Poll: Love Or Hate Cesar Millan

[Guest SusanP]

I don't like much of what I hear about him, but I can't say I've ever watched him myself. I kind of like that skinny British woman with the pony tail who goes into the homes of people with out- of -control dogs, though. I've seen that show a time or two.

[Guest greyfan]

CM has been discussed many times over and you can probably find a plethora of CM topics if you search here

 

He's a polarizing figure, that's all I'm going to say.

 

As for the manner in which he treats dogs, I will only say that I prefer to put my trust in psychological principles versus the highly controversial "dominance theory".

 

I agree.

 

 

One of the biggest issues for me is that the results of his TV show is that I see many dogs in my neighborhood having their leash snapped with a sh sound for no darn reason whatsoever.The dog can simply be sniffing a tree for pete's sake. There's something wrong with that,and that's that.

 

Is this a direct result of that TV show? Yes. Is cm at fault for that? Well I believe,in the end,yes. When this is happening fairly routinely and with different people and dogs,that's a problem imo. If there's a benefit somewhere in all this,no question,something's been lost in the translation,no matter the protective disclaimer.

 

Whenever people boast as sort of 'proof' of either cm's ways,or training based on the notion of alpha-ness -- "oh but I did this with my dog and it worked! Look,couple months later and look at how he walks with me!",etc.  -- I think to myself,well the dogs and their persons I know have reached the same or much better results and did not meet their dog with the alpha business set in their mind,but used positive training techniques where it was important.

 

It also seems like there's more then a little ego tripping,either just as a quality in them in general,or with their dog specifically, in some of the people I know who like,or in their words "love" him. 

 

 

 

Whats wrong with snapping the leash if you don't want your dog to sniff something? I dictate when we are walking and when we are just casually strolling. If I say "free" then my dog knows its ok to roam around etc. If I am on a walk or run and don't want to stop at every tree, then that is what we are going to do. You are not breaking your dog's heart by not letting them sniff a tree. The snap or "shhhttt" is just an attention getter, its not suppose to be a forceful action. I have see Victoria Stillwell use the same thing. She uses it when she is trying to train a dog that gets too excited with other dogs or people. She makes a high pitched "this way" or some other noise I don't know how to type, and switches direction.

 

I am not sure what you mean by ego tripping? By him or the people you see use his techniques. Now you are associating/blaming people's personalities on CM? Is what you call ego simply pride in changing their dog's behavior? I see the same thing from people that just completed an obedience course.

 

I agree... if we stopped to sniff every bush and tree and piece of garbage it would take us FOREVER to get home... poor me and Jojo!

 

[Guest RedBrindleBoy]

I agree... if we stopped to sniff every bush and tree and piece of garbage it would take us FOREVER to get home... poor me and Jojo!

 

There are other, more humane ways to teach the behavior than snapping the leash is the point.

[Guest caiteag]

I agree... if we stopped to sniff every bush and tree and piece of garbage it would take us FOREVER to get home... poor me and Jojo!

 

There are other, more humane ways to teach the behavior than snapping the leash is the point.

 

How is snapping a leash to get the dog's attention inhumane?? Come on!! If you prefer to train your dog differently.. that is fine.. but suggesting giving a little tug on the leash is akin to being cruel is a fairly big jump.

 

BTW.. I correct with an "EH!" and if I am ignored, I give a gentle tug on the leash. I assure you, my dogs are NOT treated poorly.. and I have high expectations when it comes to behavior for them and I work with them. I correct for inappropriate behavior and I praise and reward for positive behavior... oh yeah.. and I like Cesar.

 

 

As for the rollerblading thing... I have a friend who has rollerbladed with her greys for years. I am hoping to eventually train Ty and Choo to trot with me while I rollerblade. I just have to work on being really good on my blades first.

[Guest Winterwish]

What's important is that there are better ways.

It's of course up to you whether or not you want to leash snap your dog's neck with his leash and collar to get their attention. But you don't have to. There are better ways.

 

 

Apart from anyone's post,I tend to think the leash snapping,or what cm does is,unfortunately,just easier for people then working thru' training using positive training methods as opposed to using aversives.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Winterwish

[Guest patti909]

I think his ideas are greyt for those extreme situations where dogs are dangerous or nothing else has helped.

[kronckew]

like patti said above.

