Subject: Shock collar use in cats - question From: catbehavior@cox.net Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 13:48:23 -0500 To: "applied-ethology@usask.ca" I have been asked by my local Humane Society if there has ever been any research done on the use of these electronic training devices in cats. I was unable to find any scientific research with cats (probably with good reason!) but wondered if anyone has ever heard of use of these collars on cats. Kitty -- The Cat Spay/Neuter Connection helping families help cats http://www.catspayneuter.org Subject: RE: Shock collar use in cats - question From: Sue Bowers Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:40:03 -0500 To: applied-ethology@usask.ca CC: catbehavior@cox.net I have never heard of such a study, but if you'll humour my layman's opinion...I would suspect that it would not be very successful. ;) Cats are not really a "pack" or group animal and do not have the need to "correct" each other for anti-pack behaviour. I don't believe they have the same sort of extensive communications framework that group-living animals have developed. Physically correcting a cat is more likely to teach the cat ONLY that you (or the collar) are a threat, than to effectively modify behaviour in the way the human was intending. That's based only on my own theories, though. I would never attempt to physically correct one of our cats--I suppose they would smite me in my sleep. ~Sue -----Original Message----- From: catbehavior@cox.net [mailto:catbehavior@cox.net] I have been asked by my local Humane Society if there has ever been any research done on the use of these electronic training devices in cats. I was unable to find any scientific research with cats (probably with good reason!) but wondered if anyone has ever heard of use of these collars on cats. Subject: RE: Shock collar use in cats - question From: Derek Haley Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 17:26:53 -0600 To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Whether or not any type of collar device would work depends, I suspect, on exactly WHAT you are trying to teach the cat. Of course cats can learn! Below are a couple of references on testing the use of "collar-mounted devices" on cats: S.H. Nelson, A.D. Evans, and R.B. Bradbury. 2005. The efficacy of collar-mounted devices in reducing the rate of predation of wildlife by domestic cats Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 94:273-285. S.H. Nelson, A.D. Evans, and R.B. Bradbury. 2006. The efficacy of an ultrasonic cat deterrent, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 96:83-91. I hope these help. Derek Quoting Sue Bowers : > > I have never heard of such a study, but if you'll humour my layman's > > opinion...I would suspect that it would not be very successful. ;) > > > > Cats are not really a "pack" or group animal and do not have the need to > > "correct" each other for anti-pack behaviour. I don't believe they have > > the same sort of extensive communications framework that group-living > > animals have developed. > > > > Physically correcting a cat is more likely to teach the cat ONLY that > > you (or the collar) are a threat, than to effectively modify behaviour > > in the way the human was intending. > > That's based only on my own theories, though. I would never attempt to > > physically correct one of our cats--I suppose they would smite me in my > > sleep. > > ~Sue > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: catbehavior@cox.net [mailto:catbehavior@cox.net] > > > > I have been asked by my local Humane Society if there has ever been any > > research done on the use of these electronic training devices in cats. > > > > I was unable to find any scientific research with cats (probably with > > good reason!) but wondered if anyone has ever heard of use of these > > collars on cats. Subject: RE: Shock collar use in cats - question From: Hilit Finkler Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:25:54 +0200 To: catbehavior@cox.net, applied-ethology@usask.ca I am not familiar with any scientific material either. Like sue, I believe this would not be a good approach for cats because any sort of punishment is something they interpret as threatening and nothing more. -----Original Message----- From: catbehavior@cox.net [mailto:catbehavior@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 8:48 PM To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Subject: Shock collar use in cats - question I have been asked by my local Humane Society if there has ever been any research done on the use of these electronic training devices in cats. I was unable to find any scientific research with cats (probably with good reason!) but wondered if anyone has ever heard of use of these collars on cats. Kitty -- The Cat Spay/Neuter Connection helping families help cats http://www.catspayneuter.org Subject: RE: Shock collar use in cats - question From: Hilit Finkler Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:12:15 +0200 To: 'Danny Craig' , applied-ethology@usask.ca Perhaps you are right for single instance learning. However, I would not recommend using it on cats. Hilit Finkler PhD student Zoology department The George S. Wise Life sciences faculty Tel Aviv University Israel From: Danny Craig [mailto:dannycraig@cox.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 3:57 PM To: Hilit Finkler Subject: Re: Shock collar use in cats - question On the contrary, it would work perfectly for the avoidance of certain behaviors. E.g., counter tops – if the cat were stimmed when it hopped up on the counter top, it would cease to do so immediately because of the association of pain/discomfort with the countertop. This would be an example of single instance learning. A very powerful and long term form of learning (not easily forgotten). From: Hilit Finkler Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:25:54 +0200 To: , Subject: RE: Shock collar use in cats - question I am not familiar with any scientific material either. Like sue, I believe this would not be a good approach for cats because any sort of punishment is something they interpret as threatening and nothing more. -----Original Message----- From: catbehavior@cox.net [mailto:catbehavior@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 8:48 PM To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Subject: Shock collar use in cats - question I have been asked by my local Humane Society if there has ever been any research done on the use of these electronic training devices in cats. I was unable to find any scientific research with cats (probably with good reason!) but wondered if anyone has ever heard of use of these collars on cats. Kitty -- The Cat Spay/Neuter Connection helping families help cats http://www.catspayneuter.org Subject: Re: Shock collar use in cats - question From: "Jay R. Feierman" Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:20:15 -0700 To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Hilit Finkler: Perhaps you are right for single instance learning. However, I would not recommend using it [a shock collar] on cat[s]. Jay R. Feierman: Why not? If the issue is humane treatment of animals, the same arguent could be made for dogs. Both species are capable of association learning. To give a personal example, I have a pond at my house. My dogs were drinking the pond water as their exclusive source of water. They were getting sick because of claustridia (a bacteria) in the water. I got a shock collar kit that contained a small transmitter, wire, and a receiver collar. I put the wire around the pond. Before I put the collar on my dogs, I tested it myself. It made a very painful shock when I held it in my hand. However, it did not damage the tissue. I put the collar on one dog first. He had one trial learning. He got shocked once and then never went within 10 feet of the pond. The second dog, who was older, took two trials. I then took off the shock collar and put it away. Neither dog went near the pond again for years. It seemed to me to be the most humane way to keep the dogs from getting sick, other than to put a fence around the pond, which I did not want to do. If there was a place that one did not want cats to go, I strongly suspect the same result would occur. Cats are behaviorally different from dogs in being predominantly solitary rather than social. However, that difference should have no effect on association learning. The drawback for a cat is the collar that I used for dogs was rather large for a cat. I don't know if they make smaller collars. However, my experience was the equivalent of one trial learning. So the collar may only have to be a temporary item a cat would wear. If anyone on the applied ethology group is interested in the application of ethology to humans, go to http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/human-ethology/ Subject: Re: Shock Collars From: Audrey Schwartz Rivers Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:34:52 -0600 To: ethology network IMHO as an animal lover, a dog trainer and lay ethologist (if there can be such a thing), I strongly believe that shock (aka e-collars) are unnecessary for animal training (except in extremely rare cases where behavior modification is necessary to save a life). Despite what e-collar proponent and manufacturers say, these devices are inhumane and teach via fear not by respect for an animal's learning ability. In my mind, it is a method for lazy trainers or impatient/inconvenienced owners. Equally associative learning methods include helicoptering, whipping, submerging head in water (a method Jay could have used in lieu of a shock collar) and many of those old training practices. But why cause any harm when in almost every case, use of more positive reinforcement and animal/people-friendly methods can be used. Training should build positive bonds between animal and humans. Training methods that inflict fear or pain, no matter how "minor" are not conducive to furthering the human-animal bond. Audrey Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Subject: Re: Shock Collars From: "Jay R. Feierman" Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:40:46 -0700 To: ethology network Audrey, I only used the "shock collar" when my dog became very ill from drinking pond water. The benefit of the collar is that it was one trial learning. I tried it on my own hand first. The other benefit is that the dog did not associate the shock with me. If I knew a way of accomplishing the same thing by positive reinforcement, I would have done it. Dogs have a natural affinity for water and both my dogs were used to drinking from the pond whenever they were outside. In my opinion it was a very effective and quick method of solving the problem. Regards, Jay To join the Yahoo Human Ethology Group, go to http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/human-ethology/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Audrey Schwartz Rivers To: ethology network Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:34 PM Subject: Re: Shock Collars IMHO as an animal lover, a dog trainer and lay ethologist (if there can be such a thing), I strongly believe that shock (aka e-collars) are unnecessary for animal training (except in extremely rare cases where behavior modification is necessary to save a life). Despite what e-collar proponent and manufacturers say, these devices are inhumane and teach via fear not by respect for an animal's learning ability. In my mind, it is a method for lazy trainers or impatient/inconvenienced owners. Equally associative learning methods include helicoptering, whipping, submerging head in water (a method Jay could have used in lieu of a shock collar) and many of those old training practices. But why cause any harm when in almost every case, use of more positive reinforcement and animal/people-friendly methods can be used. Training should build positive bonds between animal and humans. Training methods that inflict fear or pain, no matter how "minor" are not conducive to furthering the human-animal bond. Audrey Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Subject: Re: Shock Collars From: Tricia Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:42:12 -0800 To: Audrey Schwartz Rivers , ethology network We use them on dogs because dogs are so forgiving. We use them because we can rather than using our bigger brain. Cats wouldn't put up with it. Dogs are the most plastic species of all and they pay the price for being so. If they save a dog's life, it's good. But I see a lot of lazy and sadistic uses of them. ----- Original Message ----- From: Audrey Schwartz Rivers To: ethology network Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 11:34 AM Subject: Re: Shock Collars IMHO as an animal lover, a dog trainer and lay ethologist (if there can be such a thing), I strongly believe that shock (aka e-collars) are unnecessary for animal training (except in extremely rare cases where behavior modification is necessary to save a life). Despite what e-collar proponent and manufacturers say, these devices are inhumane and teach via fear not by respect for an animal's learning ability. In my mind, it is a method for lazy trainers or impatient/inconvenienced owners. Equally associative learning methods include helicoptering, whipping, submerging head in water (a method Jay could have used in lieu of a shock collar) and many of those old training practices. But why cause any harm when in almost every case, use of more positive reinforcement and animal/people-friendly methods can be used. Training should build positive bonds between animal and humans. Training methods that inflict fear or pain, no matter how "minor" are not conducive to furthering the human-animal bond. Audrey Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Subject: Shock Collars From: ismail