From: IN%"Scanwyre@aol.com" 17-MAR-1997 15:13:33.36 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Quarantine-some thoughts to robin@coape.win-uk.net I totally agree with the comments written in Our dogs . When I came over to GB I brought 15 dogs with me and put them all through quarenteen . I tried to make an effort to visit the dogs as often as possible .(I lived 200 miles from the quarenteen kennels . ) They coped the first couple of months . One bitch was particularly offended by "us having let her down " but most of them seemed to cope . We had tried to keep them together in 2's for company (they were all wire fox terriers and welsh terriers ). However by the time we got to the 4-5 th month most pals were unable to live together anymore as they started fighting each other . Our visits just made things worse and we decided to leave them alone for the last month to avoid more friction . From having 8 kennels we ended up having to use 13-14 kennels . After quarenteen the youngest ( who had been 5 weeks when she went into the kennels )was the dog that had taken it the worst . She died at the age of 4 - she was always a social misfit and it took her almost a year to let herself relate to humans . Another welsh terrier dog that had been totally normal on entry to the kennels had developed a stereotypic constant circling motion-so he always went round in circles that he never stopped doing and eventually he died of a meningo encephalitis like disease (that was the pathologists diagnosis post mortem) .He died about 11/2 years after quarenteen only 5 years old . None of the dogs that went through quarenteen did so without being somewhat changed mentally - they were more clingy , very nervouse (most of them had been show dogs) The problem with quarenteen is not the kennelling . All my dogs were used to that - it was the total lack of any social contact with other dogs or humans .They couldn't even see anything outside their kennels . So there was absolutely no mental stimulation at all . It was the total isolation and total lack of stimuli that caused the breakdown , I don't think anyone will be in any doubt as to what I think about quarenteen > Geraldine Ranken MRCVS . Cand Med Vet . From: IN%"richards@hula.net" 18-MAR-1997 00:26:53.10 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Quarantine - some thoughts Robin wrote: >The big question is: should the dogs be visited? Although perhaps >counter-intuitive, is it kinder to leave them and give them one >joyful reunion to restore the bond? Interesting: the veterinarian at the Hawaii Quarantine Station suggests that owners visit their animals at least twice a week, but I've often wondered if Robin's premise would not be better for the animals. As far as the staff caretakers forming an attachment with the dogs - fat chance! at least at the HI station. They have no formal (or informal) training in canine and feline behavior, and are slow in noting changes in the animals (i.e., diarrhea, loss of appetite, etc). They certainly do no tick checks (my dog picked up quite a few). As a whole they are uneducated, uninformed, and appear to exist only to do their job, and nothing more. (Do I sound a bit bitter about the experience?!) In this type of situation, I'd say it's better for the owners to visit - at least they'd be more alert to possible medical conditions. FWIW, Dawn From: IN%"billcamp@cdsnet.net" 18-MAR-1997 01:06:07.35 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: This is another test re the quarantine problem. Que nous voirons que passe. Bill From: IN%"Anna.Olsson@sjv.se" "Anna Olsson" 18-MAR-1997 04:07:18.95 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: normalcy/pathology -Svar Dear all, Allow me to comment on the statement of J M Faur`, that cannibalism is a pathological behaviour but that it clearly increases the fitness of the hen performing it. My comment is: does it?!? A flock of laying hens consists of if not genetically equal so at least very closely related sisters. None of them is ever allowed to reproduce, since 1) there is no male present in their lives from the day of hatching when all their brothers are milled into a god-knows-what-mash 2) their eggs fall out of the reach of a hatching hen and are removed daily. Is it really meaningful to talk about fitness in such a situation? And even if it is, given the close genetic relation between the animals, killing another hen doesn't seem to be the most obvious way of increasing one's own fitness. But I think the example is good, because it illustrates the limited value of traditional biological/evolutionary terminology in a completely artificial situation. Which is one of the reasons why we have so many definitions of welfare and do not stick to the one that welfare is good where fitness is good. I have the deepest respect for all of you out there who think about these things and come up with clear and distinct definitions, which are of great value for civil servants like me, working with animal welfare legislation and its implementation. Nevertheless a blasphemic thought now and then crosses the mind of the civil servant: MAYBE we could do more for the animals by discussing their situation than by discussing how to discuss it... (not to offend anybody, just food for thought!) Anna Olsson animal housing & welfare - organic animal husbandry Swedish Board of Agriculture Division for Animal Production and Management S-551 82 Jonkoping Sweden e-mail Anna.Olsson@sjv.se tel +46-36-155000 fax +46-36-308182 "Industrialization has transformed an agriculture created for the purpose of converting solar energy into human-useful form, into an agriculture that uses more nonrenewable energy from fossils than it captures as solar energy from the sun. But what is perhaps more important is that these industrial systems degrade their human resource base. Large specialized factory farms transform independent decision makers into people who know how to follow instructions or directions but not necessarily know how to think or make decisions." John Ikerd From: IN%"Anna.Olsson@sjv.se" "Anna Olsson" 18-MAR-1997 06:09:19.74 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: normality in abnormal situations Dear all, Allow me to comment on the statement of J M Faur=E9, that cannibalism is a pathological behaviour but that it clearly increases the fitness of the hen performing it. My comment is: does it?!? A flock of laying hens consists of if not genetically equal so at least very closely related sisters. None of them is ever allowed to reproduce, since 1) there is no male present in their lives from the day of hatching when all their brothers are milled into a god-knows- what-mash 2) their eggs fall out of the reach of a hatching hen and are removed daily. Is it really meaningful to talk about fitness in such a situation? And even if it is, given the close genetic relation between the animals, killing another hen doesn't seem to be the most obvious way of increasing one's own fitness. But I think the example is very interesting anyway, because it illustrates the limited value of traditional biological/evolutionary terminology in a completely artificial situation. I have the deepest respect for all of you out there who think about these things and come up with clear and distinct definitions, which are of great value for civil servants like me, working with animal welfare legislation and its implementation. I certainly need your work as the basis of mine! Nevertheless a blasphemic thought now and then crosses the mind of the civil servant: MAYBE we could do more for the animals by discussing their situation than by discussing how to discuss it... (not to offend anybody, just food for thought!) Anna Olsson animal housing & welfare - organic animal husbandry Swedish Board of Agriculture Division for Animal Production and Management S-551 82 Jonkoping Sweden e-mail Anna.Olsson@sjv.se tel +46-36-155000 fax +46-36-308182 "Industrialization has transformed an agriculture created for the purpose of converting solar energy into human-useful form, into an agriculture that uses more nonrenewable energy from fossils than it captures as solar energy from the sun. But what is perhaps more important is that these industrial systems degrade their human resource base. Large specialized factory farms transform independent decision makers into people who know how to follow instructions or directions but not necessarily know how to think or make decisions." John Ikerd= From: IN%"CRISPINS@aol.com" 18-MAR-1997 06:14:59.32 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: PLEASE HELP!!!! I am a student taking advanced level Biology, and am investigating the Behaviour of small rodents. I would be very grateful if anyone could e-mail me with any information on both Behavioural studies, or any relevant information onsmall mammals. Please send any reply's to my school e-mail address, with my name in the subject header. yours hopefully, Peter Kelly CRISPINS@aol.com From: IN%"d.arey@ab.sac.ac.uk" 18-MAR-1997 06:48:17.38 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Abnormal behaviour and fitness Dear JM Faure Cannibalism would only be likely to increase fitness under these circumstances if food was restricted and/or lacked certain nutrients - which I don't believe it is. Anyway, such behaviour would be likely to reduce inclusive fitness because of greater risk of infection etc. Does anybody else know of examples where 'abnormal' behaviour might increase fitness? JM Faure wrote > No. It is even more complicated. Canibalism is surely an abnormal behaviour > but increase the fitness of hens performing it (reduction of competition). Dale Arey Animal and Feed Technology SAC Craibstone Estate Bucksburn Aberdeen, AB21 9YA UK AB21 9YA Tel: 01224 711058 From: IN%"jdehasse@arcadis.be" 18-MAR-1997 08:00:47.43 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: normal/pathology Hi everybody, It seems this message was lost somewhere. So I'm sending it once again. I've just loaded the discussion and its emergences in my site for the people who want to review all of it: Dr Joel Dehasse (dvm) - Brussels - jdehasse@arcadis.be http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/2913/ http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/2913/pathology.htm http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/2913/patho-emergences.htm From: IN%"Iain.Christison@sask.usask.ca" "Iain Christison" 18-MAR-1997 08:24:11.15 To: IN%"d.arey@ab.sac.ac.uk" "Dale Arey" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: Abnormal behaviour and fitness Dairy husbandry provides an example where abnormal (uncommon?) behavior improves fitness in an agricultural context. Cows which kick while being milked are soon culled from the herd whereas those which stand calmly may lead a long placid life. In the "natural" situation it would be uncommon--even abnormal--for a cow to allow another species to steal her calf's milk regularly. If fitness is the ability to produce offspring, then the long-lived cow is much more fit than the kicker that is slaughterd early. ******************* Dr. Iain Christison Animal and Poultry Science University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon S7N 5B5, Canada Christison@admin.usask.ca From: IN%"Scanwyre@aol.com" 18-MAR-1997 09:55:09.90 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: normality in abnormal situations I totally agree with Anna Olson , As a vet working as a civil servant over here in Northern Ireland I too sometimes feel the need for discussing issues of animal welfare on another niveau . Whereas I appreciate that we do need research to demonstrate why something is a problem we are wasting far too much preciouse time trying to prove things that any Tom Dick or Harry without a degree can see with their own eyes is wrong : eg : Is it cruel to keep caged birds ?How long will it take before legislation is changed to stop 90% of our poultry living under totally unacceptable living conditions . In stead scientists are trying to find alternative caging systems to cater for the industry - what about the bird ? It is as though the academics live in their own world and whereas at the end of some research project we might all benefit from it ...for us working with these issues every day it is a nightmare having to accept conditions due to lack of proper legislation due to lack of scientific proof because far too much time is wasted debating terminology . G.Ranken From: IN%"robin@coape.win-uk.net" "Robin E Walker" 18-MAR-1997 10:01:51.86 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Do not read if squeamish! >Dear JM Faure > >Cannibalism would only be likely to increase fitness under these >circumstances if food was restricted and/or lacked certain nutrients >- which I don't believe it is. Anyway, such behaviour would be >likely to reduce inclusive fitness because of greater risk of >infection etc. > >Does anybody else know of examples where 'abnormal' >behaviour might increase fitness? > >JM Faure wrote > >> No. It is even more complicated. Canibalism is surely an abnormal behaviour >> but increase the fitness of hens performing it (reduction of competition). > > >Dale Arey We seem to be waving through the notion that canibalism is "abnormal". I wonder if this is strictly true. I wonder if cannibalism in many species is "normal" but not "preferred". I know it is hugely unpopular with people who have idealized or "arcadian" concepts of their favourite species but I have for some time, had an uneasy feeling about the history of higher primates in particular. There seems to be evidence of primates eating primates, humans eating primates, humans eating humans. Interwoven with the story seems to be the question of humans eating dogs. Bear with me..in Central America dog eating and cannibalism are recorded. Startling evidence of cannibalism and dog dating arises from the history of the Far East. The Polynesian voyagers sailed with their diet dogs and colonized perhaps unfortunately small landmasses and after consuming the local wild life, in many cases, settled down to "fish and chap" suppers (with side orders of dog) presumably of necessity. And this is only the humans. Cannibalism of conspecifics occurs in a great number of species. Is abnormal the word for it? Should we say "formerly normal"? I still wonder whether along the evolutionary trail we in fact doublecrossed Toxacara canis by switching to burying our dead and dropping dog (Tartar) from the menu. Thus leaving larvae encysted in the muscles of both species which would "normally" have been recycled as diet inclusions with greater likelihood. I do hope this discussion is not unpalatable. I think it is the sort of thing ethologists should chew on. From: IN%"DPOWELL@zool.umd.edu" "DAVID POWELL" 18-MAR-1997 10:16:56.99 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: cannibalism I don't think that 'abnormal' is an appropriate term to describe cannibalism. As mentioned earlier, there are situations where cannibalism is a highly advantageous adaptation (i.e. in periods of severe food restriction or shortage). Another case is infanticide in rodents. This is really just a special case of cannibalism, but many would agree that when a female rodent is not able to successfully rear a litter then it pays off to eat the offspring because a) their chances of survival and successful reproduction may be low, and b) by consuming those offspring she is able to essentially re-coop some of the investment that she put into those offspring and use it for reproduction. Finally I think we have to be careful about treating such "taboo' behaviors as cannibalism as though they are products of special and sometimes unrealistic circumstances (i.e. captivity). These behaviors just like any others have undergone equal selective pressure throughout evolutionary history and thus probably have adaptive value. There's my 2 cents. ********************************************************************** David M. Powell "Many people assume that the absence Department of Zoology of evidence is evidence of absence. University of Maryland This is bad scientific thinking." College Park MD 20742-4415 -Fouts Phone: (301)405-6890 Fax: 301-314-9358 email: dpowell@zool.umd.edu ********************************************************************** From: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" 18-MAR-1997 10:19:31.54 To: IN%"robin@coape.win-uk.net" "Robin E Walker" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: Polar explorers Didn't Amundsen & Co eat their sled dogs one at a time and feed the dead ones to the survivors en route to the S. Pole as the amount of supplies to be hauled declined? Scott and his bunch hauled their own sleds, lost the race and kicked the bucket on the way home. Sporting yes. But not terribly pragmatic, chaps! Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke.usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" 18-MAR-1997 10:26:38.81 To: IN%"robin@coape.win-uk.net" "Robin E Walker" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: Polar explorers Didn't Amundsen & Co eat their sled dogs one at a time and feed the dead ones to the survivors en route to the S. Pole as the amount of supplies to be hauled declined? Scott and his bunch hauled their own sleds, lost the race and kicked the bucket on the way home. Sporting yes. But not terribly pragmatic, chaps! Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke.usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"arion@dialatlanta.com" 18-MAR-1997 12:27:51.88 To: IN%"robin@coape.win-uk.net" "Robin E Walker" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: Do not read if squeamish! Robin E Walker wrote: > > > >Dear JM Faure > > > >Cannibalism would only be likely to increase fitness under these > >circumstances if food was restricted and/or lacked certain nutrients > >- which I don't believe it is. Anyway, such behaviour would be > >likely to reduce inclusive fitness because of greater risk of > >infection etc. > > > >Does anybody else know of examples where 'abnormal' > >behaviour might increase fitness? > > > >JM Faure wrote > > > >> No. It is even more complicated. Canibalism is surely an abnormal behaviour > >> but increase the fitness of hens performing it (reduction of competition). > > > > > >Dale Arey > > We seem to be waving through the notion that canibalism is > "abnormal". I wonder if this is strictly true. > > I wonder if cannibalism in many species is "normal" but not > "preferred". > > I know it is hugely unpopular with people who have idealized or > "arcadian" concepts of their favourite species but I have for some > time, had an uneasy feeling about the history of higher primates > in particular. There seems to be evidence of primates eating > primates, humans eating primates, humans eating humans. Interwoven > with the story seems to be the question of humans eating dogs. > > Bear with me..in Central America dog eating and cannibalism are > recorded. Startling evidence of cannibalism and dog dating arises > from the history of the Far East. > > The Polynesian voyagers sailed with their diet dogs and colonized > perhaps unfortunately small landmasses and after consuming the local > wild life, in many cases, settled down to "fish and chap" suppers > (with side orders of dog) presumably of necessity. > > And this is only the humans. Cannibalism of conspecifics occurs in > a great number of species. > > Is abnormal the word for it? Should we say "formerly normal"? > > I still wonder whether along the evolutionary trail we in fact > doublecrossed Toxacara canis by switching to burying our dead and > dropping dog (Tartar) from the menu. Thus leaving larvae encysted > in the muscles of both species which would "normally" have been > recycled as diet inclusions with greater likelihood. > > I do hope this discussion is not unpalatable. > > I think it is the sort of thing ethologists should chew on. > > Dear Robin, Once again you have left me laughing out loud. Personally, I have serious problems with the concepts of normal and abnormal. They do not seem to be productive in any way, as though one could look upon behavior as one looks upon a road map. The road goes on despite crossing borders established through the workings of the desire to control real resources. The topography may not change much, and the pavement may not change much, but the language and customs may. So that then puts the entire discussion into a value judgement plane that stunts thought processes by causing our brains to not look into certain information files once we have named something normal or abnormal. As to the palatability of your post, Robin: here in the USA we have a tee-shirt that sports the menu of the "Road Kill Cafe" Your post is also reminiscent of the Monty Python Flying Circus. Chris Redenbach From: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" 18-MAR-1997 14:42:11.64 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: A matter of faith? I once had a conversation with a very religious person. I told him that I consider myself to be an atheist since I do not believe that anything which we would consider to be a God or gods exists, has ever existed or could ever exist. He replied that in his opinion my faith was greater than his. I asked him what he meant by this and he replied that all his religious beliefs derived from faith that a single proposition was true wheras, with no greater power of evidence I believed that a multitude of propositions were categorically false. I suppose he had a point. Anyhow, I accept uncritically the proposition that animals (non-human, or not me at any rate) have subjective experiences. I expect that most readers of this list share this belief. Can anybody out there imagine what would constitute unequivocal PROOF that an animal ever had a subjective experience? Must all evidence be suggestive or circumstantial? Are we all bent out of shape with anthropomorphism and empathy? Is the proposition ultimately a matter of faith or is proof or rejection of the proposition logically, practically or technically possible? Or is it irrelevant? I'd like to solicit a few opinions or a bit of discussion on this area if you don't all think it's too esoteric. Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke..usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"bob-nita@neosoft.com" 18-MAR-1997 15:22:19.93 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Dog eating Dear all, I read the following statement and wondered how naive some of us are. "Startling evidence of cannibalism and dog eating arises from the history of the Far East." Well now... when in 1969 the villagers in up country Thailand were burdened with so many bureaucrats from Bankok they finally had to resort to serving mystery meat. After all, chicken was rare for them,even on a Sunday. After we vaccinated water buffalo all day, the chief served us a hash of sorts ladled over hot rice. It didn't taste bad, and it was only the next morning that we found the dog skin hanging on the balcony rail. These people didn't ordinarily eat dog, and they didn't ordinarily serve it to visitors, and they tried to maintain some degree of dignity, but they gave us the best they had to offer at the time and as their economic conditions permitted. I don't think evidence of dog eating is startling, and I feel that those who are startled would have been even more startled by the consuming of the large insects we called rice bugs, something like cockroaches, that could be purchased 5 for 1 baht in the market. The deep fried females with their egg sac appeared almost palatable, but the little kid with the live one in his mouth made me a little queezy. All of is to let you know that it beat the hell out of the little tiny poached frogs and embrionated sparrow eggs. FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH DEPARTMENT R. E. Armstrong DVM, MS Houston, TX From: IN%"shale@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu" "Steven L Hale" 18-MAR-1997 16:38:46.77 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: IN%"shale@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu" Subj: RE: Do not read if squeamish! (more talk about talk) Reflecting on the issues of value judgments, normalcy, cannibalism, and objectivity, I'm reminded of a very early treatise on the relativism of our judgements of behavior in others, Montaigne's sixteenth-century essay "Of Cannibals" (an older translation is available at http://www.idbsu.edu/courses/hy309/docs/montaigne/montaigne.04.html). (In brief, Montaigne argues that our censure of cannibals is bogus, since the allegedly civilized Portuguese, in their torturing of indigenous peoples, far outstrip the barbarity of eating human flesh. He also suggests that cannibalism is in fact a rational method for reducing violence, since the public act of eating a dead opponent may cow the remaining enemy forces into submission.) The question when we use terms like "normal" or "common" or "least significant deviation" isn't "Can we avoid anthropomorphic terminology?" since all language anthropomorphizes the phenomena it describes, or even "Can we reduce anthropomorphic language?" (although this may be a useful strategy in some cases), but "What is our purpose in describing or categorizing the behavior?" In other words, what is our agenda in categorizing the behavior of a cannibal as abnormal, or the behavior of a laboratory animal as pathological or stereotypical? An ethologist, a playwright, and a forensic psychologist may all seek to categorize a particular action as normal or pathological or common, and the results in each case may all be interesting (even though--or perhaps because--all the investigations are subjective), but any discussion of the categorizing that ignores the investigator's motives will be misleading and incomplete. Perhaps we could improve our discussions not by using a neutral, objective vocabulary (since none exists), but in avoiding language that glosses over subjectivity. I've noticed that the use of the passive voice in many of the postings on anthropomorphism, objectivity, and other such topics seems to coincide with an unstated epistemological precept that observers are separate or separable from the phenomena they observe. I don't believe that the two are entirely