1. E-Collar Recent Coverage
BBC, 27 August 2018
Electric shock collars for pets to be banned
Electric shock collars for cats and dogs will be banned in England, the government has announced.
The training devices deliver up to 6,000 volts of electricity or spray noxious chemicals to control animals’ behaviour.
Environment secretary Michael Gove said this causes unacceptable “harm and suffering”.
Wales and Scotland have already taken steps to prevent the use of electric collars.
Animal charities, many of which had campaigned for the change in the law, welcomed the move.
However, some supporters of the controversial collars accused Mr Gove of making a “complete 180” after his department initially suggested there was insufficient evidence for a ban earlier this year.
A survey by the RSPCA found that 5% of dog owners reported using shock collars, suggesting that hundreds of thousands of animals would be affected by the ban.
While it supported a ban, the RSPCA criticised the decision to continue to allow electric containment fences.
A spokeswoman said: “In modern day society there is no excuse or need for the use of devices which can compromise cat and dog welfare, especially when humane and viable alternatives to training and containing dogs and cats are available.”
The Dogs Trust said that electric collars could send shocks of 100 to 6,000 volts for up to 11 seconds at a time.
Dr Rachel Casey, director of canine behaviour and research at the Dogs Trust: “Scientific research has demonstrated that electronic devices which deliver an aversive stimulus have a negative impact on dog welfare, so this ban will have a major positive impact for dogs in the UK.”
A ban on the devices was backed by 74% of people in a 2014 poll by the Kennel Club.
The dog welfare organisation said a ban would ensure that pets were trained with “positive methods, free from pain”.
The announcement follows a government consultation, in which half of the 7,000 responses said they did not want to see containment fences banned.
Mr Gove said: “We are a nation of animal lovers and the use of punitive shock collars cause harm and suffering to our pets.”
He urged pet owners to use “positive reward training methods” instead.
However, a letter sent from Mr Gove’s department in February to the Royal Veterinary College – seen by the Press Association – suggested that there was insufficient evidence for supporting a ban.
Dog trainer and campaigner Jamie Penrith said Mr Gove had made an “abrupt” policy turnaround with no additional evidence.
Ian Gregory, a lobbyist for pet collar manufacturers, campaigned to prevent the ban on containment fences, arguing that they helped prevent some of the 300,000 deaths of cats in road accidents.
He said that animal charities exaggerated the impact of the shock delivered by a collar, which was about a millijoule of energy, compared to cattle fencing which was a thousand times more powerful.
“The anecdotal problems reported with pet collars can be resolved by product standards rather than by banning a proven technology,” he said.
“The hundreds of thousands of dog owners using remote trainers do not deserve to be criminalised.”
The Times, 28 August 2018
Gove ‘ignored advice’
Electric shock collars for dogs and cats will be banned in England, Michael Gove has confirmed. But dog trainers criticised the environment secretary for ignoring letters from his department saying there was insufficient evidence for a ban. The remote-controlled collars trigger an electric pulse or spray noxious chemicals at the animal. Ian Gregory, a lobbyist, said: “The hundreds of thousands of dog owners using remote trainers do not deserve to be criminalised.”
Metro, 28 August 2018
Gove is criticised over pet shock collars ban
ENVIRONMENT secretary Michael Gove has been accused of bringing in a ban on electric shock collars for dogs and cats without new evidence.
In February a letter from his department to the Royal Veterinary College suggested there was insufficient evidence for a ban. But yesterday, while announcing the ban, Mr Gove said the collars harm pets. The Dogs Trust welcomed the move.
Dog trainer Jamie Penrith said Mr Gove had made an ‘abrupt’ turnaround. Shock collar lobbyist Ian Gregory said: ‘The hundreds of thousands of dog owners using remote trainers do not deserve to be criminalised.’
i-News, 28 August 2018
Gove ‘U-turn’ on pet shock collars
Michael Gove has been accused of making an “abrupt” policy turnaround after a letter from his department suggested there was insufficient evidence for banning electric shock collars for dogs and cats, before he announced plans for a ban.
The Environment Secretary confirmed yesterday that what he described as “punitive” training devices that “cause harm and suffering” would be outlawed, after a consultation on the proposals in March. An official letter to the Royal Veterinary College in February suggested that evidence did not support a ban. Campaigner Jamie Penrith said Mr Gove had done a “complete 180”.
Press Association
The Press Association wrote up our press release into an article which has been reprinted in at least ten outlets including the Mail Online which is the world’s most widely read news website.
Mail Online, 28 August 2018
Michael Gove accused of `turnaround´ on electric shock collars for pets
Michael Gove has been accused of making a “complete 180” after letters from his department suggested there was insufficient evidence for banning electric shock collars for dogs and cats, weeks before plans to ban their use were announced.
The Environment Secretary confirmed on Monday that the Government would outlaw what he described as “punitive” shock collars which “cause harm and suffering to our pets”, following a consultation on the proposals in March.
Used as training devices, the remote controlled collars can trigger an electric pulse of varying strength, or spray noxious chemicals at the animal.
However, a letter sent from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) in February, seen by the Press Association, suggested that there was insufficient evidence for supporting a ban.
The document, sent to the Royal Veterinary College, noted scientific research that it had commissioned “was not strong enough to support a ban” on “electronic training aids for dogs”.
A similar statement was made by Defra Minister George Eustice in a 2014 letter, in which he said the department did not consider that there was “evidence that the use of such devices causes unnecessary suffering”.
