Into learned helplessness:
This is why I don’t watch this show.
This poor dog spent most of its life in a garage.
It is like Bill Tarrant’s experiment with some coyote pups.
He kept them in a kennel run for their entire lives until they were about six months old.
When he opened the kennel door to free them, they didn’t want to go.
And when they did go, they were–um– barmy.
They were scared of everything and knew only to run in straight lines.
This poor dog has every reason to be scared of everything.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this dog wasn’t afraid of men after this encounter.
I wonder if learned helplessness is considered proper behavior for a dog by Cesar (and others). The dog is expected to submit in all ways in all situations to any human, and any spark of free will or lashing out in fear is considered inappropriate or ‘rebellious’.
I know some people expect ‘good dogs’ to never bite, no matter what the provocation or fear, and assume any dog that does is being ‘bad’ in some way.
The myth of the ‘normal’ dog:
http://tinyurl.com/2ds9vkm
Pai, I agree with you. If this were a blog on how not to raise children, I would write about young children, not yet able to speak more than a few words, who were already taught to sit-stay for hours at a time, and of parents who bragged about who they raised their children right – in isolation. And of parents who excused their own brutality with “spare the rod and you will spoil the child”. Now the government would step in, at least for children, ‘trained’ this way.
I also remember 2 people who after reading about dominance in animals, started trying those tactics on other people.
One was a grown man, who after reading that cats stare at other cats to show dominance, went around glaring at people. Weird. Makes me wonder about people watching those dominance based shows – are they trying to learn how to deal with a mean/ fearful pet, or are they trying to learn about acting like a ……… well, the sort of person who goes around trying to act dominant?
I believe it doesn’t seem very responsible to show that type of treatment of animals in a positive light, I believe that it leads people astray. As the song said “What the world needs now is love, sweet love”. We don’t need more wars, or force.
I guess there are people who believe that these dogs ‘need’ or ‘deserve’ that type of ‘treatment’, but to me, even if it WERE necessary, why watch it?
Just because a person loves to eat steak, it doesn’t mean that it isn’t weird if he also loves to watch cattle being butchered.
Well, gosh, guys, how perzackly would YOU have handled this extremely, crazily aggressive dog? I suppose you would have just given up on it and put it down for having a “bad” temperment? I actually thought Caesar’s methods shown here were rather gentle(if firm), considering how aggresive this dog was! Regardless of HOW this dog got that way, it obviously has some MAJOR issues that “click-and-treat” just ain’t going to fix! Is this necessary with most dogs raised and socialized properly? Of course not, but that’s NOT the point here!!!! I think Caesar is unecessarily rough with some dogs sometimes, and he seems to use the same methods to handle every situation(although I must admit I haven’t actually seen that many episodes of his shows–maybe most of the first season?), but in a severe case like this, if you don’t want to just give up and kill the dog, such methods ARE necessary! And no matter how firm and domineering the method, to me, it is way more humane in the long run than euthanasia, and I bet if asked, such dogs would agree!
I would have hired a real behaviorist.
The are worse things in this world than euthanasia.
I’d rather be euthanized than tortured.
It seems extreme to suggest that because someone disagrees with Cesar’s foray into teaching learned helplessness they would kill the dog or just try and “click and treat” away the problem.
They are plenty of animal behaviorists and dog trainers who use less strong-handed techniques to modify the behavior of highly aggressive dogs. Brenda Aloff. Suzanne Clothier. Karen Pryor. Trish King. I’ve personally seen Sophia Yin and two of the trainers who have worked with Mina work highly dog aggro and people aggro canines.
So it can be done. It is done. And when you can do it without employing behavior that is counter-intuitive to both dog and person (and that always comes with a “don’t try this at home alone” warning), why wouldn’t you?
What I meant, if you’ll read the other comments, is that if these other methods don’t work, I’d have the dog euthanized before subjecting it to Cesar Millan-type treatment.
A dog that can’t be fixed can’t be fixed.
And I’m certainly don’t going to punch around on one to make it work.
If it is that horribly effed up, it will never be fixed.
If we had a better infrastructure and the dog was fine in it, a responsibly managed sanctuary is the best last option. Killing the dog is always a crappy option for a dog with a drive to live.
A severely “damaged” dog should be given as many reasonable options as is possible. When and where to draw the line is dependent on the dog and situation, in my opinion. Short-term suffering for long-term gain can certainly lead to some egregious animal abuse in the name of victory.
I do not know where to draw the line for every single dog, but I do believe nearly all “damaged dogs” can be managed and “rehabilitated” in the hands of experienced “positive” trainers. Those who cannot, I believe should be given a chance at a well-managed, responsible sanctuary before death is considered an option.
Such places are so finite, though.
I would like there to be more of those for those kinds of dogs.
But lacking those, we have to make tough decisions.
I hate it.
But I can tell you that if I had the choice between either being humanely killed or being tortured every day because of what I was, I’d choose humane death.
I’m sure most dogs, though, can be trained out of aggressive behaviors, and yes, all options should exist.
But if you listen to Cesar’s believers, they tell you that the only way to handle dogs– aggressive or otherwise– is to physically dominate them.
I’m against using physical domination on dogs, mainly because I don’t have teeth like dogs do and most children do.
Some dogs some dogs cannot be helped– even by the experts.
I’d rather have a dog put down than put through the Cesar treatment.
That’s how opposed I am to these methods.
How would I handle it? Certainly not by taking a dog who is obviously extremely fearful and lashes out with aggression because of it and pinning him to the ground for OVER SEVEN MINUTES. First off, you start by making sure the dog doesn’t have a chance to bite, so the muzzle is good. Then you get a good behaviorist to work with and stop trying to fix something that took months to make in a few minutes.
“Torture” isn’t exactly what he is doing in this video, though, is it? Torture to me indicates the application of severe pain and mental stress. I don’t think there is anything particularly severe in his methods here. What is “torturous” about making this dog submit and quit attacking people? What would a “real behaviourist” do differently? I know another dog or wolf in the pack would be WAY rougher on this dog’s selfish, aggressive behaviour than Caesar was! I think what you guys don’t realize, is that application of methods like this are NOT something one has to do CONTINUOUSLY throughout the life of the dog–once or twice is usually sufficient, and then the dog can live a happy, normal life ever afterward. I had a wolf-hybrid who was given zero training and discipline(something no wolf parent would ever tolerate, I might add), and she learned to BITE people to get her way–she was a little, tyrannical HELLION–AT THREE MONTHS OLD!!!! The people who had her gave up on her at that point–to make a long story short, I ended up with her, and yes, she bit the hell out of me twice when I gently was trying to train her right after I got her. Let’s just say my methods were a LOT more dramatic and rough than Caesar’s at this point! This wasn’t a matter of “spirit” or “independence”, just outright spoiled, selfish, hateful aggression! After our little altercation(which ended up the same way, with the dog pinned until it finally submitted), I NEVER had another problem with this animal–in fact, she was one of the SWEETEST, best- tempered creatures I’ve ever known–I could take her anywhere(and did!), and she continually impressed others with how gentle and well-behaved she was–never had to do more than rarely speak firmly to her ever again. Yet she was mischievous, happy, and as spirited and independent as any dog I’ve known, too. She lived 14 long, healthy, happy years, and got to go all kinds of places and do all kinds of things. What a shame to have euthanized such a splendid animal because the human in charge was unwilling to compromise their silly, ineffective training philosophy that didn’t work with that individual! Use such methods where they are not necessary? Absolute pointless cruelty. NOT use such methods where they are the only thing that works(and get it over with quickly and efficiently once and for all) because of some human philosophy and desire to be “politically correct”? Just as cruel, and extremely selfish, when one is worried more about what people think over the welfare of the dog……
It is torture to continuously punch around on a dog to make it behave.
If I had a dog that had to be punched all the time to get it to behave, then I’d have someone shoot it.
You pinned a three moth old pup? I’ve never witnessed and ADULT dog get that rough with a PUPPY before, unless adult dog wasn’t sure how to deal with puppies. I love how you call a PUPPY hateful for biteing, when puppies, yaknow, bite. Ask any puppy about those little shark teeth.
And as for not being torture? It’s terrfied of people, and getting agressive gets people to leave it alone. Now, not only did it not work, the OMGSCARY person is touching the dog and forceing it down. Sounds pretty awful to me.
Please don’t assume that I am advocating shooting aggressive dogs.
What I’m saying is many people erroneously think the only way to handle a dog is be a “dog puncher.”
There may be a few dogs that cannot have their behavior corrected through more modern methods or the methods that a trained behaviorist will proscribe.
And those dogs can never be trusted, no matter how many times you pin them or punch them.
You’re better off euthanizing them.
The average person does not and should not be taught to physically dominate any dog.
Teaching dogs to fear human hands is asking for trouble.
for example:
http://anapoeland.blogspot.com/2010/11/goodbye-huckleberry.html
That’s a very good post.
And she’s catching hell for doing so.
That’s insult to injury.
No one wants to make this decision. No one.
But it has to be made sometimes.
http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/11/19/breaking-the-cycle-of-fear-in-dogs-and-cats/
Ignore Houlahan’s commentary on that last link.
“This wasn’t a matter of “spirit” or “independence”, just outright spoiled, selfish, hateful aggression”
well if you think dogs have emotions like that, no wonder you have no clue about how to handle one with resorting to harshness.
I wonder how many times YOU’VE been bitten.
Most dog trainers/behaviorists NEVER get bitten.. even those who handle out of control, aggressive dogs. They would regard it as a failure on their part if they were bitten.
In contrast, Cesar celebrates getting bitten.
Lane, okay it worked for you the one time you felt you needed it.
But that isn’t the same situations which CM is in on TV, is it? Aren’t most of the homes he goes to, a home with just one or two pet dogs?
That’s not the same as a zoo, or a rescue with lots of grown dogs in a pack. So can you understand how some people feel that his methods are unneeded for the dogs he uses them on?
I think you understand that it is cruel to use more force than what is necessary. You pinned the puppy, not kicked her around the yard. In the same way, some people feel that CM uses more force than what is needed.
Why film what looks to me, to be dog-breaking? I think it seems to teach people in the public, who do not understand dog training, a technique usually too forceful, and sometimes dangerous, for what they need to train a pet dog. If the public is warned not to try to use a technique at home, then why teach that technique to them?
If the show is just entertainment, like watching a lion-tamer, then people can watch it and know that it is not real – you don’t try to stare down a pride of wild lions with a chair and a horse buggy whip.
But when people follow his show like a religion, they can believe in his technique, like a kid will believe in magic. They love it, and they want to learn it, but they empower the technique with on aura that is beyond the TV show, and beyond reality.
And like the kid with a hammer, everything the kid finds seems to him to need hammering. People like that. can want to take CM’s dominance idea, and use them on a yorkie, or a poodle sized puppy who isn’t old enough to not pee on the floor. As youtube shows, there are people who watch CM’s show, and think about how to apply that technique to people – their boyfriend, girlfriend, spouse, children……..
If something is shown on TV, as if it were the way to do something, there will be people who will try it.
Surely Lane, you don’t think that is the technique to recommend that pet owners use on their pets?
Retrieverman, who said anything about PUNCHING a dog? Caesar wasn’t PUNCHING that dog–just(very mildly but firmly) pushing it in place. And Katthevamp, you must not have been around many bitches with their pups, or other dogs either, to have never seen them very firmly pin a pup and hold it down till it stops squirming–ditto with wolves and coyotes. And African Wild Dogs. Way, way rougher than what Caesar was doing in this video. Caesar DID NOT invent this stuff–it is quite natural canine behaviour. And once again Katthevamp, you are assuming something without having witnessed it–this pup of mine WAS NOT just “mouthing” me or play wrasslin’–things I allow and have no problem with–this was full out aggressive, blood drawing, deep biting!! Your experience with groups of puppies seems limited too–puppies sometimes KILL one another in dominance aggressive battles with those needle teeth! I have seen numerous purty bloody, serious fights between young pups!(that if I had not quickly broken up, would have led to serious injuries or possibly death!) I get the impression that most of you guys have only had experience with very mild-mannered breeds(one or two at a time) who have had a lot of the natural canine social behaviour bred out of them, and is why you have no clue when it comes to difficult problem dogs like this. And yes, such people unwilling to deal with it SHOULDN’T have such dogs. Don’t just assume, though, that NO ONE can or should because your own ineffective methods won’t work in such cases. You’d rather kill the dog than compromise your human-oriented ethics! Sheesh! And you keep comparing dogs with problems created by people that don’t have a clue how to train or treat their dogs with EVERYONE using anything remotely resembling physical discipline(as in the link to the article). The same way some people just cannot distinguish between a “spanking” and “beating”, though there IS a world of difference between the two. Sure, this session was traumatic for this dog, but if in the end it WORKS, my gosh, who wouldn’t prefer a little trauma to DEATH! Why do you say “it didn’t work”–is there a further chapter to this story not being shown? By the end of this video, it SEEMS the dog has finally accepted the discipline and has calmed down and is no longer trying to bite. The problem with such trainers doing this and the owners not following through and doing it themselves, is that the dogs will behave for the trainer, but not the owner! But that is no fault of the methods. I don’t know of any critter or person who’s life is perfectly rosy all the time. It would be sad if such individuals just gave up and DIED every time things didn’t go their way. In this case, this dog CANNOT be allowed to ATTACK people(especially it’s owners)–out of fear and self-defense or flat out aggression! Allowing that to go on is irresponsible to the dog, and just stupid of the owners, and is a real liability in the real world out there…..
