The World’s Most Powerful “Stop Dog Barking” Device

Stop dog barking with a really powerful ultrasonic canine noise deterrent. For good!

The World's most powerful Stop Dog Barking Device

The World’s Most Powerful “Stop Dog Barking” Device

Stop dog barking, please!

Barking dogs are one of the worst problems we have nowadays, we all know that. Most complaints to city officials and the police are about the mutts that keep barking for… ever,  while the dog owner keeper nanny is out enjoying life or just giving a damn to the neighbors with all that noise pollution.

There are many anti-barking ultrasonic devices out there that are well intended and supposed to cease the barking but most of them are too weak to do their job effectively. It is not because those companies don’t know how to make them, they just do not WANT to make one that will work and thus face the multi-billion dollar pe$t industry.

Well, there is one company that is doing exactly that.


That is the Canine Controller, High Power, Range Extenders, with Remote Control

What is it? It’s a:

  • Dog Repeller
  • Dog Deterrent
  • Dog Barking Control Device
  • Ultrasonic Anti Barking “Whistle”
  • Dog-Keeper / Dog-Nanny “Conditioner”

This stop dog barking device costs US$450.00, plus shipping. So cheap, ahn? (well, if I had the money I’d buy a dozen of them, leave them on for the whole weekend at max power, place them on the roof, all pointing to the neighbors’ yard, and leave for fishing). Added value is that this anti dog barking device can “condition” or “persuade” not just the dirty barker but the idiotic mutt nanny as well, as it is ultrasonic AND audible!!

Alternatively, if you are handy with electronics, you may build your own, just by purchasing the plan/schematic at

The parts you probably could buy locally, even though you won’t find so powerful tweeters that are a crucial part of the system. Yes, even by building your own with your hands and your time it would still be quite expensive, but only you know if the price would be worth it.

Is this anti-barking device for everyone? Of course not. Only the most desperate, and well-moneyed souls, would be able to buy it. Just remember that a barking noise victim is going to use it for just some time, it will Not be needed forever. You will train the mutt or the doggist or both, in a couple of months, max. Maybe you need to re-train after some time, because mutts and nutters are way too dumb and thus forget thinks too quickly. So, you could get a group of friends or neighbors and buy it collectively, sharing it with the ones who need it the most at that time. Later you could lend to other sufferers, or even make some money in the process. Being stealth for the outsiders helps too.

And no, this is NOT an advertisement, Amazing1 is Not my company, I have nothing to do with them, and I am making absolutely No money with this.

The only point I might encourage you to do is: if you are being bothered by barking dogs (so that is why you probably is reading this) but have no money to spend now, at least purchase the downloadable plan for a future emergency, when then build your own, or pay a technician to do so, even with alternative parts and not so powerful tweeters.

I say that because I’m absolutely sure, no doubt at all, that Amazing1 from now on will be bombarded with negative comments/death threats/bad publicity…  after this post and so I would not be surprised if they took that device out of their portfolio.

To finish, that company is not new, they have been on the market for several years already. I knew them for quite a while but never said anything here, simply to try to avoid them being shut down or such because of the nutters. Doggists are masters on this. But now I’m incensed and I don’t care. Just hope it will help at least a few normal people stop being terrorized by the barking demons.

Have a silent day you all (except you, ODORs)!

This entry was posted in NO Dogs, Please!. Bookmark the permalink.

57 Responses to The World’s Most Powerful “Stop Dog Barking” Device

  1. Peter Bright says:

    It is natural that a distressed person will focus on the perceived cause of his torment, but in barking cases this is NOT the dog.

    To bombard a barking dog with focused energy is to choose the wrong target. Let wisdom and fairness prevail … the wrongdoer is the OWNER and it is upon HIM that retaliation should be focused.

    These insensitive, uncaring swine-bags either won’t (or can’t) reason caringly and logically and therefore, when remedial communication is required, it must axiomatically be in a form which is understood.

    Very few barking victims and hardly any owners realise that dogs incarcerated and bored witless in their owners’ backyards are VICTIMS themselves, and that their loud and prolonged barking is their anguished cry for help, a terrible cry that is prolonged indefinitely because nobody does anything to relieve it. Incredibly, the so-called animal protection societies do not comprehend this basic fact, so deeply ingrained is universal animal idolatry alias anthropomorphism.

    Barking is the distress call of a cruelly incarcerated sentient being, a highly social animal from way back to whom prolonged backyard isolation is torture, and therefore compounding this torment with bombardments of any kind is the WRONG way to handle the matter.

    As owners evidently have NO concept of the cruelty they perennially inflict on their ruthlessly imprisoned animals, it is upon the owner that corrective procedures should be focused.

    Do not concern yourselves over-much about hurting stupid owners with any required retaliation because they have already proven themselves unworthy of your concern through their seemingly endless immunity to their own animal’s suffering, and therefore they may be deemed inhumane themselves.

    Let wisdom prevail – target the cause and not the victim.

    • MrMAD says:

      Quick reply.
      I’m glad to hear from you again, Peter.
      However, I’ll not go into the existencial matter of which came first, the chicken or the egg.
      Point is:
      – If there were no dog, there would be no barking (even with the worst dog keeper in the whole universe).
      – If the dog is ‘suffering’, that’s the dog nanny problem, not mine.
      – Dogs are not ‘victims’, they are animals distressing us humans. We are the victims.
      – If one thinks a dog is being ‘vitimized’ by the dog keeper, charge him with animal cruelty.
      – BTW, making a dog shut up, is our most absolutely right to self-defense, of our health.
      – It is up to the dog nanny to fix the problem? Yes. Oh, they don’t do it? We do.
      – Hurting stupid dog nannies? No hurting, we are just talking in the only language they understand.
      – “target the cause and not the victim.” Sure, the cause is *barking* and the victim are *WE HUMANS*!
      – Wisdom is being able to understand what is really important: a useless dog’s mania or a human’s health.
      – And to finish, I’ll never feel sorry for a dog. I’d feel sorry for me if I didn’t do something for my sanity.
      Hope you have not become a doggist, Peter.

