Counter Cruising must stop

I wish I had a good method for you.

The best way is to have a 100% failure rate - when she jumps up, there's
nothing there. Judicious use of baby gates helps this.

After that, she needs to be corrected immediately for jumping up. We
tried small mousetraps in "setups", which provided a measure of success
until we put Guinness on a diet. Then, all bets were off and he taught
himself to navigate around the mousetraps.

We're back to trying for a 100% failure rate, and not succeeding very well.

Good luck.

-Shannon

Marie wrote:

>One of the (few?) things hubby and I were successful at teaching Macula when
>she was a puppy was not to take stuff from table tops, counters, etc. The
>general rule of thumb was if it was on the floor, it was hers, anywhere
>else=don't touch.
>
>Of course things have become more complicated with the kidlets around--a lot
>of stuff on the ground isn't hers anymore and sometimes (her thinking?) they
>intended her to have something but missed the floor, and it needed to be
>"cleaned up" from their laps, highchair seats or trays. The counter-surfing
>has now spread to stealing pizza from the dining room table if nobody is
>looking.
>
>Obviously, remedial training is required. Problem is, I really can't
>remember how I taught Pupster not to countersurf in the first place: I just
>remember thinking "that wasn't so hard."
>
>So, any suggestions on how to break the countersurfing habit?
>
>TIA
>
>Marie
>
>
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Counter Cruising must stop 

"Marie" <mmbarkcw.TakeThisOut@rogers.com.goaway> wrote in message
news:atednYiOJuAZWPzcRVn-pw@rogers.com...
> One of the (few?) things hubby and I were successful at teaching Macula
> when
> she was a puppy was not to take stuff from table tops, counters, etc. The
> general rule of thumb was if it was on the floor, it was hers, anywhere
> else=don't touch.
>
> Of course things have become more complicated with the kidlets around--a
> lot
> of stuff on the ground isn't hers anymore and sometimes (her thinking?)
> they
> intended her to have something but missed the floor, and it needed to be
> "cleaned up" from their laps, highchair seats or trays. The
> counter-surfing
> has now spread to stealing pizza from the dining room table if nobody is
> looking.
>
> Obviously, remedial training is required. Problem is, I really can't
> remember how I taught Pupster not to countersurf in the first place: I
> just
> remember thinking "that wasn't so hard."
>
> So, any suggestions on how to break the countersurfing habit?

If you can afford a few of them, the long strips of scat-mat work really
well for breaking counter-surfers, unless they're Boxers anyway. The only
real way I know of is to manage the situation by not leaving food you don't
want the dog to steal on the counter. In my house the counters, trash &
even the grill (hot or cold) is fair game in Fancy's world. No matter how
many timeouts, how many DROP IT!s and so on, food is more important to her
than getting in trouble is. This is pretty much a breed trait so I've
learned to not leave any food on the counter/table/grill, unattended, unless
I don't mind if Fancy steals it.

--
Tara
 >> Stay informed about: Counter Cruising must stop 

"Marie" <mmbarkcw DeleteThis @rogers.com.goaway> wrote in news:atednYiOJuAZWPzcRVn-
pw DeleteThis @rogers.com:

> So, any suggestions on how to break the countersurfing habit?

Please forgive me, this has been sitting at the front of my mind since you
posted this, and I can't resist.

Get a smaller dog.

I am soooo sorry. I couldn't resist.

--
Marcel and Moogli
 >> Stay informed about: Counter Cruising must stop 

Marcel Beaudoin wrote:
> "Marie" <mmbarkcw DeleteThis @rogers.com.goaway> wrote in news:atednYiOJuAZWPzcRVn-
> pw DeleteThis @rogers.com:
>>So, any suggestions on how to break the countersurfing habit?
>
> Please forgive me, this has been sitting at the front of my mind since you
> posted this, and I can't resist.
>
> Get a smaller dog.

Or taller counters.


--
Mary H. and the Ames National Zoo:
Raise A Fund, ANZ Babylon Ranger, ANZ MarmaDUKE, and Rotund Rhia
 >> Stay informed about: Counter Cruising must stop 

Mary H Healey wrote:

> Marcel Beaudoin wrote:
>
>> "Marie" <mmbarkcw.TakeThisOut@rogers.com.goaway> wrote in news:atednYiOJuAZWPzcRVn-
>> pw.TakeThisOut@rogers.com:
>>
>>> So, any suggestions on how to break the countersurfing habit?
>>
>>
>> Please forgive me, this has been sitting at the front of my mind
>> since you posted this, and I can't resist.
>>
>> Get a smaller dog.
>
>
> Or taller counters.

Or an e-collar. I couldn't resist either.

Gwen

>
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Counter Cruising must stop 

"Marie" <mmbarkcw DeleteThis @rogers.com.goaway> wrote in message
news:atednYiOJuAZWPzcRVn-pw@rogers.com...
> So, any suggestions on how to break the countersurfing habit?

With Coda, it was easy, he just wasn't overly motivated (or
rewarded) by food on the counter.
With Bodhi, it's a different story. No matter how many times I
tell him "Uh-uh!" or "No!" or whatever, if there is food (or a
pan that once had food in it) on the countertop left where he can
reach it AND no one is home, there's no stopping him.

When I am home, even during the night, no one messes with
anything. But, I know that if I were to entrust him in the day while
were are at work? Forget it, all bets are off. That includes the
small trashcan in our bedroom that usually has used tissues
or holey socks in it. It also includes hair scruchies & boxes
of tissues. They all get put out of reach when I go to work. If not,
I figure it's my own fault for leaving them in his reach when I *know*
he'll most likely get into/destroy them.
Shelly & The Boys
 >> Stay informed about: Counter Cruising must stop 

HOWEDY tara o. aka tee,

"Tee" <crappolagozhere.RemoveThis@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:2sg2joF1knk3iU1@uni-berlin.de...
> "Marie" <mmbarkcw.RemoveThis@rogers.com.goaway> wrote in message
> news:atednYiOJuAZWPzcRVn-pw@rogers.com...
>
> > One of the (few?) things hubby and I were
> > successful at teaching Macula when she
> > was a puppy was not to take stuff from table
> > tops, counters, etc.