I’ve never seen a bitch to that to a pup.
Never.
I grew up around tons of bitches with puppies.
Cesar is not dog expert.
He’s a celebrity.
People should not use violence on dogs.
It should not be recommended period.
And Retrieverman, that pup I mentioned only needed this type of discipline ONCE, and she was COMPLETELY trustable and dependable, a wonderful animal, for the rest of her 14 years–never another serious problem out of her–ditto with other “problem” dogs I’ve had or known. The PROBLEM with this particular pup was that the people that previously owned her would NOT discipline her in ANY way–and she learned to BITE(and bite HARD!) to get her way. They tried to bathe her–she bit them, so they stopped. They tried to leash train her–she bit them, so they stopped. They tried to get her to go outside to pee-pee/doo-doo–she bit them, so they stopped. They eventually tried disciplining her with the old rolled up newspaper–you guessed it–she bit them, so they stopped! This pup was such a MONSTER by the time I got her, that nothing but SERIOUS, no-nonsense action was necessary, and it worked perfectly–no more biting! This was a blatant case where a 3-month-old pup TOTALLY dominated it’s entire human household–ridiculous! You guys are so against anything that even slightly resembles physical discipline, but all you do is spout platitudes and philosophies. I’m all for kinder, gentler methods when at all possible(and I have only rarely ever needed to get really physical, as in this case), but you guys aren’t offerring any better solutions for such SERIOUSLY problem dogs–just saying it’s wrong without offerring any alternative(except, of course, euthanasia, which is not a very humane option, in my opinion, and most dogs surveyed would agree!) So, educate me–what better, realistic method would you suggest that would REALLY work for this dog in the video? How could a “real behaviourist” do better?
http://drsophiayin.com/
This will answer your questions.
She’s a bit into Coppinger, but the rest is good.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sophia-yin/experts-say-dominance-bas_b_204482.html
[video src="http://drsophiayin.com/videos/Podee'sAggressivetoOtherDogs.mp4" /]
Oh my, looks like some of my allies are having a verbal spat with each other, what should I do, try to side with both of them? turn the hose of them both? (hard to do over the internet), try to smooth things over?
Naw, what is the use of my having a bit of Irish blood in me, if I can’t just call it a donnybrook, and wade in and verbally battle with both sides!
I have had hard dogs and I have had easy dogs. I like easy dogs. I like my dogs like I like my coffee, and like I like my men – sweet and full of sugar.
You can have all the dogs, coffee, and men, who are full of piss and vinegar – I like ’em sweet, or I don’t want them at all.
I’d euthanize a dangerous pet who bit me. Responsible parents would do the same; the childrens’ safety comes before the dogs’. Maybe it is okay for people with no children, no visitors, and a very good fence, but most people should NOT keep a dangerous dog, and even most singles don’t want a dog that bites them.
(Lane, you are NOT most people, you have animals skills, and experience with animals, as well as an attitude geared to dealing with zoo animals – but MOST people, and nearly ALL families with children, should NOT keep a dangerous pet who bites them).
It would be like inviting a child molester to live with your family, you might frighten him into not attacking your children, but you could never trust him again because he’d always have that desire to do something like that again.
I don’t watch C.M. – not my type of show, and I wouldn’t want to comment on what he did during one show, from watching just a clip from that show (and NO, I am NOT going to watch the whole thing – just from what I have watched, it is sufficient for me to know that I disagree strongly).
I think Charlie Murphy was very funny in his piece on C.M.
NOT speaking of C.M., but of someone else I knew: There are people who can impress and control mean and fearful dogs in twenty minutes. And I guess there are other people who are impressed by that and want to learn.
I am not sure that it is a thing which can be taught, except to people already geared that way to begin with. Like: You can teach people to sing, but to teach adults to sing well, it helps if you start with adults who already have a talent for singing.
But I have no idea WHY people would want to learn such a tactic? You can NOT use it on people. You can’t use it on cats – the cat would just learn to fear you. You could go to prison for using it on your children.
And, despite Lane’s success at it on a 3 month old puppy, most people can’t make it work, probablly because they don’t want to project dominance to the constant degree necessary to control a grown dog who is like that, and who has stayed like that until grown.
As emotionally painful as it might be, sometimes it is better to give up on relationships that are not working out – with boyfriends, girl-fiends, spouses, violent grown children, and yes, your dog.
Torture or emotional abuse – either one can wreck a person’s or animal’s life. Fear, can re-circuit a mind into frightend loops.
Animals, especially wild animals, can die of fright. I have read where a person was walking their little dog, when it was attacked by a larger dog, and the owner had a heart attack and died. Just the stress of watching, killed them.
Emotional shock can kill. I think it was the movie “Where’s Papa?” (Ruth Gordon) where the son dresses in a gorilla suit trying to scare his mother into a heart attack?
Look at it from what I believe might be the dog’s point of view, what it might be like if it happen to you:
You are a tough person, maybe swagger around a bit, maybe snap at your spouse, yell at your kids sometimes. Oh maybe a bit of a tough, but basically a nice person.
Then one day, a huge guy, 2 or 3 times your size comes to the door, and your spouse lets him in. You shoot your spouse a snide remark, and growl at them asking why they let this stranger into your home, and wham, the big dude jumps you!
He is choking the life out of you! Your spouse watches and smiles. You parents and brother and sister all watch and smile.
Okay, maybe you weren’t the best spouse, parent, kid, or sibling, but this big stranger is killing you, and they are doing nothing. Worse they are watching and smiling, and talking friendly to the stranger, who has come into your home, and is choking you.
How do you feel about your family now? Yes, you are frightened by the stranger choking you, but isn’t there more emotional pain from being betrayed by your family?
Then you really get scared! Your family not only isn’t defending you, they invited him in, and are paying him compliments while he is killing you. Is the big stranger going to rape you? Will your family laugh? Will he rob you?
Heck, looks like he is going to kill you, with them all standing there smiling. Slowly the life is choked out of you until you are acting automatically, not really conscious.
You come to and try to fight him off, but get choked back into oblivion again. You don’t want to die, but you sink into that dark void of shadows not knowing if you will come back alive.
You know that you might have drawn your last breath. You give up, there is no fight left in you. It is all you can do to try to breathe, with your now sore windpipe.
All the while you gasp to make up for your bout of oxygen depletion, your family smiles and chit-chats with the stranger. Which hurts most: the suffering, the fear, or the death of your feelings for your family?
When you are able to stand up, the stranger shows your spouse how to do this to you again. You get mad, try to fight it, and the big stranger steps in, and ‘teaches you a lesson’ you wont forget.
At some point you are mentally broken. Like captured soldiers whose spirit gives up.
But you begin to recover. Your tail starts to rise a bit. One day, you are feeling a bit chipper, then, with no warning, your family opens the door and invites the stranger in again. If you fight him, you lose again.
If you fight your family for your personal rights, they have been trained to do this to you. Your family now controls where you go and what you do. You are too conditioned into fear and compliance to resist. You have become their zombie, their slave, and your family is happy about this -how does that make you feel?
Somethings are wrong to do to others, even if they ‘work’ for YOU.
I believe that it is sometimes better to euthanize dangerous dogs, than to foster the belief in, and the practise of, rough methods – even IF those methods might get results with some dangerous dogs.
I like “click and treat” better than “jerk and choke”, bet your dog does too.
Some people really do want zombies for pets.
I’ll stick with non-zombified dogs, thanks. Sure, it’s a hassle when there are issues, and it might take me a little longer to have what seem to be results than pinning the dogs and treating them cruelly, but in exchange for taking the time, I have happy, loving dogs who will do pretty much anything I ask.
@hdp, good comparison, but I’m afraid there are some people who will just never get it.
Pai, some people want zombie horses, zombie friends, zombie spouse, and zombie children.
Remember the movie The Stepford Wives? Lots of men spoke up, and came right out and said that was the type of wife they wanted, “Who wants a wife to talk back to you?”
I remember something, written by some type of counselor (shrink), about how most parents, who brought their children in for treatment, did NOT want an emotionally healthy child, they wanted their child made to be better behaved, more submissive, more centered around doing what the parents wanted.
They actually wanted their child made worse off. So the client was paying to make the patient worse. Sounds to me like the parents were looking for a child-breaker, to break the spirit of their child.
I believe that applies to lots of parents, and some pet owners.
Comparisons with wolves or wild dogs are completely irrelevant. Dogs are no longer wolves or wild dogs. Their behaviors are only superficially similar. Dogs domesticated themselves with our help because they want to be with people.
Puppies that really try to kill each other (as opposed to normal puppy fights that sometimes get out of hand…. which good dogmoms and people break up) are psychological deranged and should probably be humanely destroyed. That is not normal behavior.
As for adult dogs, they actually RARELY bite humans in comparison to their numbers. And even MORE RARELY without resorting first to their many other means to communicate before they do bite. It is virtually unheard of for a dog to “bite without warning”… unless the dog has previously been punished (or manhandled into learned helplessness) for giving warnings such as growls.
Every single one of the dogs Cesar has manhandled and/or been bitten by could have been turned around by a patient, consistent application of non-physically coercive techniques, including a “nothing in life is free” program. But then it wouldn’t be dramatic tv, would it? And it would be too icky and girly for the likes of Lane and Cesar.
I bet Cesar, self-proclaimed pit bull lover and advocate, would be stringing up this spoiled boy:
http://badrap-blog.blogspot.com/2010/11/welcome-to-bootcamp.html
I would NOT compare Lane to C.M.
Lane mentioned having had one wolf-dog puppy which he pinned once in the 14 years which he owned her.
Okay, maybe many other methods would have worked too, but Lane must have felt the need to pin the wolf hybrid puppy. Who among us has not erred?
Are there any of us who has never followed some method which we later realised was wrong? Over the years, I have changed my opinion on several issues, including some dog issues – to live is to learn.
Lane has wolf dogs. He has animals where the mother dogs treat their own puppies like that! I only had one dog ever do that. It was her first and last litter – after the puppies were weaned she was sold to a pet home – can’t have that type of behavior in dogs selected for breeding.
I have, mostly, given up on training arguements. I believe that each single person should get the type of dog geared for them, and each family should get a dog geared for that family (and almost all families need an easy dog who lives to please, and who can fit in with everyone in the family).
In the big picture, on the grand scale, the best answer is breeding for good temperment, NOT trying to train unwanted instincts out of dogs. Like the Russian foxes, breed for tameness and many of your behavioral problems will never surface.
On the personal level? Individual dogs often need personal help and training.
That one mother dog that I had who bit her puppies?: When I would come into the bedroom, the mother dog would get up and come to the gate of the pen which I had her and the litter in (yes I use to raise dogs). When her puppies were old enough to walk, she would attack them if the came near the gate. She wanted my undivided attention, and she would attack her puppies to get it.
She apparently wasn’t too nice to them when I wasn’t around, so as soon as they would eat mushed up dog food, I took the puppies from her, and just put them back with her at night when she seemed to want them, and only let her nurse them during the day if I held her so she couldn’t attack them.
There was several weeks during which time, the puppies had been completely away from their mother and eating soft foods, and then eating dry food, before I sold the puppies.
The first person came to look at the puppies, and her favorite cringed whenever she raised her hand. I explained about the mother dog. But the woman did not believe that it was the mother dog, she thought it might have been me.
