Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
best friends isn't your typical shelter though. they have ridiculous amounts of money, and are truly no-kill, even for aggressive, unadoptable dogs. the dogs have homelike environments to live in and runs that they have access to at all times. i know that's not typical, and not possible for the majority of shelters, but that's the way it is there.
i think you're right, they wouldn't bring an untrained dog into a crowd of people. but how do you know whether millan has had a chance to work with the dog yet in his clip? you seem to give a LOT of leeway to millan and very little to the best friends trainer.
you are right about the body language though - millan was super attuned to the dog's body language and reacted with impeccable timing. the catch is, his reaction made the situation worse. the best friends trainer either didn't notice the dog's body language or didn't catch it in time. things like that happen though - a dog is good with people in some situations, but another situation makes them uneasy.
the "trying to make sense of it" thing is a little harsh - in millan's case, the dog is dog aggressive, saw dog, got aggressive. it was a pretty basic situation and millan set it up, so he knew exactly what was coming. it's hard to tell the context of the dogtown clip, but it seems like they had had good results in the past with the dog and people but she didn't take well to the specific situation. you think this never happens with millan? it happens to everyone, they just edit out those parts. i wonder how many truly human-aggressive dogs he's worked with on his show. i don't think i've ever seen him deal with one. i don't know if there are other episodes where he's been bitten but by using painful corrections, he managed to get himself bitten by a dog who first tried directing his aggression at everything else nearby.
anyway, i think we're getting to the "agree to disagree" point here. plus it's friday and i'm going home! it's nice to have a civil disagreement though, that's hard on the internet! i do respect your opinions. i just don't agree with them!
i do agree with you that he teaches many techniques that are sound. although i don't agree with most of the specific examples you chose - his whole "alpha" philosophy is based on studies of wolves that were discredited long ago. dogs might be descended from wolves, but their pack structure is very different - they barely have one, in fact. most feral dogs may hunt together for convenience but don't stick together. wolves have more structured packs, but even in those packs hierarchy is fluid. and wolves don't roll other wolves over. a wolf that acted the way millan acts in that video would be torn apart by the pack - alphas aren't bullies.
what it comes down to is many of the methods he teaches are at best bad training or misinformation and at worst dangerous to dogs and their owners. i'd rather have people looking at the wealth of dog training info out there that is completely or mostly sound, rather than following this charismatic guy who throws the occasional seriously dangerous technique into the mix, just cause he's on tv and isn't 100% wrong.
I'm sorry I know we agreed to disagree already, but I have to correct you on this. Dogs are not descended from wolves, dogs are domesticated wolves. They are wolves - just domesticated. The only difference being that they are not wild, and they have had controlled breeding. We did not breed out a dog's urge to be in a pack. It is still there. If a dog is left wild even for a short period, they will return to a pack. Look at the example of hurricane Katrina. After the storm there were reports of packs of dogs stalking people and even some pictures of two pit bulls trying to take down a grown bull. This whole mumbo jumbo about dogs not being wolves is BS. Dogs have been genetically designed to be in packs. It is the only way they could survive if they had to hunt for themselves.
And secondly I have watched specials on wolves and have seen them do the very alpha roll you claim they do not do. And yes the alpha dog is usually very vicious. Whether you agree or not, or whether you want to see it, that is the way it is. That is the way nature is. Heck, even the Alpha Meerkat on Meerkat Manor has been known to be ruthless! I know there are academics out there who are trying to prove otherwise, but they will have a hard time of it, being that nature will contradict all their efforts.
I don't have enough experience with dog training to know this with any certainty, but I do not think you can use clicker training and positive reinforcement with a highly aggressive dog.
Woofers
I haven't read the whole thread yet, and somebody may have already mentioned this, but I beg to differ about not being able to use positive reinforcement on aggressive dogs. Your average owner may not have the know-how to do so, but a pro trainer could. I'm on a discussion list for clicker training, and have read many discussons between trainers regarding behavior modification for aggressive, etc. dogs.
Also, many dogs that are labeled 'aggressive' are really reacting out of fear and/or stress, and positive reinforcement will actually help these dogs more, I think, than punishment. The clicker training in these cases is to help the dog realize that it doesn't need to fear other dogs/strange humans/fill in the blank. They learn to associate these with positive things, and from what I've seen (which is limited, granted) this makes for an overall more relaxed, less stressed dog.
I'm sure I'll have more comments upon reading the rest of the replies, but my $0.02 so far.