THAT was on accHOWENT of she never
put nuthing the dog could STEAL on them.

> > The general rule of thumb was if it was on the floor,

marie couldn't stop her from gettin it.

> > it was hers,

marie never stood a chance.

> > anywhere else=don't touch.

IOW, don't put it there if you don't
want the dog to STEAL it.

> > Of course things have become more
> > complicated with the kidlets around-

marie mishandles and abuses her
kids the same same as her dog.

<snip idiocy>

> > Obviously, remedial training is required.

BWEEEEEAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAA!!!

marie has taken Macula to five or MOORE
trainers and group training classes.

> > Problem is, I really can't remember how I taught
> > Pupster not to countersurf in the first place:

SHE DIDN'T.

> > I just remember thinking "that wasn't so hard."

RIGHT. marie never PUT stuff HOWET
that the dog could STEAL.

> > So, any suggestions on how to break the
> > countersurfing habit?
>
> If you can afford a few of them, the long strips of scat-mat

That's a shock device, tara o akat tee.

> work really well for breaking counter- surfers,

That so? Shocking dogs makes them
fear aggressive and SICK.

> unless they're Boxers anyway.

A dog is a dog.

You MURDERED your own DEAD DOG Summer.

> The only real way I know of is to manage the
> situation by not leaving food you don't want the
> dog to steal on the counter.

IOW, either HURT the dog or play hide the weenie.

You're a dog abusing mental case.

> In my house the counters, trash &
> even the grill (hot or cold) is fair game
> in Fancy's world. No matter how
> many timeouts, how many DROP IT!s
> and so on, food is more important to her
> than getting in trouble is.

RIGHT. THAT'S HOWE COME YOU
MURDERED YOUR OWN DEAD DOG
Summer. REMEMBER, tara o. aka tee?

> This is pretty much a breed trait

You're a lying dog abusing mental case.
You shock choke crate beat and murder
dogs and lie abHOWET it and blame the
breed.

> so I've learned to not leave any food on the
> counter/table/grill, unattended, unless
> I don't mind if Fancy steals it.

IOW, you got the same problem.

> Tara

"I'm shocked that I shocked"

"Tara O." <nospam.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bh9f81$vrac2$1@ID-92443.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Due to someone reprimanding Jar-Jar & the word "rescue" in
> the post, I decided to read down and see what he was spewing
> now. I was able to learn that besides choking, pinching,
> crating, abusing and murdering my dog, I also shocked her.
> I must be suffering from amnesia.
>
> Can someone point me to a post where I said
> I shocked my dog, or any dog, or that I even
> know *how* to use an e-collar....assuming I had one
> which must have been stolen at the same time I lost my
> memory.
>
> One would think Jerry would be happy with the "murder"
> part and all my other training sins but evidently not.
>
> --
> Tara

HOWEDY tara o.,

You didn't hurt and kill Summer.

Date: 2003-04-28 18:09:04 PST
> "Tara O." wrote:
>
> > Labs are a breed that are normally trained for field work
> > with ear pinches, e-collars and other forms of physical
> > interaction without making them fearful or aggressive.
>

==============

From: Tara O. (tara29401@yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Dane hyper when passing other dogs
Date: 2001-04-21 12:07:54 PST


I think its pertinent to mention that I've never had any dogs
who exhibited signs of aggression or were in any way, shape,
or form resistent to whatever "training" I did with them.

I would not feel comfortable relying on my past experience or
a book to train a dog to stop biting, snapping or growling.

--
Tara O.

===================

From: Tara O. (tara29401@yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Canine Behaviors For Dummies
Date: 2001-06-11 19:42:23 PST

"joshua" <joshua.RemoveThis@ycsi.net> wrote in message
news:9g3uoi$sc7$0@63.90.193.133...
> I cant seem to understand why people believe prong collars
> are cruel and inhumane. They do nothing more than pinch,
> getting the attention of the animal.
>
> Choke collars, on the other hand, do permanent damage. They
> bruise the esophagus.
>
> Shock collars will eventually destroy nerve endings, much
> the same as electric fencing.
>
> Get it straight people.

Joshua, you have just reopened a can of worms
that can quickly cause infestation here lol


--
Tara O.

===============

From: Tara O. (tara29401@yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: jerry howe
Date: 2001-04-04 11:58:06 PST

> People are tired of being abused and insulted simply for
> saying they use a prong collar, or a choke collar, or an
> e-collar, or a crate, etc. If you want to LEARN more about
> dog training and dog behavior, then listen to what they have
> to say, too.

"I've never not listened to what people say here.
I use a crate, am about to begin with a choke collar,
I'm not the bad guy here." tara o.

======================

From: Tara O. (tara29401@yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Electronic Training Collars
Date: 2001-05-11 17:29:33 PST


""Twzl, Sligo and Roy Happy Together"" wrote
>
> BTW, this is one of the frequent topics on obedience email
> lists. When people say that they haven't used corrections,
> it turns out that they feel that if they do it, it's not a
> real correction.
:)

That makes sense in a weird sort of way. I don't
honestly think that its humanly possible to train
anyone or anything without correction. Its human
nature to say 'no' or to stop a behavior by doing
something. I used a tin can with coins to correct
Summer's bad puppy behaviors and the cold shoulder
to correct her other less desirable behaviors. I
have said 'no' so many times that I probably sound
like a broken record. Amie can attest to that
lol.

It seems to me that some people are automatically
equating the term correction with punishment. I
guess they can go hand in hand since my tin can
wasn't something Summer liked. My ignoring her
when she's misbehaving is also something she
doesn't like. Therefore it can be viewed as
punishment? And that term is 100% negative.
Maybe if more people saw it as correction and not
the total negative, they'd be less inclined to
want to be PP.

Don't know if the way I wrote that made sense, it
makes sense in my head but then again the men with
the white coats could come a'knockin at any
moment.

Tara O.

===================


From: Tara O. (nospam@yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Any hope? rage?
Date: 2003-03-26 05:46:02 PST

Yes I see and understand your point. There's no such thing as
100% vigilence 100% of the time IMO. You could call an
e-fence company to find out if its possible to wire only your
front door so that if she gets within a certain range of that
front door the collar will start working. I'd think there
would be a way to work that and it may be inexpensive to do
so.

