BAT Behaviour Adjustment Training

One of the greatest shortages in dogdom is, in this writers' opinion, free dog training resources. Thanks to the internet, we have many more now than just what books your local library has on file.

This webpage give a detailed description of some training, complete with video of the training in action. The technique is called Behavior Adjustment Training (BAT). The page is from Ahimsa Dog Training in Seattle, where Grisha Stewart describes BAT

"BAT is the use of the natural environmental cues and reinforcements (positive or negative) for alternative/incompatible behaviors. This is the core protocol for BAT."

It seems to be basically operant conditioning, gradually moving the dog through its discomfort zone and rewarding it for progress. Do note in the video the dog is wearing BOTH a head halter and what appears to be a no-pull harness. The harness gets the most leash pressure. Those might be essential equipment to make progress with the dog in this type of scenario.

Allah hates show breeders.

Such philosophies certainly explain the fine hunting dogs from Arab countries. How do you keep a breed "pure" for thousands of years? Not by trotting him around a show ring! No. Having a god that forbids turning him into a pet is a much better bet.

While it might be an extreme position for most of us, it doubtless gives meat to the dictum 'form follows function'.

Dog Shortage

Pet overpopulation? What pet overpopulation? On the contrary, it seems like the shortages are already beginning.

A new report from the National Academy of Sciences says there is a serious shortage of dogs and cats required for medical research.

New suppliers of random-source cats and dogs for medical research are needed to replace Class B dealers, according to a report from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

"Immediate action" is needed to identify and develop new suppliers of these animals to avoid disruptions in research activity, according to the American Physiological Society (APS) in an Oct. 26 statement endorsing the NAS report.

"These animals remain critical for health research to alleviate serious and life-threatening conditions that afflict humans and animals," the APS says.

Well, I'm not going to suggest that anyone run out and volunteer, though, perhaps some of the dedicated environmentalists could see this as the opportune solution for their carbon-hogs?

I have no objections to animal research, if it is done humanely, but this post is more about the interesting fact that there is a lack of available animals. It sounds like they used to be able to source animals from shelters, but now some states have passed laws against that. Hmm. Does that mean unwanted dogs and cats just go straight to fertilizer in those states, without any other contributions to society? Or do the laws reflect a reality in which the numbers of unwanted pets has fallen off dramatically? It's hard to say. I certainly couldn't put it past a peta-tic to prefer killing a dog or cat to doing anything else with it.

What about the vast colonies of feral cats we still hear about? Are none of the 100 million available for research?

The shortage could simply be a sign of the times, Class B dealers (those licensed by the USDA to sell animals they have not bred themselves)are rarities in this day and age when every breeder is a "puppymill" and pet stores are routinely harassed. Unfortunately, governments have gotten in on the act too, siding against individual freedom in favor of the latest political screamers, putting additional squeeze on animal research.

If it were societal pressures alone prompting a shortage, I would say so be it. Some of that animal research isn't worth the excrement the research dogs leave behind.

Still, one wonders. Government forces and screamers combined, is this the beginning of the end?

Dog, It's what's for dinner.

This could turn into the most entertaining conflict of the decade. After years of spewing hate on those cultures that eat dogs, animal rights activists, who were often the first to jump on the green bandwagon, are suddenly coming face to face with their conflicting emotions.

Bluntly put by a New Zealand writer:

The eco-pawprint of a pet dog is twice that of a 4.6-litre Land Cruiser driven 10,000 kilometres a year, researchers have found.

For some time now, we have waited (but breathing comfortably) to see which of the environmentalists would be the first to stop talking about population reduction and start practicing it. Perhaps now, the possibility of a slightly less harsh radical approach to planet salvation will appease the conscience of many.

We shall see, eh? Who among them will love the planet more than Fido?

How do you get out of the conundrum that your useless pet is a bigger Gaia rapist than a Land Cruiser? The moral dilemma must be tearing them apart.

Victoria University professors Brenda and Robert Vale, architects who specialise in sustainable living, say pet owners should swap cats and dogs for creatures they can eat, such as chickens or rabbits, in their provocative new book Time to Eat the Dog: The real guide to sustainable living....

Professor Vale says the title of the book is meant to shock, but the couple, who do not have a cat or dog, believe the reintroduction of non-carnivorous pets into urban areas would help slow down global warming.

