Title: The Pit Bull Placebo: The Media, Myths, and Politics of Canine Aggression
Author: Karen Delise
Year published: 2007
Like the pharmacologically inactive sugar pill dispensed to placate a patient who supposes it to be medicine, eradication of the Pit Bull is heralded as the cure for severe dog attacks. However, a placebo is administered to appease a person's mental duress. In the present day climate of fear and misinformation about Pit Bulls and dog attacks, eradication of the Pit Bull is the placebo administered solely to appease the public's mental anxiety.
And so it goes. The Pit Bull: locking jaws, biting and holding while grinding, the dog that attacks like a shark. These are all media myths designed to demonize one particular dog breed.
The Pit Bull Placebo traces the media's coverage and the reality of dog bite attacks from the end of the 19th century through to today. Drawing on real cases and quoting from the newspapers' accounts of these cases, Karen Delise makes an incredibly simple case: There have always been dog attacks, some severe, some fatal. But it is the media's focus that has twisted the public's perception of the Pit Bull.
The Bloodhound was the original bad guy. Hyped up through plays based on Uncle Tom's Cabom in which the dogs chase down an escaped slave and her newborn child, these dogs were vilified and people were supposed to be frightened of them. But media reports, which did feature the dog's breed, generally focused more on the cause and effect aspect of the dog attack. They gave their readers a true picture of what caused the attack. It did not begin and end with the words "Vicious Bloodhound."
Then it was the German Shepherd Dog, which had two major saving graces: police work and Rin Tin Tin. While many substandard owners obtained German Shepherd Dogs for guard work and left them chained outside with little human interaction, many people recognized them as great, noble creatures.
The Doberman, which is still sometimes viewed in a negative light, followed on the heels of the German Shepherd Dog. The Doberman acquired its super-predator status through both reality and myth. The image of the Doberman used by Nazis was strong within people's minds. It was hard for them to see the dog as a gentle creature, a canine like any other, and so borne out of the harsh reality of life as a Nazi dog was the myth that Dobermans' heads were too small and their brains would outgrow it, thus leading to headaches that would cause them to snap. The Doberman had no saving grace like the German Shepherd Dog and only fell from this super-predator label when the Pit Bull emerged to take its place.
Through each of these decades, when the Bloodhound, the German Shepherd Dog, and the Doberman, were at the height of their turns as the supposed aggressive dogs, the newspapers continued to report dog bite attacks in a fairly realistic light.
It wasn't until the latter part of the 20th century when the media would begin to twist things to suit their need to always shock their audience. A good example of the media's twisting of the facts lies in their describing a dog that attacked as the "family dog." To most people, this description brings to mind Rover resting at the feet of his master while his master reads by the fireplace or Rover fetching the newspaper on Sunday morning. It brings to mind a well-socialized, friendly, family pet. What it does not bring to mind is a dog chained out back with a heavy logging chain, ignored for the most part, fed occasionally, often starved, beaten, or neglected. The latter cannot, in good conscience, be described as a "family dog." Delise, instead, describes it as a "resident dog." This is a more accurate term. But the media's use of "family dog" aids in leading people to the conclusion that these dogs will eventually turn on their owners.
There is just no basis for this claim. In fact, few, if any Pit Bull has turned on its owner without some sort of provocation.
Perhaps the best demonstration of the media's twisting of events can be seen in one particular case Delise outlines.
The media report can be summed up as: A 6-year-old girl was mauled to death by the family's pit bulls. The dogs were friendly, had been raised with the girl since they were puppies. In essence, they "turned on her."
The reality of the situation? The dogs (one male, one female), which belonged to the woman's recently-deceased boyfriend were intact and young. They had been confined to a basement of a vacant house while the mother and her daughter moved. They were underweight, starving (no food was found in their stomachs), and had ingested rat poison, nails, and rubber bands in an effort to feed themselves.
It sounds a bit different when they're described as they really were. Unsocialized, starving, and sick animals vs. family pet.
Delise makes the case that in order to truly understand dog attacks, one has to look at the people involved and the situation itself. Divvying up attacks by breed tells us nothing. Dogs that attack have often been chained out and neglected, are starving, have been abused, and are often intact.
Instead of looking at the real situation, the media has maligned an entire breed for sensationalism. And this has led to politicians taking up the cause and enacting breed bans.
Denver is often sited when discussions of Breed-Specific Legislation is brought up. They first enacted a ban on pit bull "type" dogs in 1989 and recently reinstated it. Their seven points in regard to why pit bulls needed to be banned were based on media sensationalism, twisted facts, contradictions, and "scientific" articles in such esteemed journals as Sports Illustrated. They brought in pseudoscience and anecdotes and called them facts. Even worse, this ban was enacted due to two incidents that happened three years apart: one fatal, one not.
What has happened to the Pit Bull has been a horrifying witch hunt that, just like the witch hunts of Salem, has no basic in reality. The Pit Bull is and can be a wonderful, real family pet if raised the proper way...just like any other breed of dog. To think that in less than 100 years human beings could create a monster of dog with anatomy unlike any other canine, is not only the height of arrogance, but is also ridiculous.
Unfortunately, this vilification is not likely to change until people start to think with a little bit more logic and the media starts to disseminate facts instead of twisted facts and sensationalized accounts that don't resemble reality.
The Pit Bull Placebo is now available online for free. Please download it and pass the link alone. This is an important book and Pit Bull owners everywhere would like you to see it.
Showing posts with label book review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label book review. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Book Review: Bringing Light To Shadow by Pamela S. Dennison
Title: Bringing Light to Shadow: A Dog Trainer's Diary
Author: Pamela S. Dennison
Year published: 2004
You can't rehabilitate an aggressive dog using positive training. You must show the dog who is the alpha in order to gain respect. And besides, positive-based trainers won't even take on aggressive dogs.
I cannot count the number of times I have heard a combination of these statements. Add to them the usual glorification of Cesar Millan, and you have the complete picture. According to these folks, he rehabilitates "red zone" dogs, the dogs others have given up on, the ones the positive trainers won't work with because they don't have the guts/know-how/calm assertive energy to rehabilitate them. These positive, rewards-based trainers are handy for training tricks, but that's it.
Except...that's not quite true. Bringing Light to Shadow proves those statements wrong. Pamela Dennison, who already had a houseful of dogs (a border collie mix, a border collie, and a sheltie), decided in a moment of craziness to add a 4th dog to the mix: a rescued border collie named Shadow. She did not know, at the time she brought him home, that Shadow was human-aggressive. As with many aggressive dogs, most of his issues were based in fear. He was a dog who, under different circumstances would have been put down. He was a dog who, under the "rehabilitation" of Cesar Millan, would have lashed out or shut down, leaving him living in a sort of hell.
Instead, Shadow ended up in the hands of positive trainer Pamela Dennison. At the time she had little experience working with aggressive dogs. She had been training dogs for agility, obedience, and herding work. But Shadow became a project of love and she stuck by him through thick and thin.
The book is written in journal format and are the actual entries Dennison made in her journal about Shadow's progression (and sometimes regression) toward becoming a "normal" dog. Included within the pages not only are her moments of looking back and pointing out what she did right and what Shadow did right, but also those moments where she made a wrong move and caused Shadow to regress a bit.
