In article ,
Janet Boss wrote:
Ah yes - part of that group that wants to howl with wolves and that
stuff. It's a really good excuse for having an un-trained dog, I have
to give you that! "I don't want to ruin his spirit" (I've heard that
from conformation exhibitors). "I like his "naturalness" and a whole
lot of other BS. Covers up for a lot of laziness.

We had some neighbors like that when I was a kid. They had
a beautiful but completely untrained OES - untrained because
they thought dog training would somehow de-animalize the
dog. That was nearly 40 years ago and I haven't run into
one of those people since. It's disheartening to hear that
some people still think that.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 07:59:39 -0500, montana wildhack
wrote:

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

I can't protect him from every source of harm, and there is
still a lot of "wild dog" in him, that perhaps I even admire.
So I
allow him some independence, and I think he and I have good
communication and trust.

Paul and Muttley

In other words, you won't be training your dog on some really basic
commands. Teaching these commands can be great fun for Muttley and good
for both of you.

But you fabricate some romance about your "wild dog" and think that no
training equals independence.

Many people here have taken in strays that have spent a lot of time on
the streets. Many of these dogs had independent natures. THEIR NATURES
WERE NOT HARMED BY TRAINING.

Even dogs that didn't spend time on the streets can have very
independent natures. Our Tasha was about as independent as they come
as was quite a challenge in obedience class (especially since the
instructor didn't seem to like Siberians, but that's another story).
She was (eventually) very well-behaved and responsive to (most)
commands, and she certainly remained independent to the end of her
life. Tasha was taken to the pound by people who either found her
running loose, as they said, or by people who owned her, depending on
whether you believe their story; the shelter staff didn't, but it
could have been true. So we don't know whether or not she spent much
if any time on the streets - we do know that she hadn't been an inside
dog - but I can't imagine a much more independent dog. I admired her
independence along with most everything else about her, but I wouldn't
admire wildness in a dog living in my house.

Mustang Sally

HOWEDY racetrack silly you pathetic miserable stinkin rotten
lyin animal murderin punk thug coward active accute chronic
life long incurable malignant maliciHOWES mental case,

"sighthounds & siberians" wrote in message news:
...
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 07:59:39 -0500, montana wildhack
wrote:

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

I can't protect him from every source of harm, and there is
still a lot of "wild dog" in him, that perhaps I even admire.
So I allow him some independence, and I think he and I have
good communication and trust.

Paul and Muttley

In other words, you won't be training your dog on some really
basic commands. Teaching these commands can be great fun
for Muttley and good for both of you.

But you fabricate some romance about your "wild dog" and
think that no training equals independence.

Many people here have taken in strays that have spent a lot
of time on the streets. Many of these dogs had independent
natures. THEIR NATURES WERE NOT HARMED BY TRAINING.

Even dogs that didn't spend time on the streets can have very
independent natures. Our Tasha was about as independent as they come
as was quite a challenge in obedience class (especially since the
instructor didn't seem to like Siberians, but that's another story).

She was (eventually) very well-behaved and responsive to (most)
commands, and she certainly remained independent to the end of her
life. Tasha was taken to the pound by people who either found her
running loose, as they said, or by people who owned her, depending on
whether you believe their story; the shelter staff didn't, but it
could have been true. So we don't know whether or not she spent much
if any time on the streets - we do know that she hadn't been an inside
dog - but I can't imagine a much more independent dog. I admired her
independence along with most everything else about her, but I wouldn't
admire wildness in a dog living in my house.

Mustang Sally

Oh, you mean, LIKE THIS?:

"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.

Either she was going to kill Tasha, my Siberian with the rock steady
temperament, or Tasha was going to kill her, right in front of us.
My
DH's first dog, and still the canine love of his life.

Good thing that Gwen is perfect in her stewardship of her
animals.

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

Gwen didn't murder her own dog. You and Tara O. did.

michael
live..
dogtv.comn

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

I turned 50 this year, and being postmenopausal I definitely am
noticing all kinds of memory deficits (losing one's train of thought
right in the middle of a sentence is so embarassing), but I'm still
pretty happy about it.

Anyway, your memory loss just means I get to tell one of my favorite
stories again. Matty got out of the fenced yard about 5 years ago,
when adult ADD DH varied his routine and went inside before closing
the gate (at that time the gate was across the driveway), promptly
forgot that he hadn't closed the gate, and let the dogs out.

Matty wasn't particularly prone to trying to escape, and we've never
discussed exactly how/why he went out of the gate, but I suspect DH
yelled for a dog or two to come back and Matty the spook got spooked.
It was a Tuesday evening and DH drove around looking for him, as did
I
when I got home from work, but that's pretty useless when a greyhound
gets loose - they tend to stay within a mile or so of home, or they
take off and end up miles away in very short order.

