HOWEDY Dr. Von,
<drvonh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:9bdbe60e-c15a-498a-883d-9a63000d560e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> It is bad enough to read the perverted values of the dog
> abusers and dog killers who post their manaical slaverings
> encouraging more mayhem upon animals;
Oh, you mean on accHOWENTA I sent you THIS?:
From: "TheSimplyAmazingPuppyWizard @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
thesimplyamazingpuppywizard@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<drvonh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 1:38 AM
Subject: You Might Enjoy This
Subject: Re: How to deal with a jumping dog
"Rocky" <3dogs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:Fri9B14DB46D75C8australianshepherdca@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "SteveB" toquerville@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said in rec.pets.dogs.health:
> [followups to rpd.behavior]
>
>> There are some things that dogs need to be corrected for.
>> And punished.
>
> Please explain how you interpret the difference between
> correction and punishment.
>
> For additional points, provide personal examples which
> differentiate your application of positive and negative
> punishment as it applies to deceasing an unwanted behaviour.
> --
> --Matt. Rocky's a Dog.
What are you doing sending out idiot's drool at 1:38 AM.
Punishment always deranges behavior; this fact has been
proved more than the idea that reward is the best way to
guide behavior.
So what did the expert say needed to be corrected
(punished) and what evidence? GvH
=============
Sorry abHOWET that, Doc <{}: ~ ( >
HOWEver, we was talkin abHOWET kneeing dogs in
the chest to EXXXTINGUISH jumping on people, a
BONDING behavior.
LIKE THIS:
Here's pathetic miserable stinkin rotten lyin anonymHOWES
coward, not so handsome, not so gentle, not so manly, not so
happy jackass, not even morrison aka dogman a.k.a. BIG
DADDY, a.k.a. tommy sorenson:
"I don't know how big you are, kiddo, so this may
not be as easy for you as it is for me, but use a little
"knee action," that is, as the dog goes charging by
you, just give the dog a little bop with your knee
and ****n.
Yep, really lean into it.
Even knock her over, if you can, but make sure to
make her think twice about ru****ng past you again -
- which is exactly what you want her to do.
Don't bother with scolding her, she'll get the message.
If it happens again, just REPEAT the knee action.
When she steps on your toes, just pick up your foot
abruptly and ****ge her with your knee. Again, no
scolding is necessary here, so you don't have to
worry about her "over-reacting."
I don't think this is necessarily a lack of respect
for you, just a lack of training. That is, she just
needs *more* of it."
-----------------------
BINACA beth's "trainer" BROKE HER OWN DOG'S RIBS doin that.
LIKE THIS:
"SteveB" <toquerville@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:9cdip5-met1.ln1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
break a dog by timing a knee to the chest or a ****n to
the chest at the moment he jumps up on me. Usually,
it just startles the dog, and causes him to bounce back
a bit.
At the same time, I say a sharp "NO". I will admit that at
times, I have thrown a dog right over on a 3/4 flip with them
landing on their backs. These are the dogs that it usually only
takes once to break.
I immediately bend at the knees and squat down and praise
and pet the dog, teaching them that I will bend down to pet
them, and they don't have to jump up to get petted. After
that, when I see them, I greet them that way, and they will
stay down until you pet them.
Most dogs go away after that, the doggie equivalent of
scratch and sniff greeting.
Sorry I was ambiguous about it, but I know some do not
agree with this technique. To those people, all I can say
is that Skippy ain't about to paw my $100 slacks, thank
you very much.
I have a pound rescue Rott/Lab that is the biggest *****cat
in the world. She must have been a guard dog or guide dog
in another life because she is totally trained, and won't even
eat unless given permission.
I believe she could and would do some damage if danger
actually occurred. We've lessened her rigidity, but she
still sticks to her training at times. She has never once
jumped up on me.
Now, if I could only break her of the doggy handshake
........... (nose to crotch and then the swift lifting of the
nose). My corgi is as hardheaded as any corgi, but he
doesn't jump up either.
Steve
------------------
And this is JEST FOR FUN~!:
"Loop the lead (it's basically a GIANT nylon or leather
choke collar) over his snarly little head, and give him a
stern correction" --Janet Boss
Here's paulie's CUSTOME MADE pronged spiked pinch choke collar:
http://tinyurl.com/5m6ppt
"J1Boss" <j1b...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:20040324071828.07753.00000001@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
He was next to me and I could see his neck
muscles pulsing. He didn't even blink an eye.
Janet Boss
"sionnach" <rhyfe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:c3qi15$2biuoh$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "J1Boss" <j1b...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:20040323173916.10096.00001938@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I can't imagine needing anything higher
> > than a 5 with it, even with an insensitive
> > dog like a Lab.
An INSENSITIVE DOG???
> > I can't remember what model of Innotek I have, but
> > I had a pointer ignore a neck-muscle-pulsing 9.
