Dog Training Symposium - First of It's Kind, Cesar Millan and American Humane Convene the Event

I think too much blame has been laid on the breeders, and the owners who don't do their homework are enabled by breed rescuers (like me) and shelters to dump their pets, when the going gets rough. People who purchase (or yes, adopt) their pets from someone who doesn't interview them to make sure they are a good match for their breed/pet, or take on a "free" pet just because it is free are doing the animal a disservice. People need to realize that dogs and cats live 12-20+ years, and need not to take on this kind of responsibility if they aren't in a position to make that kind of commitment. We are a disposable economy. It is one thing when you think of a sweater you buy, and later decide you don't like, and a living being that depends on YOU to make the decision for them. People need to learn to live up to the responsibility they take on. And responsible owners, please know I am not talking to you.

I stumbled upon this article while following a link from the Winn Feline Foundation and while I would rather not need to post the comment, I feel compelled to.
We all have our opinions and God knows, we carry them with conviction. When we generalise however, we tread on dangerous ground. Regardless of how much or little I agree with the detail of the mild polemic between CMillan and the American Humane, you are making a sweeping statement that on surface sounds very PC but in essence isn't as wise as it initially reads. Laissez-faire is great when it's what we do in our back yard, but let me explain.
You state that: "Spay/neuter is a very good thing, but you can't mandate cultural change, you do that through education"
What is the aim here? More responsible pet owners who take the time to get the right information on board in order to do the job (of raising pets) well. The first step is always education, just like in medicine, prevention is infinitely a better measure than treatment once disease has set in. To draw another parallel, the children we raise should be primarily educated and coached on what is acceptable behaviour and what isn't by parents, teachers and their respective societies (all in all our culture), so that they can develop the skills to make valid (and responsible) choices.
The question is, what happens when with the best education and will in the world and knowledge squarely with those who need to make use of it, things do not happen as they ought to, e.g. children still misbehave, people still smoke and self-harm etc?
Nature -the universe for those more spiritually inclined- has provided a solution to this and it is called "consequence", be it in the form of disease, trauma, in general, consequence. Similarly, societies have devised ways in which they can collectively defend some form of order and encourage responsibility, albeit at times interventionist. We discipline our children (or so we should) if they are not "playing ball" for their own good, so that they can be an asset to society. We treat people with disease and this too is invariably inconvenient, unpleasant,at times painful and certainly costly. Man-made or nature-induced, we are all familiar with the necessity of -and wisdom in- escalating the degree of intervention where intervention is needed to preserve balance and promote individual and collective welfare.
Why, therefore, would it be OK for pro-neuter education to stop at just providing the facts and guidance when we know enough about human nature to safely predict -with conviction- that there needs to be a second, complementary level of ensuring adherence of pet owners for the benefit of society as a whole?
If we are all in agreement that neutering our pets is not a luxury but a necessity for more reasons that would fit into this comment, then surely actions should be implemented to address a "cultural habit" of negligence that words have not sufficed to solve. Cultural change does not always come about through preaching, surely we all have several examples where this is a virtual impossibility when dealing with human nature.
The question now becomes: how serious are we about not just supporting but effecting neutering, and how much of a "key issue" do we think it is in improving pet welfare? "Key" enough to intervene when people choose to ignore it?

You ask who can complain about the work Milan & his wife are doing with schoolkids? Well, I can. I read an article in the NYT a month or so ago about Milan's ideas on dealing with dogs being adopted for use with human children. I cannot imagine his methods are any less harmful for children then they are for dogs. Children don't need to be taught that dominance is the way to deal with other living beings, be they canine or human.

Steve: My compliments to you and your colleagues at American Humane, And to Milan and his organization, for taking this step. Milan and his methods are very popular, and very well-known. In fact, he almost certainly is the only "household word" when it comes to dog training.

Regardless of one's opinions about Milan's methods, this step is a "win-win." The sharing of techniques and expertise among the "top-dog" trainers has to benefit everyone. For those who take exception to some of Milan's philosophies and techniques, the seminar is a unique opportunity to showcase and discuss alternative methodologies with which he might augment his current practices. It also provides an opportunity for practitioners of other, more "mainstream" training philosophies to learn from Milan, who has, (whatever else you can say about him), made dog training a newly emerging "pop-culture" phenomeneon.

A sincere thanks in advance to all of the individuals and organizations that will be participating in the upcoming seminar!

You're absolutely right Steve--nothing comes without communication. I think this is really exciting! I hope the concept catches the imagination of all groups with a gripe. Face-to-face meetings on the issues can be a wonderful road to transparency, even a platform for positive change, for both principals and their constituents.

