Vegetarian Discussion: "animal Rights" Vs Animal Welfare

"animal Rights" Vs Animal Welfare
Posts: 35

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4   Next  (First | Last)

D*@.
2006-06-11 13:46:43 EST
On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:37:14 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:

>>><dh@.> wrote
>>"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:

>>>> It's what they want.
>>>
>>>Who cares?
>>
>> People in favor of decent AW instead.
>
>No they don't.

Yes we do.

>I'm in favor of Animal Welfare,

LOL!!!

>but like all sane AW advocates I know it only applies to
>the animals that are born,

LOL! Everyone knows it.

>there's nothing in it that says animals *ought to be* born.

Everyone knows that too.

>>>Where's the harm? What's wrong with it?
>>
>> It works completely against the concept of Animal Welfare.
>
>It has nothing to do with the concept of Animal Welfare.

It would make decent AW impossible, so anyone in favor of
decent AW must necessarily be opposed to "ar":
_________________________________________________________
AVMA POLICY ON ANIMAL WELFARE AND ANIMAL RIGHTS

Animal welfare is a human responsibility that encompasses all aspects of
animal well being, including proper housing, management, nutrition, disease
prevention and treatment, responsible care, humane handling, and, when
necessary, humane euthanasia.

Animal rights is a philosophical view and personal value characterized by
statements by various animal rights groups. Animal welfare and animal rights
are not synonymous terms. The AVMA wholeheartedly endorses and adopts
promotion of animal welfare as official policy; however, the AVMA cannot
endorse the philosophical views and personal values of animal rights advocates
when they are incompatible with the responsible use of animals for human
purposes, such as companionship, food, fiber, and research conducted for the
benefit of both humans and animals.

http://www.avma.org/policies/animalwelfare.asp
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
_________________________________________________________
[...]
Recognition of the moral inviolability of individual animals
not only helps shape the ends that the animal rights movement seeks,
it should also help articulate the morally acceptable means that may
be used. And this is important. Many animal rights people who
disavow the philosophy of animal welfare believe they can
consistently support reformist means to abolition ends. This view is
mistaken, we believe, for moral, practical, and conceptual reasons.
[...]
"A Movement's Means Create Its Ends"
By Tom Regan and
Gary Francione
The Animal's Agenda (pp.40-43)
January/February 1992
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
_________________________________________________________
[...]
As two recent issues of Alternatives in Philanthropy discussed
("Animal Welfare vs. Animal Rights: The Case of PETA," July 1997,
and "The Humane Society of the U.S.: It’s Not about Animal
Shelters," October 1997), animal rights organizations seek to end
traditional uses of animals. By contrast, animal welfare organizations
seek to improve the treatment of animals. Animal lovers who wish
to support animal-interest organizations should keep this distinction in
mind.
[...]
http://www.responsiblewildlifemanagement.org/from_animal_welfare_to_animal_rights.htm
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
_________________________________________________________
[...]
"Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about
by human manipulation." -- Ingrid Newkirk, national director,
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Just Like Us?
Toward a Nation of Animal Rights" (symposium), Harper's, August
1988, p. 50.
[...]
"Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete
jungles--from our firesides, from the leather nooses and chains
by which we enslave it." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An
Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15.

"The cat, like the dog, must disappear... We should cut the
domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and
more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to
exist." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A
Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment
of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15.
[...]
"The theory of animal rights simply is not consistent with the
theory of animal welfare... Animal rights means dramatic social
changes for humans and non-humans alike; if our bourgeois values
prevent us from accepting those changes, then we have no right to
call ourselves advocates of animal rights." --Gary Francione,
The Animals' Voice, Vol. 4, No. 2 (undated), pp. 54-55.

"Not only are the philosophies of animal rights and animal
welfare separated by irreconcilable differences... the enactment
of animal welfare measures actually impedes the achievement of
animal rights... Welfare reforms, by their very nature, can only
serve to retard the pace at which animal rights goals are
achieved." --Gary Francione and Tom Regan, "A Movement's Means
Create Its Ends," The Animals' Agenda, January/February 1992,
pp. 40-42.
[...]
http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~powlesla/personal/hunting/rights/pets.txt
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
And lets remember that you/"aras" would rather see me kill myself,
than point out what the difference is:
_________________________________________________________
From: "Dutch" <no@email.com>
Message-ID: <UePS9.244372$Qr.7043364@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>

dh_ld@nomail.com> wrote

> AW means better lives for animals. "AR" means the elimination of
> farm animals, and as much as you obviously want to believe they're
> the same thing, they are completely different objectives.

Shut the fuck up you stupid fucking moron. Do the world a favour and go blow
your stupid fucking head off with the biggest fucking gun you can find.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Leif Erikson
2006-06-11 14:08:33 EST
Fuckwit David Harrison, ignorant lying pig-sodomizing
goober cracker, lied:

> On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:37:14 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>>Fuckwit David Harrison, ignorant lying pig-sodomizing goober cracker, lied:
>>>
>>>"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>>> It's what they want.
>>>>
>>>>Who cares?
>>>
>>> People in favor of decent AW instead.
>>
>>No they don't.
>
>
> Yes we do.

No, Fuckwit. You aren't included in that group. You
are not in favor of (gag wretch spew) "decent AW",
Fuckwit, as we've conclusively shown. You are *only*
in favor of continued existence for livestock, in order
for YOU to have access to "meat...gravy." Stop lying
about your motives, Fuckwit - we know what they really are.


>
>
>>I'm in favor of Animal Welfare,
>
>
> LOL!!!

He is.


>>but like all sane AW advocates I know it only applies to
>>the animals that are born,
>
>
> LOL! Everyone knows it.

You stupidly wish to pretend, Fuckwit, that if one is
in favor of "decent AW", one must be in favor of the
animals coming into existence. That's false. It's
also an absurd proposition. There is no moral reason
for the animals to exist, Fuckwit. IF they exist, then
responsible citizens like Dutch want to see them have
good welfare. If they don't exist, then there's no
reason to think about "their" welfare at all.


>
>>there's nothing in it that says animals *ought to be* born.
>
>
> Everyone knows that too.

YOU don't, Fuckwit: "anyone in favor of decent AW for
livestock must necessarily be opposed to 'ar'."

You "think", Fuckwit, that being in favor of (gag retch
spew) "decent AW" means one *must* want livestock
animals to exist. That's illogical and false, Fuckwit.


>
>
>>>>Where's the harm? What's wrong with it?
>>>
>>> It works completely against the concept of Animal Welfare.
>>
>>It has nothing to do with the concept of Animal Welfare.
>
>
> It would make decent AW impossible

Right: because it wouldn't be needed. (gag retch
spew) "decent AW" is only needed if there are livestock
animals, Fuckwit; no animals means it's not needed.

Stop crossposting to rec.pets.cats.community, Fuckwit,
you filthy shitbag.

B*@canada.com
2006-06-11 16:38:09 EST

Leif Erikson wrote:
> Fuckwit David Harrison, ignorant lying pig-sodomizing
> goober cracker, lied:
>
> > On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:37:14 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>>Fuckwit David Harrison, ignorant lying pig-sodomizing goober cracker, lied:
> >>>
> >>>"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>>> It's what they want.
> >>>>
> >>>>Who cares?
> >>>
> >>> People in favor of decent AW instead.
> >>
> >>No they don't.
> >
> >
> > Yes we do.
>
> No, Fuckwit. You aren't included in that group. You
> are not in favor of (gag wretch spew) "decent AW",
> Fuckwit, as we've conclusively shown. You are *only*
> in favor of continued existence for livestock, in order
> for YOU to have access to "meat...gravy." Stop lying
> about your motives, Fuckwit - we know what they really are.
>
>
> >
> >
> >>I'm in favor of Animal Welfare,
> >
> >
> > LOL!!!
>
> He is.
>
>
> >>but like all sane AW advocates I know it only applies to
> >>the animals that are born,
> >
> >
> > LOL! Everyone knows it.
>
> You stupidly wish to pretend, Fuckwit, that if one is
> in favor of "decent AW", one must be in favor of the
> animals coming into existence. That's false. It's
> also an absurd proposition. There is no moral reason
> for the animals to exist, Fuckwit. IF they exist, then
> responsible citizens like Dutch want to see them have
> good welfare. If they don't exist, then there's no
> reason to think about "their" welfare at all.
>
>
> >
> >>there's nothing in it that says animals *ought to be* born.
> >
> >
> > Everyone knows that too.
>
> YOU don't, Fuckwit: "anyone in favor of decent AW for
> livestock must necessarily be opposed to 'ar'."
>
> You "think", Fuckwit, that being in favor of (gag retch
> spew) "decent AW" means one *must* want livestock
> animals to exist. That's illogical and false, Fuckwit.
>
>
> >
> >
> >>>>Where's the harm? What's wrong with it?
> >>>
> >>> It works completely against the concept of Animal Welfare.
> >>
> >>It has nothing to do with the concept of Animal Welfare.
> >
> >
> > It would make decent AW impossible
>
> Right: because it wouldn't be needed. (gag retch
> spew) "decent AW" is only needed if there are livestock
> animals, Fuckwit; no animals means it's not needed.
>
> Stop crossposting to rec.pets.cats.community, Fuckwit,
> you filthy shitbag.


Why are you posting to rec.pets.dogs you goofy little homo goober?


Leif Erikson
2006-06-11 20:14:56 EST
nymshifting impotent homo fudgepacker pantywaist
ronnnnnnnnnnnnie hamilton, strung out on crack, whined:

> Leif Erikson wrote:
>
>>Fuckwit David Harrison, ignorant lying pig-sodomizing
>>goober cracker, lied:
>>
>>
>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:37:14 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>Fuckwit David Harrison, ignorant lying pig-sodomizing goober cracker, lied:
>>>>>
>>>>>"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> It's what they want.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Who cares?
>>>>>
>>>>> People in favor of decent AW instead.
>>>>
>>>>No they don't.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes we do.
>>
>>No, Fuckwit. You aren't included in that group. You
>>are not in favor of (gag wretch spew) "decent AW",
>>Fuckwit, as we've conclusively shown. You are *only*
>>in favor of continued existence for livestock, in order
>>for YOU to have access to "meat...gravy." Stop lying
>>about your motives, Fuckwit - we know what they really are.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>I'm in favor of Animal Welfare,
>>>
>>>
>>> LOL!!!
>>
>>He is.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>but like all sane AW advocates I know it only applies to
>>>>the animals that are born,
>>>
>>>
>>> LOL! Everyone knows it.
>>
>>You stupidly wish to pretend, Fuckwit, that if one is
>>in favor of "decent AW", one must be in favor of the
>>animals coming into existence. That's false. It's
>>also an absurd proposition. There is no moral reason
>>for the animals to exist, Fuckwit. IF they exist, then
>>responsible citizens like Dutch want to see them have
>>good welfare. If they don't exist, then there's no
>>reason to think about "their" welfare at all.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>there's nothing in it that says animals *ought to be* born.
>>>
>>>
>>> Everyone knows that too.
>>
>>YOU don't, Fuckwit: "anyone in favor of decent AW for
>>livestock must necessarily be opposed to 'ar'."
>>
>>You "think", Fuckwit, that being in favor of (gag retch
>>spew) "decent AW" means one *must* want livestock
>>animals to exist. That's illogical and false, Fuckwit.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>>>Where's the harm? What's wrong with it?
>>>>>
>>>>> It works completely against the concept of Animal Welfare.
>>>>
>>>>It has nothing to do with the concept of Animal Welfare.
>>>
>>>
>>> It would make decent AW impossible
>>
>>Right: because it wouldn't be needed. (gag retch
>>spew) "decent AW" is only needed if there are livestock
>>animals, Fuckwit; no animals means it's not needed.
>>
>>Stop crossposting to rec.pets.cats.community, Fuckwit,
>>you filthy shitbag.
>
>
>
> Why are you posting to rec.pets.dogs?

