Sandi’s K9 Management


Heidi Gives the Tug-a-Jug 5 Stars!

As many of you may know, I live with one of the world’s most intelligent dogs.  Intelligent dogs aren’t always so easy to coexist with, but I find the challenge of keeping that busy mind enriched quite entertaining!

I recently ordered the Tug-a-Jug from Premier.  Tug-a-Jug is one of the many toys from the Busy Buddy line, which are high value products encouraging enrichment activities.  All of my work with environmental enrichment for dogs keeps me going back to these Busy Buddy toys! To get at the food, the dog must manipulate a rope by pushing it into the jug and allowing an open space for the food to fall out of.  The trick is that the rope moves around when the dog pushes the jug again.  It takes quite a bit of maniupulation to work this thing!   

Typically, Heidi will figure out a food puzzle toy within seconds… which sort of defeats the purpose of filling it up for her (except that it is always better to feed a smart dog from a puzzle toy than from a bowl!).  When I opened up the package, I was beyond thrilled to see how this thing is put together.  I anxiously filled it up with Heidi’s supper and sat it down to watch the show.  I am proud to say that my Heidi took 45 minutes of non-stop work to complete her meal!!  She has improved her time slightly over the past few days, but is still baffled as to how to go about getting all of that food out of the jug at a faster rate of speed!

Heidi is laying at my feet with a calm and happy grin on her face.  Supper time was 2 hours ago.  I guess you could say that Heidi gives the Tug-a-Jug 5 stars!



All About Toys

All About Toys

Dog toys are dog toys, right?  No!  Did you know that different toys serve different purposes for dogs and their activities?  Some toys stimulate the mouth and curb chewing desires, some toys stimulate the brain and foraging activities, while others are made for interaction with you. 

Let’s take a look… 

Pacifier ToysThink of a baby with a pacifier.  These toys are meant to keep the mouth busy and to encourage chewing in puppies and adult dogs.  Most dogs like to chew, and some like to chew more than others.  Chewing is a normal dog activity, and it is far better to teach the dog to chew on appropriate toys than to run the risk of him chewing your favorite pair of shoes!Kongs, Nylabones, Greenies, Marrow Bones, Knotted ropes, and Dental Chews all fall into this category. 

Brain ToysThese types of toys stimulate the dog’s mind and provide a time-consuming activity.  These toys are wonderful in a crate, or when the dog must be left alone for any period of time as this will redirect his attention to something other than the fact that he is alone.  These toys are also excellent for mealtimes as it encourages the natural foraging behavior of dogs.  Buster Cubes, Treat Balls, and Kongs are all a part of this category. 

Interactive ToysSome toys are designed to be played with interactively with you or another dog.  These toys include: Tennis balls for retrieving, soccer balls for chasing and retrieving, and rope toys for tugging. 

Rotating your dog’s toys every few days is also an excellent way to keep your dog from growing bored with them.

This handout may be reprinted free of charge as is for distribution with full credit given to:
© Copyright  2007  
Sandi Hansen  Sandi’s K9 Management   “Building Relationships One Dog at a Time”
sandi@k9management.com   www.k9management.com  All rights reserved.



‘Dog Whisperer’ Training Approach More Harmful Than Helpful

‘Dog Whisperer’ Training Approach More Harmful Than Helpful

The training tactics featured on Cesar Millan’s “Dog Whisperer” program are inhumane, outdated and improper, according to a letter sent yesterday to the National Geographic Channel by American Humane, the oldest national organization protecting children and animals.   

In the letter, American Humane, which works to raise public awareness about responsible pet ownership and reduce the euthanasia of unwanted pets, expressed dismay over the “numerous inhumane training techniques” advocated by Cesar Millan on “Dog Whisperer.”

Several instances of cruel and dangerous treatment – promoted by Millan as acceptable training methods – were documented by American Humane, including one in which a dog was partially asphyxiated in an episode. In this instance, the fractious dog was pinned to the ground by its neck after first being “hung” by a collar incrementally tightened by Millan. Millan’s goal – of subduing a fractious animal – was accomplished by partially cutting off the blood supply to its brain.  

The letter requests that National Geographic stop airing the program immediately and issue a statement explaining that the tactics featured on the program are inhumane, and it encourages National Geographic to begin developing programming that sets a positive example by featuring proper, humane animal training. In its letter, American Humane said: “We believe that achieving the goal of improving the way people interact with their pets would be far more successful and beneficial for the National Geographic Channel if it ceased sending the contradictory message that violent treatment of animals is acceptable.”

“As a forerunner in the movement towards humane dog training, we find the excessively rough handling of animals on the show and inhumane training methods to be potentially harmful for the animals and the people on the show,” said the letter’s author, Bill Torgerson, DVM, MBA, who is vice president of Animal Protection Services for American Humane. “It also does a disservice to all the show’s viewers by espousing an inaccurate message about what constitutes effective training and appropriate treatment of animals.”

Torgerson noted that the safety of a woman and her German shepherd were jeopardized in one episode by the use of an electric shock collar, which forced the tormented dog to redirect its aggression at its owner, biting her arm. “Furthermore, the television audience was never told that Mr. Millan was attempting to modify the dog’s behavior by causing pain with the shock collar,” he said.

For more information about humane training techniques, please visit click here.

