# A kinder, gentler Caesar Milan?



## goodgirl (Jan 14, 2013)

I recently watched a couple-three episodes of the dog whisperer because I wanted to see the dogs' calming signals and body language. I was so surprised! He was using treats! Not a lot, but by golly, real treats!

Tonight, he had someone's german sheppard going to a different trainer (named O.J.) after his initial assessment. O.J. looked to be using positive reinforcement - treats AND toys! And getting good results.

Who says you can't teach an old dog yada, yada...ha!


----------



## hanksimon (Mar 18, 2009)

CM is not the evil spawn of the devil, he has just been caught using outdated methods that most trainers stopped using 30 years ago. And his current methods aren't appropriate for most people to use, because they can be fairly dangerous.

However, he does love dogs, he seems to have a reasonable understanding, and he has some great general advice ... not always put into modern, scientifically accurate terms [ dominance has been debunked! ]. If you read his book in order, you can see how he continues to learn from other experts.... Maybe he's paid attention to Dunbar and Bailey?


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

When he stops referring to resource guarding as "food aggression" and "curing" it by getting in dogs' faces and pestering them while they eat, then we can talk. Oh, and when he finally admits that dominance between dogs and humans is not a thing.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Yeah I will never think he is a horrible intentionally cruel person he has a pack of dogs, heck he even bought land & constructed a ranch AROUND THEIR needs & such so he can't be all bad ... From what I have seen of that place it's pretty nice


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

I don't know, I don't think he's a super villan but I don't think he's any sort of outstanding citizen. I'm glad he advocates for Pits and causes but I'd prefer he just do THAT and not "train" any dogs ever.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

I used to get that channel that had dog whisperer on it havent seen it in awhile-- Its just that theres not a whole lot out there on TV that shows a trainer taking time with people and their dogs, working to help them. I guess I never noticed he didnt use treats..... I do like that he has a whole pack of like 100 dogs he built a compound for and is caring for-- I dont think he abusing them, and do believe that he does love dogs....


----------



## goodgirl (Jan 14, 2013)

Wow, had no idea he keeps that many dogs, that's pretty nice to give a home to so many. Bet there are a lot of dogs still alive that would be dead if not for his rehabilitation efforts.

There are quite a few negative comments about him posted here and there. I hadn't seen his show for a few months, really since before I started reading about other methods of training. And I noticed some changes and thought it was interesting. Guess maybe everyone learns new tricks as they go thru life. 

Come to think of it, I do remember him giving treats of some kind of takeout food before...once!


----------



## Poly (Sep 19, 2007)

I don't get hung up on words - not from CM or from anybody else. I'm much more concerned about what they *do*. I think I am intelligent enough to understand what people are getting at _if I can see them doing it_ no matter what words they may use. Of course, if I can't see them, then I must rely on their words. 

The problem with the "new CM" is that what he does relies *a lot* on his admittedly very good understanding of dog movements and body language. That's a really hard thing to communicate to other people, however, even those with a lot of experience and even with the help of a video, because the whole context is important. So I'm afraid that due to the language he still uses and the small snippets that we see on TV , many people will still misuse what he is doing even with the changes he has made in his overall approach.

If you boil it down to the essentials, most of what CM does is what dog trainers have been doing since dog training started. We now have the benefit of advances in learning theory, so we have the opportunity of trying new approaches or at least, we can have a deeper understanding of the approaches we are using.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

dogdragoness said:


> Yeah I will never think he is a horrible intentionally cruel person he has a pack of dogs, heck he even bought land & constructed a ranch AROUND THEIR needs & such so he can't be all bad ... From what I have seen of that place it's pretty nice


Except that actual people who have been there have reported things like heavy shock collar usage. Don't believe everything you see on TV.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Poly said:


> The problem with the "new CM" is that what he does relies *a lot* on his admittedly very good understanding of dog movements and body language. That's a really hard thing to communicate to other people, however, even those with a lot of experience and even with the help of a video, because the whole context is important. So I'm afraid that due to the language he still uses and the small snippets that we see on TV , many people will still misuse what he is doing even with the changes he has made in his overall approach.


The "new" CM, completely misreading a resource guarder:






An expert's analysis of CM's methods in this video.

One woman's experience with leaving her dog at the compound.

A person who discusses the positives and negatives of Cesar's approach.

