# Cesar Millan is Yesterday's Dog Trainer (Part 1)



## MaggieRoseLee

Comments? (keep it nice) :wub:


----------



## JPrice

I'm not a huge Caesar Milan fan, but I thought instead of stressing dominance so much he stresses calm and assertive energy. I'm not sure haven't watched any of this guys videos on youtube either.


----------



## W.Oliver

I am not a Cesar training fan, but I admire his commercial success.


----------



## Tbarrios333

Totally agree. Dominance theories just don't ring as true to me.
If people can get much better results through positive methods, whats even the point of alpha rolling and forcing them to submit?
I think people that are just getting into dogs seriously are often quicker to believe the alpha/dominance theories than people that have some experience. I say this because you're told for example that you shouldn't let a puppy win at tug because you'll have dominance issues, but people let them win all the time and there's no problem. Another example is the couch/floor issue. My dogs are allowed on the couch and they haven't tried to "dominate" me. 
I think _confidence_ is often confused with being a dominant alpha. Obviously, it's easier to follow someone that is sure of what they are doing than someone that is second guessing themselves or fearful all the time.
While you do have to be the "head of your pack," it's not so much that you're the alpha as you're just someone your dogs behave a certain way around. You teach them how to behave with you and that creates a positive relationship; the dog knows whats expected and the human is happy he is not getting mauled.
Imo, dogs know we're not one of them and we just don't completely fit in to their pack structure. If there are multiple dogs in the house, then I can see how they would have the pack mentality between themselves, but I think we're still different in their eyes.
Ceaser's method is just too gung ho. There is no positive reinforcement, only corrections.


----------



## wildo

My thoughts: Who is that guy?

[EDIT]- I don't have cable TV. Here's his bio: http://www.zakgeorge.net/Biography.html


----------



## selzer

I agree with him. If you are bullying your dog you are wrong. 

He gives me the impression that he naturally carries himself with confidence when he works with his dogs and his body language and lack of fear around them helps him to naturally fall into a leadership position with his dogs. Leaders are not all bullies, they train, they work with, they have expectations, they reward desirable behavior. 

I am not a Ceasar fan, though I have read his book. I think there is more to him than alpha rolls and bullying, dominance, and calm assertive leader/calm submissive dog, both positive and negative that we never see. Perhaps we just work with very different dogs. 

But then the only things two trainers ever agree on, is what the third is doing wrong.


----------



## wildo

Sounds like this guy is a dog trainer. Cesar is a red zone dog behaviorist. Huge difference. Does this guy train the same kind of dogs that Cesar works with? I don't know cause I've never heard of him. What I gather from his bio is that he is just a trainer.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

Try to watch the video and THEN comment. Don't just say what you know about Cesar...





 
Here's part 2


----------



## Stevenzachsmom

MRL, I don't know what type of responses you are looking for I did watch the videos. I agree with Willy, Cesar is NOT a trainer. Cesar himself says that he "rehabilitates dogs". I don't know anything at all about this "new" guy, but it appears he is a trainer, so to compare him and Cesar is like apples and oranges.


----------



## wildo

Ok, I watched the whole second video. I think this guy has a lot of good points, no question, but I still feel it's an apples/oranges comparison. CM, is not a dog trainer. This guy is. In fact, he states in the second video:

"I'm here to offer an alternative to the rest of the world who 1) doesn't have an aggressive dog, as this isn't very common anyway..."

That's all well and good, but Cesar is working with the dogs that _are_ aggressive. I just don't see the similarities.


----------



## Jack's Dad

There have been a number of these threads and I'm with wildo on this. It's not about defending Milan but about comparing apples to apples. Milan says he is not a trainer but that he rehabilitates dogs.

I would like to see this guy, Cesar, and the woman who is on TV ( can't think of her name) all be challanged by the types of dogs that Cesar Milan works with and see the results.

Teaching tricks is not the same as going into a pen with an out of control aggressive dog that you have never met before.

If the other two can accomplish what he does with the same type dogs in a better way then show us.


----------



## Tbarrios333

Hunter Jack said:


> I would like to see this guy, Cesar, and the woman who is on TV ( can't think of her name) all be challanged by the types of dogs that Cesar Milan works with and see the results.


Now THAT would be a show I'd like to see!


----------



## selzer

I think that bonding with a dog, whether it is aggressive or not is not rocket science, and is much the same regardless of whether the dog is aggressive. 

The vid took longer than I expected and I am due at one of puppie's homes in less than an hour. So I am going to be brief and hope that I can come back to this. 

Where has this guy been all my life??? I agree with him. Teaching those tricks with the dogs is more than just your ordinary sit and down and stay. But, more than that, they show a true bond and trust in the person. 

In most cases aggressive dogs that can be rehabilitated are that way BECAUSE of the abusive or extreme permissiveness of the owners, boardering on abuse. So abuse them better and you have a response. What Ceasar does works, sometimes, and for a time, we do not hear much about failures. 

Dogs do not have to be constantly dominated or put in their place.


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom

I've watched both men and Victoria Stillwell,Cesar 's show includes a warning to not try at home w/out professional help. The average person who grew up w/out pets would not be able to watch the show and implement.Superfetch and Me or the Dog are shows for the novice or beginer. Daisy was a tough dog very dominant ,strong willed I did roll her once because she showed her teeth at me at 6 to months. Lucky who has experienced trauma needs positive reward and sometimes and redirection. Not an agressive bone in his body w/out fear or pain. Cesar would be wrong choice for him . Now I await the out cry I would have Victoria Stillwell work w/him I saw her stuff onn BBC and she can work w/ anxious dogs. the other guy seen his show it's cool got no idea how I could do what he does ,he also isn't working w/proble4m dogs


----------



## Samba

I have always been amazed how far training can go in rehabilitation of a problem dog. I am not sure why people think there is such a split? One might be amazed how far training goes in rehabilitation. It is the cornerstone of much of the work.


----------



## AddieGirl

Watched the videos. Cesar is awesome at what he does. I AM a fan and I think he takes on "last chance" cases that most "trainers" wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. He gives truly aggressive dogs and dogs with severe behavior issues a second chance at life. I agree with the others who pointed out that Cesar is not a trainer but a behaviorist. And if you don't believe that he has a loving relationship with his dogs then you haven't watched his show at all.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Samba said:


> I have always been amazed how far training can go in rehabilitation of a problem dog. I am not sure why people think there is such a split? One might be amazed how far training goes in rehabilitation. It is the cornerstone of much of the work.


I'm with you. We have these Cesar Milan threads all the time and invariably someone (or usually SEVERAL someones) say,_ but Cesar is a behaviorist, not a trainer_. I just don't see that much of a distinction between the two - they both deal with the dog's behavior, yes? When you rehabilitate the dog aren't you teaching them (training) how to behave better?


----------



## Jack's Dad

Samba.

I agree and if some of the dogs that are shown on Cesars show had been trained properly he or anyone else might not be needed.

Unfortunately there are a lot of ill behaved and even dangerous dogs out in our world.

So his show is based on what the dogs are like in real time. It's not about proper training methods as a puppy.

Again I am not defending him in everything he does and I'm sure there are others who can handle vicious, aggressive dogs. 

I do think that trainers who complain though should prove there methods with the same type of dogs.


----------



## Stevenzachsmom

I agree with Andy. It would be awesome to see these other "trainers" work with the same dogs as Cesar. I'd like this particular guy to show me what he's got. Talk is cheap. BTW...I don't think Cesar considers himself a behaviorist either. Isn't his catch phrase, "I rehabilitate dogs, I train people."?


----------



## AddieGirl

The announcer on the show calls him "dog behaviorist Cesar millan"


----------



## GSDElsa

Well, I don't really thik he pushes "dominance" anyway.....


----------



## Jack's Dad

I don't care what Cesar Milan is called.

I just want to see Cesar, Zak and Victoria thrown in kennels with 3 of the most people aggressive dogs that can be found and see who does the best.

If trainers are going to call Milan out then they should put up or shut up.


----------



## AddieGirl

Hunter Jack said:


> I don't care what Cesar Milan is called.
> 
> I just want to see Cesar, Zak and Victoria thrown in kennels with 3 of the most people aggressive dogs that can be found and see who does the best.
> 
> If trainers are going to call Milan out then they should put up or shut up.


:thumbup:


----------



## EastGSD

I think there is a very *real* distinction between a psychologist and a trainer. One teaches actions and uses various motivations to get an end result (a trainer) the other is using a dog's own behavior and behavioral preferences to establish harmony and emotional balance (psychologist.) Cesar is a canine psychologist and even calls his place the "Dog Psychology Center." I am a fan of Cesar's and have used the same premises and actions for most of my life with my dogs and those I encounter (yeah before Cesar, based on just plain dog behavior of yesteryear.) No, I am not the dog whisperer lol But I have found the methods he uses essential in developing a proper relationship with your dog. Of course my opinion and I have also seen many threads on boards, videos and other things criticizing Cesar, as others have said, let those that have these criticisms accomplish what he has and then they can put some horns behind what they are hawking. It really irritates me when trainers/dog professionals attack each other or act like one is better than the other. Dogs are very complex creatures and there will *never* be one single way to communicate with them. Live and let live I say...support and read who you prefer but this whole such and such is better and such and such is soooo wrong is old and tiring, know what I mean?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Hunter Jack said:


> Samba.
> 
> I agree and if some of the dogs that are shown on Cesars show had been trained properly he or anyone else might not be needed.


I don't think that's what she was saying. At least that's not how I took it, or what I meant by my post either, although I do agree with you on that point. I just think that training and behavior are not as separate and distinctive as many people seem to think. 

You COULD define "training" so narrowly as to include _only _teaching new behaviors, but that's definitely not how I think of it. And I'd accept his self proclaimed title of behaviorist or psychologist or whatever Cesar calls himself if he didn't misinterpret behavior so frequently. Shut down is not "calm submissive". Fear is not "dominance."


----------



## Chicagocanine

Cesar calls himself a dog psychologist, but what is the definition? What is the criteria or credentials needed in order for someone to call themselves a "red zone behaviorist" or a "dog psychologist?" A true animal behaviorist or psychologist is someone who has undergone extensive schooling and fieldwork, but I don't think that applies to Cesar? Couldn't anyone really call themselves a "dog psychologist"? Don't many trainers and behaviorists deal with similar behavioral issues to what Cesar is working with?

I know trainers and behaviorists who work with aggressive dogs and dogs with similar issues to what is seen in Cesar's show without any dominance, force, collar/physical corrections or physical placement of the dog.


----------



## Emoore

Samba said:


> I have always been amazed how far training can go in rehabilitation of a problem dog. I am not sure why people think there is such a split? One might be amazed how far training goes in rehabilitation. It is the cornerstone of much of the work.


Because half the time people think they're dealing with dominance when they're actually dealing with fear/weak nerves. Or they think they're dealing with protection with the dog is resource guarding. Or, if it's a small dog, they think "He's just scared" when in fact the dog thinks it's the king of the world. They think the dog is willful and disobedient because he tears up the house when they're gone, when in fact the dog is out of his mind with separation anxiety, or needs more exercise. They're different things and need to be dealt with differently and a 6-week obedience class isn't going to cut it.

When dealing with a problem dog _sometimes_ the issue is training, but sometimes it's genetics or fear or anxiety.


----------



## Whiteshepherds

When both video's were over I really had no idea how the man trains. Did I miss something?

I saw a BC (I think?) doing tricks and I heard a lot of things like "we should have a true organic real connection with our dogs." What exactly does that mean?

So his thoughts were....No bullying, no dominance type training, (also no clickers, no treats, did you catch that part??). He also stressed more than once that we need to get past old school training as if he'd had a revelation. Where does this guy live, in a vacuum?? Positive training isn't new.  

If he believes he's come up with a new method to train dogs, great. Let's see how he does it. So far it's a lot of words without much substance unless you want your dog to make your bed or go bowling.  I guess I'm walking away not entirely sure what makes him different from all the other PR trainers?

Finally, I think when you call out another trainer it shows a lack of professionalism and takes away some of your credibility. A good trainer shouldn't have to make another trainer look bad to make themselves look good. For that alone I'm giving the guy an F and yep, I'd like to see him and Cesar go head to head with Cujo.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Chicagocanine said:


> Cesar calls himself a dog psychologist, but what is the definition? What is the criteria or credentials needed in order for someone to call themselves a "red zone behaviorist" or a "dog psychologist?" A true animal behaviorist or psychologist is someone who has undergone extensive schooling and fieldwork, but I don't think that applies to Cesar? Couldn't anyone really call themselves a "dog psychologist"? Don't many trainers and behaviorists deal with similar behavioral issues to what Cesar is working with?
> 
> I know trainers and behaviorists who work with aggressive dogs and dogs with similar issues to what is seen in Cesar's show without any dominance, force, collar/physical corrections or physical placement of the dog.



Like I said before I don't care what title he gives himself.

He is on TV in front of cameras and goes on very aggressive dogs own turf and does his work.

Lots of people don't like what he does. But with the complaints that come from many trainers I don't see any irritated enough to get a spot on TV or in public to demonstrate a better way. 

With regard to the last sentence in your post it almost seems like they have no contact with the dog whatsoever. I don't mean to be smart but what do they do? Politely ask the dog to stop behaving like that. This subject will continue to come up over and over until someone actually shows how to deal with a vicious dog on it's own territory with only positive means.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Whiteshepherds said:


> Finally, I think when you call out another trainer it shows a lack of professionalism and takes away some of your credibility.


Why? Picture another scenario - non dog training related, where there is a clear right and wrong. Does the "right" person pointing out that the other person is "wrong" show a lack of professionalism on the part of the first person or take away any of their credibility? Wouldn't they just be correct in their assessment? 

All trainers (or "behaviorists") are not equal - some are absolutely better and more knowledgeable than others. Some are demonstrably better at reading dog behavior and influencing it in an appropriate direction.



> A good trainer shouldn't have to make another trainer look bad to make themselves look good.


But if they're better trainers, or clearly understand dog behavior better why shouldn't they give their opinion of another trainer's methods, especially if the other trainer's methods are outdated or not as effective? 

I really don't get this argument at all.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

I swear I've seen Victoria Stillwell work with aggressive dogs on her show?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> I swear I've seen Victoria Stillwell work with aggressive dogs on her show?


Yes, she has. I wonder if the people who think she can only deal with nice perfectly behaved pet dogs have actually watched her show?


----------



## codmaster

My first thought about this "trainer of the future" is - does he have or want a TV show? Sounds like he is really critical of Cesar.

Second thought is, as someone already pointed out in this thread, Cesar is NOT and does not pretend to be a "dog trainer" - he is more of a behaviorist and also tends to deal, not with simple obedience training, but rather with very difficult dogs. Wonder how many "red zone" dogs this guy has dealt with (successfully that is)? Or how many handler aggrssive dogs he has successfully trained?

Most dogs are actually easy to train in basic obedience and many trainers (don't know about this guy of course); but I have seen many who just "kick the tough cases out of class" including some with our local obedience trainers!

He does claim in the first video to "teach naturally" and has a "loving relationship" with his dog. That would be interesting to see how that translates into an actual training approach and see how he handles it the first time the dog "comes up the leash" at the owner.

Also sounds like the video owner is a psychiatrist - did he say anywhere on the videos where he got his advanced degrees in pschiatry?

I guess I need to look at the second video to find out the details on this guys "training of the future" approach.


----------



## codmaster

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> I swear I've seen Victoria Stillwell work with aggressive dogs on her show?


 
Can you remember which episode(s)? Was she ever attacked on the show by a client's dog who didn't appreciate her telling him what to do?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Hunter Jack said:


> But with the complaints that come from many trainers I don't see any irritated enough to get a spot on TV or in public to demonstrate a better way.


Surely you realize that whoever is more entertaining gets offered TV time, it doesn't just go to whoever wants it, regardless of how capable they are? Conflict sells. Blood and gore sells. Dogs biting, or dogs who have the imminent potential to bite, sells, over dogs who can be controlled in other, less spectacular ways. It's all about the entertainment factor.


----------



## codmaster

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I don't think that's what she was saying. At least that's not how I took it, or what I meant by my post either, although I do agree with you on that point. I just think that training and behavior are not as separate and distinctive as many people seem to think.
> 
> You COULD define "training" so narrowly as to include _only _teaching new behaviors, but that's definitely not how I think of it. And I'd accept his self proclaimed title of behaviorist or psychologist or whatever Cesar calls himself if he didn't misinterpret behavior so frequently. Shut down is not "calm submissive". Fear is not "dominance."


 
Did Daddy (his pit bull) seem "shut down" or fearful in any way to you? 

Seemed like a heck of a calm dog to me and afraid of absolutely nothing. Wish I could have a dog like he was.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

codmaster said:


> Can you remember which episode(s)? Was she ever attacked on the show by a client's dog who didn't appreciate her telling him what to do?


Yes, she's been bitten by client dogs, the clients have been bitten by their own dogs, and guests to their homes have been bitten by the dogs. I can't point you to exact episodes because I don't pay attention to that, but watch her show for a few weeks or months and you will see it.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Yes, she has. I wonder if the people who think she can only deal with nice perfectly behaved pet dogs have actually watched her show?


I've only seen her show about three times. 
She does deal with behavior problems.

I watched the first few seasons of Cesar and then an occasional show.
I've seen him walk into yards, kennels and houses with not just aggressive but vicious GSD's, Rottys, Pit Bulls etc... Not all of his cases are that bad but some of those dogs you couldn't have gotten most people near without a shotgun.

Part of the problem with these threads is that we could argue terminology forever. Aggressive could mean a bit pushy to one person and someone else might picture a dog ready to take your arm off.
I think of dominance as either I'm in charge or the dog is in charge.
Another person may hear the word dominance and picture some brute with a whip beating a dog.
It's difficult to have a discussion with everyone having their own pictures in their head about these various terms.

My problem is that I don't think you should chastise someone like Zak did publicly unless you are willing deal with the same situation and prove you can do it better.


----------



## codmaster

wildo said:


> My thoughts: Who is that guy?
> 
> [EDIT]- I don't have cable TV. Here's his bio: Zak George


Thanks! Most enlightening.

" From 



, to 



 or even training 



"

I guess his biography explains what he does.

Kind of what I might have thought.


----------



## codmaster

Hunter Jack said:


> I've only seen her show about three times.
> She does deal with behavior problems.
> 
> I watched the first few seasons of Cesar and then an occasional show.
> I've seen him walk into yards, kennels and houses with not just aggressive but vicious GSD's, Rottys, Pit Bulls etc... Not all of his cases are that bad but some of those dogs you couldn't have gotten most people near without a shotgun.
> 
> Part of the problem with these threads is that we could argue terminology forever. Aggressive could mean a bit pushy to one person and someone else might picture a dog ready to take your arm off.
> I think of dominance as either I'm in charge or the dog is in charge.
> Another person may hear the word dominance and picture some brute with a whip beating a dog.
> It's difficult to have a discussion with everyone having their own pictures in their head about these various terms.
> 
> My problem is that I don't think you should chastise someone like Zak did publicly unless you are willing deal with the same situation and prove you can do it better.


 
Well said! 

Vocabulary is often a big problem - esp. in emotionally charged subject discussions.

I.e. difference between a "correction" versus "punishment".

And, mention Koehler (sp?) and some folks will think of "hanging a dog" and never realize that he also advocated very strongly "NO CORRECTIONS AT ALL" until you were sure that the dog "knew" what the command meant. And also he reserved the "togh" corrections for dogs that were on their way quickly to "the needle".


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

codmaster said:


> Did Daddy (his pit bull) seem "shut down" or fearful in any way to you?
> 
> Seemed like a heck of a calm dog to me and afraid of absolutely nothing. Wish I could have a dog like he was.


I read his first book, but I've only sen a few of his TV shows. There was a Dog Whisperer marathon when I was home sick a few years ago where I watched 4 or 5 episodes in a row, but that's all I've seen, other than youtube clips. His book was a very inspirational story of an illegal immigrant making good and becoming a trainer to the stars, and I do think he has a way with dogs.

I've watched dozens of Victoria Stillwell's shows spanning several years, however, so I'm much more familiar with the kind of dogs she deals with. Just reading comments about her it seems like a lot of people who don't think much of her haven't watched her show, and I think that overall, she understands dog behavior better than he does.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

codmaster said:


> Did Daddy (his pit bull) seem "shut down" or fearful in any way to you?
> 
> Seemed like a heck of a calm dog to me and afraid of absolutely nothing. Wish I could have a dog like he was.


:thumbup:


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

AddieGirl said:


> Watched the videos. Cesar is awesome at what he does. I AM a fan and I think he takes on "last chance" cases that most "trainers" wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. He gives truly aggressive dogs and dogs with severe behavior issues a second chance at life. I agree with the others who pointed out that Cesar is not a trainer but a behaviorist. And if you don't believe that he has a loving relationship with his dogs then you haven't watched his show at all.


:thumbup:


----------



## selzer

He says it is not the tricks, but the bond that builds in training the tricks. Tricks are fun for the people, and fun for the dog, kind of like agility training for a less confident dog. I do not think we should discount someone's method because he uses the training of tricks to keep owner and dog engaged and upbeat. 

Cesar Millan and Gloria Stillwell, are like the Jerry Springer and Geraldo of dog training. And yes, I AM saying training. Because what sells is sensationalism, the TV puts on people who are so out there that there is no way to even relate to them. Not Cesar and Gloria, their clients. People letting the dog bite people -- lots of people, people letting poop and pee sit in their kids' rooms and the dog eat off a fork??? These people could probably cross the street into Jerry Springer's show audience and talk about what they do with their brothers in law or step mothers. Yuck! 

These are not ordinary people. If you watch that show, and read the paper, you would think that the twenty, or forty or even a hundred cases you hear about in a year is a GIGUNDO problem. But when you think about how many millions of dog owners there are out there, and all of them are NOT begging to be on Ceasar's program or Gloria's. This guy is right, most dogs really aren't like that. They are picking the worst of the worst, and exploiting them.


----------



## codmaster

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I read his first book, but I've only sen a few of his TV shows. There was a Dog Whisperer marathon when I was home sick a few years ago where I watched 4 or 5 episodes in a row, but that's all I've seen, other than youtube clips. His book was a very inspirational story of an illegal immigrant making good and becoming a trainer to the stars, and I do think he has a way with dogs.
> 
> I've watched dozens of Victoria Stillwell's shows spanning several years, however, so I'm much more familiar with the kind of dogs she deals with. Just reading comments about her it seems like a lot of people who don't think much of her haven't watched her show, and I think that overall, she understands dog behavior better than he does.


I have watched a number of her shows and i actually remember one in particular. The dog was tearing the house up and the woman had a crate for the dog; but Virginia told the woman that it was "cruel and inhumane (and generally really nasty" to put the dog in the crate (she might even have used the word "jail" or prison" but I am not sure).

Then she put the poor owner in the crate and locked the door so the woman could see for hersel just how nasty and rerrible the use of a crate really was.

Besides the obvious idiocy of Virginia seeing the crate use by a dog through human eyes, what the heck was she telling her audience - "Don't use crates!"?

How many of the readers of this forum use crates? My dogs have always used crates and far from "dreading" being locked up in them - they all like them and will go in them and lay there by themselves!

Too much of that kind of thing on Virginia's show to take her very seriously.

Does anyone remember any show where she dealt with a seriously people aggressive dog (I don't mean the many shows she seems to have about the dogs jumping up on visitors).

BTW, what was your purpose in stating that Cesar is an* "illegal immigrant"* and what does that have to do with this discussion? I assume that he is legal now or else the govt. would have acted and sent him packing.


----------



## selzer

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I read his first book, but I've only sen a few of his TV shows. There was a Dog Whisperer marathon when I was home sick a few years ago where I watched 4 or 5 episodes in a row, but that's all I've seen, other than youtube clips. His book was a very inspirational story of an illegal immigrant making good and becoming a trainer to the stars, and I do think he has a way with dogs.
> 
> I've watched dozens of Victoria Stillwell's shows spanning several years, however, so I'm much more familiar with the kind of dogs she deals with. Just reading comments about her it seems like a lot of people who don't think much of her haven't watched her show, and I think that overall, she understands dog behavior better than he does.


I agree and feel about the same, I have read his book and seen a few shows, I have read her book and seen many of her shows. I tend to agree that she understands the dogs better, and has a whole lot more in her tool box than he has.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

AddieGirl said:


> Cesar is awesome at what he does. I AM a fan and I think he takes on "last chance" cases that most "trainers" wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. He gives truly aggressive dogs and dogs with severe behavior issues a second chance at life.


Our first "real" trainer was with Cassidy, almost 11 years ago. Her demo dog was a rehabilitated pitbull turned over for euthanasia because it had bitten a child in the face. Lisa About Lisa Clifton-Bumpass : About A Step Beyond, LLC turned him around to where he was more likely to lick you to death than to bite you. That was my introduction to PR and clicker training. This was a serious bite case, so her methods definitely worked for aggressive dogs who were a danger to humans. Since then, I've never had a trainer who did not take on a challenge, never had a trainer who refused to work with a particular dog, no matter what kind of issues they had.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

codmaster said:


> I have watched a number of her shows and i actually remember one in particular. The dog was tearing the house up and the woman had a crate for the dog; but Virginia told the woman that it was "cruel and inhumane (and generally really nasty" to put the dog in the crate (she might even have used the word "jail" or prison" but I am not sure).


I do not agree with her on the use of crates. But for me, that does not negate everything else she stands for.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

codmaster said:


> Does anyone remember any show where she dealt with a seriously people aggressive dog (I don't mean the many shows she seems to have about the dogs jumping up on visitors).


Yes, as I already said - she's been bitten, the owners have been bitten, guests to their house have been bitten, on MANY of her shows.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

codmaster said:


> BTW, what was your purpose in stating that Cesar is an* "illegal immigrant"* and what does that have to do with this discussion?


I made a point of it because HE made a point of it in the book. Nothing more, nothing less. If you've read his book you know that he came to this country illegally. He's made a success of himself, overcoming great obstacles, and he is to be commended for that.


----------



## selzer

codmaster said:


> I have watched a number of her shows and i actually remember one in particular. The dog was tearing the house up and the woman had a crate for the dog; but Virginia told the woman that it was "cruel and inhumane (and generally really nasty" to put the dog in the crate (she might even have used the word "jail" or prison" but I am not sure).
> 
> Then she put the poor owner in the crate and locked the door so the woman could see for hersel just how nasty and rerrible the use of a crate really was.
> 
> Besides the obvious idiocy of Virginia seeing the crate use by a dog through human eyes, what the heck was she telling her audience - "Don't use crates!"?
> 
> How many of the readers of this forum use crates? My dogs have always used crates and far from "dreading" being locked up in them - they all like them and will go in them and lay there by themselves!
> 
> Too much of that kind of thing on Virginia's show to take her very seriously.
> 
> Does anyone remember any show where she dealt with a seriously people aggressive dog (I don't mean the many shows she seems to have about the dogs jumping up on visitors).
> 
> BTW, what was your purpose in stating that Cesar is an* "illegal immigrant"* and what does that have to do with this discussion? I assume that he is legal now or else the govt. would have acted and sent him packing.


Well, HE brought that out in his book. It is a truth, and the book is more of a rags to riches inspirational book then a dog behavior/training book. There is the the story to his success, some of the celebs who's dogs he helped, and the problem with dogs is that we treat them like people and not like dogs, and we do not exercise them enough. 

Victoria was raised in England, and crates are not widely used there. It is not idiocy, it is foreign that we uses crates so much here. She has come a ways since the early days, but if you had no dog and started reading the training section here, what would be the two biggies you would take away -- 1. get a crate, 2. get a prong collar. I give Gloria a lot of credit on NOT going to the two common bandaids first thing. It works what she does, so why call her an idiot? Oh, or is that because she does not advocate those things that YOU do?


