Please send this email to: info@agriculture.gov.ie
Dear Minister McConalogue,
As a responsible dog owner, I urge you to release the findings of the consultation with the Advisory Council for Companion Animal Welfare regarding the proposed ban on the E-collar. Additionally, I request clear documentation outlining the rationale behind the decision to ban the E-collar, as such a measure necessitates a solid, scientifically supported case.
Contrary to misconceptions, the E-collar does not administer electric shocks, as there is no flow of electric current through its diodes. It operates on the same technology as a TENS machine, commonly used in the medical field for pain relief and muscle re-education, including during childbirth. The E-collar utilises a 5V battery, which is insufficient to power even a smoke alarm. Many organisations within the Advisory Council for Companion Animal Welfare, as well as statements from the Department of Agriculture, have misrepresented the technology of the E-collar. Despite numerous submissions during the consultation process from farmers, owners, and trainers providing readily available scientific evidence, misinformation persists.
As a responsible owner, I implore you to reconsider the ban in Ireland and to publish the robust scientific basis for its enforcement. The E-collar represents the most effective and humane method to mitigate livestock worrying and attacks, while also addressing many issues that lead to dogs being surrendered to rescues or euthanised. Given the crisis in dog rescue centers in Ireland, it's perplexing to ban a tool that can aid while being entirely safe. Furthermore, there exists no conclusive evidence supporting the efficacy of positive reinforcement-only methods in preventing livestock worrying and other behavioral problems faced by dog owners. To ask us to believe that positive-only methods can curb a dogs instincts to hunt is to ask the us to believe in fairytales.
The lack of transparency regarding the consultation process from the beginning and its findings raises questions about the motives behind banning the E-collar. The Irish public is being misled into believing that a significant majority supports the ban, despite the absence of published consultation results.
The Advisory Council for Companion Animal Welfare appears biased, failing to represent the perspectives of everyday owners, trainers, and farmers. Its members advocate for positive-only training methods, disregarding the reality experienced by Irish dog owners and many balanced dog trainers. This ideological stance contradicts scientific studies demonstrating otherwise. I propose the inclusion of trainers and experts representing a more balanced approach to dog training within the Council or its immediate disbandment. A biased organisation cannot provide accurate advice to the Department of Agriculture on the challenges faced by Irish pet owners, jeopardising the well-being of our beloved dogs through misinformation and baseless accusations of abuse against E-collar users.
[1]
The science:
“The collar averted all 13 attempted attacks on lambs”
“No dogs showed interest in or attacked a lone sheep in the path test” Christiansen: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11278032
“The electronic training collar induces less distress and shows stronger ‘learning effect’ in dogs in comparison to the pinch collar” Salgirli 2008: https://leerburg.com/pdf/comparingecollarprongandquittingsignal.pdf
Negative reinforcement “desirable and necessary”
Marschark and Baenninger: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2752/089279302786992685
E-collars “the most effective” training,
Howell and Bennett: see page 6: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S016815912030071X
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
“Electronic training collars can be an effective remedial measure for some types of problem behaviour in dogs”
Coleman and Murray: http://aiam.org.au/resources/Documents/2000%20UAM/PUB_Pro00_TaniaColeman_RichardMurray.pdf
E-collars “resulted in complete and permanent elimination of aggression in all of the 36 dogs tested… the only treatment that has potential for success”
This is such a well-written and legal template for advocating responsible dog ownership while addressing the potential ban on E-collars. It’s great that it highlights the scientific evidence and challenges misconceptions surrounding E-collar use, especially with the clear explanation about its safe technology. As someone who values animal welfare and training, it’s crucial that these kinds of tools are considered based on facts rather than misinformation. The suggestion to include more balanced trainers in the discussion is spot-on. Let's hope for a fair and evidence-based outcome!