Does anyone watch Dog Whisperer?

[Jags mom]

I too love cesar milan and his show his tip have helped a lot of my clients( i groom dogs) with thier problems, not big ones, but things like not wanting to walk on new laminate flooring. i have practised claiming my dogs food as my rescue used to be food aggresive, now i can stick my face in her food and she will totally back off. a dog is a dog and always will be but i still treat them like my baby. i think you have to be dominant over them in order to treat them like a baby. affraid of and respectful are 2 different things. a strang person coming into control some of your actions i would shy away from to and go back to the person that lets them get away with every thing, they may look affraid but they are not. dogs try to manipulate ppl just they way kids do you have to be firm. again i love him and the fact that he gives a great name to pits and rotties, they need a good spokes person like that

[Christmas_Hamster]

I haven't checked into the show much lately but from what I have seen he is a complete moron, his training techniques and theories are outdated and the dogs only respond to him out of fear. This isn't how training should work. My dog used to love learning new things even if we were breaking him out of a bad habit he just loved to try and learn.

The think I hate most is that he trades dogs like they are pokemon cards. If he can't get the dog the way he wants within the allotted amount of time then he just gives the people one of his dogs and takes in their current one. This is a bad both on Cesar and the owners but why let it happen?

[dreamparkingspace]

I think the reason he suggests exchanging dogs with some people on the show lately is because he gives the people a dog whose energy level matches theirs better. Then the dog who had behavioral issues which the owners couldn't correct goes on to live in Cesar's doggie sanctuary rather than eventually bite someone then be put to sleep by animal control. Not sure if that's the whole procedure in trading pokemon cards, but if I had a dog I knew I just couldn't handle I'd be willing to let it live out the rest of it's life at the Dog Psychology Center playing fetch and running around with other dogs every day in a happy and balanced state.

[atchbedyto]

I rescued a highly aggressive/reactive/dominant Rottweiler. She was left tied in a back yard while her owner was in jail. She was basically a last chance dog with a bite history. She attacked me twice when I first rescued her, highly dog aggressive, wanted to eat my Cat, was bad with most people, The Vets could barely handle her etc. At first I used those old out dated dominance training methods such as alpha rolls, pinning, choker, corrections etc. Anyway, the techniques "seemed" to be working and I was pretty proud of myself. But, what really happened was my Rottweiler had shut down, was suppressed and no longer trusted me. She didn't "learn" how to be a better dog she learned to fear me which in a novices eye would look like respect. Anyway what then started happening was she learned not to give any warnings. So I'd see another dog and she wouldn't react and I would think all was well. The corrective type training made her into a sneaky dog that had not learned not to give warnings. She did not learn to not do the bad behavior.

So, I started going to a local behaviorist who uses positive only training with excellent results. She has saved many dogs from being PTS, but you'll never see her on TV. She is not a braggart as this is her job. To make a long story short I used positive training to mold my Rottweiler into the perfect dog. Just because you use positive training does not mean you have a pocket full of treats. Dogs can be rewarded in many other different ways, I used praise, toys, play, redirecting drives, laughter etc. If you have a breed with enhanced drives the dog is rewarded by allowing them to express those drives in a good manner instead of destructive. For example if I have a highly aggressive dog that I am trying to desensitize to people and she has a high chase drive then I will bounce a ball as I walk past the person to start the desensitizing process. Then I will have the other person bounce the ball and play fetch etc. The dog then associates this new person with good things. With my Rottweiler I took her natural drives and rewarded her for expressing them in a positive manner. I was able to desensitize her to horses and cats by simple tactics that did not involve food. For the horses I started bringing home the horse blankets etc to get her used to the smell and good things happened when that smell was around. Another thing as well, even the most highly dog aggressive dog will shut down when they are put into a situation with multiple dogs. A person that keeps 50 or so dogs together does not impress me at all, it's called flooding, also what a stressful way for those poor dogs to live. Flooding a dog is easy to do, but it's not getting the dog over the issue and teaching them a new behavior. My highly dog aggressive Rottweiler is fine in large groups of dogs, it's when there is only one new dog that she became reactive and it didn't matter what the other dog is like in personality she just reacts. Its more predatory drive for her when she see's another dog. So I worked on that with counter conditioning and allowing her to fulfill those drives in positive ways. I am very proud of the turn around of behavior with my Rottweiler. She now has learned new behaviors to replace the old bad behaviors. They were a natural part of her so I just directed them in another harmless forms. I do not believe in flooding, I do not believe in making a dog face it's fears in a force based manner etc, I do not believe in alpha rolls, pinning, chokers etc.

