Do You Disagree With CM?

My primary concern involves the ability of other indivduals to evoke the "control" he has.  I do believe he is very talented at reading dogs.   I believe he has incredible timing.  I believe he has the ability to predict when a dog may act aggressively and inhibit it.  I believe he has done a good thing in the sense that people are thinking about and considering training more from his influence than by most anyone else in recent history. 
I agree that the exercise and discipline (read that as good management) are critical and LOTS of pet people dont get it.  That is especially problematic with herding, working and some terriers;  heck with a lot of high drive dogs.
 
I dont like the fact it presents dog training as "magic" that can happen instantly.  It doesnt no matter what your eyes tell you, dogs are not trained that quickly or that well using those strategies.  The behaviors dont generalize in the dog or the person without adequate practice and consistent follow up (monitoring and feedback).  Small changes that will impact the entire behavior constellation will occur and folks will be clueless as to why things might crash and burn.  That is why the more traditional training approach of 8 weeks and instruction in what to do and you go home and do it as practice makes more sense from the learning theory stand point.

Great idea Anne.
 
I'm not in favor of the SHOW because it is tightly edited to make for more exciting viewing and leaves the average dog owner with the impression that there really IS a quick fix.  And despite the multiple "don't try this at home" disclaimers, some fools are going to try it at home and end up getting hurt or hurting the dog.  What immediately comes to mind is the woman who came here after breaking her dogs leg when the dog reacted to her USING the traditional methods all of a sudden,(but I've been doing EXACTLY what CM does) and was hellbent on having the dog put down because, gosh, it bite her...and of course then she dropped or threw the poor thing and rather than FIX the leg and work with the animal in a gentler way, she wanted our support in killing the poor little thing.
 
So from that aspect, I've gotta think that the show itself is very dangerous.  As to the traditional training methods, I've always been the old softie, bleeding heart who just couldn't bear to rub a pups nose in a mistake, or cause discomfort to an animal who displeased me in the name of "teaching him what I want".  I guess I've been stumbling along using the +R methods all my adult life, with the exception of the prong for Thor....and man, that one cost me a lot of sleep.
 
And to be quite honest, the trainer I most emulate?  Well, gee, Anne, that would be you.  YOU are accessable and you are someone I can TALK to and find out what the heck I'm doing wrong.  I can read all the books on the planet, but when I need some actual "this is the problem how do I fix it" advice, you're always there to help.

I agree with everything that's been said so far, for the most part.  I used to be an admirer of CM's training methods, but am not now.  The main reasons being stated by Glenda.  Why did I change my outlook, simply put: those very same methods that are espoused on his show would shut my dogs down. 

One of the things I did before I  got my dog was do some reading on the "how to" of training hounds in general and sighthounds in particular, sighthounds having been called "dumb" and "stupid" and "untrainable" when in fact they are just the opposite.  The methods of training described in "Playtraining your dog" seemed to make much more sense to me.  Get your sighthound to work-then play as a reward.  Hmmm no mention of punishment.  I thought about it for a while and started using some of the techniques. 

The best part of the whole training experience was the bond.  Even better was the "reward" process.  My dog's favorite reward in the whole world:  a 20 or 30 yard sprint with me.  The next best of course is food, or a game of "tag."  We both looked forward to training, and since the training occurred in such short timeframes (2-4 minutes max) we never got bored and his learning exceeded my best estimates. 

That being said, I do think that CM's philosophy of exercise, discipline and affection is a good one, provided that the definition of discipline is: a set of unwavering rules and boundaries and that those rules provide a structure that allows the dog(s) to feel safe in their environment.
 
eta:  I wonder if using the CM methodology and thought process one could show me a dog like "Skidboot" who seems delighted to "perform" his routine of behaviors.

Wow where to begin. There are so many layers to my disagreement I'm not real sure where to start. I used to be a big fan, so maybe I can try to put together where and how I disagree by tracing my own evolution. But in short I feel that he is poisoning the relationship people (especially JQP who only gets their information from him) have with their dogs.
 