thoya Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:38:03 -0800 (PST) To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Hello everyone I know i may sound ignorant but i feel i have to ask.In east africa where i live shock collars a very rare.Can somebody please send me a brief description of the collars including how they work, amount of power they produce,price and the variety they come in. Subject: Re: Shock Collars From: Cecilia Lambert Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:09:43 -0800 (PST) To: applied-ethology@usask.ca, kcatomeg@yahoo.com I am looking for information on pack behavour in hunting dogs and what the shock collars are used for on hunting dogs. Here in IN, I am fighting the use of packs of dogs in running pens to kill coyotes and foxes. I am also interested in the pack behavior of these same hunting dogs being used in the wild. The dog trainers say the dogs are only used in the wild for tracking. I don't think they can be trained in Live Bait Dog Training Pens and then can have them change their behavior to just tracking in the wild. I also think that dogs trained with this method can be a danger to domestic animals and small children. There is a problem with the dog runners letting their dogs run on private farmland, here in Indiana. I need comments. CeAnn CeAnn Lambert Indiana Coyote Rescue Center www.coyoterescue.org Please visit our gift shop @ www.cafepress.com/coyoterescue --- On Thu, 11/20/08, ismail thoya wrote: From: ismail thoya Subject: Shock Collars To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Date: Thursday, November 20, 2008, 10:38 AM Hello everyone I know i may sound ignorant but i feel i have to ask.In east africa where i live shock collars a very rare.Can somebody please send me a brief description of the collars including how they work, amount of power they produce,price and the variety they come in. Subject: Re: Shock Collars From: "Jay R. Feierman" Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:24:20 -0700 To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Hello Ismail Here is an add for one from PetSmart. See http://www.petsmart.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2753831. There are many other similar devices at http://www.petsmart.com/family/index.jsp?categoryId=2767085&pg=2&f=Taxonomy%2FPET%2F2767085&fbn=Taxonomy|Training+%26amp%3Bamp%3B+Behavior&fbc=1&view=all. The one that I used (for one trial learning) to keep both my dogs away from our pond where drinking the water was making them sick has a warning sound that comes on when the receiver box worn around the dog's neck is about 3 feet from the antenna wire. As such, if it took more than one trial learning, the dog gets warned by the sound before the shock occurs. My daughter has two large dogs and a chicken coop full of 50 or so hens. The dogs kept getting into the chicken coop and killing chickens. She put one of these antenna wires around the chicken coop and put a receiver/shocker on both dogs. That has worked very well for the past several years. However, a few weeks ago she discovered that one of her dogs had dug his way under the fence into the chicken coop. The battery was dead on the receiver he wears. So if one needs to keep such a device on a dog, one has to periodically check and replace the batteries. Regards, Jay R. Feierman To join the Yahoo Human Ethology Group, go to http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/human-ethology/ ----- Original Message ----- From: ismail thoya To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 8:38 AM Subject: Shock Collars Hello everyone I know i may sound ignorant but i feel i have to ask.In east africa where i live shock collars a very rare.Can somebody please send me a brief description of the collars including how they work, amount of power they produce,price and the variety they come in. Subject: Ismai - some background information on electrical stimulation that may be of use to you From: Dean Anderson Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:37:03 -0700 To: kcatomeg@yahoo.com, applied-ethology@usask.ca CC: Dean Mauritz Anderson Greetings Ismial, Up to this email I have only been reading with interest the discussions, but have not responded to any of the correspondence that has been generated on the subject of electric stimulation and animal behavior. However, since you are asking for some background I am sending you one .pdf file and details on how to access a journal article that you may find of value to give some background on animal control using electrical stimulation as one type of cue. I especially refer you to the publication "Virtual fencing- A concept into reality" page 78 that is attached as a .pdf file. Furthermore, I would encourage you to take a look at a review paper (Anderson, D. M. 2007. Virtual fencing – past, present and future. The Rangeland Journal. 29:65-78.) that is available at (http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/202.htm). This manuscript covers the concept of virtual fencing around the world through February 2007. Though neither of these papers focus on dog shock collars I believe there may be some background covered in them that you may find useful. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to e-mail me and I will try and answer them in light of my experience on the use of electric stimulation as one type of cue to control cattle. Dean Dr. Dean M. Anderson Research Animal Scientist Jornada Experimental Range Mailing address: P.O. Box 30003 MSC 3JER Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003-8003 Physical address: Wooton Hall 2995 Knox Street Room 240 Office Telephone (575) 646-5190 Office FAX (575) 646-5889 Cell (575) 649-0790 e-mail: deanders@nmsu.edu http://usda-ars.nmsu.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: ismail thoya To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 8:38 AM Subject: Shock Collars Hello everyone I know i may sound ignorant but i feel i have to ask.In east africa where i live shock collars a very rare.Can somebody please send me a brief description of the collars including how they work, amount of power they produce,price and the variety they come in. Subject: Re: Shock collar use in cats - question From: Janice Willard Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:48:38 -0700 To: catbehavior@cox.net CC: applied-ethology network Hi Kitty, Any aversive training with a cat is fraught with problems because they are very reactive to fear-causing stimuli (this makes ethological sense because they are prey animals as well as predators and so need to react quickly to threats)and they are very able to do displacement learning--i.e., they will attribute the frightening stimulus to something else in the environment rather than learning the association that you want them to learn. In other words, they will learn fear and avoidance, but not necessarily to the stimulus that you want them to avoid. And since the response to fear is sometimes aggression, you could cause the formation of an unwanted association that triggers aggression--not something you want. That said, if I were attempting an aversive training as the last resort with a cat, I wouldn't choose a shock system. I once used a citronella collar as an aversive on my Border Collie. Border Collies are very sensitive and easily form aversive-avoidance associations, so I attempted this with a great deal of caution. What I found was that the citronella itself was not nearly as aversive to my Border Collie as was the hissing sound that the citronella gas canister made. Cats also are very reactive to this kind of hissing sound. So, if as a last resort, I were to attempt a remote aversive training system for a cat, I would use a remotely controlled canister of compressed air that would hiss when triggered. I suspect that this is all the aversive one would need for a cat. Plus, I would be more tempted to put the aversive that hisses on the object that you want the cat to avoid, not on the cat. You also need to remember that using any kind of aversive training, your timing in applying and removing the aversive stimulus has to be exquisitely precise for the desired association to be made. Otherwise, it is simply a meaningless cruelty. Janice Janice Willard, DVM, MS ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:48 AM Subject: Shock collar use in cats - question > I have been asked by my local Humane Society if there has ever been any research done on the use of these electronic training devices in cats. > > I was unable to find any scientific research with cats (probably with good reason!) but wondered if anyone has ever heard of use of these collars on cats. > > > Kitty > > -- > The Cat Spay/Neuter Connection > helping families help cats > http://www.catspayneuter.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.4/1795 - Release Date: 11/17/2008 5:24 PM Subject: Re: Shock collar use in cats - question From: Cecilia Lambert Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:11:31 -0800 (PST) To: catbehavior@cox.net, Janice Willard CC: applied-ethology network And since the response to fear is sometimes aggression, you could cause the formation of an unwanted association that triggers aggression-- That is exactly what I think the dog runners are doing. They are shocking the dogs when they are attacking the coyote or fox. The dogs think the coyote or the fox is causing the shock and the dogs become more aggressive towards the fox or coyote. Is this possible? One dog runner says "Lucy wouldn't attack the coyote, no matter how often I shocked her." Then he goes on to tell that because she wouldn't attack the coyote, she had to be taken "over the hill, for a dose of lead." This is a dirty business that is now out in the open. I want it stopped in IN. Does anyone want to help? I don't have a degree, so no one pays much attention to me unless I have back up information. CeAnn CeAnn Lambert Indiana Coyote Rescue Center www.coyoterescue.org Please visit our gift shop @ www.cafepress.com/coyoterescue --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Janice Willard wrote: From: Janice Willard Subject: Re: Shock collar use in cats - question To: catbehavior@cox.net Cc: "applied-ethology network" Date: Thursday, November 20, 2008, 1:48 PM Hi Kitty, Any aversive training with a cat is fraught with problems because they are very reactive to fear-causing stimuli (this makes ethological sense because they are prey animals as well as predators and so need to react quickly to threats)and they are very able to do displacement learning--i.e., they will attribute the frightening stimulus to something else in the environment rather than learning the association that you want them to learn. In other words, they will learn fear and avoidance, but not necessarily to the stimulus that you want them to avoid. And since the response to fear is sometimes aggression, you could cause the formation of an unwanted association that triggers aggression--not something you want. That said, if I were attempting an aversive training as the last resort with a cat, I wouldn't choose a shock system. I once used a citronella collar as an aversive on my Border Collie. Border Collies are very sensitive and easily form aversive-avoidance associations, so I attempted this with a great deal of caution. What I found was that the citronella itself was not nearly as aversive to my Border Collie as was the hissing sound that the citronella gas canister made. Cats also are very reactive to this kind of hissing sound. So, if as a last resort, I were to attempt a remote aversive training system for a cat, I would use a remotely controlled canister of compressed air that would hiss when triggered. I suspect that this is all the aversive one would need for a cat. Plus, I would be more tempted to put the aversive that hisses on the object that you want the cat to avoid, not on the cat. You also need to remember that using any kind of aversive training, your timing in applying and removing the aversive stimulus has to be exquisitely precise for the desired association to be made. Otherwise, it is simply a meaningless cruelty. Janice Janice Willard, DVM, MS ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:48 AM Subject: Shock collar use in cats - question >I have been asked by my local Humane Society if there has ever been any >research done on the use of these electronic training devices in cats. > > I was unable to find any scientific research with cats (probably with good > reason!) but wondered if anyone has ever heard of use of these collars on > cats. > > > Kitty > > -- > The Cat Spay/Neuter Connection > helping families help cats > http://www.catspayneuter.