She asked to see how the mother dog was with her puppies. The mother dog had not seen the puppies in a few weeks (I don’t remember exactly how long) but I brought the mother dog out.
The puppies (I think there was 3 puppies?) all retreated as the mother dog went over to get petted by the woman, and when one of the puppies came up to try to get some of the attention, the mother dog attacked it. The puppy crouch down. One of the puppies shreiked in fear.
Then the woman believed me, as she saw how the puppies crouch down from their mother like they would have if they had been beaten by people.
The remarkable part of this event was that I had thought the puppies were over any problems they had from their mother’s mistreatment.
The mother dog hadn’t harmed them with cuts or bruises, just horrible growls and snarls, and a snap. But the puppies’ early treatment had not worn off. They had learned to trust me, and I could show that I could raise my hand and the puppies were unafraid and would boldly walk up to me.
But the puppies first response to strangers was to assume the worst, and warm up only when they had been assured that the new person was friendly.
There was no sign of any aggression in the little puppies, but I sold all of them, and their mother, as I didn’t want to take a chance of getting a behavioral problem in any future puppies which my dogs might have.
I had bought the grandmother dog when she was a little bit pregnant, and I felt that there might have been some genetic taint from the sire of the litter (the sire of the snappy mother). The snappy mother dogs’ own mother (the one I had bought when pregnant) was a fine mother, and not a problem, so the snappy mother had NOT learned bad parenting.
I had only used treats and praise on the mother dog (small breed). I would never have bothered with force because, if force was needed, then, I felt, the dog needed to be spayed, so not to continue with that problem, since it was not learned.
But what would I do, if I had owned wolf hybrids where the parents usually were that way? I don’t know.
Yup, a sure-fire way to increase the hits on yer blog, Retrieverman! And HDP–I reckon you BETTER git tha hose out–no other way to git us’ns to unlock our jaws! My, my, where to begin? I feel compelled to respond, however, to many of these comments–it’ll probably have to be split up for brevity’s sake though…first, Retrieverman, if you have been around many bitches and pups(and other dogs in a pack situation) and have NEVER seen discipline given by the adults or dominant animals(including pinning),all I can say is you must be terribly unobservant. Sometimes, though, people only see what they WANT to see, rather than the reality. I have seen such displays HUNDREDS of times–in all kinds of dogs(not just wolves and wolf hybrids). Other than pinning pups, I’ve seen bitches and other dogs pop their pups with an open mouth strike(not a true bite) to their skulls–OUCH! It makes a very audible “crack”! In fact, this is often what dogs do to pestering kids–it looks like they bit the kid, but actually it was this form of discipline they use for puppies–some dogs apparently equate pestering kids with pestering pups! And bitches weaning their pups–man! They can be quite rough on them! Not that I’m advocating this for humans to emulate, but IT IS perfectly natural dog behaviour that WORKS, and that they instinctively understand. And Retrieverman, I know I don’t know how many problem dogs(SERIOUS problem dogs, that is) that have been rehabilitated–sometimes with physical discipline, that were COMPLETELY trustable and faithful to their owners–perhaps not with strangers, but definetely to the people they trusted. Some PEOPLE, afraid of their dogs, may not ever fully trust them, but that doesn’t mean SOMEONE out there cannot, and might not be right for such a difficult dog. I think virtually ALL dogs with only EXTREMELY rare exceptions can be rehabilitated–excepting dogs in the throes of rabies, of course. Thing is, many difficult dogs CANNOT be rehabilitated(especially really dominant biters) or trusted using “positive only” methods. And this is the point I have been trying to make–in THOSE cases, I prefer to see(or use myself) a bit of physical discipline when the positive stuff falls flat, rather than euthanize or imprison-for-life(Marji) a dog. And how humanly selfish it is to do so just because such physicality is abhorred by the humans. All this postulating that some of these “positive only” trainer experts could rehabilitate ALL aggressive dogs is poppycock, just as Caesar’s methods do not and should not be used on ALL dogs. These guys usually never publicize their failures for public consumption! I am quite in agreement that positive methods should be used whenever possible. What you guys WILL NOT accept, is that SOMETIMES, perhaps only RARELY, but still, sometimes these methods, with some dogs, don’t work. If you cannot accept that, then you are blind to reality…..
It’s human selfishness that leads people to use such quick fix, behaviorally counter-intuitive methods as well. Most of what we do with dogs is anthropocentric, positive training included.
As to a sanctuary being a life sentence, it seems a little silly to me to argue against it when most dogs live a life sentence inside homes in the modern “developed” world. A well-run sanctuary provides more exercise, more mental stimulation, more ability to be a dog than the average dog gets in a crate or apartment or inside a house for 8+ hours a day. We deny our dogs a lot of natural behavior because it is convenient to do so. A well-run sanctuary isn’t any worse. And if it means a dog doesn’t have to go through the horror of learned helplessness – which is EXACTLY what CM is showing in doing in the clip – then all the better.
I wasn’t clear enough. I don’t think those sanctuaries are bad.
They are far better doing the whole Cesar Millan thing on a dog that can never be trusted to live in a normal household.
We need more of them and well-trained experts to deal with the dogs that have been really messed up.
I like sanctuaries too. But it costs money to run a sanctuary, and there aren’t enough of them to save all the dogs who are killed in ‘shelters’.
In a way, maybe many backyards are a form of boring sanctuary for dogs, like Marji said. People often don’t want their dog anymore, but they keep it, give it food and shelter, all the while wishing the dog wasn’t there, but they’d feel bad having their dog killed, so they keep the dog, but the emotion and the bond isn’t there for them.
Maybe we need a book “How to Bond with Your Dog”, instead of “How to train Your Dog”?
And it would NOT talk about pinning your dog to the ground, or making the dog submit.
What would a book like that be about? Walks for one.
I didn’t think you thought they were bad. :)
I was responding to Lane’s “life in prison” sanctuary comment, which was framed in a semi-insulting manner.
….Emily S.–Coppinger’s “theory” that dogs “domesticated themselves’ is, sorry, compltete B. S., and only someone with little knowledge of Anthropology, Archaeology, wolves, and dogs in general could believe it. EVERYTHING about Copp’s theory is WRONG, poorly though out, or totally devoid of common sense. Yes, wolf behaviour(to a degree) IS completely relatable to dogs–they maintain LOTS of basic behaviours and instincts from wolves. Territory marking, dominance/submissive posturing, chasing things that run, growling, barking, and howling from the exact same stimuli, scent rolling–I could go on and on! ALL hard-wired, instinctive behaviour in wolves AND dogs! Lots of things between the two are relatable, AND even recognized when the two(wolves and dogs) get together, which you obviously have never witnessed. As humans, we certainly are capable, and should, come up with better methods for discipline if possible. Dogs AND wolves are certainly intelligent enough to learn different species’ behaviour(they do it all the time, associated with us), BUT, when these human humane methods DON’T work, nothing gets through better, quicker, and more descicively than something they are hard-wired to instinctively understand. And, to me, WAY more humane than ENDLESS nagging, “positive only” sessions that can drag on for WEEKS! Even as a kid growing up in an era of accepted corporal punishment in school and at home, I HIGHLY preferred a quick spanking to endless, hand-wringing nagging! And so did most kids I knew. And, Emily S. you don’t think a dog can be “spirited” in temperment? You don’t think some dogs are more independently-natured compared to other dogs? You don’t think dogs can be “spoiled”? You must have very little experience with very few dog-types! And a very limited opinion of canine emotion and capability! And no, I have rarely been bitten other than the time mentioned, except when breaking up dog fights(when in the fury of the moment the offending dog didn’t even realize it bit me–and this is NOT an offense I would punish) and at vetinaries’ helping to hold terrified dogs(OhMyGod, Michy! Sometimes we had to hold the dogs way longer than 7 minutes for X-rays and other treatments! And with the poor dog in agonizing pain! Well, that’s life, it ain’t always rosy! But sometimes unpleasantry IS necessary in order to FIX things! I suppose a sit-stay for 7 minutes would be considered abusive by you, too? Better stay away from obedience schools, then.) And Emily S.–puppy fighting is NOT “degenerate”, but perfectly normal puppy behaviour. What you advocate is breeding only the most submissive, unnaturally docile animals–this is what HAS happened with many breeds, but it is NOT natural behaviour, but human- selected. This is because most people, like you, cannot deal with a naturally dominant dog–this doesn’t mean NO ONE can, or all dogs should be dull, compliant, behaviourally lobotomized caricatures because certain people can no longer deal with them in the presently politically correct manner. For me, give me a dog with some spirit and a mind of it’s own that displays something other than unnatural human compliant submissiveness!
I did have a naturally high status dog, and there were just somethings she was allowed to do, to get it out of her system.
She was not aggressive toward people, but strange dogs that challlenged her, she would squash. No blood, just a pinning.
I’ve never see a dog do that to puppies. I’ve seen them do it other dogs that are well-grown adolescents or adults.
The only dogs I’ve known that were just crazy aggressive toward other dogs were very insecure animals. And this dog would grab puppies by their muzzles. She was not the top dog in the family. She had status only when she was sitting beside my grandpa. At our house, she didn’t mess with anyone.
She is the reason why I’ve always questioned this dominance assumption. The real high status dogs I’ve known have not been the most aggressive or have been aggressive only when some idiot dog challenges them.
My grandpa had a dog that was truly high status. All the other dogs liked him, but a stupid chow tried to challenge him one day and popped that chow’s eye out.
Many people assume that I’ve never seen dogs fight or be aggressive toward each other.
this is false. I’ve seen a dog kill another dog, and I couldn’t do anything to stop it.
A lot of dogs have the attitude in this song.
I knew a boxer that essentially would sing every time he got near his favorite bitches.
He was the one who killed the other dog over a bitch.
He was Kizzy’s father.
learn to read, dude, even if your reasoning power is impaired.
.
I said that puppies ***trying to kill each other *** were deranged. Not puppies fighting. Puppies aren’t trying to kill each other when they are puppy (i.e. PLAY) fighting.
Where do you read any statement in which I say that I don’t believe that dogs can’t be spirited, or that some are more independent minded or that they can’t be spoiled? Nowhere: you’re just making shit up.
You’re a guy who believes in “dominance”. So you’re like the guy who only has a hammer: every problem is a nail. You think you can train a dog like you can a wolf. In fact you seem to think you can actually train a wolf the way you can a dog.
You want quick solutions, even if they create fear in your dog; even if they ultimately DONT work. You’re wacky, too, because you use coercive methods to force a dog to bend to your will.. but then you claim you want a dog that has a mind of its own. So which is it: do you want the dog to have its own mind.. or yours?
Most of us now are about relationships with dogs, not asserting our will on them regardless of individual personalities. Even the hardest-headed working dog wants to work with us.. you can force it to work with your methods… or you can show it how cooperation gets it what it wants.
http://fearfuldogs.wordpress.com/2010/11/22/how-dare-you/
I’m sure that’s too icky and girlie for you too.
I like the warm water, I think I will wade in again.
Lane, what you write is very interesting, but it sure puts me off the idea of wolf hybrids.
I have seen mother dogs, of large breeds with big litters, wean their puppies by cradling the puppy’s muzzle with her jaws, but I have NEVER heard a puppy hurt by this, or any noise, or any violent growling (except that one bad mother dog), so of course, it seems abnormal, to me, to read about canine mothers behaving that way.
I guesss some breeds of dog have greater parental love, greater tolerence for puppies, and a stronger inhibition against getting physical with puppies.
I did once raise a breed of dog where they were scappy with each other as adults, but NEVER with their own puppies. Even the grown males, were tolerant of puppies, even older puppies. I’d of taken any male dog, who was bad with puppies, to the vet and had him castrated. He would not of attacked a puppy twice.
I’ve had mother dogs wean their own litter, and try to take over raising other mother’s puppies. Some dogs seem to have an inborn code against hurting or disiplining puppies. If the puppy bothers the grown dog, the grown dog jumps on a couch, a bed, or a doghouse – they NEVER fight with their puppies, NEVER bite their puppies.
And the grown dogs very seldom show any aggression towards other dog’s puppies. But, once they are weaned, the puppies do act more respectful of all adult dogs.
(Oh wait, I do remember a tiny grown female dog who lived where I did, but wasn’t my dog, who repeatedly snapped and nipped a puppy, but the puppy was of a medium sized breed, and, at the time, was about the size of the of the attacker. And the puppy was not born there, but newly bought. And that mother dog was a bit off kilter anyway.
