# Wales bans the use of electronic training collars for dogs and cats



## Geoff Empey

http://wales.gov.uk/news/latest/100323dogcollarban/?lang=en

*Wales bans the use of electronic training collars for dogs and cats *

_ A ban on the use of collars designed to administer an electric shock to dogs and cats in Wales will come into force tomorrow [Wednesday 24 March] following the approval of the regulations by Assembly Members today [Tuesday 23 March]. _
_The ban was initially announced by Wales’ Rural Affairs Minister, Elin Jones, on 24 February._
_Following Assembly approval, the provisions of the Animal Welfare (Electronic Collars) (Wales) Regulations 2010 will come into force at one minute past midnight tomorrow morning [00:01, Wednesday 24 March]._
_The ban is the first of its kind in the UK._
_Wales’ Rural Affairs Minister, Elin Jones said:_
_“I’m very pleased that Assembly Members have backed the Welsh Assembly Government’s proposal to ban the use of electronic shock collars in Wales._
_“The ban will come into force tomorrow morning. It is important that owners are aware of the ban, and that they now take appropriate steps to comply with the law._
_“The Welsh Assembly Government takes animal welfare very seriously, and I’m pleased that as a government, we are taking a proactive approach to promoting the welfare of animals by banning the use of such electronic training devices in Wales.”_​


----------



## chris haynie

and it begins.

what a load of bullshit. I wonder what the Welsh Police k9 trainers think of this?

i suppose this includes E-fence as well?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

chris haynie said:


> and it begins.
> 
> what a load of bullshit. I wonder what the Welsh Police k9 trainers think of this?
> 
> i suppose this includes E-fence as well?


There has already been a case filed by the Electronic Collar Manufacturers Association. Posted on the Ecollar training list

http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/EDogTraining/message/21014

When/If Politicians look at facts and not hysteria, these kind of measures don't stand a chance.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Thomas Barriano wrote


> When/If Politicians look at facts and not hysteria, these kind of measures don't stand a chance.


How can you think that Thomas. You may remember Maren Bell Jones aversion to raising dogs in huge yards with trees and creeks. Well, the world has a lot of Marens which puts everyones rights at risk. You got to wake up and smell the roses Thomas.
Common sense has not a thing to do with how these people think.


----------



## Geoff Empey

Thomas Barriano said:


> When/If Politicians look at facts and not hysteria, these kind of measures don't stand a chance.


When for the most part will politicians look at 'real' facts? The PETAs and HSUS people are a strong lobby and they go about their lobbying very professionally. It is really hard to stand up against well organized groups like them. Really the only way to is to be just as organized and just as ruthless with lobbying efforts.


----------



## Guest

The fact is that there are a lot of nitwits, I'd venture a guess that nitwits make up the vast majority of users, using e-collars who watch SMS and other related youtube videos or go to one of the many conflicting ecollar seminars and think they understand the theory, motivations, and applications of ecollar techniques which are based largely in false assumptions, bad data, *ego* and *marketing* rather than science. 

The fact is that an ecollar in a nitwit's hands is a dangerous toy that can create a highly volatile, unpredictable and deadly weapon out of a stable animal. 

Ecollars should be regulated at least as much as cars are regulated, probably a bit moreso as there is a live animal at the end of the signal, not a hunk of metal that goes where you point it and feels nothing. People need to be held accountable.


----------



## maggie fraser

£20,000 fine or six months in prison  That's pretty fierce don't you think?

"THE use of electric shock collars is now banned in Wales following a landmark decision by Assembly Members.
Animal charities applauded the ban and called on the other parts of the United Kingdom to follow Wales’ example.
After the passing of the first ban of its kind in the UK, people who attach a shock collar to a pet could face a six month prison sentence or a fine of up to £20,000."

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...shock-collars-banned-in-wales-91466-26096255/


----------



## Candy Eggert

Geoff Empey said:


> When for the most part will politicians look at 'real' facts? The PETAs and HSUS people are a strong lobby and they go about their lobbying very professionally. It is really hard to stand up against well organized groups like them. Really the only way to is to be just as organized and just as ruthless with lobbying efforts.


When WE started educating them  The "other" side does a great job of presenting "their" facts and sometimes/most times it's all those politicians have for input. Until we can present our side, a different side, a more reasonable and factual side, we're going to behind the eight ball and running around putting out fires. ](*,)


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I am going to have to assume that this is going to do away with barrk collars also since most are based on electric stimulus.


----------



## chris haynie

and invisible fences, since they function nearly the same.


----------



## Mike Lauer

friggin moronic


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Is it illegal to own an e-collar? Is it illegal to buy or sell them?

