BRIBING DOGS:
Respect is missing when training relies on treats.

Ann Hollings, Guelph, ON
... reprinted from Dogs in Canada, May 2000

Something strange has happened in obedience training over the last few years, and I'm wondering if I'm out of touch, stubborn, or a lonely voice of reason. I am not an expert in obedience training, but I have attended classes with seven of my eight dogs over the years, and even managed to get a CD on one of them. All of my dogs have turned out to be well-behaved, happy sociable animals with no major hang-ups or problems. All accomplished without one single edible treat.

This year for the first time in eight years, I became the happy owner of a new puppy, and looked forward to taking my young charge to obedience classes. Although I had limited experience in training with treats, I had never been particularly happy with the results, and was determined to find a class that offered "treatless" training as an option.

After investigating a few classes in my area and calling some nearby training centers, I've discovered that it's practically impossible to find a class that doesn't depend solely on the use of treats to bribe dogs into behaving properly. There's not even an option to use praise, toys, or food; handlers are required to bring bags of food and to bait their dogs constantly. It seems that the slower the dog is to 'catch on' to an exercise, the more treats are used to drive the point home. I'll bet some of those dogs (especially the slow ones) eat half a pound of food during a one-hour session.

When I voiced my frustration to a non-doggie friend, she had a really interesting take on the philosophy of dog training. She figures it's the typical baby-boomer method of parenting, a method that relies on reward rather than respect. ("Tidy up your room and I'll buy you a TV." "Do the dishes and I’ll get you a car." etc.) The idea is that no one, not the handler and certainly not the dog, must be made to work, allowed to feel inadequate, or, heaven forbid, even engage in a confrontation. Despite my happy experiences with my dogs, every single one has challenged me at some point in its young life. I believe that such a challenge is an important part of the development of a healthy relationship between dog and owner. It establishes the pack order and builds mutual respect. Respect - the essential element of all good behavior (both human and canine) - is missing when training relies on treats.

I know I'm not completely alone. In The Art of Raising a Puppy, the Monks of New Skete suggest that training with treats is neither helpful nor necessary, since it focuses the dog's attention on the treat. The dog's attention should be focused on the handler, who praises lavishly for desirable behavior; it is this interaction that enhances the relationship between dog and handler, and encourages the learning experience. Certainly the frequent failure of treat-training is supported by anecdotal evidence from many of my doggie friends who have attended classes based on this method. They tell me that most of the time their dogs behave perfectly if they carry treats, and ignore them if they don't. One friend told me her dog approaches to within three or four feet on a recall to see if she's stashing treats, and is gone if she's empty-handed. The dog may understand the command perfectly well, but if he doesn't feel compelled to obey, I don't understand how this can be regarded as effective training.

During my search for classes, one training centre sent some general information that included and article by Dr. Ian Dunbar, a proponent of feeding for training. He claims that it is 'essential' to train dogs with treats since most owners are incapable of providing the appropriate amount of praise a dog needs when a job is well done. If this is true, then surely training classes should focus on providing handlers with an understanding of how to praise their dogs properly and how to motivate them, rather than giving in to this shortcoming by simply teaching the latest in bribery techniques.

I know many of the best obedience dogs have been trained using treats, and I'm sure that when it's done properly, it's a viable alternative to praise alone. But most handlers who attend obedience classes are only interested in basic good behavior for their pets or competing gently at the Novice level. Watching these handlers in the classes I have attended recently, I don't believe that they are building healthy relationships with their dogs; they are simply taking the path of least resistance to arrive at a place of tolerable peace. Trainers offer no alternatives to training with treats, and don't appear to acknowledge that other legitimate training methods even exist. No assistance is provided to owners, such as my self, who choose to train without treats; we are lectured about the value of this method and the error of our thinking.

After much internal debate, I have decided to stick to my guns and train my puppy at home. Maybe someday, the pendulum will swing back again and I can attend an obedience class without having to stuff my pockets full of liver.