 

y'all are forgetting that the dogs on his show are invariably the most badly behaved dogs that have had 'positive' re-enforcement tried on them with out success, sometimes by many professional dog training 'experts'. good dogs don't need the more physical of his methods, which he keeps to a minimum. we also only see the edited show, not the other takes where he gets bit or has problems. i ticked the grain of salt item, his techniques are not for all, and should be used with caution, and any of the physical stuff is only for the ones that do not respond to other forms of training. most of his approach is training the owners in nilf anyway. most of the CM shows we see over here do have a followup segment. (dog borstal does that frequently as well - there show is also based on 'problem' dogs. i've not as yet seen a greyhound on CM's, but have seen a couple lurchers and one greyhound on dog borstal in for recall training. one of the trainers, Robert Alleyne, is associated with G4U greyhound rehoming)

Edited December 24, 2008 by kronckew

[Guest Winterwish]

Not forgetting those aspects of the show at all.

And actually,your post points out the main problem I have with that tv show,which is that I see dogs who are being mistreated because their persons are devotee's of cm. Dogs who have no need at all to be handled like a dangerous dog. And it's not right.

 

 

An exellant book for reading is "For The Love of A Dog: Understanding Emotion in You and Your Best Friend",by Patricia McConnell.

Edited December 24, 2008 by Winterwish

[Guest LindsaySF]

In a nutshell: His training consists of setting dogs up so they will fail, and he can CORRECT them, instead of setting them up to succeed and PRAISING them.

How is he setting them up for failure? These are dogs with problem behaviors and how are you going to correct the behavior without seeing the dog do it?

Read the AVSAB paper linked by Gemma above. Here's the link again, for those who missed it: http://www.avsabonline.org/avsabonline/ima...20statement.pdf

 

That is an EXCELLENT article! I just read it. Thanks for linking it Gemma.

 

 

[IndyandHollyluv]

I switched cable providers a few weeks ago and now have Nat Geo. After hearing so much about Cesar Millan, I finally have had the opportunity to watch several episodes of "The Dog Whisperer."

 

Frankly, I was rather surprised and bummed to see him yanking, kicking, and biffing dogs upside the head. And that "chhhhh" thing - what's up with that? (per Cliff Claven). How annoying. And what's with all the Spanish Inquisition-style harnesses and collars? Pinch collars? Good grief.

 

Although Mr. Millan knows his stuff, I guess I prefer a more positive approach and would much rather watch "It's Me or the Dog." Just my

[Guest Capslock]

I'm coming down on the Pro-Cesar side. He is often working with big, strong breeds like Pits and Rotties, and believe me, nothing he does even registers on their pain or distress meters - he's just getting their focus. He's said on the show several times that greyhounds are different and he wouldn't even use the same leash/collar things on them. What I take from his show is not the pulling and nudging, but rather the calm, decisive communication with the dogs. My greys respond very well to unambiguous messages, and they respond negatively to waffling mixed messages. They look to us for leadership, and for security, which is different from mere comforting and coddling. A confident, comfortable greyhound is a sight to behold, and what I've learned from the show is how to encourage that comfort and security through clear, confident communication, which includes boundaries and limits. And additionally, every dog is different, so you can never just copy anything from the show. You take the principles and lessons and apply them in a way that is appropriate not just for the breed, but for the individual dog. The biggest lesson I've learned from the show is to recognize problems before they happen, and divert the dog's attention and focus so nothing ever escalates or becomes a habit. And don't nurture insecurity! That was a big one for one of my greys.

 

Max

[Guest GretaDad]

I switched cable providers a few weeks ago and now have Nat Geo. After hearing so much about Cesar Millan, I finally have had the opportunity to watch several episodes of "The Dog Whisperer."

 

Frankly, I was rather surprised and bummed to see him yanking, kicking, and biffing dogs upside the head. And that "chhhhh" thing - what's up with that? (per Cliff Claven). How annoying. And what's with all the Spanish Inquisition-style harnesses and collars? Pinch collars? Good grief.

 

Although Mr. Millan knows his stuff, I guess I prefer a more positive approach and would much rather watch "It's Me or the Dog." Just my

 

I know what you mean about Me or the Dog. I like how Victoria dresses up in her black leather outfits and makes her clients get down on their hands and knees and bark like a dog. I'm not sure what method of training this is, but it sure does make for good entertainment--Yaouza!

 

Seriously, though, if you watch enough of both shows, you'll see that they both use a similar approach to dog training. Although they state their messages using different words (Victoria tells her clients to be "strong, confident, leaders to their dog" whereas CM tells his clients to be "calm, assertive pack leaders"), both work mainly with the owners, rather than the dogs.

