Found this little gem whilst surfing the other day - though I would share it with you all
ENJOY!
How to Counter Arguments to Use Cesar Millan's Approach
By agilityman
Cesar Millan (the "Dog Whisperer"), star of a wildly popular TV series, national lecturer, and author of several books reaches a lot of the public on dog behavior and training issues.
For most lay people, Cesar Millan may be the most familiar source they have for information on dogs, especially training. If you own a dog or are thinking of getting one, you're almost certain to have a friend, neighbor or family member at some point approach you with "well, here is what Cesar would do" or "the reason you have this problem is because you're not the alpha and the Dog Whisperer shows how to be a head of the pack if you'd only....".
The problem is that Cesar Millan's approach has been widely discredited in the dog training world. Among serious canine competitors, DVM's, canine research facilities, and well-respected dog trainers like Patricia McConnell, his tactics have been consistently criticized.
Trying to do what the Dog Whisperer does (despite how it looks on TV) is poor advice in most cases.
Now, not all of what Millan does is bad. The idea that dogs need consistency and exercise are good ones and almost all reputable trainers have always believed these as well. But his techniques tend to be based on flooding and physical corrections.
So....how do you answer someone (family, friend, neighbor) who is trying to tell you that if only you followed Cesar's Way, you and your dog would be perfectly aligned with no problems? Here are some answers to give those people.
Step 1
Tell them that Millan's tactics have been discredited by the people who originally developed them.
For instance, Millan advocates using what he calls an "alpha-roll" or belly-roll to demonstrate dominance to a dog. Except this technique was first widely publicized much earlier by the Monks of New Skete (and Millan adopted it from them). Job Michael Evans, who first suggested the Alpha roll in his book for the Monks of New Skete, later apologized for it.
Evans indicated publicly that he wished he had never written about the alpha-roll and it has led to widespread abuse. According to Evans, the only dogs that would likely accept an Alpha roll didn't need it and the ones who do need it would bite your face if you tried it with them.
Step 2
Tell them that research (not a TV show, not someone's opinion, not one person's work, but actual research with different dogs and handlers and situations) showed that that Millan's techniques increased aggression in 25% of the dogs.
If you're challenged on this claim, you can find more details about the study here: http://askdryin.com/blog/tag/aggression-dog-dominance-alpha-cesar-millan-behavior-training/
By the way, this doesn't mean that physical corrections and force worked 75% of the time--alternative approaches had a higher success rate. But it does mean that a substantial amount of time (1 out of 4 times), physical correction and force made things worse, not better--it made the aggressive dogs more aggressive.
Step 3
Tell them that it's based on outdated research involving wolves. People originally looked at wolves and assumed the lessons we learned from wolf packs would apply to dogs. We know now that...
Wolves and dogs aren't identical in their behavior. For instance, wolves make terrible guard animals, show very little play instinct (especially as adults and when compared to dogs), have no eagerness to please and have different pack behavior than do dogs.
Our understanding of what constitutes "alpha" is wrong as well. With canines (especially dogs), alpha animals tend to not be aggressive or forceful. The alpha's control access to food (how much you get and who eats first), who gets to mate (and with whom), who gets to play and when and with what.
We've all seen dogs that are aggressive to other dogs or seek to grab the best toy or protect food. That is not alpha behavior. Dogs of equal status are more likely to fight or behave aggressively while alpha dogs almost never engage in this behavior: signs of aggressiveness (growling, prolonged stares, physical correction) are not things that alpha dogs do so when humans do those behaviors it tells the dogs that we're not the alpha, we're unpredictable and possibly dangerous.
If you find all of this a bit hard to believe because it contradicts so many stories you've heard about alpha dog status, than try looking here http://www.clickersolutions.com/articles/2001/dominance.htm or look at the research of Dr. Ian Dunbar.
Step 4
Tell them it's only television. Of course the Dog Whisperer program shows the successes. And what research on physical corrections proves is that when it succeeds (which is not always), it is almost always temporary--and usually produces negative consequences. There are plenty of examples where TV shows some kind of problem being dealt with in 20 minutes or less--do you really think that solving the problem was that simple and that quick?
Here's one example of where Millan's methods resulted in an injured dog and no improvement in behavior: http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-05-05-dog-whisperer_x.htm
The point is not that Millan and his methods should be perfect. It's that the Dog Whisperer program is so seductive because we see only short-term successes from selective cases.
Step 5
Agree that bribing an animal is a bad way to get results. But it's a mistake to believe that there are only two approaches to training behavior--either Millan's approach (relying heavily on flooding and physical correction) or bribery.
There are lots of different ways to train dogs and most of them don't rely on bribery. Actually, one method that predates Millan and has been widely used with horses, dog sports, US Navy training of dolphins, SeaWorld training of orcas and belugas and was validated with humans through the research of Fred Keller and BF Skinner is that of operant condition.
And operant conditioning isn't bribery. And it's backed by half a century of thousands of studies. Operant conditioning tends to be very successful with dogs because of their innate desire to please humans (something distinguishes dogs from other canines like hyenas, wolves, coyotes and jackals).
For more information you can go here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/10/15/CMGPHL9D1N1.DTL or research Karen Pryor and clicker training.
Step 6
Agree that dogs should not be treated like people. But to agree that dogs aren't people doesn't naturally follow that the best ways to train them involve flooding or physical correction. In fact, because of the nature of dogs (poor generalization, poor ability to vocalize, tremendous ability to perceive posture-facial expression, strong desire to get approval), flooding and physical correction work less effectively on dogs than they do on humans.
Jean Donaldson's work (The Culture Clash or Dogs Are From Neptune) or Patricia McConnell's (The Other Side of the Leash) are both great examples of practical studies and analysis of how dogs and humans are different--without having to resort to flooding and physical correction to get results. You can see verification of this here:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950CE3DF1E3EF932A0575BC0A9609C8B63
Step 7
If your friend or family member insists that you can't argue with Millan's success, than ask them to explain the following statements:
--Dr. Nicholas Dodman - DVM, Director of Animal Behavior Clinic, Tufts University,
“Cesar Millan's methods are based on flooding and punishment. The results, though immediate, will be only transitory. His methods are misguided, outmoded, in some cases dangerous, and often inhumane. You would not want to be a dog under his sphere of influence. The sad thing is that the public does not recognize the error of his ways. My college thinks it is a travesty. We’ve written to National Geographic Channel and told them they have put dog training back 20 years.”
--Dr. Suzanne Hetts, Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist and Co-owner of Animal Behavior Associates, Inc., Littleton, CO
"A number of qualified professionals have voiced concern for the welfare of pet dogs that experience the strong corrections administered by Mr. Millan. My concerns are based on his inappropriateness, inaccurate statements, and complete fabrications of explanations for dog behavior. His ideas, especially those about “dominance”, are completely disconnected from the sciences of ethology and animal learning, which are our best hope for understanding and training our dogs and meeting their behavioral needs. Many of the techniques he encourages the public to try are dangerous, and not good for dogs or our relationships with them ."
--Dr. Ian Dunbar, DVM, founder of Association of Pet Dog Trainers, expert witness in dog aggression trials, author of numerous dog training books, "Saying 'I want to interact with my dog better, so I'll learn from the wolves' makes about as much sense as saying, 'I want to improve my parenting -- let's see how the chimps do it.' "
--Dr. Andrew Luescher, DVM, asked by National Geographic to review Dog Whisperer shows, "Most of the theoretical explanations that Millan gives regarding causes of the behavior problems are wrong. Not one of these dogs had any issue with dominance. Not one of these dogs wanted to control their owners...Millan's techniques are outdated and unacceptable not only to the veterinary community, but also to dog trainers...
The show repeatedly cautions the viewers not to attempt these techniques at home. What then is the purpose of this show? I think we have to be realistic: people will try these techniques at home, much to the detriment of their pets."
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Monday, December 20, 2010
Non-Viiolent Dog Training - THE REAL DOG WHISPERER!
Paul Owens was the original "Dog Whisperer" in 1999
Millan began using the title five years later
Five years before Cesar Millan's TV show of the same name, a positive reinforcement trainer, Paul Owens, was using the "dog whisperer" name.
