So, what does everyone think of him? Really, I dislike his methods. He knows dogs, and he helps a lot. But I don't agree with them. He uses a lot of harsher techniques, uses little praise, and uses some methods that are dangerous but are shown on TV anyway! On top of that he compares dogs to wolves. Dogs have little to do with wolves today.

Since I've switched cable providers, I don't have the NGC anymore and haven't caught one of his shows in a long time.

I think he gets results, and I think their is a difference between harsh and abuse.

He obviously cares about animals very much, and has developed his own approach for training. If people choose to you his methods, good, if they choose a different method, good.

As long as you get the results you need and you and your pet are happy, I'm personally ambivalent to individual choices on training.

I'm not against harsh methods at all. If there is another route fine but many dogs just like children need tough love.

Kid doesn't know how to swim? Toss him in the ocean they learn really fast.

I do use target and motivational training myself but this is with the inclusion of appropriate pinch collar corrections, especially in personal protection work.

I like the dog whiseperer, Cesar Millan, own all his DVDs. I think he makes lots of valid points, especially about his clients not having enough exercise and that that could be part of the problem. I mean true, I don't agree with EVERYTHING he says, like forcing your dog to walk in a heel at all times or trying to make your dogs eat right next to one another (which I don't know how he does it, but all the power to him!) My dogs would start endulging themselves in everyone's bowl including their own, their neighbors, and the dog down the street! (just over emphasizing there, some hyperbole if you will).

I think harsh methods get results - but you can always tweak the method to fit your own needs. I use lots of treats when training - you do something good: Good boy - treat. Do something bad, the consequenses vary accordingly upon the bad behavior. If he messes up during Agility training, that's one thing. That's a fine lets try it again kind of thing, but if he is being aggresive (for whatever reason) I like the idea of flipping your dog on its side and making him submit to you. I also like the idea of the little "bites" Cesar does. I've been doing it to Remington since I got him (more or less) and he is a pretty stinkin' good dog I would say.

But, it's all in good training if it works!

I think Positives methods work better. Sure, something like flooding might be faster, but it could also be harmful. I correct my dogs if they do something wrong, but I like to ignore over punishing. And lots of praise when they do something right! My bigger concern is over the audience watching it. Sure, he might tell you not to pin a dog down, but there are enough idiots out there to try it. So why even demonstrate something dangerous on TV? But I see little praise from him. And his response for everything is exercise and dominance. While I agree with the exercise part, I don't with the dominance part.

I just think most of his methods are old fashioned. I have no problem with people who are great with dogs trying different and their own training methods. I do have a problem with the people who watch his show one moment and try to fix their dog's aggression problem the next.

>_> If everything on tv was pg it would be VERY VERY boring. Stupid people will do stupid things regardless of whether they have access to a television.

Then we'd have no myth busters, taboo etc.

if you're not dominate over your dog then they're dominate over you and that is most of those peoples problems along with no exercise

It's funny to me that exercise is usually one of the main factors - because one of the main responsibilities of having a dog is of course fullfilling his/her needs, one of those being physical (and mental) activity. Not only is it an expected requirement for your dog, but isn't it nice to see your dog walking with you, or running around, swimming, hiking, and just having a good time? Well, to some people - such as myself - that is more than worth it, nevermind keeping aware unwanted behaviors which is of course a plus.

Of course people will do stupid things. But less people will be apt to try out Mythbusters(love that show)then they will dog training methods. I mean, most people have access to dogs, not explosives. And it's not illegal to train your dog, but blowing things up in your backyard there might be a problem with. Not to mention, you try stupid stuff you see on TV, at the most it will affect you. But you try training methods you shouldn't, it hurts the dog big time.

In the Dog Whisperer episodes I've seen, and the book I read, dominance was not the cause in every case. Most of the time, it's not a dominance thing. But he says that's the case every time! And every time, yes, there is a problem, and yes, usually it is the human's fault, but no, it has nothing to do with dominance.

The only problem I have with the Dog Whisperer is his name. He has been given a lot of hype because he supposedly a guru. I think when it comes to dogs, there are no gurus. I believe that what works for one dog will not work for another, necessary. I have three dogs with very different temperaments and personalities. What works with my dalmation doesn't work with my yorkie. However, that said, if you have major behaviorial problems, I believe consulting someone with a really good reputation can help keep the dog from becoming "throwaway property."