      And as it seems the problem is the too much power of that equipment, let me tell everybody that there is an upgraded, even more powerful version, simply 200% MORE POWERFUL than the above! Some people deserve.

      Anyway, I’m just living in a few hours for my “No Dogs Allowed Private Gated Community” – yes, really – and will be away from this dog crazed world for a couple of days. YES!!!

      • S says:

        I agree. I have no sympathy for the dogs, and my priority is the well being of innocent HUMANS. If the dogs shut up, they will not be bothered by this device. If they are too stupid or obstinate to make the connection and shut up, then that is their problem.

      • S says:

        However, I think Mr. Bright makes a good point, although perhaps he doesn’t come right out and say it directly. In order to deal with the dog-obsessed individuals in power in law enforcement and elsewhere, we need to frame this problem as a matter of animal welfare, rather than human welfare. That is the only way they’ll care and take it seriously. Unfortunately.

        • MrMAD says:

          Sorry, I don’t see it that way, ‘animal welfare’.

          I will never, ever, become an animal defender first for only then to be a human defender, well later.

          It also seems that you are considereing only the barking/confinement in closed spaces but forget that there are many other problems caused by dogs that have nothing at all to do with animal welfare, like dogs biting and killing or just the ‘simple’ poop on our sidewalks. It has nothing to do with animal welfare.

          We must not complicate things; the root of the problem is just one: dogs.

          No dogs, no problems.

        • KaD says:

          It’s NEVER going to work that way and I’ll tell you why: everyplace is glutted with dogs now, if they have to take dogs away from owners that are neglecting the dogs social needs (which is why they bark) they will have no place to put them and will have to double or triple the number of dogs put down, so it will never happen.

    • S says:

      Boredom is a common reason dogs bark, but far from the only reason. Very often a dog will quietly sit in its backyard only to go off like explosive diarrhea the minute a stranger comes into view on the sidewalk or across the fence. These dogs are not bored or miserable; they are aggressive and territorial, making literal threats against the safety of the neighbor. A barking dog is a hostile dog that WILL attack if it can. This should be treated under the law like the THREAT that it is, and should never be tolerated.

      • MrMAD says:

        Boredom is just an ‘excuse’for why a dog barks, S. There is an article just coming on “Why Dogs Bar?!”

        Barking is indeed hostile and may be considered an Attack or at least Aggression. Either one Not to be tolerated.

    • KaD says:

      The first problem is that the law does not hold dog owners accountable for their dogs unacceptable behavior (sometimes even after the dog has KILLED a person), and does not hold the owner accountable for neglecting to exercise, play with, spend time with, and otherwise entertain and provide mental stimulation for the animal they freely chose to own- which is also part of the JOB of owning a dog. There is no moral imperative to getting or keeping an animal you are not willing to take proper care of; which means more than just a food and water bowl. If you are unwilling to control and discipline your dog don’t be upset when someone else is forced to do it FOR you. I live with my guy’s dog, the dog has a THREE bark limit and he knows it. I do not leave the dog outside to bark its fool head off and disturb the neighborhood. Upon the third bark I get off my ass, go to the window or door, and tell the dog to knock it the **** off. And the dog stops barking because he knows what will come next if he doesn’t- me going outside and a good sharp slap on the ass. Dogs are capable of learning, all it takes is a person willing to teach it.

  2. Peter Bright says:

    No, I’ve not become a “doggist” – just a long-suffering tortured person who eventually realised that dogs are ENTIRELY unsuited to life in suburbia, and that the universal but mindless popularity of confining them there, for up to their entire lifetimes, constitutes animal cruelty on an IMMENSE scale.

    No animal, particularly a free-ranging animal, should be wilfully imprisoned and rendered relatively immobile and helpless in any environment that is unnatural to its nature.

    • S says:

      You are absolutely right that dogs have no place in suburbia. Cows and horses are not kept in suburban and urban neighborhoods; dogs should not be, either.

      Ultimately the problem is due to the selfishness of humans who want to own an animal even when they are not able to give that animal a proper environment.

      In a proper world they would have to choose one or the other: live on a farm, or live without animals (other than small pets like cats and parakeets). It is a grave injustice that this is not the case.

      It is downright offensive that dogs are allowed in suburbs but dairy goats are not.

    • MrMAD says:

      Good you haven’t become a dogist, Peter.

      But dogs do not belong in suburbia AND do not belong in the countryside either. Actually, dogs do not belong even in the Amazon Forest, or in the African Savana, or even in the Australian Outback (where dingos, a wild dog, is a huge problem for farmers, who even have to fence their entire unbelievably gigantic farms to avoid those predators, obviously spending a lot of money).

      Dogs have no place, anywhere, really. A creation of men, not nature’s, the GMO of the animal kingdom.

      The only place dogs belong is several feet under the dirt.

  3. Peter Bright says:

    It is natural to believe that doubling the power of a noise emission will double the effect on the hearer, that is, to make it twice as loud.

    This would be so if the response of the human ear was linear, but it’s not. It is in fact, very far from it.

    A doubling of power constitutes a power increase of 3 db – but our ears can hardly detect the increase and of course I realise that it’s almost incredible that doubling the power will produce a barely detectable loudness increase in humans. This means that going for power doubling, for example in audio power amplifiers, is almost futile.

    The capacity of the human ear to cope with a wide range of noise intensities is truly mind-boggling. This is because our hearing response is logarithmic, not linear.

    Here are some decibel readings given that 0 db is the reference point called the “threshold of hearing” and that 120 db is taken as the “threshold of pain” – which acoustically is 1 watt per square metre.

    Threshold of hearing: 0 decibels
    Rustling leaves: 10 db
    Whisper: 30 db
    Mosquito buzzing: 40 db
    Normal conversion: 50 db
    Vacuum cleaner: 70 db
    Busy traffic: 80 db
    Subway; power mower: 100 db
    Siren; rock concert: 120 db (threshold of pain)
    Jackhammer; machine gun: 130 db
    Nearby jet aeroplane: 150 db

    To find the power ratio represented in the above decibel figures, firstly divide the number by 10, then use that figure as the number of zeros placed after the figure 1. Thus 20 db corresponds to a power ratio of 100 and 120 db corresponds to a power ratio of 1,000,000,000,000 !!! Our ears have been designed to cope with that gigantic power range.