A follow-up video of Holly:






In this, he talks about the dog dominating the bowl (around 4:45 in). He won't let Holly eat without messing with her. He calls her "dog food aggressive" rather than a resource guarder, and jerks her away from the food rather than playing trading games (which work to CURE resource guarding). And if you watch his pit bull, that dog seems very unsure around him (it even goes belly-up at one point, around 2:30 in, when Cesar gets annoyed at it for trying to play). Almost all of the dogs are throwing out appeasement behaviors galore -- they're nervous around this guy (especially the pit and that scruffy guy Cesar tries to play with at 6:17). This is a man who does not understand dogs' signals half as well as he thinks he does.


----------



## AlishaT (Apr 18, 2013)

I know that I am new here but since I am training a new puppy I have also been watching his show on Netflix and reading his books etc. I have thought about his methods and wondered if the idea of having them be treated only as the dogs they are and not like "people" is the best method. I think he really does love dogs and for sure he is doing wonderful things but does it have to be so harsh? Can't a dog without any problems be just fine as being another loved member of a family? I realize I need to be in charge just the same as I need to be in charge of my kids, (not that I always am), but I don't like the idea of domination either. I would like to know, can't there be a happy medium?


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Yes. You may enjoy Nothing In Life Is Free. Here's a good article, too: Enforcing vs. Reinforcing – Reflections on Leadership and Dogs.

Also, keep in mind that "positive" does not mean "permissive." Positive training is still training. Positive trainers treat their dogs like dogs, not like people (although the techniques used can train anything from a mouse to a whale to a human). A positive trainer is a leader to his or her dog, showing the dog what he or she wants it to do instead of punishing it for doing things it shouldn't do.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Crantastic said:


> The "new" CM, completely misreading a resource guarder:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well all I can say is.. I was thinking.... what kinda "______" gets a Fila (forgot about that breed actually) in a suburb of LA-- am pretty impressed that she ended up moving to Brazil to live on a farm with Filas... Now THAT is a true dog person....
(cant watch videos cause my plug ins have expired.... but I did read that 2nd story ..)..


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

Yeah if there was a "who is the best at reading dog body language and behavior" contest between CM and a blind Parakeet, my money would be on the bird.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Meh ... anyone can misread a dog, everyone has done it & dogs can throw mixed signals sometimes as well as the human/dog factor can mean miscomunication.

Also... I have to confess ... I mostly dont watch DW for dog training advice ... I watch it because ... well ... I think CM is kinda cute. Soooo basically I watch it for the same reason I watch TWD ... which I watch because I think Daryl is cute  

*dodges rotten tomatoes*.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

dogdragoness said:


> Also... I have to confess ... I mostly dont watch DW for dog training advice ... I watch it because ... well ... I think CM is kinda cute. Soooo basically I watch it for the same reason I watch TWD ... which I watch because I think Daryl is cute
> 
> *dodges rotten tomatoes*.


HAHAAHA too funny... sometimes a TV show IS just a TV show! Thats why he is so Popular! I can see that!


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

dogdragoness said:


> Meh ... anyone can misread a dog, everyone has done it & dogs can throw mixed signals sometimes as well as the human/dog factor can mean miscomunication.


Did you watch the videos I posted? No mixed signals there. I'm definitely no dog body language expert, but I know enough that I would not have gotten in that dog's face.

Also, it's fine to make mistakes. We all do. But the difference is that he's putting his mistakes on TV, scoring them with dramatic music, and _never admitting that they were mistakes_.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

dogdragoness said:


> Meh ... anyone can misread a dog, everyone has done it & dogs can throw mixed signals sometimes as well as the human/dog factor can mean miscomunication.
> 
> Also... I have to confess ... I mostly dont watch DW for dog training advice ... I watch it because ... well ... I think CM is kinda cute. Soooo basically I watch it for the same reason I watch TWD ... which I watch because I think Daryl is cute
> 
> *dodges rotten tomatoes*.


CM and his followers do not think his complete inability to read a dog is a mistake. They think they're right. He doesn't have the slightest idea of what he is looking at in the first place let alone figure out what the dog is saying.


