Prong Collars

[gemibabe]

since the pronged collars are on 'restricted import' it is saying(to average joe) that if a licence to import is given, the collars are then OK to use. They would have to be of a certain type of pronged collar to be allowed in to australia to begin with..

[EddyAnne]

since the pronged collars are on 'restricted import' it is saying(to average joe) that if a licence to import is given, the collars are then OK to use. They would have to be of a certain type of pronged collar to be allowed in to australia to begin with..

G'day, Eddy here.

That's what it seems to suggest to me, but OK to use maybe due to some sort of requirements or conditions, and which just might include being a certain type of pronged collar. But then I feel we are just assuming and where we might not be correct, and gees we don't want people to do in their money plus have Customs and RSPCA on their backs. Maybe K9 can help us out as he seems to have an "Import Permit", but then maybe it's best we email Customs and hear direct from them and gees they might even sent us an application for a Permit.

[GeorgesFamily]

I don't know enough to comment on this discussion, but I'm not bad at research.

So for Ricey this is the WA list of prescribed devices.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/wa/cons...2003292/s3.html

ANIMAL WELFARE (GENERAL) REGULATIONS 2003 - REG 3

“Inhumane devices” prescribed (s. 19(2)(b))

3 . “Inhumane devices” prescribed (s. 19(2)(b))

For the purposes of section 19(2)(b) of the Act, the following devices are prescribed as inhumane —

(a) a device, other than an electric fence, that is designed or modified to deliver an electric shock to an animal;

(b) jawed traps;

© spurs that have sharpened or fully-fixed rowels;

(d) spurs that are reasonably capable of penetrating the skin of the animal on which they are intended to be used.

Further in the regulations it says that using electrical devices such as 'invisible fences' may be defensible if used in accordance with the relevant code of conduct.

Electric training collar activated by the animal or a person in the course of training an animal

Training of animals

Dogs

Must be used in accordance with the generally accepted method of usage for the type of collar.

Electrical device known as the “invisible fence”

Containment and training of animals

Dogs

Must be used in accordance with the generally accepted method of usage for the type of “invisible fence”.

On the subject of applying for a permit to import - you would usually need to show a good reason why you should be allowed to import an item on the restricted list.

"Because I want one, and I think the rule is wrong" might not cut it

I haven't found any list that mentions collars, but I'm still looking.

Edited January 26, 2005 by GeorgesFamily

[EddyAnne]

I haven't found any list that mentions collars, but I'm still looking.

G'day, Eddy here.

Keep in mind that what is available on the internet maybe only be a very small fraction of what is available by other means.

[ricey]

I don't know enough to comment on this discussion, but I'm not bad at research.

So for Ricey this is the WA list of prescribed devices.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/wa/cons...2003292/s3.html

Thanks for that link, it is going to be very useful

I'm surprised that these are the only "prescribed inhumane devices" in the regulations relating to the Animal Welfare Act. I had assumed that cock fighting blades would automatically be on the list.

I'm phoning or possibly visiting the RSPCA at Malaga tomorrow to enquire as to whether prong collars are 'prescribed'.

Peter D

[GeorgesFamily]

I wondered about cock fighting spurs as well. Then I wondered whether the

© spurs that have sharpened or fully-fixed rowels;

(d) spurs that are reasonably capable of penetrating the skin of the animal on which they are intended to be used.

could be interpreted as those as well.

It's all in the interpretation!

As far as I can tell in WA the regulations you are concerned about would be

Animal Welfare (General) Regulations 2003

and the

Dog Regulations 1976

I've just wasted a whole afternoon reading court cases. Some of them were very funny - like the vet that gelded an expensive Warmblood colt by accident. OOPS!

[gemibabe]

I've just wasted a whole afternoon reading court cases. Some of them were very funny - like the vet that gelded an expensive Warmblood colt by accident. OOPS!

Gerogesfamily I have read a similar case while looking for documents on laws/legislations...

[Steve K9Pro]

Rusky:

K9

I have no idea why you decide to attack me or to be rude.

K9: I dont think I have been either, but next time your going to advise me on a new method, as you did, please back it up with some experience.

R:

Politics do not play a part K9, the law does.

K9: Firstly, Laws are made on the back of Politics, not facts. Secondly, I have known many to say certain tools are banned simply as they dont like them.

R:

I have no idea why these collars were banned

K9: Ill remind you again that it is in Victoria, & that ban occured through ignorance.

