From JessicaRabbit: "It saddens me deeply that there are still so many people that cannot seem to differentiate between intimidation/abuse and actual training.
I have seen Mr. Millan's methods ruin dogs. We have a trainer here where I live who calls himself RI's Dog Whisperer. He follows Cesars methods to the letter. He has donated his services to a number of shelters here. I have watched him drag terrified dogs from their kennels, and alpha roll dogs. For the record, EVERY SINGLE DOG he has "helped" was put down with the shelters stating that they were far worse now than before this man came to them."
This! Thanks! It makes me sad too, and angry (obviously, or I wouldn't have reacted in the way I did) because I think dogs get hurt by these people.
Thanks too for those who posted the article...
One of the more horrific Millan episodes, that I probably actually found through this forum, is the one where where he hangs a dog from the choke collar....I remember even the fairly traditional (ie. somewhat aversive) training I took my GSD to 9 years ago thought that this was so bad they would not allow it.
I've talked elsewhere about how bad aversive training can be, but it might be worth saying again. I really am ashamed of some of my early dog "training" though I know at the time I didn't know any better, and neither dog had any lasting harm (though they could have!). First, when I was young and had an AA, a nervous girl who actually looked more like a JA than an AA but was from a backyard breeder. I'd been told to punish dogs as a method of housetraining, so I did it. It didn't take too long til she began to pee in fear as soon as we came home. Of course she did! She'd been punished for accidents. It took her a couple of years to get over her fear peeing. It makes me sad to think I made a nervous dog even worse with stupid training methods that I'd been taught (in this case, not by a trainer but simply through "conventional wisdom" that wasn't wise at all).
But the example more relevent to this conversation is that I trained my GSD through somewhat Millan-like methods. This was way before Millan, but the trainer I saw did the usual things--training collar (which is not always bad I know, and this trainer did explain how to use it correctly), emphasis on always being "dominant" over your dog, alpha rolls, etc. When my GSD, who is a very soft dog as it turned out, did not do what I asked him to do, I was told he was being stubborn/dominant and I should use the alpha roll on him. I did. A lot. Now I realize he was simply very anxious, and certain parts of agility (esp. the tunnel) scared him. I'm appalled that I forced my dog to do something was supposed to be "fun." He got so he simply did not want to go to class, and he became very anxious anytime we started "training." Of course he did, poor dog. The thing is, he is a soft dog, and somewhat anxious, but not terribly fearful....I could see, however, that my behavior could have made him very timid. Or aggressive. Because a couple of times, when he was anxious and whining and refusing to perform the task didn't work, he'd grab my hand in his mouth. Not hard. And he'd look at me. And I listened to people that told me he was being "aggressive" and "dominant" when in fact I realize now he was trying as best he could to tell me that something was wrong and he was simply afraid. My male Shiba? He's not that patient or handler-oriented: he would have bit, hard, if I tried to force him to do something like that.
I'm lucky that i had dogs that overcame my mistakes. I'm lucky that I learned how to listen to my dogs better, and learned how to motivate them rather than force them to do things. And frankly, I think it is a lot harder to try to listen to them and understand them and then learn what best works in terms of training, then it is to try to force them into things. I suppose that's why some aversive training methods are still popular. Or maybe it's just a desire to dominate in some people. Either way, I have no doubts that it hurts dogs, and there is plenty of evidence to bear that out.
Well.. To be honest I did think postive about Cesar Millan until just a few minutes ago, because I had not seen the "important" videos...
Via Youtube I had seen some short clips about him making a dog trapped in cage "surrendering", by just staying with the cage, two videos about "claiming your space" (one was about a little dog barking furiously at the door and one about an Aussie jumping at his handler) and a video about a dog being aggressive when people went into his territory - Millan just stayed by him.
These are "techniques" I considered (and still consider) good and helpful and so I thought of him being a good trainer. (I use the "claim your space"-method as well to prevent Etsu from greeting "my" visitors before me.)
And THEN I took a look at the videos about Jonbee and Emilie the pitbull and I was like... Oh... My... God... How could I have ever thought, that this was a "good trainer"? A trainer at all? What he did in those videos was breaking the dogs by force!
Jonbee was NOT a totally aggressive dog! In the garden they could do all there ridiculous "alpha-roll-games" without any problems, the dog just became aggressive in the house... Well... A dog that has only been kept in the yard becomes aggressive when being forced to roll over inside a house - an area it is not really used to- , so it has to be forced to do so... Spot the mistake... What about just giving the dog some time, helping it to relax inside the house and NOT doing stupid alpha-roll-games with it?
And Emilie... Right... A dog that doesn't have leaders, but servants its whole life and didn't make contact to other dogs starts to get aggressive about other dogs... Where I come from this behaviour is called "protecting your pack"... If they had just put up some rules and tried to be good dog-leaders, the dog would have started to trust in their leadership and wouldn't have considered "protecting the pack" its task. One would still have had to try to somehow socialise the dog with other dogs, but the walks would have become quite easy. But NO, Millan has to smash the dog on its side everytime it tries to fullfill "its task" and then take it away from its owners to "rehabilitate" it...
