>Maybe so, but the owners did not want the dog confined.

But it just proves that there's always a viable alternative to bullying and cruelty.

The poor little dog had neurological problems, was blind & was in the end stage of renal failure-it died shortly after the month was up-what sort of sufffering did that poor dog experience in the hand of the so called"Dog Whisperer"the mind boggles

That is sad and unsettling that a dog with that many problems wasnt just allwoed to live the rest of his days in peace :(
If my dog was ill, near the end of his days and started acting out of character I would live round him and make his life better, not shorter and stress filled

I see that episode with the dog and racket, I couldnt understand how the dog had been allowed to have full roam outside anyway, dog could have roamed anywhere or been run over or stolen, obviously a case of outside dog doesnt need training, dont forget these people let these dogs get this bad so why should the dog suffer to be better again cause they cant be bothered to train the dog themselves, it was no where near a red zone as he puts it, poor thing was terrified :(

I will never condone his uses of collars, if he is so good why does he even need these prong and electric collars?

> Maybe so, but the owners did not want the dog confined.

What about their responsibility to the dog and the dog's needs? Using what a human "wants" as an excuse for aggression and intimidation of dogs to make them do what is "wanted" (when there are other more effective and HUMANE ways to do it or in some cases there is no need for the dog to do it anyway) is disgusting.

Have you read the links Marianne put up? They are good and explain things well.

Every single CM programme I have seen has stressed out bullied dogs looking miserable - there was one where he hemmed a dog in with plastic chairs then chased it up and down beside a swimming pool with a tennis racket - I had no idea why, and quite frankly I couldn't see that the dog did either. And I can and have watched a lot of distressing things - but one of his programmes had me in tears and walking out of the room - and I can't actually remember what he did because it upset me so much I blanked it from my mind. And I have seen some unpleasant things in my time.

I have just read mastifflover again (13/10 at 18.27)
You have hit the nail on the head, I do believe that Cesar has a passion for dogs and is good with them, THE SHOWS DO NOT SHOW THE REAL CESAR, the books and web site give a far insight to the man.

He says over and over in his books and on the site that if a dog is brought up with love care and lots of affection they would never need the sort of techniques that he uses, we can thank humanity for the 'bad dogs'.

I think the TV shows are clipped to show the shocking stuff as with most things in life why report the pleasant and sweet when people would much rather see the horror of things. That again is a mark of how sad humanity can be!

At the end of the day the man has made a career out of 'fixing' dogs, his reputation goes before him and if his treatment of dogs is so reprehensible then how come more and more people want his advice and to use his services. If his treatment of dogs is so cruel and brutal one would expect a trail of crippled and destroyed dogs behind him, and then for animal welfare bodies to step in and shut him down, I do not see this happening.

Maybe there could be a bit more affection on the show, so try to remember the image of Cesar with the little Dachund that he adopted, he said 'look at that face how could you not love it', I think this is more of what Cesar is about.

> think the TV shows are clipped to show the shocking stuff

I've heard of the opposite happening. Someone watching an episode being filmed observed him making a negative association with that ssss sound using a prong collar. For filming it looked like the noise alone stopped the dog - they didn't show that the dog had been conditioned to react to that noise using pain.

> Maybe there could be a bit more affection on the show, so try to remember the image of Cesar with the little Dachund that he adopted, he said 'look at that face how could you not love it', I think this is more of what Cesar is about.

You must be joking He didn't rescue the Dachshund he wasgiven it as a birthday present.

He is popular in the States because he is marketed so well. What about the dog that died on his treadmill ? He settled out of court & blamed an employee. CM's dogs show the real CM, greeted by tails dog, avoiding eye contact, not allowed to eat unless they are commanded to & all fed in turn in the order that he considers the "ranking"in his pack to be etc etc

The fact that he was not prosecuted for the treatment he doled out to the dying Chinese Crested shows that the real concern for animal welfare in the US stinks-for the poor thing not to be taken to his vet before he tried to "turn the dog around"would fall foul of the current Animal Welfare Act here in the UK.