And I do now remember another female dog – the one mentioned above who was attacked as a puppy, who was fine with a large breed puppy until the puppy grew as large as her, and then she attacked and hurt it – but, again, the attacking female was another one of those “not quite mentally/ emotionally normal dogs”.)
Other normal dogs, don’t so much seem inhibited from attacking puppies, so much as they just love puppies so much that they just would not ever hurt or disipline them.
But maybe it isn’t inherited? Maybe it is simply that the grown dogs that I, and the dog breeders I have known, all sense that if they dared to attack and chop a puppy, that it would be unwise.
I am with the mother dog when she has puppies, I marvel at each one born. I gush over them, and about them. Each puppy is named soon after it is born, and they are baby-talked to from birth. Dogs are observant, they must know that, like a mother dog, I love those puppies, and to harm them, is to challenge the boss dog – me.
Maybe that is why only the mentally off-kilter dogs (and that one mother dog) ever dared to bite a puppy? But then again, maybe it was instinct, because I did my best to make the grown dosg get along togerther and the adults of one breed just would not. But the dogs from the other breeds did, and the mixes that did not have the snappy breed in them were all good.
And the puppies did usually show the adult dogs respect. so maybe the puppies were naturally more friendly, gentle, or cautious than your dog;s puppies, or maybe some of my dogs had taught the puppies respect for grown dogs during sometime when I was not watching?
I guess if a dog breeder doesn’t let their dogs show aggression towards puppies, the adult dogs quit displaying aggression towards puppies, at least when the dog breeder is watching.
So, you’re saying it’s completely natural for a social species to want to kill memebers of it’s own group before it even has the hormones to want to limb the social ladder?
It seems aweful conterprodutive to be down a pack memeber, injured yourself, and now you have to waste energy keeping the status your new rank, and for what, exactly? A better bone?
What it does is it makes dispersal of pups from their natal packs happen sooner than normal or it results in a revolution.
There was a breeding female wolf in Yellowstone that ruled with an iron fist, and then one day a young female got together with some juveniles and killed her. That young female became the breeding female, and the pack was ruled in a far more libertarian manner.
That was a wolf revolution against a despot.
Wolf social organization varies a lot more than people wold have you believe. It’s not all strict hierarchy.
Dogs typically adjust to whatever social organization you want them to have, unless you have a bunch of them. Then they sort it out themselves.
Hi ketthevamp, good point.
Sometimes dogs have more hormones than brains.
Many dogs are so unable to think through their feelings that they will fight with another dog which they have just met.
It makes no sense for two dogs to fight to be boss dog, when they might only meet if they happen to be at the park at the same time -maybe less than half a dozen times in their lives.
But some dogs will risk injury and their very lives over a petty squabble, such dogs should not be bred to, they are unfit for civilized living.
Ah that’s what U mean.
Still, many breeders breed certain dogs – terriers, old fighting breeds, LGDs wanting them to have some sharpness and high-ego-tendency in their personalities.
I don’t think too all dogs should be like good Methodists.
What is the “civilized living”, then? All dogs don’t need to sit in cars with their family or walk nicely on the bulevards. Hallelujah for that.
Finally, where’s the thin line between normal behavior and aggression / abnormality?
Bridget, I think that some dogs are unhappy living as a pet.
Some dogs have been bred to want to work sheep. Some dogs have been bred to want to run in the woods and hunt. Some dogs have been bred to want to be physically active all day long.
It is beautiful to see these dogs enjoying the work they love – but when people can not give these dogs the life that the dogs want, the dogs are unhappy sitting around the house all day.
I think that if people are going to get a dog to live in a house as part of a human family, then it is kinder for the family to buy the type of dog who loves living in a house with his people.
Not all dogs like the woods. Some dogs like living inside. Some dogs, without a leash, walk with their person – the dog doesn’t want to run away into the woods by himself.
I think that it is best, when a person thinks about what kind of life they really have to offer a dog, and then the person gets a dog which will fit into that lifestyle.
Like: I love the idea of exploring the woods, hiking, camping, traveling – but I don’t do these things much anymore. So if I got a puppy now, it would be best to get a puppy who likes a quieter lifestyle.
Many people buy a puppy the same way they buy a car. They buy them for the life they WANT to live, not the life they do live.
People often buy cars and puppies to fit their dreams.
There are jokes made here about people who live in L.A. or New York City and who never drive outside of the city, but they buy 4-wheel-drive cars made for driving off of roads, because the person WANTS to be a rough outdoors man.
People sometimes buy puppies from working collie lines because they DREAM of living a rural life. But the puppy is as unhappy in the city as the owner is.
People who have never owned a gun, or gone hunting, but who DREAM of learning to hunt, and finding a spot to hunt, often buy dogs advertised as from real hunting dogs.
But what this type of owner needs is a dog who looks like a hunting dog, but has the mind of a house dog, because the dog will live the life of a house dog, so he might as well have been bred to enjoy the type of life which he will live.
>>>>>>Many people buy a puppy the same way they buy a car. They buy them for the life they WANT to live, not the life they do live.>>>>>>>
Couldn’t have said it better myself!
There are some really trustable breeds, who will be just happy to live as a house pet, like the old pet breeds the Pug, French Bull Dog, Bichons, small spitzes.. A Dalmatian may look like a hunter but I would not suggest that breed for some different reasons which I think many know.
Bridget, I think that most of the time, the question isn’t if the level of aggresion is normal or abnormal, but: Does the dog’s level of aggression match his lifestyle.
To find if the level of aggression is too high, these might be some things to check:
1. Is the level of aggression what the owner wants his dog to have?
2. Does the level of aggression in the dog keep the dog from fitting into the social life of the area the dog lives in?
For example: I spoke to a woman who lived across the street from a dog park. (Dog park = a fenced area for dogs to run loose without a leash).
She got a puppy, and enjoyed taking the puppy to the park every day, morning and night. But as the puppy grew older, he was embarrassing her because he was so rude to the other dogs.
She had the puppy neutered, but he still grew up to love to fight. Then the owner could not take her dog to the dog park anymore, so she walked him on a leash, but he raged at other dogs he saw – dogs who were being walked to the dog park.
When she had got the puppy, she found that it helped her meet other people, but now, nobody would come near her, because her dog was so aggressive towards their dog.
She kept the dog, but that ruined her ablility to socialize with other people near her, many of who had moved to that area to be near the dog park.
She saw the dog as a child – you keep your child even if the child is bad. I felt intense loyality like that towards many of my first dogs and cats.
But after raising dogs of different breeds, I have dogs as friends not babies, if they go pycho and vicious, then it is bye bye, just like a boyfriend would be left if he started hitting or being cruel.
3. Also, it isn’t just if the dog’s aggression level fits with the owner and the owner’s lifestyle, but also if the dog’s aggression level fits in with the community.
If a dog’s aggression level drives it to throw itself against the fence, trying to batter the fence down to attack people walking along the street, then the dog becomes destructive to the neighbors’ sense of well being.
“Civilized” literally “able to live in a city”, like domestic animals, but not wild animals.
But “civilized”. when used for people, means that they get along with people without hurting other people.
Sometimes it means “cultured”, obeying the culture habits of the place you are living in – like using the “proper” fork placement according to the way people do it where you are.
For example: going into a bar and being friendly is good, but people who go into bars to get into fights might be called “uncivilized”.
Ecologically, I tend to think it is better people take dogs and keep them as babies, rather than making real babies.
Well, when your neighbors get a new dog, it doesn’t raise the taxes for you.
School taxes are expensive, and everybody has to pay into them, just like everybody has to pay welfare families, baby dog neighbors don’t raise the taxes, not where I live.
DON’T TRY THIS YOURSELF. It probably won’t work for you, and might get you badly injured.
I guess one of the reasons why I dislike CM’s methods is that I use to work for a dog trainer who specialized in rehabilitating dangerous dogs, and he was NOT that assertive or forceful, but he got results.
The owners took a very long time to train, but the dogs learned real quick. I was never comfortable with the method. It was NOT violent. It was intimidating. It impressed dogs, made them think twice about messing with you. It was a way of acting. It was MOSTLY a bluff. It did work well, and quickly.
We only had one pit bull come in – it was an escaped fight trained dog, and it’s first owners came and ‘reclaimed’ it from the people who had found it and brought it in for training, so it was only there for one or two lessons that I attended, and, I think, 2 or 3 lessons total. (It has been awhile).
At that time, pit bulls just were not kept as pets where I lived. Pit bulls fights were NOT illegal, and there were lots of pit bulls – but the pit bulls all belonged to fighting kennels on the other side of town, and the people strictly kept the breed to themsleves.
That one pit bull was the first that I had seen, I guessed, as did the couple who found it, that it must have been some sort of mix of boxer mix. At that time, there were only a fewer number of purebred breeds in the area, and it didn’t look like any of them. It looked like a panther in dog form, and it, although it was grown, it was NOT a large dog, not much bigger than a Cocker, maybe almost Aussie Heeler sized?
So maybe I should cut CM some slack, he works with this generation of dogs, not a previous generation of dogs, and dog breeds themselves change rapidly, with a new generation every year, and a whole turn over in the breeding females in about 5 to 7 years.
The actual stud life of a show sire is usually much shorter than his lifespan, because he falls out of favor with the fancy – unless he is really popular or well know. Once he is no longer campained and advertised, many breeders will forget him.
So the dog breed which you know now, may not look at all like they do now, in as little as 10 years, AND THE BEHAVIORIAL GENETICS MAY HAVE SHIFTED EVEN IF THE LOOKS OF THE BREED HAVE NOT CHANGED.
The breeds can, and have changed, but of course, not all breeds have changed as much as some other breeds.
So, training methods MUST change too. For example, today, people who write about how to prevent pit bull attacks, advise things like not making eye contact, not walking towards the dog, not doing anything assertive.
But that was the very method once taught to control dangerous dogs! “Don’t act afraid, stand up to the dog, look right at it”. So what worked then, is totally wrong now?
I guess the dangerous dogs of the past were not usually as dangerous as many dangerous dogs today. At that time Dobermans were considered difficult, and most of them were real pussycats. Although I remember one who was nuts.
Of course, it wasn’t ALL bluff. First you had to”get the dog’s attention” (a popular misquote from a popular joke at the time, based on training mules) (Are jokes copywritten? or can they be repeated online?)
So there was a very brief “I’m the boss lesson” which usually was mostly teaching sit-stay with a choke chain which was gently snapped, in the proper manner. Usually just once or twice, with only a few dogs going ape from the idea of someone bossing them.
One of the secrets is that dogs don’t know strangers, and so tend to respect them more. Truely dangerous dogs are usually better dealt with off their own turf – like walking the down the street to the corner. If the dog has been walked around his own neighborhood, it is sometimes better to deal with him after driving him to the trainer’s office for the first lesson.
Again, it takes a special trainer to use such techniques, and a person should learn only under supervison from a pro. DON’T TRY THIS YOURSELF. That grouchy dog you believe thinks like a person and who you assume wont hurt you? He might go ape and teach you who is boss – HIM.
Dogs have KILLED their owners. It probably is less common simply because most people are usaully wise enough to notice when their dog is going nuts, and they have it euthanised, or, where legal, they shoot it.
Some dogs just will not learn to be nice, they need constant supervision, and it is too much to expect from most pet owners, because most people just can’t control a nutty dog who is bent on murder.
I’m sure that many dogs who get rough correction, never really were crazy dogs, their owners just use that technique because it is the one technique they know, or because it is what they like to do to their dogs.
The problem with strong arm methods is that they often are not needed, and are harmful to the human-dog bond, and affect the person using the technique more than what it does the dog. It trains the owner to be a bully, more than what it trains the dog to be submissive.
I just don’t like strong arm training methods, and when I try to watch CM, I just can’t stand it because it reminds me of other similar methods, which don’t seem as rough, but I didn’t like that method either.
I am not going to say that no dog ever needs heavy correction, or that force is never useful. But such things should be used only as a last resort.
And most families can’t go down that road, because while one correction MIGHT make a dog respect you, dogs understand people, and they know that a child is a child, not an adult.
While some dogs might love children, other dogs might be more into hierarchy and think that children need to be on the botton of the pecking order.
I’d just leave dealing with dangerous dogs to professionals who deal with behavioral problems all the time. And if I had a dog so bad, that it needed professional help just to be safe, I’d part company from it.
Choose your pet dog wisely. And if your dog is dangerous know when to give up trying, and take a hike.