This book is truly insightful and should be on every dog trainer's bookshelf. If you have a dog with aggression issues, this book can make you feel hope. And mostly, it can make anyone realize that positive training can WORK with an aggressive dog. In 18 months she turns Shadow from a human-aggressive dog to one who passes his Canine Good Citizen test. 18 months may seem like a long time, but at the end of the book he was only 2 1/2, so there are many more years to come.
I really enjoyed this book and it's one I'll keep on my shelf and keep referring back to over and over again.
Buy Bringing Light to Shadow by Pamela S. Dennison
Author: Pamela S. Dennison
Year published: 2004
You can't rehabilitate an aggressive dog using positive training. You must show the dog who is the alpha in order to gain respect. And besides, positive-based trainers won't even take on aggressive dogs.
I cannot count the number of times I have heard a combination of these statements. Add to them the usual glorification of Cesar Millan, and you have the complete picture. According to these folks, he rehabilitates "red zone" dogs, the dogs others have given up on, the ones the positive trainers won't work with because they don't have the guts/know-how/calm assertive energy to rehabilitate them. These positive, rewards-based trainers are handy for training tricks, but that's it.
Except...that's not quite true. Bringing Light to Shadow proves those statements wrong. Pamela Dennison, who already had a houseful of dogs (a border collie mix, a border collie, and a sheltie), decided in a moment of craziness to add a 4th dog to the mix: a rescued border collie named Shadow. She did not know, at the time she brought him home, that Shadow was human-aggressive. As with many aggressive dogs, most of his issues were based in fear. He was a dog who, under different circumstances would have been put down. He was a dog who, under the "rehabilitation" of Cesar Millan, would have lashed out or shut down, leaving him living in a sort of hell.
Instead, Shadow ended up in the hands of positive trainer Pamela Dennison. At the time she had little experience working with aggressive dogs. She had been training dogs for agility, obedience, and herding work. But Shadow became a project of love and she stuck by him through thick and thin.
The book is written in journal format and are the actual entries Dennison made in her journal about Shadow's progression (and sometimes regression) toward becoming a "normal" dog. Included within the pages not only are her moments of looking back and pointing out what she did right and what Shadow did right, but also those moments where she made a wrong move and caused Shadow to regress a bit.
This book is truly insightful and should be on every dog trainer's bookshelf. If you have a dog with aggression issues, this book can make you feel hope. And mostly, it can make anyone realize that positive training can WORK with an aggressive dog. In 18 months she turns Shadow from a human-aggressive dog to one who passes his Canine Good Citizen test. 18 months may seem like a long time, but at the end of the book he was only 2 1/2, so there are many more years to come.
I really enjoyed this book and it's one I'll keep on my shelf and keep referring back to over and over again.
Buy Bringing Light to Shadow by Pamela S. Dennison
Friday, June 5, 2009
Book Review: The Power of Positive Dog Training by Pat Miller
Title: The Power of Positive Dog Training
Author: Pat Miller
Year published: 2001
I think this really is the go-to book for learning about positive training and how to implement it with your dog. I've never beaten around the bush with indicating that I'm very pro-positive training and I think Pat Miller is one of the best.
The book begins with a little bit about Pat Miller's history of training, namely that she was a "traditional" trainer at one point, which many were. Traditional trainers focus more on aversives and punishments: leash pops, choke chains, and the like. It tells briefly of her discovery and switch to positive methods. I think this is important: it says that anyone can do it, no matter how they trained beforehand.
From there, the book is divided into three main sections.
The first outlines the ins and outs of positive training: how it works, why it works, why it builds a better bond with your dog. It explains a little bit about how dogs think and learn and outlines some basic training tools you'll need with your dog.
The second gives instructions on how to get your dog to do some basic obedience: sit, down, stay, come, etc. She breaks each of them down into easy steps to achieve them and gives suggestions on common problems people might encounter when trying to teach their dog the particular command. At the end of each section, she gives "bonus games" which are basic tricks you can teach your dog. She stresses, time and time again, that this should be fun: both for the human and the dog.
The third addresses common behavioral problems, such as housetraining, separation anxiety, aggression, socialization, and what to do when there's a baby on the way. Each of these sections can (and are) books on their own, so in the context of a fairly short book they're somewhat glossed over. Miller is, at every turn, careful to note that if your dog has some more serious issues that finding a good positive trainer who can work with you and your dog in person is most important.
I recommend this book to anyone who wants to get started in obedience training with their dog. They'll end up with a really well-behaved dog who loves to work for them.
Buy The Power of Positive Dog Training by Pat Miller
Author: Pat Miller
Year published: 2001
I think this really is the go-to book for learning about positive training and how to implement it with your dog. I've never beaten around the bush with indicating that I'm very pro-positive training and I think Pat Miller is one of the best.
The book begins with a little bit about Pat Miller's history of training, namely that she was a "traditional" trainer at one point, which many were. Traditional trainers focus more on aversives and punishments: leash pops, choke chains, and the like. It tells briefly of her discovery and switch to positive methods. I think this is important: it says that anyone can do it, no matter how they trained beforehand.
From there, the book is divided into three main sections.
The first outlines the ins and outs of positive training: how it works, why it works, why it builds a better bond with your dog. It explains a little bit about how dogs think and learn and outlines some basic training tools you'll need with your dog.
The second gives instructions on how to get your dog to do some basic obedience: sit, down, stay, come, etc. She breaks each of them down into easy steps to achieve them and gives suggestions on common problems people might encounter when trying to teach their dog the particular command. At the end of each section, she gives "bonus games" which are basic tricks you can teach your dog. She stresses, time and time again, that this should be fun: both for the human and the dog.
The third addresses common behavioral problems, such as housetraining, separation anxiety, aggression, socialization, and what to do when there's a baby on the way. Each of these sections can (and are) books on their own, so in the context of a fairly short book they're somewhat glossed over. Miller is, at every turn, careful to note that if your dog has some more serious issues that finding a good positive trainer who can work with you and your dog in person is most important.
I recommend this book to anyone who wants to get started in obedience training with their dog. They'll end up with a really well-behaved dog who loves to work for them.
Buy The Power of Positive Dog Training by Pat Miller
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Book Review: How to Be Your Dog's Best Friend by the Monks of New Skete
Title: How to Be Your Dog's Best Friend
Author: The Monks of New Skete
Year published: 2002 (revised updated version)
Part II in my "Know Thine Enemies" series.
I know...this sounds strange. Monks? Non-positive dog trainers?
Well, I found a bit of a conundrum in this book. I wanted to like what they had to say. I wanted to gloss over the stuff I didn't agree with and look to the good stuff. But I had to look at the book as if I knew nothing about dog training and nothing about dogs, as if I were the kind of person who would turn to this book for advice. And therein lies the problem.
There is a LOT of positive stuff in this book. It's the 2nd edition of their book, so the Monks are more up to date with modern dog training ideas than they were in their previous installment. They talk a lot about the human-canine bond and how deep and strong it can be, about how you can learn and grow as a person because of your dog.