distinct--any treatise on how dogs behave is also a discussion of how the author and audience view dogs and why they're discussing dogs. Jon Watts' question "Can anybody out there imagine what would constitute unequivocal PROOF that an animal ever had a subjective experience" could be extended to homo sapiens: How could a human prove to another human that humans have ever had a subjective experience? --Steve Hale Humanities, DeKalb College shale@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu From: IN%"kmcn@flyball.org.uk" "Kevin McNicholas" 18-MAR-1997 16:43:10.35 To: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: A matter of faith? Hello Jon >I once had a conversation with a very religious person. I told him that I >consider myself to be an atheist since I do not believe that anything >which we would consider to be a God or gods exists, has ever existed or >could ever exist. He replied that in his opinion my faith was greater than >his. I asked him what he meant by this and he replied that all his >religious beliefs derived from faith that a single proposition was true >wheras, with no greater power of evidence I believed that a multitude of >propositions were categorically false. I suppose he had a point. A point or perhaps just a way of turning the question around. He would probably fit into his own catergory of faithfulness if he was asked about all the things he categorically did not believe in. >Anyhow, I accept uncritically the proposition that animals (non-human, or >not me at any rate) have subjective experiences. I expect that most >readers of this list share this belief. Can anybody out there imagine what >would constitute unequivocal PROOF that an animal ever had a subjective >experience? Must all evidence be suggestive or circumstantial? Are we all >bent out of shape with anthropomorphism and empathy? Is the proposition >ultimately a matter of faith or is proof or rejection of the proposition >logically, practically or technically possible? > >Or is it irrelevant? The benefit of the doubt argument is appropriate, in that, if we are not certain, or cannot prove whether animals share subjective experiences like ours. I feel that we should give them the benefit of the doubt that they do share, rather than assuming they don't. Regards Kevin Mc Nicholas London England UK email kmcn@flyball.org.uk or kevin9@mdx.ac.uk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke..usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"bob-nita@neosoft.com" 18-MAR-1997 16:47:25.68 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: cannibalism DAVID POWELL wrote: > > I don't think that 'abnormal' is an appropriate term to describe > cannibalism. As mentioned earlier, there are situations where > cannibalism is a highly advantageous adaptation (i.e. in periods of > severe food restriction or shortage). Another case is infanticide in > rodents. This is really just a special case of cannibalism, but many > would agree that when a female rodent is not able to successfully > rear a litter then it pays off to eat the offspring because a) their > chances of survival and successful reproduction may be low, and b) by > consuming those offspring she is able to essentially re-coop some of > the investment that she put into those offspring and use it for > reproduction. > > Finally I think we have to be careful about treating such > "taboo' behaviors as cannibalism as though they are products of > special and sometimes unrealistic circumstances (i.e. captivity). > These behaviors just like any others have undergone equal selective > pressure throughout evolutionary history and thus probably have > adaptive value. > > There's my 2 cents. > > ********************************************************************** > David M. Powell "Many people assume that the absence > Department of Zoology of evidence is evidence of absence. > University of Maryland This is bad scientific thinking." > College Park MD 20742-4415 -Fouts > Phone: (301)405-6890 > Fax: 301-314-9358 > email: dpowell@zool.umd.edu > ********************************************************************** > Dear all, Here's a quote from Hans Zinsser's book, RATS, LICE AND HISTORY "When the male members of the larger cat families - that is, mountain lions - waylay and eat their own children, this is not truly an evidence of ferocity. It is an indirect crime passionnel; the result of an impatient tenderness for the lioness who has become too exclusively the mother. The motive is love..." He also says, "Husband eating is an accepted custom with the spiders, and among the Alacran or Scorpions, it is quite derigeur for the mother to devour the father and then, in her turn, to be eaten by her kiddies." AGAIN, FROM THE FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH DEPARTMENT R. E. Armstrong Houston, TX From: IN%"clinn@cs.uop.edu" "Chris Linn" 18-MAR-1997 19:19:58.89 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: > Does anyone know of a Biography on Niko Tinbergen. I'm trying to track > one down. Thanks. Chris > clinn@frodi.cs.uop.edu From: IN%"Kate.Littin.1@uni.massey.ac.nz" "Kate Littin" 18-MAR-1997 22:47:47.72 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: laying hen housing Hi all, i was wondering if any experts/ others could give me any references to research/ communication on the maintenance of laying hens in alternative systems (ie. indoor/ outdoor housing without caging). I am interested in doing a review of such research conducted over the past 50 or so years. I will reply to any mail i receive and can follow it up with progress reports if you are interested. Thanks in advance... i look forward to further communication. Kate. ================================== = Kate Littin = = Dept. Physiology & Anatomy = = Massey University = = Private Bag = = Palmerston North = = New Zealand (Aotearoa) = = ph +64 06 3504481 = = Kate.Littin.1@uni.massey.ac.nz = ================================== From: IN%"digger@liverpool.ac.uk" "Matthew Adams" 19-MAR-1997 05:40:16.77 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "entire ethology net" CC: Subj: Human aggression I'm looking at human aggression in first born childs with relation to the age of their Father minus the age of their mother. Assuming the older the Father than the Mother, the more aggressive is the child. Does anyone know of any relavent literature, or contacts in this area. Much appreciated, Matthew Adams. From: IN%"cmeyer5@gwdg.de" "cmeyer5" 19-MAR-1997 06:48:52.53 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Do not read if squeamish! > Jon Watts' question "Can anybody out there imagine what > would constitute unequivocal PROOF that an animal ever had a subjective > experience" could be extended to homo sapiens: How could a human prove to > another human that humans have ever had a subjective experience? > > > --Steve Hale > Humanities, DeKalb College > shale@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu Oh, come on..... If we go on this way, then we will soon be dicussing if anyone can prove that the outside world exists at all..... As far as I remember, this question has been extensively addressed by some of our ancestors. Do you really want to repeat the old philosophers' arguments on applied-ethology? As far as Jon Watt's original mail is concerned: The question of whether his philosophical thoughts are irrelevant can, in my opinion, only be answered by asking in return: irrelevant for what, or for whom? Is anything "relevant" just by itself? The relevance of being able to prove that animals have subjective experiences depends on whether society asks for this proof. In my experience, they don't. Nowadays most people (should I say: in Western democracies?) are comfortable with the idea that animals are subjects with feelings etc, and every statement of the contrary produces a public outcry. Animal welfare legislation in our countries acknowledges the animals' ability to suffer and to experience pain. So why bother? Christiane Meyer -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. med. vet. Christiane Meyer Goettingen Germany -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"Heeler@aol.com" 19-MAR-1997 07:02:37.89 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Do not read if squeamish! In a message dated 97-03-18 11:09:11 EST, you write: >I wonder if cannibalism in many species is "normal" but not >"preferred". > There are human cultures where the ingestion of the body of your slain enemy is a social ritual. Not only normal but preferred. Why should it be not only normal but preferred? I'm no expert, but from my reading and experience, cannablism occurs mainly under conditions of overcrowding where the non-canablllistic resources don't meet the needs of the captive population. The population then turns to cannabilism. Think Donner Pass. Overcrowding can take many forms and not all of them are spacial. In cases of social overcrowding, a male lion may kill and eat his own offspring to protect his posession of his pride. I suspect that most forms of human ritual cannablism are related to some kind of social overcrowding. Cheers, Margie From: IN%"Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk" "CM. Sherwin" 19-MAR-1997 07:43:31.66 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: abnormal behaviour and fitness Dear All, 3-D Some people argue that use of running wheels by animals (traditionally laboratory or pet rodents, but also a surprisingly wide variety of other species including cats, rabbits, foxes and Tasmanian Devils) is an abnormal behaviour. It has been shown that activity in running wheels increases heart weight (Leshner 1971), aerobic capacity (Friedman et al. 1992), resistance to oxygen toxicity, immuno -competence (Suzuki et al. 1992) average survival (Holloszy 1992) and reduces fat depots and blood pressure (Suzuki et al. 1992). These changes in physiological characteristics would usually be considered beneficial to the animal making it RfitterS in terms of its ability to exercise; it would be interesting to examine whether these changes also confer benefits in terms of the animals ability to produce viable offspring and therefore influence fitness in an evolutionary sense. Chris Sherwin University of Bristol From: IN%"digger@liverpool.ac.uk" "Matthew Adams" 19-MAR-1997 08:50:11.95 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "entire ethology net" CC: Subj: EVOLUTION OF VISUAL OR AUDITORY SIGNALS Does anyone know any literature on the evolution of visual or auditory signals? Thanks, Matthew Adams. From: IN%"Frank.Odberg@rug.ac.be" "Frank Odberg" 19-MAR-1997 10:23:33.22 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "applied-ethology" CC: Subj: Cushing in horses Has anybody observed behavioural changes in horses suffering from Cushing's syndrome? Maybe depending from the site of the disorder and hence the relative increase of ACTH and cortisol? Are endorphins also affected? Thank you! Prof.Dr. Frank O. Odberg University of Ghent Dpt. of Animal Nutrition, Genetics, Production and Ethology Heidestraat 19 B-9820 Merelbeke Belgium tel: +32-(0)9-2521941 fax: 5304 From: IN%"rushenj@EM.AGR.CA" "Jeff Rushen" 19-MAR-1997 10:46:08.99 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: EVOLUTION OF VISUAL OR AUDITORY SIGNALS -REPONSE Yes >>> 19/03/ 09h55 >>> Does anyone know any literature on the evolution of visual or auditory signals? Thanks, Matthew Adams. From: IN%"Hans_Spoolder@adas.co.uk" 19-MAR-1997 10:54:29.22 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: evolution of visual and auditory signals (This E-mail message was sent to you using MIME. What you are currently reading is called a MIME preamble, which indicates that your E-mail system does not support MIME. However, you should be able to read the text of the message below, but all attachments are MIME encoded. If needed, please contact your E-mail administrator regarding your system's support for MIME.) --PartBoundary_Wed_Mar_19_16:26:26__3034163 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII This mail message, and any attachments, has been checked for Viruses by ADAS before dispatch to the Internet. Form: Reply Text: (13 lines follow) Matthew, To find out more about the evolution of communication (and various other behavioural characteristics) try: Behaviour and Evolution, by P.J.B. Slater and T.R. Halliday, 1994, Camb. Univ. Press., isbn 0 521 41858 5 Hans Spoolder ADAS Terrington King's Lynn PE34 4PW UK Tel.: 01553 828621 Fax: 01553 827229 Original text: (29 lines follow) From -maiser-@GATEWAY.ADASMail, on 19/03/97 15:00: Date: 19-Mar-1997 15:00:33 +0000 200Via-host: GATEWAY.INTERNET Subject: To: XANTHE WHITTAKER@ADASMail Re-sent-by: ; on Date: 19-Mar-1997 14:49:37 +0000 From: digger@liverpool.ac.uk (Matthew Adams) Subject: EVOLUTION OF VISUAL OR AUDITORY SIGNALS To: Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca (entire ethology net) X-NVLIPM-Non-Standard: RFC822 = Errors-to: applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca Message-id: <80FF2F3381E55E70>RFC822:ECS9703191437A@liv.ac.uk X-NVLIPM-Non-Standard: RFC822 = X-VMS-To: IN%"\""Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca"\"" "\""entire ethology net"\"" X-NVLIPM-Non-Standard: RFC822 = MIME-Version: 1.0 X-NVLIPM-Non-Standard: RFC822 = Priority: Normal This mail message, and any attachments, has been checked for Viruses by the ITC. Does anyone know any literature on the evolution of visual or auditory signals? Thanks, Matthew Adams. Use Proportional Font: true Previous From: -maiser-@GATEWAY.ADASMail Previous To: HANS SPOOLDER@ADASMail Original to: HANS SPOOLDER@ADASMail Attachment Count: 0 --PartBoundary_Wed_Mar_19_16:26:26__3034163 Content-Type: application/octet-stream Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATTRIBS.BND" QmV5b25kIFBhY2tlZCBBdHRyaWJ1dGVzAI79CB8mCgAAAAAAQmV5b25kIFByb3ByaWV0YXJ5IERh dGEaAAAAABEAAAAAAAQADQCyAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT3JpZ2luYWwgdGV4dIoDRgoA AAAAAAAAAAAAoAEDAIoDmgECAAIAAAAaAAIAAQABADMAAAAAAAAAAgA0AFcDAAAAAAAAOP8AAAAA AACQAQAAAAAAAAAATVMgU2FucyBTZXJpZgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOP8AAAAAAACQ AQAAAAAAAAAAQ291cmllcgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQABADQAAgA0APd/ AgBVAPd/AgBzAPd/AgCDAPd/AgChAPd/AgCyAPd/AgDTAPd/AgAAAfd/AgAxAfd/AgBqAfd/AgC6 Afd/AgD4Afd/AgBpAvd/AgCbAvd/AgDMAvd/AgDNAvd/AgAKA/d/AgAeA/d/AgAfA/d/AgAgA/d/ AgBwA/d/AgBxA/d/AgCJA/d/AgCKA/d/AgCLA/d/AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZAABpAEBSAMB7AQBkAYB NAgB2AkBfAsBIA0BxA4BaBABDBIBsBMBVBUB+BYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABkAAHgAQHAAwGgBQGABwFg CQFACwEgDQEADwHgEAHAEgGgFAGAFgFgGAFAGgAA --PartBoundary_Wed_Mar_19_16:26:26__3034163-- From: IN%"rushenj@EM.AGR.CA" "Jeff Rushen" 19-MAR-1997 11:16:59.47 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Post-Doc in Dairy Cattle Behaviour/Stress Funds will soon be available for a post-doctoral position in dairy cattle behaviour, welfare, housing and/or stress physiology. Research will concentrate on dairy cows' fear of people, and measures of cow comfort. The money will be available initially for 1 year, with the possibility of an extension to 3 years. If you are interested, contact: Jeff Rushen Dairy and Swine Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, PO Box 90, 2000 Route 108E, Lennoxville, Quebec, Canada, J1M 1Z3 Fax: 1-819-5645507 email: rushenj@em.agr.ca From: IN%"robin@coape.win-uk.net" "Robin E Walker" 19-MAR-1997 12:37:37.22 To: IN%"Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: abnormal behaviour and fitness >Dear All, 3-D > >Some people argue that use of running wheels by animals (traditionally >laboratory or pet rodents, but also a surprisingly wide variety of other >species including cats, rabbits, foxes and Tasmanian Devils) is an >abnormal behaviour. How so? Given the choice of falling flat on your whiskers or your tail and perhaps a natural preference for having your arse in roughly the same plane as your head..I would have thought running to preserve equilibrium would be quite natural! And of course running is itself rewarding so we must also consider the (environmental) alternatives. What? What? Robin. From: IN%"richards@hula.net" 19-MAR-1997 13:53:56.81 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Quarantine: some thoughts Robin wrote: >The big question is: should the dogs be visited? Although perhaps >counter-intuitive, is it kinder to leave them and give them one >joyful reunion to restore the bond? Interesting: the veterinarian at the Hawaii Quarantine Station suggests that owners visit their animals at least twice a week, but I've often wondered if Robin's premise would not be better for the animals. As far as the staff caretakers forming an attachment with the dogs - fat chance! at least at the HI station. They have no formal (or informal) training in canine and feline behavior, and are slow in noting changes in the animals (i.e., diarrhea, loss of appetite, etc). They certainly do no tick checks (my dog picked up quite a few). As a whole they are uneducated, uninformed, and appear to exist only to do their job, and nothing more. (Do I sound a bit bitter about the experience?!) In this type of situation, I'd say it's better for the owners to visit - at least they'd be more alert to possible medical conditions. FWIW, Dawn From: IN%"shale@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu" "Steven L Hale" 19-MAR-1997 13:56:37.97 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: IN%"shale@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu" Subj: Philosophy, language, and ethology (was Do not read) I understand Christiane Meyer's and Anna Olsson's impatience with all the discussion about language (as opposed to animal behavior), but whereas European-trained researchers tend to accept the intersubjectivity of humans and other animals, U. S.-trained researchers seem more likely to believe that any talk of the subjective experience of animals is anthropomorphic and has no place in an objective or scientific discussion. Hence my rather simplistic "if a tree falls in the forest" philosophizing--to question the privileged status of objectivity. I don't believe that the subjective or relativistic nature of experience means we can't or shouldn't act to reduce the suffering of sentient beings, nor do I believe that the discussion of language is more important than direct action. Most people on Applied-ethology are engaged in such action every day, and that's why I enjoy the list. --Steven Hale From: IN%"richards@hula.net" 19-MAR-1997 14:00:21.60 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: cannibalism: categorize, cannibalize? Robin said, >Bear with me..in Central America dog eating and cannibalism are >recorded. Startling evidence of cannibalism and dog dating arises >from the history of the Far East. I'm familiar with Micronesian, Korean, Filipino, Indonesian (and others) eating dog, but I confess I was not aware of dog dating! Is this practice meant to establish stronger alliances with the canine community, or increase trading partners perhaps? David Powell wrote >I don't think that 'abnormal' is an appropriate term to describe >cannibalism. As mentioned earlier, there are situations where >cannibalism is a highly advantageous adaptation (i.e. in periods of >severe food restriction or shortage). Another case is infanticide in >rodents I don't think I'd agree with human cannibalism being an advantageous adaptation, other than the successful concept of scaring enemies, which someone mentioned earlier - let's not forget about Kuru in the PNG Highlands. Forgive my lack of animal behavior background, but as an anthropologist, I think we have to be careful about using the term 'normal', particularly when applied cross-species. Even within species, it seems somewhat risky to me. Is there, for example, behavior that would be considered 'abnormal' (as opposed to pathological) in say, a Lab, but is considered common, or 'normal' in a Shar pei? Could we use the term "common" in lieu of "normal"? If so, we might think of "categorizing" behaviorial traits, as opposed to "cannibalising" them. Categorically yours, Dawn From: IN%"highamcj@acasun.eckerd.edu" "Chris J. Higham" 19-MAR-1997 17:30:59.13 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Crustacean learning and behavior Hi My name is Chris Higham and I am an undergraduate marine biology student at Eckerd College in St. Petersburg, Florida. I am just beginning to develop my senior thesis on spatial learning in Stomatopods (mantis shrimp). I am considering different experimental designs for this project. Is there anyone out there who has done research on spatial learning, memory, or behavior of crustaceans? I'm looking for the best type of laboratory and field experiments I could perform to research this. If not, I'm open for advice and suggestions from people who have done research on learning behavior in any animal. Your suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Chris From: IN%"billcamp@cdsnet.net" 19-MAR-1997 18:01:13.74 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: prick versus lop eared dogs I managed to hoist myself on my own petard when I posted on my home page a statement I had read somewhere to the effect that lop-eared dogs' hearing is not adversely affect by their pendula.(sp) And that lop-eared types hear as well as prick-eared canids. I *know* I read it and didn't note it [I think it was in something by John Paul Scott, et al). So, someone wrote... "Bill, give me the citation, Please. Waltham has data that says prick ears hear better than lops." After two days combing my library I can't find my citation. Can anyone recall where it may have been? Meanwhile, I'd like to believe that pricks hear better than lops... the exception being cropped lops, which aren't natural pricks anyway. Bill Campbell From: IN%"harrism@sask.usask.ca" 19-MAR-1997 21:02:21.03 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "etho-list" CC: IN%"HARRISM@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: Do not read if squeamish! (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 13:47:57 +0100 (MET) From: cmeyer5 To: applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca Subject: Re: Do not read if squeamish! > Jon Watts' question "Can anybody out there imagine what > would constitute unequivocal PROOF that an animal ever had a subjective > experience" could be extended to homo sapiens: How could a human prove to > another human that humans have ever had a subjective experience? > > > --Steve Hale > Humanities, DeKalb College > shale@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu Oh, come on..... If we go on this way, then we will soon be dicussing if anyone can prove that the outside world exists at all..... As far as I remember, this question has been extensively addressed by some of our ancestors. Do you really want to repeat the old philosophers' arguments on applied-ethology? Christiane Meyer Hi everyone. I think Steven Hale's point is very relevant and not in the least far-fetched. I accept that animals have a wide range of subjective experiences. And I accept that Jon Watts has a wide range of subjective experiences. I think Jon has them because a) he shows behaviours similar to my own and b) he tells he he's experiencing subjective states. But Jon could be lying to me. I just have to observe him and take his word for it. Similarly, I observe animals and assume that they're experiencing subj. states. I have no more (or less) proof that they are than that Jon is. And I can't think of any way in which I could prove that the animals are experiencing fear, anger or grief; similarly, I can't think of a way that I could prove that Jon is. - Moira Harris From: IN%"Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk" "CM. Sherwin" 20-MAR-1997 03:11:36.09 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: abnormal behaviour & fitness Dear All, 3-D My original message regarding use of running wheels by animals appears to have been misunderstood by some bulletin board readers. I am refering to voluntary wheel running in which the animal makes a choice as to whether it enters the wheel and runs. Robin E. Walker wrote that running is rewarding. I would be most interested in evidence for this in non-human animals. Regards, Chris Sherwin University of Bristol From: IN%"rumpik@vszbr.cz" "Ivona Rumpikova" 20-MAR-1997 03:42:38.69 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: an application Dear all, My name is Yvona and I am student Mendel University of Agriculture and Forestry in Brno, Czech Republic. Excuse me my English please but I uderstand if you write me. I take interest in a ethology and welfare of poultry, cattle, pets and ...dolphins. I carried out observations with regard to possible relationship between the intensity of fights and mortality in cages within the period of formation of social hierarchy. I welcome every information about it. Thank you. With regards, Yvona My e-mail addresse: rumpik@vszbr.cz From: IN%"robin@coape.win-uk.net" "Robin E Walker" 20-MAR-1997 04:24:44.77 To: IN%"Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk", IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: abnormal behaviour & fitness >Dear All, 3-D > >My original message regarding use of running wheels by animals appears to >have been misunderstood by some bulletin board readers. I am refering to >voluntary wheel running in which the animal makes a choice as to whether >it enters the wheel and runs. > >Robin E. Walker wrote that running is rewarding. I would be most >interested in evidence for this in non-human animals. > > >Regards, > >Chris Sherwin >University of Bristol Dear Chris, I think if you reverse your paragraphs above you answer your own question. Robin Keywords: Voluntary. Choice From: IN%"peter.penning@bbsrc.ac.uk" "Peter Penning" 20-MAR-1997 07:46:10.65 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Dolly and Mary Pinned up on our notice board - a salutary tale. "Mary had a little lamb, its fleece was slightly grey, It didn't have a father, just some borrowed DNA. It sort of had a mother, though the ovum was on loan, It was not so much a lambkin, as a little lamby clone. And soon it had a fellow clone, and soon it had some more, They followed her to school one day all cramming through the door. It made the children laugh and sing, the teachers found it droll, There were too many lamby clones, for Mary to control. No other could control the sheep, since their programs didn't vary, So the scientists resolved it all, by simply cloning Mary. But now they feel quite sheepish, those scientists unwary, One problem solved, but what to do, with Mary, Mary, Mary...." Full acknowledgement to the unknown author. From: IN%"robin@coape.win-uk.net" "Robin E Walker" 20-MAR-1997 08:24:06.63 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: "Clonepoem" "I think that I shall never see A thing so lovely as a me" Williams Clonesworth From: IN%"billcamp@cdsnet.net" 20-MAR-1997 11:53:42.84 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: A matter of faith? Re. Subjective experience by non-verbal animals. Re. Jon and self-consciousness in animals, With the advent of books by people such as Temple Grandin _Thinking in Pictures_ Doubleday, 1995, I am hoping more doubters of the concept of animal thinking and self-consciousness will read it and try to imagine thinking without linear verbal language and, hence, logic. It is possible to do this without plunging into a religious sect or joining a self-realization cult. Many folks who have successfully journeyed into non-verbalism often sound a bit like people who have had out-of-body experiences. And they are often treated the same skepticism. However, just as western science has struggled with its mis-interpretation of Bacon's introduction to the scientific method of inductive proceedings [substituting the concept of *experiment* and rigid *objectivity* for its original emphasis on *experience*] many western animal behaviorists ironically subjectivize their interpretation of animal consciousness within the limits of verbalism. I know it's not popular in many scholastic circles, but I still enjoy quoting the late James V. McConnell's marvelous challenge... *If you're going to study flatworm behavior, you'd better learn to think like a flatworm.