Printable View
I just saw this pop up on my FB feed tonight, and didn't know if it was true or not!?? Has anyone else heard of this before? For those that travel to QB for a hunt (considered members of the public?) with their pooch and use the devices---are they penalized?
http://thenormaldog.blogspot.ca/2014...nment-has.html
If this is true....yikes!
Havnet heard anything on this from the QC chapters of NAVHDA. Either way I wouldnt be too worried, I am still breaking the law by using my Garmin Astro....
Should be legal to use them on a few people from Quebec...
This adds to the list of reasons I don't live there.
Some group was successful right next door to us. How long before they target Ontario?
The bizarre thing is that citronella collars are allowed. These are probably more obnoxious to a dog than an e-collar -- as is suggested by the claim that they are more effective.
This seems to have been done by bureaucratic fiat, i.e. by regulation, rather than by legislation. I don't think it can be done in Ontario without getting a bill through Queens Park.
If it's the "shock" collars that are being referred to,they're being declared hazardous for use as an unsafe product,especially the junk units that are built in Asia. Apparently,it started in Europe by the animal rights groups and is rapidly gaining ground here.
The part I find particularly interesting is they allow choke collars. With proper use any training aid is safe but the choker is probably the easiest to cause injury. Doesn't make sense.
Yeah, sure, tazer's, pepper spray, and what ever they see ok to control people is just fine..... welcome to the world of the bleeding hearts n misinformed......
Hey they have storm troopers reading restaurant menus and harassing businesses now. I have no doubt that hundreds of PQ member's friends will be hired to harass sporting dog owners.
From what I can tell, all the chatter on the internet links back to one site. I have not found a link to a news org. reporting this. Odd, that media have not picked up on this if the report is accurate. There is a movement in Canada to ban e-collars. It is just one of many initiatives on the part of vets and animal rightists that is facing us. These folks are pretty much organized whereas the hunting community is not. Breed clubs/ hunting organizations should be addressing this...whether the issue is tail removal, dew claw removal, training equipment and use of animals in dog training. And yes, the latest proposal I have seen for a federal animal welfare act would pretty much ban field trials, tests, training with birds etc.
desired regulations being presented for public input in California right now:
. a ban on the use of lead ammunition for all hunting in California.
. Ban all bobcat hunting and trapping in California.
. Ban the use of dogs for the pursuit and take of ALL wildlife in California.
We should never take our hunting /use of dogs for granted. We should be vigilant.
I should have added to my last post that the info I read was on one of the British media websites,either London Daily Mail or the Mirror. I also remember an article on a BBC Canada newscast last summer,but,I can't recall where the report originated.Quote:
Originally Posted by spinster
Sounds.fair to me.. I mean its pretty cruel taking dogs out in the bush.. Yelling at them.. Having them chase birds around.. I can't believe anyone would think that is a good life for a dog.. A dog should be pampered.. Sleep on a dog sized bed.. With a pillow top.. Carried in a purse.. Dresses up with cute little hats.. And fed ice cream all day.. That is the natural life of dog.. Not running in a bush chasing birds.. And squirrels..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharon
Is this guy for real? ^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by topher
Recently, people have failed to detect Topher's tongue planted firmly in his cheek.
No.. Not for real at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steph
Although I got it next time include ":rolleyes:" for clarityQuote:
Originally Posted by Steph
He was being sarcastic and very funny.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Steph
Lol. Forgive me. I'm not in the OOD loop anymore and I thought he was serious.
Nothing out of Quebec surprizes me anymore. I guess its better to have a lost, confused cocker spaniel than use a LOVE (e) collar. My dog is very hard of hearing so the chime on the collar is essential.:rolleyes:
Dano.
I have an ecollar and a prong collar for my brit. I love both of them and know how to use them PROPERLY. I have seen ecollars being abused. I watched a trainer of all things.....wailing on a GSP until it was yelping and whining so bad that the guy beside me was upset (rightfully so). The trainer was trying to recall the dog, but the dog was confused and came to us - all in an open field....not the dogs fault, and the trainer continued to yell and ramp up the voltage. I was very new to the bird dog game then, and at that time didn't even own an ecollar, just having a young pup. I was a guest on someone elses property. Today, knowing what I know, someone would have been told where to stick their transmitter unit.
My point: everytime someone abuses a tool, we feed the anti's. This included all tools - firearms, atv's, snowmachines, boats, collars. Please treat all these tools with respect and use them properly. Misuse them, and we might not have them anymore.
And yes, be vigilant. Educate others when you can. I often encounter people who look at the prong collar and think its a torture system designed to jab the prongs into the dogs neck! I show them how it works, and explain how my dog can pull so hard she can actually hurt her neck with a regular collar. I explain how you never pull on the leash with a prong collar, you never yank. You simply stop and let the dog figure out that it controls the thing.
