# Thoughts about Cesar Millan



## Countryboy

Interesting blog... 

But I got as far as "I think Cesar Millan is a first-rate bully and a fifth rate trainer." and then I stopped reading.

Is it really a case of CM is *all* right? . . . or *all* wrong? I really can't think so. Very few opinions and people are.

I watch his show *sporadically* and dismiss some of his methods as inapplicable to my dogs. Or inapplicable to Tonka, but not to Spud. Or vice versa.

It's interesting to watch people attempting to devise a 'one size fits all' approach to dog training. IMO that will probably never work. 

But anyone who encourages dog owners to actually think thru challenges with dogs . . get to know yr animals . . put yrself in their place . . understand their thinking patterns . . . should not be automatically dismissed as bad thing.


----------



## liljaker

Interesting.....I never really paid that much attention to him, but once the "hype" got greater than what he was doing (product line, etc.) I lost interest in him. I, too, am a firm believer of providing the pet (poodle here) with what they need to be the most confident, happiest, content poodle which will then bring out the real personality -- which I think is why most people get poodles in the first place -- the non-shedding, athletic, etc., are second to wanting the temperment. That said, when I called the retired trainer/behaviorist who worked with Jake as a pup for straight obedience, with ideas for Sunny (she lives in Arizona now) -- she asked me what I thought about CM. I told her I honestly didn't know everything about him and his methods (probably since I never needed to) but she said she likes some of his training -- that said, I don't believe CM would recommend me going on week 9 and Sunny not trusting to walk him -- and starting from scratch to build the confidence.

Pat coming in the morning to feed him his breakfast IMO is brilliant! And, she just feeds, hangs around a little, picks up the bowl and leaves. It will take longer, but we are all willing to put in the time (and money since I pay her for a "walk") to help Sunny be comfortable and trusting. Some people would say, "the dog does not have a vote if he gets walked", etc. Well, not me -- I also feel very strongly about that.


----------



## Indiana

That's true, Countryboy. Cesar really advocates lots of good things too, like rescuing dogs, committing to dogs, and giving a lot of those dogs featured on his show a better life. I mean, lots of those dogs have been locked in the garage or the yard because their own owners couldn't stand them! What a horrible life. At least if Cesar's methods work on them, they get to go for walks and socialize a bit. I just shudder to think how many people own dogs and don't provide for their basic emotional needs, blah.


----------



## Carley's Mom

CM is not for people like the ones on this forum ! We love our dogs, we want to do what is best for them, spend time with them, learn everything we can to meet the needs of each of our dogs! However we are rare ...to many people get a dog based on how that dog looks. They know nothing about the breed or it's needs, so they either put it on a chain, in the back yard, or close it off in one room of the house . They blame the dog for not knowing how to act instead of learning how to train it. Give it away and get another cute puppy... I praise CM for educating people that dogs need to be walked! So very simple and can solve so many issues , but new to so many uninformed dog owners. I am thankful that he has made a name for himself. I think he has helped lots of lost, unloved dogs.


----------



## fjm

Sitting here with my eyes tight shut, chanting "Must not get drawn into another CM argument! Must not get drawn into another CM argument!"


----------



## MrsKaia

I use a couple of CM's methods on Cal. And I still have a happy go lucky guy. If anything, he got more confident  I've watched and read several books, shows and YouTube movies (big fan of Kikopup) on several different dog-people before we actually got ourselves a dog. As far as training is concerned, I use a little bit of everything.
I think CM is a very charismatic person, driven, and I admire the energy he is willing to put into educating dog owners, helping dogs that are out of doggy sync, and trying to put a stop to puppy mills.

About the blog's point 1. A dog doesn't have to know another dog very well to be able to correct it. I've seen Cal do it to a newcomer in the dog park that we visit every weekend. Cal didn't wait until the other dog was in a situation he was sure to succeed in, so that he could lick him for good behavior. The other dog pushed a Cal-boundary, and boom! ... correction*. That's how dogs communicate. 'I don't want you to do that, so don't do that'. About the cruel part. There was an episode in which CM had to keep a leashed wolf hybrid at bay. And despite the fact that the same thing happened to the owner of the dog on a regular basis (she was bitten more than once), and that that was the reason they asked CM for help, that episode seems to have put a big 'cruel trainer'-stamp on him.

* Nothing worrying. Just a short chase and a lot of jaw chattering from Cal while he was chasing the newcomer away. The newcomer (a clumsy boxer/great dane mix) bumped into him while Cal was retrieving his ball, and then he tried to take the ball away from Cal.


----------



## JE-UK

Countryboy said:


> It's interesting to watch people attempting to devise a 'one size fits all' approach to dog training. IMO that will probably never work.
> 
> But anyone who encourages dog owners to actually think thru challenges with dogs . . get to know yr animals . . put yrself in their place . . understand their thinking patterns . . . should not be automatically dismissed as bad thing.


But isn't that what Millan is selling, the one size fits all? Granted, I don't watch him regularly, but I hear the same stuff in every episode I've seen: pack leader, calm assertive energy, dog must 'respect' you, etc. And the same physical corrections in every episode: poking, kicking, yanking. He's a one-trick pony and his trick is straight out of the outdated Koehler method, wrapped in a lot of new-age'y 'energy' woo. 

I also get really tired of the "but he advocates lots of good things too!" defense. He doesn't advocate anything a good, modern, reward-based trainer wouldn't (boundaries, exercise, rescue), but he DOES act as an advertisement for dangerous conflict-based training. 

In other words, the fact that Stalin was a great organiser and a strong leader does not excuse the horrific abuse he heaped upon his people. In the same way, spouting a few bits of good advice does not excuse the damage Millan has no doubt caused to thousands of dogs.

Off soapbox now :smile:. Any time I see a brick wall, I feel an irresistible urge to bang my head against it.


----------



## catsaqqara

No, he doesn't do one size fits all, at all. He suggests boundaries, consistency, and exercise to every dog like any good trainer would, but evaluates each dog individually, its a key thing noted in the shows. 

He is not a trainer, he doesn't train dogs, so its incorrect to suggest he is using outdated old school training methods. 

He communicates with dogs in their language, take a look at how dogs interact and correct each other. Well socialized dogs correct puppies and other dogs who are not properly socialized. 

The dogs on his shows are primarily aggressive dogs who have bitten a person. The average dog is not suited for his methods because the average dog is not aggressive.

Alpha has been "debunked" but its clear dogs practice dominance and submissive behaviors. Dogs can clearly like to lead or follow.[Like Bambi and Jaden, she likes to be the leader in many ways and Jaden is always looking to me and seeing what I'm doing and following my lead]
The dogs on his show are primarily overly or inappropriately dominant. The average dog is not dominant in this way so its inappropriate to use this method on them.