* Woof, arf-grrrr. [oops] Bill Camp-bell >I once had a conversation with a very religious person. I told him that I >consider myself to be an atheist since I do not believe that anything >which we would consider to be a God or gods exists, has ever existed or >could ever exist. He replied that in his opinion my faith was greater than >his. I asked him what he meant by this and he replied that all his >religious beliefs derived from faith that a single proposition was true >wheras, with no greater power of evidence I believed that a multitude of >propositions were categorically false. I suppose he had a point. > >Anyhow, I accept uncritically the proposition that animals (non-human, or >not me at any rate) have subjective experiences. I expect that most >readers of this list share this belief. Can anybody out there imagine what >would constitute unequivocal PROOF that an animal ever had a subjective >experience? Must all evidence be suggestive or circumstantial? Are we all >bent out of shape with anthropomorphism and empathy? Is the proposition >ultimately a matter of faith or is proof or rejection of the proposition >logically, practically or technically possible? > >Or is it irrelevant? > >I'd like to solicit a few opinions or a bit of discussion on this area if >you don't all think it's too esoteric. > > >Jon > >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Jon Watts (___) ) ) >University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( >Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) >and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( >Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) >52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& >Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ >S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ >Canada &^%%#$@ >wattsjon@duke..usask.ca "The Holy Cow" >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" 20-MAR-1997 12:17:12.41 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: IN%"f.wemelsfelder@ed.sac.ac.uk" "Francoise Wemelsfelder" Subj: animal subjectivity I think this question about subjective experiences is very important for at least three reasons. 1) Much animal welfare research is done, funded and justified on the easily understandable but difficult to demonstrate idea that animals have subjective experiences, that they can be positive or negative, and that we have some sort of responsibility to cut down on the negative. 2) As Bill Campbell hinted, there are undoubtedly insights to be had about why animals do what they do if we can find better ways to understand the world from the animal's perspective. 3) If our approach to scientific problems is so constrained that perfectly sensible questions like "do animals have subjective experiences?" appear to be unanswerable by our normal standards of scientific evidence, then maybe we need a different approach. The reason I posed this question was to do with 3). I was wondering what an alternative ethological paradigm might look like. I wanted to know what people thought about the value of what we normally consider to be scientific evidence and whether they could envisage alternatives that might achieve some kind of respectability among 21st behaviour scientists (note that I do not say "behaviourists"). I picked the question of animal subjective experiences as an example of something most of us agree about in principle (if not in kind or degree), but about which we don't appear able to produce convincing, testable hypotheses in the conventional way. This is an extraordinarily difficult question of course. It is not surprising that people do not wish to get into it for fear of being mixed up in a tedious rehashing of ancient philosophy and arguments from analogy and opinions based on structural and behavioural similarities between humans and other animals etc. Let alone, heaven forbid that we should discuss at length whether I am the centre of a solipsistic universe and you are all figments of my strange imagination! I had in mind something more concrete. Is there a better way of trying to interpret the world from an animal's perspective than watching what it does and trying to guess what it means? Donald Griffin said that one way to find how animals subjectively experience the world is through studies of communication. He emphasised the kind of studies in which the experimenter and animal interact. For example with signing apes and talking parrots. One could imagine a kind of Turing test for animal consciousness I suppose. (Alan Turing proposed a way to test whether a machine could think. A person would communicate via a keyboard with either a computer or another person. If one couldn't reliably distinguish which was which, you would have to concede that the computer was thinking.) Translate this to an animal example and I suppose you would ask the animal questions about its subjective experiences and if the answers suggested that the animal had such experiences you would have to believe it. Or would you? This plan has the obvious flaw that the animal could deceive you by claiming to have subjective experiences when it in fact did not. Unless you believe that the ability to deceive or misrepresent itself is sufficient evidence to suggest consciousness, which I do not. After all, even an orchid can pretend to be a bee. I just throw this out in case it triggers an idea with anyone else. Maybe there is some way to exploit Virtual Reality to better understand the world as perceived by the animal. I mean more than just mincing about with a silly helmet on. Perhaps if you can perceive the world through a detailed sensory simulation of your species of choice you might be able to examine an analogue of the animal's experience through introspection, in the style of pre-behaviourist psychologists. If, that is, you could be trained or drugged in a way that would submerge your tendency to make anthropomorphic interpretations of the input. Maybe subjectivity is an emergent function of certain levels of complexity in sensory systems. Perhaps it could occur even in very "simple" animals. Maybe animat researchers might be able to look at developing genetic algorithms to simulate creatures which could continuously comment on their cognitive processing and which might, if they "evolve" to sufficient complexity begin spontaneously reporting qualitative statements about their perceptions. That might tell us something an an analogical way about real animals. Anyone else have any ideas? They HAVE to be better than anything I can come up with. Or is it still too esoteric? Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke.usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"cmeyer5@gwdg.de" "cmeyer5" 20-MAR-1997 13:31:39.53 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Philosophy, language, and ethology > whereas > European-trained researchers tend to accept the intersubjectivity of > humans and other animals, U. S.-trained researchers seem more likely > to believe that any talk of the subjective experience of animals is > anthropomorphic and has no place in an objective or scientific > discussion. Why? Christiane Meyer -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. med. vet. Christiane Meyer Goettingen Germany -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"liesl@iastate.edu" 20-MAR-1997 13:50:44.12 To: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: animal subjectivity Has anyone (other than-possibly-Dr. Grandin) physically put themselves in the animal's environment and lived for a spell...as if they were that animal? Although reflections of these observations would still be from a human's perspective, they would be interesting. Afterall, it is the only perspective I can understand-at the moment. -Liesl > I think this question about subjective experiences is very important for > at least three reasons. 1) Much animal welfare research is done, funded > and justified on the easily understandable but difficult to demonstrate > idea that animals have subjective experiences, that they can be positive > or negative, and that we have some sort of responsibility to cut down on > the negative. 2) As Bill Campbell hinted, there are undoubtedly insights > to be had about why animals do what they do if we can find better ways to > understand the world from the animal's perspective. 3) If our approach to > scientific problems is so constrained that perfectly sensible questions > like "do animals have subjective experiences?" appear to be unanswerable > by our normal standards of scientific evidence, then maybe we need a > different approach. > > The reason I posed this question was to do with 3). I was wondering what > an alternative ethological paradigm might look like. I wanted to know > what people thought about the value of what we normally consider to be > scientific evidence and whether they could envisage alternatives that > might achieve some kind of respectability among 21st behaviour scientists > (note that I do not say "behaviourists"). > > I picked the question of animal subjective experiences as an example of > something most of us agree about in principle (if not in kind or degree), > but about which we don't appear able to produce convincing, testable > hypotheses in the conventional way. This is an extraordinarily difficult > question of course. It is not surprising that people do not wish to get > into it for fear of being mixed up in a tedious rehashing of ancient > philosophy and arguments from analogy and opinions based on structural and > behavioural similarities between humans and other animals etc. Let alone, > heaven forbid that we should discuss at length whether I am the centre of > a solipsistic universe and you are all figments of my strange imagination! > > I had in mind something more concrete. Is there a better way of trying to > interpret the world from an animal's perspective than watching what it > does and trying to guess what it means? > > Donald Griffin said that one way to find how animals subjectively > experience the world is through studies of communication. He emphasised > the kind of studies in which the experimenter and animal interact. For > example with signing apes and talking parrots. One could imagine a kind of > Turing test for animal consciousness I suppose. (Alan Turing proposed a > way to test whether a machine could think. A person would communicate via > a keyboard with either a computer or another person. If one couldn't > reliably distinguish which was which, you would have to concede that the > computer was thinking.) Translate this to an animal example and I suppose > you would ask the animal questions about its subjective experiences and if > the answers suggested that the animal had such experiences you would have > to believe it. Or would you? This plan has the obvious flaw that the > animal could deceive you by claiming to have subjective experiences when > it in fact did not. Unless you believe that the ability to deceive or > misrepresent itself is sufficient evidence to suggest consciousness, which > I do not. After all, even an orchid can pretend to be a bee. I just throw > this out in case it triggers an idea with anyone else. > > Maybe there is some way to exploit Virtual Reality to better understand > the world as perceived by the animal. I mean more than just mincing about > with a silly helmet on. Perhaps if you can perceive the world through a > detailed sensory simulation of your species of choice you might be able to > examine an analogue of the animal's experience through introspection, in > the style of pre-behaviourist psychologists. If, that is, you could be > trained or drugged in a way that would submerge your tendency to make > anthropomorphic interpretations of the input. > > Maybe subjectivity is an emergent function of certain levels of complexity > in sensory systems. Perhaps it could occur even in very "simple" animals. > Maybe animat researchers might be able to look at developing genetic > algorithms to simulate creatures which could continuously comment on their > cognitive processing and which might, if they "evolve" to sufficient > complexity begin spontaneously reporting qualitative statements about > their perceptions. That might tell us something an an analogical way about > real animals. > > Anyone else have any ideas? They HAVE to be better than anything I can > come up with. > > Or is it still too esoteric? > > Jon > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Jon Watts (___) ) ) > University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( > Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) > and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( > Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) > 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& > Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ > S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ > Canada &^%%#$@ > wattsjon@duke.usask.ca "The Holy Cow" > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Liesl M Hohenshell ...not an animal rights activist, Iowa State University a welfare radical. 337 Kildee Hall Ames, IA 50011 515-294-2286 liesl@iastate.edu From: IN%"bhayes@dsu.deltast.edu" "William A. Hayes" 20-MAR-1997 15:39:05.55 To: IN%"liesl@iastate.edu" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: animal subjectivity On Thu, 20 Mar 1997 liesl@iastate.edu wrote: > Has anyone (other than-possibly-Dr. Grandin) physically put themselves in > the animal's environment and lived for a spell...as if they were that animal? > Although reflections of these observations would still be from a human's > perspective, they would be interesting. Afterall, it is the only > perspective I can understand-at the moment. > -Liesl Fritz Walther (who was on my dissertation committee and who wrote _Of Horn and Hoof_) spent a number of months living in a pen with Thompson's gazelles, crawling around on all fours and returning displays so that he was pretty much taken as a rather large male by the herd. He definitely got a herd's eye view of the behavior! Best wishes, Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- William A. Hayes, II, Ph.D. | If you follow your bliss, you put yourself Professor of Biology | on a kind of a track that has been there P.O.Box 3234 | the whole while, waiting for you, and the Delta State University | life you ought to be living is the one you Cleveland, MS 38733 | are living. --- Joseph Campbell ph: 601-846-4247 \ _____ ____ fax: 601-846-4016 | \_____ _____/ \ email: bhayes@dsu.deltast.edu | __ \^^/ __ | | ////)\(0= =0)/(\\\\ // ^\| / ^^ \ |/^ \\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Website - http://okra.deltast.edu/~bhayes/index.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"Kate.Littin.1@uni.massey.ac.nz" "Kate Littin" 20-MAR-1997 16:19:46.11 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: E-mail virus warning This looked important... >This bulletin was put out by IBM this morning. Please pass it on to >>everyone on your e-mail list. > >> >>>If anyone receives mail entitled; PENPAL GREETINGS! please delete it >>>WITHOUT reading it!! This is a warning for all Internet users - there >>>is a dangerous virus propagating across the Internet through an e-mail >>>message entitled "PENPAL GREETINGS!" >>> >>>DO NOT DOWNLOAD ANY MESSAGE ENTITLED "PENPAL GREETINGS"!! >>> >>>This message appears to be a friendly letter asking you if you are >>>interested in a penpal, but by the time you read this letter, it is too >>>late. The "TROJAN HORSE" virus will have already infected the boot >>>sector of your hard drive, destroying all of the data present. It is a >>>self-replicating virus, and once the message is read, it will >>>AUTOMATICALLY forward itself to anyone who's e-mail address is present >>>in YOUR mailbox. >>> >>>This virus will DESTROY your had drive, and holds the potential to >>>DESTROY the hard drive of anyone whose mail is in your in box, and who's >>>mail is in their in box and so on. If this virus keeps getting passed, >>>it has the potential to do a great deal of DAMAGE to computer networks >>>worldwide!!! >>> >>>Please, delete the message entitled "PENPAL GREETINGS!" as soon as you >>>see it! Ensure this message is passed along to all of your friends, >>>relatives and the other readers of the newgroups and mailing lists which >>>you are on so that they are not hurt by this dangerous virus!!! >B. Offergeld, Faculty Computer Support Consultant >Veterinary Sciences Faculty, Massey University >Palmerston North, NEW ZEALAND > > ...Kate Littin ================================== = Kate Littin = = Dept. Physiology & Anatomy = = Massey University = = Private Bag 11-222 = = Palmerston North = = New Zealand (Aotearoa) = = ph +64 06 3504251 = = Kate.Littin.1@uni.massey.ac.nz = ================================== From: IN%"rushenj@EM.AGR.CA" "Jeff Rushen" 20-MAR-1997 17:42:57.96 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Email virus CLONED! I have some further information about the origin of the "pen pal" virus. Researchers at the Saskatoon School of Virtual Agriculture recently caught the notorious "Good Times" virus (remember that one!) just after it destroyed the NASA computer system. Being theriogenologists and hence unaware of the ethical implication of their research, they cloned the virus by extracting its virtual DNA and injecting it into a harmless email message that they had received from their pen pals. They cloned the virus by sending the message back and forth to each other, while keeping a copy. Unfortunately, they forgot to remove the email address of the pen pal, and so the virus was unleashed on the internet. If you receive the message, there is not much you can do. The virus is particularly dangerous since it appears to have subjective experiences. Trying to delete the message will result in a copy being sent to your virtual wastebasket, where it will thrive on the intellectual detritus living there. The best thing is, turn off your computer and take the day off. It will all seem like a bad dream in the morning. Jeff From: IN%"Pscampb@aol.com" 20-MAR-1997 18:32:37.01 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Dolly and Mary Hi! That's cute. Speaking of the lamb Dolly I read one article that said scientists we interested in the aging process of Dolly since the nucleus donor was seven years old Since she was actualy made from seven year old material would she age normally? I love You S From: IN%"kjohnson@numbat.murdoch.edu.au" 20-MAR-1997 20:57:13.80 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Thinking about thinking Jon Watts' search for new ways of thinking (about thinking) animals is the type of venture that will not be supported by granting bodies these days. But it is sort of creativity that just might let us take a great leap forward. Jon asks, "is it .. too esoteric?" Never. Keep it coming. There are only ever a few contributors at this level, we can't afford to neglect them. Ken Dr Ken Johnson, School of Veterinary Studies, Murdoch University. W.A. 6150 AUSTRALIA Phone: +61 (9) 360 2257 Fax: +61 (9) 310 4144 From: IN%"Anna.Olsson@sjv.se" "Anna Olsson" 21-MAR-1997 01:06:32.68 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Email virus CLONED! -Svar Dear Jeff My compliments for your ever-so-refreshing way of putting things back into perspective! Best wishes, Anna Olsson animal housing & welfare - organic animal husbandry Swedish Board of Agriculture Division for Animal Production and Management S-551 82 Jonkoping Sweden e-mail Anna.Olsson@sjv.se tel +46-36-155000 fax +46-36-308182 "Industrialization has transformed an agriculture created for the purpose of converting solar energy into human-useful form, into an agriculture that uses more nonrenewable energy from fossils than it captures as solar energy from the sun. But what is perhaps more important is that these industrial systems degrade their human resource base. Large specialized factory farms transform independent decision makers into people who know how to follow instructions or directions but not necessarily know how to think or make decisions." John Ikerd University of Minnesota From: IN%"d.arey@ab.sac.ac.uk" 21-MAR-1997 04:48:58.56 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: abnormal cows, hens and hamsters To Iain Christison, JM Faure, Chris Sherwin et al Is'nt placidity at milking a normal behaviour which has been artificially selected for and as a consequence of this, increased the fitness of these individuals. If all cows were released back into the wild, the minority group of kickers would then be selected for and eventually return to dominance within the population. Cannibalism is perhaps the wrong term to use when describing the behaviour of hens in cages. Is not a hen which aggressively pecks at a neighbour which represents competition and encroaches too close, behaving normally? What is abnormal about this situation is that the recipient can't escape. On the other hand, birds which feather peck appear to be displaying thwarted attempts to forage which may be considered abnormal as there appears to be no nutritive benefits only energy costs from performing it. Incidently, marathon running is also an abnormal behaviour which reduces fitness and I would also be interested to know whether equivalent consequences occur in wheel running hamsters etc. Dale Dale Arey Animal and Feed Technology SAC Craibstone Estate Bucksburn Aberdeen, AB21 9YA UK AB21 9YA Tel: 01224 711058 From: IN%"jkincaid@oncomdis.on.ca" 21-MAR-1997 06:52:28.22 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: More on animal feelings Subject: More on non human feeling Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 19:47:12 -0500 From: John Kincaid Reply-To: jkincaid Organization: ONLINE COMPUTER DISTRIBUTION To: appled-ethology@skyway.usak.ca Dear All; I have been following the discussion on non human feeling with great interest and would like to respond at this point. Regarding animal, and for the purposes of this post animal will refer to non human, I recall a post made from Dr. Suzanne Macdonald to me during which she mentioned the difficulties of proving animal feelings when we aren’t even able to say scientifically what a human feeling is. Nevertheless we know that they exist. That is good enough for me. As for proof I am not sure we could ever come up with a definition that would satisfy all of us. I recall a discussion during which a specialist in aerodynamics said that according to what was known then the common honey bee couldn’t fly. Yet we all know they do. If there is more recent knowledge that anyone has I would be pleased to hear it for reasons the bee can fly. This point was mentioned to illustrate that there is a lot we know that we can’t prove, and may never have any objective evidence for yet it happens. I feel: they feel. Now lets get on with making life more humane for them. For what it is worth and hoping to promote more discussion John From: IN%"mmolina@ull.es" 21-MAR-1997 07:04:35.23 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: practicals on applied ethology I teach ethology in the last courses of the Biology career and I am interested in obtaining information on applied-ethology practicals that could be used by students. I am particularly interested in those practicals related to ethology-species conservation (or reintroduction) and ethology-agriculture (pests) in vertebrates. Thank you From: IN%"rushenj@EM.AGR.CA" "Jeff Rushen" 21-MAR-1997 08:19:47.03 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Animal subjectivity The reason I find the debate about animal subjectivity so sterile is that the question posed "Are animals capable of subjective experience?" is too general I can't believe that many people, if they give the moment some thought, would really assert that not one of the billions of individuals of the several million different species of animals has ever had a subjective experience, about anything. In any case, as someone has pointed out, our society gives the benefit of the doubt to many animals: if I torture my dog in the street, I doubt that the judge trying my case would accept my defence that there is no scientific evidence that animals feel pain. I don't see the value of debating the general arguement any