"Suja" wrote in
:


"elegy" wrote in message:

and who is going to do all of this?

Sue Sternberg and trained minions thereof, of course.

It would probably mean that half of us would be handing over our dogs
to be euthed.

I don't believe her standards are like that when the dog is IN a home.

However, when it comes to dogs that are competing for the limited spots in
good homes, she does tend to take a harder line.

A lot of dogs are going to die every year because there aren't enough good,
long-term homes for the dogs available. She's trying to tip the scales so
that the ones that have a good shot at living out the rest of their lives
in those homes actually *make it* to those homes.

I totally understand why people take issue with her policies, but I did
think that went a little far.

Tara

"Paul E. Schoen" spoke these words of wisdom in
:


"diddy" none wrote in message
. ..
"Paul E. Schoen" spoke these words of wisdom in
:

NILIF
should be the norm in schools, at work, everywhere.



i'm surprised you said this. i recall a time when you seemed to think
NILIF
was abuse.

I can't recall ever saying that. I have always felt that one should
deserve whatever is given to them, by doing something to earn it.
Muttley now sits automagically if I have a treat for him, and usually
Lucky will sit with some coaxing. It's more difficult if they are
together.

Maybe you are thinking of the time when I was trying the JH method, and
praising Muttley even when he was ignoring me.

Paul




it's this comment from this thread where it appears that you seem to think
NILIF is harmful



Paul E. Schoen
View profile
More options Jun 27, 6:08 pm
Newsgroups: rec.pets.dogs.behavior
From: "Paul E. Schoen"
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:08:53 -0400
Local: Wed, Jun 27 2007 6:08 pm
Subject: Muttley Training, Lesson #1
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

"Judith Althouse" wrote in message

...

- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Awww Paul,
You have gone and done it!!!! As you know I am a long time supporter
of you and Muttley.
I have no problem with you sharing your training methods or for that
matter even using the methods Howe claims as his. I have to wonder why
you would want to inflame this bunch and discredit yourself by
indicating you are following Howe's lead. I have actually given
credence to some of the methods he uses but believe me he did not create
them. They are known. Matt pointed out a similar method he uses which
coincidentally is like Howe's. He just does not call it "Hot and Cold".
You certainly have a right to say what you want to it is just that I
would have been more interested in the results if you had not shared
with me that you were following an obviously disturbed person's
teachings.
We all differ on methods and my methods are ancient but basicly
successful for me. I am not one to dismiss anyone else's. I have even
learned from them.
Good luck with Muttley. I would like to share that until you are
absolutely positive that you have complete control of Muttley that you
use an old fashioned choke chain if there is a chance he is going to be
exposed to another dog unexpectedly since he has shown dog aggression.
I know I am old school, but I am not the one that would want to try to
handle a dog of that size with a nylon lead in the case of trouble.
Paul, you just had to know that even if you told us Muttley had become
an obedience champion or search and rescue dog etc. that quoting Howe
an abusive and mentally ill person just kind of ruins hearing about you
and Muttley IMO.
I continue to wish you success with Muttley.

Be Free.....Judy

The nylon limited choke collar is more than substantial and effective
enough to give me as much control as I have ever had with the the chain
choke or the prong collar. The truth is that he is strong enough to pull
against any of these tools, and for now I just need to be watchful and
ready to restrain him if he bolts after a deer or fox or whatever he sees
or hears. Even Jerry has suggested the chain choker as a backup.

You would probably be pleasantly surprised if you would talk to Jerry. Why
don't you give him a call (from a public phone if you're afraid he'll *69
you). He surprised me with his call, and it probably took some courage on
his part to do that. I've slammed him before, and I still don't agree with
everything he says. His newsgroup persona is certainly abusive, and I
wonder why he does not use his dog training methodology on people. But
that
is his business. I just want to give his methods a chance to work. Maybe
they aren't new, but I have not found anything quite like them. It seems
like there is just the "old school" Koehler methods, and newer ideas like
reward based training and NILIF.

So, thanks for your concern and positive thoughts. I can understand why
you
and some others may not be willing to give any credence to Jerry, but his
methods seem to be at the very least harmless. Maybe he is crazy. Insanity
is the spice of life! A little bit makes the dish interesting. Too much
makes it inedible. And none makes it bland and hardly worth eating.

Paul and Muttley

(Judith Althouse) spoke these words of wisdom in
:

I have yet to check out the poll on CNN and I really should. I am very
annoyed by the extremely flawed chart they posted. They posted 3
breeds, and the number of fatalaties they were responsible for. Next to
the chart of fatalaties, they posted the same 3 breeds and the number of
maulings they were responsible for. As I previously posted the chart
went back to 1982. I have no idea where they got the chart info from.