R:

however I see a few people have said things like

'sharpening the prongs'

maybe part of the reasonings behind the ban.

K9: these collars are super effecrive, there would be no advantage gained by sharpening prongs.

R:

Anyway do as you like if you feel the need to use a prong collar, can get your hands on one and feel it is the only way you can prevent your dog from pulling remember that Mr & Mrs average are likely to report you, well excepting K9 who has a permit.

K9: your confusing use with importation. Importation is restricted tio those that have a permit. Those trying to import these collars without a permit can be charged or at least they wont get their collar.

Using a prong collar in NSW is unrestricted.

R:

I simply called RSPCA to get the facts, and I did.

K9: ask to see the law or act it comes from. Or ask them for it in writing...

Have you read the case where the RSPCA falsified evidence against electronic collars, were caught & paid $100 000.00 plus to Innotek???

Would they tell you something that wasnt true????

**************************

Ricey:

Well, I have searched high and low through the Western Australian Dog Act (1976), the Western Australian Animal Welfare Act (2002), and the Western Australian Dog Regulations (1976).

Nowhere can I find any mention of prong collars.

K9: no surprise here.....

R:

I'm going to bite the bullet and phone the RSPCA to see if anyone can point me to something in writing that states that prong collars are banned in WA.

K9: as people from WA order them, I have made the calls myself in the past, each time I was given advice not to use one, but when I asked for the act or law, they couldnt provide it.

This is known as politics.

***********************

Eddy:

As K9 appears to have an "Import Permit" maybe he can let us know what requirements or what conditions there might be, this so that we all might be more informed.

K9: Each permit is granted on its own merit... A letter with your reason for import will be considered by the minister.

******************

Ricey:

As prong collars made by reputable manufacturers such as Herm Sprenger are designed to not bruise or puncture an animal's skin, it would appear that no permit is necessary to import them

K9: there has been many an argument on this basis, it will take someone to push hard to get them legalised in Vic again.

*******************

Anne:

I believe they are called curtain clips.

K9: miss labelling an item for importation will suffer heavy penalties. I call mine training collars (prong type).

I think it will make no difference what you write, they x ray the packs anyway.

*****************************

K9: These collars always raise eyebrows, reason being is that they look like medievil torture devices.

The prongs do not stick into the skin, they contact it at an angle. The collars are a two stage collar, stage one is that you can issue a very precise correction, for example, with a check chain you have about three levels of correction:

1. nagging tug used as a reminder

2. medium pop, correction when dog is not too heavily distracted.

3. hard correction, when dog is heavily distrtacted.

I have found martingales to have about 5 levels & prongs about 10.

10 equalling the intensity of level 3 on a check chain.

The varible levels gives you more precise communication with the dog.

The second stage of a prong occures when the dog lunges, whilst this may normally rip out your arm, the limited slip action of the prong causes the link to close up & firmly pinch the dog around the complete neck.

This causes the dog pain, yes. The timing is great as the dog is the one who corrects himself.

I dont know many dogs who do thsi more than once, most never do it at all.

The alternative is to have the dog jerk & pull you every time it pleases.

When a dog does this, it wins or gains success every time, this means the lunging etc will never stop.

I have used prongs for many years, never have I seen a bruise or injury caused by one.

This is a tool, a damn good one, it needs to be used with a good method.

If you are having to use any correction collar where you need to jerk hard, causing pain, your method is lacking.

We advise people here to start on a martingale, I will even use a loan one on their dog to see how effective it will be, if the dogs handler is struggling to gain confident control of the dog, due to handler to dog weight ratio or strength ratio, then we try a prong.

The owners make their own choice. Its about getting results & giving confidence back to the handler & getting them to enjoy (walking) their dog again.

[Bonniescot]

Hypothetical question................

K9: would you post a p...collar to Vic??

Cheers

[Steve K9Pro]

K9: It wouldnt be illegal for me to do so, but it would be illegal for you to use one.

[MonElite]

The second stage of a prong occures when the dog lunges, whilst this may normally rip out your arm, the limited slip action of the prong causes the link to close up & firmly pinch the dog around the complete neck.

This causes the dog pain, yes. The timing is great as the dog is the one who corrects himself.

I dont know many dogs who do thsi more than once, most never do it at all.

I have had one perfect example of it this morning.