About the American Humane Association
Founded in 1877, the American Humane Association is the oldest national organization dedicated to protecting both children and animals. Through a network of child and animal protection agencies and individuals, American Humane develops policies, legislation, curricula and training programs to protect children and animals from abuse, neglect and exploitation. The nonprofit membership organization, headquartered in Denver, raises awareness about The Link® between animal abuse and other forms of violence, as well as the benefits derived from the human-animal bond. American Humane’s regional office in Los Angeles is the authority behind the “No Animals Were Harmed”® End Credit Disclaimer on film and TV productions, and American Humane’s office in Washington is an advocate for child and animal protection at the federal and state levels. American Humane meets the strong, comprehensive standards of the Better Business Bureau’s Wise Giving Alliance and has been awarded the Independent Charities of America “Best In America” Seal of Approval. Visit www.americanhumane.org to learn more.

###



Kong on a Rope

KONG on a Rope:

KONG Stuff’N Tail Mix or dry dog kibble
Appropriate KONG toy
Rope

Pull the rope through the KONG toy and knot it. Hang this upside down from a tree, deck or post. The small hole should be facing the ground. Fill the large hole of the KONG toy with KONG Stuff’N Tail Mix or dry dog kibble. Make the toy hang just high enough that it is out of your dog’s reach. Your dog will spend hours trying to retrieve the treats from the KONG toy. At the end of the day, take the remaining treats and give to your pet as a reward. This is advanced work for your dog. – by Ian Dunbar

My dogs love this activity!  Please visit the Kong Company for more recipes and to check out all of their excellent products.  I highly recommend them!

www.kongcompany.com



Do Animals Have Souls?

 Do Animals Have Souls?
A mind-bending journey into the deeper dimensions of animal consciousness
by Ross Robertson

One day when yoga instructor Kari Harendorf was practicing backbends, her dog Charlie padded over and started stretching out beneath her on the hardwood floor. In a flash of insight that may or may not recall some ancient yogic pioneer’s moment of inspiration for Downward and Upward Dog, the modern-day discipline of doga was born. Doga, or doggy yoga—“the path to enlightenment for humans and their pets”—is the subject of Animal Planet’s new show “K9 Karma,” cohosted by Kari and Charlie; it’s also the topic of recent books like Bow Wow Yoga and Doga: Yoga for Dogs. “My relationship with Charlie is definitely special,” Harendorf says. “It’s intangible, and it goes beyond language, beyond a species barrier. He’s just . . . he holds my heart, and I hold his.”

From man’s best friend to man’s soul mate and partner on the path of spiritual liberation? If the picture of a New York City yoga studio full of people chanting “ Om” to their pit bulls and Pomeranians seems both comical and slightly strange, consider for a moment that popular curiosity about animals’ spiritual status has never been higher. Nowadays, twice as many American households include pets as include children, and even mainstream religion is embracing questions like “Do animals have souls?” Animal souls? Actually, Americans are split down the middle on this one—of the ninety-some percent who believe in heaven, roughly half think their pets will join them there. Theologians are grappling with the question, too, rethinking whether or not Benji or Fido is going to make it through the Pearly Gates when he dies. And priests and ministers are doing their part to breathe new life into the phrase “pets are people too” by performing official blessings, burials, and even marriages for animals.

Wait a minute. Heaven in the next life and marriages in this one? What’s going on here? I’ve never been much of a pet person myself—too many dogs ran me down and bit me when I was a kid—but in spite of that, I can certainly appreciate the impulse to find meaning in animal relationships. My brother and I used to love chasing after sandpipers on the beach, and I searched endlessly for crayfish in the streams near my house with my friends. As I got older, I spent more and more time in the mountains, trailing deer through the trees and keeping my eyes peeled for elusive black bears. But what has opened my eyes more than ever before to the mystery and beauty of our animal kin has been the enlightening onrush of stories that began, interestingly enough, with my research for this piece.

They came across my desk one after another, too fast to process, about all manner of animals and their relations—relations with their own kin, with individuals of different species, and, of course, with people too. There were cutting-edge studies of animal cognition and moving descriptions of compassion in elephants and morality in coyotes. There were unbelievable tales of wolves who practiced aikido with a human master, stories of great apes instant-messaging each other on AOL, even astonishing reports of a telepathic parrot. Some stretched my mind in directions it had never been stretched before; some pulled unfamiliar strings in my heart; more than a few seemed completely outlandish. But through it all, there was the ever-deepening realization that I knew a lot less than I thought I did about the puzzle of life and evolution, about the soul’s elusive temperament, and, most of all, about the boundary lines between animal and man.

The impulse to make contact

When world-famous primatologist Jane Goodall was only eighteen months old, she gathered up a handful of earthworms from her parents’ London garden, brought them inside, and made a little nest for them in her bed. After her mother patiently informed her that the worms could never survive in this dirtless environment, she hurried to get them back home again among the flowers and weeds. But the little girl who would one day travel farther than anyone before her across the borders of the nonhuman world had taken her first steps toward her destiny. What was it that gave birth to this impulse in one so young, the impulse to make contact with another species? What deeply felt curiosity or connectedness did she experience that drew her to want to be closer to them?

Oftentimes during her lectures and travels, Goodall tells the story of a man named Rick Swope who risked his life to save a chimpanzee named Jo-Jo from drowning in the newly constructed moat surrounding his enclosure at the Detroit Zoo. Among this particular posse of Michigan chimps, Jo-Jo was the head honcho, but when a younger and stronger alpha-wannabe threw down the gauntlet one day and attacked him, Jo-Jo ran, wisely or not so wisely, over the safety barrier and into the water. Chimps can’t swim, which is why zoos build moats around them in the first place; chimps are also very dangerous, which is why the zookeeper on duty that day made no attempt to rescue Jo-Jo when he panicked and sank like a stone. Against the keeper’s dire warnings, and much to the distress of his wife and kids, Swope jumped in and lifted the 130-pound ape as well as he could up the embankment. “I looked into his eyes,” he said later. “It was like looking into the eyes of a man. And the message was: Won’t anybody help me?”