Their sections on specific training give various ways of accomplishing each goal. For instance, in teaching the sit they discuss luring with a treat as well as positioning your dog using the collar and a hand on the dog's rump. The major problem with their methods is that they first suggest old-style methods using more force, but then say "a sensitive dog might not respond well to this." I'm not sure why one should begin with force and then retract it if the dog does not respond well. A more positive way would be to begin with luring and move onto something more physical if needed (I don't believe it generally is). They especially advocate the more positive approaches with puppies, but these can easily be used for older dogs as well, both ones who are even-tempered and ones who are more out of control. Clicker training (which they mention briefly) has done amazing things for many dogs of all temperaments.
They point out several myths around house training (push his nose in it, etc.), which I was glad to see. They don't make a huge deal out of dog's living in the moment, but it's a strong part of their training methods.
So all this sounds decent, right? It all falls apart in Chapter 10 on discipline. I found myself scratching my head in amazement as I read this chapter as it takes one far away from the building of a good human-canine bond that they reference many time in this book.
They describe two major methods of discipline: the shakedown (which requires the handler to grab the dog by either its jowls or the skin on the neck, lift their front feet off the ground and shake them while saying "NO" in their face loudly) and hitting the dog under the chin. To the latter, they say How hard do you hit the dog? A good general rule is that if you did not get a response, a yelp or other sign, after the first hit, it wasn't hard enough. That's right -- hit your dog until it yelps. And only then it will understand that it has done something wrong. Not only are these methods potentially dangerous (a dog who is a fear biter or has the potential for aggression is likely to snap or bite in these situations), they are also very detrimental to the human-canine bond the Monks seem to stress so highly. In fact, they mention how the dog may be shaken up mentally and physically and will not approach its handler after such a correction, which is not entirely surprising. Physical punishment is a surefire way to damage the bond.
I do agree with the Monks that a well-placed correction can be valuable feedback, but many dogs respond to a verbal correction. A quick "eh-eh" and my dog freezes and returns to what position she needs to hold.
I was glad to see them retract the suggestion of the alpha roll, though their reasoning for it was a bit off. Yes it's dangerous to owners. There is no doubt there. But it also does not work as discipline, though they seem to think it does and likely still use it in their training.
They also recommend "leash pops" using a training collar (generally a metal or nylon choke collar), which is a quick yank and release type of correction. If used correctly, it's not dangerous (though it is in the hand's of someone doesn't know how to use it), but neither is it a good method for corrections. Dogs who are jerked around are often frustrated and the fact that it can damage their windpipes is enough for me to recommend against them!
So all together, there are some good things here, but also some bad. If you can walk away from it with just keeping the positive stuff in mind while ignoring Chapter 10 and the other more negative, correction-based ideas, then it's not a bad book. But otherwise, I suggest a book more geared toward positive training, like Pat Miller's The Power of Positive Training or a more developed book on the human-canine bond, like Patricia McConnell's The Other End of the Leash or Suzanne Clothier's Bones Would Rain From the Sky.
Author: The Monks of New Skete
Year published: 2002 (revised updated version)
Part II in my "Know Thine Enemies" series.
I know...this sounds strange. Monks? Non-positive dog trainers?
Well, I found a bit of a conundrum in this book. I wanted to like what they had to say. I wanted to gloss over the stuff I didn't agree with and look to the good stuff. But I had to look at the book as if I knew nothing about dog training and nothing about dogs, as if I were the kind of person who would turn to this book for advice. And therein lies the problem.
There is a LOT of positive stuff in this book. It's the 2nd edition of their book, so the Monks are more up to date with modern dog training ideas than they were in their previous installment. They talk a lot about the human-canine bond and how deep and strong it can be, about how you can learn and grow as a person because of your dog.
Their sections on specific training give various ways of accomplishing each goal. For instance, in teaching the sit they discuss luring with a treat as well as positioning your dog using the collar and a hand on the dog's rump. The major problem with their methods is that they first suggest old-style methods using more force, but then say "a sensitive dog might not respond well to this." I'm not sure why one should begin with force and then retract it if the dog does not respond well. A more positive way would be to begin with luring and move onto something more physical if needed (I don't believe it generally is). They especially advocate the more positive approaches with puppies, but these can easily be used for older dogs as well, both ones who are even-tempered and ones who are more out of control. Clicker training (which they mention briefly) has done amazing things for many dogs of all temperaments.
They point out several myths around house training (push his nose in it, etc.), which I was glad to see. They don't make a huge deal out of dog's living in the moment, but it's a strong part of their training methods.
So all this sounds decent, right? It all falls apart in Chapter 10 on discipline. I found myself scratching my head in amazement as I read this chapter as it takes one far away from the building of a good human-canine bond that they reference many time in this book.
They describe two major methods of discipline: the shakedown (which requires the handler to grab the dog by either its jowls or the skin on the neck, lift their front feet off the ground and shake them while saying "NO" in their face loudly) and hitting the dog under the chin. To the latter, they say How hard do you hit the dog? A good general rule is that if you did not get a response, a yelp or other sign, after the first hit, it wasn't hard enough. That's right -- hit your dog until it yelps. And only then it will understand that it has done something wrong. Not only are these methods potentially dangerous (a dog who is a fear biter or has the potential for aggression is likely to snap or bite in these situations), they are also very detrimental to the human-canine bond the Monks seem to stress so highly. In fact, they mention how the dog may be shaken up mentally and physically and will not approach its handler after such a correction, which is not entirely surprising. Physical punishment is a surefire way to damage the bond.
I do agree with the Monks that a well-placed correction can be valuable feedback, but many dogs respond to a verbal correction. A quick "eh-eh" and my dog freezes and returns to what position she needs to hold.
I was glad to see them retract the suggestion of the alpha roll, though their reasoning for it was a bit off. Yes it's dangerous to owners. There is no doubt there. But it also does not work as discipline, though they seem to think it does and likely still use it in their training.
They also recommend "leash pops" using a training collar (generally a metal or nylon choke collar), which is a quick yank and release type of correction. If used correctly, it's not dangerous (though it is in the hand's of someone doesn't know how to use it), but neither is it a good method for corrections. Dogs who are jerked around are often frustrated and the fact that it can damage their windpipes is enough for me to recommend against them!
So all together, there are some good things here, but also some bad. If you can walk away from it with just keeping the positive stuff in mind while ignoring Chapter 10 and the other more negative, correction-based ideas, then it's not a bad book. But otherwise, I suggest a book more geared toward positive training, like Pat Miller's The Power of Positive Training or a more developed book on the human-canine bond, like Patricia McConnell's The Other End of the Leash or Suzanne Clothier's Bones Would Rain From the Sky.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Book Review: The Plague Dogs by Richard Adams
Title: The Plague Dogs
Author: Richard Adams
Year published: 1978
This book is not an easy book to read, not by any way you look at it. It tells the story of two dogs, Snitter (who once had a master) and Rowf (who never did and is therefore known only by the sound he makes, a great big "Rowf"), who escape from an animal experiment research place (called, amusingly enough Animal Research, Surgical and Experimental -- yes, that spells out A.R.S.E.). The stories of their tortures at the hands of the scientists and of the torture of other animals are all too realistic as they're based off real experiments, many of which are simply not necessary and are done "just to see how the animal reacts." That is part of what makes it difficult to read. The other part is some of the dialect. I admit, the dialect of the tod (a fox) was so hard to get through at first that I came close, more than once, to putting down the book.