Retrieverman, now that you are acknowledging that you HAVE seen status and dominance displays between adult dogs, where they DO pin one another in some cases(at least acknowlegding that this IS natural canine behaviour–unlike some of our debators), do realize that when a bitch or other adult dog pins a pup, it is not NEARLY as violent, as the situation is not nearly as tense–there is usually no aggression with this parental form of discipline(which I have seen MANY many times–and NO HDP, NOT JUST with wolf hybrids! ALL KINDS of dogs!). It usually occurs when pups mob an adult enthusiastically, but they continue non-stop until the adult has had enough, and the adult dog/wolf/wolf-hybrid/coyote/African Wild Dog(I have seen this behaviour in ALL these animals) will either do the open-mouth head cracking deal, or they mouth and pin the pup to the ground and hold it till it stops squirming–make it submit, in other words. Nothing violent or painful about it(except to overly squeamish, abnormally sensitive people!), unlike a serious fight or dominance altercation between adults–but it is STILL a form(mild) of pinning and forcing a submit. In the Caesar video(I watched it again, wondering if I missed a punch or something–sorry, but it just wasn’t that bad or abusive to me at all, considering the dog’s excelerated aggression. I DO disagree with the terminology he uses–obviously he is TRYING to be more politically correct and saying he’s just trying to calm the dog–that is blatantly, canine basic behaviour, MAKING the dog submit, and I think it is perfectly legitimete in such a case. But that’s just me on THIS blog, anyway!)…and Kathevamp–even though puppies are capable(and sometimes DO kill each other without any adult canine or human intervention) of this behaviour, they are usually broken up by the mom–or in wolf pack society by any member of the pack–and humans SHOULD also monitor and intervene just as a canine adult guardian would. This is yet another of many reasons why it is best to leave pups with their mom for at least 6 weeks or even longer–the bitches tend to their pups better and more sensibly(without the physical discipline taboos that a certain clique of humans have developed) than human caretakers alone. And guess how they usually seperate the pups–yup, by nosing and shoving them apart and then repeatedley pinning them till they calm down. I’ve seen it over and over(and AGAIN hdp, NOT just with wolf-hybrids, but ALL KINDS of dogs! Setters! Pointers! Scent Hounds! Sighthounds! Huskies! Mutts! etc. etc. ) And EXACTLY Retrieverman–I saw that wolf documentary too(EXCELLENT!!!), and have heard of other such incidents–wolves do not long suffer tyranny! But this is like an abusive person who is CONSTANTLY trying to make their dog submit for all kinds of stupid, pointless(in the dog’s eyes, anyway) commands. A BULLY, in other words. But also, no dominant wolf in a pack will tolerate for a second being attacked by a subordinate. The whole social hierarchy with the dominance and submissive displays and postures is to PREVENT serious fighting and injury, and it USUALLY works. What I am saying(to deaf ears, apparently), is that when a dog or wolf ATTACKS with little provacation, it’s pack members(especially more dominant pack members, and as the human, in human society, you MUST be dominant–the leader–of the dog, or it WON’T work out very well in most human-oriented situations), this CANNOT be tolerated, and if force must be used to make a dog submit, then I’m all for it(instead of euthanasia) as a last resort. Quick, fairly painless, perfectly, instinctively understood by the dog, and DONE, once and for all. If as a human, you are scared to do this, or not physically capable of it, then by all means DON’T, but don’t knock it when others do it and save a dog’s life and give it a great life in the process, just because you can’t or it doesn’t agree with your human-oriented philosophy, which ISN’T working(which in some few cases, WON’T).
I have seen dogs fight. Whether this is over dominance or over something ephemeral like status– which is very difference.
In dominance theory, there is an assumption that that’s all dogs are and the only way to relate to them is as you are the master.
In reality, all that produces is dogs that have no “spirit” and no problem solving skills.
There is also an assumption in that model that the structure is fixed. In reality, dogs and wolves alternate status. They ones with high status on average are generally those that are older and more confident. They are almost never aggressive.
My first golden and my “golden boxer” were more like co-alphas (I reject the term alpha in general). They never had displays with each other. Always got along. The golden boxer did do displays over other dogs, but never over this golden, which she could have easily clobbered. I never got the impression on any kind of observation of which of the two was dominant over the other. They were more or less equals. One had lots of brains and the other had brute strength.
I learned more about what a real high status dog is like from those two. The one with brains just outsmarted all the other dogs. She had no need to force herself on anyone. The other dog wasn’t an idiot, but she did assert herself physically from time to time.
But that said, dominance theory as elucidated as meme in dog culture is too reductionist.
I prefer to use the terms high status or low status.
And the only reason why I do this is that dominance has been taken to extreme by people like Cesar Millan and are very dangerous.
From my earlier convos with you this blog, my guess is you very rarely get physical with any of your dogs and hybrids. Well, Cesar pretty much acts like the caricature of an alpha wolf to all of his dogs.
That’s a great way to get bitten.
I think we need to recognize some important things:
1. You’re not a wolf or a dog. They have much sharper teeth and jaws than you do. They can also run faster and for a whole lot longer than you can.
2. Your advantage is that big brain you have. I think we ought be using that instead of trying to physically dominate an animal that could very well kill us if it wanted to.
Dogs and certain wolves will fit whatever social system you want. It’s really up for us to decide.
And I’d just rather not have it like sled dog team in the Call of the Wild.
And I’ll say this controversially, if two dogs are going to fight, they probably should. Trying to micromanage groups of dogs is very PC, but it’s probably not the best thing for long-term peace.
Of course, this should exist within reason. I don’t think we should let our dogs kill each other off or really damage each other.
Of course dogs fight. duh.
Yet, FEW fights, even in the wild canid world, result in death.
MOST “fights” are ferocious displays of snapping and growling which result in nothing more than one dog accepting that the other “wins” and maybe a few minor bite wounds.
Of course there are exceptions. Probably most of us know people whose dogs really did try (or succeed) in killing another.
But as with dog bites (millions/year) vs. fatal dog attacks (25 +/-5 /year, we focus on the rare event at the cost of hysterical fear and difficulty in understanding the real issues.
Yeah, but since the dog culture has been born again (changed) and fragmented during the last 100 years, causes problems between dog owners.
Retriever people, for instance, don’t like dobermans, afghans and the old fighting breeds, for example, to dominate and tease their dogs (which they often would do). That is because they have chosen the non-dominating breed and so they are situated in the “good guys party” in the dog culture map of their minds.
Dogs of to-day are more for a status and “image” of the owner than for practical purposes. So the argues and fights are as much between-the-different-owners’ as their dogs’.
And that is what makes it so complicated.
Bridget, I understand what you are saying. That is a wise comment on different types of dog owners. Many people don’t think about how different breeds attract different types of people.
When looking at real estate, I felt different about neighborhoods that have Golden Retrievers and black Labs, vs neighborhoods that had American Bulldogs and Pit Bulls. (Sorry, but these evoke different memories).
Young, non-yuppy men often seem to choose dogs to impress other men, not the type of dogs who attract the good feelings of women.
I think you might like to read about a new way of grouping dogs by what type of people that breed will attract and fit with:
http://darlingyouaredoingitwrong.blogspot.com
Then click on the last catagory on the LEFT side, where it says “taxonomy AANEW (1)
I don’t think humans acting like wolves toward their dogs really respects the dog’s dignity or essence.
That’s something I do care about.
I care very much about the dog’s nature and essence.
It’s just I don’t agree with this cartoon version of what a wolf pack is and then applying it all dog interactions with everything.
Lane, what do you feed your dogs? Raw praire oysters?
Lane, you said that you disagree with some of the terminology that CM uses.
I think you hit the nail on the head with that one. I could take CM better, if he would just come out and say “I’m going to pin this punk dog who thinks he is such a bad@$$.”
All that talk about ‘calming’ a dog – when it looks to me, like the dog is frozen from fear……..I don’t know, it just seems to me that the words and the actions don’t match up well.
Does anyone else think the words and action should match better? To me, it would be like watching the space shuttle launch on TV, but having the news guy talking saying “Here we are in New York City, in the kitchen of the famous chef Pierre, let’s see what he is cooking up for dinner.”
He said the same thing when he hung up that husky dog until it was almost unconscious… as it was lying there he said it was in a ‘calm submissive’ state. Ludicrous.
I’m not sure what the TV program is suppose to be about, I wouldn’t call, what parts of it which I have watched, exactly “dog training”, maybe “dog breaking”?
But I have only watched bits of it. Not my kind of entertainment.
There is nothing EVER “calm” about the dogs Cesar “treats”. At best, they are physically tired from much needed exercise.
So yes, if Cesar said: “now I’m going to choke this small dog into submission” or “now I’m going to hang this dog from its choke collar until it almost passes out” or “now I’m going to force this dog into a position of learned helplessness”, or “now I’m going to teach this dog it had better not ever ever show its teeth to another human” (which btw, is a great a recipe for the dog to BITE the next human who does something offensive to it) he would at least be truthful.
But who would watch him?
EmilyS – you know what type of person would watch.
There are people who like to watch that type of thing.
CM is probably milder than some of his fans. Heck, there are people who like to watch a bull get stabbed to death, and who watch kitten stomping.
I would not be the least surprised to find fans yell “Don’t just choke him, punch him too”.
But giving Lane the benefit of the doubt, Lane mentions believing in the theory of dominating dogs, but only mentions doing so once.
And I was more referring to puppies trying to kill eachother. Again, seems like an aweful waste of energy and a high risk for not that much gain.
Yeah. This kind of interesting. Most dog puppies are not aggressive with each other. Jack Russells tend to be the exception I’ve found.
Wolf pups are known to be reactive towards each other at an earlier age, but it is coyote that really start fighting when they are puppies. That’s one of the things that keeps coyotes from being such tightly structured pack animals.
Lots of young CM fans seem to believe that CM is using a totally new dog training technique. Laugh laugh.
But there have always been lion tamers in circuses from ages past. Horse breakers and horse trainers always have been two camps of horse people.
And there have been people who specialize in “leaning” a dog NOT to do something, as well as people who train dogs to do something.
Both the people who teach dogs to do something, and those who teach dogs NOT to do something, can use harsh methods.
And there are trainers who both teach dogs to do work and obey commands, and who teach dogs not to do things, who use gentle methods.
But, commonly, the habit is to reward desired behavior, and to punish or speak sharply to, dogs doing unwanted behavior.
But normal dogs who really want to please and who have a good relationship with their human family, will stop unwanted behaviors just by being told “NO!!!” when they are doing the unwanted behavior.
Smart dogs learn after 1, 2, or 3 times of being told “NO!!!”, less bright dogs might take many more lessons before it sinks in that you just don’t want him to stop it this time, you want him to never do that again, and for the dog to remember this.
But there are dogs who don’t want to please. They do tend to be more common in some breeds than in other breeds.
I understand that is this the one factor most considered when the foundation stock was chosen for guide dogs – that the puppies who wanted to please, more often became guide dogs, than puppies who scored high for any other trait.
I believe that many of the times when you find a grown dog who doesn’t want to please, the problem is the dog and owners have not bonded. Handling the dog forcefully doesn’t seem to me, to be a good way to forge a bond with a dog. But I guess some people want a different type of interection with their ‘pets’.
But sometimes there are puppies who have something wrong in their heads. And there are dogs who mature weirdly, in a way abnormal for dogs.
This is rare, but it does happen, such dogs should never be bred from even if they win BIS, they should be euthanised, or if they can go to an environment where they wont harm people or other pets then they should be fixed (neutered/spayed) and sent away.
One dog that I met who was said to be like this, later was found to have a brain tumor. Sometimes when a dogs acts like there is something wrong with it – there is something wrong with it. You can’t train a brain tumor out of a dog. And no amount of harshness will cure crazy.
There are some puppies who just aren’t easy to deal with. They want to follow their instincts during times when they should be wanting to socialise in a friendly way. They should never be selected for breeding.
>>>>>>>And there are dogs who mature weirdly, in a way abnormal for dogs.>>>>>>>>>>>
Do u mean that some dogs have tendencis to fight and challenge also their owner when young?
If so, I know few of those kinds, all of them are “normal” now. They didn’t kill or sent anyone to hospital during that period.
Bridget, you know that some breeds usually have ‘soft’ emotions, and other breeds usually have ‘hard’ emotions.
But a few puppies just don’t fit the usual patterns.
