Can Electric Pulse Collars Be Used Humanely

[raineth]

Tazar, I think that's a bit unfair to say that if you don't chose to use an ecollar to create snake aversion then you would rather your dog die from snake bite.

Its really not like its one or the other.

[Aidan3]

'Sometimes it only takes one exposure'.... that is the whole point of aversion training, you only need to do it a minimal amount of times and bingo....dog avoids snakes all together.

Not quite true, and I do worry that this is the idea that people have of aversion training. A dog can't "unlearn" something, the behaviour is always there but under effective punishment it is suppressed for some amount of time. Punished responses can and do spontaneously re-appear.

[Cosmolo]

Mita while i haven't conducted studies I can answer part of your question.

Dogs with a strong reinforcement history for 'bad' behaviour require X amount of repetitions of CC (for example) to overcome previous R history and develop new R history for the correct behaviour. We then need to determine how to get the required # of reps to change the behaviour.

I find in SOME either small dogs (with small stomachs) or dogs who do not require much food for sustenance, I can't do the required # of reps with food without them becoming full or fat- i need to look at other options, either by finding an alternate source of motivation or considering the use of an aversive- with an e collar the removal of the low level stim is reinforcing so it can be useful when other reinforcers can't be utilised.

[Cosmolo]

Agree Aidan

ETA- Aidan i'd love your thoughts on what i mention above- whether it's an issue you encounter and what you do to get around it? Perhaps for another thread though.

Edited August 6, 2013 by Cosmolo

[mita]

If an e collar is required to create a particular behaviour, it should be used to then allow you to create the reinforcement history required to maintain the behaviour without the e collar. (I am NOT talking about working dogs). One of my dogs adopted as an adult would NEVER have become reliable off lead without an e collar due to a number of issues she had. We made the decision to use the e collar to create the behaviour of coming to us but then worked hard to build her reinforcement history. Her recall is pretty great now and she hasn't had an e collar on in years- it's the reinforcement history that has maintained the behaviour, not the e collar.

It seems you're making a case that e-collars have a use with individual dogs who you find resistant to high standard rewards training. So you'd be able to describe what behaviours interfered with a rewards method being immediately successful.

I notice that the Victorian welfare legislation allows for limited use. It's not an outright ban. I've been tracking it down, as it means they might spell out a case for that use. Other states, like SA, have outright ban.

[Cosmolo]

I don't have any issue with the restricted use legislation in VIC.

[mita]

Mita while i haven't conducted studies I can answer part of your question.

Dogs with a strong reinforcement history for 'bad' behaviour require X amount of repetitions of CC (for example) to overcome previous R history and develop new R history for the correct behaviour. We then need to determine how to get the required # of reps to change the behaviour.

I find in SOME either small dogs (with small stomachs) or dogs who do not require much food for sustenance, I can't do the required # of reps with food without them becoming full or fat- i need to look at other options, either by finding an alternate source of motivation or considering the use of an aversive- with an e collar the removal of the low level stim is reinforcing so it can be useful when other reinforcers can't be utilised.

Cosmolo, thank you. You've answered my questions, spot on. Based on your experience . I could be very wrong.... but you seem to use it at lowest level more to get the dog to focus attention, rather than to produce aversion??? And you intend to then move towards positive reinforcement (rewards). So the dogs you'd see needing this, would have characteristics like.... not responding to most of the rewards options (That was a fair point about over-feeding!). Especially at their current stage. And it'd be a relatively rare occurrence. I see why you find the Victorian limited use OK.

So would an e-collar that's only set to the low levels be enough for most pet dog training (especially by owners)? And only then in rare, well-considered cases. Then it couldn't be misused (as some of the literature points out e-collars often are). Also would some other less pleasant stimulus like a certain kind of noise serve the same purpose?

Not addressed specifically to you. But there also remains the question for me, that severe behavioral problems can be rooted in an in-born lack of fear of punishment or the unpleasant. If that also occurs in dogs, then shock-type training would tend to get ratcheted up ... with the result that behaviours worsen.

Edited August 6, 2013 by mita

[huski]

So would an e-collar that's only set to the low levels be enough for most pet dog training (especially by owners)?

I'm not Cosmolo, but modern e-collar training is about using the collar on the lowest perceivable level for the dog. The dog needs to be taught what the stim means, and many people use them in conjunction with rewards like food or toys.

Each dog's working level is different and can change depending on the environment the dog is in, hence why a lot of low output collars have up to 100 levels (or more).

Also would some other less pleasant stimulus like a certain kind of noise serve the same purpose?

Some people use vibration only collars, many e-collars actually come with a vibration option too. But, and I would suggest this would be the same as a loud/aversive noise, many dogs find the vibration more aversive than a low level stim.

It can be tricky for some people to understand just over the internet, I find that when people are shown how e-collars work properly in person and feel the stim on themselves it is a lot easier to understand how it is used, and how beneficial they can be.

Edited August 6, 2013 by huski

[Tazar]

Tazar, I think that's a bit unfair to say that if you don't chose to use an ecollar to create snake aversion then you would rather your dog die from snake bite.Its really not like its one or the other.

Sorry if you think I was generalising to all people, as I was not.

I was responding directly to the OP who thinks that +R is the best way to train a dog to stay away from snakes. I think aversion training is far more effective with whatever tool you want to use, e collar or not.

I certainly do not believe that every one needs to do snake training on their dog, in fact the percentage would be very low. :)

[Cosmolo]

The advantage of the e collar as opposed to noise or other aversion is its potential for precision so no it can't be replicated easily by another aversive that the intensity of which is more difficult to hone.

In addition an e collar with limited levels would not really resolve the issue of stress with misuse as much of the issue lies with the timing of the application and removal of the stimulation rather than just the level of aversive itself.

