Modern Remote Collar Training | Livestock Worrying

Frequently Asked Questions

  • Is remote collar training right for my Dog?

    That depends. On the one hand, proper remote collar training can be beneficial for almost any dog, if you want to ensure that your dog is absolutely safe when out in nature around other animals.

    However, the dogs that generally need remote collar training are specifically high prey drive dogs. This isn’t necessarily dependant on breed, but is much more common in the shepherding dogs, terriers and hunting dogs. This includes the poodle and can sometimes present itself in Cockerpoo’s, Labradoodles, etc. Many of the rescue dogs that are brought over from Europe can have extremely high prey drives - something which most owners aren’t aware of when they adopt them.

    When considering remote collar training, you should first already have a reliable recall in relatively low distraction environments, and your dog should already show a demonstrable level ofimpulse control when asked to leave an object, person or other dog alone. Remote collar training is not an alternative or shortcut to recall fundamentals, and at The Dog’s Way we only accept clients for recall training that already have these fundamentals in place, unless their dog has already demonstrated a significant risk to livestock or themselves.

  • How can I tell if my dog has high prey drive?

    Typically, high prey drive dogs will show a high tendency to fixate on prey animals, with strong eye contacting tense body posture. Taking your dog near livestock and asking them to stay calm around stationary prey is absolutely no indication that they are safe around livestock. Chase instinct is primarily triggered when an animal runs away, not before.

    The most common issue for owners of high prey drive dogs is scent, not sight. Its not uncommon for a dog to pick up on the trail of an animal that is several hours old, and instantly switch into a high drive state. If your dog has a tenancy to go from a low to high drive very quickly around prey scent, this would also be a strong indication of a high prey drive.

    Its important to understand that not all dogs have a high prey drive, and some dogs are naturally more sensitive than others. Its important to know what’s appropriate for your dog, based on your lifestyle - as well as recognising that what may work well for dogs you’ve had in the past may not work for a new dog, if that dog has a predatory nature.

  • Are there other uses for E-Collar besides livestock avoidance?

    Absolutely. The prerequisite to any livestock avoidance training is the process of paired reinforcement with a non-aversive level of stimulus. This alone can be a fantastic way of improving engagement and recall with a dog that has a strong tendency to get their nose to the ground.

    Dogs have a Sensory Order, Touch > Nose > Eyes > Ears - which means that a dog fixated on a scent is highly unlikely to disengage to sound or a visual que. A long line can provide a touch sensation, but when it comes to transitioning your dog off lead, a remote collar can provide a ‘seat belt’ of gentle touch sensation to get your dogs attention. This is particularly the case when training blind or deaf dogs for offload freedom that would otherwise be confined to a lead.

    Remote collars can also be used at low levels of stimulation in exactly the same way as a clicker or other marker. Remote collars are by no means aversive by requirement, nor do they exclusively have to be used to correct or ‘punish’ behaviours - anymore than a lead, a hand or a voice.

  • Which remote Collar(s) do you use?

    We only recommend the use of either the E-Collar technologies Mini Educator Collar, which uses blunt pulse stimulation and their own Patented COS technology, or the Dogtra 280C with Rheostat.

    These collars both offer quality technology that ensures for full control of the amount and type of stimulus a dog is receiving, and maximises comfort with use. We recognise these collars aren’t cheap - but we don’t believe that price should be a factor when it comes to ensuring quality ethical training. We require that our clients invest in proper equipment.

  • Can I use a Vibrate Collar?

    A vibrate collar with multiple stimulus settings can absolutely work as far as the non-aversive element of recall proofing is concerned. if you have a dog which is likely to catch a scent and run off into the bushes, chase after anything exciting, or has a habit of getting away from you and running across a road - a vibrate collar can be used as a non aversive in the same way as a electrical stimulus collar.

    However, a vibrate collar presents two issues - a dog can become desensitised to a vibrate sensation where it won’t with a muscle stimulant - and a vibrate collar cannot provide a high level correction to deter predatory behaviour. These limitations means that a vibrate collar is generally used more in recall proofing, and working with blind and deaf dogs - rather than livestock avoidance training. Its also important to understand that an electric stimulus collar has both a lower minimum stimulus and a higher maximum stimulus than a vibrate. Some dogs may be startled more by a vibrate sensation than a muscle stimulus.