----------



## Kyllobernese (Feb 5, 2008)

A couple of the episodes I have seen in the last month or so, I am sure they have a shock collar on. One dog that was barking at the glass door, he had a scarf on it and I could be wrong but sure looked like a e-collar underneath it and also the reaction of the dog sure looked like one that was being zapped. I just thought it strange that it had a scarf on while he was working on it but did not have it on when he arrived.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

AlishaT said:


> I know that I am new here but since I am training a new puppy I have also been watching his show on Netflix and reading his books etc. I have thought about his methods and wondered if the idea of having them be treated only as the dogs they are and not like "people" is the best method. I think he really does love dogs and for sure he is doing wonderful things but does it have to be so harsh? Can't a dog without any problems be just fine as being another loved member of a family? I realize I need to be in charge just the same as I need to be in charge of my kids, (not that I always am), but I don't like the idea of domination either. I would like to know, can't there be a happy medium?


The problem is, you have an odd view of what positive training is. I don't treat my dog as anything other than a dog. He gets tons of exercise, I am calm and confident with him and he does live under a set of rules. As does everyone in the house. I don't allow people in the house to just run into the bathroom while I'm using it, and I don't allow the dog to grab whatever he wants off my plate.

But I don't use any punishments at all. I don't even say no. I use the power of positive training to teach my dog how I want him to act (the rules, in other words) and he acts that way. It is far, far easier to teach a dog what you want them to do than all the things you don't want. It's easier on the dog, too. 

So, no, there isn't a happy medium between punishing and positive reinforcement, because there doesn't have to be. Using PR properly creates a well trained dog who obeys whatever rules you want them to obey. (And you don't have to walk in front of your dog or keep him off the couch or eat first. That's all nonsense. Do whatever you want.)


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

PR works pretty good with people, too. My kids behave because they want to, because they know behaving means they get to do more fun stuff and it makes us happy and proud of them. I come across people all the time who tell me I can't parent without spanking or hitting my kids or they won't be well-behaved...while their kids are running wild and mine are quietly behaving. Similarly, you have workplaces where the only time you get noticed by management is when you mess up...very quickly you see employees there start to do the bare minimum not to get in trouble, but not go out of their way to do more. Contrast that with workplaces where good performance is recognized and rewarded, where employees are motivated to work harder to earn that reward. Which would you rather work in?

It seems like our society as a whole is focused very strongly on punishment as being the only real way to motivate people or animals with a high degree of fear that if you do not punish regularly that all hell will break loose. I like my home to be a refuge from that mentality.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

dogdragoness said:


> Meh ... anyone can misread a dog, everyone has done it & dogs can throw mixed signals sometimes as well as the human/dog factor can mean miscomunication.


I don't believe dogs send mixed signals. A "mixed signal", imo, is one signal = I don't know what's going on/I'm uncertain.

They know to speak their language. Do we know how to interpret it?


----------



## goodgirl (Jan 14, 2013)

I wonder if people have contacted NatGeo with requests to replace "The Dog Whisperer" with something more positive? We should start a petition! I would LOVE to see a show offering different methods. Maybe one of the experienced trainers on this forum could become a TV personality!


----------



## Flaming (Feb 2, 2013)

goodgirl said:


> I wonder if people have contacted NatGeo with requests to replace "The Dog Whisperer" with something more positive? We should start a petition! I would LOVE to see a show offering different methods. Maybe one of the experienced trainers on this forum could become a TV personality!


Replace him with kikopup, set an excellent example that works.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Problem is, good training is boring . No dramatic music, no physical altercations, no bites. . .terrible for TV, LOL.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Yep, good training is boring, haha. Plus it takes a long time. Good trainers also wouldn't do stuff like this, provoking dogs for the cameras and thinking it's funny:


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

The only thing he understands is how to shut down and repress dogs. He doesn't really understand much about how they think and learn, IMO. But hey, regardless of how the dog feels about the situation, at least their behavior has changed to make life easier for the owners. :/


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

When the dogs shut down, it looks like he gets amazing results so fast.

My husband wanted to watch an episode because it had a Greater Swiss Mountain Dog in it, so we did. The GSMD was a runt, now grown, but still young, maybe not even a year yet. He was a resource guarder and growled when people got near his food. CM's solution? Keep messing with the dog when it was trying to eat, pulling it away from the food when it growled and correcting it with a choke chain. Eventually, the dog shut down and it was deemed a success. Then, he decided that this dog needed a "cart" and came up with some contraption that looked like a plastic moving dolly that made a ton of noise. The dog was afraid to pull it and got spooked and they corrected it. The dog eventually shut down and pulled CM on that cart. I couldn't help but think, "Have they talked to their vet to see if the dog is old enough to pull, that its bones and joints are ready to pull CM's ego along the street?"