This in response to the Wales bann.

In Germany and Switzerland, the law states that possession and sale of such is not illegal. Visiting seminars in which e-collar is used also not illegal.

But, being videoed or photographed using one would cause breach of law.


----------



## Bob Scott

:-o ?!!CATS!!?


----------



## Geoff Empey

Bob Scott said:


> :-o ?!!CATS!!?


Yeah Bob don't you know Welshmen have attack cats?


----------



## maggie fraser

Don Turnipseed said:


> I am going to have to assume that this is going to do away with barrk collars also since most are based on electric stimulus.


 
Bark collars are not huge over here as far as I am aware, it may well do though, or they may well fizzle out themselves. I doubt it'll be extended to a ban on electric fences for livestock which includes horses, but who knows..... I don't get where Wales are coming from on this.

Both of the two main working dog groups in the UK don't condone the use of electric and have done for some time, and police k9 training in Britain have a no electric policy.

I think probably one of the worst fashions that have taken place in my short time, is that of the dog crate and the convenience dog. If that can be sorted out, then maybe electric collars could easily sort themselves out! 

Just a wee ramble, It's Saturday night  !


----------



## Michelle Reusser

Bob Scott said:


> :-o ?!!CATS!!?


 
I was gonna say the same thing! If they do have them, I want one. I have a cat that could really bennefit.


----------



## Lou Castle

The ban in Wales includes all Edevices that use current transmitted to the dog via contact terminals. It therefore includes bark collars, Ecollars and invisible fences. It does not include charged fences (with a visible wire) that are commonly used to contain livestock. 

It is illegal to use them but not to purchase or sell them. 

I'm told that the ban was originally passed last year but then put on hold until DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) could complete a study on them. But then for some reason this was changed. The report from DEFRA is due out this year (I think). 

The antis used a combination of lies, myths and misinformation on Ecollars to influence legislators pass the ban. There's a video (it's only viewable in the UK) that shows a couple of them showing the legislators how much the Ecollar hurts by having them feel it "on the mildest setting." Trouble is that it was nowhere near the mildest setting. They used a Dogtra collar set on at least a 40 (out of 127 levels). 

I wrote about this on a forum in the UK. It's post # 1710 (the last post on the page) HERE. If you read some of the other posts in the surrounding pages you can see the degree of fanaticism exhibited by some in the UK.


----------



## Bob Scott

I've hunted with a couple of UK terrier men that have come over here to judge working terrier trials. 
Compaired to the anti's over there peta is chump change.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Vin Chiu said:


> The fact is that there are a lot of nitwits, I'd venture a guess that nitwits make up the vast majority of users,


Really. I guess you're free to guess anything, but don't expect anyone to take your guesses seriously.



> using e-collars who watch SMS and other related youtube videos or go to one of the many conflicting ecollar seminars and think they understand the theory, motivations, and applications of ecollar techniques which are based largely in false assumptions, bad data, *ego* and *marketing* rather than science.


You want to look at all the bad training, false assumptions, duff information on the web etc. that goes on with all dog training - it's not unique to e-collars.



> The fact is that an ecollar in a nitwit's hands is a dangerous toy that can create a highly volatile, unpredictable and deadly weapon out of a stable animal.


Again ignoring the fact that a 'nitwit' will f*ck up a dog regardless of the tool used.



> Ecollars should be regulated at least as much as cars are regulated, probably a bit moreso as there is a live animal at the end of the signal, not a hunk of metal that goes where you point it and feels nothing. People need to be held accountable.


Nope. People should definitely be held responsible for their dog, but the vast majority of out of control dogs/f*cked up dogs I see have never been anywhere near an ecollar.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Bob Scott said:


> I've hunted with a couple of UK terrier men that have come over here to judge working terrier trials.
> Compaired to the anti's over there peta is chump change.


Yep. The great thing is that most of the anti's have no interest in the DEFRA funded independent study on the effects of ecollar use. They want them banned because they know that electricity is evil!


