (1982d). Understanding Electronic Dog Training Part 4. Canine Practice  14-18
Back to Top