Bark Busters And Cesar Milan

[corvus]

This morning I was chatting to someone at the dog park. I commented on the lovely temperaments that her two dogs have and she told us that she was getting Bark Busters in because they were barking at 3am when drunk people were walking past their house. She said the fellow from BB said over the phone that the dogs are barking because the humans aren't the pack leaders. I kinda scoffed a bit. I mean, we've all heard it before and it's ridiculous that he could say that without even viewing the dogs. She said she had hired BB on recommendations from lots of other people, and was impressed with a video they sent her of a well-trained dog. I expressed surprise that she had heard so many good things about them and she asked if I had heard otherwise. I just said I hadn't had any dealings with them so I couldn't really say, but just to be careful to be honest about whether the techniques are working or not and don't pay too much attention to the actual explanation.

This was the second person I have spoken to at the dog park that has said they were hiring Bark Busters. The other folks had a Great Dane pup and they had been told they had to stop giving out treats. So OH asked me if I was wrong about BB. If people thought they worked and were good, maybe they were? We had a discussion about the two separate issues of whether something worked and how you explained why it worked or didn't, but in the end I find it a bit worrying. We go to puppy school and are taught to reward the good and ignore the bad, which I think is a good message. But then, when problems arise as they inevitably do, people flounder, trying to teach a dog NOT to do something rather than teaching them what to do instead. This lady we were talking to this morning said she had been told by friends that Bark Busters and Cesar Milan would solve all her problems. A chilling thought to me, but maybe I'm making unfair assumptions.

[poodlefan]

BB is a franchise and I don't doubt there are some decent franchisees.

But every issue your dog has is not related to its status in a pack. It shits me to tears to hear advice based on this handed out to owners of baby puppies in particular. Anyone hearing this stuff would think dogs spend their whole lives trying to get the better of us in a contest of dominance. Are there extremely dominant dogs? You bet. But "one size fits all" training solutions are doomed to fail, sometimes with serious consequences.

Friend of mine got BB in to help with resource guarding issues. Solution offered was a squirt bottle. Dog went on to give her 20 stitches over a cooked chop bone it had grabbed.

I call that a fail.

[corvus]

It shits me to tears to hear advice based on this handed out to owners of baby puppies in particular.

Arg! Me too. These two dogs are like models of submission. I have a photo of one on the ground with Erik trying to out-submit him. Of course, that doesn't mean they don't try to stick their heads in your treat bag. They just do what they've learnt works. I wonder if to some degree it's a lot of confirmation bias. They are sweet, gentle dogs and I think there's every chance treating them as if they had a dominance problem would actually work. If it didn't, it would at least make the owners feel better about it all. It gets me riled, though, that people get fed rubbish, and then it works for an entirely different reason, and then this just perpetuates the myths. Sometimes I think dogs are their own worst enemy. Most of them don't punish stupid advice with 20 stitches.

[The Spotted Devil]

The nature of the (human) beast is that they want instant solutions with minimal effort. I think that is why I have such an issue with these dog training shows. It doesn't matter how many times you tell someone "don't try this at home", they just latch onto one aspect and apply it without consideration. A family that we know got a new baby puppy (Lab maybe?) I was very open to giving them any assistance they needed. But nope. They just "alpha rolled" it anytime they decided it needed to learn it's place

corvus - definitely confirmation bias!!!

[megan_]

Yes - if you give your dog treats then it won't "respect" you. There was an MS puppy at our park a year ago, it used to come every night. It was very lively. The owners got a trainer in who told them to stop all treats. I don't know the end result but I haven't seen that pup for well over 8 months....

I tell people that I'm not giving my dogs treats - I'm making them earn every piece of food I give them, rather than plonking it in a bowl in front of them. This seems to change their view a bit.

And if I see another alpha roll I'm going to vomit!

[silentchild]

Funny thing about Bark Busters.... I was walking down a street to get dinner the other day and a Bark Busters car was parked on the side of the street. A little dog was inside it. As I was walking down the street I could hear non-stop barking, but I didn't realize it was coming from the Bark Busters car until I got up to it. The dog barked endlessly the whole time, even after I had got my dinner and walked past again to head home. It was a fairly quiet street too, not like there was anything around to really cause it to bark.

So much for bark busting...