Walked my dog on the golf course on a 7m long lead and a prong collar.

A golf buggy appeared from the side and drove past us. For whatever reason my dog decided that he doesnt like the golf buggy and chased it ( he doesnt chase bikes, cars, people etc so I was taken by a huge surprise). Having the 7m of lead he gained some speed but also by the time he got to the end of it he has heard my REX, LEAVE IT! by that time he got to the end of the lead and was "spiked" by the collar. No yelp but a huge surprise in his eyes.

15 minutes later we minded our own business and the same golf buggy drove pass in the other direction. He managed to raise his ears, look at it, take one step towards it, stand in a perfect show position and not react to the buggy going pass his nose well withing the 7m reach.

Sorry Steve I know the command should have been REX COME! - just took me by surprise and I said something automatically.

Edited January 27, 2005 by myszka

[Rusky]

I need to reply to K9 post as I am going away for a few days so in haste

K9 re read my posts

Why take something personally when at that point you weren't even posting on this topic.

You came in after I posted and I still wonder if you read it correctly or indeed any of the posts I had made previously on this topic.

You need to know the law in NSW as you use this collar, for me it is purely academic.

[Steve K9Pro]

R:

Why take something personally when at that point you weren't even posting on this topic.

K9: nothing has been taken personally by me.. ok?

R:

You need to know the law in NSW as you use this collar, for me it is purely academic.

K9: lol, regardless of why you need to know, I gave you some advice, ask for a reference such as the law or the act, or get it in writing.

Have a great time where ever your going.

[Guest ANNODAM]

.

Edited May 17, 2008 by ANNODAM

[EddyAnne]

Have you read the case where the RSPCA falsified evidence against electronic collars, were caught & paid $100 000.00 plus to Innotek???

G'day, Eddy here.

Yep I've read the transcript from the Federal Court case, Innotek v's RSPCA, quite long but certainly worth it to persist reading through carefully so as to get ALL THE FACTS:-

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/...2dog+collars%22

[Steve K9Pro]

K9: if anyone doesnt have the time to read through the jargon, this article has nothing to do with prong collars.

By the way Eddy, are you saying that the section of my post that you quoted is not true?

Edited January 27, 2005 by K9 Force

[KitKat]

I think EddyAnne was just giving the background for the comment if anyone was interested, or wanted a good read.

I found it interesting as i have this type (not brand tho) of collar keeping my dog in my yard

[EddyAnne]

G'day, Eddy here.

It was you K9 who mentioned and introduced Innotek and electronic collars into this topic with, "Have you read the case where the RSPCA falsified evidence against electronic collars, were caught & paid $100 000.00 plus to Innotek???".

Well I did read the case and I thought I'd respond, and I thought that some others might also be interested in reading all the facts on what happened.

As to your comment K9, "By the way Eddy, are you saying that the section of my post that you quoted is not true?"

I'm not saying that at all and I'll put it this way, say someone might happen to hear that the Federal Court in July 2002 ordered Mr & Mrs Holliday of ("Orion" & "Innotek") that they had to pay Dr Wirth a total of $30,000. I feel that something like this might only give a small portion of what might have happened from a global perspective, and if people want to read exactly what happened then they can read ALL THE FACTS via the webpage from the Federal Court. And yep it takes a while to carefully read through 323 numbered paragraphs.

By the way in August 2002 in the Federal Court there appears to be the releasing of applicants' security for costs and one might see how much the respondents effectively received represented by the Court's judgment, those interested see at this address:-

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/fed...t/2002/967.html

[ricey]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

hhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't care who is right and who is wrong here

I think that K9Force is a very well respected dog trainer, and he seems to know what he is talking about.

I've never met him, he has never trained my dogs (more is the pity ), but he seems to make sense.

My understanding of the 'Innotek vs Hugh Wirth and the RSPCA' case is that Hugh Wirth pocketed a few thousand, whereas the RSPCA had to forfeit a bucketload more to Innotek.

Peter D

[StevieandSally]

:rolleyes:....

All I can say is if prong collars are so cruel to dogs then why do my two practically bowl me over to get them on when they hear the tingle of them coming out of the draw!

I have them and so therefore I use them every time we walk as they are the best .... I wouldn't not use them!

My hubby did not use the prong collar one day and was taken by surprise by a sudden jerk. This damaged his ring finger and now he has a permanantly bent finger that wont straighten up!