    We barking victims know from our terrible experiences that it’s the NATURE as well as the volume of barking that makes it so dreadful for us. The intensity, the aggravating suddenness of it, the multiple frequencies constituting a barking waveform and the bark repetition rate all seem designed to cause maximum hell, and they sure do!

    This is why neighbourhood barking should be removed from the “nuisance” legal category and placed where it belongs – in the legal “assault” category.

    That will bring the police into it, and whereas we have found that numerous owners defy their council’s laws with impunity there is a considerably less likelihood that they will treat the police with similar contempt.

    But the police will say “No, we are not animal control officers, and if you make us into such we will resign.”

    Given councils’ well known laxity at barking law enforcement this would mean that there’s virtually enforcement of the barking laws, and for me at least, little or no barking law enforcement means NO SUBURBAN DOGS FOR ANYONE!

    • MrMAD says:

      Thanks for the info on decibels but I’m quite knowledegeable on them. I didn’t mean we just doubled the number of speakers, actually we did Not doubled, once. There is much more than that. But no worries, it’s not for sale, for now.

      I totally agree “neighbourhood barking should be removed from the “nuisance” legal category and placed where it belongs – in the legal “assault” category.” We all agree on that. The problem is “How to Do It?”.

      Ah, cops will NEVER say “we will resign!” Ever.

      • Peter Bright says:

        I invite readers to visit this page of my Quiet Tasmania News website and to consider section 53A of this Australian state’s relatively new environmental legislation. Securing legal evidence of barking would be much simpler according to this extract …

        “53A. Evidentiary provision for environmental nuisance…

        “If, in a proceeding for an offence against section 53(1) or (2), an authorized officer or a council officer gives evidence, based on THE OFFICER’S OWN SENSES, that NOISE, smoke, dust, fumes or odour was emitted from a place occupied by the defendant and travelled to, or was, or was likely to be, detectable at, a place occupied by another person, that evidence is prima facie evidence of the matters so stated.”

        These words are massively important for securing long overdue reforms because an authorised person’s subjective assessment alone would then settle the matter, unless of course, it was subjected to legal challenge by the defendant in court. Most barking offenders would not take the risk of so doing because they know full well of the guilt that’s rooted in pure selfishness and moronic stupidity.

        Perhaps a decade ago a very senior official in the Tasmanian government’s Department of Premier and Cabinet told me of his hope that the barking of dogs would be taken from the Nuisance provisions of this state’s Dog Control Act and relocated to our Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act (aka “the EMPCA”) where penalties for noise can reach 100 penalty units and where one penalty unit is currently around A$160 which is about US$112 and UK£80.

        If the courts (anywhere in the world) then properly used such a provision for relief from the insanely cruel distress emissions of barking dogs then many potential dog owners would choose to avoid risk and not obtain or keep a dog at all.

        Fewer dogs in the community, however this immensely desirable state is obtained, would secure better environmental peace and quiet for us all.

        • MrMAD says:

          I commend your interest in contributing, Peter. However this is still too difficult, lengthy and almost nothing will happen at the end, a slap in the wrist, max. The good laws help, well yes, but the root of the problem remains, dogs.

          Just look at this current news right close to you:

          Man fined $1,000 after dog bites three-year-old girl on face in Canberra
          – The little girl, actually a toddler, is now traumatized maybe for life,
          – The little girl now needs psychological regular help,
          – The little girl will need reconstructive surgery in the future
          – The owner was fined AUS$1,000 measly dollars, like a parking fine!
          – The owner kept the dog, unharmed and free to bite/maul again
          – The owner was Not arrested.
          – Police did not become immediately involved.
          – The judge said she “couldn’t” fine more because… she wanted so!!! EVEN with the new ACT laws regarding dog attacks, doubling the maximum fine over an attack to about $14,000!!!

          And this was a kid’s/todler’s mauling, not just a “simple” barking issue, as doggists and public servants of all kinds love to use to evade their responsibility.

          Sorry for being repetitive, but the root of the problem remains: dogs.
          (and, regarding laws, the Judges, right after those beasts)

        • MrMAD says:

          Hi again, Peter.

          It seems what I said before directly contradicts my own advice on but no.

          What I meant or should have said is that each one of us should do what is the easiest for each one. Every action will help and, when you are more determined and knowledgeable on a specific area, you will do a much better job than others, even when they are well intentioned as well. You are good at convincing politicians and other public servants to combat the dog craze in your area? Great! Each effort will help as more people will see that there are even more people affected by dogs and do not tolerate that anymore.

          I know I’m Not good in that area. I know local politicians and public servants here. For me, it doesn’t work. For me.

          My oppiinion is that there are already bigger/nationals laws, anywhere, that deal with the center of the question: the well-being and safety of a citizen, a human-being. I think that those laws would be the best to be used as they would avoid loopholes and such. But what I said is that is what is better for me, for me.

          Sorry, I was not good with my words but I hope you got the eidea.

          • Peter Bright says:

            In so-called western democracies like ours it’s not the quality of a matter that determines the outcome for the voters but rather the numbers of voters in support of that matter. In short it’s numbers which win while true and proper values are submerged, perhaps almost to extinction.

            If a nation’s general population is crazy about dogs, and there are few serious objections from those barking victims who have been able to remain sane, then so-called democratic governments will not stand in defence of correct principles but will acquiesce to perceived community demand – whether this demand be right or wrong.

            It is this “the people – right or wrong” issue that is the Achilles Heel of democracy.

            When a nation’s legal system includes provisions for the protection of dogs but concurrently refuses to enforce its legislated protection of the people (or can’t, because the dog plague has been allowed to become overwhelming) then perhaps the only available defence we have against the screams and howls of selfish, narcissistic owner-tormented dogs is that which we are compelled to secure by force. In doing this we risk the wrath of the legal system’s reaction.