But almost all puppies are normal for some breed of dog – just not always the breed of dog they are. I guess that is what retrieverman says he fears could happen to the Golden Retriever, if one of these odd tempered dogs should ever become a popular sire, then in one generation the breed would loose it’s reputation for sweetness.
I once had a large pack of dogs. There was one dog who was an outcast, a social pariah. The other dogs ignored him. They didn’t play with him.
If he tried to join in when the other dogs played, the other dogs quit playing. They wouldn’t even look at him, not even the larger breed dogs which ran with the pack. It was like he was invisible to them – like he was a bush they walked around without noticing.
Then one day, someone came over, and later commented on my “pack leader”.
I’d never thought about who was pack leader. In some situations one dog would be boss, in other situations a different dog would be boss, and some situations could cause fights because something mattered so much that everyone wanted it. And, with a few exceptions, like breaking up a fight, I could change which dog got what, just with a look and a stern “NO!!!”.
I assumed that the human visitor had assumed that the big breed dogs were ‘pack leader’ over the smaller ones. That wasn’t true, as far as fighting or dominance went: the big dogs had their own group, and viewed the smaller dogs like a sheepdog might sheep – just not something to have dominance spats with. But I didn’t want to argue or get into a lecture situation, so I let her comment slide.
The other person did want to lecture. I guess she watched CM on TV or something (I had NOT heard of him then). She wanted me to know that she had spotted which dog was dominant in my pack.
I thought it rather odd, that with all that went on in my pack while she was there (I was proud of how well they were together – I wanted to make a doggy Utopia for my dogs – at least socially), that all she could say was how clever she was to be able to spot the “pack leader”.
I was more surprised to find out which dog she thought was “pack leader” – it was the outcast!
She took my surprise at her odd comment as an indication that she had told me something new. She even smiled when she said “You didn’t know that, huh?” Then she explained how she had learned what to watch for recently, blah blah blah ……
…… kind of like a person, who had just read a couple chapters on music, nitpicking something about an album, or like monday morning ‘quarterbacks’, who never have played football, criticing how pros play the game.
So I watched this one dog, and his actions better – he was treated as if he was not a dog, just a bother. The other dogs didn’t fight with him, they just ignored him.
Some dogs are clannish that way. The big dogs had their own group dynamics with each other but they played well with the other dogs, the middle sized (purebred) dogs had their own nasty little heirarchy with frequent spats, the smaller dogs fit in where they could and used play to interact with the other dogs.
But one dog was just left out. He would try to play with the other dogs, by they just did not see him as one of them. Maybe he had inherited a different immune system scent, and didn’t have the hive scent or something?
He later got grouchy with the other dogs, started to open mouthed rush them. The situation where I was, took a turn (not exactly with the dogs); there was a need to not have so many dogs, so I didn’t keep him – I think I gave him to a rescue or shelter.
Instantly, you could see the difference in the rest of the dogs – they played more, they seemed happier. I waited to see if some other dog would fall into his place as pariah/pack leader (joke), but none ever did.
I don’t know what to call him – he wasn’t a bully, some of the other dogs were 4 times his size. He didn’t start off mean. Maybe he was just odd from puppyhood, and the other dogs sensed this. But the one thing he never was, was any sort of pack leader.
Sadder but wiser now, I would never recommend buying an emotionally one-note-jonny puppy from a litter. I’d skip over a puppy who was alway boss, always scared, always bold, always distracted – I would make exceptions for puppies who are always happy, or always nice…… but maybe not for those who are always calm, or always submissive, or always outgoing.
A pack requires give and take, a dog who always wants the same position isn’t socially flexable enough for a dog park, or for living in a big pack – where the dogs must both join in, and opt out – all according to what is going on with the group.
It just becomes more and more obvious to me, as this conversation continues, that those of you totally against any type of physical or negative discipline, have no real experience with REAL problem dogs–you are just continuing to spout platitudes–not one of you has suggested any real solution(not even the very generalized, limp links sent which I did check out, by the way) to overcoming this specific dog’s serious biting problem(other than euthanizing it), and my arguement, that Caesar Milan’s technique IN THIS CASE, was not so bad, still stands. There WAS NO choking, punching, kicking, or even yelling directed to this dog in this segment!! You “positive only” folks apparently hate Milan so bad that you are unwilling to be anything but severely negative to HIM!–apparently unwilling to use those “positive only” techniques in regards to your fellow man–as in “hey, Caesar, that wasn’t so bad, maybe try THIS METHOD instead”–except, of course, none of you guys have yet offerred up any better technique–just euthanize any dog who is being “abnormal”(even if it has been human mishandling that got them that way, which in my eyes, makes it extremely unfair, and worth whatever it takes to get the dog over it). All I’m saying is I will try a lot harder to save a dog than that, AND HAVE DONE, so I actually know what I am talking about on this subject. AGAIN, I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT USING SUCH METHODS ON ORDINARY, GOOD-NATURED DOGS!!!!!!! But THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS! If you personally have not run into such an exception, then you have no grounds to criticize those that have, especially when they have been successful(as in my case), and the dog led a long, happy, fulfilling life with lots of freedom. You naysayers seem to think that ANY physical discipline breaks a dog’s spirit–showing your inexperience on the subject again. You compare pinning a dog and making it submit, to severely and continuously beating it, or some such, and they are NOT the same thing!(and yes, Emily S. you DID say–I quote–“well, if you think dogs have emotions like that, no wonder you have no clue about how to handle one with resorting to harshness”, which is why I responded dogs CERTAINLY CAN be SPOILED into bad behaviour, and certain dogs ARE more SPIRITED and INDEPENDENT than others–so I’m not just “making shit up”….). Call it “learned helplessness” or “calming” the dog if you want to confuse or exagerrate the issue one way or the other, I’ll call it just what it is, and that’s MAKING AN OVERLY AGGRESSIVE OR SEVERELY MISBEHAVING DOG SUBMIT, and is the same thing all dominant or parent wolves and dogs(who have not had all the natural behaviour bred out of them) do to misbehaving pack members and pups, and it works like a charm for those people with the guts and know-how when applied AFTER ALL HUMAN-ORIENTED EFFORTS HAVE FAILED!!!! Sorry, being made to lie still for 7-oh-my-god-whole minutes is highly preferrable to euthanasia, in my continued opinion! And no, I DO NOT think using canine language and tactics to be “degrading” to dogs–just the opposite! I find that they APPRECIATE being communicated with in the same manner they communicate with each other–other than growling when appropriate, I also whine, bark, and howl to get IMMEDIATE and appropriate responses from dogs! I also purr to cats, nicker to horses, and bleat to sheep and goats to put them at ease and communicate specific feelings. I did the same, with vocalizations and gestures, to wild chimps and baboons in Africa to let them know what my intentions were–they always seemed to appreciate rather than resent it! Expecting a dog to ONLY communicate in YOUR(the human’s) way, to me, is rather rude and selfish in outlook! Combine such animal vocalizations WITH the human commands and gestures, is one of the easiest and sure-fire ways of teaching them what your human requests/demands/orders are!…….
….you “positive only” guys seem to be completely against anything that makes a dog “submit”, but that is your unrealistic, overly romanticized view of the world–even with positive-only techniques, YOU ARE STILL MAKING YOUR DOG SUBMIT TO YOUR WILL! And it has to be this way in a human dominated world, or your dog will end up dead, likely–as in not coming when you call when it runs out on a busy road, not desisting from chasing livestock when you ask it to, not relinquishing an object it is trying to eat/chew on that could poison or otherwise harm it. ALL these(and many more) cases are of you(the human) making the dog submit to your will. So get that point, if nothing else–SUBMITTING IS NOT ALWAYS A BAD OR DEGRADING THING!!! It is often for the benefit of the dog!!!! Getting this dog(in the video segment) to learn to submit(rather than bite) is blatantly going to save this dog’s life, because no person is going to long tolerate letting their dog bite as severely as this dog seems willing to. Would another method work? Possibly, but I haven’t heard WHAT from any of you positive-only folks, and having had experience with such aggression myself, I highly, highly doubt it. It is unfortunate(as many things in this life are) but sometimes firm discipline IS necessary, and is the only thing that works–as a last resort to euthanasia……
….And if you guys cannot submit to this view, I’m afraid I’ll be forced to recommend euthanasia!!!!;)
For certain reasons, I disagree. For dogs with systemic aggression disorders, I don’t recommend anything, because that stuff is clinical. It needs someone who actually will work with the dog and tailor the regime to make it work.
Secondly, sometimes dogs are entitled to their aggression.
Cesar uses aggression but never lets dogs settle disputes.
This is dangerous unless you’re going to watch your dogs 24/7.
As soon as you leave, those dogs that have a disagreement will fight.
Sometimes, it’s just better to let them.
There are dogs obcessed to kill another dog. I knew a woman who entered one dog from her kennel in field events, the other dogs so resented this, that his life was not safe with the other dogs.
I am glad she told me, because I started to take my dogs with me when I went out, but a few times, I just took the best one – and when I got back with him, the other dogs hated him.
I learned to lock him in a room when we got home, then let the rest of the pack inside, sneak him into the backyard, while spend time spoiling the rest of the pack inside for a hour or so, before letting them outside with him.
He understood that he had got something that they didn’t, so now it was their turn – IF I had let them all in, but left him outside alone, he would have been hateful towards them when I let them back into the yard. But he knew. Dogs can understand justice – at least some of them.
Dogs do get jealous easily, and they can hate the favored one. One of my relatives was terrible about this, she would go outback with the dogs and cause dog fights which I had never had any trouble with.
I watched her interact with the dogs and could see what she was doing wrong, but she would not change. The dogs would fight for her attention like cowboys in a movie fighting over a pretty bar-girl who takes turns flirting with each of them.
Like the folk song with the line “come a little bit closer, you’re my kind of man”.
You have to be like an officer and not fraternize with a large pack. It is lonely at the top, but it has to be that way.
That is the one thing which CM does that makes sense to me – that to handle a large pack you must put some emotional distance between you and them, and never favor any one dog with your attention. CM never says this (not that I have heard) but he does hold himself aloof from the pack when they are together, and let the dogs be friends with each other, not satellites of him.
You can not just let all dogs fight it out – some dogs will fight to the death.
If you have woods, and the dogs run loose, then maybe the lesser status dog can run away. But I have heard of people doing this, and when the lesser dog sneaks back at a feeding time – he is half starved. He waits in the woods, watching the others eat, and only comes in for food when he is half dead already.
That’s how top stallions run colts from the herd, and most pack animals chase away the grown offspring.
But dogs in a yard can be brutal, the looser can’t run away. It is like the territorial dog is saying “I told you to leave, I told you to leave, I told you to leave, I am getting tired of telling you to leave”.
But the lesser status dog has no place to go. He can’t even choose the option of starving, he is fenced in.
If a person has decided to raise dogs, here are a few things that they might think about first:
1. Choose a breed/type of dog that lives well in a pack. Nothing I know of is as big a time waster and heart ache than trying to manage dogs who wont get along.
If you feel you must have a breed with no team spirit, then maybe choose hybrids, like a pack of beagle females, and one or two of your favorite nasty little terrorist dogs.
If choosing a breed for good team spirit, don’t just look at what that breed USE TO BE like. Pick dogs/puppies right from a pack – and make sure it is a pack of dogs of all ages, many dogs don’t get too nasty and turn killer until they are two years old.
If you buy dogs kept in cages, crates, or chain-link pens, then don’t be surprised if your dogs turns out to be the type who wants to be boss, and doesn’t like other dogs living in your house with you.
He wasn’t bred to live in a pack. You might get lucky, but you aren’t choosing a dog bred to live in a pack.
2. Consider putting a cap on the number of dogs which you keep, like one new puppy every other year, or no more than 5 dogs total.
3. Have dogs which you wont be using for breeding fixed (spayed/neutered).
4. Go to a shrink before starting down the path of being a dog breeder, I hear there are drugs that can tone down the obcessive/compulsive urge to have large numbers of dogs/cars/pipes/shoes/old newspapers.
I’m serious, normal people want a dog, or 2 or 3 dogs. But when people start getting 12 dogs, they often start getting 20, then 40, and so on.
And before anyone chimes in with CM’s pack – they are neutered. A pack of intact dogs of both genders are different from a fixed pack.
One tactic is to stand aloof from the pack. Don’t mess with them as if you were a dog too. Always remember that they are dogs, and that you are not. This works best with nice pack oriented dogs.
