BARKS from the Guild Issue 37 / JULY 2019 BARKSfromtheGuild.com

CANINE Addressing Aggressive Behavior FELINE Enrichment: Cats and their Boxes EQUINE Group Housing Solutions TRAINING Clicker Training Shelter Kittens BEHAVIOR Lessons from Mother Nature CONSULTING What’s Shocking Helping with Pet Loss about Shock? TRAINING Working with What science tells us about the Escape Artists use of shock in training PLUS: A FULL REPORT FROM PPG’S 2019 CANINE AGGRESSION AND BITE PREVENTION SEMINAR IN PORTLAND, OREGON © Can Stock Photo/shauna2286 © Can Stock c o v e r What’s Shocking about Shock?

Don Hanson, co-chairman of PPG’s Advocacy Committee, examines what science tells us about the use of electric shock in animal training, and what you A number of scientific studies have reported can do to help the Shock-Free that shock collars cause undue stress to and Coalition help pets and their can lead to a negative impact on welfare owners © Can Stock Photo/Vera1703

20 BARKS from the Guild/July 2019 c o v e r

he Pet Professional Guild (PPG) was founded in 2012 by current A study by Schilder and van der Borg (2004) president, Niki Tudge. As a and pet care professional, examined guard dogs who were specially bred TTudge, like many of us, was discouraged by the flawed and harm- for toughness and low sensitivity to pain and ful information being disseminated around the profession, including by stress and found that training with shock collars some trainers, day care operators, groomers, boarding kennels, breed- ers, shelters, rescues, veterinarians, and even “reality” television shows. caused long-lasting stress effects — to the point In some cases, the latter were promoted as offering “expert” dog train- that the dogs continued to associate their ing advice, but were, in fact, just like most “reality” TV: entertainment handler as aversive even outside of a training based on conflict and drama. context. From its inception, PPG has been committed to the training, care, and management of companion animals that are free from pain, force, and fear. Its Guiding Principles (2012) state that members are obligated for the training, care, and management of pets was unnecessary and to follow this philosophy: “To be in any way affiliated with the Pet Pro- harmful out of the blue. Its position is based on the careful review of fessional Guild, all members must adhere to a strict code of conduct. the growing number of peer reviewed, scientific studies that demon- Pet Professional Guild members understand Force-Free to mean: No strate that shock is not only unnecessary, but is harmful, both physically shock, No pain, No choke, No fear, No physical force, No compulsion and psychologically. based methods are ever employed to train or care for a pet.” This guarantee to kind, compassionate and scientific training meth- What Do the Professional Organizations Say? ods is why I am a member of PPG and why the Find A Professional sec- The current scientific data, in addition to the moral and ethical concerns tion of the PPG website is the first place I go when looking to refer to about mental and physical damage to animals subjected to methods another pet care professional. Whoever I recommend reflects on my using force, fear and/or pain have moved a number of representing pro- reputation and that of my business, so it is essential I know that those fessional organizations to advocate for the use of humane training tech- receiving my referrals are committed to training, care, and management niques founded on evidence-based learning theories and avoid training that comply with PPG's Guiding Principles. methods or devices which employ coercion, pain, force and/or fear In January 2015, the PPG Advocacy Committee was born with its (Tudge & Nilson, 2016). These include, but are not limited to: mission defined thus: “To reduce or eliminate the practice of using elec- • “The AAHA guidelines oppose aversive training techniques, tronic shock devices in the training of domestic pet animals. PPG will such as prong (pinch) or choke collars, cattle prods, alpha rolls (forcibly achieve this goal through strategic professional, respectful and ener- rolling a pet on his or her back), electronic shock collars, entrapment, getic processes of advocacy and education. These efforts will at all times and physically punishing