I was an owner of Dobes in the late 70's and early 80's and somewhere
during that time period GSD's and Chows topped the list of dogs that had
attacked humans, of course that was partially in fact due to the
popularity of those breeds at the time.

Something else that disturbs me is that for some reason a dog that has
an ounce of Pit Bull in it, though it may be mixed with heaven knows
what is called a Pit Bull which flaws the stats even more.


Be Free.....Judy

Cane Corso, and many other power breeds do get entered into the pitbull
mix, but it's the mossoler breeds that are attracting the bad assed people
who want bad assed dogs.

There are more beagles, more goldens, and more labs than pit bulls, How
come they aren't being targeted as bad breeds? perhaps because they
aren;t doing the damage in the large numbers that the mossoler breeds are?

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 21:20:53 -0000,
"
wrote:

On Aug 23, 3:41 pm, sighthounds & siberians
wrote:
Boy, no kidding. Cross vet off that list - - there are vets who think
greyhounds are 'aggressive' when they come in to have minor skin
wounds stitched up that are the result of the type of play (even
rougher play) that would not leave marks on thicker skinned, heavier
coated dogs. And we know that vets are not behaviorists, so not all
vets will distinguish between dog-aggressive and human-aggressive. As
for kennel owners and shelter staff making those judgments - - forget
it. And all of this assumes that the owners of potentially dangerous
dogs are going to license said dogs and/or have their dogs evaluated
for "dangerous traits".

Mustang Sally

Well, we all know from the "think of the children" card that gets
dropped in about one third of dog attack news stories that dog
aggression is the same as human aggression. I know it was just a
chihuahua/cat, but what if it had been a child... laugh.

Yep. The answer usually is "if it had been a child, nothing would
have happened".

Mustang Sally

"diddy" none wrote in message
. ..

it's this comment from this thread where it appears that you seem to
think
NILIF is harmful


My quoted comment:
But that
is his business. I just want to give his methods a chance to work. Maybe
they aren't new, but I have not found anything quite like them. It seems
like there is just the "old school" Koehler methods, and newer ideas like
reward based training and NILIF.


I didn't say anything was wrong or harmful with this "newer method" of
NILIF, and I didn't even really object to the Koehler methods. I just
wanted to see if JH's method had any merit, and since then I have proven to
my satisfaction that they did not work on Muttley. JH might think they are
harmful, not I.

Paul, Muttley and Lucky

"Paul E. Schoen" spoke these words of wisdom in
:


"diddy" none wrote in message
. ..

it's this comment from this thread where it appears that you seem to
think
NILIF is harmful


My quoted comment:
But that
is his business. I just want to give his methods a chance to work.
Maybe they aren't new, but I have not found anything quite like them.
It seems like there is just the "old school" Koehler methods, and newer
ideas like reward based training and NILIF.


I didn't say anything was wrong or harmful with this "newer method" of
NILIF, and I didn't even really object to the Koehler methods. I just
wanted to see if JH's method had any merit, and since then I have proven
to my satisfaction that they did not work on Muttley. JH might think
they are harmful, not I.

Paul, Muttley and Lucky




Thank you for clarifying that

"Paul E. Schoen" spoke these words of wisdom in
:


"diddy" none wrote in message
. ..

it's this comment from this thread where it appears that you seem to
think
NILIF is harmful


My quoted comment:
But that
is his business. I just want to give his methods a chance to work.
Maybe they aren't new, but I have not found anything quite like them.
Actually that portion of the training is called shaping. It's a commonly
used pmethod of training and it DOES work, if you have the patience and
proper timing. It's not new, and it's not Jerry's.[TM]

There are times it's advantageous to wait for a dog to offer a behavior
and reward it. Then the dog will offer the reward again, hoping for a
reward.

I am shaping a dog to pick up a dumbell, who was nearly ruined at a Sandy
Ludwig seminar. This was a sheltie. The owner came to me after the
seminar in tears. I looked to see what she was upset about, and the dog's
tongue was swollen and bruised.

we decided after that seminar, we would take this slowly and let the dog
volunteer to pick the dumbell. This is painstakingly slow. But i feel
this is the only way we will ever get this dog to retrieve.
'I never attended that seminar, but a whole bunch of people came home from
it, telling tales about the events that occurred, especially with this
particular Sheltie.
There are a whole lot of rave reviews over this person's seminars.

