TRANSCRIPT: Interview with Australian Veterinary Association spokesperson Dr Debbie Calnon

D: There is great variation of opinion about whether the use of negative or punishment based training is necessary or effective in the training of dogs. Does the AVA believe that these training methods are effective?

DC: Training methods that use positive punishment and negative reinforcement have been linked with undesirable side effects for dogs and behavioural problems such as escape and avoidance behaviour (to avoid the punishment), aggressive behaviour (in self-defence), response suppression (habituation or learned helplessness), and fear of people or things in the environment where the aversive stimulus was present (fear conditioning and generalisation).

The use of positive reinforcement is the most humane and effective training method as it avoids undesirable behavioural side effects. It also makes training more enjoyable and helps to improve the bond with the pet.

D: If not what are some of the reasons why these methods are ineffective?

DC: In order for positive punishment methods to be effective they must meet the criteria of the ICE acronym. That is, it must be Immediate, Consistent and Effective. Lets use the example of teach a dog to walk nicely on a lead and not pull (a common reason for using such a collar). To meet the 'Immediate' criteria, the dog should receive pressure on the neck as soon as the dog pulls on the lead and then the pressure should stop as soon as the dog stops pulling. This requires very careful timing which is very difficult to meet. The second criteria is that it should be consistent, i.e. it needs to happen every time the dog pulls on the lead. This is also difficult to achieve. And finally the punishment needs to be Effective, that is, it should stop the undesirable (pulling) behaviour. If you don't apply enough pressure, the pulling on the lead continues, therefore you need to apply escalating levels of pressure and jerking on the neck to achieve the desired result. This may lead to significant pain to the dog and in the worst case scenario- asphyxiation.

The other concern with punishment is that it doesn't give dogs any direction about the behaviours we want them to perform. Imagine you were working on a project at work, and your boss gave you no direction about what you needed to do. They just told you 'no, that's not what I want' and then gave you a jerk on the neck with a prong collar, and then you had to figure it out based on that feedback. Imagine how confusing and and stressful it would be. Also consider how you would start to view your boss.

A much more humane method is to give the dogs direction about what you want and then reward them when they get it right. Using the above example, when the dog pulls on the lead, call him to you and reward him when the lead loosens. Then keep giving food treats to keep him on a loose lead. Initially, you will need to use lots of treats, however, as the dog gets the hang of things, less treats are needed. Until finally, no treats are needed at all.

Positive reinforcement methods also need good timing. However, if the timing is a bit off, the consequences are much less serious. Therefore, for most dog owners, this is the most humane and rewarding method of training. It will also foster a trusting relationship with you and your dog!

And, if dogs would talk, I have no doubt that they would all universally vote for being trained using positive reinforcement methods!

D: What other techniques can be employed to effectively train dogs?

DC: It’s much better to prevent behaviour problems than modify them. Behaviour is the result of the interweaving of genetics, learning and the environment.

Breeding from dogs with good temperaments is one way of reducing the likelihood of some behavioural problems, although “genetics influences the probability of a behaviour, rather than controlling it in an iron-clad way. Both genes and environment impact on the formation of temperament and the expression of behaviour.”

It is quite clear that puppies benefit from appropriate (meaning positive and harmless) socialisation. This has been shown to decrease inter-dog reactivity and fearfulness of people, places and situations. The first 16 weeks of life are a critical learning period for puppies. During this time, social and behavioural patterns are established. For optimum socialisation, it is essential that puppies have regular social contact with humans, with other dogs and with the mother and littermates.

If they are deprived of this contact (as in some kennels or refuges) during the critical period for socialisation, there can be severe long-term effects on the ability of the pet to live successfully in a family environment. These dogs are more likely to develop antisocial behaviour, and many will eventually be referred to animal behaviourists or contribute to the number of unwanted problem dogs.

D: What damage can these collars potentially do to dogs?

DC: These collars can cause physical damage to the neck and throat area, particularly if they are misused. However, I think the biggest concern is the emotional damage to the dog and the damage to the human-dog bond. Again, they give the dog no direction about the behaviours we want them to perform.