Back when I discovered him (way back during the beginning of his first season on TV), he didn't really change what I was already doing. I trained traditionally and he was confirming everything I was doing and thinking, which sure was a nice cozy feeling.  Where I came from in dealing with my dogs was this: dogs are dogs, we are people, the dog listens to the human or else. Dogs who do not listen to humans are dominant, and the human needs to assert their alpha standing. On their end, dogs want nothing more in their whole entire lives than to be dominated by a human. A dog who resists this is unbalanced and needs correction. Once he's corrected, he'll see the error of his ways and fall in to line. A dog who is not being lead by a dominant human is not a happy dog. Happy dogs are always submissive dogs. Sound familiar?
 
When I first saw Cesar on TV I was like, "Finally someone who really understands!" And to be sure, the people he has on his show are pretty much universally showing an appalling negligence in the dog training and leadership departments, often accompanied with a complete lack of understanding of a dog's basic physical needs. I'll never argue with the fact that most of the people on that show need a serious attitude adjustment. I just don't agree with the direction of the adjustment.
 
I think his incredible over-emphasis of the dominance/alpha paradigm can and does poison the relationship people have with their dogs. I know it did mine. I loved my dogs to pieces (I had one who passed before I changed my ways, and Conrad is my crossover) but I can now see looking back that I was never able to fully develop a relationship with them because I felt that I had to constantly prove who was boss and that if I didn't, they'd try to take over. There was no room for my dogs to simply be confused or make a mistake, so I was constantly angry and upset with them.  Training was a battle of wills rather than a teaching experience, and incredibly frustrating. Every mistake on my dog's part had to be met with a correction of some kind to prove that I was in complete control. I didn't even buy dog treats because a dog should work for me just because I'm me, not for a treat. And that just made it so incredibly personal. When you feel that a dog should always perform for you simply because of what you've proved to it about your status, and it doesn't, that makes the dog's failure not about confusion or a mistake but about YOU. And it can make you hate your dog when you start falling in to that. And when you start to hate your dog, you can do some pretty awful stuff to your dog.
 
Keep in mind as I say all that that I've been a practicing and lay-ordained Zen Buddhist for the past 9 years. I am not a violent person at all. I've never hit another human in anger. My teacher gave me the ordination name of Jigen which means "compassion source". I'm a complete bleeding heart.
 
So when I say that I'm not proud of some of the things I did to my dogs in the name of "dominance" I mean it really eats me up. I alpha-rolled, I scruffed (what my husband refers to as a "shake-job"), I leash-popped, and when I learned about putting the leash behind the ears from Cesar, I was all over it. Wow that made Conrad fall into line quick. Because it hurt. And here I was talking to my dad, showing him how to walk Conrad and telling him, "Oh, don't worry, you can't hurt him." What complete BS. If it didn't hurt, it wouldn't work. If it felt like a pleasant tickle, why would it keep Conrad walking next to me instead of pulling? And now I have to deal with the fact that I hurt my dog on purpose to make him do what I wanted. Repeatedly and the whole time thinking that I was actually fulfilling my dog's deepest, most pressing desires: to be dominated forcefully.
 
That is what bothers me most about him and his show: his philosophy of what dogs are and what they want and need. Since I've changed my thinking, I've come to see that dogs are simply animals. They are animals that we are uniquely able to emotionally bond with, but they are no different fundamentally from a rat, a cat, a dolphin or a chimpanzee. I don't expect my cats to always listen to me just because I'm me, so why do I expect it from my dogs? If my dogs are having an issue, either a general behavioral issue or a training issue, I approach it now from a standpoint of trying to figure out what they are confused about, how are they mistaken in their beliefs, and how can I help to clear that up for them? It removes "ME" from the situtation, and that makes their various foibles and mistakes less a personal affront to me and more just a learning opportunity. Training is now about them and what they can do and how they can learn and not about how I can prove my status and how they are "challenging" me.
 
