cesar millan - why all the negatives here?

A few people, here and there, are professional trainers who do not agree with Milan's methods. He essentially operates from the pack model. He will use physical control when dealing with an aggressive dog and he often gets dogs who are on their last leg, socially.
 
I watch the show, too. I will often agree with his analysis though I don't particularly use his methods. And he said something recently that was so well put that I defy anyone anywhere to say that he was wrong. It was the episode where he took over care of 3 Katrina dogs. After health checks, he had them spayed and neutered. Not only for health benefits and reduction of litters, but it allows him to see their personality, which is no longer clouded by the incessant drive to mate. He ended with the plea to always spay and neuter your pets. They found the owner of the akita mix. He and NGC flew him and the dog out there and he got to go on one last rollerblade run and then they went to the house. That moment rocked.
 
The main problem people have with him is that he may use force, though not always. I like his opening statement. "I rehabilitate dogs, I train people."
 

Personally, I prefer to train my dogs in a positive manner over his fear based manner. My dogs obey because they know I'm in charge and they want to please me, NOT because they are afraid of me.  I'm older and I've used some of the "traditional" methods that CM employs and never found them anywhere near as effective as just communicating to my dogs what I wanted in a calm and clear manner.
 
It's not a whole lot different than raising kids.  When I was growing up,  not only did we GET the switch used on us, 9 times outta 10 we had to go out and CUT it!  I didn't raise my children that way....I raised them with firm perameters, guidance, clear expectations and lots of love.  The worst punishment I could give them (they tell me now as adults) is to give them "the look" and tell them the I was disappointed in them.
 
I've never been good at inflicting punishment on a little one that I wasn't convinced KNEW that what they were doing was wrong.....the old rolled up newspaper, rub their nose in the mistake stuff just never worked for me......I couldn't bring myself to do that despite common wisdom that that was the ONLY was to housetrain a pup.  Somehow using my kinder/gentler methods, I succeeded in housetraining every pup who came through my doors.
 
I guess for me I don't need to be dominant in an agressive or cruel way to be Alpha.  I can be alpha as a benevolent leader and it works just fine.
 
It appears that CM's methods work in the extreme cases that we see on TV.  However, none of those dogs ever needed to GET there.  IF people would make a lifetime commitment to an animal when they bring it home, IF people would get off their butts and WORK on training that pup and not letting it "think" that it runs the show and then freaking out when the pup hits those lovely adolescent days, there would be few if any extreme cases for CM to "fix"  Training and learning should be a lifetime thing for pups just as it is with children.  If you've raised a child the right way, you don't need to suddenly start beating him when he hits his teens.  If you've raised a pup the right way, same thing.

No, Glenda they don't "need" to be there.  But, the reality is that a lot are.  Willow is. 

I think a lot of the problem comes from people not understanding what it's like to deal with an aggressive dog.  It's very easy to use positive methods on a dog who is not a danger to anyone. 

Honestly, I've trained Willow using all positive methods.  However, there are a few issues that positive training did not work.  For example, Ceasar speaks of breaking a dogs focus on whatever is setting them off before it escalates, he uses a "shush" and touches the dog to break the concentration on whatever it is.  I've used it and it does work.  I can't stand there hoping a treat will do it, she isn't food motivated to begin with and once she wants to go after something, it's very hard to distract her. 

The only real "beef" I have with him is that I think some people might not know what they are doing and try what they see and have a problem. 

And, I've watched just about every episode, what episodes is he doing more than making a dog stay or using a choke??  What you guys who do not have aggressive dogs don't realize is that a choke collar on a dog like Willow doesn't even break her concentration for a second.  Now, I've never used one on her, but it wouldn't do a thing if I did.

I've watched almost all the episodes and I've never seen him beat a dog or use more than making him/her stay or a choke.  I think how forceful he is is quite exagerated.

There is NO excuse for this!
 
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- A television producer is suing dog trainer Cesar Millan, star of TV's "The Dog Whisperer," claiming that his Labrador retriever was injured at Millan's training facility after being suffocated by a choke collar and forced to run on a treadmill.

In a lawsuit filed Thursday in Superior Court, "8 Simple Rules" producer Flody Suarez says he took 5-year-old Gator to the Dog Psychology Center on February 27 to deal with fears of other dogs and strangers.