a pet. The guidelines note that aversive training adhere to the Guiding Principles of PPG and will be accomplished techniques can harm or even destroy an animal’s trust in his or her through the development of specific action plans, as determined by owner, negatively impact the pet’s problem-solving ability, and cause in- members of the PPG Advocacy Committee.” creased anxiety in the animal. Aversive techniques are especially a con- Key to this plan was to use the existing and developing scientific lit- cern if pets are already fearful or aggressive, rendering any aggressive erature, demonstrating that using shock to train animals is unnecessary dog more dangerous. According to the AAHA guidelines, the only ac- and often harmful and not in the interest of animal welfare, as a foun- ceptable training techniques are non-aversive, positive techniques that dation. Next came the Shock-Free Coalition, established in September rely on the identification of, and reward for, desirable behaviors. Posi- 2017, a child of the Advocacy Committee, but a separate entity with its tive is the most humane and effective approach.” - Amer- own website and a very clear mission: “The key purpose of the Shock- ican Animal Hospital Association (2019). Free Coalition is to build a strong and broad movement committed to • “The Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) sup- eliminating shock devices from the supply and demand chain. This goal ports the use of humane training methods for dogs that are based on will be reached when shock tools and equipment are universally un- current scientific knowledge of learning theory. Reward-based methods available and not permitted for the training, management and care of are highly recommended. Aversive methods are strongly discouraged as pets.” they may cause fear, distress, anxiety, pain or physical injury to the dog.” Critical steps in this process are: - Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (2015). • To engage and educate pet owners and shelter/rescue work- • “Aversive, punishment-based techniques may alter behaviour, ers to help them make informed decisions about the management, care, but the methods fail to address the underlying cause and, in the case of and training of the pets in their charge. unwanted behaviour, can lead to undue anxiety, fear, distress, pain or • To build a worldwide coalition that provides pet owners ac- injury.” - British Columbia Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Ani- cess to competent, professional pet industry service providers. mals (2019). • To create widespread pet industry transparency and compli- • The British Small Animal Veterinary Association (BSAVA) “rec- ance regarding how professionals implement their services and commu- ommends against the use of electronic shock collars and other aversive nicate their philosophy to pet owners. methods for the training and containment of animals. Shocks and other The Shock-Free Coalition website serves as an educational resource aversive stimuli received during training may not only be acutely stress- for anyone wanting to learn more about the organization and why end- ful, painful and frightening for the animals, but may also produce long ing the use of shock is so essential. It also offers anyone the opportunity term adverse effects on behavioural and emotional responses…The to support the cause by taking the Shock-Free Pledge (see also ad on BSAVA strongly recommends the use of positive reinforcement training p.23), either as an individual or as a business. Participants may pledge at methods that could replace those using aversive stimuli.” - British Small several different levels ranging from simply signing the pledge to signing Animal Veterinary Association (2019). the pledge and making a recurring financial contribution to help the • “The British Veterinary Association (BVA) has concerns about mission continue toward its goal. the use of aversive training devices to control, train or punish dogs. The use of devices such as electronic collars, as a means of punishing or con- What Does Science Tell Us about Shock? trolling behaviour of companion animals is open to potential abuse and The Shock-Free Coalition did not come to its conclusion that using shock incorrect use of such training aids has the potential to cause welfare

