Reward: Millan (Dead or Alive)

In another debate, a person had a philosophical issue with controlled deprivation in +R training. That is, having the dog work for the treat.

Other dogs are scared by the sound of a clicker.

Many have noted that Dunbar works primarily with puppy training.

Donaldson is noted for her strong personality and acerbic diatribes.

Just recently, it was implied that Pryor was taking credit for inventing clicker training.

And so, we say, do what works.

But I can't recall any time when CM was ever thought to be wrong. Not ever.

And that is really the definition of hero worship.  I agree that his followers seem to be in some kind of trance when it comes to him, and refuse to consider that he could be wrong.  I've admitted that there are some things I think he deserves credit for, but that I see a lot wrong in what he does.  But, I would also be the first one to publicly state that I hate the way Patricia McConnell teaches recalls (sorry, Trish), but I do like the way she handles fearful dogs.  The CM aficionados seem to hold him in such reverance that even when presented with evidence that a method other than his works better for their own dogs, they will not allow that he is not God incarnate (not saying that applies to anyone here - that is simply something I have noticed in the wider world).

There are times where I have disagreed with CM's diagnosis of an issue or his solution. My disagreement would be based on what I have learned from my handful of books and half a dozen sites in my favorites folder. But of course, I am wrong, because my opinion differs with his. That is, I think, another thing that some people don't get about the CM thing. If someone disagrees or questions his method or thinking or terminology, there is sometimes a string of apologetics with some odd analogies and metaphors which may sidewind into semantics, and then into philosophy. Anything but the idea that CM might be wrong or mistaken.

This is what bugs me most about him - that those who follow him seem to close themselves off from further learning.  And, it is, I suspect, why some trainers and behaviorists have written the articles they have about him putting dog training back twenty years.  If someone is still at the level he seems to be at, fine.  But, one would hope that they would continue the search for knowledge.  Instead, these threads seem to go on for 22 pages or more, but ask them to discuss the concept of "fluency" or trainers other than those who present methods similar to his, and you can only find a handful of people who even know the names, much less want to discuss them, or learn about them.

For example, the episode with the dog in the bath. It seems that I am the only one to remember that one. Where he used a "dominance" move, specifically scruffing hard enough to immobilize the head for what was a fear or anxiety response. And this wasn't a red zone dog but a family pet who had an issue about being in water. And my question was why use a last resort red zone emergency strong arm tactic for what was a fear response in an otherwise regular family dog, which might be better suited be re-conditioning to make the bath a good thing?

Yeah, I'm all for making a "bathtub ring" out of lamb flavored baby food, or peanut butter.  Fearful dogs do a lot better when they get to choose bravery and be rewarded, than when they get scared out of their wits.  Maybe the dog in this scenario learned to tolerate the tub, again out of fear that if he didn't, bad things would happen.  But, he could just as easily have learned to fear men (even hispanic men) in addition to his fear of water.   How productive would that have been???

No answer. And of course, I might be wrong for questioning his judgement in that, as well as viewing his presentation of one treat as they enter the bathtub as "positive reinforcement" as being inaccurate, thereby causing me to doubt his understanding.

I didn't catch the episode, but if he presented the biscuit before the dog was in the tub, guess what?  It is either a lure or a bribe, but it isn't "reinforcement" unless the dog got it once he was in the tub.  But, what the heck do I know?  My college gave me a degree in this crap, but they must be wrong, too, because CM has to be right, right?
 

Of course, I could be wrong. I have been wrong before.

Yeah, me too, ron. 

FourIsCompany

there are hard-core Cesar supporters who would call you wrong just because your opinion differed from Cesar's. But most likely, they agree with Cesar and have what they see as good reason to. So, my guess is that they're not saying you're wrong because you deign to disagree with Cesar, they're saying you're wrong because you disagree with them

Which lends to the "cult of personality" issue and no, I'm not calling the regular fans cultish. CM could be wrong and it gets lost in the fandom or a desire to consider all sides, even sides that are largely disproved. Has he been effective? Yes. Many were effective with the corrections and/or punishment style of training, including many of the people here, one or two that have been owning and training dogs for as long as I have been alive. And they found a way that worked even better, at least in (conservative estimate) 90 percent of the cases.