I'm glad I didn't.
After a time you get used to it and it helps to really solidify his voice in your head.
These two dogs in their travels are first chased off and later pursued by farmers for killing sheep and hens and raiding dust bins. The press gets involved, bringing the public's attention to these two dogs and after finding out that there were experiments going on regarding the plague at A.R.S.E., concocts a story in which the dogs might or might not carry the plague. Either way, the public outcry for the deaths of the two "plague dogs" is overwhelming.
What ensues from here on out is a media circus and manhunt of the worst kind.
I won't spoil the ending, because I was surprised and amazed. Despite the sometimes emotional difficulty of reading about the experiments done not just on dogs, but on many other animals as well, and despite the difficulties of reading the tod's dialect, I will say this book was VERY worth reading. By the end I couldn't put it down and I was in tears.
Besides the plot and the twists therein, I found the book a rather telling commentary on the media and just what they can do to the public's perception. The way the media twists the facts, creating a story just to sell some more copies, is astonishingly accurate.
Buy The Plague Dogs by Richard Adams
Author: Richard Adams
Year published: 1978
This book is not an easy book to read, not by any way you look at it. It tells the story of two dogs, Snitter (who once had a master) and Rowf (who never did and is therefore known only by the sound he makes, a great big "Rowf"), who escape from an animal experiment research place (called, amusingly enough Animal Research, Surgical and Experimental -- yes, that spells out A.R.S.E.). The stories of their tortures at the hands of the scientists and of the torture of other animals are all too realistic as they're based off real experiments, many of which are simply not necessary and are done "just to see how the animal reacts." That is part of what makes it difficult to read. The other part is some of the dialect. I admit, the dialect of the tod (a fox) was so hard to get through at first that I came close, more than once, to putting down the book.
I'm glad I didn't.
After a time you get used to it and it helps to really solidify his voice in your head.
These two dogs in their travels are first chased off and later pursued by farmers for killing sheep and hens and raiding dust bins. The press gets involved, bringing the public's attention to these two dogs and after finding out that there were experiments going on regarding the plague at A.R.S.E., concocts a story in which the dogs might or might not carry the plague. Either way, the public outcry for the deaths of the two "plague dogs" is overwhelming.
What ensues from here on out is a media circus and manhunt of the worst kind.
I won't spoil the ending, because I was surprised and amazed. Despite the sometimes emotional difficulty of reading about the experiments done not just on dogs, but on many other animals as well, and despite the difficulties of reading the tod's dialect, I will say this book was VERY worth reading. By the end I couldn't put it down and I was in tears.
Besides the plot and the twists therein, I found the book a rather telling commentary on the media and just what they can do to the public's perception. The way the media twists the facts, creating a story just to sell some more copies, is astonishingly accurate.
Buy The Plague Dogs by Richard Adams
Friday, February 20, 2009
Book Review: Bones Would Rain From the Sky by Suzanne Clothier
Title: Bones Would Rain from the Sky: Deepening our Relationships with Dogs
Author: Suzanne Clothier
Year published: 2005
I've read a lot of dog books and I think this book is one of the best. Clothier writes in a way that I find it very easy to connect to.
Ultimately, this book is the complete opposite of the one I read by Cesar Millan. The basis of the book is respect, love, compassion, and understanding. Clothier draws on her experiences with her own dogs and with her client's dogs to tell stories that illustrate each of her very well- explained points.
I think the main point of the book, what the book was trying to tell the reader from the beginning and through to the end, came on page 222 with one simple phrase: See the dog. It's something Clothier points out a lot of people don't actually see. They see something that has to be pushed down and dominated. They see a human in fur clothing. They see a bundle of unconditional love. But they don't actually look at and see the dog itself, the dog as a dog. And through that, a lot of miscommunication happens.
She also focuses on dogs as spiritual beings and believes that we can learn a lot from them, from the way they interact, from their body language. At one point she tells a story about a friend who got angry at her and was berating her, shouting at her, and how she wanted to walk away, shout back, get angry back. And then she stopped, imagined her as a dog snapping at her and growling, and realized that a lot of her friend's behavior was based around fear. And she stopped, listened compassionately, and allowed her friend to relax. A lot of people get irritated when people compare animals to humans, but I think the way Clothier does it works really well.
I've read a lot of dog books, read a lot of dog websites, and one thing that has always confused me is the amount of behaviorists and writers who disagree with the alpha/pack theory of dogs but at the same time talk about being a leader. I never could quite figure out how to reconcile the two and it's something I've been struggling with. Clothier, finally, seems to manage to do it and do it well. Again, she compared leadership in a dog/human relationship to leadership in a child/parent relationship. You have to be the leader with your children. You have to give them rules and boundaries. You have to pull them away from things that are bad for them. But at the same time you have to be benevolent, always showing them the way and correcting them when they're wrong without getting angry and lashing out. And in this same way, you should be the benevolent leader for your dog(s). Kindness and compassion mixed with rules and boundaries. Too little of one or the other and your relationship with your dog will suffer, not because the dog is going to then become the leader and the dominant one, but because the dog doesn't know how it fits in, what's expected of it.
And one final point about this book, and it was something I really liked. When you read a lot about these various trainers and their relationship with their dogs, you always have the impression that they do all the right things, that their dogs are great because the trainers know what to do, that they never make the mistakes a lot of us do. Clothier very carefully shows some situations in which she acted all too human with her dogs, where she got angry with them and acted out in that anger. She tells the story of Badger, a dog whose owner could not control him and who she agreed to take in. One night, shortly after he arrived, she got up to let the dogs out and when she came back, he was sprawled on her bed. She wanted him off, in his crate, and he wouldn't go no matter how much she cajoled him. She grabbed him by the collar, which results in his showing his teeth, and then, in an all too human move of frustration and anger with a dog, she smacked him on the muzzle. Soon after she realized how blinded with rage she was and calms down and things resort to normal. But the point she made here was that we all make mistakes, no matter how much training and knowledge we have. We're all human and all prone to the same human mistakes. While it's sad to read of someone smacking their dog, it's comforting to hear we all do make mistakes and we can recover from them.
I definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in learning more about their relationship with their dogs.
Buy Bones Would Rain From the Sky by Suzanne Clothier
Check out Suzanne Clothier's blog here.
Author: Suzanne Clothier
Year published: 2005
I've read a lot of dog books and I think this book is one of the best. Clothier writes in a way that I find it very easy to connect to.
Ultimately, this book is the complete opposite of the one I read by Cesar Millan. The basis of the book is respect, love, compassion, and understanding. Clothier draws on her experiences with her own dogs and with her client's dogs to tell stories that illustrate each of her very well- explained points.
I think the main point of the book, what the book was trying to tell the reader from the beginning and through to the end, came on page 222 with one simple phrase: See the dog. It's something Clothier points out a lot of people don't actually see. They see something that has to be pushed down and dominated. They see a human in fur clothing. They see a bundle of unconditional love. But they don't actually look at and see the dog itself, the dog as a dog. And through that, a lot of miscommunication happens.
