# Dog Whisperer-Ceasar Milan



## MacknCody

So, I was watching "Dog Whisperer" tonight and Ceasar brought the dog he was working to his rehab center thing to socialize it(I guess). The dog freaked when he put it in and he alpha rolled it while letting the other dogs crowd him while it was on its side. I dunno about this. 

Thoughts? 

I'm neutral on "Dog Whisperer", don't agree or disagree-have seen stuff I liked and stuff I didn't. I have to admit though we see the extreme cases with the stupidest people and the weirdest dogs so maybe we don't get the best example of him.


----------



## DianaM

I didn't watch this episode yet but he does manage to have 20+ dogs live in a pack and be at peace with each other. That's pretty impressive. Of course, people are able to do this with foxhounds and in huge numbers, but these are GSDs, mixes, pit bulls, huskies, very small dogs, etc. 

If he offered sessions with his pack, I'd go in a heartbeat just have him around all those dogs that I know are under good control and don't tear apart new dogs (at least when he's around). 

I do have mixed thoughts on his methods, but you're right- most of the people we see are very strange indeed.


----------



## scannergirl

I love learning about all the methods that are out there, and drawing my own conclusions. For me a training method must work within the physical requirements of the animal, (example- horses learn differently than dogs and must be trained differently) must NOT be abusive in any way, must improve the relationship I have with the animal and not degrade it, and must be effective. 
My Cesar Milan books will arrive tomorrow and then I'll have more knowledge to draw from. But I know what I don't want, and that's an animal to do what I want because he's afraid not to. 
He's gotta wanna.


----------



## pinkanml

Hey Diana, you could come work with me! We always have openings for dog pack supervisors at the daycare. You'd be in charge of 20-30 big dogs, all breeds and ages. It's challenging at first, but you get the hang of it fast. I can have all 25 dogs lying down and napping (I'm an old pro, lol). I think there is no better way to learn everything about pack behavior, social behavior, body language, etc. than by being surrounded by all those dogs (armed with nothing but a leash and a water squirt bottle).

Some things you can learn from a book or tv, but nothing replaces the real thing.


----------



## onyx'girl

I would love to work at a daycare for dogs! There is one nearby, but I don't think the pay would be what I make now. It is a busy place though...and my car will be paid off in two more payments!! 
I personally think Cesar has a place in the dog world, and not everyone agrees w/ his methods. He only did the alpha roll in extreme cases, and I bet he has re-thought that over the last year. There haven't been any new episodes lately(writers strike??) but I think in the future we will see a more peaceful, positive way in his techniques. In his new book he admits there are better ways of handling certain situations than he did on some of the old episodes of his show. After reading Monty Roberts _The Horse Listener_, the horse and dog training are similar in some ways, the animal does things because he wants to, not because of fear or consequences. One though, is prey animal and the other has the prey drive.


----------



## Liesje

I'm neutral on him. I don't think I'd ever hire him or let him touch my dogs, but my dogs are very well-mannered and easily trained, definitely not the tough cases he is known for. I do not agree with his methods, since it seems he uses primarily physical corrections and lots of flooding, neither of which I use. However, there is something to be said about having a stable pack of FORTY dogs!

I have seen inexperienced people try to emulate him and do more damage to their dog. I try not to hold it against him since he always has disclaimers on his show. I really wish he would focus the show more on HIS dogs that he has rehabbed and less on showing what he does with other peoples' dogs. I think John Q Public sees that and then thinks they can repeat it with their own dog after just watching TV for 25 minutes.

Personally, I tailor my methods based on the individual dog and the individual behavior we are trying to achieve. I consider myself very novice and I don't like to try anything without the guidance of a trainer I trust. I don't really read dog books and try those things on my own dogs. If I have a problem or want to try something new, I talk to the trainers first and generally they will recommend specific materials or loan them to me. So, I cannot really judge Milan because I don't have a troublesome dog and I won't judge him without actually SEEING him work with dogs, not some edited TV show that's become somewhat of a fad.

Oh, and where dog TV shows are concerned, I much prefer Victoria Stilwell "It's Me or the Dog".


----------



## dOg

Behaviorists don't much care for Cesar. His psychology doesn't fit the science. They bemoan his old school ways take us back decades, and have begged NG to kill this program.

That said, as clueless as his clients are, he probably does more good than harm for them, though he probably has been bitten and had more failures than we'll ever see.

But it's not rocket science to say a tired dog is a good dog, and more exercise will improve misbehaviors. Nor that leadership is important, and treating dogs like humans is ill-advised. 

Abscent of anything worth your time on TV, it's entertainment. The commercials about the show DURING the show are pretty redundant and asinine too.

He's laughing all the way to the bank though, so is National Geographic. That's show biz!


----------



## BucksMom

> Originally Posted By: LiesjeOh, and where dog TV shows are concerned, I much prefer Victoria Stilwell "It's Me or the Dog".


I just love watching her show!!! She has good insight and seems to get good results.


----------



## bearlasmom

i love Czar and the guy from 'im at the end of my leash'
did anyone see him handle the large black german shepherd who would snarl and bark at people who came into the home. He walked in there, and told them to let the dog GO, it charged at him and what does he do? He charged it! Right across the room and up the stairs until he had it cowering in a corner. he didnt raise a hand to it except to grab it and stare it down.


----------



## Guest

It's a good thing there's that disclaimer on his shows or THAT one would be certain to cause him liability sooner or later and my guess is sooner.


----------



## CWhite

HI,
I love his show. I have the first two seasons on DVD. I have watched the first season and I am in the process of watching the second season. 

So far the second season (in my opinion) is better than the first. He addresses the following issues: (lack of supervision at) dog parks and badly behaved little dogs. I loved it when he stated that if big dogs acted the way little dogs did, it would be considered and "issue". He also addressed the fact that people seem to encourage the out-of-control behavior in little dogs because they think it is cute. 

My favorite episode so far is the one with "Shep" the dominant GSD.


----------



## CWhite

Here is the thing with Cesar. I noticed his cases are extreme cases of stupidity. 

Gucci: pomeranian whose mate Prada died. Gucci received $150.00 worth of toys (weekly). If owners sat to watch TV she barked incessantly, so they got up and went to bed. 

Chihuahua from ****( I don't remember the dogs name): Mother put the dogs needs ahead of her son. If the son came near the mother - dog lunged and bit him. Cesar became infuriated with this idiotic owner.

Some cases are people who are trying, but do not know what to do.


----------



## meganktar

I watch his show every once in a while. I can't say it is the greatest, like a few other people on here I prefer It's Me or the Dog a lot more. I think the biggest reason for that is the owners don;t seem as stupied. She is also more intrested in working with the dogs and owners, not just blaming the owners for not being dominate enough. Again I haven't seen a huge amount of episodes of The Dog Wisperer so I may be wrong.


----------



## DianaM

> Quote: Chihuahua from ****( I don't remember the dogs name): Mother put the dogs needs ahead of her son. If the son came near the mother - dog lunged and bit him. Cesar became infuriated with this idiotic owner.


Oh gawd THAT one... Son would get attacked and Momma would never protect her son! If my dog ever nailed my kid like that, you can bet that the dog would rue the day for the rest of its life. Then again, I'm smart enough to NOT let that happen in the first place. So yes, Cesar deals with some complete morons.

Jessica, if I ever take a vacation to Virginia, I'll bring Renji and we can "throw him to the wolves!"


----------



## blackbirdzach

I have mixed feelings on his show as well. I DO like that he teaches people to read the dogs body language and he spends more time working with the people than the dogs. I use a lot of his methods, but not all...just like I use a lot of the Monks of New Skete's methods, but not all. I read a lot of material and use what I need in the real world where I think that it applies.


----------



## big_dog7777

Just like virtually anything else, there is good and not so good in his methods. Take from it what you like, leave the rest. At the very least his show entertains me.


----------



## JanH

I think he does understand dogs. His methods I understand some don't like but he does seem to get results. 
That said, both horses and dogs it seems "whisperers" get the results so people imitate them...and people imititating do so without the understanding of WHY they're doing it...or the ability to read the animal's body language...then get in trouble. I've picked up some good things from all three of those mentioned - don't get the channel to watch Cesar anymore but the early shows I saw he does seem to get through to the dog. While it's true that it's not rocket science to exercise the dog and treat a dog like a *dog*, it seems so many people do just that. They humanize the dog and end up in trouble because the dog isn't human - and reads different things into what the person does. 

I enjoy his shows...don't 100% agree with most people but can learn from them.


----------



## Lakeguy929

There was recently an episode where a couple called on Caesar because their dog was afraid of the sound of their shop air compressor, wish I had that as the biggest problem in my life..... jeeeeeez.


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: Lakeguy929There was recently an episode where a couple called on Caesar because their dog was afraid of the sound of their shop air compressor, wish I had that as the biggest problem in my life..... jeeeeeez.


I remember that. Wasn't that the dog that he said had really good energy? Like he couldn't believe they were going to complain about the dog because it was so well behaved and indifferent towards him when he sat down?


----------



## zyppi

I can just imagine the average pet owner imitating some of his practices --- consequences many not a be a pretty picture for either owner or dog.


----------



## FourIsCompany

I watch his show and have read both of his books. I like him a lot and think he helps a lot of people and dogs. I don't have to use his more controversial techniques because I don't have aggressive or problem dogs like the ones he deals with, largely because I have raised them using Cesar's overall approach to a healthy pack. I don't agree with him 100%, but I don't agree with anyone 100%. 

And yeah, I can't believe some of the people he deals with! LOL


----------



## onyx'girl

> Originally Posted By: Lakeguy929There was recently an episode where a couple called on Caesar because their dog was afraid of the sound of their shop air compressor, wish I had that as the biggest problem in my life..... jeeeeeez.


 in his book Be the pack leader, Cesar explained the reason for the dog hating the air compressor was because the wife didn't like the husband spending so much time it the garage and the dog felt her anger and was anxious when he went out there. Once Cesar fixed the wife, got her to see her resenting DH's garage time, so was the dog "fixed".


----------



## MacknCody

Well, I still don't know about him.. anyone ever wonder about his rehab center and why its all concrete flooring? I don't think he's exactly poor at this point and I'd rip up the concrete and put some kind of turf in for the dogs to run around on. JMO. 

90% of the people on the show I want to smack. You have to wonder why they have dogs in the first place.


----------



## BellatheDog

"So, I was watching "Dog Whisperer" tonight and Ceasar brought the dog he was working to his rehab center thing to socialize it(I guess). The dog freaked when he put it in and he alpha rolled it while letting the other dogs crowd him while it was on its side. I dunno about this"

Alpha rolling is controversial and can be very dangerous! This type of dominance is not used in the “dog world” and dogs don’t really understand what is going on when you do this. I would never recommend this type of dominance over a dog. You’re just looking for a fight that you will not win.


----------



## Maedchen

From Andrew Luescher, DVM, Veterinary Behaviorist  
Animal Behavior Clinic 
Purdue University

I reviewed the four preview-videotapes kindly submitted to me by National Geographic. I very much appreciate having gotten the opportunity to see these tapes before the program goes on the air. I will be happy to review any programs that deal with domestic animal behavior and training. I believe this is a responsibility of our profession. 

I have been involved in continuing education for dog trainers for over 10 years, first through the How Dogs Learn" program at the University of Guelph (Ontario Veterinary College) and then through the DOGS! Course at Purdue University. I therefore know very well where dog training stands today, and I must tell you that Millan's techniques are outdated and unacceptable not only to the veterinary community, but also to dog trainers. The first question regarding the above mentioned tapes I have is this: The show repeatedly cautions the viewers not to attempt these techniques at home. What then is the purpose of this show? I think we have to be realistic: people will try these techniques at home, much to the detriment of their pets. 

*Millan's techniques are almost exclusively based on two techniques: Flooding and positive punishment*. In flooding, an animal is exposed to a fear (or aggression) evoking stimulus and prevented from leaving the situation, until it stops reacting. To take a human example: arachnophobia would be treated by locking a person into a closet, releasing hundreds of spiders into that closet, and keeping the door shut until the person stops reacting. The person might be cured by that, but also might be severely disturbed and would have gone through an excessive amount of stress. Flooding has therefore always been considered a risky and cruel method of treatment.

Positive punishment refers to applying an aversive stimulus or correction as a consequence of a behavior. There are many concerns about punishment aside from its unpleasantness. Punishment is entirely inappropriate for most types of aggression and for any behavior that involves anxiety. Punishment can suppress most behavior but does not resolve the underlying problem, i.e., the fear or anxiety. Even in cases where correctly applied punishment might be considered appropriate, many conditions have to be met that most dog owners can't meet: The punishment has to be applied every time the behavior is displayed, within ½ second of the behavior, and at the correct intensity.

*Most of the theoretical explanations that Millan gives regarding causes of the behavior problems are wrong*. *Not one of these dogs had any issue with dominance. Not one of these dogs wanted to control their owners. What he was right about was that calmness and consistency are extremely important, but they don't make the presented methods appropriate or justifiable*.

The last episode (compulsive disorder) is particularly unsettling because compulsive disorder is related to an imbalance in neurotransmitter levels or receptors, and is therefore unequivocally a medical condition. Would it be appropriate to treat obsessive compulsive disorder in people with punishment? Or have a layperson go around treating such patients?

My colleagues and I and innumerable leaders in the dog training community have worked now for decades to eliminate such cruel, ineffective (in terms of true cure) and inappropriate techniques


----------



## 3K9Mom

> Originally Posted By: BellatheDog"So, I was watching "Dog Whisperer" tonight and Ceasar brought the dog he was working to his rehab center thing to socialize it(I guess). The dog freaked when he put it in and he alpha rolled it while letting the other dogs crowd him while it was on its side. I dunno about this"
> 
> Alpha rolling is controversial and can be very dangerous! This type of dominance is not used in the “dog world” and dogs don’t really understand what is going on when you do this. I would never recommend this type of dominance over a dog. You’re just looking for a fight that you will not win.


And _even if_ I were inclined to roll a dog, I would never ever roll a dog when there are other dogs to crowd around him. That doesn't make him more willing to submit to you as a leader voluntarily. That just teaches him that you're going to put him into dangerous situations. 

My one pet peeve about CM's shows is that he's all about taking dogs for walks, regardless of breed. GSDs can walk for 20 miles and still have physical energy to burn, and still need active mental stimulation. Walks are just tip of the iceberg. 

What I do like about CM, and I suggest to people is that if you watch his show with the volume off, you pay attention to how CM interacts with the dog and see how a leader walks, and holds himself (like, a leader doesn't bend over when giving a Down command or to encourage heeling, which many novice dog owners do). Bearing and posture. That alone is almost priceless. I also like the fact that he insists that all dogs in a pack are treated as equals, no preferential treatment for smaller dogs, older dogs, or whatever. 

The rest of it? Eh, there a better ways to train. I've trained with a host of different kinds of trainers with different models, and I pick and choose what I like best (and what works best depending on the dog). But I just don't see a lot that can be successfully carried through by a layperson on the Dog Whisperer shows. 

And, I always wonder how many takes it took to get that vicious, out-of-control, completely overindulged animal to actually behave so perfectly on film...


----------



## jinxieab

> Originally Posted By: dOg
> Abscent of anything worth your time on TV, it's entertainment. The commercials about the show DURING the show are pretty redundant and asinine too.
> 
> He's laughing all the way to the bank though, so is National Geographic. That's show biz!


EXACTLYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY


----------



## SunCzarina

I think most of what he says is worthwhile for people who are otherwise clueless about dogs. Maybe they'll learn something about being positive leader. Not everyone is a reader or knows which books or websites to believe in. i.e. the unwashed masses!

But just think, if those are the people who aren't so embarrassed by their dogs behavior that want to be on the show, who are the people who are so ashamed they watch but don't want to be on the show?

The scariest one I saw was with the korean hunting dog (forget the breed) The couple had rescued him and the dog was biting the owners every time he went in the house!


----------



## codmaster

BellatheDog said:


> "So, I was watching "Dog Whisperer" tonight and Ceasar brought the dog he was working to his rehab center thing to socialize it(I guess). The dog freaked when he put it in and he alpha rolled it while letting the other dogs crowd him while it was on its side. I dunno about this"
> 
> Alpha rolling is controversial and can be very dangerous! This type of dominance is not used in the “dog world” and dogs don’t really understand what is going on when you do this. I would never recommend this type of dominance over a dog. You’re just looking for a fight that you will not win.