Ugh.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

It's so stupid, too, because resource guarding (what Cesar calls "dog food aggression") is one of the things that you can actually cure -- not just manage, but CURE -- using positive techniques. You can make a dog LIKE you approaching its valued possessions. But noooo, Cesar thinks it's a better idea to bully the dog, to never let it eat in peace, to shut it down. Call me crazy, but I'd rather have a dog that actually likes me approaching its stuff than one who has basically just given up and only lets me near its stuff because it's learned that protesting is futile.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

If somebody bugged ME while I was eating as much as he does dogs...I don't think I'd be nearly as well-mannered as these dogs are. I guess it goes to show how forgiving dogs are that he doesn't get bitten that often doing this?


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Problem is, good training is boring . No dramatic music, no physical altercations, no bites. . .terrible for TV, LOL.


Yeah, helping Wally with his fearfulness would need a show with a 2 year run at the least. 

I don't know, though. The mistakes I'm sure I made would make for some "oh no, is this the part where something bad happens?"


----------



## Flaming (Feb 2, 2013)

packetsmom said:


> If somebody bugged ME while I was eating as much as he does dogs...I don't think I'd be nearly as well-mannered as these dogs are. I guess it goes to show how forgiving dogs are that he doesn't get bitten that often doing this?


When I was younger I *did bite* someone for messing with my food. And I'm a human that understand english, a dog doesn't understand English so you're being even more mean to him/her.


----------



## Poly (Sep 19, 2007)

Crantastic;

I'm not sure why you directed that reply to me - perhaps you may have made a mistake and was thinking about somebody else. Or maybe you didn't completely read what I wrote. 

In any case, I never used the term "reading" - or "misreading", for that matter. I suspect that we wouldn't even agree on what those terms might mean in this context. Which is why I was careful not to use them. 

I also never implied that I agreed with CM's approach to dealing with dog behavior problems, or with his specific methods, or with his modes of expressing himself. 

So your criticism via Jim Crosby's excellent analysis is completely misdirected. And I want to make it very clear that I have had only the highest respect for Mr. Crosby, for his outstanding work on so-called "dangerous dogs", and for his opposition to BSLs.

I think if you are going to be critical - even by implication - of what somebody wrote, you should read it all first.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

No, I read and understood your post. You said that what Cesar does "relies a lot on his admittedly very good understanding of dog movements and body language." I disagree that he has a very good understanding of dog movements and body language, which is why I posted the video and Crosby's explanation of how Cesar misread Holly.


----------



## EdDTS (May 30, 2012)

Willowy said:


> Problem is, good training is boring . No dramatic music, no physical altercations, no bites. . .terrible for TV, LOL.



I'm sure we'd get a couple dramatic moments that could make it a bit more interesting or at the very least we'd get to see the dog before it's been worked with.(If it's aggression, perhaps some home video from the owners of how the dog acts? Then throughout the training, refer back to the home video.) It might take awhile but it definitely could be edited down to seem more interesting just like on Cesar's show. Everything he does isn't always done in 15 minutes and a few cases on tv took awhile but they still managed to fit everything in.
They just lack someone with Cesar's sellable image.

Seems like it could be done if it was handled correctly.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

EdDTS said:


> I'm sure we'd get a couple dramatic moments that could make it a bit more interesting or at the very least we'd get to see the dog before it's been worked with.(If it's aggression, perhaps some home video from the owners of how the dog acts? Then throughout the training, refer back to the home video.) It might take awhile but it definitely could be edited down to seem more interesting just like on Cesar's show. Everything he does isn't always done in 15 minutes and a few cases on tv took awhile but they still managed to fit everything in.
> They just lack someone with Cesar's sellable image.
> 
> Seems like it could be done if it was handled correctly.


Not as long as someone is peddling fast, easy answers instead of hard work over the long term.


----------



## Poly (Sep 19, 2007)

Crantastic said:


> No, I read and understood your post. You said that what Cesar does "relies a lot on his admittedly very good understanding of dog movements and body language." I disagree that he has a very good understanding of dog movements and body language, which is why I posted the video and Crosby's explanation of how Cesar misread Holly.


Wow - you keep imputing words to me that I never used, like "misread". Makes communicating difficult.

But I don't really care much about that. However, just so you know that in this particular video- as Mr. Crosby himself said in his critique - CM actually *does* pick up on the dog's body language - at least in part . Did CM pick up all of it? No. But then, he isn't as skilled in doing that as Mr. Crosby is. In fact, Mr. Crosby is a world class behaviorist and few have that skill level. 

