Ceaser Milan

[LilyoftheValley]

Okie Dokie. I noticed alot of people on here do not agree with Ceasers methods. Why not? I don't understand. I watch his show, I read his books and it all makes sence to me. I also noticed people do not agree with his 'dominance' theory. Why not? I would LOVE to understand why. If what he's doing isn't right, then why do his tecnuiqes work SO well? When I first got Lily I bought all the training books and could find, watched tons of videos and nothing seemed to work for us. Lily still DRUG me down the street, had horrible dog agression issues and was just a rude puppy. All my dogs have been raised Ceasers way, and they are all great dogs. Ceaser's way was the only thing that worked for us. I would love to find the reasons why you do not agree..

Thanks so much! Have a safe holliday!

[houndlove]

This link right here is absolutely the best and most comprehensive explanation that I've ever come across: http://www.4pawsu.com/dogpsychology.htm
Please do give it a read, with an open mind.

I used to be a pretty big fan, back in his first season. It was watching his show that got me interested in learning more about dogs and dog training. But the more I learned, the more I realized that what he was doing was not what I wanted to be doing and that there was a way, way better way.

[MafiaPrincess]

Last years article but it puts what's wrong with CM into an easy to read format. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/opinion/31derr.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

WITH a compelling personal story as the illegal immigrant made good because of his uncanny ability to understand dogs, Cesar Millan has taken the world of canine behavior — or rather misbehavior — by storm. He has the top-rated program, “Dog Whisperer,” on the National Geographic Channel, a best-selling book and a devoted following, and he has been the subject of several glowing magazine articles.

He is even preparing to release his own “Illusion” collar and leash set, named for his wife and designed to better allow people to walk their dogs the “Cesar way” — at close heel, under strict control.

Essentially, National Geographic and Cesar Millan have cleverly repackaged and promoted a simplistic view of the dog’s social structure and constructed around it a one-size-fits-all, cookie-cutter approach to dog training. In Mr. Millan’s world, dog behavioral problems result from a failure of the human to be the “pack leader,” to dominate the dog (a wolf by any other name) completely.

While Mr. Millan rejects hitting and yelling at dogs during training, his confrontational methods include physical and psychological intimidation, like finger jabs, choke collars, extended sessions on a treadmill and what is called flooding, or overwhelming the animal with the thing it fears. Compared with some training devices still in use — whips and cattle prods, for example — these are mild, but combined with a lack of positive reinforcement or rewards, they place Mr. Millan firmly in a long tradition of punitive dog trainers.

Mr. Millan brings his pastiche of animal behaviorism and pop psychology into millions of homes a week. He’s a charming, one-man wrecking ball directed at 40 years of progress in understanding and shaping dog behavior and in developing nonpunitive, reward-based training programs, which have led to seeing each dog as an individual, to understand what motivates it, what frightens it and what its talents and limitations are. Building on strengths and working around and through weaknesses, these trainers and specialists in animal behavior often work wonders with their dogs, but it takes time.

Mr. Millan supposedly delivers fast results. His mantra is “exercise, discipline, affection,” where discipline means “rules, boundaries, limitations.” Rewards are absent and praise scarce, presumably because they will upset the state of calm submission Mr. Millan wants in his dogs. Corrections abound as animals are forced to submit or face their fear, even if doing so panics them.

Mr. Millan builds his philosophy from a simplistic conception of the dog’s “natural” pack, controlled by a dominant alpha animal (usually male). In his scheme, that leader is the human, which leads to the conclusion that all behavior problems in dogs derive from the failure of the owner or owners to dominate. (Conveniently, by this logic, if Mr. Millan’s intervention doesn’t produce lasting results, it is the owner’s fault.)

Women are the worst offenders in his world. In one of the outtakes included in the four-DVD set of the first season of “Dog Whisperer,” Mr. Millan explains that a woman is “the only species that is wired different from the rest.” And a “woman always applies affection before discipline,” he says. “Man applies discipline then affection, so we’re more psychological than emotional. All animals follow dominant leaders; they don’t follow lovable leaders.”

Mr. Millan’s sexism is laughable; his ethology is outdated.

The notion of the “alpha pack leader” dominating all other pack members is derived from studies of captive packs of unrelated wolves and thus bears no relationship to the social structure of natural packs, according to L. David Mech, one of the world’s leading wolf experts. In the wild, the alpha wolves are merely the breeding pair, and the pack is generally comprised of their juvenile offspring and pups.

“The typical wolf pack,” Dr. Mech wrote in The Canadian Journal of Zoology in 1999, “is a family, with the adult parents guiding the activities of a group in a division-of-labor system.” In a natural wolf pack, “dominance contests with other wolves are rare, if they exist at all,” he writes.

That’s a far cry from the dominance model that Mr. Millan attributes to the innate need of dogs by way of wolves.

Unlike their wolf forebears, dogs exist in human society. They have been selectively bred for 15,000 or more years to live with people. Studies have shown that almost from birth they are attentive to people, and that most are eager to please, given proper instruction and encouragement.

But sometimes the relationship goes very wrong, and it is time to call on a professional.

Aggression is perhaps the most significant of the behavioral problems that may afflict more than 20 percent of the nation’s 65 million dogs, because it can lead to injury and death. Mr. Millan often treats aggression by forcing the dog to exercise extensively on a treadmill, by asserting his authority over the dog by rolling it on its back in the “alpha rollover,” and through other forms of intimidation, including exposure to his pack of dogs.

Forcefully rolling a big dog on its back was once recommended as a way to establish dominance, but it is now recognized as a good way to get bitten. People are advised not to try it. In fact, many animal behaviorists believe that in the long run meeting aggression with aggression breeds more aggression.

More important, aggression often has underlying medical causes that might not be readily apparent — hip dysplasia or some other hidden physical ailment that causes the dog to bite out of pain; hereditary forms of sudden rage that require a medical history and genealogy to diagnose; inadequate blood flow to the brain or a congenital brain malformation that produces aggression and can only be uncovered through a medical examination. Veterinary behaviorists, having found that many aggressive dogs suffer from low levels of serotonin, have had success in treating such dogs with fluoxetine (the drug better known as Prozac).

Properly treating aggression, phobias, anxiety and fears from the start can literally save time and money. Mr. Millan’s quick fix might make for good television and might even produce lasting results in some cases. But it flies in the face of what professional animal behaviorists — either trained and certified veterinarians or ethologists — have learned about normal and abnormal behavior in dogs.

Mark Derr is the author of “A Dog’s History of America: How Our Best Friend Explored, Conquered and Settled a Continent.”

[ihartgonzo]

This link right here is absolutely the best and most comprehensive explanation that I've ever come across: http://www.4pawsu.com/dogpsychology.htm
Please do give it a read, with an open mind.


Yayyy! 4Paws! That's where I take both of my boys. =) They are superb... I recommend reading as much of their article library (OP), as you possibly can.

[adojrts]

Well done Mafia

Hey isn't ol Milan's long term 'success' rate at 67 or 68% Failure rate of the dog's that come out of his 'training' centres. With a 67 % failure rate for long term, that isn't too impressive.
Can't remember where I saw that, but it doesn't surprise me.

Lynn

[houndlove]

Erica, I'm jealous! Their website is just a treasure trove of resources for positive training. I reference it all the time.

Lynn, if you do remember where that stat came from please do let me know. I've suspected for quite a while now that at least the people who go on his show sign a non-disclosure agreement, which is why you rarely hear from those people about their experiences later.

[Maxy24]

His dominance theory doesn't make sense because most dogs are not trying to dominate their owners. He seems to think a dog that walks in front of you, goes through doors in front of you, jumps on you, sleeps on your bed or couch, or misbehaves at all is dominant. The dog simply has no idea he is not supposed to do these things or has not been properly taught, he is not trying to dominate anyone. I still can't get the image out of my head of him punishing the dog in what I call "the let's destroy the dog's confidence game". The dog had his ears flat against his head in fear after being harshly collar corrected for I don't remember what (which I don't agree with in the first place). Ceasar then stood there and waited until the dog's ears began to move away from his head, once they started he gave the dog a hard yank, then again the next time until the dog's ears were in a constant position of a fearful dog. Ceasar decided that unless the dog has his ears flat against his head he is being dominant. So apparently dogs can't be confident. I don't believe he has any degree in animal behavior, he seems to make things up. And his methods do work fast many force methods do, but do they last? do they build a relationship between dog and owner? Does the dog enjoy working with his owner? Force methods and PR methods both work with force the dog listens because he is afraid not to, with PR he listens because he has learned listening is the best thing to do it is fun for him. When someone taught there dog to heel with force they walk with their ears pinned to their head(usually), when they were trained with PR they walk with them alert (usually). I mean what the heck is calm submission? He definitely made that up. I don't remember does he alpha roll? He seems like the type that would, in which case I hate him *even* more. I just dislike his complete lack of understanding of dog's minds, anyone can make a dog too afraid to misbehave.

[adojrts]

Houndlove,
Kerri (Dekka) and I were chatting about him and she told me about that stat.
I then went looking on line and I found it but that was months ago or even last year. I 'll have a look again.
I'll ask Dekka as well, she may have the info at her fingertips.
I may have seen it here lol, Pat Miller and Jean Donaldson not too impressed with him either, go figure. I'll side with them any day over him and his methods.
http://www.dogviews.com/2006/12/against_cesar_m.html
Take care
Lynn

[adojrts]

His dominance theory doesn't make sense because most dogs are not trying to dominate their owners. He seems to think a dog that walks in front of you, goes through doors in front of you, jumps on you, sleeps on your bed or couch, or misbehaves at all is dominant. The dog simply has no idea he is not supposed to do these things or has not been properly taught, he is not trying to dominate anyone. I still can't get the image out of my head of him punishing the dog in what I call "the let's destroy the dog's confidence game". The dog had his ears flat against his head in fear after being harshly collar corrected for I don't remember what (which I don't agree with in the first place). Ceasar then stood there and waited until the dog's ears began to move away from his head, once they started he gave the dog a hard yank, then again the next time until the dog's ears were in a constant position of a fearful dog. Ceasar decided that unless the dog has his ears flat against his head he is being dominant. So apparently dogs can't be confident. I don't believe he has any degree in animal behavior, he seems to make things up. And his methods do work fast many force methods do, but do they last? do they build a relationship between dog and owner? Does the dog enjoy working with his owner? Force methods and PR methods both work with force the dog listens because he is afraid not to, with PR he listens because he has learned listening is the best thing to do it is fun for him. When someone taught there dog to heel with force they walk with their ears pinned to their head(usually), when they were trained with PR they walk with them alert (usually). I mean what the heck is calm submission? He definitely made that up. I don't remember does he alpha roll? He seems like the type that would, in which case I hate him *even* more. I just dislike his complete lack of understanding of dog's minds, anyone can make a dog too afraid to misbehave.