He like so many other Dominance obsessed "behaviourists" etc cannot seen further that the faulty theories that dogs see humans as part of their "packs"& try to dominant them if not forced into submission

The poor little dog had neurological problems, was blind & was in the end stage of renal failure-it died shortly after the month was up-what sort of sufffering did that poor dog experience in the hand of the so called"Dog Whisperer"the mind boggles

I never understand the argument that he offers some good advice so take what you want and leave the rest.  Even the worst trainers around my area know that dogs need exercise.  I think when a 'dog lover' is offering adivce that is abusive then it's time to say it doesn't matter about the odd common sense thing he says, he doesn't deserve to be listened to.

He doesn't train dogs or rehabilitate them - he BREAKS them

Using what a human "wants" as an excuse for aggression and intimidation of dogs to make them do what is "wanted" (when there are other more effective and HUMANE ways to do it or in some cases there is no need for the dog to do it anyway) is disgusting.

Agree wholeheartedly with the above comments.

Especially regarding the dog with neuro problems  - that was plainly disgusting. He lacked knowledge (a good behaviourist over here and indeed, over in the US would have got the vet involved straight away and run tests and the dog would have been given peaceful put to sleep or else understanding and kindness before it died). He revolts me because he put his own "I am the mighty Cesar" before that dog's health and well being.

Can anyone imagine just what that dog went through before it died?

All because CM has an attitude of "I know best"...

Excellent post by Moonmaiden earlier.  I have watched abit of Caesar Milan on tv but I choose not to anymore as I don't like to see his bullying techniques. 

I am shocked at another forum I look on where everyone bar a couple people think CM is great!!  In my house we have 7 dogs - 2 GSD's, 2 Rottweilers, an Akita, Staffordshire Bull Terrier and a Leo....everyday lives with my dogs consist of positive reward based training and we have no problems with any of them.

I don't think there is any need for someone like CM to be on tv...i've seen too many people try to re-create his 'training' with their own dogs...

Why can't we promote friendly, reward based training with a programme by 'good' trainers??? 

The message he is giving is that he will sort out problems on the extreme end of the spectrum. Shouldnt dog owners be taught to train their pups and young dogs so it should never be the case that you end up with a dog as nasty as some of the ones caser deals with?

He is popular in the States because he is marketed so well. What about the dog that died on his treadmill ? He settled out of court & blamed an employee. CM's dogs show the real CM, greeted by tails dog, avoiding eye contact, not allowed to eat unless they are commanded to & all fed in turn in the order that he considers the "ranking"in his pack to be etc etc

When did this happen and is there any more detail?

> When did this happen and is there any more detail?

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-05-05-dog-whisperer_x.htm

> When did this happen and is there any more detail?

Oops I should have written "nearly" died fingers slower than brain. CM did settle out of court with the owner

From what i have seen i don't think he ever considers the animal welfare, only the humans. A good behaviourist would most likely have said to the owners of the Jack Russell who was forced to ride the motorbike, is it really in his best interests? THe dog was clearly stressed out by the bike, and the prong collar used to correct him clearly caused him pain. They didn't make their other dog use the bike so why did he have to? It wouldn't really be of any benefit to him at all, other than to keep the owners happy.
I've seen him sue a prong collar to correct a shadow chasing dog - what a joke!
I watched an episonde the other night where he was bitten by a daschie. Now any good behaviourist would not have put themselves into the situation he did, where he pushed the dog too far and he felt he had to bite, the dog wan't even muzzled. It was a dog known to bite as it was protective of its owners and so he tried to show him who's boss by carrying on a touching the owner anyway. Dog couldn't cope, struck out and cesar grabbed its harness and flipped it onto the floor into an alpha roll from sofa height! How did that achieve anything? Anyone who knows dogs like he says he does could see that dog was very uncomfortable in that situation and would not have put themselves in a position where the dog could bite.

What Cesar did may have looked unpleasant to us but most of us do not encounter such aggressive animals and that dog did not look to me as though it would have responded to treats, happy high positive voices and other shows of affection.
Yep I totally agree with Moonmaiden.

I've not been training dogs for long and even on my first night taking doggie class I had some new dogs through the door who were so aggressive and if you saw them now you wouldn't believe they were the same dogs!  And I really am a beginner to this and going a lot by common sense and what I've read - and it really works. 