            Upholders of the legal system (whether it be right or wrong) will include its many inhabitants who still believe that dogs are harmless pets (and who own at least one dog themselves) and that those who want or demand peace, quiet and security as a standard human right are sufficiently peculiar (or may be taken as such for illicit convenience) that their objections can be substantially disregarded.

            When the protection provisions of a law are not enforced because of policing deficiencies, such as when councils refuse to raise local rates to pay the costs, and/or the dog problem has been allowed by default to become uncontrollable, then the law that permitted dog owners to have ownership rights should be repealed.

            If animal controls are not enforced, for whatever reason, then distressed victims of this failure or refusal automatically and simultaneously accrue the right to protect themselves.

            My only stipulation in this event is that peace be restored in the least offensive manner.

            This will mean the imposition of retaliatory actions against idiot owners rather than through imposing any kind of hurt on the dog, particularly as the wretched dog is already a tormented victim of its unsuitable owner.

          • MrMAD says:

            You have nice words up there Peter, so, I ask: what practical actions could we take against the dog keeper, not the dog?

            We could, and many do:
            – Send polite, anonymous letter.
            Didn’t work.
            – Send formal, strongly worded, litigation “threatening”, anonymous or not letter.
            Didn’t work.
            – (I’m not including KILL THE DOG here, as we are dealing with the keeper problem only)
            – Call Police. Multiple times. And we continue suffering.
            Didn’t work.
            – Call Animal Control. Multiple times. And we continue suffering.
            Didn’t work.
            – Call Animal Control for dog keeper commiting animal cruelty. Multiple times. And we continue suffering.
            Didn’t work.
            – Call Health Department. Multiple times. And we continue suffering.
            Didn’t work.

            Then what, which route to take?
            – Sue them in small claims court? We keep been suffering for so long (and we still may lose).
            – Sue them in higher court? We keep been suffering for even longer (and we still may lose).

            Which one, specially if we lose? Well, many will say: None! None at all, I can not live that way for eternity! The dog is still barking.


            Well, my answer so “that peace be restored in the least offensive manner” is: to have the dog barking dissapear. Anyway possible.

            If there is a better way that does not further victimize the Real Victim, I truy would like to know.

            You seem to be more experienced in life tan me, Peter, and I really respect that, so you may be being more considerate of others, including animals, but I’m not. I’m more practical. I’m more to-the-point. And if I have to silence an animal for my (and my family’s) well-being, I will.

            I don’t let snakes bite me because they are alone and sad in the forest. I protect myself.

  4. S says:

    I recommend that if you are plagued by nuisance barking, you consider buying one of these and then suing your neighbors in small claims court for the cost. (Warn them first and give them a chance to quite the dog themselves.)

    • MrMAD says:

      Good idea! Regarding suing the owner for compensation on any and all costs one had. This is waht everyone should/must do. Then doggists will see it is not worth it financially to keep a dog. Much less irresponsibly.

      However, not acually a good idea to claim the cost for the Anti Barking Device. As soon as the judge hears about it, with all the buzz on dogs by their apologists, he will turn the the table on you. So, I do Not recommend anyone try to do so.

      I have a post on how to sue a Barking Dog Owner and you will see why. Soon.

  5. Michael M says:

    Mr. Mad, i recently found this site: (look under Ultrasound products). They are cheaper then Amazing1. I wonder if what they are selling is as effective. Any good reviews?

    • MrMAD says:

      Thanks a lot for the tip, Michael.

      I’d visited their site long ago and they didn’t seem professional then, they are much better now.

      However I don’t have an answer for you, neither for me, so I just going to email them and ask a few questions. I’ll share it all with you.

      Thanks again.

      • Michael M says:

        I already have emailed “”, but they do not answer, what gives me no confidence to buy from them. A pity, because it looks good.

        I also bought the “Kemo M175 animal repeller ultrasonic”. It’s cheap. You can adjust the device from 8kHz to 43kHz. The acoustic pressure is max. 135dB, but there isn’t a frequency diagram so I don’t know how much dB there will be at frequencies 15 to 20kHz. I already asked Kemo and they don’t know either. I’m testing this unit right know and I already can say it’s loud. I’ll give you a update in the near future if this device works on my neighbours dogs. I’ll hope so because my nerves cannot deal with the barking anymore. Fingers crossed!

        • MrMAD says:

          Thanks for the update.

          Confidence is evrything and if they do not even answer a simple email of course I will not send them my money. Forget it!

          The Kemo is said to be 135dB, what is great, but the amount of it moves is toolittle, we need much more than that, larger sizes tweeter/speakers/transducers pvide that, but for a price.

          Let’s go back to our DIY ideas.

          Will check

          Thanks again.

          • Michael M says:

            Indeed, tested the Kemo and didn’t do a thing. My dB-meter said 105 dB (135dB, yeah right!). When I put a pipe and a flame in front of the device, the flame doesn’t move at all. Out of curiousity, I when to 38kHz, and the young but big dog’s ears did’nt go up. Only one reaction at 17-19dB: he barked back and more!

          • MrMAD says:

            Is that what you meant:
            “When I went to 38kHz, the young but big dog’s ears did’nt go up. Only one reaction was at 17-19KHz: he barked back and more!”?

            So, you found a frequency specific for that mutt, one that won’t shut up the animal, but could make it bark non-stop. Then you by mistake forgets the device working 24×7 during a long weekend when you were out for a trip in the mountains (and that neighbor had visitors at his home).

          • Michael M says:

            I don’t think a sound device will work for me, because it’s a large yard with lots of obstacles and there are around 10 dogs. I tested the device on one of them who is sitting apart at around 7 meters of distance of the hidden device. But the neighbours had putting a wooden board in front of it and that was the only free open spot. Firework or a strong water hose could work, but that’s wouldn”t be a hidden solution.

