Cesar Millan

[Erny]

Just in case you're mistaken, TonyMc ...... I'm not "excited" over CM in the ways some of the girls have expressed here (and in the general forum). I'd hate for rumours to start ....................

His experiences with and knowledge of dogs certainly interest me though. ;)

[Tonymc]

Erny,erny,erny how could I think such a thing of you!!!LOL Was it not just last week when I saw you in the Church Choir?

Erny you and Cesar are both Mexicans anyway.You know the Habit us New South Wales Men have of calling everbody south of the Border a Mexican. Tony

[Erny]

Erny,erny,erny how could I think such a thing of you!!!LOL Was it not just last week when I saw you in the Church Choir?

Hhhhhmmmm ............ now there's another socialisation idea.

[Cosmolo]

Sorry, i think i have confused everyone. Thats what happens when your posting on DOL as you are rushing out the door

Georgie the dog in question has improved significantly since we have had her. What i think is that before we got her, when others were trying to 'desensitise' her, they didn't realise that flooding was in fact taking place and, when they removed her still displaying significant fear responses, they sensitised her to the stimulus.

When we got her, i am suggesting that due to the high levels of fear experienced, flooding was our only option, as there was no distance great enough that would significantly decrease her fear without also lessening or eliminating her awareness of the stimulus. Also because critical distance was breached so regularly in the home, flooding was taking place even though it was not our deliberate intention. We did, however recognise that flooding was occurring and behave appropriately to ensure we too, did not continue the sensitisation process.

Does that make more sense? Sorry in advance if its not, its late and been a long day!

[Red Mal]

Erny, thanks for that I spent a lot of time reading through these posts.

Just out of interest, what do you guys think of trainers like Jan Fennel and Monty Roberts ??? Do you view their training methods as flooding .....i.e, Monty forcing a wild Horse to wear a saddle within a small time frame etc ?

Understanding the true meaning of flooding, it seems that there are many trainers that do this, and again, we never actually get to see the whole picture, just what they want us to see.

I also find it interesting that these types of trainers are ones that have admittedly been doing it for many, many years. Where are all the non flooding trainers ??? Are they yesterday's methods ??

Does this mean, because it only seems that outwardly the most successful trainers are ones that flood, that this is the way forward in the world of training (dogs or horses etc) ???

These are not my opinions by the way, just a thought, what do you think ??

[SueM]

I find some of Cms methods great and some downright weird did anyone see the Vizla episode he had one end of the lead attached to the dogs tail to hold it up

Edited July 13, 2007 by varicool

[Erny]

Just out of interest, what do you guys think of trainers like Jan Fennel and Monty Roberts ??? Do you view their training methods as flooding .....i.e, Monty forcing a wild Horse to wear a saddle within a small time frame etc ?

I have much respect for Monty Tom Roberts - although it was many many years ago that I read his works and this was way before I developed the understanding of animals (mainly dogs) as I do now. I confess that I would need to re-visit his literature to refresh my memory. Jan Fennel - SOME of what she does/says is ok, but I recall reading her book and disagreeing with some aspects. Again - I'd need to re-read to isolate and reference to them here. But like anything - there will always be trainers who have different preferences for different reasons. Learning of these different ways and being able to reference back to them when needed for individual dogs with individual issues is a good thing. Doesn't mean you have to use the method. Doesn't mean the method will be right for a specific dog. But in some cases it might be and you should - provided you understand the dog well enough to safely apply it.

Understanding the true meaning of flooding, it seems that there are many trainers that do this, and again, we never actually get to see the whole picture, just what they want us to see. I also find it interesting that these types of trainers are ones that have admittedly been doing it for many, many years. Where are all the non flooding trainers ??? Are they yesterday's methods ?? Does this mean, because it only seems that outwardly the most successful trainers are ones that flood, that this is the way forward in the world of training (dogs or horses etc) ???

As has been mentioned, "flooding" (in its truest sense) can be a precarious technique and not one for the faint-hearted, nor for one who isn't completely certain of the dog or what they are doing. The level of the dog's fear to a stimulus also needs to be measured/taken into account (IMO) before anyone can or should determine whether the flooding technique carries a good liklihood for success. The risk of permanent neurological damage also needs to be taken into account. Desensitisation is slower but safer - less liklihood of grave error and therefore a method that the general dog handler and trainer can apply without the sort of risk that is involved in "flooding".

Flooding (in its truest sense) is only one part of behaviour modification. Generally, because most issues dogs develop are the result of what we have done in the past, the first step is changing what we do and the way we do it. Your statement confuses me a little, but if you are suggesting that the successful trainers are those who flood so therefore to be successful one needs to implement the flooding technique, then no, I disagree and I would caution anyone against applying this technique without really knowing and without tonnes of understanding for what they are doing. The term "Flooding" IMO also shouldn't be watered down - if it is, people will use it haphazardly and without the thought, planning, observation and experience that the method requires and deserves.