The problem ALWAYS is at the other side of the leash, but Millan seems to not like this.
Of course it is easier to just force the dog into "surrendering" than to help the people how to gain the dogs trust and respect...
That is sooooo poor.
My opinion of the "dog-wisperer" has totally turned around. What he does is not "dog-whispering", but "dog-crashing".
Etsu and I had some problems with ressource-aggressions when he was about 9 or 10 months old and I had no other option then to make absoluteley clear, that I do not tolerate him claiming ressources and "protecting" them from other people by biting. (He never did that to me, because my position was clear, but to friends and visitors.) Whenever he did that, I took him in the neck and put him outside for a few minutes. That happened three times and that were the only situations I ever had to use force on him. I NEVER did alpha-rolls or ridiculous stuff like that, my male can sleep in my bed (under my blanket sometimes), on my sofa, he can walk out of doors in front of me or eat at the same time with me, but he absoluteley respects my leadership and trusts me.
Trust is - in my opinion - the most important factor in a human-dog-relationship and the only basis for lasting results. Breaking a dog with force may stop the behaviour, but it does not reach its source.
So, Cesar Millan gets a big NOT!
(I want to add that I think that a GOOD dog trainer does not need any devices other than body language, treats and toys to make a dog do what he wants him to do. Except for REALLY bad cases maybe.)
Edit: What I found most horrific about the videos was when he brought Emilie, the pit-bull, to his own dogs, went inside the kennel and forced the dog to let all the other dogs come by and make contact. That is pure animal abuse. Every human and every animal has a certain area around itself (in German this is called "Individualdistanz" - individual distance?) where it does only accept dogs it likes, because it does not feel comfortable with dogs it doesnt like being so close. Violating the dogs natural desire of having its personal space like that is absolutely... I don't know.
It is something about respect of a dogs wishes and personality, that Millan proves not to have. It is as if dogs were just machines and if you pushed the buttons they would "work right". This is... I can't find words for it.
As soon as I read this thread title I thought "Oh Osy, you know that's going to get heated." lol.
Kevin, I'm sorry if people have offended you, but in all honesty, you kind of bated them with "...when I read some of the dog pseudo-psychology on this forum, I want to laugh at a few of the members." You seem to have been a member for a little while, but I don't think you fully understand the people here. The Nihon Ken Forum is about mutual respect. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but as soon as you chirp members (either specifically or generally), be prepared to get it back ten-fold.
As for the Cesar Salad vs. Queen Victoria debate, I think people have voiced some very valid opinions posted above. I don't really have much to add, except to re-enforce the importance of TRUST.
My Shiba, Mylo, is a rescue from NYCSR. He is very dog reactive (i.e. if approached by another dog, he will REACT as though that dog has already hurt him). He has the mentality that "If I get you first, you can't hurt me". I have worked with him over the past 2 years to gain trust in me and my commands. He knows that as long as I am with him, I will protect him. Granted, he will still react to an off-leash (don't even get me started on off-leash rants) dog who approaches him, but I give him a break. He's had this mentality for the last 9 years, and I'm not about to change that completely. If my dog becomes unhappy by something, I'm not going to force him to do it. I'm going to appreciate that he is uncomfortable, and work around it. We don't go to dog parks and there is NEVER ever another dog allowed in my home, whether Mylo is home or not.
When I first got Mylo, he would get extremely anxious and pull on the leash and show body language that showed his terror whenever there was another dog in close (across the street) proximity. Now, when we walk by other dogs a simple "leave it" in a pleasant voice will turn his attention straight forward and his body language remains confident. I didn't get this result from shoving him in a room full of other dogs and "shocking" the fear out of him. I gave him TRUST. I've let him know time after time that I will keep him safe. How? By associating seeing another dog with something wonderful like treats or ATTENTION. That's right. I give my dog positive attention when other dogs are around. There's nothing wrong with that. It has created the amazing bond we have today. Some might think that given two years, any person could create a bond with a dog, but that's not true. My boyfriend has lived with Mylo and I for as long as I've had him. My boyfriend plays with and feeds Mylo as often as I do. But sure enough, whenever Mylo gets anxious when we have a few too many people in the apartment than he is comfortable with, he comes to me. He trusts me to keep him safe and calm.
In conclusion: Suck it Milan. Your "techniques" would have absolutely ruined my dog and our relationship would have been based on fear, rather than trust. I love knowing that my rescue dog has an owner that he trusts and loves, rather than fears and obeys. Can Cesar fans say that? No. No they can't.
One final thing to mention, that I always think to myself when comparing training techniques: "If this were a person, how would they react to this method?" Just think about that, and the debate between Victoria Stilwell and Cesar Millan is done.
Hello I watch Cesar Millans shows from time to time I also watch it's me or the dog shows every time I get the chance if it's a new episode or one I haven't read.