The issue with CM is that people use this method to try and train their dogs, which is incorrect. People incorrectly assume its for every dog even though its clearly shown on dogs who are dangerous and have the potential to kill or cause injuries demonstrated though previous maulings and bites. Used in inappropriate situations the dogs retreat within themselves, become timid, shy, unresponsive, etc. Used correctly after a period of being unsure of themselves they blossom and become more confident. Its really quite intricate and dog to dog specific, I don't know all that's behind it and I haven't studied all there is to know about canine psychology, its the same for human psychology; so I don't use his methods beyond the very basics, be calm, in control of your self, be your dogs leader and advocate, be confident. I personally love clicker training and all that way has to offer, my dogs are perfect for it and so are many dogs.

The woo stuff? is not. Many people have said is seems dogs are able to read your mind. They know when your going to take them for a walk or this car ride is to the vets, your stressed, are anxious or sad/in need of a laugh. Bambi is especially in tune with me, she can tell when I'm having anxiety(when the humans don't see it), its often described as an invisible illness but its not. Dogs cant read your mind, they are experts in human body language and facial expressions(there was a post here about a tv special on this). So CM describes this body language as energy because if he said to people their BL is showing that they them selves are unsure so there dog is then that's all they would concentrate on instead of trying to be calm. You have to be calm and in control of yourself so your dog can look at you and be at ease. Your BL or catchy phrase "energy", BL(voice too) can be very subtle and most dogs are sensitive to these tiny changes.

After CM's first shows he started to change his focus from only dangerous dogs to include, fearful, and unsure dogs who lack confidence, which are treated differently often with treats, exposure etc. 

The dogs gravitate toward him, they do not shy away, they visibly trust him, that would just not happen if they were mistreated. I'm not saying he doesn't make mistakes, we all do, I have seen one dog shy away from him and that dog was treated inappropriately in my opinion. And with the shock collar use, some dogs may be appropriate for it, idk, but I have seen him either correct one to many times or use an inappropriate setting. I don't like shock collars but many people use them, some animal lovers use them. He also uses a vibrating collar.

Spoos on average would be the least likely to be considered as needing a visit from CM.

Also if you take a look at the silver fox domestication, their results show that aggressive behavior is primarily genetic. I just found this interesting and somewhat relevant in that dogs(I know fox are not dogs) are not all the same and can be just plain aggressive and probably require a different approach than the more sedate and pleasant temperament of the average dog. A different approach by a professional.
This will probably be my only time entering a discussion about CM.


----------



## JE-UK

Wow, catsaqqara, thoughtful post. I disagree with some points, but it's not a criticism, just a different view.



catsaqqara said:


> He is not a trainer, he doesn't train dogs, so its incorrect to suggest he is using outdated old school training methods.


Any interaction we have with our dogs, any time we ask them to do something we'd prefer rather than what they would prefer, we are training. All the time. Just because he's not training heelwork patterns doesn't mean he's not training. I always think it's a bit disingenuous of him to say he doesn't train dogs; of course he trains dogs. Many of his methods are straight out of Koehler (the go-to guy for force-based training).



catsaqqara said:


> The dogs on his shows are primarily aggressive dogs who have bitten a person. The average dog is not suited for his methods because the average dog is not aggressive.


Not from what I've seen. The biters I've seen on his show (and I haven't seen them all) look to be mostly fear biters or resource guarders. For each of these, conflict training is the absolute worst approach. 



catsaqqara said:


> Alpha has been "debunked" but its clear dogs practice dominance and submissive behaviors. Dogs can clearly like to lead or follow. The dogs on his show are primarily overly or inappropriately dominant. The average dog is not dominant in this way so its inappropriate to use this method on them.


Your point about the debunked alpha term is a good one. Alpha is both a loaded term and one that it is not useful to use, and so is dominant, but there ARE clear differences in dogs' personalities. In my head, I characterise dogs along a spectrum of "you aren't the boss of me!!" down to "sure, whatever". :smile: 

But for dogs that fall into the former, who aren't biddable and compliant, who have strong opinions, aggressive training is again the WORST approach. This teaches the dog that conflict and physical confrontation are the way to get what you want. The fact that Millan manages to overpower them in one context is actually teaching the dog that the NEXT time, the dog needs to go harder to get what he wants. Which means the handler has to escalate.

Much better to teach the dog that cooperation rather than force gets him what he wants.



catsaqqara said:


> So CM describes this body language as energy because if he said to people their BL is showing that they them selves are unsure so there dog is then that's all they would concentrate on instead of trying to be calm.


Fair point. Given that most people he seems to deal with are neither self-aware nor aware of their dogs, that's reasonable.



catsaqqara said:


> Spoos on average would be the least likely to be considered as needing a visit from CM.


Hmm. I found a CM episode with a poodle and watched it. And then felt sick. I keep having to watch these things in order to be able to factually respond and it makes me physically ill every single time. I'll post what I thought about a poodle subjected to CM methods separately.


----------



## JE-UK

*AGAIN I have to watch CM abuse dogs ...*

I HATE watching this stuff, but always feel like maybe I'm missing something, as so many people seem to love him so much. And each time, I realise I'm missing NOTHING. He is still a brutal, abusive trainer.

I watched episode 14 of season 7, because it had a poodle, and catsaqqara said his methods wouldn't be needed on a poodle. I have issues with how he handled the other dogs in the episode, but let's focus on the poodle and see what he does with a sensitive, closely attached breed. 

The problem: there is a family with a small female Standard, who has acquired a fear of a noisy screen door after hurting herself by running full-tilt into it when it was new. The owners have not addressed this FOR TWO YEARS, and it's a major phobia now. If the dog sees the screen open, she hides in a closet ALL DAY. And it takes them TWO YEARS to get around to addressing this?? Jeez louise, people.

Cesar Millan comes in and gets straight to work forcing the dog through the doorway over and over and over. First carrying, then dragging the choking, panicked poodle through. As one would expect, the dog eventually gives up and walks through the doorway, but has not gotten over her fear. She throws fear signs all over the place. 50 minutes to shut the dog down enough so that she looks "calm and submissive". Meh. 

Then they start with the noise of the retracting screen, which sends the dog into fresh panic. Again with the dragging, choking, and carrying of the dog. The psychologists' term for this technique is "flooding" and it is *torture *to someone who is fearful or phobic. I am afraid of heights, and if you forced me to stand at the very edge on top of a tall building for 50 minutes, physically giving me no other option, I wouldn't feel any different about heights, but I'd sure feel different about you.

Again, Cesar eventually shuts the dog down. The dog is panting, shaking, hunched, with tail tucked and head averted, but he calls this calm. Clueless owners call this amazing. 26 minutes to achieve this.

So what has Millan taught this dog? First (and this is a big one for me), people won't help you. Don't rely on them when you are terrified. They will increase your fear and give you no way to escape. Is that a useful lesson? Second, the dog learns that its own opinions get no weight. The poor dog is communicating her terror CONSTANTLY and gets no acknowledgement. It kills me watching him do this to a poodle.