I actually got into an argument with my parents over Thanksgiving dinner about him. They have never in their lives had dogs, the only ones that they're really familiar with are mine, but we live in a very doggy area and everyone here has dogs, so they see them all the time. The argument actually kept me awake that night, though I'm sure they don't even remember it, because it was just so ridiculous and I was so not being able to get my point across because it was a raucous family dinner with about 3 conversations going on at once and my thoughts on the topic are nuanced and complex and don't go well with 2 bottles of wine.  But being that they aren't dog people, it gave me an interesting insight into how people who watch the show not ever having done any outside reasearch percieve it (and my dad is a PhD and college professor and no dummy). They were totally unaware that Cesar has never done any coursework in animal behavior and that his pronouncements about dogs and dog behavior are simply his perceptions and hunches, not proven scientific fact. My dad at one point actually says, "Well, he has discovered that there's this noise that dogs really hate! That Tsst! noise!" And I was like, omg dad please just stop now.  He's discovered nothing, and that noise he himself says is just a way to get their attention. But I can't even tell you how many times I've seen people walking arout tssting dogs willy-nilly like its magic, so I know dad isn't alone in that perception.
 
I tried to explain to my folks that there's other ways to train dogs that don't require you to dominate them constantly and their argument was: look at all these untrained dogs out there, so clearly there's a problem. And, see, that's not a logical argument (geez dad, you're a philosophy professor!). To me that's like advocating spanking by saying, well clearly there's a lot of crappy parenting going on out there.  I pointed to my own dogs, who were in the room and behaving splendidly and said look at Marlowe--I've never trained him that way. Their response was that "most people aren't smart enough to do that." Uh? No, it's just that there's not a hit TV show saying how to do it and it's actually monsterously easy. Way easier than "Cesar's Way" which requires you to have a forceful personality, total lack of fear of dogs, and to be kinethesiologically gifted (there was a very fawning article in the New Yorker last year that I couldn't in the end really argue with because it is true: the man has a gifted hysical presence).
 
I'll end by saying that there are some things that he, and pretty much every other dog trainer, DVM and behaviorist on the planet, advocates. More walks for dogs: yes! Though I've heard that in actual fact he thinks that dogs need 8 solid hours of excercise a day (funny, he doesn't say that on his show!) and I won't go that far. But a couple hours a day, give or take depending on individual: yes. And also that suburban yards are not a substitute for structured exercise. The 8 hours thing I suspect is one of his tricks for producing "magical transformations" in dogs. Yes, a tired dog is a happy dog, but a forced-into-exhaustion dog is a shut-down dog and I'm sure would appear quite "cured" of it's problems after a few days at his center on the treadmill for hours.
 
I'm also pretty frequently appalled at the lack of training of any kind people do with their dogs. But maybe more people would do it if it was fun for both the human and the dog and not a battle of wills.  Last night we met some family members of some friends of mine and their adorable 2 year old Portuguese water dog, Bode. The wife had never had dogs before and as we were leaving she confided in me that her husband was always telling her that she need to act like an alpha dog in order to train Bode. She said, "I don't want to act like an alpha dog!" So I told her that there's goodnews: as long as she's got opposable thumbs and uses them to control Bode's resources, she'll never have to lay a hand on him or make an alpha display. I wonder how many people who've never really trained their dogs haven't done so because they think that dog training means you have to hurt and bully your dog into submission and they don't feel comfortable doing that.
 
I'm sorry that at one time I did. I apologize to Conrad every day. And no, he has not taken over the house (yet!).
 
