Abstract

In their commentary, Sargisson and McLean (2021) object to our conclusion that the use of e-collars are unnecessary in dog training (China et al 2020). Their criticisms make 4 broad claims: firstly that the training approaches were not the most effective means of training with e-collars; secondly that the paper focussed on measures of efficacy and did not present data on welfare; thirdly that the study did not include long term measures of efficacy; and fourthly our statistical approaches were not appropriate. Sargisson and McLean (2021) also question whether the research should be used to inform policy decisions with regard to use of e-collars in dog training, although we were cautious not to make any specific recommendations regarding legislation in our paper. We shall deal with each of these objections in turn, placing the first three in the context of the research project as well as related published work, clarifying the statistical approaches as there appear to be misunderstandings by Sargisson and McLean (2021) and finally relating the research to policy implications.