[Sheilaheel02]

These dogs are barking to alert other members of their pack to a perceived threat, not barking for the sake of it. If drunks rocked up here at 3am I would be mortified if my dogs didn't bark.

If they were nuisance barking at every little noise and constantly that might be different.

S

[Inevitablue]

She said she had hired BB on recommendations from lots of other people, and was impressed with a video they sent her of a well-trained dog. I expressed surprise that she had heard so many good things about them and she asked if I had heard otherwise.

They are going the extra mile to covert enquiries to bookings.... hopefully a sign that enquiries are dropping off.

Did you know that BarkBusters is owned by the sister of the DogTech franchisor...

[Kelpie-i]

Just out of interest Corvus did you recommend other trainers etc to these people?

[fuzzy82]

So OH asked me if I was wrong about BB. If people thought they worked and were good, maybe they were?

Just because something works doesn't make it good. Compulsion and harsh training methods work, that's why so many people used them for so long, and a lot of people still use them. They get the job done, possibly quicker than positive methods in some cases, but that doesn't make them good methods. Unless 'good' means 'as quick as possible'. But if 'good' means 'effective but not painful or uncomfortable' then no.

[corvus]

Just out of interest Corvus did you recommend other trainers etc to these people?

Nope. I don't know any trainers in the area that have a good reputation and neither asked me for a recommendation anyway. Besides which, I don't know what the BB trainer is like, either. Sounds like rubbish, but I don't know the full story.

[Gayle.]

My dog barks at 3am when my teenage daughter comes home. At the first sound of someone at the door, the dog doesn't have a clue who it is, but she knows it's not right for them to be there in the middle of the night so she warns us.

The fact that she sleeps next to my bed and has the loudest bark in the world means I have to peel myself off the ceiling.......but I'd say it's normal, and to be appreciated rather than stopped. The dog barks because she hears someone entering the house in the middle of the night. That has GOT to be a good thing.

Barking dogs doesn't automatically mean bad dogs or badly behaved dogs. My girl is the best behaved dog ever, she would rather die than do something wrong. And barking at 3am is not always wrong.

[corvus]

True, Gayle. They live next to the dog park, which is a pedestrian thoroughfare for folks coming back from the local train station. I take it the dogs therefore alert bark a lot. I imagine they wouldn't do it so much at 3am if they were inside, but apparently one can just become pack leader and that will solve the problem without having to change any habits or routines.

[Nekhbet]

ahaaaa .. BB and Cesar Milan are two different ballparks. Cesar Milan I would trust with a dog, BB I would not. Just because they use similar terms does not mean their philosophy is the same.

Were the first persons dogs maybe waking and not wanting to settle when drunks go by? If that is the case then yes, I would say some control exercises wouldnt go astray but there's very little detail there.

[HugL]

I have no experience with BB but borrowed the book from our local library. If their methods are like the book then the "throw chain" will solve every problem. Interesting read but after every chapter, response was still the same regardless of problem.

Wouldn't recommend them, wouldn't use them, definitely wouldn't buy franchise!

[clipandcoach]

My philosophy on 'pack theory' style training is not that is doesn't usually work, but more that the explanation given for it working is not correct. If we look at learning theory then we can see that negative reinforcers (often adversives) are put in place to exhibit 'control' which is often referred to as becoming 'pack leader'. Control of behaviour can also be obtained with positive reinforcers, such as food rewards. Both aiming to avoid a negative reinforcer or obtain a positive one will change a dog's behaviour. In modern dog training we have realised that if something can be obtained in a way that is both more pleasant for dog and owner then why wouldn't we do it? That is why modern dog training methods use a lot of food rewards (and other rewards) as positive reinforcement for behaviour, to give the dog something to work for rather than against. I would question any trainer's methods if they are not explained from a scientific basis (using proven principles and theory's). I would also always look for enjoyable ways to train my dog. Wouldn't you?

[clipandcoach]

Corvus I totally agree

It shits me to tears to hear advice based on this handed out to owners of baby puppies in particular.

Arg! Me too. These two dogs are like models of submission. I have a photo of one on the ground with Erik trying to out-submit him. Of course, that doesn't mean they don't try to stick their heads in your treat bag. They just do what they've learnt works. I wonder if to some degree it's a lot of confirmation bias. They are sweet, gentle dogs and I think there's every chance treating them as if they had a dominance problem would actually work. If it didn't, it would at least make the owners feel better about it all. It gets me riled, though, that people get fed rubbish, and then it works for an entirely different reason, and then this just perpetuates the myths. Sometimes I think dogs are their own worst enemy. Most of them don't punish stupid advice with 20 stitches.

