Thoughts on 'pack theory' and CM

I originally wrote this as a response tot he shut up thread, but then thought it had got a bit long... I present the following for comment and debate.

I am currently studying an animal management/ animal behaviour degree. So I am still researching and studying different types of animal communication and methods of training, but here is my opinion based on my studies thus far it is by no means a definitive answer and should not be treated as such:

Cesar has a natural gift with dogs, he uses different approaches with different situations and doesn't always succeed...

The problem is not really with the man himself. Its with him not having the education to turn his 'way' with dogs into a 'method' that can be used by anyone. He himself uses different methods in different situations and not always pack theory driven, but that is not what many of his 'disciples' preach, nor what everyone understands from watching a few episodes. However I do believe that his overarching philosophy of 'your dog thinks you are its dog pack and needs pack structure' is flawed.

It is important to understand the difference between a theory or approach and a method. This is terminology used a lot in dog training and often incorrectly which becomes confusing.

A training method is tested in different conditions and with different trainers and dogs until it can be proved to work for most dogs in most situations. Clicker training or operant conditioning is one such 'method'. The skill of the trainer or behaviourist is then in adapting that method to the individual situation and dog, or in choosing the right method for the right situation. A training method will not always work in every circumstance; clicker training is more difficult with an animal with no obvious motivators or thats already fearful or distrustful of human interaction for example. But it is just one 'method' in a good behaviourists arsenal and where clicker will not work another method can be employed.

Cesar is a behaviourist using different methods, but his way of dealing with dogs is not in itself a method its an approach of one behaviourist or trainer.

'Pack theory' is not a method... its a theory, a philosophy (almost a religion). Its a way of interpreting the dogs behaviour based on a belief of how a wolf pack functions and then trying to use those perceptions of wolf to wolf communication to communicate human to dog.

There is a lot of research into wolf packs out there (only a very small amount of it by a crazy man who sleeps in their cage). Currently there is not much consensus on actual pack dynamics except that it seems to differ pack to pack and location to location. Arctic wolves and desert wolves have a very different pack dynamic than timber wolves for example, but the majority of research in wolf dynamics currently has been on canadian/american timber wolves.

Timber wolves have a very unique situation, they need to roam over large distances and take down prey far larger and more dangerous than themselves, this has lead to a very different pack dynamic than for desert wolves for example that scavenge more and take smaller prey.

Timber wolves are unlikely to have been the first dogs, far more likely to see humans as prey or a competitive predator than as a potential ally. Most dogs share a gene common to the european grey wolf which has a different pack dynamic again, but all wolves are genetically very similar and dogs share genes that could go back to any wolf species.

Desert wolves are more social and have a much more scavenging nature and are far more likely to have approached the fires of our early desert dwelling ancestors and become the first dogs. Timberwolf may be a foundation stock for the Canadian eskimo dog and husky, but is very unlikely to have been foundation stock for the greyhound for example. Ethiopian wolves (desert wolves) do not have an alpha dominated hierarchy living in family groups with shared responsibilities and hunt individually not as a pack but then bring back their small prey and share with the nursing old or nanny wolves at the den site, they do not have a singel breeding pair as timber wolves do and therefore do not have an obvious alpha. If you look at the more primal desert dog breeds, greyhounds, salukis for example, 'alpha rolling' them is unlikely to get you very far other than a hurt and confused hound.

It is likely that different breeds came from different wolf or wild dog origins in different countries and have then been interbred as people travelled and met with each other and traded their dogs.

Dogs and humans have an ancient relationship that goes back to prehistoric times. There is a dog master dynamic that is instinctively in the genes of our dogs far more than any 'wolf' gene that may still be in there. They want to please us and they look to us for guidance this much is certainly true. They do want rules and boundaries and it is wise to set some limitations. Dogs communicate through their senses though, so not touching talking or making eye contact with them is emotional deprivation and will work in that it will make a dog start to want to please you to get that communication back, but would be cruel over a long period of time if you were the only emotional communication the dog had and offered none at all in return (fortunately not even cesar advocates that).

Good things Cesar says:
Rules Boundaries and limitations - dogs want to please us and giving them things to do and places to be will help them feel happier and more secure in their place.
Give them a job to do or let them know their place in your world
Exercise - its a no brainer really
Consider the breed, look to what it was bred for - sound advice, huskies are more independent then many other breeds and more dog pack oriented, terriers want to kill small furries, lurchers want to chase big furries. these are good drives to consider when creating motivators for training; a terrier will likely be happy with a squeak toy for a motivation aid. But then every dog is an individual and many different breeds went in to making the 'pedigrees' we know today, many of which were developed based on appearance rather than function by the victorians.


Bad things Cesar says
Your dog is a pack animal and you are the alpha dog - Your dog is not stupid and knows that you are not a dog.