> What Cesar did may have looked unpleasant to us but most of us do not encounter such aggressive animals and that dog did not look to me as though it would have responded to treats, happy high positive voices and other shows of affection.
> Yep I totally agree with Moonmaiden.
>
> I've not been training dogs for long and even on my first night taking doggie class I had some new dogs through the door who were so aggressive and if you saw them now you wouldn't believe they were the same dogs!  And I really am a beginner to this and going a lot by common sense and what I've read - and it really works. 

So from your post I take it your saying you use the same techniques as Caeser in your training as in the Alpha Roll and submission on your aggressive dogs in training? Is that what you mean or have I got it wrong?
Because if I walked into a class and you were using those techniques I would be truly shocked and worried :(

Aggressive dogs dont need to be met with aggression, its just adding fuel to fire in my eyes and taking a big rixk yourself and also damaging the chances of anyone being able to train the dog in a more positive way as it will no longer trust anyone after being forced to submit in an aggressive way, if someone tried to pin me down for not doing what they wanted I would bite the person too! lol

ETA - I just read that link about the dog who nearly dies and the condition that dog was left in was obvious cruelty how the hell did it get bruising on its inner legs and be choked nearly to death thats the really worrying part. And people support a man who does this?????
I have defended him in the past and his methods but after reading that with the vets providing proof of the abuse and the dog needing major surgery, no more im afraid that would have never happned with positive training.

I saw him use an electric collar on his pit bull.  It was to teach him not to go near snakes, which can kill.

In fairness to him, Cesar only used the electric collar as a last resort to stop the dog going near rattle snakes, which live in the mountains where they walk. If I recall correctly, the dog only wore the collar on one or maybe two occasions and it probably did save his life. As soon as the dog adopted the behaviour (staying away from snakes) he stopped using the collar. Even then, Cesar admitted on the show that he regarded this as a failure and he felt he had let his dog down by having to use the collar, but in his view it was the only way to stop the dog risking its own life. I don't think this can be used to suggest that he advocates such methods generally.

What i find strange about that is that people would not use one on their small toddler - they use supervision.
I can understand people who live in such areas being very worried about such a problem (esp. with dogs who will want to range further than most toddlers would) but even so considering it often doesn't work (ie dog is so stressed it can't learn, so it doesn't always take in the lessons regarding scent, etc not just sight).
I think it could give false sense of security and I'd not risk it myself..

Even then, Cesar admitted on the show that he regarded this as a failure and he felt he had let his dog down by having to use the collar, but in his view it was the only way to stop the dog risking its own life. I don't think this can be used to suggest that he advocates such methods generally.

Thats because it is failure :)

There are thousands of dogs who have been trained in a positive way not to go near snakes using treats and so on, same as Labs have been trained to take game so gently it doesnt smudge a feather or break the skin so anything can be done if you have the time, so he copped out really for a quick stoppage to it for TV rather then take time like the rest of America and anyone else does, using those collars on TV is bad imho as normal people who have no dog training expierance what so ever use them and hurt the dog or get it completely wrong for timing etc, no need for these prong and electric collars if you have the time and patience to train :)

> There are thousands of dogs who have been trained in a positive way not to go near snakes using treats and so on, same as Labs have been trained to take game so gently it doesnt smudge a feather or break the skin so anything can be done if you have the time

I'm not arguing, but I guess in this case he felt that time is the one thing that he didn't have. Perhaps he could have taken months and achieved the same result using a different method, but maybe the dog would have been dead by then.

Pat Miller, who is on the Board of the APDT in America, is 100% a supporter of positive techniques, but in her book on the subject she admits to having used techniques that she isn't proud of, such as cap guns, to train dogs where the animal in question was a danger to itself and others (in that case I think it was a dog that kept escaping and chasing horses).

> I'm not arguing

Nah me neither lol :)

Just saying his methods are outdated and we know alot more about dog psycology to know distress signals and what they react too so do we really need these collars etc? :)

> Pat Miller, who is on the Board of the APDT in America, is 100% a supporter of positive techniques, but in her book on the subject she admits to having used techniques that she isn't proud of, such as cap guns, to train dogs where the animal in question was a danger to itself and others (in that case I think it was a dog that kept escaping and chasing horses).

