{{Short description|Behavioral-purposed device to inflict aversive stimulus}} {{About|the object worn by animals|the usage in kink|Collars in BDSM}} {{Multiple issues|{{Tone|date=December 2025}} {{Cleanup rewrite|date=December 2025}} {{POV|date=December 2025}}}} [[File:Shock collar.jpg|thumb|A typical shock collar.]] [[File:Diensthund.jpg|thumb|Shock collar used on a riot police dog in 2004 in [[Würzburg]]. Two years later,<ref name="sfstandard.com">https://sfstandard.com/community/san-francisco-first-city-ban-dog-shock-collars-static-correction/# "San Francisco May Be First City in the Nation to Ban Shock Collars". San Francisco Standard. January 16, 2023.</ref> Germany banned the use of shock collars, even by police.<ref name="animallaw.info">{{Cite web|url=https://www.animallaw.info/statute/germany-cruelty-german-animal-welfare-act|title=Germany - Cruelty - German Animal Welfare Act | Animal Legal & Historical Center|website=www.animallaw.info}}</ref>]]
A '''shock collar''', also known as an '''e-collar''', '''Ecollar''', or '''electronic collar''', is a type of [[Collar (animal)|collar]] that delivers electrical current to the neck of its wearer (usually a dog),<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wensley |first1=Sean |date=2 February 2016 |title=Vets call for ban on electric 'shock collars' |journal=The Veterinary Nurse |volume=7 |issue=1 |page=56 |doi=10.12968/vetn.2016.7.1.56}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Shock collar {{!}} Research Starters {{!}} EBSCO Research |url=https://www.ebsco.com/ |access-date=2025-09-25 |website=EBSCO |language=en}}</ref> in an effort to control behaviour as a form of [[Aversives|aversive]] training. These collars incorporate an electronic device that can either trigger automatically as in the case of bark control collars, or electronic fence systems, or may be triggered via a [[remote control]]. Many object to the use of shock collars as [[Cruelty to animals|animal cruelty]] as they can cause discomfort, pain and [[fear]],<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Seligman |first1=Martin E. |author-link=Martin Seligman |date=September 1970 |title=On the generality of the laws of learning |journal=[[Psychological Review]] |volume=77 |issue=5 |pages=406–418 |doi=10.1037/h0029790 |s2cid=145661354 |id={{ProQuest|614281984}}}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mowrer |first1=O. H. |author-link=Orval Hobart Mowrer |date=November 1939 |title=A stimulus-response analysis of anxiety and its role as a reinforcing agent |journal=[[Psychological Review]] |volume=46 |issue=6 |pages=553–565 |doi=10.1037/h0054288 |id={{ProQuest|614288080}}}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Miller |first1=Neal E. |author-link=Neal E. Miller |date=April 1948 |title=Theory and experiment relating psychoanalytic displacement to stimulus-response generalization |journal=[[The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology]] |volume=43 |issue=2 |pages=155–178 |doi=10.1037/h0056728 |pmid=18861377 |id={{ProQuest|614244452}}}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Dunsmoor |first1=Joseph E. |last2=Murty |first2=Vishnu P. |last3=Davachi |first3=Lila |last4=Phelps |first4=Elizabeth A. |author-link4=Elizabeth A. Phelps |date=April 2015 |title=Emotional learning selectively and retroactively strengthens memories for related events |journal=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]] |volume=520 |issue=7547 |pages=345–348 |bibcode=2015Natur.520..345D |doi=10.1038/nature14106 |pmc=4432479 |pmid=25607357}}</ref> and several countries and regions have banned their use. Some models offer additional features such as a tone or vibrational setting that can be used as an alternative or in combination with the shock, and may incorporate [[Global Positioning System|GPS]] functionality to track the collar's location.
Shock collars were initially developed for training hunting dogs in the 1960s, and were originally designed with only one high level of power. Many modern versions are capable of delivering varying levels of shock. In areas where shock collars are legal, they are generally accessible, although [[Petco]] took the lead as the first major U.S. retailer to cease their sale.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wallace |first=Alicia |date=6 October 2020 |title=Petco will stop selling electronic 'shock' collars |url=https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/06/business/petco-shock-collars/index.html |access-date=2023-06-02 |website=[[CNN]] |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Tyco |first=Kelly |title=Petco ends sale of electronic shock collars, calls on competitors to also 'Stop the Shock' with online petition |url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/10/06/dog-collar-petco-stops-selling-shock-collars-free-training/3636715001/ |access-date=2023-06-02 |website=[[USA Today]] |language=en-US}}</ref> Where permitted, shock collars have been used in a range of applications, including behavioral modification, [[Dog training|obedience training]], and pet containment, as well as military, police and service training.
== Types <span class="anchor" id="Types of shock collars"></span> ==
=== Invisible fences <span class="anchor" id="Pet containment system/underground fence with shock collar"></span> === [[Pet containment system|Pet containment systems]], or invisible fences, are designed to keep an animal within a boundary,<ref>{{Cite news |date=2013-04-10 |title=Electric shock collars: Ministers reject invisible fences plea |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-politics-22093514 |access-date=2025-10-01 |work=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref> such that the wearer is shocked when they try to leave a boundary defined by a hidden wire,{{sfn|Lindsay|2005|p=573}} or by a set of co-ordinates (in conjunction with a [[Satellite navigation device|GPS receiver]]).<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-08 |title=GPS cow collars create 'virtual fence' at Peasedown St John farm |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgvpenej9eo |access-date=2025-10-01 |website=www.bbc.com |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Blackwell |first1=Emily J |last2=Bolster |first2=Christine |last3=Richards |first3=Gemma |last4=Loftus |first4=Bethany A |last5=Casey |first5=Rachel A |date=December 2012 |title=The use of electronic collars for training domestic dogs: estimated prevalence, reasons and risk factors for use, and owner perceived success as compared to other training methods |journal=BMC Veterinary Research |volume=8 |issue=1 |page=93 |doi=10.1186/1746-6148-8-93 |pmc=3474565 |pmid=22748195 |doi-access=free}}</ref>
These systems are illegal for use with pets in 14 countries<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ruiz |first=Marlene |date=2025-08-18 |title=🌍 Tracking Legislation Worldwide |url=https://iacpdogs.org/2025/08/18/%F0%9F%8C%8D-tracking-legislation-worldwide/?no-cache |access-date=2025-09-25 |website=International Association of Canine Professionals |language=en-US}}</ref> and discouraged under existing [[Animal welfare|animal welfare laws]] in others, such as Scotland.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Scottish Government |date=October 2018 |title=Guidance on Dog Training Aids |url=https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/advice-and-guidance/2018/10/guidance-dog-training-aids/documents/guidance-dog-training-aids/guidance-dog-training-aids/govscot%3Adocument/00541969.pdf |access-date=24 September 2025 |website=Scottish Government |quote=Particular training devices that the Scottish Government does not condone are: electronic shock (static pulse) collars, electronic anti-bark collars, electronic containment systems, or any other method to inflict physical punishment or negative reinforcement}}</ref>
===Bark control shock collars=== Bark control shock collars are used to curb excessive or nuisance barking by delivering a shock at the moment the dog begins barking. Bark collars can be activated by [[microphone]] or vibration, and some of the most advanced collars use both sound and vibration to eliminate the possibility of extraneous noises activating a response.{{cn|date=December 2025}}
===Remote shock collars=== Remote shock collars can be activated by a handheld device to give the dog an electric shock which causes pain.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Polsky |first1=Richard H. |title=Electronic shock collars: are they worth the risks? |journal=Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association |volume=30 |issue=5 |date=1994 |pages=463–468 }}</ref> Remote shock collars can deliver variable shocks in variable duration and intensities,<ref name="Clinical signs caused by the use of">{{cite journal |last1=Schalke |first1=E. |last2=Stichnoth |first2=J. |last3=Ott |first3=S. |last4=Jones-Baade |first4=R. |date=July 2007 |title=Clinical signs caused by the use of electric training collars on dogs in everyday life situations |journal=[[Applied Animal Behaviour Science]] |volume=105 |issue=4 |pages=369–380 |doi=10.1016/j.applanim.2006.11.002 |s2cid=31552322}}</ref> and may additionally have a beep or vibration option for getting the dog's attention without the use of an electric shock.{{cn|date=December 2025}}