If you fight and win the dog goes into a 'calm submissive state' - If you fight your dog, your dog will get very confused and start to wonder if it should fight back, attacking and pinning your dog if it shows signs of agression will succeed in teaching it to show fewer signs of aggression but may not deal with the aggression problem itself (a shut down dog is a very dangerous dog).

Walk out the door first, eat first - Dont get me wrong teaching your dog to sit before going out and taking charge of the walk is common sense and good health and safety but dont think that going in front makes your dog think you are the pack leader, (in wolves the pack leader may not be at the front, the best tracker or hunter is usually at the front and that might not be the alpha animals). but it will give them a job in the dog/human dynamic and tell them that on this journey, you know where you are going will lead to a happier calmer walk. In sled animals giving them direction commands does the same thing, no point having the husky behind the sled, yet we have more control over the running husky than many have over their following dog. No point having a sheep dog behind you either for that matter.

It doesn't matter when the dogs eat as long as they learn you have the food and food is a good thing.

He over uses the treadmill in my opinion. There is little excuse for anyone not exercising their dog but if they cant be taken out for a walk for whatever reason then training games and intelligent interaction is a better substitute than being tied to a treadmill in the cellar...

He is not an evil man by any stretch and he clearly loves dogs. He is getting better as he is learning more about training methods. But still too many of his 'go to' methods are aversive rather than rewarding. Rewarding based training is not always all about giving the dog food treats. It can be as little as a pat or a good word. Dogs love touching talking and eye contact, take any of those away and they will start working to get them back, its basic operant conditioning.

Fear, pain and aversion training will work in some cases and will get fast results, smack a child and shout NO and they wont touch the radiator this time, but they might sneak behind your back later and try for themselves. Learning not 'radiators are bad' but 'don't let mum see you near the radiator'. It does not always get lasting results and wont work on all dogs and can be dangerous or damaging in some circumstances.

...

But I'm a student and I have an enquiring mind, so I'm open to debate

I`ll just sit here with me popcorn and watch this one...........

But a far better response is here:
http://beyondcesarmillan.weebly.com/
contributors include Dr Sophia Yin, Jean Donaldson, the AHA, several universities, the APBC, AVCB, etc.
Have a read of that first?

Yeah, me too, oh there goes the microwave with my popcorn! back in a sec!

Oooh good I like a popcorn debate... sweet for me.. salty is the devils work :P bleurgh :P

Good site link thanks C&D

So do I take it you are both hopping on to the fence with your popcorn for this one?

I am looking forward to Sophia's visit to the UK next year, should find out soon if it is confirmed and what dates...........

*puts bag on head and protend its not happening*

You lost my interest when you dismissed the findings of someone who you describe as 'crazy'.

Of course with you doing all this research from the outside you'll know a lot more than anyone with hands on experience.

rune

I think as someone studying animal behaviour as part of a degree you should research all that is out there and compare and contrast the findings. CM's views are not popular on Dogsey as many of his approaches do not seem dog lover friendly. (my opinion)

I have been a dog owner for the second time round for over 2 years now and being a person thats needs to understand stuff , I have read anything I can find to help me understand my dogs behaviour and attended numerous seminars and talks by the well known 'dog experts'.

I have read things that make a lot of sense mainly evidence based and have seen some of the behaviours described in my dogs.

I now apply the approach I take to my professional life and to life in general , we all have core traits , we all have individual traits and we manage these as we see fit. I think dogs are the same , its not one size fits all but the core of basic behaviour requirements can be applied with changes to suit the individual.

For me there are lots of experts out there and some speak a lot of sense , ,my approach is to remember they are animals but intelligent animals , they respond to love and kindness and above all consisent behaviour to associate being with you as a good thing. They will give so much back for so little and and will be eager to please in the right circumstances.

I dont like popcorn so maybe have to open the Chrsitmas choccies !

Didn't think I called anyone crazy, I was being careful to be less judgemental of CM who after all I did used to like very much and without whom I may not have got back into dog training at all ... but then I reread and yup I did call Shaun Ellis crazy.. darn.. Must remember to be more impartial.

You're right, consider me rebutted.

I do personally believe his methods are crazy, but that's not an opinion based on scientific evidence, just observation and that based on the tv programme made about him, which in itself had bias. It of course doesn't mean all of his findings or theories are flawed just because I don't personally like him.

Research and theory are the underpinnings of study and although they are no substitute for hands on experience, hands on experience should be underpinned with a good understanding of and constant research and questioning of theories. I am working on both gaining more hands on experience with a variety of different training methods and animals as well as trying to keep current on research in the field.

But I must keep a more open mind. Some things do cause me to knee jerk dismiss them. It is certainly a flaw in my study.

Popcorn at the ready.....I have a feeling this is going to be a long thread!