My statement described the appearance of infallibility in some of the hard-core fans. And I don't mean it as a bad thing, either. For example, CM helped a female Pit mix that was afraid of the clicking sound on the oven control dial. So, even I would say that clicker training might not work at that time in the dog's life. Maybe a little later, when meaning has been reassigned to that sound, but not just then. Not acknowledging her fear response was a key factor, allowing it to extinguish. Could someone else also admit that the stronger techniques of CM might not be so applicable in a circumstance when they were used?

OTOH, having watched a recent episode last night and seeing a better and more judicious use of treat training in his show, I think that is a step in the right direction. Which of course, is only my opinion. I wonder if that has to do with the increased popularity of It's Me or the Dog, or if this is an actual evolution for CM. And, he can keep his head. No need to take him dead or alive.

 I agree with the “right” and “wrong” statement Four.

 I do not always 100% agree with everything that Cesar does, just like I do not agree with everything Patricia McConnell does although I like and respect both of them. But the bottom line (to me) is that both have a love for dogs, both are seeking to educate people that their dogs can be helped and are not lost causes and both do what they do for the betterment of the animal. IMO neither is cruel. I am being honest when I say I have not seen the dog in the bath incident (Espencer do you have a link for that one perhaps?) but I am confident that he was not intending anything but the betterment of the dog. It is possible that if I watch it I might not agree with his methods, and who knows perhaps even he has the occasion where something does not work out like he wanted or intended. 

 To end, I try and save the word wrong for when it really matters (to me) and maybe to you some of the things you see Cesar do are wrong (to you), but for me wrong comes into play with outright cruelty and also when we paint someone as wrong across the board, or a tool as wrong across the board, and that to me is wrong.

ron2

OTOH, having watched a recent episode last night and seeing a better and more judicious use of treat training in his show, I think that is a step in the right direction. Which of course, is only my opinion. I wonder if that has to do with the increased popularity of It's Me or the Dog, or if this is an actual evolution for CM. And, he can keep his head. No need to take him dead or alive.

 I think it is an actual evolution. Cesar has stated that everything he knew about dogs was pretty much instinctual and he learned it growing up on a farm with animals. He does not possess a high level of education and most likely never read much on dog training or dog behavior growing up. His instincts are great; he is a very down to earth primal person. He is successful and any successful person with sense desires to grow and learn more. He states in his latest book that he has spent a lot of time working with others who are more in opposition to his techniques and he describes this very gracefully. He says he has learned a lot from others. He has worked with other trainers and the trainer he worked with on one of his shows was a clicker trainer who from all appearances seemed to me to be a "positive rewards based" trainer.

 I do not think “It’s Me or the Dog” is going to knock him off the charts and even if it did, he is pretty well set up for life at this point. If they canceled his show tomorrow he would most likely have enough customers to keep him going indefinitely.

spiritdogs

I agree that his followers seem to be in some kind of trance when it comes to him, and refuse to consider that he could be wrong... I would also be the first one to publicly state that I hate the way Patricia McConnell teaches recalls

I notice you didn't say Patricia McConnell is "wrong", you took responsibility for it being YOUR opinion that you "hate the way" she does something. I have disagreed with the way Cesar Millan does some things, but I don't think I have ever said he was "wrong", because he's doing things the way he does them. I disagree and dislike some of the things he does and I have said so, right here on this board, yet because I don't say he's "wrong" (using the word "wrong";) I must be in a trance?

spiritdogs

they will not allow that he is not God incarnate

That is a gross emotional exaggeration. And it shows the emotion that inspired the title of this thread.

spiritdogs

This is what bugs me most about him - that those who follow him seem to close themselves off from further learning ... ask them to discuss the concept of "fluency" or trainers other than those who present methods similar to his, and you can only find a handful of people who even know the names, much less want to discuss them

What indication do you have of this? What about when a CM fan (like myself) works with a devout +R person (like Ron) to devise positive methods to deal with my dogs? Does count at all? What about the fact that I have a couple clicker books and have ordered another one AND that I'm actively working with the clicker and my dogs?

