In this article
A spaniel races past at the park wearing a chunky collar with a small box under its chin, and someone on the next bench says surely those are banned now. In Wales, they are: using one has been an offence since 20101. In England, they are not, even though a ban got as far as approval by the House of Lords in 20232.
The government now says it will consult on whether to ban them3. Here is where the law stands in each part of the UK, what British research found when the collars were put up against reward-based training, and kinder ways to tackle the problems they are usually bought for.
Where the law stands in each nation
An e-collar, as the remote shock collar is often called, can send an electric current from the collar to the dog wearing it, and the government's own strategy says that can potentially cause harm and distress3. Whether you may use one depends on which side of a border you are standing.
| Nation | Using one on a dog | What the rules say |
|---|---|---|
| Wales | An offence since 2010 | Covers any collar designed to give an electric shock1 |
| England | Not banned | A 2023 draft ban was never made; a consultation is promised4, 3 |
| Scotland | Not banned | Guidance warns against them, and a court may consider it in a cruelty case5 |
| Northern Ireland | Not banned | No specific law, according to the BVA2 |
Wales
The Welsh regulations came into force on 24 March 2010. They make it an offence to attach a collar designed to give an electric shock to a cat or dog, to cause one to be attached, or to be responsible for a dog that is wearing one1. That reaches beyond remote controls. A 2023 review for Scottish ministers found one prosecution under the Welsh rules: a dog found in 2010 wearing a collar set off by a containment fence, whose owner was fined7. What the law does not do is stop anyone selling them7.
England
England came close. The government announced in 2018 that it was working towards a ban, and the Animal Welfare (Electronic Collars) (England) Regulations 2023 were laid before Parliament on 27 April 2023 and approved by the House of Lords that June2. They also needed the approval of the House of Commons, and the official legislation record still lists them as a draft that has not been made2, 4.
Even that plan was narrower than the Welsh law. It was due to come into force on 1 February 2024, and it covered only collars that a person sets off with a remote control, so collars triggered by barking or by an invisible fence were outside it4.
As of October 2026, the position is the one set out in the Animal Welfare Strategy for England, published on 22 December 2025. It says the government is concerned about the possible welfare effects of e-collars and will consult on whether to ban them later in this Parliament3. For now, there is no ban on using one in England.
Scotland
Scotland has guidance instead of a ban. Its 2018 guidance says the Scottish Government does not condone shock collars, electronic anti-bark collars, electronic containment systems or citronella sprays, and reminds owners that causing an animal unnecessary suffering is an offence, which can include suffering caused by inappropriate training methods5. It is advisory, but a court may consider it in a prosecution5.
In 2023 the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission, which advises Scottish ministers, went further. It noted that there was no legal control on the use, supply or possession of e-collars in Scotland, and concluded that their use for training should be prohibited7.
Northern Ireland
Northern Ireland has no specific legislation on shock collars, according to the British Veterinary Association, which wants every UK government to bring in a complete ban on their sale and use2.
What happened when UK researchers tested the collars
The most useful British evidence comes from a study commissioned by Defra and run by the University of Lincoln6. Researchers recruited 63 pet dogs referred for the kinds of problem e-collars are often used for, such as poor recall and chasing livestock, and split them into three groups of 216.
One group was trained by experienced trainers nominated by the Electronic Collar Manufacturers Association, using e-collars. The second had the same trainers without the collars, and the third had trainers from the Association of Pet Dog Trainers, UK, who focus on rewards6. Each dog had two 15-minute sessions a day for four or five days6.
A first look at nine dogs
A smaller preliminary study came first, filming nine dogs trained the way their trainers normally worked. Eight were sheep chasers, shocked with no warning signal, and seven of those eight at the collar's highest setting6. The figures are descriptive only, but they make uncomfortable reading: no yelps or whines were recorded before the first shocks, and 18 afterwards6.
Before and after the shocks
Lower settings, still more tension
In the main study, the e-collar trainers used lower settings and a warning vibration before a shock, and the dogs' reactions were less marked6. Even so, the collar-trained dogs spent more time tense, yawned more often and explored their surroundings less than the dogs with the reward-based trainers6.