Lol, when my dogs go as a pack in or out doors it has nothing to do with dominance and who gets in first. They just come in even when grouped all together, trying to be the first one in. Now if Milan's views were correct, then the 'alpha's' within my pack of dogs, should be first, nope they don't CARE!!

As for him Alpha rolling, yep he does (again proving that he is light years behind), on one of the few shows that I watched of his, he rolled an adult female GSD and got bit!!!!!!!!!!!! What kind of idiot does that???? and what kind of fool puts on t.v for someone to try????

[Paige]

^I agree. I wish he'd flip a dog of giant proportions and get knocked down a few pegs. Not that I wish harm upon anyone but I'd like to see him on the receiving end of a body slam.

[adojrts]

Okie Dokie. I noticed alot of people on here do not agree with Ceasers methods. Why not? I don't understand. I watch his show, I read his books and it all makes sence to me. I also noticed people do not agree with his 'dominance' theory. Why not? I would LOVE to understand why. If what he's doing isn't right, then why do his tecnuiqes work SO well? When I first got Lily I bought all the training books and could find, watched tons of videos and nothing seemed to work for us. Lily still DRUG me down the street, had horrible dog agression issues and was just a rude puppy. All my dogs have been raised Ceasers way, and they are all great dogs. Ceaser's way was the only thing that worked for us. I would love to find the reasons why you do not agree..

Thanks so much! Have a safe holliday!

I am curious, which training video's and books did you purchase?

Btw, the leading behaviourists and dog trainers in the world firmly believe that although some of Milan's methods which are out dated and based on faulty wolf research of 45 + years ago, can work to some degree, there are better methods now based on sound behavioural research. They also state that he has put dog training BACK at least 20 years.

[LilyoftheValley]

I am curious, which training video's and books did you purchase?

Btw, the leading behaviourists and dog trainers in the world firmly believe that although some of Milan's methods which are out dated and based on faulty wolf research of 45 + years ago, can work to some degree, there are better methods now based on sound behavioural research. They also state that he has put dog training BACK at least 20 years.


I read these books as fallows:

Dog Training for Dummies, Puppy Training, Dog training ILLUSTRATED.

I watched these videos as fallows:

Fun to know Dog training, Training your pup the right way Video Version!


Both these videos the local shelter gave me. The books I bought online. The tqnuiqes used hand signals and TONS of treats. I also took her to a obedience class at petco but I quit because she wasn't learning anything. Everytime she did anything they gave her TONS of treats which I did not like. She also wouldn't do anything for me unless I used tons of treats. Thats when I went Ceasers Way. If what he's doing is wrong, then why does it work so well?

[Renee750il]

All that business about dogs preceeding you through a doorway or into an area, or really makes an effort to walk just ahead of you when you're out . . . let's think about it from a different point of view . . .

Ever wonder if your dog is maybe following his/her instincts to be alert and to protect you from the unknown? That's probably not going to be true in all cases, with all dogs, but with more guardian-oriented dogs, it's something to be considered.

Makes you wonder how people like Caesar got such a reputation for being gurus.

[LilyoftheValley]

All that business about dogs preceeding you through a doorway or into an area, or really makes an effort to walk just ahead of you when you're out . . . let's think about it from a different point of view . . .

Ever wonder if your dog is maybe following his/her instincts to be alert and to protect you from the unknown? That's probably not going to be true in all cases, with all dogs, but with more guardian-oriented dogs, it's something to be considered.

Makes you wonder how people like Caesar got such a reputation for being gurus.

Lily wasn't walking infront of me. I do dissagree that he thinks if a dog walks infront of you he's dominant, Lily was PULLING me down the street. Dragging me. She got REALLY big REALLY fast (she was the first big dog that was ALL mine...) So now I have another question... Did I ruin her by training her Ceasers Way? If what hes doing is so bad, and I basically trained her in that manner, then did I ruin her? She's really well behaved and I have even taught her ASL commands because my parents are deaf... Shes insanely obdient. did I break her will?

[Renee750il]

I doubt you hurt Lily. Where Caesar does the most harm, I believe, is when people who want to think in terms of domination and forcing dogs - or other animals for that matter - glom onto his schtick.

You trained Lily with love, and that's what makes the difference. That will cover a multitude of inadvertent mistakes. :)

[Lilavati]

I doubt you hurt Lily. Where Caesar does the most harm, I believe, is when people who want to think in terms of domination and forcing dogs - or other animals for that matter - glom onto his schtick.

You trained Lily with love, and that's what makes the difference. That will cover a multitude of inadvertent mistakes. :)

Most of what I know about Caesar's way I only know second hand. But I really, really doubt you ruined your dog that way. There are better ways, much better ways, to train a dog. But dogs have been trained by those methods for a long time, and many if not most of them turn out fine. You love your dog, you did the best you could by her . . . and from what you've said, she turned out fine. So its all good. Just from here on out, try postive reinforcement . . . it works better and won't make you feel bad either!

The biggest danger to Caesar's methods, from my limited knowledge, is when they are applied by people who just watch his show, diagnose their own problem (because they do have a problem) and either make the situation worse, or damage their dog. I presume that Caesar does in fact have some idea what he's doing . . . we don't agree with what he does, but he is a professional, with a lot of experience. I make the assumption that he does have some understanding of which certain techniques are appropriate. When amateurs with dogs with serious problems watch heavily edited television shows using punative methods and try to replicate it . . . <shutter>. Especially when they are people see their dog as a thing and not a living creature.

I am reminded of the person whose dog kept peeing on her feet and decided it was domanance . . .

[houndlove]

"What he does works" is kind of in the eye of the beholder. There are many many ways to train dogs and to get them to do the physical things we want them to do successfully. So there's lots of things that work by that measure. (Though we actually don't really know how much Cesar's way works because all we have is anecdotal evidence. I know personally of three stories in which people took Cesar's advice and their dogs ended up becoming very aggressive and being put down. But that's still just anecdotal.)

What I find really interesting is to learn some about dog body language and then turn the volume off on the show. Don't listen to what Cesar is telling you about how the dog is thinking and feeling, make that judgment for yourself based on what you've read. I think you'll see a very different show. I personally can't watch it any more. It makes me feel incredibly uncomfortable and after a while I just get angry. Because I am not listening to the stuff that Cesar spouts (remember, he has no formal training in dog handling or dog behavior, so he is telling his viewers his opinion on dog behavior, which differs really really greatly from the educated opinions of people who have studied dog behavior formally and worked with dogs for decades), all I see are dogs who are in crisis, mishandled by their owners for years sometimes and then mishandled by this guy who comes in to their houses and starts poking, prodding, yanking, choking and flipping them over. The dogs by the end are not "calm submissive" they are shut down. Those poor dogs can not win for losing, I feel so bad for them.

I trained my first two dogs largely like that. Conrad is still with me, and I did train him with great love, I did not abuse him or anything, so I'm not accusing anyone who judiciously uses these methods of abuse. But I still regret what I did with him. It was really not fair to him, it was not terribly successful beyond a certain point, it did not solve his serious behavioral problems (separation anxiety and some mild reactivity). I used a choke chain for training, and used the occasional scruff-shake (that's a Monks of New Skete thing) and alpha roll. I had a dominance viewpoint, though we were not strict with that kind of thing--Conrad was allowed on furniture, slept with us in bed, went through doors first, that kind of stuff. But underlying all of that was my feeling that dogs need an "alpha" in order to be happy, and that to demonstrate that I was alpha I could not let Conrad "disobey" me. When the dog disobeyed I needed to punish him in a way that would let him know "I am alpha, you listen when I talk to you." I never used food rewards because I felt that Conrad should listen to me because I'm me, I'm alpha, end of story.

By the time we got Marlowe, I'd done a complete 360 and that was based on my being inspired by Cesar (so thanks to him for that) to get more interested in learning about training and dog behavior. I read "Bones Would Rain from the Sky" and "The Culture Clash" and had an epiphany. I started reading more in that vein and almost as soon as Marlowe came home, I began clicker training him. The difference between them was really striking and it made me sad. When I began to cross Conrad over to the clicker, I saw how upset being trained made him. I'd never made training a pleasant or fun experience for him. No wonder I was never able to get much beyond sit, down and shake with him. Clicker training relies on the dog being in control of his own training--he offers you behaviors that you can choose to reinforce, or not. It took Conrad months to get over his terror of doing anything in the training context but just sit in front of me and look submissive. I felt incredibly guilty. I had done that to him. I'd made him afraid to be creative.

So, back to the successfulness issue. I judge the success of a trainer or a method by a dog being creative, being vibrant, being full of zest for life, knowing how to learn, thinking independently--and all of those things are not compatible with being "calm submissive". I do not want a dog who is shut down, not that I've had a dog who really knows how to learn and how to be creative. As I say, until you've had the latter, it's hard to be able to tell the difference. But after you have both types in your life, it's really really clear.

[RD]

My problem with Cesar is dominance, dominance, dominance. He reads way too far into simple behaviors and assumes that somehow every behavior is tied into the dog's desire to reach the top of the social ladder.

When a dog is pushing past you to get out the door, being dominant over you is probably the last thing on its mind. It's pushing past you in order to get outside because that's where it wants to go!

When a dog jumps all over you to get its food bowl, it's not doing so out of dominance, it's doing so because it's been improperly trained and doesn't know any better - and, because up until now, jumping all over has always resulted in the food being set on the ground. The dog wants the food, he doesn't want to be the boss of you.

When a dog is going for a walk and is pulling on a leash, it's not because they think they're dominant over you. It's because they want to GO and aren't properly trained to walk politely with you. It has nothing to do with dominance or lack of leadership. I know dogs that have excellent leadership from their owners but are still untrained to do polite things like walking on a leash.

Cesar preaches "pack" handling skills to pet owners with only a couple dogs. If you have a gigantic pack of dogs and need to control them, you probably can't train every single one individually and so calm, quiet control is probably a good way to go. But with pet dogs, this approach just doesn't work in the long term. For one, pet dogs are treated SO differently from the dogs he works with in a large pack. His dogs in that pack aren't his friends the way pet dogs are friends to their owners. They don't follow him around in his house and they aren't there to keep him company like most pet dogs are. So how can he say that companion animals with only a human for company should be treated the same way as a dog that's in a pack of 50?

While I do find that some dogs have a desire to be 'in charge' and will challenge humans, this isn't their life. They're not wolves and their survival does not depend on who is alpha, so their every behavior is not tied into a desire to be #1, as Cesar may lead people to think.