Actually the "Alpha Roll" or something similiar CAN work. I once had a 9 month old male GSD out of very tough German lines (son of the Seiger) and he had a real bone on the floor one night. I wanted to go out and needed to take the bone away from him so we could put him in his crate. When I reached down to take the bone, he didn't want to give it up and actually growled at me when I tugged on it. Without even thinking about it, I grabbed him by the scruff of the neck and gave him a big shake and growled "NO" back at him. He gave me the bone and never ever again growled or showed such behavior again. This is a dog who at 8-9 months was the toughest dog in a Sch club I belonged to in DE. (It wasn't a very good club but still ...)

What do you think I should have done when he growled - basically challenging me?


----------



## codmaster

Maedchen said:


> From Andrew Luescher, DVM, Veterinary Behaviorist
> Animal Behavior Clinic
> Purdue University
> 
> I reviewed the four preview-videotapes kindly submitted to me by National Geographic. I very much appreciate having gotten the opportunity to see these tapes before the program goes on the air. I will be happy to review any programs that deal with domestic animal behavior and training. I believe this is a responsibility of our profession.
> 
> I have been involved in continuing education for dog trainers for over 10 years, first through the How Dogs Learn" program at the University of Guelph (Ontario Veterinary College) and then through the DOGS! Course at Purdue University. I therefore know very well where dog training stands today, and I must tell you that Millan's techniques are outdated and unacceptable not only to the veterinary community, but also to dog trainers. The first question regarding the above mentioned tapes I have is this: The show repeatedly cautions the viewers not to attempt these techniques at home. What then is the purpose of this show? I think we have to be realistic: people will try these techniques at home, much to the detriment of their pets.
> 
> *Millan's techniques are almost exclusively based on two techniques: Flooding and positive punishment*. In flooding, an animal is exposed to a fear (or aggression) evoking stimulus and prevented from leaving the situation, until it stops reacting. To take a human example: arachnophobia would be treated by locking a person into a closet, releasing hundreds of spiders into that closet, and keeping the door shut until the person stops reacting. The person might be cured by that, but also might be severely disturbed and would have gone through an excessive amount of stress. Flooding has therefore always been considered a risky and cruel method of treatment.
> 
> Positive punishment refers to applying an aversive stimulus or correction as a consequence of a behavior. There are many concerns about punishment aside from its unpleasantness. Punishment is entirely inappropriate for most types of aggression and for any behavior that involves anxiety. Punishment can suppress most behavior but does not resolve the underlying problem, i.e., the fear or anxiety. Even in cases where correctly applied punishment might be considered appropriate, many conditions have to be met that most dog owners can't meet: The punishment has to be applied every time the behavior is displayed, within ½ second of the behavior, and at the correct intensity.
> 
> *Most of the theoretical explanations that Millan gives regarding causes of the behavior problems are wrong*. *Not one of these dogs had any issue with dominance. Not one of these dogs wanted to control their owners. What he was right about was that calmness and consistency are extremely important, but they don't make the presented methods appropriate or justifiable*.
> 
> The last episode (compulsive disorder) is particularly unsettling because compulsive disorder is related to an imbalance in neurotransmitter levels or receptors, and is therefore unequivocally a medical condition. Would it be appropriate to treat obsessive compulsive disorder in people with punishment? Or have a layperson go around treating such patients?
> 
> My colleagues and I and innumerable leaders in the dog training community have worked now for decades to eliminate such cruel, ineffective (in terms of true cure) and inappropriate techniques


Sounds like you are equating training dogs with humans? Is that actually the case or are there any differences that are significant?


----------



## mjbgsd

> I watch his show and have read both of his books. I like him a lot and think he helps a lot of people and dogs. I don't have to use his more controversial techniques because I don't have aggressive or problem dogs like the ones he deals with, largely because I have raised them using Cesar's overall approach to a healthy pack. I don't agree with him 100%, but I don't agree with anyone 100%.
> 
> And yeah, I can't believe some of the people he deals with! LOL


I agree with this. 
I like some of his techniques, others I don't so I don't use them.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

codmaster said:


> Sounds like you are equating training dogs with humans? Is that actually the case or are there any differences that are significant?


Actually, Maedchen was quoting an article by a Veterinary Behaviorist from Purdue University, those were not her words. And if you read the article, he's not equating training dogs with humans at all, he's using a human parallel as an example to make it easier for to humans understand what flooding actually means, and the effect it can have on a dog.


----------



## DianaM

> What do you think I should have done when he growled - basically challenging me?


Two things could have happened... either you did indeed teach him not to be possessive or you taught him not to growl. Next time he gets possessive, he could skip the growl and go straight to the bite.

This is best dealt with in general daily life. My dog is food possessive in general but not with me. I handfed him the first weeks/months I had him, then I would make it a HUGE point to walk by now and again and toss him super special goodies. I also made sure that anytime I walked by and I didn't have food, I'd ignore him and walk around like nothing was going on. If I saw him start to get possessive, I would not react. I'd do whatever it is I was there to do, like put something away or open a blind, then I'd walk away. Typically I'd come back with a goodie, give it to him with some casual talk, then move off. I instructed anyone who was around while he ate to not stare at him. Shoot, when people hover and stare around me while eating *I* get food-aggro.  If I ever need to take stuff from him, I redirect him by taking him outside or trading him something SUPER DUPER SPECIAL. I try to just take him outside and put the goodie away while he's out.

Consequently, I can grab a bone while he is chewing it and ask him to out. He will get really antsy like "awww mom c'moooon" but there are no growls and no fuss. However, if DF goes near him whenever he has food............... let's just say that I warn DF to be extremely careful and NOT aggravate Renji when he is eating. I also do all the training and management. Because of all this I do think food aggression is best addressed as a lifestyle and not during an aggro moment. I used to be like you, come down hard for a growl, but I've since learned that doing that can be VERY dangerous... it's a hard habit to break but I think it is less stressful for all involved.


----------



## codmaster

MUCH easier to train food aggressiveness out of them if you get them as a puppy before the habit becomes ingrained! then it becomes a game - "take the food/toy from the puppy - then give it back or even substitute a toy' then the pup learns that if someone does take something he will get something good back and there simply is NO aggressivness at all. Worked for all of our dogs!


----------



## DianaM

Oh dang yeah, I really wish I had gotten Renji as a young puppy, but that's water under the bridge. Boy oh boy is he ever teaching me a LOT. I don't think I would play that "takeaway" game but I would definitely enforce "any time a human walks by, good things happen." I just hate the idea of always messing with their food, probably because I believe food is sacred, something to be enjoyed without stress and in peace.

There is more than one way to skin a cat.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

I do a form of the takeaway game, but never with food, I do trading games with toys and bones. I COULD take a bully stick away and then give it back, but why? Much, much easier if you start when they're young so they never develop guarding behaviors in the first place, but it's never too late to start.


----------



## Kayos and Havoc

I think I agree with much of what Cesar says about exercise, discipline and affection. We shower our dogs with love and affection with no thought to how it affects them. We keep them locked up with little exercise and no accountability or training. No wonder they take charge.

I do use positive punishment and I have no problem with it. It is one of the training quadrants, but it should be the quandrant used the least in my opinion. Althought I don't really have a problem with what an earlier poster did with the growling pup, I have done that too, I would have started playing at item exchanges with the puppy from day one in the house to preclude even being in that situation. But sometimes the play exchange may not work with a very high value item and you need to get it from the dog. Sometimes the dog is of the temperament (hard headed) that the correction is justified.

I like to watch Cesar mainly for some pointers on how to act like a leader. He has talked about how he came to work with dogs and he also has admitted not knowing a lot about behavior as a science. The last I had heard he was doing more behavioral studying and perhaps we may see a kinder, gentler Cesar in future. I do have his books and have enjoyed them and learned from them. I also have lots of Pat Miller, Sheila Booth, Pat McConnell and the other positive camp trainers/behaviorists.


----------



## TxRider

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Actually, Maedchen was quoting an article by a Veterinary Behaviorist from Purdue University, those were not her words. And if you read the article, he's not equating training dogs with humans at all, he's using a human parallel as an example to make it easier for to humans understand what flooding actually means, and the effect it can have on a dog.


Assuming you agree with his assessment of Millan's methods, I do not.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

You're free to disagree with anyone you like, but he does have special skill and knowledge that neither you or Cesar Milan has. Here's his bio:

Andrew Luescher, D.V.M., Ph.D.
*Director of the Animal Behavior Clinic, Purdue University*

Andrew Luescher, director of the Animal Behavior Clinic at Purdue University, *has been treating companion animals with behavioral problems for over 15 years*. Dr. Luescher sees behavioral cases in dogs, cats, parrots, horses, and food animals. *His special research interests include compulsive disorders, canine aggression, and behavioral development. His treatment regimens use scientific principles of behavior and learning*.

*He joined the faculty of Veterinary Clinical Sciences and the School of Veterinary Medicine at Purdue University in August 1997 to establish the Animal Behavior Clinic and is an associate professor. Luescher earned his D.V.M. and MS.c. from the University of Zurich, Switzerland and a Ph.D. in animal behavior from the University of Guelph, Ontario. He is certified as an applied animal behaviorist by the Animal Behavior Society and is a diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists.*

So - self taught TV trainer? Or DVM, director of the Animal Behavior Clinic at the Purdue School of Veterinary Medicine, Ph.D in animal behavior, a certified applied animal behaviorist who specializes in canine aggresssion, and a diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorsts? :shrug: I'll go with the expert, thanks. I mean, I can disagree that grass is green, but that doesn't make it so.


----------



## Raziel

He is a MORON


----------



## Ucdcrush

Well, I guess none of us REALLY knows if what we see on TV is a representation of reality.

That said, it is hard to argue with results.

I do see a lot of "expert analysis" about Cesar from degreed individuals who seem to nit-pick about theories, about what Cesar might say that is not scientifically valid, and it seems kind of petty. What about his results? And do they think Cesar HIMSELF has injured or tortured dogs en-route to results, or are they again just talking theory? If they have seen him torture and screw up dogs, what show have they been watching?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

The ends do not always justify the means. Just because something works it doesn't mean it's a good idea. And since we're seeing a show that's probably hours and hours of action edited down to 45 minutes, there's no way to really know what else went on or how long it took to get the wonderful results shown on the show.

Other people have said similar things about his detractors, and I just don't get it. When an animal behavior expert says that many of Cesar's theoretical explanations are just plain wrong, and that sometimes his assessment of what we're seeing is not even close to what he says it is, that matters to me, and I don't find it to be nit picking or the slightest bit petty. 

As I've said in numerous Cesar threads, the good things that he says and does are not new, or revolutionary, or even his idea, they're solid ideas and techniques that any decent trainer is also doing and probably longer than he has, so he doesn't get credit for those over anybody else who's also using them. Ed Frawley is touting the benefit of marker training on his Leerburg site, and good for him, but he's a little late to the party. Everybody else has been doing it for a long time (I first learned about it in Cassidy's first class in 2000, and who knows how long before that other people were doing it), do we give Ed credit for discovering marker training? Of course not - my attitude and many other people is that it's about darned time! It's great that he's doing it now, but he did not invent it. 

And the bad things that Cesar does are usually old school compulsion methods that other trainers have moved beyond, often decades ago. I certainly understand their concern that he's perpetuating these ideas and that people watching at home may try them on their own (never mind the disclaimers), to the detriment of their relationship with their dog, and possibly to the injury of themselves or family members.


----------



## ken k

Cassidy's Mom said:


> The ends do not always justify the means. Just because something works it doesn't mean it's a good idea. And since we're seeing a show that's probably hours and hours of action edited down to 45 minutes, there's no way to really know what else went on or how long it took to get the wonderful results shown on the show.


that statement sums it up nicely, thanks


----------



## TxRider

Cassidy's Mom said:


> When an animal behavior expert says that many of Cesar's theoretical explanations are just plain wrong, and that sometimes his assessment of what we're seeing is not even close to what he says it is, that matters to me, and I don't find it to be nit picking or the slightest bit petty.


I don't find it to be nit picking, but I also don't find it always accurate.

I think that english is not Millans first language, and the way he describes things doesn't always come out in terms that are percieved as they were intended to be.

He also uses words that many people key on from their own perceptions of what they mean in context to some preconceived training theory, applying a different meaning than Millan used them in.

He does force some insecure dogs to face fears a bit too much for me when they are fear aggressive or guarding aggressive, but that's not all there is to him or his methods.

I just happened to see an episode tonight, a lab test dog rescue. The owner, a shelter volunteer, had not been able to touch the dog for years. It ran and hid and would come nowhere near them.

Millan gained it's trust and had the owner walking and petting it calmly in a couple of hours just through his approach, calming signals, and behavior. No treats, not even talking to it. Made it look easy.


----------



## codmaster

Wonder how manyof the "Positive only" trainers would take on the real challenge dogs - judging by the work of a few such trainer folks in our local obedience club (granted a very limited sample), my guess would be not so many. if a dog is difficult they tell the owners to take him/her out of class. One in particular talks often about a "real holy terror"of a dog she used to have - took a long time to find out that the dog she was referring to was about 25 lbs soaking wet. Often wondered about how she and her method would work with a "red zone" mastiff or even a big GSD!

Out of curiostiy, has any one seen any studies done to compare the training time using a reasonable positive only method versus a reasonable more traditional method?


----------



## Kayos and Havoc

Why would time be an issue? If you take the quick route to the detriment of the animal, you may make a change but will it be long lasting and have you you changed the mindset of the animal. If you take the route that builds the dogs trust and confidence you have made a life long change in the mindset of the dog.


----------



## MTAussie

codmaster said:


> Wonder how manyof the "Positive only" trainers would take on the real challenge dogs - judging by the work of a few such trainer folks in our local obedience club (granted a very limited sample), my guess would be not so many. if a dog is difficult they tell the owners to take him/her out of class. One in particular talks often about a "real holy terror"of a dog she used to have - took a long time to find out that the dog she was referring to was about 25 lbs soaking wet. Often wondered about how she and her method would work with a "red zone" mastiff or even a big GSD!
> 
> Out of curiostiy, has any one seen any studies done to compare the training time using a reasonable positive only method versus a reasonable more traditional method?


I think you could find plenty of studies, maybe not specifically on dogs, but if you are serious about it just do a search on google. I think you will find conflicting views there too  Mostly what I am seeing is the long term effects are not known, and that flooding has to be done a specific way, and may take a long time (so I guess that may answer your length of time question) because the animal has to be completely over the fear, (or suppressed it completely, depending on your opinion), for it to be effective, or as many studies say, it becomes even worse, and now you have probably lost a lot of trust between you and the animal. 

Implosion (flooding) and desensitization it is not new. It is part of psychology. I think that it is important to remember this is a TV show. Kind of like the something on MTV, they will do whatever to make it interesting/shocking enough for people to watch. Regardless, I would take Karen Pryor over Cesar any day, because she has trained more than just dogs, and understands behavior. Having said that, either way, we can't be so stuck on being 'positive' or 'practical' that we are too blind to see other methods that may be more effective, or humane.

Here is a study on humans comparing flooding and systematic desensitization: http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/79/5/318/


----------



## TxRider

Kayos and Havoc said:


> Why would time be an issue? If you take the quick route to the detriment of the animal, you may make a change but will it be long lasting and have you you changed the mindset of the animal. If you take the route that builds the dogs trust and confidence you have made a life long change in the mindset of the dog.


Time is an issue when the dog is aggressive and biting and a danger to people or other animals.

There is no guarantee you could ever get a dog to face and get over a fear of something using positive only methods.

Time could also be seen as an issue in the nature of stress on the dog. 

Is it more humane to force the animal to face it's fear for a short time so it gets to the point of not being aggressive, then moving on to desensitizing.

Or is it more humane to try to entice the animal to face the fear on it's own repeatedly putting under that kind of mental stress for a much longer period of time, possibly years?

Cesar seems to mainly use forceful methods when a dog is either putting teeth on people and biting, or intends to kill another dog, and only until the dog stops trying to bite, which is a change of mindset.


There are two or three cases people point to when they talk about him using force, but they usually only speak to the initial meeting and forceful encounter, not what Cesar actually does to help the dog afterward or the program he leaves with the owners to work on.


