This message was posted by a user wishing to remain anonymous
To put it quite simply, because it works!
I believe it is always important to learn about all sides when it comes to things, not just training. Next step is to make a list of pros and cons for all sides. Even if the pros do not outweigh the cons for you, you acknowledging they exist, is equipping you to build even stronger pros to defend the side you are favoring.
Unfortunately some persons will see goals being met favored higher than the "how", even more unfortunate is how it has been glorified on TV shows. By focusing on the goal only, it tells me they did not learn about all sides, or even their own if they choose e-collars (pain, fear, and anxiety), as there is so much support showing the fall-out risks and permanent damages you make when relying on that method.
We can never stop educating and never stop showing how much better it works not relying on pain/fear/anxiety. Ideally everyone should be educating themselves, but as they chose not to, we have to keep advocating, ask persistent questions... They are either going to realize their shortcomings not having all the needed info, or realize how harming it is choosing the path of pain/fear/anxiety.
Original Message:
Sent: 02-16-2023 03:01 PM
From: Anonymous Member
Subject: Positive-reinforcement Behavioral Training
This message was posted by a user wishing to remain anonymous
For many years, it has been relatively commonplace to train dogs without causing them discomfort, fear, or pain by using positive-reinforcement methods.
Lately, prominent trainers seem to be going back to old-school methods that are not humane, such as shock collars.
A shock collar would never be used on a human and be called a humane tool. Why do people feel they are good for a dog? All this will do is cause pain, fear, and anxiety. Is there another side to this that is not clear?
#Behavior,TrainingandEnrichment