This video is from over a year ago when Jaia was but a tiny puppy.

Training Jaia and Husband on the Clicker 

What, now I don't  qualify as a typical Cesar fan because I don't fit the fanatical CM-worshiper picture you have in your head? (not that any of them are here on this board, of course.) I'm sorry, but I believe your mass judgments to be incorrect and unfounded. And you might want to consider that there just may be other reasons people don't want to discuss these ideas with you.

Your assumptions are causing you to judge a whole group of people unfairly, based on what YOU interpret about  a small portion of extremists. content deleted.

For me saying someone is right or wrong just in general can be a rhetorical shortcut but I also kind of use that statement if the person does so many things that I think are wrong, or has a general attitude that I think is wrong, then I am just going to skip the bullet-pointed laundry list and go right to "I think he or she is wrong." Does it mean I think they are a worthless human being, or that they are 100% wrong about 100% of the things they do in their lives and in their training? No, but if they get over a certain tipping point with me of doing so many things I think are wrong, I'm just going to as a shortcut say I think they are wrong.

I personally hate the way my trainer teaches down/stay (she calls it "puppy management" but as far as I can tell it's just learned helplessness). I never took her level one obedience or puppy classes, so I never had her teach me that particular thing but I know what she does and I've seen other people who have taken her lower level classes do it and I do not like it and I won't do it. But, I'm not going to go straight to "she is wrong" because most of everything else she does I agree with. Someone who trained in a way that everything they were doing I thought was the wrong way to do it except for one thing that I thought was the right way to go about things, I'm just going to go ahead and say that person is wrong, I do not agree with them.

I clearly understand where Anne is coming from.  I have been here at idog long enough to SEE just how much hatred came from those "fanatics" towards those of us who even dared QUESTION the why of something that CM did.  Not to be critical, mind you, but to have the audacity to QUESTION in any way shape or form.

Fortunately, with the infusion of some newer members, there is more open discourse now.  But, for a very long time, particularly when we had a special section for CM, which came about because the entire forum was becoming a blood bath, if you did not agree with CM in entirety, you danged well better not venture into that section.

The CM section was originally in training.  And guess who the lucky duck was who got to moderate it?  Oh yeah.  Me.  A non CM fan who was nonetheless willing to be open minded and try to understand what about the man and his methods inspired such a loyal following.  And ONE member, and only ONE was willing to be open minded enough to give me a chance......she knows who she is. The rest of the group pretty collectively SPAT on me whenever I needed to moderate and there were a TON of complaints to Admin that I was being "unfair" because I didn't like CM.  Ummmm, no, I didn't like personal attacks on anyone who didn't agree with him, nor did I appreciate the name calling.  And, no, I really wasn't crazy about being called a "treat dispensing butler" because I am primarily a +R person.

So while you, Carla, are very open minded and willing to have actual discourse, and while this entire THREAD has been very civil with very good information exchange with many folks who ARE CM fans posting very reasonably and without nastiness, this is very untypical of the previous CM threads.  If you can actually find the archives, you'll see a ton of nastiness and a whole heck of a lot of editing.  And yeah, some very real hatred.

Please understand that this thread is pretty shocking for those of us who have been spat upon for quite some time, deviled and called names simply because we didn't agree.  And please understand that as with everything, a few fanatics CAN give the whole bunch a bad name.

True story......last summer I was rushing around getting ready to leave for an HS fundraiser.  I was in my underwear when the dogs starting carrying on outside, so I started to run to the kitchen window to shush them.  For some reason, shushing from the BATHROOM window just wasn't as effective.  To reach the kitchen window, I pass the livingroom door.......UP on a 10 step to get to deck, with gates at each stairway.  As I'm rushing, I hear WOMAN, COVER YOURSELF.  Now, I'm thinking "Lord, it ain't THAT bad!" when I hear it again.  Turns out some religious zealouts had trespassed on cleared posted private property, climbed OVER the locked gate and were standing on my deck, staring into my house and scolding me for being in my undies, IN MY OWN HOUSE which is so isolated that the only one who's gonna see me in said undies is the wildlife OR a trespasser.  Some of the group started praying for my soul while their leader berated me and I continuously ordered them off my property to no avail.  Had to call the sheriff to get rid of them, and THEY have a hard time finding my house.  To THIS day, that particular religious group just makes my blood boil.  MOST of the folks in that particular religion are just fine, and I know that logically, but, by golly those few bad apples really soured me on the whole GROUP.