A good positive trainer could have gotten the dog over her fear by slowly, gradually helping her to be LESS AFRAID and to learn to rely on her human handlers to HELP her. Granted, that would not have been achieved in 26 minutes, rather over months. I blame tv producers for some of it, but CM is fully to blame for using cruel, outdated methods to traumatise a fearful dog in the name of "curing" her.


----------



## catsaqqara

I agree with you about the spoo and the door. She had made progress per the update at the end but she will probably continue to be afraid until she makes a positive association with the door. Counter conditioning would have been the way to go.

Bambi had a fear of specific clicks and it wasn't until I put the lazer(her most favorite) and the click together that clicks no longer phase her.

Carmella(older family dog) however is weird and doesn't respond to positive reinforcement. She gets excited and unresponsive, runs away, whiny. I am unable to teach her anything because of this. I'm not sure whats going on in her head, she is hard to read. Its possible that she learned this because she is crafty and has pretended to pee, limp, be helpless etc to achieve a goal of hers. She loves to be fussed over. She is a rescue and has always been like this. Anyway, she hated to go into the bathroom so I put her in a harness and gently pulled her in encouraging her to take her own steps because she is much too heavy. With each bath she got progressively better about it, she would stop walk stop walk now she walks in (on leash) on her own. She has always been fine (not loving it) about the bath just getting in there was the problem. 

I cant find good info on the Koehler method do you have links?

season 2 episode 3 also features a spoo and I feel he didn't need to be on the show but he stayed confident and comfortable when dealing with CM. I feel that the dogs who need a visit from CM are the dangerous ones and typically spoos are not dangerous. (Chances are there will be loose cannons in any breed) That's because hes known for tuning around dangerous dogs who would otherwise be put down or continue with a wake of destruction. He teaches the warning signs of escalation and how to prevent the dog from escalating into a dangerous frame of mind. The dogs and owners are not always going to be in a safe situation, things can be unpredictable sometimes, so CM gives the owners the tools to stay safe in the worst case scenarios. I see some dogs do well on his show and I think some would be better off with a different approach, it really depends on the dog the issue and how he/she responds, for me.


----------



## Poodlenatic

What a hectic discussion about CM. Sure everyone has an opinion. We are allowed to each have our opinion. For those out there with a strong opinion (bordering on dislike) perhaps you still need to read one of his books "Cesar's Rules". It is quite interesting as he talks about how he grew up and his experiences as becoming a trainer. He also talks about people's dislike in his methods. I'm not a full on fan, as some of his techniques is quite hectic and serious. 

Point is, we all do not have to agree on wrong or right. But in my opinion his good outweighs his bad. 

Happy thoughts! We don't want to upset anyone, the only reason that he is in the spotlight is because he is a celebrity trainer. There are lot of trainers out there that we might disagree with, but yet we do not know about them. Associate yourself with the good ones and you're bound to be happy.


----------



## fjm

I am not sure I agree, Poodlematic. Many things are matters of opinion, and everyone is entitled to their own, but some things are generally agreed as being unacceptable, and cruelty is one of them. CM has gained a huge following, despite video evidence that he regularly uses cruel methods (not always, and mixed in with sensible advice, but uses them nevertheless). And these methods are then shown on international television, and inevitably people will want to emulate him. Take the recent case of Jordan Shelley in the UK as an example (and also as an example of the great good that can be done by dog people getting together!).

There is scientifically proven evidence that there are more effective, safer ways to rehabilitate even the "red zone" dogs that people always come back to when praising CM. There is is also evidence that for many - probably the majority - dogs confrontational methods increase the likelihood of serious long term behavioural problems. This is not simply opinion - it is the result of peer reviewed studies. There is any amount of research that shows that the concept of Alpha pack leader, dominating wanna be dominant subordinates, is based on a misunderstanding of wolf packs, and was in any case never applicable to the behaviour of domestic dogs.

Frankly, for me arguing in favour of CM's methods is like believing that the earth is flat because a charismatic teacher tells you so - except that believing in a flat earth will probably do less harm to dogs all over the world. Can I recommend Professor John Bradshaw's book "In Defence of Dogs" (published as "The New Science Of Understanding Dog Behavior" in the US) as an excellent foundation for further study?


----------



## JE-UK

Well-stated, fjm.

Poodlenatic, I wish I could believe that people could take the good from CM's methods and ignore the bad, but everyone (EVERYONE) I run into seems to take three things away: that annoying PSSHHHT sound, pokes & kicks, and ludicrous ideas about dominance. Not the few good things he shows. 

Dogs, bless them, seem to be endlessly forgiving of our betrayals. In a beautiful yet tragic way, most dogs are willing to give people a second (or third or fourteenth) chance. Which is why trainers like Millan can get away with brutal methods. But it isn't nice, it doesn't work as well, and it can and does damage some dogs irreparably, and it ALWAYS damages trust.

I am not a perfect dog owner, by any stretch. I can have a bad day at work with a long commute and come home and confuse my dog by griping at him for something that normally doesn't bother me. But I try my damnedest not to ever frighten or hurt him, and it means he forgives me the occasional transgression. Training methods that use pain and fear destroy trust. I couldn't bear it if my dog ever looked at me with the look I see in the eyes of so many dogs on Millan's show .... the look that says the dogs think their owners or Millan are dangerous and likely to hurt them without warning, the look that says the dog doesn't know how to make it go away, the look that says the dog is trapped with a crazy and unpredictable madman who expects the dog to read his mind and will hurt him when the dog inevitably fails to do so.

Catsaqqara, Bill Koehler was a military/police dog trainer who wrote a widely-read manual on force-based training in the 60's. It's full of charming techniques ... throwing chains at your dog to punish him, shoving his head into a hole filled with water and half-drowning him to punish digging, etc. One of the hallmarks of Koehler's method was to induce the dog to fail or transgress, so the dog could then be severely punished, the idea being that if you had to invent occasions for punishment for training to be effective. I have seen this in every one of Millan's shows ... he engineers it so the dog HAS to fail, so that he can correct. 

How much better to instead help the dog, to engineer things so that he can succeed!

Suzanne Clothier has a lovely quote in her book, by Dwight Eisenhower: "You do not lead by hitting people over the head. That's assault, not leadership."


----------



## liljaker

JE-UK -- I agree with you the mroe I have read about CM. Honestly, it never really interested me perhaps becuase I never had any major training issues that weren't of my own doing with my poodles.......but the key thing is that he has such a wide following, primarily because he is marketed so well --- even my sister LOVES his show and learning about him. She has 3 yappy dogs (small ones) and is not into any kind of training or obedience other than "No" and "come here" and half the time they don't listen to her anyway --- but the big issue here is the dog owner and what kind of dog they want. I don't want a shut down dog who does whatever I say, because I would have a robot and part of the joy of owning poodles, since this is a PF, is their intelligence and trying to bring that out in them, and deal with behaviors and issues that are challenging --- I agree other breeds are different just as behaviors are, too. I have always jumped on the bandwagon of positive training -- and working through issues with the dog so the dog can come out at the other end with reslution and that resolution increases their confidence because they worked it out. Just my opinion here. Honestly, after reading the post I was surprised he does some of the things he does and still has such a following -- it's hard to say "some of his techniques work" etc., when others are cruel and may not. Interesting discussion though.