Because that half-inch weenie you suck, Fuckwit David
Harrison, put it in the headers of his fuckwitted,
no-content post.

Go stick dynamite up your gaping HIV+ asshole and light
it, ronnnnnnnnnnie.

D*@.
2006-06-12 11:14:46 EST
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, a badly confused and disturbed Goober
ignorantly maundered:

>You stupidly wish to pretend, Fuckwit, that if one is
>in favor of "decent AW", one must be in favor of the
>animals coming into existence.

One must.

>That's false.

Then explain how you would provided decent AW
for anything that does not come into existence, Goo,
anything at all...

>It's also an absurd proposition.

So you claim, but it's more likely that you're just making
yet another of your absurd claims. You need to explain how
we could provide decent lives for beings which never exist,
in order to understand the supposed absurdity of the idea
that they must exist, Goo. But you can't do it, as we have
seen and will continue to see.

H*@HotMail.Com
2006-06-12 12:11:34 EST
HOWEDY dh@.,

dh@. wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:37:14 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>
> >>><dh@.> wrote
> >>"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> It's what they want.

As the infameHOWES sindy title MOOREon, author of
HOWER FAQ's pages on K9web.CON sez in her ARGUMENT
to DEFEND jerking choking shocking spraying aversives
in dog's faces twisting and pinching ears and surgically
sexually mutilating them: 'HOWE can we know what a critter
is THINKIN?' <{): ~ ( >

Well, if you gotta GUESS that a critter MIGHT NOT LIKE
the IDEA of bein ABUSED by sadistic know nuthing miserably
lyin animal abusin punk thug coward active acute chronic
long term incurable mental cases then perhaps you belong
a the same STATE SECURE MENTAL HEELTH FACILITY For The
CRIMINALLY INSANE as she and her PERSONAL REAL LIFE PALS
Master Of Deception blankman of dogplay.CON and lying "I
LOVE KOEHLER" lynn of SFGSD RESCUE <{): ~ ( >

Sez on our FAQ'S pages at K9 Web you should knee the
dog in the chest, step on its toes, throw him down by
his ears and climb all over it like a raped ape growling
into his throat and bite IT on his ears, or leash pop IT
on a pronged spiked pinch choke collar or pop him in the
snout with the heel of your palm.

"Many People Have Problems Getting The Pinch
Right, Either They Do Not Pinch Enough, Or They
Have A Very Stoic Dog. Some Dogs Will Collapse
Into A Heap. About The Ear Pinch: You Must Keep
The Pressure Up," sindy "don't let the dog SCREAM"
mooreon, author of HOWER FAQ's pages on k9 web.

Here's her PARTNER IN RESCUE:

"Granted That The Dog Who Fears Retribution
Will Adore His Owner," lying "I LOVE KOEHLER"
lynn.

lyinglynn writes to a new foster care giver:
For barking in the crate - leave the leash on and
pass it through the crate door. Attach a line to
it. When he barks, use the line for a correction.-
if necessary, go to a citronella bark collar," Lynn K.

"Training is not confrontation,"Lynn K.

<except when it is>

"Unfortunately, some confrontation is necessary,
just to be able to handle the dogs. For example,
we need to crate train a dog immediately because
they are usually in need of medical care and they
are in foster homes with other dogs. It's a safety
necessity," lying "I LOVE KOEHLER" lynn.

"Training is not confrontation,"Lynn K.

<except when it is>

"So what? Whoever said that it's right to
always not confront? We sure can try, but
a dog who knows a command and growls when
given it is certainly being confrontational".
You can't simply walk away and pretend it
didn't happen or leave it for later work in
every situation." Lynn K.

--------------------

"You Lying Sack Of Dung.When Have I Ever Said
Anything About Using A Prong Collar, Or Any Collar
Correction At All, To Make Dogs Friendly To House
Cats? Don't bother. The answer is never," lying "I
LOVE KOEHLER" lynn.

lying "I LOVE KOEHLER" lynn writes about kats and dogs:

"This Article Is Something We've Put Together
For SF GSD Rescue

From: Lynn Kosmakos (lkosma...@home.com)
Subject: Re: I have a dog he has cats
Date: 1999/11/20

g*.@my-deja.com wrote:
> How can I get him to quit chasing the cats.

Okay - this is going to be a bit loooong - Lynn K.

"Put a prong collar with a six-foot leash on the dog. Don't
forget to put the muzzle on the dog. I think a prong works
better than a choke with less chance of injury to the dog in
this situation.

Electronics can be used to create an aversion to cats, but
should be used under the direction of a trainer who knows how
to instruct the owner in their proper use. Electronics can
take the form of shock, sonic or citronella collars. At that
time the owner will train with electronics instead of food or
whatever other reward system was being used."

8) Put a prong collar with a six-foot leash on the dog.
Don't forget to put the muzzle on the dog. I think a prong
works better than a choke with less chance of injury to the
dog in this situation. Have the dog in a sit-stay next to
you with most of the slack out of the leash and let the cat
walk through the room and up to the dog if it wishes (this is
why you have the dog muzzled).

If the dog makes an aggressive move towards the
cat, it must be corrected strongly with both your
voice and the collar.

This is important - the correction must be physically
very strong - not a nag. (PS: not many dogs need
to be corrected at all)."


"I used to work the Kill Room as a volunteer in
one shelter.) But their ability to set their own
schedules and duties causes a great deal of
scheduling overhead.

And it takes effort and thought to ensure that
volunteers get the meaningful experience that
they work for.

Someone has to be responsible for that
Volunteer Program, and it is best done
by a non-volunteer."

Lynn K.


"I worked with one shelter where I bathed and groomed
every adoptable dog on intake. I frankly felt that the
effort/benefit equation was not balanced for some of the
older/ill poodle/terrier mixes we got in badly matted condition.

Should I have refused to groom them?

Or even more pertinent - I was one of the people who
had to make the euthanasia decisions at that shelter."

Lynn K.


Baghdad Bob <Baghdadbob> wrote in message
<news:04591a2c5d469ef78d35c89ed4ed58f7@TeraNews>...

Lynn, looks like he got you there if these
quotes are true.
In the posts below you take responsibility for
making those calls.

In your post above, you state you do not
make those calls.

Which one is it?

-------------

Here's the ONLY STATEMENT lying "I LOVE KOEHLER" lynn
EVER MADE that she AIN'T EVER DENIED or CONtradicted:

WORDS OF WISDOM
From Our Own Lynn Kosmakos
1200mg Of Lithium And 50 mg Of Zoloft
EVERY DAY
For Twenty Years

I THINK I'M QUALIFIED TO TALK ABOUT LITHIUM

"I, too, have a bi-polar mood disorder (manic-
depression) requiring 1200mg of lithium and 50
mg of Zoloft every day.

I, also, care about dogs and use this forum to
learn more, while happily sharing pertinent
information I have learned. But if I were ever
to post such sh*t, I would hope that every other
reader of this group would be rightfully outraged."

"Community is an evolutionary thing that we
earn the right to participate in by observing
the easily understood rules and contributing
to in constructive ways."

"It wasn't that meds didn't work for her
- she wouldn't take them. I particularly remember
a comment she made about scarey side effects of
Lithium. Hardly. After 17 years on it, I think
I'm qualified to say that the very low risk of
any side effect is far less frightening than the
very real dangers of life without it."

Lynn K.

---------------------

> >>> Who cares?

YOU SHOULD, for starters. We ALL should.

OtherWIZE, there's a adjoinin RUBBER ROOM waitin for you.

> >> People in favor of decent AW instead.

Those "people in favor of decent AW" are predominantely
lyin dog abusing punk thug cowards and active acute chronic
long term incurable mental cases who PROFIT from hurtin
intimidatin and murderin innocent defenseless dumb critters.

> > No they don't.

Yeah, THEY DO and The Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply
Amazing Grand Puppy And Pussy Wizard HAS PROVEN IT by
QUOTING their self serving LIES and ABUSES RIGHT HERE
on The Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand
Puppy And Pussy Wizard's Human And Animal Behavior Forensic
Sciences Research Laboratories and it's ALL INDELLIBLY
ARCHIVED FOREVER on Google and other fine PUBIC unmoderated
news group search engines <{) : ~ ) >

> Yes we do.

Well then, it won't be hard to FIGGER
IT HOWET on accHOWENT of:


IF The Insanely Freakin Simply Amazing Grand Puppy Wizard is
WRONG abHOWET ANY ISSUE then he's likeWIZE WRONG
abHOWET EVERY ISSUE. Everything gotta fit together or
EVERYTHING IS DEAD WRONG, and THAT'S HOWE COME
we got this war goin on here abHOWETS.

The meaning of a statement is defined by the way it may be
verified, thus, claims which cannot be verified or falsified are
meaningless. We have reality, and we have theories which
we use to explain it. The Insanely Freaking Simply Amazing
Grand Puppy Wizard has noticed that ALL TRUTHS have
WON commonality:

THEY GOTTA FIT IN WITH ALL OTHER TRUTHS and philosopies,
otherWIZE those "TRUTHS" ARE LIES, THEORIES, SUPPOSITIONS
and MISINTERPERTATONS <{): ~ ) >

The SCIENCE of BEHAVIOR is NOT fond of THEORIES i.e., unproven
speculation based on PREFERENCES, CHOICES, OPINIONS and
UNADULTERATED SHEER BLIND STUPID DUMB FREAKIN LUCK
measured in percentages of FAILURES / SUCCESSES as compared
to other THEORIES having similar %'s of DISMAL FAIURE:

The Methods, Principles And Philosophy Of Behavior
Never Change,
Or They'd Not Be Scientific
And Could Not Obtain
Consistent, Reliable, Fast, Safe Effective Results
For All Handler's And All Critters,
ALL OVER THE WHOWEL WILD WORLD,
NEARLY INSTANTLY,
As Taught In Your FREE Copy Of The Simply Amazing
Puppy Wizard's 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY
SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method
Manual <{): ~ ) >

A DOG Is A Dog;
As A KAT Is A KAT;
As A BIRDY Is A BIRDY;
As A HORSE Is A HORSE;
As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES;
As A CHILD IS A CHILD;
As A Mass Murderer Is A Mass Murderer.