As the "original" Dog Whisperer, in 1999 he published two books, "The Dog Whisperer" and "The Puppy Whisperer".
With the subtitle "A Compassionate Nonviolent Approach to Dog Training" he has released an updated 2nd Edition, (2007) as well as The Puppy Whisperer (2007). Paul is an official member of the Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT) and is endorsed by The National Association of Dog Obedience Instructors (NADOI).
Paul's dog training philosophy:
"I believe nonviolence fosters nonviolence. Because of the link between dog and human behavior, nonviolent dog training contributes to helping build a world of peace for humans and dogs."
http://www.dogwhispererdvd.com/dog_whisperer_paul_owens.shtml
Q: to Paul Owens:
You indicate on your website that you are not affiliated with the National Geographic program, "The Dog Whisperer” which features Cesar Millan . I've never seen him use inappropriate or violent techniques with animals so why are you distancing yourself from him?
A: by Paul Owens
The methods demonstrated by Mr. Millan include the use of choke collars, jerking, hitting, asphyxiation, pinning to the ground, etc. He has stated that any method is okay to use as long as it works.
He uses physical punishment and “flooding” in order to suppress a dog's behavior. Physical punishment involves applying a physical aversive to reduce the probability of the behavior continuing. “Flooding” refers to physically forcing a dog into an overwhelming situation he or she is afraid of until the dog “shuts down” or the behavior is suppressed.
Using negative methods with fearful or aggressive dogs is actually dangerous (as demonstrated on the program) and unnecessary. People trying these methods at home, could likely kill their best friend. They are certainly not very easy on the dogs. Most importantly, these methods are not the most effective in modifying problematic behaviors.
Behavioral science has shown that suppressing behavior, especially through physical force or the threat of force, does nothing to bring confidence to a fearful dog or calm an aggressive dog, it only suppresses that behavior (out of fear) in that particular situation.
Most of the physical-force methods demonstrated on this program are in contrast to the positive behavior modification programs used by professional trainers around the world, including the leading veterinary schools of behavior at University of Pennsylvania, Tufts University, Cornell, University of California at Davis, and many others. They have found negative training to be unsafe, unnecessary and ineffective in the long run. Thirty years ago I used most of the negative methods shown on the National Geographic program and became skilled in both positive and negative training. In the past 15 years, along with other professionals and the leading animal behavioral scientists at the institutions referenced above, I have abandoned negative training, finding it to be less effective and certainly not as kind as positive training. I believe positive training is easier and more effective with even the most aggressive or fearful dog, as well as being less stressful for the human.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Original Dog Whisperer
By Andy Sternberg
Five years before National Geographic's "Dog Whisperer" became a worldwide hit, Paul Owens released a DVD and book with the same name but an entirely different approach. Andy Sternberg met with Owens to discuss the bastardization of the art of "dog whispering." “The original meaning of the term “Dog Whisperer” was treating any kind of animal with kindness, respect -- in other words without physically forcing them to do anything,” according to Paul Owens, a dog trainer who coined the phrase “Dog Whisperer” when he published a book in the 1990’s.
The more famous dog whisperer, National Geographic television’s Cesar Millan, displays a training philosophy that is much more aggressive and warlike than Owens’s. Millan’s methodology assumes that dogs are more apt to follow the leadership and energy of an aggressive owner as opposed to a passive one, according to Owens.
But Owens takes a more zen-like, Gandhian approach. When you train your dog, you’re actually training yourself to be a better human being, he says. “Basically this whole program is about teaching people how to raise and train their dogs using non-violent methods.” In describing this holistic point of view, Owens launched into song: “We call it the nine methods: food and play and socialize; quiet time and exercise; give your dog a job to do; lots of rest when days are through; train with love respect and care; and see your vet throughout the year.” Owens hesitates to describe what he calls Cesar Millan’s bastardization of his dog whispering concept, after all he continues to reap the benefits. “Every time he’s on the news or he’s on a program like Oprah or something else, our book sales and DVD sales go up, so inadvertently he’s introduced a lot of people to positive training,” says Owens. But this positive, pacifist training method, apparently isn’t cut out for prime time television.
http://web.archive.org/web/20070728153446/http://www.dogwhispererdvd.com/News-Info/AnnenbergRadioNews.pdf
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Do Dogs Get Jealous?
Do Dogs Get Jealous?
Posted by Ryan O'Meara
According to some new research by scientists, they do.
Personally, I don’t believe they do and I’ll explain more about that in a moment. But first let us look at the new research done in the name of science.
The experiment consisted of taking pairs of dogs and getting them to present a paw for a reward. On giving this “handshake” the dogs received a piece of food.
One of the dogs was then asked to shake hands, but received no food. The other dog continued to get the food when it was asked to perform the task.
The dog without the reward quickly stopped doing the task, and showed signs of annoyance or stress when its partner was rewarded.
To make sure that the experiment was really showing the interaction between the dogs rather than just the frustration of not being rewarded, a similar experiment was conducted where the dogs performed the task without the partner. Here they continued to present the paw for much longer.
Dr Frederike Range from the department of neurobiology and cognition research at the University of Vienna, says this shows that it was the presence of the rewarded partner which was the greater influence on their behaviour.
“The only difference is one gets food and the other doesn’t, they are responding to being unequally rewarded.” she said.
The researchers say this kind of behavior, where one animal gets frustrated with what is happening with another, has only been observed in primates before.
Studies with various types of monkeys and chimpanzees show they react not only to seeing their partners receiving rewards when they are not, but also to the type of reward.
The dog study also looked at whether the type of reward made a difference. Dogs were given either bread or sausage, but seemed to react equally to either. Dr Range says this may be because they have been trained.
“It’s through the fact they have to work for the reward, this confers it with a higher value,” she said.
Let’s take a look at this in smaller chunks.
The dog without the reward quickly stopped doing the task, and showed signs of annoyance or stress when its partner was rewarded.
Well of course. Surely we wouldn’t expect anything different here? The dog wants the food and it sees the other dog with the food and it gravitates toward the treat. This is quite logical, nothing ground breaking yet.
To make sure that the experiment was really showing the interaction between the dogs rather than just the frustration of not being rewarded, a similar experiment was conducted where the dogs performed the task without the partner. Here they continued to present the paw for much longer.
Yes, again this surely to be expected? Here we have a dog with no distraction, no food or other dog in the equation and it makes logical sense that most dogs will perform differently in a situation where no distraction – of any kind – is present. This, again, does not prove jealousy as we understand it.
Dr Frederike Range from the department of neurobiology and cognition research at the University of Vienna, says this shows that it was the presence of the rewarded partner which was the greater influence on their behavior.
Now we’re veering in to some strange territory. Let us imagine this experiment but with some different parameters.
We work with just one dog, no other dog in the area.
The dog gives its paw. Then a person will come in to the room and puts some food on the floor near to where the other dog would have been positioned.
Would the dog now be less interested in giving paw and more interested in food?
In my opinion, yes. Most likely.
Now repeat the same scenario but don’t have anyone put food down.
It’s my supposition that the dog would hold paw for longer.
No other dog present, no jealousy – merely distraction causing reaction.
The dog study also looked at whether the type of reward made a difference. Dogs were given either bread or sausage, but seemed to react equally to either. Dr Range says this may be because they have been trained.
Dogs like different foods. And scientists didn’t know this?
Take my own dog Mia. She loathes banana. My other dog, Chloe, on the other hand loves fruit. So if I’m eating a banana Mia will sit for a while, realise what I’ve got and then go and lie down. Chloe will stay sitting next to me, watching until I’ve finished. I’m not a scientist but I do know this – it’s……wait for it………
……because Chloe likes banana and Mia doesn’t!
Given that Mia is by far the greedier of my two dogs it proves that dogs clearly have different tastes the same as we do, this is – I would guess – pretty universal. Maybe your dog loves a type of food that my dogs don’t. Maybe your dogs go mad for aniseed whereas my dogs love cheese. Just a sec, wait. Not a good comparison – aniseed and cheese are pretty much universal ‘must eats’ on the canine menu (if your dog likes neither, please let me know – in the name of science).