D: What makes prong collars so particularly dangerous - as compared to choke, zap collars?

DC: Actually, the same principles apply to choke and zap collars. These are also not effective or humane devices to train animals, for the same reasons outlined above.

D: Does the AVA believe that the average member of the public is equip to effectively and safely use one of these collars? Should they be made available to any untrained owner, without training over the internet or across the counter of pet stores?

DC: No. In fact, I think many members of the public truly do not want to use these devices. Most people do not like using methods that hurt their dog. However, they do not always know there are other training methods available. They also see people on TV and in the media using these devices.

D: Why do you think so many within the industry and in the public have so passionately oppose the banning of these collars?

DC: Dogs have no voice of their own. Mahatma Gandhi said "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated".

TRANSCRIPT: Interview with Operations manager of the National Dog Trainers Federation and owner of K9 Services International Brad Griggs

D: For how long, and in what capacities do you work with dogs?

BG: I'm a nationally accredited canine behaviour specialist and dog trainer with around a decade of professional experience. I tend to specialise in aggressive behaviours and also the development of dogs for service work type application, and I do this for K9 Services Int’l (my business). I am also the Operations Manager for the National Dog Trainers Federation, which is Australia’s peak representative body for the dog training industry. The NDTF also delivers Australia’s only government accredited, nationally recognised course in dog behaviour and training. Personnel from the police, military, AQIS, customs, etc complete the NDTF’s course in an official capacity and is the only course in Australia to do so. I teach a broad variety of subjects and elements on the course.

D: Could you explain the two sides to dog training – abstinence and action – and where positive punishment is necessary?

BG: To address the distinction lets look at the problem of dogs jumping. Training for action in this case would involve training the dog to sit for a reward – hence actively performing a skill. It is popular for dog trainers today to claim that training the sit - a behaviour that is incompatible with jumping – is sufficient to stop jumping. This is not typically the case, as training a dog that sitting is inherently rewarding will make the sit more likely to happen but it does nothing to teach the dog that jumping is an unacceptable behaviour. Using appropriately applied punishment to decrease the jumping is training for abstinence, and in this example it rounds out the equation because we have a dog that finds one behaviour (sit) that is rewarding and enjoyable, and another behaviour that is unenjoyable and unsuccessful (jumping).

Positive punishment is the delivery of a stimulus the dog finds unenjoyable in order to make behaviour less likely to occur again, and where it does it will occur with decreased frequency or intensity. The level of positive punishment needed is always dictated by the individual dog, but examples of positive punishment is the use of a verbal reprimand (no, wrong, etc), a pop on the leash, the use of a check chain, the loud clap of hands, etc. Whether the punishment is effective or not is dictated by the dog’s individual temperament and personality.

D: What is the distinction between negative and positive punishment? Why is it important to draw this distinction?

BG: Negative punishment is the withholding of something in order to make a behaviour less likely to occur in frequency and/or intensity. For example, withholding a food treat, sin-binning the dog, ending a game prematurely, etc. Positive punishment is described above. It is important to draw this distinction because both have the same end goal, however their use is dependent upon the relative motivations of the individual dog. Both are tools that a balanced, properly educated dog trainer will understand how to employ during the training process to great effect. It is important to make the distinction so that we can better understand the motivating forces at play in dog training and have an informed discussion about how to apply the techniques in an ethically and morally sound fashion to consider not only the dogs welfare, but the higher purposes that we must consider in formulating his training plan.

D: Supporters of the petition suggest that even positive punishment is not necessary for the proper training of a dog, is this correct? What is the importance of positive punishment in a dogs training?

BG: We’ve discussed training for action and abstinence, and I’ve touched on relative motivations. Suffice to say that in most dogs some level of positive punishment is required to ensure a dog performs a given skill reliably, or abstains from a behaviour that is, for whatever reason, considered to be unacceptable. The majority of dogs trained under the guidance of dog trainer that claims not to use any positive punishment still have positive punishment used, however these trainers often fail to realise that, for sake of example, verbally admonishing your dog is in fact positive punishment. Also, these dogs typically display poor levels of reliability, and their performance is also very often entirely dependent upon factors other than a command from the handler, such as the presence of a piece of food, a certain type of equipment being worn, etc.