Anyway I am a person who tried different tactics of training I am very impressed with positive only approach. I can't begin to say how thrilled I am in the difference in my Rottweiler. She was a challenge, one which I am very proud of as she is a great representative of positive training. She also taught me so much.

I have 6 dogs, 4 which had issues when I rescued them from food/resource aggression, touch phobia's, fear issues and phobias etc. They have all thrived with routine, positive training to teach them what is expected of them and redirecting bad to desireable. They all eat side by side and are fed a high value food ( a trick many people use for highly food aggressive dogs is to feed low value food). They live in perfect harmony and have perfect lives they all sleep where they want the Rottie, Dobe and Alaskan Husky and cat sleep with me and the Newfs on the couch or where ever When I go for hikes I walk on my property (16 acres) and on trails. My dogs are loose and I never worry about them. I am very proud how well my group of dogs get along especially since they all started living together as adults.

I don't agree with the way Cesar represents dog training or the things he does. He is a good entertainer no doubt but a person to represent dog training...well that is just scary. He is what I see as a phony, but people seem to be enthralled by him because he does have the charm and lays it on thick . It almost seems when people love him they will go to extremes to push him on others which I don't like. We have many clients who are part of the Cesar cult and their dogs are the worst behaved monsters One lady who is a huge fan and follows everything he teaches even managed to ruin a nice mannered Golden Retriever. One lady that came in saw one of our Newf's paw at my Sister's leg for attention. This Cesar cult member started going on how this was a sign of dominance because Cesar said so etc My goodness it's a Newf thing!

[bckrazy]

People getting attacked using Cesar's methods. Your friend euthanized their dog just because they got attacked? I suggest you start making new friends asap. Cesar's methods will never result in death or severe injury, if used properly, and peace and happiness is always the end result. If you have watched the show, then you'll also know that most of Cesar's clients tried literally dozens of positive trainers, all of which have given up-as your friend did with their dog. I do not believe in giving up, no matter how hard.

Not a friend, an acquaintence. Her dog was food posessive and she used the EXACT, to a tee, techniques that Cesar used in food guarding "rehabilitation" including guidance in his book. She challenged her dog just as Cesar challenged that dog, and he attacked her. I could have told her that's what would happen... but no - desensitizing and conditioning using un-obtrusive, un-threatening techniques takes too long. The dog attacked her in a serious way, not just a nip. Just as Cesar himself has been seriously attacked while working with dogs. For the record, my behaviorists have NEVER been bitten by a dog while working with them, as they have the knowledge and care not to push a dog that far.

What do you think to the fact that the dogs are only coming to the treat? When I look at that technique, I see an animal, that has a high food drive, that is opportunistic. I don't see a cute funny human that I don't want to hurt it's feelings so I don't do what is natural to them, I see animal.

What do you think of the fact that negative-reinforcement trained dogs practice behaviors out of fear? When CM "tssss"s at a dog, alpha rolls a dog, hand-bites a dog, chokes a dog, what have you, he is telling the dog "stop functioning or I'm going to threaten your life". The dog doesn't understand that Cesar does not intend to kill them... to them, it's either shutdown/fight or die. When they are not given the option to fight, they do shutdown. That is what I disagree with most. A shutdown dog might seem "obedient" and "calm/submissive" to the average person, but a shutdown dog will not give me what I want from my dogs. I want much, much, much more from my dogs.