So, if I set out to train Mia with bananas as my choice of reward for her, I’d achieve less impressive results – quite simply because Mia doesn’t like banana. She places a higher value on food that she likes, similarly toys and similarly different ways of being touched – Mia doesn’t like to be stroked on the head, Chloe will take a good head stroking for several hours. So we’ve still not established jealousy in canines with this research based on the report as presented on the BBC site.
Studies with various types of monkeys and chimpanzees show they react not only to seeing their partners receiving rewards when they are not, but also to the type of reward.
OK. Well I’m not a scientist but I do know that monkeys and chimps are NOT dogs. They can and indeed probably do have emotions much more closely aligned to the emotion we recognise in ourselves as jealousy, similarly they have different social structures and are NOT dogs. So the relevance of this is no more apt than saying: “Well humans have jealousy, why can’t dogs?”
Why do I not believe dogs share the emotion we recognise in ourselves as jealousy?
If we think about what jealousy is, if we are logical about what we know about this emotion it is incredibly complex and based on a whole level of social elements.
There are humans who feel jealousy based on widely different factors – is that an innate personality trait in them or is it nurtured? – we don’t really know.
We have humans within the autistic spectrum who simply do not and can not feel jealous and others within that same spectrum who can be wildly jealous. It’s true that even scientists themselves still haven’t universally agreed a definition for what jealously is! That’s how complex this particular emotion is. What does it take to be jealous? It takes two people very, very different reasons to be jealous, even people within the same family who share almost identical genetics. Yet put two people in a room and mimic the ‘paw test’ and we’d never get close to seeing universal results proving jealous responses in people – we’re too different and jealousy is an emotion that does not run through us all in an identical fashion. So why should it in dogs?
I absolutely do not doubt for a single, solitary second that they display behaviour which is very easy for us to compare with the emotion of jealousy that we recognise in ourselves. It could be displayed in acts of resource guarding, it could be manifested by dogs who are particularly greedy, territorial, pack motivated, rank motivated – but jealousy it is not. It is quite possible that I want to get my bosses’ job and sit in his chair, in his office and take home his salary but I am not motivated even in the slightest by jealousy, I simply want to do better for myself. Dogs the same. So a dog going to another dog getting rewarded is absolutely not proof positive – in my view – that we’ve cracked the canine jealousy code, we haven’t even cracked ours yet – and we can SPEAK!
Anthropomorphism is rife. Most of the time it’s harmless but sometimes it’s nothing more than us finding another way to say: “I don’t understand my dog but I’ll bracket a particular behaviour by benchmarking it against my own”. This is, plainly, crazy. And it can lead to problems.
It will be better for dogs and better for us if we make an effort to better understand them. But always, always, always start that voyage of discovery with one overriding caveat: Dogs are no more human than we are Zebra. They are dogs. They ARE unique and we love them for it. They are masters at making us think what they want us to think. Their understanding of human body language is an art we’re not even close to mastering. Take this example:
Person comes home. Dog has wrecked the post (again). There it is, all laid out scattered over the floor.
Owner opens the door.
“Huuuuhhh!!!! What have you done???”
“Oh, look at him. Look at that face. Look how guilty he looks.”
(wait for it)
“He know what he’s done!”
Sound familiar?
Of course he doesn’t ‘know what he’s done’ and he absolutely may ‘look guilty’ but that aint guilt he’s showing, that’s him spotting body langauage and going to fear/survival mode. He’s pretty much saying: “If you want me to look guilty, if that’s the pigeonhole you want to put me in right now, so long as it means I don’t come to any harm, I’ll do a better guilty repertoire than Laurence Olivier if it makes you happy babe!”
Breed Specific Legislation
NOTE FROM LOU:
Due to the high incidence of dog attacks in South Africa there has been some discussion about introducing legislation along the lines of the UK “Dangerous Dogs Act”. It is interesting to note the article below discussing the Dutch take on Breed Specific Legislation.
Dutch Dog Bite Study Condemns Breed Specific Legislation
Posted by Ryan O'Meara on September 6, 2010
As many of you will know, the Netherlands once operated a dangerous dogs law that was closely modelled on the UK’s 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act, in that it attempted to combat the problem of dog attacks by banning certain ‘types’ of dogs. This concept is known as breed specific legislation.
Well, ever the free thinkers (the type who don’t let media hype determine the laws of the land, but instead look toward REAL facts when legislating), the Netherlands no longer operates breed specific legislation and has instead pursued a more educational approach to canine laws. Now a new study has been carried out in the Netherlands which overwhelmingly concludes that a ban on dog breeds has zero effect as a means to reduce or eradicate dog bites.
Here’s an extract from the study.
As part of an evaluation of Dutch breed specific legislation, data were collected from dog bite victims (1078) and dog owners (6139) using Internet surveys.
The incidence rate of dog bites and details of incidents (victims, injuries, circumstances and aggressors) are reported and the justification for using breed specific measurements to deal with dog bites are considered. For aggressors, attack records for breed groups and popular breeds were established by calculating breed risk indices using a reference population.
Several breeds and breed groups were over- and under-represented in the biting population and there was a mismatch between risk indices and the then-current legislation.
Mitigation strategies should not be based on attack records (since this would lead to the rejection of a significant proportion of the canine population) but on the circumstances of the incidents. Preventative measures must focus on a better understanding of how to handle dogs.
Brent Toellner over at the excellent KC Dog Blog has seen a copy of the report and he shares some of the findings on his site (you really should have a look: link).
Of particular note, this passage:
“Our findings, like those from other groups, do not support the use of an attack record in developing mitigation strategies. We found that all dogs can bite and therefore one should always be careful when interacting with a dog, even a family dog and during play. if we were to use base mitigation strategies on attack records, this would not lead to the establishment of feasible actions to take.
Removing the most common biters would also imply removing the most common breeds; for example, we found that the Jack Russell terrier was responsible for approximately 10% fo the bites and 8/10 of the most popular breeds were the most common biters (including the highly polymorphic group of mixed breed/mongrel). Eliminating these breeds is neither practicable nor desirable.”
Addition
Hi Everyone.
I forgot to add one of the sites with CM info is called "Beyond Cesar Millan" and is well worth viewing.
Cheers for now and dont foget to send me some feedback.
Lou
I forgot to add one of the sites with CM info is called "Beyond Cesar Millan" and is well worth viewing.
Cheers for now and dont foget to send me some feedback.
Lou
The Anti Cesar Millan Movement
The Anti-Cesar Millan movement./
Ian Dunbar's been succeeding for 25 years with lure-reward dog training; how come he's been usurped by the flashy, aggressive TV host?
October 15, 2006
By Louise Rafkin
It's late afternoon at Point Isabel, prime time at the Bay Area's popular off-leash dog park, and the man some call the most innovative in the field of dog training weaves unnoticed through the two- and four-legged throngs. No one recognizes the slight, snow-haired man dressed in Berkeley-esque traveler's clothes (well-pocketed shirt and cargo pants) as Dr. Ian Dunbar, the man who wrote the book -- rather, six books -- on pet dog training and the guy who developed one of the earliest puppy-training courses in the country. Dunbar is 59, and though he's been away from his native England for decades (since 1971), he carries the air of an English gentleman. Occasionally British colloquialisms slip into conversation. "I was gob-smacked!" is how he explains his recent shock over a case of dog-owner ignorance.
With an eager border collie obsessively dropping a ball at his feet, Dunbar scans the Point Isabel regulars. It's hard to imagine he's not passing judgment on particular behaviors, but mostly he smiles at the four-legged passers-by. Thirty-five years of studying dogs has not dulled him to simple joys.
"Bay Area dogs are so cool, so friendly and polite," he says. When a brown fluff ball approaches jauntily and sniffs his pant leg, he genuinely gushes. "What a cute puppy!" Then an incessant barker demands attention. "We've heard," he says firmly to the lab. "Haven't you got anything else to say?"
Though they probably don't know it, Dunbar's training methodology has probably influenced the pet-owner relationship of almost everyone here at the park. He says he was the first to preach the once revolutionary idea of training puppies off leash (formerly only those six months and older were thought trainable) and also says he was the first to stuff food into a Kong (the conical shaped rubber chew toy and object of desire of most chewing-age puppies), thus saving table legs and Italian loafers worldwide. More important, his methods and theories have saved dogs' lives. Dog training is his passion, but it's not simply because he finds a well-trained pet a thing of beauty.