further since it is a straw man. The real problems come when we try to deal with less obvious, specific circumstances. I don't see the point of agruing about whether dogs or pigs can feel pain. Our society accepts that they can. However, it is far from obvious if pigs are suffering when they are performing stereotypies, or if pigs are bored when in gestating crates, for example. This is far from obvious. Accepting that "animals" are capable of subjective experience, does not help us answer this specific question. The problem comes not so much from the difficulties of answering the question "in principle", but from the fact that no-one has yet thought up a convincing way of answering the question in practice. Jeff Rushen rushenj@em.agr.ca From: IN%"sschmerl@umich.edu" 21-MAR-1997 09:32:21.81 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" Subj: RE: animal subjectivity On Thu, 20 Mar 1997 12:16:49 -0600 (CST) wattsjon@duke.usask.ca (Jon Watts) wrote: Unless you believe that the ability to deceive or >misrepresent itself is sufficient evidence to suggest consciousness, >which >I do not. After all, even an orchid can pretend to be a bee. An orchid does not pretend to be a bee in the same sense that I pretend not to know where the cookies are hidden. You are indulging in teleological thinking, I'm afraid. An orchid grows in a way, determined more or less by a genetic program, that results in a shape which may resmble a bee. The genetic program may result from selection...but you know all that. Frankly, I can't imagine how the ability to deceive could NOT imply consciousness. A question, to help me follow the discussions: Is there a big difference between "subjective experience," "consciousness," and "thinking," or are they roughly equivalent for the purposes of this discussion? Thanks Sonia From: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" 21-MAR-1997 10:09:19.00 To: IN%"sschmerl@umich.edu" "Sonia Schmerl" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: animal subjectivity On Fri, 21 Mar 1997, Sonia Schmerl wrote: > > An orchid does not pretend to be a bee in the same sense that I pretend > not to know where the cookies are hidden. You are indulging in > teleological thinking, I'm afraid. An orchid grows in a way, determined > more or less by a genetic program, that results in a shape which may > resmble a bee. The genetic program may result from selection...but you > know all that. OK bad example. But a "deceptive" behaviour could also result from a genetic program. For example piloerection in many mammals, could be described as deceptive in the sense that it may make the animal appear larger and more dangerous than it actually is. This is unlikely to be under voluntary or conscious control in many cases, nor is it learned. This is a very simple example of course but the challenge is to explain how hiding cookies differs in principle. > > Frankly, I can't imagine how the ability to deceive could NOT imply > consciousness. I don't mean to dismiss deception as irrelevant to the question of how animals represent their world and their relations with other individuals. Or deny that it may tell us a good deal about an animal's ability to interpret events from another individual's perspective. I just meant to suggest that deception per se may not necessarily imply or require conscious processing. So one might not consider deception unqualified proof that the animal was aware. > "subjective experience," "consciousness" and "thinking," > are they roughly equivalent for the purposes of this > discussion? Yeah I guess so. I'm not too fussy about the definitions. I think they all reflect an idea of an animal being in some sense aware or sentient. Anyone got any good ideas, wacky speculations, lateral thinking or anything that could let us know more about WHAT animals experience qualitatively. I tried to suggest a couple of (probably naive) ideas about how we could figure out what animals may be feeling. I'd be really happy to hear some more thoughts on this. Don't be afraid. It's only a game:-) Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke.usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" 21-MAR-1997 10:13:57.41 To: IN%"sschmerl@umich.edu" "Sonia Schmerl" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: animal subjectivity On Fri, 21 Mar 1997, Sonia Schmerl wrote: > > An orchid does not pretend to be a bee in the same sense that I pretend > not to know where the cookies are hidden. You are indulging in > teleological thinking, I'm afraid. An orchid grows in a way, determined > more or less by a genetic program, that results in a shape which may > resmble a bee. The genetic program may result from selection...but you > know all that. OK bad example. But a "deceptive" behaviour could also result from a genetic program. For example piloerection in many mammals, could be described as deceptive in the sense that it may make the animal appear larger and more dangerous than it actually is. This is unlikely to be under voluntary or conscious control in many cases, nor is it learned. This is a very simple example of course but the challenge is to explain how hiding cookies differs in principle. > > Frankly, I can't imagine how the ability to deceive could NOT imply > consciousness. I don't mean to dismiss deception as irrelevant to the question of how animals represent their world and their relations with other individuals. Or deny that it may tell us a good deal about an animal's ability to interpret events from another individual's perspective. I just meant to suggest that deception per se may not necessarily imply or require conscious processing. So one might not consider deception unqualified proof that the animal was aware. > "subjective experience," "consciousness" and "thinking," > are they roughly equivalent for the purposes of this > discussion? Yeah I guess so. I'm not too fussy about the definitions. I think they all reflect an idea of an animal being in some sense aware or sentient. Anyone got any good ideas, wacky speculations, lateral thinking or anything that could let us know more about WHAT animals experience qualitatively. I tried to suggest a couple of (probably naive) ideas about how we could figure out what animals may be feeling. I'd be really happy to hear some more thoughts on this. Don't be afraid. It's only a game:-) Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke.usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"serpell@vet.upenn.edu" 21-MAR-1997 11:33:47.14 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: animal subjectivity I tend to agree with Jeff Rushen that all this talk of animal subjectivity or self-awareness is likely to run up against an impenetrable barrier in the near future. We know that (most) adult humans have what is now generally referred to as "a theory of mind" -- that is, a theory about how others think and feel based upon introspection or self-knowledge. We also know that three-year-old children do not apparently have a theory of mind. Numerous studies have shown that they appear to be unable to take another's perspective, although by the age of four or five they begin to do so. It is unclear whether any nonhumans possess a theory of mind, because no-one (despite considerable effort) has been able to devise the definitive animal experiment that would discriminate once and for all between actions based on having a theory of mind, and actions based on clever observation of predictable contingencies -- e.g. if I do this, he will do that, because that's what he usually does. The best evidence so far, based on training pairs of animals in tandem, when one can see the reward but can't operate the levers, while the other can operate the levers but can't see which one will release the reward suggests that chimpanzees and orangs have theories of mind, but baboons and rhesus monkeys do not. But even these findings have been challenged for a variety of methodological reasons and, in any case, if correct they certainly wouldn't imply that baboons can't "think" or engage in apparently deceptive behavior. There are exellent reviews of all this stuff in Byrne and Whiten's book "Macchiavellian Intelligence" and in Cheney & Seyfarth's "How Monkeys See the World" for those who wish to delve further. James Serpell ___________________________________________________________________ School of Veterinary Medicine, Dept. of Clinical Studies, University of Pennsylvania, 3900 Delancey Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6010. USA. Tel: (215) 898-1004 Fax: (215) 573-6050 serpell@vet.upenn.edu From: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" 21-MAR-1997 12:51:35.38 To: IN%"serpell@vet.upenn.edu" "James Serpell" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: Theories of mind Interesting issue raised by James Serpell. I'm not sure about what qualifies as evidence of a theory of mind though. When my baby son was a couple of weeks old he was able to mimic my facial expressions (eg sticking tongue out). This is not unusual. It has been demonstrated in human infants as soon as 40 minutes after birth. (I didn't shape the behaviour, he did it perfectly the first time he tried it. I don't think it was a fluke either because he also was able to mimic an open-mouth, wide-eyed "surprise" expression.) It seems to imply that he recognises my face (which he can see) and his own face (which he has never seen) as like objects. He is able to recognise that my tongue which he can see as an external object and his own tongue, a part of his body which he sees and feels from a different perspective and which he can move are functionally equivalent objects. He also seems able to figure out how his face (which he cannot see) appears to me, since he distorts it until it resembles the way my face appears to him. If he were an ape we would likely say that he was able to grasp another individual's perspective and say he had a theory of mind. Because he was so young we wouldn't credit him with having theories of anything much, let alone theories of mind. But based on his behaviour he acts as though he does. My point is that either babies DO have theories of mind or else maybe some animals that are capable of similar kinds of mental rotations that we take to be indicative of a theory of mind achieve them without such a theory. Just a thought Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke.usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" 21-MAR-1997 12:53:46.32 To: IN%"serpell@vet.upenn.edu" "James Serpell" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: Theories of mind Interesting issue raised by James Serpell. I'm not sure about what qualifies as evidence of a theory of mind though. When my baby son was a couple of weeks old he was able to mimic my facial expressions (eg sticking tongue out). This is not unusual. It has been demonstrated in human infants as soon as 40 minutes after birth. (I didn't shape the behaviour, he did it perfectly the first time he tried it. I don't think it was a fluke either because he also was able to mimic an open-mouth, wide-eyed "surprise" expression.) It seems to imply that he recognises my face (which he can see) and his own face (which he has never seen) as like objects. He is able to recognise that my tongue which he can see as an external object and his own tongue, a part of his body which he sees and feels from a different perspective and which he can move are functionally equivalent objects. He also seems able to figure out how his face (which he cannot see) appears to me, since he distorts it until it resembles the way my face appears to him. If he were an ape we would likely say that he was able to grasp another individual's perspective and say he had a theory of mind. Because he was so young we wouldn't credit him with having theories of anything much, let alone theories of mind. But based on his behaviour he acts as though he does. My point is that either babies DO have theories of mind or else maybe some animals that are capable of similar kinds of mental rotations that we take to be indicative of a theory of mind achieve them without such a theory. Just a thought Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke.usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"richards@hula.net" 21-MAR-1997 13:55:26.73 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Philosophy, language, and ethology >> whereas >> European-trained researchers tend to accept the intersubjectivity of >> humans and other animals, U. S.-trained researchers seem more likely >> to believe that any talk of the subjective experience of animals is >> anthropomorphic and has no place in an objective or scientific >> discussion. > > >Why? > D***ed good question. I notice the same thing among American anthropologists studying human and non-human primates, i.e., "Neither the emic nor etic experience is satisfactory: we can never really know how other cultures (or our closest primate relatives) think and learn, as we are too far outside their shared value system; neither can we competently study our own culture, as we're too biased to view it objectively." (That's not a direct quote BTW - just an amalgam of what I see and hear). Kind of makes one wonder, if you believe this, why bother studying any humans or non-humans? Just an objective, as much as it's possible for me, opinion, Dawn From: IN%"djmayeaux@ucdavis.edu" "Darryl Mayeaux" 21-MAR-1997 16:36:49.22 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: electromagnetic sensitivity in chickens Hello all, I understand that chickens are insensitive to a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum visible to humans. I am trying to set up a lighting situation that will allow people to see in animals' quarters but light not affect the photoperiod of the hens. I was hoping to provide low-level illumination of the room at night with whatever wavelength range of the visible spectrum the birds are not capable of seeing. Any information, references, or advice that anyone would like to share would be greatly appreciated. Darryl Mayeaux, Ph.D. Department of Animal Science University of California Davis, CA 95616 From: IN%"djmayeaux@ucdavis.edu" "Darryl Mayeaux" 21-MAR-1997 16:42:43.20 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: electromagnetic sensitivity in chickens Hello all, I understand that chickens are insensitive to a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum visible to humans. I am trying to set up a lighting situation that will allow people to see in animals' quarters but light not affect the photoperiod of the hens. I was hoping to provide low-level illumination of the room at night with whatever wavelength range of the visible spectrum the birds are not capable of seeing. Any information, references, or advice that anyone would like to share would be greatly appreciated. Darryl Mayeaux, Ph.D. Department of Animal Science University of California Davis, CA 95616 From: IN%"Kate.Littin.1@uni.massey.ac.nz" "Kate Littin" 21-MAR-1997 18:09:23.12 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: humans raised with others > Hi All, > >in response to Liesl's mail, perhaps there are some writings on the >experiences of human children raised by other animals (are these stories >myth or reality eg. Romulus and Remus)? > >Regards, Kate. > >[Has anyone (other than-possibly-Dr. Grandin) physically put themselves in >[the animal's environment and lived for a spell...as if they were that animal? >[Although reflections of these observations would still be from a human's >[perspective, they would be interesting. Afterall, it is the only >[perspective I can understand-at the moment. > -Liesl ] > > ================================== > = Kate Littin = > = Dept. Physiology & Anatomy = > = Massey University = > = Private Bag 11-222 = > = Palmerston North = > = New Zealand (Aotearoa) = > = ph +64 06 3504251 = > = Kate.Littin.1@uni.massey.ac.nz = > ================================== From: IN%"Heeler@aol.com" 21-MAR-1997 20:32:51.92 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: abnormal cows, hens and hamsters In a message dated 97-03-21 05:56:23 EST, applied-ethology-error@skyway.usask.ca writes: >Incidently, marathon running is also an abnormal behaviour which >reduces fitness and I would also be interested to know whether >equivalent consequences occur in wheel running hamsters etc. > Hamsters generally go back to bed when they "hit the wall." If not long before. This, of course is purely anecdotal, since my only reference is the behavior of my one and only pet hamster. He lived to a ripe old age for a hamster and never needed knee-replacement surgery. Since there was no big money in it for him as a professional wheel runner, he had no problem with taking a night off from the wheel if he didn't feel like running on it. Now, I'm not flaming marathoners here for a moment or believe for a minute that my hamster was smarter than a human marathon runner. I myself am personally acquainted with at least two marathon runners who are smarter than hamsters. But I do believe that there was nothing abnormal about my hamster exercising his ratting little night-running instinct and his body whenever he wanted to, given the circumstances under which he lived. Cheers, Margie From: IN%"npa@mail.telepac.pt" "npa@mail.telepac.pt" 22-MAR-1997 07:20:59.48 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "'applied-ethology@skyway.usask.ca'" CC: Subj: Pheromones in dog urine Hi everybody, I would like to know if someone can help me. I need to know every thing = about pheromones in urine of dogs. Can you give some advice and = references? Thank you, Nuno Paixao, LMV, DVM Animal Behavior Consultant Portugal From: IN%"dmills@dmu.ac.uk" "dmills" 22-MAR-1997 09:16:24.17 To: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"f.wemelsfelder@ed.sac.ac.uk" "Francoise Wemelsfelder" Subj: RE: animal subjectivity This is a really important issue and I think those that say we need a different working paradigm are right or at least we need to broaden our philosophy as to what is scientifically valid. Science is its own philosophy, and western science takes the ( sometimes dodgy) stance that the experimental method is the best way of knowing. As Singer points out, don't you think that if the subjective experience of animals became a research priority that science would be more broad minded about what is verifiable. We are not going out to proove anything in science just trying to disprove all the alternative. If we work within an evolutionary framework, surely the emphasis should be for those that believe in the absence of a subjective state to present a convincing case against subjective experience. This doesn't say that all life has such experiences but where we see analogous behaviour and homologous physiology, structure and biochemistry I think the balance of probability is probably in our favour. We have real problems with creatures like cephalopods though. If your interested in the philosophy of this then try Thomas Nagels essay. "What is it like to be a bat" in his book Mortal Questions Daniel Mills De Montfort Univerity Lincoln ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"rdecter@msn.com" "Renee Decter" 24-MAR-1997 00:09:27.45 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Your comments re: Posting my Paper of HUMOR IN DOMESTIC DOGS Dear Friends, My research project on "Humor in Domestic Dogs" is now complete, and I would like some feedback about sending it to the multitude of folks on this List who requested a copy. I thought the most expeditious way to handle transmitting it would be to post it here on the Group List. I omitted the footnotes and Appendices, so sit runs about 7 1/2 pages (single spaced with 3/4" margins and 9-pitch type). Someone kindly suggested I send it as an "attachment" or something like that, or to create my own Web page. However, I admit I'm not very well informed on how to use the Internet, and -- it might end up on Mars (which should bring forth some rather interesting responses!). Creating my own Web page would be exciting, but I frankly have no idea how to go about it. So, do you think it would be appropriate to post it here? I don't want to burden those of you on the List who aren't interested in the paper and who'd rather not get such a long message, but there are so many of you who want to read it, that I think it would take me all of next quarter to do it individually! Thanks for your suggestions/responses. Renee Decter rdecter@msn.com From: IN%"Anna.Olsson@sjv.se" "Anna Olsson" 24-MAR-1997 04:07:12.24 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Your comments re: Posting my Paper of HUMOR IN DOMESTIC DOGS -Svar Dear Renee! I look forward to your paper, which I feel would brighten my day as for the moment I have my doubts about the existence of Humour in Civil Servants - so if at least the dogs are humourous that's something to go for! I don't think it would be any problem posting it to the whole list. Just give it a clear informative heading so that those not interested will know that they can delete it without having to open it! Best wishes Anna Olsson animal housing & welfare - organic animal husbandry Swedish Board of Agriculture Division for Animal Production and Management S-551 82 Jonkoping Sweden e-mail Anna.Olsson@sjv.se tel +46-36-155000 fax +46-36-308182 "Industrialization has transformed an agriculture created for the purpose of converting solar energy into human-useful form, into an agriculture that uses more nonrenewable energy from fossils than it captures as solar energy from the sun. But what is perhaps more important is that these industrial systems degrade their human resource base. Large specialized factory farms transform independent decision makers into people who know how to follow instructions or directions but not necessarily know how to think or make decisions." John Ikerd From: IN%"MAPPLEBY@srv0.bio.ed.ac.uk" "Mike Appleby" 24-MAR-1997 05:36:21.88 To: IN%"dmills@dmu.ac.uk" "dmills" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: animal subjectivity Dear Daniel et al. > If your interested in the philosophy of this then try Thomas Nagels > essay. "What is it like to be a bat" in his book Mortal Questions We all have our hobby horses and one of mine is to persuade everyone to read Daniel Dennett's 'Consciousness Explained.' One thing he does is to take issue with the assumption that Nagels' question is unanswerable: he says that we know an increasing amount about animal senses and can learn a lot about their perceptions. For example, he suggests that use of sonar by a bat probably feels much like seeing does to us. That example was made much more apposite for me recently when Leah Braithwaite told me that blind people can now use a simple sonar gun with earphones to find their way about - and there is plenty of work from psychology to say that perceptions by the different senses are not rigidly separate but overlap and affect each other. Even more relevant to this discussion, Dennett tackles the common approach which says 'I can imagine an animal (or another human) doing those things and yet actually being an automaton, a zombie.' Essentially he answers 'I don't believe you. You can use that form of words but I don't believe that you have actually TRIED to imagine such a scenario and succeeded and I don't believe that if you did try it you could succeed.' I haven't got the book to hand so if you want more details of his argument (and a lot more besides) you'll have to read the book yourself. This doesn't answer Jeff's point about whether animals suffer in specific circumstances. However, I feel that I am beginning to understand this issue in relation to my own suffering by following Dennett's line of argument. To some extent I can regard my own body as a machine, but it is important that I have a perception of (say) pain being important to me, because if I could simply regard my pain dispassionately then I could also disregard it ('Yes, I know this fire is burning my hand, but so what?'). The same seems to apply to other people and other animals - not on an all-or-nothing basis, but to an extent which will depend on the complexity of different species' nervous systems and so on. Mike Appleby From: IN%"robin@coape.win-uk.net" "Robin E Walker" 24-MAR-1997 05:37:06.95 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Horse Lips and Horse Feathers "Behavioural significance of human lips Desmond Morris argued in "The Naked Ape" that the human lips are an analogue of the female labia, and hence sexually stimulating to the human male. " Horse Feathers! "He points out that the human lips are unique in that they are permanently everted and reveal mucous membrane." Every mucous membrane that I have everted this week has been pink and moist and sensitive in several species. "Morris points out that the redness - and hence the resemblance of the lips to the vulva - is enhanced by the habit of wearing red lipstick." In the bag with all the other daft things Homo sapiens fashionfad-ens does. "Does anybody know of any other suggestions for the origin of the shape and colour of the human lips?" Horse sense suggests that sensitive prehensile lips are an advantage. Man the inquisitive, dietary eclectic berry picker needs nimble fingers and sensitive testing tasting lips. The prominence and colour of the lips might be adaptations to the rigours of the climate. Sunburn vs Freezeburn. Heat loss vs Heat conservation. In physics I was taught that black bodies emit heat and white bodies do not. To my mind cold climate lips need to be less everted to keep warm and will have the normal mucous membrane colour or be paler. Very hot climate lips will require pigmented sun protection and may be useful heat emitters. Type and toxicity of potential foods may also be an issue. Body shape and fat distribution all point toward advantages in heat loss vs retention according to when and where a particular branch of home sapiens evolved. The rest of the story hinges around intelligent use of shade, shelter and clothing. Which of course answers the next question. Presumably once a trait is adaptive it will not be selected out unless it becomes highly unadaptive in a new context. Robin I was wondering if they might have evolved as a way of signalling