A D VA N C E S PAG E 3
reduce or eliminate the influence of exter-
STRESS CAUSED BY ELECTRIC
TRAINING COLLARS
Background
The use of electric shock collars for train-
ing dogs is controversial. Proponents of
electric collars claim that they are a reli-
able means of eliminating undesirable
behavi
a or that can be used over relatively
great distances and with less risk of stress
than some mechanical devices, such as
choke chains. Opponents point to the risk
of incorrect or abusive use of electric col-
lars, the temptation to use them without
any thought or time given to traditional
training methods, and the resulting pain
and fear electric collars can produce.
Objectives
To investigate the intensity of stress asso-
ciated with the use of electronic training
collars. The level of stress was determined
by analyzing the levels of salivary cortisol
and heart rate.
Procedure
Heart rate and saliva cortisol were used as
stress parameters in 14 beagles that were
trained 1.5 hours per day for 7 months.
To exclude circadian deviations of salivary
cortisol values, the handling of individuals
was assigned a strict daily time schedule.
T aining as well as the experiments them-
Tr
selves were conducted in seclusion to
the paragraph:
nal stressors.
Dogs were assigned to 1 of 3 experimen-
tal groups. Group A (AvA ersion) received
the electric shock when the dogs touched
the prey (a rabbit
a dummy fixed to a motion
device). Group H (Here) received the elec-
tric shock when they did not obey a pre-
viously trained recall command during
hunting. Group R (Random) received
electric shocks arbitrarily and at random.
The main experiment lasted for 17 days
after which all dogs were allowed to hunt
unimpeded for the firf st 5 day
a s. For the
next 5 days the dogs were stopped from
hunting by a leash. Each day, the stress
parameters were determined. These values
were compared with the values that were
obtained during the use of the electric
training collars. The collars were used for
7 days as described previously. y Afte
f r4
weeks, the dogs were brought back into
the research area without receiving an
electric pulse.
Results
Groups R and H showed a significant rise
in salivary cortisol levels. Group A did not.
When the dogs were reintroduced to the
research area after 4 weeks, the results
remained the same.
Author Conclusion
Dogs, which are able to clearly associate
the electric stimulus with their action, i.e.,
touching a prey, and consequently are able
to predict and control a stressor, do not
show significant stress indicators.
Inclusions
Thirty-two refe
f rences.
Editor Annotation
In this 2007 study, Schalke et al. evaluated
the use of remote shock to stop dogs from
touching a rabbit dummy in a group of
naïve laboratory dogs chosen forf their
shared derivative and husbandry history.
Three responses of 3 partially randomized
treatment groups were evaluated: (1) receipt
of shock immediately and only when
touching the dummy (av a ersion/avoidance),
(2) receipt of shock when the dogs did
not respond to a recall command about
“hunting” the dummy, (3) receipt of shock
under conditions where the shock was
delivered unpredictably and out of con-
text. The abstract of this paper closes with
“This led to the conclusion that ani-
mals, which were able to clearly asso-
ciate the electric stimulus with their
action, i.e., touching the prey, and
consequently were able to predict and
control the stressor, did not show
considerable or persistent stress
indicators.”
It is a shame that most people have
access to abstracts, but not to full papers.
A hors write abstracts and full papers
Aut
with diffef rent goals: the former is about
strategies regarding citation in a number
of venues, and the latter is about data.
In this case, the data are informative,
but not surprising. Dogs in all treatment
groups experienced cortisol increases asso-
ciated with shock, compared to baseline
values. In the context where the timing
is immediate, the stimulus clear (rabbit
dummy)m and the behavior discrete and
unambiguous (touching the rab a bit dummy),
the increase in cortisol was least in both
relative and absolute terms. The salivary
cortisol increases were highest in for dogs
in the random group by b more than an
ord
r er of magnitude compared to the
contextually clear aversion group.
In behavior, context is everything. When
one considers the constraints of the con-
trolled and measurable methodology under
which trained scientists collected these
data, one cannot be surprised at the dis-
cussion in the final paragraphs which can
leave no room for misinterpretation, as
could the abstract. The authors state:
“The results of this study suggest that
poor timing in the application of high-
level electric pulses, such as those
used in this study, means there is a
high risk that dogs will show severe
and persistent stress clinical signs.
W recommend that the use of
We
these devices should be restricted
with proof of theoretical and practi-
cal qualification required and then
the use of these devices should only
be allowed in strictly specified
situations.”
I cannot agree more. We
W need to come
to some agreement about welfare for pets.
Laboratory dogs have better legal welfare
guidelines than do pet dogs. Electronic
shock collars are sold in stores, from cata-
logs, and online in virtually every venue
that offe
f rs dog supplies. So, dog owners
have better access to them than they do to
PAG E 4 A D VA N C E S

accurate behavioral inform

f ation or spe-
cialists in veterinary behavioral medicine.
In my patient population, all the dogs
who were “treated” with a shock collar by
the owners before they sought the help
of specialist have ended up dead, because
the dogs became, or were perceived to
have
a become, too aggressive. In this age
of instantaneous gratific
f ation and quick
f xes, veterinarians have the chance to
fi
educate clients and help dogs befo f re any
n -
one reaches for a shock collar. We need to
begin to do this the very first time we see
a patient and screen for behavioral issues
at each subsequent appointment. These
simple measures may have a profound
effect on the euthanasia, relinquishment,
and abandonment rates for dogs. They
maya also improve the quality of life for
those remaining with their owners. (KLO)

Schalke E, Stichnoth J, Ott S, et al. Clinical

signs caused by the use of electric training col-
lars on dogs in everyday life situations. App
Anim Behav Sci 2007;105:369-380.