What was it in Jo-Jo’s eyes that made Swope keep himself in jeopardy (three angry males were charging down the bank toward him) in order to support the stunned and waterlogged chimpanzee until he could finally grab a tuft of grass and pull himself to safety? Are the eyes, as the saying goes, really windows to the soul? I can still remember the day when, after an embarrassingly great many years of unsuccessful fishing trips with the Boy Scouts, I finally caught my first fish. As I tried, also unsuccessfully, to extract the hook from its mouth and throw it back, I gazed into its eyes and saw something I thought was sadness. It was hard not to flinch away from that dying look, in which I could see my own carelessness nakedly reflected, but somehow I felt honor-bound not to disturb this intimate channel that, for a brief moment at least, had been opened up between us.

I made other efforts at “interspecies communication” when I was a kid, walking through the woods with my Audubon bird call and mimicking the chirps and trills I heard up above. And though I have no evidence of any definitive success, my crude attempts at avian language were nevertheless a kind of animal soul music, at least in my own mind—a curious call to the nonhuman world in search of the echo of consciousness returning back to me. Who, or what, I wanted to know, was out there listening?

Guitarist Jim Nollman must have been wondering something similar when he anchored his boat off the coast of Vancouver Island, dropped a submersible speaker overboard, plugged in, and tried to get the dolphins and killer whales to jam with him. From recordings he’s made using underwater microphones to capture their hornlike whistles and songs (Nollman compares one particularly responsive whale to Bitches Brew–era Miles Davis), he appears to have succeeded. Other Western musicians whom Nollman has invited aboard to try out his gear have tended to elicit either clear responses from the whales or no interest at all. A Tibetan lama chanting religious prayers, on the other hand, brought forth a palpable hush. As he intoned his Himalayan melody, the whales approached the speaker quietly and just huddled there, listening.

Will all thinking, feeling, caring beings please stand up?

When pods of killer whales fall strangely silent to eavesdrop on a chanting Buddhist monk, what exactly are they responding to? Is it to the vibrations themselves, sounds and sensations either pleasing or baffling to their ears? Or are they hearing the resonance of something more intangible, some transcendent echo reflected back from deep within them? What is it in us, for that matter, that responds to these things? Is it the soul?

Whatever else the soul might be, it seems safe to say that it is part of that dimension of consciousness that makes us most fully human—part of that which makes us thinking, feeling, caring beings. Could the same be true of the animal soul? Not so long ago, noble qualities like reason, emotion, and morality were all thought to be exclusively human traits. But the steady march of science is chipping away at old ideas. In 1960, Goodall observed chimpanzees at Tanzania’s Gombe Stream Reserve stripping leaves off twigs and using the sticks to fish termites out of their nests, thereby poking holes in the long-held belief that human beings were the only species to make tools. “Now we must redefine tool,” said her mentor Louis Leakey, “redefine man, or accept chimpanzees as humans.” Since then, nearly all major arguments for human uniqueness—claims that we alone possess rationality, self-consciousness, culture, empathy, language, morality, etc.—have been increasingly called into question. So if you still find yourself attached to the belief that animals are hopelessly undeveloped—dull of mind, poor of heart, and devoid of soul—breaking news from the scientific arena is here to recommend otherwise.

Let’s take reason, to start. According to Descartes, animals were mere machines, while men were machines with minds. Indeed, the bulk of Western thought, from Plato and Aristotle to Aquinas on up, puts great stock in rationality as the basic factor setting human beings apart from the rest of animal kind. And since you can’t just walk up to a guinea pig or an anteater and ask it to describe its experience of cognition, it hasn’t exactly been easy to test this claim. One way scientists have tried to get at the problem is by searching for evidence of animal deception, a cognitive skill that depends on the ability to recognize that others have thoughts and intentions different from one’s own. They’ve shown that monkeys and baboons can distract each other in order to steal food, sneak around rocks to do things behind each others’ backs, and wait until others are distracted (like during fights) to put the moves on receptive females. Just recently, a raven named Hugin passed the deception test as well, fooling a dominant bird into hunting for food where Hugin knew there was none in order to buy himself some time alone where the food really was.

Impressive as Hugin’s trick may be, it must look like kids’ stuff to one of the most accomplished birds known to science: Alex the parrot. Only last summer, Alex raised the bar on avian intelligence to new heights by demonstrating a rough understanding of the number zero, a conceptual abstraction never fathomed by even the most learned mathematicians of ancient Greece. How did he do it? Trainer Dr. Irene Pepperberg laid out a tray with four groups of blocks on it—two blue, three green, four yellow, and six orange—and then called out a number of blocks, asking Alex to identify the color of the corresponding group. But for some reason, he refused to cooperate, insisting instead on repeating the word “five” over and over again. When she finally replied “OK, smarty, what color five?” Alex quickly answered “None!” A bird with a brain the size of a walnut had understood the “absence of quantity,” something human children don’t typically grasp until age three or four.