 

As you watch more of the DW (or if you do), you'll see that CM works with a large variety of dog breeds and situations. CM has helped people get over their fear of dogs, give confidence to fearful dogs, teaching owners how to get their dog into the car, and what he best known for; rehabilitating the worst cases that other trainers have given up on by recommending that the dog be put down when the positive approach fails.

 

CM's former LADPC is also an adoption agency. CM takes dogs that aren't right for their owners in and later adopts them out, or does a dog swap with the owner for a dog more suitable to their disposition (I can hear the "dogs are children" wails now!)

 

Recently CM had his 100th episode special in which he brought back most of his past clients that appeared on the show. Several were interviewed about the long-term effects of using CM's methods. As expected the interviews were glowing, but for these people, CM's methods of dog handling did change their lives for the better.

 

Unfortunately, many here focus on one aspect that they saw in one segment of one episode, or worse yet, heard about because they, like you, have never seen the show, read his book(s), or watched a video. This is like reading a Psalm or two and then proclaiming yourself a biblical scholar.

 

CM himself says that he never uses the same method with every dog because no two cases are alike. Each dog/owner situation requires a unique approach. And as CM says, it's much easier for us to learn a dog's language than it is for us to try to teach him ours.

 

I like to watch how Greta and Frannie interact with other dogs at the bark-park. One day, there was an 18 month old, unaltered Dalmation that took a special interest in G&F. Interestingly, when G&F had had enough of his attention, they corrected his behavior by rebuffing his advances!

 

G&F didn't use a "positive" approach by rewarding the behavior they wanted, they used a negative approach by growling at him when he exhibited unwanted behavior. It must have worked, because he got the message the first time and has left them alone since.

 

A quick question, in the episodes that you watched, did any of the dogs suffer any ill effects from CM's methods or did their behavior improve?

 

[Guest Giselle]

I like to watch how Greta and Frannie interact with other dogs at the bark-park. One day, there was an 18 month old, unaltered Dalmation that took a special interest in G&F. Interestingly, when G&F had had enough of his attention, they corrected his behavior by rebuffing his advances!

 

G&F didn't use a "positive" approach by rewarding the behavior they wanted, they used a negative approach by growling at him when he exhibited unwanted behavior. It must have worked, because he got the message the first time and has left them alone since.

GretaDad, just as you encourage us to see CM as a whole and just as you encourage us to NOT focus on a single aspect of his methodology, your example here does just that.

 

The positive reinforcement methodology does NOT entail only positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement is ALWAYS used with negative punishment. Like many other psychological terms, negative reinforcement has been widely misunderstood. Negative = "remove". Punishment = decrease behavior. Negative punishment, therefore, means taking away the desired stimulus to decrease behavior.

 

As you've already noticed, a stable adult dog's very first instinct is ---negative punishment. Stable adult dogs are (famously) extremely tolerant of puppy antics. Despite the pushing, the grabbing, the nipping, the pulling, the annoyance and frustration, almost all stable adult dogs will initially do two things: 1) turn their head 2) walk away. In extreme cases where the puppy is either hurting the other dog or has no knowledge of 'etiquette', the adult dog may resort to warning growls and snaps. But the adult's first instinct is to turn its head and walk away = negative reinforcement.

 

This topic has been hashed and rehashed to its death. Let the pollsters poll, but I'll be wetting the ashes.

[Guest jcbradley11]

It really comes down to this. Anytime somebody is successful at something, there will always be critics. There will also always be those who swear by what that somebody has become successful at. I, for one, swear by Cesar. He has done a lot of good work for dogs, and not always just Rotties and Pits. I have seen episodes where they went to Mexico, where they electricute dogs to put them down, and bring them back here to be adopted. He even adopted one himself. It doesn't matter to me that the dogs were from Mexico...a dog is a dog no matter where it comes from.

I have read where so call professionals criticise Cesar for his work. However, I wonder, just how much they do to help dogs who have 'issues' and need help. A lot of people on Cesar's show have come right out and said "Cesar is our last hope". Meaning if Cesar can't help them, they will either get rid of the dog or put the dog down. In my opinion, what Cesar does is a heck of a lot more humane and decent than killing the dog or sending them away because the owner does not know how handle or train the dog.

 

[Guest Gemma]

I have read where so call professionals criticise Cesar for his work.

 

I must confess to finding it a little funny that you call into question other dog trainers and behaviorists who criticise Cesar Milan, considering that he has no official qualifications. Now, I'm not saying he doesn't know anything because if you spend enough time around large numbers of dogs, it's entirely possible to be self-taught, but he's also openly stated that he's undergone none of the training that many US behaviourists do. So I think referring to them as "so call professionals" is a little bit ironic.