ALL Critters Only Respond In
PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL
INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways;
To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment
Which We Create For Them.

You GET The Critter You TRAINED

In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS
FAILURE MEANS DEATH.
SAME SAME SAME SAME,
For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.

Damn The Descartean War of "Nature Vs Nurture."
We Teach By HOWER Words And Actions
And GET BACK What We TAUGHT.

ALL Temperament And Behavior Problems Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING

> > I'm in favor of Animal Welfare,

Perhaps FIRST we gotta DEFINE what "Animal Welfare" MEANS?

To dog lovers like the above mentioned MENTAL CASES AW MEANS
SURGICALLY SEXUALLY MUTILATING CHOKIIN SHOCKIN BEATING HANGIN
and MURDERIN innocent defenseless dumb critters TO MAKE THEM...
drumroll, Mr. Maestro;
TA DA!:

****H-A-P-P-Y****

> LOL!!!

"Luck is for SUCKERS. NEVER make a SUCKER'S BET," The
Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy
And Pussy Wizard's DADDY <{) : ~ ) >

> > but like all sane AW advocates I know it only applies
> > to the animals that are born,

Well does THAT INCLUDE invitro LIVING CRITTERS who'd be
arbritrarily unnecessarily maliciHOWESLY surgcially RIPPED
TO PIECES and thrown in the garbage so even the MAGGOTS
can't benefit from their murders by ETHICKAL veterinary
malpracticioners at the request of SHELTER and RESCUE DOG
LOVERS, dh@.?

~emily is a ETHICKAL Labradorable Dog breeder and
works as a VIVISECTIONIST for a medical research lab:

I'll be you've never had to put down litters of
beautiful labrador puppies? If you had did, maybe
you'd be singing a different tune?

"Actually, have held them for the tech to euth, and
put their bodies in the trash bag and in the freezer
for the trash company to come and dispose of.

No different tune," ~Emily

racetrack silly is PRESIDENT of a Gray HOWEND RESCUE
organization and a community SHELTER which MURDERS 67%
of the dogs they RESCUE:

"After Numerous Training Classes, Behavioral
Consultations, And Hundreds Of Dollars In Vet
Bills, I Killed My Dalmatian Several Years Ago
Due To Extreme Dog-Aggressiveness," mustang sally.

"I'll bet you don't know a thing about me.
I volunteered as assistant to the euthanasia
tech at our local shelter for a while, and
I know a bit about overpopulation and unwanted
animals.

This however has nothing at all to do with
responsible breeders, because responsible
breeders don't contribute to that problem,"
Mustang Sally.

> LOL! Everyone knows it.

And it's ALL in THEIR OWN WRITTEN WORDS yet they
steadfastly DENY IT even when confronted with
their own VERBATUM QUOTED TEXT.

> > there's nothing in it that says animals *ought to be* born.

Domestic animals shouldn't be born unless there's folks to CARE for
them.

> Everyone knows that too.

Of curse. HOWEver, THAT DOES NOT JUSTIFY surgically
sexually MUTILATING every livin critter that don't
belong to a ETHICKAL BREEDER like ~emily, et al <{): ~ ( >

> >>> Where's the harm? What's wrong with it?

Animal RIGHTS means PEOPLE DON'T OWN ANIMALS, and THAT
WOULD BE RIGHT, IF animals didn't EXXXIST, which is the
AR AGENDA <{): ~ ( >

> >> It works completely against the concept of Animal Welfare.

INDEEDY. HOWEver, AW works AGAINST ANIMALS. Just ask ANY
of the aforementioned ETHICKAL DOG LOVER'S DEATHLY ILL
DYIN an DEAD DOGS they've jerked choked shocked an MURDERED.

ETHICKALLY, of curse <{): ~ ( >

> > It has nothing to do with the concept of Animal Welfare.

The two are SO diametrically OPPOSED they serve the same puporse.

They EACH WANT TO HURT INTIMIDATE and MURDER innocent
defenseless dumb critters for their own self serving
puporses.

> It would make decent AW impossible,

"DECENT AW" IS IMPOSSIBLE so long as we got ANIMAL
ABUSERS settin the STANDARD for AW, like HOWER OWN
diddler, a ETHICKAL BREEDER, PROFESSIONAL TRAINER
and SUBSISTANCE HUNTER:

Here's diddler at her best. "Let's just say it was UGLY":

"Franticly And Desperately Demanding To Go Out,
I Finally Put Her In The barn, Locked Securely In A
Horse Stall For The Night," diddler

"My Husband Shot A Dog That Had Been Tearing Up
Trash. USING FOOTHOLD TRAPS IN THE SNOW I
FIND, IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE"

WHEN YOU CAN'T FIND ANY CATS TO SHOOT,
SHOOT HUNGRY DOGS INSTEAD FOR GETTING
IN THE GARBAGE:

From: diddy
Date: Sat, Aug 31 2002 5:57 pm
Email: diddy <d...@nospam.diddy.net>
Groups: alt.med.veterinary

Lushious Lugs wrote:

> Organ panels?

> Is that something along the lines of a blood test?

> Diana (tired & up too late)

A special panel of blood work testing organ func tion

Yes. Diana, go to sleep. See ya tomorrow/

Danny has an organ profile done every 2 months because
he's on Rimadyl. He just passed another one with flying
colors in spite of his last one having high creatinine
(I tied him up when he was running 3 1/2 miles).



From: diddy
(*.@nospam.diddy.net)
Subject: Re: What would you do in this situation?
Date: 2002-05-31 14:49:22 PST

Actually, I borrowed the vets office kitten once for a
couple days for school education on pet care and safe
handling as well as responsible pet ownership.

I kept the kitten over night in a crate within a crate
and yet my dog (yes, Angelic Danny, as well as Taya
and Toby tore that kittne to threads from between the
crate bars. (apparently he stuck his paws through the
crate to bat at the dogs. I was out doing yard work
and rushed in to find the little kittens pieces and
parts being torn through by ALL the dogs.

I called my girl friend to come get my dogs. I screamed
displeasure, and stalked out with the kitten. Danny, et
al spent 3 days in a kennel until I finally felt like I
could interact with them without doing bodily harm. All
three dogs were never touched, but knew they had done
something so unspeakable that I wouldn't associate with
them and they got banished.

To this day, Taya (mom and Dad's dog) and Danny will not
look at a cat. When confronted with one, Danny wees
himself and cowers hiding behind me for help.

I'm not saying this would work this way with all dogs,
But mom and dad now have a house cat, and she has never
been harmed by any of the dogs. Danny is there all the
time, unsupervised, and has no interest in harming the cat.

--------------­-------

From: diddy (d...@diddy.net)
Subject: Re: Dog Shot, Neighbor Charged, Anchorage AK

Date: 2002-11-08 07:00:27 PST

I guess if I felt Danny was threatened, it's the way
I would react. There would be none left standing
to deal with the threat just in case.

If someone hurt him, I would not let borders or
continents stop me from pursuing justice.

Then again, I always feed Danny INSIDE. If
someone is feeding his dog outside, his own
dog might not mean THAT much to him.

If he was feeding his dog outside though, many
dogs are food aggressive, and that could most
certainly spark a dog aggression thing.

(and if the dog was penned quietly outside, what
was it doing in his yard?)

I shot a neighbors dog one night for chasing my
horses and called him to help me find it. I would
do the same for threatening my dog.

My husband shot a dog that had been tearing up
trash up and down our road for years making an
unbelievable mess.

When we finally killed the culprit, the whole road
cheered. Animal control had never been able in
years to catch this critter. (we think it was feral it
was certainly unkempt enough to have been....
and it had been shot at by MANY of the neighbors,
but it never frightened it off enough to keep it from
NOT tearing up the road the next trash day)

------------­---

> so anyone in favor of decent AW must
> necessarily be opposed to "ar":

INDEED? SEZ WHO? DIDDLER??? ~EMILY??? lying "I LOVE
KOEHLER" lynn??? Master Of Deception blankman? Sindy
SADIST MOOREon??? racetrack silly???

BWEEEEEEAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!

> AVMA POLICY ON ANIMAL WELFARE AND ANIMAL RIGHTS

Ahhh, so NHOWE we got the FOX guardin the chicken coop?

> Animal welfare is a human responsibility that encompasses
> all aspects of animal well being, including proper housing,
> management, nutrition, disease prevention and treatment,
> responsible care, humane handling, and, when necessary,
> humane euthanasia.

Yeah, and unnecessary inapupriate surgical sexual mutilation
and toxic pharmacuticals and insane overdoses of vaccinations
for the sole benefit of the greedy ill trained ignorameHOWES
VETERINARY MALPRACTICIONERS <{): ~ ( >

> Animal rights is a philosophical view and personal value
> characterized by statements by various animal rights groups.

NHOWE AIN'T THAT DHOWEBLE TALK?

Since when is "RIGHT" a PERSONAL CHOICE?

> Animal welfare and animal rights are not synonymous terms.

Well, YES THEY ARE, if you're lookin at it from a standpoint
of MORALS, ETHICS, HUMAN DECENCY and PRINCIPLES <{); ~ ) >

You can't justify or compare hurting and intimidating
living critters BY DEGREE of PAIN FEAR FORCE and
INTIMIDATION on accHOWENT of there's NO GRAY AREA
between RIGHT and WRONG, GOOD or BAD, DECENT or CRUEL.

The Amazing Puppy Wizard has just raised the bar, kiddies.

> The AVMA wholeheartedly endorses and adopts
> promotion of animal welfare as official policy;

THAT'S A LIE.

> however, the AVMA cannot endorse the philosophical views
> and personal values of animal rights advocates

The Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand
Puppy And Pussy Wizard just took the "PERSONAL VALUES"
HOWETA the equaton to SIMPLIFY matters for these ANIMAL
LOVERS who took a HYPOCRITIC oath to protect critters.

> when they are incompatible with the responsible use of
> animals for human purposes, such as companionship, food,
> fiber, and research conducted for the benefit of both
> humans and animals.