How did Alex feel about his accomplishment? As recently as ten years ago, researchers would have argued over whether it was possible for him to have felt anything at all. But scientists no longer dispute the presence of emotion in birds—or in many other species, for that matter. African elephants, for instance, “share with us a strong sense of family and death and they feel many of the same emotions,” Kenyan conservationist Daphne Sheldrick says. “Each one is . . . a unique individual with its own unique personality. They can be happy or sad, volatile or placid. They display envy, jealousy, throw tantrums and are fiercely competitive, and they can develop hang-ups which are reflected in behaviour. . . . They grieve deeply for lost loved ones, even shedding tears and suffering depression. They have a sense of compassion that projects beyond their own kind and sometimes extends to others in distress.” Animal behavior expert Marc Bekoff adds that elephants are known to stand silent guard over stillborn babies for days with their heads and ears sunk low; orphans who witness their mothers’ deaths “often wake up screaming.” Sea lion mothers howl and cry while killer whales dine on their babies, he says. Dolphins struggle painfully to resuscitate dead infants. Once, he even saw a grieving red fox bury the body of another who had been killed by a mountain lion: “She would kick up dirt, stop, look at the carcass, and intentionally kick again. I observed this ‘ritual’ for about 20 seconds. A few hours later I went to see the carcass, and it was totally buried.”

Now that most biologists have accepted that animals have richly varied emotional lives, a far more radical proposition is taking center stage in current research. Beyond simple raw emotion, some say, animals are displaying the subtler, more complex signs of moral sensibility. “There is good evidence that chimpanzees keep track of favors and repay them,” writes primatologist Frans de Waal. And it goes both ways, Bekoff tells me: “If you’re labeled as a cheater in a pack of wolves or a pack of coyotes or a group of chimpanzees, you’re going to have a lot of trouble getting other individuals to interact with you.” He calls this “wild justice,” and it’s not just for primates and canines. Cows hold grudges and nurture friendships too. North African meerkats forfeit their own safety to stay beside wounded family members who would otherwise have to face death alone. Stronger rats sometimes even let the weaker ones win when they play at wrestling. And—remarkable as it sounds—morality in animals also crosses species boundaries. “You see animals help each other all the time,” Bekoff says. “Dogs and monkeys hug one another, console one another, travel with one another. During the tsunami last year, a baby hippopotamus was separated from his family and taken to an animal rescue shelter in Kenya. When he got there, he was adopted by a 130-year-old tortoise, and they’ve been inseparable ever since.” Not long ago, de Waal watched a bonobo named Kuni pick up an injured starling, take it outside, and place it on its feet. When it didn’t fly, she helped unfold its wings and then carefully tossed it into the air.

Then there are the stories of animal heroics that involve human beings, some of which have achieved the status of legend. Eleven-year-old Anthony Melton’s pet pig, Priscilla, made headlines in 1984 when she dove into a Houston lake to save his life. Swimming out to the boy, who was in over his head and starting to panic, she towed him to shore with her leash. In 1975, a woman shipwrecked off the Philippines was saved by a giant sea turtle that surfaced underneath her and carried her on its back for two full days until rescuers finally arrived. Once, an elderly Tennessee woman was even rescued by her pet canary. Upon seeing her trip and fall unconscious, the bird proceeded to find its way out of her house, which it had never left before. It then traveled the length of several football fields to her niece’s nearby home and banged hysterically against the windowpane until she finally got the message and went running to check up on her aunt. The canary promptly collapsed and died from the effort, but the old woman’s life was saved.

Of all such tales of interspecies love and bravado, perhaps the most enigmatic and the most miraculous involve dolphins, renowned the world over for keeping unconscious people afloat, shielding swimmers from sharks and sea lions from orcas, guarding pregnant whales while they give birth, and herding beached whales back to open sea. Most incredible of these might be the story of Pelorus Jack, a dolphin famous for guiding steamships through a notoriously treacherous channel off the coast of New Zealand around the turn of the last century. French Pass was known among sailors for claiming vessel after vessel in its swift jaws—that is, until Pelorus Jack came along. For over twenty years, every time a ship approached the mouth of the hazardous strait, he would unfailingly appear, bobbing along the surface to lead it safely through the rocks. On his watch, none ever foundered. Then in 1904, a drunkard on board a ship known as the Penguin took a potshot at him and Jack swam away trailing blood. Although he healed a few weeks later and diligently returned to his chosen task, nobody on the Penguin ever saw him again; it later ran aground in French Pass, and crew and passengers drowned.

Defining the soul: a sixty-four-thousand-dollar question

While stories like these may provide the most direct and compelling evidence of soul and soulfulness among our animal kin, the meaning of the word “soul” itself is usually the domain of religion. It’s been hotly debated by philosophers and theologians alike down through the centuries, yet the true nature of the soul remains an alluring riddle—hard enough to fathom in human beings, let alone in the rest of the animal kingdom. Still, the question “Do animals have souls?” depends in no small measure on what you think the soul is in the first place.

In times of tribal animism, the boundaries between animal and man were relatively indistinct. All of nature was suffused with the essence of the supernatural, and everything had souls, including rocks, trees, horses, and jackrabbits. Later, as increasingly sophisticated cultures evolved across the ancient world, the lines between us and other species tended to remain fluid. The Aztecs and the Egyptians thought some human souls became bees when they died; the Greeks and the Japanese said some became butterflies. But with the rise of the world’s great religious traditions came the first ideas of a transcendent God or absolute higher power, and the first sense of a dimension within the human self—the soul—that was specially connected to it. Generally speaking, religions both East and West thought animals had souls, too, but they were souls of a lower order, bound up in physical passions and trapped by mortal existence. The human soul, on the other hand, was privileged with immortality. According to Western theology, that was because humans alone had reason and free will; in Eastern thought, it was due to the fact that our unique capacity for self-awareness gave us the all-important potential for attaining enlightenment. But in either case, it was only the human soul that could escape the bonds of this earthly plane to share eternal life at its maker’s feet.