Remote shock collars use [[operant conditioning]] either as a form of [[positive punishment]], where the correction is applied at the moment an undesired behavior occurs to reduce the frequency of that behavior—or as a form of [[negative reinforcement]], where a continuous stimulation is applied until the moment a desired behavior occurs, to increase the frequency of that behavior.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Guilherme Fernandes |first1=Joana |last2=Olsson |first2=I. Anna S. |last3=Vieira de Castro |first3=Ana Catarina |title=Do aversive-based training methods actually compromise dog welfare?: A literature review |journal=Applied Animal Behaviour Science |date=November 2017 |volume=196 |pages=1–12 |doi=10.1016/j.applanim.2017.07.001 |hdl=10216/112687 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>
== How they work in training <span class="anchor" id="Training"></span> ==
Shock collars are used in dog training primarily within the framework of operant conditioning, in which behavior is modified through the systematic application of consequences.<ref>{{cite book |last=Lindsay |first=Steven R. |title=Handbook of Applied Dog Behavior and Training |volume=1 |publisher=Wiley-Blackwell |year=2000 |isbn=0-8138-0754-9 }}</ref> Depending on how they are applied, shock collars can function either as positive punishment (the delivery of an aversive stimulus following an unwanted behavior) or as negative reinforcement (the removal or avoidance of an aversive stimulus when the desired behavior is performed).<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Dog training |encyclopedia=Wikipedia |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_training |access-date=2026-01-25 }}</ref>
In positive punishment, the electrical stimulus is delivered immediately after an undesired behavior in order to reduce the future frequency of that behavior. In negative reinforcement, the stimulus is applied continuously or in anticipation of a behavior and is terminated when the dog performs the desired response, thereby reinforcing that response through relief from the aversive stimulus.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Pierce |first1=W. David |last2=Cheney |first2=Carl D. |title=Behavior Analysis and Learning |publisher=Psychology Press |year=2017 |isbn=978-0-12-800037-3 }}</ref>
The effectiveness and side effects of shock collar training are strongly influenced by timing, predictability, and consistency. For conditioning to occur, the stimulus must be closely paired in time with the target behavior, and the dog must be able to associate the stimulus with its own actions rather than with unrelated environmental cues or the presence of the handler. Poor timing or inconsistent application can lead to confusion, ineffective learning, or the development of unintended associations.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Pierce |first1=W. David |last2=Cheney |first2=Carl D. |title=Behavior Analysis and Learning |publisher=Psychology Press |year=2017 |isbn=978-0-12-800037-3 }}</ref>
From a learning theory perspective, shock collars operate through aversive control, in contrast to reward-based methods that rely primarily on positive reinforcement.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cooper |first1=James J. |last2=Croney |first2=Candace C. |last3=Farmer-Dougan |first3=Valeri |last4=Grandin |first4=Temple |last5=Hewson |first5=Cynthia J. |title=Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars |journal=Frontiers in Veterinary Science |volume=7 |year=2020 |page=508 |doi=10.3389/fvets.2020.00508 |doi-access=free |pmid=32793652 |pmc=7387681 }}</ref>. Reviews and studies have reported that avoidance-based training can produce rapid behavioral suppression but may be associated with elevated stress responses and less reliable generalization compared with reward-based methods.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ziv |first1=Gal |title=The effects of using aversive training methods in dogs—A review |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=12 |issue=3 |year=2017 |article-number=e0171963 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0171963 |doi-access=free |pmid=28241006 |pmc=5328255 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vieira de Castro |first1=Ana C. |last2=Fuchs |first2=Doris |last3=Morello |first3=Giacomo M. |last4=Pastur |first4=Simona |last5=de Sousa |first5=Luciano |title=Does training method matter? Evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on companion dog welfare |journal=Journal of Veterinary Behavior |volume=19 |year=2017 |pages=50–59 |doi=10.1016/j.jveb.2017.02.004 }}</ref>, in contrast to reward-based methods that rely primarily on positive reinforcement. In positive reinforcement training, desired behaviors are increased by the delivery of rewards such as food, play, or social interaction, without the use of aversive stimuli.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Pierce |first1=W. David |last2=Cheney |first2=Carl D. |title=Behavior Analysis and Learning |publisher=Psychology Press |year=2017 |isbn= 978-0-12-800037-3 }}</ref> Marker training, which uses a conditioned reinforcer such as a clicker or verbal marker to signal correct behavior, is commonly combined with positive reinforcement to improve precision and learning speed.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Clicker training |encyclopedia=Wikipedia |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clicker_training |access-date=2026-01-25 }}</ref>
Shock collar training is also related to avoidance learning, in which the animal learns to perform a behavior to prevent or terminate an aversive stimulus. In such cases, behavior may be maintained by the anticipation of the stimulus rather than by the presence of a reward.[citation needed] Studies in animal learning have shown that avoidance-based training can produce rapid behavioral suppression but may be associated with elevated stress responses and less reliable generalization compared with reward-based methods.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vieira de Castro |first1=Ana C. |last2=Fuchs |first2=Doris |last3=Morello |first3=Giacomo M. |last4=Pastur |first4=Simona |last5=de Sousa |first5=Luciano |title=Does training method matter? Evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on companion dog welfare |journal=Journal of Veterinary Behavior |volume=19 |year=2017 |pages=50–59 |doi=10.1016/j.jveb.2017.02.004 }}</ref> Studies in animal learning have shown that avoidance-based training can produce rapid behavioral suppression but may be associated with elevated stress responses and less reliable generalization compared with reward-based methods.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ziv |first1=Gal |title=The effects of using aversive training methods in dogs—A review |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=12 |issue=3 |year=2017 |article-number=e0171963 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0171963 |doi-access=free |pmid=28241006 |pmc=5328255 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vieira de Castro |first1=Ana C. |last2=Fuchs |first2=Doris |last3=Morello |first3=Giacomo M. |last4=Pastur |first4=Simona |last5=de Sousa |first5=Luciano |title=Does training method matter? Evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on companion dog welfare |journal=Journal of Veterinary Behavior |volume=19 |year=2017 |pages=50–59 |doi=10.1016/j.jveb.2017.02.004 }}</ref>
==Opinions about the amount of pain caused by shock collars== Pain is a difficult outcome to measure because its nature is both multifaceted and subjective,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Younger |first1=Jarred |last2=McCue |first2=Rebecca |last3=Mackey |first3=Sean |title=Pain outcomes: A brief review of instruments and techniques |journal=Current Pain and Headache Reports |date=February 2009 |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=39–43 |doi=10.1007/s11916-009-0009-x |pmid=19126370 |pmc=2891384}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Frampton |first1=C.L. |last2=Hughes-Webb |first2=P. |title=The Measurement of Pain |journal=Clinical Oncology |date=August 2011 |volume=23 |issue=6 |pages=381–386 |doi=10.1016/j.clon.2011.04.008 |pmid=21571514}}</ref> as a result, researchers disagree on how much pain a shock collar causes.