Steve,
Will you please run for office? I LOVE that you outlined how we should dialog about disagreements, not name calling and total disregard of a different point of view! If Washington would follow your lead, we'd have a better government.

I found that Cesar's methods transformed my life with my dog, so I'm in his camp! As he has taught me, I use all kinds of methods to keep my dog balanced, from treats and praise to appropriate consequences for unwanted behavior.

It's a great idea to get people together. I wish I could be a "fly on the wall" at that meeting! Please let us know what went on.
All the best,
Peggy and "Willie" my Cesarized dog!

While I am not a fan of Cesar's, I also believe that each dog/owner team is unique and there is no "one method that fits all" in dog training. What is important is that each dog receives some basic training. A trained dog is a happy dog! Therefore, I think this symposium is a much needed step in the right direction. Since behavior issues are one of most important reasons for owner relinquishments of dogs to animal shelters, any program that will share techniques to help with these problems will be highly useful for encouraging pet retention. No doubt the training techniques exchanged and discussed at this symposium will give these expert trainer participants more "tools in the box" to help their client dog owners overcome their dog’s problem behaviors, which will benefit everyone.

Steve,
While I am thinking ot myself...hmm...maybe he is getting the message and maybe he wants to change HIS ways...maybe not, but it can't hurt for him to come together with leading behaviorists!

On the other hand, his current methods do nothing to "lessen relinquishments and lessen behavior problems (a primarily reason for euthanasia)." If anything, people try to use his "techniques" to "train" their dogs from the moment they get them, which, in turn can cause aggression and other problems that will get the dog dropped off at the shelter and/ or possibly euthanized...

Good for you for being the "bigger person" in all of this... One can only hope it has a good outcome...maybe to bring some light to the "dog psychologist" himself (cough, cough... :-)

Steve-I had no idea this was going to happen, thank you so much for the info! I am a huge fan of Cesar Millan, one of the reasons being that he always keeps an open mind. I have never heard him say anything negative about other people who work with dogs (or anyone for that matter). He has never claimed that his way is the only way and you have to do what works for your dog. He incorporates many different techniques, but only one philosophy. He believes what he believes, is strong in his convictions, but has said that he will listen to anybody who has something to share. He then takes what he finds good and leaves the rest.

I think by Millan and the American Humane coming together for this meeting shows that Millan is not the only one who can keep an open mind. Hooray for all parties involved!