Dog trainer and campaigner Jamie Penrith said Mr Gove had made an “abrupt” policy turnaround with no additional evidence.
He told the Press Association that in February the Government had “insufficient evidence” to conclusively support the suggestion that the collars have a negative impact on welfare, but that “two weeks later at the beginning of March these ‘barbaric, punitive devices need to be stripped from the market’”.
“It’s a complete 180,” Mr Penrith added, saying it was not a welfare move.
Ian Gregory, a lobbyist for pet collars, said: “The Secretary of State should desist from feeding the nation’s pets to the wolves of Twitter.
“The anecdotal problems reported with pet collars can be resolved by product standards rather than by banning a proven technology.
“The hundreds of thousands of dog owners using remote trainer do not deserve to be criminalised.”
The ban on remote controlled electronic training collars will not be extended to invisible fencing systems which can keep pets away from roads and within a boundary without receiving a static pulse, the Government announced.
Mr Gove said: “We are a nation of animal lovers and the use of punitive shock collars cause harm and suffering to our pets.
“This ban will improve the welfare of animals and I urge pet owners to instead use positive reward training methods.”
The announcement was welcomed by the Dogs Trust, whose director of canine behaviour and research, Dr Rachel Casey, said: “Scientific research has demonstrated that electronic devices which deliver an aversive stimulus have a negative impact on dog welfare, so this ban will have a major positive impact for dogs in the UK.
“However, we are saddened that the Government hasn’t gone a step further and used this opportunity to ban the use of containment fences, to ensure that all UK dogs are protected from this outdated approach to training.”
Use of the collars has been banned in Wales, and earlier this year Scotland began moves towards prohibiting dog owners using them.
But it is only the UK Government which can ban their sale across the country.
Other Outlets Printing Press Association Article
Sky News: https://news.sky.com/story/electric-shock-collars-for-pets-to-be-banned-in-england-11483999
Belfast Telegraph: https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/michael-gove-accused-of-turnaround-on-electric-shock-collars-for-pets-37258686.html
Nottingham Post: https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/ban-announced-training-pets-electric-1946948
Leicestershire Live: https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/electric-shock-collars-dogs-cats-1946797
Aberdeen Evening News: https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/scotland/michael-gove-accused-of-turnaround-on-electric-shock-collars-for-pets/
Shropshire Star: https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/uk-news/2018/08/27/michael-gove-accused-of-turnaround-on-electric-shock-collars-for-pets/
Derby Telegraph: https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/electric-shock-collars-pets-outlawed-1946887
Guernsey Press: https://guernseypress.com/news/uk-news/2018/08/27/michael-gove-accused-of-turnaround-on-electric-shock-collars-for-pets/
Knutsford Guardian: http://www.knutsfordguardian.co.uk/news/national/16602006.michael-gove-accused-of-turnaround-on-electric-shock-collars-for-pets/
Broadcast Interviews
BBC Breakfast News, 28 August 2018, 08:10-08:19, video file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/14dmrT-UOcFbVh5Qbso8PFqFKLzu4mB14/view?usp=sharing
Sky News, 28 August 2018, 07:21:00, video file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/196gX-INKiT0bLqWAe3bKhPQ4Xfle6qjD/view?usp=sharing
BBC Radio 5 Live, 27 August 2018, 11:07:00 (programme time: 01:06:00) audio file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cd-DLvTAoe8BGcZhFBWIOw-AwCCn4atc/view?usp=sharing
Plus 8 local radio interviews on 28 August 2018
Other Coverage
Gizmodo 28 August 2018: In Big Win for Good Boys, England Is Banning Shock Collars https://gizmodo.com/in-big-win-for-good-boys-england-is-banning-shock-coll-1828651984
The Week 28 August 2018: Is Michael Gove right to outlaw electric shock collars for dogs? http://www.theweek.co.uk/96094/is-michael-gove-right-to-outlaw-electric-shock-collars-for-dogs
Veterinary News 28 August 2018: Government bans electric shock collars in England https://www.vetsurgeon.org/news/b/veterinary-news/archive/2018/08/28/government-bans-electric-shock-collars-in-england.aspx
Politic Mag 28 August 2018: Electric shock collars for pets to be banned in England – UK http://politicmag.net/politics-news/electric-shock-collars-for-pets-to-be-banned-in-england-uk-2810-2018/
2. Electronic Containment Systems
The Times, 27 April 2018
Gove climbs down in row over pets’ electric shock collars
Ben Webster, Environment Editor
Michael Gove is preparing to drop plans for a total ban on electric shock collars for cats and dogs, allowing them to be used to prevent pets from straying on to roads.
In a carefully scripted exchange with John Hayes, a former transport minister who uses the collars on his cats, Mr Gove indicated that he would limit the ban to collars used as training devices and exempt those used to contain animals.
The MPs heavily referenced TS Eliot, whose works include Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats, a 1939 poetry collection for children.
Mr Hayes asked: “Will the secretary of state, a noted cat owner, stand alongside those friends of felines, or will he send TS Eliot spinning in his grave and many cats to theirs, too?”
Mr Gove replied by quoting the opening line of The Waste Land. “April is the cruellest month. But this April will not be a month in which cruelty towards any living thing will be tolerated. We want to introduce legislation to ensure that the use of shock collars as a means of restraining animals in a way that causes them pain is adequately dealt with.
