Caeser milan - love or hate what do you think?

we all av our views and thats a great thing but i like some of his stuff im not soft on my dogs if they step out of line, ive had 5 dogs that i call mine and i havnt failed yet, i dont try stupid books as its all instict.

lurcherman said:

we all av our views and thats a great thing but i like some of his stuff im not soft on my dogs if they step out of line, ive had 5 dogs that i call mine and i havnt failed yet, i dont try stupid books as its all instict.

Click to expand...

I'm not knocking it. I just don't feel I know enough about it to be able to train a dog that way safely.

There's a couple of video's on youtube where he has got it very wrong and was lucky to come away with just a few bite marks.

I am fairly new to my dog career so to speak and like everyone I'm still learning. It obviously works for him and I cannot knock that. I just think it's a very dangerous way if you don't fully understand it.

agreed but your always learning with dogs m8 as all different, im not saying some of his stuff is all that but its just a feeling he good with most dogs. ive tried some things from him with a bit og success but like ive said all dogs are different.

Dogs respond best to kindness - no shouting or bullying is necessary. The "Dog Gentle" method is very effective indeed. The thought of alpha rolling and electric collars makes me sick - it is all so unnecessary and only "works" in that it makes your dog respond to you our of fear, not love or respect.

i agree that they do respond best to kindness, it has been proved that aversive techniques don't produce the same results as positive ones.

I just think cesar milan gets a lot of flack for his work with aggressive dogs, but people hardly mention the stuff he does with scaredy ones or indeed people. I've seen a few shows where he has approached completely feral dogs, or ones in a full blind panic, or encouraged people to get over their worries, he didn't acheive this by hurting anyone or thing. And you could only say he was acting kindly. Watching the odd snippet of his shows on youtube is bound to produce a bad review, those segments will have been chosen to illustrate the point of view of the person who has posted it.

Hi

I've not watched him (no telly here either), but I have read several of his books after hearing such love it / loathe it comments re him on the internet. I agree with Lurcherman that instinct with dogs is great, but if you (like me) were getting a dog not having had one since childhood - then reading up about it is a good way to get yourself more knowledgeable. Anyway, some of his books get a bit waffly, they always (of course) paint him in a good light, but they seem full of useful advice and they are really focused on looking at your dog's needs first.

Maybe he goes too far on the tv, can't comment on that, but he seems to be trying to talk sense to some people who really haven't looked at what there dog needs (examples of people walking their dog twice a week and then wondering why he was destructive in the home). He is pretty hung up on the dominance model, but that can also be seen in the context of some of the eedjits ('oh he's my baby and he likes to get carried everywhere in a bag') or some of the really desperate dog cases that he's worked with.

I guess the books give a more balanced view of what he is trying to say than the soundbite / good telly things you can see on the tv. For example, in one of his books, one of his clients' dogs is killed by a snake bite, she wants to ensure that he other dogs keep away from snakes - he brings in snakes and uses one of the shock collars two or three times on the dogs when they move towards the snakes - that's it. Have to say, much as I like positive reinforcement models of training and really don't like those collars I can't see another quick way of training a dog to keep away from dangerous snakes.

Interesting thread

Tanya

The shock collar to provide a negative association with snakes is a very particular and unusual circumstance and I can understand why his theories work in such instances, but that's not at all the same thing as putting a dog in a crate and then waving something around in front of its face repeatedly until they stop lunging at it. That's flooding and can mentally and emotionally wreck the dog long term or create a repressed (and potentially truly dangerous) dog, not a relaxed and happy dog.

I do understand that there are negative or aversive methods which may be more successful in certain circumstances, but I think that they should be used in extremely small doses only for the issues that put either the dog or the people around them at imminent risk, and they should be done in the context of a warm and positive 99.9% of the dog's life and that's really not how it comes across from what he's doing.

thats a very good point eingana, the danger does lie in people watching him use any technique on a dog, and then applying it to their own one willy nilly, and not in the context of a lovely happy relationship, but more likely as an attempt to get there unexercised, and never trained dog to stop being 'bad'. If people listened to the 'walk your ffffing dog' message a lot of problems would be solved.

But I've honestly never seen him do that crate thing, and have only a couple of times seen him pin or roll a dog, he certainly doesn't do it as a matter of course. I have seen him compleltey change his methods for dogs that are in real distress or really scared for instance, and tries everything to get the dog to relax.

He does stress that you need to fulfill your dogs needs fully, before you can begin to rehabilitate it, and he mostly gives people the tools to be ble to walk their dog, so they can begin to work on the other bits. I have also seen him talk about the danger of a bad correction on a dog, when it is trying to show you that it is stressed, how it may just learn not to give you that signal, and go straight into a defense. He describes how many fighting breeds have been bred to not give warning growls for instance, and how it is neccessary to read other signals they may be giving out. He also talks about how years of yelling at and yanking on your dogs chain, desensitises a dog to that, and choke chains and spike collars make it worse. He tells people to find a light correction that works, so you can begin to communicate properly with your dog. Which makes sense to me. Deflate the situation, and imediatley move on, rather than try and battle a dog thats already lost the plot.