 

That said, some of those professionals who disagree with him include the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behaviour, which is a highly respected group.

 

Honestly, I think these kind of issues ('is X trainer good or not') are largely influenced by what I refer to as 'the cult of personality'.

[Guest jcbradley11]

I have read where so call professionals criticise Cesar for his work.

 

I must confess to finding it a little funny that you call into question other dog trainers and behaviorists who criticise Cesar Milan, considering that he has no official qualifications. Now, I'm not saying he doesn't know anything because if you spend enough time around large numbers of dogs, it's entirely possible to be self-taught, but he's also openly stated that he's undergone none of the training that many US behaviourists do. So I think referring to them as "so call professionals" is a little bit ironic.

 

That said, some of those professionals who disagree with him include the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behaviour, which is a highly respected group.

 

Honestly, I think these kind of issues ('is X trainer good or not') are largely influenced by what I refer to as 'the cult of personality'.

 

 

When I say "so called professionals" I obviously don't mean AVSAB...as I think just about everyone will agree they are 'Professionals'. So no, I don't think it is "ironic". What I mean is articles online from people I've never heard of. I did't see their credentials, and I don't know what kind of work they have done to help the dogs that need it. That was my point, and since apparently my point was missed...I guess next time I should make it more clear. I never said Cesar is a professional...however I did say he has done a lot of good work for dogs that would have otherwise been killed. He gives them a chance to live and to live happily. They do deserve at least that since most times it's humans who get them the way they are in the first place.

[Guest Gemma]

When I say "so called professionals" I obviously don't mean AVSAB...as I think just about everyone will agree they are 'Professionals'. So no, I don't think it is "ironic". What I mean is articles online from people I've never heard of. I did't see their credentials, and I don't know what kind of work they have done to help the dogs that need it. That was my point, and since apparently my point was missed...I guess next time I should make it more clear. I never said Cesar is a professional...however I did say he has done a lot of good work for dogs that would have otherwise been killed. He gives them a chance to live and to live happily. They do deserve at least that since most times it's humans who get them the way they are in the first place.

 

I guess I'm lucky since all the articles I've read against Cesar have been by professional trainers or behaviourists.

 

I do agree that anyone helping dogs is a good thing, but I'm also in the camp that believes it can be done better. And, honestly, I watched his show devotedly for a long time and saw very few cases that were genuine 'red cases'. Usually, the owners were just overreacting and exacerbating a problem, at which point any trainer could have stepped in and done so more compassionately than Cesar. He means well, clearly, but I don't think good intention excuses using a debunked theory of schooling.

 

I understand that others feel differently, however.

[Guest jcbradley11]

I guess I'm lucky since all the articles I've read against Cesar have been by professional trainers or behaviourists.

 

I do agree that anyone helping dogs is a good thing, but I'm also in the camp that believes it can be done better. And, honestly, I watched his show devotedly for a long time and saw very few cases that were genuine 'red cases'. Usually, the owners were just overreacting and exacerbating a problem, at which point any trainer could have stepped in and done so more compassionately than Cesar. He means well, clearly, but I don't think good intention excuses using a debunked theory of schooling.

 

I understand that others feel differently, however.

 

If you understand that others feel differently then why do your comments above seem so condescending to me? Seems to me you are saying that because the only articles you have read against Cesar are by professional trainers then that's all that's out there?? I don't know, maybe I'm just reading this wrong.

 

I am also in the camp that if one wants to critisize and say the dogs he has helped weren't really that bad and could have been done better, maybe they should do it themselves??? I am no professional, I am no trainer. Whether I agree with the way an animal is trained or not is a moot point because I'm not going to step up and do it myself.

 

I will agree with you, though. Most of the time the problem is caused by the owners. It sure is a good thing Cesar has helped so many people realize they were the problem. On the other hand, the owners sometimes did ask for other trainers and vet advice, and sometimes were told to put the dog down. Luckily for the dog they didn't take that advice.

 

I find it funny though, that his "debunked theory of schooling" has saved a lot of dog's lives.

 

Say what you will to me...that's ok....I believe we can agree to disagree on this subject...but we don't have to do it in such a condescending way.

[Guest GretaDad]

GretaDad, just as you encourage us to see CM as a whole and just as you encourage us to NOT focus on a single aspect of his methodology, your example here does just that.

