|
In-house Policy on the
Use of Electronic Collars
Cam Day Consulting
www.pethealth.com.au
07 32550022
Purpose of this Policy
This policy describes the views of Cam Day
Consulting on the use of electronic collars on dogs and cats.
Its purpose is to describe the views expected of
employees of Cam Day Consulting and, when electronic collars are used, in
what circumstances employees are permitted to implement the use of collars.
This policy has been written by
Dr Cam Day BVSc. BSc. MACVS (Animal Behaviour Veterinarian).
This policy covers the
use of:
-
Electric stimulus collars (sometimes referred
to as electric shock collars) where the collar applies an electric
stimulus to the neck of a dog or cat.
-
Compressed liquid or gas collars which emit a
jet of aversive liquid (commonly citronella) or aversive gas (commonly
compressed air)
-
Other forms of collars which may include, but
are not restricted to:-
In this document, the above devices are
collectively referred to as E-collars.
Overview
Employees of Cam Day Consulting should not
routinely recommend the use of E-collars.
In most cases of behaviour therapy, we expect
employees would avoid the use of E-collars and search for other
alternatives.
However, when an employee has fully considered
the animal welfare vectors of an individual case and considers the use of an
E-collar may be in the best interest of the welfare of the animal concerned,
they can approach management to discuss that usage.
E-collars cannot be purchased through
www.pethealth.com.au.
Background
The E-collar industry has progressed since the
first introduction of such collars onto the market. Earlier collars were
inhumane.
Newer collars can incorporate technologies which
make their usage more acceptable if full consideration is given to:-
-
Case selection.
-
The benefits or limits of alternative
strategies.
-
The animal welfare vectors of each individual
case.
-
The responsible usage of an E-collar under
strict supervision and guidance of a qualified behaviourist.
How We Prefer to Create
Behaviour Change
Behaviour change at Cam Day Consulting is
created through a three-step process:-
Step 1 Fully assessing each case
Step 2 Then implementing a four-point
system of therapy based on the assessment
Step 3 Providing long-term support to
ensure any case is reaching its outcome targets.
Employees are reminded that our four-point
system of therapy (termed the ‘balance of therapies’) will require us to
look at:
-
Medical causes of the behavioural problem
-
Methods by which an animal can be taught
to show wanted behaviours thereby reducing unwanted behaviours.
-
Means by which a behaviour is managed to reduce
is frequency
-
Deciding if pheromones or medications will be
needed to effect a change in behaviour.
If an E-collar is used, at a minimum that can
only occur after a full assessment is made and more usually after a full
investigation of the balance of therapies has been undertaken and
alternative strategies have been fully investigated.
With reference to the four points of the balance
of therapies, employees should note that:
-
Where a medical issue is a
component of the behavioural problem, attempting to change the behaviour by
use of an E-collar is contrary to the animal’s welfare as it allows the
medical issue to continue untreated. The effects of the E-collar could hide
the clinical signs of the medical disorder.
-
Where an animal is in a state where it cannot
learn, the use of an E-collar is contraindicated as it could adversely
affect the welfare of the animal.
Notes
-
Some animals are
intellectually unable to learn either as a virtue of their age or due to
variations seen in ‘intelligence’ which in many ways is directly analogous
to IQ variations seen in humans.
-
Some animals
are in a behavioural state where their ability to learn is reduced and in
particular animals with:-
-
Anxiety
disorders (including but not limited to separation anxieties)
-
Panic disorders
(including but not limited to escaping behaviours, and noise fears)
-
Fearful natures
where the implementation of aversion-based strategies compounds their fear
and thereby creates an anxious (or a panic) response when that animal
repeatedly experiences the same fear-evoking stimulus.
-
Compulsive
disorders (including but not limited to some forms of barking,
self-mutilation and aggression)
-
Managing behaviour properly can reduce or
eliminate the need for an E-collar. Management can include:-
-
Enriched housing to reduce fearful, anxious or
compulsive behaviours and to reduce excessive vocalisation.
-
Provision of adequate fences to reduce excessive
vocalisation in dogs, to manage aggressive behaviour in dogs and cats and to
prevent dogs and cats from escaping or roaming. Adequate fencing can also
manage predation on other animals.
-
Medications and pheromones are often much better
targeted at the cause of unwanted behaviours than E-collars because when
carefully used they can:-
-
Reduce anxieties, fears and compulsive
behaviours where an E-collar usually cannot
-
Create a state where an animal is more capable
of learning
How E-Collars Create a
Behaviour Change
In animals that are capable of learning,
behaviour change is mostly created by:-
-
Reinforcement of a behaviour
-
Punishment of a behaviour
Further, reinforcement occurs in two ways
-
Positive reinforcement
-
Negative reinforcement
Punishment also occurs in two ways
-
Positive punishment
-
Negative punishment
Can E-Collars Change Behaviour with Positive
Reinforcement?
-
Bark-reduction collars and containment collars
currently cannot implement positive reinforcement as a primary means of
changing behaviour.
-
Remote collars often contain an audible
electronic signal (a beep) which can be used to reward wanted behaviour but
they are not commonly used in this way. They require very good operator
training to achieve this.