There are also items called Scat Mats that you place in front
of doors or any area you don't want your dog to proceed
through. When stepping on the mat, it gives off a vibration,
something which most dogs hate. They'll stay far away from
the mats. I believe you can buy them from

--
Tara

==================

Tara O. (nospam@yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Need advice--barking dog
Date: 2003-08-06 17:38:14 PST

you could consider installing an invisible fence just inside
the fence line so he cannot get too close. You could talk to
your neighbor about splitting the cost of whichever
alternative you both find most acceptable.

--
Tara

=================

From: Tara O. (nospam@yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Containment Collars
Date: 2003-03-11 07:12:57 PST

I know people who have electric fences and it works very well
for them. I know people who have them and whose dogs escape
and refuse to come back in. From the details I know of all
involved, I wouldn't use an e-fence on:

1. An adult dog that wasn't raised with the fence from a puppy
2. A dog with a high prey drive
3. A very stubborn dog

If I put my female out in an e-fence, the very first kid, cat,
dog or squirrel she sees would have her bolting through the
barrier shock or not. When she finally loses interest in
whatever has caused her to leave and her adrenalin has
diminished, she will think rationally and realize she's not
willing to come back into the yard because she knows the shock
would get her. If you have a dog who just has to go after or
up to any and everything that walks down the street then I'd
definitely not recommend one of these systems. The people I
know who it works for installed them when their dogs were pups
so they were brought up trained to it. Two of the ones I know
it didn't work for have adult adopted dogs who weren't raised
with this kind of invisible barrier.

===================

Search Result 58
From: Tara O. (tara29401@yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: escape artist, thunder, aggression questions
Date: 2001-05-12 07:56:04 PST

Since he got a taste of freedom and knows he can
get out I doubt you'll be able to stop him short
of tethering him or using a more sophisticated
device like an e-fence but I wouldn't recommend
going the electronic fence route without first
doing your homework on the pros and cons of them
and understand that they are not fool-proof.

=========================

MacKenzie's First Pinch Collar Class
Date: 2003-07-08 13:54:19 PST

I consider myself to be a pretty
good basic obed. trainer of Boxers with some learned but not
necessarily practiced, advanced training knowledge. I think
this because not only have I worked with all the dogs I've had
at my house but I'm also the one in charge of all the dogs in
our rescue, their behavioral issues (identifying and working
with), basic training (done in the foster home) and a host of
other things. I'm the one who gives the advice and walks the
foster volunteers through alot of things. Now I don't
believe, for a second, that I would be successful at teaching
basic obedience to other dogs in a class environment. Maybe I
would but probably not. Other trainers with class experience
may think I have no clue what I'm doing because my experience
has been primarily hands-on and with only one breed.

=========================
 >> Stay informed about: Counter Cruising must stop 

HOWEDY shannon,

"Shannon" <slarkin.DeleteThis@mit.edu> wrote in message
news:41629E8C.6000707@mit.edu...
>
> I wish I had a good method for you.

BWEEEEAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAA!!!

You're a MIT student and you can't
HOWEtwit the cunning of the domestic
puppy dog even after The Amazing
Puppy Wizard and all HIS 100%
CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY
SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits'
End Dog Training Method Manual
Students all over the Whole Wild
World told you HOWE to do it EZ
GENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY and
FOR FREE, to boot.

> The best way is to have a 100% failure rate -

Is TRAIN the dog using EFFECTIVE NON
PHYSICAL SCIENTIFIC and PSYCHOLOGICAL
CONDITIONING techniques as taught in your
FREE copy of The Amazing Puppy Wizard's
FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method
Manual.

> when she jumps up, there's nothing there.

That's INSANE.

> Judicious use of baby gates helps this.

You can't AVOID a behavior to train
a dog NOT to DO that behavior.

> After that, she needs to be corrected
> immediately for jumping up.

You mean, PUNISHED.

> We tried small mousetraps in "setups",

You're a mental case.

> which provided a measure of success

That so? Aversives do not train dogs.

> until we put Guinness on a diet.

BWEEEEEEAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!

> Then, all bets were off and he taught
> himself to navigate around the mousetraps.

You're a dog abusing mental case.

> We're back to trying for a 100% failure rate,

BWEEEEEAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!

> and not succeeding very well.

INDEEDY.

> Good luck.

Dog trainin AIN'T LUCK you dog abusing
mental case. "LUCK is for SUCKERS,"
The Puppy Wizard's DADDY.