----------



## Samba

Was Daddy ever a problem dog? I don 't think so.

Behaviorists use a lot of training approaches. It is often step one and very useful for dog owners who need some tools other than "don't try this at home" techniques!


----------



## codmaster

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I made a point of it because HE made a point of it in the book. Nothing more, nothing less. If you've read his book you know that he came to this country illegally. He's made a success of himself, overcoming great obstacles, and he is to be commended for that.


Is he legal now? Again, what did the fact that he came here as a child have to do with the comparison to that other trick dog trainer?

I did read his book(s) and have some of his CD's.

BTW, wouldn't you also consider Virginia to be an "immigrant" as well? I believe her TV shows are filmed in the US, aren't they? I seem to remember hearing that they were now US shows.


----------



## JPF

anyone who states that victoria stillwell deals with the same level of problem dogs as cesar is not watching either show. I have watched both many times. I now don't watch victorias because the problems are usually elementary and not that interesting to see the solutions. Cesars cases are sometimes like this also, but he also undeniably deals with much more difficult cases. 

I also see little in cesars show where he alpha rolls a dog. Calm, assertive energy is stressed the most.


----------



## Samba

Cesar became a legal resident in 2000 and a citizen in 2009.

Victoria moved to Manhattan with her husband in 1999. She became a citizen in 2005.


----------



## Whiteshepherds

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Why? Picture another scenario - non dog training related, where there is a clear right and wrong. Does the "right" person pointing out that the other person is "wrong" show a lack of professionalism on the part of the first person or take away any of their credibility? Wouldn't they just be correct in their assessment?


 
There's nothing wrong with comparing training methods, let him have at it. I just don't see why he had this need to bash Cesar Millan in the process. I think it shows a lack of class, simple as that. 

I train using positive reinforcement btw, so it's not that I disagree with the guys ideas about training. (for what little he explained them) I just didn't see a need for the snarky comments he made. He could have just as easily left out CM's name when comparing training methods. 

Anytime someone has to make someone look bad to make themselves look good it sends up a red flag for me. He made it personal when he said people like Cesar must have insecurities or they're lacking in something. He said maybe they need to feel important or feel like they have authority. 
It was condescending. Just not a great way to promote himself in my opinion.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Watched both videos. I think that guy could train a dog much better than caser, but would fall apart with a dog that was not open to being trained (such as a human aggressive dog). I would also bet that guy would not appreciate schutzhund at all where we intentionally train under stresses such as defensive drive. Also, he doesn't understand proper use of an ecollar, nor does caser. Caser seems to have a much better read of a dogs demeanor, whereas that guy seems to believe all dogs simply want to learn "right out of the box"


----------



## LaRen616

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I've watched dozens of Victoria Stillwell's shows spanning several years, however, so I'm much more familiar with the kind of dogs she deals with. Just reading comments about her it seems like a lot of people who don't think much of her haven't watched her show, and I think that overall, she understands dog behavior better than he does.


I have watched almost every episode of Victoria Stillwell's "It's Me or The Dog" and I love her methods. I think she is terrific. Although I dont agree with her about crates I do agree with her positive training methods. I love that she tells people how she sees it, she doesn't sugar coat anything. She is all about physical exercise and mental stimulation. She is all about giving the dog a job to do or getting the owner involved in a sport with their dog. She is also a huge fan of spaying/neutering pets and will take her clients to shelters to show them all the dogs that are going to be put to sleep because people dont spay/neuter.

I have seen her deal with aggressive dogs on her show.


----------



## AgileGSD

wildo said:


> Sounds like this guy is a dog trainer. Cesar is a red zone dog behaviorist.



Cesar is a TV personality. 




Emoore said:


> Because half the time people think they're dealing with dominance when they're actually dealing with fear/weak nerves. Or they think they're dealing with protection with the dog is resource guarding. Or, if it's a small dog, they think "He's just scared" when in fact the dog thinks it's the king of the world.




IME most toy dog issues_ are_ fear based. It's scary to be tiny and live in such a huge world. People have no respect for toy dogs out and about, thinking nothing of trying to pick them up, go face to face with them or even trying to harass them into aggression. On top of that, many toy dogs are so poorly socialized and have little to no training and as such, have no foundation for dealing with such interactions.



selzer said:


> They are picking the worst of the worst, and exploiting them.


 This is true of most reality shows. I know someone who did apply to be on Victoria's show for her dog's reactrvity issues. What she was told was that they were looking for a certain family dynamic for these episodes - cases where the dog's behavior is a dividing issue within the family. If her BF was willing to play along with the "plotline" then they would consider her further. But he wasn't, so it was a no go. Wifeswap (or maybe Trading Spouses) was once looking for exotic animal breeders to be on the show. They contacted a well known ferret breeder and when she said she didn't have kids, they asked if she could borrow a family member's children to be on the show. It seems to be the same story with any reality show that you hear people talking about participating in. Reality shows are more about the story line then what's "real". Stories, featuring people who everyone watching can agree are crazy or stupid and dramatic interactions is what makes for good TV, even if it isn't totally reality. There is no reason to believe Cesar's show is any different from all the other reality shows.

I haven't watched many of Cesar's shows but I will say that IMO many of the "red zone dogs" you see on there are being pushed into behaving that way. It's true, you don't often see trainers (or behaviorists or whatever you want to call them) walk into a yard with a territorial dog to meet the challenge head on. That's because real training (or behavior work or whatever you want to call it) tends happen much more gradually and often depends on working the dog under threshold. Of course, that doesn't make for good TV. Dogs threatening, snarling, barking, frothing at the mouth, snapping and biting makes for good TV. And often, the way Cesar behaves towards dogs encourages such ratings boosting behavior from the dog.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Cesar was actually dealing with dogs long before he had a show about it. He only got lucky by helping Will Smith with his problem dogs and that was his hollywood "in". He started off working at a dog groomer to handle dogs no other groomer would/could handle, b/c he understands what is threatening to a dog and doesn't do that. Thats why he says "no eye contact, no touching" and he will walk into an actual aggressive dog sideways with no eye contact. 

If you work a dog in protection work where you are intentionally trying to control the balance of prey/defense in the dog, very very subtle changes in your demeanor will be immediately reflected in the dog. Thinks like eye contact, a squared off stance, approaching, raised hands/arms, making noise, tension on the lead, driving into them... these all put the dog under stress. Looking away, moving back when the dog postures or barks, taking a sideways stance... these all lower the stress level.

So keeping that in mind, any time you do any of those things you are in fact pushing the dog into that behavior. But, if I'm just a handler's friend coming over for a beer, this is not appropriate... thats what he is trying to fix.


----------



## phgsd

I am a bit confused about this guy's training methods, but don't know much about him. If he doesn't want to train with treats (like he said in the 2nd video), what does he use? A toy? Not all dogs are particularly toy driven...
I can see training a BC (just an example) or other very biddable/drivey breeds without having to use lots of treats/toys, but what about the rest of the dog population? Dogs that could case less about pleasing their owners? 

Also, positive methods are IMO more complicated to learn, and for severe problems (like aggression) such tiny baby steps are needed. Not every dog owner will have the knowledge, timing, or patience to train with purely positive methods. If it's a question of using more "traditional" or compulsive methods or putting the dog to sleep, what is the better option? 

I am all for positive training, but I don't limit myself to using only positive methods. I think it's important to assess the dog, the owner, and the whole picture before deciding what methods to use. If positive methods will work - great! But that may not always be the case.

A while back I was at an obedience trial. There was a couple there with their very dog aggressive dog. They stood at least 150-200 yards away from any of the other dogs and that dog was STILL barking up a storm at them. They were trying to lure him with treats and he just didn't care. They spent pretty much the whole day that way and I really didn't see them making any progress. All I could think was how the dog would improve so much faster with a few well-timed corrections. And is that really so bad - a dozen or so sessions with corrections vs. weeks/months of stress on both the dog and owner's part trying to get the dog's attention around other dogs??


----------



## Samba

I have found it quite dicey to correct certain dogs for dog agression. It can certainly compound rhe problem.

Perhaps training the dog to perform obedience behaviors. In doing so the dog could learn to defer to human wishes, learn self control, have options for behavior, assume body positions where aggression is less likely ( its a body/mind) and gain confidence in doggy situations. If corrections come into the situation, they can be used to correct for not performing a behavior rather than for whacking a dog while focused on another dog. 

I have seen this training result in lots of behavior modification. That is one reason I think the two areas are not so seperate.


I can "Cesar" my friends dogs into assuming a submissive attitude and calm down (not the roll over stuff eithet). I don't like that method the best. But, it is quick and impressive! My choice for the owner and the dog would probably not be the Cesar method. Cesar's method won't work for those who can not assume a certain "presence". I have found that training with their dog is a great way to build owner confidence, calmness and control. Then you have person more likely to be able to influence the dog like Cesar talks about. Training works again!


----------



## TankGrrl66

hunterisgreat, you had a good point with :

"Watched both videos. I think that guy could train a dog much better than caser, but would fall apart with a dog that was not open to being trained (such as a human aggressive dog). I would also bet that guy would not appreciate schutzhund at all where we intentionally train under stresses such as defensive drive. Also, he doesn't understand proper use of an ecollar, nor does caser. Caser seems to have a much better read of a dogs demeanor, whereas that guy seems to believe all dogs simply want to learn "right out of the box"

Other posters had some good points as well, but I can offer an opinion as well bc I have watched all three people discussed in action. I go with results, not words. 

I have watched CM's show the most. His big downside is how many people copy his techniques when they have no idea what they are doing. IMHO a lot of people jumped on that bandwagon. 

I like most of his methods a lot. Out of these three, he has time and time again saved a lot of severely damaged dogs...the likes of which I have not seen at all on Stillwell's or the Superfetch's show. He is the only one that has dealt with intense dog and human aggression...and fixes it. He gets my respect right there. His use of structure and discipline paired with WHEN to give affection was a heavy influence on making my first GSD (unsocialized comes-with-ISSUES rescue boy) the best dog I have ever had. 

I do like Victoria and have watched her show. She is the trainer for the average pet owner. You can't really screw up what she does. I like her emphasis on obedience and how to teach it. THIS is where she is great. THIS is what dog owners need as a foundation. To teach the dog what TO do instead of hurting them for what not to do. 

I like Superfetch too. He does train with treats and toys. He can teach some impressive tricks and clearly has a good bond with dogs. I like what I see there. However, I have NEVER seen him address behavior issues. All I have seen him do was excell with communicating dogs who are fighting at the bit to learn. 
Of course you look impressive with a border collie dude! Not only are they super smart, they are very motivated and thus easy to work with. 

As far as the video, I get his point. We shouldn't just start with all this alpha rolling stuff and boss the dogs around. We should have a relationship with them that is awesome and positive. The dominance theory is over thought and you shouldn't boss your dog around constantly. But you just cannot deny pack structure. I have four dogs, and I would dismiss anyone that tried to tell me there is no such thing as dominance in dogs.
He is entirely missing the point of Cesar's methods, IMO. He has a lot to learn, and seems to be speaking about stuff he has no direct experience with. 

If I seem indecissive about who I like, that would be bc my fav trainer is M. Ellis


----------



## TankGrrl66

Samba said:


> I have found it quite dicey to correct certain dogs for dog agression. It can certainly compound rhe problem.
> 
> Perhaps training the dog to perform obedience behaviors. In doing so the dog could learn to defer to human wishes, learn self control, have options for behavior, assume body positions where aggression is less likely ( its a body/mind) and gain confidence in doggy situations. If corrections come into the situation, they can be used to correct for not performing a behavior rather than for whacking a dog while focused on another dog.
> 
> I have seen this training result in lots of behavior modification. That is one reason I think the two areas are not so seperate. I can "Cesar" my friends dogs into assuming a submissive attitude and calm down (not the roll over stuff eithet). I don't like that method the best. But, it is quick and impressive!


I completely agree with this way of dealing with dog aggression


----------



## warpwr

Cesar does not train dogs period.

I have never seen him even try to get a dog to speak or heel or down or sit or fetch or obedience or anything like that. He might urge a dog to follow or sit with a leash.

He works the dogs more the way a pack leader dog would, demanding respect. 
He doesn't give voice commands except for his sshhht sound which is only to get the dogs attention. 
It's the sound his grandmother used on him but he says you could use any sound, whatever works best for you.

Maybelline even watches his show and sometimes growls at unruly dogs until Cesar has calmed them which I find fascinating.









He has shown that calm assertive leadership behavior is what gets the animals respect. Not training, which he has no interest in.

While our dogs go to obedience classes I find that I can get them to wait at our open front door while we bring in groceries for example using the calm assertive method even better than a down-stay.


----------



## phgsd

Right...I am not saying to just correct the snot out of that particular dog, that is not the best course either. But after 6+ hours of trying to get his attention, you'd think they might have figured out it wasn't working. IMO if something is completely and utterly failing, it's time to try something else! That dog had some serious dog aggression, and little to no food drive...I just don't know how "purely positive" methods could work for him.


----------



## Oldnewbie

I don't know about dogs but I, personally, would prefer to follow someone who is calm and assertive and knows he's in charge instead of someone who claps and says YAY every time I did something right... and who doesn't have a clue what to do when I feel like biting someone. JMHO


----------



## selzer

phgsd said:


> I am a bit confused about this guy's training methods, but don't know much about him. If he doesn't want to train with treats (like he said in the 2nd video), what does he use? A toy? Not all dogs are particularly toy driven...
> I can see training a BC (just an example) or other very biddable/drivey breeds without having to use lots of treats/toys, but what about the rest of the dog population? Dogs that could case less about pleasing their owners?
> 
> Also, positive methods are IMO more complicated to learn, and for severe problems (like aggression) such tiny baby steps are needed. Not every dog owner will have the knowledge, timing, or patience to train with purely positive methods. If it's a question of using more "traditional" or compulsive methods or putting the dog to sleep, what is the better option?
> 
> I am all for positive training, but I don't limit myself to using only positive methods. I think it's important to assess the dog, the owner, and the whole picture before deciding what methods to use. If positive methods will work - great! But that may not always be the case.
> 
> *A while back I was at an obedience trial. There was a couple there with their very dog aggressive dog. They stood at least 150-200 yards away from any of the other dogs and that dog was STILL barking up a storm at them. They were trying to lure him with treats and he just didn't care. They spent pretty much the whole day that way and I really didn't see them making any progress. All I could think was how the dog would improve so much faster with a few well-timed corrections. And is that really so bad - a dozen or so sessions with corrections vs. weeks/months of stress on both the dog and owner's part trying to get the dog's attention around other dogs*??


This so ticks me off. This is why it is not allowed to have a dog at a trial that is not entered, and dogs that are finished will be excused. Those other dogs and handlers have paid entrance fees, have spent money on gas, grooming, maybe a hotel room, may have taken the day off of work to enter their dog in this show. They should not have an aggressive dog out there posturing for hours while they are working, often off-lead in the ring. No, none of those dogs SHOULD jump out of the ring and go for the dog, but you can't deny that it COULD throw a dog off. 

A show secretary should have asked them to leave. It should NEVER have gone on for six hours. The judge at the trial should have sent a steward to the show secretary and apprised him/her of the situation, and it should have been dealt with. 

Teaching your dog to accept other dogs, not aggress when it sees them should be done on the bike trail, in training classes, on walks, maybe outside of a dog park or pet store, and only for short sessions. Overwhelming a dog RARELY does anything positive.

This is my opinion of the usefulness of Flooding in psychiatry:

You have a patient who is afraid of the flying, stinging, variety. 
You take them to a hornets nest.
You throw stones at the hornets nest. 
The hornets attack you and the patient.

If the patient lives through the ordeal, there is probably a part of a percent chance that he might be cured because the hornets did not succeed in killing him. Otherwise, I do not think it would have served any purpose at all.

Why do that???


----------



## billsharp

Cesar undoubtedly knows how to "train" dogs (using the distinction made in these posts). Cesar's show is about rehabilitating aggressive or poorly trained dogs. Watching him "train" a puppy to sit would not be entertaining tv and that is why he focuses on problem dogs and has great ratings.

Zak's methods are great--but not infallible, nor complete. Some dogs require a firmer hand, which is what Cesar advocates. Zak obviously wants a tv contract himself, so take his criticism of Cesar as the attention-seeking tactic it is, in part.

I have watched and read Cesar extensively and the "dominance" hit on him has been blown way out of proportion. His credo is actually "calm, assertive energy" which works wonders. The dominance aspect is useful in the right situation with the right dog. 

As for the video clip in Zak part 2, it didn't appear to me that Cesar yanked the dog off the floor by the collar or cut off its airway. The dog was fine, and needed that tough love to realize that the jig was up--it would have to bend to the will of the human. It did, making it a nicer dog--so everyone wins.

If you can't tell, I'm kinda tired of the Cesar bashing on this site. IMHO we need to be more open-minded and take the best of all the methods offered, and tailor them to our specific dog's personality and needs.


----------



## Jack's Dad

billsharp said:


> If you can't tell, I'm kinda tired of the Cesar bashing on this site. IMHO we need to be more open-minded and take the best of all the methods offered, and tailor them to our specific dog's personality and needs.



I agree. The same could be said for the raw vs kibble threads.


----------



## Oldnewbie

billsharp said:


> I have watched and read Cesar extensively and the "dominance" hit on him has been blown way out of proportion. His credo is actually "calm, assertive energy" which works wonders. The dominance aspect is useful in the right situation with the right dog.
> 
> As for the video clip in Zak part 2, it didn't appear to me that Cesar yanked the dog off the floor by the collar or cut off its airway. The dog was fine, and needed that tough love to realize that the jig was up--it would have to bend to the will of the human. It did, making it a nicer dog--so everyone wins.
> 
> If you can't tell, I'm kinda tired of the Cesar bashing on this site. IMHO we need to be more open-minded and take the best of all the methods offered, and tailor them to our specific dog's personality and needs.


Agreed. It is one thing to train a dog to perform actions on command and another to teach a dog to behave properly. The former is to benefit the owner, the latter is to benefit the dog.


----------



## selzer

But the former can often lead to the latter. 

Ok, so let's be open minded for a moment. Let's make a premise that NO dog actually needs a firm hand, and if dogs are treated with respect, and taught to do obedience tasks, agility tasks, or other tricks, things that with praise or treats or toys, they are motivated to do, and rewarded for good behavior, lets believe that they will do these things, learn these things, and learn what the owner wants by body language and conversation, while the owner learns how to communicate with the dog. Trust builds, the bond builds, and dog and owner know what to expect from one another, and behavior improves. No alpha rolls, no punishment, corrections being only an eh! lack of reward, and a redo which is rewarded if properly performed.

Now, remember, we are being open minded here and have found this to be the case. 

If you had found this to be the case with aggressive dogs, hard to train dogs, high drive dogs, and it works. Would you then NOT want people bullying dogs to get a desired behavior? Would you speak against bullying, alpha rolling, hanging up and choking a dog out, forcing a dog to misbehave so that you could correct, etc?

I think you would. 

I think that we need to be careful when we suggest people are being closed minded because being closed minded can be on both sides of any argument.


----------



## stealthq

selzer said:


> But the former can often lead to the latter.
> 
> Ok, so let's be open minded for a moment. Let's make a premise that NO dog actually needs a firm hand, and if dogs are treated with respect, and taught to do obedience tasks, agility tasks, or other tricks, things that with praise or treats or toys, they are motivated to do, and rewarded for good behavior, lets believe that they will do these things, learn these things, and learn what the owner wants by body language and conversation, while the owner learns how to communicate with the dog. Trust builds, the bond builds, and dog and owner know what to expect from one another, and behavior improves. No alpha rolls, no punishment, corrections being only an eh! lack of reward, and a redo which is rewarded if properly performed.
> ...


To me, it seems as though 99.9% of dogs fall into this category. However, is it not also possible that some dogs that have NOT been taught in this way, that have no bonds to any human and do not respect any human - may in fact view humans solely as competitors - might not be ABLE to be taught in this way? 

I'm thinking such a dog might not listen to you or be interested in you sufficiently to even start to build trust and a bond regardless of what treat or toy you hold in your hand. In that case, a level of respect would need to be established first and I'd think with this type of dog withholding treats or verbal corrections aren't going to do it. Establishing respect doesn't need to be alpha rolls, though some form of correction might be needed. Things like your body posture, tone of voice, refusal to allow the dog to 'get away' with certain behaviours (say, charging the door) is all part of it. Then the training you describe would follow to build trust and strengthen and reinforce the respect.

Am I making any sense?


----------



## Witz

I think the best story of one's background was from Michael Ellis, who trains from pet to competetive. He reflects on his original training which was totaly based on compulsion, it's just the way it was. Then he discovered clicker/marker/positive methods and was completely sold and thought it was the gospel and felt as if he missed out on having a better approach with past dogs. 

Then he makes the statement that it is a blend of both theories applied appropriately, that proofs a dogs behavior, based on the dog and the need to add compulsion when he knows that the dog has mastered a command that has been taught thru the reward and positive methods or when those methods will not resolve the issue. 

I do find that some here think that every dog no matter what the personality, issue, previous history, will be turned around with only positive methods. Calm, assertive and occasional focused corrections can help prevent a dog from developing a behavior that turns into a long term issue. 

There are just some dogs whether by route of poor/lack of training, bad DNA or any number of reasons can be unmanagable without very assertive pack structure. 

Remember people if there is money involved, the purity of the individual fades. I take something from all trainers and behaviorists and adapt it to my approach and training. No one method is foolproof.


----------



## Samba

With a dog of this background or nature, corrections would not be where I would start.

I always get to corrections with dogs, but these corrections are well taught and understood by the dog. I have had to deal with a rank dominant male who had little pack drive or handler interest. Physicality or a coorection beginning definitely contraindicated.

There is the world of living and working with a dog that is not easily broken into simple niches of training or/vs physicality. Controlling a particular dogs world, exercising fairness, consistency, training and a certain type of compulsion... These things make up the living that changes things.

An episode on television and causing submission in a dramatic way do not reflect this reality very well. I do not believe Cesar's episodes of dramatic physicality are necessary or highly beneficial. They usually result in situations where he pushes the dog and then says this is somehow necessary. I simply don't believe this at this point.


----------



## crackem

I've watched Ceaser, mostly when he first came out, and just recently I watched a few of his shows to see if anything has changed. While I don't agree with him on some things, I hardly think he's this monster some make him out to be.

One thing I know for sure from watching his shows, especially a couple lately that had particularly reactive dogs on, he is far more control of his emotions than most of the people rallying against him. Whatever method of dog training he used, I bet he'd be successful as he's consistent and calm and in control, always. Another thing that stood out, is I feel he Genuinely loves dogs.

He uses different terminology than me, I think he's calling certain behaviors the wrong thing a lot of times, I train nothing like him, but I can think of far worse that I've seen in this world and think people should be spending more time on that, than him.


----------



## Gmthrust

Over the years, my husband and I watched all the shows on dogs that were on tv, even recording episodes for each other that might otherwise be missed; it's just one of the things that's kinda fun, and sometimes gems are gleaned.

If we hired one of the three personalities for one of our shepherds, or all of them, here's how it'd play out:

Ceaser: How can I help?

Glorius Tightypants: That's the worse case I have evah evah EVAH seen in MY WHOLE ENTIRE LIFE.....you are a SELFISH GREEDY ROTTEN person! 

Zak: Hey, wanna teach your dog how to ride that bike?

lol. Just kidding around but that pretty much sums up what they'd do to our house of crazy joy.


----------



## selzer

Hmmmm, How would it be at my house?

Ceasar: Here, put on these skates, yeah, and here are the leashes, whhoooosh! Oh, sorry, I guess I will have to take all of your critters to my ranch while you are in that body cast. 

Gloria: Now, you get into that there kennel, how does that make you feel? Am I really going to bring breakfast and dinner? fill your water bucket? Clean up after you? The stuff in the black bottle is for flies? Uhm, yes, this is not working...

Zak: OK, at the end of eight weeks your dog will be able to bowl. You don't bowl? Well that does not matter, it is not the bowling, it is the process of getting there. You have an SUV? That's nice, but what does that matter? Oh, you can get them there just fine in the SUV, but the bowling alley won't let them in anyway. 

I better just stick with what I am doing.


----------



## Zuiun

crackem said:


> One thing I know for sure from watching his shows, especially a couple lately that had particularly reactive dogs on, he is far more control of his emotions than most of the people rallying against him. Whatever method of dog training he used, I bet he'd be successful as he's consistent and calm and in control, always. Another thing that stood out, is I feel he Genuinely loves dogs.


THIS!

I've watched a lot of his shows. I don't agree with all of his methods, but one thing is undeniable. He has an AMAZING presence. It comes through even the television screen.

And one thing he is absolutely right about is that dogs will feed off of energy - positive or negative. His notion of being calm and assertive is dead on. Losing your temper with a dog does nothing but confuse it and make it lose respect for your authority. But at the same time, you can't be timid with what you expect the dog to do.

I've seen Cesar get frustrated on the show, but oddly enough, it's only ever been with the owners. In fact, I recall one episode where he got downright pissed off at the owners. But he is never that way with the dogs. Even when he's had a dog lose it and go after him or another animal, he never seems to lose control of his emotions.

So I agree with the notion that he'd be successful with virtually any training method. His attitude around them is the important thing.


----------



## Samba

Cesar does appear to genuinely care about the dogs. There are many things he says and does that make sense. The don't try this at home stuff is what I find most sensational, probably avoidable and likely misused.....because people ARE trying this at home.

On those counts, man handling, dominating, espousing that theory etc... I am with Zak. That is soooo yesterday.


----------



## TankGrrl66

I think the point of the video was that there a proven methods, positive ones, that create a better relationship with our dogs.

Too many people focus on the negatives and never bother to communicate with the dog, question why he does it, or really do anything to solve it. Instead, they will yell at their dog and swat it, insisting that the 'guilty look' is bc the dog 'knew' he chewed up whatever.

I really get his point about the insecurity thing. You see a lot of this in young guys, manhandling their pit bulls or whatever 'tough' breed that they think makes them look tough, around. This masculine but really not masculine way of controlling others. I wish they could figure out that if all you have to boss around is a dog...you have some work to do on yourself!

Sorry if I sound a little rantish...I see it all the time. 

I agree on him on several things as far as having a positive relationship with our dogs and etc., but as soon as he started bashing someone that knew so much more than he did I lost respect for him.


----------



## selzer

TankGrrl66 said:


> I think the point of the video was that there a proven methods, positive ones, that create a better relationship with our dogs.
> 
> Too many people focus on the negatives and never bother to communicate with the dog, question why he does it, or really do anything to solve it. Instead, they will yell at their dog and swat it, insisting that the 'guilty look' is bc the dog 'knew' he chewed up whatever.
> 
> I really get his point about the insecurity thing. You see a lot of this in young guys, manhandling their pit bulls or whatever 'tough' breed that they think makes them look tough, around. This masculine but really not masculine way of controlling others. I wish they could figure out that if all you have to boss around is a dog...you have some work to do on yourself!
> 
> Sorry if I sound a little rantish...I see it all the time.
> 
> I agree on him on several things as far as having a positive relationship with our dogs and etc., but as soon as he started bashing someone that knew so much more than he did I lost respect for him.


First, I do not think Ceasar knows so much more than he does. He is dealing with dogs the way people have for ages, and just because he gets progress does not mean it is the best way to do things. 

If a veterinarian/nutritionist advocates a RAW diet, and she says your vet does not know what he is talking about, would she be bashing someone who knows so much more than she? How about if your vet has been doing the job for 25 or more years? I she bashing someone who knows so much better than she? I think she has found something she believes strongly in, and is convinced it is better than the kibble the vet is pushing, and it is not so much bashing, but embracing new studies, and her own experience, and research in the topic.