DH made posters the next morning and we got some help and
plastered them all over town and all over the town to the north,
about 5 miles away, which is an old resort town that had just
closed for the season and was fairly deserted.

By that afternoon we were getting calls on sightings, and a
couple of times DH saw Matty but Matty was so spooked he ran.

Long story shortened, the police in the neighboring town called on
Thursday morning and said they'd just seen Matty and would wait
there to show us where he'd been seen before heading into the woods.

I stayed by the phone and DH said something told him to take Tasha.
The police showed him where Matty had been, DH told Tasha to find
Matty, she put her Siberian nose to the ground, and off she went. DH
figured she thought it was just a grand adventure, but Matty had been
seen there, so he had nothing to lose.

A couple of times she seemed to want to plunge into some brush
where DH couldn't follow. After about 10 minutes of walking,
Tasha stuck her head into some brush and Matty's head popped out.

DH sat on the ground while the dogs talked - - Matty was very
skittish - - and after 5 minutes or so asked Matty if he was
ready to go home. Tasha very likely saved Matty's life, as he would
not have approached us, let alone a stranger, or let anyone approach
him. If she hadn't found him, we'd have had to trap him somehow.
Needless to say, Tasha had never had any training at tracking.

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.

"Sally Hennessey" wrote in message news:
...
Nope. No more than you'd convince Patch that
prongs and e-collars, in the right hands, are not
intrinsically abusive; or that dogs trained properly
with prongs or e-collars are not fearful, in pain, or
intimidated; or that any one of us here knows our
own dogs and their reactions better than someone
who has never seen them or us...hmmm.

I'm starting to see some similarities here.
Sally Hennessey

Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 13:23:46 +0100
Local: Mon, Apr 9 2001 5:23 am
Subject: shock collars

Sally Hennessey wrote in message
...
Aside from being incredibly offensive and self-righteous,
this post shows and absence of knowledge in the differences
in dogs' temperaments, or perhaps a lack of ability to perceive
same. The fact that you, Alison, have never met a dog to whom
corrections and discomfort, even pain, were unimportant does
not mean that such dogs do not exist.

What it means is that you don't know as much about dogs
as you think you do, and you surely don't know a damn
thing about Harlan or anyone else's dog here.

I had a Dalmatian that would instigate fights with one
of her housemates; that dog had no fear or anything,
and pain incurred during a fight meant nothing to her.

I know that that dog is not unique, and I'm sure many
people here can tell similar stories. The fact that you,
Alison, continue to say things to people such as what
you said to Theresa about causing her dog to suffer
(at least I guess that's what you meant by "you cause
your dog suffers" - - must be the King's English you
guys talk about over there) means that you are an
ignorant, arrogant, insensitive person who is not worth
further notice.
Sally Hennessey

From: sighthounds etc.
Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 10:34:47 -0400
Subject: Another Rebellion Stage?

On Wed, 29 May 2002 09:03:13 -0500, Gwen Watson
wrote:

"sighthounds etc." wrote:IMO it is unwise (and
ultimately unfair to the dog) to leave something
as important (particularly to a breed like a BC)
as exercise and training to someone else (yes,
even a spouse, or perhaps especially a spouse)
unless there is proof, in the form of experience,
that that someone else will come through.
Sally Hennessey

I mostly agree with you Sally about this. Certainly it is
ideal for the person who owns the dog to be the
one exercising and giving mental stimulation. But there
are times in which a person is not physically able, which
apparently seems to be the case, at that point I personally
think it would be better to find another individual to help
out rather than not doing anything at all.

It's true that circumstances do change, and people
can't do what they could before. Definitely it would
be better for someone to exercise the dog than no
one, and I didn't mean to suggest that if the owner
can't do it, then no one should. I meant that one
should not get a dog requiring lots of exercise and
mental stimulation if one cannot meet those needs.

IOW, Leah shouldn't have gotten a BC with the
understanding that her husband would take care
of the exercise and training needs.

However, Leah said that it was actually her husband
who wanted a BC, and he promised to exercise and
train her. I guess it depends on one's experience;

IME, I'm the one doing the training, so next time my
DH wants a Dalmatian and promises to train it, I won't
believe him.

Sally Hennessey

"My spayed Siberian bitch marks and covers all
over the place, as did my spayed Dalmatian bitch.
The Borzoi doesn't, but she is *extremely* submissive."

