Rspca Australia

[mirawee]

I was wondering if it was about electric collars, since they seem to be on the SPCA's hit list, and they're used on many working dogs (I've heard of them being used on police, conservation, farm & SAR dogs for various applications).

Aren't we all a suspicious lot. The lecturer himself looks like a reasonable guy & an interesting speaker, from the link Aidan posted.

Could be that too, although are they used out in public view that often? I am sure there is some hidden reason for the seminar - would be nice to know what it is

[Staranais]

Could be that too, although are they used out in public view that often? I am sure there is some hidden reason for the seminar - would be nice to know what it is

Well, I don't think any of the departments or disciplines I mentioned are exactly advertising the fact they use e collars? I too would be interested to know what happens at this seminar, however there's no way I'm paying $160 and buying a plane ticket to Oz to do so.

[Aidan]

Could be that too, although are they used out in public view that often?

The question was stated "even if they are used out of public view", so I suppose they could get a mention. One study investigated the body language of police dogs exposed to e-collar training, it was not particularly favourable. So it does get a mention in the scientific literature, but not as an isolated causal factor.

[Christina]

Well we already have the government dictating how we train/discipline our children.

They are also getting to the point of telling us what we can & cannot feed them.

That's working really well isn't it ?

No suprise it is now animals.

There is concern over methods & cruelty used to train animals & there are laws in place to deal with this issue, but that is not entirely what they are looking at.

Suspicious too. Better things to use their money on.

In the future I may get prosecuted if I ever teach my Cockatoo to dance to his favourite tune & talk.

Insane world coming up

[mita]

I'd like to see the full program, with names of other speakers listed. And follow that to what they've published on topics relating to animal behaviour...& where it's published.

Isn't dog/animal behaviour the actual specialty of DrMcGr (who seems to pop up a lot)? If he's chairing the proceedings, it implies interest in the area & the kinds of questions being asked.

In other words, I'd need more information before doing a leap into some specific agenda.

I've got no problems with 'science' asking questions. It's the quality in the responses that counts.

[Erny]

Aren't we all a suspicious lot.

That's not our fault. It is a learnt belief system that has been reinforced time after time.

And at the risk of repeating to ad nauseum, controlling dog training and dog trainers is on the RSPCA's priority wish list.

[*Bones*]

The program isn't $160 enticing as far as I am concerned.

Dr Mcgreevy has written a few books on behaviour, and seems to consider himself an expert on equine behavior. I haven't heard anyone in the upper echelons of horse competition (dressage, 3de etc) speak well of him.

I read some rubbish he published once and that would put me off attending any of his lectures. Sorry.

[Jed]

Thanks for posting that Aidan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0t32b7QK5U

On this video is the cross bred, untested male dog which McGreevey was studding out on the net. Frozen semen was available. I notice his pup is on the video with the mother. One can only hope that he only had the one service. Plenty of dogs like that in the pound Paul, get one there next time you want one, eh rather than adding to the numbers, eh?

So ironic that he wanting to tell registered breeders how to do it, and he is studding that thing. I mean - really. I know it is old, but it's not even a particularly good mover or well conformed. Could it actually catch a full mouth full fleece weather???? Prolly not.

What a hoot

Edited September 28, 2010 by Jed

[mita]

I wanted more information, so I looked at the publications of people involved.

Dr McGreevy is not 'only' chairing this seminar. He has a book with a specific idea about dog training to push. Called 'A Modern Dog's Life'. In which it's said he sets out a 'radical' approach to dog training which is not based on the human- as -master in the dog-human relationship. But rather on the human acting like a 'life coach' to the dog.

My own thought is that's an unusual parallel to be taking from human 'learning'. Acting as a 'life coach' in the human world, is based on human attibutes & how humans learn. So if DrMGr is going to argue something similar for dogs, he'd need to make a link with dogs' attributes & how dogs learn. Also there's the key element of motivation. A human asks for the services of a life-coach, based on self-reflection and perceived need. How does a dog do that?

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=ca...C-T6QBV3F2aiIxg

You'll notice, his book gets the thumbs up from the science officer of RSPCA, Australia ( I once looked up her academic background & it was in the UK & related to primates, I think, She came from the UK RSPCA), Rob Zammitt (who's a good bloke, IMO) & Don Burke (no comment).

[Jed]

Oops, got excited and pushed too many buttons!!

Edited September 28, 2010 by Jed

[Jed]

If he used the methods he advocates on his own dogs as depicted on the youtube video ---- well make up your own minds, but I certainly wouldn't waste $$ on the book.

Mita

You'll notice, his book gets the thumbs up from the science officer of RSPCA, Australia ( I once looked up her academic background & it was in the UK & related to primates, I think, She came from the UK RSPCA), Rob Zammitt (who's a good bloke, IMO) & Don Burke (no comment).

Well, he's rumoured to be in bed with them (except Rob Zammit), so what could be expect??

[shortstep]

The program isn't $160 enticing as far as I am concerned.

Dr Mcgreevy has written a few books on behaviour, and seems to consider himself an expert on equine behavior. I haven't heard anyone in the upper echelons of horse competition (dressage, 3de etc) speak well of him.

I read some rubbish he published once and that would put me off attending any of his lectures. Sorry.

Could it be a case of

Bull Sh*t

More Sh*t

Piled higher and Deeper.