The trouble is its just sensationalist tv. We need a bog standard, train your dog right first time round programme on the telly, but it wouldn't sell.

It's interesting as his books come across as quite balanced, but it seems his tv shows (which again I've never seen , so can't comment on) don't so much. It's funny how you can get one view from a book, but another from seeing him in action. One of the many reasons I don't have a telly - sensationalist tv shows.

Tanya

Of course National Geographic pull any programme that gets lots of complaints. The one I saw was of CM dealing with an apparently aggressive husky type. He walked beside it and it did nothing so he kicked it in the ribs. The dog turned and jumped up at him. The dog pawed and mouthed his arm but the dog's body language was playful not aggressive. CM waved his arms about appearing to try to avoid the dog but, in fact, encouraging it to jump up more and mouth him more. CM then strung the dog up by its choke collar. Film is then cut. The next picture is of the dog lying prone on the floor with CM standing proudly over it. Camera zooms to show dog is blue and there is a pool of urine by its penis. Camera cut.

Film zooms in on CM's torn shirt where dog has mouthed and scratched him.

They called this episode something about Wolf Dog. It has probably been pulled, like all the other awful cruel ones, by National Geographic.

I do believe that he started out with good instincts around dogs but got caught up in all the media hype and went totally the wrong route. He is probably tied in to a contract with NG to produce sensational film that they can use. It does not, in my opinion, excuse his behaviour.

Normal, reward based, training makes very boring telly. A friend was approached to make some tv shows but refused because they leave all the hard work on the cutting room floor and people think you can train a dog in fifteen minutes.

Just to say the dog did not die. It did, in my opinion, shut down and would be all the more dangerous after his treatment of it

I think he is really good I have seen him train dogs that were on death row and he saved them,,, maybe do not agree with all he does but a lot of it works I have trained my dogs with his ideas and they do work and I certainly was not cruel to my babies x

I think he is really good I have seen him train dogs that were on death row and he saved them,,, maybe do not agree with all he does but a lot of it works I have trained my dogs with his ideas and they do work and I certainly was not cruel to my babies x

Love or loath him......his tv show highlights the outcome of not training dogs.

Apart from a few remaining die-hards promoting Cesar Millan style pack theory, most trainers and behaviourists believe that social structure in domestic dogs is much less rigid hierarchy and much more fluid relationships which vary according to situation. Strip away the commercialisation of TV presentation and I believe we can still learn a lot from CM's principles. We certainly want "trust and respect" from our dogs. Dogs definitely benefit from consistent "rules, boundaries and limitations". Greeting new dogs with "no touch, no talk, no eye contact" is universally accepted as good practice. So what about "exercise, discipline and affection, in that order". It is here that most of the controversy arises. No one doubts the importance of physical and mental exercise - this alone can solve a multitude of problems. And it is in our nature to show our affection to our dogs. It's the discipline part which divides opinion. Opponents take this to mean punishment and harsh, aversive correction. Proponents argue it is a way of establishing dominance as pack leader using calm, assertive energy, timely corrections and behaving as the 'alpha' dog.

My own belief is that a relationship of mutual trust and respect is the ideal and that dogs benefit physically and psychologically from calm, clear and consistent human leadership. I also believe that it is possible to build this relationship without an ill informed, wolf pack behavioural model. More than 10 years ago, Jan Fennel showed how to establish leadership without force or punishment in her book 'The Dog Listener'. These ideas have been developed and combined with solid behavioural knowledge and training techniques by New Zealand trainer, Doggy Dan. Whilst both still refer for the need to be a 'pack leader', the important point is whether the methodology works or not and whether or not it is easy to apply! As the warning on the Cesar Millan programmes say "Don't try this at home without consulting a professional" - this alone is probably enough to tell us that his techniques are difficult to apply!!

Also people think by watching one show they are the dogs balloons , i take little bits from each show that i think could work then try them and at times found it useful. For me he knows how to keep a dog in good health and in check that is sadly lacking nowdays by many owners.

I'm dead against his methods!

I used to think that giving a dog a quick smack nothing to hard, more as a shock was ok, because I agree with smacking children, I was smacked as a child about twice and that was more than enough. So I figured it would work the same for dog's. When I was about 12/13 as a family we got a rescue collie cross, and my dad did smack him if he did something really bad and it appeared to work. This would have been early 2000's and both my parents had dogs mainly gsd's.

Then when I got to about 20 I started going out with my long time best friend and four years later she's just finished her degrees in animal science and her honours In animal welfare.