[Lilavati]

"What he does works" is kind of in the eye of the beholder. There are many many ways to train dogs and to get them to do the physical things we want them to do successfully.

Well, yes. I didn't deny it. I did say its not the best way, by far, to do things. My main point is that it is unlikely Lily ruined her dog that way . . . if she had, we'd know. I've meet lots of dogs trained in methods like that. Most of the are fine. They may not be all they could be, but they aren't, but any stretch of the imagination, ruined. Lots of children were educated by methods that we would condemn, justly, today. Most of them turned out fine. Many of them did reach their potental. Others, of course, were in fact ruined . . . they were turned off to learning, or never learned at all, because they were punished, harshly, for things that were not their fault (such as dyslexia). But most of those kids turned out ok. We now know better. The same is true of training dogs. We know better. The old methods largely work, but they will ruin some dogs and prevent others from being all they can be. And they don't do wonders for our relationships to our dogs. So they should not be used. But I really doubt Lilly ruined her dog . . . and now she knows a different way, and can move forward from there. No harm done.

So there's lots of things that work by that measure. (Though we actually don't really know how much Cesar's way works because all we have is anecdotal evidence. I know personally of three stories in which people took Cesar's advice and their dogs ended up becoming very aggressive and being put down. But that's still just anecdotal.)

No idea. I did say what I know is second hand. But I made a point about just this: Caesar, whatever we may think of his methods, is a professional, and would not be where he is today if his methods were a total disaster.

But hand those methods over to a bunch of people who don't know what they are doing AT ALL . . . who have only read chunks of his books and his shows . . . who may not care much for or pay much attention to their dogs . . . who lack any kind of knowledge or judgement . . . and I'd not be at all suprised if their dogs turned vicious. I've been outright shocked by some of the things I've seen people do to their dogs because they read it in a book or saw it on TV . . . but in at least some of those cases, I'm pretty sure what they are doing is not what they saw on TV or in the book . . its what they THOUGHT they saw. Because they lack the judgement to know the difference. What they saw or read was probably not the best way to handle the problem . . .but it wasn't the raving stupidity I witnessed either.

By way of quick example . . . a few days after I got Sarama, I was walking her and encountered a woman sitting with her two pit bulls. Alpha rolling them. Over and over. Mostly, they were just sitting there, looking at Sarama . . . perhaps they'd get up and bark once or twice. And this woman was just sitting there, grabbing them and flipping them over. Appearently at random. And giving me a lecture on how I should show my dog who is boss. "You shouldn't" [grab, whump] "let your dog get away" [whump] "with anything. She'll try to be" [grab, whump] "dominant over you if she can" [whump] "and then you'll have" [whump] "a lot of problems" [whump]. I have no idea who this person is. I think alpha rolls are a horrible idea. But what I was witnessing wasn't even recognizable as an alpha roll under the theory of what it was for . . . it was a random assault upon her dogs. She had taken a bad idea and was now misusing it in a way that could only end in tears. She clearly had no idea what she was doing, or why, in theory, she was supposed to be doing it. She just though that knocking her dogs over would make them obediant. Bad theory, appalling application.

I am not defending Caesar . . . my main point is that what works in a limited way for him, or for someone with some empathy and care for their dogs, would be, and probably is, a total catastrope in the hands of someone who had no idea what they were doing and didn't care.

Of course, some of the worst trained dogs I've ever encountered were trained by poor +R methods . . . though none of them were vicious . . . Anything done badly is worse than anything done right. Even if what you are trying to do is the right thing.

I am a strong supporter of +R methods . . . and I recommend them to everyone who asks. On the other hand, I refuse to walk around annoucing that any dog (or even most dogs) trained by other methods are badly trained, or mean, or that their owners are bad people. I have too much evidence, seen with my own eyes, to know that simply isn't true. The best dogs I've met were trained with love, and at least a strong measure of +R. But I've met plenty of others (admittedly, loved) that turned out fine by other methods.

Frankly, you hurt your case if you declare unilaterally that all dogs trained by other methods are somehow deficient. There is too much evidence that that is not true, at least by the standards most people use. Again, I'm not supporting these methods . . . but I know lots of dogs that were trained that way, or by a hybrid of +P and +R that are simply fine. Probably, even probably, not optimial. But fine. Not zombie robots or ravening monsters. Just nice enough dogs trained well enough. Not superdogs, but not disasters.

That doesn't mean that these methods should be used (we know a better way) but it also doesn't mean that they don't work and will make your dog vicious. It just means they are not the best way to do something . . . and hold risks, when they fail, that +R does not have. And are much harder and more risky for the inexperienced to use. So they should be abandoned. Agreed.

[2dogmom]

Most of what I know about Caesar's way I only know second hand. But I really, really doubt you ruined your dog that way. There are better ways, much better ways, to train a dog. But dogs have been trained by those methods for a long time, and many if not most of them turn out fine. You love your dog, you did the best you could by her . . . and from what you've said, she turned out fine. So its all good. Just from here on out, try postive reinforcement . . . it works better and won't make you feel bad either!

The biggest danger to Caesar's methods, from my limited knowledge, is when they are applied by people who just watch his show, diagnose their own problem (because they do have a problem) and either make the situation worse, or damage their dog. I presume that Caesar does in fact have some idea what he's doing . . . we don't agree with what he does, but he is a professional, with a lot of experience. I make the assumption that he does have some understanding of which certain techniques are appropriate. When amateurs with dogs with serious problems watch heavily edited television shows using punative methods and try to replicate it . . . <shutter>. Especially when they are people see their dog as a thing and not a living creature.

I am reminded of the person whose dog kept peeing on her feet and decided it was domanance . . .

http://geocities.com/mymixedbreeddog/smileys/signs/yeah.gif
Absolutely. Most of what I know I got from his website. There is an emphasis on explaining behavior problems using 'dominance theory', there is an emphasis on classifying dogs as dominant when they may or may not be (like if they walk through the door in front of you) and ther is an emphasis on physical methods. Now it may be that there are dogs with serious behavioral issues which he has turned around and if he gives people hope, then I am all for that.
But many of us deal with fearful, submissive dogs, and the possible damage that can be done by assuming that a submissive dog is being dominant ("My dog peed in front of me to SHOW me she is boss!" :rolleyes: ) is huge. If he would make room in his tool box for submissive dogs I would be a lot happier with him.
To his credit, he has come out against BSL so I give him a thumbs up for using his name for a good cause IMO.

[adojrts]

Have either of you read ANY of the links posted in this thread?
The people who are against Milan for the most part are people that use to use the same theories and methods BUT they learned that there are better methods, based on sound reseach?
Have you read how the original reseachers on Wolf Packs from 45 years ago, (which is where all this dominance and pack theroy comes from btw) have RECANTED, they know they screwed up, that the theories and reseach were seriously FLAWED?
Alpha rolling - dominant wolves and dogs DON'T ALPHA roll, the submissive offers the roll!! And in the cases where another the one takes down another in pure aggression, its meant to kill not to punish.
The fact remains that people at the fore front of dog traininig, believe that Milan has taken training BACK 20 YEARS.
He isn't a Professional Dog Trainer by any means, but he is a PRO at marketing.

[Dizzy]

He does some good things, some bad things.

I wouldn't put a prong collar on my dog (not that you can buy them here) or correct my dog in the manner he does, but I do think that some of his ideas have a little worth.

Most of the people on the show are push overs and do not train or exercise their dogs.

[Brattina88]

Most of the people on the show are push overs and do not train or exercise their dogs.
I agree. I also agree with what Milan says about exercise first - people at work tend to ask me for help with their dog's and behavior issues they are having. My first question to them is usually how much exercise they get. I am continually surprised by how little exercise dogs are getting. Some people never walk their dogs, and their yards are small :confused: and they wonder why their dogs dig, bite, chew, etc. Even I hate being cooped up in my house too much. Dogs thrive on way more exercise than I do LOL
I also agree with his saying about remaining calm or whatever. I know a woman who just asked me to help her with her puppy who is biting at her pant legs. She flails her arms around and yells "OW! THAT HURTS!" which gets the puppy all wired up, and encourages him. Even I had to laugh, it looked like fun to me as well! :o

But that guys just plain out gets on my nerves. Everything is NOT dominance related. And I HATE that episode with the Great Dane on the shiny floors - Milan keeps repeating how his calm-assertive energy helped the dog overcome his fears. Meanwhile, the dog is clearly showing many stressed-signals and ends up panting like crazy after his flooding.
My personal opinion is that people want a quick fix - and Cesar's 'techniques' seem to work well with that. But where are some of these dogs 6mos or a couple years after he works with them?? Hmmmm...

In one of the outtakes included in the four-DVD set of the first season of “Dog Whisperer,” Mr. Millan explains that a woman is “the only species that is wired different from the rest.” And a “woman always applies affection before discipline,” he says. “Man applies discipline then affection, so we’re more psychological than emotional. All animals follow dominant leaders; they don’t follow lovable leaders.” nytimes quote (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/opinion/31derr.html?_r=1)
Ha. BS :rolleyes:

JMHO

[Lilavati]

Have either of you read ANY of the links posted in this thread?
The people who are against Milan for the most part are people that use to use the same theories and methods BUT they learned that there are better methods, based on sound reseach?
Have you read how the original reseachers on Wolf Packs from 45 years ago, (which is where all this dominance and pack theroy comes from btw) have RECANTED, they know they screwed up, that the theories and reseach were seriously FLAWED?
Alpha rolling - dominant wolves and dogs DON'T ALPHA roll, the submissive offers the roll!! And in the cases where another the one takes down another in pure aggression, its meant to kill not to punish.
The fact remains that people at the fore front of dog traininig, believe that Milan has taken training BACK 20 YEARS.
He isn't a Professional Dog Trainer by any means, but he is a PRO at marketing.

We have. And we agree. But you are not reading what we are saying. We are not supporting Caesar or alpha rolls.

He has indeed taken back training 20 years. On the other hand, it did work, in a limited way, 20 years ago, and it works, in a limited way, now. I would NOT recommend the methods to anyone. On the other hand, I will not tell someone that I think they have ruined their dog that way. I don't think they have. I think their dog is very likely to be perfectly fine. Use +R methods for here on. Not only will wracking oneself with guilt over well intentioned training be totally counter producive, I don't think there is any reason to do so.