I don't treat my dogs like cute funny people. I treat them like cute funny dogs! They are! They love me. They love to work for me. They do not do so out of fear, or out of avoidance, they do so out of an ingrained desire to please me. If I spent all of my time physically correcting my dogs and intimidating them, I would have very unhappy dogs (yes I know this from experience), and I wouldn't be happy. I would rather not have dogs.

I emphasized that the treats are phased out. You can use treats, a favorite toy, petting, or just your voice... whatever the dog is really into. You're right, dogs do have food drive and they are opportunistic. That's why I said I "use what I have". Do I have the sense of smell, touch, posture, or vocalizations that dogs have? No. Dogs DO work for motivators in the wild, and those motivations include food, affection, mating rights, etc. Food being absolutely paramount and a necessity to survive. Why not use something that highly motivates your dog to teach them what you want from them?

Dogs are born into our foreign world of cities, buildings, throngs of other people and strange dogs, having to walk on a leash, having a human control when they eat/eliminate/get out. To expect them to just deal with that, without showing them that what we want them to do is highly rewarding and positive, is unfair IMHO.

I have so many questions for positive trainers generally. What happens when the treats run out? And/or when you have no clicker or anything but your mind. Do you know that in natural cases like these these the only option is to use natural methods, that's why they're called natural methods, dogs don't use clickers or treats or persuasions on each other, so it makes sense not to either.

As I said before... treats are phased out. Food is used to create positive associations and to mark a behavior as wanted. Many years of research has found it to be the best tool in motivating dogs, no, ANY animal. I don't bring treats or a clicker on the majority of my walks and outings... I don't need them for trained behaviors! The fact is, consistency and careful weaning from the motivator has taught my dogs what I want from them (in that case, staying near me) and that what I want is positive and rewarding. Why do you think they use clickers and treats to train Orca and Bears? Do you think natural methods would work with those animals?

Another one that boggles my mind. I have heard so many cases of people who try and use positive methods on ultra-dominant or ultra-aggressive dogs, and as nobody has been able to snap the dog out of it, the dog has managed to attack or maim another dog or person. People get hurt using positive methods too, when they're not willing to use the dog's techniques back at him.

Honestly, if a dog attacks or kills a person using positive reinforcement, they are not doing it right. The point of desensitizing a dog (ie to human contact) is to NEVER break threshold. That is, the point at which the dog's brain is in a state of fight or flight... at that point, they are no longer capable of learning new behaviors. A dog growling/snarling/attacking/shutting down is well past threshold. The point is, never get past level 1, and slowly progress.

The point isn't who seems weaker, or who seems more dominant. People are the most dominance-obsessed beings of all. That's obvious. I don't really understand what you mean by "stop a dog from wanting to kill people". How in tarnations is a dog going to want to stop killing people by being physically hurt by a person? If a dog has the desire to kill another dog, do you think the other dog alpha rolling him is going to extinguish that desire? Or intensify it? Or do you think the other dog being a positive, unobtrusive, ambient source of rewards and good things would intensify it?

On another random note, why is it that 50% of what most positive trainers say is putting down natural methods? It seems they NEVER mention the good stuff, like what you just said about clickers for example, which as a matter of fact I will take into consideration and think about-thank you. Natural behaviorists, or at least the ones that I know (including me, upto now) never put down other methods, but actually use them in some areas if it is possible. I am also a believer in positive training, but in most extreme cases, it simply is not an option.

I cannot deny that I'm sure some "natural" methods do work for some dogs. I truly believe that behavioral issues in the vast majority of dogs can be solved with positive methods... but I know there are dogs who just aren't wired right. Every dog is an individual. Gonzo will do absolutely anything with just praise as his motivation, while Fozzie is very stubborn and learns new behaviors best with high value rewards. I'm sure there are dogs who respond to neither and need something more than what positive reinforcement training can do, but I feel that those dogs are an incredible minority. Regarding the 50% thing, I think that positive trainers are troubled by the new wave of negative reinforcement trainers (not just natural, punishment in general) heavily due to Cesar Millan. Dog training has made leaps and bounds over the past few decades, as has research into dog behavior, and many positive trainers feel that the Dog Whisperer has set dog training back a few decades.