----------



## Gmthrust

Ceaser invested his money to help more dogs ----all that acreage must have cost quite a pretty big amount ---all for the betterment of dogs.

What does Victorius do with all her massive fame and fortune made off dogs ---- shop for a swanky make over and some overpriced fancy pants place in Manhattan? Not that there's anything wrong with that. Good for her.

Just that it speaks volumes for who is really for the benefit of dogs.

In a world of dreams, I'd invite both Ceaser and Zak over for a get-together, and then my four girls would be perfectly balanced and bowling. haha:wild:


----------



## codmaster

"The *don't try this at home stuff* is what I find most sensational, probably avoidable and likely misused.....because people ARE trying this at home."

This is standard stuff for any pro explaining how to do most any thing - a DIY person is VERY likely to not do it right! 

For example, I used to do a LOT of web site software design and development - no matter how much and how detailed I could explain it the vast majority of untrained folks would screw it up when (if) they tried it "at home". I know because i also used to teach this very same stuff in a couple of universities!

And in the case of dog training - the untrained could also be in bigger trouble if they "screw it up".

I wonder, if someone follows Virginia's "advice" reccomendations but does it equally incorrectly - couldn't they also be in trouble with their dog? Either they or a visitor gets bit (by any of the evidently many human aggressive dogs that she handles on her show)?


----------



## codmaster

> .............
> If a veterinarian/nutritionist advocates a RAW diet, and she says your vet does not know what he is talking about, would she be bashing someone who knows so much more than she? How about if your vet has been doing the job for 25 or more years? I she bashing someone who knows so much better than she? ......


 
To whether it is "bashing and unprofessional" depends to a great deal on HOW the other person presents their argument.


----------



## AgileGSD

Samba said:


> There is the world of living and working with a dog that is not easily broken into simple niches of training or/vs physicality. Controlling a particular dogs world, exercising fairness, consistency, training and a certain type of compulsion... These things make up the living that changes things.
> 
> An episode on television and causing submission in a dramatic way do not reflect this reality very well. I do not believe Cesar's episodes of dramatic physicality are necessary or highly beneficial. They usually result in situations where he pushes the dog and then says this is somehow necessary. I simply don't believe this at this point.


 Years ago this very "Cesar like" trainer came to our training club. FWIW this was long before Cesar was in TV. I guess maybe if he got on to Oprah and gotten a TV contract he could have made millions himself. Anyway this man had previously instructed at a pretty well known private training facility owned by a pretty old school trainer. He boosted that he was especially good at working with dogs who have aggression issues and "dominance" problems. He competed with his own dogs and as is typical of volunteer based training clubs when an experienced trainer comes along, he soon was teaching multiple classes a week.

A lot of people at the club raved about this man, he had quite a following. I was skeptical but as a teen who wanted to go to classes and these ones were free to me. I ended up in a few of his. And I observed a lot of them. What I quickly noticed was this man was bitten at least once in just about every Beginner level class he taught. Highly unusual IME. The dogs in these classes were a mix of people's pet dogs and member's young dogs. They were not classes aimed at dogs with problems. It didn't take long to realize why he was being bitten though.

I was still in 4H at the time but was already competing in other stuff and on my second dog. A younger 4H member and her mom had decided to take their young collie to a class at the training club. This dog had already began 4H classes and was a typical collie with a sweet, happy disposition. The second week of the class under this instructor, the collie wouldn't lay down quickly when asked. Understandable, as it was a young, inexperienced dog in a very large class. Mr, Instructor comes up to the dog, sees the owner is having a hard time getting her to lie down and declares that she is "being dominant". He throws the dog onto the ground and holds her there by her neck. The dog panics because well, a human had never attacked her before. Dog grabs the instructor's arm, not drawing blood. Once he's done "correcting" the dog for her aggression (which happened while he was correcting her for not performing a command she didn't know), he tells the owners that they have a dominant aggressive and potentially dangerous dog. His followers who watched said how lucky these people were that they ended up in this man's class and not some other instructor at the club. Because this man knows how to deal with aggression and will be able to help them get the dog under control. Only their dog wasn't aggressive. The instructor had pushed her into a threat display so that he could look like a big, brave super trainer.

And he did that every chance he got, in every class I watched him teach. He would push and push dogs until they'd react, some more dramatically than others then justify becoming more aggressive with the dog because the dog is obviously dominant aggressive. I watched this man do some pretty awful things to dogs in the name of teaching them who was boss. Things which he openly did in classes at the training club because "he's great with aggressive dogs and those methods have a place". Also "he isn't afraid of being bitten, which is why he's so good for working with aggressive dogs. He'll walk right up to them, take the bite and then force them to become submissive to him." Eventually the complaints outweighed the support and after much drama, he was no longer instructing classes. To this day, I bet I could still find members at the club who remember him and feel he should have been allowed to stay to work with aggressive dogs. Of course, once he left there wasn't such a problem with aggressive dogs coming to classes...


----------



## Jack's Dad

Apparently this cannot be said enough times. *Cesar is not a dog trainer.* I'm sure he could be but that is not what he is getting rich at.

This forum often times lives in a bubble. People have questioned how many really aggressive dogs are out there. A lot more than you would think.
I have been through the area that Cesar originally had his center.
Think So. Central Los Angeles. Think riots. In this neighborhood and many like it all over the U.S. there are bars on peoples windows and most of the houses have dogs. Mean dogs. They don't search out ethical, responsible breeders. They buy the meanest dogs they can get and hope they bite anyone who intrudes. They do not take them to puppy classes. They will not be inviting any of these trainers but if they did I would put my money on Cesar.
Honestly I don't think Zak or Victoria would be caught dead in one of these neighborhoods. But until he recently moved that is where Cesars center was.

There are many types of trainers and different methods and probably they all work for someone.

I don't agree with everything Cesar does but if I have to pick someone to be with when facing one of the type dogs I mentioned above it would be him. If Zak thinks he is the new face of Cesar Milan let him prove it.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

warpwr said:


> Cesar does not train dogs period.
> 
> I have never seen him even try to get a dog to speak or heel or down or sit or fetch or obedience or anything like that.


There is a LOT more to dog training than teaching speak or heel or down or sit or fetch.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Oldnewbie said:


> Agreed. It is one thing to train a dog to perform actions on command and another to teach a dog to behave properly. The former is to benefit the owner, the latter is to benefit the dog.


While you can have a well behaved dog that is poorly trained and a well trained dog who is poorly behaved, that does not mean that training and behavior are completely separate. They're not. And both your examples benefit both the owner AND the dog.


----------



## selzer

Ceasar IS a dog trainer. He is training the dog and the owner to cohabitate. A behaviorist would tell you why the dog is doing what he is doing (which I think Ceasar is poor at best at), but would not necessarily even help you fix it. Perhaps they could tell you how to adjust your behavior to manage the dog's behavior. But what is happening, and what is being done, is dog training. It is just not SIT, HEEL. 

When he does his Sch!!! He is training the dog to stop what he is doing and look at him. That is training. He has training tools, he is a dog trainer whatever he wants to say about his work. Last I heard he had no degrees in dog psychology. He is a trainer.


----------



## selzer

Gmthrust said:


> Ceaser invested his money to help more dogs ----all that acreage must have cost quite a pretty big amount ---all for the betterment of dogs.
> 
> What does Victorius do with all her massive fame and fortune made off dogs ---- shop for a swanky make over and some overpriced fancy pants place in Manhattan? Not that there's anything wrong with that. Good for her.
> 
> Just that it speaks volumes for who is really for the benefit of dogs.
> 
> In a world of dreams, I'd invite both Ceaser and Zak over for a get-together, and then my four girls would be perfectly balanced and bowling. haha:wild:


On another thread, vote for my dog to win this collar, if he wins, the collar will be donated to...

What is it with people accepting a prize or earning money if it has anything to do with dogs? The way I look at it, whatever I donate or give away, any positive feeling goes completely out the window if people give me praise for that. I think that when giving is brodcasted, it is done to get people's opinions. No problem with helping Rocco win to earn money for his shelter -- that is a bit different, that was never about personal gain. 

So, I do not know or care what Victoria does with her money. I think it is totally ridiculous to discount her because she has not opened up a ranch where a bunch of dogs live in a pack. She probably would find Cesar's ranch setting for dogs pretty abusive, from what I have seen of it, it appears to be. If those dogs really would have been euthanized which I have my doubts about, I suppose that is better than the needle. But so what. 

Victoria probably believes in caring for one or two pets. Running a ranch of dogs is probably not anything most people should be trying to do. 

It would be really awful if some of those of you who have given Ceasar -- God status, if the humane society raided his place and found poor conditions, dogs with untended wounds, and allegations of abuse. Lots of times though, that is what happens with ranch-type situations. These dogs are not pets. He explains that in in his book. In his native country, dogs do not live like they live here. 

Why is it always big Daddy. He is calm, he is steady. He has tons of dogs up there that he has rehabilitated so we believe. But why not use more than just the one dog? I don't know. Obviously. 

But knocking Victoria because she does not do as Ceasar does??? 

Whatever. 

If we took a poll about which would be more likely visited by Animal Control, I wonder who would win.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Selzer. 

Cesar Milan gives grants to non profit animal shelters, organizations for rescue, rehab, re-homing of abused and abandoned dogs.

He has Daddy's fund for dog victims of violence, abuse,or natural disasters like hurricanes.

He has another fund to help with spay and neuter programs.

It has nothing to do with his ranch.

Sure sounds like a jerk doesn't he.

Since it is a foundation it is public. I don't think he needs the notoriety from being charitable.


----------



## Whiteshepherds

Hunter Jack said:


> Cesar Milan gives grants to non profit animal shelters, organizations for rescue, rehab, re-homing of abused and abandoned dogs.
> He has Daddy's fund for dog victims of violence, abuse,or natural disasters like hurricanes.
> He has another fund to help with spay and neuter programs.
> It has nothing to do with his ranch.
> Sure sounds like a jerk doesn't he.
> Since it is a foundation it is public. I don't think he needs the notoriety from being charitable.



:thumbup:His non-profit organization is the Millan Foundation.


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom

All three have their strenghts and drawbacks;I've watched Cesar's show on National Geographic ,Stillwill on Animal and Zak as well. I w/ limited training ability can put into place what Victoria does. I like Zak's show used one or two things teaching Lucky a couple of tricks but really didn't find alot I could use. Zak's show is about fairly well trained dogs who have owners who are pretty involved w/ their dogs and want their canine to do more.Cesar is working w/ dogs that are on their way to a shelter.Each is an expert. The show I've learned alot from is Dogtown.Those guys truly work w/ dogs who are at the end of the line.Zak was out of line and wrong on Cesar. Cesar's methods can be used but not by the average person who doesnt know dogs.I have had an aggressive dog I modified the enviroment to keep others safe and gradually w/ age and maybe positive reinforcement she got better. I watch what Cesar does and the reports are fantastic a year later and occassionally 18 months later.I still am still more in agreement w/Selzer some times the training on dominance bothers me.I just get stuck on how a novice w/ a lab or muttly watches that show and decides to be leader of the pack and the dog reacts or is truamatized because the novice isnt Cesar what happens to the dog then?But Cesar gives back.Victoria advovates for spay/nueter . Zak ,I havent done any research on so I cant say.


----------



## AddieGirl

He does use more than one dog. If you watch the show you will see in almost every case he brings several dogs to help in the rehabilitation. I think he had a special bond with Daddy (who wasn't even his own dog btw) but he used all the members of his pack in different situations where they could be of help. It seems like a lot of people bashing Cesar haven't even watched a whole episode of his show.


----------



## AddieGirl

Oh and most of Cesars pack members are only there temporarily. His goal is for them to be placed in homes. I just watched an old episode where he helped a man overcome his fear of dogs and then gave him a balanced calm Chinese crested from his pack.


----------



## selzer

Hunter Jack said:


> Selzer.
> 
> Cesar Milan gives grants to non profit animal shelters, organizations for rescue, rehab, re-homing of abused and abandoned dogs.
> 
> He has Daddy's fund for dog victims of violence, abuse,or natural disasters like hurricanes.
> 
> He has another fund to help with spay and neuter programs.
> 
> It has nothing to do with his ranch.
> 
> Sure sounds like a jerk doesn't he.
> 
> Since it is a foundation it is public. I don't think he needs the notoriety from being charitable.


I really do not care. He came to this country illegally, worked hard, found a nitch, got rich. Figured out how to use his money and connections to get legal. Sorry, I think they should have booted his butt out because his initial act was breaking our law. What kind of an example is he to all the others willing to break the law to come here? But we let him get legal, we let him stay, and scads of HUMAN beings are going to DIE this year trying to come into this country illegally and make it big like Ceasar. 

So he gives back to dogs. Big deal. He is rich, and has all he needs to raise his family and he uses his extra to help dogs. And who knows how much of that is gifts and donations? We don't know. We know he isn't hurting. Crossing the boarder illegally worked out for him. He may be benefiting dogs, but he has made a fortune off of dogs, if he was a breeder of dogs he would be the scum of the earth to profit from dogs. And he lets everyone know how much he is doing for dogs. 

Victoria Stillwell should be measured against him? Well, I do not think for one thing that she violated the law to get here. She made it big in her own country, then entered our country legally. I do not know, but I would be surprised if she does not give to something out of her excess, but it is none of my business if she does or doesn't. I believe in giving being private. No one should feel compelled to give anything to anyone -- that is not giving. Giving is when you want to give, and you don't go shouting about it off of mountain tops.


----------



## Whiteshepherds

Victoria Stillwell should be measured against him? Well, I do not think for one thing that she violated the law to get here. She made it big in her own country, then entered our country legally. I do not know, but I would be surprised if she does not give to something out of her excess, but it is none of my business if she does or doesn't. I believe in giving being private. No one should feel compelled to give anything to anyone -- that is not giving. Giving is when you want to give, and you don't go shouting about it off of mountain tops.[/QUOTE]

Victorian Stilwell also has a foundation. It's on her website. I wonder why she doesn't keep that information private?


----------



## selzer

Look, I do not expect Victoria or Ceasar to follow my ideal on giving, but I really do not care how much Ceasar does for dogs because he wasn't able to do this in his own country where he was legal, he came here, and everything he made should be forfeited to the state, because it ALL came illegally, that is, until he managed to get legal, write a book, and set up his foundation. The ends do not justify the means.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

Zuiun said:


> I've watched a lot of his shows. I don't agree with all of his methods, but one thing is undeniable. He has an AMAZING presence. It comes through even the television screen.
> 
> And one thing he is absolutely right about is that dogs will feed off of energy - positive or negative. His notion of being calm and assertive is dead on. Losing your temper with a dog does nothing but confuse it and make it lose respect for your authority. But at the same time, you can't be timid with what you expect the dog to do.


I think that's the main thing that's under-rated/valued about Cesar. He really has the 'whatever' it is that dogs respect and he knows how to use it! :wild:


----------



## Jack's Dad

selzer.

Why didn't you just say that you don't like him because he was an illegal immigrant many posts ago and saved us from reading all the other stuff. I do care that he gives to help animal organizations. If you want to get off on illegal immigration this thread will go on forever.


----------



## codmaster

selzer said:


> Look, I do not expect Victoria or Ceasar to follow my ideal on giving, but I really do not care how much Ceasar does for dogs because he wasn't able to do this in his own country where he was legal, he came here, and everything he made should be forfeited to the state, because it ALL came illegally, that is, until he managed to get legal, write a book, and set up his foundation. The ends do not justify the means.


I guess that means that EVERYONE who came to the country illegally and then got in one of the frequent amnesty programs from our federal government should have everything that they have now taken away by your federal government, and then kicked out back to their own country, *is that what you think?*

Or do you think that it should be only certain such now legal residents of the USA? (maybe just the *"RICH"* ones, perhaps?)


----------



## Samba

Oh goodness, we should not make this about immigration!! Lets stick to training theories dicussion. I would hate to see this go off the rails.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Samba.

I agree. I want to go back to the idea of throwing all three of them in a pen with three of the nastiest meanest dogs that can be found and see how each one's technique works out for them.

I personally don't care what titles they go by or where they come from or whether they are or were legal or not.


----------



## codmaster

Good point!

Would be interesting to see them deal with some "red zone" dogs.

AND then deal with some of the softest dogs as well.

See how they adopted to the real different needs of the individual dog, as a great pro in any field will do!


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom

The illegal thing he rectified and my bet is that man pays some serious taxes and he gives back to the dog community, I respect and admire him and have two of his books even though his training as I stated before leaves me w/ some questions.What is it w/ the world of dog training that everyone believes there is only one way to train.The individual dog needs consistent training based on their needs. I work w/ people in trouble w/ the law I adjust treatment to get them motivated and match their needs. However dogs are carbon copies ? All three individuals have talent and yes Cesar has presence but each has a niche/ and a way of training and a population that they are better w/.


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom

codmaster said:


> Good point!
> 
> Would be interesting to see them deal with some "red zone" dogs.
> 
> AND then deal with some of the softest dogs as well.
> 
> See how they adopted to the real different needs of the individual dog, as a great pro in any field will do!


 Sorry Codmaster I started writing with out reading your post. I definitely agree w/ you on individual approaches to training dogs. .


----------



## Oldnewbie

Daisy&Lucky's Mom said:


> All three individuals have talent and yes Cesar has presence but each has a niche/ and a way of training and a population that they are better w/.


I agree. That is why one of them can't say one way is the old way and another is the new way because they are interacting with the dogs for different purposes.


----------



## Zuiun

selzer said:


> He may be benefiting dogs, but he has made a fortune off of dogs, if he was a breeder of dogs he would be the scum of the earth to profit from dogs. And he lets everyone know how much he is doing for dogs.
> 
> Victoria Stillwell should be measured against him? Well, I do not think for one thing that she violated the law to get here. She made it big in her own country, then entered our country legally.


I'm just curious how you can compare Cesar to "scum dog breeders" because he's getting rich off of dogs, but yet it seems like you're somehow OK with Stillwell *ALSO* getting rich off of dogs by doing essentially the same thing.


----------



## Oldnewbie

Zuiun said:


> I'm just curious how you can compare Cesar to "scum dog breeders" because he's getting rich off of dogs, but yet it seems like you're somehow OK with Stillwell *ALSO* getting rich off of dogs by doing essentially the same thing.


I agree. To Whom It May Concern: Is there something wrong with making money from the business you are in? I thought that was what free enterprise was all about. Cesar is making money for rehabilitating dogs, I see no problem with that. Do Canine Behaviorists work for free? How about dog trainers who are also making money 'off of' dogs?


----------



## selzer

That is my point. Someone, I think Hunter Jack, said how much Ceasar was doing for dogs, and how he is so much better than Victoria -- in his opinion.

ALL HIS MONEY CAME FROM DOGS in one way or another. So he is giving back, big hairy deal! 

People on this site are all it a tizzy about anyone who breeds dogs and sells them, with the intent of making money, whether they put that money back into their dogs or not, they are somehow the scum of the earth. 

But this dude should be commended for making money off of dogs? 

I AGREE with him making money, no problem with that at all. I think that he managed to get legal probably because of his success, and THAT I kind of have a problem with. I think we want people here who follow the law, not break it to get into the country. But now that he IS legal, he should make all the money he can. Fine, no problem with that at all. 

But I do not want to hear about how GOOD he is, in whatever he does. I don't care. People who want to give of themselves or their money that's fine. It does not make them saints, or any better than someone else. It does not make them a better trainer than someone who does not have as many known charitable ventures.


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

I really hope his way of training is on the way out. I recently watched some of his episodes and was pretty disgusted. One episode that really stuck out to me was where he basically scared a dog into doing something. Did it work? Well, the dog didn't continue with the behavior. However, it begs the question, "What about when the dog isn't scared anymore?" I dunno it's not for me. If other people want to do that stuff with their dogs, then I guess they can deal with the results.

I was talking with my uncle yesterday and he actually told me I needed to be watching Cesar and using his methods on Sasha. It was the first time he had ever met Sasha, and she was sitting calmly by my side when he said it. I wasn't thrilled. His whole reasoning was that she didn't have perfect recall yet and she's afraid of thunder....Hmmm...the recall thing is a combination of my fault and the fact I haven't had her that long. 6 months of owning a rescue dog who came with issues FAR greater than her recall, and I still don't trust her off leash? Time to show her who's boss! I'm sorry but I was a little busy teaching her not to act like she as going to eat men who came near me (training that my uncle was benefiting from by the way), and guess what? I never had to alpha roll her, or intimidate her in any way. I don't think this kind of training is beneficial for the trust needed to have a good relationship with the dog. And if you don't want a good relationship with your dog, if you just want something to obey out of fear, go to therapy and don't get a dog. Just my two cents.


----------



## sitstay

selzer said:


> If we took a poll about which would be more likely visited by Animal Control, I wonder who would win.


I don't have a dog in this fight, so to speak. _*Any *_of these t.v. trainers can (and do) have inexperienced owners watch an episode or two, decide that it sure looks simple enough and have at it. Whether it is Cesar Milan and his use of flooding to desensitize a fearful dog, or Victoria Stillwell and her infamous air horn. I knew of a GSD owner who spend a ton of time teaching his dog wonderful, entertaining tricks...and, yet, the dog was still dangerously aggressive with his girlfriend. So even trick training can lose something in translation if the "trainer/show viewer" doesn't have the experience or skill to recognize serious issues.

Now, as to who animal control would be likely to visit? I am assuming that "visit" is meant to imply "investigate"? 

Cesar Milan's business revolves around dogs. So he has his own resident pets, and he has any number of client dogs living in kennels (believe me, the dogs don't run in a big pack 24/7). Most of his adult life has been spent working with dogs in some manner.

Victoria Stillwell's business revolves around people and t.v. production offices. Most of her adult life has been spent in the entertainment business, as a working actress. She lives with one dog, a Labrador. 

They both use their shows to entertain, as well as educate. Training is often as exciting as watching grass grow. That doesn't bring in viewers. But aggressive dogs do. And destructive dogs do. So Milan gravitates towards the aggressive dogs for his show, and Stillwell gravitates towards destructive dogs for hers. And if the owners of either type are super clueless? So much the better!

Personally, I preferred the old Barbara Woodhouse show on PBS. There was just something uplifting about how she would sing out "WALKIES" and then just start to march with that dog!
Sheilah


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Oldnewbie said:


> I agree. That is why one of them can't say one way is the old way and another is the new way because they are interacting with the dogs for different purposes.


There are definitely "old" ways and "new" ways of training. It would be ridiculous to think that there haven't been great strides in understanding dog behavior, how they learn, and how to use that knowledge to train effectively and efficiently, in the past few decades. The best trainers have abandoned the older, less effective ways in favor of better, new ways. Techiniques like flooding are definitely old school. 

Even Cesar has done that to an extent - his methods have evolved somewhat from what I understand, and the things that people like about him are not his original ideas, he got them from someone else or they've been around and have been used by most other trainers for awhile now. He's just had the opportunity to present them to the masses through his TV show. Staying calm, providing sufficient exercise and discipline through rules and structure in addition to affection, "treating them like dogs" - that's not "Cesar's Way", that's just dog training. But he gets credit for those ideas because people are more aware of him than they are of other, actual groundbreaking trainers and behaviorists.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Newbieshepherdgirl.

It's a lot different to work with your own dog on whatever issues it has at home.
You can take months or even years and use whatever type of training that appeals to you.

He has to deal with, in a relatively short time, in front of cameras dogs with serious behavior problems. Some are minor others are off the charts. He also does it on the dogs turf most of the time.

Are there other ways and other people who can do this? Probably.

The issue is other trainers who complain but don't show how they have a better way of dealing with with these type of dogs. So the issue is and has been for me that if they are better and can do it differently let see it.

He's not complaining about the way other people train dogs and in fact has had guest trainers on to help in areas where he feels they could do better with training. He doesn't consider himself a trainer. Does not offer classes in training.

Zak teaches dogs tricks. He does not address how he would train a very fearful or real aggressive dog. So if he and other trainers say Cesar's way is the old way then lets see the new way with dogs having serious issues.

Victoria and Zak are both on TV so if they want they could show us how they would deal with a real vicious dog on it's home turf using their techniques.

And selzer I don't care where any of them came from because what they do or don't do is the issue. 

Where someone was born and their legal status in the U.S. is a completely different topic and this forum is IMO not the place for it.


----------



## selzer

sit said:


> Personally, I preferred the old Barbara Woodhouse show on PBS. There was just something uplifting about how she would sing out "WALKIES" and then just start to march with that dog!
> Sheilah


I read Cesar's book. And I read Victoria's book. About a year ago, I got a book by Barbara Woodhouse, Walkies lady, yeah loved her when she was on. 

Read it. Chances are you will NOT like the things she says, how to deal with behavior. Of course the choke chain then was the prong collar of today. And I understand that, but I was a bit disgusted with some of the stuff in that book.


----------



## chinamom2

As a friend in the television industry told me, you have no idea how many takes occur before you see the end result on Cesar's show. Lots and lots of takes.

I am acquainted with several well-respected dog trainers who deal with difficult dogs; none would use his methods.

Frankly, I think his methods are harsh and he does more harm then good, but then again that is just my opinion.


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

Hunter Jack said:


> Newbieshepherdgirl.
> 
> It's a lot different to work with your own dog on whatever issues it has at home.
> You can take months or even years and use whatever type of training that appeals to you.
> 
> *He has to deal with, in a relatively short time, in front of cameras dogs with serious behavior problems.* Some are minor others are off the charts. He also does it on the dogs turf most of the time.
> 
> Are there other ways and other people who can do this? Probably.
> 
> The issue is other trainers who complain but don't show how they have a better way of dealing with with these type of dogs. So the issue is and has been for me that if they are better and can do it differently let see it.
> 
> He's not complaining about the way other people train dogs and in fact has had guest trainers on to help in areas where he feels they could do better with training. He doesn't consider himself a trainer. Does not offer classes in training.
> 
> Zak teaches dogs tricks. He does not address how he would train a very fearful or real aggressive dog. So if he and other trainers say Cesar's way is the old way then lets see the new way with dogs having serious issues.
> 
> Victoria and Zak are both on TV so if they want they could show us how they would deal with a real vicious dog on it's home turf using their techniques.
> 
> And selzer I don't care where any of them came from because what they do or don't do is the issue.
> 
> Where someone was born and their legal status in the U.S. is a completely different topic and this forum is IMO not the place for it.


I agree that what he's doing is somewhat different, and I'm not really sure I buy into the premise that you should be trying to rush through these issues that the dog has. What are you gaining besides maybe some good tv ratings for having a miracle cure or whatever. So then you have people watching who instead of taking the weeks or months or whatever it is that would work best for their dogs, think their dog should be "cured" in a matter of days? I'm sorry but that's just not how it usually works. Maybe you can teach them to sit in a day, maybe you can teach them to fetch in a day, but reactivity and other such issues take time. And even the things you can teach in a day, or for the sake of argument let's say the things that you can't teach in matter of days but somehow someone came in and waved their magic wand and it's all better now, have to be continually reinforced. I dunno. I like victoria ok, I'm not sold on all of her philosophies (her anti prong/ choke collar philosophies in particular) but I don't think she's scaring the dogs or intimidating the dogs. Do I still think there is the problem of it makes it look like everything has a quick fix? Yes. I don't really like either of these shows for that reason.


----------



## chinamom2

selzer said:


> I read Cesar's book. And I read Victoria's book. About a year ago, I got a book by Barbara Woodhouse, Walkies lady, yeah loved her when she was on.
> 
> Read it. Chances are you will NOT like the things she says, how to deal with behavior. Of course the choke chain then was the prong collar of today. And I understand that, but I was a bit disgusted with some of the stuff in that book.