          • MrMAD says:

            You tested the “Kemo” device, right? They seem to be quite weak unfortunately. And we also have to find the exact frequency where power is the highest And hope it affects the dawgs.

            No, it does not go through solid objects, like a wooden board or thick bushes. However, it can be “reflected” (admittdely with some loss of power) on some surfaces, like brick walls, but so you must be even closer.

            Fireworks are an alternative, not silent, but, well, they work. I do NOT recomend the waterhose as the criminal could claim you are vandalizing his property. Among other things.

  6. Peter Bright says:

    “S”writes …

    “In order to deal with the dog-obsessed individuals in power in law enforcement and elsewhere, we need to frame this problem as a matter of animal welfare, rather than human welfare.”

    “S” you are absolutely right! You have found the pathway to the solution!

  7. Peter Bright says:

    Mr MAD, just reading your complete list of what we barking victims have to endure brought back hellish memories of my own 25 years of torment which only diminished when I moved from my last suburban abode to this complex of pensioner units. Moving out is often the only way for victims to secure whole or partial relief, yet it’s so wrong for any neighbours’ selfish behaviour to compel others to relocate – with all that disruption and cost.

    Suing the offenders through the Small Claims Court (or similar) might work but successes are extremely rare and the risk of failure is huge because we cannot pay for lawyers who don’t really care anyway.

    Your complete list, and even just parts of it, justifies our belief that the legal system is a failure and therefore untrustworthy, hence my saying .. “If you want law, go to a court. If you want justice run like blazes in the opposite direction.”

    I really do understand that to forestall madness an increasing number of barking victims are forced into Do It Yourself solutions. They have been harassed into self protection, often after years of seething, stress-filled endurance, and so DIY is a survival response.

    The whole situation justifies the No Dogs Anywhere solution presented here where signatures are welcome. These signatures can form a printable protest list which may be used by those with residual faith in a legal system which, in the domain of barking, we have found has almost completely failed us.

    This leaves DIY solutions or relocation as the main providers of relief until all dogs in built-up areas are outlawed and the ban enforced rigorously.

    I concede that ongoing night barking often made me wish for a rifle, and furious crazed barking by really huge dogs just on the other side of pedestrian walkways made me wish for a gun, not to kill, but to deter. My feeling was that those big dogs wanted to viciously shred me.

    I revert to my earlier statements that it’s the owner who is liable for all this neighbourhood and personal misery and not the helpless, incarcerated, near-demented dog, and so attacking the neighbour, in ways that the idiot will understand, could often prove the best way to relief.

    That is, provide the neighbour with the same right to peace that he has given you.

    • MrMAD says:

      Morning, Peter (hopefully after a good night’s sleep).

      My usual bullet pointed reply:

      – Small Claims Courts – Here, we do NOT need to hire a lawyer. It is just me and the offending neighbor. One lawyer is appointed, ramdomly, to each one of us, lawyers who may only interfere for the legal technicalities. The power here is on us (who MUST be overly well prepared) to counter all the “victimization” defense alegations/lies made by the offender (sometimes by the defending lawer too), AND prove AND convince the judge with unrefutable evidence. Problems are: Judge may refute our unrefutable evidence anyway; Even winning, the compensation from SCCs are too small, even for their maximum amounts, which we never get anyway. These trials tend to be not so lengthy (a “few” months). Summary: We have better chances of winning (eg make the barking stop) here, WHEN we are well prepared. Do no expect significant punishment for the offender or monetary compensation for you.

      – Your saying is fantastic: “If you want law, go to a court. If you want justice run like blazes in the opposite direction.” Each person must decide by himself only what is the best for him.

      – The “No Dogs Anywhere” solution is ALL that I want! Desperatly!
      However, here I come gain, your petition is online since 2007, almost a decade, and got 68 signatures. Mine is from 2014 and I got negligible 37. Thirty seven signatures!
      People ae lazy, even when to defend themselves! They are an alternative but, as we can see, they are not working (at least not working due to lack of support from the big media, something the doggists DO have).
      My point: We have to do much better than that. Way much better. Quick! And that is the reason this website exists, we are on the begining of that. (And I need lots of help on that btw!)

      “wish for a gun, not to kill, but to deter”. That is the thinking of mine and my site as well. We don’t want to attack anything or anyone, we just want to protect and defend ourselves. Doggists do no understand nor respect that.

      “That is, provide the neighbour with the same right to peace that he has given you.”. Again, Doggists do no understand nor respect that, our peace. If we were to give them the same “right to peace” they gave us, well, that “peace” would be to blast ACDC heavy metal music at full volume together with an alarm siren blasting in full power and with some/many firecrackers exploding over his house 24 hours a day! That is the only language they would understand. Hopefully.
      So, what can we do???
      “This leaves DIY solutions or relocation as the main providers of relief until all dogs in built-up areas are outlawed and the ban enforced rigorously.”
      We have then to (I)resort to our DIY solutions eg (The World’s Most Powerful “Stop Dog Barking” Device ) or (II) relocate to No Dogs Allowed Communities created by ourselves. I’m working on such an article. Soon.

      With all that, well, I rest may case.

      (sorry for the typos)
      (side note: Hushmail is Not a secure email)

  8. Peter Bright says:

    Thankyou for your comments, Mr MAD. We are finding points of agreement.

    An article on Small Claims Courts in the USA appears here:

    My own feeling is that the judicial system has failed us all, thereby leaving Do It Yourself retaliation as our defensive right. We have found that we are dealing with narcissistic thickhead owners within whom the virtues of reasoning and fairness never resided and are foreign concepts.

    However an example where trading Noise for Noise worked to perfection appears here:

    But remember this: in our utterly warped dog-worshipping societies the police are also stupid. Even when they have Dog Control Act barking control enforcement duties to discharge they absolutely refuse to do it. They don’t want to – so they don’t.

    We are on our own.

    • MrMAD says:

      Yeah, I know then. But just take a look at their real site: Prepare to puke.

      I remember reading your ordeal long ago. It is interesting, funny and sad, all at the same time.