The only one you have to debate with against natural methods are dogs themselves, neither I, nor anyone else invented natural methods.

It is unfortunate that dogs can't talk! I would love to hear their opinion.

If I had rescued two adopted Pit Bulls? Hmm... well, I find that to be an incredible stereotype/generalization... but alright. Are you assuming that these Pit Bulls are just dog aggressive, or human aggressive as well? My dogs are both rescues. Gonzo was a pathetically fearful and abused dog when I adopted him. He had fear-based HA and DA issues when I adopted him, in addition to being afraid of all kinds of regular house-hold and city sounds, even sneezes sent him into a frenzy. Truly, fear aggression is one of the most difficult behavioral issues in the world to cure. I would think a Pit Bull who was confident, but reactive, would be easier to help if anything.

To be honest, my parents only knew "old-school" (in addition to "natural") training methods when I was 13 and adopted him. We went to classes that used choke chains, that told you to correct every growl or negative reaction, to "nip it in the bud", "give an inch and they'll take a mile", etc. He was much worse by the time he was 1 1/2 years old. Much more fearful, and much more prone to growl/snap at strangers and dogs. There was an incident where he nearly bit some one. It was then that I scheduled a session with the behaviorists at 4 Paws. I wanted to start fresh, so I stopped punishing him, I stopped flooding him, I stopped pushing him alltogether. I desensitized him to people and other dogs, and it took YEARS of work, but he learned to see them in a positive light rather than a scary one that he needed to defend himself against. He earned his CGC and his TDI - he went from being declared a "dangerous dog" to that in 2 years. I would hardly call him a naturally good natured dog, but he is a good natured dog now, not due to his genetics or teaching him that I'm the boss and he'd better follow me or else but by teaching him that the world is a happy place.

[atchbedyto]

bckrazy, I must have posted at the same time you did. Excellent post Bravo!!! I wish I had your way with words

[IRescue452]

I break a lot of "dominance" rules. My dogs sleep on the bed and walk in front of me and play tug-of-war. Guess what, I'm still the leader. I've seen plenty of alpha wolves (I know they aren't dog) walking at a regular pace while the others walk in front or behind. They're paying attention to where the alpha is going. Human parents also. Little kids walk ahead or behind and still respect where the mom is going. As long as a dog knows and cares about its leader, it doesn't absolutely need to walk behind or be constantly shut down. I like my dogs to be relaxed and safe, and in turn they are obedient and loving.

[bckrazy]

bckrazy, I must have posted at the same time you did. Excellent post Bravo!!! I wish I had your way with words

I was going to say the same about your post... wonderful. I am so touched to hear about your Rottie girl. Those are some amazing, resilient dogs, so I can only imagine the torment that she went through before you rescued her. I grew up with a rescue Rottie who had been beaten senseless, forced to fight other dogs, and left in a doghouse for months with broken hips, and he had the most rock-solid, kind temperament I've ever seen.

I LOVE that you touched on the dangers of supressing warning behaviors. A dog who is punished for growling is a dog who learns to bite first and growl later. If anything, you want a dog who is vocal about discomfort, and whose breaking point is stretched out as far as possible. Challenging agression with aggression will inevitably breed aggression!!! In observing my own dogs, I notice that Fozzie, who is vocal in everything he does, has never been challenged aggressively by another dog. If a dog makes him uneasy, he will growl/whine/roo-roo calmly, and they will completely chill out and leave him alone. He has never needed to snark at another dog, nor has he been involved in any scuffles, because he communicates how he feels before it gets to that point. Both he and Gonzo growl at each other to communicate, yet they have never had even a mild altercation. I definitely trust a growling dog over a supressed dog who snaps "out of nowhere".