Dr Diane Frank, in the [[Australian Veterinary Journal]], argues that shock collars for dogs inflict pain and distress. "Electric shock hurts and the same shock will be perceived differently by different dogs. Regardless, if the dog perceives pain, [it] experiences a stress response that actively interferes with learning positive, more favourable, substitute behaviour. If the shock and pain are profound, it is possible to induce almost immediate [[long-term potentiation]] (LTP), or the molecular changes associated with [[Hippocampus|hippocampal memory]], which will lead to a strong aversion or [[phobia]]."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Frank |first1=Dr Diane |title=Electronic collars 'hurt' |journal=Australian Veterinary Journal |date=June 1999 |volume=77 |issue=6 |pages=408–409 |doi=10.1111/j.1751-0813.1999.tb10326.x }}</ref>
In contrast, Steven R. Lindsay, in the 2013 edition of his textbook on training and behavior, stated: "At low levels, the term shock is hardly fitting ... since there is virtually no effect beyond a pulsing tingling or tickling sensation on the surface of the skin ... the word shock is loaded with biased connotations, images of convulsive spasms and burns, and implications associated with extreme physical pain, [[emotional trauma]], physiological collapse, and laboratory abuses ... the stimulus or signal generated by most modern devices is highly controlled and presented to produce a specific set of behavioral and motivational responses to it."{{sfn|Lindsay|2000|p={{page needed|date=March 2024}}}} Lindsay does note that higher levels of shock from these collars do cause "fear" and "acute pain".{{sfn|Lindsay|2000|p={{page needed|date=March 2024}}}}
In 2000, prior to Germany's ban on shock collars, Dr. Dieter Klein, in an article published in the German trade magazine "Office for Veterinary Service and Food Control", stated that shock collars for dogs cause minimal pain, comparing the impact of shock collars to other devices utilizing electrical stimulation. "Modern devices ... are in a range in which normally no organic damage is being inflicted. The electric properties and performances ... are comparable to the electric stimulation devices used in human medicine. Organic damage, as a direct impact of the applied current, can be excluded."<ref> {{cite journal |last=Klein |first=Dieter R. |year=2000 |title=Wie gefährlich sind Fernstimulationsgeräte für die Ausbildung von Hunden? |trans-title=How Dangerous are Remote Stimulation Devices for the Training of Dogs? |journal=Amtstierärztlicher Dienst und Lebensmittelkontrolle |language=de }} </ref>
==Comparing pain levels: evaluating different amperages== The intensity of pain caused by electric current can vary significantly due to small changes in amperage. This pain can be further amplified by adjusting the pulse rate and pulse duration.<ref name=":4">https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/2019-04/Basic_Electricity_Materials.pdf Train-the-Trainer: Basic Electricity Safety This material was produced under a Susan Harwood Training Grant #SH-24896-SH3 from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. {{PD-notice}}</ref>
Other factors such as voltage, waveform, and frequency of the waveform are not particularly relevant when it comes to assessing the level of pain.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Amperage, Not Voltage, Poses the Greatest Danger With Electrical Shock |url=https://www.thespruce.com/amperage-vs-voltage-1152476 |access-date=2025-09-23 |website=The Spruce |language=en}}</ref> While these factors can be used to calculate the amount of energy applied in [[Joule|Joules]], they do not indicate the actual intensity of the stimulus or how it will be perceived by the recipient.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Fish |first1=Raymond M. |last2=Geddes |first2=Leslie A. |date=2009-10-12 |title=Conduction of electrical current to and through the human body: a review |journal=ePlasty |volume=9 |pages=e44 |issn=1937-5719 |pmc=2763825 |pmid=19907637}}</ref>
In 2004, Dr. Dieter Klein conducted research and estimated that commercial shock collars, which were later banned in Germany, operated at a minimum setting of 30 [[Milliamp|milliamps]] and a maximum setting of 80 milliamps.<ref name="Klein2000">Klein, Dieter R., 2000, "How Dangerous are Remote Stimulation Devices for the Training of Dogs?" Amtstierärztlicher Dienst und Lebensmittelkontrolle{{full citation needed|this should be a journal article with a German title, volume, issue & pages|date=March 2024}}</ref> Another commonly-cited study, conducted by Christiansen et al., utilized shock collars with a higher intensity, reaching up to 400 milliamps.<ref name=":3">{{cite journal |last1=Christiansen |first1=Frank O |last2=Bakken |first2=Morten |last3=Braastad |first3=Bjarne O |date=April 2001 |title=Behavioural changes and aversive conditioning in hunting dogs by the second-year confrontation with domestic sheep |journal=[[Applied Animal Behaviour Science]] |volume=72 |issue=2 |pages=131–143 |doi=10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00203-3 |pmid=11278032}}</ref> These figures do not directly translate into a specific level of perceived pain, because collar design, pulse structure, electrode contact, and individual sensitivity strongly influence how a given current is experienced.
Depending on design, some shock collars can be set so that at the lowest level, the shock delivered is only mildly uncomfortable, and at the highest level produce acute pain.{{sfn|Lindsay|2000|p={{page needed|date=March 2024}}}} Variable settings of this kind are essential, so that the shock collar can be adjusted to provide the level of pain that changes the dog's behavior, as situations change.
Shock collars are sometimes referred to as delivering a "static shock." However, static electricity is simple direct current and carries little energy, on the order of millijoules. Shock collars do not use simple direct current because the effect is too unpredictable,<ref>Masterson, Fred A., and Campbell, Byron BYRON. "Techniques of electric shock motivation." Methods in psychobiology. Academic Press, 1972. 21-58.</ref> but rather, use pulsed direct current producing an effect resembling the square wave of [[alternating current]]. It is therefore inappropriate to refer to shock collars as delivering a static shock.