The difference is she realised her mistakes and learnt from them and learned a different way which was more positive, CM hasnt and still used the techniques many trainers left behind as they are abusive and aggressive, I used to love CM and preach his methods but now its the complete opposite! lol

> The difference is she realised her mistakes and learnt from them and learned a different way which was more positive

Erm, no she hasn't (unless you know differently of course). At least in the current edition of her book she admits that there are still cases (including the one that I mentioned) where she has never been able to find a positive method that works. She wishes that she could, but she can't.

So from your post I take it your saying you use the same techniques as Caeser in your training as in the Alpha Roll and submission on your aggressive dogs in training? Is that what you mean or have I got it wrong?
Because if I walked into a class and you were using those techniques I would be truly shocked and worried

I'm not at all sure how you jumped to that conclusion.???  You've lost me totally.

My post is clearly agreeing with Moonmaiden not with Caeser.

????

I replied to a Moonmaiden post, on her comment to this comment. Clear as mud really! :D  ;)

> What Cesar did may have looked unpleasant to us but most of us do not encounter such aggressive animals and that dog did not look to me as though it would have responded to treats, happy high positive voices and other shows of affection.

> Yep I totally agree with MoonmaideN

Moonmaiden is agreeing with some of CM's techniques for dogs which are aggressive and wont respond to treats (which I dont believe but each to their own :) ), so if your agreeing with her your inadvertatly agreeing with CM and his methods lol ;)

"> What Cesar did may have looked unpleasant to us but most of us do not encounter such aggressive animals and that dog did not look to me as though it would have responded to treats, happy high positive voices and other shows of affection."

How do you know that ??  You are an experienced Behaviourist ?

Sorry, but I have come across many dogs that have such learnt behavioural problems & the long term cure is not meeting aggression with aggression, but understanding what is causing the aggression & it is NOT the dog being dominant over their owners. Barbara Sykes has a deep understanding of aggression & never has to resort to pinch, electric shock or the "Illusion"collars(the I collars are slip leads held tight high under the ears to cause the most pain to the dog & hence submission & eventual close down from the dogs).

It is more than unpleasant BTW it is both cruel & excessively painful for the dogs involved. He states all his dogs are fulfilled with thei lives in his compound which is their whole world for most of their lives, except for when they are being filmed being exercised with CM. This is not a fulfilled life for a breed like the GSDs, who need lots of mental stimulation & not forced sbmission

Red Zone dogs do not really exist, it is a term coined by this man for dogs that have learnt that aggression is a reaction that prevents humans or other dogs from invading their"territory"-they are protecting themselves & not their human"pack". It all comes down to the wrong people owning dogs for the wrong reasons & failing to educate & train their dogs in the art of acceptable behaviour.  None of the dogs is actually in a kennels waiting to be PTS by their owners & therefore are not on Death Row. Look at Daddy, he has lived with CM from puppyhood(4 months old) & has actually been his dog for a long time, never mentioned on the program & Daddy was never ever a Red Zone dog, if he was he was one made by CM he belonged to a rapper, who did not have time to look after him enough. His replacement, Junior, also is not a "Red Zone"dog either being with CM from 5 months of age.

Some of my dogs behaviours would not be acceptable to others(like getting on the furniture etc0which is fine, but if people choose to visit me then they have to accept my dog's behaviour, just as I accept the way they treat their dogs(as long as it is humanely naturally)

Okay I agree with this. Is that clearer?  :)

Rach85,

Without trawling the posts except Tenaj's one you're ref. I can categorically assure you that Tenaj reply did not hint in any way to me (nor ever for that matter) to endorse CM :)

and as for MM you've very definitely managed to misinterpret whatever she's written because that is one lady who would be unlikely to raise her voice to a dog and would certainly NOT condone in any way shape or form negative punishments or the low life CM ;)

Methinks you need some caffeine hun and a choccy biccy :-D

Tenaj thats crystal clear :)

> Methinks you need some caffeine hun and a choccy biccy

LOL Funnily enough Ive just goen and got myself a yoguart and drink, you must have read my mind Teri :-D

> and as for MM <IMG alt=eek src="/images/eek.gif"> you've very definitely managed to misinterpret whatever she's written because that is one lady who would be unlikely to raise her voice to a dog and would certainly NOT condone in any way shape or form negative punishments or the low life CM <IMG class=sml alt=;-) src="/images/default/sml_wnk.png">
>

Whoops, lol I apologise now lol oh god when she comes on and sees it......lol!
Its hard on a forum as I do misinterperate things sometimes but Im gonna chill with my yoguart and drink now and watch you lot type lol :)

lol. This is a nice friendly and fun example of how simple things can easily get confusing isn't it! lol. :)

Easy done Rach85 - as soon as topics get really long winded it's hard to keep track (been there, done that, I just sit down now with the popcorn :-D )

Ahh so true :)
My snack was sooo tasty too, now Im refreshed and ready to typing lol!