Training, he says, saves dogs' lives.
"Without training, the life of a puppy is predictable: chewing, soiling the house, digging up the garden, followed by a trip to the shelter where, if it's lucky, it gets another try," he says, wearily. "Without training, that dog will be dead in less than a year."
There is a quiet battle being fought in dog-training circles, and Dunbar, though he didn't pick the fight, represents one side. The mild, very mannered Dunbar is armed with degrees and scientific study: a veterinary degree and a Special Honors in physiology and biochemistry from the Royal Veterinary College of London University, a doctorate in animal behavior from the psychology department of UC Berkeley and a decade of research on the olfactory communication, social behavior and aggression in domestic dogs. All this, plus decades of dog-training experience.
Impressive, yes, but his opponent in this training controversy is backed by big business, Hollywood celebrity and, even worse, some say, the power of charisma. Cesar Millan, a.k.a. the Dog Whisperer, has his own television series on the National Geographic Channel and is churning out a burgeoning enterprise of videos and books. The subject of a recent New Yorker profile by Malcolm Gladwell, Millan is often photographed on high-tech in-line skates, leading a pack of pit bulls, rottweilers and German shepherds. The sexy Millan's dog-handling credentials include an upbringing on a Mexican farm, an "uncanny gift for communicating with dogs" and his Dog Psychology Center in Los Angeles. There, with a pack of 50 dogs, he rehabilitates wayward canines.
Besides foreign roots, there is little these two men share, except, as Dunbar points out, the bedrock belief that all dogs can and should be trained.
If this were a dogfight, it would be the unlikely match between a pit bull and a border collie -- unlikely, because those who know dogs know the border collie would simply leave. In this case, however, those watching the fight keep pushing the smart dog back in the ring. Top dog trainers nationwide have expressed dismay that Millan is the current face of dog training, and most say that Dunbar should be the one with the empire. It's a perennial conflict in training discourse. Are results best achieved through rewarding good behavior or punishing bad?
Millan subscribes loosely to the idea of the pack, a dogs-as-wolves theory that had long ago fallen out of favor with many trainers. Touting dominance by pet owners, and the dictate to create "calm submission" in their charges, Millan says owners are essentially pack leaders. "I teach owners how to practice exercise, discipline and then affection, which allows dogs to be in a calm, submissive state," he explains when asked to clarify. "Most owners in America only practice affection, affection, affection, which does not create a balanced dog.
"Training," says Millan, "only teaches the dogs how to obey commands -- sit, roll over -- it does not have anything to do with dog psychology."
In his recent best-seller, "Cesar's Way," Millan writes that there are only two positions in a relationship, leader or follower. "I work with dogs all the time that are trained but not balanced." Included in Millan's repertoire is a snappy touch that he claims mimics a corrective response by pack leaders, "alpha rollovers" (forcibly making a dog show its belly), and submission to being rear sniffed.
"Never heard of that," says Dunbar when asked about bottom sniffing, but he is loath to completely discount Millan. Indeed, both trainers advocate any techniques that are humane and work for the dogs and the owner.
"He has nice dog skills, but from a scientific point of view, what he says is, well ... different," says Dunbar. "Heaven forbid if anyone else tries his methods, because a lot of what he does is not without danger." "Don't try this at home" messages are flashed throughout the show, and in September, the American Humane Association requested that the National Geographic Channel stop the show immediately, citing Millan's training tactics as "inhumane, outdated and improper."
Writer Mark Derr, in a recent New York Times editorial, went as far as to call Millan a "charming, one-man wrecking ball directed at 40 years of progress in understanding and shaping dog behavior."
Nicholas Dodman, program director for the Animal Behavior Clinic at the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University and author of "Dogs Behaving Badly," goes even further.
He calls Millan's techniques "abuse." A TV producer claiming his dog was injured while training at the Dog Psychology Center is reportedly suing Millan.
While distaste for Millan might be growing, Dunbar focuses on discounting the myths such training ideas foster. Dogs aren't wolves, Dunbar says, generations of evolution separate the two animals. "Learning from wolves to interact with pet dogs makes about as much sense as, 'I want to improve my parenting -- let's see how the chimps do it!' "
Dunbar claims compliance, the goal of all dog training, is most often achieved through positive training methods. His lure-reward methods -- using treats and praise -- have an even higher rate of success if there is puppy socialization.
Indeed, puppies put Dunbar on the dog-training track. In 1981, after buying an 8-week-old malamute, Dunbar sought a puppy class. He cast out as far as Sacramento and Carmel but came up with nothing.
At the time, common understanding was that dogs couldn't be trained until they were 5 or 6 months old, but from his studies, Dunbar knew dogs were learning behaviors long before that. Though his academic interest was in dog olfactory research and sexuality ("dog humping," he shorthands), Dunbar soon found himself venturing out of the ivory tower. He found that he enjoyed educating pet owners and began developing a training program using positive feedback, games and treats.
Sirius Dog Training, as Dunbar called it, showed proven positive results from early off-leash training. His classes, and the resulting video, were embraced by trainers and owners alike. Many say Sirius spurred the demise of punitive, punishment-based training that was the vogue after World War II. In 1993, Dunbar founded the Association of Pet Dog Trainers whose mission is to promote better training through education.
The return to dominance training such as Millan's, Dunbar says, is a disservice to dogs more than anything else. Though Millan gets results, Dunbar notes that most people don't have Millan's strength or skill, and even fewer keep dozens of dogs. "I teach methods that a supervised 4-year-old can use," Dunbar says. Having been called as a witness in high-profile Bay Area bite trials -- he was one of a team who evaluated one of the dogs involved in the deadly attack on Diane Whipple in 2001 -- he is all too familiar with the violent underbelly of dog aggression. Fear, he underscores, doesn't train a reliable dog.
Claudia Kawczynska, editor of Bark magazine, is one of Dunbar's many fans. "It's irritating to see Millan treated as the expert. Ian is an animal behaviorist with decades of experience," she says, "He should be where Millan is." Kawczynska likens the Millan cult of personality and popularity to the anti-science, anti-academic sentiment she sees prevalent in American culture and politics. "Millan lived on a farm, so what? He's good looking, but he's not smart about dogs. It seems people don't want their experts to be educated."
Dunbar refuses to comment on whether his lack of profile is due to his weighty credentials, though a Millan fan on Gladwell's blog says the backlash against the Dog Whisperer is "because Malcolm had written about the unschooled Millan rather than a string of PhDs that the average person has never heard of -- and never will."
Jean Donaldson, director of dog training at the SFSPCA and author of "Culture Clash," a book about the human-dog relationship, views the history of dog training in pre- and post-Dunbar eras. "Ian is the man," she says. "He revolutionized the field." She, too, thinks Millan is tapping into something deeper in the current culture -- and his machismo is only part of it. "It's a backlash against political correctness," she says. "People are angry and life is frustrating and [when] someone tells them it's all about dominating something smaller and weaker? They'll go for that."
"Dunbar puts training in the owner's hands," says Aishe Berger, co-owner of SF Puppy Prep, a puppy day care facility that promotes Dunbar's theory of early socialization. "His methods are based on science and learning theory, not the kind of 'magic' touted by the gurulike Millan."
But if the magic works, who wouldn't want magic?
There's the catch: Since Millan's program has gained popularity, Donaldson reports, the SPCA has been flooded with calls from confused and frustrated owners who want her to decipher -- and give them the scoop -- on Millan's "mysterious pinch."
Dr. Patricia McConnell, author of "For the Love of a Dog: Understanding Emotion in Your Best Friend" and the animal behaviorist on Animal Planet's "Petline," goes as far as to say that Millan has put dog training back 20 years. "Dunbar is a world authority," she says, "and he should be the one with the celebrity."
Dunbar doesn't argue with that. Though he hosted five years of a TV training show in England, "Dogs With Dunbar," Hollywood never bit on it, or on his other ideas, several of which are tinged with the odor of ever-popular reality TV. "Shelter Dog Makeover" ("We'd groom them, train them and find them a new home!") and "Train That Dog" (trainers compete to train a dog to do various tricks and obedience trials in the least amount of time) were two he thought most promising. Dunbar says Animal Planet mucky-mucks said they turned tail at his foreign accent, but he doubts that was the real truth. After all, the channel vaulted to popularity with hosts from Down Under.