As for the alpha rolls . . . of course they are discredited! But my point about that woman was that she was not even using them under the discredited theory . . . this is a suble distinction, perhaps . . . but the theory and the training manuals that use it tell you have to use an alpha roll. (it doesn't work, I agree, it doesn't work, but hang with me here). There is a rationale to it, and circumstances that, under the theory, it is recommended. The woman I encountered was SO ignorant, that she wasn't even using the alpha rolls as they are supposed to be used under the discredited theory. She was taking a discredited theory and applying it in a way that, even with the bad science, it was never meant to be used. That's ignorance twice over. Not only is the theory discredited, but she wasn't even doing what the discredited theory said she should do. Bad useless training methods are bad and useless, but may not do too much harm (if no good) to a balanced, stable dog. Bad and useless training methods applied in ways that even their advocates never intended are downright dangerous, even WITH a balanced stable dog.

Although there are many, many reasons to use +R, one of them should be that if you screw up +R you are most likely to get a badly behaved, but happy and friendly dog that someone can retrain later. If you screw up +P you might get a vicious, neurotic, or mentally damaged dog who will take a lot of work to fix, if it can be fixed.

Basically, there is a scale of training, from best to worst (it is of course more nuanced that this, because of debates about what technique exactly fits where, but it gives the idea):
+R done right
+R done poorly
Traditional training methods done as they were supposed to be done. (some might argue that this is better that +R done poorly, but I'm not going to get into that arguement)
Traditional training methods done poorly
Traditional traing methods done by people who have no idea what they are doing
Cattle prods

[adojrts]

We have. And we agree. But you are not reading what we are saying. We are not supporting Caesar or alpha rolls.

He has indeed taken back training 20 years. On the other hand, it did work, in a limited way, 20 years ago, and it works, in a limited way, now. I would NOT recommend the methods to anyone. On the other hand, I will not tell someone that I think they have ruined their dog that way. I don't think they have. I think their dog is very likely to be perfectly fine. Use +R methods for here on. Not only will wracking oneself with guilt over well intentioned training be totally counter producive, I don't think there is any reason to do so.

As for the alpha rolls . . . of course they are discredited! But my point about that woman was that she was not even using them under the discredited theory . . . this is a suble distinction, perhaps . . . but the theory and the training manuals that use it tell you have to use an alpha roll. (it doesn't work, I agree, it doesn't work, but hang with me here). There is a rationale to it, and circumstances that, under the theory, it is recommended. The woman I encountered was SO ignorant, that she wasn't even using the alpha rolls as they are supposed to be used under the discredited theory. She was taking a discredited theory and applying it in a way that, even with the bad science, it was never meant to be used. That's ignorance twice over. Not only is the theory discredited, but she wasn't even doing what the discredited theory said she should do. Bad useless training methods are bad and useless, but may not do too much harm (if no good) to a balanced, stable dog. Bad and useless training methods applied in ways that even their advocates never intended are downright dangerous, even WITH a balanced stable dog.

Although there are many, many reasons to use +R, one of them should be that if you screw up +R you are most likely to get a badly behaved, but happy and friendly dog that someone can retrain later. If you screw up +P you might get a vicious, neurotic, or mentally damaged dog who will take a lot of work to fix, if it can be fixed.

Basically, there is a scale of training, from best to worst (it is of course more nuanced that this, because of debates about what technique exactly fits where, but it gives the idea):
+R done right
+R done poorly
Traditional training methods done as they were supposed to be done. (some might argue that this is better that +R done poorly, but I'm not going to get into that arguement)
Traditional training methods done poorly
Traditional traing methods done by people who have no idea what they are doing
Cattle prods

Well said, your right I did think you were supporting him, thanks for clearing that up and my apologize.
I don't have time now to re-read all the posts, but I don't think any one told the OP the she had ruined her dog..........If I remember correctly she asked if she had, not anyone saying that she did.

At any rate, Merry X-mas, have to run.
Lynn

[Lilavati]

Well said, your right I did think you were supporting him, thanks for clearing that up and my apologize.
I don't have time now to re-read all the posts, but I don't think any one told the OP the she had ruined her dog..........If I remember correctly she asked if she had, not anyone saying that she did.

At any rate, Merry X-mas, have to run.
Lynn

Merry Christmas, and its cool. I tend to write long dense posts, so I understand if people get lost. I need to work on that.

[houndlove]

I think my intention may have also gotten lost in my rambling too, which was to say that I don't consider what I did with Conrad abuse, and I don't think I ruined him, but I do regret many of the things I did and I am trying to improve things with him now. The result of the way I used to train was not a ruined or abused dog, but it was a dog who still had the same behavior problems he came with, and who lacked a certain something. A certain spark, and creativity. That is what I regret, though he is coming along great now.

I did what I did way back in the day not because I did not love Conrad. On the contrary, I had been convinced that if I did love my dog, this is what I should do. So I fully understand that people train this way and have these ideas not out of spite or cruelty, but out of love. But sometimes we do things with the best of intentions and out of the greatest love that still aren't the wisest things to do, all things considered. It's why in Buddhism wisdom goes hand in hand with compassion. Just having wisdom makes one cold and remote, but just having compassion makes one make rash decisions that don't always turn out the way we want. Having both, you can do the wisest things out of the greatest compassion, and that usually ends up better in the end for everyone. We can never see the end of the story, so to speak, so we never know what the results of our actions will be. We can only take our best guess and hope for the best.

[adojrts]

Ha!! If anyone here can be accused of rambling that would be me :D

[IliamnasQuest]

I agree with most of the things said about Milan - his methods are outdated and archaic, as well as (in MY opinion) based on an abusive level of force.

When we think about whether or not a method works, we have to each decide what we consider as a "good" result. If you have a dog that doesn't pull, doesn't bite, doesn't give you any sort of dominant actions or reactions - do you consider that the method "worked" or do you look at the other aspects of the dog's actions? I see the dogs on Milan's show and they are exhibiting huge stress signals and they look absolutely MISERABLE to me. But as an experienced dog trainer, I've learned to recognize and understand the dog's body language and overall I've found that the typical person - regardless of how long they've owned dogs - does NOT have a good knowledge of the body language of dogs. Many seem to think that if a dog is obedient and minds the owner, then whatever method was used worked well. But the facts are that you can take a dog and force that dog into submission and it will indeed act obedient. I could take almost any dog out there, use the right kind of pain, and could get that dog to show submissive obedience in a relatively short amount of time (and when I say "the right kind of pain" I mean for that particular dog - it may be a tug on a choke chain for one dog, it may be a shock collar set on 90 for another). To the unknowledgeable, the end result would look beautiful - a dog that complies instantly on command. To those who know canine body language, they'd see a dog that is responding through a fear of consequence - a dog that may wag its tail, that may fawn over the handler, but that is a dog with a personality that has been broken in some way.

I don't consider that kind of result as a method having "worked". And that's what I see when I look at the dogs that Milan handles on his TV show.

Nearly every dog I've seen him work with ends up with something thin and tight directly behind the ears (at the most sensitive and easily choked section of the neck). This is a FORCE method, pure and simple, and is based on teaching the dog that any response that is not very submissive will result in being choked and hurt. Milan delivers this pain with a charismatic grin and a cute little accent and people accept this brutal treatment of their dogs! It completely appalls me that anyone can say "I LOOOOOVVVE my dog!" and then let someone brutalize it like that. Yes, the dogs are a mess generally because the owners are completely inept. Yes, forceful pain-based training gets quick results (but not necessarily long-term results). But are the results worth doing that to your dog?

I, too, trained with force when I first started. I was good at it. I could use a choke chain very effectively, alpha-roll a dog a split second after it showed any aggressive attempt, and I had dogs that were SO obedient it would make your jaw drop to watch them. I loved my dogs, but I was brutal with them all in the name of training. And I won't ever forget what I did .. regardless of how much I apologized to them afterwards, I will never forget the look of confusion in my old shepherd's eyes when I was walking around the shop reinforcing all the younger dogs (that had been trained using positive methods) for getting into heel position, and poor Dawson stood in the middle of the floor with his head and tail down, watching me, completely afraid to offer a behavior because my harsh methods had taught him that he wasn't to do anything unless given a command. He wanted to be a part of what I was doing but I had destroyed the part of his personality that made him think he was allowed a choice.

When people ask me "did I ruin my dog by using these methods?" I tell them "well, maybe not ruined - but it's likely you have changed your dog's personality by adding fear as a main part of their behavioral response to you". You CAN NOT have the same relationship with a dog if you use fear-based methods in order to train, and if you use anything that causes pain (including the choking leashes/collars) then you are compromising the relationship to a certain extent. Maybe control is more important in some instances. I know that on occasion I do use methods that provide a consequence even now, but I do it fully knowing what I'm doing and fully knowing that it could create some change in the relationship I have with my dog. And that's something I watch for very carefully.

So if people want to use force, they have the legal right to do it. But I think we all have to ask ourselves, "what kind of relationship DO I want with my dog?". If all you want is obedience then I suppose any method will do. If you want a dog that trusts you, that believes you won't cause it pain and responds from a bond you have instead of a fear, then you won't base your methods on pain. You'll work hard to develop a good, solid, trusting bond and use positive reinforcement methods as much as you can - and save the corrections for those times when nothing else seems to work.

Anyhow, having been in both camps - having seen the difference, and having enough experience to see what Milan is doing - I just wanted to offer my thoughts on this. I do agree that dogs need more exercise and that they need leadership, but those things can generally be produced with a minimum of pain. +R methods can and do work well overall IF they're applied properly and they build a trusting relationship. I encourage everyone to try that first.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska

[Chewbecca]

I haven't read this entire thread, in fact, I only skimmed the last page.

But I have a question since I cannot watch him on tv (I don't get National Geographic Channel), is he softening at all in his ways of handling dogs?

My in-laws told me of the recent show with the lab that was afraid of everything from being over in...Iraq (?) and how Cesar took this dog and calmly worked with him.
I didn't see the show and they were just talking about different things he did with him and how he worked with him for like...45 days or something.
But what they said led me to believe that maybe he's softened with his handling of dogs.

Do you think he'd still take a dog aggressive dog and force it onto his pack and force his pack onto the dog?
Because that would destroy my dog.

[Lilavati]

Melanie,

You are right about "worked." And it really depends on how abusive the methods are. There is a whole lot of debate about what is and is not an abusive training method . . . and frankly, I've never paid any attention to Mr. Milan, so I only know what other people have said.

I was using "worked" in the general public sense. . . the dog obeys basic commands, doesn't bite, doesn't jump, and generally is pleasant to be around. In terms of "fine" after using traditional training methods, I meant friendly, bonded with its owner, a satisfying animal to be around and to own. The best they could be? No, not necessiarly.