Consistent pain delivery requires good contact between the collar electrodes and the dog's shock skin.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Electronic shock collars: are they worth the risks? |first1=Richard H |last1=Polsky |journal=Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association |volume=30 |issue=5 |pages=463–468 |date=1994 }}</ref> The shock collar must be fitted according to the manufacturer's instructions. Local humidity and individual variation in coat density, skin thickness and surface conductivity, also affect the delivery of the pain.<ref name=":1">{{cite news |title=The negative effects of the electronic collar on the welfare of dogs and positive training methods as alternatives |url=https://www.uu.nl/en/news/the-negative-effects-of-the-electronic-collar-on-the-welfare-of-dogs-and-positive-training-methods |work=Utrecht University |date=14 December 2020 }} Translated from: {{cite journal |first1=C.M. |last1=Kapteijn |first2=J.A.M. |last2=van der Borg |first3=C.M. |last3=Vinke |first4=S.S. |last4=Arndt |date=2020 |title=Schokken of brokken? De negatieve effecten van de elektronische halsband op het welzijn van honden en positieve trainingsmethoden als alternatief |trans-title=Shocks or lumps? The negative effects of the electronic collar on dog welfare and positive training methods as an alternative |language=nl |journal=Tijdschrift voor Diergeneeskunde |volume=145 |issue=8 |pages=16–19 |url=https://www.knmvd.nl/schokken-of-brokken-de-negatieve-effecten-van-de-elektronische-halsband-op-het-welzijn-van-honden-en-positieve-trainingsmethoden-als-alternatief/ |url-access=subscription }}</ref>
Individual variations in temperament, pain sensitivity and susceptibility to startle in dogs mean that settings must be carefully adjusted to produce pain<ref name="Clinical signs caused by the use of"/> that is perceived by the dog as only just aversive enough to stop the dog engaging in the unwanted behavior. Normally salient stimuli, such as noises, commands and even shocks, may have no effect on a dog that is highly aroused and focused on an activity such as hunting.<ref name=":1" />
Individual shocks delivered by a shock collar are of short duration, typically 6–8 milliseconds<ref>{{Cite patent|number=US6459378B2|title=Animal shock collar with low impedance transformer|gdate=2002-10-01|invent1=Gerig|inventor1-first=Duane A.|url=https://patents.google.com/patent/US6459378B2/en}}</ref>. However, pain intensity can be increased by using the same milliamps for each shock while delivering more shocks per second:
"Many e−collars appear to shift intensity levels by altering the pulse duration or repetition rate while keeping the output current and voltage relatively constant, depending on the electrode−skin load."{{sfn|Lindsay|2005|p=573}}
The pain level can also be increased by delivering a continuous series of shocks (up to 30 seconds).<ref name="Training dogs with help of the shoc">{{cite journal |last1=Schilder |first1=Matthijs B.H |last2=van der Borg |first2=Joanne A.M |title=Training dogs with help of the shock collar: short and long term behavioural effects |journal=Applied Animal Behaviour Science |date=March 2004 |volume=85 |issue=3–4 |pages=319–334 |doi=10.1016/j.applanim.2003.10.004 |s2cid=26374104 }}</ref>
==Potential to cause physical harm== Pain experienced from shock collars is not from the electricity passing through the dog's body and reaching the ground (which would cause physical damage), but instead a result of electricity passing through a dog's body via closely-spaced electrodes (which should only cause pain). This pain is most clearly "described as physiological pain because it is not associated with any tissue damage" and even though such pain can "justifiably be described as a painful and emotionally distressing event, any potential harm would be psychological rather than physical", and therefore, burns are not likely to occur.<ref>Electronic RT in Perspective - David Chamberlain BVetMed., MRCVS.</ref>
Burns from shock collars are not unheard of, however. In 1980 (revised 1987), the US [[Center for Veterinary Medicine]] (CVM), a branch of the U.S. [[Food and Drug Administration]] (FDA), concurred in regulatory action against a manufacturer of a bark collar, stating "Complaints received, which were later corroborated by our own testing, included severe burns in the collar area and possible personality adjustment injuries to the dogs. The shocking mechanism was found to be activated not only by barking but by vehicle horns, slamming doors or any other loud noise. CVM concurred in regulatory action against the device since it was deemed to be dangerous to the health of the animal."<ref name="FDA">{{cite web|url=https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/cpg-sec-655300-barking-dog-collar |title= FDA Compliance enforcement |author=FDA|website= [[Food and Drug Administration]] |date= 20 February 2020 }}{{dead link|date=May 2025|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref> The standing policy of the US FDA is that "Dog collars which are activated by the noise of barking to produce an electric shock are considered as hazardous to the health of the animal."<ref name="FDA"/>
==Training effectiveness== Training effectiveness refers to how reliably a method produces desired behavior while minimizing unintended side effects such as stress, fear, or behavioral fallout.