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.4/1795 - Release Date: 11/17/2008 5:24 PM Subject: Re: Shock collar use in cats - question From: catbehavior@cox.net Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:26:05 -0500 To: Janice Willard CC: applied-ethology network Dr. Willard, I couldn't agree more with your thoughts and line of thinking. That given how cats respond to their environment in general, the potential for redirected aggression would be high (which is the message I had conveyed to the shelter). And I have no idea what behavior the citizen was trying to amend, address, extinguish...whatever. In any case, I believe, in most cases other alternatives exist if you are creative and consider how the animal sees its environment. I once read a quote in an article (F.A.B.??) that I believe is that sums up cats quite nicely: “Understand that most cats are pessimists – they assume the worst will happen. Try not to confirm it for them”. --- Kim Kendall I think the shelter was asking me if this was truly a viable or studied alternative. They did not think so, but I think were looking for scientific data to back up their intuitive thoughts. Thanks much, Kitty ---- Janice Willard wrote: Hi Kitty, Any aversive training with a cat is fraught with problems because they are very reactive to fear-causing stimuli (this makes ethological sense because they are prey animals as well as predators and so need to react quickly to threats)and they are very able to do displacement learning--i.e., they will attribute the frightening stimulus to something else in the environment rather than learning the association that you want them to learn. In other words, they will learn fear and avoidance, but not necessarily to the stimulus that you want them to avoid. And since the response to fear is sometimes aggression, you could cause the formation of an unwanted association that triggers aggression--not something you want. That said, if I were attempting an aversive training as the last resort with a cat, I wouldn't choose a shock system. I once used a citronella collar as an aversive on my Border Collie. Border Collies are very sensitive and easily form aversive-avoidance associations, so I attempted this with a great deal of caution. What I found was that the citronella itself was not nearly as aversive to my Border Collie as was the hissing sound that the citronella gas canister made. Cats also are very reactive to this kind of hissing sound. So, if as a last resort, I were to attempt a remote aversive training system for a cat, I would use a remotely controlled canister of compressed air that would hiss when triggered. I suspect that this is all the aversive one would need for a cat. Plus, I would be more tempted to put the aversive that hisses on the object that you want the cat to avoid, not on the cat. You also need to remember that using any kind of aversive training, your timing in applying and removing the aversive stimulus has to be exquisitely precise for the desired association to be made. Otherwise, it is simply a meaningless cruelty. Janice Janice Willard, DVM, MS ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:48 AM Subject: Shock collar use in cats - question > >I have been asked by my local Humane Society if there has ever been any > >research done on the use of these electronic training devices in cats. > > > > I was unable to find any scientific research with cats (probably with good > > reason!) but wondered if anyone has ever heard of use of these collars on > > cats. > > > > > > Kitty > > > > -- > > The Cat Spay/Neuter Connection > > helping families help cats > > http://www.catspayneuter.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.4/1795 - Release Date: 11/17/2008 5:24 PM -- The Cat Spay/Neuter Connection helping families help cats http://www.catspayneuter.org Subject: Re: Shock Collars From: Audrey Schwartz Rivers Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:22:16 -0600 To: kcatomeg@yahoo.com CC: applied-ethology@usask.ca I've attached some articles on Shock Collars. They are very controversial among dog trainers here in the USA. Success in achieving limited short-term "gains" is greatly outweighed by the collars greater tendency to cause pain, fear and injure the human-animal bond. Audrey Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Subject: Re: Ismai - some background information on electrical stimulation that may be of use to you From: margorycohen@comcast.net Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:51:49 +0000 To: applied-ethology@usask.ca More references for you: ?Understanding Electronic Dog Training? by Dr. Daniel Tortora. And excellent training generally -- and a favorite - Behavior, Development, And Training Of The Cat : A Primer Of Feline Psychology / frederic J. Sautter, John A. Glover. SF446.5 .S38. Plus - a wee tweak that is more than semantics -- there are 'shock' collars and 'e-collars' and 'electric collars.' There also is allot of baggage and distraction as to this particular item. I don't happen to train with these; however, I know some first-rate and first-class trainers who achieve terrific result and more importantly -- keep the dog (in most cases) in the home. The person who raised this in what I caught was involved with a shelter cat if I'm not mistaken and frankly shelters and cats have a more complicated sitation than choice of equipment. I always steer clear of writings that contain words like cruelty and humaneness. (Only this morning I saw a poor dog who hadn't been taught how to walk on a lead being dragged down the street in a buckle collar.) It is not equipment that trains and hurts an animal. It is usually an uninformed person who hasn't been well taught. It is I believe the trainer and ethologist's job to teach people how better to handle and interact and train their animals. I don't live with cats. I live with sighthounds, the 'cats' of dogs. I have high regard for cats. Take care as you broaden your reading and good luck to you in your study. It bears repeating what I just said: It is not equipment that trains and hurts an animal. It is usually an uninformed person who hasn't been well taught. It is I believe the trainer and ethologist's job to teach people how better to handle and interact and train their animals. -margory cohen San Francisco, CA -------------- Original message -------------- From: Dean Anderson Greetings Ismial, Up to this email I have only been reading with interest the discussions, but have not responded to any of the correspondence that has been generated on the subject of electric stimulation and animal behavior. However, since you are asking for some background I am sending you one .pdf file and details on how to access a journal article that you may find of value to give some background on animal control using electrical stimulation as one type of cue. I especially refer you to the publication "Virtual fencing- A concept into reality" page 78 that is attached as a .pdf file. Furthermore, I would encourage you to take a look at a review paper (Anderson, D. M. 2007. Virtual fencing ? past, present and future. The Rangeland Journal. 29:65-78.) that is available at (http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/202.htm). This manuscript covers the concept of virtual fencing around the world through February 2007. Though neither of these papers focus on dog shock collars I believe there may be some background covered in them that you may find useful. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to e-mail me and I will try and answer them in light of my experience on the use of electric stimulation as one type of cue to control cattle. Dean Dr. Dean M. Anderson Research Animal Scientist Jornada Experimental Range Mailing address: P.O. Box 30003 MSC 3JER Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003-8003 Physical address: Wooton Hall 2995 Knox Street Room 240 Office Telephone (575) 646-5190 Office FAX (575) 646-5889 Cell (575) 649-0790 e-mail: deanders@nmsu.edu http://usda-ars.nmsu.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: ismail thoya To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 8:38 AM Subject: Shock Collars Hello everyone I know i may sound ignorant but i feel i have to ask.In east africa where i live shock collars a very rare.Can somebody please send me a brief description of the collars including how they work, amount of power they produce,price and the variety they come in. Subject: Ismai - some background information on electrical stimulation that may be of use to you From: Dean Anderson Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:45:28 +0000 To: kcatomeg@yahoo.com, applied-ethology@usask.ca CC: Dean Mauritz Anderson Subject: Re: Ismai - some background information on electrical stimulation that may be of use to you From: Audrey Schwartz Rivers Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:37:53 -0600 To: margorycohen@comcast.net CC: applied-ethology@usask.ca Margory wrote: > It bears repeating what I just said: It is not equipment that trains and hurts an animal. It is usually an uninformed person who hasn't been well taught. It is I believe the trainer and ethologist's job to teach people how better to handle and interact and train their animals. > > I agree. A rolled up newspaper can be just as threatening and harmful to an animal as a shock or e-collar. That said, my concern with the use of these devices for training is that usually are not used in the best interest of the animal but for the convenience of the humans (trainer/owner) involved. Humans want a fast response to problems. The responsibility of the trainer and ethologist is to "first do no harm" to animals we work with or study. The electronic/shock collars should never be the method of first choice in a training situation. And I think science has come much farther than in the days of Skinner's box. Audrey Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Subject: RE: Shock collar use in cats - question From: Zen Trainer Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:39:10 -0600 To: catbehavior@cox.net, Ethics List I have been asked by my local Humane Society if there has ever been any research done on the use of these electronic training devices in cats. I was unable to find any scientific research with cats (probably with good reason!) but wondered if anyone has ever heard of use of these collars on cats. Kitty The Cat Spay/Neuter Connection helping families help cats http://www.catspayneuter.org You might check Pam Bennett's work. I may not be keeping up with her married name. She's written about 8 books on cat behavior and most public libraries carry them. I know that one is called "Twisted Whiskers". She works only with cats and I work with cats and dogs. I've worked with a few people who she had worked with first and because of aggression between two cats in the household she had them divide the house with invisible fencing. So in two instances that I know of, the cats wore shock collars that were triggered by proximity to the fence. It did not teach the cats to get along. It may have increased their dislike toward each other but they could no longer harm each other. It's not what I would have suggested. I am not a big proponent of permanent management. I like to train in a natural, gentle way, using all positive techniques. I think equipment can harm and I believe we were training animals quite well before electricity was ever invented. Tracy B Ann www.zenpaws.com "The Politics of Dogs" www.radiofreenashville.org Subject: FW: First Do No Harm From: Zen Trainer Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:00:25 -0600 To: Ethics List "The responsibility of the trainer and ethologist is to "first do no harm" to animals we work with or study." Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Audrey, Do you have a source for any animal group that actually has as any part of it's mission statement "first do no harm"? I am doing an article on who speaks for the animals and have been looking for some group that has this as their written philosophy. We tend to think it's in the oath Vets take. It's not. You might think a state Animal Control would be charged with this. They're not. Their job is to protect the public. And well, we know that a researchers goal is not "do no harm". So if you do know of a group that has this in writing, it would really help me out and I would appreciate the info! Thanks! Tracy B Ann www.zenpaws.com "The Politics of Dogs" www.radiofreenashville.org Subject: Re: First Do No Harm From: Audrey Schwartz Rivers Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:36:53 -0600 To: Zen Trainer CC: Ethics List Sorry, Tracy, I don't. This is something I always talk about when speaking to groups, other trainers, animal advocates, the public as well as during animal-assisted program training which PetShare conducts. I just assume it is a guideline, albeit not necessarily written, of all helping professionals who deal with conscious, sentient beings regardless of species. Audrey Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Tracy wrote -- > Audrey, > Do you have a source for any animal group that actually has as any part of it's mission statement "first do no harm"? I am doing an article on who speaks for the animals and have been looking for some group that has this as their written philosophy. We tend to think it's in the oath Vets take. It's not. > You might think a state Animal Control would be charged with this. They're not. Their job is to protect the public. And well, we know that a researchers goal is not "do no harm". So if you do know of a group that has this in writing, it would really help me out and I would appreciate the info! > Thanks! Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Subject: Pet rat From: doggiepause@comcast.net Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:11:53 +0000 (UTC) To: Audrey Schwartz Rivers CC: Ethics List , Zen Trainer I hope someone has time to give me a little advice. We have a pet rat that was found in the yard. He had obviously escaped from somewhere nearby, but we couldn't locate the owner. Can we get him a friend, or would they be likely to fight? I don't trust the pet store to answer this question. Thanks, Judy Gee Subject: Re: First Do No Harm From: doggiepause@comcast.net Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:18:08 +0000 (UTC) To: Audrey Schwartz Rivers CC: Ethics List , Zen Trainer The phrase is widely thought to be part of the Hippocratic Oath, but is not. It is, apparently, widely used in many medical texts. (Google it.) Judy Gee ----- Original Message ----- From: "Audrey Schwartz Rivers" To: "Zen Trainer" Cc: "Ethics List" Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 10:36:53 PM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain Subject: Re: First Do No Harm Sorry, Tracy, I don't. This is something I always talk about when speaking to groups, other trainers, animal advocates, the public as well as during animal-assisted program training which PetShare conducts. I just assume it is a guideline, albeit not necessarily written, of all helping professionals who deal with conscious, sentient beings regardless of species. Audrey Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Tracy wrote -- Audrey, Do you have a source for any animal group that actually has as any part of it's mission statement "first do no harm"? I am doing an article on who speaks for the animals and have been looking for some group that has this as their written philosophy. We tend to think it's in the oath Vets take. It's not. You might think a state Animal Control would be charged with this. They're not. Their job is to protect the public. And well, we know that a researchers goal is not "do no harm". So if you do know of a group that has this in writing, it would really help me out and I would appreciate the info! Thanks! Audrey Schwartz Rivers, MS Executive Director PetShare Houston, Texas www.petshare.org Subject: Re: Pet rat From: doggiepause@comcast.net Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:35:37 +0000 (UTC) To: Audrey Schwartz Rivers CC: Ethics List , Zen Trainer Thank you all so much for your responses. It's very generous of you to respond to my little issue. I had called the local humane society, but they were not aware of any rat rescue groups, and checking out Petfinders didn't occur to me. I'll do that. I also wasn't aware that neutering was possible. Thanks again Judy Gee Subject: RE: First Do No Harm From: Zen Trainer Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:25:24 -0600 To: Ethics List It might be a mantra, but it's not in the written oath. It's about benefiting society by protecting animals health, advancing medical knowledge (I am assuming human here), promoting public health, conservation of animal resources (not sure what that is). I do like the part about relief of animal suffering. I was looking more for a group whose primary mission was animals not society or the public. Still looking. I think the Vet Behaviorist's are closer to that. I'll keep looking, my deadline just got moved up. Yikes! Tracy B Ann www.zenpaws.com "The Politics of Dogs" www.radiofreenashville.org From the AVMA: Veterinarian's Oath (Adopted by the House of Delegates, July 1969, amended by the Executive Board, November 1999) Being admitted to the profession of veterinary medicine, I solemnly swear to use my scientific knowledge and skills for the benefit of society through the protection of animal health, the relief of animal suffering, the conservation of animal resources, the promotion of public health, and the advancement of medical knowledge. I will practice my profession conscientiously, with dignity, and in keeping with the principles of veterinary medical ethics. I accept as a lifelong obligation the continual improvement of my professional knowledge and competence. ************************************************************ It is. This is our veterinary mantra: "First do no harm." Lore I. Haug, DVM, MS, DACVB, CPDT, CABC Texas Veterinary Behavior Services 2627 Cordes Dr. Sugar Land, TX 77479 281-980-3737 281-313-1849 fax www.texasvetbehavior.com LIhaug@aol.com APDT #692, IAABC Traveling over the river or through the woods this holiday season? Get the MapQuest Toolbar. Directions, Traffic, Gas Prices & More! Subject: Re: Shock collar use in cats - question From: John Burchard Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:08:29 -0800 To: Applied Ethology list Janice Willard wrote: > Any aversive training with a cat is fraught with problems because > they are very reactive to fear-causing stimuli (this makes > ethological sense because they are prey animals as well as predators > and so need to react quickly to threats)and they are very able to do > displacement learning--i.e., they will attribute the frightening > stimulus to something else in the environment rather than learning > the association that you want them to learn. In other words, they > will learn fear and avoidance, but not necessarily to the stimulus > that you want them to avoid. And since the response to fear is > sometimes aggression, you could cause the formation of an unwanted > association that triggers aggression--not something you want. > That said, if I were attempting an aversive training as the last > resort with a cat, I wouldn't choose a shock system. I once used a > citronella collar as an aversive on my Border Collie. Border Collies > are very sensitive and easily form aversive-avoidance associations, > so I attempted this with a great deal of caution. What I found was > that the citronella itself was not nearly as aversive to my Border > Collie as was the hissing sound that the citronella gas canister > made. Cats also are very reactive to this kind of hissing sound. Not only cats and Border Collies!. That's why rattlesnakes, Saw-scaled vipers (Echis) and puff adders all make warning sounds which are quite similar, though produced by completely different means. Convergent evolution at work . > So, > if as a last resort, I were to attempt a remote aversive training > system for a cat, I would use a remotely controlled canister of > compressed air that would hiss when triggered. I suspect that this > is all the aversive one would need for a cat. Plus, I would be more > tempted to put the aversive that hisses on the object that you want > the cat to avoid, not on the cat. Good thinking . John -- John E. Burchard, Ph.D. Tepe Gawra Salukis saluqi@ix.netcom.com http://saluqi.home.netcom.com Subject: Re: Shock Collars From: John Burchard Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:10:08 -0800 To: Applied Ethology list Audrey Schwartz Rivers wrote: > I've attached some articles on Shock Collars. They are very > controversial among dog trainers here in the USA. Success in > achieving limited short-term "gains" is greatly outweighed by the > collars greater tendency to cause pain, fear and injure the human- > animal bond. As I'm sure you are aware, there are widely divergent opinions on that score. Use of the term "shock collar" already loads the assessment in a certain direction. The modern devices are in fact capable of much more differentiated application, so that the idea of "zapping" the dog (etc) when it makes a mistake is mainly an example of how NOT to go about using the device. I don't know any device that cannot be misused or abused. An ordinary leash and collar can cause permanent damage to a dog's trachea, if the user is sufficiently inept and brutal. Of course an electronic collar can be used to cause fear and/or pain, but such use is counterproductive (apart from being cruel) and is condemned by the trainers I know. John -- John E. Burchard, Ph.D. Tepe Gawra Salukis saluqi@ix.netcom.com http://saluqi.home.netcom.com Subject: Seeking endnote output style for Primates From: Dingzhen Liu Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:23:15 +0800 To: applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca Dear colleagues Sorry for bothering you! I am seeking an output style of Endnote for Primates. I am grateful to you if you happen to have and send me one copy. Sincerely Dingzhen ------------------------------ ===================== Dingzhen Liu Ph.D. College of Life Sciences Beijing Normal University Beijing 100875 Tel: 8610-5880-6699 (Office) Fax: 8610-5880-7721 Email: dzliu@bnu.edu.cn http://ecology.bnu.edu.cn/liudz/index.htm Subject: description of stereotypy From: Janice Willard Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 09:30:31 -0700 To: applied-ethology network Hi, Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one classifies a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud or a dog licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And these would not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and conditions are necessary and sufficient to meet the criteria of a diagnosis of stereotypy. Thanks, Janice Willard, DVM, MS Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: gflannigan@triad.rr.com Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:10:34 +0000 To: applied-ethology network The sequence of behaviors in stereotypies can be simple to complex but are: a. relatively invarient, b. repetative, c. with no apparent goal or function. Some authors argue that the sequence of behaviors need to be performed to an extent that the perfomance interferes with the functioning of the animal. Gerry ---- Janice Willard wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one classifies a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud or a dog licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And these would not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and conditions are necessary and sufficient to meet the criteria of a diagnosis of stereotypy. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Janice Willard, DVM, MS -- Gerrard Flannigan DVM MSc. DACVB gflannigan@triad.rr.com Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: "Jay R. Feierman" Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:11:06 -0700 To: applied-ethology network Janice, According to the Preface of S.J. Cooper and C.T. Dourish. 1990 Neurobiology of Stereotyped Behavior. NY: Oxford University Press, "We are all used to treating the hallmarks of rational behavior as normal: of laying particular value upon the organized, planned, the goal-directed, and the intelligible. Rational behavior is functional, complex, and open to change as a consequence of experience. From this point of view, stereotyped behavior is seen as an aberration: apparently purposeless, repetitive and invariant, and not under self-control." Therefore, deciding that a particular behavior is stereotyped would not be done on the basis of the form of the behavior but rather on the basis of the behavior's proximate function. For example the behavior of licking is functional if the licking is serving some type of functional purpose. By contrast, if for example a dog keeps sticking its tongue out in a licking-like manner when it is not licking anything, this would be considered stereotyped behavior. So the criteria would be a repetitive behavior that has no obvious proximate function. Regards, Jay R. Feierman To join the Yahoo Human Ethology Group, go to http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/human-ethology/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Janice Willard To: applied-ethology network Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 9:30 AM Subject: description of stereotypy Hi, Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one classifies a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud or a dog licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And these would not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and conditions are necessary and sufficient to meet the criteria of a diagnosis of stereotypy. Thanks, Janice Willard, DVM, MS Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: Peter Kabai Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 19:20:45 +0100 To: "Jay R. Feierman" CC: applied-ethology network Well, originally the word stereotype: method of printing from a plate Coined as stereotype by Didot in 1795. stereos: (greek) solid + type, character Image reproduced without change Behaviour stereotypies in the broad sense: invariable (highly predictable) behaviour. Some predictable behaviour can be quite functional, some abnormal http://www.behav.org/kabai/abstracts/kabai_horse_stereotypy.pdf Best wishes, Peter Kabai 2008/11/23 Jay R. Feierman : > > Janice, > > > > According to the Preface of S.J. Cooper and C.T. Dourish. 1990 Neurobiology > > of Stereotyped Behavior. NY: Oxford University Press, "We are all used to > > treating the hallmarks of rational behavior as normal: of laying particular > > value upon the organized, planned, the goal-directed, and the intelligible. > > Rational behavior is functional, complex, and open to change as a > > consequence of experience. From this point of view, stereotyped behavior is > > seen as an aberration: apparently purposeless, repetitive and invariant, and > > not under self-control." > > > > Therefore, deciding that a particular behavior is stereotyped would not be > > done on the basis of the form of the behavior but rather on the basis of the > > behavior's proximate function. For example the behavior of licking is > > functional if the licking is serving some type of functional purpose. By > > contrast, if for example a dog keeps sticking its tongue out in a > > licking-like manner when it is not licking anything, this would be > > considered stereotyped behavior. So the criteria would be a repetitive > > behavior that has no obvious proximate function. > > > > Regards, > > Jay R. Feierman > > To join the Yahoo Human Ethology Group, go to > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/human-ethology/ > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Janice Willard > > To: applied-ethology network > > Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 9:30 AM > > Subject: description of stereotypy > > Hi, > > > > Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one classifies > > a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud or a dog > > licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And these would > > not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and conditions are necessary > > and sufficient to meet the criteria of a diagnosis of stereotypy. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Janice Willard, DVM, MS -- Peter Kabai, PhD Associate Professor Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University http://www.behav.org Subject: Intro and question From: Dottie Love Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:08:39 -0600 To: Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca Hi everyone--please forgive my non-professionalism and newbieness. I am a college computer graphics teacher, artist, VP of the American Miniature Zebu Association, and an avid, albeit informal, student of Applied Ethology. I am fascinated by cattle behavior, bos indicus in particular, and my herd of 20 Miniature Zebu. You all are probably familiar w/ these, but in case you're not, the Mini Zebu is not a downsized version on an American Brahman. They are a natural variation landrace type adapted to poor forage conditions, and are used in Southeast Asia as draft animals in rice paddies. Mine here in North Texas are pets and show animals. I only sell calves, resulting in an extremely stable herd hierarchy of stay-at-home moms and show bulls. OK, here's my question: I need an explanation of a certain behavior. I'll try to list who, what, where, when, and I hope you can give me the why. What: the animal sinks to the ground and won't get up. It appears like they faint or "swoon." Eyes open. Nothing works to move them. Sooner or later, they jump up and seem normal. When: it occurs most often when the animal is haltered and led into the show ring. Many times it happens when they are haltered for the first time, even at home. It doesn't seem to happen when they're roped--they pull back strenuously then. (Here's my roping technique: I slowly follow them around in a small pen with a soft nylon rope noose until they put their head into it. I work slowly and alone and try to never panic my cows.) Our calves are under 20 lbs. at birth--when you carry them, they're still for maybe a minute, then struggle furiously. Where: mostly in public with a halter and lead. Never at the vet. Never in a squeeze chute or calf table, never even in a tilt table for hoof trimming. Never when loading into a trailer. Never when unrestrained. Who: most often calves with a lack of show experience. Can happen with adults with a lack of show experience. Can happen with bottle-raised, highly socialized animals who haven't been haltered and led much (because they follow you around like a dog). Can happen with seasoned show animals when they walk on unfamiliar surfaces, like very deep sand. This behavior doesn't seem to have a negative impact over time. Calves grow up into "normal" show animals with plenty of confidence (also we show our cattle all throughout their lives, not like beef or dairy breeds--they're not slaughtered). Our organization is involved in an energetic discussion over whether this behavior indicates fear, or extreme stress, or what. We don't want to scare our animals or train them using cruel or inhumane techniques. Audience responses at shows indicate they think the animal has "died of fright." Old-time ranchers often say that the animal is "sulling up" and just being stubborn. The longest time I saw it happen was about 8 hours with an adult cow. She refused to eat or drink, and even rested her head on the water bucket. Thanks in advance for your help--Dottie Love -- Dottie Love Fancher Love Ranch www.fancherloveranch.com Miniature Zebu Cattle American Miniature Zebu Association www.amzaonline.com Education/Promotion/Preservation The World's Smallest Cattle Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: Peter Kabai Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:23:22 +0100 To: Olsson@ibmc.up.pt CC: Janice Willard , applied-ethology network Good advice :-) The point I tried to make was that stereotypic behaviour simply means repetitive, predictable movement. Walking is stereotypic. Stereotypy without any direct function is considered abnormal stereotypy. (This is why it can useful to look up the original meaning of the word: Image reproduced without change). Peter Kabai 2008/11/24 : > > > > Dear Janice, > > > > If you want a simple concrete answer, don't ask a scientist. But if you want > > to work out a complete answer for yourself, get a copy of Georgia Mason's > > and Jeff Rushen's. "Stereotypic animal behaviour - Fundamentals and > > applications to welfare". > > > > Best regards, > > Anna Olsson > > > > > > > > From: Janice Willard > > To: applied-ethology network > > Date: 23-11-2008 17:21 > > Subject: description of stereotypy > > ________________________________ > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one classifies > > a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud or a dog > > licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And these would > > not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and conditions are necessary > > and sufficient to meet the criteria of a diagnosis of stereotypy. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Janice Willard, DVM, MS > > -- Peter Kabai, PhD Associate Professor Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University http://www.behav.org Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: Olsson@ibmc.up.pt Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:03:41 +0000 To: Janice Willard CC: applied-ethology network Dear Janice, If you want a simple concrete answer, don't ask a scientist. But if you want to work out a complete answer for yourself, get a copy of Georgia Mason's and Jeff Rushen's. "Stereotypic animal behaviour - Fundamentals and applications to welfare". Best regards, Anna Olsson From: Janice Willard To: applied-ethology network Date: 23-11-2008 17:21 Subject: description of stereotypy Hi, Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one classifies a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud or a dog licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And these would not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and conditions are necessary and sufficient to meet the criteria of a diagnosis of stereotypy. Thanks, Janice Willard, DVM, MS Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: "CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry" Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:09:26 +0000 To: Peter Kabai CC: Janice Willard , applied-ethology network Dear Peter, If an animal is walking, it is presumably trying to get from A to B...i.e. the behaviour has a function. This means walking is NOT a stereotypy according to the definition used most widely by applied ethologists... 'a repeated, relatively invariant behaviour with no function'. This definition has the weakness that we humans might not always know what the function of a behaviour is, but it is the definition that is most widely accepted, Perhaps you could expand on what you would classify as a 'normal' stereotypy? All the best, Chris --On 24 November 2008 11:23 +0100 Peter Kabai wrote: > Good advice :-) > > The point I tried to make was that stereotypic behaviour simply means > repetitive, predictable movement. Walking is stereotypic. Stereotypy > without any direct function is considered abnormal stereotypy. (This > is why it can useful to look up the original meaning of the word: > Image reproduced without change). > > Peter Kabai > > 2008/11/24 : >> >> Dear Janice, >> >> If you want a simple concrete answer, don't ask a scientist. But if you >> want to work out a complete answer for yourself, get a copy of Georgia >> Mason's and Jeff Rushen's. "Stereotypic animal behaviour - Fundamentals >> and applications to welfare". >> >> Best regards, >> Anna Olsson >> >> >> >> From: Janice Willard >> To: applied-ethology network >> Date: 23-11-2008 17:21 >> Subject: description of stereotypy >> ________________________________ >> >> >> Hi, >> >> Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one >> classifies a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud >> or a dog licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And >> these would not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and >> conditions are necessary and sufficient to meet the criteria of a >> diagnosis of stereotypy. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Janice Willard, DVM, MS >> > > > > -- > Peter Kabai, PhD > Associate Professor > Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University > http://www.behav.org ---------------------- Chris Sherwin Senior Research Fellow in Animal Behaviour and Welfare Division Clinical Veterinary Science University of Bristol Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk Phone 0117 928 9486 Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: Peter Kabai Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:23:41 +0100 To: applied-ethology network Dear Chris, yes, your are rigth, many researchers would classify any repetitive behaviour without direct function as stereotypy. However, restricting the term "stereotypic behaviour" to abnormal stereotypies I think can be quite confusing. An animal walking from A to B performs normal behaviour. A caged animal walking from A to B and B to A million times performs the same movement pattern, however, you would consider this as abnormal. Lots of abnormal stereotipies are normal in a different context. I think it is useful to distinguish form from function, therefore using the abnormal stereotypic behaviour (ABS). I would add, stereotypies are not necessary repetitive. Best wishes, Peter 2008/11/24 CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry : > > Dear Peter, > > > > If an animal is walking, it is presumably trying to get from A to B...i.e. > > the behaviour has a function. This means walking is NOT a stereotypy > > according to the definition used most widely by applied ethologists... 'a > > repeated, relatively invariant behaviour with no function'. This definition > > has the weakness that we humans might not always know what the function of a > > behaviour is, but it is the definition that is most widely accepted, > > Perhaps you could expand on what you would classify as a 'normal' > > stereotypy? > > > > All the best, > > > > Chris > > > > --On 24 November 2008 11:23 +0100 Peter Kabai wrote: > > >> >> Good advice :-) >> >> >> >> The point I tried to make was that stereotypic behaviour simply means >> >> repetitive, predictable movement. Walking is stereotypic. Stereotypy >> >> without any direct function is considered abnormal stereotypy. (This >> >> is why it can useful to look up the original meaning of the word: >> >> Image reproduced without change). >> >> >> >> Peter Kabai >> >> >> >> 2008/11/24 : >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Janice, >>> >>> >>> >>> If you want a simple concrete answer, don't ask a scientist. But if you >>> >>> want to work out a complete answer for yourself, get a copy of Georgia >>> >>> Mason's and Jeff Rushen's. "Stereotypic animal behaviour - Fundamentals >>> >>> and applications to welfare". >>> >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Anna Olsson >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Janice Willard >>> >>> To: applied-ethology network >>> >>> Date: 23-11-2008 17:21 >>> >>> Subject: description of stereotypy >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> >>> Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one >>> >>> classifies a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud >>> >>> or a dog licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And >>> >>> these would not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and >>> >>> conditions are necessary and sufficient to meet the criteria of a >>> >>> diagnosis of stereotypy. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> >>> >>> Janice Willard, DVM, MS >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Peter Kabai, PhD >> >> Associate Professor >> >> Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University >> >> http://www.behav.org > > > > > > > > ---------------------- > > Chris Sherwin > > Senior Research Fellow in Animal Behaviour and Welfare > > Division Clinical Veterinary Science > > University of Bristol > > Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk > > Phone 0117 928 9486 > > -- Peter Kabai, PhD Associate Professor Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University http://www.behav.org Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: "CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry" Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:53:54 +0000 To: Peter Kabai , applied-ethology network Hi Peter, I guess this comes back to whether a behaviour is stereotypical in its action (repeated, relatively invariant), in which case I would agree walking is stereotypical, or, the underlying motivation (I would not say walking to work was a sterotypy). I agree walking across a cage a million times might be a sterotypy in that it has no obvious function, however, this would presumably have started as escape behaviour (with a very obvious function) - our job is to understand when one switches to the next. Could you please give an example of a stereotypy that is not repetitive? Chris --On 24 November 2008 13:23 +0100 Peter Kabai wrote: > Dear Chris, > > yes, your are rigth, many researchers would classify any repetitive > behaviour without direct function as stereotypy. However, restricting > the term "stereotypic behaviour" to abnormal stereotypies I think can > be quite confusing. An animal walking from A to B performs normal > behaviour. A caged animal walking from A to B and B to A million times > performs the same movement pattern, however, you would consider this > as abnormal. > > Lots of abnormal stereotipies are normal in a different context. > > I think it is useful to distinguish form from function, therefore > using the abnormal stereotypic behaviour (ABS). I would add, > stereotypies are not necessary repetitive. > > Best wishes, Peter > > 2008/11/24 CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry > : >> Dear Peter, >> >> If an animal is walking, it is presumably trying to get from A to >> B...i.e. the behaviour has a function. This means walking is NOT a >> stereotypy according to the definition used most widely by applied >> ethologists... 