Sally Hennessey

"Oops, hit "send" too fast. Of course bitches in
season are advertising, so that type of behavior
might be typical of Murphy. And some folks think
that spaying actually increases dominant/aggressive
behavior in bitches that were dominant/aggressive
beforehand, so perhaps marking behavior also
increases in those bitches."

Sally Hennessey

I didn't mean to suggest that we don't love our
poop-eaters; of course, we do. If we were on
that show (The Secret Shame...), we would be
seen frantically dodging leaping Whippets trying
to plant kisses as close as possible to our mouths.

And I will admit that the night Robin barfed up poop,
he spent the night in his crate, not in bed with us.

Just couldn't chance a recurrence.

Sally Hennessey

Sighthounds etc." wrote in message news:
...
Dalmatian that would position himself behind
the Greyhounds and catch...Being a Dal, he
was sometimes a little harder to love to begin
with.

"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."

From
Date: Tues, May 24 2005 3:06 am

Sighthounds & siberians wrote:
On 23 May 2005 10:41:59 -0700,
wrote:

HOWEDY racetrack silly,
sighthounds & siberians wrote:
On 21 May 2005 19:23:51 -0700, wrote:

major snippage

I'm neither a trainer nor an expert,

RIGHT. But you ARE a mentally ill lying
dog abusing punk thug coward and president
of the GH RESCUE that MURDERS 66% of their
RESCUE dogs.

Are you reading this, Lucy? The above is a flat-out lie.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...ior/msg/b51f2b...

It probably wouldn't hurt, and a dose of reality might be helpful,
too. I'm president of the board of our local shelter. The new board
has almost succeeded in pulling the APL out of financial ruin, and
very soon now we'll be able to turn our attention to making
improvements in our shelter, increasing adoptions, etc. We are in
the
largest county in our state, and it's also one of the poorest. We
take in around 3,000 animals a year and euthanize two-thirds of
them.

Nope. No lie. Two thirds=66%. Actually, closer to 67%. IS that really
what "rescue" means, Sally? Killing 2 out of every 3 dogs one
"rescues"?

Geeez!

Does that matter to you at all, or is it OK for Jerry to make
up whatever **** he wants to 'support' his lunatic claims?

What exactly was "made up" by Jerry, then? The part about your
"mental
illness"? Why, you call him "lunatic", so you're both even on that.

Though I still can't help wondering how "sane" someone who loves dogs
can be when running a shelter that puts down two thirds of the dogs
it
"rescues".

Mustang Sally (disgusted)

Lucy (likewise)

From: sighthounds etc.
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:08:30 -0500
Subject: Melinda/Sally

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:45:21 GMT, Suja wrote:
Gwen Watson wrote:
The family is giving the dog up because apparently
he killed the next door neighbors cat. Out of respect
to the next door neighbors these people have chosen
to find new home for their malamute. It is really
very sad story they have told. For one IMO it
is the neighbors fault that their cat got into Miko's
yard and was killed.

I don't get it. How is it the dog's fault that a furry critter that got
into his yard got killed? If I were in these people's shoes, I would
very politely request that the neighbors keep their animals off my
property, but that's just me.

That's what I would do too. There have been a number of cats killed
here in our yard, by sighthounds or Siberians or a combination of the
above. They are apparently strays (our neighbor two doors down feeds
the stray cats, putting the food in the yard between us, what a good
idea). I don't like it at all, as we love cats and have indoor cats
(which our dogs are fine with), but I can't prevent it and it's not
our fault or our dogs' fault.

Though I can also understand
the situation in some ways. Pretty rotten deal. I also
wasn't aware that Malamute rescue is so full. Seems
as bad as GSD and Lab rescue. Pretty sad.

All the rescues are always full, Gwen. The problem with Malamute rescue
isn't that there is an overwhelming number of dogs like there is with
Labs and GSDs (271 as opposed to the thousands), but there are very few
homes that are suitable for them. The local Mal rescue person was
telling me that their rescue is basically run by 7 or 8 volunteers, and
they end up turning down 1/2 to 2/3rds of the applicants. They have
anywhere between 2 to 12 dogs in rescue at one time. They don't do
adoption days (where the dogs are displayed in PetsMart or some such),
because every single person who sees one of these dogs wants to go home
with them without realizing what they're getting themselves into.

Same situation with Sibes, but even more people
want those pretty fluffy dogs with blue eyes.