As for books, of which he has sold hundreds of thousands, his first experience in publishing colored his view of New York representation. Dozens of publishers turned his first book down, but the one who finally came through soured him to New York publishing. He bemoans the editing that was done on his work, and the publishing experience itself disappointed him. The numbers of books sold, he said, never really added up to what was reported -- and what he knew himself had moved.
Some local experts lament Dunbar's failure to go mainstream, citing his unwillingness to lose control over every aspect of his work, including editing.
For himself, Dunbar has almost given up on the megamedia, though he says he could name 20 excellent and attractive trainers who could make a show fly. He's got other ideas. One groups experts from many fields -- a psychologist, a puppy trainer, a hostage negotiator and a grandmother with the wisdom of life experience -- who would be presented with a problem such as a husband who won't come home from the bar after work. Each expert would devise a plan and the favorite would be implemented on the show.
"All training is negotiation," Dunbar says, "whether you're training dogs or spouses." Indeed, a recent article in the New York Times titled "What Shamu Taught Me About a Happy Marriage" hit a nerve when the author, Amy Sutherland, who writes on exotic animal training, admitted using training techniques on her partner. Dunbar agrees with Sutherland's premise that training is training is training. "You can instill fear in your kids and get them to mind, but they won't function better in the world and your relationship will suffer greatly," he adds.
"Problems that need correcting are the thin end of the wedge," he says, "with dogs and people." It doesn't take much, he claims. A smile, a kind word. "You don't have to give M&M's all the time. People -- and dogs -- are dying to be trained."
Dunbar has a 23-year-old son, Jamie, a wooden dory river guide, with his first wife, Mimi, and says his family configuration is "very Berkeley" -- both his current wife (and former dog-sitter), Kelly Gorman, and his ex-wife are on friendly terms. Gorman, also a trainer and a founder of Open Paw, an international humane animal education program for pet owners and shelters, has done a good job of training him, he reports. Currently in the midst of giving up his much-loved cigars, Dunbar muses that Gorman is actually the better trainer of the pair. Two of the couple's three dogs are hers: Dune, an American bulldog, and Ollie, a rescue from Chicago Heights Humane Society. The third, Claude, a 110-pound rottweiler-coon-hound mix from the SFSPCA, is what Dunbar calls a "special needs" case. "We train him one day, and the next day we start over again. He's more than not bright."
Despite a lack of publicity, Dunbar's recent talk on dog aggression at a local bookstore brought out a full house of fans, many with pen and paper at the ready. With little sign of any training controversy, there is, however, evidence of Dunbar's status as local cult leader by the standing-room-only crowd.
During his hour long lecture, Dunbar explained the physiology of dog aggression in a way that showcased his British humor. He easily charmed the audience with jokes and witticisms; his dog impersonations, including a rear view, full-bottom wiggle, kept the audience enthralled and grinning. Though every move he made was carefully watched and met with nods of knowingness, at times he looked a tad silly. He giggled, he gushed and he panted. Having just returned from Tokyo, he contorted his face in an impersonation of a Japanese dachshund. Could an American TV audience have embraced this kind of goofiness?
At the end of the hour, Dunbar had to leave to get ready for yet another seminar, this time in the Midwest, one of the few left to which he has committed. With 850 full-day seminars behind him, Dunbar is winding down touring. He's considering living in southern France or traveling for pleasure, one of his passions. He's passing his baton to others who will no doubt continue the struggle over dog-training particulars. But without Dunbar's engagements to drive the sales of his training guides and videos, it's easy to imagine that flashier, more commercial materials will easily eat up his market. Whether those will reflect his ideas -- or Millan's -- it's hard to say.
At least half the audience still has questions for the expert, but despite raised hands, Dunbar uses the last minute to reiterate his training philosophy. "We need to thank our dogs for being good," he says, launching into a wrap-up more spiritual than practical. "Every morning I give thanks for waking up -- the alternative is not so good. Too often, we forget to be thankful." Clearly, he's from Berkeley, not Hollywood.
Ian Dunbar's been succeeding for 25 years with lure-reward dog training; how come he's been usurped by the flashy, aggressive TV host?
October 15, 2006
By Louise Rafkin
It's late afternoon at Point Isabel, prime time at the Bay Area's popular off-leash dog park, and the man some call the most innovative in the field of dog training weaves unnoticed through the two- and four-legged throngs. No one recognizes the slight, snow-haired man dressed in Berkeley-esque traveler's clothes (well-pocketed shirt and cargo pants) as Dr. Ian Dunbar, the man who wrote the book -- rather, six books -- on pet dog training and the guy who developed one of the earliest puppy-training courses in the country. Dunbar is 59, and though he's been away from his native England for decades (since 1971), he carries the air of an English gentleman. Occasionally British colloquialisms slip into conversation. "I was gob-smacked!" is how he explains his recent shock over a case of dog-owner ignorance.
With an eager border collie obsessively dropping a ball at his feet, Dunbar scans the Point Isabel regulars. It's hard to imagine he's not passing judgment on particular behaviors, but mostly he smiles at the four-legged passers-by. Thirty-five years of studying dogs has not dulled him to simple joys.
"Bay Area dogs are so cool, so friendly and polite," he says. When a brown fluff ball approaches jauntily and sniffs his pant leg, he genuinely gushes. "What a cute puppy!" Then an incessant barker demands attention. "We've heard," he says firmly to the lab. "Haven't you got anything else to say?"
Though they probably don't know it, Dunbar's training methodology has probably influenced the pet-owner relationship of almost everyone here at the park. He says he was the first to preach the once revolutionary idea of training puppies off leash (formerly only those six months and older were thought trainable) and also says he was the first to stuff food into a Kong (the conical shaped rubber chew toy and object of desire of most chewing-age puppies), thus saving table legs and Italian loafers worldwide. More important, his methods and theories have saved dogs' lives. Dog training is his passion, but it's not simply because he finds a well-trained pet a thing of beauty.
Training, he says, saves dogs' lives.
"Without training, the life of a puppy is predictable: chewing, soiling the house, digging up the garden, followed by a trip to the shelter where, if it's lucky, it gets another try," he says, wearily. "Without training, that dog will be dead in less than a year."
There is a quiet battle being fought in dog-training circles, and Dunbar, though he didn't pick the fight, represents one side. The mild, very mannered Dunbar is armed with degrees and scientific study: a veterinary degree and a Special Honors in physiology and biochemistry from the Royal Veterinary College of London University, a doctorate in animal behavior from the psychology department of UC Berkeley and a decade of research on the olfactory communication, social behavior and aggression in domestic dogs. All this, plus decades of dog-training experience.
Impressive, yes, but his opponent in this training controversy is backed by big business, Hollywood celebrity and, even worse, some say, the power of charisma. Cesar Millan, a.k.a. the Dog Whisperer, has his own television series on the National Geographic Channel and is churning out a burgeoning enterprise of videos and books. The subject of a recent New Yorker profile by Malcolm Gladwell, Millan is often photographed on high-tech in-line skates, leading a pack of pit bulls, rottweilers and German shepherds. The sexy Millan's dog-handling credentials include an upbringing on a Mexican farm, an "uncanny gift for communicating with dogs" and his Dog Psychology Center in Los Angeles. There, with a pack of 50 dogs, he rehabilitates wayward canines.
Besides foreign roots, there is little these two men share, except, as Dunbar points out, the bedrock belief that all dogs can and should be trained.
If this were a dogfight, it would be the unlikely match between a pit bull and a border collie -- unlikely, because those who know dogs know the border collie would simply leave. In this case, however, those watching the fight keep pushing the smart dog back in the ring. Top dog trainers nationwide have expressed dismay that Millan is the current face of dog training, and most say that Dunbar should be the one with the empire. It's a perennial conflict in training discourse. Are results best achieved through rewarding good behavior or punishing bad?
Millan subscribes loosely to the idea of the pack, a dogs-as-wolves theory that had long ago fallen out of favor with many trainers. Touting dominance by pet owners, and the dictate to create "calm submission" in their charges, Millan says owners are essentially pack leaders. "I teach owners how to practice exercise, discipline and then affection, which allows dogs to be in a calm, submissive state," he explains when asked to clarify. "Most owners in America only practice affection, affection, affection, which does not create a balanced dog.