If that were MY sheltie...I'd left there for jail. I'm livid about what
happened to that sheltie, and she's not even mine.

Anyway.. back on topic. There are valueable places for shaping in
training. You already know it doesn't work well with Muttley.

BethInAK wrote:

"Melinda Shore" wrote in message
...
In article ,
elegy wrote:
i still think it's an oversimplification to look specifically at
whether the dog is intact.

To a point. "Is this owner responsible?" is a question with
an analog answer and "Is this dog neutered?" is a question
with a binary, digital answer.

ok, you are a total computer geek, but this is an awesome, simple
analogy. I like it.

Me, too.

On Aug 23, 5:59 pm, "Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...



The problem with increasing licensing requirements is it will probably
just result in an even lower percentage of people in compliance with
local licensing laws. I have heard of some local governments that
believe they only have about 20% compliance with their existing
licensing laws. The fewer people in compliance, the more difficult it
will be to properly enforce existing laws as well as any more laws
they feel like creating. Although it would be more fair than BSL, I
don't really see either as a satisfactory solution to the problem.

Compliance is a separate problem that needs to be dealt with in this case,
as well as many others. People ignore laws all the time, and then complain
when they are caught. How many people drive 10-20 MPH or more over speed
limits? How many drive aggressively or impaired? How many parolees violate
parole? Underage drinking and smoking? Illegal guns? There are all sorts of
violations of law that are done regularly with little or no consequence,
even when caught.


Compliance isn't a separate issue, it is the underlying issue. The
visual problem is that existing dog laws are not enforced by animal
control. Part of why they are not enforced is because with the
resources provided they can not be successfully enforced. You either
must provide more resources or change the system so that it takes
fewer resources to enforce the laws. With higher compliance on the
existing licensing laws, the other laws would be easier to enforce
with the existing resources. How can you verify that people vaccinate
their dog against rabies, if you don't have record of them having a
dog. Instead of banning breeds that have been causing more problems,
use the data collected to do profiled visual inspections of the
immediate vicinity of homes that have those breeds. You can't violate
their privacy, but if they are letting their pit bull/GSD/chow/
doberman/rot/whatever other breed your local government believes poses
the highest risk to run loose in the neighborhood terrorizing local
children you should be able to catch them in the act. With a little
bit of breed profiling you could do targeted enforcement of the
existing laws, and I would wager you would see a decrease in dog
attacks. I know, people don't like profiling, but it sure helps with
enforcement, and if you aren't breaking the laws then you don't have
anything to worry about if animal control happens to spend a little
more time focusing on the area around your house because you own a
certain breed. I'm not talking about random searching houses, just
spending more time focused on the neighborhoods you believe are a
problem.

snip
I don't think my proposed increase in license fees would seriously lower
compliance, at least not here, where they are so low already. I would
gladly pay ten times what I do now, if I knew that rules were better
enforced, and AC were better funded and staffed to care for more dogs, and
protect people from irresponsible pet owners.

Paul, Muttley and Lucky

The key here is you don't THINK. In the make believe world that
exists in your thought, it may work out that way. Yet, in the past
every time I have read about the results of a price increase on dog
licensing, regardless of how small, it results in a decrease in
compliance. You would gladly pay more, but most people with dogs
don't like paying the minimal amount they already pay. Furthermore,
the decrease in compliances frequently causes a decrease in funds
generated through licenses.

Nick

On Aug 23, 8:15 pm, (Judith Althouse) wrote:
I have yet to check out the poll on CNN and I really should. I am very
annoyed by the extremely flawed chart they posted. They posted 3
breeds, and the number of fatalaties they were responsible for. Next to
the chart of fatalaties, they posted the same 3 breeds and the number of
maulings they were responsible for. As I previously posted the chart
went back to 1982. I have no idea where they got the chart info from.

I was an owner of Dobes in the late 70's and early 80's and somewhere
during that time period GSD's and Chows topped the list of dogs that had
attacked humans, of course that was partially in fact due to the
popularity of those breeds at the time.

Something else that disturbs me is that for some reason a dog that has
an ounce of Pit Bull in it, though it may be mixed with heaven knows
what is called a Pit Bull which flaws the stats even more.

Be Free.....Judy

Even dogs that don't have an ounce of pit bull, but would be called
one by the uninformed observer get labeled as such. Their numbers in
the statistics are grossly increased as a result. Part of the reason
I believe the CDC threw out their study of dog bites in relation to
breeds that is the bread and butter of any BSL proponent out there.

Nick