Cruelty, Abuse and Neglect

... and ethics.


WARNING!

This page contains very upsetting images of animal abuse.






This is abuse of a normal, every-day flat collar

This is abuse of a harness

This is also abuse of a harness

This is abuse of a ‘Halti’ head-collar (sadly injury and discomfort is much more likely with this tool)
What do these examples of abuse have in common?

A human has decided to abuse animals with these tools

ABUSE IS ABUSE

Any and all tools can be misused and abused.

Have you ever seen any of the above tools used in this way? Do you think those tools generally have a bad name?

No, of course not: those tools are seen every day and it’s not those tools that go viral on social media.


Let's talk ethics.


Is it cruel to lock a human in a cage? Yes.
What about your dog, a den animal?

Is it cruel to feed a child grass for their dinner? Yes.
What about your horse, a herbivore?

Is it cruel to throw a baby in the air to teach them independence? Yes.
What about a baby bird?


Let’s break it down further.
Would you roll around in fox poo?
Would you enjoy chasing a deer?
Would you greet other members of your species by sniffing their back ends?
Would you hump a pillow?!

No, no, no and no!!

But a dog may very well LOVE any one of these
(or all, depending on their unique personality!).


Many dogs find cuddles psychologically aversive...please let that sink in for a moment.

The ‘you wouldn’t do it to yourself’ argument is invalid; what is acceptable & normal (and what is not) varies hugely between species, as do learning processes.


Not providing your dog with the training it is entitled to, is very similar to refusing your child a blood test to access life-saving treatment just because they don’t like needles.


All pets are at the mercy of a human to be ethically provided with what is genetically and biologically required for them - the issue is that we are forcing human genetic requirements onto dogs. This is hugely unethical.


We have a nation of obese, reactive, nervous and ‘problematic’ dogs as a result of humanising the canine species.

(No species deserves to have the genetic traits and biological requirements of another species forced upon it.)

The average person doesn’t have sufficient knowledge to understand what is best for the canine species (as proven by the shambles we are in today).



People’s hearts are in the right places
but we just aren’t there yet with knowledge.

Starting off with the pseudoscience available today, all of this is massively impacted by the influence that social media can have, where both misinformation AND disinformation circulate very fast.

The "purely positive" movement is loud but is very silently ruining (and euthanising) our dogs.



We must respect the species.


So, what is ethical for the canine species?



The pet industry is brimming with misinformation and disinformation and it is currently really difficult to find REAL data.



By majority, both the vet industry and the training industry have business models to keep pets returning and this is immoral.



Just so you know, the pet industry is worth $223.54 BILLION (2020)...


proHOUND avidly opposes aversion-first "trainers".

proHOUND avidly supports rewards-first trainers.



... consequences are a natural part of life for every species on earth.

It's simply part of the learning process.



‘Trainers’ often refuse to provide helpful feedback (which would allow the dog to learn and then live a happier life) because they believe it causes “pain” or “stress”.

Firstly, pain has no place in ethical balanced dog training.

Secondly, distress and eustress are two totally separate emotions; healthy arousal levels are required for learning.

The sooner we allow our truly stressed dogs to live a happier & healthier life, the better.

We must take into account how dogs learn and push our egos aside.



We cannot continue trashing ethics in the name of ethics.

Doing this causes unsustainable re-homing efforts and devastating rates of unneccessary euthanasia.


Let's talk canine-specific ethics. All dogs deserve:

• Appropriate physical stimulation
• Appropriate mental stimulation
• Excellent health
• Excellent mental wellbeing


Does this little deaf doggo look like he’s being abused?

THIS IS ETHICAL REMOTE COLLAR TRAINING

THIS DOG IS NOT SHUT DOWN

THIS DOG IS NOT IN PAIN

THIS DOG IS NOT IN A STATE OF 'LEARNED HELPLESSNESS'.

THIS REMOTE COLLAR IS GIVING THIS DEAF DOG THE CHANCE TO BE OFF-LEAD AND ENJOY SOME FREEDOM!

Thanks to Scott from OLK9 for this beautiful video of human-canine harmony (using a tool that has been vilified in the media due to an ENORMOUS lack of education).


Does this seem unethical to you?

(Please note there are poor quality e-collars on the market which cannot ethically train your dog. Always consult a reputable professional. You should also consult a reputable professional when learning how to use the remote collar.)


ALL TOOLS CAN BE ABUSED



The blame lies with the abuser, not any category of tool...



You will likely have seen this horrific case of animal abuse - it often goes viral on social media.

"The picture (above) has frequently been circulated as to why “all prong collars are dangerous” and to shock people in securing their opposition to prong collars. Let’s be clear – this does not happen in one use, this doesn’t even happen overnight. This is a dog whose studded flat collar was deliberately turned inside out so that the studs would inflict harm to the dog. A leash was attached and the dog was pulled and abused over a period of a week. Additionally anyone versed in the use and application of a prong collar would know the prongs are not applied to the top of a dog’s neck."

Canine Education and Training Association
Draft Standards and Guidelines for the Health and Welfare of Dogs in Western Australia

Full Article Here



"The use of electronic training aids, including both collars and boundary fence systems, can bring very real benefits to animals that might otherwise have led very restricted lives, or for which euthanasia would have been a likely option. This may include animals for which other training methods had not worked.

The existing legislation is sufficient to protect animals. It is clear that causing unnecessary suffering to an animal - whether with an electronic training aid or by any other means - is against the law. Enforcing the existing law would be more effective in protecting animals than adding further legislation or regulations. Any statutory controls should be focused on the quality and specification of the devices available.

The most effective way to address any issues would be through further education. Training or licensing could be either encouraged or required. One option could be devices only being available under supervision and/or after training from a licensed or regulated practitioner. There may also be a case for some form of code or guidance."

Scottish Government
Full Article Here



proHOUND-instagram     proHOUND-facebook     proHOUND-email    




“proHOUND was established:
to collaboratively centralise and circulate credible information (while critiquing both evidence and science);
to dispel 1) misinformation 2) disinformation 3) pseudoscience and 4) propaganda;
to share know-how; and to influence the respective regulation and legislation on all disharmonies surrounding the domestic canine."


©2022 proHOUND®
proHOUND® is a trading name of proHOUND LTD.
proHOUND® is a UK-registered, non-profit organisation, limited by guarantee,
under registration number SC672677