She also focuses on dogs as spiritual beings and believes that we can learn a lot from them, from the way they interact, from their body language. At one point she tells a story about a friend who got angry at her and was berating her, shouting at her, and how she wanted to walk away, shout back, get angry back. And then she stopped, imagined her as a dog snapping at her and growling, and realized that a lot of her friend's behavior was based around fear. And she stopped, listened compassionately, and allowed her friend to relax. A lot of people get irritated when people compare animals to humans, but I think the way Clothier does it works really well.
I've read a lot of dog books, read a lot of dog websites, and one thing that has always confused me is the amount of behaviorists and writers who disagree with the alpha/pack theory of dogs but at the same time talk about being a leader. I never could quite figure out how to reconcile the two and it's something I've been struggling with. Clothier, finally, seems to manage to do it and do it well. Again, she compared leadership in a dog/human relationship to leadership in a child/parent relationship. You have to be the leader with your children. You have to give them rules and boundaries. You have to pull them away from things that are bad for them. But at the same time you have to be benevolent, always showing them the way and correcting them when they're wrong without getting angry and lashing out. And in this same way, you should be the benevolent leader for your dog(s). Kindness and compassion mixed with rules and boundaries. Too little of one or the other and your relationship with your dog will suffer, not because the dog is going to then become the leader and the dominant one, but because the dog doesn't know how it fits in, what's expected of it.
And one final point about this book, and it was something I really liked. When you read a lot about these various trainers and their relationship with their dogs, you always have the impression that they do all the right things, that their dogs are great because the trainers know what to do, that they never make the mistakes a lot of us do. Clothier very carefully shows some situations in which she acted all too human with her dogs, where she got angry with them and acted out in that anger. She tells the story of Badger, a dog whose owner could not control him and who she agreed to take in. One night, shortly after he arrived, she got up to let the dogs out and when she came back, he was sprawled on her bed. She wanted him off, in his crate, and he wouldn't go no matter how much she cajoled him. She grabbed him by the collar, which results in his showing his teeth, and then, in an all too human move of frustration and anger with a dog, she smacked him on the muzzle. Soon after she realized how blinded with rage she was and calms down and things resort to normal. But the point she made here was that we all make mistakes, no matter how much training and knowledge we have. We're all human and all prone to the same human mistakes. While it's sad to read of someone smacking their dog, it's comforting to hear we all do make mistakes and we can recover from them.
I definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in learning more about their relationship with their dogs.
Buy Bones Would Rain From the Sky by Suzanne Clothier
Check out Suzanne Clothier's blog here.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Book Review: Cesar's Way by Cesar Millan
Title: Cesar's Way: The Natural, Everyday Guide to Understanding and Correcting Common Dog Problems
Author: Cesar Millan
Year published: 2006
I need to start with a bit of a disclaimer about this one. I read this book as a sort of "know thine enemies" thing. I have seen enough of Cesar's show and read enough about his techniques to know I don't agree with him and I find his ideas about dogs sometimes old and out of date, sometimes simply wrong, and sometimes dangerously wrong. But I opted to read the book to give myself a more complete picture of his techniques and so that I'm more informed when it comes to refuting those techniques I disagree with. I did, however, approach it with an open mind and made sure to take notes on the things I agreed with, as well as those things I didn't agree with.
So all that being said, here are my thoughts on the book.
The good
One of the major things that Cesar advocates is exercise. Dogs need exercise. They need to walk or run, to explore, to get out of the house. A lot of dog owners seem to forget this, especially during the harsh winter months (I can't tell you how many more dogs I've seen out walking since the weather turned milder the last couple days). So yes. Exercise. But not the way that Cesar seems to want one to. He has this idea that it's "migrating" that dogs need. Dogs do not migrate. Dogs need to explore the world, generally with their nose. He tells people to get out and not let the dog sniff, keep their head up and walking, only allow them to sniff occasionally when YOU want them to. This means the dog is missing out on all the mental stimulation of the walk and leads to the people I once saw who practically choked their dog if it so much as put its nose down to sniff.
He also makes a point of telling people that dogs live in the moment. It's a common theme throughout the book and that is accurate. I wish he went more into it, like mentioning that because they live in the moment, shoving a dog's nose into their pee, shouting at them, and hitting them, when you come home from work to discover it does not do anything except make the dog scared of your coming home.
Dogs are not human beings is another common theme throughout the book and like the last one, it's absolutely accurate. He talks about people who baby their dogs, carrying them everywhere and who treat them like babies with fur. He specifically cites Paris Hilton, which amused me. And he points out that doing such things can create an imbalanced dog. I'm sure many of us have seen the little dog that growls and snaps at people and is picked up by its owner and babied. He's talking about this sort of thing.
Other good points: Dogs need boundaries and rules. A dog without them is out of control, though for different reasons than Cesar cites. Fearful dogs often escalate into aggression which is why people need to nip that fear in the bud before it gets worse. When choosing a dog, people need to pick out a dog that matches their lifestyle and energy otherwise they can create problems for their dog. And he makes a point to tell people to work on getting their dogs used to the sorts of things they'll endure at the vets and groomers. I think if more people did this, there would be less issues at both places.
Also on the good side, he comes out against dog fighting and breed-specific legislation.
The bad
Cesar's entire book and indeed his show and life are based on the idea of dominance. If the person is not the "pack leader" then the dog will become the pack leader and then you have a very unbalanced dog. This was a fairly common theory back about 20 years or so ago after a study on wolves showed that there was an alpha who everyone deferred to and because of this, there was harmony in their pack. Except...the study was flawed. Seriously flawed. It was based on a captive group of wolves who were not from the same pack (a wolf pack is generally made up of relatives -- mom, dad, a few other relatives, and the pups) and who is the leader is very fluid. It changes from one activity to the next, depending on each wolf's strengths. And so the conclusions drawn were simply wrong and later studies show a different pack structure. Unfortunately, Cesar has bought entirely into this.
The other problem with this, of course, is that dogs are not wolves. They're closely related genetically, but they're not the same. Wolves grow and mature into adults. Dogs remain as if they're perpetual puppies. Wolves are wild animals. Dogs are not. They've been domesticated for thousands of years.
Because Cesar believes dogs are always trying to be the dominant one, he labels everything as dominant: when your dog jumps on you when you come home, he's being dominant (or maybe he's just happy to see you and has a lot of pent-up energy from being cooped up for a time); when your dog puts her paw on you, she's being dominant (or maybe she just wants some reassurance or is asking for petting); when your dog wakes you up at 5am to go out, he's being dominant (or maybe, since you've trained him to go outside to pee and he has to pee, he wants to be taken outside because he knows he's not supposed to go in the house). I'm amazed at the amount of things that are labeled as the dog being dominant and unbalanced.
