03/27/2022
The dogs showed signs of pain in response to the electrical stimuli, which included jumping, head-shaking and vocalisation. The electrical stimulus comprised a single pulse of 1 second duration, of 0.4 Amps at 3,000 volts, which was applied to dogs approaching within 1-2 metres of sheep. Christiansen et al, 2001; Christiansen et al, 2001a).
The physics: A Current above 2 mA is severely painful and lethal.
But to pass even such little amount current, requires a high enough voltage.
The typical human body resistance is around 100 kOhms.
Thus to pass 2mA current, you require 100000x0.002= 200 volts. Hence you need around 200volts DC to get killed.( For AC net resistance of body drops to half therefore AC is more lethal) .
Compared a dry dog is likely to present a resistance greater than 80 kΩ and a wet dog 20–40 kΩ.
Additionally The epidermis of a dog is 3-5 cells thick however in humans it is at least 10-15 cells thick.
Dogs skin is 3x more sensitive than human skin in regards to Electr stimulation.
When a current above 0.4 mA travels through dog neck muscles, it causes a violent spasm. If the muscles around the throat are affected the dog experiencing a choking experience similar to a dog bite.
There are well-established reward-based training methods which do not use harsh aversive stimuli. In the UK, reward-based training is used for assistance dogs (Blackwell and Casey, 2006; Guide dogs for the Blind, 2015), and according to Offord, (2014), police dogs, armed forces dogs and assistance dogs are never trained using electric shock training devices. This is significant, given the high standards to which such animals must be trained. Reward-based training is also the norm for gun dog training, where ECs are a ‘technique of last resort’ (Cook, 2008).
In Australia, an online survey of farm dog keepers was administered for three months during 2013. Eight hundred and twelve respondents submitted details for 1,806 currently working dogs, 864 recently rejected dogs, and 1,357 recently retired dogs. Statistical analyses identified seven factors which were significantly associated with successful canine training. These were: dog breed, housing
11
style, participation in working dog trials, age at acquisition, use of electronic collars, hypothetical upper limit that owners might be prepared to spend on veterinary treatment, and conscientiousness of the owner. In relation to electronic collars, 93% of respondents did not use these, but those who did use them were significantly more likely to have ‘below average’ success rates when training their dogs (Arnott et al, 2014).
Whoever uses EC (electric collars)
for dog training does not understand the basic learning theory of dogs. The use is just for convenience of the user not for the dog.
The argument that use of ECs saves lives, can not be confirmed by any study. The manufacturers warnings include “ not a safe containment devise” “not to be used to treating aggression”
There is no “proper use” of ECs, aka e-collars, shock collars, stim-collars, remote collars, etc.
The “need of a collar in training” is an argument without any scientific evidence to prove the need.
50,000 years till recently in dog training history, Dogs were successfully trained without electric Devises,
Bottom line, the use of electric Collars is an ethical problem.
Read more about how Wales UK banned the usehttps://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2017-12/electronic-collars-in-dogs-and-cats-review-of-welfare-implications.pdf