“[Mr Hayes] raises another important point in that containment fences can play a valuable role in ensuring that individual animals, dogs and cats, can roam free in the domestic environment in which they are loved and cared for.”
Mr Hayes had previously told Mr Gove during environment questions that banning containment fence collars would result in pets being killed on the roads. Under the system, when a cat approaches a cable buried around a garden, the collar first beeps a warning and then, if the cat continues towards it, delivers a shock.
Sir Steve Redgrave, the Olympic gold medallist who uses an electric collar to keep his Old English sheepdog in his unfenced three-acre garden, welcomed Mr Gove’s comments.
He said: “I am delighted that the government is moving towards a decision not to ban containment fences. I agree with Michael Gove that they are a valuable way of giving pets the freedom of the nation’s gardens and I am convinced, from my own experience, that they are not in the slightest way cruel.”
Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, is said to have used the collars to save his two cats from being run over. Mr Hayes said: “The consultation process has shown how important containment fences are to the welfare of our nation’s cats and dogs. It has confirmed what academic evidence has shown — just how important they are in protecting pets from road traffic accidents.”
The RSPCA supports a ban on containment fences as well as remote training devices.
The Telegraph, 27 April 2018
Total ban on electric cat collars will not be introduced, Michael Gove indicates
Sophie Jamieson
A total ban on the use of electric shock collars for pets will not be introduced, Michael Gove has indicated, after fears the policy would lead to more cats dying on roads.
In response to a question in the Commons on Thursday, the Environment Secretary suggested the ban would only apply to those that are used to train animals into good behaviour, and not to devices designed to prevent pets straying into dangerous territory.
Electronic collars allow shocks to be applied to cats and dogs by their owners. Containment collars work alongside underground ‘fences’, which can be installed along the edge of a property to prevent a cat wandering out into the road and being run over. The collars beep at a cat when they approach a cable buried in the ground, and if the cat continues it is given a shock.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs launched a consultation on a proposal to ban electronic training collars last month.
Mr Gove’s support for the measure is said to have caused friction at the Cabinet table, with reports that transport secretary Chris Grayling uses the containment fence system to protect his cats.
Alluding to TS Eliot’s collection of poems Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats, John Hayes, a former transport minister said to Mr Gove yesterday: “TS Eliot said that when a cat adopts you, you just have to put up with it until the wind changes.
“Well, a cruel wind may be blowing for thousands of cat owners who put protective fencing in place to stop their much-loved pets joining the hundreds of thousands who are killed on our roads each year.
“Will the Secretary of State, a noted cat owner, stand alongside those friends of felines or will he send TS Eliot spinning in his grave and many cats to theirs too?”
Mr Gove responded: “TS Eliot once wrote at the beginning of The Waste Land that April is the cruellest month.
“But this April will not be a month in which cruelty towards any living thing will be tolerated towards any living thing. We want to bring forward legislation in order to ensure that the use of shock collars as a means of restraining animals in a way that causes them pain is dealt with adequately.
“But [Mr Hayes] does raise an important point as well. Containment fences can play a valuable part in making sure that individual animals, dogs and cats, can roam free in the domestic environment in which they are loved and cared for.”
Mr Gove said “a number of submissions” had been made to the consultation about containment collars, and they were “being reflected on very carefully”.
In a letter to the Daily Telegraph on Thursday,Professor Timothy Gruffydd-Jones, of the University of Bristol, who specialises in feline medicine, warned that electronic containment fences used in combination with electric collars “are entirely different from dog training collars”.
To ban them would “condemn many cats to unnecessary suffering and death” because they prevent cats straying out from their gardens onto their streets, he wrote.
The RSPCA argues that all electronic collars should be banned because they can cause pain and fear. The collars are illegal in Wales.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has been approached for comment.
The Sun, 27 April 2018
PET SHOCK TAGS OK Michael Gove set to scrap plans for a ‘total’ ban on electric shock tags for pets
Olympic rowing legend Steve Redgrave, who uses an electric collar on his Old English sheepdog, said he was “delighted” by the news
By Greg Wilford
MICHAEL Gove is set to scrap plans for a total ban on shock collars for cats and dogs.
The Tory MP indicated he will allow the devices to be linked to containment fences to stop pets from straying out of their gardens and on to roads. Mr Gove is still set to ban the collars from use as training devices, according to The Times.
He said: “Containment fences can play a valuable role in ensuring that individual animals, dogs and cats, can roam free in the domestic environment in which they are loved and cared for.”
Olympic rowing legend Steve Redgrave, who uses an electric collar on his Old English sheepdog, said he was “delighted” by the news.
“I agree with Michael Gove that they are a valuable way of giving pets the freedom of the nation’s gardens and I am convinced, from my own experience, that they are not in the slightest way cruel,” he added.
The RSPCA supports a ban on containment fences as well as remote training devices
Mail Online, 27 April 2018
Michael Gove is preparing to drop plans for a total ban on electric shock collars for dogs and cats
- Environment Secretary had been expected to bring in the ban on the devices
- But Michael Gove hinted in the Commons that the ban will be toned down
- Supporters of the collars say they stop sheep and pets wandering into roads
By Kate Ferguson
Michael Gove has hinted that he is preparing to drop plans for a total ban on electric shock collars for cats and dogs.
The Environment Secretary had been expected to bring in the prohibition as part of his mission to transform the Tories into the party for animal lovers.