Do you think the citronella collar is CRUEL
cause the SMELL LINGERS after the dog's
been sprayed in the face and the dog won't
know HOWE COME IT was MACED?
janet CONtinues:
> > My dogs are not human children wearing fur- they are DOGS.
> > I don't have anything against electronic bark collars, but they
> > should be used in conjunction with actually working at training
> > your dog(s).
They're DUMB ANIMALS these MENTALLY ILL LYING
DOG ABUSERS HURT INTIMIDATE and MURDER.
-------------------
LIKE THIS:
Here's janet's REAL LIFE IN PERSON "student" paul:
#2 - 6/05/07
>> When I was training him under Janet's supervision I
>> was instructed to give it a ? firm yank as a correction.
> I advised you to use a prong collar, not give firm yanks
> on a chain choke collar. I hate the things.
>> She was able to get his attention with just a quick tug, but I
>> had to yank on it hard enough to lift him off his feet to get him
>> to respond.
>
>> Looking back now, I think it was based on his fear, which he
>> had for her (as an unknown), but not for me (whom he had
>> learned to trust).
> He wasn't afraid of me. He knew I was a confident trainer.
> Fear has no place in dog training, as I told you THEN.
> Janet.
It seems to me that applying stern corrections, by
popping a choker chain, prong collar, or whatever,
is a way to ensure compliance by instilling a fear
of further punishment.
Sure, if it is administered very consistently
by a confident trainer, the dog soon learns
to obey. There was no positive reinforcement,
so what remains is negative.
Also, I recall the time you were going to show me
how I could get Muttley to take his rawhide treat
from me without lunging for it. When you offered
it to him, he refused to take it. This IMHO is likely
a fear behavior.
Things have changed a lot since then, and I have
learned a lot, and Muttley has settled down quite
a bit. I probably still give him too much freedom
to think on his own, but that's just my way of
doing things, and that's probably not going to
change much. He may never win an obedience
medal, but I don't think he is dangerously out
of control, either.
Paul and Muttley
"I thought I was told that the way to get the dog to go
down was to make him sit and then step on the leash.
That was awkward and didn't seem to work.
I will confess that I only tried the "down" position
once or twice at home, and I also often used it
instead of "Off" when I wanted him to stop
jumping on me or elsewhere I didn't want him to be.
I had to give him corrections every few seconds,
and also just about kick him, to keep him at my
left side.
Muttley is really a very sweet and loving dog, but
he needs more socialization with other dogs. However,
it is very likely that I will have him put down in a week."
Subject: Muttley: Now a question of Life or Death
"Paul E. Schoen" <pst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
It is a shame that Muttley will probably be put
down (his appointment is next Wednesday),
-----------------------
THAT'S quite a SUCCESS STORY, ain't it <{}: ~ ( >
BWEEEAAAHAAAHAAA~!~!~!
HERE'S HOWE COME:
Subject: Re: redirected aggression
Date: 4/11/07
"Janet Boss" <ja...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:janet-730AB8.17321511042007@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
seems I have been dealing with this a bit lately.
Dog to dog and dog to person,, with dogs who are
obviously overstimulated by what's in front of them.
What's in front of them varies from people at the door
to dogs in their path or directly in their face. The dogs
in question all have very poor self control.
I have dog(s) with not-so-great-natural self control,
so it's something we constantly work on. We don't
have redirected stuff going on, because we have enough
obedience to avoid it.
While I know that's the big answer for the dogs in
question as well, I'm curious what things people have
found useful to redirect/focus/gain attention from
drivey dogs or just very distracted of over-the-top dogs.
We're having success with my recommendations, but I'm
always open to something novel that may be the hot ticket.
--
Janet Boss
www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com
BWEEEAAAHAHAHAHAAAA~!~!~!
SEE?
Dr. Von continues:
> but now I read one of them calling Jerry Howe unctuous.
>
> I have not yet been able to afford the Oxford English Dictionary -
> just think of it 20 volumes, 5 boxes of books all summing to 150
> pounds. Poor postman!
>
> However, I do have 46.5 pounds of dictionary,
>
> 1. my workhorse Merriam Webster Collegiate
> 1559 pages (small print, fits in one hand).
> 2. New Century, in two vol, 2831pages;
> 3. Webster's New Twentieth Century; (World Pub), 2129pp plus 160
> separately numbered special section pages, and 18 pages of colored
> maps.
> Wow.
> 4. The Oxford Universal Dictionary, 2515 pages
> 6, Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, 1728
> pages
> 5. the Random House Webster's, 2229 pages which prints,
>
> unctuous p 2058, 1. characterized by excessive piousness or
> moralistic fervor, esp. in an affected manner; excessively smooth,
> suave, or smug.
>
> in short, an Uriah Heep (see Dicken's "David Copperfield").