I know I'm "preaching to the choir", but we need to help ourselves here as well.
My two bits for the morning.
Very well said. I don't think anyone has explained that so clearly on here before. I'm saving your post. . Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by mark_t1012001
I'm so steadfast against this ban that I am going to put 2 e-collars on my dog. He's also going on a hunger strike in solidarity. I'll keep you guys posted on how it goes.
Maybe he could ask Spence on how to maintain your weight during a hunger strike :)Quote:
Originally Posted by WayneGretzky99
With the Wynne government's "activist" agenda I expect the same laws in place in Ontario within 12 months.
Oh come on its Quebec, the only thing easier to buy then beer in Quebec is a politician.
If this is or was true then I am certain that one of the companies would own a few by now
Funny I thought her supporters were fans of wearing collars etcQuote:
Originally Posted by terrym
Joke about it all you want. The list of jurisdictions that have banned ecollars is growing not shrinking. I grew up and have friends and family in Quebec and this wasn't exactly front page news there. Now it's too late. 12 months and we're screwed here, guaranteed. This fits right in with this government's agenda as they know likely 75% of ecollar users are hunters.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnvizsla
There is a good chance that ecollars will someday be banned. Veterinarians have had a significant roll in getting tail-docking banned in certain provinces here in Canada and they don't look favorably upon the use of ecollars and prong collars: http://www.canadianveterinarians.net...thods-for-dogs
The animal welfare folks just won a major victory in how farm animals are treated in Canada, and I doubt the general public really thinks about farm animal care. Imagine what will happen when they turn their attention to companion animals. They are organized, have funding and veterinary professionals behind them. So one can never say never.
Exactly,not to mention that there's a large number of hunters in our own community that have serious reservations on the use of e-collars and/or the use of dogs for hunting,in general. Publicly they don't say much,but,privately,they have plenty to say. We shouldn't delude ourselves of that fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by spinster
On the subject of ecollars- http://www.seespotrunkennel.com/blog...icy-statement/
Quote:
Originally Posted by spinster
Did you notice that blog has almost 400K hits?
What is the CCPDT? I know what the letters stand for , but what kind of licensing is their mandate?
They don't really do licensing. They set certification standards for people who want to hang out their shingle as dog trainers and show that they've passed some kind of test. There are a few competing organizations offering certification.
That is a good post ... my bet would be the policy statement is incoherent because it was written by committee and had to contain contradictory information so that everyone would feel he had got his way.
I liked that hierarchy but what is positive punishment?
Positive punishment is what we would normally think of as just plain punishment.
"Positive" in this context means we add something, "negative" that we take it away ... in "positive punishment," the thing we add is definitely negative. :)
Positive reinforcement -- we add something good to reinforce a behaviour = reward.
Negative reinforcement -- we remove something bad to reinforce a behaviour = nagging.
Positive punishment -- we add something bad to deter a behaviour = punishment.
Negative punishment -- we take away something good to deter a behaviour = denial.
Thank you.
I have just been told that a group of NAVHDA chapters in Quebec lobbied and have had this bill overturned in Quebec. To my colleagues in Quebec congratulations.
Wow! Good for them.
Any link to a source on that? I can find nothing online suggesting that this has been overturned.
If this is true it is great news.
The information came from the group that lobbied to have the law rescinded over the weekend. I am not sure currently where the removal is in the Quebec legislation but the integrity of the gentlemen that advise me , I would not challenge.Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
Integrity and accuracy are two separate things.
Quebec's legislature is not sitting at present, so obviously no bill has recently been passed on this matter.
There appears to be a great deal of confusion on the subject of Quebec's e-collar ban, which is not helped by the fact that the documents available online are in French and most of the people debating the topic can't read them. It still seems unclear whether e-collars were ever really "banned" to begin with. One document calls them "inacceptables"; another, "non-recommandes." But the law itself does not ban any specific kind of collar. It only says, "Le collier de l’animal ne doit pas gêner sa respiration ni lui occasionner de la douleur ou des blessures" -- a collar must not restrict the animal's breathing or cause pain or injury. Obviously, any collar can do any of those things, so this is open to interpretation.
I think people may be saying the law has been overturned based on the original word, "inacceptables," being changed to "non-recommandes" in a more recent version of the Ministry guidelines, but the law itself has not been changed. Using an e-collar in a way that causes pain would remain illegal.
Rather than rely on a rumour being reported at third hand, I'd prefer to see a link to something authoritative. That's not a challenge to anyone's "integrity," it's simply recognizing that what you get through the grapevine is never accurate.
If this news comes out "officially" you'll see an uproar in the animal welfare community. So far there is only silence.
Thank you.
Thanks for that clarification. Most helpful.