> -Shannon


> The Puppy Wizard <ThePuppyWizard.DeleteThis@EarthLink.Net> wrote:
>
> HOWEDY Professor Dermer,
>
> "Marshall Dermer" wrote in message
> news:cfrd0c$vi4$1@uwm.edu...
> > In article <6161b3f2.0408161244.16e345fb.DeleteThis@posting.google.com>
> > eodemolay.DeleteThis@cox.net (Steve Crane) writes:
> >
> > >Has your vet considered the chronic ear infection
> > >is a symptom of adverse reaction to food (ARF)?
>
> Chronic infections and "idiopathic" DIS-EASES
> are most often associated with STRESS, professor.
>
> > > It's one of the stonger signals of an ARF condition.
>
> Could be. But that's less likely than a STRESS
> INDUCED AUTO-IMMUNE DIS-EASE aka The
> Puppy Wizard's SYNDROME as you've seen
> in your own dog.
>
> > ARF?!!
> >
> > https://listserv.indiana.edu/archives/arf-l.html
> >
> > Animal Reinforcement Forum
>
> The Amazing Puppy Wizard just took a look see.
> That's some pretty brutal stuff they're talkin, Professor.
> The Amazing Puppy Wizard though you'd LEARNED
> MUCH MOORE than THAT in the five years you've
> been studying NON PHYSICAL CON-TROLL of all
> behaviors using the CASE HISTORY DATA in The
> Amazing Puppy Wizard's Archives on Google.
>
> > ARF is a mailing list for students, researchers,
> > behaviorists, and practitioners across the globe
> > interested in animal training and management
> > issues.
>
> Perhaps you'll introduce The Amazing Puppy Wizard?
>
> They're a bunch of IMBECILES who choke
> and shock and bribe and can't achieve 100%
> NEARLY INSTANT NON PHYSICAL CON-TROLL.
>
> > ARF's primary focus is on reinforcement
>
> INSTEAD OF EFFECTIVE CONDITIONING.
>
> "Reinforcement NEVER ends" on accHOWENT
> of the dog will NOT do the behaviors when you're
> NOT REINFORCING or MANAGING IT.
>
> > and behavior analysis applied to animals,
>
> You've SEEN the ANAL-ytic DATA The Amazing
> Puppy Wizard's 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY
> INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits'
> End Dog Training Method Manual Students REPORT
> RIGHT HERE.
>
> > as well as the research and scientific
> > principles that describe such procedures.
>
> Yeah. They was talkin abHOWET dr. sidman
> and karen pryor... Seems The Amazing Puppy
> Wizard's 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY
> INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits'
> End Dog Training Method Manual Students all
> over the Whole Wild World NEGATES their
> malarkey, Professor.
>
> YOU CAN'T ARGUE WITH THE DATA.
>
> > Also, ARF focuses on ANY management
> > procedures/tools beyond those just described
> > by operant procedures,
>
> Your SCIENTIFIC STUDIES PROVES your
> "operant procedures" FAIL CONSISTENTLY,
> Professor:
>
> Dr. George VonHilsheimer writes in
> "Is there a SCIENCE of BEHAVIOR?":
>
> "Valette 1966 is a complete trivialization of
> scientific findings. It overstates the case for
> reinforcement theory. No careful researcher
> would contend that operant techniques CAN
> ANY THING MORE than modify SHORT TERM
> BEHAVIOR in a highly controlled and limited
> environment with a large number of skillful
> experimenters. Certainly the most elaborate
> studies have shown that the withdrawal or
> temprary inefficiency of the reward system is
> immediately followed by CESSATION of the
> programmed behavior.
>
> In fortunate contrast to this depressing paper
> is the research reported by Whelan (1966) who
> makes the simple but profHOWEND caveat that
> "It is only through CORRECT, EFFICIENT APPLICATION
> (of operant principles) that children's behavor can
> be changed to the extent that they can subsequently
> contribute to the REAL WORLD in which they live." "
>
> "The Methods, Principles And Philosophy Of Behavior
> Never Change, Or They'd Not Be Scientific And Would
> Not Obtain Consistent, Reliable, Fast, Effective Results
> For All Handler's And All Dogs, As Taught In Your FREE
> Copy Of The Puppy Wizard's FREE WWW Wits' End
> Dog Training Method Manual," The Amazing Puppy
> Wizard. <{} ; ~ ) >
>
> Dr. Von continues:
>
> "Whelan illustrates the simple nature or the
> learning process by referring to Ferster's
> engaging study of two three year old
> chimpanzees taught mathematics through
> simple procedures. Whelan carries this
> EVIDENCE a step futher by pointing HOWET
> it's applicability to disturbed children."
>
>
> A Dog Is A Dog As A Child Is A Child As A Kat
> Is A Kat. All Critters Only Respond In Predictable
> Innate, Normal, Natural, Instinctive, Reflexive,
> Ways To Circumstances And Situations Of Their
> Environments Which We Create For Them.
>
> ALL BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS ARE CAUSED BY
> MISHANDLING. Damn The Descartean War of
> "Nature Vs Nurture." We Teach By HOWER Words
> And Actions And GET BACK What We TAUGHT.
>
> In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS
> FAILURE MEANS DEATH. SAME SAME SAME
> SAME, For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.
>
> Dr. Von continues:
> "If chimpanzees CAN LEARN mathematics
> through step by step learning AT THEIR OWN
> PACE, reinforced primarily by CORRECT
> ANSWERS rather than with "fruit loops and
> rasins", we can assume that even developmentally
> RETARDED or CONfHOWENDED children
> CAN LEARN as well. Moreover, Whelan
> makes the EXXXTREMELY important point
> that while most teachers assume that learning
> takes place verbally, primarily it is a non verbal
> process..
>
> Unfortunately Whelan limits himself to the problem
> that "teachers must not only modify or remove specific
> deviant behaviors, but must also develop socially
> acceptable behavior patterns in the classroom and
> classroom conditioned goals, NOT LEARNING.
>
> Other researchers have emphasized the importance
> ofadult behaviors in conditioning classroom behavior.
> An EXXXCELLENT review of this researchshowd that
> tantrum behavior, excessive crawling and dependency,
> isolated play, passivity, spelling failure, and other problem
> behaviorscan be managed by altering habitual adult
> responses to children (Harris, Wolf and Baer, 1964) .
> Such RESEARCHholds GREATER PROMISE in that
> alteration of the conditioning social environment seems
> to provide more STABLE and LASTING CHANGES than
> "M and M's". Moreover, a great deal of work has been
> done developing EFFECTIVE techniques of behavior
> modificaton through the conditioning social environment
> of peers (Hartup, 1964). These directions would seem
> more PRODUCTIVE than a simple minded trainslation
> of the Skinner cage to the classroom.
>
> Skinner (1963) pointed HOWET that operant techniques
> can "be utilized fully ONLY IF we REDEFINE the GOALS
> of education and the CONDITIONS in the educational
> environment under which those goals may be reached...
> (through) a DIFFERENT KIND of educational research
> which is much more closely concerned with the immediate
> dimensions of the student's behavior than with gross
> changes such as IMPROVED PERFORMANCES."
> UNFORTUNATELY, neither Skinner nor ANY OTHER
> learning theorist has provided us with a working model
> of a school or research enterprise based on systemic
> and thorough-going APPLICATION of LEARNING
> PRINCIPLES. Skinner (1948, 1953) approaches a