My opinion on both people while Cesar Millan's methods look great, quick, and easy to me if I did this to Saya and Bella they'd both be horrible dogs to be with and they'd be afraid of me.
I used positive reinforcement to train my dogs and guess what! Bella is my first boxer who actually heels and loose leash walks! There are times she still pulls like a deer up ahead, scent of rabbits, and birds, but she's getting better with each walk.
My past dogs were trained by my dad in more adverse methods the usual choke collar and jerking and pulling the dog back if it pulled saying again my dad did this. The training with my past two boxers were by positive methods siting for treats, comes gets special treats etc. Sadly I didn't know much on dog training when I was young.
My past two boxers were horrible I loved them dearly, but they pulled like a monster was chasing us and they got into fights over the smallest of things.
My dad worked as a K9Army trainer way back when he was 20 or so years old and he did adverse methods, but my one year of reading the internet and taking Bella to an positive reinforcement training class has done more wonders to Bella than CM methods would ever do.
Bella doesn't listen to my dad only to me and my mom I'm guessing since we are the only ones who feed, walk and work on training her I can get her to lay down no problem even without a treat and my dad he says down and if she doesn't go down he forces her into a down which worries me because he might hurt her back or legs I dunno, but it looks like unnecessary force.
From my experiences with Bella and Saya I believe positive reinforcement is the way to go with things I'd never thought I'd have a boxer who would walk on a loose leash and is heeling and getting better by the month!
Saya has a bit of a fear of kids, but slowly she is making much improvements check out Saya's page I got a picture up of her being petted by Molly she used to run away from her, but now after working with her she now walks right up to Molly and licks her and is happy to see her.
She now sees kids as a good thing she gets special treats when in the presence of kids and if I find a well behaved kid around I have him/her lightly toss her treats. I think if I used CM methods by forcing her to kids when she is not ready she would be a nervous wreck, but at least now I can walk by kids and she'll look at them excited and waging her tail not tail down and ears down.
I didn't like the Jonbe episode and the one episode where he was horrible to this husky I cried watching that episode.. =(
I guess I'm weak hearted, but hey look where dad's methods got him he lost my trust the day he threw his dinner plate at me claiming that I fed Bella table scraps at the table.
Adverse methods just don't work not for me and not for my dog.
After that I still don't like him or trust him heck with the way he treats Bella and Dink sometimes I always put Saya in her crate unless my mom is home to watch her one time he tried to Sht and poke her in the neck for nipping when she was a puppy. I don't want Saya to get hurt emotionally by him trying to alpha roll or anything like that.
You know what? I should have just kept my mouth shut. I respectfully disagree with several of the above assessments, but I ought to know better than to get carried away. Sorry, guys.
I'm still learning. I'll try to be more learnable. I guess my exposure to dog psychology has been primarily through Cesar, and because I'm more interested in learning about how a dog thinks than in getting it to do stupid tricks, I tend to gravitate to him.
I must remember, also, that my experience with dogs has been with relatively 'hard' dogs--not hard to train, but hard in the sense that Brad has mentioned--you can throw them around and they bounce back for more.
If you are really interested in HOW a dog thinks or WHY a dog does something than I would strongly encourage you to read any one of the following authors Jean Donaldson Patricia McConnell Ian Dunbar Pat Miller Turid Rugaas
All of these are actual behaviorists. Cesar is pure flash. His methods are based purely on intimidation and force, not actual psychology.
Having spent my life working with damaged and abused dogs, his methods would have gotten me killed. The above authors methods not only kept me safe but saved a lot of dogs.
no problem Kevin, you should always be able to voice your opinion. and what Jessica said, lol! Books like Culture Clash, The Other End of the Leash, For the Love of the Dog, etc. They are great reads worth your time.
"One final thing to mention, that I always think to myself when comparing training techniques: "If this were a person, how would they react to this method?" " This is great :D that's what I usually think about when it comes to my family's animals.
I think I'm the only Cesar fan on here.- nah Ur not ..I like Cesar as well and voted for him too. its a damn shame that Daddy passed away. I liked that pit bull so much..
I found Cesar's show interesting at first. So much so that after watching a few I ordered his book (my wife bought the first season on DVD too). I've seen some interesting bits and pieces, but realized after a few of the harsher episodes that this wasn't going to work, with my dogs anyway. It would most likely break my dogs. I haven't yet gotten around to reading any of Victoria's stuff, guess I should.
If this were a person, how would they react to this method?
That's my issue. Dogs aren't people. I think some of the behavioral issues we see in dogs stem from the fact that we treat them like people or expect them to reason like people.
Daddy died? That's sad. He was a sweet dog, and I don't even like pits.
Ha! As a rule, they are not my breed of choice. My girlfriend has a little pit mix--about 5 months old--that she rescued from a shelter. She's ornery, but is the sweetest little pup I've ever met. She's goofy looking, too. Probably because she's mixed with what appears to be some kind of hound. I always tell her I love her even though I didn't mean to.