>
> The New World says 5.characterized by a smug, smooth pretense
> of spiritual feeling, fervor or earnestness - too suave, bland or oily.
>
> Jerry might accurately be called a gadfly, never "smooth", BLAND!!!,
> or suave, possibly smug, surely rough, even vicious, but then when
> typing about folk who pretend to know how to train dogs, and who
> ignore fundamental psychological principles, centuries of evidence,
> and common sense, fervor is demanded.
>
> If anyone in the world is not "unctuous" it is the scrawny, angular,
> grumpy, gnarly, bumptious basher of animal torturers, Jerry Howe.
>
> He's watched me eat lunch and shared a Yngling or two with me
> once a week since 2001. I know he's rough, sometimes I keep him
> in a burlap sack so I won't get kicked out of Molly Malone's.
>
> Yngling is the name of the family which owns a beer business;
> but is also the name of a Warrior Christ figure in Nordic myth
> who batters the ungodly. John Dalmas wrote a series of Yngling
> books of fantasy history.
>
> Yngling is also a class of sailing boat. I'm hoping the
> Yngling beer will transform Jerry into the hero who
> slays all the monsters who abuse animals, especially dogs.
>
> May I remind you that one abuser on this list once
> said that I was merely a figment of Jerry's imagination.
>
> Pfui.
>
> You can find me in Who's Who in America, WW in Science
> and Engineering, WW in Medicine and Health Care, and WW
> in the World - these are all Marquis Publications, not vanity lists.
> I was first put into Who's Who in South and SWest America in 1982.
>
> George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H. etc.
HOWEDY Dr. von Alzheimer,
> Jerry, for some stupid reason this loaded,
> but now I can't make it work.
Have you been tested for aphasia?
Are you taking anti-psychotic medications?
Suffering from malacca *(Greek: crazy from self abuse) <{}: ~ ( >
Suffering from lackanookie *(Hawaiian: lackanookie) <{}: ~ ( >
> Would you be so kind as to send me "Dogman"s
> letter in which he calls you "unctuous".
Oh? HOWE COME do you want to PUNISH yourself so??
I think you meant another post so I'll copy the
"unctuous" comment by Robert Crim in a discussion
with dogman after he murdered his WONder Dog, Fritz,
and the other post which I think you meant to cite
dogman where you called him a "pompous" to the bottom
of this page <{}'; ~ ) >
> Thanks. Dr. Von Hammerhead
I suggest you keep a vomit bag handy <{}: ~ ( >
----- Original Message -----
From: "TheSimplyAmazingPuppyWizard @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
<thesimplyamazingpuppywizard@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
To: <drvonh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 9:54 AM
Subject: You Might Enjoy This:
HOWEDY Dr. Von,
Talkin abHOWET F.U.B.A.R~!
Each of the posters replying to SteveB are
lyin dog abusin obfuscationists:
Here's three posts from the thread:
<Link:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.pets.dogs.behavior/browse_frm/thread/a7f4ad64de4e6de3#>
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.pets.dogs.behavior/browse_frm/thread/a7f4ad64de4e6de3#
Subject: Re: How to deal with a jumping dog
"(null)" <diannes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message news
:48c74840$0$17194$742ec2ed@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<novalidaddy@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> When I want to correct my dog, I try to show
> him that what he/she has done displeases me.
> I can withdraw attention,
Negative punishment.
> not pet them,
Negative punishment.
> talk them in a low voice,
Can't tell how you're using this without more information here.
> or just walk away.
Negative punishment.
> Positive and negative punishments cancel each
> other with no matter left over for discussion.
Um, no. Punishment (either positive or negative) by
definition is anything that decreases a behavior.
Reinforcement (either positive or negative) is anything
that increases a behavior. (Those are the four quadrants
of which I spoke earlier, for what it's worth.)
So we've heard a little from you about how you train
your dogs to NOT do behaviors. What behaviors have you
trained a dog to do, and how did you train them?
Dianne
-----------------------
"Robin Nuttall" <robinjn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:nyGxk.335548$yE1.88973@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> SteveB wrote:
>
>>
>> Bring me up to date. What's the current way?
>> Negotiate?
>> Take the dog to self esteem cl*****?
>>
>> I'm interested in hearing new things.
>
> Though I know you're being sarcastic and probably
> don't care to learn, there are indeed many more
> effective ways to deal with a jumping up dog than
> a knee to the chest.
>
> First let's look at why a knee to the chest often
> doesn't work. To do a "proper" knee in the chest
> you have to be fast, you have to be accurate, and
> unfortunately you can actually severely hurt a dog
> if you knee them hard enough.
>
> Second, the knee to the chest teaches the dog that
> getting near you can hurt. It doesn't necessarily
> teach them not to jump up. It just teaches them to
> fear you. There's no need to do this to get the dog
> to not jump up. All you need to do is outthink the dog.
