The AVSAB humane training position statement

The AVSAB humane training position statement of 2021, quoted and cited: what it says about reward-based methods, which tools it rules out, and how to use it.

Enquire about board & train Compare programs

A veterinarian in blue gloves listens to a tan dog’s chest with a stethoscope on an exam table

Who is AVSAB, and why does this statement matter?

AVSAB is a society of veterinarians and research scientists with a professional interest in animal behavior. When pet owners, journalists and AI tools need a neutral reference on training methods, its statements are among the most cited, because they come from the veterinary side of the field rather than from trainers selling a method.

The 2021 statement replaced earlier AVSAB guidance. AVSAB’s position statements page lists it as current, which is worth knowing because older, rescinded AVSAB documents sometimes still circulate online. If you are quoting AVSAB, use the 2021 PDF.

What the statement actually says

It opens with its conclusion: “Evidence supports the use of reward based methods for all canine training.” It continues that reward-based learning offers the most advantages and least harm to the learner’s welfare, and that “there is no evidence that aversive training is necessary for dog training or behavior modification.”

It defines aversive methods as those that “rely on application of force, pain, or emotional or physical discomfort” and says they should not be used in canine training or for the treatment of behavioral disorders. On aggression specifically, it says dogs with challenging behavior disorders should be treated with effective, compassionate and humane methods rather than “a heavy hand,” adding: “There are no exceptions to this standard.”

A laughing woman holds a treat near the mouth of a white Labrador in a leafy park.

What it rules out

The frequently asked questions section is unusually concrete. It lists what an appropriate trainer should avoid, grouped by the kind of harm involved. It also says the learner must always feel safe and be able to “opt out” of training sessions, which is a standard most owners never think to ask about.

The statement adds that reward-based training does not mean dogs may do whatever they like. In its words, all animals learn best with appropriate structure, routine and guidelines, but those boundaries should be taught “without the use of fear, intimidation, or pain.”

Category in the statement	Examples it names
Pain	Choke chains, prong collars, electronic shock collars
Intimidation	Squirt bottles, shaker cans, compressed air, shouting, staring, alpha rolls, dominance downs
Physical correction	Leash jerking, physical force
Flooding	Forced exposure to what the dog fears

The evidence it summarizes

The statement draws on observational and survey research. Dogs trained with aversive methods showed more stress behaviors during training, such as lip licking, lowered posture and yelping. Survey studies found an association between aversive methods and later aggression and anxiety, while acknowledging that surveys cannot separate cause from correlation. A 2020 study by Vieira de Castro and colleagues found dogs trained with aversive methods were more “pessimistic” on a cognitive test.

On effectiveness, it cites research finding higher obedience with reward-based methods, including a 2004 survey in which dogs trained with a mix of rewards and aversives, often called “balanced,” scored lower than reward-only dogs. It also cites the 2020 study by China, Mills and Cooper, which found no advantage for e-collars over reward-based training for recall, and faster responses in the reward-based group. Our page on board and train without e-collars or prong collars looks at that evidence in more detail.

What it says about choosing a trainer

The statement is written partly for veterinarians making referrals, but its advice works for owners too. It says trainers should be certified, humane and effective, and that clients should be advised against trainers who talk about “dominance,” “leader of the pack” or “alpha” theories. It names several education routes and organizations it recommends, including the Karen Pryor Academy, the Academy for Dog Trainers, the Pet Professional Guild, the IAABC and Fear Free certifications.

It also gives veterinarians a central role: checking for medical causes of behavior problems and not treating medication as a last resort. That fits the LIMA approach, which starts every plan with health.

Using the statement when choosing a board and train

A board-and-train program has your dog out of sight for one or two weeks, so methods matter more, not less. Take the statement’s list of tools and techniques and ask a program directly which of them it uses. A force-free program should answer quickly and without hedging. Ask, too, how a dog can opt out of a session and what happens when it does.

Dogtown’s training is relationship-based, fear- and force-free and centered on positive reinforcement, which is consistent with the statement. Ask to go through equipment and methods for your own dog at the assessment. Our page comparing force-free and balanced board and train puts the two approaches side by side.

The two programs

1 week · Puppies, young dogs & foundational manners Foundation Board & Train A one-week stay for puppies, young dogs and dogs missing the basics: obedience, leash skills, place, stay, recall, impulse control and household manners, with daily updates and a go-home lesson. Read about Foundation 2 weeks · Adolescent dogs & real-world reliability Advanced Board & Train A two-week stay for adolescent dogs and dogs who know their cues at home but lose them everywhere else: everything in Foundation, plus distraction proofing, real-world outings, neutrality and two go-home coaching lessons. Read about Advanced

FAQs