Hours after dropping the dog off at the facility, Suarez claimed a worker called to inform him the animal had been rushed to a veterinarian. He later found the dog "bleeding from his mouth and nose, in an oxygen tent gasping for breath and with severe bruising to his back inner thighs," the lawsuit claims. (Watch how Millan changed the behavior of a CNN anchor's dog -- 3:24)

The facility's workers allegedly placed a choke collar on the dog, pulled him onto a treadmill and forced him to "overwork." Suarez says he spent at least $25,000 on medical bills and the dog must undergo more surgeries for damage to his esophagus.

A call to the Dog Psychology Center, also named as a defendant, was not immediately returned. A spokesman for National Geographic Channel, which airs Millan's show, declined comment.

"As of this time, the National Geographic Channel has not been served with either lawsuit, and we do not comment on pending litigation," said Russell Howard, the channel's vice president of communications.

The complaint claims breach of contract, fraud, animal cruelty and intentional infliction of emotional distress, among other allegations. It seeks more than $25,000 in damages.
 
In this situation the dog was left unsupervised on a treadmill suspended by a choke chain.  The leash was left about a foot to long, and the dog's leg was pulled under the back of the treadmill.  The dogs trachea was crushed, and back leg broken. 
 
There is no question in my mind that this should be considered gross negligence in a court of law. 

I think a lot of the problem comes from people not understanding what it's like to deal with an aggressive dog. It's very easy to use positive methods on a dog who is not a danger to anyone.

 
It is just as easy to use positive methods, or at least non-cruel methods (shush is far from cruel, it's simply a redirection done by startling the dog), to rehabilitate an aggressive dog.  The truly aggressive dog is relatively rare in polite society anyway - and due to liability, or simple danger, is best euthanized.  Sorry, but I agree with Sue Sternberg that it makes little sense to spend the time on rehabbing a dog that will always be a danger provided the right trigger appears...when there are hundreds of great family dogs dying in shelters every day.  People like Cesar Milan exist because owners hope against hope that the dog they now love can be turned around.  Good dogs with behavior problems can be turned around with positive training - owners, however, often want the quick result.
Dogs that are beyond the point where they will be trustworthy are shuttled from guru to guru, much like terminal cancer patients are shuttled from doc to doc, and then to snake oil dealer.  If you have to "hang" a dog, which is brutally painful and life-threateningly scary to that animal, are you really doing the dog a favor?  Especially, since you know that the 18-34 year old male demographic is watching this guy and emulating him in the treatment of their own dogs, most of which are good dogs who might forget their manners and chew a slipper.  They then get the treatment reserved for the dog with four puncture bite incidents to his credit.  Every class, I still get people who ask me if it's ok to knee their dogs in the chest for jumping up.  Yeah, if you want him to bite you, if you want to stop his heart, or if you want me to report you for animal cruelty.
The danger with people like Milan is that he perpetrates the "dominance" model with the general public and their should-be-easy-to-manage dogs.  They mimic him and ruin great dogs because they don't understand training and behavior and use ten minutes on a TV show to try to figure out what to do with their own dogs, when what they should be doing is getting the dog into a group class for proper socialization and training, getting the dog who isn't destined for the show ring either spayed or neutered (that would put an end to a lot of aggression problems between dogs), and trying to learn more than a cursory amount about animal husbandry and humane treatment. 
I say shame on National Geographic for going after the young, male, macho audience in this way.  But, do they have a choice?  Would they bother to watch Jean Donaldson talk about the Culture Clash???? Probably not.  But, if you really want to get a grip on dog behavior, you can always read her book.
Aggression begets aggression - in people and in dogs, and you may mask aggression for a while with harsh techniques, but it may come out to haunt you.  There are no short cuts.  There's either training/desensitization, or there's management, but no "cure".  Anyone who tells you there is doesn't understand biology, has a huge ego, or they are a charlatan.

At Last Resort K-9 Academy in Mason, Ohio we work with aggressive dogs everyday, from all over the world.  The absolute worst of the worst.  Sometimes adversives are necessary. 
 
What I dislike about Millan is that I find him very misleading.  He mystifies the training, and explains things in a way that makes viewers want to try his techniques without the proper education that goes into using them.  It doesn't matter how many times you tell people "not to try this at home" people will.  He has a responsibility to the aggressive dogs he says he cares so much about, to educate people properly.
 