Hi Steve I read your blog with great disappointment. I hope that word conveys as much import as it did to me and my siblings when our parents used to use it. There is mention of the good works of Kissinger and Jimmy Carter as being a good analogy for the step the American Humane has taken with Cesar Millan. I am sorry there was not mention of Henry Kissinger’s involvement in the carpet bombing of neutral Cambodia to give himself the negotiating position you have lauded him for. I am also sorry that there was no mention that although the Camp David Accords brought a type of peace between Egypt and Israel – the terms of these accords have arguably stalled reasonable negotiations in the Middle East. Since this treaty set up the precedent for an aggressor–and-loser-takes-all mentality it has been a stumbling-block to reasonable Israeli/Arab negotiations. In my opinion, I would look to other analogies to justify the appeasement that seems to be going on from American Humane’ s point of view. Speaking of appeasement, perhaps that is the analogy that is most useful here. Germany wanted the Sudetenland and was the biggest bully on the block. Peace was offered for the Sudetenland and the powers that be could not face another war; and simply could not win the PR battle against the Nazi economic juggernaut. Czechoslovakia was carved up, in the words of Neville Chamberlain, to produce "peace for our time". We all know how well that turned out. It seems to me this appeasement between American Humane and Cesar was put together not to buy peace but more air-time for the good cause of spay/neuter campaigns at the cost of good solid empirically supported behavior modification. Like the famous appeasement of 1938 the fallout of this will be dramatic if only for the dogs who will suffer the hangings, the kicking, the shock collars and the withheld affection until they have “done as they have been told.” And in the end it may well provide for more unwanted dogs and more euthanized dogs due to behavior problems.
I work regularly with dogs in rescue environments and support spay/neutering but not at the cost of humane treatment of the animals we are supposed to be saving. I know that many of the dogs I work with in shelters are there because they have behavioral problems - which would be made worse by the dominance theory training techniques proffered by Mr. Millan. The fallout of coercion is well documented empirically in the world of behavior modification. There is no need to debate it – there is no debate. The only debate/discussion is what a person wishes to do to their animals – either to be in keeping with good scientific humane protocols or to use damaging techniques that by some opinions verge on inhumane. I have had to field too many calls from people who tell me that they “…have tried everything Cesar says and still things are getting worse and they don’t know if they can keep their dog.” I have had too many dogs come into shelters with aggressive tendencies that were completely mitigated once the coercion was stopped. Some of these dogs land in shelters that will not euthanize no matter what. Some land in shelters that will euthanize for behavior problems. And some land in shelters where the clock to euthanize stats ticking the minute the dog enters the doors. I cannot support or believe any claim that Cesar is “saving” dogs.
I would like to see some statistics on how many dogs are euthanized for over population and how many are euthanized for bad behaviors. We can spay and neuter all the pet dogs in this country and yet we will still have the dripping faucet of puppy mills populating our country with animals intended to be whimsical purchases but who later end up in shelters because, “they chewed my stuff…”
Those of us in the trenches eking out a living as full-time trainers are left with little support as we try to convince clients that they should love their dogs first like they would their children, not kick them, not hang them, not shock them, and not force them to the ground to prove outdated and overturned theories of dominance. We would never say to our kids – “mommy will only love you when you are potty trained,” or “I will only love you if you don’t draw on the walls.” We know from research done by Rene Spitz a condition called anaclitic depression - considered an attachment disorder developed in children in an orphanage who were feed, kept clean and generally well taken care of but not “loved” or in Spitz’s words, “…who received no consistent affection from a sole caregiver.” Spitz concludes that providing only for a baby's physical needs is not sufficient for normal development. We know this is exactly the same with animals as there aren’t many of us who have not watched the heart-wrenching film clip of the rhesus monkeys who would prefer to starve to death if the choice were between eating and affection. When we in the trenches have to try to explain to a client why the tenets that Cesar and National Geographic Channel and now American Humane support are not good science we have to present a dissertation. And even if we do manage to present that dissertation we are still left with the most sinister fallout of the twentieth century – “if it’s on TV, it must be true.” We have allowed ignorant television producers, ignorant marketing gurus, and others to send good solid empirically based humane behavior modification back into the dark ages. And you and the American Humane are running to jump into the time machine with them before it leaves town.
I am always hesitant to write anything this piercing since I live in the empirical world that positive reinforcement has an overall greater effect than positive punishment, and that usually ignoring bad behavior will make it diminish. However, there are times that those of us holding the line against the dark side have to stand up and scream to advocate for the side of light, even if mine is the only voice in the winds of the hurricane that is Cesar.
This is a short sighted decision made for temporary political expedience that will ultimately harm the animals it seeks to protect.

Thank you Steve for bringing us this wonderful Article, and Mentioning Cesar Millan in a more Positive Light. We all appreciate that.

Like my friend Peggy said, " Wish I could be a fly on the wall" I bet you will inform us of the Great Attention to Animal Welfare, that will be taking place soon, will be talked of and handled by some of the Best Folks around.

I have 2 dogs now, that are fully Ceserized :) the oldest one is 5 years and my youngest is 6 months. I took to Cesar's show immediately in 2005, then came to find a Fans List Group on Yahoo, and I was hooked! It's so simple and the dogs are better for this simply by using the following: Exercise, Discipline, Affection.

I will forever do my part to keep my dogs Balanced, Healthy, and Great Ambassadors of their Breed. They join me here at work everyday, and never tire of Greeting my Clients all day long.
Each client comments on how well mannered they are, and always insist that I train their dogs to be like mine... I simply point to Cesar's Books on my shelves, and they are happier for it. The more the merrier I say.

I am so happy to see this groundbreaking symposium that brings together disparate factions within the animal welfare community. I am a strong supporter of Cesar Millan because of his flexible approach to dog behavior and his emphasis on communication with dogs at the energy level. I am also a supporter of American Humane even though they are critical of Millan's methods. I have long believed in supporting what you can and working for change from within.
I have noticed that over the years, Millan has expanded his repertoire and has learned from other animal behaviorists and trainers (and no just with specialists in dog behavior).
I think American Humane has done a spectacular job as "watchdogs" for the two most abused segments of society -- animals and children. I never like to see groups or individuals with common goals form battlelines within the ranks when, to my way of thinking, they would be better served finding common ground against something truly evil: dogfighting, puppy mills, euthanasia of health animals. The more we unite to work together against these things, the more effective we will be.
Thank you, thank American Humane and thank Cesar for starting something good!

As a member of APDT and dog trainer on a national television show, I would be very interested in attending this symposium. How can I be on the list for notification of date and place?