The main point of Mr. Crosby's criticism wasn't about that at all. Anybody could miss things in a real-time situation that would show up on a review of a video. Try taking a video of yourself training your dog sometime - you'll be surprised at all the stuff you missed completely. 

The main point of the criticism - which I completely agree with - was that CM seemed to want to associate an _emotional state_ with that body language and that in doing so, he missed the actual *behavior* that was occurring and applied inappropriate methods. 

This is an on-going problem with CM even with the changes in the specific methods that he uses. In trying to discover the emotional states of the dogs he works with - assuming that could even be done - he misses what would be training based on behaviors. Which is really the only reliable approach to training, regardless of what methods you may use.. 

Of course, CM says that he trains people, not dogs. But I think he knows that many people who watch his show think it is dog training.

You'll notice that Mr. Crosby himself never talks about "reading". That's because he is opposed to the usual meaning of the term - that is, to associating a dog's movements and body language with an emotional state. It's a trap that some trainers - not just CM - do fall into. 

OTOH, a lot of people - who don't have the observational skills of either of these gentlemen with respect to dogs - would have missed the body language completely. It's obvious, for example, that the dog's owner didn't have a clue as to what his dog was doing (notice I say _doing_, not _thinking_)


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

Poly said:


> Wow - you keep imputing words to me that I never used, like "misread". Makes communicating difficult.


I just wanted to point out that Crantastic never said that you used the word misread. She, in fact, is using it her self, as her own words to describe how CM completely ignored all of Holly's body language. So rather than accusing another member of putting words in your mouth, why not remember that there is more than one way to say something and people will say things in a different manner.

I will agree with you that he didn't "misread" Holly though... he blatantly ignores all of her calming and warning signals - "misread" indicates he missed something, or interpreted a signal incorrectly, but he is blatantly provoking a dog that he knows he is making uncomfortable.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

What's wrong with the word "misread"? It simply means "misinterpret" or "misunderstand." I think that Millan misinterpreted not only the dog's actions, but the entire situation (he thinks of all resource guarding as aggressive behavior and acts accordingly). I'll rephrase, though: I do not believe that he understands dog movements and body language half as well as he thinks he does.

I agree that some trainers fall into the trap of ignoring actual behavior because they're focusing too much on what they assume is the dog's emotional state, but I believe that dogs do feel emotions and that a skilled person can interpret them. I'm with Patricia McConnell on that one. I think that good trainers look at the whole package.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

I don't think the problem is with CM trying to discover emotional states, it's with him trying to ascribe complex and abstract motivations to behavior. Emotions absolutely inform behavior whether you are a human or a dog... I think dogs experience a small spectrum of very primal/rudimentary emotions, but they are there. My super soft dog will not learn anything when he is terrified and shut down - neither will I. He can learn anything when he is relaxed and happy - so can I. I'm not saying that to humanize dogs, and I think dismissing the recognition that dogs have emotional states as humanizing them is really an oversimplification.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Poly said:


> You'll notice that Mr. Crosby himself never talks about "reading". That's because he is opposed to the usual meaning of the term - that is, to associating a dog's movements and body language with an emotional state. It's a trap that some trainers - not just CM - do fall into.


Except - that's part of what behavior does. It's a window into the mind.

If Wally makes a mistake - I can see what he's thinking is right by what he does and READ it and adjust my strategy accordingly. Likewise, if he's too frantic/overly distracted - something is concerning him or he's too busy wondering "oh, hey, what's going on over there". Again, his behavior lets me read what he's thinking.

If he's scared, don't you think that's going to show up behaviorally? I see plenty of it. Skittish gait, lowered tail, ears pinned back, panting elevated. He'll stay super close to me. He'll do that "jump up and tap my leg" thing before looking at what he's scared of. Sounds like his behaviors are telling me "I'm scared of THAT over there! What should we do?" Oftentimes, he'll immediately sit (usually on my foot). When he sits, his tail isn't visible (when he's relaxed, it's visible). 

If he's in appeasement mode, he'll frequently lie down (calming signal). He'll move slowly (calming signal). He's clearly worried about my reaction to what he's doing. 

If he's completely confused - his tail lowers, but everything else on him is alert. He'll move slowly, uncertain of what to try next. If he stops and sits and looks at me during this, he's saying "I just can't get it!" And he's looking for more information. That's a sign to me to back up and/or "rephrase the question". 