It just makes my heart sink when I see CM, and people on a daily basis, punishing their dogs for giving warnings. He hand-bites a dog that growls, instead of respecting that growl and backing off. The dog learns that growling is ineffective, the aggression/tension/discomfort is not "blocked", it is simply supressed. Understand your dog and their breaking point. If you don't want them to growl, don't push them to that point, teach them that whatever they are growling at is not a threat and they needn't be afraid of it. When you supress ANYTHING, it may be a temporary fix, but it's going to escape someday, somewhere, somehow. And it's going to be a lot uglier than a growl, a snap, or a nip.

I've seen plenty of alpha wolves (I know they aren't dog) walking at a regular pace while the others walk in front or behind.

Werd!!!

How practical would it be, in a pack of wolves or wild dogs for that matter, if all of the other wolves HAD TO BE behind the alpha wolf at all times... lest the alpha wolf would physically punish/choke them? Quite impractical. To me, respect does not involve an invisible line at my side that can never be crossed, nor does it involve a bed, a couch, or a meal being eating before I eat mine. Respect is the look of complete trust, willingness/eagerness to please, and happy compliance that my dogs give me in all situations. What more could one want from their dog? My dogs are not slaves, they are companions. If I had to force them into being calm/submissive every moment of every day, I would be unhappy and bored.

Furthermore, has anyone here EVER seen a dog/wolf forcefully alpha roll another and hold them by the neck simply as a display? Please, please, please show me any proof of this. I would love to see. The one time I witnessed a forced alpha roll was when a Rottie was rolling Gonzo with an intent to serious maim or kill him, leaving punctures all over his neck. Does that make her an alpha dog, or an unstable and dangerous dog? Oh, and, the end result was Gonzo becoming highly reactive to other dogs after years of working toward seeing them as a good thing. Woohoo! I imagine that Gonzo would be personally hurt if I alpha rolled him, and his trust in me would be shaken. If I give that dog a stern look he is crushed, noticeably crushed, all day. I have never used any negative punishment with Fozzie, but the one time my little sister collar corrected him, he became fearful of her, tried to get away from her, and would not come near her for the rest of the day. He is such a pleasant, trusting dog, and I'm positive that physical corrections would have a devestating affect on his natural confidence in people.

[finn's mom]

Great thread. I like Cesar. The girl, Victoria, on the other show, drives me bananas. I try to watch the show when it comes on, but I haven't made it past four or five minutes. I have used some of Cesar's techniques in my home with our six dogs, and have seen improvement. My dogs are my family, but they have been learning their place in it the last few months. Just as an example, our three are no longer allowed to sleep in our bed, since we will have a co-sleeper next to the bed for the baby. They still get loved on like there's no tomorrow, they just have a few more restrictions than they did before. I don't agree with all of Cesar's methods, but I haven't met or seen a trainer that I do.

[MonicanHonda]

I find for me, what works best is the use of Victoria's AND Cesar's methods. I like things from both of them. And that's all I'm going to say.

[bckrazy]

“just aren’t wired right”. Well there it is, had to come up at some point, these are the final words of so many positive trainers who have given up before me. No dog “just ain’t wired right”, every single dog in existence wants to, and can, return to balance.

I truly believe that some dogs are inherently unstable dogs who cannot be helped... just like some people, some animals of any species, can never be "normal". Particularly because we, who control the breeding rights of our dogs, selectively breed for bizarre and dangerous traits (aloofness, silent attacks, DA/HA). I do feel that supressing/"leadership" is likely the only way to "rehabilitate" some dogs. Dogs who are not motivated by people or food or praise or interaction at all, which is indeed unusual and bad wiring for a dog, might be motivated by fear/"respect" of a leader. But to me those dogs are in the minority.

I study feral and wild dogs, and I know for a fact that in every pack there is one leader (+alpha female) and that leader does not hesitate show that he is at the top, and the followers accept it, it's in their instincts to, just as domestic dogs are, who share over 99% of the same genes as the wolf - that's something that you just can't deny. Wolves were domesticated to be adjusted to humans 15,000 years ago, and renamed the "domestic dog", that's just fact. Not only do I study the wolf, but I compare and contrast their behaviors with domestic dogs, domestic dog packs and feral packs, the similarities are endless, the only differences tend to be that most domestic dogs are just ill-equipped for survival, and of course, are fully adjusted to humans.