"Training," says Millan, "only teaches the dogs how to obey commands -- sit, roll over -- it does not have anything to do with dog psychology."
In his recent best-seller, "Cesar's Way," Millan writes that there are only two positions in a relationship, leader or follower. "I work with dogs all the time that are trained but not balanced." Included in Millan's repertoire is a snappy touch that he claims mimics a corrective response by pack leaders, "alpha rollovers" (forcibly making a dog show its belly), and submission to being rear sniffed.
"Never heard of that," says Dunbar when asked about bottom sniffing, but he is loath to completely discount Millan. Indeed, both trainers advocate any techniques that are humane and work for the dogs and the owner.
"He has nice dog skills, but from a scientific point of view, what he says is, well ... different," says Dunbar. "Heaven forbid if anyone else tries his methods, because a lot of what he does is not without danger." "Don't try this at home" messages are flashed throughout the show, and in September, the American Humane Association requested that the National Geographic Channel stop the show immediately, citing Millan's training tactics as "inhumane, outdated and improper."
Writer Mark Derr, in a recent New York Times editorial, went as far as to call Millan a "charming, one-man wrecking ball directed at 40 years of progress in understanding and shaping dog behavior."
Nicholas Dodman, program director for the Animal Behavior Clinic at the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University and author of "Dogs Behaving Badly," goes even further.
He calls Millan's techniques "abuse." A TV producer claiming his dog was injured while training at the Dog Psychology Center is reportedly suing Millan.
While distaste for Millan might be growing, Dunbar focuses on discounting the myths such training ideas foster. Dogs aren't wolves, Dunbar says, generations of evolution separate the two animals. "Learning from wolves to interact with pet dogs makes about as much sense as, 'I want to improve my parenting -- let's see how the chimps do it!' "
Dunbar claims compliance, the goal of all dog training, is most often achieved through positive training methods. His lure-reward methods -- using treats and praise -- have an even higher rate of success if there is puppy socialization.
Indeed, puppies put Dunbar on the dog-training track. In 1981, after buying an 8-week-old malamute, Dunbar sought a puppy class. He cast out as far as Sacramento and Carmel but came up with nothing.
At the time, common understanding was that dogs couldn't be trained until they were 5 or 6 months old, but from his studies, Dunbar knew dogs were learning behaviors long before that. Though his academic interest was in dog olfactory research and sexuality ("dog humping," he shorthands), Dunbar soon found himself venturing out of the ivory tower. He found that he enjoyed educating pet owners and began developing a training program using positive feedback, games and treats.
Sirius Dog Training, as Dunbar called it, showed proven positive results from early off-leash training. His classes, and the resulting video, were embraced by trainers and owners alike. Many say Sirius spurred the demise of punitive, punishment-based training that was the vogue after World War II. In 1993, Dunbar founded the Association of Pet Dog Trainers whose mission is to promote better training through education.
The return to dominance training such as Millan's, Dunbar says, is a disservice to dogs more than anything else. Though Millan gets results, Dunbar notes that most people don't have Millan's strength or skill, and even fewer keep dozens of dogs. "I teach methods that a supervised 4-year-old can use," Dunbar says. Having been called as a witness in high-profile Bay Area bite trials -- he was one of a team who evaluated one of the dogs involved in the deadly attack on Diane Whipple in 2001 -- he is all too familiar with the violent underbelly of dog aggression. Fear, he underscores, doesn't train a reliable dog.
Claudia Kawczynska, editor of Bark magazine, is one of Dunbar's many fans. "It's irritating to see Millan treated as the expert. Ian is an animal behaviorist with decades of experience," she says, "He should be where Millan is." Kawczynska likens the Millan cult of personality and popularity to the anti-science, anti-academic sentiment she sees prevalent in American culture and politics. "Millan lived on a farm, so what? He's good looking, but he's not smart about dogs. It seems people don't want their experts to be educated."
Dunbar refuses to comment on whether his lack of profile is due to his weighty credentials, though a Millan fan on Gladwell's blog says the backlash against the Dog Whisperer is "because Malcolm had written about the unschooled Millan rather than a string of PhDs that the average person has never heard of -- and never will."
Jean Donaldson, director of dog training at the SFSPCA and author of "Culture Clash," a book about the human-dog relationship, views the history of dog training in pre- and post-Dunbar eras. "Ian is the man," she says. "He revolutionized the field." She, too, thinks Millan is tapping into something deeper in the current culture -- and his machismo is only part of it. "It's a backlash against political correctness," she says. "People are angry and life is frustrating and [when] someone tells them it's all about dominating something smaller and weaker? They'll go for that."
"Dunbar puts training in the owner's hands," says Aishe Berger, co-owner of SF Puppy Prep, a puppy day care facility that promotes Dunbar's theory of early socialization. "His methods are based on science and learning theory, not the kind of 'magic' touted by the gurulike Millan."
But if the magic works, who wouldn't want magic?
There's the catch: Since Millan's program has gained popularity, Donaldson reports, the SPCA has been flooded with calls from confused and frustrated owners who want her to decipher -- and give them the scoop -- on Millan's "mysterious pinch."
Dr. Patricia McConnell, author of "For the Love of a Dog: Understanding Emotion in Your Best Friend" and the animal behaviorist on Animal Planet's "Petline," goes as far as to say that Millan has put dog training back 20 years. "Dunbar is a world authority," she says, "and he should be the one with the celebrity."
Dunbar doesn't argue with that. Though he hosted five years of a TV training show in England, "Dogs With Dunbar," Hollywood never bit on it, or on his other ideas, several of which are tinged with the odor of ever-popular reality TV. "Shelter Dog Makeover" ("We'd groom them, train them and find them a new home!") and "Train That Dog" (trainers compete to train a dog to do various tricks and obedience trials in the least amount of time) were two he thought most promising. Dunbar says Animal Planet mucky-mucks said they turned tail at his foreign accent, but he doubts that was the real truth. After all, the channel vaulted to popularity with hosts from Down Under.
As for books, of which he has sold hundreds of thousands, his first experience in publishing colored his view of New York representation. Dozens of publishers turned his first book down, but the one who finally came through soured him to New York publishing. He bemoans the editing that was done on his work, and the publishing experience itself disappointed him. The numbers of books sold, he said, never really added up to what was reported -- and what he knew himself had moved.
Some local experts lament Dunbar's failure to go mainstream, citing his unwillingness to lose control over every aspect of his work, including editing.
For himself, Dunbar has almost given up on the megamedia, though he says he could name 20 excellent and attractive trainers who could make a show fly. He's got other ideas. One groups experts from many fields -- a psychologist, a puppy trainer, a hostage negotiator and a grandmother with the wisdom of life experience -- who would be presented with a problem such as a husband who won't come home from the bar after work. Each expert would devise a plan and the favorite would be implemented on the show.
"All training is negotiation," Dunbar says, "whether you're training dogs or spouses." Indeed, a recent article in the New York Times titled "What Shamu Taught Me About a Happy Marriage" hit a nerve when the author, Amy Sutherland, who writes on exotic animal training, admitted using training techniques on her partner. Dunbar agrees with Sutherland's premise that training is training is training. "You can instill fear in your kids and get them to mind, but they won't function better in the world and your relationship will suffer greatly," he adds.
"Problems that need correcting are the thin end of the wedge," he says, "with dogs and people." It doesn't take much, he claims. A smile, a kind word. "You don't have to give M&M's all the time. People -- and dogs -- are dying to be trained."
Dunbar has a 23-year-old son, Jamie, a wooden dory river guide, with his first wife, Mimi, and says his family configuration is "very Berkeley" -- both his current wife (and former dog-sitter), Kelly Gorman, and his ex-wife are on friendly terms. Gorman, also a trainer and a founder of Open Paw, an international humane animal education program for pet owners and shelters, has done a good job of training him, he reports. Currently in the midst of giving up his much-loved cigars, Dunbar muses that Gorman is actually the better trainer of the pair. Two of the couple's three dogs are hers: Dune, an American bulldog, and Ollie, a rescue from Chicago Heights Humane Society. The third, Claude, a 110-pound rottweiler-coon-hound mix from the SFSPCA, is what Dunbar calls a "special needs" case. "We train him one day, and the next day we start over again. He's more than not bright."