You have to be kidding me. Well, duh! Of course CM's people are so "nice." This is a PR dream come true for them. You are giving him legitimacy. CM ought to have animal cruelty charges against him, not an opportunity to have a huge platform with the power of American Humane behind him. This is a total travesty and I now am going to have to include you Steve as one of the people who will be bringing more misfortune to poor unsuspecting animals.

CM is an uneducated, macho, old school "trainer" who knows nothing about the science of dog training and he should not be given any more opportunity than he already has to promote himself at the expense of animals.

Shame on you!

What we are talking about, according to American Humane’s site, is a “national symposium of the best minds in the nation in the area of dog training and dog-friendly behavior modification.” Is CM one of the “best minds in the nation in the area of dog training and dog-friendly behavior modification”? The implication of his being the first named participant is ‘yes’, at least according to American Humane.

Honestly, I am baffled as to why you “don’t get” why some people are upset by this implied endorsement.

If I were to arrange a “national symposium of the best minds in the nation in the area of evolutionary studies” you can bet that my first named participant would not be a proponent of intelligent design. No way would I risk giving the impression that there is room for legitimate disagreement, or risk furthering any sense that creationists of any stripe have earned a seat at the table of science just because their ideas are old and popular. They would not be included.

Creationists are not the peers of scientists, and presenting their ideas as “alternate theories” is insulting. Largely, people find ways to believe what they want to believe. Let’s not make it any easier to view “energy” and dominance on the same level with modern, science based methods. Superstition doesn’t get to be shrouded in science if we don’t act like its gurus should be treated as the peers of scientists: Veterinary Behaviorists and other evidence-based behavior technicians and practitioners.

Equal time does not need to be given to all theories in all settings. There’s no problem with discussing the relative merits of different techniques and methodologies, in a rational manner, but it’s not okay to get a seat at the table based on ratings, charisma, finances, or a show of hands. Or this symposium should be billed as “the biggest names in the nation” and not “the best minds”.

Here’s common ground: Cupcakes are good, and thumbscrews are bad. So what? It’s not what we’re talking about. If you want a symposium finding common ground between those who use primarily positive reinforcement based techniques and those who are comfortable with flooding and/or positive punishment as an early choice method, then just say so. But don’t bill the participants as dog-friendly.

What I don’t get, truly, is what is to come of all this. Do you think that CM is interested in changing his methods? If so, why don’t we just loan him a couple of Kathy Sdao videos and accomplish the same thing without so much fuss? And how do you think the public with see the symposium? How do you think CM’s fans and viewers will see it? (and if you’re not sure how to answer this, maybe go back and re-read the thanks you get above for finally easing up on CM.)

Sincerely, Steve, help us out. Please give us more information about what exactly this symposium is meant to be and why, because this current presentation is sticking in quite a few craws. I hope that you can try to understand how it looks from our perspective. We all understand the long and arduous debate, and I think are trying to see nuance, give you and AHA the benefit of the doubt, etc. However, I cannot imagine how the average pet owner could see it as anything other than an endorsement of CM and his methods.

Steve--While dialogue is a good idea, it is only effective when all parties concerned agree there is a problem and are willing to come together to achieve a mutually acceptable solution. Otherwise, you have one group making concessions for the sake of PR and the other group refusing to change because they have nothing to gain by doing so.
Dog professionals who use positive, science-based methods for training agree with Milan on three things: dogs need more exercise, it is best if the owner can stay calm and at least act like they are in charge and dogs need structure. These are principles, not methods. The positive training community has issues with Milan's methods and I don't see Milan changing his methods because they have made him boatloads of money and earned him the adoration of a lot of people. Besides what are the positive oriented people going to say to Milan they have not already said?
I urge you to rethink this symposium idea. Please do not put the people who believe the relationship between dog and owner should be based on cooperation and team work in the position of groveling to a man who believes the relationship should be based on fear and dominance. I prefer to see Cesar Milan as an extinction burst in the evolution of dog training methods and as every science based trainer knows, we ignore extinction bursts, we do not concede to them or dialogue with them.

I don't care for Cesar Milan. But no matter what, the people that like him will go to him, and the people who do their research won't. I truly doubt his opinions and personal views of dogs will change, they have worked for him thus far, and have succeeded in taking him from a "nobody" dog bather at a grooming salon to a PR dream! Or maybe the point of the symposium is something else, what are the goals of the dialogue? To improve info given to the public?

