What's peoples beef with Ceasar Millian?

I do like him. I think his basic pointers of exercise are excellent. I also appreciate he has a show and while he does always say certain procedures should only be carried out by a profissionial I also know people wil ignore his and try to take short cuts. massive fan of Victoria Stilwell now after seeing how she so tried to help Lennox and became so involved....
 
Why does disliking someone have to stem from jealous? I could treat my dogs in the same manner as CM if I wanted to, no need for any jealousy, I just don't like the methods or what they do to the dogs.
 
I had the old prong collar debate with a horsey person again yesterday. Someone who has no issue popping a pelham in a strong horse and bringing the bottom rein into play when they need it rather than sawing away with a snaffle whilst congratulating themselves on using a 'mild' bit.

Re Shadow (again) the dog clearly came up the lead at the owners when it was asked to do something it didn't want to do, that was the issue and that is why they called Cesar and Cesar had to fabricate a situation to make it happen...again HOW would other posters have dealt with this?
It's kind of hard to 'ignore' bad behaviour and praise good behaviour when a dog is hanging off your arm.

So you have a dog that has learned, when I don't want to do something or I am limited from doing something, I bite my handler. Do you just let that issue slide and pretend it doesn't exist and wait until real damage is done and the dog must be PTS or do you try and fix it, however un-pretty it may look?
 
krlyr said:
Why does disliking someone have to stem from jealous? I could treat my dogs in the same manner as CM if I wanted to, no need for any jealousy, I just don't like the methods or what they do to the dogs.
Click to expand...

When I refer to people being jealous I mean other trainers not Joe Public. People are quick to jump on mistakes made by these high profile trainers as though they should never falter and I think its a shame because they have some very sound methods in their repertoire that would be hard to contest.
 
Thinking overtime - is there a mindset out there that if something cannot be fixed with positive-only methods, then fixing it should not even be attempted? And the 'issue' avoided entirely and the dog never put into a situation where it may react...what happens then if that situation, one day, for whatever reason, cannot be avoided?

Do positive-only trainers only work with dogs that they know their methods will work on to the exclusion of other dogs, to the detriment of the dog and to the detriment of their owners?

If solving the issue may involve some stress to the dog in the short term, is it better not to solve it at all? Even if the issue is causing stress to the dog in the long term?

If a dog has 'issues' do we just ignore the issue, if it is dangerous to the dog itself and to others, especially if it is an issue that has to be 'corrected' rather than solved with love and biscuits?

If a 'rescue' dog or a dog that has previously been abused behaves in a manner that is dangerous to itself or others, do we ignore that completely as well?

A lot of dogs have 'issues' a lot of people have 'issues' too, does it make us special, no, do we ignore it, no, we just have to work through and tackle the issues in a number of different ways.

Just musings.
 
How do you know what issues can and cannot be resolved with positive-based methods? Btw, positive reinforcement is not really "positive only" because, yes, you have some negative aspects - e.g. ignoring a dog that jumps up is a negative reaction to the situation because you are withdrawing your attention, I do not believe that training should only be positive but I do not see the need for training with fear, pain or discomfort. You seem to have the impression that anything other than CM type methods purely involve ignoring bad behaviours.

With Shadow, I wouldn't ignore the bad behaviour - I wouldn't put him in that position to begin with! This doesn't mean you avoid dogs and avoid tackling the issue, it means you identify how close he can manage to go and remain comfortable. If it means you only go 200 yards near the dog at first, then stay 200 yards away. You might then progress to 190 yards, 180 yards, 170 yards, 150 yards. The idea is you keep the dog in a positive state of mind and reward it for not reacting, rather than push it over its threshold, make it react and then punish that behaviour.
The BAT method is becoming more and more popular over here - the idea is that you reward the dog for alternative behaviour by giving it a functional reward. So a dog that is afraid of other dogs, if you get him to just before his threshold, wait for him to clock the dog but then look away, or sniff the ground, or other kinds of appeasement signals instead of the reaction or other unwanted behaviours, you then reward it by walking away, the reward being the distance that the dog wants. You're not just teaching the dog to not react, but to use much more appropriate behaviour and changing their mindset too. Do you really think that strangling a dog will teach it to relax around other dogs?
 