> definition of the philosophical issues involved, and
> provides an utopian model of a school, but generally
> psychologists seem STUCK at a level of MANAGEMENT
> of an aggressively disturbing child in the classroom,
> through peer approval, or the aplication of accelerating
> CONsequences in the classroom, or scientifically
> S-HOWENDING tactics like "TIME HOWET" (which
> we used to know more simply as "sendin the kid to
> the cloakroom").
>
> Hobbs (op. cit.) claims that the classroom is a
> natural environement for the child. Thelen (1965)
> contends that "classroom practices are UNnatural,
> UNreasonable, and 'against NATURE.' ". This
> would seem the central issue for the philosophy of
> education. Mere trivial application of research findings
> to an institution essentially unchanged from Sumerian
> academies (Kramer, 1962) will NOT create useful
> teaching for human beings.
>
> It seems relevant to ask EXXXACTLY WHAT do we
> know abHOWT the learning situation in which HOWER
> children find themselves, and why, in the light of HOWER
> knowledge, do we do any of the things that schools do?"
>
> We know that there is little agreement among adults
> as to what it is they are SUPPOSED to be DOING,
> what something to do could be that MIGHT be
> EFFECTVE, and what it IS that other people who
> have authority over children ought to be doing (Mc-
> Eachern and Taylor, 1967). Wherefor the child's
> CONfusiHOWEN?
>
> It is NO WONDER hat the marked changes in
> deviant behavior of children can be achieved
> through brief, simple educative routines with
> their mothers which modify the mother's
> social behaviors shaping the child (Whaler,
> 1966). Some clinics have reported ELIMINATION
> ofthe need for child THERAPY through changing
> the clinical emphasis from clinical to parental
> HANDLING of the child (Szrynski 1965). A large
> number of cases improved sufficiently after
> preliminary contact with parents that NO treatment
> of children was required, and almost ALL cases
> SHOWE a remarkably shortened period for therapy.
> Quite severe cases of anorexia nervosa have been
> treated in own to five months by simply REPLACING
> the parents temporarily with EFFUSIVELY LOVING
> SUBSTITUTES (Groen, 1966).
>
> Probably the most absurd figure in Amaerican mass
> media is the TEACHER (Gerbner, 1966). HOWE can
> we EXXXPECT children to LEARN responsible P-HOWER
> from models of IMPOTENCE? We KNOW that LEARNING
> a complex ritualized social role, is facilitated by observation
> of an INTELLIGIBLE MODEL much more effectively than
> by trial and error with REINFORCEMENT. roles which are
> relatively arbitrary and senseless are the most difficult to
> learn (Luchins, 1966). Do we make ANY EFFORT as
> teachers to CORRECT the massive impact of media?
> HOWE can the ARBITRARINESS and SENSELESSNESS
> of IMPOTENT ADULT MODELS be redeemed by anything
> short of RELEVANCE and COMMITMENT?
>
> As an engaging final comment on the PROFESSION
> let me mention the little study by Dittman et al (1965)
> tha when 15 psychotherapists and 9 professional dancers
> evaluated facial and bodily expressons for effect the
> dancers ere much MOORE accurate. Need we say
> MOORE abHOWET the training of therapists?
>
> THE OPERANT FALLACY
>
> Programs utilizing the "contingencies of reinforcement
> model" proposed by Skinner (1963) ar no more well
> established in research than the various dynamic
> therapists. Research in four areas : 1) direct evaluation of
> programmed systems for elarning; 2) reinforcement;
> 3) cognitive dissonance; and 4) motivation, MOST
> SURELY DEMOLISH eth claims of operant programers.
>
> The 190 studies annotated by Schramm (1964) when
> inspected display NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES
> in SUCCESS among approaches and modifications.
> Programmed instruction is no worse than conventional
> instruction, and takes less time, but time reductions in
> conventional instruction has frequently been shown
> possible without detrimental effects. If you draw your
> controls cagily you can always show the superiority of
> your PET technique.
>
> Moore and Smit (1964) compared variations on
> programmed materials, machines, texts, written
> responses, merely reading, free response, multiple
> choice, and iving or not giving the students results.
> There were NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES despite
> Skinner's insistence on the importance of the
> CONTINGENCY of REINFORCEMENT. Carpenter
> and Greenhill (1963) could find NO DIFFERENCE
> in RESULTS even after eliminating the self-pacing
> feature by presenting the materials by TV or Video.
>
> Krumboltz and Kiesler (1965) reported that a two month
> follow up test showed NO DIFFERENCE between students
> given a variety of reinforcement schedules. Mayo and
> Longo (1966) report that naval and marine trainees
> saved 30% of time in learning electronics fundamentals
> through a programed course witrh superior scores on one
> measure but not on another, and with no follow-up reported.
> The same authors reported a reductionj from 26 HOWERS
> to 19 HOWERS in instruction time through the use of
> program with NO DIFFERENCE in test scores, except
> that as longer blocks of materiallearned through programmed
> meanswere tesed the scores DECREASED.
>
> When the control instruction is manipulated an entirely
> DIFFERENT picture emerges Jacobs and Kulkarni (1966)
> assignedstudents in three different schools to classes
> with standard programmed material giving immediate
> knowledge of results to classes without results and to
> classes with the order of sections of the program inverted.
> In two schools the groups without knowledge of results
> and the groups with inverted material SCORED HIGHER.
> In one school there was NO DIFFERENCE. So much for
> THEORY. Reid and Taylor (1965) presented a linear
> program on paper-making to 60 paid undergrads with
> a 12 week follow up test. The group which merely
> read learned the same material in 154 minutes to
> 243 minutes for the group given responses- a
> REVERSAL of the usual BIASED RESULTS based
> on POOR CON-TROLLS. There were no differences
> on post tests. Spagnoli (1965) reports on a study
> exposing the control and programed group to the same
> material in a concentrated effort over a limited period
> of time. There were NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES.
> Sassenrath and Garverick (1965) gave 4 matched
> groups of 120 students four procedures: 1) looking
> up the wrong answers, 2) having questions discussed
> by the instructors, 3) checking answers from correct
> ones on the board, and 4) no feedback. The discussion
> method proved best.
>
>
>
> Finally, in studying means of training men to perform
> a 72 action prcedure on Nike-Hercules equipment,
> Cox and Boren (1965) demonstrated that the time
> required to learn the procedure to critterion was NO
> DIFFERENT when the actions were organized into
> seven operant spans and taught in reverse order, in
> natural order, or without grouping into operant spans
> at all.
>
> IT IS CLEAR that as comparisons became more
> sophisticated programed instruction and other
> operant teaching techniquesreveal tehemselves