>
> Dogs jump up because they are rewarded for jumping
> up with attention. B.F. Skinner proved that behaviors
> that are ignored or which do not result in the desired
> reward are not repeated.
>
> Dogs are always working for the reward. Therefore,
> the most effective way to stop jumping up is to
> stand up tall, cross your arms, look away, and
> actually turn your back on the jumping dog.
>
> Totally withdraw your attention. Then when the dog's
> four feet are on the ground, bend down, make a happy
> face and cheerful voice and praise.
>
> At first the dog is likely to immediately jump up again.
> At which time you again stand tall, turn your back, fold
> your arms, and refuse to look at the dog.
>
> With just a few repeats, the dog will learn for himself,
> without you hurting him, that jumping up is counter
> productive to what he wants and keeping all four feet on
> the floor gets him what he wants. Problem solved without
> pain and possible injury to the dog.
Alas, there ARE reasonable people here.
Thank you. I shall try this on new problem pets.
Steve
-------------------
"Rocky" <3dogs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
"SteveB" <toquerville@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said in
rec.pets.dogs.health:
[followups to rpd.behavior]
> There are some things that dogs need to be corrected for.
> And punished.
Please explain how you interpret the difference between
correction and punishment.
For additional points, provide personal examples which
differentiate your application of positive and negative
punishment as it applies to deceasing an unwanted behaviour.
-------------------
And here's your comments on a discussion from
long ago to the same "diannes" and Professional
Trainer and Author LeeCharlesKelley:
From: "The Puppy Wizard" <ThePuppyWiz...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
To: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 4:40 AM
Subject: Fw: Counter Cruising must stop
> From: "diannes" <dian...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Newsgroups: rec.pets.dogs.behavior
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 12:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Counter Cruising must stop
> > LeeCharlesKelley <kelleymet...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > I wrote:
> > > > LeeCharlesKelley <kelleymet...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > On another note: I understand why someone
> > > > > proclaiming a method that works on all dogs,
> > > > > all the time, would send up "red flag" to you
> > > > > and others, but the fact remains, if a technique
> > > > > *doesn't* work 100% of the time, with all dogs,
> > > > > then there must be a flaw in the philosophy
> > > > > underlying that technique.
>
> > > > Ditto for dog training. No failure nor flaw of method
> > > > is involved - that's just acceptance of reality.
>
> > > First of all, I didn't say that there was a flaw in the
> > > method, though anyone is welcome to make that
> > > leap.
>
> > > I said there was a flaw in the underlying philosophy
> > > and its model of learning.
>
> > Correction accepted. I think that perhaps we are using
> > terminology differently here. Here is my use of the terms:
Jerry, I don't know where you find these folk who can't read.
> In order to use negative reinforcement, one must
> typically administer the aversive stimulus in order
> to be able to terminate it.
This is not negative reinforcement. Negative means no.
Positive reinforcement = behavior emitted by dog,
reward emitted immediately by trainer;
Negative reinforcement = behavior emitted by dog,
no response by trainer;
Aversive reinforcement = behavior emitted by dog,
aversive stimuli emitted immediately by trainer;
The term "reinforcement is used only tentatively with
"aversion" because aversive stimuli (aka punishment)
typically derange learning and are not followed by clean
learning curves equivalent to those which follow reward
or positive reinforcement;
Escape conditioning = dog has an aversive stimulus
applied without any dog related reason and when
behavior is emitted aversive stim is immediately turned off .
There is some indication that Escape Conditioning
works in a manner closely approximating reward;
but, ear pinch? -- too aversive.
I remind you that you should beat them over the head
with "The Misbehavior of Organisms" by Breland and
Breland, published in B.F. Skinner's ***ULATIVE
RECORD. Ignored by most profs of psychology, but
the distillation of his work.
NO PUNISHMENT.
Must pay attention to who is the animal?
His evolution, his development, and his personal history -
cannot train without respect for who is the dog? So says
the BIG TIME operant conditioning guru - and you can also
refer back to MARY COVER JONES (mother of scientific
systematic psychology), no loving, no learning.
I suppose I could wire up a dog so that his brain was
badly interrupted and the loving method of puppy training
might not work well - but it would still work better than
the methods used by dominatrix and their ilk.
Lovingly applied ethological techniques like the one
espoused by the Wizard of ALL puppies work for all
dogs, for that matter for all mammals higher than cat.
Indeed, they will work for cats if trainer is warmly competent.
You can see this in Key West on any sunny day.
Housecats performing quite happily.
Fondly, Dr. Von
--
--Matt. Rocky's a Dog.