I think you are dead right CC, having been kicked out of my previous clicker(see my previous post) class its obvious those trainers are not equipped to deal with serious aggressive issues. If I hadnt found that ex police dog handler I would have been dealing with it on my own and I suspect thats what happens to a lot of owners.

As you say people criticise but not one person has said how a positive(clicker) trainer would deal with it, Im not being sarky here I would really like to know.
 
krlyr said:
How do you know what issues can and cannot be resolved with positive-based methods? Btw, positive reinforcement is not really "positive only" because, yes, you have some negative aspects - e.g. ignoring a dog that jumps up is a negative reaction to the situation because you are withdrawing your attention, I do not believe that training should only be positive but I do not see the need for training with fear, pain or discomfort. You seem to have the impression that anything other than CM type methods purely involve ignoring bad behaviours.

With Shadow, I wouldn't ignore the bad behaviour - I wouldn't put him in that position to begin with! This doesn't mean you avoid dogs and avoid tackling the issue, it means you identify how close he can manage to go and remain comfortable. If it means you only go 200 yards near the dog at first, then stay 200 yards away. You might then progress to 190 yards, 180 yards, 170 yards, 150 yards. The idea is you keep the dog in a positive state of mind and reward it for not reacting, rather than push it over its threshold, make it react and then punish that behaviour.
The BAT method is becoming more and more popular over here - the idea is that you reward the dog for alternative behaviour by giving it a functional reward. So a dog that is afraid of other dogs, if you get him to just before his threshold, wait for him to clock the dog but then look away, or sniff the ground, or other kinds of appeasement signals instead of the reaction or other unwanted behaviours, you then reward it by walking away, the reward being the distance that the dog wants. You're not just teaching the dog to not react, but to use much more appropriate behaviour and changing their mindset too. Do you really think that strangling a dog will teach it to relax around other dogs?
Click to expand...

How do you know what issues can and cannot be resolved with positive-based methods?How do I know? How do you think I know?! Because I have witnessed and tried a lot of different training methods and now try to do what suits the individual rather than blindly follow one or the other, including CM, I know there are lots of alternative methods, I am not a cheerleader for CM by any means.
Positive-based methods do not work for all dogs.

yes, you have some negative aspects - e.g. ignoring a dog that jumps up is a negative reaction to the situation because you are withdrawing your attention
How do you withdraw attention from a dog when it is attached to your arm?!
If a dog chases a cat onto a road in front of a car - how do you withdraw attention?
If a dog self rewards - how do you withdraw attention?

Do you really think that strangling a dog will teach it to relax around other dogs?
No but it will stop it attaching itself to my arm.

Please, please answer me this: for whatever reason, a dog jumps up and latches on to your arm. The situation arose.
What do you do.
 
CaveCanem said:
Please, please answer me this: for whatever reason, a dog jumps up and latches on to your arm. The situation arose.
What do you do.
Click to expand...

I would use the necessarily force to remove it, of course. But we're not talking about dog attacks out of the blue. These dogs don't latch onto CM's arm for no reason, he has pushed them into it. My point is that there is no need to push the dog that far. Yes, you will have instances where you misjudge the situation or events out of your control lead to an unpreventable reaction, we're only human. But there is no ned to intentionally push a dog to the point where it feels the need to latch on to your arm, that is my issue here. CM had plenty of time to know that Shadow redirects onto his lead and, intentionally or unintentionally, onto his clothes/arm too. That would be the stage where I would expect a trainer to go "Whoops, this method isn't working, let's take it down a notch", not "OK, this dog keeps jumping up and using its teeth, I'm going to put it under even more pressure and see what happens!". Ditto with Holly, he had so many warning signs from the dog but he pushed and pushed until she snapped. I would not object to the amount of force needed to remove a dog from your person as I have seen several true dog fights and know how hard they are to snap out of it, but I object to the fact he's pushed them into using their teeth when it's totally unnecessary in the first place. These are not dogs that are lashing out without reason, their reactions are preceded with lots of warning that any normal human being could pick up, let alone a supposed expert.
 
Thanks for the answer.

Re taking it down a notch - does that not then show the dog that using its' teeth and redirecting gets the results it wants?

