By Steve Dale, CABC
Dr. R.K. Anderson was the grandfather of veterinary behavior and original cookie pusher. It was a name used in a derogatory manner which Dr. Anderson took as a badge of honor. Dr. Anderson, who passed away at age 90 15 years ago, was horrified when the company that sold his humane Gentle Leader head halter and Easy Walk Harness began to sell shock collars (e-collars). He tried unsuccessfully to dissuade them in every way at his disposal. I think he would be pleased at this news.
Consumers in California who purchased various shock collars and pet containment systems under the brand name PetSafe from the parent company Radio Systems, may now be entitled to $1.9 million in a class action suit.
In an effort to extract money from unsuspecting consumers concerned about the well-being of their pets, Radio Systems which manufactures, markets, distributes, and sells twenty-four shock collar products through its websites and nationwide retailers’ physical stores and websites, has shown to be falsely claiming that these shock collar products are “safe” and “harmless” tools for preventing unwanted behaviors.
For veterinary technician specialists in behavior the potential short-term effect and long-term impact of these devices comes as no surprise. Internationally published studies have for years pointed out potential dangers. Many references are included in the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior Position Statement on Humane Dog Training.
The position statement concludes, “Based on current scientific evidence, AVSAB recommends that only reward-based training methods are used for all dog training, including the treatment of behavior problems. Aversive training methods have a damaging effect on both animal welfare and the human-animal bond. There is no evidence that aversive methods are more effective than reward-based methods in any context. AVSAB therefore advises that aversive methods should not be used in animal training or for the treatment of behavior disorders.”
The good news is that it appeared, at least anecdotally, the public was catching on, until “influencer” trainers came along in social media, on TikTok and Instagram. They “demonstrated” using this equipment and an approach that even including throwing things at dogs (“bonking” or hurling a rubber banded rolled-up towel at a dog as just one example) as the most efficient manner to save lives of aggressive dogs. Not only have members of the public signed on to this philosophy, so have some (mostly no-kill) animal shelters hoping to buoy adoption numbers to impress board members and donors.
While these methods can get a dog to comply at that moment (as any of us would with force),they do nothing to change the underlying cause, which most often fear. So, in actuality, they’re making the dog more fearful. It’s only weeks to months or even potentially years later when the dog reverts. This is likely one explanation (among many) for why dog bite numbers are on the rise.
What the Court Case Confirmed
The U.S. California District court document can be found here – to read in its entirety; there’s little ambiguity. Here are some direct quotations:
“In reality, Shock Collar Products are far from safe and harmless. In fact, the use of electric shocks is gravely dangerous to the pets’ physical and psychological well-being. Hundreds of documented cases—which Defendant is aware of—reveal that the use of shock collars can cause pets severe injuries, including, inter alia, skin ruptures, bruising, inflammations, skin burns, and infections. “
“It has been tested, proven, and documented that the use of Shock Collar Products leads to psychological stress, anxiety, and depression caused by the repeated painful shocks administered in response to the pets’ completely natural behaviors.
“Scientific literature further demonstrates that the use of Shock Collar Products leads to increased aggression and other significant and irreversible behavioral changes, rendering dogs less obedient, and even dangerously defiant. Unfortunately for unsuspecting consumers, Radio Systems has for years concealed the harsh truth about Shock Collar Products. Instead of telling consumers the truth, Defendant failed to disclose the dangerous properties of Shock Collar Products on its packaging, websites, and other marketing and advertising materials, which it uses to promote its products.
“Additionally, instead of being recommended by veterinarians and professional dog trainers—as Radio Systems falsely claims—the use of shock collar products has been uniformly condemned by professional dog behaviorists, experts, trainers, and veterinarians as a cruel, dangerous, and ineffective way of modifying animal behavior.
“As described herein, Defendant’s representations contained on the packaging of the Shock Collar Products, Defendant’s websites, and other marketing materials are false and misleading because they:
a. Misrepresent the physical pain, harm, and suffering that Shock Collar Products cause to household pets;
b. Misrepresent the dangers and risks of severe physical harm and injury associated with the use of shock collar products;
c. Misrepresent the dangers and risks of irreversible psychological damage, including anxiety, stress, and depression associated with the use of shock collar products;
d. Misrepresent the dangers and risks of increased aggression in dogs and the emergence of behavioral problems associated with the use of shock collar products;
e. Misrepresent that shock collar products are considered humane or are recommended by industry experts.”
That’s A Lot of Money
The PetSafe class action settlement received preliminary court approval on August 25, 2025 and covers anyone who bought one of the following PetSafe e-collar products in California between October 1, 2018 and October 31, 2022. Here are details on actually receiving your claim from Class Action.org
My hope is that that the class action settlement of $1.9 million combined with what must be significant legal costs, may at least motivate others who sell similar products to, at the very least place warning labels on packaging or perhaps stop selling these devices altogether.