Multiple peer-reviewed studies comparing electronic shock collars with reward-based training methods have found that dogs trained using aversive stimuli show no superior learning outcomes and often exhibit elevated stress indicators, including increased cortisol levels, avoidance behaviors, and signs of anxiety. In controlled trials, dogs trained with positive reinforcement have demonstrated equal or higher compliance rates and better long-term retention of trained behaviors.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Masson |first1=Sylvia |last2=de la Vega |first2=Silvia |last3=Gazzano |first3=Angelo |last4=Mariti |first4=Chiara |last5=Pereira |first5=Gonçalo Da Graça |last6=Halsberghe |first6=Christine |last7=Muser Leyvraz |first7=Anneli |last8=McPeake |first8=Kevin |last9=Schoening |first9=Barbara |title=Electronic training devices: Discussion on the pros and cons of their use in dogs as a basis for the position statement of the European Society of Veterinary Clinical Ethology |journal=Journal of Veterinary Behavior |date=May 2018 |volume=25 |pages=71–75 |doi=10.1016/j.jveb.2018.02.006 |s2cid=148769178 |hdl=20.500.11820/23d9352e-fd84-4910-b301-f45044a22204 |hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Berry |first1=Alistair |last2=Lincoln |first2=University of |title=Electronic collars less effective than reward-based training, research finds |url=https://phys.org/news/2020-10-electronic-collars-effective-reward-based.html |access-date=2023-04-21 |website=phys.org |language=en}}</ref><ref name=Overall2007>{{cite journal |last1=Overall |first1=Karen L. |title=Why electric shock is not behavior modification |journal=Journal of Veterinary Behavior |date=January 2007 |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=1–4 |doi=10.1016/j.jveb.2006.12.006 }}</ref><ref name="Ziv2017">{{cite journal |last1=Ziv |first1=Gal |date=May 2017 |title=The effects of using aversive training methods in dogs—A review |journal=Journal of Veterinary Behavior |volume=19 |pages=50–60 |doi=10.1016/j.jveb.2017.02.004 |s2cid=151846599}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=China |first1=Lucy |last2=Mills |first2=Daniel S. |last3=Cooper |first3=Jonathan J. |title=Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars vs. a Focus on Positive Reinforcement |journal=Frontiers in Veterinary Science |date=22 July 2020 |volume=7 |article-number=508 |doi=10.3389/fvets.2020.00508 |doi-access=free |pmid=32793652 |pmc=7387681 }}</ref>
A 2014 study conducted at the University of Lincoln compared dogs trained using electronic collars, dogs trained with non-aversive methods, and a control group. The researchers found no significant improvement in obedience performance in the electronic collar group, while dogs exposed to shocks displayed more stress-related behaviors during training sessions.<ref> Cooper JJ, Cracknell N, Hardiman J, Wright H & Mills D (2014). The Welfare Consequences and Efficacy of Training Pet Dogs with Remote Electronic Training Collars in Comparison to Reward Based Training. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102722</ref> Similar findings have been reported in subsequent studies examining learning speed, behavioral reliability, and emotional well-being.<ref> China L, Mills DS & Cooper JJ (2020). Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars vs. a Focus on Positive Reinforcement. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00508</ref>
Professional veterinary and animal behavior organizations generally conclude that reward-based training methods are more effective and present fewer welfare risks. These organizations note that aversive training techniques may suppress behavior temporarily without addressing underlying motivations, potentially increasing the risk of fear-based aggression or learned helplessness.<ref name="AVSAB2018">American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (2018). ''Position Statement on Humane Dog Training''. American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior. https://avsab.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/AVSAB-dog-training-position-statement-revised-Feb-2018.pdf</ref><ref name="AVMA">American Veterinary Medical Association. ''Behavioral Management of Dogs''. https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/pet-owners/petcare/behavioral-management-dogs</ref>
While proponents argue that electronic collars can be effective when used at low stimulation levels by experienced trainers, empirical evidence does not consistently support superior outcomes compared to positive reinforcement approaches.<ref> Cooper JJ, Cracknell N, Hardiman J, Wright H, Mills DS (2014). The Welfare Consequences and Efficacy of Training Pet Dogs with Remote Electronic Training Collars in Comparison to Reward Based Training. PLoS ONE 9(1): e102722. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102722</ref><ref> China L, Mills DS, Cooper JJ (2020). Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars vs. a Focus on Positive Reinforcement. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00508</ref>. As a result, many training guidelines emphasize reward-based methods as the preferred standard for both effectiveness and animal welfare.<ref name="AVSAB2018">American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (2018). ''Position Statement on Humane Dog Training''. American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior. https://avsab.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/AVSAB-dog-training-position-statement-revised-Feb-2018.pdf</ref>
==Deterring predation in the wild== [[The Wildlife Society]] article addresses the use of shock collars as a way to prevent sheep from being preyed upon by wild [[coyote]]s. The collars were tested on coyotes for a four-month period and found that the collars stopped thirteen attacks on [[sheep]] herds.<ref name=":2">{{cite journal|last1=Andelt|first1=William F.|last2=Phillips|first2=Robert L.|last3=Gruver|first3=Kenneth S.|last4=Guthrie|first4=Jerry W.|date=1999|title=Coyote Predation on Domestic Sheep Deterred with Electronic Dog-Training Collar|jstor=3783933|journal=Wildlife Society Bulletin |volume=27|issue=1|pages=12–18}}</ref> This also is said to deter future attacks by the tested coyotes. Collars have also been used on [[Wolf|wolves]] for similar reasons. This document is the assessment of the shock collar on wolves' long-term behavior. The article talks about trying to alter wolves' behavior over an extended period of time using the collar. The consensus was while it did have an effect while in use and temporally after it was removed, the study concluded that longer exposure would be needed to have any substantial evidence.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hawley |first1=Jason E. |last2=Rossler |first2=Shawn T. |last3=Gehring |first3=Thomas M. |last4=Schultz |first4=Ronald N. |last5=Callahan |first5=Peggy A. |last6=Clark |first6=Raymond |last7=Cade |first7=Jerry |last8=Wydeven |first8=Adrian P. |date=2013 |title=Developing a new shock-collar design for safe and efficient use on wild wolves |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/wsb.234 |journal=Wildlife Society Bulletin |language=en |volume=37 |issue=2 |pages=416–422 |doi=10.1002/wsb.234 |bibcode=2013WSBu...37..416H |issn=2328-5540|url-access=subscription }}</ref><!--seems to have cited the wrong year, only 2009 and 2013 are present--> As far as non-lethal alternatives these two sources both concluded that shock collars are the most effective deterrence to predators. Both groups continued their research and the Wildlife Society has developed a new and improved version that eliminates the risk of neck injury when used on animals that previous versions caused. They have increased battery life and the durability of the unit. They devised a unit that is worn like a [[backpack]] for the animal. Previous versions caused excessive rubbing and soreness as well as being irritating for the animal to the point where they would try to take the harness off.
==Criticism== Even in countries where shock collars are legal, their use is controversial, with differing positions among animal welfare organizations, veterinary associations, professional trainers, and policymakers.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-08-27 |title=Ban on electric shock collars for pets |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-45320038 |access-date=2023-06-02 |website=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last= |first= |title='No more effective than training': Brussels to ban controversial dog collars |url=https://www.brusselstimes.com/234270/no-more-effective-than-training-brussels-to-ban-controversial-dog-collars |access-date=2023-06-02 |website=[[The Brussels Times]] |language=en}}</ref> ===Positions of veterinary associations===
The AVSAB (American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior) has strengthened their position statement on all aversive methods, including shock collars, which now states "The application of aversive methods – which, by definition, rely on application of force, pain, or emotional or physical discomfort – should not be used in canine training or for the treatment of behavioral disorders."<ref>https://avsab.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/AVSAB-Humane-Dog-Training-Position-Statement-2021.pdf AVSAB Humane Dog Training Position Statement</ref>
===Positions of animal welfare organizations===
On the advice of the RSPCA ([[Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals]]) and other welfare groups, the ACPO ([[Association of Chief Police Officers]]) banned the use of shock collars for police dog training by all UK police forces. The current ACPO Police Dogs Manual of Guidance states "Equipment that is not approved for use in the training of police dogs includes remote training collars designed to give an electric shock and Pinch Collars".<ref name="ACPO">{{cite news |url=http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2011/201103UOPDogsMoG1.1.pdf |title=ACPO Police Dogs Manual of Guidance |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140702042548/http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2011/201103UOPDogsMoG1.1.pdf |archive-date=2014-07-02 }}</ref>
The RSPCA removed a policy statement discouraging the use of shock collars in 2018 due to a UK Government statement that they would be banned.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Cruel electric shock collars for pets to be banned |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cruel-electric-shock-collars-for-pets-to-be-banned--2 |access-date=2023-10-19 |website=GOV.UK |language=en}}</ref> In June 2023 the Animal Welfare (Electronic Collars) (England) Regulations 2023 were approved by the Lords but a delay in implementation leading to the BVNA<ref>{{Cite web |last=Association |first=British Veterinary |title=BVA policy - Electric shock collars and training aids |url=https://www.bva.co.uk/take-action/our-policies/electric-shock-collars-and-training-aids/ |access-date=2023-10-19 |website=British Veterinary Association}}</ref> alongside other charities such as the RSPCA<ref>{{Cite web |title=Ban the use of shock collars {{!}} Campaigns {{!}} RSPCA |url=http://www.rspca.org.uk/getinvolved/campaign/shockcollars |access-date=2023-10-19 |website=www.rspca.org.uk |language=en-US}}</ref> launching a campaign to support the proposed ban.