Yeah he died in February. He was 16 years old and had cancer and successfully underwent chemotherapy. He lived a good life:) Cesar's got Junior now and he is a gorgeous pittie
I don't have a lot of nice things to say about Cesars training methods, but I will be the first to say that because he has such a media following, I do appreciate that he is a pit bull advocate.
yeah everyone has different views on him. I like him and am grateful that hes an advocate on all the "dangerous breeds" . Believe me when you have websites like this http://www.dogsbite.org/ Im glad someone takes a stand against stereotypes
That website makes me sick. There "statistics" have been proven to be false on more than one occasion. One of the organizations I work closely with has a legal team dedicated to just keeping them in line.
That site is a riot, I can't believe they can get away with writing such BS...I bet they get most of their statistics from the media (if not off of their own site), as the media will make the pit bull the default breed for a dog attack if they don't know the actual breed or want to get more ratings.
I've been ignoring this conversation, because, TBQH, its getting old for me. I'm sick of this argument, and this "Why Cesar Millan is great/shit" topic. But here I go again...
I don't think Cesar is purposely doing harm to the dog community, and I would be a fool to try and argue that. I believe he does love dogs and does want to do good for them. I don't think Cesar is a bad person, however I do think NatGeo and Cesar's corporate army is driven purely by greed and money and cares nothing for the dog community.
Every technique Cesar uses is *not* incorrect, and most of his techniques (whether he knows it or not) are based on Learning Theory, as are 99.99999% of all training methods, and Learning Theory is pretty much the base for the training of almost any living creature (with a relatively complex brain). So, while I am not a fan of his compulsion-based training techniques, and I prefer not to use them, I cannot argue that his training techniques are incorrect, because that would be arguing that some parts of Learning Theory are incorrect.
The issue I have with Cesar is how he explains his methods (via his "alpha", "dominance", & "pack leader" mantra), and what he says his methods are doing. The information he basis his "methods" on, and what he calls his "dog physiology", are incorrect and outdated concepts. This is what bothers me with him, he is a (very) public figure who is actively promoting a compulsion-based training mindset, while basing (and describing) his methods on an incorrect understanding of a wild canine social structure.
The current, and most accepted, idea in the behavioral community is that domestic dogs do not form a rigid dominance social hierarchy, which is the core belief Cesar basis his "dog physiology" on.
The most recent study of wild wolves have lead most wolf researches to stop using the terms "alpha" and "dominance" when referring to the wolves social structure and behavior - this is primarily because they have found that a wolf "pack" is actually made up of a "mom & dad" (a "nuclear family unit") and their progeny (aka a family). Only the "mom & dad" breed, the offspring stay around until they are old enough to look for a mate - then they leave the current pack to join another pack or create their own. Some adults never leave - just like some people never find a spouse.
So, the issue with using the terms "alpha" and "dominance", or imply domestic dogs live in a "pack", when referring to dog behavior and canine social interaction is that it implies dogs adhere to a rigid social structure - which, per the latest ideas (by latest I mean since the 1980s), is incorrect and misleading.
David Mech, who was one of the main contributors to the early alpha/dominance concepts, now admits that the use of "Alpha" and "Dominance", when describing how wild wolves fight within a pack to gain "dominance" is "outmoded" (to use his exact term)...
"Schenkel’s Classic Wolf Behavior Study Available in English
Below you can download a pdf version of Schenkel’s 1947 “Expressions Studies on Wolves.” This is the study that gave rise to the now outmoded notion of alpha wolves. That concept was based on the old idea that wolves fight within a pack to gain dominance and that the winner is the “alpha” wolf. Today we understand that most wolf packs consist of a pair of adults called “parents” or “breeders,” (not “alphas”), and their offspring." source: http://www.davemech.org/schenkel/index.html
Here is Mech's recent ideas on "Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs"...
"Labeling a high-ranking wolf alpha emphasizes its rank in a dominance hierarchy. However, in natural wolf packs, the alpha male or female are merely the breeding animals, the parents of the pack, and dominance contests with other wolves are rare, if they exist at all. During my 13 summers observing the Ellesmere Island pack, I saw none.
Thus, calling a wolf an alpha is usually no more appropriate than referring to a human parent or a doe deer as an alpha. Any parent is dominant to its young offspring, so "alpha" adds no information. Why not refer to an alpha female as the female parent, the breeding female, the matriarch, or simply the mother? Such a designation emphasizes not the animal's dominant status, which is trivial information, but its role as pack progenitor, which is critical information." http://www.mnforsustain.org/wolf_mech_dominance_alpha_status.htm
But Mech is talking about wolves, we are talking about domestic canine (which are very different from each other) and in domestic canine, and their interaction with each other (and humans), the idea of a dominance hierarchy has been debunked by most of the modern day behaviorist (see links above).