D: What are the likely implications in training dogs without this element of positive punishment? Is it dangerous to the dog?

BG: You certainly couldn’t say that training without positive punishment is dangerous per se, however if your dog trainer is absolutely opposed to the use of positive punishment in the training of dogs then you should consider finding a more balanced, better educated dog trainer.

It is as absolutely ethically unsound for any trainer not to consider the judicious application of positive punishment during training, where indicated and appropriate, because that indicates that they are not considering the overall welfare of the individual dogs under their charge for the sake of a personal agenda.

The science on the topic is emphatic that positive punishment does have a place in the training of dogs, however any dog trainer worth their salt would only apply positive punishment as part of a program that heavily focused on positive reinforcement and reward.

D: Which category of punishment does the use of a prong collar fall into?

BG: The pinch collar can actually be used in a variety of ways and does not fall into any category in the motivational matrix. The collar itself is just a training tool, which can be used in a variety of ways. In the context that this article is discussing, it is used to administer positive punishment.

D: Can you explain LIMA? Do you think that typically LIMA is often understood and used by dog trainers?

BG: Least Invasive, Minimally Aversive (LIMA) is a model used to ensure that the use of aversive measures in the training of dogs is ethically applied. I think that LIMA is generally well understood in practical terms by many dog trainers where these people have true empathy for the well being of the dogs under their charge.

D: Do you think that any problems with the use of collars lies in the equipment or in the trainers themselves?

BG: Absolutely I do. This applies to both sides of the discussed collar argument. I have had 2 dogs in the last week present that have developed extremely robust and dangerous aggressive behaviours as a result of a poor use of food and a flat collar in their training. I have seen many examples like this throughout my career, as have my colleagues.

Does this mean we should ban treats and flat collars in training? Certainly not, they are extremely valuable tools that can be used to incredible effect! I would maintain that the instructors that have played a role in creating these issues should be educated, and had they been then they would not have remained committed to the methods that eventually adversely affected these poor dogs.

Pinch collars are not the issue, education is the issue, and trainers should be required to at least be enrolled in a balanced, scientifically credible course that teaches broad skills that apply to the training of all dogs and contain a practical and theoretical assessment of their understandings and abilities. The NDTF’s Certificate III in Dog Behaviour and Training is the industry’s most shining example of this type of education.

D: You mentioned in a previous discussion that there is no enforced industry standard or formal education requirement in becoming a dog trainer. Can you further elaborate on this and the dangers that having certified dog trainers with no formal education poses?

BG: My above answer covers part of this. In Australia there are many representative organisations for dog trainers that offer membership to any person that can afford the small membership fee, and this in turn allows these people to use the organisation logo.

This approach is dangerous and ethically unsound and provides the public with no protection from operators that have little or no experience apart from having read a book and maybe watched some dogs being trained on YouTube.

These organisations typically have political agendas that lead them to operate in such a way, and this approach is really designed to bring them in large memberships and generate income whilst offering the public little or no guarantee of ability and providing negligible quality control of members. In contrast the NDTF requires that its members have a sound dog training education, and only vetted business members are allowed to use its logo to promote themselves; membership actually means something, and indicates a certain level of commitment and expertise to the craft of dog training.

State governments need to examine this situation and work with industry leaders, like the NDTF, and look towards ensuring that those operating in the field are sufficiently educated and qualified to do so. Where better to start than a government issued qualification?

D: You mentioned that positive punishment has a place in the training of a dog but that this is a part of a wider positive training curriculum. What damage could be done to the dog (psychologically and physically) if this balance is, perhaps because of ignorance of an owner or poor training, not properly found?