But critics have hit out at the plan – warning that their pets are kept alive by the collars which stop them wondering away and getting hit by cars in the road.
And in a coded exchange in the House of Commons yesterday, he suggested some pet owners will be allowed to continue using the devices.
Tory MP John Hayes, who uses the collars on his cat, quizzed Mr Gove about his plans by quoting from a book of cat poetry by TS Elliot which was used as the basis for the musical Cats.
Mr Hayes asked: ‘Will the secretary of state, a noted cat owner, stand alongside those friends of felines, or will he send TS Eliot spinning in his grave and many cats to theirs, too?’
Mr Gove replied by quoting the opening line of TS Elliot’s famous poem, The Waste Land, to suggest that the plans will be toned down.
He said: ‘April is the cruellest month.
‘But this April will not be a month in which cruelty towards any living thing will be tolerated.
‘We want to introduce legislation to ensure that the use of shock collars as a means of restraining animals in a way that causes them pain is adequately dealt with.
‘[Mr Hayes] raises another important point in that containment fences can play a valuable role in ensuring that individual animals, dogs and cats, can roam free in the domestic environment in which they are loved and cared for.’
Sir Steve Redgrave, the Olympic gold medallist who uses an electric collar to keep his Old English sheepdog in his unfenced three-acre garden, welcomed Mr Gove’s comments.
He told The Times: ‘I am delighted that the government is moving towards a decision not to ban containment fences.
‘I agree with Michael Gove that they are a valuable way of giving pets the freedom of the nation’s gardens and I am convinced, from my own experience, that they are not in the slightest way cruel.’
Mr Hayes said: ‘The consultation process has shown how important containment fences are to the welfare of our nation’s cats and dogs.
‘It has confirmed what academic evidence has shown — just how important they are in protecting pets from road traffic accidents.’
The Telegraph, 26 April 2018
Letters To The Editor: Banning electric collars would harm more cats
SIR – Michael Gove is proposing a ban of the use of electric collars for cats. Thousands of cat owners use these collars in combination with electronic containment fences to stop cats from straying from their gardens and into the street. As many as 300,000 cats are killed by traffic every year and even more are seriously injured, so these fences make a significant contribution to animal welfare.
In its consultation document, the Government presents no evidence in favour of a ban on these collars, whereas peer-reviewed evidence (N Kasbaoui et al, PLOS One, 2016) demonstrates that no long-term welfare issues result from their use.
As Emeritus Professor of Feline Medicine at Bristol University and deputy chairman of the charity Cats Protection, I have dedicated my career to the welfare of cats. I would implore the Government to recognise that containment fences are entirely different from dog training collars, and not to ban them. A ban would condemn many cats to unnecessary suffering and death.
Professor Timothy Gruffydd-Jones, Bristol
SIR – Our dog is a rescue terrier and, by the time we adopted him, he already had a strong hunting instinct. We worked hard to retrain him, but to no avail, and, despite our house being fully fenced, he got out and was hit by a car while chasing a pheasant out of our driveway.
Our vet recommended installing an electric containment fence, so we did. Our dog learnt quickly, by receiving approximately four mild shocks, all of which were preceded by a beep when he approached the edges of the garden. He now knows exactly where the boundary is.
The risk of his being injured or killed on the road far outweighs the discomfort of those four small electric pulses.
Antonia Thompson, Leigh, Surrey
The Times, 19 April 2018
Owners bite back at electric collar ban
Ben Webster, Environment Editor
Michael Gove’s latest proposal for improving animal welfare could prove painful for one north London postman.
Bertie, an 11-year-old terrier-cross, has a pathological dislike of the postman and likes nothing better than to sink his teeth into his leg.
He bit the postman twice but for the past two years deliveries have reached his home in Barnet without incident. After several dog trainers failed to change Bertie’s behaviour, Chris Sutton, his owner, finally found a way of protecting the postman. She bought an electric collar that sounds a warning then delivers a mild shock if Bertie goes too close to the front door.
Mr Gove, the environment secretary, announced last month that he wants to ban the use of electric collars for dogs and cats. The ban is primarily aimed at electric collars used as training devices and activated by remote control, which vets say can be abused. But Mr Gove also intends to include collars used to contain pets, even though many vets say they cause no harm and actually help to protect the animal.
The RSPCA says the collars can cause pain, fear and distress.
However, Ms Sutton said that Bertie had very quickly learnt not to go near the door. He had received only two shocks on the collar’s lowest setting, which she described as “like pins and needles”. She fears that Bertie might have to be put down if Mr Gove forced her to remove his collar. “He would soon learn that it was not there and he is so speedy he would escape at some point. It would be awful if the postman was there. Potentially they would class him as a dangerous dog and have him put down.”
She said that after Bertie’s second attack, Royal Mail had stopped delivering and sent a letter mentioning the Dangerous Dogs Act. Deliveries resumed after she bought the electric collar. “From a postman’s point of view he is a dangerous dog. It would break my daughter’s heart if he had to be put down because he is a gentle little soul really. But he has taken a pathological dislike to our postman. He would turn into a crazed psychopath every time anything came through the door.”
A group of vets who use collars to contain their pets have called on Mr Gove to exempt them from the ban. In a letter to The Times on Monday they said the systems prevented “horrific road accidents that claim 300,000 cats and countless dogs every year”. More than 40,000 cat and dog owners in England use electric collars to contain their pets.