The dogs I know or who have met (including one yesterday) who redirect onto leads and arms, are ones that have been allowed to throw their weight around, have been let away with the behaviour, have weak handlers who are not sending out a clear message that for WHATEVER reason, no matter how it was instigated, this behaviour is not acceptable.
Hell, some dogs do it because they get a result and because it is a fun game, or because it gets them out of whatever they didn't want to do, or because they did not get what they want to do - not because they have been abused or pushed or threatened.
 
The reason I see it is why he pushes to get that aggressive behaviour is to show the owners what to do when the behaviour occurs with them. I suspect if he didnt push the dog with his strong leadership handling skills the dog wouldnt exhibit them and if handed back to the owners with their weak and inaffectual handling it would occur again.
 
No, because you do not continue to push the dog into using its teeth so it doesn't rehearse the behaviour. You shouldn't constantly be making errors and pushing the dog into biting. A dog in that kind of state of mind is unlikely to be one that learns a lesson very well anyway because they are in a high state of fear, excitement or whatever - another reason to avoid pushing that dog beyond threshold.

Dobiegirl, dog's thesholds are so personal to that dog that it would be difficult to devise a method for your dog solely over the internet. This is probably why the clicker class was not suitable - a clicker training class would be a much more generalised class aimed at general obedience, trick training, etc., not a place to deal with a reactive dog. With Casper's reactivity, I did not go down the group class route, but one-to-one training or workshops specifically for reactive dogs (so they had a set regime to avoid the very small number - 3 - of dogs meeting each other until right at the end of the workshop, when we did a quick, very controlled exercise with the dogs). If your dog struggles to deal with a dog in the distance then a group class really isn't the place to be, and a good trainer should have given you an assessment outside of class to judge this. Remember, there are good and bad trainers in all methods, not all clicker trainers are good, I'm happy to admit that. And trainers like CM have some good methods too - his stance on exercise, stimulations, etc. are all things I agree with for the most part, I just think that many of his methods aren't good.

But, for example, did you ever try anything with a fake dog? Casper went to this reactive dog workshop and they did most of the exercises with a stuffed toy dog - it still got reactions from every dog (I was surprised, I thought they'd spot the fake straight away) but not as severely as with a living, breathing dog, and obviously a stuffed toy is a lot more neutral and easily controlled in stooge setups - it won't move out of place, whine, bark, wag its tail or anything.

The reason I see it is why he pushes to get that aggressive behaviour is to show the owners what to do when the behaviour occurs with them. I suspect if he didnt push the dog with his strong leadership handling skills the dog wouldnt exhibit them and if handed back to the owners with their weak and inaffectual handling it would occur again.
Click to expand...

But why not train the owners how to avoid that behaviour? For example, CM showed Holly's owner what Holly could do when really, really pushed. Why not teach the owners how not to push Holly that far? Teach them the basics of dog body language - Holly was very, very clear with her body language and if the owners were taught what to look for, they would know how to avoid a reaction like that. With that safety net behind them, they could then teach her not to resource guard, as per Victoria Stilwell for example. I don't think CM's actions in that clip 'cured' Holly - infact, I know it didn't because there's a clip of her at his rehabilitation centre showing some resource guarding with food still. His actions only proved that Holly would bite when pushed, she may have been easier to push than some dogs because of her existing guarding issues, but most dogs would bite when pushed so I saw no need to do that to prove a point.
 
Last edited:
No, because you do not continue to push the dog into using its teeth so it doesn't rehearse the behaviour. You shouldn't constantly be making errors and pushing the dog into biting. A dog in that kind of state of mind is unlikely to be one that learns a lesson very well anyway because they are in a high state of fear, excitement or whatever - another reason to avoid pushing that dog beyond threshold.

But sometimes you don't have to push the dog? Sometimes the owner isn't making an error?
Say...dog gobbing off at all other dogs it sees. Not fearful in the least, not abused, just shouting at other dogs. Not very well socialised and from working lines, quite dominant.
Trainer tugged at flat collar to get his attention, dog bit lead at this intrusion into his fun shouting and attempted to come up at trainer, trainer did not release pressure, dog calmed down and looked at the trainer for guidance. If trainer had released pressure, dog would have got the result it was looking for, which was to bark at other dogs and load himself without the annoying nagging.
That would have been a good result for the dog in the short term but a bad result in the long term for the dog and the handler.
 