BARKS from the Guild/July 2019 21 c o v e r

© Can Stock Photo/vauvau A study by Schilder and van der Borg (2004) examining guard dogs concluded that training with shock is painful and stressful; also, they found that the dogs involved in the study learned their owner’s presence predicted more shocks — even outside a regular training context and training problems…Electric pulse devices are sometimes used in They are an aversive training method that have in some studies been as- dog training as a form of punishment to prevent a dog from repeating sociated with significant negative animal welfare outcomes. Positive re- bad behaviour. Although training a dog is important for their well-being, inforcement training methods are an effective and humane alternative research shows that electric pulse collars are no more effective than to e-collars for dog training…The use of pain to train dogs is no more ac- positive reinforcement methods. BVA has consulted with experts and ceptable or humane when it is administered by remote control, than if it examined the evidence. Research by Schalke, Stichnoth and Jones- was delivered as a physical blow such as a punch or kick.” - Baade (2005) showed that the application of electric stimulus, even at a Veterinary Association (2018). low level, can cause physiological and behavioral responses associated • “E-collar training is associated with numerous well docu- with stress, pain and fear. In light of the evidence, BVA has concluded mented risks concerning dog health, behavior and welfare. Any existing that electric pulse collars raise a number of welfare issues, such as the behaviour problem is likely to deteriorate or an additional problem is difficulty in accurately judging the level of electric pulse to apply to a likely to emerge, when such a collar is used. This becomes an even dog without causing unnecessary suffering.” - British Veterinary Associa- greater risk when this aversive tool is used by an unqualified trainer (as tion (2018). training is largely unregulated throughout the EU, it appears that a large • “The New Zealand Veterinary Association (NZVA) does not number of trainers are unqualified). Additionally, the efficacy of these support the use of electronic behaviour modifying collars (e-collars) that collars has not been proven to be more effective than other alternatives deliver aversive stimuli for the training or containment of dogs. E-collars such as positive training. Hence, European Society of Veterinary Clinical have the potential to harm both the physical and mental health of dogs. Ethology (ESVCE) encourages education programmes which employ pos- itive reinforcement methods (while avoiding positive punishment and The Shock-Free Coalition did not come to its negative reinforcement) thereby promoting positive dog welfare and a conclusion that using shock for the training, humane, ethical and moral approach to dog training at all times.” - Euro- care, and management of pets was unnecessary pean Society of Veterinary Clinical Ethology (2017). and harmful out of the blue. Its position is based In addition to these professional bodies, several countries, including on the careful review of the many peer England, , , , , , , Swe- den, and , the province of Quebec in , and the reviewed, scientific studies that demonstrate states of New South Wales, South and the Australian Capital that shock is not only unnecessary but is Territory (ACT) in Australia, have already banned electronic stimulation harmful, both physically and psychologically. devices. Under recent amendments to ACT animal welfare legislation, anyone who places an electric shock device, such as a shock collar, on

22 BARKS from the Guild/July 2019 c o v e r

Ultimately, I think the question everyone with a dog needs to ask themselves is, “Do I want to be working with a pet care professional that does not understand the basic principles of learning?”

an animal, will attract a maximum penalty of AU$16,000 [$11,000] and counter the negative effects of getting shocked. This is in spite of the a year's imprisonment (Brewer, 2019). In Scotland, “strict guidance” has fact that handlers of non-shocked dogs admitted that they use prong been published by the Scottish Parliament which provides “advice on collars and that their dogs experienced beatings and other harsh pun- training methods and training aids for dogs, with particular focus on the ishment, such as kicks or choke collar corrections.” (Yin, 2011). welfare issues that may arise from the use of aversive methods includ- An important point to note here is that shock collar users may ing e-collars. It highlights the potential consequences of the misuse of sometimes say something along the lines of, “I don’t use the shock fea- aversive training aids, including possible legal consequences.” (The Ken- ture any more. I only use the collar with the beep on now.” However, nel Club, 2018) (Tudge, Nilson, Millikan & Stapleton-Frappell, 2019). the Shock-Free Coalition (2019) points out that the tone itself can be- come as aversive and damaging as the shock once the association has Examining Arguments been established: “If I pull out a gun, and I cock it, are you any less Meanwhile, there are pet care professionals, pet owners, and moneyed scared than if I fired it? If your dog does what you ask when he hears interests, such as the companies that manufacture and sell shock col- the beep, it means that he has learned that the beep predicts a painful lars, who disregard all the research and advocate for the continued use shock, just like cocking the gun predicts a bullet hitting you. While the of shock. Common arguments include that the shock “does not cause collar is no longer physically hurting the dog, it can still be scarring him pain or discomfort” and therefore cannot be abusive or inhumane; emotionally.” shock is “more efficient” for training than positive reinforcement train- Another study, by Schalke, Stichnoth, Ott and Jones-Baade (2007), ing; shock is the “only way” certain behaviors can be trained (e.g., snake examined the use of shock for training to stop undesirable hunting/ avoidance training); and using shock “saves dogs’ lives.” Let’s now look chasing behavior. This study also revealed that the dogs being trained at each of those arguments individually and examine them from a scien- with shock found it to be very stressful. The authors concluded, “…the tific perspective. general use of electric shock collars is not consistent with animal wel- fare.” #1: Does the electric shock from a shock collar cause pain? A third study, AW1402, conducted by the University of Lincoln and the University of Bristol for DEFRA in the United Kingdom (2010), com- States Anderson (2012): “During the initial training period, [shock] must pared the features of several shock collars and examined how they are be painful, uncomfortable, or frightening, or it wouldn’t work. It has to typically used by pet owners. The researchers concluded that “for a sub- have some unpleasant feeling that is robust enough to get the dog to work to make it stop.” Science, through published peer reviewed research, is quite clear that shock collars cause pain. While proponents might call it a “stim” a “tap,” or a “static charge,” we know from the science of operant condi- tioning that the aversive stimulus (electric shock) must be sufficiently distressing (i.e., physical or emotionally painful) to cause a change in be- havior. If it did not hurt, it would not work. Several studies have reported that shock collars cause undue stress to dogs. A study by Schilder and van der Borg (2004) examined guard dogs who were specially bred for toughness and low sensitivity to pain and stress and found that training with shock collars caused long-lasting stress effects — to the point that the dogs continued to associate their handler as aversive even outside of a training context. The dogs exhib- ited behaviors associated with fear and anxiety long after they had re- ceived shocks. “The conclusions, therefore are, that being trained [with electric shock] is stressful. That receiving shocks is a painful experience to dogs, and that the dogs have learned that the presence of their owner (or his commands) announces reception of shocks, even outside of the normal training context.” (Schilder & van der Borg, 2004).