------------------
------------------
------------------
From: "GEORGE VONHILSHEINER" <DRV...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
To: "Jerry Howe" <theamazingpuppywiz...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Proposed article for Wikipedia
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 15:48:33 -0500
The Amazing Puppy Wizard is the cognomen of a dog behaviorist,
Jerry Howe, of Orlando, Fl. Howe's primary teaching is that
dogs deserve unconditional love, respect, and attention and
that by providing these emotional needs dogs will regulate
their own behavior.
Howe is bombastically antagonistic to rewarders, but he is
aggressively hostile to punishers - he refers antagonists
to B.F. Skinner, Mary Cover Jones, and J.B. Watson and
especially to Samuel A. Corson when they mistakenly annunciate
behavioral principles to sup****t their use of punishment.
Punishment always deranges behavior, says Skinner,
Jones, Watson, Corson and Jerry Howe!
Howe developed a sonic device which calms dogs and has
been broadly tested in a wide range of different situations.
The present author is a Who's Who recognized psychologist
who was asked to evaluate Howe's device by a former student.
Howe provided the author with a device, without
charge, and said device worked as re****ted.
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
drv...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cross reference to Jerry Howe, etc.
--------------
Jerry, the difficulty with these ignorant dog molesters
is that they cannot read. Negative reinforcement is no
response by the trainer.
There is positive reinforcement, an action which is followed
by an increase in the targetted behavior (usually called
"reward" which is precisely and technically a misnomer),
negative reinforcement is the absence of any response.
Negative means 'No'.
Skinner's last book, "***ULATIVE RECORD" reviews this
thoroughly. http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/proj/nru/nr.html
Negative reinforcement is stopping an aversive reinforcement
according to this author. Read it, they have a sense of humor!
There are four forms of systematic reinforcement:
do nothing (negative reinforcement)
reward the behavior (positive reinforcement)
punish the behavior (aversive reinforcement) after habituating
the subject to punishment,
stop puni****ng (relief of aversion, which is negative reinforcement).
Logically, failing to reward after habituating a reward
is also negative reinforcement. Actually intermittent
rewards work better than consistent, invariable rewards,
so there is actually another two categories. Invariable
reinforcement and random reinforcement (on varying schedules).
Punishment is AVERSIVE REINFORCEMENT.
Actions which cause the animal being trained to avoid,
avert, cringe away from. Pavlovians always responded
to American psychologist's inability to reproduce Pavlov's
results with dogs with the comment, "American's don't LOVE
their dogs". If you ever observed a Russian psychologist
working with a dog, you'd instantly see the difference.
American psychologists were wooden, robot-like,
wanted to be "scientific".
This meant to them that they should display no
affection, or any other emotion with the subjects.
When a Pavlovian dog started to misbehave or fail to respond,
doggie was taken out of the equipment, and taken home for a
loving vacation, with much TLC. Sam Corson, Pavlov's last
student, demonstrated the same relation****ps at Ohio State.
Interestingly the first page of results for Sam Corson,
dog behaviorist is loaded with Jerry Howe quoting Dr. Von.
heh heh heh
Dr. Von
Oh, by the way, you once had a pompous fellow say that
Dr. Von was a figment of your imagination. I don't
normally mention this, but I have been listed in Who's
Who in the S & SE USA since 1982, and in the big books,
Who's Who in the USA, WW in the World, WW in Medicine
etc, and WW in Science and Technology, since that date.
These are the Marquis Publications, the "real" WW, and
you can't get yourself into them.
GvH
============
Here's a couple of tommy sorenson's aka not so handsome,
not so gentle, jackass, not even morrison a.k.a. DOGMAN,
the anonymHOWES COWARD's SUCCESSFUL "STUDENTS":
"Feisty, Humorous, Brave, Curious And
Playful. Full Of "Joie de Vivre," And DEAD.
From: Laura Arlov (l...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
Subject: Re: Chewie bit my husband !
Date: 1999/01/20
Quote laura:
Well, we're doing as you say Dogman,
and I'll keep you all posted.
Laura in Oslo
You're quite the dog enthusiast, eh laura?
Quote laura:
The listener,
You didn't WANT to listen to The Puppy Wizard when
HE told you you couldn't PUNISH and INTIMIDATE
your dog or you'd make IT aggressive.
Quote laura:
the observer.
NHOWE you got a DEAD DOG HOWETA it.
Quote laura:
We do work were you sometimes have to observe people
Like laura, MURDERING her dog...
Quote laura:
and take notes.
INDEEDY!
Quote laura:
B. has amazing powers of observation and concentration.
RIGHT...
Quote laura:
Laura and Angel in Oslo
steve walker's DEAD DOG Sampson was a shelter / rescue
Golden. He begain TURNING on his daughter so he PUNISHED
IT. That seemed to have CURED Sampson's FEAR of steve's
daughter but TAUGHT IT to attack OTHER daddy's daughters,
and GOT HIM DEAD, despite all the EXXXPERTEASE of HOWER
fellHOWE dog lovers here and the BIG SHOT, john rogerson,
in the UK <{}: ~ ( >
LIKE THIS:
Subject: < BEFORE -> "Jerry, You filthy, Unctuous,
No Good Charlatan,"
< AFTER -> "Thank You Jerry For Putting Up With
A Constant Barrage Of Really Infantile
Crap At The Hands Of Supposedly Adult
Dog Lovers.
