# Just Found: "Mythologies and Commodifications of Dominion in CM/DW"



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

say THAT 3-times fast, will U  anyway, it has a very promising beginning: 


> The dog calls forth, on the one hand, the best that a human person is capable of 
> self-sacrificing devotion to a weaker and dependent being, and, on the other hand,
> the temptation to exercise power in a willful and arbitrary, even perverse manner.
> Both traits can exist in the same person. (Tuan, 1984: 102)
> ...


i am at the library, and the $#@%! in-house software is afraid of TinyURL.com, so i will have to post a link when i get home.  phobias are everywhere, :laugh: perhaps i should ask about DS/CC for the wireless-Net.

if U are in a hurry, GOOGLE "Mythologies and Commodifications of Dominion" and the article should come up. 
cheers, 
- terry


----------



## tripod (Feb 14, 2010)

Here you go: http://www.criticalanimalstudies.or...hologies and Commodifications pgs 137-161.pdf


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Volume VII Issue 1


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

tripod said:


> Here you go: http://www.criticalanimalstudies.or...hologies and Commodifications pgs 137-161.pdf


that's what i get :lol: posting without refreshing the page!  thanks, anne... :thumbsup:

NOTE: if the Journal article gets ARCHIVED, the *Tiny-URL* will still be valid.  
BTW that is the *Journal of Critical Animal Studies*. 
enjoy, 
- t


----------



## CJAnderson (Jul 10, 2008)

If we are talking about a "bike" and when I mean motorcycle, you are thinking bicycle, very little of what I say will translate, you can even get hurt or killed. 


So it is with "Cesar's Way". Cesar's new book out Oct 5 showing how to bridge his problem behavior modification (jumping, charging, pulling, barking...) into training skills (sit,stay,down,come...) will be with disuccsions of MANY of former "anti-Cesar Professionals" already many animal groups who were against Cesar, once they accepted the invitation to come down and actually WATCH and dialog about how Cesar does what he does, have changed their position. 

I am a 55 year old college teacher who has been able to save around 50 dogs on the euthanizing list when other "professionals were unable or unwilling to help change the unwanted behavior about to cost those lives. 

I understand that so many of these people would rather have a dog euthanized then rehabilitated successfully by a technique not a part of their paradigm, but still~ Most of Cesar's techniques are safe and replicatable when the effort is made to learn to apply them correctly, as demonstrated by the over 25,000 members of my yahoo email list (and the over 3100 there right now) whose success stories are available to read in the public archive without joining. :thumbup:

I also need to clarify to ensure I am talking about the same "bike" as in the article. If I stop my dogs from running into the street after a car or animal, breaking through a window to get at birds outside, barking so the cops come with complaints from neighbors... that is dominance and not leadership watching for their safety, right?

If I had taught my elderly mom's lab not to jump on people so when one jumped on her, shattered her ankle, and started a spiral health spin down that killed her 6 weeks later, that would have been dominance, and not good dog behavior? Or how about teaching the beagle who was on his way to be euthanized because his families kids teased him so badly with getting food that he became food aggressive to the point that he bit the evaluator who needed stiches, but saw a really good dog with one fixable behavior? (Changed behavior documented on my youtube.com/cjanderson site and now instead of being dead he is in a happy forever home, with no further problems along with last chance dogs on that site that I have helped) :confused1:

But then I am not a biased professional with my own agenda, just an old college teacher concerned with saving dogs as well as helping others to know how to stop these preventable problem behaviors which is causing so many dogs to be abandoned to animal control (or the street) for someone else to fix or euthanize. 



tripod said:


> Here you go: http://www.criticalanimalstudies.or...hologies and Commodifications pgs 137-161.pdf


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

CJAnderson said:


> *bold added - *
> 
> Cesar's new book out Oct 5 showing how to bridge his problem behavior modification (jumping, charging, pulling, barking...) into training skills (sit,stay,down,come...)...


nice ad! :thumbup: and U rate a pre-release copy, too - is it autographed? [do U get a commission on sales?] 


CJAnderson said:


> *bold added - *
> 
> ...already *many animal groups who were against Cesar*, once they accepted the invitation to come down and actually WATCH and dialog about how Cesar does what he does, *have changed their position.*  [/b]


would U be attempting to include the AHA? 
they were already HERE on PF-uk, thanks - see this thread: 
about American Humane Assoc CHANGING * THEIR * MIND re CM/DW... - Pet Forums Community

and in particular THIS POST - 
Pet Forums Community - View Single Post - about American Humane Assoc CHANGING * THEIR * MIND re CM/DW... 
from *Kelley Weir, the PR Manager of the American Humane Association.*

if the AHA will be monitoring CM/DW, when will his show get the *AHA seal of approval -  'no animals were harmed...', etc?*

re *many groups who were against Cesar, have changed their positions - *
WHICH other groups, in particular? 
AVMA? 
AVSAB? 
the British Small-Animal Vets-Assoc? 
the Aus. Small-Animal Vets-Assoc? 
the ASPCA of NYC? 
IAABC? 
*do U have a list of professional organizations, who have retracted their criticism and condemnation of the tools and handling, as shown on CM/DW? 
if so - where can we find this list? 
where are the PRESS RELEASES announcing their changed decisions?*

who on this list now ENDORSES the methods and tools on CM/DW? 
Welfare in Dog Training



CJAnderson said:


> *bold added - *
> 
> I [have] been able to save around 50 dogs on the euthanizing list when *other "professionals" were unable or unwilling to help change the unwanted behavior* about to cost those lives.


would any of those "professionals" have been CPDT, KP-Academy grads, CAAB, or Vet-Behaviorists? 
or otherwise credentialed by 3rd parties? [IACP does in-house certification, and retains ownership of the certificate - 
U leave the organization, the 'certificate' evaporates.]

San Fransisco SPCA Trainers Academy? IAABC Dog-Behavior Consultants?

or just someone taking $$ to train dogs - with or without any knowledge of learning-theory, behavioral-science, 
or behavior-modification? 
IMO - B-Mod requires far more experience and know-how than merely teaching pups to sit, down, and recall on cue. 
taking a dog whose behavior is SO BAD that euthanasia is seriously considered, to someone who teaches 
basic-manners and has no credentials? foolish in the extreme, IMO - SAVING A BUCK by going to them 
rather than a CAAB, vet-behaviorist, etc, is an asinine version of 'economy'. 


CJAnderson said:


> *bold added - *
> 
> I understand that so *many of these people would rather have a dog euthanized then rehabilitated* successfully by a technique not a part of their paradigm, but still~...


by *these people* i presume U mean positive-reinforcement or reward-based trainers? 
that's funny - i HAVE worked with dogs who had bite-histories, and i HAVE had successful outcomes - 
without 
* rolling 
* pinning 
* prong-collars 
* choke-chains 
* slip-collars or slip-leads 
* shock-collars 
* bitey-hands imitating 'neck bites' 
* foot 'taps' of the animal 
* intimidation 
* confrontation 
* flooding 
or any similar techniques, as seen and demonstrated on 'Cesar Millan, the Dog-Whisperer' on National Geographic channel.


CJAnderson said:


> *bold added - *
> Most of Cesar's techniques are safe and replicatable when the effort is made to learn to apply them correctly...


oh, gee! gosh... 
_*U mean that disclaimer on the TV-screen is WRONG?! 
is it going to be taken off, then? 
do the executives of national Geographic and their LAWYERS know that U claim it's OK to imitate CM/DW... without 'consulting a professional'?

did U clear this statement with Millan-HQ and with Natl-Geo before posting it?*_

i will be thrilled to see a Natl-Geo representative affirm IN WRITING that using CM/DW techniques is safe, 
when used by members of the TV-audience; simply watch and listen - and then apply those techniques. :thumbup: 
are they prepared to be legally-liable for damages? injuries, time lost at work, med-bills, physical therapy, etc?

i await Ur reply with deep interest, 
- terry


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

CJAnderson said:


> But then I am not a biased professional with my own agenda, just an old college teacher concerned with saving dogs as well as helping others to know how to stop these preventable problem behaviors which is causing so many dogs to be abandoned to animal control (or the street) for someone else to fix or euthanize.


another PF-member has encountered ms-anderson in the past - 
resulting in pursuit around the Net, stuffing a blog with pro-Cesar messages, and endless arguments - as opposed to discussions with citations.

so i went looking - ms-anderson claims to have no official position re CM/DW, 
but here - 
CJ Anderson - Dog Whisperer: Arizona Meetups for Problem Dog Solutions (Chandler, AZ) - Meetup.com 
she is a member of Meet-Up.com and a member of *Dog Whisperer: Arizona Meetups for Problem Dog Solutions* - 
the founder of the group [? gary?] tired of paying the fee-per-month, so the ORGANIZER position is vacant - 
see Dog Whisperer: Arizona Meetups for Problem Dog Solutions (Chandler, AZ) - Meetup.com

an article *cynthia wrote on Helium - 
Victoria Stilwell or Cesar Millan: Who would you call? - by Cj Anderson - Helium

there's a poll - VOTE! :thumbup: for the kindly-candidate of yer choice, :lol:

here is c-j's criticism of *micheal patton* AKA the HotDog Method trainer 
Michael Patton is Better than the Dog Whisperer. Way Better. Heres more proof. :: The American Puppy Project 
NOTICE - that she threatens him with a lawsuit - 


> *bold added - *
> 
> _ I teach adults about risk management and none of my clients would take on someone who positions
> themselves by putting down others because it is so easy to get into a lawsuit, *especially by those who have lots of money to go as long as they need to, to win?
> who has the money these days for those fees, not to mention time in court and with lawyers? *_


very tactful, there... :thumbdown:

here is *michael's video with Jackie-Brown, his now 1-YO 85# pitbull, demonstrating her cued behavior *on a tag-collar with a dragging leash... * beside a side-street - 
YouTube - ‪The American Puppy Project starring pit bull puppy dog Jackie Brown,‬‎

she looks happy + enthusiastic - no shut-down behavior or stress signals, sits calmly on a stay, relaxes on a down... 
what's not to like? :thumbup: _*go, michael! :001_tt1: we love Jackie! good pittie!  *_

happy training, 
- terry


----------



## DogTrainerRW (Aug 11, 2010)

I would like to provide some food for thought based on my own experience as a dog trainer who subscribes to the philosophy whatever works best in each case. 

All over the western world but in America especially people have a tendency to view their dogs as another kid of the family. In my work I find that to be one of the biggest problems. People spoil their dogs based on their selfish needs to shower them with love. And while most people have the best, most loving (from their point of view) intentions, they do not really love their dog. Loving your dog means to accept his nature and provide him with what he needs and not what we think they should enjoy  this is what Cesar Millan advocates. Based on this, it is not surprising that we have a lot of people that find the positive reinforcement training method better (or more modern) because it is essentially an extension of our tendency to spoil our dogs and not correct them when called for. But just because more people find it nicer doesnt mean they are correct. And just because the true nature of animals is something we dont want to think about doesnt mean ignoring it delivers better outcomes; quite the opposite in my experience.