----------



## Don Turnipseed

In can see it now, Maren Bell Jones center stage, with Vin Chiu at her side, smiling complacently as they announce the loss of personal rights and freedoms in dog ownership and husbandry.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Newsflash: I can disagree with husbandry or training methods or all kinds of things without advocating banning them. Novel concept, amiright? This kind of subtlety is obviously not your strong point.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I don't believe in being subtle Maren...I callem like I see em. If most of this stuff appeared on a bill tomorrow you would vote for it, not because it is wrong, but, because it isn't the way you like it. and that is why this BSL goes as far as it does. All one need do is read through your posts to see it. The best post you have put up in a long time was the cut and paste on Lyme disease. It was a straight cut and paste without your personal opinion included...that is rare.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Well, I'm glad I need your seal of approval on my posts. :roll: I apparently do have to spell it out for you since, no, you can't read between the lines. It's not about you being subtle, it's about the subtle difference between disagreeing with something and advocating that it be banned. For the record, I do not support:

-mandatory spay/neuter
-BSL
-banning prong collars/e-collars (I use them myself)
-banning docking of tails, ear crops, and cat declaws (I wouldn't do it on any of my own animals, but it seems to be falling out of favor on its own)


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Well, I'm glad I need your seal of approval on my posts. :roll: I apparently do have to spell it out for you since, no, you can't read between the lines. It's not about you being subtle, it's about the subtle difference between disagreeing with something and advocating that it be banned. For the record, I do not support:
> 
> -mandatory spay/neuter
> -BSL
> -banning prong collars/e-collars (I use them myself)
> -banning docking of tails, ear crops, and cat declaws (I wouldn't do it on any of my own animals, but it seems to be falling out of favor on its own)


Your right Maren, when it gets that subtle, your going to have to take the time to point it out because it is also unbelievable coming from you. Maybe I have just read to many of your posts to take you seriously. If that is the case, I do sincerely aplogize. Now, do you believe that?? It illustrates how cheap talk can be. So, back to topic.


----------



## Mark Horne

The police in Wales, and England have not been allowed to us electric for over 10yrs, at the same time the Police were forbidden to use Pinch Collars and Fur Savers or Choke/Check Chains as we call them.

It causes real headaches, more so with some of the seasoned K9's who often don't want to out for a tennis ball!

I have no problem with using electric to stop dogs running after sheep/cattle, dog aggression, snake proofing, or anything that is proportional to the health and well being of the dog or other people or animals.

I think ethically to use electric to perfect obedience for a sport is a difficult corner to fight and devalues its use adding weight to the anti electric argument.

Mark


----------



## Ian Forbes

Mark Horne said:


> The police in Wales, and England have not been allowed to us electric for over 10yrs, at the same time the Police were forbidden to use Pinch Collars and Fur Savers or Choke/Check Chains as we call them.
> 
> It causes real headaches, more so with some of the seasoned K9's who often don't want to out for a tennis ball!
> 
> I have no problem with using electric to stop dogs running after sheep/cattle, dog aggression, snake proofing, or anything that is proportional to the health and well being of the dog or other people or animals.
> 
> *I think ethically to use electric to perfect obedience for a sport is a difficult corner to fight and devalues its use adding weight to the anti electric argument.*
> 
> Mark


Hi Mark,

Do you think any corrections are ethically correct to perfect obedience (i.e a pop on a slip collar or using a pinch collar)?


----------



## Lou Castle

Mark Horne said:


> The police in Wales, and England have not been allowed to us electric for over 10yrs, at the same time the Police were forbidden to use Pinch Collars and Fur Savers or Choke/Check Chains as we call them.


The Ecollar was banned for use by the police in the UK after an incident involving a police dog named Acer. He was strung up and then kicked repeatedly, resulting in his death. In a typical administrative knee–jerk reaction they lost the use of many tools, including the Ecollar, even though many of them had not been involved. 



Mark Horne said:


> I have no problem with using electric to stop dogs running after sheep/cattle, dog aggression, snake proofing, or anything that is proportional to the health and well being of the dog or other people or animals.
> 
> I think ethically to use electric to perfect obedience for a sport is a difficult corner to fight and devalues its use adding weight to the anti electric argument.


Mark I'd guess that your last comment is based on using the same high levels of stim for OB that are used in the sheep/cattle breaking that you mentioned where high levels of pain are used to preserve the dog's life. What if the training for OB had the stim at the level where the dog first felt it? Would that change your mind about this? HERE'S a video of a dog feeling this level of stim for the first time.


----------



## Jim Engel

Mark,

Modern collars have variable intensity settings and a vibrate only mode.

I don't ever recall going above about 1/3 of the way up in the intensity,
and 90 percent of the time it is just a reminder vibration.

The E collar is an excellent training tool, and much more humane than
the alternatives in many, many situations.

I guess you Brits are just like those of us brought up Catholic, easy
to send on a guilt trip for no real reason except that somebody can
and thinks it's fun....