'Naive' Is Believing You Can Terrorize
A Dog Into Good Behavior," Robert Crim.
>Subject: Re: Fritz---a retrospective
>Date: 02/05/1999
>Author: Robert Crim <fritzg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> You filthy, unctuous, no good charlatan. If you had
> any idea of what dogs and dog people were about
> you would realize the depths of the absolute loathing
> and contempt I hold for you right now. Were it not
> for the blessed distance and anonymity that the internet
> gives us from the s***my likes of you, I would probably
> be in a jail cell right now for turning you into the pile
> of **** you really are
Hey, Howe, you really are a wacko, eh?
Crim wrote this about *YOU,* you insipid piece of cow dung!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
--
Dogman
mailto:dog...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=====================
> On Thu, 17 Jun 1999 20:24:15 -0700, dogsnus
<"Terri"@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Wrote:>
> Hey, do like me, and killfile Jerry.
> He has millions of people aleady reading his posts and
> watching him extract his soggy foot out of his mouth!
> Out of these MILLIONS, I've only seen 2 naive childs
> come forward and actually believe in his training manual.
Robert Crim writes:
I assume that I and my wife are those two naive childs
since I freely admit to having read and, I hope, understood
enough of the manual and it's counterparts by John Fisher
and the posts of Marilyn Rammell to believe and use it.
This naive child would like to say thank you to both
Jerry and Marilyn for putting up with a constant barrage
of really infantile crap at the hands of supposedly
adult dog lovers.
The other naive child (LSW) has to put up with the
nagging idea that if people like them had been posting
earlier, maybe we would not have had to hold the head
of a really magnificent animal in our arms while he was
given the needle and having to hug him and wait until he
gasped his last gasp.
To my mind, "naive" is believing you can terrorize a dog.
Naive is believing that people that hide behind fake
names are more honest than people that use their real
names. Naive is thinking that dilettante dog breeders
and amateur "trainers" like Joey (lyingdogDUMMY, j.h.)
are the equal or better than those that have studied and
lived by their craft for decades.
"Stupid" is believing that people do not see kindergarten
level insults for what they are. Really stupid is believing
that people like Jerry Howe and Marilyn Rammell are
going to just go away because you people act like fools.
Why do you act like fools? I really have no idea, and I
don't really care.
> And, to date: I've not seen ONE come forward and
> actually admit to buying and having success with his
> little black box.
I think I'm going to get one myself for Father's day and
take it down to the Animal Shelter for their use and
testing. You would never believe the results, so you'll
never know.
> Anyone by now that doesn't see a scam man coming by
> Jerry's posts deserves to get what is sure to be coming
> to him! LOL!
I don't see a "scam man", so I guess I and Longsuffering
Wife and Rollei will just have to get what we deserve,
eh? As Joey (Dogman) says, "poor Rollei.".......right.
>Terri
Yes it was, and that is sad.
Robert, Longsuffering Wife and Rollei (do I get to
listen to the box first?)
============
SEE?
tommy sez:
> Sucker.
Crim wrote THAT about *YOU,* tommy, "you insipid piece of cow dung!"
BWEEEAAAHAAAHAAAHAA~!~!~!
AND LIKE THIS:
Newsgroups: rec.pets.dogs.behavior
From: Steve Walker <skwal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 01:54:57 +0100
Subject: Sad news (Samson)
Hello everyone, hope you remember me. I've been quiet
here for ages, firstly because of a computer breakdown
that took ages to remedy, and then it's been difficult
to find the heart to write to the group again.
You see, on Sep 21, after much heart-searching, I took
Samson back to the RSPCA to be put to sleep. He was a
brilliant dog with his family, but was becoming more &
more fear reactive with people, especially small children,
and (apparently randomly) with other dogs, to the point
where we had to muzzle him when he went out and if we
had visitors (which is often), because we just couldn't
trust people to remember to leave him alone, so his
quality of life had become not much.
We put him through a rehab programme from John Rogerson's
practice - I gather he's pretty well-known, so some of
you might have heard of him - which did everything they
said it would (reliable recall, focused his attention much
more on us, etc - except reduce his tendency to react
suddenly and bite.
The vet had checked him and found nothing, but I'd still
have suspected a brain tumour or something if it hadn't
been for the fact that he was totally reliable with the kids
and us.
I called the RSPCA to let them know that the rehab programme
wasn't working, and they said that if we gave him back, they'd
*****s him but he'd almost certainly be put down.
I couldn't let him be alone among strangers for his last
moments, so I asked if they'd let me take him immediately
and stay with him while it was done, and they agreed.
It was a sunny day, and he was happy enough on the drive to
the centre, but I could barely hold myself together. He was
nervous of going into the surgery and I had to coax him in,
and I felt like an utter traitor.
I stroked him as they prepared him, crying and telling him
how sorry I was, and nearly panicked and ran out with him
when they brought out the needle.
But I knew if I did it would only be delaying the inevitable,
and I'd be risking someone, probably a child, being injured,
which I couldn't do. So I went through with it, and in a few
seconds it was over and I'd killed my dog, who trusted me
to look after him.
I told a mailing list I'm on straight away, and they've been
fantastically kind. I was in a daze for days afterwards, and
still have the occasional flashback to that day, but I'm coping
a lot better now, and would love to give a home to another dog,
but my wife doesn't feel ready yet.
Soon, though, I hope. I miss Samson terribly, but while I
feel a lot of guilt for the decision I made, I know there
wasn't another way out, and at least I could make sure I was
with him at the end.
I owed him that.
I know there are some here who will gloat over this email,
but all I can say is that their opinion, their existence,
is irrelevant to me. For the rest of you, the good, decent
majority who frequent this group, I didn't want to just
disappear, and not tell you what had happened, after you
gave me so much sup****t and help from the outset.
Samson was my first dog, and the help I got here made
life much better for him and us while we were together.
If the glad day comes when we do adopt another dog,
I'll let you know. I hope it's soon.
God bless,
--
Steve Walker
-------------
Seems steevie is in DEEP DENIAL~!
From: Steve Walker <skwal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Date: 2000/10/09
Subject: Re: Sad news (Samson) = I'm GLAD You Killed Samson,
He Was A BAD GENETIC Choice. You Did The Right Thing. Turn
And Don't Look Back.
In article FJ6E5.62103$O95.4439...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Howe <jh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
> Nor can I. Nor can Marilyn. She does the same kind of
> work I do. We KNEW this was going to happen, based on
> steve's original posts here...
Jerry, you're still in my killfile, but somehow this one
made it through, so I'll respond before I ignore you again.
You obviously have a very short memory. Samson was not
trained using aggressive, confrontational or harsh methods.
John Rogerson's rehab programme was based entirely on using
kind methods to get Samson's attention even more fixed on us
(which wouldn't have worked if they were not kind), with the
intention that Samson wouldn't even be interested in other
dogs and people, until we had such good control that we
could start to introduce others under controlled cir***stances
that would persuade Samson it was great to have them around.
It worked, in so far as Samson became even more attached
to us, had a perfect recall etc. Unfortunately, this didn't
stop the fact that he might suddenly react aggressively to
even the proximity of a stranger or strange dog.
No aggressive methods were used in this programme. Not one.
But the problem was too deep-rooted, too instinctive, and
Samson just couldn't help himself.
He'd shake if a small child even entered the room, and if
they approached him he'd try to bite them. Not as a reaction
to aggression, but just because he had some deep-rooted fear
issue going back to before we ever had him.
We could not risk that he would injure someone, especially
a child, so we made the decision we did - not lightly, but
with tears.
You, however, are an idiot. Don't bother replying, because
even if one of your posts makes it past the killfile again,
you'll just be binned with the rest of the garbage.
Goodbye.
--
Steve Walker
-----------------
Naaaaah??
QUOTE FROM lyingdogDUMMY:
> "The only one I see acting like a fool is you, Crim,
> for buying into anything Howe ever has to say, about
> anything, and for not listening to me when it comes
> to dogs."
Ever hear the expression "sit rolls down hill?"
> but was becoming more & more fear reactive
> with people, especially small children,
That's it in a nutshell. You taught him through your own
actions, HOWE to deal with other, less capable beings.
Dogs copy our actions and attitudes. They mirror us. They
emulate us. And when we respond to their natural, innate,
instinctive, reflexive behaviors, with punishment, the dog
loses confidence in our judgement and leader****p ability.
Seems I recall you mentioning the children were learning
to CORRECT Samson on lead, so THEY could enjoy walking with
him. Didn't you mention they were learning some alpha dominance
techniques as well?
Can't let that big lug pull down the children now, can we?
So you teach the children to violate the dog's trust with
a few good corrections. And YOU back up the children with
the HAMMERS OF HELL...
And it worked. Didn't it, just as I told you so.
Just as I told Robert Crim.
But you guys were too smart to be taken in by this con man.
You listened to our fear, force, and alpha dominance control
freaks, who learned ALL that they know about dog behavior from
the MADMAN, MONSTER, wm koehler.
So, it seems the only problem is that you didn't read
the back of the book. That's what our Gang Of Thugs fails
to mention, until it's too late.