And that's where our opinions differ again, I don't believe that a dog is just "quite dominant", I believe they have reasons for their behaviour. For example, an undersocialised dog from working lines that is non-aggressive with dogs, I would imagine the main cause of this kind of barking and pulling towards another dog would be an attempt to reach the dog and play, a case of barrier frustration. If I had put the dog into a situation where it reacted like that and went to bite, I would call that a mistake. Gobbing off, even in excitement, is not a behaviour I want or that other dogs appreciate so to have put the dog in that situation would be an error. I would learn from that mistake. I might have to use pressure on the collar in this instant, because of my mistake - the dog wants to get to the other dog, so while it was barking and lunging, I would walk away from the other dog until he was far away enough to calm down. I would be unlikely to use this time as a training opportunity because the dog is now in a state of excitement and frustration, and unable to learn very effectively - I would probably continue the walk elsewhere, allowing lots of self-calming behaviours like sniffing at scents, and let the dog have a few days of non-eventual walks before dealing with the issue.
However, now knowing about this issue, I would arrange some stooge situations - with a friend, a trainer, a behaviourist, or if none of them were possible, potentially a soft toy dog or I'd carefully make use of stranger's dogs in a controlled situation, e.g. "stalk" some dog owners who's dogs were on-lead and not able to run over to us, so I had control over the distance between us and them. I would pay very close attention to the dog's body langauge and take these as my cues to guage his threshold. A dog will often be pretty clear showing things like excitement, nerves, and so on - once you know what to look for, you see them all over the place. So I'd work with the dog sub-threshold, and teach him that my chosen behaviour (sitting calmly, watching the dog but not intently, looking away from the dog to me - a variety of alternative behaviours - results in a reward. As a functional reward in this situation, you could then use a release command and let him actually go and play with the dog, providing the setup allowed for this safely. Otherwise, reward with whatever else is as appealing, or ideally moreso, than playing with this dog - really tasty food if he's food-motivated, a game of something more fun than this other dog, lots of fuss if that's what floats his boat. Basically, rewarding each alternative behaviour that isn't pulling, whining, focusing intently, etc.
It would be a WIP - you may have to practice with him at 50 yards initially but you slowly decrease that, guaging his threshold, until he can walk up to a dog and only play when you release him to play.
In the meantime, interactions with other dogs would be limited and you could gain more control by using a harness or a headcollar to ensure that any mistakes do not result in a bite, now that you know his reaction is to redirect onto you.
Sure, it takes more time than jerking on a collar or using a shock collar to punish any overexcitable behaviour but I feel that not only would the training be a lot kinder to the dog, but also more effective longterm as you have now retrained his reaction to dogs and taught him that politeness is rewarding.
(and please note, I'm not a trainer so I can't say that these methods are the most accurate ways to use positive-based training, but I would approach a trainer for guidance in my methods if I was actually facing the issue myself)
 
Last edited:
krlyr said:
But why not train the owners how to avoid that behaviour? For example, CM showed Holly's owner what Holly could do when really, really pushed. Why not teach the owners how not to push Holly that far? Teach them the basics of dog body language - Holly was very, very clear with her body language and if the owners were taught what to look for, they would know how to avoid a reaction like that. With that safety net behind them, they could then teach her not to resource guard, as per Victoria Stilwell for example. I don't think CM's actions in that clip 'cured' Holly - infact, I know it didn't because there's a clip of her at his rehabilitation centre showing some resource guarding with food still. His actions only proved that Holly would bite when pushed, she may have been easier to push than some dogs because of her existing guarding issues, but most dogs would bite when pushed so I saw no need to do that to prove a point.
Click to expand...


in holly's case she was living in a household with young kids-you cannot be certain that a child would not have pushed holly that far, so would it be better to confine the dog from all family time? or blame the child if it got bitten?

i think many owners need a wake up call to how far their dog will go in order to get them to make some serious decisions.

how anyone can slate CM with regards to the Holly situation i don't know-he has/had her at his rehabilitation centre and continued to work with her-after many years training i don't know any trainers first hand that would have continued with this dog (myself included)

i have no issue with VS and her methods many of them work for many dogs but dont be showing her as a glowing example that never makes a mistake she worked with one resource guarding spaniel and a few weeks later it mauled one of the kids in the house, VS advised owners to PTS (i would agree it was best) but she is not always right either if she had not read the dog wrong when she worked with it , then it would have been removed from the house before it bit the child
 
jools1234 said:
in holly's case she was living in a household with young kids-you cannot be certain that a child would not have pushed holly that far, so would it be better to confine the dog from all family time? or blame the child if it got bitten?
Click to expand...