BG: Please refer to my above answer regarding the 2 dogs presented to me this week. It is incredibly important to state that negative contingencies are to be expected in dogs by the balance tipping either way. Some problems typically associated with a lack of balance in a dogs training are a diminished bond between dog and owner, lack of reliability of core skills required to be a good canine citizen, aggression issues, lack of confidence in a dog and/or owner, and displays of dominance based behaviours.
On owner ignorance, if the owner is ignorant then it is the trainer’s job to educate them, and this is a key area of responsibility for any trainer.

D: In what circumstances and by who should a prong collar be used?

BG: Very interesting question once again. Pinch collars look horrible, and that is the predominant driver of these types of action to outlaw them. When you examine the actual engineering and design of these collars they have deliberately rounded ends on all protrusions; given that they are designed to pinch skin together in order to deliver an unpleasant sensation it would be counterproductive for them to be sharp in any way. They are designed to facilitate the precision delivery of stimulation in order to allow them to be used in the most humane fashion possible, and in line with the LIMA principle mentioned above.

It is also sad that a perfectly valid training tool is being demonised due to the lack of understanding and experience of a vocal minority that are intent on making anthropomorphic arguments about what is and is not good for dogs; these same people will often reason that because a dolphin of 250kg can be taught to perform complex skills without the use of any positive punishment that the use of any punishment in dog training is cruel. The reality of that situation is that the dolphins being trained are on severely restricted diets, which in itself is extremely aversive to the organism, in order to give the negative punishment of withholding fish more of a relevant motivation.

The fact of the matter is that each species is treated differently, and arguments about how an aquatic species is trained versus a land based predatory animal like a dog are basically useless in establishing what is ethical and what is not.

D: In a previous conversation you said you believed there was no present need to ban the prong collar and that it was an effective tool in the hands of the competent trainer or vet.

You described a competent trainer to be a person that has completed a science based education including exposure too and the use of all 4 quadrants of the motivational matrix.

How many people do you think would fall under this definition of competent trainer, especially considering people are able to obtain their practicing certificates without any form of education?

BG: The number is fortunately growing every year David. The NDTF has over 300 enrolments each year, and this number continues to climb. If we examine the term competent then we need to add context to the argument; we need to consider whether those encouraging the banning of a training device have a vested interest in doing so, and in most cases we find that they do. We also need to consider that these people are unlikely to be qualified to make a judgement on that which they do not understand. My opinion is somewhat more clinical as here in Victoria these collars are sadly banned from use, so I have no financial interest in putting forward a balanced argument for their place in a trainers gear bag; where the use of these tools would be of overall benefit to an individual dog it is criminal that we cannot apply the tool to the job.

I would guess that ‘competent’ trainers (read well educated and experienced in the entire science and art of dog training) would number around 35-50% of dog trainers, with variations in ratios in different areas.

D: How much instruction should an owner be required to have undertaken before using prong collars in particular on their dogs? How can it be ensured they get this training if they are able to order the collars online without any instruction at all, over the counter at a pet store or from poorly instructed dog trainers?

BG: The ability of an owner to correctly apply a pinch collar in a training environment can be quickly and efficiently achieved with any instructor of even a moderate skill level. It is always difficult to ensure sound training practices are prevalent and actively encouraged in the community, and this is going to be a problem regardless of the tools available to those practicing. The flat collar is the most abused piece of training equipment that I know of, followed closely by the humble halti. Both of these pieces of equipment have a place in a trainer’s toolbox and are very useful; should we ban Internet sales of these training tools too?

D: Should these collars be available to the public freely?

BG: See above regarding flat collar/halti comment. I applaud any move that encourages the public to buy their training equipment from knowledgeable professionals that have the relevant experience and understanding to give good advice.

D: Should the government at least register who is able to sell these collars or impose some kind of restrictions on a required amount of training as to their fitting and effective use by members of the public?

BG: I think the government would be better to invest the budget for a project like that in promoting responsible canine guardianship, and encouraging trainers to become appropriately qualified with a qualification in dog behaviour and training. I applaud any move that increases canine welfare and improves the public's access to quality dog training advice, however this would not necessarily be best achieved by restricting pinch collar sales; indeed there would be many other measures which would need to be implemented to achieve such an outcome.