Edited - I'm thinking of Tom Roberts - sorry for the confusion. It is some 35+ years since I read his works. But you remind me it is about time that I return there again. I prefer to 'gentle' an animal at its first introduction to anything foreign.

Edited July 14, 2007 by Erny

[Red Mal]

Erny, thanks for your responses, interesting.

By my statement I didn't mean that only flooding would make you a success, I simply meant that it only seems that the trainers who use flooding are the only ones who ever gain any recognition, whether it be on TV/Media or known worldwide. Trainers that dont use flooding seem to be fading into the background and are never heard of.

Here in the UK, we had an elderly horse/dog trainer many years ago, (she died in 1988) and her methods could have been described as flooding and she received much critisism for it at the time. She was a huge influence in dog training and known Nationally. Her books are still bought to this day. It's only been in recent years that people have gone back to her methods with great success. No one was as successful as her until Jan Fennel came along and who also uses some of her methods.

So, I guess what I am saying is, is flooding the new trend for training, as it only seems that people that use flooding are the most successful ??

I used Monty as an example because most people take many months to successfully and safely break in a horse, whereas Monty took a wild horse and had it saddled up within hours. This of course was due to his understanding of horses and their behaviour. If Cesar Milan adn other trainers have the same understanding of dogs, is flooding then the desired and most appropriate technique among those who understand these animals the best ???

[Erny]

Red Mal ...... I think you'll find it is the trainers who emit "leadership" through every pore of their body who are the ones who are recognised as successful. Naturally, that - coupled with a stack of methods in their tool box.

When it comes to understanding why TV programs chose certain trainers? In some cases, it might be about the sensationalism the trainers provide. In some other cases, it's about the "touchy feely" aspect that people enjoy and so the ratings are good, although I agree that these ones do seem to be short-lived. And of course there are other cases where the 'Star' carries some sex appeal (and going by some of the reactions I've read here on DOL, this seems to be the case for the little Mexican ). Remember that, from a TV's pov, they want to target as many people as they can - not necessarily just those who sport an interest in dogs. So their rationale is likely to come from "entertainment" pov rather than intentionally focussed on real and good education - although when there is some of that contained in the segment, it does have the potential to be helpful.

There are many fantastic and successful trainers who are not on the TV screen. I don't use their appearance (or not) on "TV" to measure their success, capabilities or qualities.

Edited July 14, 2007 by Erny

[The Spotted Devil]

I haven't had the opportunity to view CM in action (no pay TV for a start ) but was a little concerned when a novice (IMO) puppy owner decided to copy his technique. When the owner's young puppy (no more than 12 weeks) would not stop mouthing he performed an 'alpha roll' on it - just like CM apparently. This he did repeatedly - some of the behaviour the puppy then exhibited (as described by the owner) really concerned me - the owner thought it was a fabulous success because the puppy stopped biting. I tried explaining alternative approaches but they weren't interested.

So, I don't know whether CM actually performed this or the owner simply took it out of context (anyone?) But, these 'quick fixes' on TV concern me as people really think they can suddenly have a well-behaved puppy/dog without putting in many hours of hard work. I'm not talking about the average DOLer either - it's the people who watch a 5 minute cure and decide they don't need a behaviourist or puppy training school because the "expert" has spoken.

Just my thoughts.

[Kelpie-i]

Red Mal, I think also the reason you see many trainers on TV using this technique is because flooding is quick therefore making it easier to show results on TV, whereas desensitisation is slow and can take many weeks/months therefore does not make good TV as you cannot show the results in a half hour program. I wouldn't say that flooding is the new trend as it has been around for ages. The trend is certainly shifting towards "positive" style training and due to this, IMO, desensitisation is the more preferred method.

The Spotted Devil, unfortunately the alpha role is very much a primitive technique and one that can cause much angst to the dog, however some people still use it with some success. Personally, it is not one of my favourites!

So, I don't know whether CM actually performed this or the owner simply took it out of context (anyone?) But, these 'quick fixes' on TV concern me as people really think they can suddenly have a well-behaved puppy/dog without putting in many hours of hard work

This is my concern when showing these sorts of methods on TV and yes, CM uses a technique similar to the alpha roll - he mainly lies the dog down on its side and holds it there until it "surrenders". I think Cosmolo mentioned an episode where he was bitten 3 times by a dog which proves just how dangerous this technique can be....and he's an expert....imagine the average Joe applying this!!

I still do enjoy watching his program, however, as he certainly provides useful information, I especially like his "pack therapy" which is sensational. I would love to own as many dogs as he does and apply this type of therapy to dog-aggressive dogs.