[[PETA]] (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) opposes the use of shock collars, stating "Shock collars can cause dogs physical pain and injury (ranging from burns to cardiac fibrillation) and psychological stress, including severe anxiety and [[displaced aggression]]. Individual animals vary in their temperaments and pain thresholds; a shock that seems mild to one dog may be severe to another. The anxiety and confusion caused by repeated shocks can lead to changes in the heart and respiration rate or gastrointestinal disorders. Electronic collars can also malfunction, either administering nonstop shocks or delivering no shocks at all".<ref name="PETA">{{cite web|url=https://www.peta.org/living/animal-companions/caring-animal-companions/dogs/electric-fences-shock-collars/ |title= Electric Fences and Shock Collars |author=PETA|date= 10 August 2010 }}</ref>
===Views of proponents and training practitioners===
Some professional trainers and manufacturers argue for the collars, saying that they are humane and effective when applied correctly, emphasizing low stimulation levels, careful timing, and trainer expertise.<ref>{{cite news |last=Lindqwister |first=Liz |title=San Francisco may be first city in the nation to ban dog shock collars |url=https://sfstandard.com/2023/01/16/san-francisco-may-be-first-city-in-the-nation-to-ban-dog-shock-collars/ |work=The San Francisco Standard |date=January 16, 2023 |access-date=January 25, 2026 }}</ref>
===Scientific findings on welfare effects===
Several reviews and controlled studies have examined the welfare effects of aversive-based training methods, including remote electronic collars.
A 2020 controlled study comparing training with and without electronic collars reported that dogs trained with reward-based methods achieved similar or better training outcomes without the use of aversive stimuli.<ref> Cooper, James J.; Croney, Candace C.; Farmer-Dougan, Valeri; Grandin, Temple; Hewson, Cynthia J. (2020). "Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars" C. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 7: 508. doi:10.3389/fvets.2020.00508U. PMC 73876818.</ref>
A 2017 systematic review concluded that aversive training methods are associated with increased stress-related behaviors and poorer welfare outcomes compared with reward-based approaches.<ref> Ziv, Gal (2017). "The effects of using aversive training methods in dogs-A review". PLOS ONE. 12 (3): e0171963. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0171963U.</ref>
Experimental studies have also reported that dogs trained using aversive-based methods show elevated stress indicators and less reliable generalization of learned behaviors compared with dogs trained using positive reinforcement.<ref>Vieira de Castro, Ana C.; Fuchs, Doris; Morello, Giacomo M.; Pastur, Simona; de Sousa, Luciano (2017). "Does training method matter? Evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on companion dog welfare". Journal of Veterinary Behavior. 19: 50-59. doi:10.1016/j.jveb.2017.02.004G.</ref>
===Legislation and policy=== The UK [[Kennel Club]] welcomed<ref>{{Cite web |title='Cruel' electric shock collars banned in England {{!}} Kennel Club |url=https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/media-centre/2023/april/cruel-electric-shock-collars-banned-in-england/#:~:text=In%20a%20%27historic%20moment%20for,ten%20year%20campaign%20to%20#BanShockCollars |access-date=2023-06-02 |website=www.thekennelclub.org.uk}}</ref> the proposed legislation to achieve a ban on the sale and use of shock collars in England. Their campaign had stated that "The Kennel Club is against the use of any negative training methods or devices. The Kennel Club believes that there are many positive training tools and methods that can produce dogs that are trained just as quickly and reliably, with absolutely no fear, pain, or potential damage to the relationship between dog and handler." "The Kennel Club in calling upon the Government and Scottish Parliament to introduce an outright ban on this barbaric method of training dogs.".<ref name="KC">{{cite web|url=http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/banshockcollars |title= Kennel Club Campaign |author=Kennel Club}}</ref>
The two British members of the World Union of [[German Shepherd]] Clubs (WUSV) helped the Kennel Club win a complete ban on shock collars. They passed a motion to exclude this equipment from any of its training branches during official club training times.<ref name="WUSV">{{cite web |url=http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?d=pndpr&f=pnfpr&h=241&id=729 |title=WUSV Ban |author=WUSV |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120325061026/http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?d=pndpr&f=pnfpr&h=241&id=729 |archive-date=2012-03-25 }}</ref>
==Legal status==
=== Availability by region <span class="anchor" id="Regions where shock collars are banned"></span> === {{Undue weight|section|date=December 2025}} {|class="wikitable sortable" |+Legality of shock collars by country |- !Country !Region !Status !Date banned !Notes !{{Reference column heading}} |- |rowspan="3"|[[Australia]] |[[Australian Capital Territory]] |Banned | | |<ref name=australia>{{cite news |url=http://kb.rspca.org.au/Is-the-use-of-electronic-dog-collars-legal_279.html |work=RSPCA Australia |title=Is the use of electronic dog collars legal?}}</ref> |- |[[New South Wales]] |Banned | | |<ref name=australia/> |- |[[South Australia]] |Banned | | |<ref name=australia/> |- |colspan="2"|[[Austria]] |Banned | | |<ref name="heute.at">{{cite news |date=13 September 2021 |title=Achtung vor verbotenen Halsbändern für Hunde |trans-title=Beware of prohibited collars for dogs |url=https://www.heute.at/s/achtung-diese-halsbander-fur-hunde-sind-verboten-aber-dennoch-auf-amazon-erhaltlich-57018162 |work=Heute.at |language=de}}</ref> |- |[[Belgium]] |[[Flanders]] |Banned |{{dts|1 January 2027}} | |<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.brusselstimes.com/belgium/180894/flanders-to-ban-shock-collars-for-pets/ |title=Flanders to ban shock collars for pets|date=11 August 2021}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.benweyts.be/nieuws/uitdoofscenario-voor-stroomhalsbanden-verbod-vanaf-2027|title = Uitdoofscenario voor stroomhalsbanden, verbod vanaf 2027| date=March 2024 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=10 August 2021 |url=https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2021/08/10/stroomhalsbanden-voor-honden-verboden-vanaf-2027/ |title=Stroomhalsbanden voor honden verboden vanaf 2027}}</ref> |- |[[Canada]] |[[Quebec]] |Banned |2014 | |<ref>{{Cite web | last = Shields | first = Billy | date = July 7, 2014 | title = Quebec takes steps to protect pets from shock collars, prongs - Montreal | url = https://globalnews.ca/news/1668282/quebec-takes-steps-to-protect-pets-from-shock-collars-prongs/ | website = Global News | access-date = 2023-11-23}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web | title = Répondre aux besoins d'un animal | url = https://www.quebec.ca/agriculture-environnement-et-ressources-naturelles/sante-animale/animaux-compagnie/prendre-soin/repondre-besoins-animal | website = Gouvernement du Québec | access-date = 2023-11-23}}</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Denmark]] |Banned | | |<ref name="tv2fyn.dk">{{Cite web |date=23 May 2019 |title=Fynsk dyrlæge forarget over salg af stødhalsbånd: Hundene ved ikke, hvad der rammer dem |url=https://www.tv2fyn.dk/fyn/fynsk-dyrlaege-forarget-over-salg-af-stodhalsband-hundene-ved-ikke-hvad-der-rammer-dem |access-date=2022-04-21 |website=TV2 Fyn |language=da}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Masson |first1=Sylvia |last2=Nigron |first2=Isabelle |last3=Gaultier |first3=Emmanuel |title=Questionnaire survey on the use of different e-collar types in France in everyday life with a view to providing recommendations for possible future regulations |journal=Journal of Veterinary Behavior |date=July 2018 |volume=26 |pages=48–60 |doi=10.1016/j.jveb.2018.05.004 |s2cid=150078403 }}</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Finland]] |Banned | | |<ref>{{cite web |title=Animal Welfare Decree |url=https://www.animallaw.info/sites/default/files/Finish%20Animal%20welfare%20decree.pdf |publisher=Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.finlex.fi/fi/lainsaadanto/1996/247|title=Eläinsuojelulaki | 247/1996 | Lainsäädäntö | Finlex|website=www.finlex.fi}}</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[France]] |Banned | | |<ref>https://www.connexionfrance.com/article/French-news/France-bans-training-dog-collars-that-cause-pain-to-animals# The Connexion. France bans training dog collars that cause pain to animals. 18 January 2023.</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Souffrance animale: l'Assemblée vote l'interdiction des "colliers de dressage" |url=https://www.lepoint.fr/societe/souffrance-animale-l-assemblee-vote-l-interdiction-des-colliers-de-dressage-13-12-2023-2535805_23.php |website=[[Le Point]] |access-date=2023-11-19 |language=fr |date=2023-12-13}}</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Germany]] |Banned | | |<ref name="animallaw.info"/><ref name="Dog Keeping laws for Germany">{{Cite web|url=https://www.ramstein.af.mil/About/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/303687/dog-keeping-laws-for-germany/|title=Dog Keeping Laws for Germany}}</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Iceland]] |Banned |2011 | |<ref name="mannlif.is">{{Cite web |date=2019-01-17 |title=Notkun rafmagnsólarinnar tilkynnt sem ill meðferð til MAST |url=https://www.mannlif.is/frettir/innlent/notkun-rafmagnsolarinnar-tilkynnt-sem-ill-medferd-til-mast/ |access-date=2022-04-21 |website=Mannlíf.is |language=is}}</ref><ref name="visir.is">{{Cite web |date=15 July 2011 |title=Rafmagnsólar hunda bannaðar - Vísir |url=https://www.visir.is/g/2011227029d |access-date=2022-04-21 |website=visir.is |language=is}}</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Netherlands]] |Banned |{{dts|1 July 2020}} |Its use is subject to €20,000 fine and three-year prison sentence. |<ref name="rtlnieuws.nl">{{Cite web |date=4 April 2019 |title=Elektronische halsband voor honden vanaf volgend jaar verboden |url=https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/nederland/artikel/4665206/elektronische-halsband-honden-hondenband-verboden}}</ref><ref name="nltimes.nl">{{Cite web |date=4 April 2019 |title=Netherlands to ban shock collars for dogs, limit breeding of 'designer cats' |url=https://nltimes.nl/2019/04/04/netherlands-ban-shock-collars-dogs-limit-breeding-designer-cats}}</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Norway]] |Banned | | |<ref name="Lindin">{{Cite web |last=Lindin |first=Ina-Kristin |date=2017-01-27 |title=Dømt for bruk av strømhalsbånd |url=https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/domt-for-bruk-av-stromhalsband-1.13343560 |access-date=2022-04-21 |website=NRK |language=nb-NO}}</ref><ref>Government of Norway. (2009). Animal Welfare Act. General Treatment of Animals (§ 3), Use of Equipment and Technical Solutions (§ 8), and Prohibitions in Training (§ 26.3). Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/animal-welfare-act/id571188/.</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Slovenia]] |Banned | | |<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Stroman |first=Reta |date=2023-08-26 |title=12 Countries Where Shock Collars Are Banned And Illegal - FunniPaw |url=https://funnipaw.com/countries-shock-collars-illegal/ |access-date=2023-10-12 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>Total Slovenia News. (2021). Slovenia Tightens Rules on Pet Care. Retrieved from https://www.total-slovenia-news.com/lifestyle/8923-slovenia-tightens-rules-on-pet-care."</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Spain]] |Banned |2022 | |<ref>{{cite news |title=Animal Protection Law in Spain gets the green light after months of delays |url=https://spanishnewstoday.com/animal_protection_law_in_spain_gets_the_green_light_after_months_of_delays_1736118-a.html |work=Spanish News Today |date=16 February 2022 }}</ref><ref>https://www.publico.es/sociedad/gobierno-aprobara-proximo-viernes-ley-proteccion-animal.html Publico. El Gobierno aprobará este próximo viernes la Ley de Protección Animal. 15 March 2022.</ref><ref>https://el-lorquino.com/2022/02/16/espana/espana-aprobara-el-viernes-la-ley-de-proteccion-animal/134443/ El Lorquino. Spain will approve the Animal Protection Law on Friday. 16 February 2022.</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Sweden]] |Banned | | |<ref name="Gernes">{{Cite web |last=Gernes |first=Jonatan |date=2021-05-20 |title=Elhalsband gav plågsamma skador på hunden |url=https://www.hallandsposten.se/1.47781288 |access-date=2022-04-21 |website=hallandsposten.se |language=sv |archive-date=2024-04-29 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240429164716/https://www.hallandsposten.se/nyheter/laholm/elhalsband-gav-plagsamma-skador-pa-hunden.8e99267c-3890-4138-8bbf-6f81ecac77e2 }}</ref><ref name="Todd2018">{{cite journal |last1=Todd |first1=Zazie |date=May 2018 |title=Barriers to the adoption of humane dog training methods |journal=Journal of Veterinary Behavior |volume=25 |pages=28–34 |doi=10.1016/j.jveb.2018.03.004 |s2cid=149309452}}</ref> |- |colspan="2"|[[Switzerland]] |Partially banned | |Automatic anti-barking shock collars are banned. |<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-02-13 |title=Great News For Dogs As Switzerland Passes Law To Ban Cruel Anti-Barking Devices |url=https://www.holidogtimes.com/anti-barking-collars-finally-banned-in-switzerland/ |access-date=2022-04-21 |website=Holidog Times EN |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Ordonnances du domaine vétérinaire: modifications |url=https://www.admin.ch/gov/fr/accueil/documentation/communiques.msg-id-69446.html |access-date=2022-04-21 |website=www.admin.ch}}</ref> |- |rowspan="2"|[[United Kingdom]] |[[England]] |Not banned | |Legislation to ban e-collars has been drafted, but as of October 2025 its passage into law is indefinitely delayed. |<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Carter |first=E |date=November 2007 |title=Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2007 |journal=Animal Welfare |volume=16 |issue=4 |page=524 |doi=10.1017/s0962728600027470 |issn=0962-7286}}</ref> |- |[[Wales]] |Banned | | |<ref name="Electric Shock Collars">{{cite news |title=Electric Shock Collars |url=https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/about-us/campaigns/electric-shock-collars/ |work=Kennel Club UK}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Electric shock collars banned in Wales |url=https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/electric-shock-collars-banned-wales-1931122 |website=[[Wales Online]] |publisher=WalesOnline |date=23 March 2010 |access-date=20 November 2023}}</ref> |}