If he's wound up and excited, his behavior will show it. He's flying around, charging, doing everything with 2000% enthusiasm. He's "dog laughing". Eyes bright and eager. Playful barks and growls. Very wide tail swishes that move his rear end as well. All behaviors signaling his emotional state. If he's circling around (and doesn't need to pee) or tapping me with his nose, he's bored and wants to do something. When he's got bouncy steps and wide eyes and a big grin and high tail - he's trying to entice me to play. 

Given that dogs are at least as much irrational (i.e. emotion/non-logical) as they are rational (able to make deliberate choices), it makes sense that one of their primary communication methods (body language) would display their emotional state.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

sassafras said:


> I don't think the problem is with CM trying to discover emotional states, it's with him trying to ascribe complex and abstract motivations to behavior. Emotions absolutely inform behavior whether you are a human or a dog... I think dogs experience a small spectrum of very primal/rudimentary emotions, but they are there. My super soft dog will not learn anything when he is terrified and shut down - neither will I. He can learn anything when he is relaxed and happy - so can I. I'm not saying that to humanize dogs, and I think dismissing the recognition that dogs have emotional states as humanizing them is really an oversimplification.


Nothing learns anything when they are scared/stressed/shut down, not dogs, horses, or humans. I have worked in places that were very opressive "CM-esque" workplaces & I can tell you that its horrible.

Question: Did anyone see that episode with Dexter, the dog who was really bad about redirecting on his owner, so bad she couldnt walk him without a muzzle? I mean I have seen dogs redirect & even I have been redirected on once or twice but I have never seen such a bad redirecter as that dog was, it was like his go-to coping mechnisim... I dont often say this ... but I found myself thinking that maybe the dog would have been best with CM while he found another homee, it seemed like that woman just didnt have what it takes to own him.

there were also a couple of episodes with ACDs both of which were laughable ... thats all I will say.


----------



## Poly (Sep 19, 2007)

Crantastic said:


> What's wrong with the word "misread"? It simply means "misinterpret" or "misunderstand." .


As it is often used and in this context , "reading a dog" specifically means determining the emotional state of a dog based upon its behavior and vocalization, and altering your training based upon the "reading". So "misreading" would mean coming to an incorrect conclusion in that regard. It is something that people as diverse as CM and Patricia McConnell (and others) consider to be an important part of dog training. 

I happen to agree with Mr. Crosby (and many modern dog behaviorists) that "reading a dog" as described above is irrelevant in practical training. Even if you could get it right every time, which you can't, these eminent folks (and myself) are of the opinion that it just isn't going to impact how you change or develop a behavior, which is really what training is all about. Not that I'm putting myself in their category, simply saying that I agree with them.


----------



## jiml (Jun 19, 2008)

Poly said:


> As it is often used and in this context , "reading a dog" specifically means determining the emotional state of a dog based upon its behavior and vocalization, and altering your training based upon the "reading". So "misreading" would mean coming to an incorrect conclusion in that regard. It is something that people as diverse as CM and Patricia McConnell (and others) consider to be an important part of dog training.
> 
> I happen to agree with Mr. Crosby (and many modern dog behaviorists) that "reading a dog" as described above is irrelevant in practical training.



I agree with the other "modern dog behaviorists". LOL . Interpreting a dogs emotional state and ones skill at "reading" them is an important component of training. these are living thinking creatures not a science textbook.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Poly said:


> I happen to agree with Mr. Crosby (and many modern dog behaviorists) that "reading a dog" as described above is irrelevant in practical training. Even if you could get it right every time, which you can't, these eminent folks (and myself) are of the opinion that it just isn't going to impact how you change or develop a behavior, which is really what training is all about. Not that I'm putting myself in their category, simply saying that I agree with them.


So being able to tell that Wally is scared isn't going to impact how I develop or change his behavior? Allaying his fear is going to go a LONG way to getting him to actually even want to focus on what I want to develop. It also gives me a clue to his motivation, which give me a different point of reinforcement. He's scared. Moving away from fear will be reinforcing. I can get a behavior and then move from fear. That's different than if he's happy and just overly wound up but not encroaching on fight/flight mode.

None of this in a vacuum. Throwing out emotion is pretending that behavior is not impacted by or does not communicate emotion. I can not agree with that. It doesn't make logical sense unless dogs do not have emotions at all, which they do.