Oh, and some articles that explain the techniques & philosophy behind them:
That said, he has spawned an enormous army of "shush-ers" who really have no clue what they are doing but happily and confidently take on dog rehabilitation projects that they are woefully unequipped to handle. These "shush-ers" readily apply alpha-rolls and choke corrections when it is completely inappropriate to do so. It isn't so much Cesar as the hordes of inept copy-cats.
Agreed! And this is the problem a lot of positive trainers have with him and other similar techniques. They both work - in the hands of experienced, pro trainers. In the hands of the general public (and I include myself here), there is a MUCH higher potential for creating problems when the correction-based methods are used incorrectly.
Using positive reinforcement incorrectly may inadvertantly reward an undesireable behavior, but it won't stress, frighten or harm the dog.
Again, this accusation that he uses "negative" reinforcement is baseless. He does not strike the animals, he does not starve the animals, he does not shove them in a kennel everytime they are "bad". He works uniquely with each case and helps the dogs overcome their behavioral issues.
Well, actually none of those things you've mentioned above are negative reinforcement. What Cesar does use would qualify:
Quote:
Negative Reinforcement: Negative reinforcement is when an aversive is applied, and then eliminated to increase the occurrence of a behavior. There are two types of negative reinforcement.
The first is avoidance. An example of this would be a child cleaning her room to avoid a scolding. A dog walks next to you to avoid a harsh leash correction. In avoidance, it is the threat of the aversive that is removed.
The second is escape. This is when the aversive is continually applied and the aversive is eliminated when the animal does the behavior you want. An example of this would be teaching a dog to sit by pulling up on a leash, when the dog sits, the leash tension is relaxed. Parent yells at a child until the child starts cleaning his room, then the yelling stops. A dog is shocked with a collar until it starts a return to the handler, then the collar is turned off.
You're against "flooding"? How would teach a dog that is afraid of garbage cans that there is nothing to fear? You'd rather hide every garbage can in the world at keep your scared dog in a neurotic bubble?
Easy! Teach the dog that garbage cans = really yummy food (or a game of tug, or fetch, or whatever the dog finds extremely rewarding.) I successfully used this method with Sienna, my sheltie mix, who was very scared of the fireworks earlier this month.
Not just on the 4th, but literally for a week prior and a week after, people in my neighborhood were setting off fireworks. Poor Sienna turned into a quivering mess, nightly. I remembered reading about this technique, so I decided to try it. Every time I heard an explosion, I would say to her in a happy voice, "Great, fireworks! That means you get a treat!" I went to the fridge, called her over to me, and fed her bits of hot dog until the explosions ended.
After 2 days of this, she would hear an explosion and look expectantly at me, waiting for me to call her to the fridge. Another day or two, and she stopped shaking, and actually wagged her tail while eating her treats. The neighbors finally stopped setting off rockets at that point, thankfully. Based on her progress, in another couple of days she would have been happily bounding over to the fridge every time someone set off a firework.
Now, had I put her in a crate and set off fireworks all around her...? She would be traumatized for life, and would never again trust me. Maybe, eventually, she would have desensitized to them, before having a heart attack. Maybe. But she wouldn't ever be happy to hear fireworks. And all of that stress would probably have taken years off of her life. So yeah, I'm gonna go with the camp that is strongly against flooding.
Pat Miller (http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:kujOXlRwLuEJ:www.peaceablepaws.com/downloads/docs/cat_article.doc+counter+conditioning+dog&cd=67&hl= en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a - broken link)
I watched the clip of Meryl, the Vick dog. The one thing I noticed was that the handler was patting her on top of the head. He was also leaning over her a bit. Both of which can be very threatening to a dog, especially one that's been abused. At the shelter where I volunteer, we are told NEVER to pat a dog on top of the head - only pat them on the back or chest. Also not to lean over them. So this guy was doing two things wrong that I could see.
Right, Venom. Nothing like getting your head held to the ground and yelled at. A four year old wouldn't mind, right? I ask, because that is the mentality of a dog. Were you a victim of abuse?
I gather from your comment that you like the techniques. Does watching it fascinate you, or do you practice it? How many dogs do you train? I notice you didn't share any of your personal experiences.