Sally Hennessey

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

From: sionnach )
Subject: Correct use of prong collar
Date: 2001-05-05 13:03:14 PST

And Sally responded:
Who said that? I would never do or recommend
that, and neither would most of the regulars on here.
Sally Hennessey

I've posted my entire quote, since Patch failed to do so.
Take it out of context and you'd think I was flinging puppies
across the room!
here's what I said (keep in mind that we're talking about a
12 week old ~25# FCR puppy):

A small scruff shake is appropriate if he's
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^*^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
very persistant.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Um, may I suggest a re-wording that might make
it clearer- given that "scruff shake" is too easily
misinterpreted as "pick the puppy up by the scruff
of the neck and shake the puppy in the air"?

I think I'd phrase it something like "if the puppy is very
persistant, it can be appropriate to take hold of the
loose skin at the back of the neck and give a slight
shake to the *skin*".

Janet's not talking about actually shaking
the puppy, which I think we ALL agree is
abusive."

Aggression, Opposition And Allelomimetic Behavior -
Teaching RESPECT For Your HIGHER INTELLIGENCE -
"BAD DOG ALWAYS WORKS!!!"

Here's professor SCRUFF SHAKE:

Mine will go "bonkers" if he has been exercise deprived.

From: Marshall Dermer )
Subject: new puppy bitting/chewing hands
Date: 1999/07/05

In article
976F54CA8C2C77AB.9DF245927D0DAB8B.90BA464FE454E..

Jason writes:
:
I would assume that all puppies like to bite and chew
on just about anything. How do you train a young
puppy NOT to chew on hands and feet? Although
there is a time and place for saying 'no' and giving
the dog a scruff shake I do no know if this is appropriate
at this age.

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.

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).

My dog is about 1.5 years old. "No" is usually
sufficient but sometimes I use "Bad Dog" to
stop a behavior.

"Bad Dog" ALWAYS works.

then, of course, quickly say "Good Dog" when
he is appropriately behaving.

In providing verbal punishment and reinforcement
as in using nonverbal punishement and reinforcement,
timing is very important.

Use these consquences to control behavior much
as in the game where a child is told "your getting hot"
or "your getting cold." If the delay between the behavior
and the consquence is too long then the behavior will
not appropriately change.

--Marshall

In article ,
sighthounds & siberians wrote:
I admired her
independence along with most everything else about her, but I wouldn't
admire wildness in a dog living in my house.

I think there are a few breeds that behave so badly without
training that they'd cure those "EMBRACE THE *WILD*!" people
pretty quickly, and Tasha was one of them. Those folks need
to experience their dog digging a hole in their living room
sofa, chewing all their shoes, and burrowing through their
drywall.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

(Melinda Shore) wrote in news:flr7k1$mkf$1
@panix3.panix.com:

Those folks need
to experience their dog digging a hole in their living room
sofa, chewing all their shoes, and burrowing through their
drywall.

Oh, hey! I've BTDT! It wasn't to do with lack of training or
wildness, but I think I'm qualified to say that such behavior is NOT
SO CHARMING.

Also, you forgot breaking windows, pulling doors off their hinges,
and removing baseboards.

--
Shelly
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

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


"Judith Althouse" wrote in message
...
Paul said in part....
Especially, when I walk Muttley in the spooky woods late at night, I am
glad to have him along. Sometimes my flashlight catches the
yellow-orange eyes of some creature, and I may see them blink and
disappear.................
______________________
Paul,
Oooh, I don't think I could go walking at night, probably because I
would fall on my ass if the mosquitos didn't eat me alive. Except for
the yucky "parts" Muttley comes up with, it sounds like beautiful woods
to be walking in. Maybe a Bob-Cat out there?

I think it is most likely a large fox. There are several foxholes along
the trails where I usually walk Muttley, but not near the places where I
saw the glowing eyes, which was close to the road. I have seen a rather
large fox walking along the road near where I had the nocturnal
encounters with the watchful eyes, so that would be my guess. I once saw
what appeared to be a large tan cat, and it's possible that it could
have been a bobcat.

At night, I stay on the dirt road and trails that are close to Warren
Road, but sometimes I will venture up to the meadow on top of the hill,
especially when the moon is full, or when the sky is clear and full of
stars. It is a good vantage point to observe meteors, or just to enjoy
being out in nature. I feel much safer in my woods at 2 AM than I would
walking around the shopping center or apartments just 1/2 mile up the
road. There is more to fear from humans than wild animals. As was said
in "Animal Farm", "four legs good, two legs bad".