> There are thousands of dogs who have been trained in a positive way not to go near snakes using treats and so on

How did you find this out?
This discussion has been had before, I searched & searched the net and the only other method that is reputed to reliably teach snake avoidence is to set the dog up to be bitten by a snake.

I do not agree in the use of e-collars as a standard training tool, but in the case of snake avoidence I think it is a bit different. In parts of the world it is common for deadly snakes to be found in your garden or even your home, dogs that have received the e-collar training avoidence have actually alerted thier owners to the presence of deadly snakes in the home which could well have lead to saving the life of a family member as well as the dogs own life.
I think that as we are in the UK and the only snake worry is from Adders in some areas (that are shy and actively avoid us & our dogs and are rarely fatal), we are lucky not have to have to think about how we should ensure our dogs know, beyond a shodow of a doubt, that snakes should always be avoided.

This clickertraining  doesn't offer a reward-based method to snake avoidence.

How did you find this out?
This discussion has been had before, I searched & searched the net and the only other method that is reputed to reliably teach snake avoidence is to set the dog up to be bitten by a snake

Didnt find it out as such just thought along the lines of all the thousands and thousands of dogs which are owned in snake bearing countries and how the dogs manage to avoid them same as we do even without training!
The dog is an amazing creature and can usually figure out for its self the snake isnt to be gone near as it will bite, animals understand animals and we underestimate this, if it was really as bad as CM or anyone else makes out then we would have dead dogs laying round everywhere due to snake bites all over america or australia! :)
And theres always anti venom if the worst does happen.

> Moonmaiden is agreeing with some of CM's techniques for dogs which are aggressive and wont respond to treats

Where did you see that? From her past replies on these subjects I would be very surprised - as far as I have managed to understand it she is 100% positive reward based and loathes the man. :-D

I have to confess though I misunderstood Tenaj's post too. Obviously I misread as well - will go back and have a look. :-)

> The dog is an amazing creature and can usually figure out for its self the snake isnt to be gone near as it will bite, animals understand animals and we underestimate this,

As you say, "usually". In the case we're talking about above, this was the unusual case where a dog isn't picking up on the signals that the snake is to be avoided and so was putting itself at risk. According to his own account Cesar has walked hundreds of dogs in snake country, but this is the only time that he had to resort to an e-collar because other techniques hadn't worked.

> And theres always anti venom if the worst does happen

Which is not 100% effective and only then if given very quickly after a bite. Not that practical if you're on a walk miles from your car and then 20 miles to a vet.

Where did you see that? From her past replies on these subjects I would be very surprised - as far as I have managed to understand it she is 100% positive reward based and loathes the man.

Munroe Ive apologised for that post already as Imisunderstood it lol Please dont draw any more attention to it I dont want a telling off LOL ;)

> Whoops, lol I apologise now lol oh god when she comes on and sees it......lol!

ROFLMAO :-D life's too bl**dy short to get angry anymore ;-)

*Peeks over from behind sofa* so.....is ...the coast clear? LOL :) ;)
Good ole CM threads always have intresting endings lol!!

:-D :-D :-D

The snake question brings up a few interesting thoughts. As humans, we are used to getting what we want - but if a potential dog owner lived in an area where there were many snakes, is it ethical/moral to go out and buy a dog to live in such a place? A bit of a simplisitic question in some ways, because snakes are all over the place including some places I walk (new forest)  but the discussion did make me wonder.

Speaking personally, I don't think I'd buy a dog if I lived in a place which was actually known for having many snakes (ie snakes whose venom would be very likely to kill a dog). I don't think it would be fair and it would be indulging my passion at the expense of the dogs, who would risk dying an unpleasant death just because I fancied having them :(

Maybe people should exercise more restraint and not even consider having a dog unless the environment they live in is safe regarding snakes?! I would not want to subject any dog of mine to pain either, to supposedly protect them - as I said, IMO there could be a false sense of security there anyway with say, CMs method. And i'd be putting a dog through a painful method of training just because of "I want, I want". Doesn't seem right to me after thinking about it.