Fear and Anxiety Late veterinarian Dr. Sophia Yin (2011) discussed this study in a post on her blog and made the following key conclusions: • Overall, the researchers concluded that even when compared to working dogs trained using choke chain and pinch collar corrections, dogs trained with electronic shock collars showed more fear and anxiety behaviors than those trained by other traditional police dog and watch- dog methods. • Avoidance behavior and fear postures during the shocks indi- cated that the shock elicited both pain and fear and therefore were not just a distraction or nuisance. • “The enormous rewards the dogs experience during training i.e. chasing down, catching a criminal and winning the sleeve, do not

BARKS from the Guild/July 2019 23 c o v e r

After the [invisible fence] system was installed, the while telling people it’s not really a shock and/or it won’t hurt their Jake saw the neighbor out in her yard. Since he dog? They are certainly not being truthful. Sadly, greed has caused hu- had always liked his neighbor, he ran straight mans to do unethical and unnecessary things from the beginning of toward her, but was shocked when crossing the time. I believe this excerpt from Dogs, Cats, and Scapegoats (2017) fur- ther illustrates my point about shock causing pain as well as the motiva- invisible line. This happened a few more times, tion for selling shock collars. It begins with Dr. Radosta’s statement cited until, one day, Jake was inside his home when in the previous paragraph and continues with a video of someone the neighbor knocked on the front door. When demonstrating a shock collar on themselves. I use this excerpt in my ori- the family opened the door, Jake saw the entation program for all my Basic Manners students and in a presenta- neighbor and immediately reacted by biting her tion for my aggression clients, and it does help people understand that in the leg. shock is very painful.