Back on the exercise thing, Cesar talks a lot about "mastering the walk." What he means by this is that you walk at a brisk pace with the dog either at your side or behind you. The dog is not allowed to sniff unless you stop, allow it to for a moment, and then continue on. The dog can never ever be in front of you, even if it does not pull, because that means the dog is, of course, being the dominant one ("the pack leader does not follow"). I find a lot of issues with this. For one, I like to be able to see my dog. If she's behind me, I can't know what she's doing. Is there a chicken bone or a piece of cat poop on the ground that I didn't see (which I wouldn't see because, of course, I'm walking tall with my chest puffed out and looking straight ahead like a good "pack leader" should) that she scooped up to eat as we walked? Is someone coming up behind me that could threaten her in some way? walking along side me is fine, but I never ever want her behind me. I also find a lot wrong with his not allowing the dog to sniff and here's where I think he goes really wrong. Physical exercise is important. There is no doubt of that. But mental exercise is just as important. He doesn't really bring up the idea of mental exercise until page 228 and even then it's glossed over. He looks down on the idea of obedience training (it won't bring balance to your dog/show them who's leader/teach them to be "calm submissive").
Cesar believes that in order to have your dog balanced, you have to give the dog exercise, discipline, and affection. Three very good things, but he believes that it should be 50% exercise, and 25% each of discipline and affection. And to push this even further, he says you should give the dog them in that order. In other words, exercise the dog first, then give it discipline, then finally give the dog affection. He thinks that new owners should not give affection to their dog for the first two weeks they have it, that somehow the exercise is enough for a bond. I really heartily and strongly disagree with this. Affection IS important. The other two are as well, but I think they're all equally important. Giving a dog affection before exercise is not going to create an unbalanced dog. All things in moderation, including exercise.
There are some more minor things that he gets wrong, though some of those are common miconceptions, like the "don't comfort your dog during a storm; it'll make her more fearful" thing (for a good description of why that is wrong, check out this article by Patricial McConnell).
The ugly
Some of Cesar's techniques are downright dangerous, not just merely irritating or against what is natural. Two of the most controversial are the alpha roll and flooding.
The alpha roll is a technique where you take a dog that is acting "dominant" (or, to put it closer to what he really does, aggressive) and force it down and onto its side or back. The idea here is that a dog showing its belly is submitting to the pack leader and in order to show the dog who's "boss" one has to get it down into that position. If a dog is "too dominant" and will not do it, then it is up to you to force the dog into the position where, Cesar believes, they will then become a "calm submissive" dog and accept your leadership. I saw him do this once on an episode with an aggressive dog. He did it by grabbing the dog by the leash, pulling it up until it was hanging with its front feet in the air, and then shoving it down and onto its side. At the end, he said "see, calm submissive dog, ta da!" Except it wasn't. It was a dog who had shut down out of extreme fear (and who was most likely fearful to begin with). I'd be scared too if someone hung me and then shoved me over. This whole alpha roll idea came, again, from that study of captive wolves and is as flawed as the study was. In nature, a more dominant wolf does not force a dog into submission -- submission is granted (for a good example of what really happens, see this video of a wolf submitting to a higher member of the pack). The alpha roll is dangerous to the dog's emotional state -- an aggressive dog is likely to become more aggressive. And it's also dangerous to the human attempting it. He claims it should be used only by trained professionals (which, mind you, he is not), but then in the epsiode referenced above, he teaches the dog's owners to do it as well.
Flooding in a concept wherein if a dog is afraid of something, you flood them with it in order to somehow make them more comfortable with it. In one episode, which he discusses in the book, he forces a Great Dane who is scared of shiny floors across one. He drags the dog onto them and forces him to stay there. Then, when the dog "submits" he calls it cured. Unfortunately for the dog, he had simply shut down out of extreme fear. Flooding is not a technique anyone in psychology would recommend. Imagine if you were afraid of snakes being forced to have a bunch on you. Would that cure your fear? I think it would make mine worse if I were afraid of something. I know it would with my particular phobia. Counter conditioning works much better in these matters than flooding, but Cesar stands by his stance on flooding and on how the dog reacted.
He also advocates the use of a treadmill for exercise if you can't get out and walk the dog enough. Yes. He's talking about putting your DOG on a treadmill. This can work in certain situations and some people use them. But the way he uses them is downright dangerous. First of all, he ties the dog to it with a leash. If one is going to do this, it would be best to put a harness on the dog so that the dog cannot choke if anything happens. Then he says that once the dog is used to it, you can leave him alone on it for short periods of time. No. Never. It's an electrical piece of equipment that your dog is tied to with what could easily turn into a noose. It's a BAD IDEA to leave the dog alone on it. And then there's the issue of this being proper exercise for a dog. Dogs need to sniff and explore and a walk is great for this. Just running in place on a treadmill is not. I'm surprised that he advocates this after he was sued for damages to a dog who was slapped on a treadmill with a choke collar on.
Right in the beginning of the book he talks about how he walks into his dog pack (30-40 dogs he keeps at his "Dog Psychology Center") and shows he is the pack leader by looking away, not meeting their eyes. That meeting their eyes is a sign of weakness. Unfortunately for Cesar this is pretty much the absolute OPPOSITE of how dogs really work. A dog who is confident is one who is leaning forward on his front legs, ears forward, eyes staring into the eyes of another dog. A dog who is deferential turns his face and eyes away. Cesar is giving off the complete opposite of the signals he claims he is. He also allowed his very young, toddler-aged, kids to walk through the pack all alone. He's very lucky nothing happened to those kids.
Cesar, really, is not a master of reading dog body language. I suppose this is because he believes it's about his energy and so he's never devoted his time to reading dogs. At one point in the book he shows a picture of a very frightened pit bull: tail down, head down, fearful set to the face with the mouth pulled back. The dog IS clearly in a fear position. But I've seen other dogs show that same body language on his show and he calls it "calm submission." Hint: he's right about it in the book, wrong on the show.
The weird
Cesar talks a LOT about "energy" and how dogs can feel your energy. If you're not projecting "pack leader" mentality, the dog will know it. Not by reading your body language, but by your energy. He gets far too New Agey in much of this book and sometimes I kept thinking "is he going to tell me my dog can read my aura next?" Dogs are masters of reading body language, theirs AND yours. It's not about energy. It's about how you move and what the look on your face is or where your hand is positioned.
Cesar: How to Write a Book with So Many Contradictions that No One Should Take it Seriously
It's hard to believe a person could contradict themselves so often in just 320 pages. Here are some of the contradictions I noted:
1. Dogs do not want to be the leader. They do not want to be the dominant one. But they're always looking for weakness in their humans and trying to become the dominant one. Either they want to be leader or they don't. Pick one and stick with it.
2. He says that you cannot blame a dog's breed for the way it is acting, but then goes on to talk about shutting off a dog's "pit bull genes" and talks about how a Siberian husky is not a good city dog because it needs to roam. Either the breed is important or it's not.
3. Dogs must always walk behind the owner or next to the owner, but never in front. But then he goes on to say that he allows the dogs in front sometimes. Does that mean they become the pack leader in those moments?
4. Dogs must always walk behind the owner or next to the owner, but never in front. But then he goes on to say that dogs who are guiding the blind must be out in front, yet the person walking them is in charge and they know it. So why can't a dog who is out in front of a seeing person know the person holding the leash is "in charge"?
5. He talks about a dog being submissive a lot, "calm submissive" (which he touts as being the ultimate state of mind for a balanced dog), but then goes on to says that submissive dogs are weak and have low self-esteem.
