cesar millan - is he right about walking a dog?

[operamommy]

Hi all!

I've read on this forum that not a lot of people agree with Millan's methods, feeling that uses outdated training techniques. I actually had never heard of him before reading of him here, which piqued my interest, so we ordered his first season from Netflix.

I found the show to be very interesting. We own a 4-month-old lab mix who we've had for 3 weeks. So far no issues. So far we've used Ian Dunbar's books as our training guide.

One thing that Millan stressed on an episode that we watched last night was the need to train the dog to walk slightly behind you on the leash. What do ya'll think of that? Our pup Moose walks very nicely on a harness, and we've always let him roam ahead to the end of the leash. Is this setting up a bad habit, or is Millan wrong here? I didn't see much from Dunbar on leash walking. Thanks!

[greenmagick]

He is incorrect. His idea is that if a dog is in front of you they think they are "above" you in pack status, and this is just not true. First, we are not dogs and therefore not part of the pack...second, pack structure is not a strict hierarchy where one leads and everyone else follows. A good example of the absurdity is in service and guide dogs...they are definitely not being dominating by walking ahead.

However, a dog should most definitely have leash manners and not pull.

[SquishyKitty]

I would teach him to walk beside you, not in front, but more because you want to be able to control his pulling. If he's way out in front already, and THEN starts to jump or yank at somebody or a good smell, it's harder to correct him. If he's right beside you, you can kind of see what's coming.

We don't teach the dogs to walk behind us, but we do teach that we're in control of the walk, and they walk next to us or behind, but not in front. Has nothing to do with dominance, though.

I swear, if the whole concept of dominance didn't exist, Cesar Milan wouldn't be famous though. He tends to attribute everything a dog does wrong to dominance. It's annoying and tired lol.

[operamommy]

Thanks for the opinions. I *do* like the idea of teaching him to walk beside us, just as mentioned so that we can better control him when coming into contact with other dogs and people. Nice to know that it's not necessary to establish "dominance" though.

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

The thing about him is that he deals with dogs with issues already so allowing a dog who is already dominant to go in front of you just reinforces that in their mind. I love Milan watch his shows daily as well as It's Me or the Dog and I have learned so much about dogs in general and how to deal with them.

I just bought Milan's book How to Raise the perfect Dog and I cant wait to read it and apply the things I think will help in our situation.

I do think that the whole family is a pack to the dog. I also think it is very important that they know who is in charge from the start to avoid issues down the road.

[Subhuti]

If the dog is an easy-going, happy-go-lucky dog, letting them walk in front of you is no problem. If it is a difficult to control dog, a dominant dog, I would be a bit stricter.

Mainly, I prefer my dogs to walk at my side so that I don't trip over them and so they are following me, not vice-versa.

You haven't ruined your dog -- you can alway retrain. No problem.

[PlayaMama]

i would possibly reconsider using the harness as it gives the dog much more power when pulling (sled dogs anyone?)

i ian dunbar and did sirius puppy training for all of our pups about 10 years ago.

i think ceasar milan is fine but i do agree that he often works with dogs that have issues and that require a more strict hierarchy. my dog, for instance, is the most submissive pup you could meet, she could walk on my head and she'd never think twice about me being the leader of her pack.

[russsk]

Originally Posted by PlayaMama

i would possibly reconsider using the harness as it gives the dog much more power when pulling (sled dogs anyone?)

I think this really depends on the dog. We had a reactive dog and we found that the type of harness used for sled dogs was the best thing for walking him. It seems counter-intuitive, but he had no desire to pull when the pressure from pulling was evenly distributed over his chest and shoulders, if that makes sense. Also, when he did pull (when seeing another dog) the situation was not made worse by pressure points (on his neck, face or shoulders, depending on the equipment). Didn't solve our issues, but it helped and didn't cause more, like everything else seemed to.

Regarding walking in front or behind: Our dog (different from the one above) is not what you'd call easy-going or relaxed (he's an Australian Shepherd). He is pretty well trained, however, and will heel if I want him to. Because of that, the vast majority of the time I let him walk where he wants - ahead or behind. He's 8 years old now, and we've never had any problems walking him this way.

[North_Of_60]

Originally Posted by greenmagick

First, we are not dogs and therefore not part of the pack...

I disagree with this. While I do agree that many "dominance" theories are pretty inaccurate, I do believe that dogs, when living among humans, view us as pack members. They are, after all, social creatures. Of course we are no more a dog than they can be human, but to totally segregate humans and dogs into living in two totally different social structures is, in my opinion, also inaccurate.