Despite a lack of publicity, Dunbar's recent talk on dog aggression at a local bookstore brought out a full house of fans, many with pen and paper at the ready. With little sign of any training controversy, there is, however, evidence of Dunbar's status as local cult leader by the standing-room-only crowd.
During his hour long lecture, Dunbar explained the physiology of dog aggression in a way that showcased his British humor. He easily charmed the audience with jokes and witticisms; his dog impersonations, including a rear view, full-bottom wiggle, kept the audience enthralled and grinning. Though every move he made was carefully watched and met with nods of knowingness, at times he looked a tad silly. He giggled, he gushed and he panted. Having just returned from Tokyo, he contorted his face in an impersonation of a Japanese dachshund. Could an American TV audience have embraced this kind of goofiness?
At the end of the hour, Dunbar had to leave to get ready for yet another seminar, this time in the Midwest, one of the few left to which he has committed. With 850 full-day seminars behind him, Dunbar is winding down touring. He's considering living in southern France or traveling for pleasure, one of his passions. He's passing his baton to others who will no doubt continue the struggle over dog-training particulars. But without Dunbar's engagements to drive the sales of his training guides and videos, it's easy to imagine that flashier, more commercial materials will easily eat up his market. Whether those will reflect his ideas -- or Millan's -- it's hard to say.
At least half the audience still has questions for the expert, but despite raised hands, Dunbar uses the last minute to reiterate his training philosophy. "We need to thank our dogs for being good," he says, launching into a wrap-up more spiritual than practical. "Every morning I give thanks for waking up -- the alternative is not so good. Too often, we forget to be thankful." Clearly, he's from Berkeley, not Hollywood.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
More on the Dog Whisperer.
Anyone wanting to see video footage of his methodology google search Cesar Milan For and Against - but beware, some of the footage will shock you!
Let me know what you think!
Cheers for now
Lou
Let me know what you think!
Cheers for now
Lou
BACK ON LINE
Hi Everyone,
After a frustrating month of having no real inernet, I am back up and running again. So Apologise to everyone for being so quiet!
Will be posting lots soooooonn
Cheers for now
Lou
After a frustrating month of having no real inernet, I am back up and running again. So Apologise to everyone for being so quiet!
Will be posting lots soooooonn
Cheers for now
Lou
Thursday, December 9, 2010
WHY I SHOULDNT WATCH NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC!
Hi Everyone!
There are some TV shows that I just shouldn’t watch! It is a miracle that I haven’t chucked a brick through my nice new big screen television yet! (Now that could be cause for a divorce – even after 35 years lol!)
After watching The Dog Whisperer on National Geographic yet again ........... I find myself in a bit of a quandary. I rarely comment on other trainers and even less on other behaviourists but in this case I feel I just have to make an exception!
Granted Cesar Milan is a great showman I will give him that! The tight T shirt showing bulging muscle and the snugly fitted jeans might well appeal to some younger woman, but it all leaves me cold! I look past the glitz and straight onto the dog’s body language and communication messages and what I see from observing the dogs on his show makes me very sad indeed.
To avoid conflict, dogs offer a wide variety of calming or appeasement signals that are clearly visible to any person who has worked with dogs – or should I qualify that to “any person who takes the time and trouble to be able to identify these signs or signals”. (Dogs have over 30 calming or appeasement signals that they use)
Milan has made catch phrases sound like pseudo-science. “Calm acceptance” is one of his favourites, after challenging/bulling and (sometimes physically) threatening dogs into total and absolute submission. Submission is not acceptance! Submission is an “avoidance” behaviour that animals use to avoid conflict –In most of the footage I have seen; the dogs initially try to frantically defuse Milan who appears to be oblivious of their message and communications. As previously mentioned, dogs have some 30 signals (body language and facial messages) that they use to calm or defuse potentially worrying or frightening situations. However it seems that Milan has not been informed of these basic dog communications!
Milan fails to read any of these messages, and pushes and continues to push most of the dogs seen on his show, to the point where they totally “shut down” – the light is on but no one is home! This is the most basic will to survive. Dogs at this stage are beyond even total submission – which is certainly not the same as acceptance. In most cases this is a temporary behaviour and not a lasting cure, and something I find highly distressing to view!
After viewing some horrific video footage on U Tube and other social networks I am horrified to say the least! Such bully tactics belong in our dark past.
A good site to view to see the truth is to Google search “Cesar Milan for and against” which shows some disturbing footage of what can only be described as abuse. A dogs being lifted into the air and strangled wearing a pinch collars, another dog being terrified by the use of an electric shock collar to the stage where it is hiding under a chair defecating and urinating in terror. No wonder some of them try to defend themselves! However, if they do try and defend themselves the abuse intensifies and you will see dogs thrown on their backs with Milan’s knee in their chest, threatening direct (terrifying)) eye contact to get them to “submit”. It must also be noted that dogs do not do this “forced roll over” to each other. In dogs, it is an “OFFERED BEHAVIOUR” not one achieved through brute force!!!
In my humble opinion – that is not training! Nor could that be considered rehabilitation or behaviour modification. I truly fail to understand why one species. that supposedly has a superior intellect would need to resort to such lengths.
Surely responsible television should be encouraging the public to use their superior intellect to solve problems – not muscle power.
Many unsuspecting owners have been badly injured from being told not to back down from a dog challenge. Taking on a challenge that you are not likely to win in my opinion is just plain stupid! Unless you are from Mexico and a self taught “expert” from being around dogs all your life! I have two children, and have been around them for the last 30 odd years, but this doesn’t make me a child psychologist!!!!
Milan is a “self taught” expert??? He has no academic qualifications. That is fact! There are many experts who are voicing their concern about some of his methods, and one article I recently read stated that “Milan has put positive reinforcement dog training back 20 years – back to the old dark ages”!
The pack theory that he constantly spouts about, has been scientifically proved to be nonsense years ago. Dogs are not wolves, their hierarchy is not ABCDEFG – rather they work TOGETHER for the good of the group, and some view certain things as being more valuable than others, this is also not set in stone, as each one is a total individual and each dog has a different value system.
Actually dominant or high ranking dogs don’t need to be aggressive, as every other dog defers to them. High ranking dogs are generally aloof and rather distant. In a group aggression is often seen in middle ranks. Lower ranks would not dare and higher ranks don’t need to be aggressive, so why do we as humans need to use aggression and bully tactics???? It doesn’t make any sense at all (apart from getting better TV ratings)!
Why do you think the show comes with a warning “Do not try this at home”???????? That to me should be the first clue. But still, the gullible public feed on it all and lap it up like mother’s milk, believing that there is a quick fix to each and every problem!
There is only one method shown on this TV show, and that method is flooding. Now in human terms if I am afraid of spiders, and you shove me in a room (or drag me around on a pinch/spike collar) in this room full of spiders – I really don’t think it will cure me. Eventually I would .............................. yes I would .............. SHUT DOWN as my mind attempts to protect me psychologically!
My last refuge of self preservation /survival is to .............SHUT DOWN!!!
What is very sad is that most aggressive dogs have huge fear issues – so technically Milan is punishing dogs for being fearful or for communicating that fear, which really doesn’t make any sense at all!
I now come to the issue of punishing dogs for growling – I love dogs that growl!!!! If they growl they are less likely to bite! Growling is a distance increasing message - It is a warning! The dog is saying “get out of my space – go away!”
If you punish the growl out of the dog he will most likely than go to the next level WHICH IS A BITE, so again, a dog who is growling should not be punished!
Of course the cause of the growl needs to be addressed – but the growl is a message that needs to be heard not punished! Again I remind you that most aggression is based in fear! Fearful dogs should not be punished; their confidence needs to be built up not punished into shutting down! The latter makes for a very unpredictable animal that is likely to one day attack with little provocation.
Personally I do not believe there is EVER a reason to use these forms of bully tactics.
After a recent workshop we held at Paws Abilities on calming signals and canine communications, a chap was describing the method (by his dog training instructor – not from my school!) he was told to use on a Labrador who did not come reliably when it was called.