As for ruining your dog . . . I agree with you. But, I think it really depends on the exact training methods. But I've met a lot of dogs trained by traditional methods that I would not call ruined, because the training was balanced with a lot of love and affection from their owners, who meant well. Was their relationship damaged? Probably, but I also think that it can be repaired. I've met ruined dogs. They're scared and scary. Most dogs trained by traditional methods, as they were meant to be used, do not turn out that way. They may not be what they could be, and they may not have the incredibly strong bonds with their owners that +R creates . . . but they are not ruined. And largely, I feel, by switching to +R, you can fix it, and heal your relationship. Of course, that also depends on the dog, and what you mean by traditional methods. That's where we get into debates about what is and is not acceptable in a +R program . . .which is probably for another thread. :)

However, I do refuse to condemn somone who did the best they could, have a dog that is not insane, and wants to learn more. Guilt is not constructive.

[corgipower]

Without reading the entire thread, but having skimmed most of theposst, and with only having watched a couple episodes of the show, I have been less than impressed with his lack of dog reading skills. One episode that stands out for me involved a dog that he took and put in with his pack. He showed the dog on video commenting how the dog was calm and confident and was now exhibiting control, blah blah blah, while the dog stood in the corner, tail tucked up against his belly, head half way to the ground, tongue hanging out with stress panting and trembling.

I was horrified that he would show that and comment on it being calm and confident. The dog was scared witless.

[Lilavati]

Without reading the entire thread, but having skimmed most of theposst, and with only having watched a couple episodes of the show, I have been less than impressed with his lack of dog reading skills. One episode that stands out for me involved a dog that he took and put in with his pack. He showed the dog on video commenting how the dog was calm and confident and was now exhibiting control, blah blah blah, while the dog stood in the corner, tail tucked up against his belly, head half way to the ground, tongue hanging out with stress panting and trembling.

I was horrified that he would show that and comment on it being calm and confident. The dog was scared witless.

I think I am glad that I have never actually watched the show . . . sigh . . . from your description, that behavior and its meaning should be obvious to anyone, even one not familiar with dogs . . . the dog is speaking universal Mammal.

[Maxy24]

It also bothers me how he does that with almost all the dogs, throws them in with his "pack". The "pack" all gather around the dog all showing him who's boss at the same time, stressing and scaring the dog. I think Caesar feels this is supposed to teach the dog to be submissive and that he is not always boss or something :rolleyes:. He's lucky there have been no big fights (that I've seen). Oh and IliamnasQuest GREAT post, it reminds me a lot of the book I'm reading "Bones would Rain from the Sky" it talks about how training methods can either help or hurt your relationship with your dog and how to read your dog and truly listen to what he is asking so that he learns to trust you and feel that he can depend on you to read him and respect him, not push him further than he can go. Certain training puts a value on you respecting your dog, other methods could care less about you respecting your dog it's all about the dog respecting you. You need to remember that your dog is directly and constantly affected by you and everything you do. Every time you are with him or interacting with him you are affecting his behavior, it's not "my dog has a problem" it is always "we, me and my dog, have a problem". So yeah now I'm getting off track but it's such a great book, everyone should read it I think. Your post just reminded me of it so much.

[adojrts]

I think I am glad that I have never actually watched the show . . . sigh . . . from your description, that behavior and its meaning should be obvious to anyone, even one not familiar with dogs . . . the dog is speaking universal Mammal.

lilavati;
You really need to watch at least one episode, I think you will then see what everyone is talking about.
As for 'it being obvious', it constantly amazes me how unobservant so many people are. And even when they do see something, they don't know what it means.
I can give a good example, I know someone who has been in the dog industry for over 25 yrs as a pro. They also compete with their dogs. (this person is not a dog trainer, except for the work they do with their own dogs).
They have 4 dogs, 2 males and 2 females all of different breeds and mixes, ALL are spayed and neutered. 3 of the dogs are rescues.
In the last two or three months, they have been having an esculating problem between the older female and the younger (2 yrs) bully cross female.
I was over at their place just last week and we were discussing the problem.
All the dogs were there, greeting me etc, while we were standing there, I watched some very subtile signs pass between the two dogs. I pointed the signs out to the owner and told them that it was at this point that they needed to redirect and take control of the situation. They missed it completely, so we let things carry on. With both of us chatting and watching, it happened again, owner missed it again. My visit turned into a lesson in subtile body language of dogs. And also a strong recommendation to get their hands on some books and DVD's. And which ones to purchase.
Before they have a blood bath, btw blood have already been drawn.

[houndlove]

I always recommend that people watch the show with the volume up, and then hit "mute" and watch with no sound. Humans are very very verbal creatures, and the show is chock full of this supposed expert telling the viewer what they are seeing. He is constantly interpreting and "translating" for the dogs, into human language and we as humans tend to really glom on to that. There's this really constant running commentary about, "Now the dog is feeling this, see he did that which says he's feeling this way and is about to this thing, and now I'm reacting in a way which tells him this and that and the other and now see he's saying this new thing, mission accomplished." Get rid of that commentary, and all of a sudden you can see what the dog is trying to say much more clearly, because this human verbal chatter isn't getting in the way of you just interpreting physical signals. And rarely is the dog actually saying what the commentary is telling the viewer it is saying.

[Cessena]

Ugh, I'd never watched any Cesar Milan until this weekend. I don't get Nat Geo, but my parents do. So I was home for christmas and had the flue, I decided to watch me some dog whisperer, and man do I regret it. In the episode I watched he worked with 3 different dogs, and each time he talked to the owners, and essentially blamed them for their handling of the dogs. (And he did say a few things that I agreed with but then he'd say something totally ridiculous to follow it up.)

He would get into this whole thing about how the owners needed to project a commanding presence blah blah blah and just by being assertive they would be able to get their dog to obey. He did this on three separate dogs, and on all three dogs, they show this HUGE almost instant change in behavior that they've made and going on and on about how much the owner's confidence and assertiveness helps.

And every single one of those dogs was switched to a regular buckle collar to some kind of choke collar. Wow, I'm sure it was just the ATTITUDE that fixed the problem, it has nothing to do with the rope/chain currently shutting off airflow every 5 seconds when Cesar thinks they are putting a foot out of line. Yank yank yank yank. It just broke my heart.

I am really surprised that more people don't see through his BS. But I guess it helps that I've heard all about it before.

[oc_spirit]

All I have to say is that Cesar Milan is nothing more than a waste of time...and air space ;)

[heartdogs]

I have little use for the guy - one thing I do notice in the more recent shows is that there is a subtle attempt to discredit some of his detractors. For example, he used to just leave whatever equipment the owner had on the dog, without much commentary. But, when a dog appeared in a Halti, he took that off quickly as if to suggest that it was harmful equipment. I wanted to say, "No, idiot, the owners probably just stuck the darn thing on the dog without acclimating it at all, and expected the dog to like it, which it didn't." The number one reason head collars fail isn't because they don't work, it's because the handler introduces it improperly. If you can get a dog to stand for having its nails clipped, or you can make it come when called, what the heck should be so hard about acclimating it to a head collar? But, it's like everything else - people want the "magic bullet", the "quick fix". And, Cesar Millan makes it look like that is possible - through the magic of television. I think that houndlove is dead on - that guy doesn't know fear when he sees it - fear and stress do NOT equal "calm submission",

[lives4dogshows]

I've never really watched CM or read any of his books but one day I did happen to catch him alpha-rolling a dog on one of his shows as he was flipping channels. That was it for me, I really don't want anything to do with his methods. The Dominance theory has been debunked in the last few decades and the fact that he is still using it as a basis for working with dogs just made me sick.

Anywho that's my two cents on the whole thing.

Have a Happy New Year!!

[krisnguyen]

i have read every post in this thread. there has been really good observations written by everyone who has posted. i have to comment and add my two cents worth:
i have korean jindos. they are great dogs and rare outside of california in this country. the first time i had heard them mentioned outside of a breed specific publications was on the dog whisperer. it should have made me really happy that an interesting and smart breed was going to get this kind of attention.
when i was training dogs at PetSmart, my good friend and head trainer recommended watching some CM because so many people reference his methods when they start the course and it helps to know what your customers are talking about. i don't have national geographic and so she invited me over to watch the show which featured Jindos.
it was awful: he started out by demonizing Jindos as agressive and unsuitable for living with families with small children or with families period. he said that most people leave them in the backyard with good reason: they are untrustworthy. then, as a dominance exercise, he put a choke chain on the dog and held the dog off of the ground so that only his back toes were touching the ground. his front paws were off the ground. cm held him that way until he was "calm", then let him down. if the dog moved without his permission, cm repeated this action. the owners stood by and let this happen. the justification? this dog was a rescue off of the street.
we watched it first with the sound off and then with the sound on. it is astonishing the difference that his accent makes. and he distracts with his running commentary.
i have great dogs who have been trained with +R methods. every jindo i know is a good dog.
i teach school. if i used any methods for R (+ or otherwise) that were considered acceptable and necessary 45+ years ago i would be fired. most teaching methods from that era are laughed about if they are brought up in faculty meetings now. if i tried to teach without proper training or without proper certification and relied on my experience alone, i wouldn't be called a professional, i'd be drummed out of town on a pole. and rightly so.
karen pryor has a great article about why cm is on oprah and clicker training isn't. it has a lot to do, i think, with america's obsession with the amateur - you know Next Super Iron Design Big Thing that was Living Right Next to You. and you could be next.
i know that lots of people have said similar things but i really don't want my breed demonized in any way by him, so i felt like i needed to say something.

[bordercollie22]

The only training method the guy has is turning the camera off for a few hours and then turning it back on when the dogs fixed.

[FourIsCompany]

All my dogs have been raised Ceasers way, and they are all great dogs.

All my dogs have been, too. I LOVE Cesar Millan. I know he has a lot of detractors (clearly), and that's ok. He is certainly not for everyone.

But I really appreciate the work he does to save dogs that would otherwise be put down or recycled back into the rescue/shelter system. And I know millions appreciate him for helping them to get their situation under control. He's doing a marvelous service for problem dogs and their people.

He's just one person, sharing what he knows. Take it or leave it.

Fortunately, he stresses that people should contact a professional several times during every show. As I see it, if people don't do that, it's hardly his fault. On TV, we see people racing cars, bungee jumping and performing all kinds of ridiculous feats and stunts, but nobody is all up in arms about those shows... I don't hold Cesar responsible for the mistakes every Joe Dogowner makes with their dogs.

Bottom line, if he weren't doing something right, he wouldn't be in the position he is with so many adoring fans and benefactors. Would he? Love him or hate him, it doesn't really matter. There are plenty of people on both sides of this icon. But he's helping dogs. He has helped MY dogs. And that, to me, is what's important.

[Dekka]

I love it when people say he saves dogs. Maybe, but he ruins many. I would hazard that as many dogs are euthanized due to his outdated training techniques as are saved. There are many stories of people who's dogs he has fixed, reverting.

