I agree that this is an issue that needs dog owners to lobby those places that do not allow fences (though I would also argue that people are not entitled to a dog if they cannot provide a safe and appropriate environment for it --if they can't have a fence and won't put the active time into therefore walking and getting out with their dog, that they don't live in a situation appropriate to owning and giving quality time to a dog. Full stop).
For me, the bottom line is -- WHY do people feel that even if they can't build a fence, they need an invisible fence? There are so many known problems with invisible fences including that trainers regularly see dogs with all sorts of fear aggression problems or severe timidity that have been subjected to these stupid things (like the dog in the story! Just amazes me that they aren't thinking -- doh! I electrocuted my dog! I will never put this hideous device (that can malfunction, too), back on a dog I love! Instead they think -- oh, I'll just change the level at which I electrocute my dog).
Millions upon millions of people all over the world own dogs in places that do not have gardens and where dogs can never just be turned loose outside-- my city house for example. Like all those millions of millions of other dog owners, I just take the dogs to the park daily for a run --this is not a big deal for me or the dogs! And they get 4 walks a day (my partner has plenty of land and we have fenced an acre or so of it ourselves so dogs have plenty of room to run around when I am out there during the week -- and really, it makes little difference to them which place they are at).
Invisible fences do absolutely nothing that a caring owner should want for their dog. They do not prevent the dog from being attacked -- indeed they are left there like sitting ducks for any passing aggressive dog, cruel adult or child, with no where to go. They do not prevent the supposedly beloved pet from being taken by thieves or worse -- cavaliers in particular are attractive to thieves, one of the easiest most friendly dogs to take and easy to sell on to puppy farmers, backyard breeders or unsuspecting families or kept to use as a breeding dog. Or to be sold as fighting dog bait. And they do not ensure that a dog won't risk the shock to get out -- and never return. Perhaps to be immediately be hit by a car as it runs out into a road in front of the house.
Who could possibly want to risk their dog in these ways?
Sure, not being able to put the dog outside and then do something else, means the owner has more responsibility and needs to spend more time giving their dog some quality exercise, but why do people who don't want to give their dog this kind of time daily, and have this kind of active fun, get a dog in the first place? Just sticking the dog in the garden is NOT adequate exercise or activity. Any trainer will concur that a dog would much rather spend an hour with -- WITH! -- it's owner, on a long walk or hike or playing safely and freely in a local park, than be shunted into a garden where most will just lie about anyway, not 'exercise themselves'.
In much of Europe electric training collars are illegal -- these electric fence collars function autonomously in the same way and in the opinion of many, should also be illegal.