#2. Is training a dog with an aversive such as a shock collar more set of dogs tested, the previous use of e-collars in training are associ- efficient than using positive reinforcement training and food? ated with behavioural and physiological responses that are consistent The next argument we might hear in favor of using shock is that the with significant negative emotional states; this was not seen to the pain it causes is “irrelevant,” because, as a training method, it is “so same extent in the control population. It is therefore suggested that the much more efficient.” Well, is it? use of e-collars in training pet dogs can lead to a negative impact on The DEFRA AW1402 study (2010) indicates that not only does shock welfare, at least in a proportion of animals trained using this technique.” cause pain, it is often misused. This led to a second DEFRA study, The AW1402 researchers also observed that the instruction manuals AW1402a (2011), to assess the effect of pet training aids, specifically re- that came with shock collar products did not provide an adequate ex- mote static pulse systems, on the welfare of domestic dogs. AW1402a planation of how to use the device. When the individuals using the col- was designed to investigate how dogs would react when a shock collar lars were interviewed, they could not explain how to use the collar was used per the manufacturer’s instructions. The study looked at three properly and often indicated that they had failed to read the instruc- different groups of dogs, all with owners that had reported their dog ei- tions or chose to ignore them. The researchers concluded that “…some ther had a poor recall or chased cars, bicycles or animals. One group of of the reported use was clearly inconsistent with advice in e-collar man- dogs was trained with a shock collar by dog trainers that had been uals and potentially a threat to the dog’s welfare.” (DEFRA, 2010). trained by shock collar manufacturers; the second group of dogs was As noted in the AW1402 study, misuse and inappropriate use of trained by the same dog trainers but with positive reinforcement. The shock collars are not uncommon. One of my employees witnessed such last group of dogs was trained by members of the Association of Pet abuse at a field trial event. A dog owner with two dogs was working Dog Trainers (APDT) in the United Kingdom using positive reinforce- with one dog and had a second dog in his truck in a crate. The dog he ment. The researchers found “behavioural evidence that use of e-collars was working with did not respond to a cue, so the owner pressed a but- negatively impacted on the welfare of some dogs during training even ton on the remote to shock the dog. The dog still did not respond to the when training was conducted by professional trainers using relatively cue, so the owner shocked the dog again. Meanwhile, the dog in the benign training programmes advised by e-collar advocates.” The study crate was yelping each time the owner intended to shock the dog he also demonstrated that the shock collar was no more effective at resolv- was allegedly training. It was not until our staff member pointed it out ing recall and chasing behaviors than positive reinforcement training. that the owner realized he was shocking the wrong dog as he was using the wrong remote unit. Ethics and Welfare Ultimately, I think the question everyone with a dog needs to ask A study by Hiby, Rooney and Bradshaw (2004) specifically assessed the themselves is, “Do I want to be working with a pet care professional effectiveness of different training methods (positive reinforcement, pos- that does not understand the basic principles of learning?” States vet- itive punishment, and negative reinforcement) and how they affected a erinarian and veterinary behaviorist Dr. Lisa Radosta in the 2017 docu- dog’s behavior. The scientists did not just look at shock as an aversive, mentary, Dogs, Cats and Scapegoats: "If your trainer is still using pinch but even evaluated vocal punishment and physical punishment. They collars and choke collars, they haven't read a book or gone to a scientifi- concluded: “There are ethical concerns that dog training methods incor- cally based seminar in 25 years." The sad fact is that dog training is an porating physical or verbal punishment may result in pain and/or suffer- unregulated profession, and because of that, there are far too many ing. We provide evidence that, in the general dog owning population, people in the profession spreading disinformation about dogs, their be- dogs trained using punishment are no more obedient than those havior, and how to train them. trained by other means and, furthermore, they exhibit increased num- For anyone who understands how animals learn, what could be bers of potentially problematic behaviours. Problematic behaviours can their motivation for using, recommending, and selling shock collars all compromise welfare as they are often associated with an increased

SUBMIT A CASE STUDY OR MEMBER PROFILE FOR PUBLICATION IN BARKS from the Guild If you’d like to share your experiences and be featured in BARKS, here are our easy-to-fill-out templates... Member Profiles: bit.ly/2y9plS1 Case Studies: petprofessionalguild.com /CaseStudyTemplate All you have to do is fill them in, send them to us and we’ll do the rest!