      When I mentioned using ultrasonic devices to silence a mutt, it is Not intended to hurt it. The objective is to make the mutt learn that there is a bigger mutt anywhere, the boss of the wild dog pack. That is the one that gives the orders, by shouting louder, much louder. This is what the device is made to do, telling and convincing the mutt it is just a lower member of the pack and has to obbey its master. Or face consequences.
      Just like in nature, as close as we can get.

      Also, ultrasonic frequencies that actually harm dogs are well beyond the ones this device provides. Painful frequencies for dogs are in the 35KHz/50KHz range. I have a research on that hidden in my files, may publish it later.
      So, no, dogs are Not being hurt. They are being conditioned, by a higher, more powerful entity.

  9. Peter Bright says:

    I understand your reasoning about ultrasonic devices being a form of pack leader offering a stinging rebuke to dogs further down the chain, but I lack the understanding of dog physiology to immediately accede to it.

    With my engineering background I perceive there are too many variables (such as power, frequency, distance and duration) being broadcast to the dog by ordinary folk almost entirely lacking in technical understanding and awareness of the effect upon the dog, and so I overwhelmingly favour directing audible noise at the ignorant owner rather than his prisoner. This targets the real offender and not his cruelly incarcerated victim. I understand that for some people, overwhelming power is the only way to get a message through to them.

    In keeping any animal unnaturally incarcerated to such an extent that it continuously gives vent to its anguish in the only way it can, dog owners perennially demonstrate their unsuitability for ownership. It is inexcusable that the so-called animal protection societies condone this universal cruelty by their inaction as this characteristic incompetence demonstrates they they, as well as the owners, are not only ignorant but stupid as well.

    Trading Noise for Noise temporarily adds to the acoustic din characterising dog-ridden suburbs and this can draw the wrath of the police who, in my experience, are also stupid for they lack the elementary reasoning power to perceive that if the dog owner keeps his dog quiet the retaliatory noise will also go quiet.

    In short, the keeping of an incarcerated animal historically programmed to free range constitutes animal cruelty on an enormous scale, especially as the animal’s continuous distress is nearly always left unattended.

    And so we come back to the suburban solution upon which we agree absolutely, namely No Dogs Anywhere.

    • Malmo says:

      With all due respect, Peter, but I think your suggestion is not the best.

      By annoying the dog owning neighbor with audible noise, instead of just the dog with inaudible ultrasonic noise, everyone around would also be negatively affected. The little baby, you, your family, neighbors to the left and right, bacck and front.

      I followMr Mad suggestion, at least in the beginning: blast ultrasound noise on the dog to make it shut up AT THE SAME TIME you deal with the owner by sending the letters, a polite, a strongly worded, and the one signed by a lwayer.

      Then, if after all that, nothing worked, so a noise exchange may be an option, but only them.

      And I’m considering your other neighbors are working people with no free time at all, like doctors or airline pilots. Otherwise, if those neighbors just wanted a free ride on your work, well, blast noise, audible, as much and as lou as you can!

    • Mark says:

      Peter, I agree with Malmo. You want to be “cute and pleasant” when politeness hasn’t worked. Speaking kindly to the neighbor, writing a heart felt letter (which has been done 4 and 5 times already) explaining how getting only 3 or 4 hours sleep a night is causing you high blood pressure, nerve conditions and poor work performance! Calling animal control and going through the motions with their paperwork that leads to nothing more than, “we sent them a letter advising their “pet” is a nuisance.” and nothing more.
      All the blah, blah crap doesn’t work. Call police–won’t even respond anymore and they advise you to call the inept Animal Control Board. YOU KNOW IT but just want to be Mr. Wonderful! Mr. Reasonable! Without everyone explaining and looking for YOUR approval we all just want the dog(s) to shut up. Once they shut up there will be no need to continue a broadcast of the ultrasonic sound! Is that what you’re waiting to hear? That we won’t run ultrasound 24/7? Does that meet you high moral standards! You’re just like the crappy neighbors who says, “dogs are suppose to bark, that’s their form of communications…be tolerant!” Is that why your nose is so high in the air? Come off it Lochte!

      When the dogs shut up on the own or by the owners (who seems to loves animals more than humans, after all we humans work and animals can lay around all day, then bark all night while poor humans are trying to sleep) should the owner notice the dogs are irritated and finally take control to stop their barking dogs or bring the animal they love so much inside their house so they can enjoy all the lovely communications, the ultrasound would be discontinued, Mr High and Mighty Peter! You’re JUST LIKE THE IRRESPONSIBLE OWNERS! Talk a good game of fairness to all except for the ones being hurt…they can continue to be hurt in the name of PC and fairness! Since your butt-crap doesn’t stink, why don’t you rub it all over your face and smell how wonderful you are!

      • MrMAD says:

        Thanks for your comment, Mark. Or should I say, your outflow? I can clearly see how angered you are with all those barking dogs all around you, all the time, with no help. Sure, an environment like that pushes us to the limit, our breaking point. I understand and respect that.

        Now, in defense of Peter (yes Peter, I’m on your side here!) I don’t think he is “just like the irresponsible owner“. No. I instead think that Peter wants to be too polite and go-with-the-system, what we KNOW doesn’t work in the absolute majority of cases. In rare cases they work but most of the times not. Also they take a loooooot of time, and we can not wait that long. I can’t.

        I think his approach is not the best (specific laws/bylaws/ordinances… specifically about dogs when there are general laws that already deal with any of these specific matters like noise/littering/vandalism/health/safety…) and they take time.

        If you looked at his comment here you would see that he was as tomented as we were, or still are.

        One of the main goals of this website is to give better options to deal with this problem.

        You gave one suggestion: “don’t be too polite”.

        And that’s great!

      • KaD says:

        Animal Control is more part of the problem than the solution. They have purposely created the system so as to minimize their contact with belligerent, asshole dog owners.

  10. Michael M says:

    Here is another site I have found: (look under “Acoustic Devices”). These things are serious loud! But I think way to expensive.

    • MrMAD says:

      Hi again, Michael.

