18/02/2025
To the American Kennel Club,
For decades, you have positioned yourselves as a leading authority on dogs in the United States.
With that position comes immense responsibility, to ensure that policies and practices reflect the best available science and prioritize the well-being of the animals entrusted to us.
Yet, when it comes to modern, science-backed dog training, your policies remain alarmingly outdated and increasingly at odds with every major behavioral science organization worldwide.
Let’s be clear: there is no credible scientific body that supports your stance on allowing aversive training methods, including shock collars, prong collars, and coercive techniques.
The American College of Veterinary Behaviorists (ACVB), the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB), the British Veterinary Association (BVA), the European College of Animal Welfare and Behavioral Medicine, and even your counterparts, The Kennel Club in the UK, have all reached the same conclusion: aversive training methods are harmful, unnecessary, and counterproductive.
And yet, you continue to stand in opposition to legislative efforts aimed at protecting dogs from these outdated practices.
In 2025, you actively lobbied against New Jersey Senate Bill 3814, which sought to establish humane, evidence-based regulations for dog training by eliminating cruel and scientifically discredited aversive methods.
You opposed Bill 3814 to protect aversive training methods, yet had no issue with its exemption allowing violent and inhumane practices in police dog training. Your priorities are clear, and they are not in the interest of canine welfare.
Instead of embracing this opportunity to lead, you defended archaic techniques that have been shown to cause fear, distress, aggression and unnecessary harm.
You labeled the bill “restrictive,” insisting that trainers need “flexibility” in their methods, even when those methods violate the overwhelming body of research demonstrating the dangers of aversive training.
This is not leadership; it is negligence.
Your current stance is not merely outdated, it is dangerously out of step with scientific consensus and directly undermines canine welfare.
Research consistently shows that punishment in training increases stress, anxiety, and aggression in dogs while offering no advantages over positive reinforcement.
So, why does the AKC continue to defend the indefensible? Is it a reluctance to evolve? A desire to appease outdated training factions? Or a fundamental misunderstanding of the science that governs animal behavior?
Whatever the rationale, the consequence is the same: you are obstructing progress and putting dogs at risk.
Contrast your actions with those of The Kennel Club UK, which has embraced modern science, championed humane training, and lobbied for a complete ban on electric shock collars in England.
They took this stand because they recognized that dog welfare must come before outdated traditions.
The question before you is not a complex one:
Should the public trust the overwhelming consensus of the world’s most credentialed veterinary behavior experts, or should they believe that the AKC alone possesses knowledge that somehow eludes the world’s leading experts in animal behavior and welfare?
It’s time to modernize your stance to one that prioritizes dog welfare by eliminating harmful training methods.
Take a leadership role by publicly rejecting shock collars, prong collars, and coercive techniques.
Align your policies with the overwhelming scientific consensus that positive reinforcement is not just the most effective method, it is the ethical path forward.
History will remember those who led the way and those who stood in the way.
Zak George
Sources for more info
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SW-sUZ8bhZxXqKGv1qz9wLVqfTy9wzbdY_suFGG_OrA/
Our Approach