health and thereby attracting mates (maybe a kind of "honest signalling" of good physical condition). Presumably, prominent lips first evolved in dark skinned people in Africa. The evolution of part of the human body which puts the mucous membranes on display might provide an indication of health in the sense that redness of the lips would indicate the absence of anaemia and good circulation generally. Does anybody have any comments? Does anaemia (perhaps due to malaria, for example) cause paler lips? Could the more prominent and everted lips present in Africans be due to the darker skin generally making it harder to assess circulatory quality otherwise? What do people think? Julian O'Dea julian.odea@dpie.gov.au From: IN%"VANDENBOS@rullf2.LeidenUniv.nl" "Ruud van den Bos" 24-MAR-1997 09:53:41.07 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "All" CC: Subj: 2-day conference CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT: Perspectives on Animal Consciousness Wageningen International Conference Centre Wageningen 3rd-4th July 1997 SPONSORS:KNAW Onderzoeksschool Ethiek (Netherlands School for Research in Practical Philosophy); NWO Stichting voor Filosofie en Theologie; Anti-Vivisectie Stichting (AVS); Programme: 3rd July Morning Session 1:Animal Consciousness & Philosophy (chair: D. Kornet, University of Leiden, Leiden, the Netherlands) C. Allen (College Station, TX, USA); S. Lijmbach (Wageningen); W. van der Steen (Amsterdam); J. Vorstenbosch (Utrecht) Afternoon Session 2:Animal Consciousness & Ethics (chair: Tj. de Cock Buning, University of Leiden, Leiden, the Netherlands) D. Macer (Tsukuba City, Japan); H. Verhoog (Leiden); E. Rivas (Nijmegen); P. Cohn (Abington, PA, USA) Special Evening Programme: P. Carruthers (Sheffield, UK); R. Heeger (Utrecht); M. Bracke (Wageningen) 4th July Morning Session 3:Animal Consciousness & Science (chair: B. Spruijt, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands) B. Bermond (Amsterdam); R. van den Bos (Leiden); J. Fentress (Halifax, NS, Canada) Key-note speaker: to be announced Afternoon Parallel Workshops: Workshop 1:Biological Foundation of Ethics (Tj. De Cock Buning, University of Leiden, Leiden, the Netherlands) Workshop 2:Research Methods in Animal Welfare (F. de Jonge, Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen, the Netherlands) Workshop 3:Animal Welfare, Politics & Legislation (J. Staman, Ministry of Agriculture, the Hague) Special Closing Lecture:J. van Hooff (Utrecht) Conference fee:f200,-- (Dutch guilders) (includes: coffee & tea during breaks; lunches; evening drinks on 3rd July; abstracts) Payable through account. nr.:ABN: 53.95.09.426 to LUW, sector L&S, project Animal Ethics (nr.059918) Conference site:WICC-IAC Lawickse Allee 11 6701 AN Wageningen tel:0317 - 490133 fax:0317 - 426243 People who wish to stay in Wageningen overnight should contact: VVV (Tourist information) Wageningen: tel: 0317 - 410777 fax: 0317 - 423186 Name:_____________________________________________ Address:_____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ Tel: _____________________________________________ Fax:_____________________________________________ E-mail:_____________________________________________ For those who wish to attend a workshop please indicate your choice below (first, second): Workshop 1 (Tj. de Cock Buning): _______ Workshop 2 (F. de Jonge): _______ Workshop 3 (J. Staman):_______ This form should be sent to (by e-mail or surface mail): Organisation Conference 'Perspectives on Animal Consciousness' Ruud van den Bos Phd Institute of Evolutionary and Ecological Sciences Section Theoretical Biology University of Leiden P.O. Box 9516 2300 RA Leiden the Netherlands tel:071 - 527 4921 fax:071 - 527 4900 e-mail: VANDENBOS@rullf2.medfac.leidenuniv.nl From: IN%"FHURNIK@APS.UoGuelph.CA" "Dr F Hurnik" 25-MAR-1997 13:00:06.66 To: IN%"djmayeaux@ucdavis.edu" "Darryl Mayeaux" CC: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: electromagnetic sensitivity in chickens Dear Darryl: Relatively simple way to achieve such an visual differentiation is to use low pen illumination, within the blue range color of the visible spectrum. Since human eye can adapt to this portion of the visible spectrum much easier and faster then chicken eye, after short period of exposure the interior of the pen became visible to humans, while the birds themselves will be in "darkness". Please keep me informed about your success. Sincerely, Frank Hurnik Date sent: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 14:35:41 -0800 (PST) From: Darryl Mayeaux Subject: electromagnetic sensitivity in chickens To: applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca Copies to: applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca Hello all, I understand that chickens are insensitive to a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum visible to humans. I am trying to set up a lighting situation that will allow people to see in animals' quarters but light not affect the photoperiod of the hens. I was hoping to provide low-level illumination of the room at night with whatever wavelength range of the visible spectrum the birds are not capable of seeing. Any information, references, or advice that anyone would like to share would be greatly appreciated. Darryl Mayeaux, Ph.D. Department of Animal Science University of California Davis, CA 95616 From: IN%"aa266@cleveland.Freenet.Edu" 25-MAR-1997 13:19:50.89 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: My E-mail To all who may have tried to send me any E-mail recently: I have been on the road for the past 6 weeks and my mail box filled up. If you have sent any messages to me that were returned as undeliverable, please try again. I am cleaning out some room in the box right now. Thanks, -- DBC (aka D.B. Cameron, DVM) Animal Behavior Clinic Middleburg Hts., OH 44130 216/826-0013 Fax: 234-3407 From: IN%"grarthur@vassar.edu" 26-MAR-1997 00:53:39.64 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS. I am designing a residential treatment plan for emotionally troubled kids where I incorporate keeping pets, namely fish. I knew that if I chose a cat, dog or other animal the kids may end up hurting the animal (or vice versa). So I decided on fish. But I've never kept fish before. I know that some of you out there were pretty mischevious as children so tell me, how did you toture the fish and how can I avoid it? Greg A. K-Arthur Vassar College Class of 1997 Biology From: IN%"Petra.Mertens@lrz.uni-muenchen.de" 26-MAR-1997 01:52:49.70 To: IN%"grarthur@vassar.edu" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS. I believe that the most common animal abuse we see in children keeping animals - of any kind - is that they`re not properly taken care off, including cleaning, feeding, housing conditions. Not that it`s done on purpose necessarily ... it`s mostly a lack of education and knowledge re. the needs of the animal. If you use fish it depends on what kind you aquire since the requirements vary. In addition, I would say that the fish should remain in the water ... that`s what comes to the "sadistical" part of my mind first ... Why using fish - I think it might be a problem that kids don`t tend to build up a strong relationship/ bonding to fish - as e.g. to dogs or cats. I think it is essential for projects like this that the species you chose is not only save - for both parties involved - but what does a fish in a tank mean to those kids. It can`t be touched, they hardly interact. It s basically a pet that you can watch and clean and feed. Good luck with the project! Petra __________________________________ Dr. Petra A. Mertens Instititue for Ethology and Animal Welfare Ludwig-Maximilians-University Muenchen Schwere-Reiter-Str. 9 80797 Muenchen petra.mertens@lrz.uni-muenchen.de From: IN%"MAPPLEBY@srv0.bio.ed.ac.uk" "Mike Appleby" 26-MAR-1997 03:40:13.48 To: IN%"grarthur@vassar.edu" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS. Greg et al. > I am designing a residential treatment plan for emotionally troubled kids > where I incorporate keeping pets, namely fish. I knew that if I chose a > cat, dog or other animal the kids may end up hurting the animal (or vice > versa). So I decided on fish. But I've never kept fish before. Reminds me of the time our cleaning woman stood looking at my brother's zebra finch (we also had fish in a tank at the time) and said 'You know, I don't think I like living things being kept in cages. It's all right with fish, and things like that, but not LIVING things.' Mike From: IN%"renee.bergeron@san.ulaval.ca" "=?UNKNOWN?Q?Ren=E9e?= Bergeron" 26-MAR-1997 07:51:47.61 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Goat welfare Dear ethologists, I am desperately looking for scientific literature on stress and welfare in goats. I searched our library databases and the web, and I only found a few references on heat stress and transportation stress. Is anyone aware of any other work done on this topic? Thanks in advance for your help, Renée ***************************************************************** Renée Bergeron Département des sciences animales Université Laval Ste-Foy, Quebec, Canada, G1K 7P4 Tel: (418) 656-2131 poste (ext)5950 Fax: (418) 656-3766 E-mail: renee.bergeron@san.ulaval.ca ***************************************************************** From: IN%"sarwarm@paknet1.ptc.pk" "Muhammad Sarwar" 26-MAR-1997 09:36:44.22 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Request for Research Article Pakistan Journal of Livestock and Poultry is dedicated to the dissemination of fundamental knowledge in all areas of Animal Science. This journal is published quarterly uner the supervision of Agri-Livestock Bureau, Pakistan. The bureau exists for the advancement of education and research in animal sciences and allied disciplines. The Journal conveys latest information, research and extension activities here and abroad on drugs, vaccines, biologics, latest technology, modern equipments and applied information to extension worker for application in the field. INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS PREPARATION OF MANUSCRIPTS Before preparing a manuscript the author(s) should follow the following guidelines: 1. Manuscript should be written in clear, concise and grammatical english, and be submitted in triplicate. 2. Full papers are limited to 15 pages in length including tables, figures and abstract. Short communications are limited to 6 pages only. 3. The arrangement of the manuscript should be as follows: Title: Author's name(s); Abstract; Introduction, materials and Methods; Results and Discussion and References. 4. References cited in the text should arranged alphabaticaloly according to author's name (2) year of publication (3) title of the paper (4) name of the journal (or book) in abbreviation (5) volume and pages of the Journal or book Examples Sarwar, M., M.N. Saeed and G. Muhammad, 1994........................ Crop Sci., 24: 12-15. 5. Figures should be drawn in black ink and must be legibly labelled. Try to accoummodate at least 4 figures on one A-4 size paper. 6. Only standard abbreviation should be used both in the text and references. Subscription Information One volume per year, each consisting of 4 issues. Price per voluem Rs. 200/- (Local and US$ 25 (International) Correspondance Address: Agriculture Livestock Bureau Pakistan 334-B, Peoples Colony, Faisalabad Email: sarwarm@paknet1.ptc.pk Note: You can send your article through the above mentioned email address. From: IN%"cmeyer5@gwdg.de" "cmeyer5" 26-MAR-1997 11:49:35.45 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS > I am designing a residential treatment plan for emotionally troubled kids > where I incorporate keeping pets, namely fish. I knew that if I chose a > cat, dog or other animal the kids may end up hurting the animal (or vice > versa). So I decided on fish. But I've never kept fish before. Despite that fact that children may not develop emotional bonds to fish as easily as to dogs or the like, I strongly agree that you choose animals that can be kept at a safe distance from the kids. Whether you choose fish, small rodents, birds or whatever, make sure that you can present the animals in a way that is attractive for the children without them being able to touch the animals. For fish, this basically means that the aquarium must have a lid that is so fastened that the children cannot throw anything into the water and cannot stick their hands in the water to chase the fish. Choose an aquarium that is large enough to keep different species of fish, showing a broad spectrum of behaviours which could be interesting for children. Be sure that the children do not knock on the glass, and that they cannot move the aquarium. Let them not use graffity spray colours or anything which could spread harmful substances into the aquarium in the room (many substances can get into the water via air). Do not let anyone touch fish feed or any aquarium equipment who has been smoking a cigarette. Nicotine is poisonous for fish. Keep all equipment away from the children to prevent misuse. Use aquarium equipment ONLY for the aquarium. Good luck! Christiane ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. med. vet. Christiane Meyer Goettingen Germany ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"arion@dialatlanta.com" 26-MAR-1997 12:31:54.07 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Re:KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS I agree that fish are less prone to being tortured by kids perhaps. I would suggest the live bearers as being very interesting for observation for several reasons. They reproduce easily and quickly so that there is more "news" in the aquarium. They have a tendency to develop easily treated fungus in some of the species that require just slightly brackish water and the medication and care may be an interesting lesson. They come in many colorful shapes. There are many good books and advanced water chemistry sets in good aquarium shops that should make it not too difficult. But the problem of being difficult to bond with is also true. However, perhaps the children need to approach the bonding situation gradually. In Dade County Florida (where Miami is) Dr. Dick Dillman had a good program where one day a week, very young, inner city at risk children would go to a petting zoo and get guided intros to the different species. Perhaps such an idea could be adapted to the more complex needs of these children. Perhaps the Delta Society or the Latham Foundation could give you some information about programs similar to yours and the solutions they found. Chris Redenbach From: IN%"grarthur@vassar.edu" 26-MAR-1997 13:11:09.91 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS A few have mentioned that the children may not be able to develop an emotional bond with the fish. This may be true, but it is important to remember that these children have difficulties developing and expressing their emotions in the first place. I want, more than anything, the children to develop an appreciation for the fish. I believe that if I kept Oscars, for example, the kids would love watching their behaviors, feeding, etc. It would certainly shatter their conceptions of fish as boring. Hopefully, they will learn that if they can be responsible enough to care for the fish, they may gain recognition and appreciation in return. This may be a good therapuedic springboard toward facilitating respect of others, etc. Well, my ideas are still in the works but I think it'd be good for them. Greg A. K-Arthur From: IN%"Heeler@aol.com" 26-MAR-1997 18:59:02.41 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS In a message dated 97-03-26 14:14:10 EST, you write: > I want, more than anything, the >children to develop an appreciation for the fish. I believe that if I kept >Oscars, for example, the kids would love watching their behaviors, feeding, >etc. It would certainly shatter their conceptions of fish as boring. I'm just pitching in here with no background. But I think the most important thing is to teach the kids that their behavior has an affect on the behavior of the animals. Asking them to maintain these animals in good health with no behavioral feed back might be asking them for reinforcements they don't yet appreciate. Your best bet might be to assume responsibility for the basic maintenance of the aqairium and let the kids feed the fish according to your schedule.. The fish, like Magda's fish will start to respond pre-feeding cues and may teach the kids something about the goodies you get from nurturing. Then you can start to teach them other care-taking behaviors after they've learned that fish respond to their care-givers.. It seems to me that they need to take their first plunge (forgive the pun) in a way that teaches them that postitve reinforcement is cute and fun and that even fish respond to them.. I dunno. Cheers, Margie From: IN%"mplonsky@uwsp.edu" "Plonsky, Mark" 27-MAR-1997 04:22:23.36 To: IN%"TIPS@fre.fsu.umd.edu" "'TIPS@fre.fsu.umd.edu'", IN%"ETHOLOGY@SEGATE.SUNET.SE" "'ETHOLOGY@SEGATE.SUNET.SE'", IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "'applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca'" CC: Subj: Science & Dog Training I am looking for web sites to add a new section at the dog training site (http://www.uwsp.edu/acad/psych/dog/dog.htm) called science information (http://www.uwsp.edu/acad/psych/dog/lib-sci.htm). It contains scientific info that is relevant to dog training but does not specifically address it. Currently, I have a bunch of stuff on learning theories, some stuff on the senses, etc. Do you know of any web sites that talk about imprinting, instincts, displacement activities (and other such notions of ethology), behavioral endocrinology, behavior genetics, nonverbal communication, sociobiology, psychology, biology, and any other relevant "ology". I am especially interested in sites that provide the type of info described above and do so in layman's terms. Thanx in advance, >----- Mark Plonsky, Ph.D. 715-346-3961 wk ----- >----- Psychology Dept. 715-346-2778 fx ----- >----- University of Wisconsin 715-344-0023 hm ----- >----- Stevens Point, WI 54481 mplonsky@uwsp.edu ----- >----- http://www.uwsp.edu/acad/psych/mphome.htm ----- > > From: IN%"schilder@neuretp.biol.ruu.nl" 27-MAR-1997 05:09:02.30 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: IN%"Jon@neuretp.biol.ruu.nl", IN%"Watts@neuretp.biol.ruu.nl", IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" Subj: consciousness and deceiving >Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 10:31:01 -0400 >From: Sonia Schmerl >Subject: Re: animal subjectivity >To: applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca >Cc: Jon Watts >Reply-to: sschmerl@umich.edu > sonia wrote: > >An orchid does not pretend to be a bee in the same sense that I pretend >not to know where the cookies are hidden. You are indulging in >teleological thinking, I'm afraid. An orchid grows in a way, determined >more or less by a genetic program, that results in a shape which may >resmble a bee. The genetic program may result from selection...but you >know all that.=20 > >Frankly, I can't imagine how the ability to deceive could NOT imply >consciousness. >A question, to help me follow the discussions:=20 >Is there a big difference between "subjective experience," >"consciousness," and "thinking," or are they roughly equivalent for the >purposes of this discussion? >Thanks >Sonia I think deceiving can take place without implying consciousness in the sense of a capability of reflecting on onself. Take the famous example of Lorenz' dog, that was taken by Lorenz to walk while Lorenz biked to his work. One day, the dog got a wound on one of its paws and started limping, upon which Lorenz halted. This dog quit quickly learned to limp when Lorenz took his bike. Simple operant conditioning may explain a number of examples of deceiving. But: probably this type of explanation does not suffice for many examples of deceiving, especially in the apes. In all case awareness (=3D I limp) plays a role, but not cenessaroli counsciousness (=3D I know that I limp) Regards dr Matthijs Schilder Utrecht University From: IN%"schilder@neuretp.biol.ruu.nl" 27-MAR-1997 05:14:01.21 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: animal subjectivity sonia wrote: > >An orchid does not pretend to be a bee in the same sense that I pretend >not to know where the cookies are hidden. You are indulging in >teleological thinking, I'm afraid. An orchid grows in a way, determined >more or less by a genetic program, that results in a shape which may >resmble a bee. The genetic program may result from selection...but you >know all that.=20 > >Frankly, I can't imagine how the ability to deceive could NOT imply >consciousness. >A question, to help me follow the discussions:=20 >Is there a big difference between "subjective experience," >"consciousness," and "thinking," or are they roughly equivalent for the >purposes of this discussion? >Thanks >Sonia I think deceiving can take place without implying consciousness in the sense of a capability of reflecting on onself. Take the famous example of Lorenz' dog, that was taken by Lorenz to walk while Lorenz biked to his work. One day, the dog got a wound on one of its paws and started limping, upon which Lorenz halted. This dog quit quickly learned to limp when Lorenz took his bike. Simple operant conditioning may explain a number of examples of deceiving. But: probably this type of explanation does not suffice for many examples of deceiving, especially in the apes. In all case awareness (=3D I limp) plays a role, but not cenessaroli counsciousness (=3D I know that I limp) Regards dr Matthijs Schilder Utrecht University From: IN%"lsr1000@cus.cam.ac.uk" "Louise S. Rajack." 27-MAR-1997 07:37:35.23 To: IN%"grarthur@vassar.edu" "Greg Arthur" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS On Wed, 26 Mar 1997, Greg Arthur wrote: > A few have mentioned that the children may not be able to develop an > emotional bond with the fish. This may be true, but it is important to > remember that these children have difficulties developing and expressing > their emotions in the first place. I want, more than anything, the > children to develop an appreciation for the fish. I believe that if I kept > Oscars, for example, the kids would love watching their behaviors, feeding, > etc. It would certainly shatter their conceptions of fish as boring. > > Hopefully, they will learn that if they can be responsible enough to care > for the fish, they may gain recognition and appreciation in return. This > may be a good therapuedic springboard toward facilitating respect of > others, etc. > > Well, my ideas are still in the works but I think it'd be good for them. > > Greg A. K-Arthur > > There are a number of reports indicating that childhood pet keeping is important in fostering positive attitudes towards, and an appreciation of, animals in later life. Two studies that spring to mind and which might be of interest are: Kidd & Kidd (1989). Factors in adults' attitudes to pets. Psychological reports, 65:903-910 Paul & Serpell, (1993). Childhood pet keeping and humane attitudes in young adulthood. Animal Welfare, 2:321-337 While the depth of relationship a child may develop with fish may be less than with other species of pets such as dogs and cats for example, I beleive that if conducted carefully, and appropriately (and that may vary from child to child), that a programme such as the one you propose could be helpful in acheiving the aims of developing appreciation of and respect for other life forms and even other humans. Personally, I think that Oscars are a particularly interesting breed of fish. My teenage brother kept some for a number of years. They can also be quite large - which may be advantageous - its easier to watch and recognise different behaviours than in say guppies for example. This might also help to maintain interest for longer periods of time, and would enable a few children to be able to see the fish simultaneously (could avoid fights!) You might get more information concerning how best to present them/ keep them safe, given your viewers, from the American Humane Association. Incidentally, they held a summit on violence towards children and animals and so if you are dealing with abused children, they might be able to provide more information on this type of programme. > Certainly, I would like to encourage you in this venture and I would be interested in hearing how things progress. Kind regards, Louise S. Rajack ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| / /\___/\ | Louise S. Rajack MSc. | / /_/* *\_\ | Animal Welfare & Human-Animal | \______________ /\*/\ | Interactions Group | ( ) | Department of Clinical Veterinary | \_______________\ -\< | Medicine | << \\ \\ | University of Cambridge | \# \# \# | Madingley Road | | CAMBRIDGE | A righteous man cares for | CB3 0ES | the needs of his animal. | | Proverbs (Holy Bible). | | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: IN%"npa@mail.telepac.pt" "npa@mail.telepac.pt" 27-MAR-1997 17:23:48.08 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "'Ethology'" CC: Subj: Self mutilation in rabits Dear all: I have a companion rabit who started selfmutilating is digits. What can = I do to stop this? I know that fluoxetine is very good to stop fether = picking but can I use fluoxetine in rabits? Which dose? Thank you, Nuno Nuno Paixao, LMV, DVM Caparica Animal Clinic Behavior Service Clinical Director Portugal npa@mail.telepac.pt From: IN%"npa@mail.telepac.pt" "npa@mail.telepac.pt" 27-MAR-1997 17:54:17.51 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "'Ethology'" CC: Subj: Coprophagia Dear all, This is a behavior problem very distressing and repugnant to pet owners. = In my experience not always is easy to solve. I read a lot about this = but I think is not enough. Why they do that? How to stop this behavior?=20 Please give your ideas. The ideas from books I know. I would like to = talk about your experience working with this kind of animals. Thank you, Nuno Nuno Paixao, LMV, DVM Caparica Animal Clinic Behavior Service Clinical Director Portugal npa@mail.telepac.pt From: IN%"heather@jukebox.demon.co.uk" "heather j. cole" 28-MAR-1997 06:23:34.39 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "ethology mailing list" CC: Subj: Fwd: maternal docking? hi everyone, i've been pretty quiet so far, but now i have something i'd like you to chew on: we were talking with a man in our local pub last night who claimed that his (canine) bitch chewed the tails off two of her pups when they were born, apparently because the tails were damaged or malformed. how likely is this to be true? and could she possibly have confused the tails for umbilical cords? incidentally the bitch who looked to be some kind of a collie-cross had only a stub of a tail herself but since she was acquired as a stray, we cannot know how she lost it (or maybe she never had it). maybe she chewed off her own tail?! heather j. cole From: IN%"heather@jukebox.demon.co.uk" "heather j. cole" 28-MAR-1997 06:34:17.05 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "ethology mailing list" CC: Subj: Fwd: maternal docking? hi everyone, i've been pretty quiet so far, but now i have something i'd like you to chew on: we were talking with a man in our local pub last night who claimed that his (canine) bitch chewed the tails off two of her pups when they were born, apparently because the tails were damaged or malformed. how likely is this to be true? and could she possibly have confused the tails for umbilical cords? incidentally the bitch who looked to be some kind of a collie-cross had only a stub of a tail herself but since she was acquired as a stray, we cannot know how she lost it (or maybe she never had it). maybe she chewed off her own tail?! heather j. cole From: IN%"gadagkar@is2.dal.ca" "Sudhindra Gadagkar" 28-MAR-1997 17:54:47.40 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "Applied-Ethology" CC: Subj: RE: maternal docking? On Fri, 28 Mar 1997, heather j. cole wrote, among other things: > hi everyone, i've been pretty quiet so far, but now i have something i'd > like you to chew on: we were talking with a man in our local pub last Just wondering if the place where the conversation took place is a significant factor to consider, before speculating on the possibility of such a thing happening? Did you include that bit of information for a reason? Best, Sudhindra. From: IN%"Petra.Mertens@lrz.uni-muenchen.de" 29-MAR-1997 08:25:16.63 To: IN%"npa@mail.telepac.pt" "npa@mail.telepac.pt" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: Self mutilation in rabits Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 23:02:28 -0100 From: "npa@mail.telepac.pt" Subject: Self mutilation in rabits To: 'Ethology' Dear all: >>I have a companion rabit who started selfmutilating is digits. >>What can I do to stop this? Exclusion of potential medical problems. Change bedding. Check abdomen (contact allergies)..... Environmental enrichment! >> I know that fluoxetine is very good to stop >>fether picking but can I use fluoxetine in rabits? Which dose? The study you refer to (feather picking) is probably the one I conducted while I worked at Tufts - and I did not find that Prozac was exceptionally good. I`d rather use clomipramine - like in ALD. Dose?! Maybe use allometric scaling on the basis of the canine dose of 2 mg/kg SID po (side efects: anticholinergic and arrhythmia). I know that someone used haloperidol in rabbits - unfortunately I can`t find the papaer. One of the authors was Iglauer .... Best wishes, Petra petra.mertens@lrz.uni-muenchen.de From: IN%"morrisji@gov.on.ca" "Jim Morris" 29-MAR-1997 18:57:20.02 To: IN%"arion@dialatlanta.com" "Chris Redenbach" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: Re:KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS Fellow readers: Fish can also be tortured by Kids. I heard where a 3-year-old decided to feed the fish and deposited detergent in the tank instesd of feed. Close supervision by parents is a must to nuture the proper kid/pet interaction. Yours, Jim Morris On Wed, 26 Mar 1997, Chris Redenbach wrote: > I agree that fish are less prone to being tortured by kids perhaps. I > would suggest the live bearers as being very interesting for observation > for several reasons. They reproduce easily and quickly so that there is > more "news" in the aquarium. They have a tendency to develop easily > treated fungus in some of the species that require just slightly > brackish water and the medication and care may be an interesting lesson. > They come in many colorful shapes. There are many good books and > advanced water chemistry sets in good aquarium shops that should make it > not too difficult. > > But the problem of being difficult to bond with is also true. However, > perhaps the children need to approach the bonding situation gradually. > In Dade County Florida (where Miami is) Dr. Dick Dillman had a good > program where one day a week, very young, inner city at risk children > would go to a petting zoo and get guided intros to the different > species. Perhaps such an idea could be adapted to the more complex needs > of these children. > Perhaps the Delta Society or the Latham Foundation could give you some > information about programs similar to yours and the solutions they > found. > Chris Redenbach From: IN%"morrisji@gov.on.ca" "Jim Morris" 29-MAR-1997 18:59:05.67 To: IN%"arion@dialatlanta.com" "Chris Redenbach" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" Subj: Re:KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS Fellow readers: Fish can also be tortured by Kids. I heard where a 3-year-old decided to feed the fish and deposited detergent in the tank instesd of feed. Close supervision by parents is a must to nuture the proper kid/pet interaction. Yours, Jim Morris On Wed, 26 Mar 1997, Chris Redenbach wrote: > I agree that fish are less prone to being tortured by kids perhaps. I > would suggest the live bearers as being very interesting for observation > for several reasons. They reproduce easily and quickly so that there is > more "news" in the aquarium. They have a tendency to develop easily > treated fungus in some of the species that require just slightly > brackish water and the medication and care may be an interesting lesson. > They come in many colorful shapes. There are many good books and > advanced water chemistry sets in good aquarium shops that should make it > not too difficult. > > But the problem of being difficult to bond with is also true. However, > perhaps the children need to approach the bonding situation gradually. > In Dade County Florida (where Miami is) Dr. Dick Dillman had a good > program where one day a week, very young, inner city at risk children > would go to a petting zoo and get guided intros to the different > species. Perhaps such an idea could be adapted to the more complex needs > of these children. > Perhaps the Delta Society or the Latham Foundation could give you some > information about programs similar to yours and the solutions they > found. > Chris Redenbach > > > From: IN%"RC_RUTT@compuserve.com" "Chris" 30-MAR-1997 03:12:11.57 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" "INTERNET:applied-ethology-error@skyway.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Your comments re: Posting my Paper of HUMOR IN DOMESTIC DOGS I would very much like to see it Best wishes Chris From: IN%"RC_RUTT@compuserve.com" "Chris" 30-MAR-1997 03:12:26.12 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" "INTERNET:applied-ethology-error@skyway.usask.ca", IN%"APPLIED-ETHOLOGY@sask.usask.ca" "'Ethology'" CC: Subj: Self mutilation in rabits How about Gentian Violet applied topically? R.Chris Rutt EMail:RC_RUTT@Compuserve.com From: IN%"RC_RUTT@compuserve.com" "Chris" 30-MAR-1997 03:14:01.14 To: IN%"applied-ethology-error@sask.usask.ca" "INTERNET:applied-ethology-error@skyway.usask.ca", IN%"APPLIED-ETHOLOGY@sask.usask.ca" "'Ethology'" CC: Subj: Self mutilation in rabits How about Gentian Violet applied topically? R.Chris Rutt EMail:RC_RUTT@Compuserve.com From: IN%"aa266@cleveland.Freenet.Edu" 30-MAR-1997 11:39:31.93 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: oof thread--sanctuary for Miss Spider Reply to message from crystal1@capecod.net of Tue, 11 Mar > >Hi ... I'm a list member and have been for a while not an ethologist but >interested anyway. > >I have a friend who has a sweet 6yr old spayed female black cat named Spider >who need a new home. Spider does not get along with her owner's 4 other >felines and she was given to an elderly lady. the lady can no longer take >care of Spider so Spider has returned and lives under a bed until a suitable >home for her appears. > >Spider lives in Massachusetts but will relocate for the right home. She >needs a single cat family or maybe one sibling who is very understanding. >She was the love of the elerly ladies life and Spider blossomed. > >Can anyone help her? No animal researcher in need of a cat, or satanic >cults or cult members need apply because spider would not do well as a >sacrifice,or research cat. She doesn't taste too good and probably has the >wrong blood for them. > >Please help me help Spider .... contact me at crystal1@capecod.net and I'll >get you spider's phone number. (that's crystal and the number 0ne) > >Thank you --- only serious replies please >Truddi > > > Has it occured to you to do a bit of behavior mod. so that Spider can join your web? There are behaviorists in Mass. who are well qualified to help. -- DBC (aka D.B. Cameron, DVM) Animal Behavior Clinic Middleburg Hts., OH 44130 216/826-0013 Fax: 234-3407 From: IN%"aa266@cleveland.Freenet.Edu" 30-MAR-1997 11:59:33.48 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Cow grazing behavior Reply to message from jbeller@zoo.uvm.edu of Wed, 12 Mar > >Dear All, > I have been a member of this list for many months now and have >witnessed how helpful you are to people with questions. Given this >observation, I was wondering if anyone could help me with questions I >have concerning graduate research I will soon be conducting. Just for >general background, I am an accelerated masters student at the University >of Vermont working on a degree in animal and food sciences. My research >will focus on the grazing behavior of dairy cattle. Specifically, I >would like to study the fence effect (also known as the edge effect). >Just as a little background for anyone who might not be aware of this, the >fence effect is the phenomenon wherein cows graze a disproportionate amount >of time along the fenceline in intensive grazing conditions. > It would be a great help if anyone could give me contacts or >possible resources where I might find more information on this topic. In >addition, if anyone has any possible hypotheses that explain this >phenomenon, I would love to hear them and add them to my list. Thank you >very much for you help in this matter. > Jen Beller > >****************************************************************************** >Jennifer E. Beller >24 Green St. >Burlington, VT 05401 >(802) 862-5985 >jbeller@zoo.uvm.edu > > > I know little more about bovine grazing behavior than what you described, but on that basis it would seem to be a form of redirected behavior. That is: cow is hungry. -> Cow's available pasture is already over grazed, but she can see better forage just beyond the fence. -> This releases her grazing behavior but she is physically limited to the overgrazed pasture, which receives her redirected grazing energy. Since her stimulation is greatest near the fence, that is the area most frequently assaulted. On the other hand, considering this city-boy's esperience with cows, you might better ask the cow. -- DBC (aka D.B. Cameron, DVM) Animal Behavior Clinic Middleburg Hts., OH 44130 216/826-0013 Fax: 234-3407 From: IN%"aa266@cleveland.Freenet.Edu" 30-MAR-1997 12:21:59.05 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: normalcy/pathology (Canibalism) Reply to message from faure@tours.inra.fr of Mon, 17 Mar > >>Dear all >> >> >No. It is even more complicated. Canibalism is surely an abnormal behaviour >but increase the fitness of hens performing it (reduction of competition). >J.M. FAURE Why is canibalism SURELY an abnormal behavior? We may believe that it is not nice, but, particularly if it increases fitness (survival), why is it abnormal? -- DBC (aka D.B. Cameron, DVM) Animal Behavior Clinic Middleburg Hts., OH 44130 216/826-0013 Fax: 234-3407 From: IN%"aa266@cleveland.Freenet.Edu" 30-MAR-1997 13:15:14.18 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Your comments re: Posting my Paper of HUMOR IN DOMESTIC DOGS ABSOLUTELY!!! FOR SURE!!! POST IT!!! And if you don't, please send me a copy! Thanks. Desh Reply to message from rdecter@msn.com of Mon, 24 Mar > >Dear Friends, > >My research project on "Humor in Domestic Dogs" is now complete, and I would >like some feedback about sending it to the multitude of folks on this List who >requested a copy. > >I thought the most expeditious way to handle transmitting it would be to post >it here on the Group List. I omitted the footnotes and Appendices, so sit >runs about 7 1/2 pages (single spaced with 3/4" margins and 9-pitch type). >Someone kindly suggested I send it as an "attachment" or something like that, >or to create my own Web page. However, I admit I'm not very well informed on >how to use the Internet, and -- it might end up on Mars (which should bring >forth some rather interesting responses!). Creating my own Web page would be >exciting, but I frankly have no idea how to go about it. > >So, do you think it would be appropriate to post it here? I don't want to >burden those of you on the List who aren't interested in the paper and who'd >rather not get such a long message, but there are so many of you who want to >read it, that I think it would take me all of next quarter to do it >individually! > >Thanks for your suggestions/responses. > >Renee Decter rdecter@msn.com > > -- DBC (aka D.B. Cameron, DVM) Animal Behavior Clinic Middleburg Hts., OH 44130 216/826-0013 Fax: 234-3407 From: IN%"arion@dialatlanta.com" 30-MAR-1997 13:24:11.41 To: IN%"morrisji@gov.on.ca" "Jim Morris" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" Subj: RE: KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS Jim Morris wrote: > > Fellow readers: > > Fish can also be tortured by Kids. I heard where a 3-year-old decided to > feed the fish and deposited detergent in the tank instesd of feed. > Close supervision by parents is a must to nuture the proper kid/pet > interaction. > > Yours, > Jim Morris > > On Wed, 26 Mar 1997, Chris Redenbach wrote: > > > I agree that fish are less prone to being tortured by kids perhaps. I > > would suggest the live bearers as being very interesting for observation > > for several reasons. They reproduce easily and quickly so that there is > > more "news" in the aquarium. They have a tendency to develop easily > > treated fungus in some of the species that require just slightly > > brackish water and the medication and care may be an interesting lesson. > > They come in many colorful shapes. There are many good books and > > advanced water chemistry sets in good aquarium shops that should make it > > not too difficult. > > > > But the problem of being difficult to bond with is also true. However, > > perhaps the children need to approach the bonding situation gradually. > > In Dade County Florida (where Miami is) Dr. Dick Dillman had a good > > program where one day a week, very young, inner city at risk children > > would go to a petting zoo and get guided intros to the different > > species. Perhaps such an idea could be adapted to the more complex needs > > of these children. Yes, Jim, you are right. But at least the fish can't retaliate and hurt the children (presuming caution to not allow such fish as piranhas). Chris From: IN%"richards@hula.net" 30-MAR-1997 20:08:38.56 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Horse Lips and Horse Feathers Julian wrote: >I was wondering if they might >have evolved as a way of signalling health and thereby attracting >mates (maybe a kind of "honest signalling" of good physical >condition). And Robin replied: >"Behavioural significance of human lips Desmond Morris argued in >"The Naked Ape" that the human lips are an analogue of the female >labia, and hence sexually stimulating to the human male." >Horse Feathers! I've read this before, but not sure if I agree with Morris. Presumably, when our hominid ancestors became bipedal, females still had estrus cycles, and we needed new methods of signalling sexual receptivity. Hence, the development of larger breasts in human primates (as compared to non-human primates), and the larger male penis (compare human with gorilla!). Perhaps lips became more fleshy and red in color at the same time, but perhaps it has more to do with humidity and pigmentation. Back when I was in grad school, the study of anatomical features among differing races was falling somewhat out of favor, as it was considered to be racist by some, even though the term "race" was used purely in its biological sense to describe the biological nature of recognizably different pops. Anyway, from what I recall, the consensus then was that anatomically different features are determined by numerous genes, and aren't segregated into just a few phenotypes. Now, to show my ignorance about animals, do different canine coat colors and coat types, or snout lengths, suggest any sort of adaptation to climatic/environmental differences? (other than human breeders looking for desirable traits after domestication). Don't be shy about informing me that I'm totally off the wall. Dawn From: IN%"rdecter@msn.com" "Renee Decter" 31-MAR-1997 00:41:43.75 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: "Humor in Domestic Dogs" paper (It's very long) WARNING — VERY LONG POST FOLLOWS. Since many of you requested I post my paper, “Humor in Domestic Dogs,” on the Applied Ethology list, I am doing so here. For those of you who want to paste it to a word processing program, please use the following settings: the paper was written in WordPerfect7 (Corel); 3/4" margins all around; 10-pt Arial regular font for text, 9.5 Arial regular font for indented quotes (I notice that everything is 10-pitch on this e-mail -- I also notice that the Endnotes don't appear at the end of this post, possibly because I also don't see the Endnote numbers in the text (!); so, if you don't get them after converting the paper to a word processing software, let me know and I can post them separately). The paper was set for double spacing except for indented quotes and Endnotes which were single spaced, but it posted to this e-mail single-spaced. The Appendices have been deleted in this post. If you use Microsoft Word, I believe it is down-loadable in that software. For those of you not interested in this subject, simply delete this post. Please let me know if there are any problems in receiving this E-mail in its written format, and also please feel free to e-mail me with your comments about the paper (rdecter@msn.com). ALSO: Please do keep in mind that this project was done for a seminar course at my university in which we explored the sociology of humor (in humans!). I am not an ethologist but have been owned by household pets of all kinds for over many decades and have volunteered with animal organizations for 25 years, the last ten doing “therapy” with severely abused dogs. Also, while this was a serious sociological study of humor and animal behavior, it nonetheless was approached in a humorous manner, one which I hope you will share with me as you read on. Enjoy!! * * * * * * * * * * * * Humor in Domestic Dogs by Renee Ruth Decter, March 10, 1997 (All Rights Reserved) “The great pleasure of a dog is that you may make a fool of yourself with him and not only will he not scold you, but he will make a fool of himself too.” — Samuel Butler in note-books of “Higgledy-Piggledy,” 1912 INTRODUCTION There are millions of species of life that exist on earth today but of all these the dog is almost certainly the animal that is closest to our hearts. ... we have allowed them to share our dens, our food, our companionship. Of all the hundred of millions of species that have ever existed on this earth, surely the dog has become the one we should understand the best (Fogle, 1990, p. vii). Understanding the dog, however, is not an easy task, for they do not speak our language nor we, theirs. Animal behavior has been the subject of fascination since at least the time of Plato and Aristotle, and if human curiosity drives research, then animal behavior should be near the top of our list (Ibid). It is this researcher’s curiosity about animal behavior in general, and dog behavior in particular, that drives this current research, which focuses on humor in domestic dogs. “We tend to study animals for what they can teach us about ourselves or for facts that we can turn to our advantage. Most of us have little interest in the aspects of their lives that do not involve us. But dogs? Dogs do involve us (because) they have shared our lives for twenty thousand years” (Thomas, 1993, pp. 3-4). Humans tend to define their own lives in their own terms. That is, our species focuses on the world through human lenses with an anthropomorphic view which holds that “mental experiences are a unique attribute of a single species” — the human species (Griffin, 1981, p. 170). However, putting aside our anthropomorphic opinions may not be entirely possible in this discussion because, to some degree, anthropomorphic thinking “is factored into it. I think it has to be ... or else I don’t see how we can distill these discrete emotions in a pet. I don’t think that we can really define them without ... injecting a little bit into it” (Winters, 1997). It is suggested that projecting meaning from one species to another can be misleading, particularly when making comparisons between animal and man (Hinde, 1982, p. 201). Even so, our interactions with dogs can provide a rich source of insight into their behavior, and even ours, for there are over 50 million dogs in the United States (“Nature,” 3/2/97). But, do dogs have a sense of humor? Are they capable of “doing” humor and “being done” by it? In order to engage in humor, an organism must have a certain level of mental ability. Do dogs have mental experiences? Do they possess a consciousness? Do they feel and think? These questions are germane in our look at humor in dogs even though we are “well advised to study the behaviour, rather than attempting to get at any underlying emotion.” However, this is not to say that “animal feelings do not exist and are not important” (Masson, 1995, p. 9). In a sociological exploration of humor and play in dogs, we do well to remember that all human experience is socially constructed. So, too, are dogs’ experiences in their association with humans. I further suggest that both humans and their dogs “are continually engaged in giving meaning to the world around them (for humor) occurs in a social environment in which participants act to make things humorous” (Mulkay, 1988, p. 106). While dogs do not laugh in the sense that we understand laughter, the humor that humans see in their interactions with their pets is socially mediated by both parties to form a collective moment, one which has meaning to each of them. This moment is created by, and facilitated through, certain behaviors and feelings shared by both dogs and their owners which, I suggest, involve mental experiences and awareness. Inherent in seeking answers to the question of dog humor and awareness, we will examine comments from the field of ethology, the scientific study of animal behavior (Encarta95). While “direct parallels between animal and human behavior are rarely appropriate ... animal data are sometimes useful not because animals are like man, but just because they are different” (Hinde, 1982, pp. 201, 202). In light of these differences, my focus will be on play in dogs, rather than directly on humor, for it is in the play of dogs that their owners perceive humor. Anecdotes from dog owners will demonstrate why many of them perceive humor in their animals. I should state that, as a dog owner, it is probable that my hypothesis that dogs “do” humor, and the argument I present to substantiate this view, is slanted — given that I also interpret my dog as “doing” humor in his play. However, a discussion on dog play, including verbal signals, facial expressions, and body movements, will serve to further illustrate how dogs “do” humor. I will end with a discussion on the possible consequences of humor in dogs and in their persons. It is hoped that the evidence presented will demonstrate that dogs, indeed, “do” humor and that play is the way they do it. If I fail to convince you of this, then at least — have fun! METHODS Data was collected in a variety of ways. The literature pertaining to ethology and animal behavior was reviewed, and interviews with pet owners and a veterinarian were carried out. The veterinarian interview was taped, and a transcription of that discussion is located in Appendix A. Comments by pet owners will be found in Appendix B, and E-mails by ethologists and other researchers from Internet ethology list groups form Appendix C. Anecdotes referable to my current and previous dogs, Sandy and Charlie respectively, are not included in the Appendices. DISCUSSION & FINDINGS Humor is the key to the problem of the evolution of mind in animals, and perhaps to even larger questions as well” (Fagen, 1997). The Dog Mind and Mental Capacity “Human capacities for cognitive functioning, and particularly for language, introduce new dimensions, including a possibility for cultural diversity of a different order from that encountered amongst animals” (Hinde, 1982, p. 201). While, anthropomorphically speaking, some humans attribute mental experiences only to their own species (Griffin, 1981, p. 170), many people believe that animals do have mental experiences and can be unhappy and also feel happiness, anger and fear ... (there is) constant evidence of it before their eyes ... animals love and suffer, cry and laugh; their hearts rise up in anticipation and fall in despair. They are lonely, in love, disappointed, or curious; they look back with nostalgia and anticipate future happiness. They feel. No one who has lived with an animal would deny this (Masson, 1995, pp. xiii, xxii). And, if a dog can feel, then I suggest that they have mental capacity including consciousness. In order for a dog to “do” or experience humor, we must view him in terms of his mental capacities. However, considering that the existence of animal consciousness “entails a whole nest of knotty and interrelated questions, we must be prepared to give equal weight to evidence for and against our favorite opinions” (Griffin, 1984, pp. 12, 13). But, consider this scene between Sandy when he was two years old and Charlie, a then five-month-old Daschund puppy. Sandy is sound asleep on the sofa, his toys grouped together on the floor beneath him. Charlie runs around the room, jumps into the pile of toys, and drags one of them to the center of the room. He then begins “eating” it. Sandy instantly awakens, and barks at Charlie. Charlie continues chewing, his huge black eyes looking up at Sandy, who is still on the sofa. Sandy stops barking and begins growling, jumps off the sofa, and literally stands over Charlie and the toy. At this point Charlie releases the toy and runs into my lap for protection. Certainly, Sandy communicated something to Charlie, and in such a way as to imprint Charlie’s mind. For, in future situations, all Sandy had to do was stand over Charlie, sans a bark or a growl, and Charlie immediately abandoned the toy. However, in these future episodes, Charlie did not run to me for protection, for Sandy must have also communicated that he would not hurt Charlie once the puppy relinquished the object. Thus, Sandy assessed the situation, and Charlie assessed Sandy. Some sort of mental experience must have occurred in these dogs, although it may differ in the nature and complexity of those mental experiences seen in humans. In this, then, how we define mental processes can help us identity what we are talking about in discussing dog consciousness. Certainly, these “terms are obviously difficult to define,” and the meanings of words and concepts “can be quibbled to death by excessive insistence on exact operational definitions” (Griffin, 1981, pp. 11, 12). However, considering “an animal to have a mind if it has such experiences, whether they be simple or complex ... (is) important for their social companions to understand” (Griffin, 1981, pp. 12-13). “Conscious” is defined as being aware of what one is doing or intending to do, and having a purpose and intention in one’s actions. “Consciousness” refers to the totality of the impressions, thoughts, and feelings which make up a person’s conscious being. “Feeling” is a pleasurable or painful consciousness and the emotional appreciation or sense of one’s own condition or of some external fact. And, “thinking” refers to the ability to form, or conceive of, a thought, notion or idea in the mind (Griffin, 1984, p. 5). We are cautioned to remember, however, that human definitions possess “a circular quality, since words are used to define each other” (Ibid). Thus, perhaps blind faith is required to believe that humor, and the mental processes that produce it, exist in a dog. “The implicit denial of mental experiences to animals has become almost an act of faith (which) is supported primarily by arguments and assertions that true language is a unique and characteristic attribute of our species (entailing) “a feeling of ‘own-group superiority’” (Griffin, 1981, p. 88.) On the other hand, “all one needs to do is to look around and not see something and then conclude that the thing that was not seen in a particular species is totally absent in that species” (Griffin, 1981, p. 112). So, while we do not explicitly see dogs belly-laugh or do stand-up comedy, “I think a lot of dogs enjoy being entertainers and playing to an audience” (Kershaw, 1997). In so doing, a dog’s subjective experiences may be different from any of our own, but they are probably quite important to” him (Griffin, 1984, pp. 7-8). I posit that dogs not only possess a consciousness but that they are also able to think. It may take blind faith on our part to believe this, but sometimes the evidence is so overwhelming that blind faith is not necessary. For example, Sandy is well-trained to respond to the usual commands of dog training; however, when I say “come,” his response is not always consistent. When he does not obey, I notice that he indicates understanding by looking up at me and raising his ears on hearing the word. However, he will rather go in another direction, say, in pursuit of a toy. Thus, Sandy made a decision to seek out a toy at that moment rather than obey. In order to make that decision, he must have the ability to think and decide on his course of action. The most essential aspect of consciousness ... is the ability to think about objects and events ... It seems likely that animals understand ... how their mental experiences relate to objects and events in the world around them. ... Clearly a conscious organism must do more than merely react; it must think about something ... any thinking animal is likely to guide its behavior at least partly on the basis of the content of its thoughts, so the information constituting that content must be available to the animal (Griffin, 1984, pp. 8-9). Consider how Sandy guides his behavior when a thrown toy ends up hidden between two pieces of furniture while he diligently works to figure out how to reach it. He will sit and stare in its direction, look to his right, to his left, try one avenue and then another, until he reaches the toy and retrieves it. His ability to always retrieve a hidden object illustrates strong “evidence suggesting (that) animal consciousness stems from (dogs’) enterprising solutions to newly arisen problems” (Griffin, 1984, p. 209). And, I suggest, that Sandy’s ability to find a way to reach the object represents his ability to think. If consciousness were used as a criterion of mind, “it would be a signally useless one, because the only way to tell whether any other thing is conscious is to ask it. And that you can only do to human beings” (Griffin, 1981, p. 90). Yet, consider behaviors in dogs that were never taught to them by their persons. Sandy has a habit of repeatedly returning toys to his doggie bed when we are done playing. I did not teach him to be so neat, and I seriously doubt that he learned to do this before coming to live with me, as will be explained later on. So, what is going on with this behavior? Since Sandy is an “only dog,” possessiveness of his property could not be motivating this behavior. It would be absurd to deny that mental experiences are important components in human behavior and human affairs in general. To the extent that animals have them, mental experiences may also be significant in their activities. It is obvious that one could not understand human beings as well, or predict their behavior as accurately, without taking some account of their awareness and intentions. The same consideration applies to other species, insofar as mental experiences are significant in their behavior (Griffin, 1981, p. 133). And, doing humor in play constitutes a significant behavior in dogs. “If one wants to make the point that we evolved from animals, and we have emotion, therefore animals have emotion, then it seems very reasonable (and obvious) that they have a sense of humor and can laugh” (Maina, 1997). Maina’s advice to me was to research animal play in exploring dog humor, and I will now follow her suggestion. Doggie Play While “the study of play joins worlds as separate, narrow, and cloistered as (dance) and experimental science, (it) links disparate minds, and thereby sows seeds of intellectual revolutions that may lie decades or even centuries in the future” (Fagen, 1993, p. 195). The study of play in dogs in not new in scientific study, but translating humor in dogs to play in dogs is relatively novel. Perhaps this discourse will add to the intellectual revolution in viewing humor in domestic dogs as play, which in turn is humor. And, perhaps we see humor in dogs because they make us laugh and feel good. Or, maybe what we call humor should rightfully be called play. In order to explore humor in dogs, we have to broaden the definition of that word (Winters, 1997), and I will broaden it to mean “play” because, in play, dogs obviously have fun, as do their humans when they are so honored to be drawn into the game. Thus, I suggest, that “doing” humor and “being done” by it constitute fun. Indeed, “there is something compelling in the recognition that other creatures enjoy play as much as we do” (Masson, 1995, p. 132). Having said that, I posit that, if humor is fun, and play is fun, then humor is play. And, it is from this perspective that we will view humor in domestic dogs. “Play may be regarded as a direct expression of the capacity to interact with the environment ... (and) reflect(s) an animal’s ability to ... anticipate novel stimulation” (Wemelsfelder, 1993, p. 71), such as when Sandy figures out how to retrieve a hidden toy. “In animal play, we see animals solving novel problems (which suggests) the subjective nature of animal behaviour” (Wemelsfelder, 1993, pp. 71, 72, 74). I cannot speak directly to Sandy’s subjective awareness nor on how and why he behaves as he does, for he cannot talk to me in my language. There may be ways to overcome such a communication problem if dogs could actually talk to us, but they can’t, at least not in human language. While dogs may not “understand the terminology ‘sense of humor’ they do indeed have a sense of play, which in turn can be very humorous” (Patrice, 1997). But, where did dogs learn how to be so humorous in their play? The design of certain behaviors “seems to suggest that play evolved through a series of phases involving development of physical capacity and skill, “development of close positive dyadic social relationships, assessment of well-being, ... integrative aspects of individual personality in relation to the physical and social environment, and a sense of fun (italics mine)” (Fagen, 1995, pp. 39-40). Most dogs are quite ready to show exuberance, joy, and a sense of fun, but that may not mean that they have a sense of humor in human terms in that their joyful behavior may merely be one that provides rewards or pleasure (Allen, 1997). In this, then, dogs would not be considered as having a sense of humor comparable to what we think of as existing in people (Boschert, 1997). However, if dogs can be happy, calm, scared, angry, dominant, submissive, and so forth, “I'm supposing that one might ask, then, why can pets have those emotional states and not also have a sense of humor” (Malocha, 1997). There is, though, a decided difference in the way dogs “do” humor from the way humans do it. I think that humor is uniquely human - like designing complex machines and planning for retirement. To me, things are funny because of a more complex mental process - perhaps a divergence from logic - and it's that divergence that makes them humorous. (One expects to see the man walk down the stairs - he falls - its slapstick. One expects a wife to like their husband - she calls him an idiot and it's funny standup... ) I just don't believe dogs and cats and birds and gerbils see things that way (Malocha, 1997). On the other side of the score board is Robert Fagen, Ph.D., an ethologist who specializes in animal play. He believes that dogs indeed have a sense of humor as demonstrated in their play (Fagen, 1997), as does Elizabeth Kershaw (1997). “I live with what has to be one of the worlds most humerus (sic) dog breeds — the Bearded Collie ... of course what I don't know is whether they intend to be humerus or whether they just seem funny to me” (Kershaw, 1997). W. H. "Hank" Halliday, of Wolf Awareness Inc. in Ontario, Canada also believes that it is a short leap to say that dogs have a sense of humor if we say they have a personality, and since personalities are a fact in these canids (dogs and wolves) I would suggest humour cannot be far behind. When my dog plays, it is not mechanical. He changes the rules to have "fun" with me. He certainly teases me and I would suggest that teasing is a form of humour (Halliday, 1997). Teasing, and indeed all dog behavior, may also be facilitated through signals with which the dog further communicates to us. Signals Signals refer to a dog’s verbal sounds, facial expressions, and body movements which are specialized communicative behavior used “ to convey information to another animal” (Griffin, 1984, p. 155). Expressions change with a dog’s mood, and they “can even amuse themselves by rolling on their back (while) making all sorts of vocal noises” (Forsyth, 1997). In this, Orca provides an example of verbal communication. Verbal Signals Orca is a 13-year-old Malamute who howls to her owner in a deep husky voice when her person is on the phone talking to a landlord about renting a new apartment. I asked her person if she performs this vocalization at any other time, and he said, “no, she only does this when I am on the phone talking to someone about an apartment to rent.” When asked if Orca makes facial expressions accompanying her howls, her person said that she seems to purse her lips together, much as we do when whistling (Orca, 1997). What is it that Orca is saying in this behavior? How does she know that her person is on the phone with a potential landlord? Is she saying that she doesn’t want to move? She couldn’t be jealous of his attention, for she does not howl when her person is on the telephone at other times. I suggest that Orca must have some conscious awareness of what is going on when she communicates in this manner, as she also displays a facial expression when howling at these moments which differs from her facial expressions at other times. “There is a visual signal (open mouth, a particular lip and muzzle posture) that suggests at least joy and possibly amusement” (McConnell, 1997). So, perhaps Orca was joyful at the prospect of moving, or maybe she merely wanted to amuse her person. However, it does seem clear “that some animals communicate complex messages so closely attuned to the nuance of the social situation that great caution is called for in reaching ... definite conclusions” that they cannot communicate (Griffin, 1981, pp.73-74) . Sandy has a vocal repertoire unlike any I have seen in a dog. When he wants to play or go out and I am moving too slowly for him, he will sit in the middle of the house and begin uttering a long, high-pitched whine. If I do not appear at his side post haste, the pitch of his whine becomes lower. If I still am not responding to his beckoning, he lets out a series of eardrum-piercing barks, with a pause between each bark, as if to say, “Get over here!” When I finally come to him, he is waiting with sparkling wide eyes and an open, relaxed mouth, which says, “Gotcha Ya!” Granted, this is an anthropomorphic translation on my part; however, this series of barks differs from those he uses when someone rings the door bell, for that “warning bark” involves a series of loud, sharp, nonstop barks, during which his mouth is tightly pursed. Sandy also “speaks” to me when he wants to play and I am working at the computer. He sits next to my chair, silent and motionless, staring at me until I look down at him. If I don’t get up to play with him or take him out, he begins “talking,” first with a low growl, which then grows louder and higher-pitched until I get up. Certainly, the human is the only animal that can talk in “human language,” but Sandy is definitely “talking” to me when I am too slow in meeting his demands. While Noam Chomsky refers to the human ability for language as “a species-specific capacity,” (Griffin, 1991, p. 74) some humans also have the ability to communicate without spoken language. Consider sign language, which of course is based on human language, but which is not facilitated through spoken language, either in hearing-impaired humans or in primates who have learned to sign. So, who can say that dogs do not also employ language to communicate with us, and with each other? Their language may just be a foreign one that we have not yet learned. In addition to sounds, dogs communicate through their facial expressions, some of which have been previously mentioned as appearing on Sandy’s face. Facial Expressions/Smiling A large role is played by nonverbal communication in many species as seen in facial expressions. Andy, a 3-year-old Akita mix, will eat only when his back, directly in front of his tail, is being vigorously scratched by his person. He sits in front of his food dish and silently looks up with a tilted head, offering an expectant expression that seems to say, “I’ll eat if you scratch me.” While being scratched, Andy eats — until his person stops scratching. He will then look up with the same sort of facial request as before. When the scratching resumes, so does his eating (Andy, 1997). The messages conveyed in gestures such as these “tend to be rather general and often convey emotional states rather than specific information about discrete objects” (Griffin, 1984, pp. 160-161). Still, it is easy, at least for dog-lovers and dog owners, to recognize meaning in their dog’s facial expressions. The previous “Sandy Gotcha Ya” example demonstrates one signal, that of a “relaxed, open-mouthed facial expression” without panting which humans might call smiling. Dr. Winters (1997) related a situation which he found humorous, and which he suggested the dog in question did too. He was putting a German Shepard to sleep in his person’s home. This lady had already dug a grave in the backyard. The dog went to sleep peacefully, and then was carried out to the grave. Dr. Winters and the lady were getting ready to lower the Shepard into the grave, when they looked down and saw the lady’s other dog “standing in the grave looking up at us with a rather quizzical look ... he was just sitting there ... just perched right down there ... if he could have smiled, I think he would have” (Winters, 1997). Now, this little terrier may have been confused, or he may have been reluctant to “let go” of his canine companion, but we can also suggest devilish humor in his facial expression, just as Dr. Winters did. Such “smiling” expressions can also be an “invitation to play.” In regards to dogs actually smiling, as humans understand a smile, much observation has been made in primates, resulting in some interesting suggestions concerning its probably phyletic origin ... On the basis of evidence drawn from a wide variety of sources, van Hooff (1972) suggested that smiling and laughter vary along at least two dimensions ... friendliness and playfulness ... many species have a ‘play face,’ often accompanied by vocalizations, which seems to signify, ‘What I do is only in play, and not serious.’ ... (others) a ‘fear grin’ or a ‘silent bared teeth’ display, sometimes accompanied by vocalizations (Hinde, 1982, p. 213). While dogs may not laugh, several dog breeds exhibit smiles, especially Belgian Shepherds ... their face is wrinkled like in threat but they do not show a lot of teeth, and the tail is wagging. It's more a grimace than a smile. Several dogs do that when people laugh, or to make people laugh. They even can do it on command” (Dehasse, 1997). There is also “laugh contagion (in which dogs will) respond well to peoples’ smiles and laughs, wagging their tail with them” (Ibid). I’ve never been able to command one of my dogs to smile, but I do know how to get Sandy’s tail wagging as he assumes certain postures while we do the “humor dance” together. Body Posturing and Movement The dance of play is “the distinctive choreography of animal play (which) allow(s) us to recognize and characterize play in animals” (Fagen, 1995, p. 32). In this, dogs display an “inventiveness in movement, or playfulness itself,” not unlike that seen “from the perspective of performance, including Western concert dance” (Fagen, 1995, p. 38). Sandy has a very distinctive dance during our nightly play in which the first three inches of his long tail go up high, with the end of it going straight down, forming a ninety degree angle to the floor. He not merely runs, but leaps and jumps much as a kangaroo. He “dances” at high speeds through the kitchen, around into the livingroom, does a figure-8 under the dining room table, then races back down the hall into the bedroom, reverses, goes back through the kitchen, around the table, into the living room, around me (while I sit in the middle of the room), and back down the hall and into the bedroom. In this nightly ritual, Sandy is communicating with his body language. He gleefully has fun and also invites me to play with him, as he establishes how that play is to be done. By his actions, Sandy demonstrates “the paths in space followed during chases (which) may be more intricate, with reversals of direction (and) reversals of role in which the chaser becomes the animals being chased,” with sharp turns being accomplished (Fagen, 1995, p. 31). In my household, however, Sandy is both the chaser and the chased, as if he envisions another (imaginary) dog in the house. Sometimes, when I can, I will chase, or be chased by, him for a short distance, which causes him to do his dance with even greater vigor. “A possible starting point in the dog for an inquiry into ‘humour’ might be the game of ‘chase me’ where the dog ‘play bows’ and teases another into chase behavior (Walker, 1997). The play bow is when a canid lowers its forelegs to the ground and waves its tail ... (this) is a way of saying, “everything that follows is just a game. Are you ready to play?” Dogs will attempt to play with another animals, cats, for example, but are usually disappointed in their lack of fluency in or indifference to this canid metalanguage. This gives special poignance to the play between a dog and its human friend as if dogs recognize that they have found a companion in which they can teach the rules. Nor do they seem unhappy at trying to figure out human rules for the games we wish to play with them. The concentrated posture a dog assumes over a stick he is waiting for his human friend to move is obviously meant to be slightly humorous: that is part of the game. Playing these games is almost like looking through a window into the dog’s mind. We see what he intends. And the dog, too, gets a clear glimpse into our minds and knows what we want (Masson, p. 132). It appears that Sandy wants me to play “chase me” or “retrieve” when placing his elbows on the floor, back side up, for the placement of a dog’s elbows on the floor may “serve to initiate and maintain play and to communicate information about the immediate well-being of the players” (Fagen, 1995, p. 32). (Well-being will be further discussed under consequences of humor to follow.) In addition, playing games with humans is a way for dogs to exhibit their humor to us, especially in playing "lead or dead doggie." This involves the dog making him or herself as heavy as they possibly can and laying absolutely still and literally pushing their body on the couch, sofa or bed or whatever you’re trying to move them off of while they are laying down or trying to sleep or nap. Dogs tend to find this amusing, as lifting or even dragging 65 lbs. of ‘dead weight’ can be quite a challenge when you yourself are tired. Another aspect of playing ‘lead or dead doggie’ involves laying down right next to you in bed, facing you, while stretching out their legs as they try to push themselves down the mattress, effectively pushing you out of their way (Michalski, 1997)! Sandy weighs only 15 pounds, but he has nearly pushed me off the bed more than once. In their play, we can also say that the dogs described herein demonstrate a sense of well-being, which I see as an important component in doing humor, and in being done by it, insofar as consequences of dog humor are concerned. Consequences of Doggie Humor Humor may be a “fear coping strategm” or an “emotion of relief” (Walker, 1997), and it may also serve to “alleviate the detrimental effects of social isolation” (Wemelsfelder, 1993, p. 75), as we shall soon see having occurred in Sandy’s life. Dog humor also establishes and/or maintains a sense of well-being for canids and humans alike, and communicates something to another animal (including a human) with motivation or intent, as I posit the aforementioned body posturing, facial expressions and verbal responses indicate. Well-being Well-being in a dog “has special significance” (Fagen, 1995, p. 33). Although one significance of play is “survival and reproduction across different animal species” (Fagen, 1995, p. 35), and while play is only possible when you are not busy trying to survive (Dehasse, 1997), play in adult dogs also “has the shape of love” (Fagen, 1995, p. 35). Play in nature most often occurs between parent and offspring or between prospective or actual mates (Ibid), but I suggest that in a domesticated animal, play incorporates “social bonding functions rather than development of specific motor skills or survival abilities.” That is, there is a “persistence of play ... in precisely those social contexts involving the closest, most intimate, and potentially most emotionally positive kinds of dyadic relationships” (Fagen, 1995, p. 36). Play in these relationships involve “individual creativity, interpretation, improvisation, and cultural transmission.” Such are the “essentials of juvenile primate play,” (Fagen, 1993, p. 194), and why, too, could they not be in juvenile and adults dogs? An interesting example from primate studies relates to dogs as surrogate mothers for infant monkeys. These studies suggest that dyadic responsiveness, and very possibly play itself, is important for normal social development. Dogs were much more effective than passive mechanical ‘mothers’ (for the infant monkeys because) play captures many of the elements of companionship (which is) important in primate and in social canid development, and was one major experiential difference between the monkeys raised by dogs and (those) raised by mechanical surrogates (Fagen, 1993, p. 195). These studies are especially applicable to Sandy. When I first met him, he was cowering in the corner of a cage at an animal rescue organization where I volunteered, and was so thin that I could see his rib cage through his curly tufts (he is part Bichon, part Poodle). I