I felt compelled to quote this again, as the topic of wolf behavior and dogs being the equivalent of wolves has been brought up over & over. Some one I respect A LOT directed me to this link, and I would love for you and anyone else that's interested to take a gander: http://darrennaish.blogspot.com/2006...estic-dog.html & this if you have a couple of hours: http://www.nonlineardogs.com/socialorganisation.html

Being a volunteer at a rescue shelter, I know that if a pit bull comes in from rescue, it has some issues, that’s a fact you can’t deny unfortunately.
On a somewhat random but relevant note, can I just remind you that I use positive reinforcement all the time (seriously) but I cannot use it when it is simply not possible to.

I have met countless rescued Pit Bulls who have never had a mean bone in their body towards any man or animal. Lovable, sensitive, goofy lugs. In my experience, Pit Bulls are a far more resilient and good-natured breed in general than most breeds, including Border Collies.

the fact that I’m male and your female I believe does have some, if not a lot of influence on our opinions about dogs and dog training.

I agree 100%!

I have noticed that men tend to feel empowered by using physical force and being a "leader"... in any situation, not just dog training. There are positive trainers who I adore who are men (Dr Ian Dunbar is one of my favorites of all times), but most of my encounters with "dominance" trainers have been men. It brings up a really nice quote from the second link I posted.

"Not only do the concepts of “dominance” and “submission” assume that the contents of a dog’s consciousness are similar to the contents of human consciousness, they are also unparsimonious and inelegant, and are entirely superfluous in explaining the behavior of the domestic dog. Respondent and operant conditioning are sufficient to explain the behavioral responses on the organizational level of the system called “dog”, and to explain the emergence and maintenance of a larger canine social system."

In many cases of dominance theory, I find that assumptions are made more than real, true, scientific observation. Dominance enthusiasts assume so much, when one can observe isolated dog "packs" all day long, and that does not change the fact that we will never think exactly like a dog or know what is going on in a dog's brain. We can only use what we have, to change they way that they react and behave, in a foreign world, ruled by a completely foreign species of animal.

With regards to the debate, it could go on forever (quite literally…so)-with the things we disagree on, I propose that we agree to disagree, and agree that what we each use works best for us individually.

You're right. I've said my piece... if not more. I did learn something, and I respect that you don't take "natural" training to extremes.

To be honest, you'd have to see me working with a dog first hand to see whether you truly agree with / understand what exactly I do.

I would love to see that. I'm sure it would be eye-opening! Feel free to keep posting here, don't be afraid of me. I'm usually quite well-behaved, believe it or not.

[Jags mom]

I truly believe that some dogs are inherently unstable dogs who cannot be helped... just like some people, some animals of any species, can never be "normal".

I agree with that totally. In the way humans are mentally challenged i feel dogs can be like that too. wiring gone wrong during fetal development. working at a grooming shop i have had thousands of dogs in front of me and have noticed just odd behaviour(like one puppy i groomed at 3 months was very aggresive and i dont mean biting out of fear it was full blown aggresion and it was a shih tzu pup). I have asked a few vet friends and they all agree there are mentally challenges dogs. while in school i worked with mentally disable kids and there wer ones that were just very slow and there were some that got very aggresive when they were challenged, again i belive that dogs are the same way. and when the wiring has gone wrong there is nothing you can do to fix it. not even cesar, though i do love his ways.

I cant remember where i had read this but its a tested thing in dogs that pits are one of the most well rounded if you might say dogs there are. they great with kids, other dogs(if socialized properly, same as any other dog), less likely to snap at nothing, they usually have a good reason, very trainable, great couch potatoes when you want them to be and athletic both at the same time. there is a whole buch of reasons why they ranked the top of the list of dogs tested but i cant remember the site i found it on.

[Alysser]

Being a volunteer at a rescue shelter, I know that if a pit bull comes in from rescue, it has some issues, that’s a fact you can’t deny unfortunately.
On a somewhat random but relevant note, can I just remind you that I use positive reinforcement all the time (seriously) but I cannot use it when it is simply not possible to.