[Tazar]

'Sometimes it only takes one exposure'.... that is the whole point of aversion training, you only need to do it a minimal amount of times and bingo....dog avoids snakes all together.

Not quite true, and I do worry that this is the idea that people have of aversion training. A dog can't "unlearn" something, the behaviour is always there but under effective punishment it is suppressed for some amount of time. Punished responses can and do spontaneously re-appear.

What if the dog has never seen a snake before? Is it 'unlearning'?

[Salukifan]

Yes, they can.

[Aidan3]

'Sometimes it only takes one exposure'.... that is the whole point of aversion training, you only need to do it a minimal amount of times and bingo....dog avoids snakes all together.

Not quite true, and I do worry that this is the idea that people have of aversion training. A dog can't "unlearn" something, the behaviour is always there but under effective punishment it is suppressed for some amount of time. Punished responses can and do spontaneously re-appear.

What if the dog has never seen a snake before? Is it 'unlearning'?

Ha, good question! If they've never seen a snake before, but they show interest and you punish that, it's still suppression of some learned or innate response.

[mita]

So would an e-collar that's only set to the low levels be enough for most pet dog training (especially by owners)?

I'm not Cosmolo, but modern e-collar training is about using the collar on the lowest perceivable level for the dog. The dog needs to be taught what the stim means, and many people use them in conjunction with rewards like food or toys.

Each dog's working level is different and can change depending on the environment the dog is in, hence why a lot of low output collars have up to 100 levels (or more).

Also would some other less pleasant stimulus like a certain kind of noise serve the same purpose?

Some people use vibration only collars, many e-collars actually come with a vibration option too. But, and I would suggest this would be the same as a loud/aversive noise, many dogs find the vibration more aversive than a low level stim.

It can be tricky for some people to understand just over the internet, I find that when people are shown how e-collars work properly in person and feel the stim on themselves it is a lot easier to understand how it is used, and how beneficial they can be.

Thank you, huski. Spot on answers to my questions. I'm really interested in that vibration option.... didn't know it existed.

Again, I could be wrong.... but it seems a vibration sensation is more about gaining attention rather than giving a feeling of pain. It could cancel out negatives like raising cortisol levels so high.

To be honest, I wonder if there's a use for vibration only collars....linked, as Cosmolo does, with as quick as possible move to rewards???

Maybe there needs to be some soundly based alternative to straight out use of e-collars. The UK research, funded by one of their government departments, didn't come up with support.

[Weasels]

Except lots of people who've used the vibration option say it scares the dog more than the normal settings. It's not about the level of pain, it's about something against your neck suddenly doing weird-ass shit and you don't know why.

[mita]

The advantage of the e collar as opposed to noise or other aversion is its potential for precision so no it can't be replicated easily by another aversive that the intensity of which is more difficult to hone.

In addition an e collar with limited levels would not really resolve the issue of stress with misuse as much of the issue lies with the timing of the application and removal of the stimulation rather than just the level of aversive itself.

Thanks, Cosmolo. Also LBD for the comments about the vibration option.

I found a reference from a dog behaviorist, Roger Mungford. He's used a 'hiss' noise, but very targeted. Radio controlled to the dog's collar. As predictable, there's variation.

I'm a determined little digger!

I have employed the hiss sound of inert gas release in dog training for over twenty years, initially to deal with unwanted barking (although not distressed or separation-induced barking). There is an enormous variation in sensitivity, where approximately 8% of dogs have no fear or do not respond to the sound of gas-training collars. Another 10% are hypersensitive so would become unhappy wearing the collars but the majority, about 80%, become collar-cued, relaxed and don't bark when wearing the device.

Edited August 6, 2013 by mita

[Cosmolo]

Double post

Edited August 6, 2013 by Cosmolo

[huski]

Mita I think one thing that is important to remember is that we don't decide what a dog does and doesn't find aversive. It might sounder kinder to use a vibration as opposed to a static pulse but like it has been pointed out many dogs find the vibration more aversive.

We also can't force a dog to have value for a reward, again that's something the dog decides and we can really only work with the natural desire/instinct they have genetically. One common problem scenario when a dog is bought in cor training is that the dog has a long, powerful reward history with things the owners can't control - other dogs, wild animals, etc and no to little value for the rewards the owners can offer and control. What path you'd would take to help them would depend on the dog and what methods they will respond well to, and the owners skill level and goals.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Personally I prefer to use the reward/no reward method of training.

My timing is often crap. I don't think I could successfully use the ecollar.

I'd trust Steve C with one but not me.

As for who is a dog trainer... everyone who owns a dog is a dog trainer with varying degrees of success. In my case - I suspect my dog is slightly better at training people than I am at training her.

And my dog is collar smart - it would be extremely difficult to get compliance for anything trained with something as chunky as an ecollar if it was not on her.

She knows what different training gear means. And I can't imagine there would be any useful transfer of value with the ecollar... apart from blaming the snake for the buzz/zap.

So if Bob Bailey can train dolphins in open water to do bomb disposal with rewards only, then I can surely train my dog to ignore a snake or at least indicate it from a safe distance. The main problem would be having a snake in lots of different habitats to practice with. We've got varying degrees of success with the local cats. From lunging at them, to letting them have a pat while she sits there. A lot of it has to do with working the threshold of able to learn and completely over the top C A T... (too close too quick).

[corvus]

If I had a deaf dog I would consider it worthwhile to condition it to a vibrating collar. I would opt for the vibration rather than the electronic stimulation because I am guessing there would be less potential for variability in the sensation depending on things like whether the dog is wet or dry etc. I'd be far more comfortable with something that did not depend on electrical current and conductance. Incidentally, skin conductance is considered a pretty decent indicator of changes in arousal and emotional state. I have no idea if that could also alter how the dog experiences e-collar levels.