Some of his methods are ok, but he sites the wrong reasons. It is not dominance but training. For example, the idea that the dominant dog goes through doors first is hogwash. How ever training your dog to wait for you to go through first is a good thing, so the dog learns that the human controls the exciting resourse of going outside. It teaches the dog to be obedient and observant, it is also safer. So raising a dog with some of CMs stuff (as long as you though out the down right abuse...which there is LOADS of in his show) is ok, as long as you realize he is a fancy snake oil salesman. He points to shut down scared dogs (dog is now lying still on the floor in fear the strange man is going to do something 'scary' the dog might appeasingly wag its tail and look away too try to calm the monster his family has invited into their house) and says look there is a trained dog. Wrong, its now a confused scared dog. I don't get me started with the abuse related lawsuits.

People say "what he says makes sense" and it does, if you are a human. It does not make sense from the dog's point of view. And who is it we are trying to train?

[adojrts]

All my dogs have been, too. I LOVE Cesar Millan. I know he has a lot of detractors (clearly), and that's ok. He is certainly not for everyone.

But I really appreciate the work he does to save dogs that would otherwise be put down or recycled back into the rescue/shelter system. And I know millions appreciate him for helping them to get their situation under control. He's doing a marvelous service for problem dogs and their people.

He's just one person, sharing what he knows. Take it or leave it.

Fortunately, he stresses that people should contact a professional several times during every show. As I see it, if people don't do that, it's hardly his fault. On TV, we see people racing cars, bungee jumping and performing all kinds of ridiculous feats and stunts, but nobody is all up in arms about those shows... I don't hold Cesar responsible for the mistakes every Joe Dogowner makes with their dogs.

Bottom line, if he weren't doing something right, he wouldn't be in the position he is with so many adoring fans and benefactors. Would he? Love him or hate him, it doesn't really matter. There are plenty of people on both sides of this icon. But he's helping dogs. He has helped MY dogs. And that, to me, is what's important.

I am curious, have you read any of links posted concerning CM, his methods and how world reknowned and leading behaviouralists and trainers has to say about him???

Hey Dekka, where are those stats on Milans long term failure rate? I can't find them, although I haven't worked to hard at it. I don't care to read and wade through all the Milan crap again lol.

[heartdogs]

All my dogs have been, too. I LOVE Cesar Millan. I know he has a lot of detractors (clearly), and that's ok. He is certainly not for everyone.

But I really appreciate the work he does to save dogs that would otherwise be put down or recycled back into the rescue/shelter system. And I know millions appreciate him for helping them to get their situation under control. He's doing a marvelous service for problem dogs and their people.

He's just one person, sharing what he knows. Take it or leave it.

Fortunately, he stresses that people should contact a professional several times during every show. As I see it, if people don't do that, it's hardly his fault. On TV, we see people racing cars, bungee jumping and performing all kinds of ridiculous feats and stunts, but nobody is all up in arms about those shows... I don't hold Cesar responsible for the mistakes every Joe Dogowner makes with their dogs.

Bottom line, if he weren't doing something right, he wouldn't be in the position he is with so many adoring fans and benefactors. Would he? Love him or hate him, it doesn't really matter. There are plenty of people on both sides of this icon. But he's helping dogs. He has helped MY dogs. And that, to me, is what's important.

I actually find this pretty amusing. Cesar says to take your dog to a professional. Well, I'm a professional. But, I still deal, every single day, with people who don't want to believe me about their dogs because they saw this dude on TV yanking the "terrifying jindo" into submission, or dragging the Great Dane across the floor (needless to say these are also people who wouldn't know a stress signal if it bit them, and care more about results than about results with humane methods. They think I, or any other trainer or behaviorist, for that matter, should be able to "fix" what's wrong with their dog pretty much instantly (and, oddly, they always seem to think in terms of fixing, not training), and wonder why it costs "x" or takes "x" time. And, to be honest, I get the same reaction from people on message boards, too. They think I'm full o' beans, if they watch this guy, when I talk about classical conditioning, desensitization, positive reinforcement. And, some of them spend most of their posting day trying to refute everything I say. So much for Cesar's advice or his disclaimer.
And, as for him being good at marketing, I think that ability rests with Oprah - without her he'd still be looking over his shoulder for the border patrol.

[Angelique]

Cesar's great! I've been using a similar philosophy for years with excellent results. My current dog was a wreck when I first brought her home from the shelter. She is doing awesome now!

I was really surprised when I first saw his show. I'm so glad someone is finally understanding how dogs think and view us through a dog's eyes.

I can't recommend his philosophies, show, books, dvd's, seminars, etc...highly enough!

I can see how some folks misunderstand what he's doing and what he's trying to teach based on the belief systems of the the +R authors, trainers, and their followers. You either "get-it", or you don't...and that's okay.

The holy crusade against him is a bit sad, though.

The International Association of Canine Professionals (IACP) site is an interesting read. Be sure and check out their articles section in addition to Cesar's tips.

www.dogpro.org/

Happy New Year and happy training!

[Dekka]

hmm its not a holy crusade. But most of us on this forum love dogs, and so see the stress behaviours exhibited by the dogs on his show are too painful for many to watch. I am a pretty strong person, I can't watch his show, I am conflicted between wanting to cry and going to hit something. I find it sad that people cling to loving his 'methods' even when no proffesional behaviouralist endorses him, infact all are quite verbal against his methods. Some say its jealousy, but jealousy over what? Most of the good behaviouralists (like Ian Dunbar) have their own TV shows, lots of clients etc...

And there success rates are much higher than those of CM. Lynn, I don't have them handy, they are out there on the net, but you have to dig for them. They were the stats as said by one of the big wigs in National Geographic when they were trying to defend him. I think it was acutally about 80% which sounds good, till you realize that wouldn't even get you published in a journal. Most ACTUAL behaviouralist/trainers have a success rate of over 98%.

Just a note even Oprah dropped him. If you want to love his methods, thats fine..some people still believe the world is flat, even when You show them the proof. If you can't see the stress his methods evoke, well I weep for your dog, and for you-for the relationship you COULD have had.

[FourIsCompany]

I am curious, have you read any of links posted concerning CM, his methods and how world reknowned and leading behaviouralists and trainers has to say about him???


I don't know which links you're referring to, but yes, I do know that a LOT of people, trainers and behaviorists don't agree with a lot of what he says and does. And a lot also do. And of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Like any public figure or subject close to our hearts, there are plenty of people on both sides of the issue. I make my determinations based on my own experience and observations, not on what someone I don't even know has to say about it. And let's be honest, Cesar's success would be a really motivating reason for other professionals to try to "shoot him down", if you know what I mean.

What I would really like to see is some data on the alleged stories of dogs being euthanized and reverting. Any dog, using any training or rehabilitation method would revert if the people didn't keep up with it. If they don't keep up with it, I really can't blame Cesar for that. That's like blaming my obedience instructor because I didn't do the homework during the week and now my dog won't sit.

I would also love to see the data on all these lawsuits. I know of only one lawsuit and Cesar wasn't even there when the dog was injured... He's just the one with the money.

I appreciate the concern, but there's no need to weep for my dogs and our relationships. We are excellent!

[Dekka]

If you do some looking you will find it, often it has been settled out of court. Behaviour science, is science, and what he does is short term. My fave comment about his show is you can put a bandaid over a bullet wound on TV and call it healed, but the patient is still dead.

He uses suppression, not training...for example..

Lets say you were afraid of men in big black hats (lets call them BBH) and you can't speak the same language as your loved ones for some reason. Every time you see a man in a BBH you yell stay back. But your loved ones just yell, or strangle you until you shut up. Does this make you like men in BBH? Not likely. Does it make you stop yelling at them, sure. Does it make you distrustful of those you care for, also likely. Now what happens of your loved ones, thinking you are now cured, allow a man in a BBH to come over and give you a hug? It doesn't matter if they kept up with the yelling and the strangling, you might still push them away...

Now take a behaviouralists method.. Every time you see a man in a BBH your loved one slips you a $50 (or something you really like) They make sure no man in a BBH gets close enough that you are really scared. Eventually you will start to point out the men in BBHs, and become excited when you see one. Eventually they will become a happy image for you, not a scary one.

The above method works on all animals. CM would not work on a lion or killer whale, or even a house cat, his methods take into the account that dogs are amongst the most forgiving and patient of creatures.

[adojrts]

I don't know which links you're referring to, but yes, I do know that a LOT of people, trainers and behaviorists don't agree with a lot of what he says and does. And a lot also do. And of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Like any public figure or subject close to our hearts, there are plenty of people on both sides of the issue. I make my determinations based on my own experience and observations, not on what someone I don't even know has to say about it. And let's be honest, Cesar's success would be a really motivating reason for other professionals to try to "shoot him down", if you know what I mean.

What I would really like to see is some data on the alleged stories of dogs being euthanized and reverting. Any dog, using any training or rehabilitation method would revert if the people didn't keep up with it. If they don't keep up with it, I really can't blame Cesar for that. That's like blaming my obedience instructor because I didn't do the homework during the week and now my dog won't sit.

I would also love to see the data on all these lawsuits. I know of only one lawsuit and Cesar wasn't even there when the dog was injured... He's just the one with the money.

I appreciate the concern, but there's no need to weep for my dogs and our relationships. We are excellent!

They were posted in this very thread.
Did you know that Dr. N Dodman, leading behavioralist and head of the the Behavioural Sciences and the Behavioural Clinic at Tuffs wrote to the National Geo Channel informing them that CM has taken dog training BACK 20 yrs??
What you just don't get, is its isn't that the methods don't work to some degree but those methods are centuries OLD and outdated. The pack theory that he uses is based on research that was proven to be flawed and WRONG!! Even the org. researchers admit that!!
There are better methods now, based on sound behavioural research, proven to be humane and MORE effective.
So don't read, don't educate yourself, its your dogs loss. And btw, most of the people including the ones on this forum, use to use such methods and we believed then too. We've been there done that. So if you think that we don't understand, don't know the methods and are bleeding hearts..........your wrong.

[Saintgirl]

They were posted in this very thread.
Did you know that Dr. N Dodman, leading behavioralist and head of the the Behavioural Sciences and the Behavioural Clinic at Tuffs wrote to the National Geo Channel informing them that CM has taken dog training BACK 20 yrs??
What you just don't get, is its isn't that the methods don't work to some degree but those methods are centuries OLD and outdated. The pack theory that he uses is based on research that was proven to be flawed and WRONG!! Even the org. researchers admit that!!
There are better methods now, based on sound behavioural research, proven to be humane and MORE effective.
So don't read, don't educate yourself, its your dogs loss. And btw, most of the people including the ones on this forum, use to use such methods and we believed then too. We've been there done that. So if you think that we don't understand, don't know the methods and are bleeding hearts..........your wrong.


