Coating apparatus – Gas or vapor deposition – Work support
Reexamination Certificate
2001-11-30
2003-07-22
Abbott, Yvonne (Department: 3644)
Coating apparatus
Gas or vapor deposition
Work support
C054S071000, C119S831000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06595156
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates generally to the field of animal control devices, and specifically relates to a halter device for controlling an animal such as a dog.
BACKGROUND
Many restraining devices are known to handle dogs and other types of animals. These devices are used to control, limit or direct the dog's behaviour, and can range from simple collars and leashes, to more coercive devices such as choke collars.
The traditional simple neck collar typically consists of a length of leather, rope or chain which buckles or ties in a continuous loop around the neck of the dog. Usually a leash or lead is attached to the collar at one end and a dog handler will grasp the other end of the lead. This method of restraint requires the handler to exert a pulling force equal to or greater than the opposite force exerted by the animal. This type of restraining device can be ineffective, as a handler weaker than the animal may not be able to control the animal or can be injured from sudden unexpected acceleration by the animal. Furthermore, the handler's grip can fail, thereby allowing the dog to escape.
This problem is acerbated by the natural proprioceptive reflex of the animal that will cause it lean into an applied force. The tension applied to the collar therefore causes the animal to pull harder and the required response has to be learnt rather than rely on a natural reflex.
A further disadvantage to the neck collar is that, in use, the collar exerts pressure on the front of the animals neck under the chin thus exposing the animal to risk or injury to sensitive tissues in the throat, such as the cervical vertebrae, trachea and larynx. Moreover, some animals have a neck of greater circumference than the head, which makes the collar ineffective as it may slip over the head and allow the animal to escape. Various modifications have been proposed to overcome these difficulties.
The choke chain is frequently used on a dog and typically comprises a single length of chain having a metal guide or ring attached to one end. The dog handler forms a loop by threading the opposite end of the chain through the metal ring. The loop is then enlarged to fit over the dog's head and is positioned to encircle the dog's neck. A leash is then attached to the opposite end of the chain. Accordingly, the loop contracts about the dog's throat when the leash is pulled. It will be apparent that a choke chain is more coercive than the simple collar, and that the choke chain can result in serious damage to the dog's neck. Indeed if the choke chain is used with an unattended dog left anchored to fixed object, the dog can strangulate itself.
The choke chain is based on a theory of dog training which states that an adverse stimulus on the dog can be used to dominate the dog and therefore train the dog. However, it is known that the use of pain to control a dog requires a cognitive response on the part of the dog, such that the dog must be aware of the pain and then make a decision as to how to respond. While periodic “pain” conditioning can result in the dog making the decision to ‘stop’ based on receiving the pain reflex, it can also antagonize some dogs into extremely violent behaviour. Accordingly, may contemporary animal theorists believe that such training is unnecessarily brutal, ineffective and clumsy.
A variant of the choke chain is a prong-type collar which includes metal projections to press into the skin of the dog's neck when the dog handler jerks the leash. Similar to the choke chains, prong-type collars force prongs into the dog's neck to condition the dog to stop the undesired behaviour. It will be apparent that prong-type collars suffer from the same disadvantages as regular choke collars.
Other devices, such as muzzles, have been used to encase the snout or muzzle of the dog. The devices typically comprise a cage which surrounds the dog's snout and teeth. However, these devices merely physically prevent the dog from biting people or other dogs and do not condition or train the dog to stop its undesired behavior.
As an alternative to the collar, dog harnesses have also been used to distribute the leash pulling force more evenly over neck and chest of the dog. These devices are intended to “harness” a dog's pulling energy, and are not intended to provide a command useful for stopping the dog.
Another group of dog training and behavior control devices has been developed to address some of the problems discussed above. One such device is known as a Halti™ and is disclosed as a canine halter in Canadian Industrial Design No. 56,430 issued to Mugford. This canine halter includes a neck strap which is worn around the neck of the dog. The neck strap is connected to a short strap extending forwardly under the dog's lower jaw and connecting to a metal ring. A is positioned over the top of the dog's snout and extends downwardly through the metal ring. A second ring is provided for attaching a leash to the lower part of the nose band below the dog's lower jaw in front of the neck.
In operation, the dog handler walks with the dog on one side and holds the leash loosely. This permits the nose band to remain in a generally slack or loose condition about the dog's snout. If the dog exhibits undesirable behaviour, such as pulling or refusing to walk, the dog handler pulls on the leash, thereby tightening the nose band about the dog's snout.
Another similar device is described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,941,313 to Anderson. This patent discloses a combination collar and muzzle training aid which includes a collar that encircles the neck of the dog immediately behind the ears. A separate muzzle loop encircles the upper and lower jaws and extends downwardly through a ring carried on the collar below the dog's lower jaw. A leash is attached to a part of the muzzle loop which extends through the ring below jaw of the animal.
In operation, if the leash is pulled in a forward direction the muzzle loop of the Anderson device contracts and applies pressure to the dog's muzzle. It is prevented from slipping off the muzzle by transferring the pulling force to the collar through the ring.
Unfortunately, the design of the Halti™ and Anderson animal control devices have a number of disadvantage. These devices may cause a twisting force to be applied to the dog's head and neck when the leash is pulled from a location at the side or rear of the dog, which are the usual positions for the handler when walking the dog. This twisting force is caused by locating the leash attachment point on the nose band below the dog's lower jaw in front of the neck. As the leash is pulled to stop the undesired behaviour, the lower leash attachment point is drawn toward the dog handler, thereby forcing the dog's neck to twist. This twisting action may increase the change of injury to the dog's neck if the leash is pulled too abruptly.
A further disadvantage of these devices also relates to the leash attachment location below and near the lower jaw. If the dog is nervous or agitated and prone to biting, the dog handler is forced to attach the leash near the dog's teeth, below the lower jaw. This is undesired because it increases the chance of a dog bite injury to the handler.
Also, the Halti™ and Anderson dog control devices are usually removed from the dog and replaced with a conventional collar after a dog-training period has ended. However, this requires the dog owner to purchase two devices, a training device and a conventional collar, thereby increasing dog ownership costs.
It is therefor an object of the present invention to provide a novel animal halter device which obviates or mitigates at least one of the disadvantages of the prior art.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
In a broad embodiment, the invention provides a halter for controlling an animal comprising a halter comprising an anchor portion to extend across a forward facing portion of an animals head, a nape portion connected to said anchor portion and extending across
Abbott Yvonne
Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner L.L.P.
LandOfFree
Animal restraining halter does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Animal restraining halter, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Animal restraining halter will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3025786