----------



## MTAussie

I think if you look into the two methods you will see that neither adheres to a specific amount of time, but the amount of time taken to use the flood method accurately should not be rushed, and it MUST be done with a clear understanding of behavior, and knowledge. 
Therefore I think it is not a method that should be recommended to anyone but professionals in a dire need type situation. 
TXRider, your very suggestion of forcing the dog to face its fear and then move on to desensitizing suggests you do not understand either method or how to use them correctly. Not that everyone does, but to suggest one method is better than the other, it is important to know what you are suggesting and why. Even more so when actually attempting to use that method on an actual animal.
Additionally, the stress from flooding is exceptionally more than desensitizing, but don't take my word for it, just do some research. What is inhumane is flooding a dog repeatedly thinking that you are helping, and then making the average dog owner with zero training or behavior knowledge think they should do the same to their dog. 
Additionally, desensitizing is not enticing, is is small amounts of exposure to the stimuli where the animal can remain calm, and begin to pair the stimulus with something positive.


----------



## TxRider

MTAussie said:


> TXRider, your very suggestion of forcing the dog to face its fear and then move on to desensitizing suggests you do not understand either method or how to use them correctly. Not that everyone does, but to suggest one method is better than the other, it is important to know what you are suggesting and why. Even more so when actually attempting to use that method on an actual animal.


I think you misunderstand my meaning. My meaning was that the response to the fear is changed from instantaneous biting to something else, even if that something else is learned helplessness or shutting down or just avoidance.

A different response, none of which are so automatically a death sentence for dogs as biting is. 

All of which then could be more easily dealt with through desensitizing using other methods. Time for the dog is gained, he won't be as likely to be euthanized if he isn't biting.



> Additionally, the stress from flooding is exceptionally more than desensitizing, but don't take my word for it, just do some research.


Of course it is, but in some cases once is all it takes for an animal, even a human to come a long way to realizing that what it feared was not actually harmful.



> What is inhumane is flooding a dog repeatedly thinking that you are helping, and then making the average dog owner with zero training or behavior knowledge think they should do the same to their dog.


Repeating any method that is not getting results is not wise. Especially one that inflicts stress or pain.

From what I have seen, the show says never try this at home.



> Additionally, desensitizing is not enticing, is is small amounts of exposure to the stimuli where the animal can remain calm, and begin to pair the stimulus with something positive.


You can put it that way, but unless you are exposing the animal to the stimuli enough to cause at least some level of stress, you are not desensitizing anything. 

And providing access to a valuable resource as a consequence for facing that stressful stimuli is in my view enticing it to face it's fear, and rewarding it for doing so.

Either way the dog faces a stressful stimuli to allow the animal to experience that environment and realize that no harm comes from it if the method is successful. Either way the dog is then rewarded with something positive.

One is simply gradual and more prolonged, the other is not. Either could work better for a particular dog with a particular issue. I have seen Millan use both methods for what it's worth.


----------



## Fuse

That analogy about flooding being like putting an arachnophobic person person in a closet with spiders is horrible.

That is more akin to say, if a dog is afraid of a vacume cleaner, depriving them of sight (maybe smell), puting them alone in a confined space right next to a vacume and turning it on.

A more accurate (but still not perfect) analogy would be taking your son who is afraid of spiders and holding thier hand and showing them a spider in its web in your back yard, demonstrating the spider is not going to hurt them.

No doubt that some of the stuff Ceaser does would have potentially disasterous results if done by a random viewer, I think he gets a unfairly hard rap from the 'behaviourist establishment'.


----------



## SuzyE

and on it goes...cesar millan has brought more attention to dog behavior than any other person in history.


----------



## Kayos and Havoc

Fuse, the analogy about the spiders is fairly accurate. Flooding by definition (in layman's terms) is an overwhelming presentation of a fear causing stimulus. 

If done poorly it is disasterous. It is something that must be done carefully and be well thought out.

Have you considered introducing yourself?


----------



## TxRider

Kayos and Havoc said:


> Fuse, the analogy about the spiders is fairly accurate. Flooding by definition (in layman's terms) is an overwhelming presentation of a fear causing stimulus.


I don't find the analogy very accurate, technically maybe, but not representative.

I believe flooding is usually more strictly for irrational fears. There is ample rational reason to fear spiders, they are poisonous so it's not a very clear analogy.

Not many rational people do not have some fear of spiders.

A better analogy would use a more clearly irrational fear, a a panic inducing fear of closed spaces, or open spaces, or crowds or of all people of the opposite sex or of all birds or something more clearly irrational IMO.

Like a person with a bird phobia who panics if a bird gets close being locked into a room full of parakeets. Clearly an irrational fear and more representative.


----------



## AgileGSD

DianaM said:


> I didn't watch this episode yet but he does manage to have 20+ dogs live in a pack and be at peace with each other. That's pretty impressive. Of course, people are able to do this with foxhounds and in huge numbers, but these are GSDs, mixes, pit bulls, huskies, very small dogs, etc.


 To say it is impressive, you'd have to know for sure that the dogs really always got along and that they could be left unsupervised together. My understanding is that these dogs are kenneled when unsupervised. He also exercises the dogs 6+ hours a day - most dogs would be pretty easy to get along with if one could exercsie them that much each day. 

As for the bringing the dog in and pinning them, I'd not go about it in that way for sure. There is a reason for his bringing one strange dog into the group though, despite how impressive it may seem. Very few dogs, even dog aggressive ones will not try to fight when it is one against many. I have actually seen this in person multiple times with dogs known for fighting with other dogs. 

I worked at a doggy daycare and managed sometimes up to 30 dogs a day by myself in a wide range of breeds, all sizes together. 


codmaster said:


> Wonder how manyof the "Positive only" trainers would take on the real challenge dogs - judging by the work of a few such trainer folks in our local obedience club (granted a very limited sample), my guess would be not so many. if a dog is difficult they tell the owners to take him/her out of class. One in particular talks often about a "real holy terror"of a dog she used to.


 If the dog is aggressive or so shy they won't interact in class, they shouldn't be there. Group classes are not a place to address serious behavioral issues. 

I had a GSD in my classes once that was very aggressive towards other dogs and moving children. The dog could stay in the group class, so I did 6 weeks of private lessons with the owner. We worked through the dog's problems using "abandonment training". It worked extremely well and she was able to come back to class. The training stuck too and she was no longer an issue out and about either. 
People don't seem to understand there are a lot of "out of the box" ideas with training that doesn't depend on force. It's either dominance methods or it's giving dogs treats. That couldn't be further from the truth.


TxRider said:


> There is no guarantee you could ever get a dog to face and get over a fear of something using positive only methods.


 Nor is there a guarantee that you could get a dog over a fear of something using flooding. In many cases, flooding makes the dog worse.


TxRider said:


> Or is it more humane to try to entice the animal to face the fear on it's own repeatedly putting under that kind of mental stress for a much longer period of time, possibly years?


 Who is suggesting something will take years? If a trainer is using the same method for years without results with the dog, they aren't a very good trainer.


----------



## Kayos and Havoc

TxRider said:


> I don't find the analogy very accurate, technically maybe, but not representative.
> 
> I believe flooding is usually more strictly for irrational fears. There is ample rational reason to fear spiders, they are poisonous so it's not a very clear analogy.
> 
> Not many rational people do not have some fear of spiders.
> 
> A better analogy would use a more clearly irrational fear, a a panic inducing fear of closed spaces, or open spaces, or crowds or of all people of the opposite sex or of all birds or something more clearly irrational IMO.
> 
> Like a person with a bird phobia who panics if a bird gets close being locked into a room full of parakeets. Clearly an irrational fear and more representative.


 
How do you know panic in closed spaces is irrational? If you had been locked in one it would be rational in your mind, as would a fear of birds if you had been dived bomb by a few. 

No different that the great dane being drug over a tile floor (flooding) that it was terrifed of after it had fallen on one. Irrational or not?


----------



## DogGone

MacknCody said:


> So, I was watching "Dog Whisperer" tonight and Ceasar brought the dog he was working to his rehab center thing to socialize it(I guess). The dog freaked when he put it in and he alpha rolled it while letting the other dogs crowd him while it was on its side. I dunno about this.


To layman that are not familiar with dog and wolf behavior it might seem quite strange. 

Cesar Milan is exceptionally good. Cesar is using dog psychology and dog language to control and bring peace to the pack.
Remember that Cesar Milan often takes dogs that would otherwise be put down that other trainers had failed with. I find it strange that many of the people that criticize Cesar are often the ones that can’t train such high-spirited red case dogs and often recommend their euthanasia. Cesar Milan is saving many of these dogs that the critics of Cesar Milan failed with.

There are risks and it's not perfect but Cesar Milan is excellent.

Remember most of the cases he takes and shows on TV are difficult and dangerous "red cases", that often require more extreme techniques.


dOg said:


> Behaviorists don't much care for Cesar. His psychology doesn't fit the science.


Untrue. His science is sound; he uses dog psychology and uses canine instinct rather than to try to fight it. The results speak for themselves. He typically as resounding success on so many red cases that have been the result of crackpot politically correct pseudoscience.


----------



## AgileGSD

DogGone said:


> To layman that are not familiar with dog and wolf behavior it might seem quite strange.
> 
> Cesar Milan is exceptionally good. Cesar is using dog psychology and dog language to control and bring peace to the pack.


How is alpha rolling using "dog physcology"?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

DogGone said:


> He typically as resounding success on so many red cases that have been the result of crackpot politically correct pseudoscience.


Where did you come up with this? What kind of pseudo-science are you referring to?


----------



## TxRider

AgileGSD said:


> People don't seem to understand there are a lot of "out of the box" ideas with training that doesn't depend on force. It's either dominance methods or it's giving dogs treats. That couldn't be further from the truth.


There certainly are.

Much if not most of my training is simple conditioned association for example. It requires no force, treats, praise nor punishment nor rewards. 

I religiously repeat a word or phrase consistently when a dog is doing a particular behavior until the dog associates it with the behavior.

A lot of people are taught to do this when a dog relieves itself, to repeat a phrase when the dog starts to relieve to train it to do so on command, I have always used it for so much more, basically for every aspect of daily life.

I use it to teach everything from eating food, drinking water, names of all toys, names of all rooms, names of all outside doors, the truck, the car, to actions like find it, get it, all sorts of things just by always repeating the word or phrase when they do most anything I can attach a word or phrase to like entering a room.

After a few years when they have a pretty large vocabulary of actions and objects and places you can have pretty good conversations, and it gets amazing to watch the gears start turning in their minds and light bulbs popping on when you use a word or phrase they recognize in a different way and chaining actions, objects and places in simple sentences.

The great part is it's so easy to do, no training sessions, no treats, just talking to your dog normally, repeating a word or phrase to mark anything you want them to understand a word or phase for as you go about your day. Like repeating the name of a room every time they enter it.

Kind of like capturing a behavior with a clicker, but a lot less formal.


----------



## TxRider

AgileGSD said:


> How is alpha rolling using "dog physcology"?


Positive punishment, an aversive. 

As in one of the four quadrants of operant conditioning.


----------



## TxRider

Kayos and Havoc said:


> How do you know panic in closed spaces is irrational? If you had been locked in one it would be rational in your mind, as would a fear of birds if you had been dived bomb by a few.
> 
> No different that the great dane being drug over a tile floor (flooding) that it was terrifed of after it had fallen on one. Irrational or not?


Your perfectly describing an irrational fear. Irrational as in not logical.

I have been dive bombed by birds, even a hawk. But if I now panicked an got overly anxious when any bird was near that would be an irrational fear, a phobia.

Flooding is a method to cure it, as is slower desensitization. But unless you confront that fear you can never decondition the unreasonable fear response.


----------



## Fuse

Kayos and Havoc said:


> Fuse, the analogy about the spiders is fairly accurate. Flooding by definition (in layman's terms) is an overwhelming presentation of a fear causing stimulus.


The analogy is terrible, the person making the analogy intensifies the situation with unrelated stimulus to make his point and to elicit an emotional response from his reading audience.

In the analogy the person being afraid of spiders is not just put into contact with them, but is put into a situation designed to magnify the fear and sense of helplessness by being deprived of his senses and then confinded to a small space, either of which can be traumatic on thier own.

Why not add in a 400decibel sountrack of children screaming? Maybe a strobe light and some blood on the walls?

The analogy dosent appear to be designed to help somone understand flooding, but instead to make people have an emotional reatction of OMG CEASAR MILAN IS A TERRIBLE PERSON!



> If done poorly it is disasterous. It is something that must be done carefully and be well thought out.


This certainily sounds reasonable. I woud certianly seek advice about how to deal with a strong fear reaction and not just do something because I saw it on TV. 

I understand that some people would do it just because they saw it on TV, understand why that is a problem and understand that is why some people are uncomfortable with the shows.



> Have you considered introducing yourself?


Sure, my name is Jesse. I am 36 years old, live in Oregon with my wife and came to this website in the course of doing research into getting a German Shepherd Dog.

I'm glad to have found this site as it seems to contain a wealth of information and a friendly group of people, including Kaos and Havoc who has given me some good advice via pm. 

Feel free to pm me if you have any other questions.


----------



## AgileGSD

TxRider said:


> Positive punishment, an aversive.
> 
> As in one of the four quadrants of operant conditioning.


 How is the alpha roll "dog psychology" though? And what does it have to do with understanding dog and wolf behavior?


----------



## JOSHUA SAMPSON

I alpha roll my dogs any time I want, I never had a problem out of them ANY OF THEM I can do this because I am my dog's alpha. They will not challenge me. My puppy is still learning and will be alpha rolled many times especially when he acts dominant. I have never had an aggressive dog, and I never will. however, I only get dogs that start out as puppies, and I raise them to be their alpha. they love this because it is easy for them and they are less stressed. Just last week my older female brought her chicken back upstairs and my wife looked at her and said "smokey take that chicken back to your box" and she did EXACTLY that.


----------



## lrodptl

And there you have it.


----------



## mjbgsd

> I think that english is not Millans first language, and the way he describes things doesn't always come out in terms that are percieved as they were intended to be.


You are correct, he is from Mexico where he lived on a farm with numerous dogs. Came to America and his first words he learned was looking for a job, or something like that. His first job was a dog bather. 

I think CM is great, I don't agree with everything he does but I still like him. 

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4023/4388429587_5bb627ff73_o.jpg


----------



## AgileGSD

JOSHUA SAMPSON said:


> I alpha roll my dogs any time I want, I never had a problem out of them ANY OF THEM I can do this because I am my dog's alpha. They will not challenge me. My puppy is still learning and will be alpha rolled many times especially when he acts dominant. I have never had an aggressive dog, and I never will. however, I only get dogs that start out as puppies, and I raise them to be their alpha. they love this because it is easy for them and they are less stressed. Just last week my older female brought her chicken back upstairs and my wife looked at her and said "smokey take that chicken back to your box" and she did EXACTLY that.


 How exactly does your dog "act dominant"?


----------



## selzer

I can tell my dogs to down, and roll them over and give them a belly rub any time I want to. Does that count???

I never considered a belly rubbing and alpha roll. Probably because I do not consider myself the alpha. 

Sorry, but I am not a dog and my dogs are smart enough to know that. So I do not try to simulate teeth around the neck correction (prong collar), or alpha rolls. Also, I agree that dogs/wolves do not force a more submissive dog/wolf to turn over in the submissive position, they do it on their own. 

As a leader, I do not need to use physical force to make my dogs calm submissive. I agree with Ceaser's calm assertive attitude stuff though. I usually think of it as stepping out in confidence. 

Good leaders do not get in squabbles with those they are leading. They use body language, eye contact, and their tone of voice to let the led know what they want from them. It does not require collars or leashes, or alpha rolls, or choking, or making them sing for their supper.


----------



## Kayos and Havoc

JOSHUA SAMPSON said:


> I alpha roll my dogs any time I want, I never had a problem out of them ANY OF THEM I can do this because I am my dog's alpha. They will not challenge me. My puppy is still learning and will be alpha rolled many times especially when he acts dominant. I have never had an aggressive dog, and I never will. however, I only get dogs that start out as puppies, and I raise them to be their alpha. they love this because it is easy for them and they are less stressed. Just last week my older female brought her chicken back upstairs and my wife looked at her and said "smokey take that chicken back to your box" and she did EXACTLY that.


YIKES!!!! 


I think I will now leave ths thread alone as I am apt to say somethng ugly. :headbang: :surrender:


----------



## Kayos and Havoc

Just one more thing TXRider.... a fear is not irrational to the perosn or animal in the grip of it.


----------



## DogGone

AgileGSD said:


> How is alpha rolling using "dog physcology"?