You have GOT to be kidding me? You're telling me pitbulls that come into rescues have issue of some kind? That is a very general (and ignorant) statement to make. I actually liked some of your posts until you said this dumb statement. Not all pitbulls or just dogs in general that come into rescues have "problems". I volunteer at the SPCA and very few pitbulls there have "problems". Most of the dogs at the SPCA I work at come in because their owners are having economic problems or they are moving, Not because they have "problems".

If you meant something else or I misunderstood you, I'm sorry but I really hate when people say pitbulls have problems because they came to a shelter.

[atchbedyto]

Being a volunteer at a rescue shelter, I know that if a pit bull comes in from rescue, it has some issues, that’s a fact you can’t deny unfortunately.
On a somewhat random but relevant note, can I just remind you that I use positive reinforcement all the time (seriously) but I cannot use it when it is simply not possible to quote by gtmanning .

We have had many APBT's come in from SPCA and rescue sources and they have turned out to be wonderful pets. Also, some behavioral motor patterns seen in many purebred dogs are lost when not selectively bred for which happens with many. One of the Vet tech's and the head Vet rescued APBT's and used positive only training on them and had lovely dogs. Even in the old AKC books it states that Staff's, APBT's and other bull breeds are the easiest breeds to rehome.

Another one that boggles my mind. I have heard so many cases of people who try and use positive methods on ultra-dominant or ultra-aggressive dogs, and as nobody has been able to snap the dog out of it, the dog has managed to attack or maim another dog or person. Quote by gtmanning

I have used positive methods on my ultra dominant ultra aggressive (human and dog) Rottweiler with GREAT success. I have however seen many people using corrective forced based training that the dogs have gone on to attack. Your typical cowboy trainer who likes to impress others with his skills of taming the wild beast

I study feral and wild dogs, and I know for a fact that in every pack there is one leader (+alpha female) and that leader does not hesitate show that he is at the top, and the followers accept it, it's in their instincts to, just as domestic dogs are, who share over 99% of the same genes as the wolf - that's something that you just can't deny. Wolves were domesticated to be adjusted to humans 15,000 years ago, and renamed the "domestic dog", that's just fact. Not only do I study the wolf, but I compare and contrast their behaviors with domestic dogs, domestic dog packs and feral packs, the similarities are endless, the only differences tend to be that most domestic dogs are just ill-equipped for survival, and of course, are fully adjusted to humans. Quote by gtmanning

What kind of studies are you doing feral and wild dogs, what resources are you basing your studies. I disagree with what you have say. Our domestic dog (Canis familiaris) evolved to be an opportunistic scavenger, humans did not capture a few Wolf pups and domesticate them Heck if that were the case with our modern ways we should be able to domesticate wolves now a day. Humans way back in time would not have had the means nor the time/interest to domesticate a wolf. Canis familiaris (you'll find them still living as they have for centuries in 3rd world countries, you'll see them living in dumps etc but always living around human activity and human waste areas). Also domestic dogs do not mate with one superior dog, they can be bred by multiple dogs when in heat. The males do not stick around to help raise the litter, which is what a pack is all about. When our 6 dogs first started living together we had one female and one male which were intact, the breeder wanted a litter. They were the breeding pair which in a pack would have made them the so called alpha's...correct me if I'm wrong. These 2 are so far from being dominant it's not funny. Even while the female was in the prime of her heat cycle there were no issues with our dogs, we never had to seperate them.

Many biologists call domestic feral dogs groups and not packs. Plus dogs are very well equipped for survival they have in fact made a very unique niche in the world that has made them prime to survive and would survive better than wolves. As long as there are humans dogs will scavenge off us Coyotes as well have adjusted and differ a great deal from wolves as well. Which brings up another item about the genes and mtDNA studies, they are for the most part inaccurate.