{|class="wikitable sortable" |+Jurisdictions permitting regulated use |- !Jurisdiction !Regulatory approach !Oversight !{{Reference column heading}} |- |[[United States]] |Permitted with state variation |Animal welfare and cruelty statutes |<ref>{{cite news |last=Lindqwister |first=Liz |title=San Francisco may be first city in the nation to ban dog shock collars |work=The Standard |date=16 January 2023 |url=https://sfstandard.com/2023/01/16/san-francisco-first-city-ban-dog-shock-collars-static-correction/}}</ref>
|- |[[Switzerland]] |Conditional permission |Veterinary and training regulations |<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-02-13 |title=Great News For Dogs As Switzerland Passes Law To Ban Cruel Anti-Barking Devices |url=https://www.holidogtimes.com/anti-barking-collars-finally-banned-in-switzerland/ |access-date=2022-04-21 |website=Holidog Times EN |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Ordonnances du domaine vétérinaire: modifications |url=https://www.admin.ch/gov/fr/accueil/documentation/communiques.msg-id-69446.html |access-date=2022-04-21 |website=www.admin.ch}}</ref> |- |[[United Kingdom]] (England) |Under legislative review |Draft legislation pending |<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Carter |first=E |date=November 2007 |title=Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2007 |journal=Animal Welfare |volume=16 |issue=4 |page=524 |doi=10.1017/s0962728600027470 |issn=0962-7286}}</ref> |}
===Legal cases involving shock collars=== In 2001, British magistrates found that the aggressive behaviors of three dogs were due to the effects of shock collars. The initial incident occurred when the dogs, startled by a small dog, caused their owner to jump, inadvertently triggering the shock collars. This led to the dogs associating small dogs with receiving shocks, resulting in fear and aggression towards them. Over time, this escalated, leading to the dogs attacking and killing a small dog.<ref name="Legal case">{{cite web|website=The Argus|title=Collars turned dogs into killers |date=25 October 2001 |url=http://www.theargus.co.uk/archive/2001/10/25/6771344.Collars__turned_dogs_into_killers_/?ref=arc |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141024152825/http://www.theargus.co.uk/archive/2001/10/25/6771344.Collars__turned_dogs_into_killers_/?ref=arc|archive-date=2014-10-24}}</ref>
In 2002, the [[RSPCA Australia|Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals]] (RSPCA) in [[Victoria, Australia]] lost a defamation lawsuit to a shock collar manufacturer and was ordered to pay [[AUD]]100,000 in damages. The RSPCA was found to have falsely claimed that shock collars can cause burns, deliver 3,000 volt shocks to dogs, and that the current from a shock collar had caused a 60 kilogram dog to perform backflips and resulted in brain damage. RSPCA's claims that these collars caused epileptic fits, vomiting, seizures, burning and bleeding was also found to be misleading.<ref>{{cite web |title=Dogfight nets RSPCA chief $30,000 |url=https://www.theage.com.au/national/dogfight-nets-rspca-chief-30-000-20020706-gdud8l.html |website=The Age |date=6 July 2002 |access-date=27 July 2018}}</ref> The RSPCA's senior inspector had falsified evidence in an attempt to demonstrate that shock collars can cause burns.<ref>{{cite web |title=Orion Pet Products Pty Ltd v Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Vic) |url=http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/2002/860.html |website=Federal Court of Australia |access-date=27 July 2018}}</ref>
In 2010, the High Court in Wales upheld a ban on the use of shock collars for cats and dogs. It was unsuccessfully challenged by Petsafe, a manufacturer of these devices, and the Electronic Collar Manufacturers' Association. The court upheld the law and ruled that it did not breach [[European Convention on Human Rights#Article 1 – property|Article 1 of the First Protocol]] of the [[European Convention on Human Rights|European Convention of Human Rights]] (concerning the [[right to property]]).<ref name="EU Court">{{cite web|url=http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2010/11/23/electric-shock-pet-collar-ban-did-not-breach-human-rights/ |title=Electric shock pet collar ban did not breach human rights |author=Catriona Murdoch |date= 23 November 2010 |website=UK Human Rights Blog}}</ref>
In 2011, a Welsh man became the first person convicted of illegal use of a shock collar in Wales,<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-13042363 |work=BBC News |title=Shock collar found on pet dog roaming on Vale beach |date=April 18, 2011}}</ref> receiving a fine for £2,000.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-14181927 |work=BBC News |title=Ogmore illegal shock collar dog owner gets £2,000 fine |date=July 18, 2011}}</ref>
In 2022, a class action suit was filed in [[California]] for "a variety of brands" falsely marketing shock collars as "safe" and "harmless" tools, as well as "conceal(ing) the true nature of the Shock Collar Products" by using "neutral euphemisms to describe what being electrocuted by a shock collar feels like for a pet.<ref name=cc>{{cite court |litigants=Hernandez v. Radio Systems Corporation |court=[[United States District Court for the Central District of California]] |date=October 21, 2022 |url=https://www.classaction.org/media/hernandez-v-radio-systems-corporation.pdf |access-date=April 8, 2025}}</ref> Among the most popular terms that it uses to falsely describe a painful electric shock are 'static correction,' 'surprise,' 'tickle,' and 'stimulation.'<ref name=cc/> The case was settled on February 5, 2025.<ref>{{cite court |litigants=Hernandez v. Radio Systems Corporation |court=[[United States District Court for the Central District of California]] |date=February 5, 2025 |url=https://www.pacermonitor.com/case/46549960/Steven_Hernandez_v_Radio_Systems_Corporation |access-date=April 8, 2025}}</ref>
== See also ==
* {{Annotated link |Cattle prod}} * {{Annotated link |Electroshock weapon}} * {{Annotated link |Graduated Electronic Decelerator}} * {{Annotated link |Electroshock weapon|Stun gun}}
==References== {{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}
[[Category:Dog training]] [[Category:Abuse]] [[Category:Cruelty to animals]]