Jim





Mark Horne said:


> The police in Wales, and England have not been allowed to us electric for over 10yrs, at the same time the Police were forbidden to use Pinch Collars and Fur Savers or Choke/Check Chains as we call them.
> 
> It causes real headaches, more so with some of the seasoned K9's who often don't want to out for a tennis ball!
> 
> I have no problem with using electric to stop dogs running after sheep/cattle, dog aggression, snake proofing, or anything that is proportional to the health and well being of the dog or other people or animals.
> 
> I think ethically to use electric to perfect obedience for a sport is a difficult corner to fight and devalues its use adding weight to the anti electric argument.
> 
> Mark


----------



## Mark Horne

Thanks Lou, good video, you are right that my last comment was based on high levels of stim used *once* on a well bred mature Sch 3 working line dog being fried repeatedly to perfect his healing. The dog was hysterical and virtually crawling around the field. This is the only occasion I have seen it abused and being new I failed to challenge the perpetrator.
Whilst you are preaching to the converted these are the examples the anti e-collar brigade seize.
I have also seen many experienced K9's sent to their death because the organisation has failed to manage what they have created.

The answer has to lie with Accredition, and re accreditation say every 5yrs. The option to put our heads in the sands will not be productive, and a solution has to be sought.

Like it or not Lou the standards you set yourself place you in a minority group, and the voice of the anti lobby seems to ring louder with the majority of owners who don't have a clue.

Mark


----------



## Mark Horne

Just read Jim's reply, 

This is a good debate, don't vent your frustrations on the first individual that shows an objective view, all be in support of Lou.

And lose the Brits and catholic crap, you are more likely to embarass your fellow countrymen and women.

Mark


----------



## Geoff Empey

Mark Horne said:


> I have also seen many experienced K9's sent to their death because the organisation has failed to manage what they have created.


Created by what Mark? E-Collars or just bad training?

Plus I don't really believe that a K9 would be sent to it's death for doing it's job. Could you give examples? If anything your statement is pretty broad and general and for me hard to fathom.


----------



## Bob Scott

E-collars can be a great tool but I equate them to todays cellphone/calculator/camera/whatall combo pocket whatevers the kids carry around today.
What did we do before they came along? DUH! We had to use our brains to learn/train.


----------



## Mark Horne

Geoff,

Example from Kent Police; Handler/K9 try to arrest a teenager responsible for an attack, believed to be armed with a knife, on arrest becomes violent, handler has a fight with teenager, dog bites off part of teenager's ear. Despite a subsequent International campaign the dog is destroyed for excessive force. Handler and community heartbroken.

I have known K9's who display aggression in the police kennels when their handlers go on leave; then put to sleep prior to return of Handler.

The rights and wrongs have been done to death, with enormous support from the Us in some cases.

The point I am making is Dogs are fine during training, however several years of operational experience have an impact, especially around the "outing" i.e. dog out's in fight with group of assailants, gets kicked, drive goes up, doesn't then out. They become stronger and more aggressive, the UK Police then don't have the means to correct problems in training brought about through real life experience, as they can't use E Collars. Dog then fails its annual licencing, then can't be re-homed due to control/aggression issues etc.

I appreciate I am still the only one trying to suggest a solution, however accreditation schemes would mean Public trainers/ Police etc would have access to the E Collars, it's a middle ground, minimises abuses. Everyones wins particularly the dogs.

Soldiers during their experiences of war often behave in ways they would never do in training, why, brought about through experiences; what works, what doesn't, what do I have to do. What support do they get when we ask them to fit right back into society, the organisation has created this situation and should have a duty of care.

Mark


----------



## Lou Castle

Bob Scott said:


> E-collars can be a great tool but I equate them to todays cellphone/calculator/camera/whatall combo pocket whatevers the kids carry around today.
> What did we do before they came along? DUH! We had to use our brains to learn/train.


The insinuation seems to be that one does not need to use their _"brain to learn/train"_ a dog with an Ecollar. Of course that's just silly. One needs a thought process with any tool/method.


----------



## Edward Egan

I don't really care for the e-collar, but it has it's purposse, I recently started using one to fix an issue with my dog. I've also seen many that use it daily, I've seen it abused once or twice.

The problem as I see it is,
1. They are making desisions based one one side of the story.
2. These animal do righters are never content, I bet they are, as we speak, going after some other animal rights issue.

What's next, we can't crate our dogs?


----------



## Adam Rawlings

I'm backing anyone supporting the ban of e-collars in the US. It is my feeling that the sooner this happens, the sooner Fred Hassen will stop killing us with his ridiculous videos and posting them on our fine board.[-o<


----------



## Lou Castle

adam rawlings said:


> i'm backing anyone supporting the ban of e-collars in the us. It is my feeling that the sooner this happens, the sooner fred hassen will stop killing us with his ridiculous videos and posting them on our fine board.[-o<


*roflmfao*


----------