So, yeah, I do understand why some folks have long felt that it's an "us vs them" thing.

ron2

silverserpher

Playing it straight and calling yourself a trainer shrinks the audience to just those hardcore dog lovers who turn to watch somebody "fade a lure" or "mark behavior." 

 

I beg to differ. I watched both Dog Whisperer and It's Me or the Dog last night. They were on simultaneously. CM took a Rottie in who had a tendency lunge at and injure any guest coming in. Fortunately for the owners, CM's compound is only an hour or so away. I don't know what it would have taken if he didn't have the 40-dog pack. As it was, there were still corrections. But, eventually, CM was able to introduce the dog to his family and friends, who were able to give treats for calm behavior and for heeding obedience commands. Which shows me that there is some understanding of positive reinforcement, or at least trying to make the right way easy and rewarding and the wrong way not rewarding. I liked some of how he handled the female Pit mix that was afraid of the click noise on the oven, which was a sign of other problems. The part I liked was a combination of proper stance and acclimating himself to her. At the oven, he didn't correct but he didn't make a deal out of her fear, either.

It's Me or the Dog had the lady dealing with a manic family with two littermates, a cross between Labs and Great Danes, averaging over 100 lbs each. Pulling like crazy. One of the dogs had once been attacked and now attacked any strange dog. Her solution was to change the attitudes of the owners and in the immediate time being, use Gentle Leaders, which allows for some control over the walk until you can train differently. Plus, she made the point of telling them that once your dog has attacked another, there is no way to ever trust them fully again that it won't happen but you can retrain their response to other dogs, in a large extent.

Between the two, CM was friendly and personable, as he always is. The british lady seemed more like a mum.

Both seemed effective.

I can like one thing CM does and not like another. That does not make me a sheet flapping in the wind. It means that no one's perfect, we all have the right to disagree. I don't particularly like the Gentle Leader but it may be very effective. I trained walking manners differently than either method, without corrections and without special equipment. Of course, your mileage may vary.

And, FWIW, I still like the direction and tone of this thread. It seems we can disagree or just discuss and not have it become a war of our own personalities.

But you're one of those hardcore dog lovers I was referring to.  It would be interesting to compare the ratings between the two shows.  I just don't think we can have a complete discussion of CM and his philosophies without acknowledging the impact of "the show."  Some of what is motivating CM and his producers and Nat Geo, is simply the desire to make compelling television.  And when we ponder why he doesn't call himself a trainer, or what a "whisperer" is, or what a "red zone" dog is, I think we have to consider the motivation to attract viewers to the show. 

glenmar

If you can actually find the archives, you'll see a ton of nastiness and a whole heck of a lot of editing.  And yeah, some very real hatred.

Ugh! I think I'm going to take your word for it. The way you describe it, it doesn't sound like something I'd actively go looking for.

And, yeah, I'm speaking of my experience here and elsewhere and I wasn't here when all this was happening. I remember one of the first things I "complained" about when coming here was that there was a "special" CM section. What the heck was that about? I wondered... Poor you! LOL

glenmar

So, yeah, I do understand why some folks have long felt that it's an "us vs them" thing.

Thanks for the explanation and I certainly hope we ALL can shed some of those past experiences and move on. My experience before this board was pretty much the opposite that you described. This is the most positive stuff I've read about CM on any board! Many times I was one of a handful (or less) of his supporters and we pretty much because of the nastiness leveled at us and him. Either way, it's a useless proposition. We need to talk, not try to prove the other wrong.

spiritdogs

And that is really the definition of hero worship.  I agree that his followers seem to be in some kind of trance when it comes to him, and refuse to consider that he could be wrong. 