Well then, PERHAPS we shouldn't realy on the bums
who MAKE MONEY off of HURTIN INTIMIATIN an MURDERIN
innocent defenseless dumb critters to set the STANDARD
for MORALLY ETHICAL CARE and TREATMENT of innocent
defenseless dumb critters?

> http://www.avma.org/policies/animalwelfare.asp
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> [...]
> Recognition of the moral inviolability of individual
> animals not only helps shape the ends that the animal rights
> movement seeks, it should also help articulate the morally
> acceptable means that may be used. And this is important.

Yeah...

> Many animal rights people who disavow the philosophy of
> animal welfare believe they can consistently support
> reformist means to abolition ends. This view is mistaken,
> we believe, for moral, practical, and conceptual reasons.

IOW, they'd PUT THEMSELVES HOWETA BUSINESS.

> [...]
> "A Movement's Means Create Its Ends"
> By Tom Regan and
> Gary Francione
> The Animal's Agenda (pp.40-43)
> January/February 1992
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> _________________________________________________________
> [...]
> As two recent issues of Alternatives in Philanthropy discussed
> ("Animal Welfare vs. Animal Rights: The Case of PETA," July 1997,
> and "The Humane Society of the U.S.: It's Not about Animal
> Shelters," October 1997), animal rights organizations seek to end
> traditional uses of animals. By contrast, animal welfare organizations
> seek to improve the treatment of animals. Animal lovers who wish
> to support animal-interest organizations should keep this distinction in
> mind.
> [...]
>

http://www.responsiblewildlifemanagement.org/from_animal_welfare_to_animal_ri

ghts.htm
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> _________________________________________________________
> [...]
> "Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about
> by human manipulation." -- Ingrid Newkirk, national director,
> People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Just Like Us?
> Toward a Nation of Animal Rights" (symposium), Harper's, August
> 1988, p. 50.
> [...]
> "Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete
> jungles--from our firesides, from the leather nooses and chains
> by which we enslave it." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An
> Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the
> Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15.
>
> "The cat, like the dog, must disappear... We should cut the
> domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and
> more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to
> exist." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A
> Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment
> of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15.
> [...]
> "The theory of animal rights simply is not consistent with the
> theory of animal welfare... Animal rights means dramatic social
> changes for humans and non-humans alike; if our bourgeois values
> prevent us from accepting those changes, then we have no right to
> call ourselves advocates of animal rights." --Gary Francione,
> The Animals' Voice, Vol. 4, No. 2 (undated), pp. 54-55.
>
> "Not only are the philosophies of animal rights and animal
> welfare separated by irreconcilable differences... the enactment
> of animal welfare measures actually impedes the achievement of
> animal rights... Welfare reforms, by their very nature, can only
> serve to retard the pace at which animal rights goals are
> achieved." --Gary Francione and Tom Regan, "A Movement's Means
> Create Its Ends," The Animals' Agenda, January/February 1992,
> pp. 40-42.
> [...]
> http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~powlesla/personal/hunting/rights/pets.txt
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> _________________________________________________________
>
> And lets remember that you/"aras" would rather see me
> kill myself, than point out what the difference is:
> _________________________________________________________
> From: "Dutch" <no@email.com>
> Message-ID: <UePS9.244372$Qr.7043364@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>
>
> dh_ld@nomail.com> wrote
>
> > AW means better lives for animals. "AR" means the elimination of
> > farm animals, and as much as you obviously want to believe they're
> > the same thing, they are completely different objectives.
>
> Shut the fuck up you stupid fucking moron. Do the world a
> favour and go blow your stupid fucking head off with the
> biggest fucking gun you can find.

Well then, PERHAPS you'd LIKE The Incredibly Freakin Insanely
Simply Amazing Grand Puppy And Pussy Wizard to GIVE YOU THE
INSTRUCIONS given that HE'S as a EXXXPERT instructor of
marksmanship? Don't worry abHOWET the LHOWED noise, you won't
even hear it and it's PAINLESS <{): ~ ) >

TRUST The Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing
Grand Puppy And Pussy Wizard <{); ~ ) >

Animal Welfare Science Essays 2004

These essays represent students' work and the
views expressed in them are not necessarily
those of the Faculty of Veterinary Science or
the University of Sydney.

"The Effectiveness And Welfare Implications
Of Current Dog Training Methods"
By Evan Cariola

> Introduction

The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard doesn't mean to
be CRUEL to emerging veterinary students. HOWEver,
in the interests of TRUTH, JUSTICE and The American
Way, The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard will IDENTIFY
EXXXPOSE and DISCREDIT the SOURCES of INFORMATION
HOWER young veterinary students are relyin upon for
THEIR INFORMATION:

> Although historically, dog training methods primarily
> involved punishment and negative reinforcement,

Seems that's been a BHOWEN of contentiHOWESNESS here
abHOWETS on The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard's 100%
CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWWW
Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual Forums <{); ~ ) >

> the focus in recent years has shifted towards an
> increasing application of reward-based strategies
> (Hiby et al., 2004).

And THAT has been the cause of nearly as many cases
of fear aggression and hyperactivity as the punishment
based methods.

Unfortunately, there's ONLY WON WAY to pupperly
handle and train dogs and you'll ONLY find it
RIGHT HERE in The Incredibly Freakin Insanely
Simply Amazing Puppy And Pussy Wizard's 100%
CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE
WWW Wits' End Dog And Kat Training Method Manual:

WELCOME to The Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy
And Pussy WIzard's 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE
WWW Wits' End Dog And KatTraining Method Manual Forums <{); ~ ) >

I'm Jerry Howe, The Incredibly Freakin Insanely
Simply Amazing Grand Puppy And Pussy Wizard <{) ; ~ ) >

Here's your own FREE COPY of The Incredibly Freakin
Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy And Pussy Wizard's

The *666* Edition Of Your Own
FREE COPY
Of
The Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy
And Pussy Wizard's
100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL
FREE WWW
Wits' End Dog And Kat Training Method Manual <{) ; ~ ) >

<{#}: ~ } >8< { ~ :{@}>
<{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}>
<{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}>
<{#}: ~ } > http://makeashorterlink.com/?K3AD21A3D < { ~
:{@}>
<{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}>
<{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}>
<{#}: ~ } >8< { ~ :{@}>

> Positive reinforcement is currently employed
> with enormous success in training dogs

INDEEDY. HOWEver, it FAILS MISERABLY:

"Postitive emotions arising in connection
with the perfection of a skill, irrespective
of its pragmatic significance at a given
moment, serve as the reinforcement. IOW,
emotions, not outside rewards, are what
reinforces any behavior," Ivan Pavlov.

Pavlov Told Us So 100 Years Ago. Sam Corson,
Pavlov's Last Student Demonstrated At UofOH
That Rehabilitation Of Hyperactive Dogs Can
Easily And Readily Be Done Using TLC. Tender
Loving Care Is At The Root Of The Scientific
Management Of Doggys. <{) ; ~ ) >

"...all the highest nervous activity, as it manifests
itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a continual
change of these three fundamental processes -- excitation,
inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov

"ALL ANIMALS LEARN BEST THROUGH PLAY," Konrad Lorenz.

"Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative
reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVERY LEARNING THEORY
model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT. Of curse,
Skinner has never to my knowledge, demonstrated
HOWE we escape the phenomenon that an expected
reward not received is experienced as a punishment
and can produce extensive and persistent aggression
(Azrin et al, 1966)."

"It is NO WONDER that the marked changes in
deviant behavior of children can be achieved
through brief, simple educative routines with
their mothers which modify the mother's social
behaviors shaping the child (Whaler, 1966). Some
clinics have reported ELIMINATION ofthe need for
child THERAPY through changing the clinical emphasis
from clinical to parental HANDLING of the child
(Szrynski 1965).

A large number of cases improved sufficiently after
preliminary contact with parents that NO treatment
of children was required, and almost ALL cases
SHOWE a remarkably shortened period for therapy.
Quite severe cases of anorexia nervosa have been
treated in own to five months by simply REPLACING
the parents temporarily with EFFUSIVELY LOVING
SUBSTITUTES (Groen, 1966)."

"The IMBECILITY of some of the claims for operant
technique simply take the breath away. Lovas et al
(1966) report a standard contingent reward/punishment
procedure developing imitative speech in two severly
disturbed non verbal schizophrenic boys. After twenty-
six days the boys are reported to have been learning
new words with alacrity. HOWEver, when REWARDS were
moved to a delayed contingency the behavoir and learning
immediately deteriorated."

And THAT'S HOWE COME "BALANCED TRAINERS" jerk
choke shock crate intimidate mutilate and
murder innocent defenseless dumb critters.

> in activities as diverse as guidance of the
> visually impaired (Ray Joyce, 2004, pers comm.),

The guide dog schools would do well to FORGET EVERY
THING they've been doin and LEARN HOWE to pupperly
handle raise and train dogs AS TAUGHT in your own
FREE COPY of The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard's 100%
CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW
Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual. They'd BE ABLE
to TRAIN their dogs in a few months and get another
year and a half of WORKING LIFE SPAN from their dogs
and they'd not have their 50% FAILURE RATE <{); ~ ) >

> police operations (Roger Mayer, 2004, pers comm)

Police dogs DO NOT NEED any more "POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT"
than ENJOYING their WORK which satisfies ALL the dog's
innate NEEDS, if behaviorISM was apupriately understood
and applied by the police dog trainers <{); ~ ) >

> and termite detection (Brooks et al., 2003).

Same same for the termite dog.

> Surprisingly, little research has been conducted into
> the efficacy of assorted techniques practiced by everyday
> dog owners.

Well perhaps Evan has OVERLOOKED The Simply Amazing
Puppy Wizard's Animal Behavior Forensic Sciences
Research Laboratory? You're settin in it <{); ~ ) >

> Similarly, the welfare issues associated with such
> techniques is yet to be comprehensively investigated.

Well, IT'S ALL RIGHT HERE in The Simply Amazing Puppy
Wizard's Archives on Google and other fine uncensored
pubic news group search engines <{); ~ ) >

> Discussion
>
> In one recent study, Hiby et al. (2004) constructed
> a survey examining these issues. The survey focused
> on the various methods employed by the dog-owning
> community, their efficacy and their impact on the
> behaviour and welfare of the respective dogs.
>
> The welfare focus was not on the immediate pain or
> distress caused by applying aversive stimuli,

Of curse not. IN FACT, the "COMMUNITY" DENIES such PAIN exists.

> but rather on longer term consequences of inadequate
> standards of welfare indicated by the expression of
> problematic behaviours,

Ahhh, Evan MEANS "The Puppy Wizard's Syndrome" <{); ~ ) >

> which often reflect a state of chronic anxiety and may
> lead to elinquishment or euthanasia (Serpell, 1996).