Funny you mention Barbara Woodhouse. The trainer, who helps us work with the shelter dogs, met her years ago when she came to do a show in our town. It seems she didn't like any of the shelter dogs available, said they were just too dirty. Someone ask the trainer if she could use her dogs instead, at which the trainer said not a chance. She said she wasn't going to let her put a choke collar on her dogs and jerk them around the stage. Walkies indeed.


----------



## Zuiun

selzer said:


> People on this site are all it a tizzy about anyone who breeds dogs and sells them, with the intent of making money, whether they put that money back into their dogs or not, they are somehow the scum of the earth.
> 
> But this dude should be commended for making money off of dogs?


I still can't see any logical correlation between the way a "scum breeder" makes money off of dogs and the way that Cesar makes money off of them.

There is a clear difference. The breeders in question that people hate clearly do NOT value dogs for anything other than a cash crop.

Cesar turned something he loves - dogs - into a business.

There is a UNIVERSE of difference between the two. Agree with his methods or not, his intent is clearly to better the lives of the dogs he works with. He has made it his life's work to help and donate money to dog welfare.

He -- now this is the important point that separates him from the "scum breeders" -- *cares about what happens to them*.

Your issue is clearly the fact that he came into this country illegally. And you seem to think that negates any good he does. In fact you made a comment that he should forfeit any money he made. Whatever.

The thing is, you keep accusing people of elevating him to sainthood or giving him God-status. That's a strawman argument. Useful to allow you to bash down that notion. Trouble is, people are praising the good he does for animals, but I see no one calling him "saint Cesar." Some people here clearly admire his methods and the positive things he is trying to do for dog welfare, and some don't. Period.

If his once illegal status is going to continue to be the sticking point, then this topic is going to get boring fast. It is what it is and shouldn't be an issue regarding whether or not anyone agrees with his methods. The fact is, the guy *did* become legal and so successful that I'm certain he has paid much, much more in taxes back into this country than he ever earned prior to his success. So in that respect, he HAS "forfeited" whatever money he made prior to becoming legal. Get over it.


----------



## codmaster

selzer said:


> That is my point. .............
> ALL HIS MONEY CAME FROM DOGS in one way or another. So he is giving back, big hairy deal!
> ............
> But *this dude* *(little disrespectful of a man you never met, don't you think?) *should be commended for making money off of dogs?
> 
> I AGREE with him making money, no problem with that at all. I think that *he managed to get legal probably because of his success*, *(HOW did he do this? What exactly did he do - bribe an immigration agency employee?)* and THAT I kind of have a problem with. I think *we* *(wonder who you are referring to here?)* want people here who follow the law, not break it to get into the country. But now that he IS legal, he should make all the money he can. Fine, *no problem (doesn't sound like it!)* with that at all.
> 
> But I do not want to hear about how GOOD he is, in whatever he does. I don't care. People who want to give of themselves or their money that's fine. It does not make them saints, or any better than someone else. It does not make them a *better trainer (true enough - just a better person!) *than someone who does not have as many known charitable ventures.


*Selzer, I think we got it - you don't like Cesar. (Maybe because you don't like his training approach?)*

*How about this thread gets back to a simple, but still very emotional, discussion of the various dog behavior approaches seen in various TV shows? *

*Enough of immigration status on many other forums on the web - better we should just stick to dog stuff here.*


----------



## selzer

Codmaster, last I heard you were not a mod or an admin. 

I am answering the post that very distinctly lists some of Ceasar's dog-related charities, and because of them, discounts Victoria. 

All of what he does with his excess money does not make him a better trainer. 

I actually don't dislike him. I think his methods are outdated, dangerous, and make for good reality television ratings. I have read his book, I have watched his show. He was an illegal immigrant. He does a lot for dogs. I do not hate or dislike him, but I do not like him either. I simply do not care about him, or what he does. I have a bit of a problem with our system that allowed him to stay here and wonder what their reasoning was. But I would have that problem with anyone who was here by illegal means and now is legal.


----------



## Jack's Dad

selzer said:


> Codmaster, last I heard you were not a mod or an admin.
> 
> I am answering the post that very distinctly lists some of Ceasar's dog-related charities, and because of them, discounts Victoria.
> 
> All of what he does with his excess money does not make him a better trainer.
> 
> I actually don't dislike him. I think his methods are outdated, dangerous, and make for good reality television ratings. I have read his book, I have watched his show. He was an illegal immigrant. He does a lot for dogs. I do not hate or dislike him, but I do not like him either. I simply do not care about him, or what he does. I have a bit of a problem with our system that allowed him to stay here and wonder what their reasoning was. But I would have that problem with anyone who was here by illegal means and now is legal.


Selzer . 
I mentioned his charities because in an earlier post you basically implied that the money went to his ranch. You know the one you think the Humane Society should visit.

I simply pointed out that you were wrong. He has a foundation and I've already listed those charities. I never said anything about Victoria. I can't comment on what she does or does not do with her money because I haven't got a clue.

When folks say something negative about Victoria, someone will always ask, how many of her shows have you watched?
I've already said that I have only seen about 3 and on those she didn't deal with very tough behavior problems. If she deals with extremely aggressive out of control dogs then I would like to see her technique.

I wonder how many shows the anti Cesar people have seen. Most of the time he talks about being calm and assertive. Hard to fault that. He also talks about rules, boundaries, and limitations. What is wrong with that? Dogs need them, todays kids sure need them, and even us adults have to have them or suffer the consequences.

I have no idea where you or anyone else gets the people think he is a saint or god idea. He is just a guy with a particular take on our relationship with dogs. People can take it or leave it or in my case I agree with some of his view and disagree with some.

He shouldn't be called out though by other so called professionals unless they are willing to prove they can do what he does better than him. IMO.


----------



## codmaster

selzer said:


> Codmaster, last I heard you were not a mod or an admin. *You are correct! At least for now!*
> 
> I am answering the post that very distinctly lists some of Ceasar's dog-related charities, and because of them, discounts Victoria.
> 
> *Because it mentions Cesar's generosity you think that "discounts" Victoria? How does it do that? Maybe you could find out something about Victoria that would be note worthy, perhaps? Something that would be an example of rich Victoria helping out some of our more unfortunate pets? Do you know of anything that she has done along those lines?*
> 
> All of what he does with his excess money does not make him a better trainer.
> *Who said it did? And I assume that since you didn't (couldn't?) answer my last post when I suggested tht it did demonstrate that he was a better person that you perhaps also believe that supposition?*
> 
> I actually don't dislike him. I think his methods are outdated, dangerous, and make for good reality television ratings. I have read his book, I have watched his show. *He was an illegal immigrant*. *(pretty hung up on this, sounds like!) Do you think that he should just go "home" now? How about everybody else that came illegally, but then became legal, perhaps through one of the official amnesty programs from the federal government? *
> 
> He does a lot for dogs. I do not hate or dislike him, but I do not like him either. I simply do not care about him, or what he does. I have a bit of a problem with our system that allowed him to stay here and wonder what their reasoning was. But I would have that problem with anyone who was here by illegal means and now is legal.


 
Right!


----------



## Gmthrust

Selzer, you brought up charities, and then made a red-herring (false argument) with it. Is there a way to direct-link the posts individually so I can show that?

I apologize for making fun of Victoria Stillwell. I actually meant for that part to be delivered with humor. I didn't mean for it to be emotive. I'm very much sorry. Hoping to defuse any unnecessary negative vibes brewing.


----------



## CarrieJ

Wow, I just read through the last eleven pages, sat through two vids and got here in time to see an interesting thread start to self destruct.

In my opinion, there are things that I like about Ceasar Milan and there are things that I like about Victoria Stillwell.
Ceasar has the body language thing down. That is a major way dogs communicate. That is the "whatever" in the "whatever he has that dogs relate to"
Victoria, uses (or used to I haven't had satellite tv in awhile now), lots of visualization for her human clients to get her point across. 
When I would watch either show both "trainers/psychologist/behaviorists" would definitely chastise the owners before the dog. 

I don't know anything about Mr. Zak. But, the "organic" relationship in which he's referring to in my opinion is merely giving the dog what it needs as far as working it's brain. 
It's almost like reading Michael Moore....coming from a logging family from Northern California...tell me more about the recession of the 80s and how they stopped counting people on unemployment to make their numbers look better. Redundant. *yawn*

As far as Barbara Woodhouse, I remember watching her as a little girl on PBS and the trick of finding "the spot" as far as an affection reward still works. The Choke Chain training...just dated. I have an old dog training book from the late fifties(sorry, I loaned it to my boss for a good laugh) was all choke chain training and trick training and it was written by a GSD breeder in upstate New York. I'll get it back from my boss and post the title at a different time.


----------



## Zuiun

selzer said:


> But I would have that problem with anyone who was here by illegal means and now is legal.


That being the case, I hope you've never paid to watch an Arnold Schwarzenegger movie...


----------



## selzer

Gmthrust said:


> Ceaser invested his money to help more dogs ----all that acreage must have cost quite a pretty big amount ---all for the betterment of dogs.
> 
> What does Victorius do with all her massive fame and fortune made off dogs ---- shop for a swanky make over and some overpriced fancy pants place in Manhattan? Not that there's anything wrong with that. Good for her.
> 
> Just that it speaks volumes for who is really for the benefit of dogs.
> 
> In a world of dreams, I'd invite both Ceaser and Zak over for a get-together, and then my four girls would be perfectly balanced and bowling. haha:wild:


Yep, this is the post Ceasar is all about the dogs and Victoria is someone to be discounted as a joke. Yes it is upsetting. So what. Cesar is living in a great home and doing something he loves as his work. All those dogs on his ranch -- that is his hobby, his calling, his whatever but it is what he loves and wants to do. So he spends his excess money, and probably a lot of donations and such to care for a bunch of dogs? That is what he wants to do. He does it because he WANTS to -- and nothing wrong with that.

Victoria would probably NEVER have such a place because she would find that kind of situation for dogs to be revolting. She has A dog. And suggesting her training is a joke because she is not running a ranch of bully breed and other formidable dogs is just nog right.


----------



## selzer

Zuiun said:


> That being the case, I hope you've never paid to watch an Arnold Schwarzenegger movie...


My mother loves him, I don't really care about him. I looked it up though, he MAY have had some visa issues at some point -- that is a little different then coming in illegally. We all know about bureaucracy, and it always possible that the fault of whatever caused the visa issue wasn't even his. But no, I have never spent money to see him in anything.


----------



## Jack's Dad

CarrieJ.

I will admit to a lot of my posts being redundant. The reason for that is because I often wonder if some people actually read a whole post before responding.
Sometimes you can get a few posts down the line from your own and find that what you said, someone has screwed up to the point you can hardly recognize it. They add things in that weren't said and ignore things that were said.

I think most people would like their view, opinion, idea to at least be recognized and understood whether you agree with it or not.

I jumped into the middle of a thread a little while back and took what turned out to be incorrect info. and ran with it. That was my mistake and lesson. I try to read carefully now and if I haven't followed a thread not jump in until I have read it.

Unfortunately in this thread it seemed necessary to repeat things.


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom

For those of you questioning Stillwil's charitable and volunteer work I checked out her website and did a search. She has volunteered during 9/11 w/ the canines at Pier 94. She wants to raise money for service dogs like the cadaver dogs who worked so faithfully at the 9/11 site She has sponsored small animal rescue and has a foundation. Come on folks this is not a right /wrong issue. I dont know if some one makes money training dogs and they want to give some to the local dog charities where I live,unless they are advocating abuse ,bring that cash on since we (the Mahoning Valley) dont have any.Is there a reason to promote your trainer in this fight by insulting the others? You may think she isn't a good trainer and that's your right but to state you know she doesn't give back to charity is not true and shows a lack of information on your part.She trained in England since the 80's per one site and she loves Shepherds . She just wrote about visiting the newest Rin Tin Tin and how she admired the line.. I want some positive media attention for our breed.She and Cesar do that for the "aggressive breeds".


----------



## Jack's Dad

selzer said:


> Victoria would probably NEVER have such a place because she would find that kind of situation for dogs to be revolting. She has A dog. And suggesting her training is a joke because she is not running a ranch of bully breed and other formidable dogs is just nog right.


Have you seen pictures of that ranch. I live in California and know exactly where that is and it's beautiful with a very mild climate. Doesn't seem like too bad a life for dogs that probably would have been euthanized otherwise.


----------



## CarrieJ

Hunter Jack, I'm sorry...I didn't mean that the posters themselves were redundant. I re-read my post and realize that it wasn't clear. I apologize.

I did mean that Mr. Zak was redundant.
Postive reinforcement has been around for eons. He's not the original personality that he seems to think that he is. IMO.
I have also noticed when any particular trainer or group bashes Milan or the term "dominance" they only play a few seconds of any video and it's very easy to get things out of context. 
Personally I try to find a middle ground between Milan and Stillwel and still like McConnell or Dunno better than either. Somewhere between cookie pushing and trick teaching and compulsion/dominace "I'm The Queen of Your World" methods.
I'm not a huge fan of vets but Dr. Nicolas Dodman has written very interesting stuff.

I almost didn't jump into this thread. Usually I'm a bit brighter and stick to the random thread or pictures....
It's been pretty good so far, everyone has been pretty civil...not like the dog food threads.

Once again, I apologize for anyone person and Hunter Jack thinking that I was calling them redundant.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Carriej.

Got it, You were talking about ZAK

Thanks. I did not take it personally but a lot of my posts on this thread are redundant for the reasons outlined before.


----------



## Gmthrust

Selzer, obviously I hurt your feelings. I apologize. I'm sorry and never meant for that to happen.


----------



## G-burg

> All of what he does with his excess money does not make him a better trainer.


Is anyone really saying he's a better trainer? 

Each trainer has their way of doing things and if what they do works then great for them! If the owners and the dogs are better for it, well then, that's all that matters..

Never heard of the new guy nor have I watched the vid.. Really have no interest.. As I'm sure it's nothing new when you've been around dogs for any length of time..

I love watching Cesar and Victoria.. More so because of the differences in them..


----------



## Zuiun

selzer said:


> My mother loves him, I don't really care about him. I looked it up though, he MAY have had some visa issues at some point -- that is a little different then coming in illegally. We all know about bureaucracy, and it always possible that the fault of whatever caused the visa issue wasn't even his. But no, I have never spent money to see him in anything.


His issues are harder to find now. His PR people did a good job of glossing them over.

He came over here on a non-immigrant visa -- basically, a visitor pass -- that allowed him to compete in body building. Joe Weider, the fitness guy, offered him a job and paid him a salary, cars, etc. This was in CLEAR violation of his visa and everyone involved knew it. He didn't obtain a work visa until more than a year after being (and earning a living) here.

So, although he didn't have to "sneak across the border," what he did was no less illegally immigrating to the US than what Cesar did.

Since this is skewing way, way, WAY off topic, I'll just say a few more things and then I'm done.

The point is, I can understand being against illegal immigration. I am, too. But a) I can't fault someone for realizing they will have a better life here and sneaking in when when they don't fit an ideal demographic to make their legal immigration easy or possible, and b) it's hard to blame them when we have a system that not only turns a blind eye to it, but depends on illegal immigrants for the economy (no one wants a head of lettuce to cost more than a New York Strip because the farmers in California suddenly have to hire legal workers and pay taxes on them).

So Cesar came to this country illegally. He took the necessary steps to obtain legal status. End. Of. Story. And what's more, there's no way that you, me, or anyone else could try to honestly claim that we would never do the same thing were we in his position.

Hanging that past on his head in the light of the discussion of what he does now, as a legal citizen, to help dogs is ridiculous.

If you want to talk about someone who cannot and will not ever escape their past, then how about the notion that Michael Vick wants to go to Washington to testify in favor of increased bans on dog fighting?


----------



## Tbarrios333

selzer said:


> Hmmmm, How would it be at my house?
> 
> Ceasar: Here, put on these skates, yeah, and here are the leashes, whhoooosh! Oh, sorry, I guess I will have to take all of your critters to my ranch while you are in that body cast.
> 
> I better just stick with what I am doing.


LOL, this gave me a really good laugh. Thanks Selzer.


----------



## Ucdcrush

Wow! Quite a thread, and I have to say I agree with HunterJack totally.

In my best estimation, Zak made these videos in large part to stir up discussion about him (Zak), to get people to watch his videos and to take the time to comment on them. All of which makes him money on Youtube as well as furthering his popularity/career.

As far as I've seen, he doesn't deal with aggression or fear issues, so he is off base to criticize another person who does deal with these things very successfully. As I posted in his first video comment on Youtube, teaching a border collie to retrieve a frisbee is not comparable to the work Cesar does.

If you've watched Zaks Youtube channel before, he is *constantly* advertising himself, his facebook, twitter, his other youtube channel, blah blah blah. I used to think it was interesting watching him and his frisbee dogs. But after another shot at publicity, by bashing Cesar, a person I feel does much more important work for dogs, I unsubscribed from Zaks channel and don't feel the need to watch him anymore.

And put me down as another person that would love to see a competition to rehab a highly aggressive dog. Because Zak did this as a way to stir up discussion about himself, I would not invite him to this competition. Please, NO ONE would put Zak into the same category as Cesar, EXCEPT ZAK, for the purpose of drumming up interest in himself.


----------



## HecklingGopher

This guy does what so many PR trainers already do. And he is original? Publicity stunt. I don't necessarily agree with Alpha rolls, as I question how effective they are. With my dog Apollo, he is one of the most aggressive GSD's I have ever seen, on par with many police dogs. If I were to ignore his bad behavior (wanting to kill every dog he sees) he would have been put down long ago. Using some rather controversial training techniques has proven very effective, as he knows that acting the fool at other dogs will earn him a nasty correction depending on how bad he is acting. And guess what? It works. I have so much better control over this dog than I did a year ago its not even funny. He fears getting corrected, and while he still raises his hackles and growls, literally all it takes most of the time is telling him "easy" and "hair down" and he calms down. Probably for the majority of non aggressive dogs, PR training will work pretty well. But I do believe that a combination of corrections and PR is the happy medium, and that is how I will continue to train from here on out.


----------



## EastGSD

I have read the whole thread and haven't seen one person claim that Cesar is better than anyone other than when it comes to dealing with red zone dogs. So why Selzer are you so offended at people actually liking or supporting Milan? No one has said he is the be all and end of all, people just said they liked him. I like him and would love to meet him. I personally do not care for Victoria but, I find myself feeling that way about a number of British type celebs due to the way they communicate with people lol Although, I absolutely love Gordon Ramsay! Wow could you imagine Gordon training a dog? That would be very interesting lol

My bottom line is that as with anything things change over the years and with new generations. Cesar is not some 20 year old and came from a place where dogs where not personified or looked at as family members. This is part of the key to understanding him. I have watched him all the time and I just do not see all this dominance coming from him. Assertiveness yes, dominance no. For instance the episode with the Dachshund (I think his name was Rudy) that kept biting his owner's roommate on the couch. Yes, Cesar sat down and pushed the dog to react (you have to in order to provide the communication and correction that that is wrong) you can't simply tell the dog "Now, when I sit on the couch you shouldn't bite her Rudy" you have to have the event happen and then give the reaction that will communicate to the dog that his behavior is unacceptable. Cesar basically got the dog off the couch when he tried to bite and put him on his back on the floor, gently of course. Why? As an "alpha roll?" No. Not at all as Cesar is not his owner and this was not a case of the dog challenging Cesar but because this is what the dog would understand from when he was a puppy and his mother was in control, that if he misbehaved or did something she didn't want him to do she would roll him and pinch his neck until he calmed. This is not "abusive" or "mean" this is simply using our tools of observation and watching a dam with her litter and how she communicates with them and then imitating it. Doing this to the dachie a number of times caused the dog to think about what was happening and while the dog still does not realize it is wrong to bite the roommate in terms as people understand he became to understand that if he behaved that way he would be corrected and not be allowed on the couch. Stopping the aggressive reaction then opens up the table so to speak for the dachie and the roommate to develop a relationship. How anyone can see any of this as abusive I have no idea. In the end these are dogs, they do not speak our languages, everything we have them do is based on conditioning and their drives being met. Kindness is of course very important with any living creature but, I think many people over do it and hense end up with problem dogs that have no idea how to make sense out of a would they do not understand and which goes against their innate nature.


----------



## Hillary_Plog

I think that to comapre Zak to Caesar, or Victoria to Caesar, is comparing apples to oranges. 

That being said, Zak teaches dogs tricks. This is what he does. Granted, they may be multi-stepped, complicated tricks, they are still just tricks. 90-95 % of pet owners just want their dog to go to the bathroom outside, walk nicely on a leash, be nice to the neighbors and children, have house manners, and not bite. They don't want their dog to make their bed and they don't want to have to teach their dog to make their bed in order to have the right "bond" with them in order for the dog to behave! There are other, more realistic, ways to get the average person to "bond" with their dog. 

What he does with his own dogs is amazing, but it's not a real life remedy for the issues that most people have with their dogs. He has a "gimmick" that makes it fun to watch him but it's not real life. 

Victoria Stillwell works with the more "average" pet owning person, but she too uses gimmicks which sometimes makes me cringe when I watch her. I literally just got done watching an episode of "It's me or the dog" and it was two rich Jersey type yuppies that lived in a castle (I swear to God) with a handful of ankle biters and a pig. The little dogs pooped and peed all over the house because the owners were too lazy to properly potty train them and were too busy having "pup cake" parties where the dogs wear hats and sit at the table eating pup cakes. 

This is what Victoria did. She spent *10 minutes* of the show giving them a schedule of when/how to take them out to go potty and telling them to stop free feeding, but NEVER not once explained to them WHY the dogs need a schedule, WHY they need consistency. She didn't talk about boundaries or gating off the house so it was easier to potty train. 

Then...the rest of the show, I SWEAR, was them dressing up in costumes (Victoria as well) and taking professional pictures with the dogs, teaching clicker training to chickens, and recording a rap song. 

*WHAT????!!!!* I have also seen her recommend squirt bottles (have you ever seen a person running after two great danes with a squirt bottle? Ridiculous.), rattling cans with change in them at the dogs, and other gimmicks. Again, gimmicks, and not realistic when the cameras are turned off and people are in "real life". 

Lastly, Ceaser is not a "trainer". He is a behaviorist that works with extreme cases. It's fun to watch, but most average people aren't dealing with severely aggressive dogs and shouldn't be using his methods. His methods work on dominant/aggressive dogs...but most people don't have dominant/aggressive dogs, so what they take away from the show is how to be a good pack leader. I respect the methods he uses for the dogs that are being rehabilitated.

Apples to oranges, Zak. Apples to oranges.


----------



## Hillary_Plog

EastGSD said:


> I have read the whole thread and haven't seen one person claim that Cesar is better than anyone other than when it comes to dealing with red zone dogs. So why Selzer are you so offended at people actually liking or supporting Milan? No one has said he is the be all and end of all, people just said they liked him. I like him and would love to meet him. I personally do not care for Victoria but, I find myself feeling that way about a number of British type celebs due to the way they communicate with people lol Although, I absolutely love Gordon Ramsay! Wow could you imagine Gordon training a dog? That would be very interesting lol
> 
> My bottom line is that as with anything things change over the years and with new generations. Cesar is not some 20 year old and came from a place where dogs where not personified or looked at as family members. This is part of the key to understanding him. I have watched him all the time and I just do not see all this dominance coming from him. Assertiveness yes, dominance no. For instance the episode with the Dachshund (I think his name was Rudy) that kept biting his owner's roommate on the couch. Yes, Cesar sat down and pushed the dog to react (you have to in order to provide the communication and correction that that is wrong) you can't simply tell the dog "Now, when I sit on the couch you shouldn't bite her Rudy" you have to have the event happen and then give the reaction that will communicate to the dog that his behavior is unacceptable. Cesar basically got the dog off the couch when he tried to bite and put him on his back on the floor, gently of course. Why? As an "alpha roll?" No. Not at all as Cesar is not his owner and this was not a case of the dog challenging Cesar but because this is what the dog would understand from when he was a puppy and his mother was in control, that if he misbehaved or did something she didn't want him to do she would roll him and pinch his neck until he calmed. This is not "abusive" or "mean" this is simply using our tools of observation and watching a dam with her litter and how she communicates with them and then imitating it. Doing this to the dachie a number of times caused the dog to think about what was happening and while the dog still does not realize it is wrong to bite the roommate in terms as people understand he became to understand that if he behaved that way he would be corrected and not be allowed on the couch. Stopping the aggressive reaction then opens up the table so to speak for the dachie and the roommate to develop a relationship. How anyone can see any of this as abusive I have no idea. In the end these are dogs, they do not speak our languages, everything we have them do is based on conditioning and their drives being met. Kindness is of course very important with any living creature but, I think many people over do it and hense end up with problem dogs that have no idea how to make sense out of a would they do not understand and which goes against their innate nature.


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## selzer

Hillary Plog, never saw that episode. 

EastGSD, I was reacting to the post discounting of Victoria by saying that Ceasar does more for dogs, obviously cares more about dogs, which I guess makes him a better trainer. 

Barbara Woodhouse's methods of choking and jerking were the norm, we have done a lot to move away from that type of training. Ceasar is kind of a throwback to all of that. I am not saying that jerking and choking and some of the rest of it does not work, but that does not mean that there is not a better way. And some of the dogs the _behaviorist _(with no education in that field) are fear aggressive, not dominant. 

Lastly Heckling Gopher, I do not want my dog to fear punishment ever. Not ever. If that is the relationship you want with your dog, well that is fine, but no way would I be satisfied with that. Your dog is afraid of other dogs -- that is what that hackling, lunging, growling it, plain old fearfulness, now he is afraid of you too.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

EastGSD said:


> Yes, Cesar sat down and pushed the dog to react (you have to in order to provide the communication and correction that that is wrong) you can't simply tell the dog "Now, when I sit on the couch you shouldn't bite her Rudy" you have to have the event happen and then give the reaction that will communicate to the dog that his behavior is unacceptable. Cesar basically got the dog off the couch when he tried to bite and put him on his back on the floor, gently of course. Why? As an "alpha roll?" No. Not at all as Cesar is not his owner and this was not a case of the dog challenging Cesar but because this is what the dog would understand from when he was a puppy and his mother was in control, that if he misbehaved or did something she didn't want him to do she would roll him and pinch his neck until he calmed. This is not "abusive" or "mean" this is simply using our tools of observation and watching a dam with her litter and how she communicates with them and then imitating it. Doing this to the dachie a number of times caused the dog to think about what was happening and while the dog still does not realize it is wrong to bite the roommate in terms as people understand he became to understand that if he behaved that way he would be corrected and not be allowed on the couch.


*sigh* I don't even know where to begin....


----------



## Samba

Actually, you can. teach a dog to alter its behavior without pushing it beyond threshold. This example is exactly what I was talking about regards CM. I have good results working to alter aggression with it below threshold. 

I am afraid the lack of understanding of this in many people's minds is what makes CM make sense to the general viewing public. This continues the ideas of dominance, intimidation, etc intervention. It really can have its fallout. Thid will not be seen on the show.

Besides CMs techniques are not to be tried at home, so they are for entertainment anyway.


----------



## Samba

Duplicate


----------



## Jack's Dad

Samba.

I always appreciate your comments but I wonder how many episodes of Cesars show you have watched..Also have you read any of his books.

He of course has entertaining stories on TV but even he realizes that an overnight correction is not a cure.

In his books you will find a very compassionate guy with regard to dogs. He is very much in favor of food and clicker training and positive training in general.

Some of the dogs on his show were too much for a single TV episode and many of them go to his center for weeks to months for rehabilitation.
He has done episodes with seriously fearful dogs that he ultimately took to his home to work with long term. His patience with those dogs or aggressive dogs is unbelievable.

You have mentioned types of training that will work without using his techniques. I am sure there are lots of techniques and individuals who can work with these dogs but it will be a long slow process. You are right it would not make for good TV.

I give him credit for what he does with dogs that are already screwed up and even more credit for pointing out to their owners how the dogs got that way.

The stories that are brought out about alpha rolls and dominance are *way* out of proportion to what he does most of the time. 

He probably doesn't view dogs as our little animal babies, I believe too many people think they are little children creatures that can't possibly be pampered enough.
Sort of like the way a lot of children are being raised today. The results of over involved, over permissiveness can be seen in kids and dogs today and in some cases it's not a pretty sight. I don't like being around kids or dogs that are brats.


----------



## Gmthrust

selzer said:


> "........... I was reacting to the post discounting of Victoria by saying that Ceasar does more for dogs, obviously cares more about dogs, which I guess makes him a better trainer."


Selzer, what I wrote was taken out of context, and over-reacted to the out of context. I didn't mean for that to happen, and very much I am truly sorry that it did.

:hugs:Hoping you'll forgive the accident.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Hillary_Plog said:


> I think that to comapre Zak to Caesar, or Victoria to Caesar, is comparing apples to oranges.
> 
> That being said, Zak teaches dogs tricks. This is what he does. Granted, they may be multi-stepped, complicated tricks, they are still just tricks. 90-95 % of pet owners just want their dog to go to the bathroom outside, walk nicely on a leash, be nice to the neighbors and children, have house manners, and not bite. They don't want their dog to make their bed and they don't want to have to teach their dog to make their bed in order to have the right "bond" with them in order for the dog to behave! There are other, more realistic, ways to get the average person to "bond" with their dog.


Ridiculous.), rattling cans with change in them at the dogs, and other gimmicks. Again, gimmicks, and not realistic when the cameras are turned off and people are in "real life". 
Apples to oranges, Zak. Apples to oranges.[/QUOTE]

I liked your whole post but this portion really struck me.
I found the bed making and especially the trash hauling videos embarrassing. 
I thought them to be demeaning to dogs. Frisbee catching, *yes.* Wasting time to have your dog do tasks like pulling your sheets up a resounding *no*.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Hunter Jack said:


> The stories that are brought out about alpha rolls and dominance are *way* out of proportion to what he does most of the time.


I don't think anyone has said he does this "most" of the time, or that everything he does is bad. The point is that alpha rolling is not a good technique and really shouldn't ever be used. It can be dangerous, it can backfire, and there are better ways to accomplish the same end, with the same kind of dog. Flooding isn't the best technique either. Most trainers (and especially behaviorists) don't put a lot of credence in the outdated dominance theory and alpha rolls but he still does. How is it out of proportion to point that out? If he never did those things, great. But he does. Why would it matter if he used bad or outdated training techniques often or occasionally? He uses them, and he should stop. 



> He probably doesn't view dogs as our little animal babies, I believe too many people think they are little children creatures that can't possibly be pampered enough.
> Sort of like the way a lot of children are being raised today. The results of over involved, over permissiveness can be seen in kids and dogs today and in some cases it's not a pretty sight. I don't like being around kids or dogs that are brats.


I don't like human or canine brats either, but in 25 years of having GSDs I have _never_ met a trainer, read a training book or article, or watched a training video that views dogs like little animal babies or thinks they should be pampered or raised permissively. So I'm not sure what your comment has to do with Cesar. :thinking:


----------



## Stevenzachsmom

I just gotta ask....How many people can handle a pack of 40 dogs? Anyone? Anyone? I can't. I am in awe of Cesar's control over his pack - big dogs, little dogs, pitbulls, rotties, and GSDs. At least give credit, where credit is due. Cesar is also the only one I know that uses a pack to work with dogs who have issues. It is amazing to me how the pack teaches the new dogs how to be dogs and act normal. 

I have seen Cesar find homes for dogs in his pack. I have seen him swap out his well balanced dogs for a clients "problem" dog. Remember Diablo the chihuahua? He was taken in by a pitbull rescue. Nasty little dog. Beat up on the pitbulls. Cesar took Diablo and gave the rescue one of his very sweet pitbulls. He said it was time for the pitbull to find a home. Diabo moved into the pack. He was used to assist with other clients dogs. And - he was adopted by a member of Cesar's crew. I have also seen Cesar keep a clients dog and replace it with one from his pack. I have also seen him "offer" to do to this - as with the red zone pitbull that the owners opted to keep.

It seems to me that Cesar advocates a lot of what I hear on this forum, every day. EXERCISE! No talk. No touch. No eye contact. I recently saw an older episode from season 2. There was a family with 2 out of control min pins. Yes, they were much better after Cesar took them roller blading. The family was supposed to continue working with them. During the recap, at the end of the show, Cesar reported that the family had euth'd one of the min pins. He made it clear that he was not contacted prior to that decision. I have no doubt he would have taken the dog. (The min pin forum hasn't gotten over that one yet.) In the same episode, there was a little white terrier that was terrified of men. Cesar sat down to talk to the owner. He totally ignored the terrier. That dog all, but crawled into Cesar's lap.

Maybe Cesar isn't for everybody, but I sure like him. Whatever he's got, I wish it could be bottled and I could sprinkle a little on myself. I wish I could have a fraction of his calmness. My BP would be sooo low. And yes Sue - I wish I could roller blade without falling on my face. LOL!


----------



## TankGrrl66

I think the thread is drifting a bit, and most of us (myself included) just jumped to comparing the trainers' styles... Instead of comparing apples to oranges or squawkin' about illegals who 'took ar jawbs' (FYI, not poking at anyone, just trying to make a laugh so _re_lax) why not get back to what Zak (superfetch guy) is trying to say?

He has a golden point in rewarding our dogs for doing the right thing. His other golden point is training tricks to build a relationship with our dogs. Teaching a dog something new, such as a trick, is a great way to build your relationship with them. This was the direction he should have stayed in, IMHO.

Also, when Zak's 2nd vid was going over the whole wolf thing...he must have been referring to dominance training as a whole. I have never really heard Cesar talk about wolves unless he was directly working with them. He cannot deny that pack structure still exists in all domestic dogs. His point was that dogs are not wolves, but he really put that in the wrong video. 

Regarding shock collars (as an example of 'out of bounds' as he says), he is opinionated that they are cruel and barbaric...anyone who uses them hasn't heard the word, lol.
Yet he makes no effort into thinking of the postive influences they have in some areas of training. They are very popular and useful for the field dog and SchH crowd, for example, to 'fine-tune' a trained dog.

Without turning this into a shock collar thread (I just used it as an example as he did), I think his bottom line with bringing that up is this: *If there is a positive way to teach a dog something, why not use it? Why resort to 'harsh' methods that hurt the relationship we have with our dogs?*
------------------------------------
What he is failing to realize when he addresses CM is that those methods he downplays have helped the vast majority of those dogs where love and treats have done nothing.

There is nothing wrong with giving a dog boundries and limitations on what they can do. There is nothing wrong with waiting until a dog is in the "right state of mind" to give affection/reward. And when a dog learns to be "bad" and becomes a danger to society, trying to dig yourself out with bits of food or teaching it how to bowl doesn't do much, if anything (unless it is specifically obedience related, and even then...it only helps, doesn't fix). 

I think this is why he got so much response, and why that first video is now private...he had a good point, but he brought another trainer into the discussion and made a broad and negative generalization about him to try and prove a point. Not cool. Apparently he has not had much success with that, as now people want to see him fix the dogs that Cesar does


----------



## TankGrrl66

Stevenzachsmom said:


> I just gotta ask....How many people can handle a pack of 40 dogs? Anyone? Anyone? I can't. I am in awe of Cesar's control over his pack - big dogs, little dogs, pitbulls, rotties, and GSDs. At least give credit, where credit is due. Cesar is also the only one I know that uses a pack to work with dogs who have issues. It is amazing to me how the pack teaches the new dogs how to be dogs and act normal.
> 
> I have seen Cesar find homes for dogs in his pack. I have seen him swap out his well balanced dogs for a clients "problem" dog. Remember Diablo the chihuahua? He was taken in by a pitbull rescue. Nasty little dog. Beat up on the pitbulls. Cesar took Diablo and gave the rescue one of his very sweet pitbulls. He said it was time for the pitbull to find a home. Diabo moved into the pack. He was used to assist with other clients dogs. And - he was adopted by a member of Cesar's crew. I have also seen Cesar keep a clients dog and replace it with one from his pack. I have also seen him "offer" to do to this - as with the red zone pitbull that the owners opted to keep.
> 
> It seems to me that Cesar advocates a lot of what I hear on this forum, every day. EXERCISE! No talk. No touch. No eye contact. I recently saw an older episode from season 2. There was a family with 2 out of control min pins. Yes, they were much better after Cesar took them roller blading. The family was supposed to continue working with them. During the recap, at the end of the show, Cesar reported that the family had euth'd one of the min pins. He made it clear that he was not contacted prior to that decision. I have no doubt he would have taken the dog. (The min pin forum hasn't gotten over that one yet.) In the same episode, there was a little white terrier that was terrified of men. Cesar sat down to talk to the owner. He totally ignored the terrier. That dog all, but crawled into Cesar's lap.
> 
> Maybe Cesar isn't for everybody, but I sure like him. Whatever he's got, I wish it could be bottled and I could sprinkle a little on myself. I wish I could have a fraction of his calmness. My BP would be sooo low. And yes Sue - I wish I could roller blade without falling on my face. LOL!


That was a very good post :thumbup:


----------



## Jack's Dad

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I don't think anyone has said he does this "most" of the time, or that everything he does is bad. The point is that alpha rolling is not a good technique and really shouldn't ever be used. It can be dangerous, it can backfire, and there are better ways to accomplish the same end, with the same kind of dog. Flooding isn't the best technique either. Most trainers (and especially behaviorists) don't put a lot of credence in the outdated dominance theory and alpha rolls but he still does. How is it out of proportion to point that out? If he never did those things, great. But he does. Why would it matter if he used bad or outdated training techniques often or occasionally? He uses them, and he should stop.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't like human or canine brats either, but in 25 years of having GSDs I have _never_ met a trainer, read a training book or article, or watched a training video that views dogs like little animal babies or thinks they should be pampered or raised permissively. So I'm not sure what your comment has to do with Cesar. :thinking:


With regard to my post on Cesar and dominance. If you took the time and read his book on being a pack leader you would learn that the way he refers to dominance is not at all what most people on these threads picture. If I have time I'll try to look it up. My wife was the clinical director of a shelter and counseling agency for abused women and children. If you use the word dominance with them it can frighten them and bring up all manner of fearful images.
When I hear the word (not in connection with dogs) in general terms. I think of sports. One team won handily.

The other comment about treating our dogs like babies refers to the general public. I know people personally who spoil their dogs to the point that I don't even want to be around them because the dogs are running the house. Those are the type of dogs that often wind up on Cesars show. That is the connection of that comment to Cesar. Sorry if it wasn't clear.

There are people here like yourself who will never like the guy. That's fine. 

I just wish people who are anti would sound a little more informed about the whole person and his philosophy about our relationship with dogs. If you have seen a lot of episodes and read a couple of his books and still dis agree thats great but I think a number of people latch on to a few words like dominance and just dismiss almost anything he has done to help dogs.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Andy, I said earlier in this thread that I have read his first book and I've watched a few episodes of his show, but not that many, probably 4 or 5. I also never said I didn't like him. I do think he has a way with dogs, and I respect him for what he's accomplished, coming from a humble backround in a different country and english not being his native language - he's made it big, and good for him. He has brought the idea that dogs need to be trained to the masses, and that's a good thing. Many of his ideas I have no problem with, they are things that any decent trainer would do too. They are not really "his" ideas anyway, although many people haven't heard them before because the whole concept of dog training is new to them. 

But for me the good does not negate the harmful things he does, especially since he's got a public forum in his TV show, and I would prefer that he stop doing them. The simple fact that people watching his show are picking up messages like you have to push a dog to react in order to alter its behavior, concerns me greatly. There are ways to deal with aggression that don't involve a very high risk of being bitten. The exercise, the limits, the boundaries - nothing wrong with any of that.


----------



## selzer

I read his book, I have seen many episodes. I still disagree with a lot of what he does. I have seen the episodes where what he did with the dog, did not work for the person, so they gave him the dog and he gave them one of his. 

I wonder what people here think of that. The dog did not get euth'd true. BUT, we are trading dogs? Someone screws up their dog to the point that it is biting people, and you take one of your rehabilitated dogs and give it to them? They could not manage the dog they had with your instructions. I do not know how I feel about that. 

I think Ceasar COULD be the best positive dog trainer around. Dogs would respond extremely well with him if he worked in a positive manner. Partly because he is not bringing with him the baggage. He is not afraid of dogs, and he steps out in confidence. Add that to a positive dog trainer, and good things happen. Unfortunately, then no one would believe that he is actually working with aggressive dogs. He would not be pushing the dogs over the threshold for tv ratings, so we could all see the teeth and the biting and the behaviors. 

There is a vid on here of a JRT doing rally. If you take an aggressive dog, and put time and energy into the dog, so it will do what it should at each sign, your aggressive dog is probably going to be showing very few signs of aggression when you get it to that level of training. The dog learns that you are not going to hurt him, his self-confidence increases when he does well and is praised. You learn him and relax some, he relaxes even further due to your being more relaxed. 

There are ways to rehabilitate dogs without showing them who's the boss, without pushing them to their thresholds, I think you get a better pet at the end of that. 

Most of us do not live with a pack of 40 dogs. Maybe in that setting, it is what he needs to be -- the top dog, calm assertive, will not back down until the dog is calm submissive. 

A dog is a dog. Yes, it should walk it should not be carried. Clothing on dogs is kind of embarrassing, yes. We should not have expectations for dogs that are not canine -- ie, he should not try to tie with his sister, etc. But, we do not have to live like a giant dog pack either. I was at a demonstration once where the k9 officer told us they all had to go out and pee on a tree, and then NOT let the dog pee over top of it. Really? I wonder where that left female handlers? But whatever -- we do not have to be that guy. That kind of I'm the Boss, stuff is old school. 

If I started a show, and said the reason you are having all of these problems is because your dog is living inside with you. It is a dog. It belongs out in the fields, out with the herds, hunting in the woods. Trying to make a dog live in a house with people is unnatural, and unhealthy. I then take the untrained, unsocialized GSD with good drive, and put the dog on sheep 14 hours a day, let it sleep outside under the sun, and fed it a good raw diet. I bet its behavior would be a remarkable turn around. Partly because it cannot get to the curtains to rip them down, partly because it is dog tired and has a job and is not bored. If I get success on the other end, does that mean all my premises throughout are correct?


----------



## Jack's Dad

Cassidy's Mom.

I meant *you* in general not you personally.

Like I said earlier often the problems with threads are verbage and semantics.

When I said you and others don't like him, again that was a general expression. It is simpler to say than (maybe you and some people like him personally but do not like some of his methods) and (maybe you and some people like his techniques but don't like him personally) or blah,blah,blah. I try to keep posts short and in doing that I can't cover all or even many views people have on Cesar Milan. So I generalize and in doing so am bound to miss the mark for some individual experience or opinion.
I have never said that I agree with everything Cesar does.
Lets reverse the whole argument, oops (discussion) and say that Cesar had said he could teach tricks better than Zak or that Zak was the trick teacher of the past. Then I would be questioning Cesars remarks and telling him if he thinks he is better than Zak prove it.

I got into this thread because I think Zak should put up or shut up if he thinks what he does makes Cesar history. 

Cesar is not going around questioning what others do with dogs.


----------



## Samba

Code:


[CODE]

[/CODE]I have watched CM. I have some sets of his seasons. I still watch him some. I have read one of his books. I don't know CM personally, but from what I see on TV, I like him. Many times he makes me smile. I am often moved by his compassion and understanding. I would spend time with him, sure. 

There are parts of the show that seem to be the ones that people grab onto. Many people are looking for a quick fix. There are now numbers of people coming to class who relate..."i did that Cesar thing to him". The last dog was peeing often in the owners presence subsequently. The really good parts of the approach are often overlooked by people. These parts are more subtle and don't stand out. 

Also, as I mentioned previously, there is this scenario, sometimes, of pushing the dogs over threshold. IMO, this is not necesssary. I have seen behaviorists (which is often a word used in praise of CM but in disparagement of other behaviorists ) work with dogs below threshold and get good and lasting results. IMO, their techniques are less stressful for the dogs and have less chance of fallout. They are approaches and protocols that pet owners can put into practice (as opposed to "don't try this at home" physicality). 

I have a friend who can not control her dog well. She always laughs and tells the dog that he better look out or I will Cesar him. I can assume the posture and attitude and that dog completely transforms. He is a bit intimidated, I guess his attitude might be called calm submissive by some. Now, my friend is not going to ever have that presence or approach to her dogs. She has gained better control by training and consistency...these things she can do. It has calmed her down because she has some control. I don't know if her dogs are calm/submissive but they mind through their daily lives. It seems they have developed a relationship in which they look to her for direction. 

CM does have a pack of dogs. I must say that is experience I have not done at all. I keep my dogs intact as much as possible. If my memory serves, CM has desexed animals in that situation and often recommends this procedure to owners.


----------



## Stevenzachsmom

Here, Here, Andy!! Applause! LOL!

In all honesty, while I appreciate different things about the various trainers - and yes, Cesar is my favorite, I really don't need any of them. I can handle my own dog and her issues. It's a lot like "Super Nanny". I find it highly entertaining and some episodes cause me to wonder why there isn't mandatory spay/neuter for some people....but I have never needed Super Nanny to come to my house to teach me how to raise my kids. 
I am evil incarnate and yes I did spank my kids. Heck, I even smacked my dog. There. I admit it. I smacked her. Quick correction. Immediate results. Oddly, neither my dog or kids fear me. Actually, they sort of love me and they know my expectations.


----------



## cta

i did not read through all of the posts in this thread, but i did watch the videos and all i have to say is "wow." no, not "wow, this guy is great!" more like..."wow, is this guy serious?" it's nice that he can teach a dog to make the bed and go bowling, but like a few others have proposed, could he handle a red zone case like cesar does all the time? and a lot of cesar's work is about dealing with the human as well. a lot of the time people do not realize that they can create or even aggravate a negative behavior. no i don't believe in abusing dogs or doing alpha rolls on them...they will learn from positive guidance. but there are some instances when there needs to be firm directions given. all dogs are different. shooting rainbows and butterflies out your butt at a dog, like this guy seems to do, doesn't always work! everyone is obviously entitled to their own opinions, but how can this guy just deny all of the good cesar has done for families and their dogs? and if he cannot fix the problem, he takes the dog into his personal pack. and i was under the impression that his training is not based on dominance, but rather on leadership...calm and assertive. i think this zak whatever-his-name-is totally misrepresented the work of cesar milan. he picked certain clips of him that would make him look bad and totally skewed the truth in his own favor. overall, sucky video (he filmed it himself lol) and bad representation of a "fair" argument. two thumbs down.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

I have watched CM , VS and a couple of Zak's shows.

After watching the videos of Zaks, this is my opinion, I saw alot of "tricks", giving dogs a 'job' to do, I would find him much more credible in what he says and does IF he had some videos of him rehabbing red zone dogs. I kinda chuckled at his 'most dogs are not aggressive' comment, obviously he hasn't read alot of problem behavior forums. 

While I do not agree with some of CM's methods, the one thing I give him ALOT of credit for, is, he takes on dogs that are thisclose to the big needle, and rehabs them. If not for him, those dogs would all be dead..Another thing, I give him credit for, is having that pack of dogs he has, all co habitating rather peacefully. I don't know of anyone else who has THAT many dogs, all living together with relatively no problems.

VS, well, I think she has a more passive/patient approach to training, and while I think she does a good job, I can't say I have ever seen her work red zone dogs but maybe she has.


----------



## ShatteringGlass

I've watched all 3. Victoria Stillwell irks me, she thinks everything is cruel. No crates, no prongs, no remote collars. She wont even acknowledge that those things have their uses in dog training. I think she relies too much on food in her methods. There's no balance in the training.

The guy Zak, Im not sure what his "future" of dog training is? I mean, it's nice to have a dog that knows tricks, I guess, but what about their behavior in social situations? I've met a lot of dogs that are very good at tricks, but honestly have the worst temperaments when it comes to dog aggression, fear, & anxiety.

Cesar isn't going to people's houses and alpha-rolling dogs to get them to roll a bowling ball. So I dont consider them on the same platform of dog training.

I think it's kinda lame to make not one but 2 videos on how you dont like so and so and that you're better than them. I dont see Cesar or Victoria making videos calling other people bad trainers, its un-professsional.

And as for the clip of Cesar's he showed, where he "choked a dog". Ive seen that episode and that dog wanted to EAT Cesar's hands off. Pulling up on the lead to keep the dog from being able to move its head around is what you want to do in that situation, I've had to do it working as a groomer when a dog I had on a slip lead suddenly decided it wanted me for lunch.


----------



## EastGSD

Cassidy's Mom said:


> *sigh* I don't even know where to begin....



Don't know where to begin on what?

Everyone has their own opinions on what are good or bad ways to work with dogs however, there are no facts that one way is better than another. I believe in what I wrote so if it is being implied that I need to be corrected I disagree. If you wanted to debate what Cesar did fine, do that but please do not make a post that appears to infer that I need to be taught or be informed of something by you if that is what your above post was suggesting.


----------



## Samba

There is some pretty decent study in the area of dog behavioral problems. More understanding is coming along. I think there is good argument for some approaches over others. The darn thing about dogs is that they are so hardwired to respond to us, that they can reinforce less than optimal approaches. And then everyone is standing around saying"look, it worked!". I always tell the dog, "way to go reinforcing that training".

I tried to watch some CM today. It does look like he has altered some of the presentation of techniques. At least what I viewed today had little talk of dominance and showed little physicality with them. Much less than in earlier seasons. I wondered if that material might take less of a role in programming eventually. There has been contoversy on some of CMs endorsements because of the poor fit the method had with research on aggressive behavior mod.

Everything else was pretty fun to watch. Many people getting the amazing revelation that they can tell their dog not to do something. There were good messages on how owner tenseness and nervousness transfer to the dog. Good work on the need for exercise and teaching the dog to walk on a leash calmly.


----------



## AgileGSD

EastGSD said:


> For instance the episode with the Dachshund (I think his name was Rudy) that kept biting his owner's roommate on the couch. Yes, Cesar sat down and pushed the dog to react (you have to in order to provide the communication and correction that that is wrong) you can't simply tell the dog "Now, when I sit on the couch you shouldn't bite her Rudy" you have to have the event happen and then give the reaction that will communicate to the dog that his behavior is unacceptable.


 http://www.4pawsu.com/Donaldson.pdf

Course, such a protocol makes for a really boring TV show.


----------



## Samba

Great artice. Thanks for posting it. 

Relatively safe, good efficacy, executable by many, minimal risk of fall out or injury, consistent with behavioral research.....absolute yawner on primetime!


----------



## Jack's Dad

I agree a great article. I do have a couple of questions though. If a person has a dog like that who is guarding it's food against it's owner, how much would it cost to have a trainer come in for days at each meal to rehab the dog? 
Don't think I could afford it.
Which brings me back to Cesar. He would probably spend more time on the owners than the dog. Because when the trainer leaves if the owners don't step up to the plate the origional problem could resurface down the line or a new one. I'm guessing but the problem was probably caused by the owners to begin with.

If the owners are able to change and follow through then I think it is a great technique.


----------



## codmaster

That article was certainly an interesting one. Thanks for posting it as well. It did explain a lot about the approach when I saw that it was a APDT one and the author was Jean Donaldson. From reading her book, I got a very distinct impression of her overall approach. She said in one chapter - about training the retrieve only positively, for example, "so what if the dog is not as reliable as a more traditionally trained dog" or some words like that. Now granted for a retrieve and you were doing it only for obedience competition - that is certainly a reasonable approach - but what about around the house behavior - recall, no jumping, no resource guarding, etc. etc. Wonder if she would accept "less reliability" there also due to her methods?

Back to her article - she certainly is great at using *"Strawmen"* in setting up her reasons why her Pos only method is best.

I.E. She mentions that there are only two types of trainers 
A. Trainers "free from use of *Aversives*"
B. Trainers who feel they are needed and *"Benign"*

*What about those who feel they are needed for some things and are definitely not even intended to be "Benign"?* Maybe she doesn't realize that such trainers even exist? Or doesn't want to compare to their results?

There were a few other things that I found confusing. She made a great deal out of treating "soft" biters from "hard" biters very differently in her "treatment". But she never really said what to do with the dogs who haven't yet bitten anyone yet? Treat as hard or soft? Make them bite a couple of people so then she could do her "very complete bite analysis". Just a thought.

I also found it interesting that her "case study" was with a puppy! And she told what a great success she had with the puppy. Looked like a very young puppy as well, in the picture. I would have preferred a tougher case as a good example of her method - maybe a 2 yo GSD, or Rottie (Pittie?), for example. It would have had a lot more impact on her method, for me anyway.
I wonder how many other people got a kick out of her statment about changing her approach *"if the dog is offended"!! One, how would she know the dog "is offended" (esp. since she made a large point earlier about her not knowing or caring what the dog is thinking!)?* This latter explanation came when she was bashing more traditional dog trainers (as she does a lot).

Anyway, thanks again for the article - made for some interesting Sunday reading.

And I do think that her methods of training would work very well with certain dogs and certain behaviors that the owner wants to influence. For example I think they would work very well with my sister-in-laws Golden Retriever - a very gentle non aggressive soft temperamented dog. My own 3 yo pushy, very hard, pushy, sometimes DA male GSD - not so much!


----------



## Jack's Dad

Thanks for the more in depth post codmater. I'm kinda worn out from all my posts yesterday. She completely lost me on the soft vs hard bite and how many bites etc...

Seems to me a behaviour needed to be corrected an all that bite stuff was unnecessary.


----------



## Stevenzachsmom

My goodness. Is this thread still going? It is making me tired. I guess I am never going to be a PR kind of person. With kids - I don't care if parents don't want to smack them, as long as they have control. When I am on a plane or in a store and kids are screaming, while parents are begging and pleading with them to behave - I just want to hit the parent upside the head. They obviously have no control at home, so of course they have no control in public. Same with dogs. I'd rather correct. Quick. To the point. Over. Got that? Good dog!

Gonna get off of here now. Have to go kick the dog and roll the kids. LOL! No worries, the dog would never let me hurt the kids.

Andy, if you ever get that contest set up with all the trainers, let me know. I can't wait to watch.


----------



## Redhawk

I watched the guy in the red shirt ... what is his name? (Zak/willy/whatever).

What occurred to me is that he has a naturally very strong, leader type of personality and energy. My guess is the dogs feel that and respond to that 'lets get it done' type of personality, along with the positive reinforcement. Maybe he doesnt realize that is part of his natural energy because it comes natural to him?

Caesar works with clients who are often "it's OK if you walk all over me" type of personalities. I don't think if you have that type of personality all positive reinforcements would work. 

It seems to me any relationship (with dog, animal, child, friend, lover) has to include both the limits, enforcing your personal boundaries, and also the positive reinforcements, chicken, chocolate and kisses. Isn't that what balance is? Go to far either way and it never works. 

I think it' best to find out what personality you are and then head towards the middle. 

RH


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

codmaster said:


> And I do think that her methods of training would work very well with certain dogs and certain behaviors that the owner wants to influence. For example I think they would work very well with my sister-in-laws Golden Retriever - a very gentle non aggressive soft temperamented dog. My own 3 yo pushy, very hard, pushy, sometimes DA male GSD - not so much!


That ball of fluff was a Chow Chow. And what you learn from working with Chows and Chow mixes is that you had better bring your brain with you to the training session. So she used an intelligent and yes, dull, process to get this dog to repeat behaviors consistently and well, and this dog will repeat those behaviors not just for this person but for others (and because of this she is now adoptable). That's a pretty big deal. But that post was in response to how else that Doxie could have been trained. 

So if she got those results from a Chow Chow, I say good show! That is not a gentle, soft dog. 

She would probably get the same results with a GSD in about a quarter of the time. 

Bummer - article no longer available:
_Chows_ and _Chow_ Mixes - Leerburgleerburg.com/*chows*.htm - Cached
*...* a dramatic increase in the number of people who contact me with aggression problems with _Chows_ and _Chow_ mixes. *...* Ask Leerburg your _training_ questions *...*


----------



## AgileGSD

codmaster said:


> That article was certainly an interesting one. Thanks for posting it as well. It did explain a lot about the approach when I saw that it was a APDT one and the author was Jean Donaldson. From reading her book, I got a very distinct impression of her overall approach. She said in one chapter - about training the retrieve only positively, for example, "so what if the dog is not as reliable as a more traditionally trained dog" or some words like that. Now granted for a retrieve and you were doing it only for obedience competition - that is certainly a reasonable approach - but what about around the house behavior - recall, no jumping, no resource guarding, etc. etc. Wonder if she would accept "less reliability" there also due to her methods?


 IME there is no method that produces a 100% reliable retrieve in all dogs or a 100% reliable anything else for that matter. I have known plenty of dogs reliably trained with positive methods and with ear pinch. I have known plenty who have not been reliable trained with positive methods and with ear pinch too. I honestly don't see a drastic difference between the two and plenty of competitors are now successfully using motivational methods to teach the exercise. 

When it comes to resource guarding, the "positive methods" are much more likely to produce good results for most pet owners than CM's approach. I'm not saying dogs can't be corrected out of resource guarding but doing so requires someone who is willing to potentially get bitten in the process. If a methods requires that of most pet owners, it would carry a high risk of death for the dog (most pet dogs who bite their owners don't live long). 

Both methods can obviously work to teach any number of things but often people are under the impression certain types of dogs "need" for their owner to become violent towards them now and again. Perhaps those dogs would not have "needed" such handling if the owner had resorted to it in the first place. 



Hunter Jack said:


> I agree a great article. I do have a couple of questions though. If a person has a dog like that who is guarding it's food against it's owner, how much would it cost to have a trainer come in for days at each meal to rehab the dog?


 Or you could just buy Donaldson's inexpensive book on resource guarding ("Mine!") and work through it yourself. 




Hunter Jack said:


> Don't think I could afford it.
> Which brings me back to Cesar. He would probably spend more time on the owners than the dog. Because when the trainer leaves if the owners don't step up to the plate the origional problem could resurface down the line or a new one. I'm guessing but the problem was probably caused by the owners to begin with.
> 
> If the owners are able to change and follow through then I think it is a great technique.


 I think I'm missing the point here. Just because a TV show makes it look like CM can "cure" any and all dog issues in just a few minutes doesn't mean that is the...well, reality of dog training. Dog training/behavior work using any method absolutely requires owner follow through. Without the owners being willing to change how they interact with and work with the dog, the problem will never really go away. 

If not, this dog's owners wouldn't have had to resort to removing the dog's canines when CM failed to "cure" him. And of course, the dog is "dominant" and the dog's nervousness is described as being hunting posture 





And post-CM:
Stopping Vicious Dogs with Canine Disarming | Care2 Causes



JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> That ball of fluff was a Chow Chow. And what you learn from working with Chows and Chow mixes is that you had better bring your brain with you to the training session. So she used an intelligent and yes, dull, process to get this dog to repeat behaviors consistently and well, and this dog will repeat those behaviors not just for this person but for others (and because of this she is now adoptable). That's a pretty big deal. But that post was in response to how else that Doxie could have been trained.


 
I was going to point out the same thing. Her case study was a Chow that she took to work with because the dog came into the shelter and was deemed not adoptable due to resource guarding. Chows are not considered soft, gentle or non-aggressive by most people involved with dogs. In one of Donaldson's books, she mentioned she stopped all "maintenance" work with the resource guarding in hopes that the behavior would return so that trainers she was working with could have some hands on work with the process of modifying guarding behavior. The resource guarding has yet to return though. I would guess that has something to do with the methods use actually modifying the dog's behavior and changed the dog's outlook on people coming near her resources.


----------



## Jack's Dad

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> That ball of fluff was a Chow Chow. And what you learn from working with Chows and Chow mixes is that you had better bring your brain with you to the training session. So she used an intelligent and yes, dull, process to get this dog to repeat behaviors consistently and well, and this dog will repeat those behaviors not just for this person but for others (and because of this she is now adoptable). That's a pretty big deal. But that post was in response to how else that Doxie could have been trained.
> 
> So if she got those results from a Chow Chow, I say good show! That is not a gentle, soft dog.
> 
> She would probably get the same results with a GSD in about a quarter of the time.


Jean. 

I think given enough time and money there are probably dozens of trainers and methods that will work for these issues. I mentioned in another thread that at one time I had a rescue Border Collie That bit several people. We had a behaviorist out who was trying to deal with him in a positive manner.
Having him go through basic obedience skills he already knew. This was to establish a relationship slowly. In the middle of this he tried to attack her and instinctively she did exactly what Cesar did. She held him up almost off his feet for self protection. He was an unpredictable dog and since we got him as a rescue I don't know why he had his issues. 

It is one thing if that type thing (holding dog up) is your training method. What you do on a regular basis. Cesar does not advocate that. In his book Be the Pack Leader he advocates clicker training the use of food and any other positive methods that work. The stuff on the show is for out of control dogs on TV. Admittedly no one would be interested in watching someone feed a dog over a period of days or weeks so that it doesn't get aggressive with it's owner.

There is another issue here. I couldn't afford her or Cesar to come spend that much time at my home. If she was there for all the meals that she fed that Chow, unless she did it for free or to prove a point it would have to have been very expensive.


----------



## codmaster

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> That ball of fluff was a Chow Chow. And what you learn from working with Chows and Chow mixes is that you had better bring your brain with you to the training session. So she used an intelligent and yes, dull, process to get this dog to repeat behaviors consistently and well, and this dog will repeat those behaviors not just for this person but for others (and because of this she is now adoptable). That's a pretty big deal. But that post was in response to how else that Doxie could have been trained.
> 
> So if she got those results from a Chow Chow, I say good show! That is not a gentle, soft dog. *(NO, you are correct! It was a "hard" puppy! Must have been real tough to train a puppy not to guard his food! Sounds like her method really did work and she was able to convince her puppy to be nice at meal time!)*
> 
> She would probably get the same results with a GSD in about a quarter of the time.  *(Puppy?)*
> 
> Bummer - article no longer available:
> _Chows_ and _Chow_ Mixes - Leerburgleerburg.com/*chows*.htm - Cached
> *...* a dramatic increase in the number of people who contact me with aggression problems with _Chows_ and _Chow_ mixes. *...* Ask Leerburg your _training_ questions *...*


IT WAS A *PUPPY* CHOW CHOW! Look at the picture with the article.

Are you saying that a puppy is about all she could handle if it were an aggressive breed? So that this was a great example of how well her approach to dog training will work with the tough dogs to train?

Or do you think (and her too) that a puppy Chow Chow is tougher to correct aggressive behavior in than a 2 yo GSD or Rottie? That is what it sounds like to me in your post.

Which of course is fine for you, if that is your opinion about handling aggressive dogs.


----------



## codmaster

Agile, * "certain types of dogs "need" for their owner to become violent towards them now and again.".*

Do you really believe that a "correction" is always VIOLENT?

Wonder what "type" of dog are you referring to here? 

What would YOU do to a dog who comes up the leash at your arm, or face? What kind of treat would you offer in place of your arm? Do you think you could have a "higher value" treat than your arm?

No one method will work well with every dog - a good pro trainer will know all of the methods and approaches and be able to choose the best approach for each individual dog.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

Wow, really? I know what a puppy looks like and YES, a Chow puppy can be more to handle than adults of other breeds. Sorry, it is what it is. 

And of course I am not saying what you are trying to say I am saying.


----------



## codmaster

Hunter Jack said:


> Thanks for the more in depth post codmater. I'm kinda worn out from all my posts yesterday. She *completely lost me on the soft vs hard bite and how many bites etc*...
> 
> Seems to me a behaviour needed to be corrected an all that bite stuff was unnecessary.


 
Typical (and usually very effective!) approach to set up a "strawman" argument, and esp. useful if you must respond but do not want to answer any real questions!


----------



## codmaster

Quote from her article's so called case study".

"Buffy, a stray *Chow foster puppy*,presented with object and food
guarding against people and dogs."

Wonder if she could have found a tougher dog to use as her case study - maybe one that would be more typical of a real problem. I don't consider a puppy as a real problem to train not to resent touching it or taking something out of it's mouth. Be serious!​ 
And her study also, by her choice for some reason, doesn't address her puppy resource guarding against other dogs - just people. So she also only addressed half of the problem, at any rate. Did she address object guarding from people? (I didn't remember from my read of her article, but don't remember that she did, but she might have as I would think that she should)? Maybe just keep dropping a "Higher Value" object - i.e. trade with your puppy?


----------



## Samba

The bite gradation is utilized as a scale in aggression scenarios.


----------



## wildo

Redhawk said:


> I watched the guy in the red shirt ... what is his name? (Zak/willy/whatever).


What the... haha- no. Not me. I was just one of the first few people to comment on the OP.


----------



## Jack's Dad

I will be out for a bit but in the mean time would someone tell me what it would cost to have someone come and spend days in your home to train a Chow puppy not to bite you over his food. Most dog owners can not afford that level of training.


----------



## Samba

In my experience, someone would not come and stay in the home. Generally, owners and dogs are seen. The owner learns to begin protocols. There are follow up visits to guage progress and assist. Most protocols are such that owners work with the dog. This is important for the overall dog/owner relationship.


I have seen this behaviorist. She
was pretty good.

ACVC 2001 - Changing the Owner-Pet Relationship

Dr. Karen Overall has developed protocols I have used also. I like her work.


----------



## codmaster

Samba said:


> The bite gradation is utilized as a scale in aggression scenarios.


 
Understood that, but my question was what does she do, since it seems like such a big part of her approach according to her text, when the dog hasn't bitten anyone yet? Or just one bite - seems like statistically a single bite esp. to a stranger wouldn't be a very scientific basis to making such a radical change in her training treatment.

Does anyone short of Jean herself know what the answer migh be if there is no bite history?

Remember this approach is one recommended for owners to do themselves (with the purchase of her book naturally) and I think she mentioned that it could be dangerous if you don't do a good bite analysis. I.E. a "soft" biter versus a "hard" biter.

Wonder what she would recommend to do with a top ScH 3 dog (if any such dog ever became a food/resource guarder against people and/or other dogs)? They would all be considered "Hard" biters or would they?


----------



## Samba

I saw that the bite severity is felt to be a prognosticator. It also can guide in what protective equipment might be anticipated. 

I think a large powerful dog would by obvious assessment indicate more precautions than a flat faced toy breed. With no history, it would be harder to assess. But, if there has been guarding and no biting or minimal biting, then things look better. For instance, I would be more optimistic about success if there has not been biting as yet. I had a GSD who had a hard bite but he did not bite when resource guarding. A better pronosis and less anticipated danger than the Golden who had already demonstrated the propensity to bite when guarding, and hard at that!


----------



## AgileGSD

codmaster said:


> Agile, * "certain types of dogs "need" for their owner to become violent towards them now and again.".*
> 
> Do you really believe that a "correction" is always VIOLENT?


 Where did I say that all correction was violent?  However, that trainer I mentioned earlier in this thread? He most certainly became very violent with dogs. And he would tell you that you have to, if you are going to deal with X type of dog. Only, most of the dogs who "needed" these sorts of corrections where dogs that he pushed into aggression, often dogs who when someone wasn't physically attacking them were perfectly fine. 

My oldest Belgian was "temperament tested" when returned to her breeder by a very dominance minded professional trainer. Part of the test involved him flipping her over and pinning her on her back. When she bit him, he declared she was "dominant aggressive" and probably should be put to sleep. Said that the chances of her being rehomed with someone who was willing and able to handle giving corrections that such a dog would need and staying on top of her was pretty slim. She's actually a pretty friendly dog, a breed CH who is a great show dog and has never had any exam issues. I have never had to worry about people coming to her when out and about at all. So much for a dog who requires strong physical corrections. But apparently, she won't tolerate a strange man coming up to her and flipping her on her back. 



codmaster said:


> What would YOU do to a dog who comes up the leash at your arm, or face? What kind of treat would you offer in place of your arm? Do you think you could have a "higher value" treat than your arm?


 Interestingly, that is a scenario I was thinking of when people suggest that one must become violent with types of certain dogs. Many people believe if you have a dog who "comes up the lead" at you, you must become violent with the dog to teach them not to do it. But most dogs I have known who hand such issues were dogs who developed them in relationship to corrections being given when the dog was over threshold. If the owners were not using correction with a dog who was over threshold, they likely wouldn't have a dog redirecting on them to start with. Perfect example of what I said. And it becomes a never ending cycle. The handler becoming increasingly aggressive towards the dog and the dog becoming increasingly aggressive towards the handler.


----------



## AgileGSD

This seems to apply pretty well to this topic:

The Possibilities in Dog Training | Susan Garrett's Dog Training Blog


----------



## Samba

I had not read that article before. It is a good one and I saved it for careful study later.

I have never had a dog come up the leash that I have trained. But, those that others have created conflict with...yes, I have had that. I worked to refuce the conflct as much as possible. It is so much fun with dogs with a history. You will stumble upon a trigger from their past experinces and the response occurs. If a physically adept/strong handler and impressive correction was the way for these dogs to be fixed, they would have been fixed in their previous situation. 

This dominance stuff is everywhere. I do believe that such topics on TV programming can set training way back. In class the other night, I praised my young dog with energy and he got excited. My fault for adding too much energy. I took hold of his collar and he rolled on his back giving me the squirmies in response. One man in class remarked how I had put that dominance move on him so well. Egads. Definitely not what happened, but some people really get attracted to that idea and start to "see" the world in a manner that fits that framework.


----------



## wildo

AgileGSD said:


> This seems to apply pretty well to this topic:
> 
> The Possibilities in Dog Training | Susan Garrett's Dog Training Blog


Read that article last night, and it is interesting indeed. One thing to keep in mind with SG articles is that she seems to use the term "reinforcement" a lot more broadly than perhaps others are used to- at least more broadly than I am used to.

When I think of "punishment vs controlling reinforcement" (as her graphs are labeled), I think of collar corrections vs treating. But this is _not_ what SG is referring to. For her- reinforcement can come from anywhere. The dog (in training) can be reinforced by focusing on a barking dog in the distance. The dog can be reinforced by sniffing the ground when you want them to be looking at you in focused heeling. In other words, the dog will be reinforced by _anything and everything_ in its environment. It's your job to ensure that you are *the most* reinforcing thing in the environment.

This may be an obvious concept to many- but it's something I have to constantly remind myself when reading SG articles. Her graphs make a lot more sense when keeping this mindset.

And ultimately (at least according to her- who I agree with), that mindset is the foundation of pure positive training. If you can't handle, enforce, and be mindful of the concept that _you_ must be the most reinforcing thing in the environment- then PP training is just not going to work out (which I think is the point of her graphs).


----------



## codmaster

AgileGSD said:


> Where did I say that all correction was violent?  However, that trainer I mentioned earlier in this thread? He most certainly became very violent with dogs. And he would tell you that you have to, if you are going to deal with X type of dog. Only, *most of the dogs* who "needed" these sorts of corrections where dogs that he *pushed into aggression*, *often dogs who when someone wasn't physically attacking them were perfectly fine. *
> 
> ................... So much for a dog who requires strong physical corrections. But apparently, she won't tolerate a strange man coming up to her and flipping her on her back.
> Interestingly, that is a scenario I was thinking of when people suggest that one must become violent with types of certain dogs. Many people believe if you have a dog who "comes up the lead" at you, you must become violent with the dog to teach them not to do it. But *most dogs* I have known who hand such issues were dogs who developed them in relationship to corrections being given when the dog was over threshold. *If the owners were not using correction with a dog who was over threshold*, they likely wouldn't have *a dog redirecting on them* to start with. Perfect example of what I said. And it becomes a never ending cycle. The handler becoming increasingly aggressive towards the dog and the dog becoming increasingly aggressive towards the handler.


So Agile,

You use the term "MOST dogs" a few times in your post - does that mean that you believe that there are some dogs that do need corrections when they exhibit very aggressive behavior? 

Or do you actually believe that *no *dog needs a correction for any behavior? Just curious?

And you think that all handler aggression is just "*a dog redirecting on them"?*

*"If the owners were not using correction with a dog who was over threshold..."* So if the dog bites their handler, it is the handlers fault, right?

I guess that we do certainly have very different philosophies toward our dogs - I happen to think that my dog should do what i tell it to do when I tell it to do it. I really am firm in my belief that my dog should not think it is ok to bite or even growl at me no matter what i do to it short of real physical pain. 

The fact that you might have a very different idea of who is in charge of your dogs relationship with you is of course perfectly fine - that is up to you and your dog, of course.

It sounds like you are one of those people who think (and of course I am guessing here only from what I have seen and could be totally wrong) that "there is no bad dog" - sort of like some people also think "there is no bad kid" - (perhaps except maybe for the serial killers and the like). Hope that you never have the misfortune to meet either!

BTW, one small example of a "bad" dog I ran into once. In an advanced obedience class the pro trainer was trying to show an owner how to do a dumbell retrieve - bent down with dumbbell in hand in front of a male collie. He was on one knee in front of the dog and started to put the dumbbell in front of the dog and the dog suddenly with no discernale warning snapped at him and laid his forehead open just above his eye. 

Would you have corrected that dog if you had been the trainer or owner? Or just chalked it up to the dog redirecting or just feeling threatened?

And in case anyone was interested, no the trainer did not use the "ear pinch" he was just kneeling right next to the Collie holding the dumbbell in his hand and talking to the owners when the dog bit him. Bad dog?


----------



## Samba

If the dog was threatened, he should be further threatened by a physical correction. This would confirm to the dog that this was not a threatening situation after all. He would be able to see that his action caused the correction and would be so intimidated by it that he would never try that bad behavior again. 
Am I right?


----------



## Dlilly

I agree with Zak. 

When I tell people I'm into dog training, they always ask me if I like CM. It is like he is the only dog trainer they know of. I am a Zak George and Susan Garrett fan.


----------



## selzer

codmaster said:


> BTW, one small example of a "bad" dog I ran into once. In an advanced obedience class the pro trainer was trying to show an owner how to do a dumbell retrieve - bent down with dumbbell in hand in front of a male collie. He was on one knee in front of the dog and started to put the dumbbell in front of the dog and the dog suddenly with no discernale warning snapped at him and laid his forehead open just above his eye.
> 
> Would you have corrected that dog if you had been the trainer or owner? Or just chalked it up to the dog redirecting or just feeling threatened?
> 
> And in case anyone was interested, no the trainer did not use the "ear pinch" he was just kneeling right next to the Collie holding the dumbbell in his hand and talking to the owners when the dog bit him. Bad dog?


I wasn't there, and no one asked my opinion, but from this little short story, no, this does not indicate a bad dog. My guess would be, suddenly seeing the man right in his face with a dumbell in his hand, the dog was scared. 

Now a dog that has not been corrected for warning signals like growling or barking or shrinking might have barked or growled. My guess is that these people did not socialize the dog well, and when he did exhibit fear aggressive warnings, they came down hard on him. Then, when he was in a totally unfamiliar situation and scared out of his wits, he could not bark or growl because that is going to have someone come down hard on him, and he went right for the home-run. 

Not a bad dog, probably just weak nerves, lack of proper socialization, and inappropriate reactions to his fearful behavior.


----------



## BowWowMeow

I like the Zak guy. Identifying CM as a behaviorist and the other guy as a trainer is splitting hairs. If I had $1 for every person who asked me if I learned to train Rafi or that they learned to train their dog by watching CM I'd be rich. 

I'm all about the paradigm shift...so many dog owners have used CM style training and messed their dogs up so severely. They don't have a dominance agenda but they are confused about what's expected of them and in the absence of clear, confident and fair leadership they start making their own decisions and that's where problems arise. There is a dog like this across the street from me. You can see the confusion in her eyes when she does what she thinks she should do and then gets punished. 

For those of you arguing about dominance and meeting aggression with aggression--I wonder how much experience you've actually had? I've rehabbed a couple of really tough dogs that came into rescue. I've been bitten before by a fear aggressive dog and one of my own fear aggressive dogs also bit. The rescue took in some german shepherds that even animal control wouldn't go near and I watched other volunteers rehab them. They turned into really nice dogs. 

I used to train old school with the stupid alpha roll and everything. Then when I got Basu I had to unlearn all of that stuff. He was 4.5 years old and aggressive and he was a big, powerful german shepherd. Had I used that style of training he would have ended up being euthanized. Instead I used counter-conditioning, structure, clear consistent and fair leadership and positive reinforcement and he became something like a "normal" dog.


----------



## Jack's Dad

BowWowMeow said:


> I like the Zak guy. Identifying CM as a behaviorist and the other guy as a trainer is splitting hairs.


It's not splitting hairs. One guy teaches tricks and the other deals with behavior problems. A guy who doesn't deal with aggressive dogs cannot replace Cesar until he proves he can do it better.

My issue with all of these behavior/trainers including Cesar is that they really don't do the follow up or don't publicize it, on the long term affects.

I think there are dogs that can never be fully trusted again period. No matter who works with them. With regard to how dogs become aggressive or fearful etc... To me it doesn't matter. Some people seem to think that almost no dog is at fault or beyond redemption. Fine if you are willing to be liable financially if the dog harms someone. If you are willing to re-arrange your life to take 24/7 responsibility that your dog never has the opportunity to bite or injure someone.
I think it was Carmspack who said dogs should enhance your life.
I agree. That doesn't mean you dump dogs for normal dog problems.
I had one rescue dog that was a biter and our family spent five years with fear everyday that somehow that dog would find another opportunity. I had two trainers and a behaviorist at a substantial cost and the dog was still untrustworthy. I will never give up so much of my life again for a dog like that.
Look at Dharmas mom's situation with her own dogs. She has been bitten twice. It's her decision how she chooses to live with that.

I will have dogs that I trust or I won't have them. If I had one I could trust and one I couldn't then I'd get rid of the one I couldn't trust.
I also don't want a dog that has been rehabbed for aggression or fear and it doesn't matter who did it including Cesar.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

> I will never give up so much of my life again for a dog like that.


This is just to show how differently people can view things. Not saying any way is right or wrong. But people who choose to have dogs like that - and there are those who do - do not view it in that way. 

"Giving up so much of my life" got me the two wonderful dogs in my avatar. 

Granted, I never ended up getting stitches or any injuries of any consequence from either, but what I did get is the opportunity to try to crawl inside the mind of another animal, and make an impact in their lives, by having them teach me things that ultimately, have helped other dogs. They gave me way more than I gave them. 

From a dog who had to be ACE'd just to board at the vets when she was pulled from the shelter, the black dog in that photo ended up being able to lay in the middle of a busy ER as sweet as could be, at the end of her time. 

So that's just a different way of seeing things for people reading this thread.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Jean.

People who do rescue or volunteer in shelters are doing a great service.
There are lots of things people do that I may not want to. I may take on volunteer opportunities that you may have no interest in.
My point was that I want my home to be as peaceful as possible. My refuge. Not a place that I come to in fear of what my own dog might do. 
I am curious. Are you implying that all dogs can be rehabilitated to the point of absolute trust? I for one do not believe all dogs or people for that matter can be rehabilitated.


----------



## Lilie

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> Granted, I never ended up getting stitches or any injuries of any consequence from either, but what *I did get is the opportunity to try to* *crawl inside the mind of another animal, and make an impact in their lives,* *by having them teach me things that ultimately, have helped other* *dogs. They gave me way more than I gave them*.


And THAT is how it should be with every single dog we have in our lives! All of the CM pooh-pooh has lead to a canine society of easy fixes and canned training. One size fits all. Every dog the same. And that is were the HUGE mistake is being made. Not every dog behaves the same way. Not every dog thinks the same way. You can utilize certain training techniques as tools, but just because you have a hammer doesn't mean that pounding a square into a round hole is the correct thing to do!


----------



## wildo

Lilie said:


> All of the CM pooh-pooh has lead to a canine society of easy fixes and canned training. One size fits all. Every dog the same.


I _really_ don't want to jump into this argument, but just can't resist. Can you site *one single instance* where CM has stated "every dog is the same?" I'm ready to be proven wrong- but I don't think you will find such a statement...


----------



## Lilie

wildo said:


> I _really_ don't want to jump into this argument, but just can't resist. Can you site *one single instance* where CM has stated "every dog is the same?" I'm ready to be proven wrong- but I don't think you will find such a statement...


 
Sorry, should have been more clear. I wasn't pointing directly at CM - I don't have cable so I rarely even watch his show - I was speaking about trainers who are highly visable in the public eye. 

What they teach is meant to be a tool, not a solution. All training techiques are meant to be tools and not solutions. People want instant gratification. They want to alpha roll (what they think is) their dominate dog and it's instantly Lassie. 

Take NILF. It is a great tool. IMO - it works. Only because it forces us stupid humans to reward our dogs for good behavior EVERY time. NILF is 80% for humans and 20% for the canine. NILF is a tool - not a solution.


----------



## wildo

Lilie said:


> Sorry, should have been more clear. I wasn't pointing directly at CM - I don't have cable so I rarely even watch his show - I was speaking about trainers who are highly visable in the public eye.
> 
> What they teach is meant to be a tool, not a solution. All training techiques are meant to be tools and not solutions. People want instant gratification. They want to alpha roll (what they think is) their dominate dog and it's instantly Lassie.
> 
> Take NILF. It is a great tool. IMO - it works. Only because it forces us stupid humans to reward our dogs for good behavior EVERY time. NILF is 80% for humans and 20% for the canine. NILF is a tool - not a solution.


I agree with everything you've stated here. And I also don't have cable.  I would hope that the people watching the dog shows about animals with aggressive behavior realize that every dog is different and the tools (methods) they use on the shows are tailored to that dog. I have seen a few (10-15) Cesar episodes and he often will state (of course I also googled it and couldn't find anything off hand) that he is tailoring a particular method to that particular dog for this reason or that, etc, etc.

If there is a TV personality out there that is actually making it seem like " canned training. One size fits all. Every dog the same." then (as _we_ all know) they are totally wrong. Like I said, I don't have cable, so I haven't seen a ton of these shows. I suspect that not many of them would make such a foolish claim. Therefore the issue must be all the dumb _watchers_ of the show that _think_ that the methods (while different) look the same. That's why so many people could practically be caught saying "cesar == alpharoll." There's a lot of ignorance with the watchers of shows like that who would claim that the show hosts are performing "canned training."


----------



## codmaster

Hunter Jack said:


> Jean.
> 
> ..................I am curious. Are you implying that all dogs can be rehabilitated to the point of absolute trust? *I for one do not believe all dogs or people for that matter can be rehabilitated*.


 
Absolutely true! Most probably can be, at least to a reasonable.

But try asking one of these "every dog can be rehabbed" advocates if they would trust their own small child (or spouse) with that dog alone. 

I have asked that question of a trainer near us and the answer (garbled in a lot of double-speak) was "NO!". I believe it would be with all of these people with the right dog.


----------



## selzer

Hunter Jack said:


> I think there are dogs that can never be fully trusted again period. No matter who works with them. With regard to how dogs become aggressive or fearful etc... To me it doesn't matter. Some people seem to think that almost no dog is at fault or beyond redemption. Fine if you are willing to be liable financially if the dog harms someone. If you are willing to re-arrange your life to take 24/7 responsibility that your dog never has the opportunity to bite or injure someone.
> I think it was Carmspack who said dogs should enhance your life.
> I agree. That doesn't mean you dump dogs for normal dog problems.
> I had one rescue dog that was a biter and our family spent five years with fear everyday that somehow that dog would find another opportunity. I had two trainers and a behaviorist at a substantial cost and the dog was still untrustworthy. I will never give up so much of my life again for a dog like that.
> *Look at Dharmas mom's situation with her own dogs. She has been bitten twice. It's her decision how she chooses to live with that*.
> 
> I will have dogs that I trust or I won't have them. If I had one I could trust and one I couldn't then I'd get rid of the one I couldn't trust.
> I also don't want a dog that has been rehabbed for aggression or fear and it doesn't matter who did it including Cesar.


A lot of this I disagree with, in that a dog should never be fully trusted in some respects. One does not leave the dog on the floor with the baby and go out and mow the lawn. Even dogs with issues, generally do not have issues where they are completely unpredictable, and taking chunks out of anyone and everyone. 

I was talking to a lady today who told me of her shepherd who is not safe with people outside her immediate family. They want the dog as a guard, and did not socialize her, but three of her litter mates have already been put down for aggression. So there is a genetic component there too, probably. Still the dog is fine with the family and if they have someone coming over, they kennel the dog. How hard is that? The dog gets to live and have a good family experience, and is kept safe from strangers and her own over-protective behavior. The dog is not solid, and you might euthanize such a dog. But I cannot agree with that.

I think much of the problems dogs have in society, is caused by us, certainly bad breeding plays a part, but bad owners play their part too, some are abused, some are neglected, and that does not make a difference to you. If a dog was starved to the point of needing IVs and slow multiple feedings per day to bring them back from that condition, and such a dog will react if some one bother them when they are eating, what in the name of all that is holy is wrong with just leaving the poor beast alone while he eats? No, no, this dog has by man's hand been starved to the point of losing all its weight and condition, and now man should put him down because he should not show any issues about his food dish. 

And what about Dharma's Mom's situation? She knows how to never get bit again. She knows if she separates the bitches, there will never be a problem with either of them. They are not aggressive toward her, she has gotten bitten while they are fighting. If they are not fighting, she will not get bit. To keep them from fighting, they can be separated. Who should she put down oh enlightened one? Tessa the ten year old foster, or Dharma, the young maturing bitch? Who deserves life? Who deserves death? Death for something that is easily avoided? 

I could not live with myself if I put a dog down for pack order aggression / same sex aggression, only within my pack. Maybe you could live harmoniously with forty dogs if you put down every dog that snarled at another. But when we open our house to a second dog, we have to have a plan in the event that they do not get along. They are not stuffed animals, and they are not robots. Not every dog is going to get along perfectly all the time with every other dog. When we bring them in to live in our home, two bitches, well, we have to be prepared. And that does not mean being prepared to euthanize one of them. 

Wildo, having watched dozens of CM episodes, it is often the same worn out theme, the dog is dominant, and you need to be more of a leader, you need to make the dog calm submissive. Many times I disagree with his assessment, but I am not an expert. 

Hunter Jack, one thing I do agree with CM on, is that most of dog's problems are due to people, and the answer to most of them is not euthanasia. 

I believe in a different approach to dogs with issues:
1. is management, protect the dog from people and people from the dog, this means proper supervision and containment.
2. is training, building a bond of trust through positive training techniques, build the dogs confidence by setting him up to succeed and praising him for it. If that means silly pet tricks, yes, it will improve the dog's bond of trust with you his owner, and the dog does not know they are silly.
3. slowly decrease the distance between the dog and those things the dog has issues with. Maybe the dog will never be a dog park regular, but if you can walk him down the street on lead, while other dogs are walked on lead in the vacinity without barking and lunging and being a total weenie, well, that is awesome. And it can happen. Without serious compulsive methods, as the dog builds his confidence and his trust in you. 
4. continuing steps 1,2, and 3 forever. Proper containment and supervision, and training should be a regular part of a happy dog's life anyway. Continued baby steps in socialization is not that hard to do.


----------



## Lilie

wildo said:


> " There's a lot of ignorance with the watchers of shows like that who would claim that the show hosts are performing "canned training."


I'm sorry, come again?


----------



## stealthq

Lilie said:


> ...
> People want instant gratification. They want to alpha roll (what they think is) their dominate dog and it's instantly Lassie.
> ...


Yes, yes, and yes! And it isn't just things like aggressive dogs - it's any behavioural problem that is sufficiently annoying. Lord knows I've fallen into that trap before w/ excessive barking. You just want an instant fix and are not thrilled when someone tells you it's going to take time and patience.



codmaster said:


> Absolutely true! Most probably can be, at least to a reasonable.
> 
> But try asking one of these "every dog can be rehabbed" advocates if they would trust their own small child (or spouse) with that dog alone.
> 
> I have asked that question of a trainer near us and the answer (garbled in a lot of double-speak) was "NO!". I believe it would be with all of these people with the right dog.


Let's not forget that even if every dog can be rehabbed, most dog owners aren't skilled enough to do it even with professional help. And, if everyone in the household isn't 100% on board, you can practically GUARANTEE failure.

ETA: I'm talking about people aggression, here. Dog aggression is easier to handle - at least it's possible to keep dogs apart if necessary.


----------



## wildo

Lilie said:


> I'm sorry, come again?


They aren't performing canned training. Remember my challenge to find one single Cesar quote of him saying every dog is the same? So it would be an ignorant claim to say that they are using the same training methods, or more so "canned training" on every single dog.

I didn't call you ignorant, if that's what you are thinking. You said you didn't watch the show, and I said:


> There's a lot of ignorance with *the watchers of shows like that* who would claim that the show hosts are performing "canned training.


Since you don't watch the show, you aren't qualified in my statement.


----------



## BowWowMeow

It doesn't matter what CM says he is and that he is working with aggressive dogs and that is says, "Don't try this at home." People edit that stuff out. They watch the show and then they try to train their dogs the same way. 

I don't totally trust any dog. Dogs are dogs. They have dog instincts. I work toward a dog fully trusting me but I will never make the mistake of fully trusting a dog. They are not human and they have lots of sharp teeth. Rafi can be off leash almost anywhere but I always have him under voice control. If I perceive the situation is not safe for him then I put his leash on. It's my job to protect my dogs. 

The dog I have now is darn near perfect for me and my lifestyle (despite coming with quite a few behavioral issues) but he would be a very difficult for a lot of people because he is smart, has lots of drive and needs a confident, kind and consistent leader...someone who takes the time to understand who he is and how to work with him to help him be a wonderful companion. If I raise my voice with him he starts to shake. However, if I speak to him in a conversational tone, he listens. He listens to the intent of what I'm saying because we have a very strong bond. 

That's why Jean's dogs listen to her too. They trust her. She takes the time to figure out who they are and how to work with them, not against them. Over time they have gained a tremendous amount of confidence. They aren't easy dogs but she doesn't look for easy dogs. Luckily there are people out there like her who take in dogs that other people have neglected at best and abused at worst. 

I've seen so many people crush their dogs' spirits in the name of dominance and/or training. You can see it in their eyes.


----------



## wildo

BowWowMeow said:


> It doesn't matter what CM says he is and that he is working with aggressive dogs and that is says, "Don't try this at home." People edit that stuff out. They watch the show and then they try to train their dogs the same way.


That's kinda my entire point. Ignorance is bliss- until you've tried to use a method you don't understand and end up with a dog that is worse of than you started. The disclaimer is there for a reason and the people who overlook it, try something, and fail are ignorant. That's not Cesar's fault. ...Ask any lawyer- haha!

It's no different than a warning label on a hair dryer about not dropping it in the bathtub full of water.


----------



## Jack's Dad

There are a lot of good things about this forum but I have found that a lot of people who will spend hours upon hours training, rehabbing. getting medical panels, seperating warring dogs, rotating and all that must not have had the same type of adult life that I did.
I worked forty to sixty hours a week for years. Was a single dad with custody of my 3 daughters. When I came home I mowed lawns, fixed cars, repaired the leaky toilet went to church and on and on. I had several GSD's and other large dogs during these years and I didn't have time for them to have aggression and fear issues. There were kids coming and going from my house all the time. I never had an incident with any of my dogs over all these years.
The only problem dog was the one mentioned above and that was a rescue. I was remarried and had a son and couldn't let his friends anywhere near that dog.
I never had any dog euthanized for behavior. Selzer
I should have had the Border Collie rescue euthanized.
I can post frequently if I want because I'm now retired but I really don't understand how so many people can be on this forum for hours on end dispensing advice unless they do not work, have no children, or are very young and not having too much responsibility yet. Maybe some are housewives or househusbands but in the real world most people come home from work and don't have time to spend getting into their dogs head to analyze what all of his issues are.
Raise them right just like kids and you should not have to many problems.


----------



## BowWowMeow

No one is saying it's CM's fault! But these are dogs, living sentient beings, not potential legal cases. It doesn't matter whose fault it is: it's the dogs (and sometimes unsuspecting humans) who suffer the consequences.


----------



## codmaster

*"Raise them right just like kids and you should not have to many problems. "* Exactly!

BTW - I would not ever have a dog in my house that I could not trust with any members of my family. Strangers, perhaps, BUT THEIR OWN FAMILY! Be serious.

As far as trusting my dog with my small toddlers - of course I would. I wouldn't leave them alone only because I WOULDN'T LEAVE THE BABY ALONE ANYWAY. Any of the many GSD's that we have had over the years I would have absolutely no problem leaving them with our kids (and with other kids as well!).

In fact, woe unto anyone who would dare harm our baby or kids!

Why would anyone have a GSD whom you couldn't trust with your baby and kids etc?

A foster or other adult dog, you would have to have the trustworthiness demonstrated; but a dog we raised from a puppy. *Be serious!*

And yes, temperament does have both genetic and environmental pieces. A very few dogs will never have a sound temperament no matter what we do with them, just like a very few people.


----------



## selzer

Hunter Jack said:


> There are a lot of good things about this forum but I have found that a lot of people who will spend hours upon hours training, rehabbing. getting medical panels, seperating warring dogs, rotating and all that must not have had the same type of adult life that I did.
> I worked forty to sixty hours a week for years. Was a single dad with custody of my 3 daughters. When I came home I mowed lawns, fixed cars, repaired the leaky toilet went to church and on and on. I had several GSD's and other large dogs during these years and I didn't have time for them to have aggression and fear issues. There were kids coming and going from my house all the time. I never had an incident with any of my dogs over all these years.
> The only problem dog was the one mentioned above and that was a rescue. I was remarried and had a son and couldn't let his friends anywhere near that dog.
> I never had any dog euthanized for behavior. Selzer
> I should have had the Border Collie rescue euthanized.
> I can post frequently if I want because I'm now retired but I really don't understand how so many people can be on this forum for hours on end dispensing advice unless they do not work, have no children, or are very young and not having too much responsibility yet. Maybe some are housewives or househusbands but in the real world most people come home from work and don't have time to spend getting into their dogs head to analyze what all of his issues are.
> Raise them right just like kids and you should not have to many problems.


It is not hard to keep dogs separated. I can post quite a bit now because I am currently keeping a shop open days, and working weekends at other jobs. Not a big deal, but my home and dogs have me and no one else to pay the house payment and take care of them. So, if that answers your question, I dunno. And yes, no one else to mow the lawn, take care of the car, clean the house, cook the food, etc, etc, etc,. Course, cleaning the house does always come in last. But I have two dogs to take to classes tonight, so have to go now. BTW, no, I do not have any major issues with my dogs now. They do fine, but I do not let them run together 24/7 either.


----------



## Jack's Dad

codmaster said:


> *"Raise them right just like kids and you should not have to many problems. "* Exactly!
> 
> BTW - I would not ever have a dog in my house that I could not trust with any members of my family. Strangers, perhaps, BUT THEIR OWN FAMILY! Be serious.
> 
> As far as trusting my dog with my small toddlers - of course I would. I wouldn't leave them alone only because I WOULDN'T LEAVE THE BABY ALONE ANYWAY. Any of the many GSD's that we have had over the years I would have absolutely no problem leaving them with our kids (and with other kids as well!).
> 
> In fact, woe unto anyone who would dare harm our baby or kids!
> 
> Why would anyone have a GSD whom you couldn't trust with your baby and kids etc?
> 
> A foster or other adult dog, you would have to have the trustworthiness demonstrated; but a dog we raised from a puppy. *Be serious!*
> 
> And yes, temperament does have both genetic and environmental pieces. A very few dogs will never have a sound temperament no matter what we do with them, just like a very few people.


----------



## onyx'girl

codmaster said:


> *"Raise them right just like kids and you should not have to many problems. "* Exactly!
> 
> *BTW - I would not ever have a dog in my house that I could not trust with any members of my family. Strangers, perhaps, BUT THEIR OWN FAMILY! Be serious.
> *
> As far as trusting my dog with my small toddlers - of course I would. I wouldn't leave them alone only because I WOULDN'T LEAVE THE BABY ALONE ANYWAY. Any of the many GSD's that we have had over the years I would have absolutely no problem leaving them with our kids (and with other kids as well!).
> 
> In fact, woe unto anyone who would dare harm our baby or kids!
> 
> *Why would anyone have a GSD whom you couldn't trust with your baby and kids etc*?
> 
> A foster or other adult dog, you would have to have the trustworthiness demonstrated; but a dog we raised from a puppy. *Be serious!*
> 
> And yes, temperament does have both genetic and environmental pieces. A very few dogs will never have a sound temperament no matter what we do with them, just like a very few people.


I have two dogs(one rescue and one that has fear aggression) that I do not trust with kids. I have teenagers, and they are fine with them and their friends, but I would never have them around toddlers. So what....should I put them down? No, I manage them carefully. 
I wish they were ok with little children, but who will subject their children to my dogs while I desensitize them?


----------



## Jack's Dad

Jane.

People can keep aggressive dogs if they want but the liability can be major.
We have friends who recently had a situation (not aggression) where their dog ran out into the street towards a bicyclist and the lady fell. She was not severely injured but the result was a lawsuit settled out of court for $65,000 dollars. Most of the money was paid by insurance but now they have to pay a major premium and had a hard time even getting a homeowners policy. If this were an aggression case the costs would have been even higher.

Euthanasia is obviously not the first choice remedy for aggression. In severe cases it's an option.


----------



## onyx'girl

Believe me, I am very aware that my dogs are a liability. That's why I am diligent in keeping them managed.
Too bad so many 'breeders'(not just GSD) are putting dogs together without knowledge/ that what they breed is a liability. The saying 'blame the owner, not the dog' is true, though managing a genetically weak dog for its life is a responsibility that is huge and not many are cut out for it.


----------



## BowWowMeow

This is getting ridiculous. The case you just cited, Andy, could happen to anyone. My dog is trained to never go into the street without a release but most dogs I know will go into the street and could inadvertently scare a cyclist just because they're big dogs. It's risky having a big dog, no matter what. 

I know of lots of freak accidents that have happened with friendly, seemingly perfect dogs who have ended up biting a toddler, child, teenager or adult. Lots of times it's an accident. I got bitten by a foster who mistook my hand for a stick. Should I have euthanized him? He lived 10 wonderful years with a family who adored him and he was a therapy dog, visiting nursing homes on weekends. 


I'm sorry you had a bad experience with your border collie. That seems to have colored your perspective on dogs. Even very well bred, well raised dogs that people buy as puppies end up with issues. There are lots of dogs like that on this board. There are just as many dogs that people adopt as adults who don't have issues.


----------



## Jack's Dad

BowWowMeow said:


> This is getting ridiculous. The case you just cited, Andy, could happen to anyone. My dog is trained to never go into the street without a release but most dogs I know will go into the street and could inadvertently scare a cyclist just because they're big dogs. It's risky having a big dog, no matter what.


 Of course the example could happen to anyone. 

However if you own and choose to keep an aggressive dog then it's like leaving a loaded gun accessible in your house. I've said several times if you want to do it go for it.

My choice is to not take the extra risk of keeping an aggressive dog.
Why do people keep bringing up euthanasia? Shouldn't be an issue because their seems to be enough people on this forum that would be glad to take my aggressive (other sentient being) in with no concern whatsoever. I also said it should not be a first remedy.
The Border Collie did not warp me. It was one dog in my life that was a bad experience and I choose not to repeat that.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

Hunter Jack said:


> Jean.
> 
> People who do rescue or volunteer in shelters are doing a great service.
> There are lots of things people do that I may not want to. I may take on volunteer opportunities that you may have no interest in.
> My point was that I want my home to be as peaceful as possible. My refuge. Not a place that I come to in fear of what my own dog might do.
> I am curious. Are you implying that all dogs can be rehabilitated to the point of absolute trust? I for one do not believe all dogs or people for that matter can be rehabilitated.


I wanted to respond since asked. 

1. My dogs are my refuge. I work with people and work in trying to help people. It is very difficult to help people, rewarding, but there are so many factors that we and they cannot control and so while it can be rewarding when someone is able to get the help they need, there are others that we can't help. My dogs are easier to help!

2. I think anyone who thinks their animal can be 100% trusted is living in a fool's paradise. Horse, cat, dog...I don't care what, I do not trust them not to act like an animal at any given time. (sorry don't know how to fix the double negative!) There are some who are definitely less trustworthy, some more, but never fully trusted. 

3. I do believe there are dogs who cannot make it in the boundaries of this world. Dogs that you cannot make a mistake with, dogs that need so many conditions to be successful, that combined with not being able to make a mistake, have painted themselves into a very tiny corner. I will say that I have seen dogs that were heading down that road, get a different handler and turn around in an unbelievable way. So it's hard to say when the dog has exhausted their chance and it's always good to see how someone else does with them. 

I had a foster who actually stayed with my mother - it was the poor dog's third foster home - she had attacked one dog in one home, was unable to be managed in another. She was with my mom because there were no other dogs there and my mom is a pretty natural leader. This poor dog was so messed up though - she tore open a 4 month old spay incision, would growl/snap at puppies at meet/greets (even though she had been a mom), would snap and grab her handler if she was threatened (and that was not a high threshold) and terrified my dogs in a way I had never seen when I would take them over to work on her issues. 

When she attacked my old male - who had never had a dog even challenge him with a look - she tried to kill him, I was sick. I had 4 people evaluate her, and the rescue said we cannot continue moving her and the 4 agreed that she was not well. I wish I still had tried one other person - but I think the dog was in that situation of - you could not make a mistake with her, and her ideal home would have been a fortress. Certainly not adoptable in the logical sense. Emotionally, I still feel awful. Because obviously this dog's life was awful - probably a combo of a bad temperament and then she came from Arkansas and was dropped at the shelter with a 1 day old pup - so add environment to that. 

So I do understand that not every dog can be saved. I just hope that people do everything they can before making that choice.


----------



## sagelfn

Hunter Jack said:


> .... in the real world most people come home from work and don't have time to spend getting into their dogs head to analyze what all of his issues are.
> Raise them right just like kids and you should not have to many problems.


Because most people are ill prepared to be dog owners. You should have time to properly care for your dog. You should have time to take care of his needs. If you don't have time then you shouldn't own a dog. If I have to forfit some sleep to make time that is what I do.

Raising a dog like a child is a good way to cause problems. Dogs are not children. You can raise a dog "by the book" and still have problems due to genetic issues as well.

How could one raise their dog like a child and then if it becomes "untrustworthy" euthanize or rehome it?


----------



## Samba

I raised my kids the same and they turned out very differently! I think one son has genetic issues and unfortunately I think it is my gene contriution! Yes, there is nuture and nature in living beings outcomes.

I would not say that aggression in itselfis a problem. I own German Shepherds and if properly bred, they have agression. What is at issue is weak nerves and resultimg issues...timidity,fear, insecurity and compromised aility to think.

Viva La Aggression


----------



## Jack's Dad

sagelfn said:


> Because most people are ill prepared to be dog owners. You should have time to properly care for your dog. You should have time to take care of his needs. If you don't have time then you shouldn't own a dog. If I have to forfit some sleep to make time that is what I do.
> 
> Raising a dog like a child is a good way to cause problems. Dogs are not children. You can raise a dog "by the book" and still have problems due to genetic issues as well.
> 
> How could one raise their dog like a child and then if it becomes "untrustworthy" euthanize or rehome it?


I think it very egocentric to think that you have the ability to determine who should and should not have dogs and how much time *you* think they should devote. 

With regard to why a dog can be euthanized. Severe aggression that harms a human being severly or if bad enough other animals. It is allowed in this country whether you like it or not.
Unless you are a vegan vegetarian why are you not worried about all the animals who live in horrid conditions until they are slaughtered for human consumption. Perhaps it's because you don't have a pet steer in your home. Ever seen how chickens are crated or killed for us to eat. 

Lord save me from holier than thou people.


----------



## sagelfn

Hunter Jack said:


> I think it very egocentric to think that you have the ability to determine who should and should not have dogs and how much time *you* think they should devote.
> 
> Hmm well I think it is selfish to say you don't have time for your dog and rather than make time you rehome or euthanize it. You chose the dog, you chose to be responsible for it.
> 
> With regard to why a dog can be euthanized. Severe aggression that harms a human being severly or if bad enough other animals. It is allowed in this country whether you like it or not.
> I'm not against euthanizing a truely aggressive dog BUT only after all methods for helping the dog have been exhausted.
> 
> Unless you are a vegan vegetarian why are you not worried about all the animals who live in horrid conditions until they are slaughtered for human consumption. Perhaps it's because you don't have a pet steer in your home. Ever seen how chickens are crated or killed for us to eat.
> Who said I'm not concerned about how my food is killed? I buy my meat local. I went to school with the butcher's son. I have been to their farm.
> 
> Comparing animals for food vs pets that are family members is not the same thing at all.
> Lord save me from holier than thou people.
> Are you saying that people shouldn't be prepared to own a dog and have time to properly care for a dog? That is what I said in my last post..if that makes me a holier than thou type on a high horse well that is fine by me.


...


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Just another bizarre tangent that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Again.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Just another bizarre tangent that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Again.


Sometimes they go on because of rediculous statements like since I don't have time for my animals that I just rehome or euthanize them. Where the **** did that come from. I have had dogs for six decades and have never re-homed a dog. The only dogs I have euthanized were from old age and medical conditions.
I raised dogs for six decade's with no incidents (rescue border collie ) the one exception. They all seemed very happy in my household. I guess I just didn't know how many mistakes I might be making.

Cassidy's mom.Several times you have said something about the direction of threads after I post. I don't know if their is significance to that or just coincidence but if my posts are off track then delete them and everyone else's. 

When it gets personal then a lot of these threads go off track.

How people see fit to train and raise their dogs is often heated because we differ on how. I can take the heat but if it's dished out then it's going to come back.
I guess we could all just talk about who is joining a new puppy class or put up lots of pictures or whatever is non controversial. Then it's more of a friendly chat room for those who already agree with one another.


----------



## sagelfn

Now I understand what happened...

When I said "You should have time to spend with your dog..." it wasn't meant at YOU Andy it was you in the people sense. I should have made that more clear = use words correctly


----------



## Jack's Dad

sagelfn said:


> Now I understand what happened...
> 
> When I said "You should have time to spend with your dog..." it wasn't meant at YOU Andy it was you in the people sense. I should have made that more clear = use words correctly


 Peace.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Hunter Jack said:


> Cassidy's mom.Several times you have said something about the direction of threads after I post. I don't know if their is significance to that or just coincidence but if my posts are off track then delete them and everyone else's.


Actually I said that after Brandi's post.  Off topic posts are not against board rules, so no, they won't be deleted. But what's the point of talking about vegans and vegetarians and how animals are raised for human consumption and whether or not someone has a steer in their house (_really?!?!?_) in a thread about dog training methods? It's completely irrelevant. 

It's not just you, although you have done this before on other threads. There are other people that do the same thing - bring a bunch of tangents into a discussion that really are not relevant at all to the what's going on in that particular thread. They may be perfectly valid things to talk about, but wouldn't they get more attention in their own dedicated thread than buried in another thread that has nothing to do with that topic? Shouldn't a dog training thread be about, oh, I don't know......_dog training_?

I think it's helpful too if people try not to take everything so personally and assume that every comment someone else makes is about them. The "you" word is often used generally in conversation so if you're not sure if someone is referring to YOU personally, but rather using "you" to refer to other people in general, it would be best to ask for clarification before jumping to the attack, don't you think? Why get yourself all worked up over nothing?

And BTW, grass is green, I don't know why anyone would say it's red. oke:


----------



## Jack's Dad

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Actually I said that after Brandi's post.  Off topic posts are not against board rules, so no, they won't be deleted. But what's the point of talking about vegans and vegetarians and how animals are raised for human consumption and whether or not someone has a steer in their house (_really?!?!?_) in a thread about dog training methods? It's completely irrelevant.
> 
> It's not just you, although you have done this before on other threads. There are other people that do the same thing - bring a bunch of tangents into a discussion that really are not relevant at all to the what's going on in that particular thread. They may be perfectly valid things to talk about, but wouldn't they get more attention in their own dedicated thread than buried in another thread that has nothing to do with that topic? Shouldn't a dog training thread be about, oh, I don't know......_dog training_?
> 
> I think it's helpful too if people try not to take everything so personally and assume that every comment someone else makes is about them. The "you" word is often used generally in conversation so if you're not sure if someone is referring to YOU personally, but rather using "you" to refer to other people in general, it would be best to ask for clarification before jumping to the attack, don't you think? Why get yourself all worked up over nothing?
> 
> And BTW, grass is green, I don't know why anyone would say it's red. oke:


Well you are the moderator and the expert so if you say it's so it must be so.


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom

I was absent from the thread when it restarted. Daisy has always been a problem around young children.I worked in puppy play w/ her and in other venues. She wasn't good w/ kids. We modified our enviroment and really worked to make everyone safe. She loves adolescent and adult males and kids who arent afraid. She is now 11 and calmer,not as reactive and frankly doesnot see as well or hear as well.WE dont have children ,we foster a young man who I know. Daisy believes he is hers,gives kisses ,sometimes listens to him and in general wants cuddles.Daisy genetically had aggression that was compounded by the fact that I was inexperienced and she did not get enough 
exposure to kids after her bout of parvo.I was able to work w/ her issues and keep kids safe. I trust my dogs ,Daisy I can take food out of her mouth and other then once as a bratty adolescent has never curled her lip at me.Daisy's case is uniqe we were able to work around her issues. If we had children it would have been a different story or would it? If she had been exposed from the begining in her home would she be ok or even good w/ kids. Once again nature vs nuture.The response appear to be a continuation of a different thread to me but I'll go back and reread. Ceasar works with dogs who are ggressive but also w' dogs who pull and react in many different ways. Whether you keep a dog who has aggression issues is a personal decision that hopefully is based on many salienty factors. what I did wouldnt be feasible for a couple who had grandchildren in and out .I dont think that there is anabsolute answerhere. I lke Ceasar ,his methods I would make a mess of but he works with dogs who others would say are beyond help.The question is do you want to live w/ that dog? that is a individual decision that each must decide.


----------



## dogdragoness

VS wouldn't be able to handle Izze (my heeler)
Jo (my GSD/BC/heeler... ?) yes, she is a very soft, willing, biddable dog. Izze is not, Izze needs clear black & white "what I can & what I cant do" lines or she will run right over a person. She pretty has no respect (obedience wise that is, being around other ppl, she behaves in public) but if a random stranger would tell her to do something, she would prolly just turn her back & trot right back to me.

I dont understand all the hatred twds CM perhaps its BC he has no credentials but still claims himself to be a DBE (dog behavior expert) heck, anyone csn pick up a good book on canine body lingo & calming signals &
Look like an "expert".


----------



## ShatteringGlass

I find it strange that many people have absolutley no problem accepting the fact that dogs correct it eachother, it's their nature, they respond to eachother's corrections and they move on with life. They aren't beaten, their relationships aren't damaged, they accept the correction and move on, hopefully learning from it. 

But some of these same people don't like the idea of a human telling a dog "no" or giving a leash correction. If corrections are so foreign to a dog's learning process that we humans can't grasp the proper use of them, then how come other dogs can??

I'm not pointing out anyone specific, just an observation.


----------



## AgileGSD

codmaster said:


> And you think that all handler aggression is just "*a dog redirecting on them"?*


 It depends on the situation. Handler aggression is sort of a vague term I suppose. I always think of it as dogs who redirect onto their handlers. IME dogs who "come up the leash" at their handlers are generally dogs who are reacting to correction after a history if excessive use of physical correction in training. Not all dogs are as willing to tolerate that sort of treatment. 




codmaster said:


> *"If the owners were not using correction with a dog who was over threshold..."* So if the dog bites their handler, it is the handlers fault, right?


 It greatly depends on the situation but certainly it could be the handler's fault.



codmaster said:


> I guess that we do certainly have very different philosophies toward our dogs - I happen to think that my dog should do what i tell it to do when I tell it to do it. I really am firm in my belief that my dog should not think it is ok to bite or even growl at me no matter what i do to it short of real physical pain.


 Many forms of correction rely on physical pain. 



codmaster said:


> The fact that you might have a very different idea of who is in charge of your dogs relationship with you is of course perfectly fine - that is up to you and your dog, of course.


 I always have to  a bit at comments like this. 



codmaster said:


> It sounds like you are one of those people who think (and of course I am guessing here only from what I have seen and could be totally wrong) that "there is no bad dog" - sort of like some people also think "there is no bad kid" - (perhaps except maybe for the serial killers and the like). Hope that you never have the misfortune to meet either!


  again. There are certainly dogs out there who simply aren't wired right. I have known some dogs with pretty serious aggression issues. FWIW neither positive nor correction based training could fix the issue. One of those dogs became so much worse after correction based training was attempted on him that he ended up being euthanized in his crate after attacking his owner. The dog's aggression wasn't caused by correction based training but it was worsened by it. Prior to that, the dog had not ever attacked his owner. For dogs like this, management is really the only option. Muzzling the dog, strict confinement, no contact with people outside of the immediate family, careful interaction, etc. If the owner isn't willing or able to do so, the dog should be PTS. 



codmaster said:


> BTW, one small example of a "bad" dog I ran into once. In an advanced obedience class the pro trainer was trying to show an owner how to do a dumbell retrieve - bent down with dumbbell in hand in front of a male collie. He was on one knee in front of the dog and started to put the dumbbell in front of the dog and the dog suddenly with no discernale warning snapped at him and laid his forehead open just above his eye.
> 
> Would you have corrected that dog if you had been the trainer or owner? Or just chalked it up to the dog redirecting or just feeling threatened?



Can't really comment since I have no idea what the situation was or the background. Generally, dogs don't just randomly bite people.


----------



## codmaster

Aigle,

I give you much credit for your responses (well, sort of responses) to my direct statments and esp. to my questions. You are a great representative of the other PO trainer advocates that I have come across in my dog training adventures. If they coudn't answer a question about the proper response to a difficult training or behavior question - they would just ignore it. As you did with the example I gave you below:
_*BTW, one small example of a "bad" dog I ran into once. In an advanced obedience class the pro trainer was trying to show an owner how to do a dumbell retrieve - bent down with dumbbell in hand in front of a male collie. He was on one knee in front of the dog and started to put the dumbbell in front of the dog and the dog suddenly with no discernable warning snapped at him and laid his forehead open just above his eye. 
Would you have corrected that dog if you had been the trainer or owner? Or just chalked it up to the dog redirecting or just feeling threatened?*_

"Can't really comment since I have no idea what the situation was or the background. Generally, dogs don't just randomly bite people." 

I get your meaning exactly here. You don't have a good answer! Maybe a "Higher value" treat would be in order. How about a "Time out" for the dog?

Or perhaps we should just blame the nasty trainer for asking the dog to do something that he didn't want to do.

BTW, I really truly doubt that it was a "Random" bite, my personal opinion was that the dog really meant to bite the trainer!

Just for the heck of it - what would you have done with the dog (just based on what I have related about the incident, that is). Or maybe just admit that perhaps the PO approach really is not designed to work with a situation like that, maybe?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

codmaster said:


> I get your meaning exactly here. You don't have a good answer!


:thinking: That's an interesting interpretation of what she said, which was basically that she didn't have enough information:



> ...I have no idea what the situation was or the background.


You may not think those things are important, but many people would want more details before determining how they would have responded.


----------



## AgileGSD

Cassidy's Mom said:


> :thinking: That's an interesting interpretation of what she said, which was basically that she didn't have enough information:
> You may not think those things are important, but many people would want more details before determining how they would have responded.


 Exactly. It is hard to say what *I* would have done in the situation because I don't really know what the situation was. I'm not sure where it is coming from that I would suggest getting a better reward or using a time out, I never suggested either of those things. I also didn't suggest the dog wasn't trying to bite the owner. I would find it extremely unusual if you would have me believe that an adult dog in an advanced OB class randomly decided to bite his owner having no history of any sort of aggression towards his owner and without showing any warning signs. Dog was happily working one second and latching onto his owner's face the next? If that really is the case, my gut feeling would be that the dog had a type of seizure or some other medical issue causing the sudden "attack".


----------



## codmaster

AgileGSD said:


> Exactly. It is hard to say what *I* would have done in the situation because I don't really know what the situation was. I'm not sure where it is coming from that I would suggest getting a better reward or using a time out, I never suggested either of those things. I also didn't suggest the dog wasn't trying to bite the owner. I would find it extremely unusual if you would have me believe that an adult dog in an advanced OB class randomly decided to bite his owner having no history of any sort of aggression towards his owner and without showing any warning signs. Dog was happily working one second and latching onto his owner's face the next? If that really is the case, my gut feeling would be that the dog had a type of seizure or some other medical issue causing the sudden "attack".


Yo, Agile, read my post a little slower. 

I never said the dog bit the owner - it was the obedience instructor who knealt down in front of the dog (who was sitting) to show the owner something. never got a chance before the dog bit him. As it turns out the dog had bitten at least one person before and I believe it was in the owners family BUT the owner just neglected to inform the trainer of that little fact beforehand. And the dog had a CD and was working on the Open exercises (hence the "advanced obedience" class).

Did I say that you personally recommended the "better reward' and/or "timeout" approach? I don't think I said that you did, just that those are two of the often used examples of the PO trainers that I have come into direct contact.

OOPs, sorry if I implied that that is what you would have done in my example -* you actually never did say what you would have done, did you?*, even hypothetically with a disclaimer due to the admitted limited knowledge.

Want to take a shot at telling us what you would have done with a dog who just laid open an instructors forehead? From a PO and "No punishment or correction" approach, I mean. What "negative punishment" could we take away from the dog in this case so he comes to learn that biting someone in the face is not a good thing to do and that we need to "make that behavior extinct"! I would love to hear the proper PO response to this type of behavior.

And it wouldn't be to just "manage" the dog better, would it? Or maybe "don't put the dog in that situation"?

The dog is in that situation and had that behavior - now what would a PO advocate do about it? Just leave?


----------



## codmaster

Cassidy's Mom said:


> :thinking: That's an interesting interpretation of what she said, which was basically that she didn't have enough information:
> You may not think those things are important, but many people would want more details before determining how they would have responded.


Cassidy,

You are absolutely correct about needing more information, *if* I was actually asking a trainer for what I should do with my current dog in a current situation; but this was not needed so much in a hypothetical case - just asking for a best guess at what to do in a PO approach! 

And just base the answer on what we know now about the situation and dog. I wanted to get the proper response of the PO approach - I know what the real pro trainer did and also the result, so was curious if any of the PO advocates on this forum had ever had to deal with a dog like this one and if so, what would they do (or advocate doing).

Alas, we still don't have any answers from anyone who knows the PO approach and advocates it for all dogs and all situations and all behavior. 

Is it possible that the PO approach is not designed for super aggressive dogs since we cannot use any correction for that biting behavior? 

I admit that I don't know what the PO response to such a dog should be and was curious about it. The PO trainers in my local obedience club (a couple with long experience in the PO approach and who converted from the balanced approach a number of years ago) would advocate "managing" the dog or simply exclude such an aggressive dog from their obedience classes. 

Which solves the problem for them obviously, but doesn't address the problem of the dog's owner.

Anyway, I was just curious as to what a PO response to such a dangerous animal would be to eliminate that type of behavior. Sounds to me like that approach is not designed for this type of dog and would be a tough approach to try. 

Just my opinion, of course.


----------



## Samba

If no one knew why that dog did that behavior and never saw it coming....interesting group of owners and pro trainers. I have seldom seen something did not not have some predictors before hand in the dog's behavior and life.

There is something missing innthis story that makes it nearly impossible to say what would be the approach. 

I think you are talking about dog trainers who went to reward based training rather than behaviorists? Sounds like a typical training club situation.


----------



## Samba

I would not want to cofuse agression diagnosis and behavioral modification appraoches with positive training of specific behaviors. These are different things.

Most trainer, be they positve primarily or otherwise, would probably best suggest careful management until an experienced person can make a plan for the behavioral approach. Most of the trainers at clubs where I go concentrate on teaching dogs certain behaviors...home manners, competition behaviors, etc. This does not place them in them realm of dealing with aggression or other behavioral issues. Different things.

A dog that bit during a competition class becomes a different story. It is not something for a person teaching a retrieve to now act on the aggression problem. Very different things. A trainer is not an all inclusive thing.

The proposing of a situation in which the details are not available, will probably not result in a conclusive answer. This does not mean there is no answer nor is it an indictment of a particular approach. The information for an answer must be in the scenario. 

In the mean time, remove the dog until someone with the assessment abilities and behavioral knowledge can make an assessment. I don't know if that is positive or negative reinforcement. Just sense.


----------



## codmaster

Samba said:


> If no one knew why that dog did that behavior and never saw it coming....interesting group of owners and pro trainers. I have seldom seen something did not not have some predictors before hand in the dog's behavior and life.
> 
> There is *something missing innthis story* that makes it nearly impossible to say what would be the approach.
> 
> I think you are talking about dog trainers who went to reward based training rather than behaviorists? Sounds like a typical training club situation.


What would you say was missing?

This is not a real difficult to understand situation.

Dog is sitting in a line of dogs sitting next to their owners and practising getting their dogs to take a dumbbell in preparation for teaching the dumbbell retrieve. The instructor (a real pro trainer by the way - not just an obedience club wannabe, thank goodness) comes over to the owner who is having some problems getting his dog to take the dumbbell (no aggression just wouldn't take and hold it) kneels down in front of the dog and starts to give the dog the dumbbell and SNAP! No outward sign of aggression and definetly no growls or barking or lunging beforehand. The instructor certainly didn't notice anyrthing amiss in the dog - he was certainly knowledgable enough about dogs to notice.

Sounds like some folks either don't know what they would probably do with a dog that attacks an instructor, or just don't want to answer the question in terms that are proper from a PO approach! 

Can *anyone* answer my question with an answer from a PO approach? Would a correction of any type be in order at all? 

Would it be ok to tug the dogs leash to get him to stop attacking? (I am assuming that offering the dog a treat would not be effective in this case but who knows?).


----------



## selzer

Codmaster, maybe the positive trainers are a little dumbfounded by this because our positively trained dogs have never reacted in this way, without any warning, etc. I certainly have never had a dog bite the trainer, and I hope I never do. But is it not possible that this particular dog had a very different history, and a man bending over him with some strange thing in his hand caused him to react, and possibly because of heavy handed tactics when warning signals were given in the past that this dog no longer uses warning signals?


----------



## Samba

...obviously someone missed something here! The story is incomplete by the most modest of standards for the description of dog behavior! I find this in many dog training classes..something happens and no one saw it coming!! Well their "lack of seeing" does not mean it was not there. The fact that one could believe this story to be well told and easily understood, tells a great deal in itself!

If this was the best information that could be gleaned by those in the situatio, then, no of course, I would not recommend a correction.

Lack of information does not indict a lack of an answer! 

I would refer anyone interested in dealing with the assessment and modification of aggression to Dr. Karen Overall's works or Steven Lindsay. Plenty of information and answers there....after their assessment phase is more complete. The story that a dog bit and people were surprised just is not enough, I guarantee.

This story is not something a person who teaches an inducive retrieve or go-out would necessarily have experience in. Apples to oranges. Seem plenty of dog trainers who thought that dog training gave them mastery of behavioral issues get into trouble. Don't confuse the two.


----------



## Samba

I want to know this dogs temperament and history.need to know the temperament of the owners and their history. I would bet there were signals that were missed. To try and find out from those who missed it just what they missedmakes no sense to me. So the dog would need to be observed and history taken my someone skilled in the observation.

I have known pro trainers with disfiguring results of attempting training and interaction with a clients dog they had no relationship with. They would admit it was their mistake. They put teaching obedience above the entireity of the dog they were presented with. It is not shocking that such things happen in those situations. They might be pro at teaching a down or a retrieve, but not so pro at not getting bitten by a dog that is not their own. Yes, it happens.


----------



## Samba

Let's say we were given enough information to make a determination of dominance aggression. (i would not venture a guess that this is what is going on with the dog in class as there is insufficient data. Codmaster, your story is like telling your doctor you have a pain in your side and then insisting that she tell you if you need surgery or medication based soley on that info. It is a simple side pain, afterall!)


Here is a behavioral approach to dominance agression from Overall( below). I have experience with this here as I like the type of dog that is prone to it. I have also seen it in dogs others own. I have seen many experienced and strong men try to correct this kind of thing out if dogs. The strong correcting never solved the problem and many times made it worse. I do life with mine much like Dr. Overall describes and so far doing okay with the dogs. Also please nnote her explanation of the role of anxiety in this behavior. I believe this also. Nothing like a correction out of nowhere to reduce anxiety! Works every time...NOT.


Dominance aggression in dogs: Part 1


----------



## codmaster

Samba said:


> Let's say we were given enough information to make a determination of dominance aggression. (i would not venture a guess that this is what is going on with the dog in class as there is insufficient data. Codmaster, your story is like *telling your doctor you have a pain in your side and then insisting that she tell you if you need surgery or medication based soley on that info*. It is a simple side pain, afterall!)
> ......................


What the heck difference does the cause make (dominance aggression or fear or just because he felt like it) once we have ascertained that the instructor did nothing that should cause the dog to bite (and he did not)?. 

Good grief, do all PO advocates need the entire life history and a motivation analysis of any dog before recommending a suitable aproach to eliminating this type of behavior.

Actually, Samba, it is more like going to an ER with a knife stuck in your side and then insisting that something be done - like pulling it out and then having stitches. Would you expect the ER doctor to ask you a lot of questions about how did it happen and tell you that you must have really caused the knife to be plunged into your side before he/she does something to help you in the short term?

If a dog bites an innocent person who was not threatening either dog or handler; IMHO, SOMETHING must be done to impress upon that dog that behavior is not acceptable!

All I am *still asking* from any PO advocate is what would you recommend as far as what can be done to stop the dog from biting again in a similar situation? 

From the admitted little I know about the PO approach from the local PO advocates, choices might include nothing, redirect the dogs attention, treat when he stops biting, remove the instructor from the dogs area, ?????.

I must say that I am beginning to believe that I am geting the answer of the PO approach!


----------



## codmaster

Samba said:


> I want to know this dogs temperament and history.need to know the temperament of the owners and their history. I would bet there were *signals that were missed.* To try and find out from those who missed it just what they missedmakes no sense to me. So the dog would need to be observed and history taken my someone skilled in the observation.
> 
> I have known pro trainers with disfiguring results of attempting training and interaction with a clients dog they had no relationship with. They would admit it was their mistake. They put teaching obedience above the entireity of the dog they were presented with. It is not shocking that such things happen in those situations. They might be pro at teaching a down or a retrieve, but not so pro at not getting bitten by a dog that is not their own. Yes, it happens.


*Samba,*
* A quote from the article you referenced on "Dominance Aggression" kind of contradicts what you said above about blaming somebody for the dog biting the instructor "missing signals".*

*"Bites are usually not preceded by a vocal warning."*

*Sounds like there might not have been any to miss, huh?*


----------



## codmaster

Samba said:


> .................
> Here is a behavioral approach to dominance agression from Overall( below). I have experience with this here as I like the type of dog that is prone to it. I have also seen it in dogs others own. I have seen many experienced and strong men try to correct this kind of thing out if dogs. The strong correcting never solved the problem and many times made it worse. I do life with mine much like Dr. Overall describes and so far doing okay with the dogs. Also please nnote her explanation of the role of anxiety in this behavior. I believe this also. Nothing like a correction out of nowhere to reduce anxiety! Works every time...NOT.
> Dominance aggression in dogs: Part 1


hey Samba,

Do believe all that stuff about dominance aggression in the reference that you listed above?

I thought that the Pack theory and dog dominance was generally rejected out of hand by PO advocates? You know the theory of doggy behavior based on the old "Wolf Pack" theory.

Another interesting quote from the article is this:
*"These dogs are needy and are constantly setting people up to attend and defer to them. "*

Since you know the article - can you explain what a "needy" dog is - is it like a "needy" person? And how does a dog "set up people to attend to them"?

That article sounds like a PhD dissertation!


----------



## codmaster

Samba,

Thanks for the link to the paper on "Dominance Aggression". It provided a very interesting look at the treatment recommended by the author (and by PO advocates in general, I will assume). I assume that you agree with this list, don't you?

Here they are:

"Treatment involves the following steps: 
• *Avoidance of all circumstances* known to provoke an affected dog _(e.g. _if the dog reacts when hugged, don't hug the dog; if the dog reacts when sleeping on the bed, don't let the dog sleep on the bed). 

• Passive behavior modification to *encourage dogs* to defer to their owners. Passive behavior modification also *ensures that undesirable behaviors aren't rewarded* _(e.g. _if the dog stares at you, walk away; *if the dog won't let you put on a leash or collar and instead rolls over and tucks in its neck and jaw, walk away*); the key here is to* prevent a struggle over control* and decrease the dog's reactivity in the situation. Passive behavior modification also involves spontaneously praising or rewarding a dog whenever it exhibits a desirable behavior.
• Active behavior modification in the form of *desensitization and counterconditioning* to teach the dog a new, less aggressive way to react in the situations it regards as provocative
• *Antianxiety medications*, if necessary."

She also mentioned that this dominance can occur in dogs as young as 8 weeks!

So, owners should let their young puppy decide if they can put a leash or collar on? Or let them decide if they will get off the bed or move if the owner walks toward them.

*ARE YOU (AND THE AUTHOR) SERIOUS?*

I am supposed to "walk away" if my dog stares at me??????????????????? Got to be kidding, right?

If you let a dog get away with this you are quickly teaching ok - teaching it that THEY are in charge and can do what they want and when they want.

Exactly what that Collie in the training class was thinking when he didn't want to take tthe dumbbell so he bit the instructor!


----------



## selzer

I think it makes a great deal of difference how to proceed if the dog is biting because he is afraid or if the dog is biting because he does not like a guy he does not know over top of him. If he is biting out of fear, I think that you need to desensitize the dog to what he is afraid of. If he is biting out of some dominant male baloney, I think leadership training would be appropriate. In any case a dog that is biting is not in a situation that is healthy for him, and the owners need to do something differently. 

Dominating or punishing a dog biting out of fear could be the worst thing to do. 

I think that in the heat of the moment, you may react, maybe appropriately, maybe inappropriately for the dog's reason for the behavior, and that might make things better or worse, but going back over the event and determining why the dog acted the way it did can give you the information you need to create a plan for the dog. And you factor your response into that plan. 

Unless you think that all that needs to happen is a strong NO!, and maybe a physical type of punishment, and then that's it. But I think a dog that reacts like that needs more than a single response to his reaction.


----------



## selzer

Maybe that is my problem, I have never had a staring match with my dogs. Wow. Do most people have dogs that stare at them? Mine don't, they stare at the food dish wondering when I will get around to them. Are they challenging the food dish??? 

Ok, I know that staring is a challenge, but I have never had to stare them down. Is this ordinary. Codmaster, do you have to stare your dogs down?


----------



## Samba

Dear Sir,
I get the impression you are an expert on postitive training of some sort that I am not familiar with. Since I believevwe are not speaking of the same thing or from similar experience, I am not sure there is any point to this. You are very clear on its definition and how it is utiized. I am sure there is nothing I could tell you that would result in further enlightenment or development!

I suppose for your opposition to PO, you are hoping I am a PO advocate or purist. I am not, so I am not able to speak from such a position.

I have no problem with idea of packs and a dog behaving in a dominant manner at times, though it appears very fluid. I don't think I am a dominant dog, is all. I am a human. Dogs have been domesticated for eons and are not wolves. They are amazing in the way they have been selected for abilities that allow us to interact with them and teach. I don't see dominating dogs as a human as too practical or effective. It is not a philosophical position but rather one seen over the years as accomplished trainers got stitches due to the dogs they dominate. And, even though the owner appeared to dominate at times it was never lasting as a behavior modifier. So no soapbox...just see no sense in potentialing utlizing the healthcare system without the hope of pretty good results from the efforts. I have seen a lot of it.

I am a pragmatist of the highest kind. That is the origination of any use of positive methods or behavior mod. Its value is what attracts me, not warmth of heart.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Codmaster, why do you keep insisting on making assumptions about what other people might think or what they would do? You make a lot of gross generalizations about PO training (usually derogatory) and then say that you assume everyone agrees with that or would do things that way because nobody said otherwise. Sometimes people don't answer your questions because your argumentative conversational approach gets tiresome. That doesn't mean that you can assume anything one way or another, maybe they just don't feel like discussing it with you any further.


----------



## codmaster

Ok, folks,

This post has gone on long enough. And with a very interesting string of posts, I must say. Thanks to all who responded (and to those who read the posts).

I must admit that I was disappointed in not being able to hear from any of the PO advocates with ANY real response as to what they would do if it were their dog or what they would recommend to the owner.

At any rate, here is what actually happened.

Once the trainer cleaned up and put a bandage on the bite, he came back to the owner (who had finally also fessed up to the fact that the dog had bitten before and actually had growled at the owner before) and took the dogs leash. But this time he was ready for the handler aggressive, maybe dominant dog. The dog did make another try for him as he was heeling. The instructor (remember he was an pro dog trainer who had done a lot of ScH and police and military K9 dog training) gave him a heck of a correction ( a "motivating: correction in some trainers descriptions). After some time in training that night, the dog evidently decided that he was not quite so dominant and was seen walking nicely on lead throughout the entire class of dogs and people. As far as I know, the dog never threatened or bit anybody else. We were in contact with the owners (friends of ours in the lovcal obedience club) for the next couple of years before we moved and they indicated that the dog really had changed and gotten a lot more calmer and better behaved.

Evidently at least in this case, correction based training did work.

BTW, of course, the owners changed how they treated the dog as well, based on what this instructor told them (and what they had seen!).


----------



## Samba

I most definitely responded with an answer as to what I would Do and recoomend from at least a positive perspective. Those who read the posts might note that. Most PO trainers are not going to comment on behavior mod areas because they know it is not what they deal with generally. Other trainers often realize it is not their arena too. I imagine it might be difficult to find that population to give such an answer.

I like to think it is becsuse we don't have many silly, mushy, cookie trainers here but, rather mostly those fairly adept at positive approaches to training behaviors.


----------



## codmaster

selzer said:


> Maybe that is my problem, I have never had a staring match with my dogs. Wow. Do most people have dogs that stare at them? Mine don't, they stare at the food dish wondering when I will get around to them. Are they challenging the food dish???
> 
> Ok, I know that staring is a challenge, but I have never had to stare them down. Is this ordinary. Codmaster, do you have to stare your dogs down?


 My dog will stare at me often - sit or lay across the room and just look at what I am doing. I happen to think it is very cute. I also work EXTREMELY hard to get him to listen to my "LOOK" command to reinforce this looking. 

I will also reach out and grab Baron by his nose when he is staring and he thinks that is great fun.

I certainly hope he doesn't think of staring at me as a challenge (I don't). Because after he stares I will often put a little bitty treat in my lips and let him come up to me and take it out of my lips with his great big teeth!

On the other hand, staring can be the sign of a challenge from a dog (esp. between dogs!) but there is different body language that goes with that form of staring! So one has to be able to read the "stare" to know what should be done, if anything, about a doggy stare.


----------



## codmaster

Samba said:


> I most definitely responded with an answer as to waht I would and recoomend. Those who read the posts might note that.


 
Right! And thank you for that. 

I must have missed some of it though - did you say whether you would issue any type of a correction as the dog was biting?


----------



## Samba

I would not correct the dog for biting. If I had the chance to physically intervene to mitigate or stop it, I certainly would. Only in the hopes of decreasing damage, not so much thinking I was going to fix the dog in that moment.

Did anyone correct the dog? Has he been a perfect gentledog since?

I doubt very much he was adog without issues before this happened.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

it's been an interesting thread One question I would ask is why the heck would the trainer put his face in the area of a strange dogs face? And I would fault the owner as well, knowing this dog had done this before, should have given the trainer a little heads up.


----------



## codmaster

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Codmaster, why do you* keep insisting on making assumptions about what other people might think *or what they would do? You make a lot of gross generalizations about PO training (usually derogatory) and then say that you assume everyone agrees with that or would do things that way because nobody said otherwise. Sometimes people don't answer your questions because your argumentative conversational approach *gets tiresome.* That doesn't mean that you can assume anything one way or another, maybe they just don't feel like discussing it with you any further.


 
AH, Cs,

Appears that you may have made some assumptions about me. That is cool, however, since they are your assumptions. 

I likewise feel very free to make assumptions in the event of a lack of facts/authoritative information. (This is why I asked for PO experienced people to respond).

I was simply very curious about what a PO approach to a given DA situation that I personally went through a while ago. That was all! And I do believe that I got at least some of what I was looking for. So I thank all that responded.

I thought that it would be interesting to see the contrast between what a traditional trainer did and a hypothetical PO approach.

I did admit that my knowledge of PO training was limited to what I have read about this approach, and my personal experience with a few such trainers here in a local obedience club. That is all. 

And those people, like others of that approach, seem to be very sensitive about direct questions about precisely what treatments that they would recommend for certain doggy behavior.

If any such folks are reading this, I apologize if any of questions or my thoughts about PO training might have offended anyone. I do admit that I do not know a lot about this approach to dog training hence i do ask a lot of questions about what should be done in this method.

BTW, sometimes your polemic tirades also get tiresome.


----------



## codmaster

JakodaCD OA said:


> it's been an interesting thread One question I would ask is *why the heck would the trainer put his face in the area of a strange dogs face? *And I would fault the owner as well, knowing this dog had done this before, should have given the trainer a little heads up.


 
The dog (and all of us) had been in class for a few weeks before this happened. But the instructor was asking himself that afterward as well! he also "spoke to" the owner about that very subject!!!


----------