I watched the clip of Meryl, the Vick dog. The one thing I noticed was that the handler was patting her on top of the head. He was also leaning over her a bit. Both of which can be very threatening to a dog, especially one that's been abused. At the shelter where I volunteer, we are told NEVER to pat a dog on top of the head - only pat them on the back or chest. Also not to lean over them. So this guy was doing two things wrong that I could see.
that wasn't the handler. i'm not sure who that was. the handler should have told the person not to do that though.
lizcab - wolves roll over for each other in a ritualistic display of submission. they do not roll each other over. the studies that showed that they did the latter are old (from the 1940s) and discredited (the research was done on captive wolves and many of their actions were misinterpreted), but those ideas are still bouncing around in popular culture. in reality, a wolf only rolls another wolf if he intends to kill it. if you asked any expert on wolves, they would tell you this. they don't even use the term "alpha" anymore, they use the term "breeding pair". this is because in the wild, wolf packs are actually family units and the "alpha" wolf often lets the other wolves (his children, and especially his mate) eat first, walk in front, jump all over him, etc etc etc. hierarchy is fluid and is initially determined by generation and litter order.
and dogs do NOT form packs like wolves. they may form opportunistic packs as need be, but they don't form stable or hierarchical packs. they will band together for protection or food, then dissolve and form new packs with other dogs. dogs have been domesticated for 15,000 years, and it has changed their behavior greatly. they are distinct enough to be considered a subspecies of wolf (whereas a chihuahua is not distinct enough from any other breed to be considered a supspecies of dog).
why do you think "academics" would randomly try to prove these things if they were not true? do you really think that scientists just decide "ooh i want to say this is true despite all evidence being to the contrary"? i guess if you want to see it that way, you can believe whatever you want and declare anyone who disagrees to be making stuff up. but i challenge you to find ONE recent scientific study that backs up your assertions. just one.
some links to resources:
http://www.wolf.org/ - general info about wolves
http://www.avsabonline.org/avsabonline/images/stories/Position_Statements/dominance%20statement.pdf (broken link) - association of veterinarians & behaviorists' statement on dominance-based training
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:m35eFXuKFW0J:dogpublic.com/articles/article.aspx%3Fsid%3D14%26pid%3D1640+wolf+dominanc e+myth&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us (broken link) - excellent summary of the scientific evidence against dominance theory in wolves & dogs here is a scientific abstract about pack hierarchy and dominance by one of the foremost experts on wolves in the world: http://www.wolf.org/wolves/learn/bas...ipbehavior.pdf
another one: http://www.wolf.org/wolves/learn/bas...us_english.pdf
you'll forgive me if i value the opinions of experts in the field over something you saw on tv.
you seem like a smart, thoughtful person and someone who cares about dogs. i'd strongly urge you to read some of the experts on the subject and draw your own conclusions.
one book that lays everything out very clearly is "the culture clash" by jean donaldson.
i guess for balance you could read "how to beat your dog", er, "how to be your dog's best friend" by the monks of new skete
but i challenge you to find ONE recent scientific study that backs up your assertions. just one.
Groar - Did you just say you challenge me? Uh oh, now its a challenge, now I have to get serious . I have to say I do respect your opinion, and most of this is all in fun, although I hold very strongly to what I stated before.
The reason I think Academics set out to prove their very wrong theories on dogs/wolves, is the same reason any Academic sets out to prove any wrong theory. They have a very strong belief system and they hope to prove it. The dog one in particular seems to be focused around the behaviorist theory of learned behavior. And although a wolf may not physically roll over another wolf, the submissive wolf will roll over when they are being challenged by the more dominant member. The technique that Cesar uses, is meant to mimick that. And whether you call the dominant dogs in the pack "alphas" or "breeding pair", the point is they are the dominant dogs. It doesn't matter what you call them. Wolves understand this and I'm sure they have no use for such distinctions.
Another point. The dominant wolves/dogs have been known to be vicious as I stated before. So vicious that if another female in the pack gives birth to a litter, the pups are at risk of being killed by the Alpha female. No matter how "fluid" the system is, that is the fact and reality of being a wolf.
And yes, dogs have been with us since the start of civilization, some 10,000 years. But I fail to see how that could alter their genetic code. Humans have been civilized for just as long and we have the same genes and natural instincts as any "savage". We may have selected genes we preferred through breeding - hair color, stature, disposition, hunting skills. But you have failed to prove that we excluded the urge to form packs in the process. Yes we have interfered temporarily with their natural pack structure, but we have not altered their genetic code. Left to their own devices, they would develop their natural packs within a few generations.
I will be posting some links for what you requested. Give me some time, I have to sort through some journals . And no it won't be anything off of TV.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