Can E-Collars Change Behaviour with Negative
Reinforcement?
-
When an animal chooses to avoid a consequence it
is strengthening an alternative behaviour. E-collars that emit a warning
tone, such as confinement collars and some bark-reduction collars, are
teaching a dog to avoid a consequence and this is thereby negative
reinforcement.
Notes.
-
A useful example of negative reinforcement is
that a driver will choose to slow down when seeing a police radar to avoid
the fine. By using marked police cars, road-side radar vans with adequate
sign marking and road-side speed cameras with sign marking, the police are
strengthening slower driving using negative reinforcement. Drivers choose to
avoid the fine.
-
Because a dog or cat chooses not to get the
electric stimulus, the knowledgeable implementation (by a behaviourist) of
warning tones can be more welfare positive than the use of the aversive
stimulus (shock)
Can E-Collars Change Behaviour with Positive
Punishment?
-
E-collars attempt to change behaviour by
positive punishment when an aversive stimulus (e.g. a shock, citronella
spray or cold air) is administered as an immediate consequence of an
animals’ behaviour.
-
Pet owners who use loud voices, hit pets with
rolled newspapers, throw items at pets and use other aversive stimuli are
also practicing positive punishment.
Notes:
-
A pet has to be capable of learning for positive punishment to work
-
Pets with fearful or anxious natures often do not respond well to positive
punishment
-
Aggressive pets can become more aggressive when positive punishment is
used.
-
Timing is very important with positive punishment so, for pets that are
capable of learning, one advantage of E-collars is that the stimulus is
better timed to the unwanted behaviour. Owners are often incapable of timing
aversive stimuli correctly and the positive punishment they use is therefore
often off-target
-
But owners or trainers can choose when the punishment is appropriate
whereas collars attempt to positively punish all occurrences of a behaviour
– whether it is appropriate or not.
Can E-Collars Change Behaviour with Negative Punishment?
Notes:
Animal Welfare Outcomes We Have Observed from
the Use of E-collars
We have consulted with many dog owners and a few
cat owners who have used E-collars on their pets prior to seeking our
assistance and have seen detrimental outcomes and some beneficial outcomes
from the use of E-collars.
Below is a summary of some of the animal welfare outcomes we have observed.
At this stage, we do not have means of collating these outcomes and the
below information is empiric only but employees can discuss the below
information with clients to allow clients to be fully informed.
Undesirable Animal Welfare Outcomes We Have
Observed
-
Fearful behaviour when approached by owners
-
Anxious behaviours when approached by owners
-
Including moroseness, cowering, trembling, avoidance, escaping, growling
-
When an electronic stimulus is received:-
-
Yelping and screaming
-
Cowering and freezing
-
Pressure necrosis from contacts on neck
-
Dogs being fearful of being in areas of the garden protected by
containment systems
-
Failure of collars to achieve behaviour change
-
Creation of unexpected behaviour changes
-
Changes in nature or frequency of vocalisation to avoid the electric
stimulus
-
Animals motivated to endure a containment collar stimulus to escape and
then becoming ‘trapped’ outside the boundary fence by the containment system
not allowing the animal to return.
Notes: Most of the above outcomes were based on owner-error in the
implementation of the collar usage and/or inadequacy of the documentation
included with the device.
Desirable Animal Welfare Outcomes We Have
Observed
-
Reduction or cessation of unwanted behaviour
that could not be achieved in other ways including
-
Escape-related behaviours in dogs and cats where significant welfare risk
would be present if escaping continued
-
Excessive vocalisation in dogs where owner punishment was causing anxiety
and distress
-
Reduction in some dangerous forms of owner-directed aggression
-
Reduction in predatory aggression in some large dogs
-
Confinement of cats to property/garden where enclosure confinement was
causing distress and where the cat’s welfare would be at great risk if
roaming was allowed to continue.
How Often Would Employees Be Expected to Use
E-Collars?
It is expected that the usage of E-collars would
be rare.
Summary
-
Used incorrectly, E-collars can be harmful to animals and can place an
animal’s welfare in jeopardy.
-
E-collars should only be used when other remedies have been proven to be
unsuitable and only when an animal’s welfare will be enhanced by the use of
the collar.
-
E-collars should not be used as the sole remedy for animal behavioural
problems. Balanced broad-based solutions give best results.
-
Used correctly E-collars can provide welfare benefits when combined with
other broad-based solutions.
-
E-collars should only be implemented when qualified behaviourists are
overseeing their usage.
-
Not all E-collars are equal in their benefit-to-risk ratio.
-
Remote-activated collars require considerable skill to ensure their use is
correct and are the collars most likely to cause harm.
-
Bark-activated collars need to be used with great caution for dogs with
anxious, fearful or compulsive behaviours. For such behaviours, there use
may be contraindicated.
-
Containment collars need to be installed thoughtfully and adequate
training is vital to ensure the dog or cat recognises the boundary to
minimise the stimulus received. Where traditional fences are not effective,
a containment collar system properly installed can produce welfare benefits
by preventing roaming.
|