I have said on the other thread that I think removing Holly from the household was not the wrong thing to do, given the inability to predict/control a child 100% of the time. But I don't see that CM needed to push Holly to biting to make this point. If he is such an expert, why could they not take his word for it that a resource guarding dog is a big risk around a child?
 
This is interesting actually all Dex's poor behaviour stems from over excitement...... Dex used to mouth like no bodies business- it hurt, bruised and occasionally broke the skin. I was told to ignore him- you can not totally ignore a 25kg dog that is for all its worth launching itself at you and using its teeth- infact it made him "try" harder as he was not getting the reaction he wanted.
Taking steps towards him, rather than backing away and Taking hold of said dog by collar and calmly putting it in the next room alone for 5 mins had the desired effect.

I also did the whole click treat/watch me method for calm behaviour round other dogs for over a year with pretty much no improvement- what works infinitely better now is a martingale headcollar and a firm leave it. As working a dog sub threshold is all well and good but depending on where you live is not always possible.

I think that there is defo a middle ground between yank and crank only and rewards based only- especially for those dogs that maybe have not had the best start, of are generally unafraid of chucking their weight around.- Would I allow CM to alpha roll my dog? hell no.
 
CaveCanem said:
The dominance in this dog, as well as a lot of the other behaviours it exhibits, would be genetic.

Who mentioned shock collars?!
Click to expand...

CM uses shock collars. He's used it in a similar situation with a GSD too focused on a cat. Interestingly, the use of the shock collar either causes or doesn't prevent the GSD redirecting onto CM with its teeth.
 
I cant multi quote so here goes, I rang beforehand and explained to both accredited trainers what my dogs problem was(he was a rescue so not cocked up by me). They both said the same well you can always come in and sit the lesson out and watch what we do, the minute I walked through the door and he reacted they said take that dog out of here and dont come back. Now they had my phone number and could have quite easily rung me but I never heard another thing from them. A fake dog wouldnt have worked because he wouldnt react unless it barked, I had done that much at home as he was good and reliable with dogs he knew.

My new trainer ex police dog handler knew exactly what to do and first took me outside to take the dog away from the situation in order to talk to me and explain what he wanted me to do. When we walked back inside the trainer walked beside us giving me instruction at every moment. As I said before when checked (he was on a choke chain) he would come up the lead and bite, without the choke chain I would have had no control as he was 40kg. Only haltis were available then and were pretty rubbish as they rode up to his eyes and would have made the situation worse. Under his guidence my dog became 100% reliable and sadly I lost him a couple of years ago due to a medical problem.

What you are seeing on CMs shows are dogs with very severe problems and like others am not convinced that Hollys only problem was food aggression. We didnt get to see the whole programme and so its unfair to make a judgement on a snapshot in time.
 
This dog I mentioned, the dog who is genetically predisposed to being dominant and a bit hard-headed, is on a flat collar and the owner will not countenance anything more.

I do not see the relevance of shock collars to the scenario I am talking about, sorry.

Yes, sometimes shock collars activate dogs, sometimes they don't.
Sometimes dogs throw tantrums when they are distracted from their fun activities like cat chasing and arm-grabbing.
 
'shoot me now'

i have in the past used an shock collar on my lurcher to stop her from hunting feral cats, she does not just chase she hunts, she can easily clear without touching a 6ft fence, i have no idea how high she could scale. she has followed cats out onto a busy road in the excitement of the chase. i have introduced her to cats, have worked with her on a lead with cats but it makes no difference her prey drive is huge-the electric collar has created a dog that thinks feral cats have a defence mechanism that hurts if she is hunting creating a dog that has not hunted a cat for a couple of years. she wore the collar for 2 months before it was used she was in a safe enviroment and it took 3 shocks.

if i had not been able to stop this she would have to be kennelled all the time i am at work instead of being able to come with me and be loose on the yard. i think she would have a much lower quality of life if i had not bitten the bullet and swallowed my pride (i was against these collars) all dogs and situations are different.

also you cannot blame CM if the owners of a dog do not realise how serious a situation is with their dog, meaning he has to demonstrate
 
Dobiegirl said:
I cant multi quote so here goes, I rang beforehand and explained to both accredited trainers what my dogs problem was(he was a rescue so not cocked up by me). They both said the same well you can always come in and sit the lesson out and watch what we do, the minute I walked through the door and he reacted they said take that dog out of here and dont come back. Now they had my phone number and could have quite easily rung me but I never heard another thing from them.
Click to expand...