24 BARKS from the Guild/July 2019 c o v e r

© Can Stock Photo/mexitographer A growing number of professional member bodies have issued position statements in support of humane training methods that are based on current scientific knowledge of learning theory state of anxiety (e.g. Askew, 1996) and they can also lead the owner to Jake’s guardians were concerned about him leaving the yard because he relinquish the dog (Serpell, 1996). Because reward-based methods are frequently went to visit the neighbors. He loved visiting with them and associated with higher levels of obedience and fewer problematic be- they enjoyed having him there. For what they believed was Jake’s pro- haviours, we suggest that their use is a more effective and welfare- tection, the family installed an underground fence system that would compatible alternative to punishment for the average dog owner.” (Hiby, keep him in their yard. They trained him to the system per the manufac- Rooney & Bradshaw, 2004). turer’s instructions. A 2012 study by Blackwell, Bolster, Richards, Loftus and Casey After the system was installed, Jake saw the neighbor out in her specifically looked at the use of shock collars for training dogs, why yard. Since he had always liked his neighbor, he ran straight toward her, owners used them, and how effective they were. The researchers con- but was shocked when crossing the invisible line. This happened a few cluded that “more owners using reward based methods for recall/chas- more times, until, one day, Jake was inside his home when the neighbor ing report a successful outcome of training than those using e-collars.” knocked on the front door. When the family opened the door, Jake saw (Blackwell, Bolster, Richards, Loftus & Casey, 2012). the neighbor and immediately reacted by biting her in the leg. There is ample evidence in the peer reviewed literature to support To Jake, the neighbor was the predictor of the shock, and he now reward-based training as more effective and less stressful for the dog, associated her with being shocked. This incident could have been pre- and less likely to cause other behavior problems such as aggression. vented with the installation of a real fence or by supervising Jake when There is also evidence that the use of shock can be a cause of aggressive he was out in the yard. behavior. Case #2: Jenny Aggressive Behavior: Case Studies “Jenny” would drag her guardians around on her leash, especially when How can shock cause aggressive behavior? I believe most everyone un- she saw another dog. Jenny was just curious and friendly and wanted to derstands that there are times when they have been anxious, reactive, greet the other dogs, but her guardians were older, and Jenny was an rude, or outright aggressive when they were experiencing any type of energetic and powerful dog. They had made no attempts to train Jenny pain or stress. Often, the target of that aggression will be whatever they and were frustrated with being dragged around anytime Jenny saw an- are focusing on when they experience the pain. Here are two cases in- other dog. They went to a big box pet store where it was suggested they volving dogs that were brought to me for a behavior consultation due to purchase a remote shock collar. They were instructed to shock Jenny aggressive behavior. In both cases, the owners believed the aggression whenever she pulled on her leash. had been caused by the use of a shock collar. On their next walk, Jenny, as she always had done, moved forward in friendly greeting when she spotted another dog. Jenny was fixated on Case #1: Jake the dog she wanted to meet when she was shocked. The next time “Jake,” a very social dog, bounded off to greet every person he saw. Jenny saw another dog on a walk, she immediately became anxious. As

BARKS from the Guild/July 2019 25 c o v e r the dog approached, Jenny lunged, but this time she also growled and bared her teeth. Jenny had become very afraid. She was trying to look fierce to scare the dog away before he hurt her, when she was shocked yet again. Jenny, now anxious and confused about other dogs, learned to become aggressive because of her fear of the shock, which she asso- ciated with other dogs. Dogs can be trained in Jenny’s guardians did not train her to stop pulling; all they suc- snake avoidance using ceeded in doing is making a previously dog-friendly dog, dog-aggressive. nonaversive methods If they had enrolled Jenny in a reward-based training class and made use of a front-connect walking harness, they could have taught her to walk nicely without ever causing her any pain or fear. These are not isolated occurrences. I have training colleagues throughout the country that could tell you of similar incidents. A study by Polsky (2000) examined five cases of severe attacks by dogs who had been trained or contained via electric shock. None of the dogs had a his- tory of aggression before being shocked. The study concludes there is a high probability that experience with shock was at least partially re- © Can Stock Photo/adogslifephoto sponsible for the aggressive behavior. This is very similar to Jake’s story. any peer reviewed literature to suggest that it is. Meanwhile, there is ample anecdotal evidence that demonstrates shock is not necessary in #3. Is the use of aversives necessary to train behaviors such as training more challenging behaviors. Certified professional dog trainer snake avoidance? Pamela Johnson conducted a webinar for PPG where she explains ex- Why use a shock collar if we know it can cause pain and can create pre- actly how to train your dog to be safe around snakes without resorting viously nonexistent behavior problems like anxiety and aggression, es- to the use of shock. pecially when it is no more effective and often less effective than When it comes to teaching animals “mission critical” behaviors, far reward-based training? One answer we may often hear is that there are more advanced than rattlesnake aversion, one only need to look to the certain behaviors you can “only” teach a dog with an aversive like a work done by Animal Behavior Enterprises (ABE) and the U.S. Navy Ma- shock. A typical behavior that is often used as an example is training a rine Mammal Training program. Marian and Bob Bailey were part of dog to stay away from rattlesnakes, or any other kind of venomous both of those efforts and trained animals to do many amazing things all snake. While there is no peer reviewed literature to support the argu- with positive reinforcement training. Yin (2012) discusses how Bailey ment that shock is not necessary for training snake aversion, nor is there and Bailey continued to use their expertise to help train military dogs and also shares a little-known story about work they did in the 1960s training cats for the Central Intelligence Agency. What were the cats trained to do? To follow people through airports. If you want to learn more about how animal training moved from being a craft to a science, you might want to track down a copy of a film ABE made on the subject called Patient Like the Chipmunks.