Part of that may come down to the trainers, or to when and where they worked. Dogs trained by the e-collar trainers without collars also explored less, and on tension they did not differ significantly from the collar-trained dogs. The reward-based group trained near Lincoln the following spring, while the other two trained near Edinburgh in autumn and winter6.
And the training itself? In all, 92% of owners reported an improvement, with no significant difference between the three groups, although owners of the collar-trained dogs were less confident about using the approach they had been shown6. The researchers summed it up like this.
These findings suggest that there is no consistent benefit to be gained from e-collar training but greater welfare concerns compared with positive reward based training6.
Do e-collars at least get better results?
Supporters argue that in experienced hands a collar is a valuable training aid8. In 2020 the Lincoln team put that to the test on the same training videos, counting how often each dog came or sat when first asked and how quickly it responded8.
The dogs with the reward-focused trainers came back first time on 82.5% of calls, against 71.0% for the collar-trained dogs, and sat first time on 83.5% of requests against 76.8%8. They also set off back a little sooner, and no group disobeyed more often than another8.
These are the same 63 dogs, so this is a second look at one study, not a second trial, and it shares the same catch: the reward-focused group trained months later and was recruited to match the others instead of being allocated at random8. The authors still concluded that there is no evidence e-collar training is necessary, even for the off-lead problems it is most widely recommended for8.
A wider look agrees. Reviewing the research for Scottish ministers, the Scottish commission found reward-based methods appear at least as effective, and judged that whatever the user's skill, the risk of harm from e-collars is out of proportion to the perceived benefit7.
What about anti-bark collars and invisible fences?
Shock collars that go off by themselves when a dog barks or nears a buried boundary wire are treated unevenly by the law. In Wales they fall under the ban, because it covers any collar designed to give an electric shock1. England's 2023 draft would not have touched them4.
The BVA's concerns go beyond remote-controlled collars. It says electric containment fences, choke chains, prong collars and anti-bark collars that use noise, vibration, ultrasound or a spray of water or citronella also have the potential to cause suffering, while noting a lack of research on their welfare effects2.
Kinder ways to fix what collars are sold for
Most people who buy a shock collar want something reasonable: a dog that comes back, leaves sheep alone, stays in the garden or barks less. Each has a kinder route, and Scotland's guidance puts it plainly: reward-based training, ideally with a qualified trainer, is the most effective method5.
| Problem | The kinder fix |
|---|---|
| Chasing sheep or other livestock | A lead whenever livestock are, or may be, nearby7 |
| Poor recall in open spaces | Reward-based recall training, ideally with a qualified trainer5, 8 |
| Escaping the garden | Secure fencing, so your dog is safely enclosed at home7 |
| Barking | A qualified trainer or behaviourist, to find and tackle the cause5 |
Before you buy a shock collar or book a trainer
Do
If your dog already wears a shock collar, you can stop using it today. Keep them on a lead or a long line in the places where you relied on it, and ask a reward-based trainer to help you rebuild the recall, or tackle the barking, from the beginning.
When to get expert help
If the trouble is aggression, fear, or a behaviour that has appeared out of the blue, start with your vet, who can check for a physical cause and refer you on to a qualified behaviourist. For recall, chasing or barking, look for a trainer who uses reward-based methods; the BVA suggests starting with the Animal Behaviour and Training Council2.
Whatever England decides after its consultation, you do not need to wait for a law to make the choice for your own dog. A pocket of treats and a patient trainer will get you at least as far, and your dog will enjoy the lessons.
Sources and further reading8 sources
The small numbers in the article link to the source behind each fact. Sources open on their own websites.
- The Animal Welfare (Electronic Collars) (Wales) Regulations 2010
- Electric shock collars and training aids
- Animal welfare strategy for England
- The Animal Welfare (Electronic Collars) (England) Regulations 2023
- Dog training aids: guidance
- The Welfare Consequences and Efficacy of Training Pet Dogs with Remote Electronic Training Collars in Comparison to Reward Based Training
- Dog training - use of handheld remote-controlled training devices (e-collars): report
- Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars vs. a Focus on Positive Reinforcement