You stole the very words out of my mouth. Education is the key.

[lizzybeth727]

Fortunately, he stresses that people should contact a professional several times during every show. As I see it, if people don't do that, it's hardly his fault.
Question: Did YOU contact a professional before beginning to train your dogs with CM's methods?

[FourIsCompany]

Gosh, I didn't know people would be so objectionable to my opinions. But that's ok, too. :)

If you do some looking you will find it, often it has been settled out of court.


I'm not going to go in search of data to prove your allegations.


Lets say you were afraid of men in big black hats


Only one problem... I am not a dog. I advocate desensitization. I believe there is a time and place for flooding, but I have used desensitization with my dogs.


Did you know that Dr. N Dodman, [...] wrote to the National Geo Channel informing them that CM has taken dog training BACK 20 yrs??


No, not specifically, but as I said, we're entitled to our opinions and so is Dr. Dodman.


What you just don't get...


I'm sorry. I don't believe you have enough information to tell me what I "get" and what I don't "get". You are mistaken. I DO know how old his methods are. :) But that in itself does not prove them outdated or useless. If that were the case, then we could say that since Scientific Method is old, it's outdated, and I'm SURE you would disagree with that. And conversely, just because something is "new and improved", doesn't mean it's better, or everyone would be running Windows Vista! LOL

I am also aware of the pack theory studies and subsequent findings. I'm also aware of Operant Conditioning and positive reinforcement training. I used to use it exclusively. So I've been on both sides of the fence as well. You might say I've also been there, done that. ;)

I think positive reinforcement is great! I still use it all the time. But I have expanded into the other quadrants of OC along with other types of learning theory.


So don't read, don't educate yourself, its your dogs loss.


Excuse me. I am highly educated in this subject. :) And my dogs benefit from my education.


So if you think that we don't understand, don't know the methods and are bleeding hearts.....

I don't think any such thing! I think you have chosen the method you prefer to use with your dogs and I have no negative judgments about that and I wish you all the luck and success in the world! Remember, I'm not accusing you of anything.

[harrischrysler]

Ok... I thought I would just be a casual observer and keep myself from being ostracized, but... The overwhelming negative attitude towards one person has forced me to at least add a little balast to the other side. It seems that no matter what your position is as a trainer, you should know every style of training to be an effective trainer. By knowing a heavily sided +R method, as well as the opposite, you can more efficiently communicate to owner's what it is they should be doing. Not everyone is going to be successful with one method. Every owner is different, and every dog is different. So, knowing a variety of methods is the only way to be more responsive to a varying degree of owners. (I didn't sell cars for nine years by only inducing positive thoughts and responses.) There seems to be an underlying movement that has it's motives set on proving the past wrong, be it dog trainers or general history. (stopping myself here.)
All I'm going to end on is: My dogs are happy, know my limits, and do NOT cower and respond to me out of some fear response that a lot of people here seem to want to find. Thank you Mr. Milan, and thank you Mr. Koehler. Less thanks but still gratitude towards Karen Pryor.
-only by knowing your enemy inside out, top to bottom, can you articulate a convincing response.-
Let me have it...
http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc255/republicanoutlaw/100_3317.jpg

[FourIsCompany]

Question: Did YOU contact a professional before beginning to train your dogs with CM's methods?

I don't have problem dogs like those on CM's show. But if I did, I would either contact a professional or be accountable and responsible for the outcome. Whatever I did, he would not be responsible.

Thanks in large part to watching him and reading his books, my dogs never developed any behavioral issues. Any "training" I have done (obedience training, etc) I have used OC. I said I "raised" my dogs with his methods, meaning the basic tenets of his philosophy.

[Dekka]

But good +P trainers don't like him either. Its not just his methods, its the fact that he is so ridiculously off base in his theories. The popular version pack mentality as spouted by CM has been PROVEN not to be applicable to dogs. Years of research, independently funded, has shown this. Even the original researchers who observed WOLVES back in the late 50's who came up with the idea of how dominance worked, recanted and said they were seeing things that had not been there, and showed the world their new research. Unfortunately pet dog trainers had taken that idea and ran with it.

Here's a flip question to all of you who love him then.. If he is so awesome and his methods work, who do successful trainers and competitiors, esp the world reknown ones not use his methods. If he is so good why is there so much stress behaviour in the dogs on his TV programs.

Oh and I did start with a choke chain etc on my dogs, but have been winning far more red ribbons (that is first place here in Canada..) since I started teaching what I want my dogs to do, vs punishing all that I don't want. So my wall of ribbons pays homage to K Pryor. Really I truely believe if you need to resort to punishment your training method has failed and now you are in damage control. Some of the most successful trainers in the world can do some amazing things..funnily enough with minimal or no -R and +P

[harrischrysler]

The world is flat. Sorry. Oh, and humans are causing warming trends in the weather that have been observed since the first thermometer.

[adojrts]

The world is flat. Sorry. Oh, and humans are causing warming trends in the weather that have been observed since the first thermometer.

What kind of statement is this?? and to what purpose does it serve??

Hey I have a poll for the trainers on this board. How many people and dogs have you had to retrain with issues because these people read and used CM's methods without success? On the same note, how many people have you retrained that have screwed up PR?
Now here is the big one..............which were easier to solve??

My answer...........too many to count that have used CM's methods and failed.
Yep had people who attempted PR and were not successful either, but having said that a little redirecting and they come along just fine.
Much easier to solve with failed PR unless it was to the point where they had no training at all and though that permissive was positive.

[FourIsCompany]

The popular version pack mentality as spouted by CM has been PROVEN not to be applicable to dogs.


I believe wolf pack theory has been proven not to be 100% applicable to dogs. But dog pack theory, disregarding wolves, is quite valid. Dogs aren't wolves, but in groups, they display observable behavior indicating that some dogs within the group are more submissive members of the group... others are in more commanding roles.


If he is so awesome and his methods work, who do successful trainers and competitiors, esp the world reknown ones not use his methods.


He is not a dog trainer. So why would trainers use his methods to train dogs?


If he is so good why is there so much stress behaviour in the dogs on his TV programs.


Probably because they are "problem dogs". That's the premise of his program. He works with problem dogs. Aggressive dogs. Dogs who are on their way to the shelters if they don't get some help.


Oh and I did start with a choke chain etc on my dogs, but have been winning far more red ribbons (that is first place here in Canada..)

Congratulations! Yes, Karen Pryor is a great dog trainer. I use many of her methods when training my dogs. Check out this video! I was teaching my husband how to clicker train our puppy. He was off on the timing a few times, but I thought he did a great job.

Clicker Video (http://s116.photobucket.com/albums/o19/CaraMia_photo_album/?action=view&current=Puppy-HubbyTraining.flv)

[lizzybeth727]

I don't have problem dogs like those on CM's show. But if I did, I would either contact a professional or be accountable and responsible for the outcome. Whatever I did, he would not be responsible.
I'm sorry, I've only seen a few episodes (no cable at home) and it's been a while, but doesn't the disclaimer that you mentioned say something like, "Contact a professional before trying any of the shown techniques"?

[harrischrysler]

[QUOTE]Hey I have a poll for the trainers on this board. How many people and dogs have you had to retrain with issues because these people read and used CM's methods without success?[QUOTE]

Tell ya' what. I will call you when it happens. (18 months and counting...)

And my comment added to the discussion just as much as demonizing does. When local trainers have cahorted and all conclusively decided this dog can't be trained, CM and Koehler stepped up to the plate without clickers and bribes to actually TRAIN THE DOG. One-sidedness has destroyed another forum for me. Still waiting on a real response without name dropping.

[Dekka]

Well no one would argue bribing is bad. But don't discount fellow chazzers. I have rehabbed dogs for the JRTRO. So far I have rehabbed 5 dogs that were due to be destroyed due to HA and DA issues. One I could not help, turned out he had a medical condition. Others on this board are very skilled at what they do. Some extreemly gifted trainers have left this forum because they got sick of arguing with people who wanted to to harm/hurt their dogs in the name of training.

I am by no means as talented as some of the others on this forum, but I am proud of the ribbons, titles and dogs I have helped. What have you done other than 18 months with your own dog that gived YOU such insight?

[harrischrysler]

So, you accuse me of discounting others when you've clearly discounted myself? Go spank your children and I will now leave you all alone. Pascifists...

[Dekka]

lol pascifists... nope I switched cause I am competitive. I want to win, and do well, at first it had nothing to do with being 'nicer' or 'kinder' Then when I read all about the theory of OC etc (learned about it in university) I delved into it more.

Why does my son need a spank..I am pretty sure he is happily sleeping.

[adojrts]

Pascifists??? what is that? hell I even grab the dict. and could find it there...
anyone?

And I don't believe that Dekka was discounting herself either lol.
I think things should come to a close, this have gone from the sublime to the ridiculous in a heartbeat.

[harrischrysler]

One last blast before I erase my account... I bet a Ward Churchill type was your professor... Appeasement monkeys.

[Lilavati]

So, you accuse me of discounting others when you've clearly discounted myself? Go spank your children and I will now leave you all alone. Pascifists...

One last blast before I erase my account... I bet a Ward Churchill type was your professor... Appeasement monkeys

<notes the elephant avatar>

This is great! Political paraody performance art on a dog training forum! This is simply sublimely ridiculous! I love it!

Could someone switch their avatar to a donkey and call him a "warmongering thug"? I mean, dog training techniques as a proxy for political affiliation . . . the possibilities for satire are endless!

So . . . what training methods does Rudi Gullani use? Or Hilary Clinton?

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

Excuse me, time to make more popcorn . . . .

[adojrts]

<notes the elephant avatar>

This is great! Political paraody performance art on a dog training forum! This is simply sublimely ridiculous! I love it!

Could someone switch their avatar to a donkey and call him a "warmongering thug"? I mean, dog training techniques as a proxy for political affiliation . . . the possibilities for satire are endless!

So . . . what training methods does Rudi Gullani use? Or Hilary Clinton?

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

Excuse me, time to make more popcorn . . . .

Mine just finished popping

[blue]

My bet would be that both RudEi and HiTllary would both use CMs meathods.

[Chaoslillith]

first you are defending Milan, but then you say you use positive reinforcement and operant conditioning which he doesn't use.

You say wolf pack theory is incorrect not dog pack and that Milan in not a trainer so what is he???

I think you are defending Milan just to defend him because it sounds like you do not really use his methods.

[FourIsCompany]

first you are defending Milan, but then you say you use positive reinforcement and operant conditioning which he doesn't use.