> as simply another prestigiHOWES FAD--somewhat
> better than conventional instruction in saving time,
> but certainly not providing a better or better organized
> or more independently useful GRASP of KNOWLEDGE.
>
> The IMBECILITY of some ofthe claims for operant
> technique simply take the breath away. Lovas et al
> (1966) report a standard contingent reward/punishment
> procedure developing imitative speech in two severly
> disturbed non verbal schizophrenic boys.After twenty-
> six days the boys are reported to have been learning
> new words with alacrity. HOWEver, when REWARDS
> were moved to a delayed contingency the behavoir and
> learning immediately deteriorated. Despite this, and
> despite the fact that there was no evidence of cognitive
> association with the words, the authors leap to the
> conclusion that the fact that the boys improved in the
> acquisition of Norwegian words WITHOUT REWARDS
> while still being given English words WITH REWARDS
> suggest hat the children may be able to acquire new
> behaviors on their own. The need for this study escapes
> one, particularly in view of the very well established fact
> that schizophrenics condition quite readily (Mednick, 1958)
> One can see the "SCIENTIFIC" PRECISION by which the
> authors drop contingent reinforcements thus PROVING
> that the parrot behavior was indeed caused by the schedule
> and NOT by some other mystical force. The useof Norwegian
> to demonstrate learning that could not even remotely be
> related to previous history is a grotesquery too bizarre to
> be credited. Who could possibly doubt that this useless
> and probably damaging trained seal routine depended on
> the psychologist's antics? What on earth led them to
> believe that a schizophrenic needs even more other-
> focused responsiveness?
>
> Lovaas et al (1965) reportedthree programs carried
> out on five year old autistic twins conditioining them
> to "social behavior" and to eliminate pathologial
> behaviors such as self-stimulation and tantrums.
> Affectionate and other social behaviors toward
> adults increaseed after adults had been associated
> with shock reduction. The routine for this treatment
> brings immediate relief to mind Sawrey and Wesz
> (1956) routine for producing ulcers in monkeys. I
> suppose it is USELESS to speculate on the source
> of SO CALLED THERAPISTS willingness to experiment
> on human beings with procedures for which there is
> sound experimentally established WARNINGS. If the
> "double blind" theory of the origin of schizophrenia
> (Bateson, 1956) is at all valid, HOWE DEVASTATING
> the experience must ULTIMATELY BE. Do Lovaas et
> al REALLY BELIEVE the schizophrenic has no cognitive
> processes and DOES NOT KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE
> FOR THE SHOCK? Greger (1965) criticized this study
> on the basis that trainsfer CANNOT be generalized. That
> issue can be answered by experience, and, of curse, the
> "social" behavior of these children deteriorates as soon
> as the psychologists LOOSE INTEREST. The IMPORTANT
> ISSUE for a SCIENCE OF BEHAVIOR is why not attempt
> those things which are KNOWN to WORK at least in some
> cases if only for control puporses. Kanner (1954) reports
> that 13 classically autistic children improved enough to
> go to school without "anything that is regarded as good
> psychotherapy or as psychotherapy at all..." Autistic
> children have been known to become permenantely
> social by deinstitutionalization, BY REMOVAL from
> the parents, BY RADICAL CHANGES in other environments,
> and by MASSIVE DOSAGE of TOUCHING, HOLDING,
> FONDLING LOVE DESPITE THE REJECTION OF THE
> CHILD. My case, Larry, (vonHilsheimer, 1965b), demonstrates
> a recovery by using the mother as an autistic boy's teacher
> in an open millieu. It is curiHOWES that the operant technicians
> provide as few, and as UNIMAGINITAVE controls for thier
> "research" as the Freudians.
>
> REWARD / PUNISHMENT
>
> Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative
> reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVER LEARNING
> THEORY model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT.
> Of curse, Skinner has never to my knowledge,
> demonstrated HOWE we escape the phenomenon
> that an expected reward not received is experienced
> as a punishment and can produce extensive and
> persistent aggression (Azrin et al, 1966).
>
> MIMICRY, PLAY, EXPLORATION AND
> THE NEED FOR DATA
>
> Complex activities are LEARNED MORE QUICKLY
> through OBSERVATION (copying, if you will) than
> by trial and error with reinforcemet (Luchins,).
> Observers of subjects making a first trial of a multiple
> choice bolt head maze made fewer errors than the
> practiced subjects in the second run, while subjects
> who have been shocked for error on a first trial made
> more errors than either (Rosenbaum & Hewitt, 1966).
> Students will modify their beliefs more when rewarded
> for the way in which they carried out arguing for a
> disagreeable position (role reward), than when rewarded
> for the content of the argument (Wallace, 1966).
>
> > as well as an overall scientific understanding
> > of animal behavior in general.
>
> Would you be willin to settle for 100% CONSISTENTLY
> NEARLY INSTANT SUCCESS using none of your
> psychobabble?
>
> karen pryor was corresponding to the list. Seems
> she MURDERED her own DEAD KAT on accHOWENT
> of she couldn't C/T train IT not to crap in her stove top.
>
> > Finally, ARF is the official listserv for the Animal
> > Trainers Forum, which is the animal trainers special
> > interest group (SIG) of the Association for Behavior
> > Analysis (ABA).
>
> Looks to The Amazing Puppy Wizard like they're
> a bunch of dog abusing frauds, Professor. Wouldn't
> you agree?
>
> > --Marshall
>
> HOWEDY People,
>
> Here's The Amazing Puppy Wizard EXXXPOSING
> the lying dog abusing COWARD, dr. plonsky of
> UofWI:
>
> > WELCOME
>
> You're a DOG ABUSING FRAUD, professor.
>
> > I am Dr. Mark Plonsky (Dr. P),
>
> The Amazng Puppy Wizard sez you're
> a dog abusing lying coward, professor.
>
> > a Professor of Psychology at the University
> > of Wisconsin - Stevens Point.
>
> You HURT dogs and LIE abHOWET it, professor.
>
> > I am an experimental psychologist
>
> The Amazing Puppy Wizard has PROVEN
> you're a dog abusing punk thug coward, professor.
>
> > with expertise in animal learning & behavior,
>
> You're a FRAUD, professor.
>
> > drugs & behavior,
>
> The Amazing Puppy Wizard just sez "NO!"
> to drugs and has IDENTIFIED EXXXPOSED
> and DISCREDITED you as an incompetent
> behaviorist, cause you're a DOG ABUSER.
>
> > and educational technology.
>
> The Amazing Puppy Wizard would LOVE
> to talk BUSINESS with you in front of the
> board of your university, or the govenor's
> council, professor.
>
> > One of my interests and passions is dog training.
>
> You choke and shock and spray aversives
> in their faces and lock them in boxes bribe
> and withhold bribes attention and affection.
>
> > Personally,
>
> PERSONALLY, you're a dog abusing coward, professor.
>
> > I prefer the scientific perspective
>
> The Amazing Puppy Wizard has DISCREDITED
> your SCIENCE as INEFFECTIVE BRUTALITY.