6. He talks about wearing your dog out from exercise. He thinks that the ideal amount of exercise is 8-10 hours! I'd be in great shape if I could walk that much, but I think my dog, who loves affection, might not be too happy if we walked THAT much. But then he eventually says that you should walk your dog twice a day, ideally for 30 minutes each time. That's not very long at all and isn't enough to exhaust a dog.
7. You should position your dog's collar high up on their neck, where it's in the most vulnerable place on their neck. Keep their head up on the walk and give a correction when they put it down (I've seen someone doing this before -- it's not pretty). A couple contradictions here: According to him if you just exude the right "calm assertive" energy the dog should naturally follow and a dog should be walking with its head down because that shows a "calm submissive" state instead of a dominant one.
In conclusion
Cesar ends his book with this: I sincerely hope that, with this book, I have helped you find a place to begin in your quest for a better, healthier relationship with the dogs in your life.
I do believe he believes this. I do believe he is sincere. Unfortunately, this book contradicts itself too often and when the advice is clear, it is not anything based on the reality of dogs. It is based on a flawed study about captive wolves. You can get some common sense things out of this book (exercise, boundaries, etc.), but you can get those from any book on dog training or psychology. I really recommend against this book and would suggest, if you want a book that is more positive and gives you some good idea on what to do with dogs, check out Patricia McConnell's The Other End of the Leash.
Author: Cesar Millan
Year published: 2006
I need to start with a bit of a disclaimer about this one. I read this book as a sort of "know thine enemies" thing. I have seen enough of Cesar's show and read enough about his techniques to know I don't agree with him and I find his ideas about dogs sometimes old and out of date, sometimes simply wrong, and sometimes dangerously wrong. But I opted to read the book to give myself a more complete picture of his techniques and so that I'm more informed when it comes to refuting those techniques I disagree with. I did, however, approach it with an open mind and made sure to take notes on the things I agreed with, as well as those things I didn't agree with.
So all that being said, here are my thoughts on the book.
The good
One of the major things that Cesar advocates is exercise. Dogs need exercise. They need to walk or run, to explore, to get out of the house. A lot of dog owners seem to forget this, especially during the harsh winter months (I can't tell you how many more dogs I've seen out walking since the weather turned milder the last couple days). So yes. Exercise. But not the way that Cesar seems to want one to. He has this idea that it's "migrating" that dogs need. Dogs do not migrate. Dogs need to explore the world, generally with their nose. He tells people to get out and not let the dog sniff, keep their head up and walking, only allow them to sniff occasionally when YOU want them to. This means the dog is missing out on all the mental stimulation of the walk and leads to the people I once saw who practically choked their dog if it so much as put its nose down to sniff.
He also makes a point of telling people that dogs live in the moment. It's a common theme throughout the book and that is accurate. I wish he went more into it, like mentioning that because they live in the moment, shoving a dog's nose into their pee, shouting at them, and hitting them, when you come home from work to discover it does not do anything except make the dog scared of your coming home.
Dogs are not human beings is another common theme throughout the book and like the last one, it's absolutely accurate. He talks about people who baby their dogs, carrying them everywhere and who treat them like babies with fur. He specifically cites Paris Hilton, which amused me. And he points out that doing such things can create an imbalanced dog. I'm sure many of us have seen the little dog that growls and snaps at people and is picked up by its owner and babied. He's talking about this sort of thing.
Other good points: Dogs need boundaries and rules. A dog without them is out of control, though for different reasons than Cesar cites. Fearful dogs often escalate into aggression which is why people need to nip that fear in the bud before it gets worse. When choosing a dog, people need to pick out a dog that matches their lifestyle and energy otherwise they can create problems for their dog. And he makes a point to tell people to work on getting their dogs used to the sorts of things they'll endure at the vets and groomers. I think if more people did this, there would be less issues at both places.
Also on the good side, he comes out against dog fighting and breed-specific legislation.
The bad
Cesar's entire book and indeed his show and life are based on the idea of dominance. If the person is not the "pack leader" then the dog will become the pack leader and then you have a very unbalanced dog. This was a fairly common theory back about 20 years or so ago after a study on wolves showed that there was an alpha who everyone deferred to and because of this, there was harmony in their pack. Except...the study was flawed. Seriously flawed. It was based on a captive group of wolves who were not from the same pack (a wolf pack is generally made up of relatives -- mom, dad, a few other relatives, and the pups) and who is the leader is very fluid. It changes from one activity to the next, depending on each wolf's strengths. And so the conclusions drawn were simply wrong and later studies show a different pack structure. Unfortunately, Cesar has bought entirely into this.
The other problem with this, of course, is that dogs are not wolves. They're closely related genetically, but they're not the same. Wolves grow and mature into adults. Dogs remain as if they're perpetual puppies. Wolves are wild animals. Dogs are not. They've been domesticated for thousands of years.
Because Cesar believes dogs are always trying to be the dominant one, he labels everything as dominant: when your dog jumps on you when you come home, he's being dominant (or maybe he's just happy to see you and has a lot of pent-up energy from being cooped up for a time); when your dog puts her paw on you, she's being dominant (or maybe she just wants some reassurance or is asking for petting); when your dog wakes you up at 5am to go out, he's being dominant (or maybe, since you've trained him to go outside to pee and he has to pee, he wants to be taken outside because he knows he's not supposed to go in the house). I'm amazed at the amount of things that are labeled as the dog being dominant and unbalanced.
Back on the exercise thing, Cesar talks a lot about "mastering the walk." What he means by this is that you walk at a brisk pace with the dog either at your side or behind you. The dog is not allowed to sniff unless you stop, allow it to for a moment, and then continue on. The dog can never ever be in front of you, even if it does not pull, because that means the dog is, of course, being the dominant one ("the pack leader does not follow"). I find a lot of issues with this. For one, I like to be able to see my dog. If she's behind me, I can't know what she's doing. Is there a chicken bone or a piece of cat poop on the ground that I didn't see (which I wouldn't see because, of course, I'm walking tall with my chest puffed out and looking straight ahead like a good "pack leader" should) that she scooped up to eat as we walked? Is someone coming up behind me that could threaten her in some way? walking along side me is fine, but I never ever want her behind me. I also find a lot wrong with his not allowing the dog to sniff and here's where I think he goes really wrong. Physical exercise is important. There is no doubt of that. But mental exercise is just as important. He doesn't really bring up the idea of mental exercise until page 228 and even then it's glossed over. He looks down on the idea of obedience training (it won't bring balance to your dog/show them who's leader/teach them to be "calm submissive").
Cesar believes that in order to have your dog balanced, you have to give the dog exercise, discipline, and affection. Three very good things, but he believes that it should be 50% exercise, and 25% each of discipline and affection. And to push this even further, he says you should give the dog them in that order. In other words, exercise the dog first, then give it discipline, then finally give the dog affection. He thinks that new owners should not give affection to their dog for the first two weeks they have it, that somehow the exercise is enough for a bond. I really heartily and strongly disagree with this. Affection IS important. The other two are as well, but I think they're all equally important. Giving a dog affection before exercise is not going to create an unbalanced dog. All things in moderation, including exercise.
There are some more minor things that he gets wrong, though some of those are common miconceptions, like the "don't comfort your dog during a storm; it'll make her more fearful" thing (for a good description of why that is wrong, check out this article by Patricial McConnell).
The ugly
Some of Cesar's techniques are downright dangerous, not just merely irritating or against what is natural. Two of the most controversial are the alpha roll and flooding.
The alpha roll is a technique where you take a dog that is acting "dominant" (or, to put it closer to what he really does, aggressive) and force it down and onto its side or back. The idea here is that a dog showing its belly is submitting to the pack leader and in order to show the dog who's "boss" one has to get it down into that position. If a dog is "too dominant" and will not do it, then it is up to you to force the dog into the position where, Cesar believes, they will then become a "calm submissive" dog and accept your leadership. I saw him do this once on an episode with an aggressive dog. He did it by grabbing the dog by the leash, pulling it up until it was hanging with its front feet in the air, and then shoving it down and onto its side. At the end, he said "see, calm submissive dog, ta da!" Except it wasn't. It was a dog who had shut down out of extreme fear (and who was most likely fearful to begin with). I'd be scared too if someone hung me and then shoved me over. This whole alpha roll idea came, again, from that study of captive wolves and is as flawed as the study was. In nature, a more dominant wolf does not force a dog into submission -- submission is granted (for a good example of what really happens, see this video of a wolf submitting to a higher member of the pack). The alpha roll is dangerous to the dog's emotional state -- an aggressive dog is likely to become more aggressive. And it's also dangerous to the human attempting it. He claims it should be used only by trained professionals (which, mind you, he is not), but then in the epsiode referenced above, he teaches the dog's owners to do it as well.
Flooding in a concept wherein if a dog is afraid of something, you flood them with it in order to somehow make them more comfortable with it. In one episode, which he discusses in the book, he forces a Great Dane who is scared of shiny floors across one. He drags the dog onto them and forces him to stay there. Then, when the dog "submits" he calls it cured. Unfortunately for the dog, he had simply shut down out of extreme fear. Flooding is not a technique anyone in psychology would recommend. Imagine if you were afraid of snakes being forced to have a bunch on you. Would that cure your fear? I think it would make mine worse if I were afraid of something. I know it would with my particular phobia. Counter conditioning works much better in these matters than flooding, but Cesar stands by his stance on flooding and on how the dog reacted.
He also advocates the use of a treadmill for exercise if you can't get out and walk the dog enough. Yes. He's talking about putting your DOG on a treadmill. This can work in certain situations and some people use them. But the way he uses them is downright dangerous. First of all, he ties the dog to it with a leash. If one is going to do this, it would be best to put a harness on the dog so that the dog cannot choke if anything happens. Then he says that once the dog is used to it, you can leave him alone on it for short periods of time. No. Never. It's an electrical piece of equipment that your dog is tied to with what could easily turn into a noose. It's a BAD IDEA to leave the dog alone on it. And then there's the issue of this being proper exercise for a dog. Dogs need to sniff and explore and a walk is great for this. Just running in place on a treadmill is not. I'm surprised that he advocates this after he was sued for damages to a dog who was slapped on a treadmill with a choke collar on.
Right in the beginning of the book he talks about how he walks into his dog pack (30-40 dogs he keeps at his "Dog Psychology Center") and shows he is the pack leader by looking away, not meeting their eyes. That meeting their eyes is a sign of weakness. Unfortunately for Cesar this is pretty much the absolute OPPOSITE of how dogs really work. A dog who is confident is one who is leaning forward on his front legs, ears forward, eyes staring into the eyes of another dog. A dog who is deferential turns his face and eyes away. Cesar is giving off the complete opposite of the signals he claims he is. He also allowed his very young, toddler-aged, kids to walk through the pack all alone. He's very lucky nothing happened to those kids.
Cesar, really, is not a master of reading dog body language. I suppose this is because he believes it's about his energy and so he's never devoted his time to reading dogs. At one point in the book he shows a picture of a very frightened pit bull: tail down, head down, fearful set to the face with the mouth pulled back. The dog IS clearly in a fear position. But I've seen other dogs show that same body language on his show and he calls it "calm submission." Hint: he's right about it in the book, wrong on the show.
The weird
Cesar talks a LOT about "energy" and how dogs can feel your energy. If you're not projecting "pack leader" mentality, the dog will know it. Not by reading your body language, but by your energy. He gets far too New Agey in much of this book and sometimes I kept thinking "is he going to tell me my dog can read my aura next?" Dogs are masters of reading body language, theirs AND yours. It's not about energy. It's about how you move and what the look on your face is or where your hand is positioned.
Cesar: How to Write a Book with So Many Contradictions that No One Should Take it Seriously
It's hard to believe a person could contradict themselves so often in just 320 pages. Here are some of the contradictions I noted:
1. Dogs do not want to be the leader. They do not want to be the dominant one. But they're always looking for weakness in their humans and trying to become the dominant one. Either they want to be leader or they don't. Pick one and stick with it.
2. He says that you cannot blame a dog's breed for the way it is acting, but then goes on to talk about shutting off a dog's "pit bull genes" and talks about how a Siberian husky is not a good city dog because it needs to roam. Either the breed is important or it's not.
3. Dogs must always walk behind the owner or next to the owner, but never in front. But then he goes on to say that he allows the dogs in front sometimes. Does that mean they become the pack leader in those moments?
4. Dogs must always walk behind the owner or next to the owner, but never in front. But then he goes on to say that dogs who are guiding the blind must be out in front, yet the person walking them is in charge and they know it. So why can't a dog who is out in front of a seeing person know the person holding the leash is "in charge"?
5. He talks about a dog being submissive a lot, "calm submissive" (which he touts as being the ultimate state of mind for a balanced dog), but then goes on to says that submissive dogs are weak and have low self-esteem.
6. He talks about wearing your dog out from exercise. He thinks that the ideal amount of exercise is 8-10 hours! I'd be in great shape if I could walk that much, but I think my dog, who loves affection, might not be too happy if we walked THAT much. But then he eventually says that you should walk your dog twice a day, ideally for 30 minutes each time. That's not very long at all and isn't enough to exhaust a dog.
7. You should position your dog's collar high up on their neck, where it's in the most vulnerable place on their neck. Keep their head up on the walk and give a correction when they put it down (I've seen someone doing this before -- it's not pretty). A couple contradictions here: According to him if you just exude the right "calm assertive" energy the dog should naturally follow and a dog should be walking with its head down because that shows a "calm submissive" state instead of a dominant one.
In conclusion
Cesar ends his book with this: I sincerely hope that, with this book, I have helped you find a place to begin in your quest for a better, healthier relationship with the dogs in your life.
I do believe he believes this. I do believe he is sincere. Unfortunately, this book contradicts itself too often and when the advice is clear, it is not anything based on the reality of dogs. It is based on a flawed study about captive wolves. You can get some common sense things out of this book (exercise, boundaries, etc.), but you can get those from any book on dog training or psychology. I really recommend against this book and would suggest, if you want a book that is more positive and gives you some good idea on what to do with dogs, check out Patricia McConnell's The Other End of the Leash.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)