#4. Does using a shock collar save dogs’ lives? Sometimes we might hear or read on social media that “using shock can save a dog's life.” This is essentially the argument for using shock to train snake avoidance. In reality, it is a last-ditch attempt to “shock” an owner into a state of fear and anxiety, because no one wants their dog to die. The fact is there is no peer reviewed research to prove or dis- prove this statement, and never will be, because the design of such a study would never be approved by a review board because it would not be ethical.

How You Can Help If the Shock-Free Coalition is going to be successful, we need the help of every single PPG member. Here are some things you can do to help:

Sign the Pledge If you are a PPG member and have not signed the Shock-Free Pledge There is ample evidence in the peer reviewed literature to support reward-based training as more effective and less stressful for the dog, and less likely to cause other behavior problems such as aggression. There is also evidence that the use of shock can be a cause of aggressive behavior.

26 BARKS from the Guild/July 2019 c o v e r

States Anderson (2012): “During the initial the most important parts. training period, [shock] must be painful, Even though the ESVCE Position Statement on Electronic Training uncomfortable, or frightening, or it wouldn’t Devices focuses primarily on Europe, being one of the most recent posi- work. It has to have some unpleasant feeling tion statements, it is a valuable resource anywhere. Ask the veterinari- ans in your community if they are familiar with this document and if that is robust enough to get the dog to work to they are not, print a copy and share it with them. make it stop.” On the Web The Shock-Free Coalition website is full of excellent information for you to review and share with others as you help spread the word about the (see also ad on p.23), please do so! I get it, we’re all busy, and sometimes importance of educating people about the use of shock. This material is we put things on a “to do list” and then just never get to it. As a PPG freely available to you for when you need to speak to clients and others member, you have already committed to The Guiding Principles, so we about the reasons for selecting positive reinforcement training as op- know that you understand the importance of ending the use of shock posed to using aversives. n collars. It is important that we get all PPG members to sign the pledge. Don Hanson is the co‐owner of the Green Acres Kennel Shop Position Statements (greenacreskennel.com) in Bangor, Maine. He is a Bach Foundation Familiarize yourself with the PPG Position Statement on Shock Training registered animal practitioner (BFRAP), certified dog behavior con‐ and the AAHA Canine and Feline Behavior Management Guidelines. sultant (CDBC), associate certified cat behavior consultant (ACCBC) These two documents, especially when used together, make a com- and a certified professional dog trainer (CPDT‐KA) and also produces pelling and scientifically sound argument for never using shock. Ask the and co‐hosts a weekly radio show and podcast, The Woof Meow Show veterinarians in your community if they are familiar with the AAHA on The Pulse AM620 WZON and live streamed (wzonradio.com) . He Guidelines, especially those that are AAHA accredited facilities. If they writes about pets on his blog (greenacreskennel.com/blog) and is co‐ are not, print a copy and share it with them. You might even highlight chairman of PPG’s Advocacy Committee.

