Episode with resource guarding greyhound

None of my students end up with possessive dogs when they follow this method correctly. 

There's the difference right there.  That dog was already possessive and mine was too.  And, I can tell you that if she had something and I had something else, she didn't care to trade.  You do have to teach them to back off whatever it is they have. 
 
Also, I don't understand the analogy of using a broom is like someone coming at me with a baseball bat.  You are not threatening to hit the dog with the broom. And, a broom is much softer and a lot less threatening that a bat.

I didn't see the episode, so I can't comment on it.
 
I personally do not use the "trade" concept, and neither does Cesar. It's based on human logic and human psychology, not dog psychology. My dogs have always given up anything they have to me (anyplace and anytime) because everything is already mine and I share with them, not the other way around.
 
But, folks should do what they feel works best with their own dogs, and can define what "controlling resources" really means to them. []
 
 

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

Approaching a dog with a broom is a lot like approaching a human with a baseball bat (if you aren't at Fenway Park).  You may think it's soft, and it is if you don't use the bat/broom, but it is threatening.  And, frankly, it is the threat that you pose to the dog, in terms of taking away his stuff, that he is seeking to repel. 

Thats totally a human concept, if you as human are worried about a guy who's coming at you with a baseball bat that is because you know that baseball bats are use for hitting, CM uses the broom as a "extension of the human body", for the dog the broom is another owner's "arm", unless they used the broom before to punish the dog with it then i dont see any reason for the dog to be afraid of the broom, the owners could even use a shot gun  in the same way as the broom and the dog would not think different about it because the dog does not know that shot guns are actually made to kill people, now do that with a human and you will have a different reaction

Approaching a dog with a broom is a lot like approaching a human with a baseball bat (if you aren't at Fenway Park). You may think it's soft, and it is if you don't use the bat/broom, but it is threatening.

We would never approach a caterer serving champagne and point a weapon to her face, we'd ask for it with a smile... And yes, a gun would be threatening. To turn this around, a dog would just approach the server, and without any long-lasting, relationship damaging feelings, would simply show her his "weapons". And once it gets what it wants, it would expect you to get over it: "Don't bend out of shape about it!".
I don't think we can compare humans communicating to humans when they want something and dogs - we just can't compare our psychological responses in situations like that... "Culture clash" [].

I can see what's he's doing. For example, imagine two dogs playing ball with you. One dog runs and catches the ball. The other dogs wants the ball, so he just goes over and sort of nudges the other dog sideways while having his muzzle getting closer and closer until he just takes the ball. The other dog just gives it to him.

 
I have seen that kind of behavior, but in my opinion the dog who comes and takes the ball is showing "rude" dog behavior. The dog who relinquishes the ball is probably a good-natured, conflict-avoiding dog who would rather back off than fight - this would be like someone who lets someone cut them in line to avoid an argument... it doesn't mean cutting is normal/polite behavior. Most people with multidog homes, as well as dog behaviorists I've read (McConnell comes to mind), agree that resource guarding is not really pack hierarchy related.
 
Just to be clear, I wouldn't equate teaching "back off" with "rude dog behavior." [] Training a command means your dog has the chance to voluntarily relinquish the item and is not put into a fight-or-flight situation.

ORIGINAL: TinaK

I don't think we can compare humans communicating to humans when they want something and dogs - we just can't compare our psychological responses in situations like that... "Culture clash" [].

I'm sorry Anne but as some internet geeks would say, you just got owned by TinaK []

I had typed a longer reply but said, "the heck with it."
 
CM has been slammed previously for giving treats to a dog to desensitize him to getting a bath. So, it's no wonder that criticizing CM, which is what this thread was originally meant to do in a section that is supposed to be for CM supporters, continues to be "entertainment."

ORIGINAL: willowchow

None of my students end up with possessive dogs when they follow this method correctly. 

There's the difference right there.  That dog was already possessive and mine was too.  And, I can tell you that if she had something and I had something else, she didn't care to trade.  You do have to teach them to back off whatever it is they have. 

Also, I don't understand the analogy of using a broom is like someone coming at me with a baseball bat.  You are not threatening to hit the dog with the broom. And, a broom is much softer and a lot less threatening that a bat.

I  disagree, despite that Tina now supposedly owns me. [:'(]
This method works on dogs that are already guardy, and, in fact, was written for those dogs - we simply adopted it as a great preventive protocol.
And, the fact that Cesar doesn't use "trade" means nothing.  I'm sure that there are other methods that work, but that he doesn't use.  You can jerk a dog with a leash and it will heel, but you can also click a dog for heeling and it will heel. 
The baseball bat may be a human concept, but the notion of being threatened is not.  I merely used that as an analogy that humans can understand, but you didn't get my drift apparently.
Not surprising, since it's virtually impossible to have any discussion here about CM that is not absolutely in line with his thinking on a particular problem. Did it ever occur to anyone that CM might never have tried the trade protocol, and that he might even be interested in learning about it?

Not surprising, since it's virtually impossible to have any discussion here about CM that is not absolutely in line with his thinking on a particular problem.

