18/11/2025
If Aversive Tools Were Truly Harmless… Why Wouldn’t We Use Them?
When we talk about dog training, emotions inevitably get involved, and rightfully so.
Think about it, we read something, disagree and even that can impact us enough to retaliate with anger in some cases.
Words can hurt our feelings but being pronged and shocked doesnt ever hurt dogs?
Dogs are sentient beings, they experience fear, stress, joy, curiosity, and connection. So when conversations come up around tools like shock collars, prong collars, or choke chains, it’s important to approach the topic with compassion and clarity.
Let’s be honest for a minute.
If there truly existed a tool, say, a shock collar, that wasn’t aversive, wasn’t punishing, didn’t hurt, didn’t frighten, and genuinely felt good for the dog… while also delivering fast, reliable training results… then why on earth wouldn’t we use it?
Seriously.
If a device could magically communicate what we want, instantly and painlessly, and dogs enjoyed the experience, it would be irresponsible not to consider it. We’d all want access to something that made learning easier and deepened the bond between handler and dog.
But that’s not the reality.
Why I Don’t Use These Tools
Speaking personally, and on behalf of my business, the reason I don’t use shock, prong, or choke tools is simple:
I don’t need them.
I already have methods available that:
teach effectively
build trust
protect the dog’s emotional well-being
create lasting behavioural change
strengthen the human-dog relationship
And I can achieve all of this without applying pain, fear, intimidation, or intentional discomfort.
If a tool relies on causing an unpleasant sensation, or the threat of one, to stop behaviour, then it is, by definition, aversive. And even when an aversive tool “works,” it can bring along unwanted side effects: anxiety, suppression, stress, or breakdowns in communication.
Think about it…
If these tools were truly harmless…
If they truly had zero negative emotional or physical impact…
If dogs genuinely enjoyed them…
Why would any compassionate, welfare-focused trainer choose not to use them?
It would make no sense to leave an effective, pain-free training option out of our toolbox. Trainers aren’t avoiding them out of stubbornness or ideology. We avoid them because:
The evidence doesn’t support the “harmless” claim.
There are better, kinder, modern alternatives.
The welfare of the dog matters more than shortcut results.
It’s not about shaming people for being misinformed or overwhelmed, its about showing there are kinder, better ways if you want to be a compassionate caregiver.
It’s about advocating for dogs.
It’s about ensuring the methods we choose, every single day, honour the emotional lives of the animals who trust us.
When we know better, we do better. And as professionals who understand behaviour, learning theory, body language, and stress responses, we have a responsibility to choose approaches that prioritise welfare.
At the End of the Day…
I don’t avoid aversive tools because I just dont know how to use them properly.
I avoid them because I don’t agree with using them.
And if there ever came a day when a genuinely non-aversive, enjoyable, instant-communication collar existed? I’d be the first to research it.
But until then, I’ll stick with what protects the dog, respects the dog, and builds them up from the inside out.
Because that should be the heart of training:
teaching with kindness, clarity, and compassion.