was asked to work with him for two weeks to get him adoptable, and so I took him home. There, he exhibited motor uncoordination when walking, or a stiff body position when approached by humans. He spent his days curled up in a remote corner or under the bed. He may have been a “normal,” active puppy at one time in his life, but he was extremely passive when we met, obviously due to severe abuse and neglect. He did not appear to me to have had the type of mothering, nor the type of childhood, required to produce a happy, confident, well-adjusted eighteen month old dog when I took him home. So, in effect, I became his surrogate mother and taught him to accept affection, tummy rubs, grooming (which is an important social behavior among primates) — and how to have fun. Wemelsfelder (1993) suggests that “the transition from an active to a passive mode of behaviour is initially experienced by the animal as boredom, and subsequently as depression and/or anxiety in the final stages” (Wemelsfelder, 1993, p. 66). She calls this “stereotyped behaviour” in which an animal may “show an overall reduction in behavioural diversity ... and may frequently assume immobile bodily postures” with a decreased “tendency to interact with environmental stimuli.” There may also be apathetic behavior (Wemelsfelder, 1993, pp. 80-81, 84). Sandy, indeed, appeared to be apathetic, showing little interest in my attention nor in that of my other, aged dog (who died eight months after Sandy joined us), and he was quite uninterested in playing with us. In fact, he did not even know how to play! The fun of play can shape a young primate’s developing interpretations of a challenging new social and physical world in positive directions. But if fear of such novelty, itself highly adaptive at times (per Hinde, 1987), overwhelms fun ... (then) development may be slowed or diverted into different pathways (Fagen, 1993, p. 195). The “fun of play” can also shape a dog’s development, and I think that Sandy’s “different pathways” resulted from being severely isolated and ignored as a young dog. He would not let me or anyone hold him or even touch him, which I took as a sign of fear and possibly depression. However, if such an “animal were to be permanently transferred to an enriched environment, it may be expected that the animal would return to its normally variable and flexible behavioural repertoire” (Wemelsfelder, 1993, p. 85). After working with Sandy for about two years and literally forcing him to let me hold, rock, kiss and groom him, he indeed became “adoptable” — by me! As is evident in Sandy’s anecdotes described herein, his present behaviors indicate a complete turn-around, for he now demonstrates an “anticipatory, flexible character (such as that seen) in exploration and play (which) expresses a state of general subjective integrity or well-being” (Wemelsfelder, 1993, p. 67). Sandy was a dog in great distress without a hint of play or humor in him three years ago, but, what we see now as we watch him dance and play is “a wild display of flamboyant yet elegant fun” (Fagen, 1995, p. 195). Play in both humans and nonhumans involves many of the same characteristic body movements and communicative signal patterns. The functional significance of animal play, “so far as is known,” involves three aspects of social relationships. Play contributes to future reproductive success and indicates current well-being; play helps animals learn in which situations to act in self-defense and when not to (as seen in rats); and “play is important in developing and maintaining close, emotionally positive dyadic social relationships” (Fagen, 1995, p. 40). It is the latter of these functions that so greatly benefits both the dog and his person. “Whether or not we accept that animals have fun in the human sense of the word, it is undeniable that animals have a biological interest in their own and others’ well-being” (Fagen, 1992b, p. 40). They may even be able to foresee future consequences or imply intent in their playful actions. Intention/Motivation Ethologists have found the term ‘intention movement’ widely applicable to those postures and relatively slight movements of animals that convey to other animals reliable information about probable future behavior. ... Since both conspecifics and human observers can predict the future behavior of an animal from its intention movements, it seems remarkably unparsimonious to assume that the animal executing the intention movement cannot anticipate the next steps in its own behavior (Griffin, 1981, p. 94). Ellie, a small 9-year-old “Heinz variety,” is very possessive of two tennis balls, her favorite toys. She plays alone with one of these balls, taking it into her mouth, swinging her head down and then up to the side, subsequently releasing the ball which then hurls through the air. She proceeds to chase it, fetch it, return to the spot whence she first flung it, and then repeats this entire procedure. Since her person has never played with her in this manner, we could say that Ellie has learned to anticipate future events in flinging the ball, for that movement always causes the ball to hurl across the room. She also knows what will happen if she flings the ball in a wrong direction. In this case, the ball rolls under a low-setting piece of furniture, which makes it unretrievable, and, so, Ellie no longer flings the ball in that direction (Ellie, 1997). Both Sandy and Ellie also know that if they have an accident in the house, they will be verbally scolded. In an anticipatory fashion, when I or Ellie’s person return home, our respective dogs are hiding in a corner or closet rather than jumping all over us with their customary “hello.” Thus, they are apparently anticipating the consequences of their past actions and future human responses. Consider a Bearded Collie, as our last example of motivation and intention, who plays “her own version of football with a squeaky ball,” in which she appears to be “mimicking human behaviour.” She pushes the ball with her nose, and her persons are then allowed to kick the ball back. The aim was to get the ball past her to score a goal and for her to stop the ball passing and return it to us for further play. Her agile goal keeping skills were incredible. From time to time she started a series of squeaks with the ball before returning it and clearly expected us to squeak back when it was our turn. Inaccurate pushes were retrieved quickly by her for a replay (Kershaw, 1997). Sandy also squeaks his toys during playtime, and if I don’t squeak another of his toys back, he stops playing with me! In these games, it would appear that the dogs are exhibiting intention and/or motivation, which in turn suggests evidence for their mental ability. When animals communicate to one another they may be conveying something about their thoughts or feelings (and, so) eavesdropping on the communicative signals they exchange may provide us with a practicable source of data about their mental experiences (as well as their humor in play). ... The communication behavior of other species is bound to suggest conscious thought roughly to the extent that it shares essential features with human speech. In allowing ourselves to entertain the notion that animals may be aware of past, present, and future events, or may experience mental images ... it certainly is not necessary to assume that such mental experiences are at all similar to those which a person might have under analogous circumstances (Griffin, 1981, p. 87; Griffin, 1984, p. 39). CONCLUSION If we take humor to mean an “outpouring of joviality” (Winters, 1997) in which humans are having fun, then in a sense they are playing. When animals play, they, too, are having fun. Therefore, if humor is fun and play is fun, then by logical deduction humor is play. Many the reader will consider this statement to be the epitome of illogic, and least the reader think that research concerning humor in dogs to be ludicrous, if not altogether hysterical, I caution you to “profit from adopting a comic approach” to this question (for) there is, today, increased scientific inquiry into “humor, laughter, and the ‘lighter side’ of play” (Fagen, 1995, p. 41). There is a power in our relationships with dogs in which we share feelings that are reserved only for our closest family members. Why is it that dogs are so extraordinary in their multidimensional behaviors? Are they born this way, or is it their desire to serve us or demonstrate their devotion to us? Is it their intelligence or their endless desire to please? And what is this bond that draws together two species? “Is it something we will ever understand? Do we need to? Whatever it is, it seems it will last forever” (“Nature,” 1997). And, why do we continue to study domestic dogs? Because, they are “unsurpassed observers (and) may perceive things about us or about the world that would surprise us. Without animals ... we can’t even identify what we don’t know” (Thomas, 1993, p. 143), and “we need to understand animals to understand ourselves” (Patrice, 1997). “Marvellous as may be the power of my dog to understand my moods, deathless as is his affection and fidelity, his mental state is as unsolved a mystery to me as it was to my remote ancestor” (Fogle, 1990, p. xviii, quote by Williams James), and so — a mystery it largely remains for this writer and the reader. However, “the most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science” (Strum, 1987, p. xi, quote from Albert Einstein). If, indeed, I have failed to shed any light at all on the nature of play and humor in dogs, then that is all the more reason why we should continue to unravel this mysterious nature of one of our closest companions, the dog. References Allen, J. 1997. E-mail. Andy. 1997. Interview with his owner, 3/6/97. Boschert, K. 1997. E-mail. Dehasse, J. 1997. E-mail. Ellie. 1997. Interview with her owner, 2/23/97. Encarta95. 1994. Microsoft Corporation, Funk & Wagnall's Corporation. Fagen, Robert. 1992a. Moving beyond words in Behavioral and Brain Sciences (15:2): 275-276. (Dr. Fagen kindly mailed me these five articles, since all his books have been checked out of the UCLA libraries for the duration of this quarter.) Fagen, Robert. 1992b. Play, fun, and communication of well-being in Play and Culture (5): 40-58. Fagen, Robert. 1993. Primate juveniles and primate play in Pereira, M.E. & Fairbanks, L. A., eds. Juvenile Primates: Life History, Development and Behavior. New York: Oxford Press. Fagen, Robert. 1995. Animal play, games of angels, biology, and Brian in Pellegrini, A.D., ed. The Future of Play Theory: A Multidisciplinary Inquiry Into the Contributions of Brian Sutton-Smith. Albany: SUNY Press. Fagen, Robert. 1996. Individual distinctiveness in brown bears, Ursus arctos L. in Ethology (102): 212- 226. Fagen, Robert. 1997. E-mail. Fogle, B. 1990. The Dog’s Mind: Understanding Your Dog’s Behavior. New York: Howell Book House, Maxmillian Publishing. Forsyth, G. 1997. E-mail. Griffin, D.R. 1981. The Question of Animal Awareness. New York: The Rockefeller University Press. Griffin, D.R. 1984. Animal Thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Halliday, W. 1997. E-mail. Hinde, R.A. 1982. Ethology, Its Nature and Relations with Other Sciences. New York: Oxford University Press. Internet. 1997. Kershaw, E. 1997. E-mail. Maina, D. 1997. E-mail. Malocha, P. 1997. E-mail. Masson, J.M. (1995) When Elephants Weep, The Emotional Lives of Animals. New York: Delacorte Press McConnell, P. 1997. E-mail. Michalski, D. 1997. E-mail. Microsoft Bookshelf’95. Mulkay, Michael. 1988. Entering the humorous mode in On Humour: Its Nature and Place in Modern Society. Cambridge: Polity Press. “Nature.” 3/2/97, PBS (Channel 28, Los Angeles). Orca. 1997. Interview with her owner, 2/21/97. Patrice. 1997. E-mail. Strum, S.C. 1987. Almost Human: A Journey into the World of Baboons. New York: W. W. Norton. Thomas, E.M. (1993). The Hidden Life of Dogs New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Verkerk, G. 1997. E-mail. Walker, R. 1997. E-mail. Wemelsfelder, F. 1993. The concept of animal boredom and its relationship to stereotyped behavior in Lawrence, A.B. & Rushen, J., eds., Stereotypic Animal Behaviour: Fundamentals and Applications to Welfare, pp. 65-95. (Dr. Wemelsfelder is currently working on a research project at the Scottish Agricultural College in Edinburgh, Scotland and was kind enough to mail me these two articles.) Wemelsfelder, F. 1997. Investigating the animal’s point of view. An enquiry into a subject-based method of measurement in the field of animal welfare in Dol, M. et. al., eds, Animal Consciousness and Animal Ethics, pp. 74-89. Winters, J. 1997. Interview on 2/25/97. ENDNOTES From: IN%"sarwarm@paknet1.ptc.pk" "Muhammad Sarwar" 31-MAR-1997 08:58:05.53 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Request for Research Articles Pakistan Journal of Livestock and Poultry is dedicated to the dissemination of fundamental knowledge in all areas of Animal Science. This journal is published quarterly uner the supervision of Agri-Livestock Bureau, Pakistan. The bureau exists for the advancement of education and research in animal sciences and allied disciplines. The Journal conveys latest information, research and extension activities here and abroad on drugs, vaccines, biologics, latest technology, modern equipments and applied information to extension worker for application in the field. Please send your articles (Full Length Papers, Short Communications, Clinical Articles, Review Articles) for publication in this journal NOTE: YOU CAN SEND YOUR ARTICLES THROUGH EMAIL TO: SARWARM@PAKNET1.PTC.PK INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS PREPARATION OF MANUSCRIPTS Before preparing a manuscript the author(s) should follow the following guidelines: 1. Manuscript should be written in clear, concise and grammatical english, and be submitted in triplicate. 2. Full papers are limited to 15 pages in length including tables, figures and abstract. Short communications are limited to 6 pages only. 3. The arrangement of the manuscript should be as follows: Title: Author's name(s); Abstract; Introduction, materials and Methods; Results and Discussion and References. 4. References cited in the text should arranged alphabaticaloly according to author's name (2) year of publication (3) title of the paper (4) name of the journal (or book) in abbreviation (5) volume and pages of the Journal or book Examples Sarwar, M., M.N. Saeed and G. Muhammad, 1994........................ Crop Sci., 24: 12-15. 5. Figures should be drawn in black ink and must be legibly labelled. Try to accoummodate at least 4 figures on one A-4 size paper. 6. Only standard abbreviation should be used both in the text and references. Subscription Information One volume per year, each consisting of 4 issues. Price per voluem Rs. 200/- (Local and US$ 25 (International) Correspondance Address: Agriculture Livestock Bureau Pakistan 334-B, Peoples Colony, Faisalabad Email: sarwarm@paknet1.ptc.pk From: IN%"drogers@zoo.uvm.edu" 31-MAR-1997 11:52:16.46 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: circus animals Dear Subscribers: I am Shannon Bayer, a University of Vermont animal sciences major conducting an investigation of methods and practices used in the training of circus animals, with special emphasis on animal welfare considerations. Literature searches have provided meager resources. I would very much appreciate any information, potential contacts, and leads to reputable published material on this subject. If you would like to respond to this request directly my e-mail address is: sbayer@zoo.uvm.edu Thanks to all. From: IN%"sschmerl@umich.edu" 31-MAR-1997 12:15:26.60 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: IN%"schilder@neuretp.biol.ruu.nl" Subj: the limper and the gobbler On Thu, 27 Mar 1997 12:11:55 +0100 schilder@neuretp.biol.ruu.nl wrote: >sonia wrote: >>Frankly, I can't imagine how the ability to deceive could NOT imply >>consciousness. > >I think deceiving can take place without implying consciousness in the sense of >a capability of reflecting on onself. Take the famous example of Lorenz' dog, >that was taken by Lorenz to walk while Lorenz biked to his work. One day, the >dog got a wound on one of its paws and started limping, upon which Lorenz >halted. This dog quit quickly learned to limp when Lorenz took his bike. Simple >operant conditioning may explain a number of examples of deceiving. But: >probably this type of explanation does not suffice for many examples of >deceiving, especially in the apes. In all case awareness (= I limp) plays a >role, but not cenessaroli counsciousness (= I know that I limp) > >Regards > >dr Matthijs Schilder >Utrecht University Interesting example. I realize now that in my definition of "deception" I had assumed some degree of intention to decieve, which would imply awareness of another's state of mind, which would imply awareness of ones own state of mind, at least as being distinct from the other's. In other words, to call Lorenz's dog deceptive, we would have to attribute to his consciousness:"I know that I limp and I am not injured" and "I know that Dr. Lorenz does not know that I am not injured." This is fun, but with all due repsect to Konrad Lorez, it is his story that we are interpreting, and not necessarily an accurate account. I think I remember reading a desription of an ape in captivity (I don't remember the species or who the observer was) who was observed to discover the location of some hidden food, and to avoid the cache until other apes were otherwise occupied, whereupon he availed himself of the hidden goodies unmolested. This was presented as an example of "deception." What do you all think? Sonia From: IN%"rdecter@msn.com" "Renee Decter" 31-MAR-1997 13:21:53.60 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Humor in Domestic Dogs Posting -- A MESS Hi Folks, I see the format of the post came to you as a mess. I'm trying to convert it into plain text (once I find out how!). Sorry for this. I'm new to all this and am learning as I go along. Will try to fix up the paper and repost it to you. I appreciate your patience. Regards, Renee From: IN%"wattsjon@duke.usask.ca" "Jon Watts" 31-MAR-1997 13:32:30.05 To: IN%"sschmerl@umich.edu" "Sonia Schmerl" CC: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca", IN%"schilder@neuretp.biol.ruu.nl" Subj: RE: the limper and the gobbler On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Sonia Schmerl wrote: > Interesting example. I realize now that in my definition of "deception" > I had assumed some degree of intention to decieve, which would imply > awareness of another's state of mind, which would imply awareness of > ones own state of mind, at least as being distinct from the other's. In > other words, to call Lorenz's dog deceptive, we would have to attribute > to his consciousness:"I know that I limp and I am not injured" and "I > know that Dr. Lorenz does not know that I am not injured." > > This is fun, but with all due repsect to Konrad Lorez, it is his story > that we are interpreting, and not necessarily an accurate account. > > I think I remember reading a desription of an ape in captivity (I don't > remember the species or who the observer was) who was observed to > discover the location of some hidden food, and to avoid the cache until > other apes were otherwise occupied, whereupon he availed himself of the > hidden goodies unmolested. This was presented as an example of > "deception." What do you all think? > > Sonia > > I think I'm noticing a tendency for things we formerly assumed to require "high" cognitive abilities to turn out to be possible without such abilities, for people to anthropomorphise over the skills required to achieve a certain goal and for apparently complicated behaviour patterns to arise from fairly simple rules. This theme seems to crop up everywhere these days, from fractal geometry to computer-simulated neuroethology to animal "language" studies. Seems that a salvo from Lloyd Morgan's Canon might be in order, to reduce the complexity to a more meaningful collection of rubble. Of course in some cases invoking a "higher" cognitive faculty might be the more parsimonious explanation. What seems to get overlooked however is that the cognitive representations of animals are as likely to be utterly alien to us as they are to be recognisable. It might be that we can only interpret a certain action in human terms as deception, or misrepresentation. Its significance to the animal might be completely different. Perhaps some animals might not partition external reality and internal processing as separate entities in the way that we tend to do (unless we are "sick"). It only looks to us as if the animal is exploiting an internal mental state to influence the outside world because we interpret these as different. My contention is not that animals don't have minds, but rather that their minds may be more different from ours than we are capable of imagining. Thats what I think (today!) Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Watts (___) ) ) University of Saskatchewan |o o|___________/ ( Dept of Herd Medicine O \#/ | ) and Theriogenology |bser| | Statistical | ( Western College of Vet. Med. |vati| | analysis | ) 52 Campus Drive |ons.| \___________/| *& Saskatoon ------ || || %$#@ S7N 1B4 / \ || || ^*@*~ Canada &^%%#$@ wattsjon@duke.usask.ca "The Holy Cow" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: IN%"serpell@vet.upenn.edu" 31-MAR-1997 13:34:27.48 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: the gobbler To Sonia (and others) who wrote: >I think I remember reading a desription of an ape in captivity (I don't >remember the species or who the observer was) who was observed to >discover the location of some hidden food, and to avoid the cache until >other apes were otherwise occupied, whereupon he availed himself of the >hidden goodies unmolested. This was presented as an example of >"deception." What do you all think? I believe this example came from Franz de Waal's book "Chimpanzee Politics" and it does indeed present us with an intriguing anecdotal example of a probable case of 'conscious' deception by a subordinate male chimpanzee living in a zoo colony. However, some purists have argued that anecdotal observations always suffer from interpretive biases, and that the chimpanzee's apparent deception could have been based on a much simpler learned contingency -- e.g. if I start finding and eating these hidden grapefruits when the dominate males can see me, they will beat me up and take the fruit (because that's what they always do). So I will wait until they are out of sight/asleep. It has also been argued that, because of their experience of interacting with deceptive humans, zoo chimpanzees' cognitive abilities are not necessarily representative of those living in a natural state. James Serpell ___________________________________________________________________ School of Veterinary Medicine, Dept. of Clinical Studies, University of Pennsylvania, 3900 Delancey Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6010. USA. Tel: (215) 898-1004 Fax: (215) 573-6050 serpell@vet.upenn.edu From: IN%"CROWELL-DAVIS.S@calc.vet.uga.edu" "Sharon Crowell-Davis" 31-MAR-1997 13:34:44.05 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: KIDS TORTURING ANIMALS > > A few have mentioned that the children may not be able to develop an > > emotional bond with the fish. This may be true, but it is important to > > remember that these children have difficulties developing and expressing > > their emotions in the first place. I want, more than anything, the > > children to develop an appreciation for the fish. Greg Having just come back from several days spent at home with the kids and some new fish, (as well as the rest of our menagerie) I found this discussion quite interesting. I will have to disagree with those who say children can't develop an emotional bond with fish. We have had fish for years, as well as furred and feathered friends, and the children certainly do develop attachments. Many of the fish are named. Their daily lives are observed and discussed. There are arguments over whether "Angel" or "Bluefin" is the prettiest fish. When they die, tears of real grief are shed and there are numerous little scaled creatures that have been reverently buried in the pet cemetery in our backyard. I think there are some real benefits to fish for your situation. Sitting together in front of the fish tank is a good bedtime activity. Everyone is probably familiar with the research on watching a tank of fish resulting in a lowering of blood pressure. It is also a good time for a family to just sit and talk. The fish always make a good topic, but conversation can drift other ways without the fish becoming fidgety or running off, as sometimes happens with the furred pets. Regarding specifics, a community tank tends to have a greater variety of things going on and things to talk about than a single species tank. You have to be careful and get non-aggressive fish, though. A mixture of bottom-feeders, mid-feeders and top feeders adds to the diversity. The antics of loaches (bottom feeders) seem to be especially popular with children. I would certainly agree with the comments that live-bearers (guppies, platys, mollies, swordtails, etc.) are great with children. Be prepared for everything else to come to a halt if a female is caught giving birth. It can bring as much delight as a dog or cat giving birth, without the attendant problem of having to find homes for the offspring. Grass or other shelter for the offspring to hide from their cannibalistic parents is a must, however (and could possibly be a springboard for talking about having to hide from parents?). Good luck with this project, and do keep a secure lid on the tank. Sharon Crowell-Davis ********************************************** Sharon L. Crowell-Davis DVM, PhD Diplomate, American College of Veterinary Behaviorists College of Veterinary Medicine University of Georgia Athens, Georgia 30602 706-542-8343 FAX 706-542-0051 Email crowell-davis.s@calc.vet.uga.edu If a little knowledge is dangerous, where is the man who has so much as to be out of danger? T.H. Huxley On Elementary Instruction in Physiology