Prong Collars

In Victoria, Queensland and Tasmania prong collars are prohibited under Animal Welfare legislation. Despite this, many individuals operating as dog trainers continue to use them—sometimes even disguising the collars under flat fabric covers to disguise them.

The reality is simple: To use a prong or shock collar effectively, you would need:a) a thorough understanding of canine behaviour
b) a deep knowledge of learning theory
c) impeccable timing and skill

And if you truly possess those three things—you don’t need a prong or shock collar at all.

"Abuse starts where knowledge ends."

Why Punishment-Based Training Fails Dogs

Research consistently shows that punishment in animals enhances anxiety and fear, making them more reactive. Instead of solving behavioural problems, punishment increases aggression and arousal, especially in dogs that are already reactive. These dogs feel threatened, and their stress response escalates.

Multiple studies confirm that punishment-based methods:

• Cause irreversible physical harm

• Trigger undesirable behaviours long after training

• Fail to achieve obedience goals as effectively as reward-based methods

Dogs trained with aversive tools such as prong collars show more stress-related behaviours—not just during training but also in everyday life.

The Illusion of "Effectiveness"

Many owners perceive prong collars as effective because they see certain unwanted behaviours stop. However, research reveals that what’s actually happening is far more troubling:

• Dogs suppress not only undesirable behaviours but also many normal canine behaviours

• Dogs in studies displayed more avoidance, hiding, scanning and hyper-vigilance behaviours. 

• These are not signs of learning, but of anxiety and fear

The Hidden Physical Risks

Beyond psychological harm, the physical dangers of prong collars are severe. Documented injuries include:

• Damage to the larynx, esophagus, thyroid, and trachea

• Development of lesions from muscle trauma

• Increased intraocular pressure (eye pressure) that can lead to long-term vision problems

For dogs with pre-existing conditions such as thin corneas, glaucoma, or corneal injuries, prong collars pose a serious medical risk.

Key Scientific Findings

1. Harm to Physical Health

• Increase in intra-ocular pressure, risking vision damage (Pauli et al., 2006)

• Documented injuries to larynx, oesophagus, thyroid, and trachea, along with lesion development from muscle trauma

• Dogs with thin corneas, glaucoma, and eye injuries such as corneal lacerations are especially at risk

2. Damage to Mental Wellbeing

• Punishment-based training is linked to increased fear, anxiety, and aggression (Dreschel, 2010; Ziv, 2017)

• Dogs often display avoidance, hyper-vigilance, scanning, and hiding behaviours—all signs of stress, not learning (Fernandes et al., 2017)

3. Reduced Human–Animal Bond

• Owners using prong collars reported weaker attachment and higher surrender rates to shelters (Kwan & Bain, 2013)

4. No Training Advantage

• Studies show reward-based training is equally or more effective for obedience without the welfare risks (Vieira de Castro et al., 2021)

Myth-Busting Common Arguments

“It doesn’t hurt if used correctly.”

• Scientific evidence shows even when prongs are used “correctly,” they increase stress, fear, and physical risks such as eye pressure and throat damage (Pauli et al., 2006; Schilder & van der Borg, 2004).

• Dogs cannot distinguish between “controlled discomfort” and pain—they only feel the aversive stimulus.

“It’s the only thing that works for strong or stubborn dogs.”

• Research (Cooper et al., 2020; Vieira de Castro et al., 2021) proves that positive reinforcement is equally or more effective, even for difficult cases. Reward-based methods also result in more reliable long-term outcomes.

“In the right hands, they’re safe.”

• With no licensing or regulation of dog trainers in Australia, the “safe in skilled hands” argument collapses. Anyone can use these devices without oversight, increasing the risk of harm.

“It works faster than other methods.”

• Quick suppression of behaviour is not the same as learning. Studies show prong collars often stop all behaviours, including healthy ones, leaving dogs anxious and shut down instead of truly trained (Fernandes et al., 2017).

Regulatory Context

• Prong collars are already illegal in Victoria, Queensland, and Tasmania.

• Australia has no licensing or qualification requirements for dog trainers—meaning anyone can use aversive tools without oversight.

• The common pro-prong argument (“safe in skilled hands”) is irrelevant in a system without regulation.

Expert Consensus

• Leading welfare bodies, including the Pet Professional Guild (PPG) and RSPCA (2024), publicly condemn prong collars.

• Internationally, momentum is growing toward bans, aligning legislation with modern animal welfare science.

Policy Recommendation

To protect both dogs and the public, we recommend:

• A national ban on the importation, sale, possession, and use of prong collars

• Aligning federal law with existing bans in VIC, QLD, and TAS

• Promoting and subsidising evidence backed reward-based training education

• Introducing minimum qualification requirements for all dog trainers

Why This Matters

Prong collars are outdated, high-risk tools. Humane alternatives achieve the same or better outcomes, strengthen the dog–guardian bond, and support safer communities. Modern legislation should reflect the science—and protect both dogs and the public.

References

Primary

• Brammeier, S. et al. (2006). Good trainers: How to identify one and why this is important to your practice of Veterinary Medicine. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 1(1), 47–52. doi:10.1016/j.jveb.2006.05.001

• Schalke, E. et al. (2009). Comparison of stress and learning effects of 3 different training methods in dogs. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 4(6), 252. doi:10.1016/j.jveb.2009.05.014

Secondary & Additional

• Ciribassi, J. (2015). Forget dominance: Fear-based aggression in dogs. Veterinary Medicine, 110(8), 210-212

• Cooper, J.J. et al. (2020). Efficacy of dog training with and without remote electronic collars vs. a focus on positive reinforcement. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 7, 508. doi:10.3389/fvets.2020.00508

• Dreschel, N.A. (2010). The effects of fear and anxiety on health and lifespan in pet dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 125(3–4), 157–162. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2010.04.003

• Fernandes, J.G., Olsson, I.A.S. & Vieira de Castro, A.C. (2017). Do aversive-based training methods actually compromise dog welfare?: A literature review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 196, 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2017.07.001

• Kwan, J.Y. & Bain, M.J. (2013). Owner attachment and problem behaviors in dogs. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 8(5), 282–287. doi:10.1016/j.jveb.2013.06.002

• Pauli, A.M., Bentley, E., Diehl, K.A. & Miller, P.E. (2006). Effects of the application of neck pressure by a collar or harness on intraocular pressure in dogs. Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association, 42(3), 207–211. doi:10.5326/0420207

• Schilder, M.B.H. & van der Borg, J.A.M. (2004). Training dogs with help of the shock collar: short and long term behavioural effects. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 85(3–4), 319–334. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2003.10.004

• Steiss, J.E. et al. (2007). Evaluation of plasma cortisol levels and behavior in dogs wearing bark control collars. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 106(1–3), 96–106. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2006.07.002

• Vieira de Castro, A.C. et al. (2021). Improving dog training methods: Efficacy and efficiency of reward and mixed training methods. PLOS ONE, 16(2), e0247321. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0247321

• Ziv, G. (2017). The effects of using aversive training methods in dogs—a review. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 19, 50–60. doi:10.1016/j.jveb.2017.02.004