Sorry that was so long. I've really developed quite a hate-on for this entire school of dog training, probably because there's no zeal like the zeal of the converted![]

I completely agree with what has been said already. I do have one argument All the CM fans seem to dodge. I do not train pet dogs, I train sport dogs. I do everything exactly the opposite the CM does, as do most of my friends. None of us have the problems CM says we should have.
My youngest dog. had not even ever heard me raise my voice till she was a year. she is a very confident proud dog. So she is not shy or fearful.
According to Ceasar, this dog allowed to it's own devices basically would self destrcut and become this raging menace. I did nothing with this dog that was forceful. I allowed her to jump, bite, runaway, steal food, beat up other dogs. everything, nothing was off limits. If she got to be to much, I just picked her up and put her in the crate. And all this dog recieved was affection.
How did this dog become a well adjusted, social, bahved dog. without me constantly reminding her who the boss was?
Because. I know how to effectively and effeciently commuicate with the dog. I can tell her precisly what I would like. and because she is a dog, a capable of social hierarchy, she knows her role. Why do humans say dogs are smart, and then in the area of thier expertise,pack structure, we think they are to stupid to make the hierarchy for themselves.

I agree with much of what's already been said... I'll add another layer to my disagreement with Millan, though, and say I think there are fundamental flaws in his philosophy that go straight back to his "happy dog" model from whence all his behaviorist goals come.
 
I read Cesar's Way. His model of happy, mentally healthy dogs comes from observing the street dogs of the village he grew up in until the age of six years old. These dogs lived outside in packs, found their own food, and roamed around all day. And, it bears repeating, Millan left the village when he was six years old. In his early teen years, he formed the concept that city dogs were neurotic and unhappy compared to the village dogs of his early childhood. (Now, I don't know about you all, but when I was that age I formed the belief that anarchy and George Orwell were together the pinnacle of civilization. So, maybe not trusting a 14-yr-old's judgment so much?) His most recent model of a happy healthy dog is the dog of a homeless person, who follows his owner around all day.
 
My view is, I'm certain that when left to their own devices dogs will form stable packs and everything seems great... along the way some members may be ostracized or even killed if they're very aggressive, and then everything evens out and they spend all day doing their doggie jobs and it's all wonderful. But to me, and I think to Cesar as well, that life bears little resemblance to the life most pet dogs live... the difference is that I think that's a very unhelpful model for us to base our dog training on, and Millan has shaped his non-training training around it. If you read his book carefully you will note that he thinks most dogs should get about 4-8 hours of heavy exercise (ie full out running) per day. This to me is an absurd amount of exercise for most pet dogs... they are not wolves, and unless you have certain types of working dog it's unrealistic to think dogs could get that much exercise even if they wanted to (I don't really see a Yorkie taking a 10 mile run but maybe that's just me). That goes beyond "a tired dog is a happy dog," to something more like "a physically depleted dog can't do much of anything so no need to train him!"
 
I also do not agree with his idea that discipline is so all important for dogs. Discipline is important for human children... they go through normal processes of figuring out their identities and moral values and their relationships with loved ones and how to be successful in life.... Dogs don't go through those psychological turmoils and they don't need to be taught right and wrong in a moral sense. All they really want to do is take the path of least resistance toward their versions of happiness and satisfaction, and I believe teaching them how to communicate with humans (through training) does that far more quickly, smoothly, and fairly. Teaching rules through corrections (don't do that, no that's not allowed) is taking a step backwards to a trial-and-error method of learning that is just unnecessarily primitive. It's like if you showed up for a new job that you didn't know how to do and your new boss said, "okay now do some work," and then just stood around TSSTing at you until you figured out what you were supposed to be doing. We already have tools to communicate relatively complex (certainly more complex than YES and NO) ideas to dogs; to willfully not use them seems perverse.

gunny, I am always being accused of using a method that is suited only for "tricks", yet I train pets, therapy dogs, and performance dogs. 

I agree with CM's assertion that most dogs need exercise, but I have not seen him mention that, for some dogs, too much exercise, especially if it's the wrong kind, can hype them up too much and make their behavioral problems worse.  It's often the type of exercise that makes the difference.  You could put my Aussie on a treadmill for a while, but you wouldn't necessarily be doing anything to provide an outlet for her predatory drive.  Fifteen minutes of frisbee chasing is better than a four hour walk for some dogs.
I'm a bit put off by the simplistic nature of his commentary, and the analogies he makes.  And the book was just more of the same.
I'm used to reading Lindsay and Overall, and compared to them, this guy is in kindergarten.  No, I'm not jealous!!!!!!!!!  I just wish that some of the truly great behaviorists in the country had had the Hollywood or Oprah connection and been able to really change life for America's dogs in a hugely positive way.  What we need is a Karen Overall with a bit of charisma and a latin last name perhaps.  NGC is clearly pandering to a certain demographic, and it's annoying.
I want the equivalent quality of a program like PBS' Nova - for dogs.