  • What does a remote collar feel like?

    A remote collar is a nerve stimulant which interacts directly with the muscles through touch - how it feels varies massively dependant on the amount of stimulation used, whether or not you are physically moving, and whether your attention is on something else.It is the same technology used in pain relief products including TENS machines.

    As a rough guide - from a scale of 1-100, a 1-10 is generally imperceptible to a human. a 10-20 feels like your hairs standing on end, or a very mild tingling sensation. a 20-30 feels like pins and needles, and 30-40 feels like being nicked, pricked or pinched. Above a 50, the sensation would begin to feel like a muscle cramp - in fact it is a muscle cramp - and the intensity of that cramp increases as the stimulus increases.

    We actively encourage our clients to experience the remote collar themselves and practice on us prior to the work they do with their dog - so that they understand first hand how they are communicating with their dog.

  • Why don't you use other training methods?

    We do. We absolutely use positive reinforcement, long line work, ball games and other training to teach a solid recall. But the simple fact of the matter is that a dog with a predatory nature will not be deterred from chasing and killing other animals in return for food, toy or praise reward.This is well documented and evidenced. It would be fraudulent to say otherwise. Reinforcement reinforces - it does not by its very nature discourage or deter - and when the strongest reinforcer is the opportunity to hunt and kill another animal, a Jack will never beat an Ace.

    If a dog catches another animal, it won’t “bite” it. It will likely rip, maul, and/or disembowel them - causing extreme suffering. Even if it doesn’t, herd animals like sheep will often trample each other in a panic and abort unborn young. And if a farmer catches a dog chasing livestock, they have the right to shoot the dog. Having spoken with clients who’s dogs have been shot, or ordered to be euthanised, and farmers who have had to put down severely injured sheep - I can say with certainty that this is not an issue which people take seriously enough until it is too late.

  • Why not just keep a dog on a Lead near livestock?

    A lead works - until it doesn’t. A lead works, until you develop arthritis and can’t keep a good grip, or until its a cold winters day and it slips through your gloves. Or you lose your balance on an icy or muddy path. Or if your dog takes you by surprise and pulls it out of your hands. Or maybe your dog is too strong for you, or you’re elderly or infirm. Or until your clip breaks, or until your dog wriggles out of their collar, or head collar, or harness. A lead works until you’re distracted on your phone or fumbling for something in your pocket, or you pass it to one of the kids - just for 10 seconds to hold onto. A lead works until you decide that you’re well over a mile away from any livestock, and your dog is safe to let off - only for it to promptly turn around and cover that distance in less than minute.

    A dog that is restrained on a lead but not trained to stay away from prey animals is always a risk - just as a seatbelt does not prevent a car accident from occurring. You should always have your dog on a lead around livestock, but you never solely rely on one.

  • Is remote collar training painful or cruel?

    Professional remote collar training is carried out in a way where the level of stimulus used is the minimum amount required to capture your dogs attention - most dogs will work anywhere between a 5 and a 20, though there are outliers. In principle, it should feel no different to tapping your dog on the shoulder or nudging them with a lead.

    However, it cannot be understated that at the high levels, the stimulus can most certainly be uncomfortable. This is by design and necessity, because dogs on the hunt with bodies pumped full of adrenaline and endorphins are not going to register lower levels of stimulus. The aim of professional training is to ensure that high level stimulus is used only when your dog intends to chase or kill other animals, for the minimum amount of exposure possible. Generally for less than a second, and in most cases with only one or two repetitions.

    The entire aim of livestock avoidance training is to maximise your dogs safety and freedom, as well as protecting other animals from harm. Some people believe that any form of high level stimulus, even for a couple of seconds - should never be used. The trade off is that the dog must spend its entire lifetime confined to a lead or in a back garden.

Scientific Review

DEFRA AW1402A & the China et. Al Study

It is very commonly said that scientific literature has demonstrated that remote training collars aren’t as effective at training dogs as positive reinforcement. This statement in fact refers to a specific study by DEFRA, named AW1402A - which can be found here, and subsequent study by China et. Al reviews the same training video captured for the Defra study, and can be found here.