Nobody disputes that wolves, and as an extension dogs, are pack animals with a complex social structure and hierarchy, books like Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation by L. David Mech and Three Among The Wolves by Helen Thayer highlight our latest understanding and Mechs comments on the matter are actually the key argument in the latest Time article on the matter. Both books provide deeper insights into the hierarchy and the less aggressive than previously assumed rise of the pack leader (to our latest understanding it is basically group selection instead of fighting it out). All of this is fascinating reading and I recommend it but none of that is actually any contradiction to any of Cesar Millans philosophies. I understand the desire to use especially Mechs work for trying to make the point; he wrote THE book on the matter but it is also dishonest as Millans calm-assertive pack leader position is in full alignment with all of this. If you want to criticize Cesar Millan, please do it with things he actually says or does but not by fabricating things he doesnt stand for. BTW, all our dogs are genetic descendants of the Middle Eastern wolfs and as such any wolf pack studies are very relevant to dogs. It is also dishonest wanting to use Mechs work and findings on wolves to criticize Cesar Millan and then also to say, well dogs arent wolves (like one profiles tag line here seems to indicate). You need to decide if you think they are close enough (like geneticists tell us) to use wolf studies or not. If you believe not, I would however challenge anyone who takes that position to provide the relevant differences between wolves and dogs as they relate to training and rehabilitating dogs.

I also would at some point like to see a compelling argument for Victoria Stillwells approach of positive ONLY training. I think that position is as wrong as alpha-rolling a dog for everything (just to be clear Cesar Millan does NOT do that excessively, but only when addressing TRUE aggression, where it is an absolutely acceptable approach to bring a dog back into a balanced state). I watch Victorias show as well (for professional reasons I like learning as many styles and techniques as I can, as all dogs are different) and in a 2009 episode I saw her advocating (together with a vet) that a particular dog with separation anxiety should be put on anti-anxiety medication. Now that is TRUE animal cruelty in my view and a complete humanization of an animal that is really not to its benefit at all. Anyone who thinks that it is a positive approach to drugging a dog your methods dont work on should really take a look at the Cesar Millan DVD Common Canine Misbehaviors, where he shows how to address separation anxiety with CALM-ASSERTIVE leadership. He teaches the owners how to bring their dog back to balance and resolve this issue and he doesnt touch the dog even once. Same issue, different methods, which is healthier for the dog? 

We dog trainers are pretty messed up people. The only thing two dog trainers will ever be able to agree on is that a third dog trainer has no clue. Just because certain groups of dog trainers and their organizations disagree with a certain method and would like to see their own ways advanced, doesnt mean their criticism is valid, it doesnt mean it is wrong either but the notion because critisism exists, it is valid is a false conclusion.

I think it is ok to debate techniques but lets have real arguments with substance instead of demonizing people. We obviously all care about dogs. If we can all start acknowledging that and go from there, I think our dogs are all better off in the long run.


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

DogTrainerRW:

Some interesting points, and two I do agree with is that it is useful to research various methods, and to tailor any programme of training or behaviour modification to the individual dog and owner. I think most here would agree wqith those points. However.....

Your first paragraph implies that you are of the opinion that people who base their training on R+ nd avoid the use of aversives are the same people who spoil and baby their dogs. This is simply not true. Some dogs with behaviour probalems are spoilt, others simply not trained, whilst some have been attempted-trained using harsh methods.

On the flip side, there are many owners, handlers, trainers and behaviourists who train and rehab dogs very successfully, using R+ and avoiding the use of physical P+ or R-.



> ...not correct them when called for


Here we disagree on a major point. You clearly believe that some correction (ie positive punishment) is necessary. Many of us do not. 
We do not avoid it because it is unpalatable, but because it is often ineffective, it can be potentially harmful to the dog or dangerous to the handler, and it has a high risk of "fallout". Dogs can be perfectly well trained, and rehabilitated, without the use of "corrections".

As for the wolf / dog comparisons. Personally I find wolf behaviour interesting, but I am not stupid enough to think my dog is a wolf. It is not. Thousands of years and generations of selective breeding, specifically domestication, have changed them radically. Their body shape, their dentition, their brains, their reproduction (different seasons and rearing methods), and their behaviour are all very different.

CMs mumbo-jumbo is nothing more than a re-hashed version of the old "dominance theory", which was in fact based on a study of wolf behaviour.

There are two problems with this:
1) The study in question has been discredited as it actually provides a highly inaccurate view of normal wolf behaviour.
2) Dogs are not wolves anyway.

Interestingly, there has been research into feral and stray dogs - which indicate that they do not in fact choose to live in packs, nor do they have a linear hierarchy led by an "alpha".

The point is; the entire concept of "dominance" as spread by CM and co is NOT true for wolves, NOT true for feral or stray dogs, and NOT true for domestic pet dogs.



> I think that position is as wrong as alpha-rolling a dog for everything (just to be clear Cesar Millan does NOT do that excessively, but only when addressing TRUE aggression, where it is an absolutely acceptable approach to bring a dog back into a balanced state).


I am fairly sure I have seen cases of CM pinning or rolling a dog for considerably less than "TRUE aggression". As for bringing the dog back into a "balanced" state. What BS. An "alpha roll" is nothing more than a physical attack on the dog. The dog is not "calm submissive" - it is emotionally shutdown, having been forced into a state of such extreme stress that it has entered a state of learned helplessness. This is NOT training, it is abuse!

There should be need to do this in the first place anyway. Good trainers / behaviourists rarely get bitten because they first bother to assess the dog and identify the cause of the aggression as well as any triggers, they do not put the dog into circumstances to cause it to bite, and they manage to successfully rehab the dog without hurting the dog or getting themselves bitten in the process. All without resorting to physical violence.

Your separation anxiety example is also debatable. I feel that medicating a dog for behaviour problems should be a last resort, used ONLY when necessary.
CM presumably attributes SA to dominance? Well, he attributes every other behaviour to dominance so I would think so. Unfortunately it really isn't so simple. Simply using "calm assertive leadership" is not going to help many dogs with genuine SA. They need to have their confidence built up, and be gradually desensitised to being alone. This is usually a slow process but the results are worth it. Unfortunately, not all owners can stop leaving the dog whilst he is undergoing behaviour modification, so the dog continues to experience extreme distress. In certain cases, using appropriate medication can help to reduce stress enough that the dog is capable of learning, and be-mod can be successful.

Please explain how reducing stress in a dog that suffers from extreme anxiety problems is animal cruelty?



> Just because certain groups of dog trainers and their organizations disagree with a certain method and would like to see their own ways advanced, doesnt mean their criticism is valid,


No. But consider this:

1) CM claims he uses the "knowledge he was born with". Very reliable I'm sure. Would you use the services of a vet / doctor / other professional who magically got their skills from the fairies at birth? 

2) Despite all the voodoo mumbo jumbo, the bulk of CMs stuff is identical to the original dominance theory. This theory has been disproved time and again for decades now. Believing it is really like believing the earth is flat. It is PROVEN beyond all reasonable doubt that neither wolves, nor dogs, behave as described by this theory.

3) CM clearly does not assess dogs individually. Resource guarding? Dominance. Pulls on the lead? Dominance. Jumps up? Dominance. Chases cats / joggers / tractors / lights? Dominance. Scared of stairs or slippery floors? Definitely dominance.

It's not just the problems either - he also totally ignores the dogs body language. Ears back or forwards, tail up or down, wagging or waving or still, body held tall and forward or low and back, teeth bared or not, all makes no difference to Milan. He still comes to the same conclusion (survey says dominance) every time.

4) The people criticising CM are the profeswsionals. The people with extensive knowledge, qualifications, experience and skill. They include trainers, behaviourists, owners, handlers, rescue workers and rehabilitators, etc. People with BSc, MSs, even PHDs. People who have successfully owned, trained and rehab'd thousands of dogs WITHOUT resorting to the abuse found in Cesars way.

There are plenty of published, peer reviewed scientific studies proving CM to be talking nonsense. Studies of canine body language, training and behaviour, wolf behaviour, etc. There is a wealth of proof that stress inhibits learning. Proof that aversives cause stress. Proof that choke chains and shock collars can cause serious physical injury and long term stress. I could go on....

CM Has NOTHING to back up any of his claims. He hides behind his "calm assertive" mumbo jumbo because unlike the "modern" trainers he has no evidence to back him and because virtually everything he preaches goes against science.

And please tell me how exactly what is "calm assertive" about goading a dog into a state of high stress in order to incite aggression, only to yank the dog around violently on a steel noose before forcing it to the ground and pinning it there by its throat??? 
Do that to a human being and you would be rightly arrested.

Last but not least:


> The only thing two dog trainers will ever be able to agree on is that a third dog trainer has no clue.


Actually I agree with numerous posters on here including Leashed4Life and CarolineH; I also happen to agree with the likes of Barry Eaton, Jean Donaldson, Patricia McConnell, Gwen Bailey, Ian Dunbar, the APBC, the APDT, and a whole range of other individuals and organisations.

I agree with the experts - not the witch doctor selling his magic beans!


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

DogTrainerRW said:


> All over the western world but in America especially people have a tendency to view their dogs as another kid of the family. In my work I find that to be one of the biggest problems. People spoil their dogs based on their selfish needs to shower them with love. And while most people have the best, most loving (from their point of view) intentions, they do not really love their dog. Loving your dog means to accept his nature and provide him with what he needs and not what we think they should enjoy  this is what Cesar Millan advocates.
> 
> Based on this, it is not surprising that we have a lot of people that find the positive reinforcement training method better (or more modern) because it is essentially an extension of our tendency to spoil our dogs and not correct them when called for. But just because more people find it nicer doesnt mean they are correct.


hey, rw! :--)

let me clarify absolutely: i *don't* 'spoil' dogs - i have high expectations of the dogs, and the clients. 
i have helped disabled clients train their own assistance-dog to public-access standards; but my primary work since 1985 
has been in B-Mod, modifying undesirable behaviors - dog-aggro, human-aggro, nuisance barking, phobias, OCD, sep-anx, and so on.

i don't do pos-R or reward-based training because it is 'nicer' --- i use pos-R because it teaches; it's efficient, it's effective, 
-and- it's enjoyable: people will avoid things they dislike, if the owner or family avoids training the pup, they are quickly 
an un-trained and difficult teenaged pup - ignorant, willful, no longer connected by that elastic umbilical, 
but boldly and independently exploring - and *much* harder to now, train.

just as people avoid distasteful experiences, dogs will evade being recalled if RECALL is followed by applied-punishment: 
puppy is happily at play with another dog at the park - we call Pup, who ignores us, fully engaged with the new friend. 
we walk up on the puppy, scold, Pup sinks to the grass appeasingly, we swat her/his bum, clip the leash on, and go home. 
_what did the puppy just learn?_
recall or _COME!_ is in my experience, the single most commonly poisoned cue of all - and very often, the earliest 
cue to be tainted; yet for our dogs, it can be the most vitally-important and can literally save their lives. 