The other tactic is to go to the other extreme, and get into the mud hands on. You are the boss of the pack, you rule, you spend your day and night telling the pack what to do. This works better with fewer dogs.
A common method which dog breeder use, is to start off knowing that their dogs will fight, and so, build kennels for them. When this information sneaks up on a breeder who has started out thinking that she could keep all of her dogs loose in the house and yard, then the breeder often ends up with dogs in crates and cages.
This is not good for the dogs, not good for the dog breeder, not good for the dog breeder’s family, not good for the people buying a puppy, and not good for the breed.
Know, if you get lots of dogs, that the day will probably come when your dogs decide that there is too many of them for one pack. And they will try to reduce that number by driving away some other dogs – and since the loosers can’t leave – there can be death or serious injury. Take the correct action BEFORE that day arrives.
Start with nice dogs, and your chances of your dogs being able to live in a pack is better, but, of course, you have to behave right too.
Training isn’t everything, but it isn’t nothing either.
Handling a pack is not the same as handling 1, 2, or 3 dogs. And no 2 packs are the same. You can remove one dog from a pack, and it will completely change that pack.
Lane seems to be writing about handling a pack, not one pet dog. I wouldn’t do it the way he does it, but then, I don’t have his pack, and I am not him.
Each person must find the training/attitude that works for them, and get the type of dogs that go with that attitude.
I believe that ALL families with children should get dogs geared to be good with children. That’s the first step, then raising those dogs, and how you and your family interacts with those dogs – not necessarily in that order.
It takes some experience or a lot of luck. I am reminded of a woman who complained to me that the local pet shop sold her a kitten “with fish hooks in it’s claws”.
She said she bought the kitten and gave it to her daughter to play with. She let the little girl carry the kitten outside. Something scared the kitten, and it clawed up the little girl and got away.
The mother was able to recapture the kitten from under a parked car but “the fish hooks had dropped off the kittens paws”.
The mother showed me the little girl’s scratches as proof that the kitten had been sold to her with fish hooks in it’s paws.
I explained that cat’s have claws, and showed her that the claws were still there but sheathed.
She was upset that the pet store did not tell her that cats have claws. She thought that nobody would buy a cat if they knew that in advance.
I told her that lots of people had cats as pets, and that this seemed to be a very tame kitten.
She asked why other people’s kid’s weren’t all scratched up?
I told her that it wasn’t a thing which I could explain, but that it was mostly in how the kitten was handled, and knowing when to let go of a scared kitten.
We were standing in front of her apartment, and she invited me in. Idiotly, I went in with my new friend. When we got into the kitchen she grabbed something to use as a weapon, stood in front of the door and said that I wasn’t going to leave until I had trained her daughter in how to handle a kitten.
I told her that I couldn’t explain, because it wasn’t a thing of words. I told her that it was like learning to drive a car – you just watch other people, get a few instructions, and corrections, and pick it up as you go along.
She didn’t understand, she had moved from New York, and never had a car, and only been in a taxi a few times. Her daughter stood halfway between us. I realized that this woman wasn’t just totally inexperienced with cats, she was nuts, and dangerous too.
I ran through some examples like “You just can’t tell a person how to paly piano”, “You just can’t tell a person how to dance”………. at some point she understood and stepped aside.
You don’t have to be sane to get pregnant, and you don’t have to be sane to buy a pet, or rent an apartment.
Much of dog training is not a thing of words. You need a coach/trainer to correct what you are doing wrong, and help you understand. This takes someone not just good with dogs, but also good with people, and able to recognise what is being done wrong, and to find the words to correct a novice.
A person could be very good at training/handling dogs, but unable to teach others. And guessing what it is that you are doing right, doesn’t mean that you are communicating the part which the other person needs to hear.
Everyone knows part or even most, of what they need to know about training, they need to learn which parts of what they already know will fit their situation, and to learn the few bits which they don’t know.
I simply can NOT find how to use words or actions to communicate “How to handle a kitten”. I might recognise when it is being done badly, but I can’t find the words to express how to do it right.
>>>>>>>She didn’t understand, she had moved from New York, and never had a car, and only been in a taxi a few times>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
-LOL- Is that an American criteria of a kind? Me haven’t ever had a car, and don’t like taxis either.
Bridget, I guess I didn’t write very clearly. No, it is NOT an American expression.
I only meant that I was trying to explain the idea that some things are skills, not education, and can not be communicated with words – they are things a person must learn to do, by experience and practice.
I used learning to drive a car as an example of a skill which is mostly learned by experience and practice, not out of a book. The car example wasn’t good for her because she had not learned to drive a car.
She wasn’t stupid or ignorant because of anything to do with a car. It is only that driving a car was not an example she understood.
For example: Say you went on vacation, and walked through the deep ash where where a volcano had blown up.
Traveling back home, a person asked you what was it like, walking through the ashes?
Maybe you would say “It was like walking through snow”.
That comparion is good IF the person you are talking to has walked in snow. But if the person you are speaking to has never walked in snow – then your words explain nothing.
As if I said “It is like riding a weporeofopew”.
That explains nothing.
Unless I say, oh that was a mistake, my cat walked on the keyboard, I meant the last word to be motorcyle.
I think this person was a bit crazy, mostly because she was so extreme emotionally. But she could have been trying to scare me away to get to the man I was dating who live in the same apartment building which she did.
Or she might have done something like this to every woman who walked by her apartment, just so that all the single women would go down the other street. Sometimes women with very attractive boyfriends do things like that to scare away possible competition. (I was younger, prettier, and thinner then than what I am now).
She might not have been crazy, she might have been mean and manipulative. Or she might have had some reason that I didn’t understand, to act that way.
Compare the Cesar clip to this one: video:http://www.wildliferesources.org/gwr-videos/
Yes, when I’m discussing my own dogs, I’m usually referring to a pack. A LARGE pack! I TRY to limit myself to no more than 10 dogs at once, but I seem to end up in situations involving potentially wonderful dogs with problems that are going to be destroyed if I don’t take them. I know I can’t save everybody, but SOMETIMES you just can’t say “no”…..8 of the 12 I have now are rescues, from very traumatic(human-caused) situations–NONE of which, I might add, ever needed any physical discipline of any kind!! None of them ever attacked or tried to bite me, either. That wolf hybrid pup I used as an example WAS AN EXCEPTION–which I am glad SOME of you seem to understand(even if you still don’t like the fact that I pinned her and made her submit when she bit me)–I had an adult wolf-hybrid at the time, too, and guess how he disciplined this bizarrely aggressive pup? Yup. he pinned her regularly till she submitted. He LOVED her, devotedly, and they were always best pals, but he WOULD NOT put up with her out-of-control aggression either, and he dealt with it in the way dogs and wolves have successfully maintained peaceful relations in the pack for thousands(yea, millions) of years. This behaviour in A PUPPY was bizarre, but she had been made that way by people who did not know how to discipline her, and only attempted(half-heartedly) to use mostly “positive” methods–and with this very dominant little hard-head, they just didn’t work. The only other puppy I’ve seen that was THAT aggressive to humans(and I’m NOT talking “play fighting” here–I certainly know the difference!) was a Chow pup–another very independent, dominant-natured breed……
I think it largely depends on the individual. My best dog so far is a Shiba Inu, a dominant, independent breed. Positive reinforcement was’t a surefire shot with him, but treating him aggressively only made him worse. Sometimes I wonder why there’s so many Shiba that will bite humans is because people manhandle them.
I never manhandled mine, crated him or pinned him down. I treated him like a family; if he got sassy, playtime was eliminated, he wasn’t allowed to hunt mice or greet new people and he got shoved off the furnitures. Essentially, he was allowed to be himself, until he start snapping or become sassy, then his freedom is slowly eliminated until he stops misbehaving. I find a lot of dominant dogs enjoy their freedom more than pleasing their owners.
He’s still our best-trained dog too. We never followed the “How to train your German Shepherd” or “How to Train Your Retriever” manuals because we knew he wasn’t the type that was eager to please, he’s too stubborn ad crafty for that.
Souggy, I applaud your belief in kindness to dogs, but I understand the emotion in what Lane writes, he needs for a pack of dogs to get along, and to respect him. But I think you are right about the rough stuff only making a shiba worse – it isn’t their type of training.
I went through all of that dog training stuff, and left it all behind. For me, the answer is simpler: Get nice dogs!
If someone wants to rescue difficult dogs, that is fine with me. But for me, and my future, I have settled on my answer: NICE DOGS. Dogs that don’t need domesticating, dogs who aren’t hyper, dogs who don’t live to fight – get nice dogs and most of your problems will never happen.
P.S. It is also easier to pick a nice husband, than to pick a mean one and to try to change him into a nice one. Ditto, most other relationships too.
Not that you can’t get help and fix a bad relationship, but it is easier if you don’t have to go through all of that heart ache.
>>>>>>I TRY to limit myself to no more than 10 dogs at once, but I seem to end up in situations involving potentially wonderful dogs with problems that are going to be destroyed if I don’t take them. I know I can’t save everybody, but SOMETIMES you just can’t say “no”…..8 of the 12 I have now are rescues>>>>>>>>>>
That is wonderful! Very demanding, too.
Yes, souggy, and if those methods work, I’m all for them–and they should certainly be tried first. Serious, aggressive biting is just a really difficult thing to deal with, because you can’t even touch such a dog prone to that, even in a friendly manner without getting bit! As for fighting between dogs, I rather agree with Retrieverman in NOT intervening if not absolutely necessary–let them establish and work out their own hierarchy, and then try to respect it. But of course, the dogs use the same physical methods on each other that you anti-physical folks so deplore! I DO intervene in certain circumstances–if a serious fight(not just squabbling over social position or a toy or a bone–although these can sometimes escalate into a more serious conflict…) develops between a large and a small dog, I feel it is necessary to stop it quickly to avoid serious injury or the killing of the small dog, that is so physically outclassed. And although most of you have probably not run teams of sled dogs, I have for many years–various breeds and mixtures. Anyone who runs sled dogs eventually has to bust up a dog fight! Some are worse than others–malamutes and Canadian Eskimo dogs can be very dog aggressive, and start fights at the drop of a hat! Serious, deadly, killing fights. And you MUST intervene pronto, or you will have dead or seriously injured dogs–“positive only” WILL NOT work in such emergencies! And not just sled dogs, but anytime there is a “pile-on” in a pack situation, of everyone going after one dog, you MUST intervene to save that dog’s life! In keeping multiple dogs, you must understand, too, that some types and individuals just are too inclined to fight(like TERRIERS of most sorts! What is the old adage about terriers? “kennel 3, bury 1″), and must be kept seprate when not supervised–I have some dogs right now that I would NEVER leave alone together without supervision or they WOULD kill each other….
He was a biter too at first, then he was “mouthy” when he wanted to show affections, but he made the connection: if I don’t bite or grasp my mouth around people, I am allowed to do whatever I want. He learned not to snap at people’s faces.
Heh… I wouldn’t let the dogs duke it out either; especially moreso since he used to be aggressive toward all large dogs and bears as well. If we let ours do that, not only we would have a dead dog, we would have a dog that doesn’t know how to call it quit. It’s better to teach them to mind their own business if they don’t want to lose their privileges.
To be honest, I can’t stand dogs that will work for praises or treats; too much of a people-pleaser. I also can’t stand dogs that are controlled by a dominant owner either; they have too much fear in their eyes. So, I am not sure what to make of the “click and treat” mantra, or the “brute force” training. I would rather have a confident, well-adjusted dog that can operate independently. I don’t see a lot of those dogs in our society these days– only with working dogs.
In my experience: Mouthing (liking to chew on people’s hands) is inherited.
I had several litter of puppies before I had one that was a mouther (hand-chewer). I spoke to an older breeder with my breed and she said that every puppy she had was a mouther – she thought every breeder had to train puppies not to chew on people.
Another example of: When you buy foundation stock – think of how much effort that type of dog needs, and GET ONLY NICE DOGS!
It depends on what the person want. I would love to have another one like him, frustrations and all, except as a trail-brazer who will tag along loosely; not another bush-hunting dog who will only come back when he’s hungry or thirsty.
I don’t want another cocker spaniel that doesn’t even know the difference between a kibble and a pebble. Or an English Pointer people-pleaser that cowards every time I raise my voice. But I don’t want to work with an only-defensive Pom acting like an improperly-bred dangerous Rottwieler either.