Sam Gaines, of the RSPCA, said: “We would urge owners to use alternative and positive training methods to prevent their animals from straying as research has shown that applying an electric shock can result in behavioural and physiological responses associated with pain, fear and distress and can compromise welfare.”
The Times, 19 April 2018
LEADING ARTICLE: Dog Days
The government’s proposed ban on electric shock collars goes too far
Michael Gove has been a great friend to animals since taking up his post at the environment department. His plans to subject animal abusers to tougher sentences and ban sales of ivory will make this country more humane. On one issue, however, he has gone too far. His proposed blanket ban on electric shock collars for cats and dogs has not been thought through. When the collars are used to contain animals in certain locations, they can keep pets safe and keep the land open.
So-called “containment systems” work by giving animals a minor shock when they stray outside an area enclosed by a live wire, which is often buried. They will normally hear a beep first to warn them of the oncoming shock, and they quickly learn where is out of bounds.
Not only does this prevent pets going walkabout, it also stops them getting killed. A group of vets wrote to The Times earlier this week to note that these containment systems do no harm to pets and “stop them joining the 300,000 cats and countless dogs killed on the roads every year”.
Sir Steve Redgrave, the Olympic gold medallist, uses a containment system to stop his sheepdog from wandering outside his three acres in Buckinghamshire. It means he does not have to put up a fence, keeping the countryside more neighbourly.
Shock collars used for training are another matter. This is a lazy option for owners who would rather get their pets into good habits with stick than carrot. Those who teach a dog to sit, heel or follow with shocks are subjecting it to gratuitous pain when they could adopt a positive “repeat and reward” approach that does the job every bit as well. It is, after all, the technique used to train dogs that help the ill and guide blind people across roads. If Mr Gove wants to ban something, he should restrict his focus to electric collars used for training.
Daily Mail, 17 April 2018
Collars that give pets ELECTRIC SHOCKS to help keep them SAFE are humane, vets say
- Collars which give pets mild electric shocks are ‘in the animals’ best interests’
- They are used by 40,000 pet owners in the UK who use them to train animals
- The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs have announced a ban
By Tom Payne
Collars which give pets mild electric shocks to help keep them safe in gardens are humane and in the animals’ best interests, vets say.
The collars are used by 40,000 pet owners in the UK and buzz before sending a mild electrical pulse to the animal if it crosses a boundary.
Others, known as remote training devices, allow an owner or trainer to deliver a shock to the animal at the push of a button if it misbehaves.
Last month the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs announced a ban on both types of collar after pressure from the RSCPA and other animal rights campaigners.
It could come into force as early as the end of this month. But a group of vets oppose the decision, saying the collars used to keep pets from wandering should not be banned.
‘The pet is in control and quickly learns not to go close to the boundary,’ the group of 11 wrote in a letter to The Times yesterday.
‘We are confident in the sound science that shows that these garden systems do no harm to pets. They instead stop them joining the 300,000 cats and countless dogs killed on the roads every year.’
On the other hand, the remote training collars should be regulated because there is evidence that they can upset dogs, they said.
In the Mail last month Quentin Letts told how he believes the collars keep his dogs safe.
He said the electric pulse was more of ‘a static charge’, adding: ‘If you think they are scared of their collars, please explain why they happily sit at my feet while I fix them in place.’
It is not yet clear what punishments pet owners can expect to receive if they are caught using the collars.
The Times, 16 April 2018
Lloyd Webber in hot water over cat collars
Ben Webster, Environment Editor
His love of cats prompted him to write a smash-hit musical based on TS Eliot’s collection of feline poems.
Now Andrew Lloyd Webber is one of more than 40,000 cat and dog lovers facing criminalisation. The composer uses electric shock collars on his Turkish Van cats to prevent them being run over on the fast country road beside his estate in Hampshire.
The collars are activated by a hidden wire surrounding the 350 acres but the cats quickly learnt never to cross it.
The government last month announced plans to ban the use of electric collars on dogs and cats in England. Michael Gove, the environment secretary, acted after being accused of failing to follow the lead of the Labour-led government in Wales, which banned the collars in 2010.
Concerns about the collars mainly relate to those used as training devices, which involve remote control being used to activate the shock. These systems are open to abuse and most vets agree that they should be banned. However, Mr Gove included “containment fence” systems, such as the one used by Lord Lloyd-Webber, in the proposed ban despite the absence of evidence that they harmed animals.
A group of vets who use containment systems are calling on Mr Gove to exempt them from the ban. In a letter to The Times today, they say the systems do no harm to pets and that they “stop them joining the 300,000 cats and countless dogs killed on the roads every year”. Ben Pedley, a signatory of the letter, who uses the collars on two dogs and two cats, said that in ten years before installing the system he lost eight cats in collisions on the 60mph country road beside his home in Cheshire. He has not lost one since installing the system in 2015.
Sir Steve Redgrave, the Olympic gold medallist, uses an electric collar to prevent Arthur, his Old English Sheepdog, from wandering out of his unfenced three-acre garden near Marlow in Buckinghamshire. He said the fence allowed Arthur to enjoy freedom in the garden and in six years he had received a shock on fewer than ten occasions.
Mr Gove’s proposed ban would also affect senior Conservatives who have installed the containment systems, including Chris Grayling, the transport secretary. Ross Thomson, the Conservative MP for Aberdeen South who helped persuade Mr Gove to propose the total ban, now accepts containment systems should be exempt. However, the RSPCA said it supported a ban on electric collars used in containment systems as well as those used as training devices.