> since that is how I was trained.

Blame professor descartes, professor.

> While I have been very successful with this approach,

You're a liar, professor. You teach
people to hurt and murder dogs.

> I also have respect for other points of view

Cause you're a COWARD, professor.

> because I have known many very successful
> trainers who are not familiar with scientific theories.

Well professor, you've learned much from them.

> My goal for this site is to organize and give
> visitors easy access to the information

You're SELLIN stuff, professor FRAUD.

> available on the Internet about dog training and behavior.

You HURT dogs.

> The idea is to use technology

You mean DHOWEBLE TALK, professor.

> to provide a resource (or virtual library) that will
> be useful to pet owners, hobby trainers, professional
> trainers, scientists, veterinarians, police K9 handlers
> and other students of canine behavior.

YOU HURT DOGS, professor.

> In order to provide easy access to such a large
> amount of information, four interfaces are available.

<snip>

> Please note that I have included links to ANY
> page that provides substantive information
> about dog training and is not blatantly commercial
> (except for sections on books, videos & magazines
> & equipment providers, etc.).

BWEEEEEEAAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!

You link to the most viciHOWES sites on the WWW.

> Thus, I do not agree with everything
> that you may read here.

But you're willin to TEACH IT cause you
got no effective methods.

> In fact, sometimes one article will contradict another.

SHAAAZZZAAAMMM???

> However, I am a firm believer in intellectual freedom.

You're an OBSTRUCTIONIST, professor DOG ABUSER.

> The American Library Association defines intellectual
> freedom as "the right of every individual to both seek
> and receive information from all points of view without
> restriction.

There's NO effective SCIENTIFIC way to HURT
and INTIMIDATE dogs HOWEtside of a 24 HOWER
a day CON-TROLLED laboratory, professor.

> It provides for free access to all expressions
> of ideas through which any and all sides of a
> question, cause or movement may be explored.

You mean you'll do and say ANYTHING to defend
your alleged RIGHT to HURT and MURDER dogs.

> Intellectual freedom encompasses the freedom
> to hold, receive and disseminate ideas".

Animal abuse is what you DISSEMINATE, professor.

> I have had dogs for most of my life and it is t
> o them that I dedicate this site. I obtained my
> first purebred, a black, male, German Shepherd
> named Lobo in 1989. I began training him in a
> variety of ways (cross training).

BWEEEEEAHAHAHAHHAAA!!!

> We received titles in obedience, agility, and
> Schutzhund (protection) training

BWEEEEEAAHAHAHAHHAHAAA!!!

> and have given a few hundred presentations
> on the subjects of assistance dogs in particular
> and dog training in general. In 1994, I began
>working as a part-time, Field Instructor/Presenter
> for the nonprofit organization, PAWS With A
> Cause
> and have worked with several mobility impaired
> and hearing impaired clients since. Also in 1994,
> I began a K9 Behavioral Consulting Practice and
> obtained a second German Shepherd (a sable,
> female named Schatze).
>
>In 2001, I obtained another German Shepherd
> named Cree (after loosing Lobo to old age).
>This site grew out of my bookmarks file and was
> first posted in April of 1996. It has won numerous
> awardsand typically undergoes a major update
> twice each year. If you would like to be notified
> when this occurs, send an e-mail with the words
> "DT notify" in the header to mplonsky.DeleteThis@uwsp.edu.
>
> I believe that my experience of studying animal
> learning and behavior in an academic/research
> context, training dogs in a variety of ways, and
> using technology in education, provides me with
> a good perspective with which to serve as an
> organizer of this material and the webmaster
> (or librarian) of this site.

Perhaps professor plonksky should read The
Amazing Puppy Wizard's Archives on Google
and then get the heel HOWETA this business
before The doGgamened Puppy Wizard drops
the hammer on him for bein a dog abusing fraud.

> If you like the site, please consider making a
> donation to help support it.

CuriHOWES that the university doesn't pay
him enough so he don't need to beg money
from his readers. The Amazing Puppy Wizard
ain't never asked noWON for money to HEELP
them.

> Feel free to link to this site. Please note that
> the graphics used were designed to give it a
> unique look and feel and are NOT for public
> use unless they serve as banner links back
> to the pages of this site. If you wish to reprint
> an article, for whatever reason, you must obtain
> permission from the author of the article.
>I sincerely hope you enjoy your visit here and
> find it to be educational, helpful, and fun!

"Speech is a mirror of the soul: as a man speaks,
so is he." Publilius Syrus, First century B.C., Maxim 1073

"We are what we do."

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

>Paul B wrote:
>> While the concept of shake cans is not new,
>> I haven't read any other advice that says to
>> praise immediately regardless of what the dog
>> does next (the common advice is to praise once
>> the dog is doing a desired behaviour or at least
>> stopped the unwanted behaviour), this is unique
>> to Jerry (and Marilyn) and from my own experiences
>> is an important part of the process.

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

Jerry is not God and his manual is not the Bible.

His advice could be subject to an empirical analysis.