Wolflike canines use Alpha rolls to establish hierarchy, to keep order and to show respect. Alpha rolls are part of canine sociology and are part of canine instinct. Cesar Milan is essentially taking the role of Alpha Wolf and using dog language.
　
An Alpha roll in a wolf pack, is much like a salute in the military; it's an acknowledgment of rank/hierarchy.


selzer said:


> dogs/wolves do not force a more submissive dog/wolf to turn over in the submissive position, they do it on their own.


False. Wild dogs and wolves often will forcibly submit (Alpha roll) other pack members. You need to watch more nature documentaries and/or study animal psychology.
　
Typically once a pack leader establishes his leadership the forcible Alpha rolls subside. When other pack members shows signs of challenge or insubordination don't show submission; often the leader will exert an Alpha roll or some other show of force to reestablish pack order.
　
Sure dogs/wolves will submit to on their own, but that’s typically only ones that have a submissive disposition or where pack hierarchy is already set and stable. Like many Johnny-come-lately’s you don’t know or appreciate the work that brought about the peace and order.


Cassidy's Mom said:


> Where did you come up with this? What kind of pseudo-science are you referring to?


The crackpot politically correct pseudoscience where dog owners treat their dogs much like spoiled children using Dr. Spock philosophy. The dogs and often the whole family suffer neurosis; so Cesar Milan often has to come in and pick up the pieces. 
　
Like Cesar Milan often says it's often a case of rehabilitating the dog and training the owner.


Kayos and Havoc said:


> a fear is not irrational to the perosn or animal in the grip of it.


Not necessarily. Fear is often based on emotions rather than rational thought. Often so-called rationalizations are not based on facts and are not logical; therefore they are typically considered irrational.
　
BTW
I think the word "rationalization" is miss nomenclature; I think the word "irrationalization" would better fit the definition of "rationalization". 
I think the word rationalization as defined in the dictionary makes about as much sense as inflammable.


----------



## Kayos and Havoc

I like the term psycho-babble too. That seems to be what a lot of this thread consists of. 

I don't know if this has been posted before in this convoluted thread.

Dog Whisperer, Dog Psychology and Cesar Millan


----------



## TxRider

Kayos and Havoc said:


> Just one more thing TXRider.... a fear is not irrational to the perosn or animal in the grip of it.


Sure it is, irrational simply means not rational, not logical. 

It does not mean the person doesn't experience the fear, it does not mean that it isn't a real conditioned response to a stimulus, it doesn't mean it does not -feel- rational to the person, it simply means it is a response lacking logical reason.

It is simply an unreasonable conditioned response to a stimulus.

Which is why people seek treatment for such phobias, and flooding and desensitizing are both scientifically proven methods to get over these fears. 

Both are methods to condition a different response to the stimulus, to replace the fear and panic response with a different response.

The danger from either is that instead of replacing fear and panic with calm, it could just replace the panic with learned helplessness and leave the fear. Flooding has a higher chance of that occurring, but it can occur with either method.


----------



## TxRider

Kayos and Havoc said:


> I like the term psycho-babble too. That seems to be what a lot of this thread consists of.
> 
> I don't know if this has been posted before in this convoluted thread.
> 
> Dog Whisperer, Dog Psychology and Cesar Millan


That is actually a pretty good article, I don't see what it has to do with Milan though. 

I think he would agree with all of it.


----------



## TxRider

AgileGSD said:


> How is the alpha roll "dog psychology" though?


Because it is an instinctual submissive, as well as a vulnerable position.




> And what does it have to do with understanding dog and wolf behavior?


I don't know that it does. It can however accomplish a couple of things.

First it can desensitize a dog by the dog learning it can be submissive and vulnerable and nothing bad will happen, that only ore pleasant things happen if it shows submission.

Second it can actively condition that particular instinctual submissive response to a stimulus that previously was responded to with fear and fight/flight response.


----------



## selzer

Actually, in natural dog packs, wolf packs, a true alpha asserts his authority without fighting or forcing submission. 

Fights occur when there are changes in the pack hierarchy and you have contenders, beta wolves/dogs, alpha wannabe's. Leaders who rule with an iron jaw do not last long. Because the pack does not, for survival want to spend energy on a lot of fighting. Injuries to wild animals are often death sentences. It is not the natural order. 

I think that packs that are in part human created, in captivity, or psuedo wild, where the animals are in a confined area, where food is plentiful and somewhat provided, will show a different set of behaviors. And I think that is where a lot of this Alpha-BS comes about. 

Again, my dogs are too smart to think I am a dog, so I do not have to be alpha anything. I prefer to be their Goddess, and not their psuedo canine leader, waiting to be overthrown when I become sick or frail or let my guard down.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

DogGone said:


> The crackpot politically correct pseudoscience where dog owners treat their dogs much like spoiled children using Dr. Spock philosophy. The dogs and often the whole family suffer neurosis; so Cesar Milan often has to come in and pick up the pieces.


You missed the point of my question - where you said this:



> He typically as resounding success on so many red cases *that have been the result of crackpot politically correct pseudoscience.*


Where did you get your information that those problem dogs are the result of failed "pseudoscience" training, politically correct or otherwise? It's obvious that many of these dogs have had NO training, the people are clueless about dog behavior, and that many of the owners have been treating their dogs like spoiled children, but there is no training, scientific or pseudo-scientific, that suggests that's an appropriate way to raise a dog, and I've NEVER heard of using Dr. Spock philosophy on dogs. I think you just made that up to support your argument. :shrug:


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Fuse said:


> The analogy dosent appear to be designed to help somone understand flooding, but instead to make people have an emotional reatction of OMG CEASAR MILAN IS A TERRIBLE PERSON!





> I woud certianly seek advice about how to deal with a strong fear reaction and not just do something because I saw it on TV.
> 
> I understand that some people would do it just because they saw it on TV, understand why that is a problem and understand that is why some people are uncomfortable with the shows.


But don't you see, that's exactly why the training community comes out so strongly against some of the tactics that Cesar uses - it's not that he's a terrible person and that everything he does is bad, it's because some of the things he does are ill-advised, especially in the hands of someone less experienced and skilled at handling dogs, and yet people ARE going to do it because they saw Cesar do it on TV. And they're going to be much more likely to either make a situation worse, or cause injury to themselves or others because they don't know nearly as much as they think they do. He's charismatic and people love him - they're going to emulate him no matter how many disclaimers of "do not try this at home". He's not the only trainer using outdated and potentially dangerous training techniques, but he's the only one with a popular TV show, the public face that everyone recognizes, which is why he's become the target of criticism - he has a much bigger impact on people than anyone else using similar methods. 

It IS a concern and it SHOULD be a concern, and whether or not the analogy is exactly comparable I think it helps people understand better when it's put into human terms. Thinking like a dog doesn't always come naturally to us, we tend to think in terms of "I want my dog to do this and he won't" or "I don't want my do to do this but he won't stop" rather than try to figure out his motivations, whether or not he actually understands what we want, and how he might be experiencing a situation, and then work with that to figure out how to make it clearer, less confusing, and more rewarding for the dog to comply.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

DogGone said:


> Fear is often based on emotions rather than rational thought.


Sure, which is why changing the emotional response to the situation is so powerful. If the behavior you want to change is based on an emotional response, change the emotional response and the behavior extinguishes on its own. But if you're mislabeling fearful defensive behavior as "dominant" then you're targeting a completely different issue rather than dealing with the ACTUAL problem.


----------



## Fuse

I find that article linked above to be confusing.

It seems to imply that dominance is not an issue with dogs and pack hierarchy is not important. (It also has another horrible analogy comparing studies done on wolves to Jews in Nazi death camps. Lol wat? Here is another blatent attempt to use an emotional reaction to sway people to a point by someone attempting to be 'scholarly'. This stuff discredits the writer in my mind.)

To clarify, do people in the 'anti-Cesar' camp believe that dogs do not establish pack hierarchy and that being the leader of your pack is not important? It is important for your dog to know who's boss isn't it?

I wonder if the word 'dominance' has negative implications for people? Does it imply violence? Here is the definition of dominant from dictionary.com:

*adjective* 
1. ruling, governing, or controlling; having or exerting authority or influence: _dominant in the chain of command. _
2. occupying or being in a commanding or elevated position.
3. predominant; main; major; chief: _Corn is the dominant crop of Iowa. _
4. _Genetics_. of or pertaining to a dominant.
5. _Music_. pertaining to or based on the dominant: _the dominant chord. _

I think most people (probably even Ceaser Milan) would agree that beating a dog into submission is not a healthy or appropriate way to establish dominance, but I would also think most people would agree that points 1 and 2 of the definition would apply to a healthy relationship with thier dog. Wouldn't they?

After agruing that dogs dont require dominance, then the article states that humans are 'already dominant' because we have opposible thumbs. Again, what? So are dogs hierarical pack animal that require a dominant leader or not?

I have other issues with the article too. It says 'Many of the dogs seen on the show are pushed to the point of escalation before their behavior is suppressed.' but it gives no examples or alternate methods to use in the specific situation. 

Also, it implies that a 'calm-assertive' demeanor is equivalent to what bullies use to intimidate people. When I watch It's Me or the Dog, I would describe Victoria Stillwell's demeanor as 'calm-assertive' as well and don't see how it could be seen as 'bullying' the dogs.

Since I have been reading posts on this website I hear alot about NILF, and when I watch the show I hear alot about Exercise, discipline then affection. To me, both are saying the dog needs to earn thier rewards.

In fact, here are the things I personally get from watching his show:

1. Be the pack leader -- the dog needs to respect me and know that it is my house, my rules. When we meet other people or dogs, I control the situation, not the dog. Basically I am in charge and make decisions, not my dog.

2. Rules, boundries, limitatons -- it is important for the dog to have rules boundaries and limitations to know what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior and again that it is my decision to determine what is acceptable and unacceptable and not the dog

3. Exercise, dicipline, affection -- the dog needs to earn thier rewards and it is important for me to fufill the dog's needs for both physical and mental exercise

4. Animal - dog - breed -name -- dogs are dogs and not humans, and I need to respect the animal nature of my dog. What is good for a human may not necessarily be good for a dog, and vice versa, for example comorting a dog that is displaying undesired behavior actually reinforces the behavior.

5. Often times 'dog behavior problems' are acutally human behavior problems. Also, that our stress, tension and frustration can be transferred to them. 

6. Problems can be fixed.

The anti-Ceasar crowd seems to want to portary him as a bully beating dogs into submission and running around telling everyone to alpha roll thier dogs. That is not the picture I had at all. 

In fact, I only recall him alpha rolling one dog in the 1.5 seasons I have watched (there may be more examples, but this is the only one I remember). The dog was a Korean hunting dog that was rescued and the rescue person had, what to my untrained eye seemed to be extreme agression issues. He did force the dog into a submissive posture and did appear to make progress with it. He did NOT recommend anyone else to do that and it was made clear that other trainers had tried and failed to get anywhere with this dog and it's next stop was the needle. It was a extreme method used in an extreme case and was presented as such.

This is not the only way he interacts with dogs though, he does deal with dogs as indiviuals. The clip isn't up on Hulu anymore but I'd like people to watch the show where he deals with the german shepherd Cici (maybe sissy?) in a shelter. The dog was extremely scared of people and the shelter workers could not get her to come out of here shell, watching him work with that dog was beautiful to me.

The point being (other than to see if people on here believe that dogs do not want a pack leader) is that he uses a wide variety of methods with a wide variety of dogs and a wide variety of problems. Do I think he is the second coming? No, not at all and I have seen shows where I think he has made mistakes. If any of you know a trainer that has never made a mistake, please pm me thier number! I do however think that he deeply cares for dogs and has a way with them. Watching the show has been inspirational for me (if anyone has issues with my list of what I got out of the shows, I'm open to hearing about it).

I see alot of 'anti-Ceaser' stuff that focuses on corner cases and is sometimes clearly written with an agenda and designed to elicit an emotional response rather than an intellectual one. I'm sure there is a valid discussion and valid criticisim of his methods, but the near relegious fervor that the aguements seem to devolve into is offputting.


----------



## Fuse

Cassidy's Mom said:


> But don't you see, that's exactly why the training community comes out so strongly against some of the tactics that Cesar uses - it's not that he's a terrible person and that everything he does is bad, it's because some of the things he does are ill-advised, especially in the hands of someone less experienced and skilled at handling dogs, and yet people ARE going to do it because they saw Cesar do it on TV. And they're going to be much more likely to either make a situation worse, or cause injury to themselves or others because they don't know nearly as much as they think they do. He's charismatic and people love him - they're going to emulate him no matter how many disclaimers of "do not try this at home". He's not the only trainer using outdated and potentially dangerous training techniques, but he's the only one with a popular TV show, the public face that everyone recognizes, which is why he's become the target of criticism - he has a much bigger impact on people than anyone else using similar methods. [\quote]
> 
> Yes, I definitely understand this concern and it is a vaild one. Stupid people do stupid things because they see it on TV.
> 
> He dosen't always use 'outdated and potentailly dangerous' techniques, but sometimes does in specfic cases with specific dogs and under specific circumstances. It appears to me that these techniques work in some situations, but I understand that I am not a professional dog trainer and would not beable to do this stuff my self. It is pretty clear to me which things are good tips that I would be comfortable using in my home and things that I would need to refer to outside help for.
> 
> I understand that not everyone would be so discriminating and why that is a problem, I guess my issue is in the way the problem is being adressed.
> 
> I think to say that the show has no redeming qualities for dog owners outside of entertainment is disingenous and I wish the articles would have a more balanced approach. Instead the 'establishment' seems to have a massive axe to grind and want to discredit him completely. I have an issue with that sort of response.
> 
> Positive criticisim and education, presenting a different opinion and backing it up is an effective method of discourse and does not require overblown analogies, emotional triggers and a strongly one sided viewpoint to get the message across.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thinking like a dog doesn't always come naturally to us, we tend to think in terms of "I want my dog to do this and he won't" or "I don't want my do to do this but he won't stop" rather than try to figure out his motivations, whether or not he actually understands what we want, and how he might be experiencing a situation, and then work with that to figure out how to make it clearer, less confusing, and more rewarding for the dog to comply.
> 
> 
> 
> I do not see this point to be at odds with Ceasar's philsophy at all. Looking at problems from the dogs point of view, as a dog is important for behavior modification. Primarily the message seems to be aimed at the owners misreading or misunderstaning the dogs needs.
Click to expand...


----------



## crown86

Cassidy's Mom

Agreed with what you said above about "don't try this at home". I recently got my GSD Roscoe as an adoption he was 1 year old. I am 5 weeks into 2-3 times per week one on one obdience training with him for the ultimate goal of a therapy dog. I have had dogs all my life but Roscoe is the first dog I jumed in hardcore with obdience training. Yep Cesar was of great interest and actually still is...I love watching the show. But the thing I have learned from training..Man I didn't know Squat about dogs and obdience training. Like most of the general public I am sure Cesar appears as a miracle worker and why not try some of the methods he uses.

Man from the training I have a completely different perspective now. My eyes have been opened up to a world I didn't know existed to the point I almost feel like a fool with the rest of my dogs. My trainer was like yeah it's the difference between having a dog and doing something with it. So my preumption is when the public see's his method's why not try them? My guess is with no base foundation of understanding dogs it is a recipe for disaster at times...I know for me it would have been.

Not to sound like an idiot but I had no idea between obdience training and what Cesar does as behavioral mod. Man I am glad I am putting the time to truly learn. I think the problem is not so much with Cesar but how many people are truly willing to put the time and effort into their dogs? Me personally I love watching the show but after getting involved in training I have a whole new perspective.


----------



## selzer

There was a technique in a show today with two different GSDs, on the second dog, Ceasar, and their owners, were not only poking the dog, but kicking it with their off foot, behind their near foot, not to injure, but to swerve the attention. Ceasar even said that the dog should not see it coming. leash pops, ok, pokes, sounds, well ok, I am not sure that I like the physical means used to distract the dog, especially the foot thing.


----------



## Lilie

I admit I don't watch a lot of TV, and I have never seen his show. But I have to say that at least there are individuals who are watching and attempting to fix problems they have with their dogs instead of throwing them away.:fingerscrossed:


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Fuse said:


> He dosen't always use 'outdated and potentailly dangerous' techniques, but sometimes does in specfic cases with specific dogs and under specific circumstances. It appears to me that these techniques work in some situations, but I understand that I am not a professional dog trainer and would not beable to do this stuff my self. It is pretty clear to me which things are good tips that I would be comfortable using in my home and things that I would need to refer to outside help for.


