13/10/2026
Huge respect to Nick for sharing his truth 💙
I have a great deal of respect for trainers like Nick who are prepared to speak openly about how their approach to dog training has evolved.
I know of many trainers who publicly identify as ‘positive only’ and hold accreditation with organisations that promote that methodology, yet privately use methods and equipment that fall outside those organisations’ accepted practices.
Being open about that could cost them their accreditation, their standing within those circles and, perhaps most importantly to them, their credibility.
So they stay silent.
But there is a much bigger issue here.
While trainers are protecting their reputations, there are dogs whose lives are potentially at stake.
Dogs with serious behavioural issues, dogs whose owners are running out of options, and dogs for whom euthanasia is already being discussed.
I’m not suggesting an e-collar is the answer for every dog. It isn’t. But neither should potentially useful training options be dismissed because acknowledging them might upset an organisation or damage someone’s professional standing.
We talk endlessly about welfare, ethics and putting the dog first.
Yet how ethical is it to publicly condemn methods you are privately prepared to use?
We need more honesty, more professional integrity and considerably higher moral and ethical standards within this industry.
Because protecting your accreditation should never take priority over protecting a dog’s life.
If we genuinely believe in putting dogs first, that principle has to matter more than the badge next to our names.
I spent over 12 years as a “positive trainer”, and for most of that time I strongly believed e-collars were cruel.
Despite doing a bunch of qualifications, I’d never been taught how they were used. I’d never even held one. I imagined the sensation was like touching a livestock fence. Very painful!
For years I thought e-collar training was simply electrocuting a dog when they didn’t do what you asked. It’s not hard to see why someone would find that horrendous, or even advocate for banning them.
Eventually, I got the chance to try one myself.
I put it against my skin and hesitated for what felt like forever before finally pressing the button…
My first thought? “Is that it?”
Since then, I’ve watched dozens of people have exactly the same reaction.
I started learning how experienced trainers actually used them, and discovered something far more sophisticated and nuanced than simply lighting dogs up for non-compliance.
I don’t want to lie to you. The higher levels aren’t nice. They’re not supposed to be. They can be used to interrupt dangerous behaviour, like a dog running towards traffic or chasing livestock.
But many dogs will never need anything close to those levels.
In my experience, the most aversive part of training is extremely short-lived, sometimes just a handful of repetitions. And the potential payoff? Years of off-lead freedom.
That’s an incredible return on investment.
We already subject dogs to unpleasant experiences for their long-term welfare. Nail cutting, grooming, vaccinations, veterinary restraint, etc.
I might be “disowned” by the positive training community now, but I was once a respected member of it. I was invited to speak at conferences, deliver workshops and appear on podcasts.
I’m very familiar with both sides of this conversation.
And I’ve seen with my own eyes an enormous difference in training outcomes, and the resulting welfare benefits, that responsible e-collar training can provide.
Does that mean you should buy one and figure it out yourself? Absolutely not.
You need guidance from a knowledgeable professional. But when used responsibly, they can be a serious game-changer.