I think Lindsay has raised a very good point. However, I think in some countries, such as large parts of America, Australia, South America etc etc, animals such as snakes are pretty ubiquitous, so that would probably mean that nobody living outside of big cities could have a dog, including anybody living on a farm.

However, I do think that it is extremely unfair when people expect a dog to adapt to a person's living environment simply because they want one and think they will be a "good" owner (which to many people just means they will walk it, rather than thinking what the dog really needs in its life). We used to live in central London, and the number of people who used to have high energy dogs like malamutes and huskies, or working strains of springers, was ridiculous. You knew that 90% didn't have the time to give the dog the exercise it needed, but they had the right image.

Personally, I think a city gent who keeps a working ESS in a flat in London because it gives him a "country look" that goes with the 4x4 and the green wellies, is just as bad as the hoodie who keeps a staffie because it looks "dead hard".

I saw the episode with the snake and it wasn't a last resort from what I remember it was a demonstration on how to keep a dog away from snakes after a friend/client had contacted him about her dog that had been bitten by a snake and died shortly afterwards and she was worried about her other dog or dogs.  I'm sure Ceaser said that he didn't have problems with snakes where he lived! The demonstatration was done with Daddy with the snake in a wide open space caged in a metal crate type container and Daddy was zapped for showing an interest in the cage/snake, which wasn't exactly reprisentative of how a dog would come across a snake in the wild!  Most dogs would not generalise that situation to a snake in it's natural environment slithering and moving about maybe half hidden in undergrowth - it's just nothing a like.  What the dog would be more likely to become wary about would be the metal cage with something in it and maybe things that look like it!

That situation could have been set up exactly the same and teaching the dog a strong 'leave' just as effectively without the negative consequences.  However that probably would have looked quite as dramatic as Daddy giving the cage about a 200ft wide berth after being zapped a few times when Ceaser called him because he was avoiding the cage!

I agree with your points Lindsay, however I think in a lot of cases if people like you say, did more in the way of supervising and also kept walks interesting and about interacting with their dogs, they would be less likely to go off and find other things more interesting and therefore more likely to get into trouble, of any kind!

I realise it's not that simple in areas where snakes are all over the place but then I think that is where the question of whether it's right to have a dog in that environment comes into the equation.

The dogs that he calls 'red zone cases' are mostly frightened dogs that need to find another way of communicating and dealing with things because aggression is all they know, and it has been effective.  However Ceaser takes away the only way they have of communicating and leaves them with nothing.  I have seen many dogs with similar problems to that on the show turned around using positive methods, he is not their last hope of getting better, infact hope and Ceaser, to me are just two words that don't fit together!

The little dog with the neurological problems was the last time I watched that show, that little dog had no hope of ending its life the way it should have with him involved.

> Maybe people should exercise more restraint and not even consider having a dog unless the environment they live in is safe regarding snakes?! I would not want to subject any dog of mine to pain either, to supposedly protect them - as I said, IMO there could be a false sense of security there anyway with say, CMs method. And i'd be putting a dog through a painful method of training just because of "I want, I want". Doesn't seem right to me after thinking about it.

People in these parts of the world grow up with the risk of snake-bites, they raise thier children in these places, I don't think that for them wanting a dog is selfish.
All the dog breeds we have today have been invented for mans own purpose, to defend us, protect us, kill vermin for us, round our cattle up, keep us safe and keep us company. Keeping a dog as a pet in a snake-populated part of the world is no more irresponsible and selfish then having children in that part of the world. And what about guide dogs, rescue dogs, police dogs, should these dogs not be able to work there because of snakes?
If a zap from an e-collar is the only way to reliably teach a dog to stay away from snakes I honestly think it is worth it.
I put my human babies thought the pain of vaccination, I say pain because one of them was prone to a localized reaction that cause a swelling and really hurt him constantly for a week after, yet I put him through that repeadedly to safeguard him against desease, beacuse the pain from the vacination is nothing comapered to what could happen to him without it. The same for dogs, a zap from an e-collar is nothing compared to the painfull death from a venomous snake-bite.
Somebody mentiond anti-venom, it's only possible to use that if you know exactly what speciaes of snake it was that bit your dog. Surgery and other medical procedures are painfull for our dogs, yet we put our dogs through it because the benefit outweighs the pain & emotional suffering of it.