'a repeated, relatively invariant behaviour with no >> function'. This definition has the weakness that we humans might not >> always know what the function of a behaviour is, but it is the >> definition that is most widely accepted, Perhaps you could expand on >> what you would classify as a 'normal' stereotypy? >> >> All the best, >> >> Chris >> >> --On 24 November 2008 11:23 +0100 Peter Kabai >> wrote: >> >>> Good advice :-) >>> >>> The point I tried to make was that stereotypic behaviour simply means >>> repetitive, predictable movement. Walking is stereotypic. Stereotypy >>> without any direct function is considered abnormal stereotypy. (This >>> is why it can useful to look up the original meaning of the word: >>> Image reproduced without change). >>> >>> Peter Kabai >>> >>> 2008/11/24 : >>>> >>>> Dear Janice, >>>> >>>> If you want a simple concrete answer, don't ask a scientist. But if you >>>> want to work out a complete answer for yourself, get a copy of Georgia >>>> Mason's and Jeff Rushen's. "Stereotypic animal behaviour - Fundamentals >>>> and applications to welfare". >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Anna Olsson >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Janice Willard >>>> To: applied-ethology network >>>> Date: 23-11-2008 17:21 >>>> Subject: description of stereotypy >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one >>>> classifies a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud >>>> or a dog licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And >>>> these would not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and >>>> conditions are necessary and sufficient to meet the criteria of a >>>> diagnosis of stereotypy. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Janice Willard, DVM, MS >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Peter Kabai, PhD >>> Associate Professor >>> Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University >>> http://www.behav.org >> >> >> >> ---------------------- >> Chris Sherwin >> Senior Research Fellow in Animal Behaviour and Welfare >> Division Clinical Veterinary Science >> University of Bristol >> Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk >> Phone 0117 928 9486 >> > > > > -- > Peter Kabai, PhD > Associate Professor > Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University > http://www.behav.org ---------------------- Chris Sherwin Senior Research Fellow in Animal Behaviour and Welfare Division Clinical Veterinary Science University of Bristol Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk Phone 0117 928 9486 Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: Peter Kabai Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:57:42 +0100 To: "CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry" CC: applied-ethology network Dear Chris, fixed action patterns are stereoypic in the sense that they are relatively invariant. In some textbooks grooming is discussed under stereotypic behaviour. Degree of stereotypy of FAP has been analysed in some species. I am not in the hair-splitting business, it is OK to label abnormal repetitive behaviour simply as stereotypy, actually applied ethologists do it all the time. But then others would stick to the ethymology (Invariable) resulting in some confusion. Peter Z Tierpsychol. 1973 Aug;33(1):35-7.Links Stereotypy of a fixed action pattern during ontogeny in Coturnix coturnix coturnix. Schleidt WM, Shalter MD. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4799432 Variation and Stereotypy in the Displays of Anolis Aeneus (Sauria: Iguanidae) http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/brill/beh/1973/00000047/F0020001/art00005 2008/11/24 CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry : > > Hi Peter, > > > > I guess this comes back to whether a behaviour is stereotypical in its > > action (repeated, relatively invariant), in which case I would agree walking > > is stereotypical, or, the underlying motivation (I would not say walking to > > work was a sterotypy). I agree walking across a cage a million times might > > be a sterotypy in that it has no obvious function, however, this would > > presumably have started as escape behaviour (with a very obvious function) - > > our job is to understand when one switches to the next. > > > > Could you please give an example of a stereotypy that is not repetitive? > > > > Chris > > > > --On 24 November 2008 13:23 +0100 Peter Kabai wrote: > > >> >> Dear Chris, >> >> >> >> yes, your are rigth, many researchers would classify any repetitive >> >> behaviour without direct function as stereotypy. However, restricting >> >> the term "stereotypic behaviour" to abnormal stereotypies I think can >> >> be quite confusing. An animal walking from A to B performs normal >> >> behaviour. A caged animal walking from A to B and B to A million times >> >> performs the same movement pattern, however, you would consider this >> >> as abnormal. >> >> >> >> Lots of abnormal stereotipies are normal in a different context. >> >> >> >> I think it is useful to distinguish form from function, therefore >> >> using the abnormal stereotypic behaviour (ABS). I would add, >> >> stereotypies are not necessary repetitive. >> >> >> >> Best wishes, Peter >> >> >> >> 2008/11/24 CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry >> >> : >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Peter, >>> >>> >>> >>> If an animal is walking, it is presumably trying to get from A to >>> >>> B...i.e. the behaviour has a function. This means walking is NOT a >>> >>> stereotypy according to the definition used most widely by applied >>> >>> ethologists... 'a repeated, relatively invariant behaviour with no >>> >>> function'. This definition has the weakness that we humans might not >>> >>> always know what the function of a behaviour is, but it is the >>> >>> definition that is most widely accepted, Perhaps you could expand on >>> >>> what you would classify as a 'normal' stereotypy? >>> >>> >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> >>> >>> --On 24 November 2008 11:23 +0100 Peter Kabai >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Good advice :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The point I tried to make was that stereotypic behaviour simply means >>>> >>>> repetitive, predictable movement. Walking is stereotypic. Stereotypy >>>> >>>> without any direct function is considered abnormal stereotypy. (This >>>> >>>> is why it can useful to look up the original meaning of the word: >>>> >>>> Image reproduced without change). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Peter Kabai >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2008/11/24 : >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dear Janice, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If you want a simple concrete answer, don't ask a scientist. But if you >>>>> >>>>> want to work out a complete answer for yourself, get a copy of Georgia >>>>> >>>>> Mason's and Jeff Rushen's. "Stereotypic animal behaviour - Fundamentals >>>>> >>>>> and applications to welfare". >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Anna Olsson >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: Janice Willard >>>>> >>>>> To: applied-ethology network >>>>> >>>>> Date: 23-11-2008 17:21 >>>>> >>>>> Subject: description of stereotypy >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one >>>>> >>>>> classifies a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud >>>>> >>>>> or a dog licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And >>>>> >>>>> these would not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and >>>>> >>>>> conditions are necessary and sufficient to meet the criteria of a >>>>> >>>>> diagnosis of stereotypy. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Janice Willard, DVM, MS >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Peter Kabai, PhD >>>> >>>> Associate Professor >>>> >>>> Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University >>>> >>>> http://www.behav.org >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------------------- >>> >>> Chris Sherwin >>> >>> Senior Research Fellow in Animal Behaviour and Welfare >>> >>> Division Clinical Veterinary Science >>> >>> University of Bristol >>> >>> Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk >>> >>> Phone 0117 928 9486 >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Peter Kabai, PhD >> >> Associate Professor >> >> Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University >> >> http://www.behav.org > > > > > > > > ---------------------- > > Chris Sherwin > > Senior Research Fellow in Animal Behaviour and Welfare > > Division Clinical Veterinary Science > > University of Bristol > > Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk > > Phone 0117 928 9486 > > -- Peter Kabai, PhD Associate Professor Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University http://www.behav.org Subject: Re: description of stereotypy From: Cecilia Lambert Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 06:04:57 -0800 (PST) To: "CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry" , Peter Kabai CC: applied-ethology network Please give me an example of a sterotypy that is not repetitive. I want to look for it in my coyotes. CeAnn CeAnn Lambert Indiana Coyote Rescue Center www.coyoterescue.org Please visit our gift shop @ www.cafepress.com/coyoterescue --- On Mon, 11/24/08, Peter Kabai wrote: From: Peter Kabai Subject: Re: description of stereotypy To: "CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry" Cc: "applied-ethology network" Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 8:57 AM Dear Chris, fixed action patterns are stereoypic in the sense that they are relatively invariant. In some textbooks grooming is discussed under stereotypic behaviour. Degree of stereotypy of FAP has been analysed in some species. I am not in the hair-splitting business, it is OK to label abnormal repetitive behaviour simply as stereotypy, actually applied ethologists do it all the time. But then others would stick to the ethymology (Invariable) resulting in some confusion. Peter Z Tierpsychol. 1973 Aug;33(1):35-7.Links Stereotypy of a fixed action pattern during ontogeny in Coturnix coturnix coturnix. Schleidt WM, Shalter MD. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4799432 Variation and Stereotypy in the Displays of Anolis Aeneus (Sauria: Iguanidae) http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/brill/beh/1973/00000047/F0020001/art00005 2008/11/24 CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry : > Hi Peter, > > I guess this comes back to whether a behaviour is stereotypical in its > action (repeated, relatively invariant), in which case I would agree walking > is stereotypical, or, the underlying motivation (I would not say walking to > work was a sterotypy). I agree walking across a cage a million times might > be a sterotypy in that it has no obvious function, however, this would > presumably have started as escape behaviour (with a very obvious function) - > our job is to understand when one switches to the next. > > Could you please give an example of a stereotypy that is not repetitive? > > Chris > > --On 24 November 2008 13:23 +0100 Peter Kabai wrote: > >> Dear Chris, >> >> yes, your are rigth, many researchers would classify any repetitive >> behaviour without direct function as stereotypy. However, restricting >> the term "stereotypic behaviour" to abnormal stereotypies I think can >> be quite confusing. An animal walking from A to B performs normal >> behaviour. A caged animal walking from A to B and B to A million times >> performs the same movement pattern, however, you would consider this >> as abnormal. >> >> Lots of abnormal stereotipies are normal in a different context. >> >> I think it is useful to distinguish form from function, therefore >> using the abnormal stereotypic behaviour (ABS). I would add, >> stereotypies are not necessary repetitive. >> >> Best wishes, Peter >> >> 2008/11/24 CM Sherwin, Animal Health and Husbandry >> : >>> >>> Dear Peter, >>> >>> If an animal is walking, it is presumably trying to get from A to >>> B...i.e. the behaviour has a function. This means walking is NOT a >>> stereotypy according to the definition used most widely by applied >>> ethologists... 'a repeated, relatively invariant behaviour with no >>> function'. This definition has the weakness that we humans might not >>> always know what the function of a behaviour is, but it is the >>> definition that is most widely accepted, Perhaps you could expand on >>> what you would classify as a 'normal' stereotypy? >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> --On 24 November 2008 11:23 +0100 Peter Kabai >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Good advice :-) >>>> >>>> The point I tried to make was that stereotypic behaviour simply means >>>> repetitive, predictable movement. Walking is stereotypic. Stereotypy >>>> without any direct function is considered abnormal stereotypy. (This >>>> is why it can useful to look up the original meaning of the word: >>>> Image reproduced without change). >>>> >>>> Peter Kabai >>>> >>>> 2008/11/24 : >>>>> >>>>> Dear Janice, >>>>> >>>>> If you want a simple concrete answer, don't ask a scientist. But if you >>>>> want to work out a complete answer for yourself, get a copy of Georgia >>>>> Mason's and Jeff Rushen's. "Stereotypic animal behaviour - Fundamentals >>>>> and applications to welfare". >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Anna Olsson >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: Janice Willard >>>>> To: applied-ethology network >>>>> Date: 23-11-2008 17:21 >>>>> Subject: description of stereotypy >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Could someone here give me a definition or description of how one >>>>> classifies a behavior as a stereotypy? Certainly a cow chewing her cud >>>>> or a dog licking a hurt paw is engaging in a repetitive behavior. And >>>>> these would not be considered a stereotypy. What behaviors and >>>>> conditions are necessary and sufficient to meet the criteria of a >>>>> diagnosis of stereotypy. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Janice Willard, DVM, MS >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Peter Kabai, PhD >>>> Associate Professor >>>> Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University >>>> http://www.behav.org >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------------------- >>> Chris Sherwin >>> Senior Research Fellow in Animal Behaviour and Welfare >>> Division Clinical Veterinary Science >>> University of Bristol >>> Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk >>> Phone 0117 928 9486 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Peter Kabai, PhD >> Associate Professor >> Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University >> http://www.behav.org > > > > ---------------------- > Chris Sherwin > Senior Research Fellow in Animal Behaviour and Welfare > Division Clinical Veterinary Science > University of Bristol > Chris.Sherwin@bristol.ac.uk > Phone 0117 928 9486 > -- Peter Kabai, PhD Associate Professor Dept Ecology, Szent Istvan University http://www.behav.org Subject: Re: Shock Collars From: John Burchard Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:00:36 -0800 To: Applied Ethology list Cecilia Lambert wrote: > I am looking for information on pack behavour in hunting dogs and > what the shock collars are used for on hunting dogs. Here in IN, I am > fighting the use of packs of dogs in running pens to kill coyotes and > foxes. > I am also interested in the pack behavior of these same hunting dogs > being used in the wild. The dog trainers say the dogs are only used > in the wild for tracking. I don't think they can be trained in Live > Bait Dog Training Pens and then can have them change their behavior > to just tracking in the wild. > I also think that dogs trained with this method can be a danger to > domestic animals and small children. There is a problem with the dog > runners letting their dogs run on private farmland, here in Indiana. > I need comments. I cannot comment on the situation in Indiana, because I know nothing about it. I cannot comment on "running pens" because none of the hunters I know use them or even (AFAIK) know about them. I have myself hunted with sighthounds for nearly 40 years and have not yet seen a "running pen" . There are laws in some states which prohibit allowing dogs to chase prey in a confined enclosure. They were enacted to eliminate "park coursing" of hares (in which, if properly managed, the hare does not come to harm and indeed does not take the whole business very seriously) but in at least some cases their wording probably covers other similar activities directed toward foxes or coyotes. In any case the pursuit of game in an enclosure is not "hunting" and is objectionable to most ethical hunters who adhere to the principles of "fair chase". I know many sighthounds who hunt hares, foxes and/or coyotes. It is frankly absurd to suppose that such activity makes them dangerous to humans, including small children. In general such dogs also do not molest livestock - their owners (at least here out West) usually also have livestock. If the dogs grew up with the livestock there is no problem at all. Dogs raised in an urban setting, without experience of livestock, may chase or harass livestock, but that is independent of what kind of dogs they are, and of whether or not they have any kind of hunting or chasing experience. In fact those which do have hunting experience are usually better able to understand what is to be chased, and what not, than a completely inexperienced dog. Some of the greatest livestock depredations, often attributed to coyotes or wolves, are committed by packs of ordinary farm dogs (not even hunting dogs) when outside the view and control of their owners (a world-wide phenomenon, not by any means confined to the U.S.). My own dogs are Salukis, used by Bedouin in Arabia for centuries to course and capture hares, foxes, gazelles and sometimes larger game (Oryx, onager, even wolves). The Bedouin are shepherds and could not tolerate dogs which bothered the sheep. In the villages the same dogs live at peace with chickens, goats and whatever other animals may be around. Not to mention small children, who of course abound in both environments . Those dogs were and are remarkably discriminating in what they hunt and don't hunt. For example, in Arabia my household also included a wolf and several cats. All these lived together peaceably - even when our cats wandered out into the desert - but the same Salukis would instantly kill any unfamiliar cat - unless they recognized it as a "pet". I would say, that sort of thing is a routine observation. Do not underestimate animals' powers of discrimination. I should add that in my experience it is unnecessary (and possibly counterproductive, I've never tried it) to use "aversives" to prevent the Salukis from chasing some new kind of livestock or, say, someone else's cats. All that's necessary is to introduce them. I have several times taken my Salukis, of a generation which no longer has experience with cats in the home, to visit other people who do have cats. The Salukis make no attempt to chase or harm the cats, but regard them with mild, benevolent interest. There may, however, be breed differences among sighthounds. Some of them may be more headlong and less discriminating than Salukis. Some of them are not "cat safe". AFAIK nearly all of them are "child safe". To return to your original question about "pack behavior in hunting dogs" I could say quite a bit about group behavior in sighthounds, my area of substantial experience. Sighthounds are used to pursue game which may be captured or (more often) may escape unharmed. I have seen an e-collar in use on two occasions (in 38 years ...). The intent was in both cases to deter a behaviorally problematic animal from attacking or harassing other dogs participating in the course. Such incidents typically arise not while actually pursuing the game, but when after hounds are slipped the game immediately disappears into cover, so the dogs are aroused and frustrated before they have run any significant distance. Even playful interference on such occasions may be cause for dismissal of the hound by the judges, so owners with a problematic hound may be at pains to try to prevent such behavior. That, anyway, was the only context in which I have seen an e-collar used - and I cannot report whether or not it was successful on the only two occasions when I saw it. I myself have never owned nor used one. Sighthounds are, for the most part, peaceful and unaggressive animals, amiably tolerant of other dogs, and of humans familiar or unfamiliar and of all ages. Any other behavior would interfere with the work for which they have been used since antiquity. Perhaps the dogs you are talking about are not sighthounds, but some kind of trail hounds. About those I have no special expertise. Perhaps the owners are laboring under the usually mistaken notion that dogs need some "practice" at killing to become effective hunters. Such has not been my experience. The one obvious exception is hunting wild or feral swine. There a dog without some experience dealing with smaller, weaponless pigs is quite likely to be killed or grievously wounded in its first encounter with an adult hog. Wild boar are, in fact, probably the most dangerous of all game animals, not excluding tigers or Cape buffalo. So dogs used for boar hunting need some practice - not at killing boar, they don't do that anyway - but at avoiding being killed while holding the boar at bay awaiting the arrival of the human hunters. Altogether the idea of using a "shock collar" to induce hunting dogs to attack their prey sounds to me like a completely cockamamie idea. If there are people who actually do that, or try to, I think they must be quite ignorant of dog behavior. Dogs hunt because they love to - and anything you do to associate that with pain or discomfort is going to be counterproductive. This sounds in fact like the myth that racing Greyhounds are shocked in the starting boxes to make them chase the lure. Nothing would be better calculated to have the opposite effect. If a dog doesn't want to run, nothing on earth will force it to do so. You might be able to coax or cajole it into running, but any kind of aversive training will not work. Sighthounds live to run and chase. It is the greatest joy of their lives - but nothing could force them to do so if they didn't want to (in fact they are rather like cats in their response to aversive or heavy-handed training methods ). John -- John E. Burchard, Ph.D. Tepe Gawra Salukis saluqi@ix.netcom.com http://saluqi.home.netcom.com Subject: Re: Shock collar use in cats - question From: John Burchard Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:06:48 -0800 To: Applied Ethology list Cecilia Lambert wrote: > And since the response to fear is sometimes aggression, you could > cause the formation of an unwanted association that triggers > aggression-- > > That is exactly what I think the dog runners are doing. They are > shocking the dogs when they are attacking the coyote or fox. The dogs > think the coyote or the fox is causing the shock and the dogs become > more aggressive towards the fox or coyote. Is this possible? I think not, see below. > One dog runner says "Lucy wouldn't attack the coyote, no matter how > often I shocked her." > Then he goes on to tell that because she wouldn't attack the coyote, > she had to be taken "over the hill, for a dose of lead." > This is a dirty business that is now out in the open. I want it > stopped in IN. Does anyone want to help? I don't have a degree, so no > one pays much attention to me unless I have back up information. I have to wonder what is going on there. I know a number of hunters out West who hunt coyotes with sighthounds - mostly "longdog" mixtures predominantly Greyhound in composition. I do not hunt coyotes, nor do I support hunting them, but I do know many of those folks (and their dogs) well enough to know that nothing of the sort described above goes on there. For one thing it's totally unnecessary; and probably even counterproductive. The idea that shocking a dog will make it more likely to attack its prey sounds to me like a myth, the sort of thing that gets propagated among "wannabe" folks with no actual knowledge of hunting with well-bred dogs. The hunters I know are experienced practical dog men, and wouldn't fall for that kind of nonsense. You might apply an aversive if you wanted to teach the dog NOT to attack a coyote (or whatever). Take a look at "snake proofing" training for a good example. The dog is shocked when it tries to approach the snake. I am told this works well (I have no personal experience of it; my Salukis avoid rattlesnakes without training). So this whole picture does not make sense to me, unless the people concerned are in fact "wannabes" with no real understanding or experience of what they are trying to do. John -- John E. Burchard, Ph.D. Tepe Gawra Salukis saluqi@ix.netcom.com http://saluqi.home.netcom.com Subject: Running pens From: Cecilia Lambert Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 04:04:39 -0800 (PST) To: applied-ethology@usask.ca For those of you who do not believe the abuse of coyotes and foxes in the running pens. Please read the text from one of those pens. CeAnn CeAnn Lambert Indiana Coyote Rescue Center www.coyoterescue.org Please visit our gift shop @ www.cafepress.com/coyoterescue Subject: Measuring heart rate in dogs - automatically From: "Randi Helene Tillung (Fjellanger Hundeskole AS)" Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 13:40:04 +0100 To: 'ethology' , Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca Dear everyone! One of our students would like to make measurements of dogs heart rates during search behaviours. Does anyone have any experience using tools or equipment for taking these frequencies? The dogs need to be able to work freely (not restrained) Thank you! Yours, Randi Helene Tillung M.Sc ethology Fjellanger Dog Training Academy Subject: Re: Measuring heart rate in dogs - automatically From: Simon Gadbois Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:00:25 -0400 To: ethology CC: Applied Ethology List Hi, Hössler, Kuhne, Struwe and Balzer used the POLAR System (abstract of the 2008 Canine Science Forum; "Effect of Tactile Stimulation in Common Human-Dog Interactions on the behaviour and physiology of dogs"). We are working on a system for Galvanic Skin Response in Dogs as well (more later). The group above used SMARD-Watch for GSR. Cheers. Simon G. ~~~~~~ Y. Simon Gadbois, Ph.D. Department of Psychology / Neuroscience Institute Life Sciences Centre 1355 Oxford Street Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4J1, Canada Canid ethology & fish neuroethology http://web.mac.com/ysg/ Chemical Signals in Vertebrates 2009 http://csiv09.dal.ca/ ~~~~~~ On 25-Nov-08, at 8:40 AM, Randi Helene Tillung (Fjellanger Hundeskole AS) wrote: > Dear everyone! > > One of our students would like to make measurements of dogs heart rates during search behaviours. Does anyone have any experience using tools or equipment for taking these frequencies? The dogs need to be able to work freely (not restrained) Thank you! > > > Yours, > > Randi Helene Tillung > M.Sc ethology > Fjellanger Dog Training Academy > > > Subject: re: Shock Collars From: Sue Bowers Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:07:45 -0500 To: applied-ethology@usask.ca There are indeed many ways to use the shock collar. I know of some very skilled dog training folks who use it as sort of a "negative clicker"--a mild distraction to "mark" undesirable behaviours, immediately replaced by positive reinforcement (treats) when the dog is thusly reminded of his error and switches to the correct behaviour. This is done at the lowest stim level the dog can feel. A process of "loading" the dog to the collar is performed beforehand, which determines this level of stimulation...as well as training the dog that when he feels the tingle, a response is required. "Loading" is done while the dog is lying calmly nearby. You apply a level 1 pulse, and watch the dog. If he responds with an ear flick, scratches his neck, or any other small reaction...he has detected your stim; this is your training point. If not, move to the next level. The next step is to train him that when he feels the stim, he is to make eye contact. This is a normal response for most dogs & is very easy to teach. Rather than a pulse, the stimulation is turned on continuously--and the *instant* the dog makes eye contact, the stim is stopped. He very quickly realizes that HE is in control of the stimulation. (!) The removal of the irritant, at the instant of the correct behaviour, sends a very strong signal to the dog--and it can be used in contexts that are hard (or impossible) to reinforce in other ways. This "removal of an aversive" process should be very familiar to ethologists, behaviourists, and trainers. ;-) The tool is very effective at teaching a solid recall in a very short period of time. It also has a *tremendous* potential for misuse! I would NOT recommend it to anyone who has not mastered a version of clicker training. It can easily be used abusively by an owner *wishing* to abuse his dog, and it can be harmful and confusing to a dog when it is used by someone who doesn't understand it or who has poor timing. For the average person, the e-collar is not a tool that I, personally, would recommend...and if this were a John Q. pet list, I probably wouldn't be typing all of this. ;) However, like any tool, it certainly has its place. I could not find the link on beginning training and loading the collar, but here is an interesting link for those who may be interested in reading further. http://www.uwsp.edu/psych/dog/LA/castle3.htm One concern with the e-collar is that it could get the dog agitated--and some dogs will redirect their frustrations. This is the reason that e-collar experts warn to NOT use the collar in dealing with matters of aggression. For instance, dog-dog aggression is something that is likely to push an owner to look for more extreme "cures"...yet when their dog roars at another dog and they activate the collar, one of two things is likely to happen. 1) He will associate the other dog with the shock, and dislike him that much more or 2) he becomes even more overstimulated, and puts that much more energy into his threat display. At this point, the owner is likely to instinctively increase the level of the shock to get more response--but if he hurts the dog, this additional "response" may well be to lunge out in fury against the other dog--in his mind, the "cause" of his aversive! Granted, he *might* simply avoid the other dog--as with "snake aversion training", which is an extremely effective use of the e-collar and saves lives--but it really depends on the situation and IMO, there are much better alternatives for dog-dog aggression. I could see the collar being used to "egg on" a dog already *ENGAGED* in a physical conflict with its prey. I could also see the collar being used to deter the animal, in its "thinking about whether to chase" stage, from beginning a chase. If the collar were previously used to build a very solid recall, I would imagine that the dog is already pre-programmed for the latter...but there's a big difference between the "thinking about chasing" stage, and the "I have committed to capture/kill" stage. It's a tricky business. I have done a bit of personal research with the collar, myself, in the capacity of a "negative clicker". Most subjects were highly reactive dogs...one was an extraordinarily "soft" dog...some very shy. Even the soft dog did not have a negative reaction to the collar. The dogs actually looked forward to it, because it meant that treats and fun were on the way. I have found that, used *in the right way*, the collar actually built confidence (animal learning that she can control her environment!) as well as communicating "wrong, try again" in a very effective manner. But, I've seen video of, and heard stories of, so many dogs badly shaken and confused by the collar because the owner was too demanding, did not understand the tool, and/or used too high a level of correction. It's no wonder that this is a controversial piece of equipment. My two cents, ~Sue! ________________________________ From: John Burchard [mailto:saluqi@ix.netcom.com] As I'm sure you are aware, there are widely divergent opinions on that score. Use of the term "shock collar" already loads the assessment in a certain direction. The modern devices are in fact capable of much more differentiated application, so that the idea of "zapping" the dog (etc) when it makes a mistake is mainly an example of how NOT to go about using the device. Subject: re: Shock Collars From: Cecilia Lambert Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:06:02 -0800 (PST) To: applied-ethology@usask.ca, Sue Bowers Sue Thank you so much. CeAnn CeAnn Lambert Indiana Coyote Rescue Center www.coyoterescue.org Please visit our gift shop @ www.cafepress.com/coyoterescue --- On Tue, 11/25/08, Sue Bowers wrote: From: Sue Bowers Subject: re: Shock Collars To: applied-ethology@usask.ca Date: Tuesday, November 25, 2008, 11:07 AM There are indeed many ways to use the shock collar. I know of some very skilled dog training folks who use it as sort of a "negative clicker"--a mild distraction to "mark" undesirable behaviours, immediately replaced by positive reinforcement (treats) when the dog is thusly reminded of his error and switches to the correct behaviour. This is done at the lowest stim level the dog can feel. A process of "loading" the dog to the collar is performed beforehand, which determines this level of stimulation...as well as training the dog that when he feels the tingle, a response is required. "Loading" is done while the dog is lying calmly nearby. You apply a level 1 pulse, and watch the dog. If he responds with an ear flick, scratches his neck, or any other small reaction...he has detected your stim; this is your training point. If not, move to the next level. The next step is to train him that when he feels the stim, he is to make eye contact. This is a normal response for most dogs & is very easy to teach. Rather than a pulse, the stimulation is turned on continuously--and the *instant* the dog makes eye contact, the stim is stopped. He very quickly realizes that HE is in control of the stimulation. (!) The removal of the irritant, at the instant of the correct behaviour, sends a very strong signal to the dog--and it can be used in contexts that are hard (or impossible) to reinforce in other ways. This "removal of an aversive" process should be very familiar to ethologists, behaviourists, and trainers. ;-) The tool is very effective at teaching a solid recall in a very short period of time. It also has a *tremendous* potential for misuse! I would NOT recommend it to anyone who has not mastered a version of clicker training. It can easily be used abusively by an owner *wishing* to abuse his dog, and it can be harmful and confusing to a dog when it is used by someone who doesn't understand it or who has poor timing. For the average person, the e-collar is not a tool that I, personally, would recommend...and if this were a John Q. pet list, I probably wouldn't be typing all of this. ;) However, like any tool, it certainly has its place. I could not find the link on beginning training and loading the collar, but here is an interesting link for those who may be interested in reading further. http://www.uwsp.edu/psych/dog/LA/castle3.htm One concern with the e-collar is that it could get the dog agitated--and some dogs will redirect their frustrations. This is the reason that e-collar experts warn to NOT use the collar in dealing with matters of aggression. For instance, dog-dog aggression is something that is likely to push an owner to look for more extreme "cures"...yet when their dog roars at another dog and they activate the collar, one of two things is likely to happen. 1) He will associate the other dog with the shock, and dislike him that much more or 2) he becomes even more overstimulated, and puts that much more energy into his threat display. At this point, the owner is likely to instinctively increase the level of the shock to get more response--but if he hurts the dog, this additional "response" may well be to lunge out in fury against the other dog--in his mind, the "cause" of his aversive! Granted, he *might* simply avoid the other dog--as with "snake aversion training", which is an extremely effective use of the e-collar and saves lives--but it really depends on the situation and IMO, there are much better alternatives for dog-dog aggression. I could see the collar being used to "egg on" a dog already *ENGAGED* in a physical conflict with its prey. I could also see the collar being used to deter the animal, in its "thinking about whether to chase" stage, from beginning a chase. If the collar were previously used to build a very solid recall, I would imagine that the dog is already pre-programmed for the latter...but there's a big difference between the "thinking about chasing" stage, and the "I have committed to capture/kill" stage. It's a tricky business. I have done a bit of personal research with the collar, myself, in the capacity of a "negative clicker". Most subjects were highly reactive dogs...one was an extraordinarily "soft" dog...some very shy. Even the soft dog did not have a negative reaction to the collar. The dogs actually looked forward to it, because it meant that treats and fun were on the way. I have found that, used *in the right way*, the collar actually built confidence (animal learning that she can control her environment!) as well as communicating "wrong, try again" in a very effective manner. But, I've seen video of, and heard stories of, so many dogs badly shaken and confused by the collar because the owner was too demanding, did not understand the tool, and/or used too high a level of correction. It's no wonder that this is a controversial piece of equipment. My two cents, ~Sue! ________________________________ From: John Burchard [mailto:saluqi@ix.netcom.com] As I'm sure you are aware, there are widely divergent opinions on that score. Use of the term "shock collar" already loads the assessment in a certain direction. The modern devices are in fact capable of much more differentiated application, so that the idea of "zapping" the dog (etc) when it makes a mistake is mainly an example of how NOT to go about using the device. Subject: e-colars for cats From: Peter Haskins Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 18:28:04 +1100 To: applied-ethology@usask.ca It appears that I posted this to the wrong list :-( Fot those who haven't seen it then, here it is again. Note: in NSW where I live, electric shock collars (whether you call them shock of not!) are proscribed. Jenny H Coffs Austrlia Proposed Legislation in Victoria, Australia. 6.1.5 Use of electronic collars and certain electronic devices 32 Victorian Government Media Release, ibid., 21 June 2004 33 Shock Collars: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bark_collar 34 Blackwell, E. and Casey, R., The use of shock collars and their impact on the welfare of dogs: A review of the current literature, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science University of Bristol. See: http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/Satellite?blobcol=urlblob&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id& blobtable=RSPCABlob&blobwhere=1138718966544&ssbinary=true 35 Quoted in Hansard UK, House of Commons, 27 Apr 2007 : Column 1157 36 Schalke, E., Stichnoth, J. and Jones-Baade, R. (2005) Stress symptoms caused by the use of electric training collars on dogs (Canis familiaris) in everyday life situations. Current Issues and Research in Veterinary Behavioural Medicine: Papers presented at the 5th International Veterinary Behaviour meeting. Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, Indiana 37 Tortora, D.F. (1982a). Understanding Electronic Dog Training Part 1. Canine Practice, 9 (2), 17-22 38 Schalke, E.; Stichnoth, J.; Ott, S. & Jones-Baade, R., 2007, “Clinical signs caused by the use of electric training collars on dogs in everyday life situations”, Applied Animal Behaviour Science 105 39 Polsky, R.H., 2000, “Can aggression be elicited through electronic pet containment systems”, Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 3: 345–357. 40 Grandin, T., 1998, Review: Reducing Handling Stress Improves Both Productivity and Welfare, The Professional Animal Scientist, Volume 14, Number 1, March 1998 41 MSA (2004) Meat Standards Australia: MSA03 MSA Requirements for handling cattle 42 Animal Health Australia, 2008, (Draft) Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines for the Land Transport of Livestock: Public Consultation Response Action Plan 43 NSW Department of Primary Industries, Standard Operating Procedures – Cattle collection of semen (electro-ejaculation), Ref Code: CAT13 44 Palmer, C.W., 2005, Welfare aspects of theriogenology: Investigating alternatives to electroejaculation of bulls, Theriogenology, 2005, vol. 64, n 3, pp. 469-479 45 Restraint of Livestock: http://www.grandin.com/references/abdlps.html For the "NSW Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act" see: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/poctaa1979360/ http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/poctaa1979360/s16.html