Dr Matthew Offord (MP Hendon) presented a parliamentary bill before the House of Commons in respect of banning remote training aids earlier this year, supported by the Kennel Club and the RSPCA. One of these organisations screwed dogs up for financial gain for over a century .. The other one drives brand new motors (bought with charitable donations) where a ten year old van would suffice, and pays management-grade wages but baulks at the idea of investing time and money on educating themselves as to how they might actually save more lives than they take. - Why? - Because touting such pseudo-welfare-driven mythology gains greater access to the public purse - thats why. Dr Offord claimed that it is Virtually impossible to stop a dog from chasing livestock with a remote training collar ... He went on to state the following - (written like a child with a tongue hanging out and a crayon in their fist) .... (1) An electric shock collar hurts the animal because it has to; if it did not hurt, it would not work. (2) As a dog will have no idea what caused the pain, it is far more likely to associate it with something in its immediate environment rather than with its behaviour at the time. (3) Scientific learning theory dictates that if a dog has a strong desire to indulge in what it believes is pleasurable behaviour, any negative training method employed to prevent this has to be far more unpleasant for them than their natural behaviour is pleasant—it has to be extremely aversive. (4) Scientific learning theory dictates that if a dog has a strong desire to indulge in what it believes is pleasurable behaviour, any negative training method employed to prevent this has to be far more unpleasant for them than their natural behaviour is pleasant—it has to be extremely aversive. (5) The Kennel Club and the Dogs Trust take the view that unwanted behaviour in dogs is best resolved by positive training methods. What a brilliant example of knowing absolutely nothing whatsoever about your subject matter. Points 1 and 2 completely blow me away with their total inaccuracies .. Pain???!!!! ... Does the good Dr SERIOUSLY believe that it is possible to train with pain, that I or any self-respecting dog owner would endorse PAIN to achieve an aim?? I can inflict PAIN with a snapped branch, a chain or a lead ... Why on earth would I bother to do so with a remote training aid? ... I dont ... I wouldnt .... The idea of achieving an aim via pain is appalling. It is also extremely misguided, poorly educated and misinformed. In point 3, the Dr states that a consequence must be extremely aversive in order to prevent a desire to indulge in a pleasurable behaviour ... If you take a table at a restaurant (your favourite table) but now the table wobbles when you cut your food (causing your drink to spill), you will likely move table to one which doesnt wobble ... Behaviour altered - Where is the pain or the extremely aversive consequence? Scientific learning theory does NOT state the point raised by the Dr .. Cherry-picked learning theory does. As for point 5, I take the view that the world ought to be run on love and cohesion - Ive never seen that view come to fruition ... Likewise ............ The bill was rejected: “the evidence from these studies is not strong enough to support a ban under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. The Government therefore has no plans to ban such devices in England. However, we have asked the industry to draw up guidance for dog owners and trainers advising how to use e-collars properly and to develop a manufacturers’ charter to ensure any e-collars on sale are made to high standards.” ABSOLUTELY AGREE ....1010% - Were already doing that and the charter already exists.
Posted on: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 08:38:11 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015