So, the use of the term "dominance" when applied (or referring) to any part of domestic canine interaction is incorrect - no matter how it is used (as a descriptor or to imply social structure), and that is the issue I have with Cesar and his show - and I am not the only one, the APDT is an organization that was started with one of its primary focuses to combat the use of the dominance/alpha concepts - before Cesar ever had a show!
----
Then there is this, and I write this a lot, but I really think it makes a great point...
If presented with 2 options to achieve 1 training goal for your dog, why would you choose the potentially relationship-damaging compulsion-based method over a positive and safe reward based method?
You can achieve the same results either way, just one involves "happy talk" and treats while the other involves force and potentially damaging physical contact.
Why would you take the risk? Cesar does in every single one of his shows, I wouldn't let that man near any of my dogs, no matter what good he does or how much he likes dogs.
Eh like i said everybody's got a different view on him. I like him and Victoria both but to me they're both just tv shows. Any idiot who believes that they can change their dog in 30 min obviously deserves a head check. I like the message Cesar sends about being a pack leader,everything else is just entertainment to me. And Cesar acknowledges that there are many different training methods and suggests using the one that the owner feels most comfortable with and that works for them and their dog. My dogs are trained the way i wanted and i have no problems with them. anyways that's the way i think. thought this was pretty interesting http://www.americanhumane.org/about-us/newsroom/news-releases/dog-training-symposium.html
Comments
I have seen Mr. Millan's methods ruin dogs. We have a trainer here where I live who calls himself RI's Dog Whisperer. He follows Cesars methods to the letter. He has donated his services to a number of shelters here. I have watched him drag terrified dogs from their kennels, and alpha roll dogs. For the record, EVERY SINGLE DOG he has "helped" was put down with the shelters stating that they were far worse now than before this man came to them."
This! Thanks! It makes me sad too, and angry (obviously, or I wouldn't have reacted in the way I did) because I think dogs get hurt by these people.
Thanks too for those who posted the article...
One of the more horrific Millan episodes, that I probably actually found through this forum, is the one where where he hangs a dog from the choke collar....I remember even the fairly traditional (ie. somewhat aversive) training I took my GSD to 9 years ago thought that this was so bad they would not allow it.
I've talked elsewhere about how bad aversive training can be, but it might be worth saying again. I really am ashamed of some of my early dog "training" though I know at the time I didn't know any better, and neither dog had any lasting harm (though they could have!). First, when I was young and had an AA, a nervous girl who actually looked more like a JA than an AA but was from a backyard breeder. I'd been told to punish dogs as a method of housetraining, so I did it. It didn't take too long til she began to pee in fear as soon as we came home. Of course she did! She'd been punished for accidents. It took her a couple of years to get over her fear peeing. It makes me sad to think I made a nervous dog even worse with stupid training methods that I'd been taught (in this case, not by a trainer but simply through "conventional wisdom" that wasn't wise at all).
But the example more relevent to this conversation is that I trained my GSD through somewhat Millan-like methods. This was way before Millan, but the trainer I saw did the usual things--training collar (which is not always bad I know, and this trainer did explain how to use it correctly), emphasis on always being "dominant" over your dog, alpha rolls, etc. When my GSD, who is a very soft dog as it turned out, did not do what I asked him to do, I was told he was being stubborn/dominant and I should use the alpha roll on him. I did. A lot. Now I realize he was simply very anxious, and certain parts of agility (esp. the tunnel) scared him. I'm appalled that I forced my dog to do something was supposed to be "fun." He got so he simply did not want to go to class, and he became very anxious anytime we started "training." Of course he did, poor dog. The thing is, he is a soft dog, and somewhat anxious, but not terribly fearful....I could see, however, that my behavior could have made him very timid. Or aggressive. Because a couple of times, when he was anxious and whining and refusing to perform the task didn't work, he'd grab my hand in his mouth. Not hard. And he'd look at me. And I listened to people that told me he was being "aggressive" and "dominant" when in fact I realize now he was trying as best he could to tell me that something was wrong and he was simply afraid. My male Shiba? He's not that patient or handler-oriented: he would have bit, hard, if I tried to force him to do something like that.
I'm lucky that i had dogs that overcame my mistakes. I'm lucky that I learned how to listen to my dogs better, and learned how to motivate them rather than force them to do things. And frankly, I think it is a lot harder to try to listen to them and understand them and then learn what best works in terms of training, then it is to try to force them into things. I suppose that's why some aversive training methods are still popular. Or maybe it's just a desire to dominate in some people. Either way, I have no doubts that it hurts dogs, and there is plenty of evidence to bear that out.
Via Youtube I had seen some short clips about him making a dog trapped in cage "surrendering", by just staying with the cage, two videos about "claiming your space" (one was about a little dog barking furiously at the door and one about an Aussie jumping at his handler) and a video about a dog being aggressive when people went into his territory - Millan just stayed by him.
These are "techniques" I considered (and still consider) good and helpful and so I thought of him being a good trainer. (I use the "claim your space"-method as well to prevent Etsu from greeting "my" visitors before me.)