Basically I think we're all on the same page here. I've said it once, and I'll keep saying it, even though I don't 100% agree with him I have nothing against the guy. It's the "as seen on TV" fad that envolves him, all the people that limit themselves to regurgitate what he says/does. As someone said in some other thread, I would like to see how trying to alpha roll a Fila, a Pharaoh hound or a mastiff goes for the one doing the rolling. All this fanatism has created an entire "if CM said it and did it on tv, it MUST be right", and there's always a magical explanation that can only come from watching WANTING to "believe", and being scared of even questioning why.

The way I see it, this guy has done for dogs what some remodeling shows have done for homes, on one hand he has created a DIY awareness, but on the other, well, I'll put it this way, how many people here would do a "trading spaces" makeover in their place?. Of course, the results of CM-ing a dog may not be as immediately and painfuly obvious as an orange couch on top of a green astroturf carpet to match the pink drapes and the orange/red stripes on the wall, but you get the idea.

Well, I must say that presented an interesting mental picture of a "House Beautiful" LOL.
I wouldn't even mind if he didn't alpha roll an aggressive Fila - I would settle for seeing him try to put one on its side. []  Or, maybe he'd like to go for a nice walk in the neighborhood with a pack of them.  All males.

I don't agree with the dog's are wolves philosphy. I don't even agree that wolves act that way. Farley Mowat lived amongst wolves and in reading "Never Cry Wolf", he doesn't mention the strict dominance. In fact, they shared responsibility for leading.
 
My dogs are not planning an uprising. Leash pulling or stealing a roll of toilet paper doesn't preceed planning to bite me. They understand that a human who brings home bags of meat, opens doors, refrigerators, cans and gates has more power than they do. They follow the path of happiness by enjoying what the human offers and convincing the human to offer it. And yup, I'm a sucker. I can often be enticed into a game by a pretty smile and a play bow.
 
I've learned from many authors but one of the things they have in common is to "listen" to your dog. I liked Suzanne Clothier's behavioral series booklets. My dog' do not want to be jerked around. Gentle brushing and massage have done wonders to create a bond of trust between myself and a somewhat fearful Malinois.
 
Finally, I believe that even small displays of force is physical violence and I'm opposed to it on principle.

Well of course I disagree with CM#%92s methods!!!!!!
 
Hey, I think CM is on occasion, interesting TV, but that is all it is TV. I can#%92t for the life of me can#%92t imagine my dogs responding to that kind of handling. The boxer would likely cower and shut down completely. The dobie would explode (not in a forward direction) although I would pay to see CM attempt to alpha roll him. The mutt would shut down, and the dachshund would wait for an opening to bite.

 
What most people don#%92t realize is this is an edited show. We have so many people that come into the clinic where I work and say “Oh we#%92ve been trying to train him like the Dog Whisperer and it#%92s just not working, I think he might not be trainable”. I just want to bang my head against the wall when someone says this. I always point out that there are more than CM#%92s way of training. I usually send them home with a book list. Amazingly most of these clients come back after reading these books, and state that their new training methods are working wonderfully.
 
I wish that everyone that watches and enjoys CM would realize that though it makes for interesting TV, it doesn#%92t mean that this is the best method for your dog.

I agree with what others have said so far. I do think CM makes a good point about exercising your dog. However like spiritdog said, dogs should be exercised mentally and physically. I can walk Dasher till the cows come home but unless I give him a job that requires mental stimulation such as agility he would be a nut job. []

My main issue with the CM show is as everyone has already said, it portrays dog training as a 30 minute fix. I have in-laws that don't have dogs (thank goodness) that go around saying "tsst" to every dog they see. [8|]

I don't disagree with CM's philosophy of more exercise but I do disagree in the methods of training.  My dogs could use more exercise but 4 hours of it might kill them.  They just don't have that need for exercise that some dogs do.  It might help if they were more fit but they can't be too bad if they do agility now can they?