From the perspective of religious salvation, therefore, animals are clearly out of luck. Yet history’s canvas is filled with images of yogis and saints who loved their animal brethren and honored them as moral and spiritual beings. Twentieth-century Indian sage Ramana Maharshi taught that animals could reach enlightenment directly without needing to advance first through human birth. He was famous for having close spiritual relationships with dogs, cats, cows, peacocks, squirrels, birds, and monkeys; his favorite cow, Lakshmi, is said to have achieved final liberation when she died. Back in the day, fish supposedly poked their heads above water to hear St. Anthony preach. St. Martin de Porres trained animals in ethics and virtue, and St. Francis gave sermons to flocks of birds from around the world. Once, Francis even tamed the terrible wolf of Gubbio, walking straight into its lair and demanding that it stop eating the local livestock—and the local townspeople. To everyone’s surprise, this tactic actually worked: the wolf bowed its head, placed its paw meekly in the saint’s hand, and followed him into town, where the people agreed to keep it well fed in exchange for its pact of peace.

With the advent of science, the religious belief in sharp distinctions between humans and animals has taken somewhat of a beating. As Bekoff explains, it is consistent with evolutionary biology that everything humans have (including souls), animals have, too—if perhaps in less developed form. “Variations among different species,” the argument goes, “are differences in degree rather than differences in kind.” Charles Darwin called this idea evolutionary continuity, and it has become a fundamental axiom in the study of animal behavior. Yet while some scientists such as Bekoff probably take Darwin’s insight too far by saying that the only major difference between us is that animals don’t cook their food, there are others who recognize far more significant distinctions. In her studies of the chimpanzees at Gombe, for instance, Goodall concluded that their lack of a spoken language has been a fundamental evolutionary ceiling, making it impossible for them to develop higher capacities like shared moral codes. “Chimpanzees show behaviors that seem likely precursors to human morality—as when a high-ranking individual breaks up a fight to save a weaker companion,” she writes, “but for the most part, in their society, ‘might’ is ‘right,’ and the subordinates have to be submissive whether or not they are in the wrong.”

Where all this leaves us is ambiguous at best. As philosopher Daniel Dennett says, “Current thinking about animal consciousness is a mess.” Japanese roboticist Masahiro Mori even goes so far as to say that robots possess the unquenchable spark of awakening known as Buddha-nature. Robot souls? I guess anything’s possible, but it’s hard enough to come up with definitive answers about animals, let alone artificially intelligent machines. There is one more realm of evidence we have yet to examine, however. And there, things operate by a different set of rules entirely . . .

The further horizons of animal consciousness

Biologist Rupert Sheldrake has spent upwards of fifteen years researching psychic phenomena in animals—things like the impossible synergy of bird flocks wheeling together in unison or the uncanny knack some dogs and cats seem to have for knowing when their owners are coming home. “Unexplained abilities like telepathy,” he says, “are widespread in the animal kingdom.” Indeed, one of his most intriguing studies involves a famous Manhattan parrot named N’kisi who not only shares a telepathic bond with his owner Aimée Morgana but, by virtue of his advanced language ability, also has the tools to prove it. Schooled from a young age as though he were a human child, N’kisi knows roughly a thousand words; he conjugates his own verbs, cracks jokes, initiates conversation, and invents novel word combinations with delight. He also has the unnerving ability to read your thoughts and repeat them back to you out loud.

In a series of double-blind tests, Sheldrake placed Morgana and N’kisi in different rooms on different floors of a building and simultaneously videotaped them as Morgana flipped through a series of pictures she’d never seen before and N’kisi chattered away happily on his perch. Three times more often than chance would allow, N’kisi was talking about the image Morgana happened to be browsing atthat very same instant. “Can I give you a hug?” he chirped as she viewed a photograph of a couple embracing. “What’cha doin’ on the phone?” he said when she saw one of a man talking on his cell phone. Sometimes, N’kisi even eavesdrops on Morgana’s dreams: “I was dreaming that I was working with the audio tape deck,” she remembers. “N’kisi, sleeping by my head, said out loud, ‘You gotta push the button,’ as I was doing exactly that in my dream. His speech woke me up.”

I was surprised to find that interspecies telepathy was not only more common historically than one might think but that it seems to be turning into the foundation for a whole new occupation: professional animal communicator. Considered by many to be the field’s chief pioneer, Penelope Smith has made psychic contact with everything from horses to horseflies over the past thirty years—not to mention training several hundred others in the subtle spiritual arts of animal mind-reading and even animal therapy. This small brigade of clairvoyant counselors means business. They’re there to listen to your pet’s point of view and help you sort through whatever issues may have come between you, even over the phone. If you’re lucky, they might even help you wake up to what animals have to offer you. “Animals have tremendous understanding of our problems,” Smith says. “They’re always trying to help de-stress us, to help us play and meditate and all the rest, you know?” As bizarre as that might sound, she’s not the only one who thinks so. Epona Farm in Sonoita, Arizona, is now hosting human development seminars facilitated by telepathic horses; the dolphins of Dolphin Heart World offer workshops in life skills, community-building, and alternative healing modalities via their nonlocal “Dolphin Consciousness.”