That's the part that says when the dog is finally provoked
to act out on his trainer or other weaker family members,
that you've got to HANG the dog till his eyes roll back in
ITS head, ITS tongue turns thick and blue and falls out the
side of ITS mouth, and when you put IT back on the ground,
IT should stagger to IT'S feet, and PUKE.
That's the cure for this behavior problem, you just never asked.
I expect you'll enjoy your next dog as much as you enjoyed Samson.
Tell him HOWEDY for me, eh good buddy? Eh? Huh? Huh? Eh??? Eh???
Yours for responsible dog handling and training,
Jerry "Don't Confront The Dog," Howe.
From: Dogman <dog...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Date: 2000/10/08
Subject: Re: Sad news (Samson) = ninnyboy
"JohnK" <jo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> It's too late. I already know what a disgusting, vile
> human being you are. You are to be ignored now.
Come on, John.
It didn't really take that Sampson post for you to know
that Howe is a disgusting, vile human being, did it?
I hope not.
--
Dogman
mailto:dog...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SEE?
AND LIKE THIS:
Subject: Re: RIP Teena 1999 - 2004
"Handsome Jack Morrison" <me10...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
message news:p8sn1093e89a5202rdr1an5b5pgd3gdrrf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On 31 Jan 2004 17:48:39 GMT, KWBrown arfenarfSPAMBL...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
> Well.
> She tried to take a bite out of our trainer, and that was that.
> Teena the ESS made her last trip to the vet and, I hope,
> sleeps more peacefully than she has in years.
I'm very sorry to hear that, Kate.
But going by the information you posted here about her,
you had no choice.
Godspeed, Teena.
--
Handsome Jack Morrison
*gently remove the detonator to reply via e-mail
Hello Dogdirtforbirdbrains,
You ain't getting away with that any more. You are not going to get
away with blaming genetics for the behavior problems created
through abusive training methods recommended by thugs like you
and Koehler, that cause dogs to turn on their owners and families,
and die as a result!
People are getting smart around here, and fast! You becoming well
recognized for what you are. I don't need to elaborate on that
anymore. Everybody knows.
> What a piece of **** you are, Crim. Blaming me, or blaming
> Koehler, for poor Fritz's problem, is like blaming a doctor who
> couldn't save your child's life, and that's unconscionable.
You told Crim that Koehler was fantastic. He bought it hook, line,
and sinker, and it sank him. You must know the risk, just as I do.
I've seen this sort of thing happen repeatedly for over thirty years.
It will stop. I'm not going to allow you people to get away with it
anymore.
I will dog you, Koehler, and all of your kind right to the gates of
Hell, and I'll train Appallion to keep you there forever. Guaranteed.
The gates of Hell are guarded by a Wits' End trained dog.
> Your dog was almost certainly predestined by his *genes* to end
> up like he did, particularly since he had *you* as his thoroughly
> confused, ignorant and inconsistent doofus owner.
No, it was the Koehler method that killed Fritz. It was your advice
that killed Fritz. It was me, not being here sooner, that killed Fritz.
Crim was a victim, just like Fritz. Crim did everything by the book,
exactly as per the instructions. He followed your advice. He lost,
big time. I could have predicted the outcome, the percentage of this
kind of "collateral damage" is unacceptably high.
Those things, I am certain of. Those things, I am determined to stop.
> The only one I see acting like a fool is you, Crim, for
> buying into anything Howe ever has to say, about anything,
> and for not listening to me when it comes to dogs.
You are mad at me, because I forced Crim to examine exactly what
happened to Fritz, and he came to the correct conclusion. If I
hadn't, he'd be doing the same things he'd done before, but harder,
and faster, and maybe lost his next dog, faster and harder.
You now blame the genes, you now blame Crim for mishandling.
You said it was a good thing he destroyed his untrustworthy dog.
That is the kind of response you have given many people over the
years, isn't it? I know that for certain, I've been fighting you
Thugs all my life. It's almost over now, people are getting wise to
you, and Koehler, and Fraud Die, and the rest of the "in crowd" here.
Before, it was just me fighting for proper handling and training
methods. You've all ganged up on me, trying everything possible
to discredit and intimidate me. That didn't work. Not one of you
cretins have successfully discredited any of my methods. Keep trying,
please.
Now, there are several competent professional dog trainers, all with
somewhat different but nonetheless acceptable, non force, methods.
For the first time in my career, I've learned something from another
dog trainer. We've got a good thing going now, and you and our
Gang Of Thugs have to change, or go off into obscurity, in shame and
contempt.
You can't make up for the harm you've done, but you were an
innocent victim just like Crim, and you can be forgiven, and
rehabilitated, and you don't have to continue doing any more harm.
The choice is up to you. It's time to do or die.
> Dogman aka "Big Daddy"
> dog...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===================
BWEEEAAAHAAAHAAA~!~!~!
|