As an example:
One episode Millan was working with a cat aggressive Malinios.  A shock collar was used to deter this behavior.  When the dog went after the cat, he was shocked by one of the assistants off camera.  All we saw on screen was Millan (and then the owner) popping the dog in the side with there hands making silly sounds.  Then it was explained how he "used his energy" to bring the dogs focus back to him.  WHATEVER!  He used a $2000 tri-tronics shock collar to bring the dogs focus back.  Why was this collar NEVER mentioned. 
 
The next week I got 4 calls by owners who cats were attacked, because they tried to implement these techniques. I think that not explaining what really goes on is careless. 
 
Also, I was disappointed to see an e-collar used so improperly.  The dogs reaction to the correction (hiding his head under the bed) shows me that he was absolutely NOT trained on it.  That is just abusive.  It takes about 21-24 days to train a dog on an e-collar.  Once the training is complete then you can use it to deter drivey and aggressive behaviors.  But just slapping the collar and shocking the negative behavior is just really piss poor training. 
 
I would fire one of my trainers if they even considered being this lazy.  Millan doesn't put in the time to educate the dog or owner before he starts the behavior modification process. 
 
He is a yank and crank trainer who has found a very clever way to explain things.  Some of his ideas are great, like his explanation of exercise, discipline, and affection; and also his explanation of rules, boundaries in limitations.  I would like to see him put in a lot more time with the dogs before he resorts to correction, but that isn't good TV.

It is just as easy to use positive methods, or at least non-cruel methods

I agree in most cases it is, but there ARE a few areas where I needed something more with Willow.  Of course, I don't advocate being mean or cruel. 

I wonder what Mic's opinion on that statement is?
 

 Sorry, but I agree with Sue Sternberg that it makes little sense to spend the time on rehabbing a dog that will always be a danger provided the right trigger appears

 
Willow fits this description perfectly.  And this is my issue with trainers in general.  They should be able to adjust there training to work with any dog not just the perfect family dog.  Frankly, after training her through her problems I can't even imagine why a trainer would be necessary with a "perfect" dog, it should be able to be done at home. 

Excellent points, Mic

I don't personally think that positive is always the way to go, and I also completely disagree with euthanasia for behavior problems (with that said I am not an advocate of "no-kill" shelters). 
 
People need to put in the time an effort to fix the problems.  Unreasonable force only has to be used when owners have unreasonable expectations.  I finished with a dog yesterday that we had been working with for 16 months to resolve its aggression problems.  We finally did it.  He is now a trust worthy member of society.  It took about 70 total hours of professional training and about 500 hours of owner work, but she got the job done.  This isn't the case with most dogs, but the worst of the worst take a lot of time.

The only real "beef" I have with him is that I think some people might not know what they are doing and try what they see and have a problem.

That is my beef with him as well.  I was explaining this to my SO and he thought I was being overly sensitive...Until about 2 weeks later.  We were having lunch with his Aunt who is not dog savy, doesn't even own a dog.  She starts talking about CM and how he is the greatest thing since sliced bread.  She said she watched ONE show and after that she went to see her sister and tried one of his methods on her dog!![8|] That is my problem with him.  He doesn't give people the whole picture which can lead to uneducated people thinking they are expert dog trainers.

(Needless to say my SO was eating crow after our lunch with his Aunt![])

No negatives here, I like the guy...what you might find interesting, is to look at the breeds people own, or have experience with, or like and relate that to their feelings on Milan, not just here but various breed specific boards etc. It's quite consistent and very IMO eye opening That's only my opinion of course...but as I've been keeping track of the haters, lovers, and indifferents the theory is bearing out pretty well...
 
 

It says multiple times on every show "Do not attempt these methods without the help of a professional trainer" or something like that. If people cannot read or make the choice not to follow this advice, is it the show's or CM's fault?

Of course it is MiniMom! That's why you can execute a wicked running slide across the wet floor at WalMart...right past the "wet floor/piso mojado" signs, fall...break a collarbone...and then sue THEM for negligence lmao!
 
That's why you can climb the fence into the neighbors yard, right over the "beware of dog sign"...and get bit...then sue!
 
That's also why you can put up a fence around your pool...but if a neighbor kid climbs it and drowns, it's your fault!
 
I believe it's called the death of common sense, []

There is no question in my mind that this should be considered gross negligence in a court of law

ORIGINAL: mrgmfoster

There is NO excuse for this!

Ooh boy Mic I am in agreeance with you!! I am not fond of CMs training methods and believe he should be held accountable.