Revolutionary dolphin researcher John C. Lilly talked about the wonders of dolphin consciousness, too, but he may not have been sober at the time, and he certainly wasn’t capitalizing the term and using it to sell life skills workshops. Inventor of the isolation tank and psychedelic compatriot of Timothy Leary, Lilly took enormous doses of LSD and ketamine while he was with dolphins and came back raving about vast, incandescent matrices of information surging through their powerful group mind. Your guess is as good as mine on that one, but it’s interesting to note that the gifted American psychic Edgar Cayce might have agreed with him—Cayce also believed that the deepest dimensions of the animal self exist not at the level of the individual but of the entire species. “Cayce would say that there is a group soul, for example, for all cats,” explains scholar Kevin Todeschi. “And this overseeing energy, which is part of the divine, is really responsible for the cat world. Rather than each cat having its own individual soul like a human being, each attracts a piece of that group soul as its individual personality. And it’s possible to attract that same personality more than once, so you could have a cat die and another cat come along, and you might say, ‘My cat came back to me.’”

Speaking of animals “coming back,” the literature of supernatural experience is positively teeming with the ghosts of pets haunting places and people they knew while they were alive. Once, for example, a veterinarian treating a sick white horse gave its owners some baffling instructions: he told them that for safety’s sake, it would be best to separate the ailing animal from the other white horse in its corral. “What other horse?” they asked—and were dumbfounded as the vet went on to describe, in unmistakable detail, a second horse of theirs who had recently died. On another occasion, two young boys were close to drowning in a cold lake near the Austrian border when their father leapt into the water to rescue them. Swimming as fast as he could, he saw that the family dog Fritz had beaten him to the punch and watched as the faithful pet steered his boys back to the beach. The wrinkle: Fritz had been dead for over a year. When they all got to shore, his ghost disappeared, but not before a dozen onlookers had seen him too.

When chimps get religion

Ultimately, the precise parameters of human uniqueness may be too elusive to pin down, the character of the animal soul too loosely understood to be tied off with any authority. Even so, there’s one last question on my mind: What lies in store for the future? Just last September in the rainforests of the Congo, new types of tool use were observed among wild gorillas. Then in November, researchers in St. Louis made the startling announcement that higher mammals like whales and humans aren’t the only ones smart enough to be able to sing—now mice have been overheard performing complex (and catchy) ultrasonic love ballads to woo potential mates. And new findings like these seem to be cropping up by the month. Of course, science itself is always progressing, but could these discoveries also suggest that animal consciousness is evolving? If so, are their souls evolving too?

However one understands the soul’s nature and function in human beings, is it possible that animals—audacious as it may seem to ask—could even have their own spiritual inklings? One of Goodall’s most famous stories is of a great forest waterfall in the Kakombe valley where she occasionally observed the chimpanzees performing strange, spontaneous dances. Their behavior was inexplicable, she writes, but for the sense that they were responding to “feelings akin to awe . . . a feeling generated by the mystery of water; water that seems alive, always rushing past yet never going, always the same yet ever different.” J. Allen Boone reflects on a similar incident in Kinship with All Life, marveling at a German shepherd watching the sunset from a mountaintop ledge: “His gaze was focused on a point in the sky considerably above the horizon line. He was staring off into fathomless space. Out there beyond the ability of my human senses to identify what it was, something was holding the big dog’s attention like a magnet! And it was giving him great satisfaction, great contentment, great peace of mind. That fact was not only written all over him; it was permeating the atmosphere like a perfume. I had watched human pilgrims in such meditative poses on sacred mountains in the Orient. I wondered . . . and wondered . . . and wondered . . .”

What does this mean? Goodall speculates that it was “similar feelings of awe that gave rise to the first animistic religions, the worship of the elements and the mysteries of nature over which there was no control.” Bill Wallauer, a videographer who has spent nine years with the chimps in Tanzania, adds, “We can’t come to any real conclusions, but I honestly do believe that chimps have the capacity to contemplate and consider (even revere) both the animate and inanimate.” Unlikely though it seems, it’s fascinating to consider the notion of some sort of proto-religious impulse in animalkind. Yet evolutionary philosophers such as Teilhard de Chardin and Henri Bergson would likely have seen such a development as no longer possible. Now that the wild upward thrust of consciousness in the universe has finally burst the bonds of matter through the awakening human mind, they believed, it has no more need to push its way forward through other species.

“Everywhere but in man,” writes Bergson, “consciousness has had to come to a stand; in man alone it has kept on its way.” Nevertheless, the future is an open book. What unseen potentials of soul and consciousness might one day rise to the surface of the animal mind? Reflecting on my own few moments of fleeting communion with the spirit and intelligence of wild creatures, I can’t say for sure. But I’ve heard that in the high, cold mountains above Dharamsala, India, Tibetan monks in exile recite the dharma to their dogs in hopes that someday they, too, will be able to practice it themselves . . .
http://www.wie.org/j32/animal-souls.asp



Time in the Animal Mind by Carl Zimmer

From left, Adam Jones/Photo Researchers; Luke MacGregor/Reuters; Esteban Felix/Associated Press; Will & Deni McIntyre/Photo Researchers

Scrub jays, left, seem able to plan for the future in experiments, hiding today’s pine nuts for tomorrow’s breakfast. Squirrel monkeys also seem to think about future consequences, while hummingbirds seem to recall time and location of visits to flowers, and rats to remember where they encountered food in a maze.

Article Tools Sponsored By

Published: April 3, 2007

Correction Appended

Humans are born time travelers. We may not be able to send our bodies into the past or the future, at least not yet, but we can send our minds. We can relive events that happened long ago or envision ourselves in the future.