And THEN I took a look at the videos about Jonbee and Emilie the pitbull and I was like... Oh... My... God... How could I have ever thought, that this was a "good trainer"? A trainer at all? What he did in those videos was breaking the dogs by force!
Jonbee was NOT a totally aggressive dog! In the garden they could do all there ridiculous "alpha-roll-games" without any problems, the dog just became aggressive in the house... Well... A dog that has only been kept in the yard becomes aggressive when being forced to roll over inside a house - an area it is not really used to- , so it has to be forced to do so... Spot the mistake... What about just giving the dog some time, helping it to relax inside the house and NOT doing stupid alpha-roll-games with it?
And Emilie... Right... A dog that doesn't have leaders, but servants its whole life and didn't make contact to other dogs starts to get aggressive about other dogs... Where I come from this behaviour is called "protecting your pack"... If they had just put up some rules and tried to be good dog-leaders, the dog would have started to trust in their leadership and wouldn't have considered "protecting the pack" its task. One would still have had to try to somehow socialise the dog with other dogs, but the walks would have become quite easy. But NO, Millan has to smash the dog on its side everytime it tries to fullfill "its task" and then take it away from its owners to "rehabilitate" it...
The problem ALWAYS is at the other side of the leash, but Millan seems to not like this.
Of course it is easier to just force the dog into "surrendering" than to help the people how to gain the dogs trust and respect...
That is sooooo poor.
My opinion of the "dog-wisperer" has totally turned around. What he does is not "dog-whispering", but "dog-crashing".
Etsu and I had some problems with ressource-aggressions when he was about 9 or 10 months old and I had no other option then to make absoluteley clear, that I do not tolerate him claiming ressources and "protecting" them from other people by biting. (He never did that to me, because my position was clear, but to friends and visitors.) Whenever he did that, I took him in the neck and put him outside for a few minutes. That happened three times and that were the only situations I ever had to use force on him. I NEVER did alpha-rolls or ridiculous stuff like that, my male can sleep in my bed (under my blanket sometimes), on my sofa, he can walk out of doors in front of me or eat at the same time with me, but he absoluteley respects my leadership and trusts me.
Trust is - in my opinion - the most important factor in a human-dog-relationship and the only basis for lasting results. Breaking a dog with force may stop the behaviour, but it does not reach its source.
So, Cesar Millan gets a big NOT!
(I want to add that I think that a GOOD dog trainer does not need any devices other than body language, treats and toys to make a dog do what he wants him to do. Except for REALLY bad cases maybe.)
Edit: What I found most horrific about the videos was when he brought Emilie, the pit-bull, to his own dogs, went inside the kennel and forced the dog to let all the other dogs come by and make contact. That is pure animal abuse. Every human and every animal has a certain area around itself (in German this is called "Individualdistanz" - individual distance?) where it does only accept dogs it likes, because it does not feel comfortable with dogs it doesnt like being so close. Violating the dogs natural desire of having its personal space like that is absolutely... I don't know.
It is something about respect of a dogs wishes and personality, that Millan proves not to have. It is as if dogs were just machines and if you pushed the buttons they would "work right". This is... I can't find words for it.
Kevin, I'm sorry if people have offended you, but in all honesty, you kind of bated them with "...when I read some of the dog pseudo-psychology on this forum, I want to laugh at a few of the members." You seem to have been a member for a little while, but I don't think you fully understand the people here. The Nihon Ken Forum is about mutual respect. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but as soon as you chirp members (either specifically or generally), be prepared to get it back ten-fold.
As for the Cesar Salad vs. Queen Victoria debate, I think people have voiced some very valid opinions posted above. I don't really have much to add, except to re-enforce the importance of TRUST.
My Shiba, Mylo, is a rescue from NYCSR. He is very dog reactive (i.e. if approached by another dog, he will REACT as though that dog has already hurt him). He has the mentality that "If I get you first, you can't hurt me". I have worked with him over the past 2 years to gain trust in me and my commands. He knows that as long as I am with him, I will protect him. Granted, he will still react to an off-leash (don't even get me started on off-leash rants) dog who approaches him, but I give him a break. He's had this mentality for the last 9 years, and I'm not about to change that completely. If my dog becomes unhappy by something, I'm not going to force him to do it. I'm going to appreciate that he is uncomfortable, and work around it. We don't go to dog parks and there is NEVER ever another dog allowed in my home, whether Mylo is home or not.
When I first got Mylo, he would get extremely anxious and pull on the leash and show body language that showed his terror whenever there was another dog in close (across the street) proximity. Now, when we walk by other dogs a simple "leave it" in a pleasant voice will turn his attention straight forward and his body language remains confident. I didn't get this result from shoving him in a room full of other dogs and "shocking" the fear out of him. I gave him TRUST. I've let him know time after time that I will keep him safe. How? By associating seeing another dog with something wonderful like treats or ATTENTION. That's right. I give my dog positive attention when other dogs are around. There's nothing wrong with that. It has created the amazing bond we have today. Some might think that given two years, any person could create a bond with a dog, but that's not true. My boyfriend has lived with Mylo and I for as long as I've had him. My boyfriend plays with and feeds Mylo as often as I do. But sure enough, whenever Mylo gets anxious when we have a few too many people in the apartment than he is comfortable with, he comes to me. He trusts me to keep him safe and calm.
