the gran whisperer

[Adrianne]

[Kimmikins]

Ba ha ha! Love it! It's amazing how much of a turnaround there's been, I remember not too long ago when his programmes and books were like the bible.

[Adrianne]

I have a 5 mth old pup on my books just now that already has 'millanese' attributed problems!



I do not know Mr. Millan so I have no opinion of him, personally. However, I do not like the tv program or the training and so-called “rehabilitation” techniques used and promoted on it. In my opinion: the techniques depicted on The Dog Whisperer are outdated, harsh, cruel, dangerous and can cause side-effects sometimes worse than the original behaviour problem they were supposed to solve.
20 years ago, force and choke chains were the name of the dog training game. This is how trainers dealt with dogs, and if you were taught how to train or solve behavioural problems 20 years ago, you were taught how to use harsh, forceful techniques. In fact, the "miraculous", "innovative" and "unique" techniques shown on The Dog Whisperer meant to supposedly "rehabilitate" dogs are pretty familiar to “crossover trainers” of today. The methods have been around for ages.and so has the knowledge that they cause pain and discomfort to dogs and damage to the human-dog relationship.
The program shows techniques that have been around since the early 1900s, These techniques cause pain and are meant to intimidate dogs and stifle behaviour;
CM is a skilled handler and an expert at using these techniques and can cause a dog to behaviourally and emotionally shut down in a relatively short period of time - effectively eliminating the display of bad behaviour ( but not addressing the root cause, nor teaching the dog a new, better way to behave). And just because he is good at causing a dog to shut down and therefore stop doing the unwanted behaviour, it doesn’t mean that the owners will be able to get the same results.
It is up to an individual in their career to keep up with the times and keep themselves up to date with the latest research and developments. CM is shown by tv to be in a training time warp of old disproven methods.

In the past, techniques like alpha rollovers, shaking the dog by the scruff, and jerking them around on a collar made with metal were typical and accepted. Intimidation and causing fear to get a dog to stop reacting were “the only ways” to get a dog to “behave”. But dog training and behaviour modification has come a long way, and now there is much available information about why techniques used in the past and those currently used on The Dog Whisperer are so detrimental to a dog’s mental and physical wellbeing and the human-canine bond.
When I have ever seen the program, I recognise the real fear and distress in the faces of the dogs as he is working with them. And i have also worked with dogs after such methods and what comes next is generalised fear and aggression, distrust of the owner and lack of enthusiasm.

The Dog Whisperer production team cleans up the methods used and presents the show in a nice package. If you don’t know exactly what it is you are watching, it might not seem so bad. The viewer is left with a strong, positive impression – the hopeless cases, the dogs on the edge, saved from the brink. In he walks, with a smile, and an explanation for all he does, he apparently 'is not flooding, he's "making the dog face his fear"; that's not physical force and intimidation, it's "creating calm submissive energy in the dog".
And the old favourite - used for everything from dog-dog aggression to tennis ball obsession - "the dog is dominant" so the dog must be shown who his “leader” is, perhaps the most dangerous things are the euphemisms and distorted explanations of what exactly it is he is doing. The audience is being manipulated into believing one thing when reality is actually something entirely different.
The program talks of "energy" as if it was some magical force that he exudes to get dogs into a "calm, submissive" state. Those who understand what he is really doing know that the words of the day are "intimidation" and "flooding" – CM uses physical force and pain to get a dog to "submit" and a behavioural technique called flooding to overwhelm dogs into a state of complete mental shutdown.
I remember in one program a reactive dog got jerked then kicked with the bottom of a shoe in an effort to get him under control. This happened over and over again. "I am not kicking him!" "it is never okay to kick a dog!" Apparently it's okay as long as you don't call it kicking the techniques depicted on The Dog Whisperer are painful and cause fear and stress, regardless of the words used to explain what is being done.

The public who watch The Dog Whisperer and are impressed by the quick-fix techniques don’t seem to realise that serious dog behaviour problems are not solved in the short period of airtime each case gets. There is also little if any follow-up to the cases presented. So while footage of a ‘Before’ with the dog reacting and causing madness stands in stark comparison to the ‘After’ shots in the same show, the viewer doesn't see the long-term effects of the techniques. Was the dog actually helped Was the owner able to use the techniques themselves to maintain the results? Did the dog get better, worse, or much worse

CM gets a lot of publicity - he's a Hollywood trainer with his own TV show and a PR team. In actuality, many trainers use methods similar to CM's in dog training and behaviour modification (they have been around for a very long time). They just aren't in the media. There really is nothing unique about what he does, just a case of right person, right time, and right team backing him. This isn’t necessarily about skill or unique ability. Charisma and publicity go a long way in an age of celebrity There are far more gifted, kinder, more qualified trainers and behaviourists out there using better methods.