 

Giselle, please don't make the assumption that just because I didn't write about other examples of canine behavior corrections that I've witnessed in my and other dogs, that they didn't happen.

[Guest GretaDad]

I guess I'm lucky since all the articles I've read against Cesar have been by professional trainers or behaviourists.

 

I do agree that anyone helping dogs is a good thing, but I'm also in the camp that believes it can be done better. And, honestly, I watched his show devotedly for a long time and saw very few cases that were genuine 'red cases'. Usually, the owners were just overreacting and exacerbating a problem, at which point any trainer could have stepped in and done so more compassionately than Cesar. He means well, clearly, but I don't think good intention excuses using a debunked theory of schooling.

 

I understand that others feel differently, however.

 

All of the articles you've read against Cesar have been by professional trainers or behaviorists, but have you read all of the articles by professional trainers or behaviorists about Cesar?

 

Cesar himself has said that there are few genuine red zone cases and in most instances, it is the owner misinterpreting their dog's behavior. What you may have missed in many of the red and non-red cases is that the owners tried professional trainers and behaviorists who were unsuccessful in correcting the dog's unwanted behavior before Cesar stepped in.

 

Good intentions? I prefer to look at one's actions. If you're to judge him and his methods, also look at his work with adoptions, rescues and canine welfare awareness. Has Cesar helped more dogs or hurt more dogs?

Edited January 8, 2009 by GretaDad

[Guest Gemma]

If you understand that others feel differently then why do your comments above seem so condescending to me? Seems to me you are saying that because the only articles you have read against Cesar are by professional trainers then that's all that's out there?? I don't know, maybe I'm just reading this wrong.

 

Not at all, and I apologise if that's what you read from my comment.

 

GretaDad, thanks for taking the time to comment. To answer your question, yes, I have read the articles that support Cesar. I was actually a big fan of his for a while and read a lot about him. It was actually my interest in him that led me to research dominance theory, which is when I changed my mind about him. I also have some experience with badly abused dogs, which also led to me changing my opinion.

 

You know, as revitalising as healthy debate can be, considering that my tone has already been called into question and I am therefore noting a little bit of defensiveness here, I think I shall bow out of the discussion before anyone says something they will later regret.

[CathyI8205]

I always get into these threads too late. I'm a big CM fan! But he usually works with clueless dog owners.

 

He would probably think that most greyhound owners here are doing the right thing. We walk our dogs often. Keep the leashes short. And we're strong "pack leaders".

[Guest greytgrandma]

"Physical domination" is more than actually grabbing or restraining the dog. Like when he took the dog that was terrified of tile floors and dragged him across it, until the poor thing was in full panic mode: salivating, glassy eyed, panting, crouched, etc. When the dog from sheer necessity managed to get onto the carpet, he was proclaimed 'cured'. Instead, he'd just learned a valuable lesson: the tile floor really is scary!! Another example is the dog he hauled up using a choke chain until it was clearly restricting its breathing. As others have mentioned in posts to this forum, when you correct behaviour like growling, you're teaching the dog not to growl; you are not teaching the dog to deal with whatever is making him/her feel the need to growl. This is basically all that CM does. He stops dogs from reacting but because he's not dealing with the psychology behind those reactions, the problems will occur again when he leaves.

 

CM doesn't need to use the word 'alpha' because he uses the word 'leader' to mean the same thing. All his talk about dogs wanting to take over the pack, and you needing to dominate them to prove your leadership, that's all based on dominance theory. In the link I supplied, you'll find a very thorough and educated explanation for why this has been debunked in recent years.

 

I have seen episodes where CM has genuinely helped, usually for less extreme cases, but I've also seen episodes where the 'cured' dog is left panting and crouched low in classic stress postures. That isn't a 'happy submissive' dog, that's a scared dog. Considering that positive reinforcement really does work, why not use that method? It seems so much more ethical to me.

 

Also, let's not forget that there's a disclaimer on his show now not to try the methods at home without a trainer! Shows that teach positive reinforcement don't legally require warnings like that.

 

Iv never watched the show. And Im sure glad Iv never seen it. Just reading things that he has done like drag the dog across the tile floor is enough to turn me off to watching him. Even if he does a few good things it doesnt make up for things he does do that I believe are wrong.