In conclusion: Suck it Milan. Your "techniques" would have absolutely ruined my dog and our relationship would have been based on fear, rather than trust. I love knowing that my rescue dog has an owner that he trusts and loves, rather than fears and obeys. Can Cesar fans say that? No. No they can't.
One final thing to mention, that I always think to myself when comparing training techniques: "If this were a person, how would they react to this method?" Just think about that, and the debate between Victoria Stilwell and Cesar Millan is done.
Actually, I didn't think we had any Cesar fans on here at all LOL ~
My opinion on both people while Cesar Millan's methods look great, quick, and easy to me if I did this to Saya and Bella they'd both be horrible dogs to be with and they'd be afraid of me.
I used positive reinforcement to train my dogs and guess what! Bella is my first boxer who actually heels and loose leash walks! There are times she still pulls like a deer up ahead, scent of rabbits, and birds, but she's getting better with each walk.
My past dogs were trained by my dad in more adverse methods the usual choke collar and jerking and pulling the dog back if it pulled saying again my dad did this. The training with my past two boxers were by positive methods siting for treats, comes gets special treats etc. Sadly I didn't know much on dog training when I was young.
My past two boxers were horrible I loved them dearly, but they pulled like a monster was chasing us and they got into fights over the smallest of things.
My dad worked as a K9Army trainer way back when he was 20 or so years old and he did adverse methods, but my one year of reading the internet and taking Bella to an positive reinforcement training class has done more wonders to Bella than CM methods would ever do.
Bella doesn't listen to my dad only to me and my mom I'm guessing since we are the only ones who feed, walk and work on training her I can get her to lay down no problem even without a treat and my dad he says down and if she doesn't go down he forces her into a down which worries me because he might hurt her back or legs I dunno, but it looks like unnecessary force.
From my experiences with Bella and Saya I believe positive reinforcement is the way to go with things I'd never thought I'd have a boxer who would walk on a loose leash and is heeling and getting better by the month!
Saya has a bit of a fear of kids, but slowly she is making much improvements check out Saya's page I got a picture up of her being petted by Molly she used to run away from her, but now after working with her she now walks right up to Molly and licks her and is happy to see her.
She now sees kids as a good thing she gets special treats when in the presence of kids and if I find a well behaved kid around I have him/her lightly toss her treats. I think if I used CM methods by forcing her to kids when she is not ready she would be a nervous wreck, but at least now I can walk by kids and she'll look at them excited and waging her tail not tail down and ears down.
I didn't like the Jonbe episode and the one episode where he was horrible to this husky I cried watching that episode.. =(
I guess I'm weak hearted, but hey look where dad's methods got him he lost my trust the day he threw his dinner plate at me claiming that I fed Bella table scraps at the table.
Adverse methods just don't work not for me and not for my dog.
After that I still don't like him or trust him heck with the way he treats Bella and Dink sometimes I always put Saya in her crate unless my mom is home to watch her one time he tried to Sht and poke her in the neck for nipping when she was a puppy. I don't want Saya to get hurt emotionally by him trying to alpha roll or anything like that.
I think I'm the only Cesar fan on here.
I'm still learning. I'll try to be more learnable. I guess my exposure to dog psychology has been primarily through Cesar, and because I'm more interested in learning about how a dog thinks than in getting it to do stupid tricks, I tend to gravitate to him.
I must remember, also, that my experience with dogs has been with relatively 'hard' dogs--not hard to train, but hard in the sense that Brad has mentioned--you can throw them around and they bounce back for more.
Jean Donaldson
Patricia McConnell
Ian Dunbar
Pat Miller
Turid Rugaas
All of these are actual behaviorists. Cesar is pure flash. His methods are based purely on intimidation and force, not actual psychology.
Having spent my life working with damaged and abused dogs, his methods would have gotten me killed. The above authors methods not only kept me safe but saved a lot of dogs.
That's my issue. Dogs aren't people. I think some of the behavioral issues we see in dogs stem from the fact that we treat them like people or expect them to reason like people.
Daddy died? That's sad. He was a sweet dog, and I don't even like pits.
I have dedicated my life to rescuing them.....
I don't think Cesar is purposely doing harm to the dog community, and I would be a fool to try and argue that. I believe he does love dogs and does want to do good for them. I don't think Cesar is a bad person, however I do think NatGeo and Cesar's corporate army is driven purely by greed and money and cares nothing for the dog community.