DogTrainerRW said:


> And just because the true nature of animals is something we dont want to think about doesnt mean ignoring it delivers better outcomes; quite the opposite in my experience.


who is suggesting we ignore the dog's "true nature"? 


DogTrainerRW said:


> Nobody disputes that wolves, and as an extension dogs, are pack animals with a complex social structure and hierarchy, books like Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation by L. David Mech and Three Among The Wolves by Helen Thayer highlight our latest understanding...


putting *thayer's memoir in the same category as *mech's compilation of research is a bit of a muddle - 
*thayer and her husband are not ethologists; they eulogize the one M-wolf as "Alpha" by name, and portray him as the dominant animal, without exception. they are not trained observers; backyard birdwatchers may or may not be accurate, objective, careful observers, too. 


DogTrainerRW said:


> ...Mechs comments on the matter are actually the key argument in the latest Time article on the matter. Both books provide deeper insights into the hierarchy and the less aggressive than previously assumed rise of the pack leader (to our latest understanding it is basically group selection instead of fighting it out).


 wolves don't vote another animal into office - parents get to be leaders by mating, whelping and rearing their children, as a co-operative effort. *IMO this is the key social difference between wolves and dogs - * 
the lack of a pair-bond and the polygamous nature of domestic dogs. 


> ...Millans calm-assertive pack leader position is in full alignment with all of this. If you want to criticize Cesar Millan, please do it with things he actually says or does but not by fabricating things he doesnt stand for.


having read his first book, and watched *every episode* up until Sept-2009, when i moved and no longer get Natl-Geo channel, 
i can list extensively and exhaustively *what I do that he does not, and what he does which I will not - *
but i am not writing a book - i am writing a post. 


DogTrainerRW said:


> ...provide the relevant differences between wolves and dogs as they relate to training and rehabilitating dogs.


 i have already done so - in this post above, and in many others. 


DogTrainerRW said:


> *bold added - *
> 
> I also would at some point like to see a compelling argument for *Victoria Stillwells approach of positive ONLY training*.


*stilwell does not espouse *only rewarding desired, and only ignoring un-desired behaviors -* 
for one thing, it is impossible to always and forever be 'positive', as in rewarding, happy, upbeat... 
life happens, the environment can throw us negatives anytime. (shrug) and WE are not always 'happy' - with the circs, 
with the dog's behavior, with our own inadequacy, with our frustration, whatever the thing might be. 
i can GIVE rewards - or withhold them; i can OFFER social contact or play, or REMOVE the opportunity. 
and most of all, before training begins, i can *manage effectively* to prevent unwanted behaviors, which are predictable, from even happening - let alone becoming habits. 


DogTrainerRW said:


> I think that position is as wrong as alpha-rolling a dog for everything (just to be clear Cesar Millan does NOT do that excessively, but only when addressing TRUE aggression, where it is an absolutely acceptable approach to bring a dog back into a balanced state).


 we are going to disagree on this - there were multiple occasions when CM/DW showed a dog being rolled or pinned, who had as yet displayed *zero aggressive behaviors*, IMO - with several decades of B-mod and more years before that, training basic behaviors.

also IMO and IME, there is never any reason to deliberately pin a dog *except for mandatory and immediate urgent vet-care - * bleeding, getting a dog to regurgitate poison after ingestion, etc. 


DogTrainerRW said:


> I watch Victorias show as well... in a 2009 episode I saw her advocating (together with a vet) that a particular dog with separation anxiety should be put on anti-anxiety medication. Now that is TRUE animal cruelty in my view and a complete humanization of an animal that is really not to its benefit at all.


 again, as a certified Veterinary Assistant, i would disagree; 
that dogs can use similar medicines, surgical techniques, eat similar food to humans, etc, is only reasonable - 
dogs share 65% of the human genome and are another mammalian species, why should this be astonishing? 


DogTrainerRW said:


> Anyone who thinks that it is a positive approach to drugging a dog your methods dont work on should really take a look at the Cesar Millan DVD Common Canine Misbehaviors, where he shows how to address separation anxiety with CALM-ASSERTIVE leadership. He teaches the owners how to bring their dog back to balance and resolve this issue and he doesnt touch the dog even once. Same issue, different methods, which is healthier for the dog?


having worked with dogs whose sep-anx was so severe that they had broken teeth or dug gaping wounds in their foreleg with compulsive licking [ALD or OCD licking with a wound exposing muscle and tendon], and other forms of self-injury, i disagree - 
just as i would disagree that we could 'cure' malaria with a laying-on of hands in a healing ceremony; the healing-ceremony might be a great emotional support adjunct, but a parasite causes malaria, and MEDS are needed to combat the bloodborne infection. 


DogTrainerRW said:


> The only thing two dog trainers will ever be able to agree on is that a third dog trainer has no clue.


that's funny - i have been in the same room with dozens, and occasionally hundreds of other trainers, 
and rarely if ever did we disagree - except over the lunch-menu, as i don't eat meat.


DogTrainerRW said:


> *bold added - *
> 
> Just because certain groups of dog trainers and their organizations disagree with a certain method and would like to see their own ways advanced, doesnt mean *their criticism is valid*, it doesnt mean it is wrong either but the notion *because critisism exists, it is valid* is a false conclusion.


looking at the source of the criticism tells me more than the actual difference - 
i regard the criticism of AVSAB as considerably more weighty and important than my own, for instance; and the fact that 
the program CM/DW, the books, the videos, and the rest of the trademarked sales-material has an overwhelmingly 
non-professional fan base, among pet-owners and even people who have never owned so much as a goldfish in a bowl in their lives, IMO speaks volumes. 


DogTrainerRW said:


> ...lets have real arguments with substance instead of demonizing people. We obviously all care about dogs. If we can all start acknowledging that and go from there, I think our dogs are all better off in the long run.


what have i been doing for the past 6 years, and for over 20-years before the DW-show debuted? 
*the last time i used a prong-collar i believe, was in 1980 - *
the client brought the dog, a 125 to 150# Dane-mix, along with the prong already on the dog; in 20-mins, the dog was on a wide all-fabric martingale collar, and walking just fine; we still had to work on lunging, but without the prong to exacerbate the dog-reactivity, life was much improved for the dog.

as soon as *cesar* STOPS rolling, pinning, poking, 'tapping' with his foot, lifting dogs on a slip-lead or slip-collar, flooding dogs, and otherwise escalating behaviors by IMO using confrontation, he and i will have much more common ground. 
as it stands... 
the commonalities are limited to mostly verbal, and are truisms that i heard with my first pup, under my mentor in 4-H - in the 1960s. 
time has moved on - WW-II training methods are IMO + IME outdated, and the rationalizations used to support them are convoluted beyond belief.

Ur choices to train are Ur own; as are mine - i will not adopt the uppercut while sitting espoused by the *monks of New Skete*, 
as a 'correction'; nor will i roll, pin, flood, use a choke-chain or shock or a prong, etc. 
happy training, 
--- terry


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

Colette said:


> I agree with the experts - not the witch doctor selling his magic beans!


I agree with all the professional behaviour, veterinary and training bodies and individuals who are condemning this CM persons 'teachings'.:yesnod:

He may have the look, the swagger and the attitude but he does not have the knowledge that he should have. He is a showman, pure and simple.


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

DogTrainerRW said:


> People spoil their dogs based on their selfish needs to shower them with love. And while most people have the best, most loving (from their point of view) intentions, they do not really love their dog. Loving your dog means to accept his nature and provide him with what he needs and not what we think they should enjoy  this is what Cesar Millan advocates. Based on this, it is not surprising that we have a lot of people that find the positive reinforcement training method better (or more modern) because it is essentially an extension of our tendency to spoil our dogs and not correct them when called for. But just because more people find it nicer doesnt mean they are correct.


Positive reinforcement is better because it really works, once the dog understands it pays to go along with your wishes, they really enjoy complying and trusting your calm judgement and leadership.

A happy dog, that's not fearful, is simply more receptive and learns quicker.

I just watched a Cesar show tonight with Cesar tackling an aggressive bulldog which had a poor start with an owner who didn't train and neglected the dog. Contrary to Collete's statement he did actually observe body language position of ears, and actually Cesar quite often comments on those. In this show, he did read the dog I think, though it's oft pointed out here, that he makes many errors in reading signs, and this can be a cause of Cesar's regular encounters with the canine's canines *grin*

On the plus point, Cesar advised ceasing use of a prong collar and swiched to a Halti "Gentle Leader", he did use a vibration collar but it was demonstrated on human wrists to show that it was not giving pain, like a shock collar.

However the real shame was, Cesar was using Positive Reinforcement with the owner, but neglecting to have the owner positively reinforce the dog's good behaviours enough whilst it was happening. All to easy to do, we humans seem to rapidly take good behaviour for granted.

I do agree though with the sentiment, that's there's far too many dog Mum's & Pop's around, who follow human instincts with their dogs, rather than follow the practices established by research and experience.


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

> do agree though with the sentiment, that's there's far too many dog Mum's & Pop's around, who follow human instincts with their dogs, rather than follow the practices established by research and experience.


Can I just clarify what you mean by this? Are you suggesting that we should treat dogs as dogs, not as children?

If so, I actually disagree. Let me explain:

1) Both dogs and children need to be taught boundaries, what is and is not acceptable, how to behave in polite society, and how to follow certain "commands" from their parents / owners.

2) Both dogs and children can develop serious problems as a result of improper teaching / training / rearing. This can include problems themselves, like anxieties and lack of confidence, and "behaviour problems" - inc aggression, destructive behaviour, etc.

3) Dogs, children and every other animal with a brain and a nervous system are capable of learning through the same basic principles.

Every such animal, from goldfish and chicken, through dogs and horses to th big cats and great, up to human children and adults, will obey the same laws of learning. That behaviours that are rewarded / rewarding will be repeated, whilst behaviours that are not will be extinguished.

In all cases, harsh punishment is unnecessary, and "after the fact" punishment is virtually useless even in humans. Rewarding good behaviour and compliance, and developing relationships based on trust and respect - rather than fear - is the quickest, easiest rou7te to a well behaved person or animal.