If a zap from an e-collar is the only way to reliably teach a dog to stay away from snakes I honestly think it is worth it.

But it's not the only way to teach a dog to reliably stay away from any thing, just as it's not the only way to teach dogs to stay away from other dogs, cattle, sheep, food that may be posinous etc etc.  The example shown in the program IMO certainly would not reliably keep a dog safe from snakes in their natural habitat.  I often hear it's for the dogs own good (the e-collar) ie, my dog loves to run free but can't be trusted around sheep so he gets the benefit of running off lead for the occasional shock.  That too me is just an excuse, we use the dog as an excuse to use the quick fix.

If people have the level of skill and timing required to use an e-collar safely and effectively then they have the ability to achieve better results using positive training methods.

> Speaking personally, I don't think I'd buy a dog if I lived in a place which was actually known for having many snakes (ie snakes whose venom would be very likely to kill a dog).

well I'm stuffed then I guess :-(

I'm not far off emigrating to Australia... and I'm taking my two dogs with me.  And in fact I'll probably be at more of an advantage to own more dogs where I'm going as I will be living more rurally. 
I will be in an area where there can be venomous snakes and spiders.  But as Mark has already said, snakes and spiders are ubiquitous.   Probably moreso in the countryside, but also prevelant in towns and cities.
But, I will do my utmost to protect and retrain my dogs.  All you can do is be careful and aware that those beasties are around.

An acquaintance of mine who lives in Aus, just lost her 11 year old to a snake.  The snake didn't fair well either if it's any consolation (was apparently in bits in the back yard).
The dog though, in my colleague's opinion, had died doing what she loved best (as everything that moved and whether furry or not was fair game!) and is now buried under the lemon tree in the yard. 

> If people have the level of skill and timing required to use an e-collar safely and effectively then they have the ability to achieve better results using positive training methods.

The levels to which any dog is capeable of learning isn't just down to the trainers, each dog has it's own limits. Teaching a dog to leave something alone is different than teaching a dog to stay well away from it, and to do so with haste, this reaction may be teachable to the high-learning capacity of dogs that can make the grade as search & rescue dogs, guide dogs etc, but for the average dog it is a major feat.
Not evey dog trained to be a guide dog for example will make the grade, even though they all undertake the same training. The e-collar relys on negative association, something which is easy for any dog to learn. The time could be taken for frequent exposure to snakes using a positive method for the dog to leave the snake alone and for the dog to learn it musn't get within 2 metres (eg) of that snake, but this is more of an advanced thing that not all dogs are capeable of learning and would also require frequent exposure to snakes. As we all know frequent exposure to something is the basis of socialisation, the more a dog is exposed to anything (anything that has no negative effect) the more relaxed the dog is with that thing - the opposite of what the dog needs to learn.

Talking of e-collars has reminded me of a time years ago when my dog got 'zapped' by an electric fence that was in a cow field. We got used to the fence and most of the time you could hear when it was 'live' (a slight 'static' noise), on this occasion we thought it was off and never slowed the dogs down, so the dog trotted underneath with his tail held high, his tail touched the fence, the dog let out a yelp and cowered away from my dad (who was stood nearest the dog), the dog spent the rest of the walk very shy of my dad, but on the way back, he crawled under the fence. He soon forgot the association between the shock & my dad, but he never, in his 12 years of live ever got a shock from an electric fence again.
You would think, as humans we would be better at learning our lesson, but several times we had all grabbed hold of the fence thinking it was off and recieved a shock!

> Personally, I think a city gent who keeps a working ESS in a flat in London because it gives him a "country look" that goes with the 4x4 and the green wellies, is just as bad as the hoodie who keeps a staffie because it looks "dead hard".

I agree.

> it was a demonstration on how to keep a dog away from snakes

> Daddy was zapped for showing an interest in the cage/snake

So you mean he didn't even have the excuse that he needed to stop his dog, he inflicted pain on his dog for the purpose of a demonstration? I didn't think it was possible for me to dislike the man more than I did already. Seems I may have been wrong.