New studies suggest that the two directions of temporal travel are intimately entwined in the human brain. A number of psychologists argue that re-experiencing the past evolved in our ancestors as a way to plan for the future and that the rise of mental time travel was crucial to our species’ success. But some experts on animal behavior do not think we are unique in this respect. They point to several recent experiments suggesting that animals can visit the past and future as well.

The first clues about the twists and turns of mental time travel came from people with certain brain injuries that caused them to forget autobiographical details without forgetting the information they had picked up along the way. A man known in the scientific literature as K.C., for instance, could play chess with no memory of having ever played it. K.C. could remember sentences psychologists taught him without any memory of the lessons.

K.C. had lost what psychologists now call episodic memory. Endel Tulving, a Canadian psychologist, defined episodic memory as the ability to recall the details of personal experiences: what happened, where it happened, when it happened and so on.

Dr. Tulving argued that episodic memory was distinct from other kinds of memory that did not involve personal experience. People can remember how to get to a subway stop, for example, without recalling the first time they were there.

Episodic memory was also unique to our species, Dr. Tulving maintained. For one thing, he argued that episodic memory required self-awareness. You can’t remember yourself if you don’t know you exist. He also argued that there was no evidence animals could recollect experiences, even if those experiences left an impression on them.

Many animal behavior experts agreed with Dr. Tulving, even though they had not actually run experiments testing the idea. But when Nicola Clayton, a comparative psychologist, first heard about the claim, she had a different reaction. “I could feel my feathers ruffling,” said Dr. Clayton, who is now at the University of Cambridge. “I thought, hang on, that doesn’t make sense.”

Dr. Clayton began to test western scrub jays to see if they met any of the criteria for episodic memory. The jays can hide several thousand pieces of food each year and remember the location of each one. Dr. Clayton wondered if scrub jays simply remembered locations, or if they remembered the experience of hiding the food.

She ran an experiment using two kinds of food: moth larvae and peanuts. Scrub jays prefer larvae to peanuts while the larvae are still fresh. When the larvae are dead for a few hours, the jays prefer peanuts. Dr. Clayton gave the birds a chance to hide both kinds of food and then put them in another cage. She later returned the birds to their caches, in some cases after four hours and in other cases after five days.

The time the scrub jays spent away from their caches had a big effect on the type of food they looked for. The birds that waited four hours tended to dig up larvae, and the birds that had to wait for five days passed the larvae by and dug up peanuts instead. (To make sure they were not just picking up the smell of rotten larvae and avoiding those spots, Dr. Clayton dumped out the caches as soon as the birds had made them, and filled all of them with fresh sand.)

In 1998, Dr. Clayton and her colleagues published the results of their experiment, declaring that scrub jays met the standards for “episodic-like” memory. Ever since, Dr. Clayton has been investigating the memories of scrub jays more deeply. Last year, for example, her team discovered that scrub jays not only remember when and where they hide food, but also whether they are being watched at the time. If one scrub jay notices another one watching it hide food, it tends to dig up the cache later and hide it somewhere else. Other scientists have followed Dr. Clayton’s lead and have searched for signs of episodic-like memory in other animals. When rats are exploring a maze, for example, they seem to be able to recall which kinds of food they encountered along the way. Hummingbirds seem to remember where and when they visited individual flowers for nectar. Rhesus monkeys can remember where they put food, but not how long ago they put it there.

Some researchers have not been persuaded by these studies, however.

“Animals seem to be living very much in the present,” said Thomas Suddendorf, a comparative psychologist at the University of Queensland in Australia.

Dr. Suddendorf argues that a scrub jay could remember type of food along with the location of a cache without having a sense or memory of self. “Information is not really what characterizes mental time travel,” Dr. Suddendorf said. “I know that in 1967 in Sweden my mom gave birth to me, but that doesn’t mean I can travel back to that time and experience that event.”

Episodic memory also depends on many other faculties that have only been clearly documented in the human mind, Dr. Suddendorf argues. He said he believes it evolved after our ancestors branched off from other apes. The advantage lay not in knowing the past, however, but in providing “an advantage for predicting the future,” he said.

Recent brain scanning studies support Dr. Suddendorf’s link between the past and future. Daniel Schacter, a psychologist, and his colleagues at Harvard University recently studied how brains function as people think about past experiences and imagine future ones. Constructing an episodic memory causes a distinctive network of brain regions to become active. As a person then adds details to the memory, the network changes, as some regions quiet down and others fire up.

The researchers then had their subjects think about themselves in the future. Many parts of the episodic memory network became active again.

Dr. Suddendorf argues that these overlapping networks for mental time travel evolved at least 1.6 million years ago. He points to stone tools hominids made at that time. Paleoanthropologists have determined that the tools were moved many miles from where they were made.

“If you’ve just eaten, the only reason you’re going to take a tool with you is if you anticipate using it in the future,” he said.

Dr. Suddendorf has roused comparative psychologists to action — “like a red rag to a bull,” as one comparative psychologist, Sara Shettleworth of the University of Toronto, put it. They have been looking for evidence that animals can also plan for the future.

Some studies suggest not. Cebus monkeys, for example, will eat until they are stuffed and throw the rest of the food out of their cage, despite the fact that they will not have food the next morning.

But in other studies, animals show more promise. “We tested squirrel monkeys to see if they could anticipate the future, and to our surprise it looks like they could,” said Dr. William Roberts, a comparative psychologist at the University of Western Ontario. He and his colleagues ran a test in which they offered squirrel monkeys a choice between one piece of date or four. Not surprisingly, the monkeys took four.