----------



## MrsKaia

I do use 'some of his techniques'.
- I make him sit and wait for his food, and he only gets his food when he's calm. Begging will get him nowhere.
- When there's someone at the door, he barks, and that's okay. That is what dogs do. I make him sit and wait so that I can open the door. He can come over and smell when I say it's okay to come over and smell. I don't want to have to keep my dog at bay while trying to have a conversation with someone at the door. That just doesn't work. Living room, kitchen, hallway, they are all open. So unless I put him in the back yard (which in my opinion will teach him nothing), there is no other way I can keep him from getting all excited at the door. In the beginning I used to have a leash ready at the door. Although it could still use some fine tuning, I can now keep him in a sit behind me without having to use a leash.
- When we prepare for a walk, it's just that. I don't use my voice to get him all excited about going out. The walk is reward enough.
- Before we go out for a walk, I make him sit at the door so that I can clip on the leash. I go out first, because if I let him go first, he will drag me outside. Especially when my husband is already in the front yard.
- When we come back from the walk and we are on the drive way, I make him sit so that I can take off the leash. From there on he's off leash. Our front yard is not fenced, but we live in a quiet street. I let him walk up to the front door, where he sits so that I can unlock the door and enter the house. Than I turn around and I signal him to enter. He sits again, and I take off his collar.
- In the house he's not allowed in the hallway that leads to the bedrooms and garage unless we invite him there. There's no baby gate. I must admit that during play, when the ball lands in the hallway, he does go after it. But that is something that I don't mind as long as he picks up the ball and comes right back. Other than that, he respects that boundary.
- I have a toy boxer dog on my couch that he is not allowed to play with (battery mechanism inside), but I refuse to put it somewhere where he can't get to it. If I do that, he learns nothing. When we first had him, he took it off the couch a couple of times. I only used a "hey!", and body language to make him drop the toy. I then wait until he sits or lays down. Then I turn, pick up the toy, put it back on the couch, and go about my business again. No kicking or poking is involved, but I don't think that is necessary with him.
- When I'm in the kitchen preparing food, he's supposed to stay in the living room. He can watch from there. I have to remind him every now and then, but he's becoming pretty good at it. If it slips his mind, I snap my finger to get his attention, and I use my body and arms to guide him to the living room until he sits or lays down. No words, no kicking, no poking. If he's been a good boy, he gets something in his food bowl.

By accident we discovered that it actually *is* much easier to alter a behavior when your dog is tired. So we used that to make him _not bark_ at people that come too close to the car when we're standing still somewhere.

I think the above 'regime' has made Cal a calmer dog. He is still happy and jumpy and playful, but he settles down much easier. He's become less skittish of sudden sounds, and he listens better.

Techniques that I did or do not use.
- The food tap while walking. Mainly because I would probably lose my balance.
- Claiming high value food with body language (he had resource guarding issues to the point that even a poodle looks scary). He was such an insecure dog that claiming the food only made things worse. We didn't stop giving him high value food treats. Instead we started walking up to him (not straight up) with a piece of raw beef while he was having a high value food treat. He only got the beef if he didn't give us 'weird' looks. We did not want to take away the food treat, we did not want to trade, we only wanted to be able to come close and touch him, which we now finally can.
- He knows heel, but he does not necessarily have to walk behind me or in any other way does he have to stay glued to my side all the time. He's not a reactive dog, and he slows down when he's at the end of the leash. When we call him to us when he's on the leash, he comes. When we call him to us when he's off the leash, he comes, provided there are not too many distractions (you can then see him hesitate ("that distraction does look mighty interesting..."), but in that case I consider it my job to look farther ahead.

Positive reinforcement is a training technique I use to teach new behavior. I am convinced though that when it comes to an unwanted behavior that has already formed, dogs learn quicker from corrections. It is what they use among each other.


----------



## fjm

He sounds like a very well mannered, well trained dog, MrsKaia, who is fortunate to have an owner capable of sorting the wheat from the chaff. I would consider most of what you describe reward-based training - especially your very sensible approach to resource guarding, and your body blocking plus possible treat for complying to keep him out of the kitchen.


----------



## JE-UK

Likewise. Manners and boundaries are necessary for dogs to live with us. My dog, I'm sure, thinks I have a really tiresome laundry list of rules. But the key is to communicate clearly, fairly, and consistently, and to reward the behaviour you want. 

There is no need to frighten or hurt the dog in order for him to learn, as you clearly show. In fact, pain and fear act as OBSTACLES to learning.

Liljaker, I too am often puzzled by people who own dogs and never want to DO anything with them! What's the fun of that? :smile:


----------



## Poodlenatic

MrsKaia! Love your post about the techniques you use! Pretty much the same that I do, I am still struggling a bit with the barking and excitement when someone is at the door. *He seems like a really amazing well behaved poodle! *

P.S. The pictures on flickr looks very beautiful. I'm sure my husband will love the "cut" Cal is in. Never thought about cutting the hair on the ears. It looks good!!


----------



## fjm

Very interesting, and perceptive, review here: Review: Cesar Millan’s The Pack Leader Tour Heavenly Creatures


----------



## Countryboy

I like what she kinda hints at in this paragraph.

And if I can digress for a moment, one thing I’ve noticed is that people who love Cesar Millan tend to be people for whom obedience is more important than relationship in other aspects of their lives, as well. At work, at home, with their kids, with neighbors, politically, religiously. Someone I love dearly but who has always been extremely strict, emotionally cold, and rigidly egocentric, once said to me, “You know, Cesar Millan would have that dog fixed in 5 minutes.” My dog didn’t need to be “fixed”, and whatever behavior needed to be worked on took more than 5 minutes. And I’m happy for it, because the process actually built a long, loving, strong emotional bond between human and dog – something I fear my friend may never have experienced.

I don't 'train' Tonka to do 'tricks' or to wait at the door, or to wait for his food. *It takes him long enuf for him to get around to it now.* He's learned where to stand in the hallway to be out of the way of me changing into slippers . . . and where to wait on the stairway 'til I open the door . . and it's the same place. He moves directly to it when he comes in the entrance door. 

I didn't teach him that. He figger'd it out all on his own self! 

'Obedience' isn't such a big thing with me. Giving them time to fit into yr life is important tho...

But I had to laff at her abhorrence of choke collars. I had a 75lb 'white shepard' once upon a time. He would near pull me out of my shoes . . even with a choke collar!


----------



## JE-UK

Very interesting to see an opinion by someone coming into Cesar Millan's methods completely cold.

I saw this video linked on another forum; interesting to see how Sophia Yin handles a 'red zone' dog. Not very dramatic, however :smile:. I guess she'll never be a Mongo Big TV Star.


----------



## fjm

I love it - "MTV not Materpiece Theatre"! I particularly noticed the loose leash (and her explanation of why it had to be tighter at first, and how this should have been avoided if possible), and the very rapid rate of rewarding. I suspect I am too parsimonious with rewards, at least at first.

Another one to bookmark for my Training folder - thanks.


----------



## Fluffyspoos

Can we really stop bringing up this topic? Isn't it obvious that the to and against sides aren't going to change each others minds? We can go against each other about what we see and what we read and what we feel, but that's not going to sway how anyone feels.


----------



## mdwcarolina

Right, and is there ever going to be a "Complete Book of Correct Child Rearing"? Nope. All I can say after reading this whole thread is that there is a lot of good thinking here, and probably everybody who is thinking about how they handle their dogs this much is doing everything pretty much right. People have styles. Dogs are experts at figuring that out. Everyone here is caring SO much at how they do things with their dogs that nothing anyone could say here, in agreement OR disagreement with CM or anyone else, will scare me. I feel really comfortable that every dog owned by everyone here is doing well. I only worry about the people who are NOT reading, not commenting, NOT asking, not considering.

Dogs figured out how to grab scraps from medieval folks (and before that, too), who were probably not so nice about how to get in on the campfire or the dog bed. They probably giggle about us while we're sleeping


----------



## Fluffyspoos

I say do what works best for YOUR individual dog.


----------



## JE-UK

Fluffyspoos said:


> Can we really stop bringing up this topic? Isn't it obvious that the to and against sides aren't going to change each others minds? We can go against each other about what we see and what we read and what we feel, but that's not going to sway how anyone feels.


Is it not?

I'm always open to new ideas, new ways of thinking, new or different training methods. I am the least creative person on the planet, so steal from other trainers shamelessly, all the time. I change what I think all the time, especially if there are good, sound, logical arguments for doing so.

I read a lot of dog training resources, and this thread started with me sharing something I thought was articulate and useful in clarifying some of my own thinking about force-based training and celebrity trainers.

Understand that you are a fan and unlikely to change that stance, but that's not to say that others won't, given the right input.


----------



## Rowan

JE-UK said:


> Is it not?
> 
> I'm always open to new ideas, new ways of thinking, new or different training methods. I am the least creative person on the planet, so steal from other trainers shamelessly, all the time. I change what I think all the time, especially if there are good, sound, logical arguments for doing so.
> 
> I read a lot of dog training resources, and this thread started with me sharing something I thought was articulate and useful in clarifying some of my own thinking about force-based training and celebrity trainers.
> 
> Understand that you are a fan and unlikely to change that stance, but that's not to say that others won't, given the right input.


QFT.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that we're each free to post whatever we wish so long as we're respectful of other members, and abide by the Poodle Forum rules. The same grooming, food and health topics pop up now and again and that's great too--new members equal new perspectives. And I often prefer a new thread to a resurrected zombie thread too! :wink:

It's my opinion that if there are members (new and old) willing to discuss a topic it can be brought up as often as necessary. I don't see it as an _attempt_ to change anyone's mind, but to learn and expand our personal perspectives. I know that my perspective on CM has changed over the years. There are great trainers and training methods I wasn't even aware of because they don't receive the publicity afforded to CM, and I'm grateful to this forum for opening my eyes to new methods and behaviourists. I also appreciate being able to take part in lively discussions where members offer opposing views. It's a great way to learn and challenge your own way of thinking. 

If I don't want to read about a specific topic, I can avoid that particular thread. Rehashing old news doesn't hurt anyone and from what I can see, nobody got out of line during this discussion. On the contrary: it was a very healthy and productive exchange.

That's just my two cents or loose change.


----------



## Chagall's mom

Fluffyspoos said:


> Can we really stop bringing up this topic? Isn't it obvious that the to and against sides aren't going to change each others minds? We can go against each other about what we see and what we read and what we feel, but that's not going to sway how anyone feels.



*No.* I don't think it's at all possible for you to have this wish fulfilled, given that every member here has an equal voice and the right to exercise it.

I continue to find it both odd and amusing when someone appears to object to a topic, but continues their participation in it. And, to go even further, seems to think they have the right to censor others from participating in discussions of interest to them. 

It's_ useful _to discuss and revisit topics, that's how people's thinking and opinions evolve. Also, members join the forum and threads at different intervals so there's always an opportunity to hear new voices, something else I find to be desirable. You know, sometimes I find the potty training threads tiresome, but the folks steeped in doo-doo do not; I would never presume to say let's stop talking about sh--.:biggrin1:

I count myself among the many here who are not threatened by dissenting viewpoints, not hung up on having the final say, or being in charge of any dog other than my own. I also _completely _respect your desire not listen to CM discussions any more. One of the great things about the forum is there's no "mandatory" thread reading list, unless possibly you consider the forum rules to be such. Hey, that means in a way your wish _can_ be filled after all and the CM discussion can disappear for you forever! Wow, see the power of discussion (even just amongst myself!) at work?!! A win-win! Yay!


----------



## Countryboy

JE-UK said:


> I know, I know ... horse, dead, beating.





fjm said:


> Sitting here with my eyes tight shut, chanting "Must not get drawn into another CM argument! Must not get drawn into another CM argument!"





JE-UK said:


> Any time I see a brick wall, I feel an irresistible urge to bang my head against it.


It must be a guy thing. If we're beating a dead horse, we stop. And we don't bang our heads against immovable objects. Both are pointless wastes of time. 

But do carry on y'all.

And the next time I see...



Rowan said:


> QFT.


...I'm gonna ask "Who's truth?"


----------



## Rowan

Countryboy said:


> It must be a guy thing. If we're beating a dead horse, we stop. And we don't bang our heads against immovable objects. Both are pointless wastes of time.
> 
> But do carry on y'all.
> 
> And the next time I see...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Rowan
> QFT.
> 
> 
> 
> ...I'm gonna ask "Who's truth?"
Click to expand...

Why wait? If you mean "whose" truth:
*MINE*.

I can't say _who is_ truth. 

It's quite simple really: It means I agree with the quoted sentiment, statement, or opinion. 


> QFT
> QFT = Quoted For the Truth.
> Is used after a quote.
> States that you agree with this person.
> Usually used on internet forums.
> 
> QFT= QUOTED FOR TRUTH
> 
> Used on internet forums when quoting someone with similar views as yours.


----------



## fjm

Countryboy said:


> It must be a guy thing. If we're beating a dead horse, we stop. And we don't bang our heads against immovable objects. Both are pointless wastes of time.


I dislike banging my head, but I also frequently remind myself that "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." (Edmund Burke) 

Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe in - politely, if possible, but stand up nevertheless.


----------



## Countryboy

Rowan said:


> Why wait? If you mean "whose" truth:
> *MINE*.
> 
> I can't say _who is_ truth.
> 
> It's quite simple really: It means I agree with the quoted sentiment, statement, or opinion.


Arrrrrrgh!! Ya got me there. I didn't like 'whos' with or without the apostrophe. But I went with it anyway.  lol

I guess what I'm saying is that yr acronym is misleading. U should be saying 'Quoted for Agreeing with My Opinion' . . . not 'Quoted for Truth'. 

'Cos often someone else's 'Truth' is not mine.


----------



## frankgrimes

I think he does good work... HE does good work, the people trying to mimick what they have seen on tv often do so incorrectly and do more harm than good.


----------



## Rowan

Countryboy said:


> Arrrrrrgh!! Ya got me there. I didn't like 'whos' with or without the apostrophe. But I went with it anyway.  lol
> 
> I guess what I'm saying is that yr acronym is misleading. U should be saying 'Quoted for Agreeing with My Opinion' . . . not 'Quoted for Truth'.
> 
> 'Cos often someone else's 'Truth' is not mine.


It's not _my _acronym, CB. It's internet lingo or jargon, much like LOL, D&C, ML, FWIW, etc., so in this context my usage of "QFT" is acceptable. 

Internet Acronyms Dictionary


----------



## Fluffyspoos

I don't use CMs methods, and *I don't think people should*. There's an idiot warning at the start of the show and after every commercial saying _YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING, DON'T DO THIS_!

However, I think it's wrong to put down someone that's saved so many animals that were going to be euthanized and either found homes for them when he got them to earn trust of people, or kept them at his own 'shelter' of sorts to live.

He doesn't train for agility or obedience, he helps dogs gain trust and come out of their shell so they can actually live.


----------



## zyrcona

In the end, I think what is most important is that people train their dogs and spend time with them. I would rather a dog was trained to some degree using any training regime than not trained at all. What's most important is that the training method fits the dog and the owner and the owner is aware of situations they can't handle and knows how to prevent it from getting to that point.

While I don't think BDSM training methods are the best way to train a dog, I don't think the other popular method of stuffing dogs with treats for getting something right and ignoring them every time they misbehave works either. The former method is going to brutalise a timid dog and bore an intelligent one. The second teaches a dog there are no consequences to disobeying instructions, and any dog with a brain is going to realise that it can have the treat for doing what it's told in its own time, when it's finished whatever's more interesting.


----------



## JE-UK

zyrcona said:


> While I don't think BDSM training methods are the best way to train a dog, I don't think the other popular method of stuffing dogs with treats for getting something right and ignoring them every time they misbehave works either. The former method is going to brutalise a timid dog and bore an intelligent one. The second teaches a dog there are no consequences to disobeying instructions, and any dog with a brain is going to realise that it can have the treat for doing what it's told in its own time, when it's finished whatever's more interesting.


Except that the research bears this approach out as the quickest and most effective teaching method. Although I'm not sure it is fair to characterise reward-based training as "stuffing dogs with treats". It is slightly more complicated than that :smile:.

Perhaps it's more a mindset difference, a difference in expectations.

I don't expect my dog to "misbehave". I expect him to want to work with me. I also expect him to be a dog, to be interesting in dog things, i.e. chewing, sniffing, eating, peeing on stuff. Lo and behold, this is true! He does want to work with me, but he also wants to pee on stuff :smile:. When our desires conflict, it's my job (MY JOB, as the presumably brainier of the two of us, though Vasco has his doubts) to make my way more rewarding. I can do that by hurting him, or I can do that by making him WANT to do it my way. I prefer the latter. And shoot me for thinking so, but I think that's the way all dogs should be trained. 

I also don't think children should be beaten in school, I don't think factory workers building Apple products should be intimidated into working 18 hour shifts, I don't think thieves should have their hands cut off, etc. Those methods were once thought to be the only way to "motivate", but we know better. 

It's good to talk about this sort of topic; I get insight even if I'm still not convinced about Millan.


----------



## zyrcona

JE-UK said:


> Except that the research bears this approach out as the quickest and most effective teaching method.


What methods did they assess and for what training purposes?

I’m not really all that familiar with Cesar Milan. I don’t think he is that well known in this country. There are, however, a lot of programmes on that seem to be to do with stuffing treats into a dog whenever it does as it’s told, and rather fewer to do with BDSM dog training in which the trainer proclaims it works because he is ‘alpha’. People can probably learn something from both types. Some of the BDSM methods do work, although not because of the reasons their practitioners claim. These trainers will tell you that making an emotionally excited dog lie down and then lying on it to hold it down calms it down because it is ‘being alpha’ whereas I think this is more to do with Temple Grandin’s idea of gentle squashing pressure being calming. For the same reason, I will often put my dog on my lap and hug her firmly when people are visiting and she won’t stop wandering around the room. Similarly, dogs can be taught to wait before eating their food or going out the door because it’s good manners, not because it’s ‘submissive’.

There may be some difference here between a working dog and a pet dog. A working dog is an extension of its master’s reach and it needs to be completely trustworthy, because if it isn’t, it could potentially be a matter of life and death for that dog and even other people/animals working with it. I’m not talking about weeing on things, I’m talking about going berserk in a field of sheep or running off the premises and into a road because there’s another dog there. It’s sometimes necessary to deter a dog from dangerous or inappropriate behaviour by telling it no, or in drastic situations by hitting it, as well as reinforcing correct behaviour.

Don’t get me wrong — hitting is not a training technique. Hitting is what happens when you’ve lost control of a situation, and it’s a bad thing happening that serves as a substitute for the dangerous thing that was just narrowly avoided, such as getting run over by a combine harvester. The dog has to learn that there are bad consequences to ignoring instructions, no matter how exciting the alternative is. Ideally, you shouldn’t lose control of the situation in the first place, but occasionally it does happen and you need to do something to get it back in control. Why hitting often becomes ineffective is because someone will try it on a dog in desperation, get the result they want, and then start hitting the dog routinely and it will lose its effectiveness as well as reducing the dog’s trust in its master. A dog that is only hit when it’s absolutely necessary won’t mistrust its owner, because the dog knows it is safe with its human as long as it stays close. You never, ever hit a dog for coming to you or after obeying an instruction, no matter how belated it might be or how stupid the thing it did beforehand was. You also should not hit a dog if its behaviour is motivated by fear.

Certainly, some dogs will have temperaments that mean they don’t need to be hit. Some of them just aren’t that emotionally excitable, and some of them will always stop at a raised voice. Most dogs, when they are mature, will have learned self-control and it won’t be necessary to hit them. Should children be hit? I don’t work with children or have much to do with them at all, but a lot of the people I know who do claim that children go through a phase rather like adolescent dogs before they understand cause and consequence or reasoning, and hitting is effective at this stage for some children of certain personalities. I was hit as a child and I remember frequently resenting the people doing it, and I also remember being hit for things I hadn’t done by people who had to apologise when they realised. I probably was too young to remember being hit at the ‘hitting stage’, so my view of it in retrospect is somewhat biased. Should criminals have their hands cut off or be otherwise permanently mutilated? Certainly not. That would just make the criminal dependent upon society. Should criminals in jail be made to do something useful and productive during their time their? Probably. Should minor criminals be humiliated by ‘the birch’? Probably. They might think twice about doing it again.

Dogs aren’t the same as humans in how they respond to hitting. Dogs bite and get nasty with familiar dogs in certain situations, and the dogs don’t hold grudges. They don’t feel embarrassed or humiliated in this kind of situation. I started off thinking that hitting animals was barbaric and unnecessary, but later I came to understand it was in a small number of situations the most effective solution. And TBH, I think my dog would rather have a thump for doing something stupid than the nonviolent alternative — which is shutting her in the house until I’ve finished whatever needs doing because she can’t be trusted with it. As soon as someone resorts to this, the dog stops learning because the rest of the time it could have had outside and working with its owner is denied. Removing the dog from the situation would work, but it would probably take longer and be harder on the dog, because as I see it a dog’s greatest desires are to be with people and explore and do fun stuff. A dog’s greatest desire is not to avoid a smack.


----------



## Chagall's mom

JE-UK said:


> Except that the research bears this approach out as the quickest and most effective teaching method. Although I'm not sure it is fair to characterise reward-based training as "stuffing dogs with treats". It is slightly more complicated than that :smile:.
> 
> Perhaps it's more a mindset difference, a difference in expectations.
> 
> I don't expect my dog to "misbehave". I expect him to want to work with me. I also expect him to be a dog, to be interesting in dog things, i.e. chewing, sniffing, eating, peeing on stuff. Lo and behold, this is true! He does want to work with me, but he also wants to pee on stuff :smile:. When our desires conflict, it's my job (MY JOB, as the presumably brainier of the two of us, though Vasco has his doubts) to make my way more rewarding. I can do that by hurting him, or I can do that by making him WANT to do it my way. I prefer the latter. And shoot me for thinking so, but I think that's the way all dogs should be trained.
> 
> I also don't think children should be beaten in school, I don't think factory workers building Apple products should be intimidated into working 18 hour shifts, I don't think thieves should have their hands cut off, etc. Those methods were once thought to be the only way to "motivate", but we know better.
> 
> It's good to talk about this sort of topic; I get insight even if I'm still not convinced about Millan.


I would be happy to be your dog, your child, your co-worker, your neighbor, your friend. There are others, though well-intentioned and certainly entitled to their opinions, from whom I would run away, quit or move. I admire your consistent ability to share your thoughts and beliefs with respect, grace and humor, and to create a comfort climate for discussing differing points of view. I see you as both a model dog owner, and forum member. (I also see you as an _ideal_ candidate for a moderator, too._ Any interest there??_)

I just want to assure you I never hit (or for that matter choked!) my children, or my poodle. I have extreme pride in all three. My daughter does not hit my grandchildren, nor her dogs or cat, nor does my son throttle his. No member of my pack is stout from having treats force fed them like a Christmas goose in hopes of eliciting good behavior. I confess to years back using a choke chain collar on our first dog._ I knew no better!_ It was part and parcel of our dog obedience instruction. If I could make amends to that eager and animated sweet creature, I'd do it in a heartbeat! 

When I hear of people resorting to shock collars to quiet a barking dog or dissuade it from jumping, I cringe. And when some of these same people spend countless dollars and hours grooming and making these same dogs (poodles, no less!) lovely, I am left so bewildered! 

Over the years as I've learned more about dogs and examined my own expectations for their behavior, I've changed my ways. At this rate, by the time I'm 100 I should be a very fine dog owner, and perhaps an improved mother as well. Thanks again *JE-UK*, for being you, and for what you bring to this forum.:smile:

(For the record, I don't think any of this meaningful exchange is about "beating a dead horse." I think it's about finding ways to live with and regard a creature possibly more loyal and wonderful than any man or woman should be entitled to know.)


----------



## Rowan

Chagall's mom said:


> I would be happy to be your dog, your child, your co-worker, your neighbor, your friend. There are others, though well-intentioned and certainly entitled to their opinions, from whom I would run away, quit or move. I admire your consistent ability to share your thoughts and beliefs with respect, grace and humor, and to create a comfort climate for discussing differing points of view. I see you as both a model dog owner, and forum member. (I also see you as an _ideal_ candidate for a moderator, too._ Any interest there??_)
> 
> I just want to assure you I never hit (or for that matter choked!) my children, or my poodle. I have extreme pride in all three. My daughter does not hit my grandchildren, nor her dogs or cat, nor does my son throttle his. No member of my pack is stout from having treats force fed them like a Christmas goose in hopes of eliciting good behavior. I confess to years back using a choke chain collar on our first dog._ I knew no better!_ It was part and parcel of our dog obedience instruction. If I could make amends to that eager and animated sweet creature, I'd do it in a heartbeat!
> 
> When I hear of people resorting to shock collars to quiet a barking dog or dissuade it from jumping, I cringe. And when some of these same people spend countless dollars and hours grooming and making these same dogs (poodles, no less!) lovely, I am left so bewildered!
> 
> Over the years as I've learned more about dogs and examined my own expectations for their behavior, I've changed my ways. At this rate, by the time I'm 100 I should be a very fine dog owner, and perhaps an improved mother as well. Thanks again *JE-UK*, for being you, and for what you bring to this forum.:smile:
> 
> (For the record, I don't think any of this meaningful exchange is about "beating a dead horse." I think it's about finding ways to live with and regard a creature possibly more loyal and wonderful than any man or woman should be entitled to know.)


QFT as in QUOTED FOR TRUTH, which means that ***I** couldn't agree more with the sentiments expressed in this post. * _Beautifully _said, Chagall's Mom. Your post illustrates our natural tendency to evolve and learn, to change out way of thinking. You once used a choke collar and have since changed your mind about it as a training tool. Threads like this make people stop, think and reconsider and IMHO, that makes it more than worthwhile.

I've always thought that *JE-UK* or *FJM *would both make ideal Mods for this forum, and they're both in a different time zone to boot. That idea is close to.....perfect.


----------



## fjm

You are very kind, Rowan, but I am allergic to anything that smacks of committees, meetings, etc, etc - I think I overdosed during my working life, and now come out in hives at the mere thought! I just about manage to cope with being Secretary of our very laid back Residents' Association because someone else does the minutes, and our infrequent meetings are accompanied by copious drafts of wine!


----------



## Chagall's mom

fjm said:


> You are very kind, Rowan, but I am allergic to anything that smacks of committees, meetings, etc, etc - I think I overdosed during my working life, and now come out in hives at the mere thought! I just about manage to cope with being Secretary of our very laid back Residents' Association because someone else does the minutes, and our infrequent meetings are accompanied by copious drafts of wine!


*fjm*: Hearing about the generous amount of wine poured at those infrequent meetings, I'd be willing to fly over and attend. Though I understand your reluctance to be "drafted" as a mod, it's something I too have secretly hoped might come to pass. Still, membership has its privileges, and it's a privilege to belong to a group that has you in it; wine (whine?) or not!:wink:


----------



## Rowan

Did somebody mention _wine_?  :cheers:


----------



## catsaqqara

Well, I am glad I actually did join in one of these CM discussions. Its made me take a critical look at what exactly I think is good about CM and provoked a lot of thought.

Thanks for that video. It seems the same kind of correction but its done with a gentle leader and treats. I never thought about the choke chain use and if its really necessary. I guess it isn't, he could just as easily use gentle leaders and harnesses and have the same effect.

Clicker training takes care of the "stuffing dogs with treats". The noise is turned into the reward with initial "stuffing" though you can do this with your dogs meal and feed it piece by piece. Then the treats are phased out and you can use just the noise with the occasional treat to reinforce it.


----------



## fjm

catsaqqara said:


> Clicker training takes care of the "stuffing dogs with treats". The noise is turned into the reward with initial "stuffing" though you can do this with your dogs meal and feed it piece by piece. Then the treats are phased out and you can use just the noise with the occasional treat to reinforce it.


I don't think this is quite correct - the click must ALWAYS be followed by a treat - it is rather that you gradually up the ante, and only click and reward for the very best responses.

I never really understand people's objections to food rewards - do they not feed their dogs? If so, why is it better to put all the food in a bowl and give it to the dog in return for one sit and stay, rather than using it to motivate the dog to learn all day long? When mine were pups and we were doing lots of training, I used the thirds approach - one third in a bowl, one third in kongs etc, one third for training treats. Same amount of food, rapid training, highly motivated and happy dogs. Is it down to the old canard that the best dogs perform simply because they "want to please"?


----------



## JE-UK

Chagall's mom said:


> I see you as both a model dog owner, and forum member. (I also see you as an _ideal_ candidate for a moderator, too._ Any interest there??_)


You are too kind, Chagall's mom, but I used to be a TERRIBLE dog owner! I am still paying penance :smile:. 

Probably why I have swung so far the other direction is that I HAVE trained (decades ago now, thankfully) with choke chains and corrections. And I had well-trained dogs. At the time, that's the only way anyone knew. But I never felt okay about it and never got the joy out of training that I do with reward-based methods. 

I was a mod years ago (back in Compuserve days ... ack!) and it is too much like herding cats!


----------



## littlebluetrike

I think we could make the argument move from the owners who do put effort in their dogs lives vs the ones who don't even brush them, and pretty much run wild. Honestly I haven't seen a person with a low iq with a spoo yet. I assume that is yet to come.

What I come away with cm is that he is trying to train the owners rather than the dog. And it's mostly common since things we don't recognize ourselves as we do this without thinking. Our dogs have to challenge us now and then but we already know the ideas cm teaches.


----------



## zyrcona

fjm said:


> I never really understand people's objections to food rewards - do they not feed their dogs?


I don't have an objection to food rewards.  When you have a puppy or are training a dog something new, I can't see how you can do without food treats. What I was more referring to was training techniques that suggest you stuff your dog with treats to distract it from doing something you don't want it to do. I went to a few different training groups to see if any of the trainers could help with my dog behaving maniacally around some other dogs, and one of them was about feeding them to the dog at a rate of one per second. My dog got through the small tin I usually have with me when we are out in public, and then most of a jar the trainer gave me. I ended up crushing them on the edge of the chair and feeding her the crumbs to make them last longer. And it doesn't work, at least for my dog, because when my dog goes into anxious nutcase mode, she doesn't give a monkey's about stopping to have a little bit of food. Usually I've seen it recommended not to give dogs their normal food as treats, and I don't think it's really all that good for the dog to eat that amount of treats.

The other thing with it is that I find once you move onto more advanced things, the dog stopping to eat the treat is a distraction from the work, and you can't exactly throw the food at the dog to eat when it is working at a distance from you, such as when you are trying to teach it herding. Plus it's not always possible to have food on your person, and not very nice to carry a stinky sweaty cheese (etc) around in your pocket on a hot day. That's why I prefer to use treats initially to teach a dog to enjoy praise and then use praise and treats only occasionally (which I consider is similar to clicker training, only you are attuning the dog to your voice rather than an object that you could potentially lose).

Edit: just to clarify, I have never used choke chains or other kinds of implements to hurt my dog. I don't believe in using brutal methods or fear to motivate dogs, but I do use negative training methods such as 'no' as well.


----------



## JE-UK

zyrcona said:


> I don't have an objection to food rewards.  When you have a puppy or are training a dog something new, I can't see how you can do without food treats. What I was more referring to was training techniques that suggest you stuff your dog with treats to distract it from doing something you don't want it to do.
> 
> ...
> 
> The other thing with it is that I find once you move onto more advanced things, the dog stopping to eat the treat is a distraction from the work, and you can't exactly throw the food at the dog to eat when it is working at a distance from you, such as when you are trying to teach it herding.


With food rewards, what you describe is two different things. I use food as "payment" when training the dog to DO something (I don't work for free, and don't really expect my dog to either) ... that is "operant conditioning". 

Using food to help change how a dog FEELS about something, i.e. using food to set up good associations with things he finds fearful, is called "classical conditioning". 

The terms don't really matter, but it's useful to distinguish the two in your head.

In the case you describe, with the trainer having you reward frequently, that could have been either operant (reward the dog for keeping his attention on you in the face of a big distraction) or classical (use food to set up a different association if he is maniacal because he's fearful). In either case, it sounds like the trainer set up a situation with too much stimulation to start with. Starting farther away may have given the dog the chance to succeed.

The clicker is a reward marker. It means "that, THAT thing you just did, that earns you a treat". Brain scans have shown that a very distinctive sound, like a clicker, works better than your voice, but certainly you can use your voice. I use "YESSS!" when I don't have a clicker on me.

As for distance training, the reward doesn't have to be food. I use a toy in some of my training, and with our agility training, the opportunity to do more is a reward in itself. Probably the same for herding.


----------



## fjm

I am using food to teach my neighbour's terrier that it is not necessary to growl and lunge at every dog that passes us - and it works. The key is to keep her below threshold, so that she can concentrate on doing what I ask - "Watch me" - and get rewarded for it. It's a bit tricky, as I can't control the distance between us and the other dog, but it is very effective.

But the issue is at bottom about trying to use rewards rather than punishments, and reognising that it is the dog that defines what is rewarding, and what is punishing (and here speaks one who got very, VERY stern with the whole family of dogs and cats when they woke her up for the third time squabbling last night, so I do resort to aversives on occasion, especially when sleep deprived!).


----------



## patalina

I used food to successfully teach Louis tricks and reward appropriate behaviour. While I don't adhere to CM's method of dominance and think a lot of his techniques are not appropriate, I much prefer positive training to dominance theory, I have found that the "shhh" sound that he uses does snap my puppy out of certain behaviours. My favorite trainer, which I'm sure everyone here has heard of, is Dr. Ian Dunbar  

Check him out if you haven't already:


----------