Sam Gaines, head of the RSPCA’s companion animals department, said: “We would urge owners to use alternative and positive training methods to prevent their animals from straying as research has shown that applying an electric shock can result in behavioural and physiological responses associated with pain, fear and distress and can compromise welfare.”
Caroline Kisko, secretary of the Kennel Club, said: “We support Defra’s full proposal [and] believe that dogs should be contained by proper garden fences rather than an electronic fence.”
The Times, 16 April 2018
Letters To The Editor: Safe Pet Collars
Sir, We write as vets about Defra’s plans to ban two types of electronic collars which are widely used on pets. The first type is a remote training device, where the owner presses a button to trigger an electric pulse in the collar to stop their dog misbehaving. There is evidence that this can upset the dog and they merit some regulatory action.
Collars of the second type, which keep cats and dogs safe in gardens, are overwhelmingly in the pet’s interests. In these systems the pet is in control and quickly learns not to go close to the boundary. If it ignores the initial warning buzzer then the electric pulse it receives is very mild. We are confident in the sound science that shows that these garden systems do no harm to pets. They instead stop them joining the 300,000 cats and countless dogs killed on the roads every year. Many of us use them for our own pets and banning them would lead to even more tragedies.
Dr Bruce Bladon, FRCVS; Dr Damien Bush, MRCVS; Jo Cottee, MRCVS; Dr Vicky Ironside, MRCVS; Dr Paul Manning, MRCVS; Dr Chris Mann, MRCVS; Dr David Mason, MRCVS; Dr Eric McCarrison, MRCVS; Dr Ben Pedley, MRCVS; Dr Matt Smith, MRCVS; Dr Tony Warr, MRCVS
Mail Online, 22 March 2018
‘Shock’ collars to control pets AREN’T cruel. Banning them will kill our furry friends… a controversial but passionately held view by QUENTIN LETTS who’s sure electric collars help keep his beloved dogs alive
By Quentin Letts
When I heard Conservative politicians talk of ‘freedom’ this week at an event to promote individual liberty, I thought of our late dog Cinders.
Part Bedlington terrier, part Heinz, Cinders loved to run. She would pin back her ears and chase the breeze. To see that darling dog sprint from side to side of our Herefordshire field, a flat, grey, galloping streak of speed, was to see freedom.
One winter morning 12 years ago, Cinders was hit by a car on the road outside our house. The motorist, brutishly, did not stop.
Although her two back legs were wrecked, Cinders somehow managed to crawl to our front door in a pitiable state and we rushed her to the vet. After more than £1,000 worth of treatment, she survived.
But she never ran again, poor love, and I have never been sure we did the right thing in keeping her alive for another couple of years. Without running, life had lost its zest for her and eventually we had to have her put to sleep.
When we gave a home to a new dog (Flip, an adult Patterdale terrier), we were worried when she kept exploring the road. How could we keep her safe? A friend suggested a freedom collar. This device has a watch-style battery which gives the dog a warning vibration when it crosses a wire buried round the perimeter of your garden.
The vibration, comparable to an electric charge (think static carpet), is preceded by a beeping noise. After a couple of ‘shocks’ the dog learns to stop advancing as soon as it hears that beeping. Although they are called ‘shock collars’ they should really be called ‘beeping collars’, for that is what works as the deterrent.
It’s a clever system and works brilliantly. I only wish we had known about it before Cinders had her accident. Flip, and more recently her daughter Bonnie, have worn their collars for years.
Like most terriers they are frisky souls — a polite way of saying they are exuberantly disobedient, particularly if they spot a rabbit — but thanks to that collar both dogs have kept away from the road.
The collar has also stopped them terrorising the public right of way that cuts through our garden. It has stopped them yapping round the ankles of ramblers and the hooves of horses.
Meanwhile, Flip and Bonnie are free to roam our field. They may not run as elegantly as Cinders but they love the freedom. And if you think they are scared of their collars, please explain why they happily sit at my feet while I fix them in place.
All that is now imperilled thanks to our interfering political class. Officials at the Environment Department propose to ban freedom collars, having been got at by professional animal-rights lobbyists who claim the collars are cruel.
Thousands of dog and cat owners in England thus face a dilemma (it’s estimated there are around half a million electric dog collars in use in Britain).
If a ban comes into force, should they disobey the law? Or should they remove their pets’ collars and put them at risk of being run over?
Supporters of the proposed ban want to outlaw both the sort of electric containment fences that we use for Flip and Bonnie, and handheld devices which allow dog trainers to give their animals shocks at the press of a button.
I have never used such a machine, but some dog owners say they can be useful in controlling their pets in the street or in fields with livestock. Maybe they can but my concern, as I have described, is for the beeping collars which keep a dog inside its familiar territory. Both systems may soon be outlawed.
The way some animal-rights fanatics talk, anyone who uses such a containment fence for their cat or dog is worse than Hannibal Lecter. When I debated the matter on BBC1’s Daily Politics this week with Scots Nationalist MP Deidre Brock, she claimed that the collars administered electric shocks of 6,000 volts. From one tiny little battery? The word for that claim is ‘barking’.
On social media, those of us who support freedom collars are denounced as fascists and animal torturers and worse. ‘Wear one yourself and see how you like it!’ scream anonymous online commentators. My answer to this is: ‘I did.’ Before we ever used the collar on Flip, I tested it on myself to make sure she would not be hurt by the vibration. ‘Build a real fence, mate!’ say others.