Edited to add---Regarding the above quote.  It's not that the discussion isn't in line with his thinking it's that his methods and thinking are being completely misinterpreted.  The OP was questioning his just using the broom to control this which wasn't the ultimate goal if you watched the episode.  And, you saying he was threatening the dog with the broom, which also wasn't what he was doing at all. 

I don't have a problem with people disagreeing with his methods and suggesting a different or even better method but I think what he's doing needs to be discussed based on what CM is actually doing not what others are interpreting (wrongly) that he's doing. 

Then we can fairly compare methods.

Now on to my opinion---
For me, I'm speaking more of my own experience with "trade" than comparing it to what CM does. 

These methods did not work at all on Willow when she was at her most snarly and guardy.  She didn't care to trade at all.  She wanted what she had and that was it, didn't care if the thing we had was better. 

For example--I'd go over to her, "Willow, look what mama has." And, she'd immediately hunker down on what it was she already had.  And, growled and stiffed more. 

She didn't just go, "oh, OK, I'll take that instead, thanks." 

So, in my eyes what he did with the broom actually worked better than when I tried trade.  Because at some point the dog backed off the broom and the treat.  At no time did my dog back off anything when I tried to trade for something.  In fact, I was more at risk because if for some reason she did lunge at me, now I've got something that she would try to go for in addition to me. 

Hopefully this makes sense, gotta get me some coffee.

Cesar touched on his philisophy regarding resource guarding in his book or on another show, I believe. He talked about how you shouldn't "take" the item away but you should "claim" it because that's what dogs do to each other. I can't remember if it was McConnell or Clother that also said that in wolf packs possession is 9/10 of the law. Dogs may sometimes give up a goodie to another dog, but it is very bad manners to come and take the item away.

I don't know about your house, but at my house and my sister's it works that way. When one dog wants what the other has, they won't just take it away. They WILL use some very pushy body language and eye contact to let the dog know they want the object. The "owner" of the object in question my try to go somewhere else, but the other dog will follow. Eventually, either the "owner" of the goodie will drop it or the other dog will give up. Rarely will there be an acctual physical confrontation. Blackhawk, who was old and slow, would do this to Lucy all the time. My sister's 10 pound rat terror will also use this technique on her 120 pound great dane with great success. It's much more of a mind game than a physical confrontation. It reminds me a lot of the dog in the article Suzanne Clothier wrote called "Why Not Take Candy From a Baby? (If He Lets You?)"

CM has been slammed previously for giving treats to a dog to desensitize him to getting a bath. So, it's no wonder that criticizing CM, which is what this thread was originally meant to do in a section that is supposed to be for CM supporters, continues to be "entertainment."

 
Ron - since I started the thread, I feel the need to defend myself.  I never meant to discredit CM, nor have I ever in any post, at any time.  I watch the show because I'm usually impressed by what he can do.  I simply posted this time because I was confused by how it was handled.  If I'd ever seen a dog I'd consider in the "red zone", this was the dog.  I didn't feel that the issue itself was dealt with, but the owners were simply shown a way to retrieve a bone or toy without getting bitten.  If that was the only intent, then he was 100% successful.  I was just left thinking that the dog is still scary aggressive, and I personally wouldn't be comfortable with the situation.  Sorry if you thought this was started as a slam on CM, but it truly wasn't.  I also thought the responses were generally pro-CM, not negative. 

I guess I just don't get it. [8|]
If you aren't planning to threaten the dog, then why do you need a broom, or any other object?  If you handle this situation correctly, the dog never needs to use his teeth and you don't need a weapon, or a barrier.  But, if you intend to force the dog's hand, then you do.
This is just another of those situations that I would handle differently, but if you think he did this dog right, so be it.  But, would you feel safe, after CM's intervention, inviting that dog and his owner to your house for Thanksgiving Dinner, and take the chance that a kid without a broom drops a drumstick on the floor?  

If you aren't planning to threaten the dog, then why do you need a broom, or any other object?

spiritdogs, I haven't seen this episode, but I don't suppose he stood there waiving it above his head, dancing around like a witch. [][]
I just don't think there is anything inherently frightening about a broom in the eyes of a dog - it's not any scarier than having a cactus plant in your hands or huge sun glasses... They're all weird-shaped objects to them that have no meaning until they learn to associate them with good stuff or bad stuff. (If "threatening" was what I wanted I'd use a vacuum or an umbrella, those seems to be more threatening to some dogs...)
I saw an episode where a farm dog would not let anyone approach the house. Guests were instructed by CM to use a tennis racket to block and go inside...
I think a broom (or a tennis racket) is used to train *a human* to be more confident. It's used as a shield to block a potential bite. The shield gives you confidence, confidence makes you calm, and when you are calm good things happen... so it's spirals the success...

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

 Did it ever occur to anyone that CM might never have tried the trade protocol, and that he might even be interested in learning about it?

 
No he hasnt because pack leaders dont "trade" []

If you handle this situation correctly, the dog never needs to use his teeth and you don't need a weapon, or a barrier.

 
Again, I will say that Willow never cared about trading.  She did feel the need to continue to threaten even when we had the better object.