The Fall of Cesar Milan

[minimuu]

At last the message is getting through

link here

I dont like his 'leaning' thing

I DO think his insistance that dogs need proper and plentiful excercise is excellent advice. If at least THAT has got through to people I think he has done some good. Its part of his mantra isnt it?

How many dog's bad behaviour is down to not getting walked enough.

Years ago the sort of idiots that get dogs now and dont think about the amount of walking they need, used to just let them out to roam all day. This is not to be recommended but at least the poor dogs got out.

We have a new class of idiot now that gets a dog and leaves it indoors all day and then kicks it because it chew and poos.

He's done some good things - but so have positive trainers. I get fed up hearing about all the dogs he's rehabilitated (and I'd love to know how many have STAYED rehabilitated after the show ) as if it's some sort of validation of his methods. Behaviourists all over the world are PROPERLY rehabilitating dogs in a positive way, quietly, without kicking and shocking them.

And yes, he does make sense sometimes. Except the occasional gems of common sense he comes out with are NOT NEW, and NOT UNIQUELY HIS.

The exercise thing is a case in point though.

Dogs need plenty of exercise? Well, no shit Cesar! Really? Exercise you say? Wow

Anyone with half a brain knows that, even without a doggy background.

But how many "ordinary" people have the time and resources to take their dogs roller blading for an hour, then take them for a 3 hour trek, then run them on a treadmill??

His claims that dogs in the wild/feral dogs travel for miles and miles and miles every day are dubious, too. Yes dogs need exercise but the amount he recommends just isn't realistic or attainable - or, for most dogs, necessary.

That article is just an opinion piece...one persons work....means nothing.

I work a lot in the area of challenging behaviour with humans (well kids really)

I am firmly of the belief that all behaviour has a reason and, in the case of children with profund and severe disablities, is a means of communication.

The more I learn about this behaviour in humans the more I learn about this behaviour in animals.

I would never, ever hit a child with difficult behaviour and I would look to see what was going on to cause it (MUCH easier when the child in question is not mine I will admit).

How then could I hit a dog who has even less means of communicating what is going on to make them behave in this way?

I am not comparing dogs with disabled children btw. I am comparing animal behaviour with human behaviour.

Not a perfect analogy particularly as I despise anthromorphism (or however its spelt)

Ah yes, that Guru stuff is always irritating - and far too seductive for the Gurus, methinks.

That was in response to CalmaityKate's post, btw

Moving too fast for me!

See, he's (apparently) good looking and undoubtedly charismatic and when he starts spouting guff about calm assertive energy, and giving the dog your energy (I'm sitting here laughing as I type it - it's just so STUPID) he is so convincing. He'd make a GREAT politician.

But you're absolutely right, MrsDeVere.

It's so, so simple. Dogs Do What Works. If they're doing something you don't like, it's because it's achieving something. Take that something away, and behaviour will diminish.

If they're doing something you do like, and it gets rewarded, that behaviour is likely to increase.

Dogs don't do guilt, or spite. They don't think ahead, and they don't reflect on the past. They are very, very simple beings.

"I do this - that happens".

Training is a matter of deciding whether "this" is something you like or not, and managing "that" accordingly.

And it can ALL be achieved without hitting.

Imo, one of the most dangerous things about his show is that Jo Public will copy. I know there is a disclaimer telling people not to, but they inevitably will. The shows producers know this.

There was one show where I saw him forcefully bundling terrified Akitas into a transport van, now credit where credit is due, he was rescuing them from a puppy farm but no mention was made of the fact that his technique would be highly dangerous for the public to use. I have owned an Akita, if I'd ever tried to force him into a situation where he was scared in the way that Ceaser did he would, undoubtedly, have taken my arm off.

Similar to my Terrier. We have had many problems with him, not excluding him trying eat my parents Macaw. My Dad tried aversive methods on him when I was out of the room, copied from none other than CM himself, believing my dog needed a firmer hand than I was giving him. I heard the raucous from the other room and was able to contain my dog before any serious damage was done. My dog got scared and went in for the kill. My Dad escaped with bruises and scratches only because my dog is small and was leashed at the time so he was able to hold him off to some degree until I flew in and removed the dog. He would have been PTS in many other families for this behaviour i.e protecting himself from what to him was a very real threat

How many members of the public have tried his methods on fearful dogs with the same results and then blamed the dog?

NB: The dog no longer attempts to eat the bird. Cheese appears as if by magic when he ignores the bird. Cheese is easier to 'kill' than birds with powerful beaks.

Yep. Of COURSE people ignore the disclaimer. I've seen it myself - a family crossing the road with a young Staffie on a lead, coming in the other direction. We sort of passed in the middle and the Staffie veered away to try to sniff my dog. Well apparently that constituted a lack of respect because when I turned round a few moments later, the "Alpha Male" of the family had the Staffie pinned to the pavement

everyones going to have opinions on the guy. i just hope he keeps doing what hes doing because he shows people that everyone deserces a second chance including dogs. hes rehabilitated dogs completely in the red zone. where as victoria stilwell, ive seen tell owners to destroy there dogs and they actually listened to her and did so. i dont believe in smacking a dog (read an earlier comment about that) that really is just silly. a method really just all depends on the situation

Misslala - you don't believe in smacking, but you believe in using shock collars, poking dogs and kicking them??

Dog moms bite, shake their pups by the scruff of their neck. It is a very physical form of disciplining. A smack is similar in that is it is physical form of discipline. For those who say a smack physically hurts a dog, they are frankly in la-la land and have not seen dogs freely playing with each other.

I have actually seen my dog when she was a puppy calm down after a smack and fall asleep in my arms. It did reassure her and get her down from a hyper state. Worked much better than a no, which she would just have been noise at that excited moment.

I think that there is no point in getting too rigid about dog training methods. Keep an open mind and do what works in that situation. Some of you are bonkers on how unyielding you are regarding training methods, just pushing a one horse cart on frenzied dog treat training. Other people also know what they are doing, even if they do things differently than you. Some of you honestly sound like religious fanatics about this!

Smacks reassure them.... riiiiiiight....

no i dont use shock collars, i dont kick or poke. i give a firm touch if i see my dogs not paying attention. kind of like 'hey listen' most of the time i yank the lead and make them sit. if i was oh so sensitive with my dogs, theyd take over. theres so many out of control akitas and shepherds, giving the breeds bad names all due to eityher abuse or the owners simply not having control.

I have a nice open mind flatbread. If I want to teach or change a behaviour I know there are lots of different options available to me to help make that happen.

I would choose a positive reinforcement technique over any other because I believe
a) it is the most effective method, both for instantaneous specific marking and teaching of the behaviour but also for long term retention of it.
b) it doesn't involve using any cruelty or to stress my dog out in anyway.
c) it has an over reaching positive effect on my relationship and bond with my dog.

If I want to get my dogs attention I use the "watch me" command (for us I use a very quiet tut sound) and I have her undivided attention instantaneously. I no longer need to treat for this.
Likewise with sit I just say "sit" and she sits! No treats and no lead yanking. Easy.

and yy Kate. Totally with you on the tap dance thing . Love it.

I don't hold much respect for CM, not because I have followed his ideas and they don't work, or that I have spent much time watching and understanding what he does and doesn't do. I have been told again and again that I shouldn't like his methods. I think he comes across as brash, shiney and confident and I think he finds himself very important. Jan Fennel is another no-no.

If you have a dog that takes no notice of you, and runs off into the wild blue yonder at every opportunity, kills a small fluffy and comes back eventually, what do you do? Keeping said dog on the lead at all times is not always the best thing for either party, especially if the dog is leading the way. The dog is in a win-win situation and there are only good results for the dog. What earthly use are treats when the dog comes back?

I am not condoning CM's methods and would hope not to use them, but the reward based ideas for this kind of behaviour are in my experience, rubbish.

silent in the situation you have described of freedom + chasing small fluffy vs bit of cheese then yes it's a no brainer.

However.

I have a dog that pays attention to me all the time during walks. If she sees another dog, she stops and looks at me (she is waiting for the "OK" from me to greet the dog or a recall or down command). If she sees joggers or people running around playing with a ball, she stops and looks at me. If she sees a great flock of seagulls sat in the middle of the park she stops and looks at me. I've trained this behaviour using positive reinforcement.

She doesn't run off into the blue yonder because I am way more fun to her than anything else on offer out there. Positive reinforcement.

She doesn't pull on the lead. positive reinforcement.

You have to be creative and focussed and find out what "treats" really hit the spot with your dog, and yes it takes time but ime positive reinforcement for these exact issues is far from rubbish, it's brilliant.

and just in case you think I have a perfect dog, we currently have some issues with squirrel interest. Clicker, cheese, kong wubba, tennis balls and I have no doubt we will crack it.

Calamity - I'm afraid I'm with him on the exercise thing. Adequate, stimulating, often breed-specific exercise is the most important tool in dog training/rehabilitation, IMHO. If people find that level of exercise unattainable then they should have got a cat (or a pekingese or some other horrible, stunted lap dog).

I think it is both carrot and stick. My dog is in rural France and has grown up free range. She often has dog visitors and goes off for a sniff with them, or for treats from the old lady down the road.

I am fine with that, but she must come back when I call for her. Once when she was little, she went off and was so busily occupied with a neighbour and his young children and the barbecue smells that she ignored my call. I went, found her and got her back. She got a small smack, but then, the worst thing of all, the silent ignore. She hates that more than anything. Smacks are for smaller sins, and she has no issues with them, just acknowledges with a lick on my hand. The silent ignore is the big stuff for her, and it really distresses her.

After that, a single call and she is back. When she returns she gets butter or cheese or whatever is at hand and cuddles. The positive reinforcement. Good behaviour=reward, bad behaviour= appropriate punishment. Very simple and effective.

This thread is not good for my blood pressure. I cannot believe the old fashioned view of training that so many people are still using.

I do work with dogs and people every day and really thought the message was getting through but this thread says otherwise

If you have a positively trained dog half of the scenarios mentioned on here will never happen as Scuttle explains.

So many of the inappropriate behaviour are because of the inappropriate training methods the dogs have received.

Positive reinforcement does not mean treats for all dogs, some dogs it is toys some dogs it is praise and a pat, one of y dogs it is a metal tray (don't ask!)

The bond you get from training a dog with positive methods is second to non. I can be absolutely 100% my dogs will listen to me at ALL times. i am th one who gives them fun, treats and fulfills all their needs - why would they not pay attention to me?

One of the trouble with aversives is what do you do when it stops working (which it will) either the dog gets used to the shock etc or gets so stressed that the behavior escalates. The all the trainer can do is to up the punishment it does not train new behaviour.

Please some of your dog owners who are surprised by positive training find out about it read the books mentioned earlier on this thread - you honestly will not look back.

Dog sports eg agility, HTM obedience are getting more and more advanced - the dogs are expected to do harder things and this is happening by the ability to train dogs easier by using positive training methods.

The debate on CM amongst professionals, academics and people who study dog behaviour finished several years ago as he methods have been scientifically proven to be cruel and ineffective in the long term. That message just needs to get down to the general public now for the sake of the poor dogs.

Give me any behaviour and there will be a straightforward method to change that behaviour using positive reward based training

Minimuu, rewards and punishments have been used to motivate humans and animals down the ages. Both together, are effective. Only one or the other, less so.

Are you saying human beings down the ages have gotten it wrong and you are omniscient and have discovered the only true path? Btw, 20 years from now, what you are saying will be a fad and there will be another only, true way..till the next fad comes along