Had they ever met a Patterdale terrier, they would know they will dig under a fence within minutes. One of my wife’s first pets, a sausage dog called Emma, did just that and was duly squashed by a lorry.
As for people who claim that Patterdales can be trained by positive food rewards, I can only say that I admire their optimism.
The bile spouted by some animal-rights fanatics is odd. If they were really interested in animal welfare, would they not consider the freedom of movement these collars afford our animals?
Pet insurers Petplan claim 250,000 cats are hit by cars every year in Britain. Is that not far more cruel than a system which gives them one or two vibrations when they are young, and then keeps them off the road for the rest of their lives?
Owners of containment fences have included a former chief vet of the RSPCA — hardly someone who was horrible to animals. Transport Secretary Chris Grayling, most mild-mannered of men, uses one for his cat. Grayling the cat torturer? Come off it.
As a long-term admirer of Environment Secretary Michael Gove, I am baffled. Why on earth is he thinking of banning collars which allow people to take the initiative and let their cats and dogs enjoy the open air and freedom of gardens without having to worry about their safety?
These collars are entirely good for animal welfare. Mr Gove supposedly believes in a small state. He is opposed to ‘nanny government’ making our lives worse. But here is his department set to ruin the pet-care arrangements of thousands of citizens just trying to do the responsible thing.
Only this week the minister attended the relaunch of the Tory Party’s youth movement, which has been rebranded ‘Freer’. The idea behind that new name is a good one. Party strategists believe there is a growing public desire for individual liberty.
Voters are fed up being told what not to do by a patronising elite. In areas such as data protection, careers, pensions, the EU, freedom of expression and others, many of us are fed up with being lectured by the Establishment ‘blob’ (as Mr Gove has himself called it).
Why is he now siding with that very blob, after a cynical political campaign by big-shot charities whose lobbyists are forever seeking new laws to justify their existences? Ban, ban, ban. That’s always the blob’s way.
In 2014, Mr Gove’s Environment Department fellow minister George Eustice said there was no evidence that containment fences caused unnecessary suffering.
Bristol University has found ‘enormous welfare benefits’ and ‘an irrefutable case for the benefits of’ containment fences. Lincoln University has found ‘no evidence of long-term welfare problems’ for pets from these collars.
Yet now a Tory Government — a Tory Government! — is caving in to ill-founded lobbying.
Why? I’m afraid the answer is itself horribly cynical. The Conservative Party, having stupidly promised in its 2017 election manifesto to give MPs another vote on fox-hunting, is now bending too far in the other direction to show itself pro-animals.
A Tory backbencher I know was one of a group of MPs recently given a briefing by Downing Street and told that ‘animal rights is polling well so we’re going to be doing more of that’.
As a dog owner — correction, we dog owners know that the dogs really own us — I am all in favour of preventing unnecessary animal suffering. That is why, like thousands of other pet lovers, I use a containment fence.
Please, Mr Gove, put a stop to the electoral games and short-term propaganda tactics. Put animal freedoms first. Have nothing to do with this illiberal, life-shortening, counter-productive ban.
After what happened to our lovely Cinders, I never again want a dog of mine to crawl, whimpering, to my front door after being run over in the road.
But that is the likely upshot of this dreadful proposal.
BBC, 19 March 2018
Shock collar: Letts threat to take dead dog to Gove
English dog and cat owners could be banned from using shock collars to train their pets after Environment Secretary Michael Gove launched a consultation to potentially ban the “punitive devices”.
While some charities back the move, commentator Quentin Letts told Daily Politics presenter Jo Coburn how a previous pet died after a road accident, adding: “If one of our little dogs gets run over, I am going to take its dead body and put it on Michael Gove’s desk.”
He added that the proposed ban in England – already enforced in Wales and about to be introduced in Scotland, was a “rotten, illiberal and life-ruining and life-decreasing law”.
Express, 6 March 2018
Pet shock collars: Michael Gove considering consultation on outlawing controversial device
PLANS to ban controversial electronic collars for cats and dogs are set to send the fur flying among pet charities and even the Cabinet.
By John Ingham
Environment Secretary Michael Gove is considering a consultation on outlawing the devices which give pets an electric shock.
They can be used to train pets or keep them confined in an area by laying an underground cable which can create an invisible “fence”.
An RSPCA of 3,000 dog owners last month found that 5 per cent use electric shock collars.
Critics of the collars that can give electric jolts for 11 seconds at a time include the RSPCA, Dogs Trust and Cats Protection.
Supporters include the Feline Friends charity and the British Association for Shooting and Conservation.
The policy could cause a Cabinet rift by pitting dog lover Mr Gove against cat loving Transport Secretary Chris Grayling.
There are unconfirmed reports that Mr Grayling has used the “virtual fence” system to keep his cats in his garden in southwest London.
Electric collars were banned in Wales in 2010 and Mr Gove, who owns two dogs, including a Bichon Frise called Snowy, is under pressure to extend the ban to England.
The head of the RSPCA’s Companion Animals department, Dr Samantha Gaines, said: “We support a ban on these collars as scientific research clearly shows that the application of an electric shock can cause both a physiological stress response and behaviours associated with pain, fear and stress in animals, therefore impacting on their welfare.
“Furthermore, as animals trained with these devices can show behaviours associated with pain and fear both during training and some time afterwards, the use of shock collars can have long-term effects.