      I checked that site and, boy, they have nice stuff there.

      Problem is I don’t think they would sell them to the little guys (us, or at least, me). They seem to be made for billionaires, A-level politicians and Hollywood actors.

      Also the acoustic device similar to the one in this page is Not made to control dogs, but people, for which they really work (already saw them in action, a similar one, people can not stand them). For dogs it is a little different but makes a lot of difference in the final result.

      Anyway, if someone could get a hold of them and test it well, please let us know about it. We desperatly need it!

    • MrMAD says:

      So, so far we found:

      And the one best for us is…?

  11. Michael M says:

    That’s right MrMad, exactly what i meant.

  12. Michael M says:

    To leave the device on could have been a very good idea so the dog wouldn’t shut up barking, but I can’t do that anymore because I already returned the Kemo with a full refund. A pity.

    • MrMAD says:

      Yeah, quite unfortunate it didn’t work. Next time. And don’t forget to let ‘somebody’ make an anonymous call to police on the non-stop barking dog disturbing the peace on the community. Hey, you were not there!

      A few other points I want to mention:

      – Measuring dBs with cellphone apps (that I suppose is what you did) is not a precise way to do so. They are very innacurate.
      – For a better estimate (out of specific sound labs) source and decibelimeter must be on a distance of 30cm/1 foot
      – Anyway, from the advertised 130dB down to 105dB is a HUUUUUUGE difference, even with all considerations taken into account.

  13. Michael M says:

    Actually I used a real decibel-meter: Voltcraft SL-100 (not professional, 50 dollars). There was a big drop in dB when the frequencies went higher. There was also a difference when I set the meter on dBA or dBC. I have used the meter at 5cm,30cm and 100cm. But couldn’t get it higher then 105dB.

    • MrMAD says:

      Good to know.

      Kemo is so weak then, not worth it.

      Just a point; you know the frequency that affects that menacing dog, so maybe someone could use one of those videos from Youtube and give it as a gift for that barking beast. It doesn’t need to be that powerful, that loud. Just thinking.

  14. Not Me says:

    Who makes the 200% more powerfull?? does it resolves the dog problem off the uper neibour in a concrete apartment? Can it be ON 24×7?

    • MrMAD says:

      Manufactured by the same company, Amazing1. It seems to be on request only.

      Unfortunately, that one does Not solve the dog problem coming from the upper neighbour in a concrete apartment. It’s powerful but doesn’t go trough walls, much less dense ones.

      Your options are limited. After trying the usual first tries (letter, police, landlord…), maybe blasting *really* loud music when owner is present so s/he could ameliorate the problem. Otherwise I don’t see any other viable and safe alernative.

      • Mark says:

        Yeah MrMad, I wish playing loud music “could” be an answer back towards the barking dogs neighbors! Disregarding the other neighbors for the moment (which my neighbors said they wouldn’t mind putting up with if it would have an impact on the dog owners) still can’t be done! WHY? Because, legally playing your music loudly is a public nuisance which the POLICE will respond to and issue you a citation! Oh, don’t think that since the police are there (called by the barking dog owners) that the police will issue the barking dog owners a citation! Even if the
        dogs are barking right then and there non-stop! No, the police will tell you that you must go through….da, daaaaahhhh, Animal Control! Laws protect those that break the laws, not those that keep and respect the law! Are you going crazy yet?

        • MrMAD says:

          “Oh, don’t think that since the police are there (called by the barking dog owners) that the police will issue the barking dog owners a citation!”

          I know that. I’ve been there.

          That’s why an ultrasound device, as powerful as it can be, is one viable and effective option.

          Another option is being stealth, do Not identify yourself: 1- Blare loud music, stop. 2- Record and play the barking back to the neighbor in loud volume, then stop. 3-Fireworks up in the sky?

          We should not expect too much from police, they are mostly dog lovers, in the worst meaning possible, like you can see here at “Why cops do Not come for dog violations?”.

          Anyway, there is A right way to call the police on barking dogs. It’s not just calling and hope they will do their job. Soon.

          “Are you going crazy yet?”

          Not yet, just close.

          Right now, my sanity is in the right place: NO dogs barking here!

          Actually, nowadays, day and night, my immediate neighborhood has not been too bad. In fact, it’s quite livable, in a high-level speaking. As you could see here it is not that bad. BUT it did NOT happen for nothing. Some people DID soomething, if you understand me.

          Of course it’s not perfect, but it is at the top of civility as far as I can tell (and expect). Most of the time.

  15. Michael M says:

    A while ago I had tried the Kemo module that didn’t work. But a week ago I have bought a device that actually does work, so I wanted to share it here so that other people also could benefit from it.
    It’s a headphone with acoustic noise cancelling technology in it. It’s called Bose QuietComfort 25. I bought this headphone because I also had trouble with noises from a nearby football field. Every time when they kick the ball or when the ball falls on the ground, it gives a low noise that bothers me a lot. And every week 2 tractors are lawning the grass for 3 hours long. And the football canteen likes to play loud music with heavy bass. Also the low male mumbling talking of the football-players distracts me. When I put the headphones on, all of that is gone! Pure silence. Noise cancelling technology is very good at terminating low frequency sounds.
    But I never could have dreamed it also helped with my neighbours dogs from hell because dogs have higher frequencies. Let me explain my situation: There are roughly 10 dogs about 15 meters next to my house, small ones who are yapping with very high pitch and two big dogs. One of the big dogs barks very loud (I can hear him sometimes 200 metres from my house). Happily for me his pitch is rather low. This is what happening: I hear the dogs, I’ll put my headphone on but still with the Noise cancelling off. The high pitch bark sound of the small dogs is eradicated. That’s because of the passive sound insulation (the headphones are around your ears) and do well at minimizing high frequency sounds. When I hear the big dog with low pitch bark, I could still hear him, but it sounds as far away. But here comes the magic: when I put the Noise Cancelling on, it’s like the dogs are vanished. Bark-free!
    I did not know this technology has gotten that far and it saved my sanity because after all these years, I just couldn’t cope with it anymore.
    I don’t have stocks and shares from Bose, just want to share my experience and happiness with you.
    I also can’t hear any planes or choppers flying over my home, car-doors slamming, the tumble dryer, construction noises, you name it.
    Thank you technology!
    It’s a pity Bose isn’t cheap, but replacing my windows or moving house would cost me a lot more.
    I have found other brands on the internet that will release their new products with Noise Cancelling in the near future, something to look out for. Because some of them could help at reducing higher frequency sounds (for example high pitch barking, women, baby crying,…). If someone will buy this things in the future, let us know here if they help with those sounds.
    Here are the names of the products:
    If they work as good as Bose or even better, wouldn’t that be nice!
    Enjoy silence and keep up the spirit!