Like I said, not every trainer is the same. I would not take my reactive dog into an indoor group class even if we were sitting the lesson out as I know that he would struggle a lot with dogs moving around all over the place in what can usually be quite a busy, energetic environment (lots of smells and sounds, lots of excited dogs). The trainer I approached held outdoor classes so the idea was that we could skirt around the edges of the (very large) venue and work on our commands with Casper beneath threshold, and as well as training the usual commands, teach him to work around other dogs and ignore them. The trainer was happy to consider this but arranged an assessment, and we found that even at a distance, he was not at the stage where he could focus on me with a dog moving around at as far a distance as we could manage (with me needing to be able to hear her for the class). The assessment was purposely done outside of class time so that her other, paying, customers weren't affected, so that the other dogs in the class weren't affected (she used her own dog, very used to seeing dogs react and not bothered by it at all) and so that Casper was only tested at a minimal level, so no unnecessary stress on him either. Walking a reactive dog into the middle of a class being taught is not fair on anyone involved IMO.

CaveCanem said:
This dog I mentioned, the dog who is genetically predisposed to being dominant and a bit hard-headed, is on a flat collar and the owner will not countenance anything more.
Click to expand...

A trainer can only suggest, it's up to the owner to take action. If I were a trainer and a client refused to do as I suggested then there is little more I can do other than try to explain my methods and talk them around to it, even just giving it a try. Though the use of a flat collar wouldn't particularly be an issue if they kept the dog below threshold. Interestingly, I know many people who have found a reactive dog to be 'cured' almost instantly by switching from a flat collar to a harness though - the lack of pressure on the neck can make a huge difference, whether it's down to an association the dog has formed with the feeling, to allowing the dog more oxygen, removing a source of pain, removing the tension that the dog may pick up on and so on.

As I said, I don't believe in dogs "being dominant", not in this kind of context, so cannot really give my view on how to deal with a trait I don't believe exists.
 
A harness on this dog gives complete freedom to the head and neck, allowing him to fixate and gob off at whatever dog he wants. Has already been tried.

I said the dog is dominant genetically. Do you think genetics do not have a role to play?
 
I think genetics play a role, sure, but not in dominance. The dog may be genetically more prone to overexcitement, a lack of self control, to fear (in the case of fear reactivity, not this dog) and so on, but I don't think that dominance exists in the way you are using it.

The harness may give more freedom, but we're giving the dog more distance to prevent him reaching the state of gobbing off, remember. If he's still gobbing off, he's been pushed over threshold and the owner needs to create more distance, remove distractions, move down a level in training.
 
krlyr said:
The harness may give more freedom, but we're giving the dog more distance to prevent him reaching the state of gobbing off, remember. If he's still gobbing off, he's been pushed over threshold and the owner needs to create more distance, remove distractions, move down a level in training.
Click to expand...

i dont think i would live for enough years (let alone the dog) to be able to solve the issues some dogs have using your suggested methods-i am not all for a quick fix but i would still not be able to be in the same street as a running cat if i had not gone on to try other methods

some behaviour is just not acceptable and you cannot control the dogs enviroment 100% of the time, sometimes no means no and the handler has to make the dog aware of that. you dont see bitches taking their puppies away from every situation that the puppy might find worrying or taking it if a puppy redirects its aggression and she is in the firing line, she would just floor them
 
Nope. Maybe more likely to show a strong guarding behaviour, maybe more independant thinking if it's from a line of dogs that have been left to think for themselves, maybe more vocal, but not just "dominant", I think behaviours are more diverse with more explanation behind them than just "dominance"
 
OK, you don't like the word dominance.

How about genetic predisposition to handler aggression, dog aggression - ingrained and NOT caused by fear or over-exciteability - aggression over resources, sensitivity to correction, hardness to correction, vocalisation as you say, shyness. They all exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top