And it breaks my heart every time I see a good decent family dog given up to the SPCA just because people want a lapdog who will blindly follow their every word, and they got the wrong breed because of TV or their neighbours.
>>>>>>>In my experience: Mouthing (liking to chew on people’s hands) is inherited.>>>>>>>>
Yes, but it can be controlled and turned off.
Many retrievers do that, for they are anxious to get something in their mouth to carry. In that case, a dog’s nosing / chewing hands is asking for, and not biting in no way.
Souggy, I use to feel like you do – I thought I wanted a dog with lots of spunk.
In horses, stables often rent nags that plod along like tired zombies – so I wanted a horse with some dash and spice – a horse that wants to gallop. I thought it better to have a horse that you have to hold back, than one which you have to urge forward.
But it isn’t only a line which goes left and right, but a diamond shape that goes left and right, and up and down too. The other axis being “I want to go MY way” vs wanting to co-operate.
In horses I want a social horse which doesn’t just submit, but who likes to be part of a relationship with a person. Physical ability, agility, and spunk are not as important as being friends with your horse.
It is true that, with many horses, you must make them submit, to ride them. But nice horses are more fun. Yes, it is true that a rider needs to be the leader, but many horses don’t even want to be the leader, so that isn’t a problem.
An animal which you have to force to submit usually isn’t going to be a very good friend. Too often, at each new thing, you must, once again, use force – because that animal wants things to go HIS WAY, and people who own animals usually want things to go their way. Too many bosses, not enough friends.
The max number of saucy spicy dogs per household? One is the easiest number – unless you count zero. Obviously, I have changed my priorities in what to look for in animals.
My ‘Hagrid’ days of liking ‘dragon’ type animals is long gone, but I don’t begrudge others the same path which I started on, I merely point out that there are other paths and the going is easier there.
I guess I am biased in my judgement because I grew up around “working dogs,” as in farm dogs, hunting dogs, guide dogs. The idea of a companion-only pet or a competing dog is a relatively new idea to me. We just expected our dogs to be able to work when we asked them to, and to be able to retire when needed.
So when I moved to the big city, and found out how many people are owning rejects clearly not compatible with their lives, I didn’t know such dogs existed– you know, the stereotypes: the muzzled aggressive Akita, the hyperactive Border Collie, the fear-biting German Shepherd, the destructive Jack Russel. Actually, I didn’t know people breed dogs for fight-rings, flyballs, herding trials, field trials and so on– we didn’t have those where I was raised. As a family, we only had moderate all-around dogs with their own quirks.
But I can understand what you means, I am a bit more strict about what breed am planning to pick up next. Why? I got a really tame Colombian tegu one time, when 99% of them are known to be unruly and people-hater, and as a result of me showing him off… people thought ALL Colombian tegus are like him; when the truth was: he’s a freak of nature. So that resulted in quite a lot of people being disappointed with their purchase.
With dogs, I feel it’s the same way. People choose the dogs because they see a well-behaved one someone else have, not realizing that there’s a lot more at work behind the scene. So for this reason alone, I am eliminating breeds and bloodlines with reputations of being hard to handle. I would rather have a model citizen other people can expect.
So I agree, just because you can have a saucy dog, it doesn’t means it’s a good idea to purchase one.
I guess I am biased in my judgement because I grew up around “working dogs,” as in farm dogs, hunting dogs, guide dogs. The idea of a companion-only pet or a competing dog is a relatively new idea to me. We just expected our dogs to be able to work when we asked them to, and to be able to retire when needed.
So when I moved to the big city, and found out how many people are owning rejects clearly not compatible with their lives, I didn’t know such dogs existed– you know, the stereotypes: the muzzled aggressive Akita, the hyperactive Border Collie, the fear-biting German Shepherd, the destructive Jack Russel. Actually, I didn’t know people breed dogs for fight-rings, flyballs, herding trials, field trials and so on– we didn’t have those where I was raised. As a family, we only had moderate all-around dogs with their own quirks.
But I can understand what you means, I am a bit more strict about what breed am planning to pick up next. Why? I got a really tame Colombian tegu one time, when 99% of them are known to be unruly and people-hater, and as a result of me showing him off… people thought ALL Colombian tegus are like him; when the truth was: he’s a freak of nature. So that resulted in quite a lot of people being disappointed with their purchase.
With dogs, I feel it’s the same way. People choose the dogs because they see a well-behaved one someone else has, not realizing that there’s a lot more at work behind the scene. So for this reason alone, I am eliminating breeds and bloodlines with reputations of being hard to handle. I would rather have a model citizen other people can expect.
So I agree, just because you can have a saucy dog, it doesn’t means it’s a good idea to purchase one.
souggy, I understand about your tegu. I once bought a nice grown dog, he was a very nice dog. But as I got more into his breed, I found that most of that breed were horrible dogs.
One long time breeder of his breed told me that I shouldn’t breed him because he didn’t have the typical (bad) temperment of the breed.
I felt that was like telling someone that they shouldn’t breed a dog which doesn’t have hip dysplasia, because most of his breed have hip dysplasia, so the disease is typical for that breed so only the dogs with hip dysplasia should be bred.
Maybe it is like what Pedigree Dogs Exposed was saying about Rhodesian Ridgebacks – that the faulty dogs are the ones being given winning ribbons, the normal Rhodesian Ridgebacks without the ridge on their spine are being killed or neutered.
But with my stud dog, he had a nice temper. I met the woman who bred him, she said that he was nice becausee of all the handling he recieved as a puppy, but most of the puppies he sired were better than average in their temperments.
Lane, you are right about some nasty breeds of dogs. Some dogs just can not live together – you would come home to a dead dog.
I have raised different types of puppies together, and their breed disposition will overtake their mind when puberty starts.
You just can’t have a big pack of most breeds of purebred dogs, and in many dogs 2, 3 , or 4, is the top pack size for adult dogs over 2 years old.
Anyone who has had a pack of soft dogs, and thinks that they know how a technique to make a pack of breeding dogs play nice together, has never tried to mix a litter of hard puppies into their pack. With time, the hard puppies will turn hard.
Life runs smoother with soft dogs. One saucy spicey dog is cute, 20 of them trying to kill each other and the 20 softer dogs in the pack is just not doable.
Don’t get a team of impressive, proud, leader type dogs. Those types of dogs are like @$$holes – you only need one, and you don’t want 2.
…and ruthchrisler, the wolf capture video shows just how deeply ingrained that instinct to submit is in wolves(and dogs)–we have to do the same thing with our Red Wolves here at the N. C. Zoo when they need to be caught up for physical exams, etc. Because they are an “Endangered Species” and are being raised in captivity for breeding and release to the wild(as are these Mexican Wolves in the video), hand-raising and training and familiarizing with humans is not allowed–the negativity of the rough handling is actually considered beneficial in that it keeps the wolves from ever wanting anything to do with people, a real asset when released back to the wild, or in raising pups that will be released. Contrast that to Wolf Park, in Indiana, which is an educational facility and not part of an endangered species(or subspecies) release program–they hand-raise their wolf pups, leash train and thouroughly socialize them with human handling. Vets can come in and give them shots, exams, etc., with none of the trauma an unsocialized zoo animal has to go through–which is, I think, much more ideal for an animal that must spend it’s life in captivity, and is not part of a release program. Zoo life is a whole different ball of wax from being a pet/companion in a person’s home, though…..
That’s just it in training methods, one size DOES NOT fit all. I think a lot of this negativity involving the “brute force” methods is derived from people thinking that’s the ONLY method being used by those that DARE to admit that in some few cases, on some rare occaisions, it is necessary. Used sparingly and fairly(from a canine perspective–as in utilizing it in the same way they do with each other to maintain peace and control in the pack) it DOES NOT produce cringing, grovelling, abjectly terrified dogs. The dogs that need such discipline are usually so strong-willed that there is no way they are ever going to become fawning, subserviant types! Which I don’t want them to be, myself, either! My impression of the dog in the video is this–it is very insecure and uncomfortable with being a “dominant” animal, but it does not trust or respect people enough to relinquish this position, and yet is fearful at the same time. This is why it strikes out so violently–a bad combination of both fear AND aggression, and it has unfortunetely learned that BITING makes people(which it does not trust) leave it alone. Of course in a household pet situation, this is a sure way to get euthanized. Working at vet’s and kennels and for groomers, I often had to hold the “biters” to allow them to be worked on. Those situations usally involved just plain fear–no dominant aggressive behaviour at all. The bites were half-hearted, and not nearly so savage. In no way would I EVER be aggressive in return to such a dog in such a traumatic situation–that WOULD only exacerbate the problem. But a dog that is displaying insecure dominant aggressive behaviour, as I think the dog in the video is, what dominating it does, using basic canine body language as in pinning, is to let the dog know a human has come along that will take the responsibility and stress of being top dog which it is uncomfortable with anyway. Contradictory as this may sound, it WILL eventually allow the dog to calm down(though certainly not while the confrontation is going on), and it WILL feel relief and relax and no longer need to bite to control everything, because it has relinquished that control to another. Being subserviant is NOT necessarily a degrading thing–that is a very human view, not felt by most dogs. Dogs have been bred for generations to be submissive, that’s why so many feel so insecure(and become tyrants and bite) when they feel they are forced into a dominant position by humans that don’t understand basic dog psychology. I personally was totally submissive to the family dog when I was growing up–it never even occurred to me to tell this dog what to do(as a toddler)–I did what HE did, and followed his direction. I never felt degraded or unhappy–quite the opposite–I had a BLAST following this dog’s every whim! Including chasing cats and livestock, turning over neighborhood garbage cans, peeing in flower beds–you name it, I grew up committing almost every canine faux pas out there! And we got into a LOT of trouble doing it! Which is why I know, like most humans cannot begin to imagine, that in the doggy/human relationship, it REALLY IS better for the human to be in charge–you can still have loads of fun and a great life, but as the human, you know which activities(or SHOULD, if you have a lick of common sense) are going to eventually get you in trouble, and as a wise old pack leader, direct your dogs away from such, and protect them. Nothing degrading about it–dogs deeply, instinctively, appreciate it(even if they don’t exactly understand the why’s and wherefores involved)…..
Lane, that is one complaint someone has made about CM’s TV show – that, like a one-size-fits-all, they said he recommends and uses the same method again and again. I haven’t watched much of his shows, what other dog training methods does he use? Click and Treat? Zap and Snap? Praise and Affection? typical praise and correct?
Good God! Half of you probably sleep with your dogs or lick them back when they lick you. Dogs are distant relatives of wild animals (many generations removed from the wild I admit) but they have not lost their instinctive behaviour totally. Some of you are totally wierd, gee sorry I’m not as nice as some of the other posters. C.M. ‘s methods aren’t the only methods but they’re certainly based on animal instincts and I have never seen him hurt ONE animal. Some of you describe him “punching” a dog. Where is your head! He has been forcefull when necessary to rehab a dog that has been screwed up by humans and of course what you see on TV is the episodes that will be appealing to viewers. Get a life. Most of the so called dog lovers of today are totally void of any knowledge of why dogs do what they do and don’t deserve to have one. C.M. has an excellent grasp of “how to rehabilitate”, he probably makes some mistakes that we don’t see on TV but the ones we do see, make pretty good sense. Most of the dissenters on this site are probably dominated by their dogs.
It may not be that they “lost” their behaviors. Genetic analysis shows that dogs are derived mostly from Middle Eastern wolves, which don’t form large packs to hunt prey.
But even then, dogs are not derived from modern wolves, except in some unusual cases, like the Czechoslovakian wolfdog and the Saarlooswolfhond. To try to make comparisons with dogs and wolves that exist right now– especially northern Eurasian and North American wolves– is not useful.
Further, all that we think we know about wolves come from highly stressed captive populations that were just thrown in together. Do you think that we can make great generalizations about humans from observing prisoners?
This dominance paradigm is even being eroded for the large, northern wolf subspecies, so why do people think that this idea is so good to impose upon domestic dogs?
Although we’re still trying to figure out exactly what is going on, there is some evidence that dogs have evolved to be much more cooperative with people than wolves are. Granted, there are some biases in these studies– they use mostly Western dogs and Western dogs have been heavily selected to work closely with people.
The big northern wolves are to dog what Neanderthals were to us. John Bradshaw has an interesting way of thinking about it. The wolf survived the mass extinction event at the end of the Pleistocene by becoming the dog. The wolves that remain now are a relict population of wolves that never hitched their evolutionary star to people.