--Marshall

=================

"Marshall Dermer" <dermer.DeleteThis@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu>
wrote in message news:9ihtee$7ib$1@uwm.edu...
>
From: Paul B (NOSPAMpanders@zfree.co.nz)
Subject: Re: Jerry's Dog Training Manual
Date: 2001-07-12 00:13:28 PST

Hello Marshall,

The way I view it from my observation of how
my dogs react is that the distraction interrupts
the dogs thought, not for good or bad, just
interrupts, the dog is therefore distracted for
a second and then will either continue the
behaviour or do something else.

The praise reassures the dog that the sound
distraction is not a threat or punishment,
however if everytime the dog resumes a
particular behaviour it's distracted immediately
(and praised immediately for reassurance) then
it quickly decides this behaviour is not fulfilling
and it ceases.

A dog will offer another behaviour in it's place
and if that is acceptable to us then we let it be
otherwise the distraction continues until a suitable
alternate behaviour is offered.

One example, Sam used to jump up on me
when I arrived home, I would shake can to
distract him right at the moment he was
about to jump up, after about 4 repetitions
he tried sitting and offering me his paw, of
course this was fine so I let it be.

While the concept of shake cans is not new,
I haven't read any other advice that says to
praise immediately regardless of what the
dog does next (the common advice is to
praise once the dog is doing a desired
behaviour or at least stopped the unwanted
behaviour), this is unique to Jerry (and Marilyn)
and from my own experiences is an important
part of the process.

> Thanks Paul! He does recommend praising
> a dog for barking, but he appears to recognize
> that this may not work and so distraction
> is recommended as a back up procedure:
> There really is NOTHING new about the advice above!

Nuthin EXXXCEPT HOWE IT'S DONE.

From: Marshall Dermer (dermer@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu)
Subject: Re: Jerry's Dog Training Manual
Date: 2001-07-10 13:34:38 PST

In article <HRI27.3908$187.184000@news-rep.ab.videon.ca> "Jenn"
<dont.DeleteThis@try.it> writes:
>
> Hi Lynn,
>
> I used to have a barking problem with my
> German Shepherd Dog a couple of years ago.
> I tried several things recommended to me by
> different trainers, and nothing was working.
>
> When I read that section of Jerry's Manual,
> I thought the same way you did.
>
> "What???? PRAISE her for barking?" It sounded
> counterproductive, but I had tried everything else
> I'd heard so I thought I'd try it too.
>
> Next time she went nuts at a person walking by
> outside, I told her, "Good job! Good girl! You are
> such a good protector!" And instead of continuing
> the barking, she came to me for a belly rub! She
> will still bark (she's a guard dog, that's her job),
> but after one bark, she knows she's done her job
> to warn me by my praise, and she stops.
> Jenn,

Could you be so kind as to post here the
section from Jerry's manual where he
writes that you should JUST praise the
dog when it barks?????????

As I recall, I thought he first advocates
distracting the dog from barking, with
keys or the soft sound of pennies in a
can, before praising.

Perhaps you can tutor me regarding
Jerry's system.

Thanks in advance!

--Marshall Dermer

PS: I don't read Jerry's posts but I look
forward to your post.

From: Marshall Dermer (dermer@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu)
Subject: Re: Clicker training "stay"
Date: 2001-06-21 20:25:38 PST

In article <iqtY6.5456$rA2.1119871@news-rep.ab.videon.ca> "Jenn"
<dont.DeleteThis@try.it> writes:
>
> Hi, DogStar716, sorry you feel this way about
> me. I hope I can change your mind in the future,
> as I love reading your posts, and value (and
> have used) some of your advice.

BWWWWWEEEJAJAJAJAJAJAAAAA!!!

> As for my post to Jer, I am just attempting
> to get a plain answer about something instead
> of a trash- fest. I just want to know if it can be
> done.
>
> Jenn Standring

I'm not Jerry but sure you could use a clicker to
distract a dog but that is not the purpose of a clicker.

You can also use a teaspoon to cut steak but that
is not the purpose of teaspoon!

--Marshall

"Dan Moore" <mooreteam.DeleteThis@worldnet.att.net>

wrote in message
news:fS2Lc.114567$OB3.42357@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.
...
>
> Tracy,
>
> What worked for me, in just one storm,
> was to praise the dog after each clap
> of thunder, telling him he's a Good Dog!
>
> This is an almost 13 year old Doberman, BTW.
>
> The next time it thundered, he did not even
> react at all--you could not tell it was the same
> dog as before.
>
> There was more thunder just the other day,
> and same thing, nada, nothing, zilch, no
> cowering, whimpering, trying to hide at all,
> it was that simple.
>
> I got this idea from Jerry Howe, who might seem
> to be a "wild and crazy" character, but his non-
> abusive way of handling dogs WORKS.
>
> Wonderfully.
>
> Praise.
>
> It's that simple.
>
> Juanita


"Estel J. Hines" <ejhines.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:w86dna9lBfNZgbTdRVn-hA@comcast.com...
>
>>> Until i read the Jerry method of Bark
>>> reduction, it went something like this
>>> with our 11 month old puppy "Yoshi"
>>> Yoshi: Bark, bark,
>>> us: HUSH Youshi
>>> Yoshi Bark, bark......................
>>> us: Hush Youshi
>>> Yoshi BARK, BARK, BARK, ................................. >
>>> it stopped when Yoshi got tired barking
>>> We decided to try the Jerry method
>>> :Yoshi: BARK, BARK
>>> US: GOOD Yoshi, Good Boy, who is it?
>>> Yoshi Bark, Bark
>>> US: It's ok, good boy Yoshi, We know them.
>>> Yosh without fail, now stops after we say that.
>>> I must say, it is so much more fun, when we
>>> can praise him, to deal with things like this.
>>> Thanks Jerry
>>> ps: We are just starting to go thru the Jerry
>>> Papers, and learn how to live with our son
>>> "Yoshi", whom we love very much. --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Estel J. Hines

==============

"If I Knew It Would Be That Easy, I Would Have
Done This A Long Time Ago Saving Myself 5 Years
Of Dealing With A Bouncy, Over Excited Dog!" Jenn.

Hello Jenn,

"brijen" <brijen.DeleteThis@vennercnospams.com> wrote in message
news:397cfaa3_1@news.oanet.com...
> Hello Jerry,
> I just wanted to let you know that I am
> trying this right now. <