"The title of the book is a little bit of a shock tactic, I think, but though we are not advocating eating anyone's pet cat or dog there is certainly some truth in the fact that if we have edible pets like chickens for their eggs and meat, and rabbits and pigs, we will be compensating for the impact of other things on our environment."

Just a shock tactic, eh? More like a moral beat down between the holy factions of the religion of global warming.

NEWSFLASH - People don't eat their "pet" chickens.

Still, perhaps they will learn a little tolerance for cultures that have used dogs sustainably for millenia?

Any bets?

How to make a dog insulin resistant

Overfeeding kibble is a good place to start.

Blog Hyperlipid recently reported on a study done with dogs in an attempt to prove that saturated fat causes insulin resistance.

The goal of the study seemed noble enough:

the development of peripheral and hepatic insulin resistance relative to one another in the context of obesity-associated insulin resistance is not well understood. To examine this phenomena, we used the moderate fat-fed dog model, which has been shown to develop both subcutaneous and visceral adiposity and severe insulin resistance.

and the authors concluded:

Our results indicate that a diet enriched with a moderate amount of fat results in the development of both subcutaneous and visceral adiposity, hyperinsulinemia, and a modest degree of peripheral insulin resistance.

How did they achieve these results? To quote Peter (of Hyperlipid)

Cr@p in a bag: Total calories 3,885kcal/d

For "less cr@p in a bag but plus 2g/kg bacon grease": more like 3,945kcal/d


This is for a 27kg dog sitting in a cage.

Go on, read that again; 3,945kcal/d. I'm not joking.

The real trick of course, is to blame the subsequent insulin resistance on saturated fat.

Peter writes:

So this is another study where the introduction and discussion are utterly divorced from the methods and the results (and from reality). It's worth just flicking through the methods and, in your mind's eye, look at how much money was used on these dogs. A clinical MRI was around about £1000 a shot in the UK Home Counties in 2009.

This study was funded in the US of course, guess we all look forward to such sterling research with our tarp funds.

Where's PETA when you need them?

Art imitating life...

This Onion story is almost to scary realistic to be funny. Enjoy it anyway :-)

Dog Humiliated In Front Of Entire Park
AUGUST 24, 2009 | ISSUE 45•35

CONCORD, NH—Banjo, a local border collie mix and loyal human companion, was utterly humiliated Tuesday, when his owner, 34-year-old Michael Ingram, loudly scolded the dog right in the middle of Cold Brook Park.

. . .

"I just find the whole thing really awkward," said Douglas Lax, who takes his 6-year-old yorkshire terrier every morning to play in the park. "Sometimes Michael and I will be talking about baseball or whatnot, and out of nowhere he'll make some weird joke about Banjo 'being lazy' or 'shedding his hair all over the couch.'"

. . .

"I used to go over to their place all the time for dinner, but I always felt so uncomfortable," said acquaintance Janet Schrump. "All those comments Michael would make about how 'we'd better keep our food away from Banjo' were rude enough, but when he decided to lock the poor thing inside the bathroom one night, I just couldn't take it anymore."

"Honestly, if my husband ever did that to me, I'm not sure what I'd do," Schrump added. "Probably shit in his bed."

Read the whole story here.

Get Happy?

Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years (HAPPY) is a nauseatingly titled bill making its way through the halls of CONgress. Is that how they're burning through our money, making aides come up with cute names (and sappy acronyms) they can all sign on and say "hey! look how much we love pets!"

According to WashingtonWatch.com, "H.R. 3501 would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for pet care expenses."

Evidently the text of the bill has not been released yet, so the details are completely unknown. At face value, I tend to support anything that puts limits on how much of my money they steal. But a bill like this could easily turn into something that expands the pet health insurance industry, or uses the "companion animal" language and further undermines our property rights with pets. The more I think of it, the less optimistic I am. I mean, what is the motivation for a bill like this? The government desperately needs all the tax money it can get. Sure, there are a lot of pet owners, but they spend a lot of money on pet health care, and the tax loss could be significant. Would it really buy that much favoritism with the pet owner voting blocs? Somehow I don't think so. So what's the motivation? Any good ideas?

Guess we'll have to wait and see.