Of course not, and I didn't mean to imply that he did. But that's what people talk about most because it's controversial. The techniques he uses that most every other decent trainer is also using isn't what makes him stand out. And may I applaud you for knowing what you know and what you don't know and would need help with - if everyone had that kind of basic common sense (and probably also sufficient access to a variety of good training classes nearby) then it wouldn't be such a big deal that one guy out there, even one with a popular TV show, was still doing some things that most of the training community frowned on.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Fuse said:


> In fact, here are the things I personally get from watching his show:
> 
> 1. Be the pack leader -- the dog needs to respect me and know that it is my house, my rules. When we meet other people or dogs, I control the situation, not the dog. Basically I am in charge and make decisions, not my dog.
> 
> 2. Rules, boundries, limitatons -- it is important for the dog to have rules boundaries and limitations to know what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior and again that it is my decision to determine what is acceptable and unacceptable and not the dog
> 
> 3. Exercise, dicipline, affection -- the dog needs to earn thier rewards and it is important for me to fufill the dog's needs for both physical and mental exercise
> 
> 4. Animal - dog - breed -name -- dogs are dogs and not humans, and I need to respect the animal nature of my dog. What is good for a human may not necessarily be good for a dog, and vice versa, for example comorting a dog that is displaying undesired behavior actually reinforces the behavior.
> 
> 5. Often times 'dog behavior problems' are acutally human behavior problems. Also, that our stress, tension and frustration can be transferred to them.
> 
> 6. Problems can be fixed.


Those are all good things, and if you're getting them from watching his show, that's great. If that were ALL people were getting from his show, there would be no controversy and the training community would embrace him - and while they criticize some of his methods they also often do point out the good stuff you can take away from his show. But the thing is that you can get all those same things from a show like Victoria Stillwell's too, and her methods are very different from his. There are ways other than physical force to be the pack leader and earn the respect of your dog. NILIF would be one of them.


----------



## crs996

I know some of the jargon CM uses sounds hokey: "energy, rules boundaries limitations", etc. But if you take a close look at the principles, it makes a lot of sense. Half of the dogs would not even be on the show if they had basic obedience training that was adhered to, in addition to not showing affection when dogs are snarling etc.

I do not particularly care for PC training with treats and gentle leaders. I've always wanted my dogs to follow commands because they respect me, not for chicken pieces. I believe that if you train in a manner that is fair, firm and with lots of praise you can do just as well as with treats. I give treats when my older dog is learning a new behavior, 5-10 times maximum, and of course much more with puppies.

All this is a moot point however until *owners* are consistent. I was in the vets office this week and a lady in the waiting room said "sit" 12 times and then gave up. I don't care what method you use, this will teach a dog nothing but the fact that if they outlast you, they win.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

crs996 said:


> I do not particularly care for PC training with treats and gentle leaders. I've always wanted my dogs to follow commands because they respect me, not for chicken pieces.


I don't think there's anything "PC" about using food or toys in training. I use food all the time to teach my dogs new behaviors, and they DO follow my commands because they respect me. That's the biggest, most enduring fallacy about using food - that the dog is only doing it for the food and that you'll always have to have food on you or they won't obey. It just ain't so! 

If you don't understand the concept and do it incorrectly it IS possible that that can happen, but that's because _you're doing it wrong_. Done properly, the behavior is enduring and not dependent on the presence of a reward, the reward just teaches them why they should care what I want them to do. Praise is just words until the dog learns relevance - pairing it with a food reward in the initial stages of training makes it a secondary (conditioned, or learned) reinforcer. Food is a primary reinforcer - you don't need to teach your dog to value it, he already does, which is why it's such an effective training tool. The more you reinforce your dog for doing something, the higher likelihood that behavior will continue. Because I rewarded my dogs heavily for eye contact from the time they came home as puppies by marking and treating when they looked at me, I've developed a strong foundation of focus and attention - I don't need to ask for it, and I no longer need to constantly reward them for it either.

I also use plenty of praise and petting as a reward, and real life rewards such as access to valued things like play. I withhold those things as a consequence of non-compliance.


----------



## TxRider

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I don't think there's anything "PC" about using food or toys in training. I use food all the time to teach my dogs new behaviors, and they DO follow my commands because they respect me. That's the biggest, most enduring fallacy about using food - that the dog is only doing it for the food and that you'll always have to have food on you or they won't obey. It just ain't so!


It certainly is an enduring fallacy.

Using food is nothing short of a very explicit display of dominance.

I control the resource, you as the dog must figure out what explicit appeasement behavior will please me enough to allow you to have access to it.

It really doesn't get a lot more dominant than that IMO.


----------



## TxRider

selzer said:


> Actually, in natural dog packs, wolf packs, a true alpha asserts his authority without fighting or forcing submission.
> 
> Fights occur when there are changes in the pack hierarchy and you have contenders, beta wolves/dogs, alpha wannabe's. Leaders who rule with an iron jaw do not last long. Because the pack does not, for survival want to spend energy on a lot of fighting. Injuries to wild animals are often death sentences. It is not the natural order.


I would take exception to that. What you see is that the alpha rolls do not happen, that the subordinate rolls itself over in display of submission.

That is a somewhat learned response from pupyhood though where they -are- physically pinned and rolled and by the time they adults have learned that display to respond to certain stimulus as part of a wide variety of social responses.

Something a dog taken from mom at a young age and not socialized may not have learned, along with many other social rules and responses.

And if you listen to Milan, he isn't quoting some 1940's study, he is just saying this is something mother dogs do to puppies to teach them proper responses.



> I think that packs that are in part human created, in captivity, or psuedo wild, where the animals are in a confined area, where food is plentiful and somewhat provided, will show a different set of behaviors. And I think that is where a lot of this Alpha-BS comes about.
> 
> Again, my dogs are too smart to think I am a dog, so I do not have to be alpha anything. I prefer to be their Goddess, and not their psuedo canine leader, waiting to be overthrown when I become sick or frail or let my guard down.


I think lot of the alpha/dominance comes about because dogs are quite opportunistic.

If they believe they can control a resource they often will attempt to, if aggression or dominant or manipulative behaviors are successful and reinforced through their success they will use those behaviors.

I once experimented with a dog, one who never showed me any aggression to see how quickly he would take advantage of me and show aggression if he thought he could gain something from it succesfully. 

It took me a whole 5 minutes to have him snarling at me and snapping at me guarding food, which 5 minutes earlier I could have taken from his mouth and did. All it took was a little fearful and insecure body language and actions close to his food. Took another 5 minutes to reverse it.



Where I think Milan has trouble is his lack of being able to clearly express what he is doing and why, english is not his first language. 

And the academically trained people hear the talking point words like dominance and automatically link him with older academic training theory based on works Milan never even heard of when working with dogs on a farm as a poor kid in Mexico.


----------



## crs996

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I don't think there's anything "PC" about using food or toys in training. I use food all the time to teach my dogs new behaviors, and they DO follow my commands because they respect me.


I think you misunderstood my comment. I use food to teach new behaviors as well. I am talking about 1: Petsmart nonsense training and food bribery; and 2: some ridiculous videos on YouTube showing a "positive trainer" walking an aggressive dog toward and (after 30 minutes) past another dog, giving treats every 2 feet. An entire fanny pack full. It was truly laughable, but if that makes people feel good about themselves, then so be it, just not my style.

Giving food is very alpha, but treat bribing is a whole other animal IMHO. You mention that training with food, done improperly can result in a dog who doesn't listen without food. The key words are done improperly, the same as with Cesar's methods, done improperly, they don't work.


----------



## shehulk

Cesar Milan is a product of brilliant marketing. I do, however, give him credit for having a way with his dogs, thus explaining his ability to keep peace in that huge pack of strong breeds at his center. The CM enterprise operates on a simple strategy:

1. Trademark a proven fact as "Cesar's Way" - "Dogs are pack animals. Demonstration of pack leadership is important."
2. Select the most extreme cases of dog 'issues' where an ignorant owner is clearly the cause
3. Repeat steps 1 and 2

I really believe most of the cases he handles could have been prevented by any owner eager to understand dogs. I just don't think the show's #1 target audience is serious dog people willing to put in the time to do the research, which is why everything CM says sounds so magical because they've either never heard it before or CM's advice is the only piece of animal behavior info they've come across. IMO, a more appropriate name for the show should be "The Ignorant-Dog-Owner Whisperer."


----------



## codmaster

shehulk said:


> I really believe most of the cases he handles could have been prevented by any owner eager to understand dogs.


If people were as knowledgable as they should be and sort of like you imply above, there wouldn't be much need for obedience classes or even professional dog trainers either would there? Every dog owner would know how to train and handle their dogs.

Cesar even states that he "trains" owners!


----------



## selzer

I disagree. I certainly know how to train my dogs to heel, sit, down, stay, come front, etc. But I take them to puppy and basic and advanced classes because I want them to feel comfortable around other people and people with dogs, etc. 

Trainers train people, more so than dogs, but many of us repeat offenders are there just for the dogs.


----------



## AgileGSD

DogGone said:


> Wolflike canines use Alpha rolls to establish hierarchy, to keep order and to show respect. Alpha rolls are part of canine sociology and are part of canine instinct. Cesar Milan is essentially taking the role of Alpha Wolf and using dog language.
> 
> An Alpha roll in a wolf pack, is much like a salute in the military; it's an acknowledgment of rank/hierarchy.
> 
> False. Wild dogs and wolves often will forcibly submit (Alpha roll) other pack members. You need to watch more nature documentaries and/or study animal psychology.


 You may want to do some more studying yourself. 

The idea that wolves "alpha roll" each other to determine dominance is extremely outdated and was based on very early studies. The truth is that the more submissive individuals generally actively submit to the more dominant individuals through routine submissive gestures: lip licking, lowering body, rolling over, submissive urination, etc. The more dominant individuals show dominance posturing: standing tall, raising their tail, stiffening, showing teeth, etc. Dogs and wolves are both much more subtle in their actions than to just go around trying to physically roll each other. If the domiannce/submission displays become physical, it is after a lot of other posturing. Isolating one physical aspect of communication (such as physically holding a more submissive individual down in a dispute), saying "this is how wolves establish dominance" and trying to copy it in dog training is extremely off base. It loses everything in translation without the subtle cues which would go with it and "alpha rolling" as done in dog training is not really ever done between wolves.

The alpha wolves are not necessarily the strongest, the fastest, or the smartest. High rank has more to do with attitude and confidence than size or strength. Dominance also does not favor gender — either the alpha male or the alpha female may be the overall "leader of the pack". 
"While dominant wolves generally act more self-confident than lower-ranking ones, wolves do not walk around constantly displaying their status. They most often adopt a neutral pose, changing their expression towards dominance or submission depending on which other wolves are around. (A wolf will show dominance to a lower-ranking animal, and submission to a higher-ranking one.) A wolf displaying dominance stands up tall, looks directly at the other wolf, puts its ears forward, and will lift its tail (usually not much higher than its back, unless it is very excited). A wolf displaying submission crouches down to look small, lowers or even tucks its tail, looks away from the other wolf, and puts its ears down and back. This is usually all that happens when two wolves meet: wolves cannot afford to spend all their time fighting, and these subtle displays are all that is needed to maintain social stability. 
Wolf communication involves a lot of signals like these. The postures and facial expressions used will vary in intensity, or strength, depending on the context: an alpha wolf will often simply look hard at a wolf to send it a dominance message, and a submissive wolf will often just look away from a dominant wolf to give the appropriate response. An excited alpha may give a stronger dominance message, and growl at a lower-ranking wolf or even hold it down. Stronger submission signals include whining and pawing at the dominant wolf. Mostly, signals just get louder and stronger the more excited the wolves get, and fighting rarely occurs. The alpha wolves are not necessarily "in charge" or "leaders of the pack". They may decide where and when to hunt or they may not. An alpha wolf is not a leader so much as a wolf who has the right to do whatever it wants, whenever it wants. Since they have so much social freedom to do what they like, alpha wolves often have more opportunity than lower-ranking wolves to start hunting or to choose a resting place. The rest of the pack will then often follow and join in." http://www.wolfpark.org/wolffaq.html#livetogether 

　


DogGone said:


> Typically once a pack leader establishes his leadership the forcible Alpha rolls subside. When other pack members shows signs of challenge or insubordination don't show submission; often the leader will exert an Alpha roll or some other show of force to reestablish pack order.


 Do have a source for this information? 
　 


DogGone said:


> The crackpot politically correct pseudoscience where dog owners treat their dogs much like spoiled children using Dr. Spock philosophy. The dogs and often the whole family suffer neurosis; so Cesar Milan often has to come in and pick up the pieces.


Do you feel people who don't alpha roll their dog and force submission on a regular basis are "spoiling" them? Do you honestly believe that the owners on CM's show are using any sort of training technique on a regular basis with their dogs? Seems likely that like most pet owners with behavioral issues they have done little to no training and little to no socialization. Or if they have attempted to train the dog is has not been with any real method but with misguided advice from neighors, doing what their parents did or reacting to the dog's behavior out of anger. 
　


TxRider said:


> Because it is an instinctual submissive, as well as a vulnerable position.


 Following that line of logic, it would be beneficial to routinely make your dog submissively urinate or cower away from you as well.


----------



## Shepgirlfriend

Hi, I'm new here (first post). I've met Cesar Millan twice and he is very charming (and funny). He's the true essence of the American Dream (except for the coming here illegally part). He was gracious to all his fans and took the time to sign everyone's books and pose for pictures. We will all miss "Daddy".


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

crs996 said:


> The key words are done improperly, the same as with Cesar's methods, done improperly, they don't work.


Very true, but I wanted to make a distinction between being merely ineffective and potentially dangerous.


----------



## TxRider

AgileGSD said:


> Following that line of logic, it would be beneficial to routinely make your dog submissively urinate or cower away from you as well.


That would not be following that line of logic.


----------



## AgileGSD

TxRider said:


> That would not be following that line of logic.


 Submissive urination and cowering from a "dominant" figure displaying authority are also natural submissive signals for dogs. Why is forcing dogs onto their back good training "because it is a natural submissive posture" but forcing them to submissively urinate or cower from their owners is not?


----------



## selzer

AgileGSD, great post. thanks for the link.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang

> Cesar Milan is essentially taking the role of Alpha Wolf and using dog language.


:headbang:

WE. ARE. NOT. DOGS!!!!!

We humans will NEVER *EVER *be able to speak 'dog'.

*NEVER!*

Dogs can express a multitude of information with a single look. With the way their tail is carried. With the a single grumble in the back of their throats. With the flick of an ear.

We humans *CANNOT *mimic that and we should not try.

The best we can hope for is to help dogs understand OUR language.


----------



## TxRider

AgileGSD said:


> Submissive urination and cowering from a "dominant" figure displaying authority are also natural submissive signals for dogs. Why is forcing dogs onto their back good training "because it is a natural submissive posture" but forcing them to submissively urinate or cower from their owners is not?


You asked how is it dog psychology, not if it was good training or not.

If you can't see a difference between the extremity of laying a dog on it's side, and doing whatever it would take to inspire enough fear to make a dog cower and urinate I don't think there's a lot of point in trying to have a rational discussion.


----------



## TxRider

Lauri & The Gang said:


> :headbang:
> 
> WE. ARE. NOT. DOGS!!!!!
> 
> We humans will NEVER *EVER *be able to speak 'dog'.
> 
> *NEVER!*
> 
> Dogs can express a multitude of information with a single look. With the way their tail is carried. With the a single grumble in the back of their throats. With the flick of an ear.
> 
> We humans *CANNOT *mimic that and we should not try.
> 
> The best we can hope for is to help dogs understand OUR language.


That's just ridiculous. We are often told about using eye contact in certain ways, body language like not standing over a dog, to mimic a yelp if a pup gets too mouthy, to using different tones of voice, to using excited movement and such and more.. Many aspects of how dogs naturally communicate are part of training and dealing with dogs.

We are both mammals and do have some things in common, and we are perfectly capable of observing and using what we can from what we observe about how dogs communicate within our physical limitations as they are learning how to communicate verbally with us within their limitations.


----------



## TxRider

AgileGSD said:


> The truth is that the more submissive individuals generally actively submit to the more dominant individuals through routine submissive gestures: lip licking, lowering body, rolling over, submissive urination, etc. The more dominant individuals show dominance posturing: standing tall, raising their tail, stiffening, showing teeth, etc.


At what age and by what method and from who do they learn these routine behaviors for them to become routine?



> The alpha wolves are not necessarily the strongest, the fastest, or the smartest. High rank has more to do with attitude and confidence than size or strength.


Alpha wolves are generally just the mating pair, the parents of the pack which is family unit naturally.




> An alpha wolf is not a leader so much as a wolf who has the right to do whatever it wants, whenever it wants.


Reminds me of a few problem dogs I have seen. Some even call them dominant.



> Do you honestly believe that the owners on CM's show are using any sort of training technique on a regular basis with their dogs? Seems likely that like most pet owners with behavioral issues they have done little to no training and little to no socialization. Or if they have attempted to train the dog is has not been with any real method but with misguided advice from neighors, doing what their parents did or reacting to the dog's behavior out of anger.


Many of the owners on the show I have seen have paid for professional trainers, sometimes several trainers, and some have been told by those professionals they need to put the dog down. Others have not and have done no training, or wrong training and you can't make a blanket statement you have to take it on a case by case basis. As well keep in mind the number of dogs Cesar rolls on their side are a tiny minority on the show.
　
My dogs roll over and show me their bellies daily, usually several times a day, I give them too many good belly rubs, they love it, and they are spoiled...


----------



## AgileGSD

TxRider said:


> My dogs roll over and show me their bellies daily, usually several times a day, I give them too many good belly rubs, they love it, and they are spoiled...


 That is much more natural to a dog then randomly forced onto their bnacks without warning. 



TxRider said:


> You asked how is it dog psychology, not if it was good training or not.
> 
> If you can't see a difference between the extremity of laying a dog on it's side, and doing whatever it would take to inspire enough fear to make a dog cower and urinate I don't think there's a lot of point in trying to have a rational discussion.


 Inspiring fear or not, with many dogs alpha rolling them will cause submissive urination. I did a private lesson yesterday where the young dog submissively urinated when greeting her people after they had been away. That is not uncommon problem with young dogs, especially females. Following the logic that alpha rolling is a good training tool because it puts the dog in a place of submission, encouraging submissive urination and "low dog" body posture when greeting humans would be good for the same reason.

A couple things I have come across:

This article mentions a case where a dog that CM "rehabbed" ended up biting his owner afterwards: Sophia Yin: Experts Say Dominance-Based Dog Training Techniques Made Popular by Television Shows Can Contribute to Dog Bites
Dr. Jennie Jamtgaard, an applied animal behavior consultant and behavior instructor at Colorado State University College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences gives an example. 
"I saw an Australian Cattledog mix with severe aggression (lunging, growling, barking) directed at other dogs whenever they came into view, even hundreds of feet away. The dog was fine with people and had never been aggressive to people before. The owners watched the Dog Whisperer with Cesar Millan regularly and dealt with the dog in a completely punishment-based way. They repeatedly tried to physically subdue the dog whenever it was aggressive. Finally, at PetSmart, the dog growled and lunged, and when the female owner tried to force the dog down, she was bitten on the arm. That was when they called me."​And of course his rehabbing didn't work so well with Cotton the Eskie, who was later "disarmed": Taming Cotton with 'canine disarming' - latimes.com
*"Cotton*


(From the Krieger family) 
Krieger appealed to the fabled "Dog Whisperer," loved by some and despised by others. The star of the show, Cesar Milan, had a brilliant success. Cotton became the dog Krieger always dreamed he could be, calm and submissive. But that lasted one day. The episode (titled &#147;Raw Cotton&#148 first aired more than two years ago. Now page 299 of the "Dog Whisperer Ultimate Episode Guide" reveals the sad truth: &#147;The Kriegers have not been able to successfully implement Cesar&#146;s technique.&#148;

Krieger had a follow-up visit with Milan at his South L.A. center, where he suggested that the family try a full-time muzzle. Krieger already tried that and concluded a restraint has yet to be invented that Cotton can't wriggle his way out of. Here, a temporarily tamed Cotton poses with Milan, far left, Krieger, husband Eliot and sons Adam and Seth."


I certainly won't claim CM's methods never work, or that any training method never works. Dogs have been being trained for years with force based, dominance theory methods. I think a lot of his advice is good common sense advice about dogs especially about exercising the dog and being confident. The problem is however that when things go wrong with force based training, things can go very wrong and people and dogs can get hurt. How forceful is too forceful? How long and how often is it ok to cut off the dog's airway to stop a behavior? What if the owner can't physically overpower their dog? What if the dog responds aggressively to being aggressively handled? How much is it ok to escalate the conflict between human and dog? Is being involved in a constant physical struggle really the relationship one wants with a dog?

Patricia McConnell has a good article in the current BARK magazine about this subject and her first experience with a force based training class before she was a dog trainer. The article illustrates perfectly what can and sometimes does go wrong.


----------



## TxRider

AgileGSD said:


> Following the logic that alpha rolling is a good training tool because it puts the dog in a place of submission, encouraging submissive urination and "low dog" body posture when greeting humans would be good for the same reason.


Which is where your disconnect is. I'm speaking of having the dog experience that it can submit and allow itself to not be on guard at all times and nothing bad will happen if it does by then providing positive reinforcement, as CM does.

The dog, the situation, the context, and the reinforcement is important as it is any behavior modification technique.

My dog mistrusted men when I got her from rescue, I am a rather large single man. She would never let herself be without her feet under her body and able to bolt for over two months after I adopted her. Eventually she did realize she could lay on her side and trust me, she could relax in a vulnerable position with me, and now she loves to do so and get a belly rub, and her fear of men is very much long gone..

I likely could have rolled her onto her side by force, provided lots of positive reinforcement when she was there and had her realize that this was the case a lot faster. 

If she was a danger and her mistrust was expressed with biting and gone on longer, if it was a life or death issue and she was to be euthanized, I might have ended up doing just that, forcing her to lay on her side, and then giving a lot of praise and positive reinforcement to show her it's ok, she can trust. Counter conditioning.

Not a lot different than a trainer who can't lure a dog to sit and pushes a dogs butt down and gives positive reinforcement. Sit = good... but force was used to get there.



> A couple things I have come across:
> 
> This article mentions a case where a dog that CM "rehabbed" ended up biting his owner afterwards: Sophia Yin: Experts Say Dominance-Based Dog Training Techniques Made Popular by Television Shows Can Contribute to Dog Bites
> Dr. Jennie Jamtgaard, an applied animal behavior consultant and behavior instructor at Colorado State University College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences gives an example."I saw an Australian Cattledog mix with severe aggression (lunging, growling, barking) directed at other dogs whenever they came into view, even hundreds of feet away. The dog was fine with people and had never been aggressive to people before. The owners watched the Dog Whisperer with Cesar Millan regularly and dealt with the dog in a completely punishment-based way. They repeatedly tried to physically subdue the dog whenever it was aggressive. Finally, at PetSmart, the dog growled and lunged, and when the female owner tried to force the dog down, she was bitten on the arm. That was when they called me."​


Sounds like a not too smart owner who used the wrong method at the wrong times on the wrong dog from watching a TV show, something CM and show say not to do.



> And of course his rehabbing didn't work so well with Cotton the Eskie, who was later "disarmed": Taming Cotton with 'canine disarming' - latimes.com
> *"Cotton*
> 
> 
> (From the Krieger family)
> Krieger appealed to the fabled "Dog Whisperer," loved by some and despised by others. The star of the show, Cesar Milan, had a brilliant success. Cotton became the dog Krieger always dreamed he could be, calm and submissive. But that lasted one day. The episode (titled “Raw Cotton”) first aired more than two years ago. Now page 299 of the "Dog Whisperer Ultimate Episode Guide" reveals the sad truth: “The Kriegers have not been able to successfully implement Cesar’s technique.”
> 
> Krieger had a follow-up visit with Milan at his South L.A. center, where he suggested that the family try a full-time muzzle. Krieger already tried that and concluded a restraint has yet to be invented that Cotton can't wriggle his way out of. Here, a temporarily tamed Cotton poses with Milan, far left, Krieger, husband Eliot and sons Adam and Seth."


So it is CM's fault the owners cannot follow though and improve the dog, not only using his methods, but anyone elses they have tried either? Seems to me they should probably rehome the dog. 




> I certainly won't claim CM's methods never work, or that any training method never works. Dogs have been being trained for years with force based, dominance theory methods. I think a lot of his advice is good common sense advice about dogs especially about exercising the dog and being confident. The problem is however that when things go wrong with force based training, things can go very wrong and people and dogs can get hurt. How forceful is too forceful? How long and how often is it ok to cut off the dog's airway to stop a behavior? What if the owner can't physically overpower their dog? What if the dog responds aggressively to being aggressively handled? How much is it ok to escalate the conflict between human and dog? Is being involved in a constant physical struggle really the relationship one wants with a dog?
> 
> Patricia McConnell has a good article in the current BARK magazine about this subject and her first experience with a force based training class before she was a dog trainer. The article illustrates perfectly what can and sometimes does go wrong.


I have a different view from the very foundation of this statement.

I don't see CM as a force based trainer, just a person not above using some force only when appropriate but avoiding it normally. Never using force as a method to change behavior, but only using force as a means to a goal where he can then reward the dog with positive reinforcement and condition the response by means of positive reinforcement.

I don't even know that I would call him a trainer really.

I don't think your questions have much to do with CM or anything he himself does or tells owners to do.

And I think you'll have to admit that CM is certainly not in any sort of "constant physical struggle" with the large number of dogs he keeps.


----------



## DogGone

onyx'girl said:


> not because of fear or consequences


I feel that you are being dishonest in trying to represent Caesar's method as instilling fear.
　
He has success with dogs that are dangerous because of "politically correct" methods like you seem to support that have failed and have allowed/enabled/encouraged the dogs to become wild controllers and dangerous.


Liesje said:


> Oh, and where dog TV shows are concerned, I much prefer Victoria Stilwell "It's Me or the Dog".


I think the show largely speaks for itself. I think the series shows Stilwell's methodology is less successful. I feel many of the techniques she is using is just putting Band-Aids over the problems. She allows the dogs to control too much, negotiating with the dog may bring short-term success; but in the long run it is rewarding the dog's controlling/bullying behavior; so in the long run the behavior is likely to get worse.
　
It's much like in the cities that give alcoholics and drug addicts and apartment (crash pad); it may temporarily get the problem out of sight, but in the long run it encourages drug abuse and alcoholism. It's also unfair to the people that are homeless and don't get government subsidized housing, just because they are not drug addicts or alcoholics.


CWhite said:


> Here is the thing with Cesar. I noticed his cases are extreme cases of stupidity.


Agreed. He takes some of the worst cases and a wide swath of problems and personalities. The root of bad dog behavior, is almost always the owner/dog handler. The owners often have little rules, boundaries, or limitations and are often poor leaders and often don't read the signals of their dogs and don't communicate and behave in a manner that a dog can easily understand.
　
I think the wide array of bad dog behavior and bad owner/dog handler behavior makes for interesting TV and I also think it demonstrates that many of the politically correct techniques don’t work; especially when recklessly applied.


zyppi said:


> I can just imagine the average pet owner imitating some of his practices --- consequences many not a be a pretty picture for either owner or dog.


If someone merely imitates his practices the results are quite likely to be disastrous. However if they truly understand what he is doing, then the results are likely to be very successful. There are always risks involved, no matter how careful. No method is perfect or foolproof.
　
Not all methods are appropriate for all situations, dogs or owners. Methods have to be adjusted to the particular situation and to meet the needs of owners and dogs.
　
Most of the dogs in Caesar's videos are dogs and owners with severe problems; that often require extreme correction. The more typical dogs typically wouldn't need such extreme corrections. The show would not be is interesting and educational if it just used more typical dogs and owners.
　
The reason that his show has a disclaimer, is that there is risks, and of people try to imitate his techniques without really understanding them there is a good chance that they will make things worse for the dog and the owner/dog handler.


MacknCody said:


> anyone ever wonder about his rehab center and why its all concrete flooring?


I think that was his old facility; when he was located in a more urban industrial area. I think the new facility that he has now is in a more suburban/country type of area. I think now he has dirt and grassy areas. Though with as many dogs as he has in his pack I wouldn't be surprised if at all becomes dirt/mud, and if he decides to try some other surface that holds up better under high-traffic.


BellatheDog said:


> Alpha rolling....This type of dominance is not used in the “dog world” and dogs don’t really understand what is going on when you do this.


False. Alpha rolling is commonplace amongst canine experts and in the natural canine world. Dogs should understand it on an instinctual level and well socialized dogs should understand it on a social/mental level. There are probably some dogs that don't understand it; but that is probably because they have been poorly treated and poorly socialized; these are dogs are typically neglected and or treated like people. Part of rehabilitation is using the alpha roll to teach them in a manner that they can more easily instinctually understand.


Maedchen said:


> From Andrew Luescher, DVM, Veterinary Behaviorist
> Animal Behavior Clinic
> Purdue University
> ...positive punishment...
> 
> The last episode (compulsive disorder) is particularly unsettling because compulsive disorder is related to an imbalance in neurotransmitter levels or receptors, and is therefore unequivocally a medical condition.
> ...


Luescher is wrong, bigoted and myopic.
Sure brain chemistry is often a causation and or a factor of compulsive disorder; however there are other causations and factors of compulsive disorder. Sometimes environmental, social, and other psychological issues are causations and/or factors of compulsive disorder.
　
As far as his stance on positive punishment; I feel he is being dramatic and wrong much like Dr. Spock. I feel dogs just like people should have rules boundaries and limitations and should face consequences for their actions. I feel dogs just like people should know that they could possibly face discipline if they do something wrong. The Dr. Spock mentality is partly why we have so many sociopaths in society now.

Luescher is assuming that the basis of all compulsive behavior is brain chemistry. That’s not the case. There was an episode on the dog whisperer, where a German Shepherd was chasing his tail and biting it obsessively. The problem wasn’t brain chemistry, the problem was the owners/dog handlers were not giving the dog enough exercise and entertainment so the dog was going crazy in boredom. Cesar showed how to correct the behavior but more importantly he showed them how to prevent the behavior. Which was basically to take the dog on longer and faster and more frequent walks. I think he also included saddlebags with bottled water to wear the dog down more and to give the dog a job to do.

I think it's sad that people want to throw expensive drugs at a problem that could be solved by simply taking a dog on walks and playing with the dog more often. I think it's sad that people would rather medicate their dogs, then treat them humanely.


DianaM said:


> I redirect him by taking him outside or trading him something SUPER DUPER SPECIAL


That can often makes things worse, as it can be rewarding bad behavior. There are some circumstances were those techniques can be used and can work well; however often it makes things much worse and does a lot of harm. That's often when someone like Cesar Milan have to come along and pick up the pieces.
　
When the raccoons used to break in to the garbage cans my mom used to try to redirect the raccoons behavior by throwing them peanuts when they would break into the trash cans. I explained to her that she was just exasperating the problem. By rewarding the raccoons with peanuts; she was encouraging the raccoons to break into the garbage cans.
　
I use bungee cords across the lids to make it more difficult for the raccoons to get the lids off the trash cans, I also let the dog out every time the raccoons started messing around with the trash cans; the bungee cords prevented the raccoons from being rewarded for trying to break in to the trash cans. Letting the dog chase the raccoons after they started messing around with the trash cans; taught the raccoons that there were undesirable consequences to breaking into the trash cans.
　


DianaM said:


> My dog is food possessive in general ... if DF goes near him whenever he has food............... let's just say that I warn DF to be extremely careful and NOT aggravate Renji when he is eating.


I feel that you are being quite irresponsible in allowing your dog to be food aggressive. That could be a ticking time bomb.
You should control your dog instead of restricting DF. You’re punishing the victim, instead of the offender.


----------



## DogGone

Cassidy's Mom said:


> So - self taught TV trainer? Or DVM, director of the Animal Behavior Clinic at the Purdue School of Veterinary Medicine, Ph.D in animal behavior, a certified applied animal behaviorist who specializes in canine aggresssion, and a diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorsts? I'll go with the expert, thanks. I mean, I can disagree that grass is green, but that doesn't make it so.


A lot of crackpots have titles and flaunt them. So-called experts often are not. I prefer results, science and logic over fancy titles. Titles and reputations are often not deserved.
　
Remember there was a lowly chemist that was scoffed at by the medical community for theorizing that microbes cause disease. The medical community scoffed at the idea that handwashing and sanitation could prevent disease and increase surgery survival. They scoffed at the idea of immunology.
　
Remember it was the so-called authorities with all the titles that insisted that the earth was the center of the universe and that the world was flat.
　
Andrew Luescher is an example that people with educations and titles can be crackpots. Andrew Luescher unfoundedly attacks Cesar Milan using the straw argument that brain chemistry causes compulsive disorders. Sure brain chemistry can cause compulsive disorders; but there are many more causations and factors. Someone so well educated should know that there's more than one causation/factor. So either Luescher is poorly educated and/or he is blinded by his bigotry. When it comes to Andrew Luescher's slanderous attack on Cesar Milan; I think it just shows that Cesar Milan is more of an expert then Andrew Luescher.


codmaster said:


> Wonder how manyof the "Positive only" trainers would take on the real challenge dogs - judging by the work of a few such trainer folks in our local obedience club (granted a very limited sample), my guess would be not so many. if a dog is difficult they tell the owners to take him/her out of class. One in particular talks often about a "real holy terror"of a dog she used to have - took a long time to find out that the dog she was referring to was about 25 lbs soaking wet. Often wondered about how she and her method would work with a "red zone" mastiff or even a big GSD!
> 
> Out of curiostiy, has any one seen any studies done to compare the training time using a reasonable positive only method versus a reasonable more traditional method?


A lot of the cases that Cesar Milan takes have already been to such trainers that have only made things worse, yet Cesar Milan has had quite a bit of success with their failures.


Kayos and Havoc said:


> Why would time be an issue? If you take the quick route to the detriment of the animal, you may make a change but will it be long lasting and have you you changed the mindset of the animal. If you take the route that builds the dogs trust and confidence you have made a life long change in the mindset of the dog.


Time is often critical. It's best to correct a dog's behavior immediately when there's bad behavior, so that the bad behavior does not become ingrained behavior, and so that they can associate the correction with the undesirable behavior. Often it is detrimental to the animal to use slower politically correct techniques.
　
I don't know why you people think that only one type of technique is appropriate. There needs to be different techniques for different situations, different animals and different people.
　
Like Cesar says; if you can correct the behavior before it becomes bad it's much easier and much less stressful on the dog and human. So it's very important to understand and observe the language of the dog and choose and adapt the methods to the dog and the person and the situation.
　
I prefer to use many different methods; rather than fixate on just one or a few methods.


Fuse said:


> That analogy about flooding being like putting an arachnophobic person person in a closet with spiders is horrible


I think that would be a bad analogy also. I think that would be much like throwing a non-swimmer into the water. I think fear and aversion therapy is great; though it can go wrong. There are no guarantees either way gentle or cowboy. In some cases I think it's best to be slow and gentle; but for some situations I think it's best to cowboy it.
　
Sometimes being too slow and gentle can actually help anxiety build. So it depends on the situation and the animal.


selzer said:


> Good leaders do not get in squabbles with those they are leading.


False. A good leader will try to prevent squabbles. If a squabble ensues sometimes is necessary to intervene to stop it.


Cassidy's Mom said:


> Where did you get your information that those problem dogs are the result of failed "pseudoscience" training, politically correct or otherwise? It's obvious that many of these dogs have had NO training, the people are clueless about dog behavior, and that many of the owners have been treating their dogs like spoiled children, but there is no training, scientific or pseudo-scientific, that suggests that's an appropriate way to raise a dog, and I've NEVER heard of using Dr. Spock philosophy on dogs. I think you just made that up to support your argument.


Like many here they don't use the name Dr. Spock, but many clients of the dog whisperer (like many of the people on this message board that are attacking and slandering Cesar Milan) have used a similar or identical philosophy as Dr. Spock. Morality consequences, and logic are virtually removed: and replaced with idealistic politically correct rhetoric.
Letting dogs rule. Letting dogs be dominant and aggressive of people and dogs at their own whims. Not making immediate corrections. Not making a dog face consequences for its inappropriate behavior. Not having reasonably clear and reasonably stable environment, rules boundaries and limitations.


TxRider said:


> That is actually a pretty good article, ....
> 
> I think he would agree with all of it.


There are some good points in the article, however it is severely flawed and dishonest. Wolves and dogs do alpha roll. Wolves and dogs both do voluntary and forced roll and pinning type of behavior to establish and reinforce hierarchy.


selzer said:


> Actually, in natural dog packs, wolf packs, a true alpha asserts his authority without fighting or forcing submission.


False. While submission is typically voluntary in dog packs and wolf packs; alphas do resort to force when they are challenged. You are seriously misinformed and poorly educated when it comes to wolf and dog behavior. You seem to have some sort of idealistic fantasy of canine behavior without knowing the reality. Sometimes there is even injury or fatal battles that ensue.


Cassidy's Mom said:


> Sure, which is why changing the emotional response to the situation is so powerful. If the behavior you want to change is based on an emotional response, change the emotional response and the behavior extinguishes on its own. But if you're mislabeling fearful defensive behavior as "dominant" then you're targeting a completely different issue rather than dealing with the ACTUAL problem.


That's why Cesar is always preaching calm and assertive; to reduce the fear component as much as possible. That's why Cesar prefers to address the actual problem rather than to play politically correct games.

Sometimes it takes trial and error to analyze what the source of the problem is and what method works the best.


----------



## doggiedad

he knew he could get away with charging the dog. i wouldn't
recommend charging any dog, large or small. what did
making the dog cower and staring it down do?



bearlasmom said:


> i love Czar and the guy from 'im at the end of my leash'
> did anyone see him handle the large black german shepherd who would snarl and bark at people who came into the home. He walked in there, and told them to let the dog GO, it charged at him and what does he do? He charged it! Right across the room and up the stairs until he had it cowering in a corner. he didnt raise a hand to it except to grab it and stare it down.


----------



## Syaoransbear

Anyone watching the full day of The Dog Whisperer that's on right now? His main dog Daddy died so the national geographic channel is doing a tribute to his dog. Very sad, that dog was such a good representative of its breed along with all the other bully breeds in his pack.

I've been watching a lot of episodes and I've only seen cesar use treats once. I'm more in favor of a balance of rewards and corrections to help give the dog a very clear understanding of what you want and what is unacceptable. I also think the dominance theory is kind of excessive. I think you don't need to walk over to your dog and push it to the ground and be dominate for no reason, that sounds like it would make the dog nervous. IMHO, you don't need to dominate your dog, you just should never let your dog dominate you. You don't have to be aggressively dominate to be the dominate figure to your dog.


----------



## crs996

What is with the _Alpha rolling_ obsession with CM?? It seems like half of the topics on him degrade into diatribe over alpha rolls, when that is so far from the point of his shows. I don't believe I've ever even heard him mention alpha rolls.

Who cares whether wolf packs do it or not? We are not wolves or dogs. If laying a dog on its side brings about a calm, submissive state, what does it matter? Why is it so controversial? If my 2 dogs are fighting (none of my dogs ever have), I am not going to run over with a clicker and treat.


----------



## Konotashi

That's a HUGE reason why I don't like his training methods. He's an alpha roll freak, but IMO, this just makes an insecure, unconfident dog. Wolves don't physically roll the other members of the pack onto their backs - they willingly submit to the alpha because they know their place.


----------



## crs996

And that was my point, we're not wolves. Has CM ever called rolling the dog on the side an alpha roll? 

How does this make an insecure dog? Most of the dogs on the show are HIGHLY insecure, but they had never been alpha rolled previously in many cases.

It really makes me laugh how people will go into huge heated debates over whether alpha rolling is actually done in a pack. The ones who are against it say it's not natural behavior. Since when are clickers, chicken treats, leashes, collars, etc natural? But this point is always evaded because the alpha roll or whatever variant is what everyone loves to hate.


----------



## Konotashi

crs996 said:


> And that was my point, we're not wolves. Has CM ever called rolling the dog on the side an alpha roll?


We're not, but our dogs are all descended from them and share common behaviors with them. Can't comment on the second question because I don't watch him.



crs996 said:


> How does this make an insecure dog?


I believe it's because they're forcibly being placed into a submissive position. Personally, I wouldn't like it if I was FORCED into a submissive position. But I'm no expert. I think they become insecure or aggressive.



crs996 said:


> The ones who are against it say it's not natural behavior. Since when are clickers, chicken treats, leashes, collars, etc natural?


But it's been proven that positive reinforcement techniques are far more effective than punishment. Alpha rolling, or whatever you want to call it, is a punishment, IMO, and has no benefit. Clickers and treats are used with positive reinforcement, and collars and leashes are to protect your dog.


----------



## crs996

Konotashi said:


> Personally, I wouldn't like it if I was FORCED into a submissive position.


Exactly, one of CM's main points, people humanizing dogs and giving them human emotions.


Konotashi said:


> But it's been proven that positive reinforcement techniques are far more effective than punishment.


Proven by whom? There is a lot of focus on self esteem, positive teaching and non-judgementalism in schools, are the kids turning out better? 

As always, I am curious how people can call CM an alpha roll freak or any number of other things, _when they never watch him_?

It seems a bit disingenuous to keep reading posts by people who "don't like him" or are "not a fan of his methods" but have never seen him! lol I think Victoria Stillwell and some of the folks on Dogtown are dog trainers as much as the folks at Petsmart, but I still watched them many times before coming to conclusions.


----------



## Dainerra

yes, dogs are descended from wolves.. BUT, dogs were specifically bred to keep many of their puppy characteristics, not those of adult wolves. and know what happens to wolf pups? when they get too rowdy, they get alpha rolled by the adults. Dogs also will roll each other if the other dog doesn't submit. someone pointed out earlier that, in captivity, wolves will sometimes be seen alpha rolling each other. That is how the idea first got introduced to dog training. 
Now, it's "not natural" because wild wolves have been found not to do it? Dogs have about as much in common with wild wolves than man does with chimpanzees! Kind of an illogical argument, isn't it?
Yes, wolves avoid it whenever possible and don't go around rolling each other just to remind who is boss. The submissive dogs roll to let the leader know that they DON'T need to be reminded. Now, what happens when another wolf decides HE should be the alpha wolf? A fight that lasts until one of them submits. 
That is when Cesar is saying that he rolls the dogs. When it refuses to accept that anyone else is the leader. Can just anyone do it? No! Because not just anyone is strong enough/has the energy that Cesar does to pull it off. Once the "spell" is broken, though, the dog is more open to being submissive to other people. Open to listening to what he is told and knowing that he has to obey.

Again, not everything that Cesar does is on the show. They cut out everything but the most exciting parts that will draw ratings. The warning on the show is there for the same reason that there is fine print on the car commercials - people are morons!! 

So, in the end, what Cesar does works for Cesar. All the "bad endings" have all been admittedly because the owner didn't or couldn't follow through with Cesar's techniques. But, that is how many bad endings out of how many dogs??? 

On the Gentle Leader? I got one for a lab we owned in FL. It worked like a dream for him. I tried to put one on Rayden when he was a pup and he dang near broke his neck. After weeks of working, I finally got him to tolerate wearing it. The first time I put the leash on, he about broke his neck, my arm and all his legs from getting tangled in the leash. I kept on trying like I was supposed to and know what? after only a couple times he would hide when he saw me pick it up. I don't doubt that there is a good chance that, if I kept using it, he would have gotten aggressive with me. Shoot, it was a fight just to get it on. Corrections were a joke. He would start screaming, thrashing, and fighting the collar at even the slightest pressure. I couldn't even drop the leash because the weight of it on the GL sent him into a frenzy!

I have only alpha rolled a dog once in my entire life. Our lab had gotten out of the house and had been missing for several weeks. Finally someone called to say that he had turned up at their house. He was VERY food aggressive, something that he had never been before. He was outside with a bone; I was a few feet behind him planting flowers. My youngest (about 4yrs old) went running past, several feet away, but he still lunged at her. It was more of a Mother instinct than anything else. I grabbed the back of his neck and he was on his back and I was in his face. He didn't fight, just instantly submitted. It was never repeated; it never needed to be.


----------



## Ucdcrush

Konotashi said:


> I think they become insecure or aggressive.


CM has a huge pack of dogs that appear to be happy and balanced, not insecure or aggressive. How can an alpha roll freak have a huge pack of happy balanced dogs if alpha rolling makes dogs insecure or aggressive?

CM has said that most (all?) of his dog pack were previously aggressive, so knowing him we can almost be sure they have all been put on their side by CM in working to decrease their aggressive behaviors. Again, no proof that it makes them insecure or aggressive. If anything there is proof of the opposite.


----------



## Samba

I think that often what is called calm submission is actually shut down.

It is probably true that some basic approach to being a leader rather than a servant is helpful to many dog owners.


----------



## TxRider

Konotashi said:


> But it's been proven that positive reinforcement techniques are far more effective than punishment. Alpha rolling, or whatever you want to call it, is a punishment, IMO, and has no benefit. Clickers and treats are used with positive reinforcement, and collars and leashes are to protect your dog.


I disagree.

Positive reinforcement is more effective to get a dog to perform a behavior, to increase the occurrence of a behavior.

Negative and positive punishment are more effective to get a dog to stop a behavior, to decrease the occurrence of a behavior.

Clicker training is a combination of positive reinforcement and negative punishment to increase wanted behaviors and decrease unwanted ones.


----------



## Samba

I am wondering if behaviors that are positively punished don't tend to recurr once the punisher is removed.


----------



## Syaoransbear

I think that alpha rolling doesn't make the dog insecure, it's how people are using it. What people are taking away from the show is that they must 'assert' their dominance on their dog all the time in the form of pinning it to the ground, instead of just being the dominant figure all the time and not letting your dog take advantage of you. People are thinking that every time they walk by their dog they should alpha roll it to 'remind' it who is dominant. That's not what ceasar is doing. He's only alpha rolling when the dog is trying to dominate him. The problem is that he's putting so much importance on being dominant that people think forcing their dog into submission, even when it's already in a submissive state, is the right way to assert their dominance. I think it creates an insecure dog when the dog is already being submissive and the owner comes along, alpha rolls it, and basically reprimands the dog for being submissive.


----------



## TxRider

Samba said:


> I am wondering if behaviors that are positively punished don't tend to recurr once the punisher is removed.


They can, just as behaviors that are positively reinforced can stop occurring if positive reinforcement is removed.

Positive punishment is all around us and normal, it's just as natural a way of learning as positive reinforcement.

If the behavior recurrs it is likely due to it being a behavior which provides some sort of positive reinforcement, and has not gone without that positive reinforcement long enough and the consequence has not been aversive consistently enough or long enough to become extinct.


Or following Skinner...

"In addition to the four main quadrants of Operant Conditioning, Skinner defined principles which expand the basic concepts. One of these principles is called Extinction. Put simply, extinction says if a behavior is not reinforced, even after it has been conditioned. it will gradually eliminate or change."

It seems to me this is the principle CM is using when he calmly holds the leash while an aggresive dog throws it's fit. Not allowing the behavior to be reinforced as it would be if he reacted by allowing the allowing the aggresion to succeed in it's purpose. Lack of that self reinforcement will eventually lead to extinction of the behavior.

He then may use some force to get the dog to provide the proper behavior, and positively reinforces that behavior to increase it's occurance.


----------



## Konotashi

crs996 said:


> Exactly, one of CM's main points, people humanizing dogs and *giving them human emotions.*
> 
> Proven by whom? There is a lot of focus on self esteem, positive teaching and non-judgementalism* in schools, are the kids* turning out better?


Dogs aren't humans. You just said that, then turned around and compared dogs to children.


----------



## Samba

I think I see Cesar getting the behavior to occur and then claiming to show the dog leadership or dominance in some fashion. I can see there might be suppression of behavior but this might not produce lasting change in emotional response. He also tries to have the dog have a positive experience so hopefully enough of this will change the base emotional response. 

I am still not sure the emotional response could not be altered without evoking the undesirable behavior and then having a physical altercation of sorts. I am not certain that part is necessary.


----------



## Samba

> But with such a wide viewing audience and so much potential to influence the way people understand dog behavior and approach modifying it, I can only hope that DogTown is a sign of things to come.


 Nicole Wilde



DogTown Versus The Dog Whisperer | Dog Star Daily


----------



## TxRider

Samba said:


> I think I see Cesar getting the behavior to occur and then claiming to show the dog leadership or dominance in some fashion. I can see there might be suppression of behavior but this might not produce lasting change in emotional response. He also tries to have the dog have a positive experience so hopefully enough of this will change the base emotional response.