Paul and the MuttMeister



Or more likely a coyote. That is not fox behavior, and fox are not large,
they are about the size of a large housecat. There is no such thing as a
LARGE FOX

This animal was perhaps 20-30 pounds and maybe three feet long. I often see
foxes run across the road, especially at night, but they seem very shy and
I rarely get a good look at them. The creature I saw was walking slowly by
the side of the road, and looked like a fox, but was about twice as big as
most I have seen, and was mostly gray, rather than the reddish color I have
seen on foxes. It did not look like any dog I have ever seen, and I only
saw what was probably a coyote at a distance, at night, from the porch of
the Wauwona hotel in Yosemite about 5 years ago. I don't know of any coyote
sightings around here, but I am adjacent to the Loch Raven Watershed, which
is large enough to support larger animals. Maybe my friend at AC can inform
me if coyotes have been seen in this area.

This picture
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...te_arizona.jpg looks
a little bit like the animal I saw. The face and bushy tail are vaguely
foxlike, and I did not get a really good look while I was driving. Yes,
more likely a coyote.

Paul and Muttley

"Paul E. Schoen" wrote in
:

looked like a
fox, but was about twice as big as most I have seen, and was
mostly gray, rather than the reddish color I have seen on foxes.

Grey foxes tend to live in more heavily wooded areas than red foxes.
A coyote may be more likely, depending on the local habitat. We have
all three around here (red and grey foxes and coyotes). Strangely,
I've seen more foxes in town than I did out in the country, though I
saw them there, too. There seem to be quite a few of them around
campus, both red and grey.

--
Shelly
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

"Shelly" wrote in message
...
"Paul E. Schoen" wrote in
:

looked like a
fox, but was about twice as big as most I have seen, and was
mostly gray, rather than the reddish color I have seen on foxes.

Grey foxes tend to live in more heavily wooded areas than red foxes.
A coyote may be more likely, depending on the local habitat. We have
all three around here (red and grey foxes and coyotes). Strangely,
I've seen more foxes in town than I did out in the country, though I
saw them there, too. There seem to be quite a few of them around
campus, both red and grey.

Here's another nice photo of a coyote, courtesy NPS:

http://www.nps.gov/archive/yell/slid...ages/00051.jpg

The narrow snout is rather fox-like.

Here are many more nice pictures:

http://www.nps.gov/archive/yell/slid...oyote/page.htm

I'll have to warn my neighbor, who has a tiny $1000 dog named "Bug", and
some young girls who like to play in the woods. I think he needs a Muttley
to go with them as protection.

Paul and Coyote-buster Muttley

"Paul E. Schoen" wrote in
:

Here are many more nice pictures:

http://www.nps.gov/archive/yell/slid...oyote/page.htm

Thanks, but I've seen plenty of coyotes.

I'll have to warn my neighbor, who has a tiny $1000 dog named
"Bug", and some young girls who like to play in the woods. I think
he needs a Muttley to go with them as protection.

The kids aren't playing in the woods at night, surely?

--
Shelly
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

Not all dogs are too dumb to eat sharp bones without injuring themselves. I
have a dog which seems to eat slowly and carefully enough not to swallow
sharp edged bones.
Some dogs just frantically wolf down their food without caution (often due
to abuse or neglect by humans)and they are the ones who are likely to injure
themselves. As owner, you should know your dog and it's proclivities. I saw
a female pit bull eat a plastic teaspoon, without ever showing so much as a
burp. Dog is alive and well three years later. Now that this pit bull has
been removed from her neglecting caretaker and is fed regularly, she no
longer gobbles her food recklessly. It is probably save for her to eat
something with bones now, but I would definitely start with uncooked safe
bones and make sure. In fact, it is probably best to never give cooked
poultry bones to a dog, why take a chance- just give the dog safer bones.
Mike.
"Paul E. Schoen" wrote in message
...

"Shelly" wrote in message
...
Janet Boss wrote in
:

Nah - be honest - you were afraid of being BITTEN. Teach him DROP
IT. It could be a lifesaver.

Yes. But in this situation, "leave it" would have been even better.
I wouldn't have let Harriet pick up something like that in the first
place, much less allowed her to keep it. But, then, I've seen a dog
I cared about die from perforated intestines, and I don't intend to
ever to it again, if there's anything I can do to keep it from
happening.

I also wouldn't keep a dog in my home whose mouth I couldn't take
things out of. Even disgusting, tasty things like bones.

I can take things out of Muttley's mouth without worrying that he will
bite me, but from experience I know that he will just try to hold onto it
or will eat it more quickly, which is not a good thing. I believe that is
what happened with Diddy's dog Tuck.

Of course, "leave it" or "drop it" are best, or avoiding the situation to
start with, but there are always new things to find, hidden under leaves
and underbrush in the woods. I think much of the problem with bones is how
the dog eats them. Muttley seems to chew them thoroughly.

Paul and Muttley