    • MrMAD says:

      Michael, thanks a lot for sharing your experience with noise cancelling headphones. Great to know they worked so well for you.

      In my case, I’d tried them in the past, the Bose one (don’t recall which model), while in one big and crowded shopping mall in North America. Well, for me, they didn’t perform as I was expecting, I could still clearly hear people talking and so on. Fortunately there was No dog inside that mall those years so I couldn’t evaluate that. I was expecting more silence, but it was me.

      In the past I also had bought one another cheap noise cancelling headphones, I guess from Aiwa. It didn’t perform well at all as noise cancelling, just as a regular headphone.

      Anyway, my experiences happened several years ago so nowadays the technology may have improved a lot.

      Don’t take me wrong, people. They work, but Not as a 100% Cancelling noise device. You will still hear lots of noises, just at a much lower volume, intensity.

      As Michael’s links above show, there are the In-Ear and Over-the-Ear noise cancelling “headphones”. If you can choose, pick the Over-the-Ear as they also prevent sound waves (noise) reaching your ear and so you get a lesser impact from the noise (some noises can get to your bones! eg barking). Or you could get a non-working headphone to use it over the head and use the In-ear phones, which is also quite a good alternative, just a cheap and geeky alternative.

      Regarding dog barking, this remains being one of the worst noises to be drawn off. Barking is a staccato sound, loud, repetitive, with a sick cocktail of frequencies/harmonics, and so sudden that makes it extrememely difficult for headphones to cancel them, or even catch and reduce them. I’m talking about affordable, civilian devices, but certainly military ones could do that much better, just we wouldn’t have the money to buy.

      To finish, if you can afford a high quality noise cancelling headphone, that is a good investment for your silence and sanity, in the home. Not just because of dogs but for all other noises that we have to live with when in the big city. Or anywhere else in the modern world.


      Yes, it’s not us non-dog-keepers that should spend money to eliminate barking from our lives but sometimes it helps, and not just for barkng dogs, like when you are traveling to another city (and obviously won’t go out there on the street to ‘talk with the neighbor’).


      From all the options above provided by Michael (thanks again, Michael, great info!), just basing from their web sites, I’d pick the Kokoon. It seems to fare quite well (no, I’ve not tested it nor am I getting any benefit from them).

      If anyone has any experience with them, please let us know!

    • MrMAD says:

      There is a lot of people searching for silence:

      Kokoon Kickstart campaign:

      (pledged of $100,000 goal)

  16. Michael M says:

    Glad to help Mr. Mad.
    The previous model of the Bose q25 was the Q15 and it seems the technology has been moving forward with better results.
    What I did before I bought the unit, was going to a local Bose store and I brought my I-pod with me and connected it on a good sound machine in their quiet demo room. I listened to the noises I pre-recorded in my home room at the same volume i hear them at home. That way I knew it would work or not. It took me 90 minutes to check all the sound samples and the test was so surprisingly good I took the bet. Glad I took my chances. I also tested the unit in a big shopping mall and indeed, I also could hear the voices of people, so I tought it wouln’t work for dogs either, but i was wrong. When people/dogs are outside your room (behind double glass window), their sound is weakened and the frequency seems lower. When family members (male and female) are outside in front of my window i still hear them talking with my Senheiser 280 Pro insulating headphone. With the Bose, can’t hear them at all. But if they would shouting, off course I would hear them. All the sound-tests I have done are with no music at all. If I listen to music through Bose headphone, it will eliminate even louder sounds.
    Bose gives you the the chance to give them back for 30 days if you buy them at a local store, so you can always test them out and if you aren’t satisfied, get a refund. Just try it. If dogs are next to your window, i don’t think it will work, but in my case at around 15 meters, they work. I hear nothing.
    I have read lots of reviews an people keep telling that Noice cancelling works best when it’s a constant noise, but I want to argue that. I have tested at home with a lot of noises driving through my stereo system like irregual drum beats and even at a modest volume you can’t hear them. Every week my towns orchestra (Fanfare) repeats 50 meters from my house inside a building. Without my headphones you can hear them very good even while my tv is playing loudly. Often I could hear them with my ear plugs in. The same deal with the football kicks who are very irregual and not constant. With my noise cancelling on, those noises are completely erased. Those are my experiences. Here is my advice: just test them out, you will not regret it I am so excited because they work for me at such a low price. I could have build a sound-insulating room withing a room, but boy that would have cost me 10 000 euro. There was a moment I had plans to drag sandbags into my house or putting them outside my window. I wanted to live in the dark like a caveman to find my peace. Glad I didn’t!
    Indeed it’s a shame we have to pay for solutions instead of the dog owners, but when there are no more other possibilities left, in the end, a solution is a solution. I don’t wear them all the time, but the barking doesn’t give me so much stress anymore, because I know if I want peace and quiet, I can, i only have to put on the headphone and then I’m sure it will be quiet. Knowing that, gives me my sanity back.
    The Kokoon I will surely test, beause Bose I cannot wear at night. I do wear ear plugs, but cannot wear them longer then 4 hours. If the Kokoon is comfortable and works as good as Bose, it would be a godsend. And I like to Lucid dream, so the Kokoon also helps with that. And if I can’t sleep, the kokoon will play the sound I want and let me put to sleep like a baby.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *