'Dog Whisperer' being sued for injury of dog!
- Thread starter mojozen
- Start date
- Status
i assume that the dog's injuries were an accident resulting from the dog either tripping or becoming so exhausted while being run on the treadmill that it fell, and because it was on a choke collar, was strangled. goodness knows if the dog was being supervised or not, but i expect serious damage to a dog's trachea could occur pretty quickly in that kind of a circumstance.
since cesar regularly puts dogs in choke collars on treadmills on his show, it does not surprise me, even while i doubt the dog's injuries resulted from any kind of "correction" or "training". i think it was pure stupidity, carelessness, and the policy of putting dogs in chokers on treadmills.
i have no problem with treadmills. i don't even have much of a problem with choker collars when used correctly. but putting the two together is like begging for a tragedy. and it's exactly what they got.
since cesar regularly puts dogs in choke collars on treadmills on his show, it does not surprise me, even while i doubt the dog's injuries resulted from any kind of "correction" or "training". i think it was pure stupidity, carelessness, and the policy of putting dogs in chokers on treadmills.
i have no problem with treadmills. i don't even have much of a problem with choker collars when used correctly. but putting the two together is like begging for a tragedy. and it's exactly what they got.
MomOf7 said:
If you all knew some of the training methods professional Hunt Test or Field Trial people use....You would flip! The strangest would be a marble and a sling shot!
These dogs end up being the NFCS and FC's and MH and so forth. Awsome working dogs! I am not saying I agree or like some of the methods.
I personally dont care for the dog whisperer. Not because of any training method I have seen him use...I just get a bad vibe from him!
These dogs end up being the NFCS and FC's and MH and so forth. Awsome working dogs! I am not saying I agree or like some of the methods. I personally dont care for the dog whisperer. Not because of any training method I have seen him use...I just get a bad vibe from him!
LOL. You have no idea how much I've delved into training research, learning theory and psychology or how long and how many dogs I've worked with in my 50 years...LOL.
This is not only my opinion, but the opinions of many PHDs/advanced degrees in canine behavioral science and many, many well respected dog trainers, marine mammal trainers, other animal trainers and authors. This is the philosophy of most successful and enlightened trainers of service and therapy dogs, S&R dogs, bomb sniffing, cancer sniffing, drug sniffing, movie actor dogs. Even police forces are beginning to use operant conditioning methods for training their dogs. This is the training philosophy of today, based on how dogs think and learn, not based on dominance, coercion, avoidance, fear, worry, pain or any other aversive.
The old scruff and yank and alpha, domination stuff is all based on old, unscientific and disproven wolf studies done on wolves in captivity a long time ago, which have no relevence to our domestic dogs. That kind of garbage is being replaced by something that has been shown to train dogs well, reliably with little to no wear and tear on them.
So, sure it's my opinion and I'm not afraid to state it. But it's most certainly not my opinion alone. ROFLOL.
This is not only my opinion, but the opinions of many PHDs/advanced degrees in canine behavioral science and many, many well respected dog trainers, marine mammal trainers, other animal trainers and authors. This is the philosophy of most successful and enlightened trainers of service and therapy dogs, S&R dogs, bomb sniffing, cancer sniffing, drug sniffing, movie actor dogs. Even police forces are beginning to use operant conditioning methods for training their dogs. This is the training philosophy of today, based on how dogs think and learn, not based on dominance, coercion, avoidance, fear, worry, pain or any other aversive.
The old scruff and yank and alpha, domination stuff is all based on old, unscientific and disproven wolf studies done on wolves in captivity a long time ago, which have no relevence to our domestic dogs. That kind of garbage is being replaced by something that has been shown to train dogs well, reliably with little to no wear and tear on them.
So, sure it's my opinion and I'm not afraid to state it. But it's most certainly not my opinion alone. ROFLOL.
Last edited:
W
and yet my post had nothing to do with yank em crank em grab the scruff, alpha stuff did it??
Nor have I advocated that anywhere, and YES, when you say the statements like you did and there is a lot to the contrary, and you simply want to close your eyes to it. Fine. A lot of it comes from the same respected people you're quoting and talking about. I've even put it out there for you. I could take more time and put more out there, but we both know where that would get us.
It wouldn't prove you're right or wrong, but it is there, so just continue to ignore it. There is a time and place for both in training to deny it doesn't make you any more right.
and what's all the laughing for??
Nor have I advocated that anywhere, and YES, when you say the statements like you did and there is a lot to the contrary, and you simply want to close your eyes to it. Fine. A lot of it comes from the same respected people you're quoting and talking about. I've even put it out there for you. I could take more time and put more out there, but we both know where that would get us.
It wouldn't prove you're right or wrong, but it is there, so just continue to ignore it. There is a time and place for both in training to deny it doesn't make you any more right.
and what's all the laughing for??
I was not referring to anything you posted. I don't even remember what you posted. I'm comparing this kind of training to Ceasar's way...the flooding, the force and roll stuff. I know about more compulsive training methods. I use to use them. I've trained both ways and I see a huge difference. It's not just book learned stuff. I've been around where dogs and horses are concerned. And I wouldn't be trying to promote something that was harmful or useless and that's why I say what I do. It is nothing personal toward you.
What's all the laughing for? Because I'm in a great mood today. My lawn mower finally started and my dogs are happy out on the grass. My smallest boy dog is content with a leg bone from a dead deer, hoof and all and it's a sunny day. I also laugh because how could you know how many years I've been researching dogs, how much time and experience I've had with them and what amount of education I've had in animal behavior. And yet, you make such a statement. So, it's mildly amusing, kind of humorous to me.
I'll bow out of the discussion now. I've said all I have to say. It will be interesting to see how this law suit plays out and if there will be a rippling effect. Hopefully, the dog will heal adequately and suffer no lasting fear of people.
What's all the laughing for? Because I'm in a great mood today. My lawn mower finally started and my dogs are happy out on the grass. My smallest boy dog is content with a leg bone from a dead deer, hoof and all and it's a sunny day. I also laugh because how could you know how many years I've been researching dogs, how much time and experience I've had with them and what amount of education I've had in animal behavior. And yet, you make such a statement. So, it's mildly amusing, kind of humorous to me.
I'll bow out of the discussion now. I've said all I have to say. It will be interesting to see how this law suit plays out and if there will be a rippling effect. Hopefully, the dog will heal adequately and suffer no lasting fear of people.
D
Oh lord!!! All animals face corrections at one point in there life. Doesn't a puppy's mother correct him if he gets too rough? Doesn't the mother correct the puppy if he tries to eat her food first? Doesn't the mother correct the puppy when she wants to be left alone? While doing this the mother usually gives a warning first (growls) and then bites. Eventually the puppy will know that a growl means that the puppy is doing something wrong anf they WILL think twice about crossing the mother. They DO learn from correction or else the mother of ANY animal would not use correcting. If there was no correction by the mother the puppy would abuse the mother and constantly annoy her.
People get too focused on in depth things but fail to look around and realize that the answer is right in front of them.
People get too focused on in depth things but fail to look around and realize that the answer is right in front of them.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2006
- Messages
- 1,083
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
Coming in late in the discussion, as usual .. *L*
I can't say I'm surprised by this news. It was only a matter of time before something happened. When you train with force (which is what Cesar does and what his employees do) you are going to end up with problems. I feel bad for the poor dog that had to endure this, as I do with many of the dogs he works with.
I'm a cross-over trainer. I started with aversive methods paired with praise - but I was taught the basic "spare the rod, spoil the dog" type of training. I believed that force was the way to go and it was effective in many ways. I can see much of what I USED to do in Cesar's methods. He not only is NOT a "dog psychologist" but he is back in the old-style training methods that very few truly good trainers use anymore. The advantage to those methods is that it appears to make an immediate difference in the dog - but in the long run, those methods fail miserably. They make dogs that are fearful and unable to make good decisions for themselves. They result in dogs that later can flare out into aggression that has been kept internal through fear of consequences. These are methods that people used because they just didn't know any better. And it's been shown time and again that the methods are NOT good, but because the uneducated see an immediate change they think it's a miracle and it makes for good TV .. *RME*
People use force because they can, not because they should.
Now, I'm not against corrections as a whole. I do think that there is a place for a proper correction and I do use them on my chows on occasion. I rarely have to use any sort of correction with my shepherds - that's a breed that, trained properly using high levels of reinforcement, willingly works with you. A simple "eht eht" or "hey!" is enough to stop my shepherds from doing something they shouldn't. The chows take a bit more convincing at times.
But corrections should not be the basis of training, and for Cesar they are. Forcing a dog into submission is punishment. Using a choke chain is punishment. Dragging a dog is punishment. And these are all used as TRAINING techniques, not as proofing later on. Even as proofing these are pretty severe.
Unfortunately for the poor dogs that end up under Cesar's "care", these are only a few of the methods he uses. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone dubbed him a "whisperer"!! The whole concept of the horse whisperer was that he used understanding and kind communication. Cesar's methods are not kind.
I don't know who in Hollywood owed Cesar a favor, but he was put in a position of misguided power and unfortunately dogs are suffering because of it. There are SO many trainers out there who can get much better results by using kind methods, but because this guy is on TV we have people fawning at his feet. It just shows the level of ignorance still present in dog training overall.
Melanie and the gang in Alaska
I can't say I'm surprised by this news. It was only a matter of time before something happened. When you train with force (which is what Cesar does and what his employees do) you are going to end up with problems. I feel bad for the poor dog that had to endure this, as I do with many of the dogs he works with.
I'm a cross-over trainer. I started with aversive methods paired with praise - but I was taught the basic "spare the rod, spoil the dog" type of training. I believed that force was the way to go and it was effective in many ways. I can see much of what I USED to do in Cesar's methods. He not only is NOT a "dog psychologist" but he is back in the old-style training methods that very few truly good trainers use anymore. The advantage to those methods is that it appears to make an immediate difference in the dog - but in the long run, those methods fail miserably. They make dogs that are fearful and unable to make good decisions for themselves. They result in dogs that later can flare out into aggression that has been kept internal through fear of consequences. These are methods that people used because they just didn't know any better. And it's been shown time and again that the methods are NOT good, but because the uneducated see an immediate change they think it's a miracle and it makes for good TV .. *RME*
People use force because they can, not because they should.
Now, I'm not against corrections as a whole. I do think that there is a place for a proper correction and I do use them on my chows on occasion. I rarely have to use any sort of correction with my shepherds - that's a breed that, trained properly using high levels of reinforcement, willingly works with you. A simple "eht eht" or "hey!" is enough to stop my shepherds from doing something they shouldn't. The chows take a bit more convincing at times.
But corrections should not be the basis of training, and for Cesar they are. Forcing a dog into submission is punishment. Using a choke chain is punishment. Dragging a dog is punishment. And these are all used as TRAINING techniques, not as proofing later on. Even as proofing these are pretty severe.
Unfortunately for the poor dogs that end up under Cesar's "care", these are only a few of the methods he uses. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone dubbed him a "whisperer"!! The whole concept of the horse whisperer was that he used understanding and kind communication. Cesar's methods are not kind.
I don't know who in Hollywood owed Cesar a favor, but he was put in a position of misguided power and unfortunately dogs are suffering because of it. There are SO many trainers out there who can get much better results by using kind methods, but because this guy is on TV we have people fawning at his feet. It just shows the level of ignorance still present in dog training overall.
Melanie and the gang in Alaska
Now, Im not saying any names because there are a fair few that do this and a fair few that dont.
But why, the minute someone has "alot" of dog experiance be it courses or just life exerpaince does that make them right? Isnt dog training a LIFELONG learning curve? Are there not allways going to be better ways out there?
But why, the minute someone has "alot" of dog experiance be it courses or just life exerpaince does that make them right? Isnt dog training a LIFELONG learning curve? Are there not allways going to be better ways out there?
D
That is what I have been saying on all my posts regarding corrections. Corrections, IMO, are as simple as a "no" but people confuse the term correction with abuse, or maybe I am confusing it. Using corrections is NOT to TRAIN your dog, but to enforce your training. It would be wrong to correct a dog for not knowing or understanding the command. I am not familiar with Cesar Millan of his techiniques but from what I hear he IS abusive. But telling your dog "no" on occasion, IMO, is not harsh.
amen!!
i think we put too much emotional baggage on the world "correction". corrections are not inherently mean/abusive/harsh/forceful.
i love this article by suzanne clothier on the subject.
i think we put too much emotional baggage on the world "correction". corrections are not inherently mean/abusive/harsh/forceful.
i love this article by suzanne clothier on the subject.
Coming from a background in canine behavior studies and being that I am current and do know the research, I agree 100% with Doberluv. The FACT is that this is exactly what has been concluded to date. I'd love to see any current studies to the contrary. There will always be old school trainers hanging on to antiquated methods like a baby with a soother instead of doing the real work to see that dog training evolves.
I tell my dogs "no" or "eh-eh-eh!" or "leave it!" I use a fairly sharp voice sometimes. I just don't use it when I'm teaching obedience skills or agility. If I didn't ever say "no" and stopped what I was doing each and every time my dog was maybe about to get into something or bug the other dog, I'd be jumping up out of my seat like a jack rabbit. I'd also have to have the patience of a saint. I don't think of those things as punishment, more like telling the dog something. I don't need to use yanks on the collar or punishment when I'm practicing something with the dogs but I do use a firm voice, not loud, but decisive. Physical punishment is not what a leader is about, so I steer clear of that. So, maybe it's a matter of definition of what a correction is exactly.
The trouble with Ceasar is that subdueing a dog, keeping it in this "calm submissive" state and reinforcing that by only giving attention when it is submissive conditions the dog to behave less. Not only does he stop the behavior in question for the time being, but he stops behavior in general when punishment and that amount of domination is used all the time. There are other behaviors or intentions happening besides the one he is trying to stop....or correct. So the dog may have to guess which behavior it is he should stop or should he stop something else also? So he stops that behavior as well as any other behavior happening at the time. Behavior just sort of fades out altogether in general and you get a toned down version of a dog, a shell of what was a dog. That is what I see on a lot of those dogs in those programs...these half dogs walking along "behaving" and looking very subdued.
That's the beauty of "positive" reinforcement. You reward a behavior or you don't. Nothing bad happens to the dog. If you mess up and reward the wrong behavior, you can go back and fix it later. If you punish a dog by accident, it's much harder to win back the trust. It takes a little chink out of the relationship.
About mother dogs and puppies. We aren't dogs and I think our dogs know it. We have a human-domestic dog relationship. I don't really see a big correlation there. If a mild correction or communication to stop something is used, I have no problem with that anyhow. I'm talking about this general, excessive use of "putting a dog in it's place" mentality and sharp leash corrections, frightening alpha rolls where if the dog doesn't feel frightened like he's about to be attacked, he feels over run by some other specie....a human being of all things.
The trouble with Ceasar is that subdueing a dog, keeping it in this "calm submissive" state and reinforcing that by only giving attention when it is submissive conditions the dog to behave less. Not only does he stop the behavior in question for the time being, but he stops behavior in general when punishment and that amount of domination is used all the time. There are other behaviors or intentions happening besides the one he is trying to stop....or correct. So the dog may have to guess which behavior it is he should stop or should he stop something else also? So he stops that behavior as well as any other behavior happening at the time. Behavior just sort of fades out altogether in general and you get a toned down version of a dog, a shell of what was a dog. That is what I see on a lot of those dogs in those programs...these half dogs walking along "behaving" and looking very subdued.
That's the beauty of "positive" reinforcement. You reward a behavior or you don't. Nothing bad happens to the dog. If you mess up and reward the wrong behavior, you can go back and fix it later. If you punish a dog by accident, it's much harder to win back the trust. It takes a little chink out of the relationship.
About mother dogs and puppies. We aren't dogs and I think our dogs know it. We have a human-domestic dog relationship. I don't really see a big correlation there. If a mild correction or communication to stop something is used, I have no problem with that anyhow. I'm talking about this general, excessive use of "putting a dog in it's place" mentality and sharp leash corrections, frightening alpha rolls where if the dog doesn't feel frightened like he's about to be attacked, he feels over run by some other specie....a human being of all things.
I am in total agreement that a dog needs to know when he's headed in the wrong direction, and yes corrections such as "eheh" or "try again" are IMO not only acceptable but necessary. It's the verbal abuse and physical corrections/punishment that are unnecessary and totally useless. I have never said that I was against negative markers and I don't believe that any trainer can be truly non-aversive understanding that a mere "eheh" is considered aversive.
Last edited:
D
OMG!!! That is what I have been saying and I think that is where the miscommunication comes in. I believe verbal "no" and "uh-uh" are corrections and that is what I usually refer to as correcting.
I agree with you. You should never assert your dominance through physical means. It only makes things very rocky with you and your dog and THAT is what creates an agressive dog. A dominant dog is not always agressive, just their personality but there are ways to go about that to show your leadership WITHOUT using force. Doing everyday things for your dog such as feeding, walking, playing ect, are enough for the dog to consider the human alpha.
Actually, when you bring a puppy home and once they accept you as their new pack then they treat you like they would treat their littermates. Thats why they bite and nip us becuase that is how they communicated with their fellow dogs. It is the owner who teaches and makes the dog notice that we are not like dogs and make it unacceptable to bite humans. That is where the distinction between humans and dogs comes into play. Sure they know we look different but it isn't until we train them that a human is different than a dog and certain behaviors is uncceptable to the human race.
I was not reffering to correcting the same way a mother does to her puppy but just proving the point that animals do face corrections and if they weren't necessary then they would not be used in the wild or part of nature.
I agree with you. You should never assert your dominance through physical means. It only makes things very rocky with you and your dog and THAT is what creates an agressive dog. A dominant dog is not always agressive, just their personality but there are ways to go about that to show your leadership WITHOUT using force. Doing everyday things for your dog such as feeding, walking, playing ect, are enough for the dog to consider the human alpha.
Actually, when you bring a puppy home and once they accept you as their new pack then they treat you like they would treat their littermates. Thats why they bite and nip us becuase that is how they communicated with their fellow dogs. It is the owner who teaches and makes the dog notice that we are not like dogs and make it unacceptable to bite humans. That is where the distinction between humans and dogs comes into play. Sure they know we look different but it isn't until we train them that a human is different than a dog and certain behaviors is uncceptable to the human race.
I was not reffering to correcting the same way a mother does to her puppy but just proving the point that animals do face corrections and if they weren't necessary then they would not be used in the wild or part of nature.
W
sorry, but most of the "New" stuff that I read, is not new, its been around a long time. Maybe not as well understood a while back, but its not new. And again, most of the studies that "prove" physical corretions aren't effective and will destroy the bond between handler and dog, are OLDER yet. And things done since then have shown more than enough benefits and that the older studies on aversives that keep being quoted were not entirely reliable.
So you have new authors using even more anitquated studies to "prove" their point. Do we need to keep going round in cirlces?? and still I'd like to see, other than making dogs run fast, a group of people that are winning every year in major dog sports that have not used a leash correction at some point in their training.
We could go round and round on research, its there, you just have to look. I gave a few references to get you started in another thread I'm not going to dig it all up again. SInce research isn't the be all and end all, I like real world stuff too.
So you have new authors using even more anitquated studies to "prove" their point. Do we need to keep going round in cirlces?? and still I'd like to see, other than making dogs run fast, a group of people that are winning every year in major dog sports that have not used a leash correction at some point in their training.
We could go round and round on research, its there, you just have to look. I gave a few references to get you started in another thread I'm not going to dig it all up again. SInce research isn't the be all and end all, I like real world stuff too.
- Status