Every technique Cesar uses is *not* incorrect, and most of his techniques (whether he knows it or not) are based on Learning Theory, as are 99.99999% of all training methods, and Learning Theory is pretty much the base for the training of almost any living creature (with a relatively complex brain). So, while I am not a fan of his compulsion-based training techniques, and I prefer not to use them, I cannot argue that his training techniques are incorrect, because that would be arguing that some parts of Learning Theory are incorrect.
The issue I have with Cesar is how he explains his methods (via his "alpha", "dominance", & "pack leader" mantra), and what he says his methods are doing. The information he basis his "methods" on, and what he calls his "dog physiology", are incorrect and outdated concepts. This is what bothers me with him, he is a (very) public figure who is actively promoting a compulsion-based training mindset, while basing (and describing) his methods on an incorrect understanding of a wild canine social structure.
The current, and most accepted, idea in the behavioral community is that domestic dogs do not form a rigid dominance social hierarchy, which is the core belief Cesar basis his "dog physiology" on.
The most recent study of wild wolves have lead most wolf researches to stop using the terms "alpha" and "dominance" when referring to the wolves social structure and behavior - this is primarily because they have found that a wolf "pack" is actually made up of a "mom & dad" (a "nuclear family unit") and their progeny (aka a family). Only the "mom & dad" breed, the offspring stay around until they are old enough to look for a mate - then they leave the current pack to join another pack or create their own. Some adults never leave - just like some people never find a spouse.
So, the issue with using the terms "alpha" and "dominance", or imply domestic dogs live in a "pack", when referring to dog behavior and canine social interaction is that it implies dogs adhere to a rigid social structure - which, per the latest ideas (by latest I mean since the 1980s), is incorrect and misleading.
Here is a study on domestic canine social structure: http://www.nonlineardogs.com/socialorganisation.html
There are some really good articles out there on this subject too...
http://www.apdt.com/petowners/articles/docs/DominanceArticle.pdf
http://www.apdt.com/petowners/choose/dominance.aspx
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/advanstar/vm0908/#/32
http://abrionline.org/article.php?id=254
http://abrionline.org/article.php?id=225
http://www.theotherendoftheleash.com/cesar-millan-and-merial/
David Mech, who was one of the main contributors to the early alpha/dominance concepts, now admits that the use of "Alpha" and "Dominance", when describing how wild wolves fight within a pack to gain "dominance" is "outmoded" (to use his exact term)...
"Schenkel’s Classic Wolf Behavior Study Available in English
Below you can download a pdf version of Schenkel’s 1947 “Expressions Studies on Wolves.” This is the study that gave rise to the now outmoded notion of alpha wolves. That concept was based on the old idea that wolves fight within a pack to gain dominance and that the winner is the “alpha” wolf. Today we understand that most wolf packs consist of a pair of adults called “parents” or “breeders,” (not “alphas”), and their offspring."
source: http://www.davemech.org/schenkel/index.html
Here is Mech's recent ideas on "Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs"...
"Labeling a high-ranking wolf alpha emphasizes its rank in a dominance hierarchy. However, in natural wolf packs, the alpha male or female are merely the breeding animals, the parents of the pack, and dominance contests with other wolves are rare, if they exist at all. During my 13 summers observing the Ellesmere Island pack, I saw none.
Thus, calling a wolf an alpha is usually no more appropriate than referring to a human parent or a doe deer as an alpha. Any parent is dominant to its young offspring, so "alpha" adds no information. Why not refer to an alpha female as the female parent, the breeding female, the matriarch, or simply the mother? Such a designation emphasizes not the animal's dominant status, which is trivial information, but its role as pack progenitor, which is critical information."
http://www.mnforsustain.org/wolf_mech_dominance_alpha_status.htm
But Mech is talking about wolves, we are talking about domestic canine (which are very different from each other) and in domestic canine, and their interaction with each other (and humans), the idea of a dominance hierarchy has been debunked by most of the modern day behaviorist (see links above).
So, the use of the term "dominance" when applied (or referring) to any part of domestic canine interaction is incorrect - no matter how it is used (as a descriptor or to imply social structure), and that is the issue I have with Cesar and his show - and I am not the only one, the APDT is an organization that was started with one of its primary focuses to combat the use of the dominance/alpha concepts - before Cesar ever had a show!
----
Then there is this, and I write this a lot, but I really think it makes a great point...
If presented with 2 options to achieve 1 training goal for your dog, why would you choose the potentially relationship-damaging compulsion-based method over a positive and safe reward based method?
You can achieve the same results either way, just one involves "happy talk" and treats while the other involves force and potentially damaging physical contact.
Why would you take the risk? Cesar does in every single one of his shows, I wouldn't let that man near any of my dogs, no matter what good he does or how much he likes dogs.
----
*Excuse the language.
----
thought this was pretty interesting
http://www.americanhumane.org/about-us/newsroom/news-releases/dog-training-symposium.html
Snf
Did you happen to read/see this link from my above post?
http://www.apdt.com/petowners/articles/docs/DominanceArticle.pdf
----