He also leaves the owners with instruction and a how to carry on to help change the base emotional response over time. Just as with any other person it will alays depend n how well the owners follow up.



> I am still not sure the emotional response could not be altered without evoking the undesirable behavior and then having a physical altercation of sorts. I am not certain that part is necessary.


It most certainly could, which is why it's debated which methods are better. I enjoy the debate and thinking the options through, but it seems many misrepresent what CM does to a great extent.


----------



## Samba

Cesar does get some emotional reactions from people. The one's that I give most credence to are the folks who are concerned with misuse of the methods if misinterpreted.

I note Cesar's show does not go into his utilization of electric collars much. I am not opposed to electric, but I think sometimes on TV we do not see the entire story. Also, I think much of what he does makes for good TV. Other types of work are like watching grass grow.

Also, the methods used result in too much physicality to be appealing to me for the most part. The dogs could be kept below threshold and work could go on to alter base emotional response. The owner's need something other than this physicality to work with in most cases I would imagine. 

When I see much or it, other than you should be the leader ( nothing at all new in this information as it has been out there for decades), I am usually left with a feeling that there is a better way. One that involves less stress, less cortisol, and fewer catecholamines for both dogs and owners.


----------



## TxRider

Samba said:


> Nicole Wilde
> 
> 
> 
> DogTown Versus The Dog Whisperer | Dog Star Daily



Yet another "vs" article that compares apples to oranges.

The vick dog cherry was not dog aggressive, but very fearful and timid.

The actual dog aggressive pits at dog town are still there and likely will be for life isolated in a kennel by themselves and managed through separation not cured of their aggression.

If she wanted to do a fair comparison she would have compared to one of the dog aggressive pit bulls dog town will keep in a kennel, isolated from other dogs, for life.

Not a whole lot different from CM's suggestion that the owners leave the dog with him permanently, which they refused to do.

Not to mention the good folks at dog town having years of 1-1 conditioning time with the dogs in a controlled environment, and CM having only the short time an owner will commit to.


----------



## Samba

I am thinking that a lot of the dogs labelled dominant aggressive have a fair degree of fear element in them. I actually have not seen so much pure dominance aggression. The most confident, dominant dogs I have seen... not so likely to act out. 

In dogs that can be some what dominant and have some fight in them, the fear driven behavior can look very dominant. The dogs may own some dominance and aggression, but often with an element of fear they act out. In a fight or flight situation, these dogs are going to choose fight. It is going to look very dominant posturing and forward, but a lot of time insecurity still drives it.

I am not sure that an owners lack of commitment is driving Cesar's methods.


----------



## Samba

Dominant dal puppy:






Dominant cat:


----------



## selzer

ROTFLMAO the dal puppy eats the food on the table when they are not there. 

Hello!!!!

It's a puppy!!!

Well, I am raising a hoard of canine terrorists because I LET them get affection and climb up and share the bed, etc, etc. 

I guess if it ain't broke, ya just don't fix it. 

But puppies solicit attention, eat food that is left around, and sleep in your bed if you let them. I do not think that has anything to do with dominance. 

The greeting everyone thing, well, ya know dals are always associated with children, BUT they are probably one of the worst candidates. Maybe not the worst. But their original intent was to run under the carraige and protect the carraige and horses from wild animals and theives. This sounds like a dog that would need plenty of energy, confidence, and aggression (good aggression). Not surprising it runs up and jumps on people to say hello. Sounds like a puppy that needs training, not a behaviorist though.


----------



## TxRider

No just a Dal and cat displaying dominant behaviors.

Dominant relationship is defined by priority access to resources by one animal of the two animals in the relationship, with the subordinate animal in the relationship deferring to the dominant animals priority access to the resource.

In the first case the resource is attention, and the Dal is demanding priority access, and that the firemen defer to him over the resource.

Dr yin's article these are referred to in is quite badly written and logically contradicts itself in several places like this. 

It also badly misrepresents Milan's methods, and glosses over Yin's use of force snapping the dogs head around repeatedly, which she claims in the video is positive punishment, but is ok because it is used to with the goal of getting the dog in a position to providing positive reinforcement. Exactly what CM does.


----------



## GranvilleGSD

After reading through this whole thread I think I only saw it mentioned once that what Cesar is doing on his show would be considered more of a behavior modification which really cannot be compared to the traditional obedience training that humans do with their dogs. I think people are missing the point. Teaching a dog to sit, heel, or stay is ENTIRELY different than a dog learning how to interact with other individuals be they human, canine, or other. Therefore, different methods do need to be employed. You can teach your dog to come, roll over, sniff out drugs, do bitework, sit, bring you a beer from the fridge using treats, clickers, rewards, or force. Either way you get the trained result that you are looking for. What Cesar is usually addressing in his show is how to get the dog to be a balanced member of society. Sure, a trainer could take a dog-aggressive dog, and through use of positive training and treats eventually you could redirect the dog's attention to the handler and be able to walk the dog on a lead through a group of dogs. That is a trained response. I bet any amount of money that if you let that trained dog offleash in a pack of dogs it would be aggressive. This was my first GSD Shannon, sure we fixed the problem of being able to walk around other dogs, but that never fixed the root of the problem which was instability.

I'm not saying all hail Cesar, but his show gives people something to think about. It also gives some of them incentive to at least try to correct a problem, rather than dumping the dog at the shelter for the next unsuspecting victim, or euthanizing it. I had heard all kinds of bad things about Cesar, but the show that made me change my mind was about an older (Lab, I think it was?) it was a search and rescue dog, very highly trained and even had been awarded some medals of honor. Something happened where the dog all of a sudden became extremely sound sensitive, to the point that it had to be pulled from work, and became a nervous wreck at home anytime it heard certain noises I believe thunder was one of the noises. The owner/handler was heartbroken that her partner was suffering. Cesar took the dog to his center and through the use of excercise, "flooding" or desensitization, and pack life the dog was able to get over her sudden fear and go back to work.

Cesar also states that during this "flooding" the dog must be in a calm submissive state. If you want to compare to humans again, this would not be like locking somebody in a closet with a million spiders as that would be in a fear state of mind. This would be closer to presenting a single harmless spider to somebody who was meditating. As for the "Alpha Roll," again, he's not always rolling the dog to be dominant, sometimes he lays the dog on it's side to get it into a calmer mindset. This is NOT the same thing! An actual alpha roll is FORCING a struggling dog to lay on it's back, wheras many hyperexcitable dogs do well with a time out of laying calmly on their side.


----------



## codmaster

Good explanation!


----------



## mjbgsd

It's interesting to read what people think. opcorn:


----------



## Samba

Speaking of training, I think people may under estimate the power of training in dealing with preventing behavioral issues. Evolution has provided for the possible building of a bond between people and dogs. 

Training establishes a method and system of communication between a dog and an owner. It gives the owner skills in management and control. Training helps to balance the nurturing and leadership roles. It helps to build the dogs attention and impulse control abilities. There will be a much greater chance of a confident dog who is socially competent and cooperative.

If there is not training or it is not good enough to establish a relationship, then behavioral issues are more likely and more difficult to deal with. 

I don't understand why Cesar is not more in touch with the benefits of training in dealing with and preventing behavioral issues, but best I can tell he does not give this too much credence. I did see an episode where a GSD was taken to a trainer so the owners could get some skills. 

Training helps a good deal in relationship sorting out and then all the talk of dominance is not so necessary and there is not so much much need for dramatic physical intervention. But then there is not much TV worthy in that.


----------



## AgileGSD

TxRider said:


> No just a Dal and cat displaying dominant behaviors.


:help:

Really? You really think that an untrained puppy acting like an untrained puppy is showing "dominance"?


----------



## TxRider

AgileGSD said:


> :help:
> 
> Really? You really think that an untrained puppy acting like an untrained puppy is showing "dominance"?


Not in the sense you seem to think, just displaying a dominant behavior.

It is simply being opportunistic as dogs will be, and demanding priority access, demanding control, over a resource. Yin's own definition of dominance.

Her suggestion they only pet the dog when it sits on the floor, and stand up if it jumps on their lap is exercising control of the resource, making the pup defer to them for access to this resource, and would be a dominant behavior on their part and establishing a dominant relationship.

Read Yin's definition of dominance...

"dominance is defined as a *relationship* between individuals that is established through force, aggression and submission in order to establish priority access to all desired resources (food, the opposite sex, preferred resting spots, etc). A relationship is not established until one animal consistently defers to another."

The pup is attempting to establish by force(jumping up, nosing etc), priority access to a valuable resource (attention), and expecting the firemen to submit and give that resource(attention) on demand.

The firemen by standing up when the pup jumps on their lap would be establishing a dominant relationship over this resource through controlling the resource by force as well.

Attention is a valuable resource to most dogs. For example it is the only resource my two dogs come to blows over, fighting between themselves to establish who gets priority access to or control over access to my attention, to establish a dominant relationship concerning that resource. And each would cut the other off from it if they were allowed to by violent means and have attempted to do so.

It is more important to my two girls than food is, which they have never fought each other for. Something I must actively control access to and counter condition their drives to dominate so it doesn't escalate into these two girls seriously hurting each other. Fighting for that resource are the only times I have seen either of them fight period.

Any resource a dog does not defer to you over and tries to control access to can be considered dominant behavior by the common definition Dr. Yin describes.

It does not mean the dog is trying to achieve some notion of hierarchical "rank", it does not mean the the dog is trying to "dominate" you or control you completely and take over your life. Dogs will commonly take what they can get, and establish a dominant relationship over what resources they can. Food guarding is probably the most common one, but attention, a spot on the sofa, chasing, access to outdoors, even your presence are valuable resources. Access and deference to you over any singular resource is at issue.


----------



## TxRider

Samba said:


> Speaking of training, I think people may under estimate the power of training in dealing with preventing behavioral issues. Evolution has provided for the possible building of a bond between people and dogs.
> 
> Training establishes a method and system of communication between a dog and an owner. It gives the owner skills in management and control. Training helps to balance the nurturing and leadership roles. It helps to build the dogs attention and impulse control abilities. There will be a much greater chance of a confident dog who is socially competent and cooperative.
> 
> If there is not training or it is not good enough to establish a relationship, then behavioral issues are more likely and more difficult to deal with.
> 
> I don't understand why Cesar is not more in touch with the benefits of training in dealing with and preventing behavioral issues, but best I can tell he does not give this too much credence. I did see an episode where a GSD was taken to a trainer so the owners could get some skills.
> 
> Training helps a good deal in relationship sorting out and then all the talk of dominance is not so necessary and there is not so much much need for dramatic physical intervention. But then there is not much TV worthy in that.


I think this is probably the best and most useful post in this entire thread. Well said.


----------



## TxRider

For those keeping up, here is Dr yin's article with the previous vids... The Dominance Controversy and Cesar Millan

A very poorly written article that contradicts itself in several areas IMO.


----------



## selzer

About that Dalmation puppy, personally, pretty much ALL puppies act like that normally until four months. Their canine leaders allow just about anything until they reach four to five months old, and then they start laying down the law. 

Pups that go to their new homes at seven to ten weeks old will also act like that IF they are given no limits and boundaries. 

I agree that this is just an unchecked untrained puppy and it is not displaying any behavior that concerns me EXCEPT that it is displaying the fact that its owners haven't a clue. 

I also agree that taking a dog to training classes early on, and continuing until the dog has a decent foundation will prevent a Ceasar or Gloria Stillwell call in the vast majority of cases.


----------



## TxRider

selzer said:


> I agree that this is just an unchecked untrained puppy and it is not displaying any behavior that concerns me EXCEPT that it is displaying the fact that its owners haven't a clue.


Exactly, nothing to be very concerned about but a behavior that needs to be checked all the same. Just stating that by Dr. Yin's definition it is technically a dominant behavior.


----------



## Samba

The puppy is displaying "seeking" behavior to my perceptions. Seeking is a drive in dogs and to see it as dominant is not my take.

The kitty is defensive to my eyes, not dominant.

Methinks, there is perhaps too much dominance in Cesar's approaches. I would say "train the dog'", don't label it dominant.


----------



## pupresq

TxRider said:


> Exactly, nothing to be very concerned about but a behavior that needs to be checked all the same. Just stating that by Dr. Yin's definition it is technically a dominant behavior.


How do you figure? 

According to Yin:
_dominance is defined as a *relationship* between individuals that is established through force, aggression and submission in order to establish priority access to all desired resources (food, the opposite sex, preferred resting spots, etc). A relationship is not established until one animal consistently defers to another._

I don't see anything about that in the video clip. The Dal puppy is behaving in a perfectly normal fashion for a puppy, seeking attention and checking everything out. He needs some guidance understanding the rules and behavior that is expected of him but it's nothing to do with dominance. 

That's one of the biggest mistakes I see with all the vogue of "dominance" issues, people misinterpret a dog who doesn't know the rules as one who is demanding something. 

If you went to another country where you didn't speak the language and didn't know the culture, you might commit some social gaffs that within that culture were interpreted one way, but you had no such intent. Same thing here - except as humans, it's incumbent upon us to realize the species gap and meet the dog where he is, not expect him to know everything without being told.


----------



## Fuse

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Those are all good things, and if you're getting them from watching his show, that's great. If that were ALL people were getting from his show, there would be no controversy and the training community would embrace him - and while they criticize some of his methods they also often do point out the good stuff you can take away from his show.


Those are the things that he emphasises in the show and encourages people to do with thier own dogs. This is the message of the show.

I have never seen him tell an owner to alpha roll his dog, I don't recall him ever using the term alpha roll and I am certain he does not recommend all dogs be alpha rolled all the time. Also, I've read two of his books (Member of the Family and How to Raise the Perfect Dog) and he does not recomment (or even mention) to my recollection alpha rolling dogs.

It does not suprise me that some people miss the message and go straight to forcing thier dog onto thier back, but protecting stupid people from themselves is a difficult thing to do. 

Like I said though, I do understand the concern. What I dont understand is the way the training and behavorist community came out so hard against him. It is the 'professional community' that has created this 'us and them' mentality where Ceasar=bad. 

Before I found this forum, but after watching and enjoying alot of DW, I googled Ceasar to see what other trainers thought of him and was shocked at the one sideness of the articles. I dont know, maybe the community has tried to get in touch with Ceaser to adress the concerns in a constructive manner, and maybe he wasnt interested, but I find it strange that a professional community would look past all of the good messages that he has, that reach a lot of people, to focus on something that isn't part of his message (at least overtly) and something that he does not recommend people to do. Makes it seem like sour grapes to me and makes me question the motives of the 'experts'.

As an aside, I am really impressed with THIS community. The fact that this thread is still on topic and civil is outstanding and indicates a level of maturity and discourse that is unfortunately rare on the Interweb. I'm glad this forum is out there for when I actually have actual issues with an actual dog.


----------



## selzer

I am surprised that you were shocked. When you sit down to dinner, do you exclaim how spotlessly clean you water glass is? "The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones." Trainers are not rushing to the internet to right rave reviews of Ceasar, not surprising. 

If they have gotten anything positive from his techniques, or have helped clients with his techniques, why bother. It is the natural progression that a famous trainer would have something to offer that works, no reason to jump onto the net and say Kudos! 

On the other hand, if they are seeing clients that are having problems with their dogs, and they have tried Ceasar's methods, and in their opinion, the methods and how applied have actually made the situation worse, then they might be much more likely to complain about it in any forum. 

The internet is a great tool, but people have to be careful what they take away from it, if 98% of the people like or dislike something strongly, it does not mean that the product or service has a 98% success or failure rate.


----------



## codmaster

selzer said:


> I am surprised that you were shocked. When you sit down to dinner, do you exclaim how spotlessly clean you water glass is? "The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones." Trainers are not rushing to the internet to right rave reviews of Ceasar, not surprising.
> 
> If they have gotten anything positive from his techniques, or have helped clients with his techniques, why bother. It is the natural progression that a famous trainer would have something to offer that works, no reason to jump onto the net and say Kudos!
> 
> On the other hand, if they are seeing clients that are having problems with their dogs, and they have tried Ceasar's methods, and in their opinion, the methods and how applied have actually made the situation worse, then they might be much more likely to complain about it in any forum.
> 
> The internet is a great tool, but people have to be careful what they take away from it, if 98% of the people like or dislike something strongly, it does not mean that the product or service has a 98% success or failure rate.


Or perhaps some cases of "Professional Jealousy" in at least some cases.


----------



## selzer

Just human nature I think.


----------