“Such techniques are both unacceptable and unnecessary as reward-based training, where desirable behaviour is rewarded using praise, toys and treats achieves long-term change in behaviour and doesn’t subject the animal to pain or distress.”
The Dogs Trust, which is waging its “Shockingly Legal” campaign, also called on the Government to ban electric shock collars, saying: “These torturous devices can send between 100 to 6000 Volts to a dog’s neck, and have the capacity to continuously shock a dog for up to 11 terrifying seconds at a time.
The policy could cause a Cabinet rift by pitting dog lover Mr Gove against cat loving Transport Secretary Chris Grayling.
There are unconfirmed reports that Mr Grayling has used the “virtual fence” system to keep his cats in his garden in southwest London.
“Research shows that physical effects can include yelping, squealing, crouching, and physiological signs of distress in direct response to an electric shock.
“Whilst the use of electronic shock collars is banned in Wales, and Scotland has also made moves towards prohibiting the use of these cruel devices, England is dragging its heels.
“Only Westminster has the power to ban the sale of electronic shock collars so Dogs Trust is urging members of the public to tweet their MP using the hashtag #ShockinglyLegal to help bring this important issue to light.”
Environment Secretary Michael Gove is considering a consultation on outlawing the devices.
Cats Protection also said it is opposed to the use of electronic collars while the National Cat Adoption Centre said it was opposed to any collars other than quick-release ones for cats because they can get caught up in undergrowth while playing, hunting or even trying to escape from danger.
But the Feline Friends charity, which says up to 300,000 cats get run over in the UK every year, backed the use of electric collars as part of a “virtual fence” system.
It commissioned research by vets at the University of Lincoln which two years ago found no evidence of long-term welfare problems in cats living with these fences, compared to cats able to roam freely in and out of their owners’ gardens. The study appeared in the peer-reviewed journal PLOS One.
Professor Daniel Mills, Professor of Veterinary Behavioural Medicine in the School of Life Sciences at the University of Lincoln, said at the time: “While some will argue that electronic containment systems can never be justified for pets, others highlight that, in the UK alone, tens of thousands of cats are killed and injured on roads each year and these devices can prevent these often fatal injuries and the emotional cost to the cats and their owners.”
The BASC said a ban on electronic dog collars would be “disproportionate,”
Glynn Evans, BASC head of game and deer management, said: “A ban on the use of such training aids could remove the solution to remedying the behaviour of certain problem dogs.
“There is little scientific evidence relating to these aids being inherently harmful to the welfare of dogs, and no convincing evidence of long-term effects on welfare if collars are used in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions.”
Mr Grayling was not available for comment about how he controls his cats.
A spokesman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: “The Government is currently considering the issue.”
The Times, 5 March 2018
Gove faces cabinet cat fight over ban on shock collars
Ben Webster, Environment Editor
Michael Gove’s plan to improve animal welfare could cause some awkward moments around the cabinet table. The environment secretary wants to ban electric shock collars for cats and dogs but sources say that Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, uses them to save his two cats from being run over.
This week Mr Gove, who has two dogs, is expected to announce a consultation on outlawing use of any collars on cats and dogs which deliver an electric shock. The collars, which have been banned in Wales since 2010, are used either as a training device or to keep animals within certain boundaries.
Mr Grayling is said to have installed the latter system, with a cable buried around a garden acting as a “containment fence”. When the cat approaches the cable, the collar first beeps a warning and then, if the cat continues towards it, delivers a shock.
The RSPCA and Dogs Trust have campaigned for the collars to be banned. The trust said that some collars had the capacity “to continuously shock a dog for up to 11 terrifying seconds at a time” and that dogs responded by yelping, squealing and crouching.
However, the Feline Friends charity said that the collars were used by tens of thousands of people to keep cats safe.
Caroline Fawcett, the charity’s chairman who uses the collars on her three cats, accused Mr Gove of putting cats at risk by trying to ban them. “This barbaric ban would kill thousands of cherished pets,” she said. “In the past I lost much-loved cats to busy roads and I will never allow those I have now to suffer agonising slow deaths in a gutter.
“Mr Gove is threatening the lives of my cats with no scientific evidence to support him. The current law requires me to protect my pets from ‘pain, suffering and injury’ and I do that by having a containment fence.”
She supported banning use of the collars as a training device because they could be abused by people who wanted to treat animals cruelly.
She said her cats Rumpel, Teazer and Misty had learnt not to approach the boundary and had been given a light shock only once or twice.
David Bowles, head of public affairs at the RSPCA, said that there was no evidence from Wales that more cats had died on roads since the collars were banned there.
A spokeswoman for Mr Grayling said that she was unwilling to ask him whether or not his cats had an electric collar. “It’s a ridiculous question. I can confirm to you that Chris has a cat, possibly two,” she said. “But I am not going to ask him whether or not it wears a collar and whether or not that collar shocks it.”
She said that if the government confirmed it was going to ban the collars “I am sure that at that point Chris will declare an interest either way”.
Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, spoke out against shock collars last month. “I’m absolutely shocked to discover that electric collars are being used on dogs as utensils of discipline and education. There are far better ways of training your dog,” he said. “Just as you don’t need to cane children any more — we have moved on from that. Let’s move on from electric shock dog collars.”
The British Association for Shooting and Conservation said that it opposed a ban because “electronic collars used properly are an effective method for addressing serious problem behaviours in dogs which may otherwise be put to sleep”.