Last week, the dog training world in the United States was rocked by some big news.
One of our country’s major national pet-supply retailers announced a critical decision:
October 6, 2020
It ends today.
Today, we stop the pain for Buddy because he barks at the doorbell.
We stop the stress for Sadie because she jumps for joy all over the neighbors when they walk in the door.
And we stop the fear for Cooper because he prefers a good pair of sneakers over all the chew toys on the market.
As of today, Petco no longer sells shock collars operated by a person with a remote in hand. Because, as a health and wellness company dedicated to improving pet lives, they have no business in our business.
And frankly, we believe there’s a better way.
So today, we say out with shock collars and in with POSITIVE TRAINING.
We say goodbye to remote controls that cause pain, and hello to expert trainers who mentor pets and pet parents with positivity, patience and compassion.
Today, we call on the rest of the pet industry and anyone who loves pets to join our movement and help us drive positive change beyond just Petco.
Today, we encourage anyone using or looking for shock collars to consider training with treats instead of electricity, and partnership instead of pain.
In fact, we’ll cover your first positive training class if you’ll let us.
Learn what we’re taking off our shelves and add your voice to our petition below. And thank you for always helping us give all pets their very best lives.
Today, we #StopTheShock.
Ron Coughlin
Petco CEO
Around the country, organizations for dog-training professionals responded quickly:
Nic Hoff (Ohio) shared the response to Petco’s announcement from the Association of Professional Dog Trainers:
“The APDT applauds Petco’s decision to remove all shock products from their stores and committing to positive-reinforcement dog training.”
Sonia Fetherling (Illinois) shared the response from The Pet Professional Guild:
“The Pet Professional Guild (PPG) and the Shock-Free Coalition are greatly encouraged by Petco’s announcement on October 6, 2020, that it will no longer sell electric shock collars ‘operated by a person with a remote in hand.’
“PPG has always believed unequivocally that the pet-owning general public needs—and deserves—to have access to better educational tools so they can 1) make the right decisions regarding their pets’ training, care, and welfare, and 2) ensure they live in safe, nurturing, and stable environments, free from fear and pain.”
Linda Keast (Oregon) shared the response from The Little Dog Laughed Animal-Assisted Therapy. (Petco Foundation has been one of Little Dog’s primary supporters for its team training classes.)
“For Little Dog, whose focus is teaching kiddos how to use positive reinforcement rather than coercion to change behaviors in animals (and humans!), this is a no-brainer. We 100% support this decision and hope it expands to include other aversive devices like prong collars.”
Photo by Steven Cogswell
I asked dog-training professionals for their reactions to Petco’s decision:
Dawn Elberson Goehring (Hawaii) I am thrilled at their decision. It is about time a company took a stand and put animal emotions and welfare over profits. I have commented on their posts to praise their decision and thank them. I have not suggested any additional devices be stopped because right now this decision needs reinforcement. Baby steps . . . We pushed for this and need to be thankful for this step; we can work on other devices later.
Marilyn Marks (Connecticut) I was working at Petco until COVID hit. On the Facebook page for trainers, there was a lot conflict between having [shock collars] for sale while trying to REALLY sway people away from using/buying them. I totally agree with that—they needed to pick a stance. And they still haven’t. They still sell e- and citronella bark collars, maybe the fences and indoor barriers, and prong and choke collars. So I feel it was either fine under pressure to take some stance or step in that direction or was a plotted marketing ploy in some other way? As with all things marketing and/or political, it’s hard to feel they really have best practices in mind. If you were CEO of a large corporation, would you take half a step in the right direction on this topic? Then again, we can’t possibly know their real idea. Maybe half a step was as much as they could get the other side to move.
Janet Velenovsky (Virginia) Celebrating!
Claudia Black-Kalinsky (Georgia) About time.
Gwen Jones (California) Thankful! They should not be in the hands of the general public.
Sherry Al-Mufti (California) This is a very important move by Petco, and a major step in the right direction. I respect the decision, and hope other retailers will follow suit.
Nathalie Mosbach Smith (California) One small step for a business and a huge step for dog-kind!
Margaret Tyler (Illinois) On Facebook, I see far too many people advise others to use shock collars. And the people who are getting that advice have demonstrated that they know virtually nothing about training—allowing a dog to repeat an unwanted, self-rewarding action without trying to prevent it, for example. A shock collar used by someone who doesn’t understand behavior is a disaster waiting to happen. I have never felt the need to use one. I think it’s a good thing to make this punishment less immediately available.
Kat Camplin (California) I am extremely happy with this decision. Barring the welfare issue, shock collars are tools that have a high probability of being misused. Lay people use them when they are experiencing frustration at a dog’s behavior, instead of using them for training purposes. Much as table saws are legal but result in thousands of injuries every year, shock collars cause severe harm when used incorrectly. They should never be in the hands of someone who has never used one without any formal instruction and apprenticeship.
Colette Kase (Mexico) I’ve been working on the shock-collar issue since the early 1990s. I used to have one that I used when I taught humans about training dogs and understanding dog behavior. In the UK, at that time, people were horrified that such equipment existed, as no one had really heard of these collars over there. They couldn’t fathom why anyone would need to use them. After all, people had been training dogs in the UK for every purpose and had done perfectly well without them.
Change, especially when it comes to human and animal welfare, comes slowly. Those benefiting from being able to exploit their power over other people or animals as a means of control cling onto that power and, as demonstrated by the shock-collar industry, will profit from that power.
That heady combination of power and money is a tough one to fight, but I’m proud of colleagues of mine, who, over the years, have patiently used science to show people that being humane is not a weakness. I’m sure those who run shock-collar training classes, workshops, and conferences, or who sell shock collars and profit off of them in other ways, will be regrouping to rebrand and aggressively market shock collars in countries where people are not as informed about these issues. This is the pattern we’ve seen with other types of fear/dominance-based training.
We just have to keep on educating, informing, and showing that animals trained without pain or fear are superior in every single way. This is just one battle. There will be many more.
Who will be affected by Petco’s decision to stop selling shock collars? Probably not average pet owners; shock collars are still sold by other national pet-supply retailers in stores across the country, and shock collars are still available online from many sources. Dog trainers and dog-training companies that use shock collars also stock and sell shock collars to clients, sometimes as part of a training package that includes board-and-train. In fact, anyone who wishes to own a shock collar will have no difficulty finding a shock collar to purchase.
Who will benefit from Petco’s decision?
Dogs whose owners believed that buying a box containing a shock collar and remote was going to be the solution to what their dogs were “doing wrong.”
Dogs whose owners took those boxes home, read the directions on the box and the several-page pamphlet inside, and hooked up their dogs; owners who thought before they hit the remote the very first time that what they were going to do to their dogs was fair and kind.
Dogs whose owners knew nothing about what might happen next; owners who’d inadvertently chosen to use punishment and pain as the primary way to communicate with their dogs.
Those dogs and their owners will benefit—if the impulse for a “quick fix” turns into “this might be more complicated than I thought,” and an owner decides to do the due-diligence required before deciding how to “train” their dog. Pain and punishment or positive reinforcement?
There’s so much information available now about why positive reinforcement can be far more effective, it makes that impulse buy look more foolhardy. If a major pet-supply retailer decides not to sell a product that might harm dogs because that is against their corporate ethics, maybe the novice dog owner will think, “I’m going to try positive reinforcement instead.” Good!