Dogs naturally and instinctually follow behind or beside leaders, so nothing else is necessary. Quote by gtmanning

Really? I have owned dogs for 40 years and had have multi dog households for that time frame. My dogs are well trained...but, my dogs have fun on their hikes with me. I depend on hikes to get the energy out. My dogs run ahead, play, run back to me, play in the water etc they do not walk behind or beside me all the time.

When I was growing up Positive training was our natural way of training dogs...that's how my grandfather trained all his dogs and the wild life he rescued as well. When I tried using correction based training I had people who were "experts" in that kind of training help me with my Rottie..it didn't work for her. My personality and corrections do not mix. I've also seen many dogs ruined by correction based training. It seems the people who talk the most about alpha this, alpha that I am the leader, my dogs know their place etc have the most screwed up dogs . I see it often as I work in a dog related field of work. When we were growing up dogs were dogs and they grew up with us kids and they went every where with us. They were good dogs as they were social from day one and had the opportunities during the critical period of sociliazation. We had a Shepherd/Husky mix, border collie mix and we always had the neighbors Shepherd and husky with us and other neighborhood dogs would hang around us kids and our dogs. They all got along, there were no fights and they loved hanging out with us kids, they went to the beach with us every day etc. Our dogs were never confused, a confused dog is a dangerous dog and that is what I see a lot of is people confusing the heck out of their dogs. We never gave much thought to how well behaved our dogs were back then but we certainly got a lot of compliments. Our dogs slept with us kids, when we ate meals they sat under the table and patiently waited for hand outs, came to my friends houses and were very good...they were such a part of my childhood and we did not go to extremes training them...they naturally learned from example. I think sometimes that our dogs were so well behaved and we didn't put much thought into it we did not use corrections etc. We never over thought it. Now we have people who are trying to make dogs seem a mystery, wolves that are trying to adjust to living in a human family...silly really. When my mom was growing up dogs were used for everything from baby sitters, going to the store to fetch groceries...Newf's were used for that a great deal, hook up a cart and send the Newf off to the local grocery to pick up food by itself. No pack leader to walk with it, the dog did it out of routine. I have a book written by locals of dogs when they were growing up and how much dogs did for them.

As a studier of canids and wild canids I can honestly say yes. Most of the time all the animal needs to project is a dominant energy and the other animal will roll over and show their neck to the dominant animal, the neck biting is rarely required, and if it is, it does not puncture the skin. Truth is, a pack of wild dogs or wolfpack would never become as instable as a lot of the domestic dogs owned by people today, so to forcefully alpha roll a pack member is actually very rare and pointless in a normal-functioning pack of canids.
Alpha rolls etc never have the intent to kill or maim etc as you keep repeating, they only help to reinforce the rankings that will keep the pack at total relaxation with one another, and with wild canids, to survive (domestic dogs still have this instinct). Quote by gtmanning"

OK lets take a livestock guardian dog, when a livestock guardian pup begins to show dog social motor patterns toward sheep the pup will roll on its' back and expose their belly to the sheep. For a farmer this means the pup has successfully bonded with the sheep. The dog is being submissive to the sheep but will go on to be a wonderful guard dog for these very same sheep. So, are the sheep dominant over the dog? The reason a wolf pack would not become unstable like many dogs owned by humans is most times wolves leave packs and go form their own pack...they rehome themselves LOL I've seen my very highly dominant Rottweiler roll on her back in front of puppies, for her its showing the pup that she basically means no harm and intices play - this is what she learned. My dogs also will roll on their back for any human they think may rub their belly. For them rolling on their back for humans is not being submissive it's for a positive action they have come to expect from it. Who can resist a belly rub. Our male Newf Dylan which is a dominant male will lay around the grooming shop on his back for hours while other dogs walk by etc. He likes this position as it's comfortable and he likes to show off the goods. He is not showing any sort of submissive behaviors towards anyone etc. I've seen my dogs when they are playing rolling around on the ground together, for them it's not rolling over to show submissive they are playing and having a blast. I think it's very good to be able to read dogs body language, it has helped me out a great deal working with dogs to read their body language. But at times some people really over do it and read too much into it...or try to bring up wolves and pack behaviors...to be a dog is not to be a wolf.