The best dog training is suited for the individual dog, it's balanced, it's not "all positive", or "dominance based", and plenty of trainers who try to use any unbalanced methods will not have good results. I have seen training results from many different programs and they vary so greatly. Dog behavior problems are certainly "fixable", but only with proper obedience and giving dog clear direction. Cesar has had some challenging cases on his show- how he handled them, I'm not so sure, but at least he gives people the belief that training can accomplish real changes in behavior. Dogs are not just "bad". Why should we care?-- lack of proper training is usually the cause of people's dogs behaving badly or being given up/euthanized.

If the purpose of having Cesar at the symposium is to point out the similarities between the two sides, I think we run the risk of being seen as endorsers of his methods. However, If we are allowed to engage in open dialogue and debate with Cesar, I am for it 1000 percent. But the debate must be done in a civilized manner. The people we are trying to reach aren't those that are hardcore fans & followers of Cesar. We are trying to reach those that are on the fence or who just might not know other, better methods exist. Vilifying Cesar (as seems to be much en vogue these days) will only entrench his standing further. However, hoping that Cesar, his methods, and his popularity will extinguish themselves is just not going to happen. Too much money is being made.

I'd have to agree with Vicky's comments here. Nicely put.

When you consider that Cesar Milan already went on TV, in the UK, and stated (about American Humane) ;

"we invited them to come [to the set] and they've changed their state of mind about what is cruel"

You've stated that is not the case, but regardless, you've got to see how this invitation is going to reflect in the eyes of the general dog owning public?!

By all means talk to the man, but why does it have to be at a national symposium ? Why not go on his show and discuss what it is about his methods that create concern? If he's really open-minded and willing to listen, there can't really be any objection to that?

I don't think there is any need to vilify him, because I am sure he genuinely loves dogs and truly believes in what he says. Like many others, he perhaps just has not had the opportunity to experience other methods and it would be great to see him engage in trying those. He does have some sound principles (don't spoil your dog, exercise your dog, set boundaries for your dog - all superb) it's just the application of those that some of us have issues with.

It sounds to me like CM PR team have American Humane exactly where they want them. I'm pleased there is some common ground to work from and I do think adult dialogue is better than legal battles, BUT I think the location and timing of this has placed the ball firmly in CM court.

Just wanted to say, it may not be much but you just gained one fan by helping foster this. Normally I would tune your show out when it turned to the subject, not because I am a follower of Cesar and his ways, I am not, but because of just the negative droning on and on about him. Trainers should be able to have a dialogue with each other, even if your methods are wildly different and you do not agree with them, it does not mean you encourage or endorse these methods. Frankly, I think this is a great step in getting people to understand methods used in training, positive methods should be able to stand on their own merits, and science behind them, no matter who is at the table.

I think that if I was the St. Bernard getting dragged up the stairs with a choke chain I would not give a flying fig about all the wonderful things he's supposed to have done for animal welfare. But I guess all the dogs he's supposed to have helped somehow makes up for the dogs he's strangled. Will there be a veterinarian on hand at the symposium with radiographic films of what his improper choke chain use can do to a dog's trachea?

Question, Steve:
How much is the trainer charging American Humane to participate in this Symposium? Or is he waiving his fee? (He fills every seat and charges exorbitant ticket prices during his traveling shows.) The use of the word "symposium" does garner an image of the free flow of ideas, an exchange of knowledge and more than just two sides who oppose each other's philosophies; rather, a series of panel discussions, only one of which would involve this trainer. If this Symposium is something else, with passionate finger pointing while the cameras roll and click, one might just as well call it a public relations announcement. And we see how that turned out for Toyota.
I truly hope that the trainer and American Humane are not being used by each other for PR purposes (tho since I do know you, I have never seen you or AH display greed or opt for this type of PR tactic, so kudos for that). I'd also like to see the list of panelists, would hope to be a member of the press in attendance, and look forward to a true account of the Symposium. Please, give us all more details when you have them, and let us know who else has been invited. It's also important to know who was invited and declined to participate, and why.
While I commend the attempt, I'm not sure that the end result will satisfy many.

Thank you Steve for a balanced post. Cesar has done plenty for dogs and dog owners indeed.

I always feel weird when I find people criticizing his methods. His skills are undeniable, no? The only problem I find with his methods is that most people have a hard time applying them properly. I think that point gets overlooked. Most people are unable to remain calm under stress, most people are unable to detach from the situation and take a bird's eye view of the situation. Things like the alpha roll are counter-productive 9 times out of ten. Have I seen it work? Yes, I have and could cite specific examples. I think a lot of it has to do with indoctrination into one (or another) school of thought, I've written about it in my blog http://dogandogs.com/everything-you-know-about-dog-training-is-wro-1 for anyone who cares to learn more about indoctrination.