Positive reinforcement-based training that eliminates the use of pain and intimidation in training has become really popular, especially over the past ten or fifteen years. Behaviourists have shown research demonstrating that POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT (R+) is an effective way to alter behaviour and change mindsets without instilling fear, causing pain, or producing side effects. More and more dog trainers and behaviour consultants are using these methods to teach dogs new behaviours and eliminate old, unwanted behaviours. Dogs taught through use of R+ actually learn new behaviours and the emotional issues causing problem behaviour to manifest in the first place are eliminated and replaced with a new, healthier emotional state. The trainers using and promoting these methods tend to have backgrounds in learning as scientists and authors or lecturers.
The method that CM uses employs NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT (R-) and POSITIVE PUNISHMENT (P+) in training. R- uses pain/discomfort to teach a dog something new - when CM jerks a dog into heel position, he is using R-. P+ uses pain or another unpleasant thing to stop unwanted behaviour. Pinning a dog to the ground, choking him or kicking/hitting to stop aggression is P+. Since CM describes himself not as a dog trainer but a rehabilitator, most of what he does involves STOPPING behaviour, not teaching new behaviour. So P+ is mainly what he uses when he works with dogs. P+ does not teach a dog a new way to behave; it suppresses behaviour that is already happening. Sometimes, new or worse behaviour manifests as a result of this suppression.
Dogs shut down emotionally, and exhibit something called "learned helplessness" - they learn they are unable to prevent or change something in their environment and so simply stop reacting.
They exhibit stress, fear, or increased aggression. R- and P+ often causes a dog to redirect aggression onto its handler. (Note that this is a big reason CM gets bitten so often.) So a dog that is pinned down in response to an aggressive outburst directed at another dog suddenly turns and bites his owner instead. Now there are two problems instead of just one.
And although "dominance" is CM's excuse for everything a dog does wrong, there are a variety of reasons a dog may act out in an aggressive or seemingly-defiant way - usually fear and confusion are the main causes. Using pain or force on a dog that is frightened or confused is unfair and inhumane.

People, such As CM, who are skilled at using positive punishment, may get instant results that can be quite impressive.
A wildly reactive dog can be subdued into a stressed but unreactive state in just minutes. Has any real learning taken place?
Maybe the dog has learned fear of the punisher, or a fear of moving incase more pain be issued. Maybe an inadvertent conditioning which leads the dog to believe that the presence of certain things in the environment are an indicator that he is about to experience pain (this can later cause extreme reactivity and increased aggression directed at new things in the environment). But that initial suppression of behaviour makes it seem as if the “punishment is working”.
An owner using punishment might see instant results, and be inclined to use punishment again. When the behaviour worsens later or new behaviour pops up down the line, the person doesn't believe that the technique is at fault; obviously the punishment just wasn't administered strongly enough. So the dog experiences harsher treatment, and a downward spiral of worsened behaviour/harsher punishment occurs.

Perhaps most frightening is that the owner doing the punishing is actually experiencing reinforcement for inflicting pain on a dog. This doesn't necessarily happen on a conscious level.
When a person smacks the dog for nipping, or jerks the leash for lunging, and the dog's behaviour at that moment subsequently stops, the person has been reinforced for punishing. "Oh, what I did had the desired effect! The dog stopped misbehaving".
That's reinforcement. When any organism receives reinforcement for something, it is going to keep repeating whatever that something is. So a person keeps using punishment, in a variety of ways, often inappropriately, and to increasingly harsher degrees
Owners who don't truly understand what it is CM does, or know that there are other, kinder options, see CM as a true magician with dogs. Yet you could fill a bookcase with all the positive reinforcement-based training books out there. And spend days scanning research material proving why R+ works and is a better choice than physical, heavy-handed techniques
Instead,the program is touting his calm, assertive energy on national TV and getting rich off of misleading and dangerous advice.