I use Operant Conditioning (all 4 quadrants) to train my dogs to sit, down, stay, etc. I use Millan's (and others') philosophy to develop and maintain a well-balanced, stable pack of dogs within my home. They are not mutually exclusive.


You say wolf pack theory is incorrect not dog pack and that Milan in not a trainer so what is he???


He's a Dog Whisperer. ;) Seriously, I would call him a behaviorist or a psychologist, without the piece of paper. Or a rehabilitator or a therapist for dogs. I would not call him a dog trainer by any stretch of the imagination. He rehabilitates dogs. He trains people. He is... the Dog Whisperer. LOL


I think you are defending Milan just to defend him because it sounds like you do not really use his methods.

I guess that depends on what methods you mean. As I said, I don't have problem dogs, so I have never had a need for many of the "harsher" methods we see on his show. But I think he's doing the right thing and I support most of what he does. I think he's fantastic with dogs and reads them right 90% of the time. I use his philosophy. In other words, I believe a group (or pack) of dogs needs a strong leader and it's important to maintain leadership. I believe in the tenets of exercise, discipline (in the form of rules, boundaries and limitations) and affection. I believe that if there a problem with the dog, it's most likely because they don't have strong leadership.

Does that clarify it for you some? I have better things to do than to defend someone just to defend them. But this is a very interesting discussion.

[houndlove]

I would like to note that the original question was "If you don't like Cesar Millan, why not?", not "What does everyone think of him?"

[lostcoyote]

The only training method the guy has is turning the camera off for a few hours and then turning it back on when the dogs fixed.

now there's a double digit IQ statement if i've ever seen one.


:lol-sign:

[lostcoyote]

I love it when people say he saves dogs. Maybe, but he ruins many....Don't get me started...

then let me help you get started.... provide reference material directly from his clients which state that he has ruined their dogs..

if you can not do this, then stop making presumptions based solely on your exagerated & emotional projections.

[lostcoyote]

I actually find this pretty amusing....

indeed, it is amusing, no matrer which way one is traveling down the internet highway. it's hillarious on this end of the pixels.

[lostcoyote]

It seems that no matter what your position is as a trainer, you should know every style of training to be an effective trainer. By knowing a heavily sided +R method, as well as the opposite, you can more efficiently communicate to owner's what it is they should be doing. Not everyone is going to be successful with one method. Every owner is different, and every dog is different. So, knowing a variety of methods is the only way to be more responsive to a varying degree of owners. (I didn't sell cars for nine years by only inducing positive thoughts and responses.) There seems to be an underlying movement that has it's motives set on proving the past wrong, be it dog trainers or general history.

sounds like common sense to me. use as many tools at your disposal which work to make your "pack" one cohesive and happy unit.

[elegy]

In other words, I believe a group (or pack) of dogs needs a strong leader and it's important to maintain leadership. I believe in the tenets of exercise, discipline (in the form of rules, boundaries and limitations) and affection. I believe that if there a problem with the dog, it's most likely because they don't have strong leadership.

but nothing in that at all is unique to cesar.

[houndlove]

now there's a double digit IQ statement if i've ever seen one.


:lol-sign:

And there's a really unnecessary personal insult if I've ever seen one.

[DanL]

You know what's great about CM threads? You can read the 1st page, skip to the middle page, and then to the end page, and it's all the same. The same people who don't like him blast him, the same people who like him support him.

I don't care about him either way. I enjoy watching his show because it's about dogs and there are some interesting situations on it. But, I'd also be interested in seeing where he's ruined dogs. We all know about the one he put on the treadmill who got hurt, but what else is there? If nothing else, he brings awareness to the families who come to him. I think we can all agree that 99% of the problems with the dogs on his show are because of the owners, and just making them think about what they are doing is going to improve their relationship with their pet.

I know this topic is great forum fodder, but it never ever gets anywhere. People have as many differences of opinion on dog training, just like they do on politics and religion. There is no set way, you do what works for you.

[FourIsCompany]

but nothing in that at all is unique to cesar.

Oh, I know. I have said that his philosophy has been around for a long time. I'm fully aware of that. So has positive reinforcement. We've been studying that since Skinner named it in the 1930s. And Classical Conditioning (used in clicker training) even before that. I'm not claiming that Cesar invented anything. He's just brought it to the forefront of the consciousness of dog owners in the US. Much as Karen Pryor has made clicker training a household name.

And as a personal opinion, I LIKE Cesar. I like his personality and admire his connection with dogs. He's fun to watch and I learn a lot from him.


We all know about the one he put on the treadmill who got hurt, but what else is there?


Actually, he didn't put the dog on the treadmill. Cesar wasn't even there. It's an interesting story, because while Cesar did give his staff permission to have the dog in his "Psychology Center", there was no contract and the dog owner didn't pay a fee for the use of the facility. He was getting a freebie, and there was an unfortunate accident, but Cesar wasn't involved. That's not to say he doesn't carry some responsibility. He does. And he owned up and paid.

Source (http://www.celebritydogwatcher.com/category/a-g-celebrities/cesar-millan/page/2/)


I know this topic is great forum fodder, but it never ever gets anywhere.

At least a discussion with 2 sides is a little more interesting and informative than 6 pages of a one-sided consensus of loathing. Well, to me, anyway. It doesn't get much of anywhere, but at least people are (usually) permitted to express their opinions. But as houndlove has pointed out, apparently opinions expressing support for Cesar Millan are a little too uncomfortable and not welcome in this thread. That's okay. I have expressed my opinion and now it can return to the totally useless and uninformative mission of a Cesar bash-fest.


People have as many differences of opinion on dog training, just like they do on politics and religion. There is no set way, you do what works for you.


Exactly! Well-said.

[Dekka]

Well I go back to school today, holiday is over :( I will look over the next few weeks to find where people have been badly bitten by their dogs AFTER CM has worked with them. Some seem to imply that they have settled out of court and part of the agreement is not to talk about it (smart really)

He will go the same way as Monty Roberts, given as much time. (took a long time for people to see him for the fraud he is too :))

Its very true Dan they never go anywhere, but often if I (and others) say nothing, then people will think we agree with him. I do get tired of pointing out the fallacies of pack theory (as related by CM) but its usually new people to the forum everytime.

(there are interesting situations, but how can you stand to watch the animals so stressed by CM? Doesn't it make you want to step in there yourself ;) I would trust you Dan, to train my dogs-and I know we don't always agree. Long before I trusted them to CM)

[houndlove]

I have expressed my opinion and now it can return to the totally useless and uninformative mission of a Cesar bash-fest.

Just to re-iterate, the point of the original post, was asking people who do not like Cesar why they do not. Are people not allowed to ask that question and get honest replies any more?

Given that a lot of people come here assuming that if you have dogs you must love Cesar, this thread was quite informative.

[DanL]

I would trust you Dan, to train my dogs-and I know we don't always agree. Long before I trusted them to CM)
Well, thats an honor! Thank you!

[lostcoyote]

And there's a really unnecessary personal insult if I've ever seen one.

no.

i stated:
"now there's a double digit IQ statement if i've ever seen one."

what that means, is that the STATEMENT is double digit IQ material. it is an ignorant statement but that does not nessessarily reflect upon bordercollie22 as a low IQ individual.

i said absolutly nothing about the PERSON (bordercollie22) who wrote it.
i don't know bordercollie22. but i saw the post and it is what it is.

(but you can interpret it as a personal insult if you wish)

now if bordercollie22 had actually been on the set to witness camera activity over the couirse of several months and made such a statement, then it would be valid. but something tells me that is not the case. bordercollie22 is just another anti CM basher/hater.

[jjwoodee]

I believe wolf pack theory has been proven not to be 100% applicable to dogs. But dog pack theory, disregarding wolves, is quite valid. Dogs aren't wolves, but in groups, they display observable behavior indicating that some dogs within the group are more submissive members of the group... others are in more commanding roles.




If anyone has traveled outside the country particulary South America and India one can't help but notice ferrel dogs that hang out together in the towns. They only naturally gravite toward establishing a dog pack. People in South America, Mexico (small town and city locals) and not the wealthy (they actually own dogs like american families)view dogs as something that is outside and stays outside. They offer them occasional scraps for acting as alarms but thats about it. I should know when we had our pup traveling around and visiting my wifes poorer family members in Peru were a bit offended that we wanted the puppy to stay in the house with us and potty train him - we were using newspapers at the time.

Anyways, I imagine that impoverished areas and their peoples can;t be spending a bundle of time or their own food training their dogs with treats like we can in America. They have different needs. I think in our country and Europe, alot of owners bring in dogs as extensions to their family to fulfill their emotional needs.

I have seen some incredible levels of poverty in India that is appalling to western standards. There we alwys dogs running around -along with cows and pigs. When we ask the dogs to come live with us behind four walls their has to be some semblence of structure and rules - without rules the dog has no other choice but to resort to behaviors that we find unacceptable in human living environment to express their frustrations.

[Dekka]

Actually it was studying the feral dogs in countries like south america, that it was observed they did not form family packs like wolves and coyotes. They hang out with who ever is there, not a stable pack. The hierarchy is not applicable, with the 'alpha' wolves mating only. All available dogs breed with all available bitches. And yes dogs roaming free, like in Greece, often have much better social skills than those raised solitarily in a house. But that has to do with socialization and nothing to do with pack theory.

[fillyone]

He will go the same way as Monty Roberts, given as much time. (took a long time for people to see him for the fraud he is too :))


Monty's a fraud? Dang, saw him years ago in KY and was very impressed, what's the scoop?

[Dekka]

Umm well basically people have come out of the woodwork, including family and childhood friends to tell the truth about how he grew up. And I do know of numerous successful lawsuits of people being badly hurt very shortly after receiving their horses back from training. If you google the truth about Monty Roberts you should find plenty of reading (I find his stuff even harder to watch than CM..like that video where he chases the young horse for over 24 hours....oh and the camera crew from that video has come forward to tell some interesting things too)

[adojrts]

Monty's a fraud? Dang, saw him years ago in KY and was very impressed, what's the scoop?
I saw Monty too, but at least his methods did some good instead of taking them back 20 years. With the exception of what he did to that poor little mustang, that was bloody criminal.
After his book came out he was sued right left and centre by his family members and others etc. I can't remember which mag it was but it was either H & R, or Equus that did an expose on him. It was after all that that he recanted that everything in his book was 'correct'. He claimed it was a story and not a Bio.
His history with horses was fabricated, so was the fact that he did all that work with foster kids (not one kid), so it turns out that most of his life, experiences etc were fabricated to sell a book and himself. Did he develop Join Up and Follow Up, well that is the big question, some claim he didn't and stole it from some else but he marketed it and claimed it as his own.