Edited September 28, 2010 by shortstep

[Aidan3]

but of course, you could measure some of the brain chemistry - though whether the animals would 'enjoy' that is also an interesting question.

Why shouldn't they? We only need to drill a tiny little hole in their skull!

For many purposes a saliva swab is all that is required, quick and easy.

I think I'm starting to see the reason for the suspicion, must be an old DOL meme regarding Dr McGreevy going on. I think I'll stay out of this one!

[Erny]

Dominance Nup, don't like that word.

Leadership Nup, don't like that word any more either.

Life Coach ???????????????????????????

Is this the new catch phrase perhaps?

(Tongue in cheek)

Edited September 28, 2010 by Erny

[Sheridan]

I wanted more information, so I looked at the publications of people involved.

Dr McGreevy is not 'only' chairing this seminar. He has a book with a specific idea about dog training to push. Called 'A Modern Dog's Life'. In which it's said he sets out a 'radical' approach to dog training which is not based on the human- as -master in the dog-human relationship. But rather on the human acting like a 'life coach' to the dog.

My own thought is that's an unusual parallel to be taking from human 'learning'. Acting as a 'life coach' in the human world, is based on human attibutes & how humans learn. So if DrMGr is going to argue something similar for dogs, he'd need to make a link with dogs' attributes & how dogs learn. Also there's the key element of motivation. A human asks for the services of a life-coach, based on self-reflection and perceived need. How does a dog do that?

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=ca...C-T6QBV3F2aiIxg

You'll notice, his book gets the thumbs up from the science officer of RSPCA, Australia ( I once looked up her academic background & it was in the UK & related to primates, I think, She came from the UK RSPCA), Rob Zammitt (who's a good bloke, IMO) & Don Burke (no comment).

A life coach ... Erm, can I just say

[bedazzledx2]

Absolutely agree!!! This is really scary...kinda smacks of PETA.

The 2011 Scientific Seminar will explore the animal welfare implications of training animals by asking how our attempts to modify animal behaviour affect the animals themselves. Is making animals work for our own purposes justified? How do we motivate animals to perform, or behave the way we want them to, and do any of them actually enjoy it? Can we use training to improve the welfare of individual animals? And are the training methods used always acceptable, even when they are out of public view?

Bolded to say, are they for real? This statement makes me suspect that they have never seen a happy working dog, seeing as they seem to find the idea so incredible.

Have they never left the university grounds to see how dogs are actually used in real life? The dogs I have seen working out in the real world (SAR, farm dogs, customs dogs, police dogs) all absolutely loved their jobs.

Most dog jobs employ instincts & drives that the dogs like, even need, to have satisfied. The dogs that don't have the drive to do the job or earn the reward simply don't get used. After all, why on earth would you want to rely on a team-mate who would rather not be there?

[*Bones*]

You must not refer to dogs or cats as pets. They are no longer pets, they are now Companion Animals. I believe Peta coined that one. Pets is a pornographic word, and not politically correct in this modern world where animals are to have rights.

And we are not trainers or owners we are life coaches.

Of course companion animals with rights would need life coaches.

I see job openings for companion animal psychologists.

The 2011 Scientific Seminar will explore the animal welfare implications of training animals by asking how our attempts to modify animal behaviour affect the animals themselves. Is making animals work for our own purposes justified? How do we motivate animals to perform, or behave the way we want them to, and do any of them actually enjoy it? Can we use training to improve the welfare of individual animals? And are the training methods used always acceptable, even when they are out of public view?

the pack leader would modify the behavior of the pack. He wouldn't care whether the pack enjoyed it or not.

Dogs i've "motivated to perform" or "behave the way I want them to" (formerly referred to as "training") seemed to me to be enjoying the process. they enjoyed the time spent with their leader, and they enjoyed learning something new, as well as gaining satisfaction from getting it right, and I never train with food or toy treats (at a lowish level, anyhow) so their reward was approval and success.

But I suppose it is reasonable to drill a hole in their skulls to ascertain this. We do need scientific proof of things we already know. And, of course, a cuphook could be screwed into the hole later, and used to hold the poo bags when on walks. Or the shopping bags.

I'd rather prefer the money spent on scientifically qualfying things already known, and not dreadfully important into more shelter places, so fewer dogs die, more education on choosing the correct dog, so the dog is not dumped, on providing training videos for loan to the public,so they could learn how to train their dogs

It would be nice to see the funds actually benefiting dogs, instead of providing a wage for someone researching nonsense.

What a world we exist in

[Aidan]

But I suppose it is reasonable to drill a hole in their skulls to ascertain this. We do need scientific proof of things we already know. And, of course, a cuphook could be screwed into the hole later, and used to hold the poo bags when on walks. Or the shopping bags.

I'd rather prefer the money spent on scientifically qualfying things already known, and not dreadfully important into more shelter places, so fewer dogs die, more education on choosing the correct dog, so the dog is not dumped, on providing training videos for loan to the public,so they could learn how to train their dogs

It would be nice to see the funds actually benefiting dogs, instead of providing a wage for someone researching nonsense.

We research animal emotion and motivation for many, many reasons, including those you have mentioned. The hole in the skull thing was a joke, it refers to a process known as "Trephination" (which was at one time used to let out evil spirits) which is what we would still be doing if our money wasn't spent on scientific research.