Call it what you want - a pack, a family, a unit, etc - but when dogs and humans live together we form a co-existing bond. I can only assume that when a domesticated dog lives among humans and not other dogs, that they do in fact look to us as pack members. You can see this when dogs don't act like humans just because they live among us. They're still dogs. And they treat us like dogs. When they're puppies and they play and nip at us like other puppies. When they're adults and they mark our property. To them, a "pack" is the family unit in which they live. And we are very much that to them.

What has been disproved is how dominance among a pack can be applied to training. Not that packs don't exist, or that dogs won't view us a members of their social group. It's very obvious to me, in my home (with 4 dogs) that they very much view us (me and my family members) as members of their "pack". Which really, is only to say that we are a bonded family unit.

[greenmagick]

I do believe we live together in a group or pack...however I really dont see dogs reacting to us like we are a dog. I see most of the time them using more "human" signals than dog signals to us....not that they dont use some dog signals too, but I truly dont believe dogs think we are just part of the pack. My dogs treat each other and other dogs totally different than they treat humans.

I guess I also shy away from it because often when people say we are all part of the pack the next sentence is therefore we have to be alpha.

[North_Of_60]

Does it really matter what signals they use, or what percentage of the time they are signaling to us like humans or dogs? We are two different species living together. Among humans, we call the group a "family". Among dogs it's a "pack". Of course, for the sake of communication, there are going to be times when we adapt for their sake, and being that they are intelligent creatures they can learn spoken words or body language.

But at the end of the day, I do not believe that dogs view us and them totally separately. We're a unit. One that has made adaptions and learned behaviors and made sacrifices to ensure that everyone is happy and has their needs met. Call it whatever you want. But I disagree with your statement; "we are not dogs and therefore not part of the pack". We don't HAVE to be a dog be a member of a pack. Or a group. Or a family. Or whatever.

What I wish people would stop doing is applying loosly defined group dynamics to training. What works for one family unit with a dog is NOT necessarily going to work for another. Just as a home with kids won't function exactly the same as their neighbors. Dogs, just as people, are individuals.

But we are in fact living together, and I do think my dogs look to me as a member of their [insert which ever word you'd like to use to describe our little group here].

[operamommy]

So I've been doing a combo of letting him out ahead on our (deserted) gravel road and keeping him close by my side when out in public places. It's working nicely. As I said, he doesn't really pull at all, so that's a huge plus!

Our only issue is that he's taken up barking when he sees new people and dogs. I've been taking him out as much as possible, but it's been *very* rainy here, so not a lot of opportunity to go to the park. I've been shushing him and giving a jerk (not hard!) on the leash when he starts to get upset, but sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't work at all. It's embarassing to have everyone staring because he's barking! Any suggestions? I know that we can't avoid taking him out because of this issue, since he NEEDS to be more socialized, but I just don't know what to do when he barks. Thanks!

[mamalisa]

What works for us, with our dog, is the "look" command. We started by saying "look" and holding a treat at our eye level. When she looked, she got the treat. Now, when she sees something that distracts her, dog, bird, kid, person, we say "look" and she makes eye contact with us, ending her focus on whatever it is she can't have.

Also we taught her how to bark on command, which gives us the ability to stop her also on command. That is a life saver.

[da-tamsta]

I like to have my dogs next to me. Not behind me. But I am in favor of the pack leader. I am the pack leader in our house. All animals and children refer to me as the final authority. I am not sure why, but I think it has to do with consistency and with positive rewards. I have trained a good number of dogs, horses, sheep, pigs, etc and feel that positive consistent interactions is best. I've got lots of blue ribbons to back that up. And the gal that mentioned the "look" command...we used that too. Isn't it awesome?

[happysmileylady]

I have a shepherd/lab mix, who started out pretty hyper as a puppy. She's 7 now, and much more mellow. But, when she was younger, we tried a bunch of different things to keep her under control. She was never agressive, just excited and happy and hyper all the time. In addition to reading books by serveral differernt dog experts (including Cesar) we took two training classes.

Pretty much everything I took in says to not let the dog in front, because it makes the dog harder to control. Whether it's Cesar saying you can't let the dog think she's in charge, or a local trainer saying it's easier for you to be in charge when the dog is next to you, it's all basically the same IMO. If you have a puppy, I think you want to be sure you train the dog to walk next to you. It's just easier to control a dog on a short leash, especially a bigger dog like a lab. It's easier to control anything that is within arms reach, as opposed to trying to control it through a long extension like a leash.

[Fuamami]

Originally Posted by greenmagick

I guess I also shy away from it because often when people say we are all part of the pack the next sentence is therefore we have to be alpha.

What's wrong with that? I haven't read either book, but what I remember from training my puppies was that it was good to be alpha. Isn't it best if your dogs always obey you?