[Jordan]

I remember the first video I saw of CM where he kicked the dog on the side while walking it.........I was horiffied ......that put me right off him. Glad I made the right choice.

[Kimmikins]

I do think that there's something to portraying calmness...ok, "calm, assertive energy" may be hocum in the context CM uses, but remaining calm and giving off calm vibes DOES have an effect. Dogs do pick up on what you're feeling.

[Adrianne]

most definitely they do .. a dog learns to trust and respect the calmest influence (its mother) and subsequently the calmest human in the house .. to be calm is to be strong..not worried..no anxieties..therefore the best person or other dog to keep you safe....when we are loud..raise our voices in anger or excitement we cause the dog to doubt our ability to cope, and can also justify there own feeling of fear ..- if we feel anxious then they were right to feel anxious we just confirmed that fear is the correct response..whats more if your owner is afraid and cant cope te dog will just have to do its best and take over
unfortunately primates including humans have a tendency to respect and feel secure with the loudest animated influence...think of the gorilla beating his chest..the politician shouting into a microphone..
stay calm and train your dog!

[baileysworkworld]

I feel strongly that there isn't such a thing as a 'dominant' or 'aggressive' dog.

A lot of people say a dog is being dominant if they sleep in a high place (on stairs or fav sofa), if they eat first or if they pull you round on a lead.

It is not natural for dogs to be 'doninant'. In the wild, wolf packs have a mating couple who lead. Everything they do is about feeding and bring up the young. Once a kill has been made, it is either the young who get to eat first, or the females who then go back to the cubs and regurgitate for them. There is no queue with the alpha dog eating first and the rest waiting in line. They tend to all tuck in.

Play fighting in young wolves is often seen as battling for top place, where actually it is more likely to be testing each others strengths and weaknesses so, when on a hunt, they will know who has a stronger bite, or who has more stamina!

In a pack type environment, it is not the top dog who gets the most comfy spot. I have some dogs who prefer lying on a hard floor and others who will only lie on a quadruple thick folded duvet! It's not about the best place, it is about who feels comfortable in which spot. Some of my dogs prefer to be out in the hall, in the quiet, away from all the hustle and bustle, others have to be right under my feet!

Very often I hear dogs described as dominant when other words will describe them just as well, such as - boisterous, unsocial, bouncy, snappy, young (!), ill-mannered, thuggish, bulling, vocal, the list can go on.

I also don't think dogs are naturally aggressive. As Adrianne said, dogs bite for 2 reasons, fear and frustration. Much 'on lead' reactivity can be put down to the frustration of not being able to get to interact with the object of the 'perceived' aggression.
Food aggression can be classed as frustration, unless certain methods have been used which will then make a dog fearful around food.

Anything new and strange which promotes snarling, snapping, lunging or biting is obviously fear based as many dogs will be fearful of very new experiences unless they are properly habitulised and socialised.

I am of the school of thought that I learn from each and every dog and dog trainer / behaviourist / owner (pretty much every canine professional) that I meet. Whether it is learning tips and tricks and good things or learning what not to do!

I have studied CM along with others and even seen him in the flesh. I agree with some of his theories, mainly, exercise is one of the keys to a happy, healthy dog. However, due to his reputation and peoples views of him I am in a position where if I use certain phrases such as -

Balance (I describe all dogs who are happy, healthy and calm as well balanced because they are!!)

Exercise, discipline, affection (I tend to agree that dogs need all these things and usually if they get them in the appropriate quantities, each individual is different, this will lead to a happy well balanced dog!)

No Touch, no Talk, No Eye Contact (a method which I personally find works with dogs, especially nervous, fearful dogs. I ignore until they are comfortable with me and let me know in their own time. It also stops me getting leaped on by every bouncy, boisterous dog we meet when out and about, I find many people have been jumped at and even knocked down by strange dogs because of how they react when a eager, bouncy 2 year old lab is running at them full pelt to say HHHHIIIIIII!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - And yes, the owners should know better!)

and mainly Calm Assertive Energy (which is something I try to use at all times with my dogs. They are very good at letting me know when I am stressed, believe me!)

people, especially other dog professionals assume you are a CM devotee and think that you must have no idea what you are doing!!


Unfortunately, I have been using my methods with dogs since I was a child, long before CM was known. He has just been able to put into words what has been in my head for many years.