I know Wally learns FAR faster when he's excited than when he's nervous or anxious. He's not going to want to perform a behavior on an object he's scared of (changes development of the behavior). Seeing he is anxious about an object let's me switch objects (changes how I present the problem). Not afraid, and perhaps even attracted to that object, progression continues (more change in how quickly the behavior develops).


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I've read quite a bit of McConnell's stuff, but I haven't read much from Crosby. Can you point me to online resources (or to a book) where he discusses disregarding emotion in dogs while training? It seems counter-productive to me, but I'd like to read what he has to say so that I'm better informed.


----------



## Poly (Sep 19, 2007)

Crantastic said:


> I've read quite a bit of McConnell's stuff, but I haven't read much from Crosby. Can you point me to online resources (or to a book) where he discusses disregarding emotion in dogs while training? It seems counter-productive to me, but I'd like to read what he has to say so that I'm better informed.


I don't think that he has a book. He gives seminars and he has a blog. The blog mostly covers the "aggressive dog " cases he is involved with. He's an internationally recognized behaviorist and has testified around the world in "aggressive dog" cases. But he still considers himself a trainer. He trained dogs for a long time.

And I want to say that he's not the only trainer that feels this way. But since you asked specifically about him, here are a couple of quotes from his blog that kind of capture his view of dog training.



> A Dog Trainer, with or without fancy titles or specific behavior analysis training, *modifies unwanted behavior*. The trainer takes a dog with an unwanted behavior (pooping on the floor for instance) and teaches the dog another, more acceptable behavior (asking to go outside). *They train the desired behavior, train the dog to replace the undesired behavior with the desired behavior, and then use reinforcement to fade the old and support the new.* This is ultimately what we do, minus all the frills, no matter who we are or what we claim to be. We are teachers. We are trainers. We choose to work with a specific species, and those are dogs.





> One can call themselves a "Communicator", a "Rehabilitator", or any other fancy term they want. They can whisper, emote, center their energy, focus their spirit...whatever. There are no established standards for these fancy sounding classifications, and honestly no way to quantify and test their claims, so anyone can call themselves anything they want. Not my problem or issue. *The only quantifiable, testable process is counting whether the dog a) produces the desired behavior more frequently or on cue and b) reduces the number of occurrences of the undesired behavior. And if it involves a new task or trick, does the dog produce the desired response to the assigned stimulus. * Period.





> Dangerous, mean and vicious are human terms, placing human values on an *animal’s behavior*, or more exactly, a dog’s response to a perceived threat.


My emphases.

Please note that the concentration is on a dog's behavior, not on the dog's emotional state. He doesn't say that dog's don't have emotional states, or that emotional states aren't important _to the dog _. He is only saying that _when we train our dogs_, what is relevant in that situation is a dog's behaviors. 

Those are points of view I happen to agree with, and that drive the way I train. 

If other people want to do it differently, that's up to them. I just don't agree with it.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

I dont consider CM an "whisperer" in fact, refering to body language, he is actually "yelling, & shouting" to the dog using his body language, he only uses the cues dogs use when they have exausted all other means of peaceful resolution of the issue. 

Of course there are dogs who defer straight to those kinds of interactions, I have one who does for some reason ... she is just a bully ... some dogs are. It's not like she is strong or a confident dog ... quite the opposite ... but I still have to mediate her when I am playing with the other two dogs because if I dont she will single out Josefina & pick on her. So when she starts doing that she goes to time out, nothing mroe is said to her. She can whine & belly ache all she wants ... but I ignore her until I am through playing with the other dogs.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

When I think of a "whisperer," I think of the horse whisperer and I think of someone who is gentle and very connected to the animal they are working with and who works by gaining their trust.

Yep...doesn't sound much like CM.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

If he would let the dominance crud go, a whole new world would be opened up to him ... but even as far as he has come (esp from season 1) he still has to insert "dominance" into the conversation everytime, even when its clear even to the untrained eye that there is no dominance present. 

if you pay close attention ( with the sound off) you can even see the OWNERS body language is all "I'm unsure of this is the right thing or not" but thengs to a waiver they sign to be on the show ... they cant say anything.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Poly said:


> Please note that the concentration is on a dog's behavior, not on the dog's emotional state. He doesn't say that dog's don't have emotional states, or that emotional states aren't important _to the dog _. He is only saying that _when we train our dogs_, what is relevant in that situation is a dog's behaviors.