References Welfare Science 3 (4) 345‐357. Available at: bit.ly/2MDilVk American Animal Hospital Association. (2019). AAHA behavior guide‐ Sandgrain Films. (2017). Shock Collar [Video File]. Available at: lines offer solutions to managing behavior problems with your pet. vimeo.com/235106629 Available at: bit.ly/2ZhM9s0 Schalke, E., Stichnoth, J., & Jones‐Baade, R. (2005). Stress symptoms Anderson, E. (2012). What is Shock Training? – Is It Really Just A Tap? caused by the use of electric training collars on dogs (Canis familiaris) Shock Collar Training Explained. Available at: bit.ly/31p0G79 in everyday life situations. Current Issues and Research in Veterinary Blackwell, E.J., Bolster, C., Richards, G., Loftus, B.A., & Casey, R.A. Behavioral Medicine. 5th International Veterinary Behavior Meeting. (2012). The use of electronic collars for training domestic dogs: esti‐ West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press, 139‐145 mated prevalence, reasons and risk factors for use, and owner per‐ Schalke, E., Stichnoth, J., Ott, S., & Jones‐Baade, R. (2007). Clinical ceived success as compared to other training methods. BMC signs caused by the use of electric training collars on dogs in everyday Veterinary Research (8) 93. Available at: bit.ly/2OEVAvY life situations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 105 (4) 369‐380. Brewer, P. (2019). Do let the dogs out: Huge fines for pet confinement Available at: bit.ly/2Ww2Zlf part of ACT animal welfare overhaul. Available at: bit.ly/2Wx0Qu8 Schilder, M., & van der Borg, J. (2004). Training dogs with help of the British Columbia Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. shock collar: short and long term behavioural effects. Applied Animal (2019). Position Statement on Animal Training. Available at: Behaviour Science (85) 319–334. Available at: bit.ly/2Foqgj8 bit.ly/2XEb8W2 Shock‐Free Coalition. (2019). Myths and Misconceptions. Available at: British Small Animal Veterinary Association. (2019). Position State‐ shockfree.org/Education/Myths‐and‐Misconceptions ment on Aversive Training Methods. Available at: bit.ly/2F0HdAa The Kennel Club. (2018). The Kennel Club and Scottish Kennel Club British Veterinary Association. (2018). Aversive training devices for Welcomes the Scottish Government’s Effective Ban on Shock Training dogs. Available at: bit.ly/2XByUlv Devices. Available at: bit.ly/31r1Zm7 Canadian Veterinary Medical Association. (2015). Humane Training Tudge, N.J, & Nilson, S.J. (2016). The Use of Shock in Animal Training. Methods for Dogs – Position Statement. Available at: bit.ly/2KHCcQr Available at: petprofessionalguild.com/shockcollars Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. (2010). Studies Tudge, N.J, Nilson, S.J., Millikan, D.A., & Stapleton‐Frappell, L.A. to assess the effect of pet training aids, specifically remote static (2019). Pet Training and Behavior Consulting: A Model for Raising the pulse systems, on the welfare of domestic dogs: Project Code Bar to Protect Professionals, Pets and Their People. (n.p.): DogNostics AW1402. Available at: bit.ly/2XwC6yJ Career Center Publishing Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. (2011). Studies Yin, S. (2011). Are Electronic Shock Collars Painful – A New Study Re‐ to assess the effect of pet training aids, specifically remote static veals Some Answers. Available at: bit.ly/SHOCK‐Yin‐Pain‐2011 pulse systems, on the welfare of domestic dogs; field study of dogs in Yin, S. (2012). How Technology from 30 Years Ago is Helping Military training: Project Code AW1402a. Available at: bit.ly/2XwC6yJ Dogs Perform Better Now. Available at: bit.ly/POS‐REI‐SpyCats European Society of Veterinary Clinical Ethology. (2017). ESVCE Posi‐ tion Statement: Electronic Training Devices. Available at: Resources bit.ly/2WoBMAM American Animal Hospital Association Canine and Feline Behavior Hiby, E.F., Rooney, N.J., & Bradshaw, J.W.S. (2004). Dog training Management Guidelines: bit.ly/AAHA‐2015BHx methods—their use, effectiveness and interaction with behaviour and European Society of Veterinary Clinical Ethology ‐ Position Statement welfare. Animal Welfare (13) 63–69. Available at: bit.ly/2XCS6PB on Electronic Training Devices: bit.ly/2F1Ag1D New Zealand Veterinary Association. (2018). Use of behaviour modify‐ Pet Professional Guild ‐ Rattlesnake Avoidance Training Using Force‐ ing collars on dogs. Available at: bit.ly/2F1z6Dj Free Methods [Webinar]: bit.ly/2Iu6h3g Pet Professional Guild. (2012). Guiding Principles. Available at: Pet Professional Guild ‐ Member Search: bit.ly/PPG‐Find‐A‐Prof bit.ly/PPG‐GuidingPrinciples Pet Professional Guild ‐ Position on Shock Training: bit.ly/2MC0nm0 Polsky, R. (2000). Can Aggression in Dogs Be Elicited Through the Use Shock‐Free Coalition: shockfree.org of Electronic Pet Containment Systems? Journal of Applied Animal Shock‐Free Coalition Pledge: shockfree.org/Pledge

BARKS from the Guild/July 2019 27