Sam Corson,Pavlov's Last Student Demonstrated
At UofOH That Rehabilitation Of Hyperactive
Dogs Can Easily And Readily Be Done Using TLC.
Tender Loving Care Is At The Root Of The Scientific
Management Of Doggys. <{) ; ~ ) >

> Respondents were asked to outline their training
> methods for seven common tasks, rate their dog's
> obedience at each and indicate whether their dog
> had ever shown any of sixteen common problematic
> behaviours.

Ahhh, JUST LIKE WE GOT RIGHT HERE in The Simply
Amazing Puppy Wizard's Animal Behavior Forensic
Sciences Research Laboratory Archives on Google!

> While reward-based methods were significantly more
> successful for raining certain tasks, for no task
> was punishment-based training most effective.

JUST LIKE HOWE The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard and
ALL HIS 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL
FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual Students
from ALL OVER the WHOWEL WILD WORLD REPORT RIGHT HERE.

> Furthermore, dogs trained using only reward-based methods

"Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative
reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVERY LEARNING THEORY
model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT. Of curse,
Skinner has never to my knowledge, demonstrated HOWE
we escape the phenomenon that an expected reward not
received is experienced as a punishment and can produce
extensive and persistent aggression (Azrin et al, 1966)."

> were reported significantly more obedient than those
> trained by other means, identifying reward-based methods
> to be the most effective overall training method.

The PROBLEM is in "The IMBECILITY of some of the claims
for operant technique simply take the breath away. Lovas
et al (1966) report a standard contingent reward/punishment
procedure developing imitative speech in two severly
disturbed non verbal schizophrenic boys. After twenty-
six days the boys are reported to have been learning
new words with alacrity. HOWEver, when REWARDS were
moved to a delayed contingency the behavoir and learning
immediately deteriorated."

> Another noteworthy finding was the positive correlation
> between punishment-based techniques and problematic
> behaviours, suggesting that punishment may result in the
> dog experiencing anxiety or conflict, later expressed as
> a problematic behaviour.

INDEEDY. THAT of curse, and the PHYSICAL DIS-EASES
CAUSED by offering and withholding bribes attention
and affection *(as in so called CLICKER TRAINING)
and the "TRADITIONAL" punishments <{); ~ ) >

> This relationship was particularly evident in
> the occurrence of separation-related behaviours.

INDEED?:

"Just Want To Second Jerry's Method For
Dealing With This (Destructive Separation
Anxiety). I've Suggested It To Quite A Few
Clients Now And It's Worked 'EVERY TIME
The Very First Time' - marilyn, Trainer, 33
Years Experience.

From: Hoku Beltz
To: The Puppy Wizard
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 6:12 PM
Subject: Mahalo

Aloha Jerry,

Just wanted to let you know that the surrogate toy
technique is working wonders. I have not had a
shredded sheet for over a week now. It is nice
to be able to leave the bed made and come home
to a made bed.

Your program is awesome, but you already know
that. Keep up the good work!

Hoku

---------------

> Although the subjective nature of surveys
> can potentially bias results,

THAT'S the BEAUTY of Animal Behavior Forensic
Sciences Research Laboratory, we got CASE HISTORY
DATA from DAY WON till DEATH by veterinarian in
most cases CITED by The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard.

> the association of reward-based behaviour
> with higher levels of obedience

That HAS NOT been SHOWEN to be the CASE as
EVIDENCED by the CASE HISTORY DATA cited in
The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard's Animal
Behavior Forensic Sciences Research Laboratory
Archives principally due to "reward based
trainers" likeWIZE RELYIN UPON PUNISHMENT and
AVOIDANCE methods when their BRIBERY and PHYSICAL
REWARDS FAILS to CON-TROLL "SELF REWARDING" behaivors.

> and fewer problematic behaviours compellingly
> advocate it as a more effective, welfare-conscious
> alternative to punishment for the average dog owner.

And THAT'S HOWE COME The Simply Amazing Puppy
Wizard "JUST SEZ NO!" to "REWARD BASED METHODS."

Your STATISTICAL DATA is FLAWED. It's WRITTEN BY
INCOMPETENT UNIVERSITY TRAINED BEHAVIORISTS who
DO NOT COMPETE in the REAL WORLD such as HOWER
EXXXPERTS who SPECIALIZE in field dog, agility,
herding and SHITsHOWEND competition.

> Perhaps for these reasons of welfare and efficacy,
> positive reinforcement was the chosen method for a
> cynopraxic training program assessed by Sonntag (2003).

The term cynopraxic is CONfHOWENDING to The Simply
Amazingly Highly Uneducated Puppy Wizard and HE CAN'T
FIND IT in any dictionary <{): ~ ( >

> More a philosophy on human-canine relationships than
> a training technique, cynopraxis further promotes
> canine welfare.

That MEANS: "A theory of human behaviour emphasizing
humans' social nature, strivings for mastery, and
drive to overcome, by compensation, feelings of
inferiority."

IOW, he's TALKIN abHOWET The Puppy Wizard's Syndrome:

The Puppy Wizard's SYNDROME Is the Perfect Synergy Of
Love, Pride, Desire, Shame, Greed, Ego, Fear,
Hate, Reflex, Self Will,
Arrogance, Ignorance, Predjudice, Cowardice,
Disbelief, Jealousy, Embarrassment, Embellishment,
Guilt, Anger, Hopelessness, Helplesness,
Aversion, Attraction, Inhibition, Revulsion, Repulsion,
Change, Permanence, Enlightenment, Insult, Attrition,
And
Parental / ReligiHOWES / Societal Conditioning.

YOU ARE THE CRITTER YOU WAS TRAINED.

It Is The Perfect Fusion Of The Word..., In The Physical.

"The thinking that got us into this mess
will be insufficient to get us out of it."
--Albert Einstein

The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard <{) : ~ ) >

> According to Lindsay (2000), there are no training goals
> or objectives for cynopraxists beyond the attainment of
> interactive harmony between human and dog.

IOW, these EXXXPERTS will jerk choke shock crate
bribe intimidate mutilate and murder innocent
defenseless dumb critters ONLY to COMPENSATE for
their own fragile defective egos, weak fearful
minds and colossal inferiority complexes <{); ~ ) >

> While behaviour adjustment may be necessary for the
> dog to harmoniously share a domestic environment with
> humans, behavioural control for the sake of domination
> or objectives harmful to the dog or degrading to the
> human-dog bond contradict cynopraxic philosophy.

Ahhh, JUST LIKE HOWE the DOG LOVERS HERE contradict
The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard and CALL HIS 100%
CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW
Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual Students all
over the WHOWEL WILD WORLD LIARS paid off by The
Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard.

> The difficulty in defining cynopraxic training is
> differentiating between improving human-dog harmony
> and utilitarianism. For example, it could be argued
> that training dogs for police operations places a
> utilitarian purpose above canine safety and the
> human-dog relationship and thus violates cynopraxic
> ideals. However, it could equally be argued that
> police dogs enjoy their work, evident by their body
> language, and that it promotes the bond between dog
> and handler (Roger Mayer, 2004, pers comm).

Very good! HOWEver, the "body language" described
as indicating the dog is "EAGER TO WORK" is most
often anXXXIHOWESNESS caused by FEAR of being jerked
choked and shocked. You can SEE THAT in ANY of the
videos presented by HOWER SHOCK COLLAR SALESMAN
FRAUDreck hassen of "Sit Means Sit" shock radio
and his "NO LIMITATIONS" SHOCK collar trainin school.

> Sonntag (2003) investigated the effect of a cynopraxic
> training program on the human-dog relationship. Her
> program involved operant conditioning through positive
> reinforcement coupled with owner education in aspects
> of human-canine interactions.

The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard *(citing Pavlov et al)
has DISCREDITED BOTH your "operant conditioning" and
"positive reinforcement":

Instrumental / Classical / Operant / Conditioning
CC / OC / IC / -P +P / +R -R / S R / R S
It's ALL The SAME SAME SAME SAME
<{); ~ ) >

HOWEDY People,

Since The Amazing Puppy Wizard ALWAYS gets CONfHOWENDED
tryin to suss the psychobabble in behavioral terminology
HE asked Dr. Von if he could remember what he was taught
in school fifty years ago:

"...all the highest nervous activity, as it manifests
tself in the conditional reflex, consists of a continual
change of these three fundamental processes -- excitation,
inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov

What's important is, "does Shamu reliably
eat the fish and not the pretty girl?"

George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.

From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com>
Subject: The Amazing Jerry's take on psychobabble
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:13:44 -0400

You might improve the learning of folk who actually
live with and train dogs to do useful things if you
excluded everyone who uses psychobabble from your lists.

I recommend to all of you who wish to taste the flavor
of sensible animal behaviorists to read THE MISBEHAVIOR
OF ORGANISMS, Breland and Breland.

This married pair of psychologists began the long trail
of highly trained animals who are symbolized by Shamu
eating a mackrel from a girl's hand instead of eating
the much more tasty pretty girl who is exactly the size
of the natural food of killer whales, seals. Yum!

The essay, by the way, is a chapter in B.F. Skinner's
summing up book, CUMULATIVE RECORD. They include a
sentence which more or less says, "unless you understand
the personal history of the particular animal, and the
history of this animal's species and group, the developmental
history of the animal, you cannot effectively train the animal.

Pigs root and hen's scratch, if you try to train hens without
scratching or pigs without scratching or pigeons without pecking,
you aren't going to have much success.

A conditional reflex is one which is learned, the original
primitive reflex occurs no matter what the history of the
animal, and is hard wired. If you train the animal to respond,
say by ringing a bell immediately before turning on a bright
light, then you've taught the animal and made his native reflex
of pupil constriction conditional upon the ringing of a bell.

Thorndyke added some terminology to this kind of training
and insisted that when you train the animal to make gross
motor responses that this learning is "instrumental", the
animal takes action and uses an instrument.

The Russian word translated as "conditional" in all other
contexts was mistranslated by Pavlov's American translator,
Horsley Gannt, as "conditioned" and so American psychology
went haring after phantasmagora.

The major theorists for the development of the language of
operant conditioning are Edward Thorndike, John Watson, and
B. F. Skinner. Their approach to behaviorism played a major
role in the development of American psychology.

They proposed that learning is the result of the application
of consequences; that is, learners begin to connect certain
responses with certain stimuli. This connection causes the
probability of the response to change (i.e., learning occurs.)