He was told to go after it, and grab it by its ear and drag it back to the position where it was called. He was told it “must listen!” and must be punished for disobedience!
Several of our delegates appeared to be visibly shocked! One lady said “Even if it worked – which logically it would not – and she continued to explain "as if your dog was punished for coming to you why would it want to ever come to you again as you would have destroyed its trust and faith in you – but again even if it worked WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO DO SUCH A THING?? That to me was the sweetest thing I had heard in a long time! Blind obedience of the public toward some dog training instructors is also something I find rather disturbing. I frequently hear “but my trainer told me to .......” Don’t people have brains anymore??
Of course logically if a dog is rewarded for any behaviour he will most likely repeat it – and coming when called is no different! If a dog or any animal is successful in its aim (be it a game of ball, a treat / whatever turns the dog on) the dog will repeat the behaviour that got him what he wanted. Success breeds success! Limit the opportunity to fail so that your can have more opportunities to succeed and reward! Sounds really simple – the thing is – IT IS SIMPLE!
I will end with the sincere hope that most humans have the intelligence to be able to work out that to successfully train a dog, you need to develop a relationship of mutual trust and respect for each other. This should not be a relationship of master servant, but two species working together not against each other! This is only achieved by using our (supposedly) superior intellect – not our muscle power!
There are some TV shows that I just shouldn’t watch! It is a miracle that I haven’t chucked a brick through my nice new big screen television yet! (Now that could be cause for a divorce – even after 35 years lol!)
After watching The Dog Whisperer on National Geographic yet again ........... I find myself in a bit of a quandary. I rarely comment on other trainers and even less on other behaviourists but in this case I feel I just have to make an exception!
Granted Cesar Milan is a great showman I will give him that! The tight T shirt showing bulging muscle and the snugly fitted jeans might well appeal to some younger woman, but it all leaves me cold! I look past the glitz and straight onto the dog’s body language and communication messages and what I see from observing the dogs on his show makes me very sad indeed.
To avoid conflict, dogs offer a wide variety of calming or appeasement signals that are clearly visible to any person who has worked with dogs – or should I qualify that to “any person who takes the time and trouble to be able to identify these signs or signals”. (Dogs have over 30 calming or appeasement signals that they use)
Milan has made catch phrases sound like pseudo-science. “Calm acceptance” is one of his favourites, after challenging/bulling and (sometimes physically) threatening dogs into total and absolute submission. Submission is not acceptance! Submission is an “avoidance” behaviour that animals use to avoid conflict –In most of the footage I have seen; the dogs initially try to frantically defuse Milan who appears to be oblivious of their message and communications. As previously mentioned, dogs have some 30 signals (body language and facial messages) that they use to calm or defuse potentially worrying or frightening situations. However it seems that Milan has not been informed of these basic dog communications!
Milan fails to read any of these messages, and pushes and continues to push most of the dogs seen on his show, to the point where they totally “shut down” – the light is on but no one is home! This is the most basic will to survive. Dogs at this stage are beyond even total submission – which is certainly not the same as acceptance. In most cases this is a temporary behaviour and not a lasting cure, and something I find highly distressing to view!
After viewing some horrific video footage on U Tube and other social networks I am horrified to say the least! Such bully tactics belong in our dark past.
A good site to view to see the truth is to Google search “Cesar Milan for and against” which shows some disturbing footage of what can only be described as abuse. A dogs being lifted into the air and strangled wearing a pinch collars, another dog being terrified by the use of an electric shock collar to the stage where it is hiding under a chair defecating and urinating in terror. No wonder some of them try to defend themselves! However, if they do try and defend themselves the abuse intensifies and you will see dogs thrown on their backs with Milan’s knee in their chest, threatening direct (terrifying)) eye contact to get them to “submit”. It must also be noted that dogs do not do this “forced roll over” to each other. In dogs, it is an “OFFERED BEHAVIOUR” not one achieved through brute force!!!
In my humble opinion – that is not training! Nor could that be considered rehabilitation or behaviour modification. I truly fail to understand why one species. that supposedly has a superior intellect would need to resort to such lengths.
Surely responsible television should be encouraging the public to use their superior intellect to solve problems – not muscle power.
Many unsuspecting owners have been badly injured from being told not to back down from a dog challenge. Taking on a challenge that you are not likely to win in my opinion is just plain stupid! Unless you are from Mexico and a self taught “expert” from being around dogs all your life! I have two children, and have been around them for the last 30 odd years, but this doesn’t make me a child psychologist!!!!
Milan is a “self taught” expert??? He has no academic qualifications. That is fact! There are many experts who are voicing their concern about some of his methods, and one article I recently read stated that “Milan has put positive reinforcement dog training back 20 years – back to the old dark ages”!
The pack theory that he constantly spouts about, has been scientifically proved to be nonsense years ago. Dogs are not wolves, their hierarchy is not ABCDEFG – rather they work TOGETHER for the good of the group, and some view certain things as being more valuable than others, this is also not set in stone, as each one is a total individual and each dog has a different value system.
Actually dominant or high ranking dogs don’t need to be aggressive, as every other dog defers to them. High ranking dogs are generally aloof and rather distant. In a group aggression is often seen in middle ranks. Lower ranks would not dare and higher ranks don’t need to be aggressive, so why do we as humans need to use aggression and bully tactics???? It doesn’t make any sense at all (apart from getting better TV ratings)!
Why do you think the show comes with a warning “Do not try this at home”???????? That to me should be the first clue. But still, the gullible public feed on it all and lap it up like mother’s milk, believing that there is a quick fix to each and every problem!
There is only one method shown on this TV show, and that method is flooding. Now in human terms if I am afraid of spiders, and you shove me in a room (or drag me around on a pinch/spike collar) in this room full of spiders – I really don’t think it will cure me. Eventually I would .............................. yes I would .............. SHUT DOWN as my mind attempts to protect me psychologically!
My last refuge of self preservation /survival is to .............SHUT DOWN!!!
What is very sad is that most aggressive dogs have huge fear issues – so technically Milan is punishing dogs for being fearful or for communicating that fear, which really doesn’t make any sense at all!
I now come to the issue of punishing dogs for growling – I love dogs that growl!!!! If they growl they are less likely to bite! Growling is a distance increasing message - It is a warning! The dog is saying “get out of my space – go away!”
If you punish the growl out of the dog he will most likely than go to the next level WHICH IS A BITE, so again, a dog who is growling should not be punished!
Of course the cause of the growl needs to be addressed – but the growl is a message that needs to be heard not punished! Again I remind you that most aggression is based in fear! Fearful dogs should not be punished; their confidence needs to be built up not punished into shutting down! The latter makes for a very unpredictable animal that is likely to one day attack with little provocation.
Personally I do not believe there is EVER a reason to use these forms of bully tactics.
After a recent workshop we held at Paws Abilities on calming signals and canine communications, a chap was describing the method (by his dog training instructor – not from my school!) he was told to use on a Labrador who did not come reliably when it was called.
He was told to go after it, and grab it by its ear and drag it back to the position where it was called. He was told it “must listen!” and must be punished for disobedience!
Several of our delegates appeared to be visibly shocked! One lady said “Even if it worked – which logically it would not – and she continued to explain "as if your dog was punished for coming to you why would it want to ever come to you again as you would have destroyed its trust and faith in you – but again even if it worked WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO DO SUCH A THING?? That to me was the sweetest thing I had heard in a long time! Blind obedience of the public toward some dog training instructors is also something I find rather disturbing. I frequently hear “but my trainer told me to .......” Don’t people have brains anymore??
Of course logically if a dog is rewarded for any behaviour he will most likely repeat it – and coming when called is no different! If a dog or any animal is successful in its aim (be it a game of ball, a treat / whatever turns the dog on) the dog will repeat the behaviour that got him what he wanted. Success breeds success! Limit the opportunity to fail so that your can have more opportunities to succeed and reward! Sounds really simple – the thing is – IT IS SIMPLE!
I will end with the sincere hope that most humans have the intelligence to be able to work out that to successfully train a dog, you need to develop a relationship of mutual trust and respect for each other. This should not be a relationship of master servant, but two species working together not against each other! This is only achieved by using our (supposedly) superior intellect – not our muscle power!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)