I agree with his quotes, and I've seen Dunbar say similar things. But does Crosby actually say anywhere that he ignores the dog's emotions while training? It seems from those quotes that you're reading into his statements. Yes, of course the only quantifiable, testable way to know if your training is working is to look at whether the dog produces the desired behavior more frequently/on cue or reduces the number of occurrences of the undesired behavior. That doesn't mean that you ignore the dog's emotional state while training/extinguishing said behaviors.


----------



## Poly (Sep 19, 2007)

Crantastic:

I didn't read anything into those quotes. I simply quoted them exactly as they appear on his blog.



Crantastic said:


> Yes, of course the only quantifiable, testable way to know if your training is working is to look at whether the dog produces the desired behavior more frequently/on cue or reduces the number of occurrences of the undesired behavior. That doesn't mean that you ignore the dog's emotional state while training/extinguishing said behaviors.


 I must say I'm at a loss to understand. If your training *activities* are based on your dog's behavior (as he says they are and I agree), and your *criteria for the effectiveness *of your training are based on your dog's behavior (as he says they are and I agree), and the *changes to your training* that you may or may not have to make are based on your dog's behavior (as he says they are and I agree), just where in that whole process would that emotional content come into play? There doesn't seem to be any room for it.

Of course, if one wants to train a dog based on what one perceives the dog's emotional state to be, rather than basing it on what the dog's behavior is, I'd say "Try it and let's see how that works out". There are more than a few trainers around who will assert that is exactly the way one should train a dog. In fact, CM himself - whom you've been very critical of here - is and always has been firmly in that camp. Isn't that what he is doing when he talks about those emotional states he refers to as "dominance", "aggression", and "submission"? 


It's not the camp I want to be in, however. 

And if you think Mr. Foster is saying anything like that, it would absolutely be misreading what he wrote.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Who is this crosby person? does he have a site where I can read what/how he teaches?


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

It's here, dogdragoness.

Poly, if behavior is all that matters to Crosby, then why does he say things like this:



> At 00:47, *looking confused*, the dog voluntarily lies down without command or input, yawns, and tries to disengage. The FDT turns to the audience and talks. While talking the FDT leans back, averts his face and gaze to address the audience, withdraws his outstretched leg and frontally-positioned body, and the dog calms more. *The dog remains down, looking around with closed mouth, soft eyes, and appears relaxed through 1:10.*





> At 1:20 the FDT stops advancing just in front of the dog, who is backed up against the fence. The dog relaxes her face, closes her mouth, gives repeated appeasement licks and averts her gaze from the FDT, who is still staring the dog down. *The dog still shows tension*, but does not pursue or otherwise engage the FDT. She holds her ground as there is no where else to go. At 1:25 you can see clearly that the dog is backed up against the fence.





> Is this dog "safe", especially around small children? Not at this juncture. This dog needs work. Progressive, positive and instructive work to desensitize the problem behavior and replace that behavior with *acceptable, calm behavior*. Can that be done? Most likely, given enough time and safe management of the dog until the problem is mitigated. *That depends on the dog-they are living beings with their own personalities and are influenced by genetics, experience, training, environment-and even just how they feel a certain day.*


He obviously pays attention to whether a dog is relaxed or tense, and would shift his methods accordingly if he were in this situation. He refers to good behavior as "calm" behavior. He pays attention to how a dog feels on any given day. I find it hard to believe that he completely divorces dogs' emotions from their behavior while training.

And I'm not sure why you keep mentioning Millan, as if I agree with his methods -- if you've paid attention to my posts here at all, you'd know that I'm one of his more outspoken detractors.

To be really clear: I am not talking about deciding whether a dog is "dominant" or "submissive" or anything Millan-y like that. I'm talking about observing a dog while training to see if it's confused, anxious, calm, etc. at the time, so that you have a better idea of whether whatever you're attempting to teach is sinking in, or if you should work on building confidence or getting the dog back under threshold first.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Well, if you and I and Jim Crosby all pay attention to whether a dog is behaving as if it's anxious, calm, or confused during any given training session, and alter our methods accordingly, then... what are we arguing about, again? Like sassafras said on the last page, "trying to ascribe complex and abstract motivations to behavior" like Millan does (and applying a label like "dominant" to a dog and basing all training off of that designation) is a problem, so as long as we're not doing that, why quibble over whether or not we define "confused" or "calm" as a feeling or a behavior?


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

His arrogance is appearent in the intro to his show "No dog is too much for ME to handle..." but natgeo will never drop him ... hes like .... a total cash cow.


----------