The china et al study published in the Frontiers journal quotes:

“In many ways, training with positive reinforcement was found to be more effective at addressing the target behavior as well as general obedience training. This method of training also poses fewer risks to dog welfare and quality of the human-dog relationship. Given these results we suggest that there is no evidence to indicate that E-collar training is necessary, even for its most widely cited indication.”

This singular piece of research has been widely cited as proof that e-collar training is unnecessary. However, whilst at a surface level this would appear to be a conclusive statement, subsequent review of the study found a litany of biases and flaws. A full review by Professor Doug Eliffe of the University of Aukland described the paper as “Very seriously flawed and should not be relied on” and can be found here. A review published in Frontiers by Sargisson - university of Waikato can be found in full here.

Flaws in the study include, but are not limited to:

  • The E-collar group was trained in an extreme snow storm in the winter in scotland, whilst the non-collar group was trained in late spring.

  • The test, was supposed to be a double blind observational study, but whilst all dogs wore receiver collars, only the e collar group trainers were carrying transmitters, making them easily identifiable as a group - alongside the snow, and the fact that different trainers were training different dogs.

  • The size of the groups of dogs were not the same, nor was the distribution of livestock worrying dogs - 85.7% of the animals in the remote collar group had issues chasing livestock (4.8% had recall issue without chasing issues), compared to 76% in the reinforcement only group (14.2% recall issues without chasing issues). Dog on dog aggression was present in 9.5% of dogs in the collar group compared to only 4.8% in group 3.

  • The dogs were primarily referred for predatory behaviour towards livestock and recall issues - the primary reason why e-collars are used. However the tests measured the effectiveness of teaching two commands “come” and “sit”. The dogs were not tested on their avoidance of free livestock in a real world situation. Despite this, the study still claimed e-collars were unnecessary or ineffective.

  • There was no consistent goal setting during the experiment. The distance that the dogs were required to sit near, and recall away from livestock were not consistent between the groups, nor was there a requirement to use or not use a long line, nor was there a specification on what prey the dog was being recalled from. In practice this means that an collar trainer able to recall a dog that is placed within 2 metres of a penned sheep without the use of a lead on a first call, and a reinforcement only trainer recalling a dog that is placed 10 metres from a penned chicken using a 2 metre line on a first call would score exactly the same for the purposes of the experiment, despite the practical implications being clearly different.

  • The scientists conducting the study (including principle researcher Daniel Mills) had previously petitioned or lobbied for the tools to be banned through various welfare charities and governmental avenues, demonstrating implicit bias towards this conclusion prior to the research being carried out.

At the Dog’s Way, we believe that quality scientific research is essential when it comes to the proper and ethical application of behaviour modification techniques. The single study used to demonstrate a supposed lack of requirement for remote collars in livestock avoidance is on our view littered with serious flaws both by way of scientific method, and the bias with which the researchers reached their conclusion. Given that DEFRA originally concluded that their £500K study did not provide sufficient evidence to support a ban on remote collars on a welfare basis, it seems highly unlikely that the China et Al study based on a review of the same original footage (nearly a decade later) could reach a different conclusion.

External sites and further research

If you would like to explore the literature and evidence regarding remote collar training and animal welfare, the Association of Responsible Dog Owners (www.joinardo.com) provides a more detailed exploration of these issues, alongside a wealth of video evidence and review of the scientific literature.

Just keep your dog on a lead around livestock…?

 

The Gallery below has four photos at various points of a hike on the North York Moors. In every single photo, there is at least one sheep. Can you spot them?

Now consider this. Your average dog can run at up to 35mph an hour. They can pick up the trail of an animal that is several hours old, and they can pick up their scent on the wind from over a mile away. In every single one of these examples, the sheep are less than ten seconds away for a dog. It probably took you longer than that to find the sheep in these photos.

The video example is from another point on the same walk. How close to the sheep do you need to be before you see it? And how much time would that give you to recall your dog and put them on a lead? Would your dog even come back? Here’s another question. How strong is your dog on a lead? and how stable is your footing? What about on the slick, muddy ground in this video? Are you absolutely confident that you could keep a hold of your dog in this situation?