I did read an interesting article about a "cat fight" going on between CM and Ian Dunbar, not sure who wrote the article but was very interesting. Here's the Link to the article.

[The Spotted Devil]

Thanks for the link Kelpie-i It makes for very interesting reading. As someone who uses a scientific approach to animal behaviour/welfare, I found this comment quite pertinent although, as I said, I haven't seen any of CM's work:

"He has nice dog skills, but from a scientific point of view, what he says is, well ... different," says Dunbar.

OT: Why do people so often think that all an animal needs is a "quick fix" ?????

ETA: When Zig was younger we met another puppy owner in the street. We were discussing the personalities of our respective puppies - my lad is very, very bold and persistent. Puppy owner suggested I use the alpha role on him as that's what his breed club told him to do with his pup. Thanks, but no thanks, I said....I'd prefer my pup to trust me and respect me....with consistent, calm training we're on our way....although sometimes of course I feel like throttling the little rascal!

Edited July 14, 2007 by The Spotted Devil

[Erny]

The trend is certainly shifting towards "positive" style training ...

Do you think so, Kelpie-i? I'm beginning to identify that more people are opening their eyes and minds to the benefits of a 'balanced' form of training. IE Positive where positive will work efficiently and economically and Negative where required depending on what's required and why. But then my contact or opportunity to view the trends of people is a minority to the whole, so I might not be getting the true picture.

Sorry ..... this thread is weaving off-topic somewhat.

Edited July 14, 2007 by Erny

[Kelpie-i]

Yes I most certainly think the trend is leaning towards "positive" training......"Positive reinforcement methods" seems to be the buzz word these days with many trainers/training organisations claiming this is the only method they use....as seen on their advertisements.

I personally would like to see more "balanced" trainers but perhaps we'll just have to wait our turn for that

Sorry...OT!!

[Kaz]

I went to puppy preschool with one of my dogs - the main aim was to socialise.

One of the puppys' owners was discussing a dominance issue concerning another dog and the puppy school trainer was quite irate when she said

"We do not use the 'D' word here!"

She must have been all of 23 years old and it occured to me to wonder how she would go about handling a dog aggressive rottweiler or dane with that perspective

[Red Mal]

Thanks guys for the input

Great stuff to ponder on and take in.

Kelpie, I agree, I think part of the problem, is owners wanting a quick fix, as they dont have the time to train their dogs in the methods we prefer. Our society demands that we do everything the quick way with maximum effect. I 'Want it NOW' attitude, so trainers are jumping on the opportunity to show how quick they can succeed, regardless of the long term effects.

Erny I agree, TV is all about being aesthetically pleasing, a the 'lil Mexican' is no different , although I have to say you wouldn't say that if you saw a picture of the elderly trainer I mentioned earlier....Barbara Woodhouse .....LOL

I havn't read the link yet, but I will do now, I know Mr Dunbar is very well respected.

It's great having this discussion and bouncing ideas around. Makes you think about much more

Edited July 14, 2007 by Red Mal

[Erny]

Kelpie, I agree, I think part of the problem, is owners wanting a quick fix, as they dont have the time to train their dogs in the methods we prefer.

Not arguing with the statement above, but to add balance to it - there are times when a 'quicker fix' than what 'positive only' methods would provide IS required. For the owners' sake and relative safety. For the community's sake and relative safety. And often times for the dog's sake and relative safety.

Edited July 14, 2007 by Erny

[Red Mal]

Kelpie, I agree, I think part of the problem, is owners wanting a quick fix, as they dont have the time to train their dogs in the methods we prefer.

Not arguing with the statement above, but to add balance to it - there are times when a 'quicker fix' than what 'positive only' methods would provide IS required. For the owners' sake and relative safety. For the community's sake and relative safety. And often times for the dog's sake and relative safety.

I totally agree Erny. I just think there are too many people these days that want a quick fix when it's not necessary, but their own lifestyle demands that it be done sooner, to please them, as apposed the dog

[Erny]

Agreed, RedMal ..... We humans are usually the cause, but we don't want to change what we do so that the cause may be removed. Nor do we want to make the effort to undo the behaviours we have instilled in our pet. Yet we want the dog to behave differently.

Calling all trainers .................... magic wands at the ready.

Sorry LL. Have really taken your thread .

I will refrain.

If I can.

Hopefully.

ETA: I speak generally. There are a good number of my clients and clients of others' whom I know, who want to and do make a tremendous effort to rehabilitate their dogs.

Edited July 14, 2007 by Erny

[Lowchenlove]

Barbera Woodhouse - now there is a name that takes me back..................................

Am I imagining it or did she advocate smacking a dog on its nose?

I was only young when I watched her but she scared the stuffing out of me.