And we used to have lots of disagreement over the smacking of dogs, so she started to teach me about dog physiology etc and I've completely changed my view on Smacking a dog, because dogs do not think anything like humans so the comparison that I made between a child and a dog is in retrospect is stupid, I was completely ignorant on the subject and I have a habit of being a bit of a self confessed know-all at times most of the time In subject I do really know and understand and some times like the dog smacking in a subject I don't really know a lot about.

And in the animal industry their appears to be a lot of ignorance. With people thinking that because they've had dogs all their lives they know everything their is to know about dogs. That goes for my parents too. So when people say that to me now I just say well I've been walking most of my life but that's doesn't make me an expert on gate and walking patterns.

Having said that I've recently ended up with a 18month stray greyhound x saluki and it's hard to keep old habits away, but I have managed to teach him everything he knows with positive reinforcement such as treats, praise and toys, while he still does have some issues he is well on the way to being a model dog. And we are both learning together..

Caesar Milan uses outdated methods and outdated theory's such as the wolf pack theory. He should be banned from working with animals and put in to prison.

ignorance is not a excuse to mistreat animals we all have a duty of care to the animals that live with us and all it takes nowadays is a couple of hours with google and you can see for your self how successful positive training methods.

Sorry about a long post

sencimat, dont worry bout the long post but you say ceasar should be put in prison!!! geez your having a laugh now ive hit my dog in younger days and when i say hit we are not talking battered him to within a inch of his life, he did a wrong thing so he got a good slap and with a heavy long stare into his eyes he never did that wrong thing again, now this may not work for every dog but i took a action which i thought was right for my dog which proved to be correct, now im not saying your ways are wrong but if its all the same i will stick to mine and over 30 yrs in dogs i havnt had a fighte r biter or a runner but my dogs have always stayed loyal by my side..

he trains people, but wouldn't let him near any dog. he follows wolf pack theory which has been disproven, also dogs will not form pack with humans as we are a different species

lurcherman said:

sencimat, dont worry bout the long post but you say ceasar should be put in prison!!! geez your having a laugh now ive hit my dog in younger days and when i say hit we are not talking battered him to within a inch of his life, he did a wrong thing so he got a good slap and with a heavy long stare into his eyes he never did that wrong thing again, now this may not work for every dog but i took a action which i thought was right for my dog which proved to be correct, now im not saying your ways are wrong but if its all the same i will stick to mine and over 30 yrs in dogs i havnt had a fighte r biter or a runner but my dogs have always stayed loyal by my side..

Click to expand...

its about what will work in the long run and what you would like to feel with your dog. If you think you need to be the bigger man then yeah go for it, if you want your dog to do what he's told because he loves you, wants to please you and loves to work for you, then you will have a much nicer relationship using positive reinforcements. Who wants their dog doing things just because its too scared off you.

Hahahaha my dogs aint scared of me you fool, i may be old school but my dogs obey me for love im sure and in my view these new style ways still gets you the same sort of dog. I give my dogs freedom but hey you carry on ur way over training your dogs making them jump through hoops.. Just to add i havnt had to train my dogs too much as its not needed so far, a good dog in good hands is easy trained..

Oh and by the way the dog in question the brindle in my avatar has been my most loyal friend for nearly 12 years, he looks happy to me and in my view has had a cracking life with somes miles under his belt..

I have watched the show and read a couple of his books and although the books are repetitive, the methods do make sense to me.

Cesar rehabilitates dogs with serious issues. He's a 'last straw' call out for dog owners who have exhausted every other option. He does however have a tv special and book about how to raise the perfect dog. He brings to light a lot of good points that most dog owners don't consider when choosing their perfect pup in the first place. He insists that dog owners choose a puppy with 'medium level energy' as they are easier to train and don't already have the instinct to dominate. This makes sense to me. For example, a friend of mine got a jack russell and it's hyper, dominant, jumps all over guests and is ball obsessed. She's a busy and sometimes lazy person and doesn't walk or exercise the dog daily. She chose the wrong breed...

Cesar's experience is acceptable to me. He was raised around packs of dogs on a farm in Mexico. He observed their behaviour and interacted with the pack on their level. When he decided that he wanted a career with dogs, he worked as a kennel boy for professional dog trainers to learn their methods and apply them but when he saw the living conditions of some of the dogs and the training methods, he was shocked at the cruelty and vowed to never repeat those methods.

Cesar is the first trainer I've seen that poses to the public the obvious about dogs in that they sense our emotions. Isn't that why we love them? If we're upset, they know that and they come to console us. That's the same with our stress and anxiety, they pick up on that as well. Cesar trains people and rehabilitates dogs. He teaches the owner to be calm and confident and lead so that their dog doesn't feel the need to lead for them. This makes perfect sense to me.

Also, I can't help but say that no one should hit a dog unless they're trying to escape a mauling.