I have been fortunate not to have this problem. My one favorite trainer is Victoria on Its Me or the Dog. Her suggestions make sense to me. In fact, they almost seem common sense. I have seen her turn around some pretty dramatic situations.

I love Ceasr's methods. They are basic, simple, and instinctual for the dog. I use them on my dogs with great sucess. Also, if you read his books, he states that if your dog is well behaved and doesn't have behavior issues, you don't have to be so strict. The extreme structure demonstrated on the show is for dogs who have issues and need to be rebalanced in a highly structured manner. I let my dogs walk in front of me all the time, but they know who's really in charge (me) and if I call them back to me, they turn on a dime. But alot of the stuff he recommends is really useful for any dog. Like making sure the dog remains in a calm frame of mind as much of the time as possible. Nothing wrong with that.

Other trainers like Victoria, IMO use too much human psychology, instead of dog psychology, and their methods are therefore much more time consuming than they need to be.

But dogs don't see humans as dogs. They see us as humans. So while we should read what they're telling us, we don't need to speak it all back to them.

Millan's methods aren't always about being calm. He doesn't practice what he preaches. For example, the alpha roll or flooding. In those situations he is not dealing with a calm dog. That dog is terrified, stressed, and totally confused. It can end up harming you or the dog.

Really, if the safest method is the longest, that's okay. There's no reason for a training methods to be so dangerous.

I agree with pretty much everyone here. Every training method has it's pro's and con's. Some training methods are misunderstood as well. For example, positive reinforcement does not mean I only give dogs treats and praise. All it means is I add something to the situation to make a behavior more or less desirable. Negative reinforcement only means that I am removing something to make a behavior more or less desirable. Both have the possibility for abuse (Hitting a dog- adding (positive), starving a dog- removing (negative). That being said, the so-called 'dog whisperer' (pah-leeze, we have enough 'whisperers' in the horse world!) does have some fairly effective tecniques (sorry about the sp). Another dog trainer showed me the basics of his stuff when I first started working at a day camp facility for dogs. I must admit, they are very effective, especially for a situation where you must establish yourself as the go-to person in a short period of time. The trainer had control over the dogs (which there could be anywhere from 5 to 25 in one room) most of the time, and all the dogs loved her or at least looked to her for leadership.

That being said I rarely use those tecniques. For one thing, I'm lazy and rarely weigh much more than the dogs I would use this on. I don't want to wrestle with a dog, thank you very much. For me, it's dumb. For another thing, not every dog is going to accept me forcing it onto it's side and submitting it. Some dogs I would scare the living daylights out of and others would turn around and bite my face off. Sometimes it really doesn't even work. However I have used it on certain dogs and those dogs now not only seem to enjoy being around me but will also listen to me quicker than most other dogs. I do not have the ability to establish trusting, long-term relationships with most dogs that we get in day camp, so anything that will help me to have control over a literal pack of dogs quickly is something I want to have on file- just in case.

So for me, no training method is necessarily good or bad. I am a firm believer that most training methods have a time and a place. If a dog latched on to me and wasn't going to let go, I'd have no problem doing whatever it took to get it off, for example. Some training methods are more effective, or quicker or what have you. So long as the methods are based on solid theology and a firm understanding of dog behavior, I won't dissaprove unless it's dangerous to the dog or the person. It's a very nice thing to have more than one bag of tricks to draw from.

It's not that I disagree with all of his techniques. But most of his training methods stems from the 'wolf pack' theory. Which makes no sense. When it comes to dog training I try to make every training method as positive as I can. I've watched him hold a dog tightly while she tries to bite him. I flinch when I see that. The dog he is holding is one terrified and confused dog. I see no logic behind doing something like that. I don't see the dog looking respectfully at him, that dog is submissive. I want my dogs to listen to me, to be well behaved. But i don't want them to fear me! And Millan's tactics include fear.

I see where you're coming from and I agree. As both a dog and horse trainer, the LAST thing I want is for the animal to be afraid of me. Sometimes though you have to take the risk in order to get things done, unfortunately. A good trainer will back down if the animal is getting too scared to learn, though. There are times when you basically gotta work thru the fear. It's a very hard balancing act sometimes.