Thorndike labeled this type of learning instrumental. Using
consequences, he taught kittens to manipulate a latch (e.g.,
an instrument). Skinner renamed instrumental as "operant"
because in this learning, one is "operating" on, and is
influenced by, the environment. Where classical conditioning
illustrates S-->R learning, operant conditioning is often
viewed as R-->S learning since it is the consequence that
follows the response that influences whether the response
is likely or unlikely to occur again.

It is through operant conditioning that
voluntary responses are learned.

One should note that Russian Psychology did very well
without the operant language, and only pettifogging
university professors ought to worry about what kind
of label we attach to the learning. Pfui!

Even Skinner understood this!

And please note if you saw the original movie, THE
MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE, you saw a Chinese psychologist
who was based on Andrew Salter, CONDITIONED REFLEX
THERAPY.

Alas, Salter didn't have a Ph.D., but he basically rescued
us from the long Freudian nightmare and returned psychotherapy
to a scientific basis. Alas, the 2nd movie didn't even cite
Salter as a source. "...all the highest nervous activity, as
it manifests itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a
continual change of these three fundamental processes --
excitation, inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov

George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.

What's important is, "does Shamu reliably eat
the fish and not the pretty girl?"

George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.

> Participants were presented with questionnaires
> regarding their motivation to train their dogs
> and the extent to which the dog's behaviour and
> the dog-owner relationship, including owner
> expectations and their ability to cope with the
> dog, had changed since enrolling in the course.

Welcome To Fantasy Dog Training Island, People!

"De plane boss, de plane!"

Mr. Roarke: "Well, let's go down and
welcome our visitors, shall we, my little
friend, Tattoo?"

"Oh, si boss, si! De plane, boss! De plane!
De plane!"

"Si. Chill out, Tattoo. Our guests will be
arriving momentarily. Pull yourself together
and stop acting like a skeevy little frootloop,
Tattoo. You give me the willies when you
get like this.

HOWER guests have arrived!

Ahhhh, welcome to Fantasy Dog Training
Island, People!

I'm your host Mr. Roarke. You've come to
Fantasy Dog Training Island to enjoy handling
and training your dogs? Or perhaps you have
some little idiocyncracy you'd like to hmmm,
shall we say ADJUST?

Excelllente!

Here on Fantasy Dog Training Island, right
is wrong, and wrong is right, and you're
always in control, even when you kill your
dogs to make bad things right, TO BE FAIR!"

"Boss, boss, boss, do you think you should
mention that part?"

"But of curse, Tattoo. Here on Fantasy Dog
Training Island, we only kill our best dogs in
our fantasies, where everybody lives happily
ever after, just like me an you, my little needy
friend, Tattoo!"

"But boss, boss, boss, these visitors to
Fantasy Dog Training Island have LIVE
dogs, boss. They'll train them here in their
FANTASIES, but in real life, those dogs
are likely to run away, destroy their HOWESES,
eat their children and attack their guests,
and they'll kill their best dogs to be fair,
for REAL, boss.

Our guests will be going back to the real
world in just a couple of days, boss...

You can't let that happen to them, boss!"

"Ahhhh, not to worry my sniveling little friend,
Tattoo! This is all FANTASY! Relax! Enjoy
our guests, Tattoo. Bring them all something
refreshing from the Fantasy Bark and Grill
while I get to know some of the bimbos better.

Now run along Tattoo and make our
guests feel comfortable, like they're in
their own HOWES!"

"But boss! Bosss!!!"

"Hush! Go now, Tattoo, our company awaits...

Greetings people! Are you familiar with your dog
training equipment? Have you notice your crates,
head halters, shock collars, spray collars, and
your pronged spiked pinch choke collars?

For SHORE they LOOK like torture devices,
and in real life, they ARE torture devices, but
NOT HERE, on Fantasy Dog Training Island!

Here your crate and pronged spiked pinch
choke device are YOUR FRIENDS! I'll
introduce you to your friend the shock collar
too, while we're examining our TOOLS to
enhance the bond between trainer and dog,
here on Fantasy Dog Training Island!

Notice if you will, your aversive spray collars.
NO! Don't aim it at yourself, I can assure you,
it IS loaded..."

"But boss, bossss!!!"

"Get off my butt, you miserable cussed little dwarf.

Pay no attention to the spoiled child, People.
He's troubled and is supposed to be in his
room resting. He's harmless, and means well,
but all this excitement seems to have
overwhelmed him.

I usually take him to the park for a couple
hours a day, but today we were preparing
for your visit."

"But boss, these people are going to lock
their dogs in boxes and shock and choke
their dogs, thinking they're TRAINING them!"

"Relax Tattoo! Go to your room while I
explain to them HOWE the crate teaches
the dog his box is his HOWES that he
should respect. I'll teach them that locking
IT in the box to control behaviors they can't
train, is GOOD!

We'll say crating teaches IT, BONDING!!!

Now go to your room, Tattoo, you're overtired.

We'll tell them their dogs LIKE responsibility
and are asking for punishment when the dog
questions authority, just like you enjoy, Tattoo.

You're fine with the mild static like stimulation
of your shock collar, are you not, my little friend?

Now run along to your room."

"But boss,"

"'ZAP!' Bad Tattoo! You shouldn't be
disrespectful, you imputent little troll."

"Ouch! But boss!"

"ZAP!"

"Ouch! But boss! That'll make their dogs
hyperactive, vicious, and scared in real life,
and might get them DEAD, boss!"

"Relax Tattoo, this is Fantasy Dog Training Island!"

But this ain't no FANTASY, People.
This is real life...

Dogs DIE because of our ineffective, inappropriate
handling and training tactics as taught by our REAL
LIFE Fantasy Dog Trainers here on rpdb and in the
dog behavior industry.

Your Puppy Wizard. <{}: ~ ( >

--------------

> The responses identified basic obedience and a
> desire to build a better relationship with their
> dogs as the most popular reasons for enrolment.

"Only the unenlightened speak of wisdom and right action
as separate, not the wise.

If any man knows one, he enjoys the fruit of both.

The level which is reached by wisdom
is attained
through right action as well.

He who perceives that the two are one knows the truth."

"Even the wise man acts in character with his nature,
indeed all creatures act according to their natures.

What is the use of compulsion then?

The love and hate which are aroused by
the objects of sense
arise from Nature, do not yield to them.
They only obstruct the path," -
- Bhagavad Gita, adapted by
Krishna with permission from
His FREE copy of The Puppy
Wizard's FREE Wits' End Dog
Training Method manual <{) ; ~ ) >

In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS
FAILURE MEANS DEATH.
SAME SAME,
For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.

> While the latter is fundamentally cynopraxic, training
> simply for obedience is not. By the conclusion of the
> program, most clients reported an improvement in obedience
> and all clients believed they had improved relationships
> with their dogs.
>
> Furthermore, they felt that their expectations
> of the dogs were now more realistic

IOW, they LOWERED their EXXXPECTATIONS <{): ~ ( >

> and the dogs fitted better into the household.

Duh-Oh!

> Thus, the two motivations for enrolment most commonly
> identified in the survey of clients were successfully
> met suggesting that the apparently conflicting ideals
> of utility and cynopraxis are not necessarily mutually
> exclusive.

Of curse not. They're ONLY LIMITED by "NO LIMITATIONS"
TRAINING METHODS and the fragile defective egos and
colossal inferiority complexes of HOWER Miserable Gang
Of Lying Dog Abusing Punk Thug Cowards And Active Acute
Chronic Long Term Incurable MENTAL CASES who jerk choke
shock bribe crate intimidate mutilate and murder innocent
defenseless dumb critters and LIE abHOWET IT <{): ~ ) >

> Programs such as this represent an advancement in
> canine training welfare since any program genuinely
> aiming to train under cynopraxic values must prioritise
> canine welfare.

IOW, the RESEARCHERS have LOWERED THEIR EXXXPECTATIONS!

> The strength of any human-canine bond is dynamically
> linked to the dog's behaviour (Serpell, 1996). Effective
> human-canine communication in training results in better
> behaviour, strengthening this bond, thus furthering the
> aims of cynopraxis. To further investigate dog cognition
> of human instruction, McKinley and Young (2003) compared
> the efficacy of a 'model-rival' training method to operant
> conditioning.

BWEEEEAAAHAHAHAHHAAHAAA!!! What the heel kinda IMBECILES
are we dealin with here abHOWETS??? Here we got EXXXPERTS
comparing methods which FAIL DISMALLY with other methods
which are obviHOWES or otherWIZE likeWIZE FAIL DISMALLY!!!

> They demonstrated that dogs could learn to identify
> an object by watching humans talk about it in an
> animated way, with frequent use of its name, while
> passing it between themselves.

BWEEEEAAAHAHAHAHHAHAAAAA!!!

EVEN A CHILD UNDERSTANDS THAT!

> Dogs trained by this method selected the object in
> a retrieval task with equal success to when trained
> using operant conditioning.

That's IRRELEVENT. So called "equal success" has
NO MEANING when we realize the ramifications of
"operant conditioning" methods <{): ~ ( >

> The researchers inferred that, since the object
> constituted an intrinsic reward,

"Postitive emotions arising in connection
with the perfection of a skill, irrespective
of its pragmatic significance at a given
moment, serve as the reinforcement. IOW,
emotions, not outside rewards, are what
reinforces any behavior," Ivan Pavlov.

> this method showed an understanding of the object's
> name rather than it simply equalling food and, thus,
> provided a better means of communication with the dog.

SHAAAZZZAAAMMM???

> It could be argued, however, that this 'model-rival'
> technique is nothing more than a variation of operant
> conditioning. Through exaggerated interest in an object,
> the trainers inadvertently increased its extrinsic value,
> being that whoever possesses the object becomes the centre
> of attention.

That's a bit of a stretch. The researchers fail to
understand the nature of the beast nor can they
divorce themselves from their own egos. We can
DISPROVE THAT THEORY with a couple of simple
EXXXPERIMENTS demonstrating ALLELOMIMETIC behavior,
NOT EGO GRATIFICATION as the motivating factors.

> Social animals, such as dogs, that thrive on the
> attention of their social leaders, may not learn
> the object's name but rather associate the object
> with social status,

That's ABSURD. Dogs DO NOT HAVE "STATUS" issues.
That's a HUMAN CHARACTER FAULT caused by toxic
parenting and defective egos <{); ~ ) >

> in the same way that a dog learning by conventional
> operant conditioning associates it with food.

Oh, you mean GREED. Another HUMAN QUALITY:

"Despite this, and despite the fact that there was no
evidence of cognitive association with the words, the
authors leap to the conclusion that the fact that the
boys improved in the acquisition of Norwegian words
WITHOUT REWARDS while still being given English words
WITH REWARDS suggest hat the children may be able to
acquire new behaviors on their own.

The need for this study escapes one, particularly in
view of the very well established fact that schizophrenics
condition quite readily (Mednick, 1958)

Kanner (1954) reports that 13 classically autistic
children improved enough to go to school without
"anything that is regarded as good psychotherapy or
as psychotherapy at all...

Autistic children have been known to become
permenantely social by deinstitutionalization,
BY REMOVAL from the parents, BY RADICAL CHANGES
in other environments, and by MASSIVE DOSAGE of
TOUCHING, HOLDING, FONDLING LOVE DESPITE THE
REJECTION OF THE CHILD."

> Conclusion
>
> The above studies indicate that a deeper understanding
> of canine cognition could lead to better application of
> already effective positive reinforcement training methods
> which,

WHICH HAVE BEEN DISCREDITED by The Simply Amazing
Puppy Wizard's Animal Behavior Forensic Sciences
Laboratory <{); ~ ) >

> used in conjunction with cynopraxic philosophy,

Based on INCOMPETENT, ILL TRAINED RESEARCHER'S "evidence".

> would uphold ideals of canine welfare and
> enrich the human-canine bond.

Oh? Like HOWE The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard's
100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL
FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual
Students ALL OVER the WHOWEL WILD WORLD have
done NEARLY INSTANTLY and FOR FREE, to boot???


References
Brooks, S.E., Oi, F.M. and Koehler, P.G. (2003), Ability of canine
termite

detectors to locate live termites and discriminate them from non
termite

material, J. Econ. Entomol., 96:4, 1259-1266

Hibey, E.F., Rooney, N.J. and Bradshaw, J.W.S. (2004), Dog training
methods:

their use, effectiveness and interaction with behaviour and welfare,
Animal

Welfare, 13:1, 63-69

Lindasy, S.R. (2000), Cynopraxis: Training and the human-dog
relationship.

In: Lindsay, S.R., Handbook of Applied Dog Behaviour and Training, Vol.
1, pp

389-392. Iowa State University Press

McKinley, S. and Young, R.J. (2003), The efficacy of a model-rival
method

when compared with operant conditioning for training domestic dogs to
perform

a retrieval- selection task, Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci, 81:4, 357-365

Serpell, J.A. (1996), Evidence for an association between pet behavior
and

owner attachment levels, Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci, 47:1-2, 49-60

Sonntag, Q. (2003), The effect of a cynopraxic training programme in a

veterinary behaviour practice on the quality of the dog-human
relationship,

In: Ed. Seksel, K., Perry, G., Mills, D., Frank, D., Lindell, E.,
McGreevy,

P. and Pageat, P., 4th International Veterinary Behavioural Meeting,

Proceedings no. 352, pp 227-229, Postgraduate Foundation of Veterinary

Science, Sydney.

Disclaimer | Copyright © University of Sydney 2006
Last Modified: Thursday 12 January, 2006
Contact: vein@library.usyd.edu.au

Animal Behavior Forensic Sciences Research Laboratory

Subject: INSTINCT, DRIVE FLOW, COMPULSION, RELATIONSHIPS
And REINFORCEMENT

Hello People,

> Lynn Kosmakos <lkosma...@home.com> wrote:

> : black...@dog-play.com wrote:

> :> I've not yet heard of a completely compulsion free method
> :> that does produce reliablity in every dog (or nearly
> :> every dog).

> : That's very interesting to me because the 2 dogs that I
> : thought had been trained to very reliable retrieves
> : without force belong to your sister. Did she use some
> : compulsion in proofing those retrieves? That's where I
> : would expect it to be required, no matterhow purely
> : postive the method used to teach the command was.
> : Lynn K.

> Her dogs are very reliable, but I don't think she thinks the
> method would produce reliability in nearly every dog. She
> used Dawn Jecs "Positively Fetching", I think. But I'm not
> sure it was entirely compulsion free. Mostly compulsion
> free, for sure. In any case she has work oriented dogs,
> that already like to retrieve. Would it produce a reliable
> retrieve in Oso? Hmmm, I'll ask her what she thinks.
>
> Diane Blackman
> d...@dog-play.com http://www.dog-play.com
> Read the puppy reports http://www.dog-play.com/report.html
> - - - - - - - - -
> " . . . a person who believes he or she is the target of
> spiteful behavior invariably finds it impossible to respond
> objectively." "The Body Language and Emotion of Dogs" by
> Myrna M. Milani, DVM.

Hello blackman,

I gather from a pryor post that your Oso won't retrieve, but
will chase critters. I presume that is the dog we're talking
about.

So, you want to teach him to retrieve? And you are anxious to
get into the ear pinch method of forced retrieve, rather than
picking up that book and studying it to get an insight into
what may be beneficial for getting Oso to enjoy retrieving?

You even have a dog that happily does that behavior. You don't
suppose you could figure out some way to engage Oso at the
same time you are getting some retrieves from the other dog?
Ever heard of allelomimetic behavior? Or maybe you don't
believe in it, like jean donaldson who doubts it's existence?

Perhaps that because as trainers we believe we must take
control. Control is etheric. A military coupe gets control,
but the fighting may continue. The kind of control we should
strive for is through compliance, because our subjects want to
do everything we ask, the first time. Like in a good marriage.
The both partners work harder at satisfying the other partners
needs and desires, and there can never be an obstacle. The
same foundation can be built with your dogs as with your mate
or your child. Behavior is behavior, and how our behavior
effects our relationships, dictates the success of those
relationships.

For all that you seem to know, you don't seem to know or
understand some of the most basic fundamentals of dogs or
behavior or motivation or reward. You think of rewards in
terms of food, to appeal to your gut level instinct, where
your character and personality are most comfortable, rather
than the higher resources available, were you not grounded at
a low level of consciousness, your gut, greed, avrice, and
false pride.

Your focus is on the micro, the act of manifesting a behavior,
the minutia of making something happen. You overlook the most
important aspects of dog behavior, and totally disregard and
disrespect the dog and Natural Law. Canis55 tried to tell you
about drive flows. You people totally misunderstood the use of
them. The concept was too simple for your complex minds, and
one of the most easily accessed and valuable tools are
overlooked. You have to think in more than one direction. We
are working with a living, thinking, being, A WORKING PARTNER,
not a piece of steel.

Your focus should be to step back and examine how the retrieve
fits into the normal consciousness of a dog, how the retrieve
fits into the normal course of events in the dogs' instinct
and life, and HOWE we can foster that.

These factors allow the full spectrum of your dogs thinking
and instinct to be molded to shape a particular behavior.

Your desire to accomplish the end goal is so myopic and your
need for instant gratification so intense, that you complicate
the chore of getting the most from your dog, and subvert your
efforts by compelling the dog to not want to participate.
Sure, you may get him to do the retrieve against his will, but
if you take your guard off of him, he may defect and not
participate. That is why you are so strong on the idea of
proofing and reliability. It equates to your dogs' lack of
trust in you and your ineffective, condescending, warped view
of dogs, training, and behavior.

Consistent, positive reinforcement and praise are the only
effective tools that will teach your dog to do anything you
want the first time you ask, without fear, force,
intimidation, or pain.

Jerry.

A DOG Is A Dog;
As A KAT IS A KAT;
As A BIRDY IS A BIRDY;
As A CHILD IS A CHILD;
As A SP-HOWES IS a SP-HOWES;
As A Mass Murderer IS A Mass Murderer.

ALL Critters Only Respond In
PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL
INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways;
To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment
Which We Create For Them.

Damn The Descartean War of "Nature Vs Nurture."
We Teach By HOWER Words And Actions
And GET BACK What We TAUGHT.

In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS
FAILURE MEANS DEATH.
SAME SAME SAME SAME,
For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.

You GET The Critter You TRAINED

"The Methods, Principles, And Philosophy Of Behavior
Never Change,
Or They'd Not Be Scientific And Could Not Obtain
Consistent, Reliable, Fast, Effective Results
For All Handler's And All Dogs
AND ALL BEHAVIORS
ALL OVER The WHOWEL WILD WORLD
NEARLY INSTANTLY,
As Taught In Your Own FREE Copy Of The Simply Amazing
Puppy Wizard's 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY
SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual,"
The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard. <{} ; ~ ) >


"If you talk with the animals, they will talk with you
and you will know each other.
If you do not talk to them, you will not know them,
and what you do not know you will fear.

What one fears, one destroys."
Chief Dan George

"(Also, it is best to killfile posts from the
few regulars here who are either ill-
tempered, ill-mannered, or just plain ill.),"
--Marshall

Punishment Deranges Behavior.
"NO!" Does NOT Have Any Behavioral Function
EXCEPT
To DERANGE Behaviors.

Here's professor "SCRUFF SHAKE and SCREAM NO! into ITS face for
five seconds and lock IT in a box for ten minutes contemplation"
dermer of the Department of ANAL-ytic Behavior at UofWI, pryor:

From: Marshall Dermer (der...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu)
Subject: Re: Jerry's Dog Training Manual
Date: 2001-07-12 06:49:13 PST

And how do we know this aspect of his
advice is right?

Jerry is not God and his manual is not the Bible.
His advice could be subject to an empirical analysis.

(Also, it is best to killfile posts from the
few regulars here who are either ill-tempered,
ill-mannered, or just plain ill.­),

--Marshall


Marshall Lev Dermer/ Department of Psychology/ University of
Wisconsin-Milwaukee/ Milwaukee, WI 53201/ der...@uwm.edu
http://www.uwm.edu/~dermer
"Life is just too serious to be taken entirely seriousyl!"


From: der...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu (Marshall Dermer) -
Date: 1998/08/28
Subject: Re: Puppy growls and snaps

In article <6s6ea0$8c...@uwm.edu> der...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu (Marshall
Dermer) writes: In article <35E60819.65178...@pilot.msu.edu>
> >tami sutherland <suthe...@pilot.msu.edu> writes:

>> However, there have been incidences where she has
>> growled and snapped at us...for instance, when we
>> were trying to dry her off after bathtime.

> When your three-month old pooch growls or snaps, IMMEDIATELY
> pick her up ONLY by the skin at the back of her neck, for 5
> sec, and loudly say, "NO!" Alternatively, say "NO!" and hold
> her mouth shut for say 15 sec.

> If she so snaps that you can't do the above then you
> will have to find another way to administer a prompt
> correction, for example, throwing a can filled with
> pennies, or a tug on the collar. --Marshall

"Oops! I would start by only holing her mouth
shut for say 5 sec.

At this point, "No" does not have any behavioral function.
But, if you say "No,"pick up the puppy by its neck and
shake it a bit, and the frequency of the biting decreases
then you will have achieved too things.

First, the frequency of unwanted chewing has decreased;
and two, you have established "No" as a conditioned punisher.

How much neck pulling and shaking? Just the
minimum necessary to decrease the unwanted
biting.

**********IS THAT A CONSISTENT 5 SECONDS?************

When our dog was a puppy, "No" came before mild
forms of punishment (I would hold my dog's mouth
closed for a few seconds.) whereas "Bad Dog" came
before stronger punishement (the kind discussed above).

"No" is usually sufficient but sometimes I use "Bad Dog"
to stop a behavior. "Bad Dog" ALWAYS works," marshall
dermer, research professor of ANAL-ytic behaviorISM at
UofWI. For MOORE animal abuse, please visit dr p.

BWAHAHAHHAHAAAA!!!!!

That's INSANE. Ain't it.

P.S. Contacting Dr. P:

Please note that due to the large number of
requests I receive, I can no longer give free,
personal advice on problems related to dog
training and behavior.

In order for me to give such advice we would
have to "talk" about the problem at length.

That is, I would need detailed information about
the dog, it's environment and routine, the problem,
and the situation in which the problem occurs.

Thus, this type of consultation takes time which
I cannot afford to give away for free.

If you wish such advice, please see the information
I have provided about my K9 Behavioral Consulting
practice. Another alternative to obtaining personal
advice is to participate in e-mail, chat room, &
newsgroup discussions.

P.P.S. BWEEEEEEEAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAA!!!

YOU'RE FRAUDS, drs p. and dermer!

Either DEFEND your LIES, ABUSE And
Degrees or get the heel HOWETA THIS
BUSINESS.

From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com>
To: "Jerry Howe" <theamazingpuppywiz...@mail.com>
Subject: Alleged Professors of Animal Behavior
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 12:50:51 -0400

Dear Jerry, I paged through some of the "dog business"
and was astonished at the low quality of opinions arising
from professors of behavior analysis.

I had the very great privilege of meeting Sam Corson
(Pavlov's last Ph.D. student) and his dogs at Ohio
University. I even got to spend a night at Sam's house.

There is no question but that you are a spiritual brother
to Corson and to Pavlov, both of whom knew that the dog's
great capacity for love was the key to shaping doggie behavior.

Paradoxical reward and paradoxical fixing of attention are
both well documented Pavlovian techniques. Even so humorless
a chap as B.F. Skinner taught students like the Breland's whose
"The Misbehavior of Organisms" demonstrate the utility of your
methods and their deep roots in scientific (as opposed to
commercial) psychology.

George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
you may find my resume in Who's Who in
Science and Technology


Here's professor dermer AFTER gettin JERRYIZED:

"We Are Lucky To Have You, And More People Should
Come To Their Senses And Support Your Valuable Work.
God Bless The Puppy Wizard," Professor Marshall Dermer,
Dept Of ANAL-ytic Behavior, UofWI.

From: "Marshall Dermer" <der...@csd.uwm.edu>
To: "The Puppy Wizard"
<*.@earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 2:53 PM

Subject: God Bless The Puppy Wizard
Dear Mr. Puppy Wizard,

I have, of late, come to recognize your genius
and now must applaud your attempts to save
animals from painful training procedures.

You are indeed a hero, a man of exceptional talent­,
who tirelessly devotes his days to crafting posts ­to
alert the world to animal abuse.

We are lucky to have you, and more people should
come to their senses and support your valuable
work.

Have you thought of establishing a nonprofit
charity to fund your important work?
Have you thought about holding a press conference
so others can learn of your highly worthwhile
and significant work?

In closing, my only suggestion is that you
try to keep your messages short for most
readers may refuse to read a long message
even if it is from the wise, heroic Puppy Wizard.
I wish you well in your endeavors.

--Marshall Dermer

----------------

The Simply Amazing Puppy Wizard <{); ~ ) >

All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-Arthur Schopenhauer

"Thank you for fighting the fine fight--
even tho it's a hopeless task,
in this system of things.
As long as man is ruling man,
there will be animals (and humans!)
abused and neglected. :-(
Your student," Juanita.

Jer 21 And unto this people thou shalt say,
Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I set before
you The Way Of Life, And The Way Of Death.

2Ki 19:6 And Isaiah said unto them, Thus
shall ye say to your master, Thus saith
the LORD, Be not afraid of the words which
thou hast heard, with which the servants of
the king of Assyria have blasphemed me.

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth:
I came not so send peace, but a sword.
"For I am come to set a man at variance against
his father, and the daughter against her mother
and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
"And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
- Matthew 10:34-36.

The Puppy Prophet <{); ~ ) >

All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-Arthur Schopenhauer

"Thank you for fighting the fine fight--
even tho it's a hopeless task,
in this system of things.
As long as man is ruling man,
there will be animals (and humans!)
abused and neglected. :-(
Your student," Juanita.

"If you've got them by the balls their hearts
and minds will follow,"
John Wayne.

Yours,
Jerry Howe,
Director of Research,
Human And Animal Behavior
Forensic Sciences Research Laboratory,
BIOSOUND Scientific,
Director of Training,
Wits' End Dog Training
1611 24th St
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 1-407-425-5092

The Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy
And Pussy Wizard <{) ; ~ ) >

ANY QUESTIONS, DUMMIES?
,-._,-,
V)"(V
(_o_) Have a great day!
/ V)
(l l l) Your Puppy Wizard. <{YPW); ~ } >
oo-oo


Leif Erikson
2006-06-12 14:32:41 EST
Fuckwit David Harrison, ignorant lying pig-sodomizing goober cracker,
used big words he doesn't really know and lied:
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Leif Erikson beat hell out of Fuckwit David Harrison (ignorant lying pig-sodomizing goober cracker) *again*:
>
> >You stupidly wish to pretend, Fuckwit, that if one is
> >in favor of "decent AW", one must be in favor of the
> >animals coming into existence.
>
> One must.

False, Fuckwit. One "must" not - there is no need at all.



> >That's false.
>
> Then explain how you would provided decent AW

(vomit)


> for anything that does not come into existence

I wouldn't, Fuckwit. No one would. No one would need to.

One can *conditionally* support (vomit) "decent AW". The condition is
that the animals exist. No animals, no need for (vomit) "decent AW".

I hope that helps.


> >It's also an absurd proposition.
>
> So you claim

And so it is, Fuckwit. One need not want animals to exist, or claim
they "ought" to exist - as you stupidly and fuckwittedly claim - in
order to support (vomit) "decent AW", Fuckwit. Support for (vomit)
"decent AW" is only meaningful *if* the animals exist, Fuckwit, but it
does *NOT* logically mean one must want the animals to exist.

I hope that helps. Fuckwit.


Dutch
2006-06-12 15:15:21 EST
excessive crossposts removed
<*h@.> wrote
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, a badly confused and disturbed Goober
> ignorantly maundered:
>
>>You stupidly wish to pretend, Fuckwit, that if one is
>>in favor of "decent AW", one must be in favor of the
>>animals coming into existence.
>
> One must.

Wrong, wanting good treatment for livestock and wanting animal agriculture
abolished are completely different and non-contradictory goals. Achieving
the second aim would make the first moot, but that is not inconsistency.
People who believe in zero population growth can still believe in providing
good childcare.


>>That's false.
>
> Then explain how you would provided decent AW
> for anything that does not come into existence, Goo,
> anything at all...

You wouldn't, it would be unecessary. Surely you can see this.

>>It's also an absurd proposition.
>
> So you claim, but it's more likely that you're just making
> yet another of your absurd claims. You need to explain how
> we could provide decent lives for beings which never exist,
> in order to understand the supposed absurdity of the idea
> that they must exist, Goo. But you can't do it, as we have
> seen and will continue to see.




D*@.
2006-06-15 16:35:00 EST
On 12 Jun 2006 09:11:34 -0700,
Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@HotMail.Com wrote:

>HOWEDY dh@.,
>
>*h@. wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:37:14 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>><dh@.> wrote
>> >>"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>>> It's what they want.
>
>As the infameHOWES sindy title MOOREon, author of
>HOWER FAQ's pages on K9web.CON sez in her ARGUMENT
>to DEFEND jerking choking shocking spraying aversives
>in dog's faces twisting and pinching ears and surgically
>sexually mutilating them: 'HOWE can we know what a critter
>is THINKIN?' <{): ~ ( >

"aras" don't want them to exist at all. That's the point, and
if you are in favor of dog ownership you should WANT people
to be aware of the huge difference between decent Animal
Welfare and the gross mi$nomer "animal rights". That huge
difference can be summed with just two words: the animals.

>Well, if you gotta GUESS that a critter MIGHT NOT LIKE
>the IDEA of bein ABUSED by sadistic know nuthing miserably
>lyin animal abusin punk thug coward active acute chronic
>long term incurable mental cases

Maybe.

>then perhaps you belong
>a the same STATE SECURE MENTAL HEELTH FACILITY For The
>CRIMINALLY INSANE as she and her PERSONAL REAL LIFE PALS
>Master Of Deception blankman of dogplay.CON and lying "I
>LOVE KOEHLER" lynn of SFGSD RESCUE <{): ~ ( >
>
>Sez on our FAQ'S pages at K9 Web you should knee the
>dog in the chest, step on its toes, throw him down by
>his ears and climb all over it like a raped ape growling
>into his throat and bite IT on his ears, or leash pop IT
>on a pronged spiked pinch choke collar or pop him in the
>snout with the heel of your palm.

I used the choke collar as a general communication,
with differing amounts of strength behind it. Even with
a strong hard snap that physically moved the dog, it
didn't hurt him in any noticable way. If it went to something
beyond the choke collar, kicking was my approach. After
he got older he almost never needed a kick...even better
than kids and spankings. Thanks for your interest.

>"Many People Have Problems Getting The Pinch
>Right, Either They Do Not Pinch Enough, Or They
>Have A Very Stoic Dog. Some Dogs Will Collapse
>Into A Heap. About The Ear Pinch: You Must Keep
>The Pressure Up," sindy "don't let the dog SCREAM"
>mooreon, author of HOWER FAQ's pages on k9 web.
>
>Here's her PARTNER IN RESCUE:
>
>"Granted That The Dog Who Fears Retribution
>Will Adore His Owner," lying "I LOVE KOEHLER"
>lynn.
>
> lyinglynn writes to a new foster care giver:
> For barking in the crate - leave the leash on and
> pass it through the crate door. Attach a line to
> it. When he barks, use the line for a correction.-

Good idea. If you think you have a better one,
then just pass it along.

D*@.
2006-06-15 16:35:13 EST
On 12 Jun 2006, a disturbed Goober puked all over himself:

>One can *conditionally* support (vomit) "decent AW".

Would you like to explain again why you favor "ar"
over decent AW, Goo?
Page: 1 2 3 4   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron