21/06/2026
Sharing this important post from Dr Nicole.
These are the words of one of the most qualified and experienced veterinary behaviour professionals we are lucky to have here in Perth.
So clearly written. So factual. So important.
You will not see veterinary behaviourists referring to trainers who promise to “fix” dogs through punishment, intimidation, fear, shock collars, prong collars, choke chains, leash corrections or suppression-based methods.
This information is not opinion. It is grounded in evidence, welfare science, neurobiology and clinical practice.
Aversive methods do not address the underlying emotional state of the dog. They can increase fear, anxiety, stress and defensive aggression, while making behaviour less predictable and less safe.
Reward-based behaviour support, appropriate management, veterinary care and medication when indicated are not “soft” options.
They are best practice.
They are safer.
They are more ethical.
And they protect both the dog and the humans around them.
Thank you, Dr Nicole and Dr Zoe for putting this so clearly and for always advocating for our precious animals.
As veterinary behaviourists, our clinical practice is grounded in evidence-based medicine, animal welfare science, and an ethical obligation to minimise harm. We do not support the use of aversive training methods or equipment, including but not limited to shock collars (electronic collars), prong collars, choke chains, leash corrections, or any technique that relies on pain, intimidation, or fear to alter behaviour.
Aversive methods function through positive punishment or negative reinforcement, mechanisms that inherently carry a risk of adverse emotional and physiological consequences. A substantial body of research demonstrates that these approaches are associated with increased fear, anxiety, stress-related behaviours, and in some cases, aggression. Importantly, these outcomes are not limited to the training context; they may generalise to the environment, handler, or unrelated stimuli, thereby exacerbating the original behavioural concern or creating new problems.
From a neurobiological perspective, aversive stimuli activate stress pathways, including the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis, which can impair learning, reduce behavioural flexibility, and negatively impact welfare. In contrast, reward-based training promotes engagement, improves learning outcomes, and supports the development of a positive human–animal bond. This is particularly critical in patients presenting with anxiety-related or fear-based behaviours, where aversive interventions are contraindicated due to the high risk of sensitisation and escalation.
There are also significant safety considerations. Aversive techniques suppress behaviour without addressing underlying emotional states, increasing the likelihood of unpredictable or defensive aggression. This presents a risk not only to handlers and the public but also to the dog, who may face relinquishment or euthanasia as a consequence of deteriorating behaviour.
Positive reinforcement-based training, combined with appropriate environmental management and, where indicated, pharmacological support, provides an effective and humane framework for behaviour modification. These methods focus on reinforcing desired behaviours, reducing fear and distress, and addressing the underlying emotional drivers of behaviour. This approach is supported by major veterinary and animal welfare organisations internationally, including the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB), the British Veterinary Association (BVA), and the RSPCA.
Our commitment is to interventions that are scientifically supported, ethically defensible, and aligned with best-practice welfare standards. Accordingly, we advocate exclusively for reward-based training methods and do not recommend or endorse the use of aversive equipment in any clinical or training context.
This position reflects our responsibility to promote both effective behavioural outcomes and the long-term welfare of the animals under our care.