That is what bugs me about the so called "Other Side"......isn't that a little over board?....I mean, there are plenty of folks here on this board who like CM, but would not engage, and don't agree with certain things he does......how many people actually agree 100% with what he does.....don't name names, just give us a number......

I've been THRILLED with this thread.  And I actually feel like a might have learned a thing or two along the way.

I still don't agree about the bare floor thing tho, at least not with Tyler.  The woman who had him for those two months, complained, among a myriad of other things, that he wouldn't walk on the ceramic tile floors (often wet since that was THE door the family and dogs used and it was winter) and described him on that floor as "Bambi on ice".....and laughed about it.  She was stupid and cruel in my mind not to just put a danged rug down to ease his fears, but "the other dogs didn't have a problem" with it, so he shouldn't either.  Of course, she may have actually cut THEIR nails now and then too.  His had not been cut once in the two months that he was there and it was obvious that they hadn't.

Whatever happened to that boy in those two months, he returned, fearful, tenative and just plain messed up.  NOW he is a therapy dog who works with the most vulnerable of our population, the elderly, and they absolutely love him, and him them.  He is the boy who does the six mile MS Walk with us and has never met a stranger he doesn't like....once I give him "permission" to make a new friend.  He's your typical shepherd in that he does not go to strangers to make friends and is rather aloof to them unless TOLD it's ok.  But, by golly, bare floors still frighten him and it's not something that I'm gonna push.  If I need to take him outside to walk around a building and come in another door to avoid a slippery floor, well, so be it, I will do that.  He looses coordination and DOES fall when he is forced onto those floors and that simply reinforces his fears.  There is no making him do it so he gets over the fear, because making him do it causes him so much fear that he falls and it becomes a vicious circle.

So, on that one, I'm not budging.  But, this thread HAS helped me to see a lot of things.

ron2: Quite true. So, I could just state that he was wrong, imo. And if he happens to peruse this forum he could explain to me why he did that. Sounds fair.

glenmar

So, on that one, I'm not budging.

And I personally wouldn't ask you to budge. Because you know your dogs better than anyone. And if you're willing to find another entrance or put down rugs for him, that's totally your choice. I still DO think, with the proper handling, and perhaps another handler, he could overcome the fear, but I respect your choice not to go there.

I think it's important to be ok with disagreeing and respecting the fact that others make the choices for their animals.

Some people afraid of flying just don't fly. That's valid and should be respected. And since we find ourselves in the position of making these kind of decisions for our animals, I think they should be respected.  

I love this thread, too.  

There's a definite degree of marketing genius at work with the "dog whisperer."

lostcoyote

did ya happen to catch last nights episode..... the first case dealt with fear agression --------- if you happened to see it, what did you think of the technique that was used

I watched most of that episode. Are you talking about the female Pit mix or the 6 year old Rottie? I commented on those in another post.

I applaud the more visible use of treat training that he is incorporating and I am willing to stipulate that he may be evolving to use these more and refine his understanding. And he has been wrong in the past, imo. Or should I say imho? If I use the word humble, does that make it better? Believe it or not, I'm not wanting to argue or bait someone into defending him. Just the same, when criticisms or disagreements of style are used against Pryor, McConnell (including Spiritdogs having a disagreement with one of her methods), or even Dunbar, for primarily working with puppies instead of our 90 + lb borderline dogs, we just go on and praise "expanding the toolbox." When a criticism or disagreement is leveled against CM, there is no acceptance that he might have been wrong among some quarters of the population, here and abroad, especially in the past. Even now, there is no acceptance that he could be wrong and I am invited to ask the man directly, which may not do much for me, as I think he has been wrong on occasion and it has nothing to do with his personality. FWIW, he has a warmer personality than Victoria Stilwell, imHo, which may make it easier for humans to listen to him, which is kind of funny since I think he has admitted or intimated that he often got along better with dogs than with humans for some time. And to his show's credit, there are plenty of disclaimers.

My own disclaimer is that I base my opinion on some of his methods and actions on science, learning theory, and the proofs therein.