The Kennel Club took part in a debate organised by the University of Lincoln on 28 February, 2008, regarding the use of electric shock training aids or static pulse training aids; and whether their use should be allowed to continue. The Kennel Club was represented by Holly Lee, Public Affairs Manager, who was joined by leading behaviourists Dr Roger Mugford, Kendal Shepherd and Sarah Fisher. The debate was organised by Professor Daniel Mills, Head of Biological Sciences, who is highly regarded for his work around animal behaviour

The debate between the ‘anti’ and ‘pro’ shock training device lobby was heard by students, academics and others with an interest in animal behaviour and welfare. The motion debated by the guest speakers was: ‘This House believes that the use of electronic training devices on companion animals is a valid and acceptable means of training which should be allowed to continue on animal welfare grounds.’ The debate was chaired by Professor Brian McGaw, the Dean of Health, Life and Social Sciences at the university.

After both sides had stated their arguments and answered questions regarding their stance, the audience was asked to vote on the motion. Overwhelmingly, by a majority of 44 to 5 (with 7 abstentions), the Kennel Club and those against electric shock training aids won the debate.

Said Caroline Kisko, Kennel Club Secretary, "This is yet another victory in our campaign to ban electric shock training devices throughout the UK. It is clear from the number of people – all with a specialist interest in dog training and behaviour – who voted against the motion, that the arguments put forward by the Kennel Club and other members of the team were compelling. This comes at a time when we are eagerly awaiting the results of both the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Government consultations into the use of electric shock training devices, which we hope will echo the outcome of this debate.”

Anti shock training device debate team Holly Lee, Dr Roger Mugford, Sarah Fisher and Kendal Shepherd

More information on electric shock training devices:

• Electric shock collars - worn around a dog’s neck, these work either via a remote control with various settings which, when activated, deliver an electric shock to the neck of a dog, or deliver an electric shock to a dog automatically when a dog barks or enters a pre-defined perimeter shock zone.
• Electric shock mats - there are two types of electric mats: one is known as a ‘wireless crate’ and emits electric shocks to the dog when it steps off the mat, and the other is called a ‘scat mat’ and emits an electric shock to the dog when it steps on the mat.
• Electric shock leads - these emit electric shocks to a dog if it exerts more pressure on the lead than is considered ‘normal’ for its size.

First hand experience

Anjelica Steinker, of the Courteous Canine Dog School and Doggie Gym said; "A friend of mine rescued a Jack Russell Terrier after a professional dog trainer had used an electric shock collar to help house train her.

When the terrier came to my friend she was very fearful of urinating and constantly checked herself, presumably for urine. It took several months to house train this dog because of all the fear that was caused by the shock collar.”

Pat Miller wrote for Whole-Dog-Journal.com; ‘Rufus was a typical adolescent Labrador Retriever; Rufus’s energy was a bit much for the younger children. A pet supply store (sold) a product that promised to solve problems with the push of a button. One rainy afternoon, a neighbour sent his son out to the pen to take Rufus for a walk. Rufus wouldn’t let the boy get near him. He said Rufus had this green colour round his neck under the training collar. I carefully removed the collar to find a huge gaping hole in Rufus’ neck, under one of the prongs’.

Dr Susan Benson of the Animal Medical Centre in Preston, Idaho who treated Rufus’ injuries claimed: “This was one of the worst electrical burns I have seen other than dogs who have had contact with high power lines.”

Scientific research

Independent scientific research confirms that the collars are both ‘painful and frightening’, and influence the dog’s well being negatively in the long term (Matthijs B.H. Schilder and Joanne A.M. van der Borg, was published in the Applied Animal Behaviour Science Journal)

Professional Trainers

The Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT), one of the UK’s largest professional pet dog training bodies, has also joined the campaign. According to the APDT there is no behaviour or training problem in dogs that is best dealt with by delivering an electric shock to a dog.

Establishments that have already banned electric shock collars include the Association of Chief Police Officers, the armed forces, and the two largest German Shepherd Dog clubs in the country - they have imposed a voluntary ban on the use of electric shock collars to train their dogs.

Shock collars fail to address underlying behavioural problems and can give rise to more serious problems. Confusion over where the painful shock has come from means the dog is more likely to associate it with something in its immediate environment than with its behaviour at the time. This can make attacks on owners, other dogs and animals more likely if the dog believes that they are the source of the pain.

18th March 2008

For further press information, images or interview requests please contact:
The Kennel Club Press Office
020 7518 1008
Email
Website

Top of page