The thing, as others have stated, is that JQP will try things like that at home.  One gentleman that came to my agility classes said that he alpha rolled his Standard Poodle for chasing the cat. [8|]  And he told me it was because of watching that show.

Though I do get value from watching CM I do not use his methods. Or his order of events. They aren't practical in my situation. I walk Shadow in harness. When I first got him and realized that he was more husky than lab, in spite of the dark coloring, I felt that a dog should be allowed to be the dog that it is. For example, if I had a rat terrier, I would try and devise burrows and tunnels to run through and find treats. Let the dog what it was bred for. Shadow was bred to pull hard and run fast. So, it never occured to me to walk with a slip-knot and he would have choked himself severely doing so. What I did, instead, before even watching CM was teach him mushing commands with tugs on the leash or use the command when he makes the right move to make it connect. The only type of physical correction I have used is the scruff and I didn't learn it from CM. Shadow does respond to it but I haven't used it as often as I used to. So, some might see it as a dichotomy. I agree with CM's idea that it is the attitude, not the equipment, while at the same time, I don't use the equipment he uses. I'm going to keep using the word alpha because it means I lead, though leader will work just as fine. Example, today the kids behind us are playing and they will get near the fence knowing that Shadow will bark at them. The boy is the Spawn of Satan I have mentioned before. So, I go over to Shadow and keep getting in front of him until he looks at me. Then I command a sit, which he doesn't obey. So, I give his rump a touch and gentle, and I do mean gentle pressure, into a sit. Then I lead him into a down, without a treat. And stroke his fur and "good boy" for a few minutes. This is my chance to reinforce "calm" behavior in a distracting circumstance. While the obedience postures were trained with treats, the will to lead and decide upon and control his behavior, at least for a few minutes, is something I get from CM. No leash pop, no tsst, no scruff, but I will have it my way and that's the fact, Jack. But I do it in a benevolent way, as Glenda might say.
 
I also have gotten better at signal watching and timing, which I get from watching the show.
 
But I have also seen a +R show called "Good Dog U" dealing with leash reactive dogs, wherein, ala Spiritdog, you find the distance at which the dog is comfortable and reward that. Then work your way in and reward each successive and successful stage of progress.
 
As for exercise, I don't have the time to exercise him for 4 hours. Those that can mush must devote at least 3 or 4 hours a day, usually on their own 200 acres and prepared trail, etc. It's a rich man's hobby. Me, I work 8 to 10 hours a day in the blistering heat and frigid cold. While exercise is important for the health and will sometimes settle a dog for a while, it cannot replace training. Training must be in place or they will get back into trouble as soon as they are rested.
 
I can't help it that there are people out there who watch his show and do not understand what they are seeing, even though they try to implement it, often with the wrong results. Of the people here that have used his techniques, I think most of them have actually bothered to read his books and watch his DVDs to get the whole story, not just a 7 minute segment in a 30 minute show (they have to do commercials so, a day's work is condensed to about 6 or 7 minutes per case).
 
Some things depend on lifestyle. We simply don't have guests over and it's not because we don't want them. We just live quite a ways from others and its usually more logistically savvy to go to there place. So, we really haven't had a chance to work on greeting guests. OTOH, if you were a ne'er-do-well coming up to the door and you heard a growl that can rumble your gut through the door, you might just decide to go away.
 
OTOH, while I don't flood Shadow, repitition does have its results.
 
So, yes, his show is entertaining. I usually defend him because of what I see as unfair assumptions based on an edited show. Yes there are other trainers with easier methods to follow and it's not just a matter of bribing. Even if it was bribing in the beginning, it eventually becomes a "pavlovian response", for lack of a better phrase. That is, it will become an unconscious association that obedience equals good. Which is why training must start in puppyhood.