Teaching a dog to leave something alone is different than teaching a dog to stay well away from it, and to do so with haste, this reaction may be teachable to the high-learning capacity of dogs that can make the grade as search & rescue dogs, guide dogs etc, but for the average dog it is a major feat.

I disagree that it takes a high learning capacity to teach a dog to leave something, the degree of the training ie, leave  what you are near, or leave it and don't go within 20ft or whatever is still teaching a leave, what an individual wants the leave to mean is down to the trainer and the training they do, but certainly not a particularly difficult thing to teach in the scheme of things.  Another way of dealing with the problem would be teaching a strongemergency recall combined with a stop or the leave, in that kind of situation it would be a great way of dealing with it, again not something that requires high intelligence , it may take time and effort on the part of the handler but again isn't something that is difficult to teach. 

Of course it will be easier for some dogs to learn that others, that's the same for any behaviour you teach and I think the level a dog can be trained to has far more to do with the abilities of the trainer than the intelligence of the dog.  I've worked with so many dogs that have been labelled as stupid or dense that were far from it, they were just being trained in the wrong ways and without the appropriate motivators for that dog.

I'm sorry but in the wrong hands e-collars are extremely dangerous and they do take precision timing and skill, like you say it is very easy to make a negative asociation for a dog so if you don't get the timing bang on then that association is likely to be transfered to other things aswell.  So what if that negative association is transfered to something else that happens to be near at the time,  a bang that goes off or another dog or person/owner or just being outside.

There are better and kinder ways to teach this and if a person has not got the skill or time to do it then they have no place getting their hands on an e-collar and using it on their dog. 

I find it confusing that anyone that considers themselves a positive reward based trainer is comfortable with the use of an ecollar for any situation, the two just don't go hand in hand.

I agree with your points Lindsay, however I think in a lot of cases if people like you say, did more in the way of supervising and also kept walks interesting and about interacting with their dogs, they would be less likely to go off and find other things more interesting and therefore more likely to get into trouble, of any kind!

Yep definitely agree with that one. I walk in the new forest in summer but ensure I always know what my dog is doing, where she is and am able to recall her. The summer is the worst - April - October - as snakes are more likely. Of course from about November to March they hibernate :)
We once were in the Lake District and came across a huge adder in the middle of the path sunning itself. My dog was fairly close to it but I was able to call her calmly. Adders don't attack and so she was fine, she just came away and we photographed the snake! as it was so big. I have a friend whose flatcoat was bitten but he was ranging a bit further from her - not her fault, just one of those things. Not life threatening though thank goodness. I'm always looking out for snakes in the sunny mornings particularly.

Keeping a dog as a pet in a snake-populated part of the world is no more irresponsible and selfish then having children in that part of the world. And what about guide dogs, rescue dogs, police dogs, should these dogs not be able to work there because of snakes?
Children can be controlled more easily than dogs though, who are going to be off lead and wanting to run. I'm not saying "this is how it should be" but more raising an idea/view/thought....and what I think personally. I'm always interested in others views and why they have them :)
Guide dogs presumably would be more likely to be city dogs so perhaps not a problem. Rescue and police - yes, more of a problem in some areas perhaps.

If a zap from an e-collar is the only way to reliably teach a dog to stay away from snakes I honestly think it is worth it.

For avoidance training, the level has to be set high (usually at the highest level of the collar). Not sure if CM did this to Daddy or whether he used a lower level.And if a dog is highly stressed by the first zap, it physiologically is not capable of learning about the smell/movement other things it is usually subjected to in snake avoidance. Dogs, like us, don't learn when they are too stressed as the older part of the brain which is more emotional than cognitive takes over. This gives  a false sense of security to my mind. I'd not rely on such a method to keep my dog safe as I don't "believe" it is one hundred per cent effective.

Therefore from my viewpoint, it would be subjecting the dog to something causing severe pain and might well still not have the desired effect.

The same for dogs, a zap from an e-collar is nothing compared to the painfull death from a venomous snake-bite.
It is one way of looking at it, I agree. But then should the owner have a dog where snakes are so prevalent they feel it is necessary to have to do this possible ineffective but certainly painful method? Ultimately it's down to personal views/ethics/ etc but worth thinking about.