[Guest jcbradley11]

"Physical domination" is more than actually grabbing or restraining the dog. Like when he took the dog that was terrified of tile floors and dragged him across it, until the poor thing was in full panic mode: salivating, glassy eyed, panting, crouched, etc. When the dog from sheer necessity managed to get onto the carpet, he was proclaimed 'cured'. Instead, he'd just learned a valuable lesson: the tile floor really is scary!! Another example is the dog he hauled up using a choke chain until it was clearly restricting its breathing. As others have mentioned in posts to this forum, when you correct behaviour like growling, you're teaching the dog not to growl; you are not teaching the dog to deal with whatever is making him/her feel the need to growl. This is basically all that CM does. He stops dogs from reacting but because he's not dealing with the psychology behind those reactions, the problems will occur again when he leaves.

 

CM doesn't need to use the word 'alpha' because he uses the word 'leader' to mean the same thing. All his talk about dogs wanting to take over the pack, and you needing to dominate them to prove your leadership, that's all based on dominance theory. In the link I supplied, you'll find a very thorough and educated explanation for why this has been debunked in recent years.

 

I have seen episodes where CM has genuinely helped, usually for less extreme cases, but I've also seen episodes where the 'cured' dog is left panting and crouched low in classic stress postures. That isn't a 'happy submissive' dog, that's a scared dog. Considering that positive reinforcement really does work, why not use that method? It seems so much more ethical to me.

 

Also, let's not forget that there's a disclaimer on his show now not to try the methods at home without a trainer! Shows that teach positive reinforcement don't legally require warnings like that.

 

Iv never watched the show. And Im sure glad Iv never seen it. Just reading things that he has done like drag the dog across the tile floor is enough to turn me off to watching him. Even if he does a few good things it doesnt make up for things he does do that I believe are wrong.

 

This is one person's interpretation of his show. I watch his show all the time and have never seen such behavior from him, but I guess it all comes down to how you interperate it. Personally, I prefer to make my own judgements rather than make my judgements from the interpretations of others.

[Guest GretaDad]

"Physical domination" is more than actually grabbing or restraining the dog. Like when he took the dog that was terrified of tile floors and dragged him across it, until the poor thing was in full panic mode: salivating, glassy eyed, panting, crouched, etc. When the dog from sheer necessity managed to get onto the carpet, he was proclaimed 'cured'. Instead, he'd just learned a valuable lesson: the tile floor really is scary!! Another example is the dog he hauled up using a choke chain until it was clearly restricting its breathing. As others have mentioned in posts to this forum, when you correct behaviour like growling, you're teaching the dog not to growl; you are not teaching the dog to deal with whatever is making him/her feel the need to growl. This is basically all that CM does. He stops dogs from reacting but because he's not dealing with the psychology behind those reactions, the problems will occur again when he leaves.

 

CM doesn't need to use the word 'alpha' because he uses the word 'leader' to mean the same thing. All his talk about dogs wanting to take over the pack, and you needing to dominate them to prove your leadership, that's all based on dominance theory. In the link I supplied, you'll find a very thorough and educated explanation for why this has been debunked in recent years.

 

I have seen episodes where CM has genuinely helped, usually for less extreme cases, but I've also seen episodes where the 'cured' dog is left panting and crouched low in classic stress postures. That isn't a 'happy submissive' dog, that's a scared dog. Considering that positive reinforcement really does work, why not use that method? It seems so much more ethical to me.

 

Also, let's not forget that there's a disclaimer on his show now not to try the methods at home without a trainer! Shows that teach positive reinforcement don't legally require warnings like that.

 

Iv never watched the show. And Im sure glad Iv never seen it. Just reading things that he has done like drag the dog across the tile floor is enough to turn me off to watching him. Even if he does a few good things it doesnt make up for things he does do that I believe are wrong.

 

Well, to be fair, Gemma did not mention the outcome of the Great Dane episode or the cause of the dog's phobia. The owner regularly brought her dog to work without problems. One day, the dog was running, slipped on the floor and crashed into the wall. The owner immediately ran to the dog began the "it's okay" thing, which confirmed in the dog's mind that something serious had just happened, and that it should now avoid shiny surfaces that it had previously ignored.

 

By the end of the segment, the dog did overcome his shiny floor phobia and was seen walking throughout the office without a problem. The owner confirmed in the follow-up that their lives had returned to normal and that she was able to resume bringing her dog to work without the need for rugs and carpets.

 

Also, CM does not correct the growling, but the behavior behind it. If you try to correct a dog's growling, you're too late with your correction because you should be correcting the cause, not the symptom.

 

But, as you've admitted to having never seen a show, why are you taking another's word for how situations are dealt with, rather than learning for yourself? If I told you that it was raining greyhounds, would you believe me, or take a look out the window?

Edited January 8, 2009 by GretaDad