Perhaps my critism of CM's body language thing is jaded by one particular episode which featured a spitz type dog, in a crate in a garage... CM entered the room and the dog started to bark and growl. As CM approached the dog backed up, lowered its head and continued to make a racket. CM approaches and looms over the crate, staring directly at the dog. The dog is by now wedged as far back into the crate as possible, head and tail down, ears back, desperately trying to get away. CM just stands there looming and staring. Eventually the noise stops, but by now the cowering dog is shaking.

CM's take on all this?
What a surprise the dog is being dominant!!! Oh and "he's shaking because he's learning"!

Seriously, this is not the only occassion - CM routinely works with dogs showing every behaviour indicative of fear / stress / calming signals etc and in virtually every case he still insists it is dominance. These dogs are doing everything they possibly can to make themselves understood but he doesn't bother to even attempt to listen. Just jumkps to his usual BS conclusion andn yanks them into submission.



> Positive reinforcement is better because it really works, once the dog understands it pays to go along with your wishes, they really enjoy complying and trusting your calm judgement and leadership.
> 
> A happy dog, that's not fearful, is simply more receptive and learns quicker.


Agreed. But personally I would fear, not trust, a person who ignored my good behaviour yet choked / hanged / pronged / hit / kicked / pinned me by the throat etc.


----------



## tripod (Feb 14, 2010)

Is this the episode you speak of: Cesar Millan | Dog Whisperer | Commentary on Bella

I have yet to see CM read or describe canine communication with any skill - its like he and i are watching different dogs


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

Yes that's the show tripod, I am sure you could list many objections, just remember I am trying to be balanced, as I feel it is more likely to win ppl over than being very stridently anti-Cesar, casting doubt via a few clear points and putting some ****** in the uncritical fan hero worship cult. I'm not saying Cesar's reading in that show is spot on, nor would I feel qualified to comment on such.

The more knowledge one seeks out over the issue, the more obvious Cesar's "mistakes" become, though I have not heard of lines of ppl suing him (just 1 case on Dog Psychology Centre, or saying he 'broke their dog') which one would expect if he was generally not improving the dog's situation.

Have you seen the "Clockwork Orange" show? One with a Lurcher that was initialy described as a Doberman, and was very fearful and not eating except with coaxing? At one point in that in the swimming pool, Cesar really looks out of his depth and somewhat phobic, despite the dog being obviously one of the most gentle creatures and to me, it just wanted some support because it was not ever going to be able to float in water.


@Collette: I agree there's many similarities, but I rather feel that many ppl do make unwitting errors, by babying the dogs overly, rather than ensuring the dog's real needs are met. Dog's sleeping in bedrooms for example, when they can perfectly happily accept a regular secure spot in less proximity and luxury. I could go on about constant petting, and all the fat overweight young dogs I see that are getting constant treats, but that discussion would belong in another thread and I can't see anything positive about axe grinding on that issue.

I just feel it's a mistake to isolate on the bad shows, and not acknowledge that Cesar has apparently taken on board some of the criticism. Anyone who does things, learns about spectators carping from side lines rather than chipping in constructively, and when you do do things, you inevitably err on occasion.


----------



## tripod (Feb 14, 2010)

Rob I think you're a few years behind me so  - I am over being balanced when I witness such mistruth and in some cases abuse of dogs. Don't mean to be mello-dramatic but it really has gone on too long.

Ok get the emotion out of the way...that's why I like Eric's description of that ep as he talks in facts and in a relaxed manner for everyone to consider.

I also don't believe that CM uses R+ on pet owners - for that to be so we would have to be aware that their behaviour has changed and that they are more likely to increase the behaviour that he advises. This is many of the follow up segments/shows hasn't been so.
Yes he is chamring and nice to them which is all well and good but in many cases this is not reinforcing.

I am cynic  and I don't see a whole lot of evidence that CM has taken on criticism or increased his knowledge. He still preaches the same tired old lines and invents more ways for dogs to be considered dominant. Do I agree with some of the things he says in his shows - yes, a small amount for sure. But the dogs' signaling, that he seems to be unaware of, screams at me from the screen telling me they are distressed. Calm-submissive is what he describes but not what i see. Distressed, still and miserable does not equal calm. This, for me, is often the biggest challenge - teaching people about doggie signaling when in their minds they are thinking DW stuff 

I don't think that the failing is in 'spoiling' or 'babying' dogs, from my experience its lack of understanding dogs and how they fit in human life. I don't think CM supplies a better alternative to help us with the culture clash - just the other extreme. He is not the first, last, or only one to preach discipline, exercise etc.etc.etc.etc. His fans just think he is 

OK there I go agin getting sucked into another pointless debate about this person - he and his actions consume enough of my time asnd energy (for all the wrong reasons) so I am out


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

EXCERPT from the linked article - Volume VII Issue 1


> *bold + underline added - *
> 
> _ Just as dangerous for dogs is the myth of an *ideal*: a loyal sidekick, well-adjusted, house-trained, tons of fun and ready to give love unconditionally. The expectations of the dog owner can be unreasonable, informed by cultural icons such as Lassie and Rin Tin Tin or predicated on the cuteness of a "helpless" puppy.
> *"Being a pet," that is, simply learning to co-habitate with a human family, let alone save Timmy from the well or endure dress-up time, is already a "demanding job for a dog, requiring self-control and canine emotional and cognitive skills matching those of a good working dog" *(Haraway, 2003: 38). If the dog cannot live up to her owners' ideals, she can, once again, fairly easily be discarded. [5
> ...


the owners taught the dog as a pup, a game which became a generalized compulsion - 
but it's STILL the dog's 'fault' and he is punished - not the #*%[email protected]! twits that installed the obsession.

there are, BTW, many alternatives to treat or re-teach a compulsive behavior - 
the choices are *not* limited to 
* 'live with the behavior', 
* 'get rid of the dog', 
* 'extinguish the behavior via applied punishment' : 
prong-collar, choke-chain, shock-collar, jerks, 'taps', rattle-can, shake-bottle, throw-chains, spray-bottle, spray-collar, ultrasonic-burst, or other aversives, coercives, or 'corrections' - 
and i here specifically include threatening body-language, intimidation, and confrontation, as well as flooding 
[immersing the animal in stimuli known to cause stress, distress or fear].

happy training, 
- terry


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

RobD-BCactive said:


> ...to me, [the Lurcher] just wanted some support because [the dog] was not ever going to be able to float in water.


no, that is true: dogs do not and cannot 'float' - they are unlike humans, negatively buoyant; if they stop swimming, 
they sink promptly - which is why swimming is good aerobic exercise while being low-impact, but *must* be supervised. 
*fencing-off any pool too deep for the dog to stand in, as we do to prevent children getting into water, is imperative.*


RobD-BCactive said:


> ...I rather feel that many ppl do make unwitting errors, by babying the dogs overly, rather than ensuring the dog's real needs are met.
> Dogs sleeping in bedrooms for example, when they can perfectly happily accept a regular secure spot in less proximity and luxury. [or] ...constant petting, and... fat overweight young dogs I see [given] constant treats, but that discussion would belong in another thread and I can't see anything positive about axe grinding on that issue.


how is isolating a newly-purchased puppy, only 8-WO, and allowing the pup to whine, bark, yelp or otherwise 
vocalize in distress, helpful? yet i see it recommended here on PF-uk, frequently - *just make the puppy deal, ignore him, don't give in when she cries... *, etc. Isolating a pup who will need to get up in the wee-hours ANYWAY in order to void, is IMO pointless and even more, unkind; it creates entirely un-necessary added stress, for a young animal already coping as best s/he can, with huge changes. U can always move the post-housetraining puppy out of the bedroom, later; there is no need to put the unhousetrained new-arrival downstairs, 3 rooms away, etc - have the pup where they can be easily monitored and readily gotten out to toilet, As Well As comforted by the near-presence of adults who can be seen, smelt and heard - 
everybody sleeps better; what's the big deal? _the puppy is reassured, and nearby for monitoring._ :thumbsup:

for my part, my dog slept in my bedroom as did my clients, *because* it is quality-time for dogs left solo during the working day, 
*and* if anything happens, i can get my dog the H*** out of the house, promptly - without hunting for a dog in the dark. 
dogs in my bedroom may be crated or gated or free - depending on age, trustworthiness, etc - but sleeping on wall-to-wall is hardly IMO 'luxury'. 


RobD-BCactive said:


> I just feel it's a mistake to isolate on the bad shows, and not acknowledge that Cesar has apparently taken on board some of the criticism. Anyone who does things, learns about spectators carping from side lines rather than chipping in constructively, and when you do do things, you inevitably err on occasion.


'isolate the bad shows'? 
i watched *every* episode from 2004 to Sept-2009; i saw no sign in that entire period, that the tactics, tools or methods, 
let alone the philosophical underpinnings, had changed - 
did U? where and when did CM/DW acknowledge that, due to some new fact or learning, he was changing X? 
or said, 'i no longer think / feel / believe that...' ?

we are not discussing 'erring on occasion' but IMO a clear and systematic pattern of behavior, documented on screen. 
all my best, 
- terry


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

> I agree there's many similarities, but I rather feel that many ppl do make unwitting errors, by babying the dogs overly, rather than ensuring the dog's real needs are met. Dog's sleeping in bedrooms for example, when they can perfectly happily accept a regular secure spot in less proximity and luxury. I could go on about constant petting, and all the fat overweight young dogs I see that are getting constant treats, but that discussion would belong in another thread and I can't see anything positive about axe grinding on that issue.


People often make unwitting errors - now that I certainly DO agree with!

Dogs sleeping in bedrooms? What's the big deal? Many dogs would prefer to sleep in the same general location as their family, and many people like having the dog there. Win win situation. Sleeping in the bedroom does NOT of itself cause the dog to become "dominant" or develop any other behaviour problems. Personally I see it just as a personal matter. If you want the dog to sleep in the bedroom, fine. In the kitchen, fine. In the lounge, fine.

As for fat dogs constantly getting treats - I think we can all agree that is a problem, but it is certainly NOT an argument against R+. Training treats should only be pea-sized, and as soon as the dog has mastered the cue, rewards should be put on an intermittent schedule. Not to mention that access, freedom, main meals, walks, toys and games, petting and praise etc are ALL suitable forms of R+. Or that it is up to the owner to ensure that the dog gets the right balance of food intake : exercise to ensure healthy weight.

But indeed - surely both dogs and kids need their actual needs met, and neither should be allowed to run, nor treated into obesity.

In the interests of "balance":

1) I agree with CM's stance on BSL being nonsense, and his promotion of pit bulls etc in a positive light. :thumbup:

2) I am with CM on his anti puppy farm, pro-adoption / rescue stance. :thumbup:

3) I agree with the "exercise, discipline, affection" mantra, thoug possibly not in the same way. But the basic principles of ensuring your dog is well behaved, knows the rules and obeys your cues etc, gets plenty of suitable exercise and mental stimulation, and is loved and well treated - all good.

Funnily enough though, all those things have been preached and practised by a great many people for a great many years.

IMO they do NOT give CM the right to LIE to the owners and the public or to ABUSE dogs in the name of training.


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

tripod said:


> Yes he is chamring and nice to them which is all well and good but in many cases this is not reinforcing.
> 
> I am cynic  and I don't see a whole lot of evidence that CM has taken on criticism or increased his knowledge


The problem with this position, is that someone who's enjoyed and been impressed by the Dog Whisperer programs, is going to think you are out of your tree. They'll say "but it works" and think you're just slagging off Cesar out of spite or some professional jealousy.

There's plenty of Cesar fans out there, who will say it's worked for them.

He does encourage the owners, what's sad is amongst the correction how little positive encouragement of the dogs there is in most shows. Again Cesar says he's not training, but showing the owners how to change the dog behaviour, yet I do see examples where the owner is required to train the dog as follow up.

In that programme the explanation about the vibration collar not inflicting pain, must have been included for a reason!

Anyway this is pretty pointless debate, and I don't want a rehash of previous discussion.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Colette said:


> 1) I agree with CM's stance on BSL being nonsense, and his promotion of pit bulls etc in a positive light. :thumbup:
> 
> 2) I am with CM on his anti puppy farm, pro-adoption / rescue stance. :thumbup:
> 
> ...


yes - 
it is *incredible,* it is *unbelievable,* it is *amazing! - 
other people* have taken a strong stance against BSL; *other people* see pitbulls as a wonderful breed - 
they have their flaws as any breed, they have their great talents as any breed.

*other people* despise the profitable farming of domestic-dogs like cattle, the poor care in puppy-mills, 
the *lack of human contact* and *complete neglect of habituation to human environs -* 
household noises, walking on a leash, husbandry and handling - *no matter how hygienic,* 
puppy-mills neglect the social needs of domestic dogs - and most are far, far from 'hygienic'.

*other people* promote the adoption of pre-owned, pre-loved dogs - 
or pre-owned, pre-neglected dogs who need to make that vital connection of trust with human-beings, 
which they have not had the chance to make - trust, partnership, mutual support, emotional faith. 
there are great dogs and even pups in rescues, shelters, and breed-rescue - look! 

if U doubt that U can discern a major behavioral-issue from a minor quirk, *ask for help - * 
i have gone to the shelter with the prospective adopter, to look -at- a dog or look -for- a dog; 
find a dog-savvy person, bear in mind that not ALL behaviors will show in an hour getting acquainted 
or even evaluating, and choose a dog who is homeless as that next companion. 
*are they all perfect? * no - are U?  *are most problem behaviors addressable? * yes! 
and in many cases, just decent management and consistent rules will fix the problem, without pro-help.

*exercise, discipline, affection - *  What vet, trainer, behaviorist, dog-owner, groomer, 
pet-sitter, or anyone else who knows anything about dogs, *does not see exercise as mandatory?* 
only stuffed-toys made to look-like dogs, don't need exercise. :001_tt2: otherwise, old, young, they ALL do! 
*discipline - * 
this is not autocratic, harsh or punitive, IMO - *discipline is rules.* rules for humans, too - 
don't loom-over a timid dog; don't grab a dog who just came over to sniff Ur shoes; don't assume liberties 
which U never, ever would with a human-stranger U had just met! be polite, be friendly; not intrusive, 
overbearing or insensitive. for dogs, the rules need to be consistent - *everybody has to agree on what's OK.* 
if friends or relatives allow the dog to do things that U do not want - *Correct the human - Not the dog.* 
be an advocate for Ur dog - don't allow complete strangers to mug the dog, feed them inapropos treats, etc.

*affection - * 
praise is affection made concrete; so is social contact, emotional support, paying attention to the dog - 
what worries them? what makes them happiest? what bores them? thrills them? overexcites them? 
*providing for the dog's needs by making time to train, find DOG-social time, give the dog a chance 
to do things the *dog* enjoys - stretch a little! - * is important; step out of Ur own comfort-zone, 
and do something for and with Ur dog.

i don't worry about which of these 3 comes 'first' - they are in my eyes, simultaneous. 
*management* IMO comes first, last and always - to prevent unwanted behaviors is crucial, and lifelong - 
set the dog up for success, not failure; it saves a lot of anguish on both ends of the leash.

happy training, 
- terry


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

Colette said:


> Dogs sleeping in bedrooms? What's the big deal? Many dogs would prefer to sleep in the same general location as their family, and many people like having the dog there. Win win situation.


Well I have seen many threads where issues with the dogs on toilet training, chewing, and other undesirable behaviours are made far worse due to such sleeping arangements. I'm not even going to consider the hygeine issues.

Then there's the sensational cases where a dog turns aggressive against one of the owners, and winds up doing a savage bite attack from it's sleeping spot, on the master bed due to it's desire to monopolise the lady of the household.

When it's obvious that the average dog owner, has problems having their dogs walk comfortably and safely on a leash, I wonder how they will police the beds and other non dog proofed furnishings.

Dogs will sleep quite happily and comfortably in their own spot, and having interrupted sleep due to doggy nocturnal movements, doesn't seem like win-win to me. Just watch the night cams on the TV shows, where the dogs are uncrated in bedrooms.


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

Colette said:


> In the interests of "balance":
> 
> 1) I agree with CM's stance on BSL being nonsense, and his promotion of pit bulls etc in a positive light. :thumbup:
> 
> ...


Me too! All the above is what most good trainers and behaviourists have been saying for years! Those ideals are not exclusive to CM and he did not invent them.  It is a shame though that whilst he was adopting those theories, that he did not also bother to learn about proper canine body language and how to correctly interprete it - but then I suppose his fans are too easily impressed and swallow what he has to say about what he does not know anyway!


----------



## tripod (Feb 14, 2010)

RobD-BCactive said:


> The problem with this position, is that someone who's enjoyed and been impressed by the Dog Whisperer programs, is going to think you are out of your tree. They'll say "but it works" and think you're just slagging off Cesar out of spite or some professional jealousy.
> 
> There's plenty of Cesar fans out there, who will say it's worked for them.
> 
> ...


Rob I'm not being smart here but I deal with about 20 clients a week who have either watched the show religiously, tried some of the stuff and are reaping the 'rewards' of this - this accounts for about half the people I see/talk to each week through my business.
When the CM thing first started, I did the entire thing of explaining in facts the problems with this attitude to dogs. I have got lots of 'attention' from CM fans, some of whom have found there way here, and have dealt with the criticism from them. Its tired and old - I no longer go after the die-hard fans, they don't want to know - when they are ready to develop a true understanding of dog behaviour and humane treatment of man's best friends I will be waiting to help them and their dogs without bitterness.
I spend my energy cleaning up his (and others') messes and I need that energy.

Yes fans of his will say that 'it' works but that number is reducing and reducing. Dogs are amazing and most consistently applied training programs will _appear_ to work - but thats all in the eye of the beholder... When someone says that their dog is happy and confident after such and such training technique I ALWAYS have my doubts - seeing is believing and if people think what they see on TV is 'working' well then I will prob disagree with them. Thats where my energy goes - how do you recognise that a situation is too much for a dog - that's the key.
In pretty much all of those cases I take on that are ex-punitive-training-victims the people's entire attitude is turned around; many of them become avid spreaders of the 'good' word. That's where my energy lies, not with this


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I'm so glad to see people are still talking about CM.:thumbup: The guy is still good at his job imo.*


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

leashedForLife said:


> how is isolating a newly-purchased puppy, only 8-WO, and allowing the pup to whine, bark, yelp or otherwise
> vocalize in distress, helpful? yet i see it recommended here on PF-uk, frequently - *just make the puppy deal, ignore him, don't give in when she cries... *, etc. Isolating a pup who will need to get up in the wee-hours ANYWAY in order to void, is IMO pointless and even more, unkind;


The dogs are very soon perfectly happy about it and settle to those arrangements very quickly, it's just the way things are in the new place. I could make emotional comments about lack of litter mates and the mother, and the obvious failings of poor ersatz substitutes for this comfort provided by human near strangers.

Having a dog that's a near constant companion seems often to result in seperation axiety issues and problems down the line with damage, that seems to be a common thread. The dog might enjoy these mini-blitzes but it causes huge distress, expense and suffering to the owners.

You know perfectly well that the advice to ignore cries and noises, is to avoid reinforcing the undesirable behaviour, and resulting in the long term for greater distress.


----------



## tripod (Feb 14, 2010)

RobD-BCactive said:


> Well I have seen many threads where issues with the dogs on toilet training, chewing, and other undesirable behaviours are made far worse due to such sleeping arangements. I'm not even going to consider the hygeine issues.
> 
> Then there's the sensational cases where a dog turns aggressive against one of the owners, and winds up doing a savage bite attack from it's sleeping spot, on the master bed due to it's desire to monopolise the lady of the household.
> 
> ...


Wow me and about 80% of my clients better watch out so for the raging vicious dog coming to get me . ALL my fosters start off in my bedroom, my dog has occassionally slept in there and even on the bed :eek6: (my cat always sleeps there  ). Sorry to be smart again, but this is the biggest load of hooey.

From widespread studies on dog bites and attacks the common ingredients in dog attacks tend to be: 
-unneutered dog
-inappropriate/inadequate supervision
-multiple dogs
-'resident' dog rather than companion/pet dog
-housing such as kennels, chaining that leads to reduced attention/interaction, distress, reactivity

The leading cause of minor bites in the home is resource guarding (and handleability), sometimes of the dog's 'spot'.

The leading cause of inappropriate toileting behaviour in otherwise toilet trained adults is medical issues. After that distress such as separation.

The leading causes of excessive chewing (outside of healthy puppies) are pain/physiological issues, distress at separation (in many cases a physiological issue), boredom.

Undesireable behaviour is caused by inadequate training and socialisation.

Its stuff like that that further buries actual real info on dog behaviour in quagmire. Taking your knowledge from surveying internet forums and TV shows is just not adequate to make such broad statements in relation to dog behaviour.

Sure a lack of boundaries will cause any animal to act inappropriatley but this is not representative in dogs that sleep with their owners. Behaviour problems are for the most part people problems not dog problems.

OK now I am definitley out of this conversation.


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

tripod said:


> Rob I'm not being smart here but I deal with about 20 clients a week who have either watched the show religiously, tried some of the stuff and are reaping the 'rewards' of this - this accounts for about half the people I see/talk to each week through my business.


Sounds good for business. The problem is that anti-Cesar people are posting statements that are easily refuted. It undermines the argument against it.

When someone says he ignores the ears, and there's been a programme shown recently where Cesar talks about dog ear movements, it doesn't look good, it actually undermines the points made.

Now there's nothing wrong with pointing factual errors out, so that the quality of the criticism improves and it actually holds water, to a typical casual viewer of the show who is raising a dog. It doesn't mean someone is a support of CM, and believe it or not, they might prefer to apply energy in better ways than be sucked into these justifications.


----------



## tripod (Feb 14, 2010)

Yes but his interpretation of the ear movements plus lesson 1 in interpreting body language in ANY animal is you have to take the whole animal and the context.

Yes Janice his abuse keeps me in business  :frown:  there are not enough smilies to express how disgusting that is to me.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

RobD-BCactive said:


> The problem with this position, is that someone who's enjoyed and been impressed by the Dog Whisperer programs,
> is going to think you are out of your tree. They'll say "but it works" and think you're just slagging off Cesar
> out of spite or some professional jealousy.


ah, i see - AVSAB, AVMA, the ASPCA, *nicholas dodman, DVM* - they are all jealous? 


RobD-BCactive said:


> There's plenty of Cesar fans out there, who will say it's worked for them.


the ones who ignore the *don't do this at home* disclaimer? 
the ones who later whine about how their dog does A, B or C - which are clearly fallout from aversives?

the ones who later hire a pos-R trainer to fix the problems - subsequent to rolling the dog as a pup, 
neck-pokes that make the dog snappish when their collar is touched, harsh handling that makes the dog hesitant? 
the dogs who won't DO * ANYTHING for fear it might be on the Bad Behaviors List? 
sullen, untrusting, manic, withdrawn, defensive, timid - it manifests in different ways, in individual dogs; 
but fallout from aversives and coercion is far more-likely than it is UNlikely.

conversely, there are vanishingly-few serious issues of fallout subsequent to pos-R AKA reward-based training. 
if U reward [or mark with a click, flash...] the wrong behavior, its no big deal - just don't mark or reward it again. 
extinction of an entirely unrewarded behavior is painless and takes no enormous effort by the handler; 
it just happens.

*self-rewarding behaviors* include barking, exploring, self-stimulating [licking, grooming...] - 
which can become OCD behaviors. managing to prevent or redirect self-rewarding behaviors is needed; 
eating food left unattended is a self-rewarding behavior; policing the kitchen is how we prevent it. 
*digging is self-rewarding - * if U don't want Ur dog to dig, don't leave the dog in the garden for hours, 
unsupervised.  prevention beats cure, any day and every day.

happy training, 
- terry


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

Sorry Terry I didn't see those people you mention reply in this thread, what have they got to do with it?

Is there a problem with having some factual basis to the criticism of CM?

Actually I have met happy dog owners out exercising their happy dogs, who have enthused, and well I have responded by trying to diplomatically hint at the justified doubts of CM, based on the work of scientific evidence based animal behaviour researchers.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

RobD-BCactive said:


> Well I have seen many threads where issues with the dogs on toilet training, chewing, and other undesirable behaviours are made far worse due to such sleeping arangements.


hey, rob! :--) 
and i've had clients whose dogs chewed destructively overnight, or before the owners were up, or voided indoors, and the destruction and/or toilet-training issues ceased when they move the dog into the bedroom - 


RobD-BCactive said:


> I'm not even going to consider the hygeine issues.


my dog and my clients dogs sleep *in my bedroom - * not * on my bed. * there's a difference. 
FWIW i *never* advocate, suggest, or even support having a dog share the bed.

re hygiene, 
if my dog is too filthy to sleep in my bedroom, then the dog's dirty state is IMO the problem - 
not 'where does the dog sleep'!

i am deliberately ignoring the sensational-cases of bloody attacks - as speculation IMO is futile. 


RobD-BCactive said:


> ...the average dog owner, has problems having their dogs walk comfortably and safely on a leash,
> I wonder how they will police the beds and other non dog-proofed furnishings.


 by closing the door when they are not themselves in the bedroom?  


RobD-BCactive said:


> Dogs will sleep quite happily and comfortably in their own spot...


this is not always true - some dogs who are already left at home, alone, for 9 to 10 hours a day, 5 days a week, 
get anxious, and sharing the bedroom can help them relax + sleep. night-time pacing, chewing, and other 
anxiety-driven behaviors can be rooted in social deprivation or simple boredom.

many dogs as young adults CAN sleep happily + contentedly in their own area - 
which is fine; but denying social-support and the reassurance of adult-presence to a young puppy 
is IMO + IME excessively dogmatic, and often causes problems that might otherwise not exist. 
moving a 4-MO pup out of the bedroom - they are now housetrained in most cases, more emotionally mature, 
more independent, etc - is straightforward and if that's what the owner wants, fine.

the young pup [under 6-MO to 12-MO, depending] is likely to still need *confinement* to a dog-proof area, 
which can be gated, behind a door, crated, etc. 
most adult-dogs can sleep without worries about destructive chewing, indoor voiding, etc.

personally, *if there is a fire, weather emergency, or other overnight problem* i want my dog 
in my bedroom - or my clients dogs! - so i can KNOW where they are, have leashes, etc, to hand, 
and even in total darkness, get us out of the situation.

JMO + IME, 
- terry


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

RobD-BCactive said:


> The [puppies] are very soon perfectly happy about it and settle to those arrangements very quickly, it's just the way things are in the new place. I could make emotional comments about lack of litter mates and the mother, and the obvious failings of poor ersatz substitutes for this comfort provided by human near strangers.


my experience, rob, has been that since i am providing food, care, direction, training, and so on, is that i am a perfectly adequate substitute as a parent-figure for their dam - 
in terms of a reassuring adult-presence.

*for UNDER-age pups* who should not even be separated from dam + sibs [before 49-days age or much to be preferred, 
56-days minimum] i would prefer the buyer or the recipient of the 'gift' underage pup, *go to the authorities and report 
the sale or separation of the underage pup or litter - immediately. *


RobD-BCactive said:


> Having a dog that's a near constant companion seems often to result in seperation axiety issues and problems down the line with damage, that seems to be a common thread. The dog might enjoy these mini-blitzes but it causes huge distress, expense and suffering to the owners.


this is one of the reasons i do not suggest or support dogs sharing the bed - 
sleeping in the same *room* is not likely to cause over-attachment, all else being normal - 
the dog is adequately exercised, gets sufficient stimulation, is not alone 60 or more hours weekdays, etc. 


RobD-BCactive said:


> ...the advice to ignore cries and noises, is to avoid reinforcing the undesirable behaviour, and resulting in the long term for greater distress.


IME simply bringing the young-pup into the bedroom, in a crate, simplifies life for everyone: 
the pup is no longer fussing, the crate is right there - the owner can get up at 3-AM, get the pup out, 
take them to toilet and get back to bed promptly - *thus preventing the fussing, getting everyone a decent night's sleep, 
and installing good housetraining early - * with a lot less emotional drama and IMO needless angst.

if the pup is not crying, we don't have to try to ignore that noise - and the pup does not have that distress. 
save money, time + space  then when pup IS housetrained, move the pubertal-pup where U please; 
they are now about 16-WO: not the highly-dependent, needy infants they were, on arrival. 
cheers, 
- terry


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

RobD-BCactive said:


> ...I didn't see those people you mention reply in this thread, what have they got to do with it?
> Is there a problem with having some factual basis to the criticism of CM?


 American Humane Association. Dog Whisperer Training Approach More Harmful than Helpful. September 6, 2006. 
American Humane Association, 2008. March 20, 2008
American Humane: Protecting Children and Animals Since 1877

Bullock, Marcus. Watching Eyes, Seeing Dreams, Knowing Lives. Representing Animals. 
Nigel Rothfels, Editor. Bloomington: Univ of Indiana Press, 2002. 99-118.

Coren, Stanley. How Dogs Think: Understanding the Canine Mind. 
New York: Free Press, 2004.

Eagleton, Terry. Ideology: An Introduction. London: Verso 1991.

Garner, Robert. Animals, Politics and Morality. 
Manchester: Manchester University Press,1993.

Grier, Katherine C. Pets in America: A History. 
Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, 2006.

Fudge, Erika. A Left-Handed Blow: Writing the History of Animals. Representing Animals. Nigel Rothfels, Editor. Bloomington: Univ of Indiana Press, 2002. 3-18.

Haraway, Donna. The Companion Species Manifesto. 
Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press, 2003.

Isenberg, Andrew C. The Moral Ecology of Wildlife. 
Representing Animals. Nigel Rothfels, Editor. Bloomington: Univ of Indiana Press, 2002. 48-65.

McConnell, Patricia. The Cautious Canine: How to Help Dogs Conquer Their Fears. 
Black Earth, WI: Dogs Best Friend, Ltd., 2005.

_____________. For the Love of a Dog. New York: Ballantine Books, 2006.

_____________. The Other End of the Leash: Why We Do What We Do Around Dogs. New York: Ballantine Books, 2003.

Mott, Maryann. Dog Whisperer to Critics: My Techniques Are Instinctual , 
July 31, National Geographic News. March 20, 2008. Dog Whisperer to Critics: My Techniques Are "Instinctual"

Nast, Heidi J. Loving... Whatever: Alienation, Neoliberalism and Pet-Love in the Twenty-First Century", 
ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies 5:2 (2006) 300-327. October 28, 2008. http://www.acme-journal.org/vol5/HNa.pdf.

Palmer, Clare. Animal Ethics: Wild and Domestic. 
Critical Animal Studies Collective. University of Washington. February 1, 2008.

Perlo, Katherine. Marx and the Underdog. 
Society and Animals 10:3 (2002) 304-318.

Pryor, Karen. Dont Shoot the Dog! The New Art of Teaching and Training. 
New York: Bantam Books, 1999.

Rothfels, Nigel. Introduction. Representing Animals. 
Nigel Rothfels, Editor. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 2002. viii-xv.

Tuan, Yi-Fu. Dominance and Affection: The Making of Pets. 
New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984.

Wolfe, Cary. Animal Rites: American Culture, the Discourse of Species and Post-humanist Theory. 
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003

Cesar Millan - The Dog Whisperer: Critics Answers

Critics Challenge 'Dog Whisperer' Methods | LiveScience

Hollywood & Celebrity Pet News: The Anti-Dog Whisperer

Modern Dog Training vs. Cesar Millan


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

American Humane: Newsroom: News Releases: Dog Whisperer



> _ 'Dog Whisperer' Training Approach More Harmful Than Helpful
> Denver (September 6, 2006)
> 
> The training tactics featured on Cesar Millan's Dog Whisperer program are inhumane, outdated and improper, according to a letter sent yesterday to the National Geographic Channel by American Humane, the oldest national organization protecting children and animals.
> ...


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

RobD-BCactive said:


> ...anti-Cesar people are posting statements that are easily refuted. It undermines the argument against it.
> 
> When someone says he ignores the ears, and there's been a programme shown recently where Cesar talks about dog ear movements, it doesn't look good, it actually undermines the points made.


actually, since i have seen every episode from 2004 UP * TO Sept-2009, rob, 
i have repeatedly said that obvious signals of fear, arousal, distress, anxiety, etc, 
are either utterly ignored OR blatantly verbally mislabeled to the viewing audience.

there is no possibility of misconstruing my statements - either dog-signals are ignored and bulldozed over, 
or the voice-over describes something done by the dog, in ways that no other dog-professional would 
describe that action - I-E, a dog yawns, it is dominance; the dog locks-up in fear and resists handling? 
dominance...

U also have to bear in mind, JUST looking at ears will not tell U much, even if the ear-position 
is accurately interpreted - just as a dog who has been taught to BITE perps in cop-k9 training will WAG + bite: 
the dog is doing the pleasurable, much-rewarded and encouraged behavior, on cue - and is happily excited. 
the tail indicates that happy excitement - but it does not mean that the dog will not happily bite. 
*dog body-language is a whole body exercise: ears And tail And posture And piloerection And... *

if CM/DW has suddenly begun accurately and sensitively reading dogs and handling them appropriately, 
using that displayed feedback to inform his handling, i have yet to hear about it. 
to my knowledge, he is still the same one-trick pony: Everything is dominance; 
everything is 'fixed' by demoting the dog, or promoting the human, or both - it's all hierarchy. 
*training - as in teaching cued behaviors - can be done without ever addressing social status - 
a new entry to 'Ripley's Believe it Or Not!* 

cheers, 
- terry


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

tripod said:


> Yes but his interpretation of the ear movements plus lesson 1 in interpreting body language in ANY animal is you have to take the whole animal and the context.
> 
> Yes Janice his abuse keeps me in business  :frown:  there are not enough smilies to express how disgusting that is to me.


Could it not be the fact that people "TRY" and copy his ways and go about it wrongly that is more likely the fault and not CM's? I too have seen him explain body language but some on here still insist their way is best.I like his way and think he has a great respect for animals and life in general.


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

Yeah he sure knows his canine body language!
YouTube - from the donkeys
and YouTube - The Dog Whisperer - Leash on a tail !!
:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

Perhaps I worded my comment badly. Milan does one of two things on his show.

In some cases he does not draw attention to the dogs bvody language at all. He simply states that the behaviour is caused by dominance, regardless of what the problem behaviour is, or what body language the dog is displaying.

In other cases he does draw attention to body language, then gives the same BS anyway. For example the old "its shaking because its learning" or whatever. 

Makes no odds to me which he does - both are inexcusable. There is no excuse for completely ignoring body language. And making statements about body language that are simply NOT TRUE is just a lie. Dogs do not cower, bow their heads, pin their ears back, tuck their tails between their legs and shake as a sign of "dominance" and claiming that they do is ludicrous. 

Factual basis for criticism? Factual basis????

Seriously, I thought we had covered this....

Evidence Against CM:

1) Peer reviewded, published scientific studies of domestic dog behaviour, wolf behaviour, feral dog behaviour, dog training methods / equipment, learning theory, animal behaviour in general, etc. Pretty much ALL of which goes totally against the theories and methods preached by CM.

2) The views of an extensive army of professionals, inc vets, dog trainers (inc pet, sport, working and assistance dog trainers), qualified behaviourists, rescue works (inc care staff and rehabilitators), animal welfare officials, etc.

Many of these have had to work with the fallout of CM style techniques - from dogs requiring vet treatment for collar injuries, to those whose basic training problems have escalated into very serious behaviour problems, to those dogs who have been surrendered or abandoned for their faults, etc.

These people have cleaned up CM's messes, they have trained / rehab'd, behaviour modified, rescued, rehomed, owned, worked and competed all sorts of dogs WITHOUT ever having to resort to CM style abuse.

I should point out that a great many of these individuals hold high level qualifications, inc BSc, MSc and PhD level degrees in subjects from animal care and management, zoology, through behaviour and welfare, to veterinary science.
Many are also members of professional bodies like as the APBC, APDT, various veterinary associations, etc.

3) Evidence other than scientific studies. 

For example, there is evidence (from veterinary records) that choke chains can cause a range of problems from transient foreleg paralysis, hindleg ataxia, fainting, nerve paralysis, and even collapsed tracheas. 
There is veterinary and photographic evidence of injuries caused by prong and chock collars.

4) Evidence on CM's own shows!

One only has to watch the DW with an open mind and a little knowledge to see how wrong he is. for example:

Watching the dogs body language (preferably without any sound) shows many dogs showing signs of stress, and in many cses extreme distress and fear.

Dogs throwing calming signals left right and centre, all of which are ignored by the humans present.

With the sound on, you will notice CM either totally ignore the dogs attempts to communicate, or hear him make up some nonsense that is patently untrue (like shaking because its learning!)

The "Don't try this at home" warnings. CM's get out of jail free card. He can preach to the masses about how wonderful and effective his methods are, but woe betide you get savaged for your troubles. not CM's fault that - no - obviously you were copying it wrong!

But it isn't just the people trying to copy CMs methods that have problems is it? CM get bitten on a regular basis. He has proved far more effectively than anyone else that alpha rolling triggers aggression. Decent dog trainers and behaviourists rarely get bitten, because they can read the dogs body language, they have bothered to thoroughly investigate the dogs problems, and because they do not resort to abuse or deliberately trigger aggression.

5) Look at the "cross-over" trainers / behaviourists. Finding people who spent years using CM type methods and tools, that have since changed to R+ methods is easy. There are plenty of them. These guys have used both methods with an open mind, and stuck with the one they found the best (usualy most effective and most humane, and least risky!) What about those who started out as R+ trainers then changed to P+ / R- methods like CM uses? A rare breed indeed. What does that tell you?

On the flip side, evidence FOR CM:

1) Most of his methods are based on "dominance theory", which came form a study of wolf behaviour. A study that has been totally discredited, and disproved repeatedly for decades now. Even those directly involved have now admitted it was flawed.

2) The people who tried his methods and found them effective.

I don't believe I have ever said that CMs methods never work. I'm sure sometimes they do. Personally though, I would rather get my results without casuing suffering to my dog, putting myself at risk, or potentially causing further behaviour problems.

It also depends what you mean by "work". If I managed to stop my dog performing an unwanted behaviour, by causing him so much distress that he emotionally shut down and stopped offering any behaviours I would NOT consider that a success. Rather I would feel like a monster - and rightly so!

Sadly, some people do just want a dog that lies there doing nothing, showing appeasement behaviours. But then, some people are sadists.

3) Magic! Let us not forget that CM's great wisdom comes from knowledge he was bron with. The fact he has ZERO qualifications in any related field, or the fact he has NEVER actually trained a dog to a high standard, are obviously irrelevent. He was born with it so it must be right.


----------



## tripod (Feb 14, 2010)

JANICE199 said:


> Could it not be the fact that people "TRY" and copy his ways and go about it wrongly that is more likely the fault and not CM's? I too have seen him explain body language but some on here still insist their way is best.I like his way and think he has a great respect for animals and life in general.


Unfortunatley, I see many of the same signs in the dogs he works with on his shows 

The reason I feel this is a waste of time is its the blind following the blind - if people want to broaden their experience there is a wealth of critical resources out there. This sort of thread will not convince or educate and will degenerate into the same old stuff.
If people genuninely want help thats not quick fix, not based on flawed inaccurate ideas, popular opinion or old wives _tails_ and not going to do further harm to pet or people than I will happily help but otherwise continue watching CM and the likes. I hope one day we can all get together with open minds and open eyes and develop our understanding


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

leashedForLife said:


> actually, since i have seen every episode from 2004 UP * TO Sept-2009, rob,
> i have repeatedly said that obvious signals of fear, arousal, distress, anxiety, etc,
> are either utterly ignored OR blatantly verbally mislabeled to the viewing audience.
> 
> there is no possibility of misconstruing my statements - either dog-signals are ignored and bulldozed over,


It wasn't your statement that was refuted. But that last one is not true of every show, though it is common particularly in the earlier shows. I saw some series 1 repeats and they had some real shockers in it.



JANICE199 said:


> Could it not be the fact that people "TRY" and copy his ways and go about it wrongly that is more likely the fault and not CM's?


I think that's a fair point.

However according to UK consensus opinion (I believe based on behavoural science) his approach & recommendations on food guarding, are actually quite likely to cause or escalate the issue. The guidance is out there from the Cesar's way book. But hearing explanations and reasoning of other experienced trainer-behavourists, that suggests that CM's advice is actually causing the problem in some cases.

One of the CM based websites (dog breed info one) actually talks about the animal behaviour researchers making mistakes, saying because CM's way wasn't followed the dogs were therefore unbalanced, causing spurious results. They also complain about ppl blackening his name. Now hopefully you can see the problem with that.

Why on earth wouldn't peer review and the competitive research process, come up with the flaws in the experiments? They're interested in uncovering the truth, and testing competing theories and models, not someone with a commercial product to market.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

EXCERPT, *bold added - * 
Volume VII Issue 1 


> _ I suggest that we *examine what we accept as givens* in the enactment and representation of dog-human relational moments.
> 
> Relational moments, writes Haraway, the instances in which a dog and a human make contact, are the smallest units of analysis in terms of the human-dog companion species, its inherited histories and necessary joint futures (2003: [ref 7).
> *In The Dog Whisperer there is, for each dog, a web of relational moments with which she has to contend: she must interact with her owners, the camera crew, and, by extension, the viewers at home, all of which are arranged around her interaction with Cesar Millan. *
> ...


----------



## tripod (Feb 14, 2010)

RobD-BCactive said:


> I think that's a fair point.
> 
> However according to UK consensus opinion (I believe based on behavoural science) his approach & recommendations on food guarding, are actually quite likely to cause or escalate the issue. The guidance is out there from the Cesar's way book. But hearing explanations and reasoning of other experienced trainer-behavourists, that suggests that CM's advice is actually causing the problem in some cases.
> 
> ...


First off all its not a _fair point _if it can be so easily refuted with tons of evidence 

Secondly, CM did not 'invent' his particular brand of rubbish - its been around forever. I remember people preaching this hooey since I started in dogs, at least two decades before we heard or saw anything of CM and DW. There is no correct way to do this stuff - its aversive and aversives cause fallout - this is non-refutable. I feel my blood pressure going up the more i stay in here :scared: I am going to spend some time with R+ trained/lived with canines :thumbup:


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

Rob, can I please ask for your actual stance on this issue? I'm getting all confused, some times you seem to be mainly pro R+, yet other times you defend CM vehemently despite all the evidence you have been offered. I'm curious as to what your personal opinion is regarding dog behaviour / training and specifically CM?

You keep going on about "evidence" despite having been provided with plenty. Yet no one has yet offered a single piece of evidence that Cesars way is either correct, effective, humane or safe.

How is that being unbiased? The evidence in the arguemnts "against" CM are extensive, and insurmountable. There is NO evidence "for" CM. I should that says it all.



> One of the CM based websites (dog breed info one) actually talks about the animal behaviour researchers making mistakes, saying because CM's way wasn't followed the dogs were therefore unbalanced, causing spurious results. They also complain about ppl blackening his name. Now hopefully you can see the problem with that.
> 
> Why on earth wouldn't peer review and the competitive research process, come up with the flaws in the experiments? They're interested in uncovering the truth, and testing competing theories and models, not someone with a commercial product to market.


I'm not sure I follow what you are saying here...

Are you actually suggesting that all the evidence is wrong? That every dog ruined by Cm preached abuse is only that way because the methods were not properly?

Do you honestly believe that CM is like the real Dr Doolittle, the ONLY one who has the correct knowledge and skills and every other trainer, behaviourist, owner etc has got it wrong?

I think you hit the nail on the head with one line though - about people with a commercial product to market. That is the point. CM is a showman, an entertainer, and he has got rich and famous from his show and subsequent books. He may be a pro showman, but he is not a pro dog trainer or behaviourist.

And for the record, anyone who makes a living abusing dogs and encouraging thousands of others to do the same deserves to have their name blackened. It wouldn't be so easy if every other word he spouted wasn't total drivel.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

RobD-BCactive said:


> One of the CM based websites (dog breed info one) actually talks about the animal behaviour researchers making mistakes, saying because CM's way wasn't followed the dogs were therefore unbalanced, causing spurious results. They also complain about ppl blackening his name. Now hopefully you can see the problem with that.
> 
> Why on earth wouldn't peer review and the competitive research process, come up with the flaws in the experiments?
> They're interested in uncovering the truth, and testing competing theories and models, not someone with a commercial product to market.


if the researchers are - according to CMs public-relations and media-managers - *doing it all wrong,* 
how likely is it that the average dog-owner *does it right* while mimicking a highly-edited montage?

and i agree with *tripod/anne - 
CM/DW is Not New, created from whole-cloth, unique, etc - *primarily it is derived from Wm Koehler, 
among the most-famous of modern-day post-WW-II trainers... who like many of his peers at the time, 
*was* an Armed-Forces dog trainer and a veteran, who remade himself as an animal-trainer after 1945.* 
he was most-famous for his work for **walt disney* in his many animal features, *which like CM/DW* 
often looked-like documentaries - which they were definitely Not.

Koehler Method of Dog Training by William Koehler - Reviews, Discussion, Bookclubs, Lists

Dick Koehler

The Koehler Method Template

*many of the things *koehler did in *disney films would not be permitted, today -* 
like luring a bear-cub into a hollowed-out log, and allowing it to roll downhill + smash against a ? tree? rock? - 
i don't remember; footage was shot from inside the log, with the cub, as the log careened downslope, 
and then the outside-view from up the hill, as it shattered; then the cub is seen, 
staggering from the wreckage, disoriented - all very funny. 

one of *koehler's competitors, *captain haggerty*, had a face and figure so well-known, that with his reputation 
as a tough no-nonsense veteran, HE became the model for 'Mr Clean' - bald, muscular, square-chin, arms folded - 
closing off differing opinions; it was a caricature - but also, it was accurate.

Captain Haggerty - Biography

TV ACRES: Advertising Mascots > Mr. Clean (Procter & Gamble)

*haggerty, too, was not a reward-based trainer; *choke-chains + leash-jerks in his group training-classes 
were S-O-P, as they had been in his scout-patrol training in the Army*; *haggerty was also a decorated 
veteran of war, but his was the Korean war.

* we are not training green dogs to become patrol k9s on the front-lines of a war in 6 to 8-weeks - 
we have no endless supply of interchangeable raw recruits, either; 
most pet-dog owners have ONE dog in training, hopefully as a lifelong companion; 
'make or break' is not a desirable attitude toward training pets, as opposed to patrol-dogs. 
also, bear in mind that up to 60% of patrol-k9s failed to graduate - 
pet-dog owners need something that does not discard 40% of the class as hopeless.*

times change; knowledge accumulates - and standards change with the new knowledge.  
happy training, 
- terry


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

Colette said:


> Rob, can I please ask for your actual stance on this issue? I'm getting all confused, some times you seem to be mainly pro R+, yet other times you defend CM vehemently


If I perceive unfair criticism of CM, then I object and may point it out. I have done it before. Regard it as a sense of fair play.

I think the case against CM should be made in a solid way and has no need for hyperbole, exagerations or inaccuracies.

I think it is a mistake to polarise people into camps on this, I actually do care about the dogs and would like people to understand what is good & what is bad in what they see.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

RobD-BCactive said:


> I think it is a mistake to polarise people...
> I... would like people to understand what is good & what is bad in what they see.


then we can simplify it greatly, rob - 
* most of what CM/DW *does* either does not help, or makes things worse 
* *some of what *cesar says is accurate - * most of that has been said for decades, if not centuries 
* *some of what *cesar says IMO is pure invention - * like "the right energy cures aggression", 
which is right up there in my Top-5 ridiculous statements.

*most of his handling* is something other pros only use in a crisis - 
I-E, an emergency where the dog is about to assault someone - *making the crisis happen 
to advance the plot-line of the episode * is not commendable, but sets the dog up to fail.

*training is not a crisis - * training is planned, has a goal, has intention. 
*accidents + crises happen - * 'making' crises happen is only creating drama. 
and lets not get into the _*"but he doesn't TRAIN, he REHABILITATES" *_ party-line, just this once - 
*training like rehabilitation, intends to change a past un-desired behavior and to install 
a preferred, desired behavior - * *cesar is NOT a 'trainer' - but what he DOES 
is supposed to be train, as in 'teach', 
or 'rehabilitate' as in repair or improve - 
sadly, IMO it often does neither; instead it exacerbates future behaviors.


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

I believe we can add, that the past behavioural studies that Cesar uses to justify his methods have been discredited. Despite some Cesar fan websites may say (not his PR ppl AFAIK), other qualified professional dog behaviourists find the newer research has improved their approaches, and agree with this work, finding it sound based on their personal experiences.

The mystic pschyo-babble talk about energies is totally uncessary, and the desire for apparent instant improvements to help the showline may lead to corner cutting and unrealistic expectations.


Now OTOH I have seen a show where I actually think Cesar was doing a good job. He actually stopped a lady jerking lead incensitively, and got her to be gently leading the dog instead. Later he also actually praised a dog for walking well, training it positively, rather than sticking to silent energy stuff.

Someone who saw that show, would not understand the criticisms, but very well might if they caught re-runs of the first series.


Now as a viewer, I enjoy the show seeing bad dogs and unbelievable owners, I enjoy seeing St Cesar of the Whispering bitten best of all, but sometimes seeing him doing something dodgy is just fun to. In some shows I cringe however at the treatment of the animals.


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

Herein lies the problem - you can pinpoint one good show where OMG Cesar actually PRAISED a dog???



> Now OTOH I have seen a show where I actually think Cesar was doing a good job.


As you have probably noticed, he uses very little in the way of rewards (and it is worth pointing out that actually most dogs are not very motivated by praise and petting, and CM rarely if ever uses tangible rewars like treats, toys, freedom etc.)
The vast majority of his work still boils down to leash jerks, hitting and kicking (sorry finger jabs and foot taps), and alpha rolls, with the occassional hanging thrown in for good measure.



> Now as a viewer, I enjoy the show seeing bad dogs and unbelievable owners, I enjoy seeing St Cesar of the Whispering bitten best of all, but sometimes seeing him doing something dodgy is just fun to. In some shows I cringe however at the treatment of the animals.


I cringe every time, and frequently feel physically sick. I don't enjoy watching dogs being manhandled, scared and hurt. I don't enjoy watching dogs desperately throwing calming signals and being ignored. I take no pleasure in watching dogs cower, shake or wet themselves in fear. I certainly don't like seeing dogs yanked around by the most sensitive part of their neck or strung up until they pass out.

And perhaps most of all, I don't like to see the abuser in question smiling smugly telling his clients and his audience that this is how you teach dogs and if you don't do it then your dog will become dominant! Or that what he is doing is all about being "calm assertive"!


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

& mostly non-confrontational discussion. :thumbsup:


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

i found a UK-article which also refers several times to the marketing skills & aspect -

Milan - Communicating Canines Dog Training

but i could not find a date on the article?


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Cesar Millan: The Dog Whisperer? The history, background and reputation of Cesar Millan.

Original article is here.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> i will not adopt the uppercut while sitting espoused by the *monks of New Skete,*


If anything is scratching the bottom of an already empty barrel that one is.

To put that quote on context - _"espoused by the monks of New Skete,"_ who I am told wrote that around late 1970's and who no one in UK has ever heard of except for the rare quote on net forums & whose book sold only a smidgen of copies in the context of book distribution....for all we know about them in UK they could be a local baseball team somewhere in mid west USA.

Your even going back to the days when people bought & read such things as dog training books (very few here always a tiny, tiny market), the days of that sort of book reading is more a historical thing, a tiny number of people use the net on the odd rare one off occasion but thats all, books are in increasing obsolesence, especially unknown books such as that.

So in context, to quote such an obscure source for anything except the power of prayer is a non starter, pray to heavens you never do such a silly thing again!


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> RobD Positive reinforcement is better because it really works, once the dog understands it pays to go along with your wishes, they really enjoy complying and trusting your calm judgement and leadership.


No one does or can use positive reinforcement base for any kind of learning anything, that is impossible, although you did not say _"positive reinforcement 'base'"_ you implied it, if you/anyone use B F Skinners technical terms then show some respect to Skinner and use them properly!


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> Collette - there are many owners, handlers, trainers and behaviourists who train and rehab dogs very successfully, using R+ and avoiding the use of physical P+ or R-


Collette, your another making the same mistake a lot make here repeatedly make in that your Skinnerian symbols are the wrong way around, so to restart & make it read sensibly & in real Skinner symbols heres the correct way of writing Skinnerian symbols

+R = Positive reinforcement, not _reinforcement positive_ R- as you have put

+P = Positive punishment, not _punishment positive_ P+ as you have put

You destroy your own point above, if you do not even know how to write the operants then you sure as hell don't know how to apply the theory, if you apply a theory incorrectly because you dont understand it then at best you will not get the required result except by random chance, at worst you get the opposite result!

Back to basics please to avoid confusing some people.
etc, ect....


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> RobD based on the work of scientific evidence based animal behaviour researchers.


What study title? & on what behaviour? apart from where the study is designed to give the results the researchers want, your post is just to vague to have any credibility without the study refs!


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Most of this thread is old SB.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

Ohhh lol thanks for telling me, sun am half asleep I did not notice....no more of ths for me..


----------