[aussielover]

I have a 3am barker too!

If someone comes home late, Mindy will let you know.

I consider it a good thing, I want to know if people are wandering around my house in the middle of the night!

slightly, but Cesar Milan's "sound" where he goes shhhh or whatever, actually works! I tried it on my dog when she was being naughty (stole a sock) and she immediately looked at me, ran over and sat in front of me! Perhaps this is the secret to dog training? lol!!!!

[Nekhbet]

My philosophy on 'pack theory' style training is not that is doesn't usually work, but more that the explanation given for it working is not correct. If we look at learning theory then we can see that negative reinforcers (often adversives) are put in place to exhibit 'control' which is often referred to as becoming 'pack leader'. Control of behaviour can also be obtained with positive reinforcers, such as food rewards. Both aiming to avoid a negative reinforcer or obtain a positive one will change a dog's behaviour. In modern dog training we have realised that if something can be obtained in a way that is both more pleasant for dog and owner then why wouldn't we do it? That is why modern dog training methods use a lot of food rewards (and other rewards) as positive reinforcement for behaviour, to give the dog something to work for rather than against. I would question any trainer's methods if they are not explained from a scientific basis (using proven principles and theory's). I would also always look for enjoyable ways to train my dog. Wouldn't you?

negative reinforcement is the removal of an aversive to reinforce a behaviour - what you are referring to is positive punishment. Positive reinforcement is the application of an appetitive stimulus to reinforce behaviour. The world is also 'aversive' - an unpleasant stumulus NOT necessarily something that causes pain. If you're going to discuss the theory have a better understanding of it.

Being a good 'pack leader' is not all about the application of aversives. Its about being a decent teacher to your dog and being a consistent, firm leader. If you have leadership qualities the dog will listen - if you act in a nervous, uncoordinated manner what do you think the dog will learn? Its not all about Koehler and alpha rolls you know. I belive the dog requires consequence, every organism on the face of the planet experiences them, it's a fact of life. What that consequence is though is dependant on the dog and what it requires in order to learn.

Modern dog training is not really a totally modern concept. Its simply the ommision of other methods to hand, so relying on positive reinforcement and negative punishment (the ommision of the appetitive stimulus when the unwanted behaviour is shown) to handle and teach the dog. Its not more effective, its just a hands off method. Too many 'modern trainers' also band about the 'dangers' of wrong timing of corrections, their ineffectiveness etc as if you're about to permanently scar your dog for life. Funny spend half an hour with majority of owners and they can grasp it, when some trainers seem to think they cannot. If you can time a reward you can time a correction. Not every dog on the planet can be fixed or controlled without corrections, saying that not every dog on the face of the planet needs one. Hence 'modern dog training' is incapable of helping every type of dog or problem, it is tailored at a specific niche of the pet dog market.

Edited March 5, 2011 by Nekhbet

[Staranais]

My philosophy on 'pack theory' style training is not that is doesn't usually work, but more that the explanation given for it working is not correct. If we look at learning theory then we can see that negative reinforcers (often adversives) are put in place to exhibit 'control' which is often referred to as becoming 'pack leader'. Control of behaviour can also be obtained with positive reinforcers, such as food rewards. Both aiming to avoid a negative reinforcer or obtain a positive one will change a dog's behaviour. In modern dog training we have realised that if something can be obtained in a way that is both more pleasant for dog and owner then why wouldn't we do it? That is why modern dog training methods use a lot of food rewards (and other rewards) as positive reinforcement for behaviour, to give the dog something to work for rather than against. I would question any trainer's methods if they are not explained from a scientific basis (using proven principles and theory's). I would also always look for enjoyable ways to train my dog. Wouldn't you?

We've had this debate on the forum a million times, if you search the archives. Some people believe every dog can be trained to a high standard within a reasonable time frame using only reward and frustration, whereas others believe some dogs need aversives to reach their potential within a reasonable time frame, and these two groups are IMO simply never going to agree.

Having said that, I wouldn't be calling other trainers methods unscientific if you don't know the difference between positive punishment & negative reinforcement yourself. Hopefully, since you are a professional trainer, that was merely a typo.