But the scientists then began to take away water from the monkeys before they offered the choice. If the monkeys took four pieces, the scientists kept the water away for three hours. If the monkeys took one, the scientists returned the water in half an hour. The monkeys learned to choose one date. Even though they were not thirsty at the time, they anticipated becoming thirsty in the future. (If the scientists stopped withholding water, the monkeys went back to picking four pieces of dates instead of one.)

Dr. Clayton recently tested her scrub jays for foresight. She and her colleagues put the birds in three adjoining compartments for six days. Each morning the birds were shut for two hours in one of two rooms. In one room they got nothing to eat. In the other room, they got powdered pine nuts (the scrub jays can eat the powder, but they cannot cache it). For the rest of the day, each bird could move around all three rooms and enjoy more powdered nuts.

On the seventh day, the scientists switched the powdered pine nuts with real ones. If the birds were so inclined, they could cache the pine nuts in ice cube trays the scientists put in the two morning rooms. “If I’m a bird, what I could do is take some of the provisions and hide it in there so that if I do wake up there in the morning, I can get my own breakfast,” Dr. Clayton said.

Dr. Clayton found that the birds put over three times more pine nuts in the no-breakfast room than in the breakfast room. She argues that the results mean that birds can take action for their future needs, knowing what they’ll need and where they’ll need it.

Other experts on animal behavior say that the study is compelling. Even Dr. Suddendorf, who has been so critical of previous studies, is intrigued by Dr. Clayton’s results. He said he wonders how long the birds can plan ahead: “Can they do this for an event next week or next month like humans can? Is it limited to caching, to just food?”

“It’s good to see people waking up to this,” Dr. Suddendorf said. “In five years the picture is going to look a lot clearer. The future looks bright for research on the future.”

Correction: April 5, 2007

Pictures with an article in Science Times on Tuesday about how animals experience time were published in error. The photographs were of the Florida scrub jay — not the western scrub jay, which was used in the research described in the article.



Bounder’s Basic Biscuits

Ingredients:

  • 2/3 cup flavored liquid (broth, meat drippings, bouillon, etc)
  • 6 Tbsp. vegetable oil
  • 1/2 cup cornmeal
  • 2 cups whole wheat flour

Instructions:

Mix all ingredients together.  Roll and cut into different shapes.  Bake at 350 degrees for 35 – 40 minutes.  These are very easy to make, and you can give them a different flavor by changing the flavored liquid.  My dogs and our guests love them!!



IAABC Concerns Regarding Child Safety on National Geographic’s Dog Whisperer Show
April 14, 2007, 10:11 am
Filed under: Dog Behavior, Dog Training, Dogs, Uncategorized

October 27, 2006

 

To National Geographic Channel:

 

We, members of the Human-Animal Mutualism Division of the International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants (IAABC), are writing to express our concerns regarding the television show, The Dog Whisperer. We feel that the program may lead children to engage in unsafe behaviors.   

 

The episodes that we have reviewed carry a rating of TV-G, General Audience. According to TV Parental Guidelines published on www.tvguidelines.org, this rating indicates that: “Most parents would find this program suitable for all ages. Although this rating does not signify a program designed specifically for children, most parents may let younger children watch this program unattended.” The show also carries a disclaimer indicating that the viewer should not attempt to replicate Mr. Millan’s techniques. Young children will not understand the disclaimer. If the rating indicates that children do not need to be supervised while watching the show, there is no reason for parents to believe there is a need to do so.

 

Research demonstrates that children’s behavior is impacted by what they see on television.1 The techniques depicted on the show can lead to injuries. In fact, Mr. Millan himself was bitten on several episodes. 

Furthermore, many episodes depict children engaged in activities that could lead to injuries. For example:

  • A 10 year old child is taught to walk a 150 lb Rottweiler
  • A child is asked to ride skateboards near a bulldog with a history of attacking skateboards
  • A child is asked to lie down under an agility obstacle while an Australian shepherd with a history of fearful behavior towards children jumps over the child

 

Children who view the program may try to attempt the same techniques with their own pets and could be injured.

 

The public’s perception is that National Geographic is a “family channel.” This fact makes it even more likely that parents will allow their young children to watch this program unsupervised. For children’s safety, we encourage National Geographic to change the rating given to all The Dog Whisperer episodes. Additionally, we encourage National Geographic to stop depicting children engaged in unsafe behavior. 

 

Behavior modification and training techniques that minimize the use of aversives and emphasize the use of reinforcement are less likely to trigger aggressive/fearful behavior in dogs. These methods are effective, efficient and are safer ways for both adults and children to modify animal behavior. Additionally, in cases where animals have aggressive behavior histories, safety precautions need to be taken, such as the use of a basket muzzle, if children are to be permitted near the animal. Children are often bitten on the neck, face and head, so the consequences of a bite to a child can be serious.2

 

If you would like additional information on methods that would be safer for both adults and children to implement, please contact us at iaabc@comcast.net. We look forward to hearing from you in this regard.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Veronica Sanchez, M.Ed. Early Childhood Education, CABC

Chair, Human-Animal Mutualism Division, IAABC

www.iaabc.org

 

Jane Miller, MSSA, LISW, CDBC – Service and Therapy Animals

Member, Human-Animal Mutualism Division, IAABC

 

Darlene Arden, CABC

Specialist in behavioral issues of small dogs

Member, Human-Animal Mutualism Division, IAABC

 

Robin Pool BS, CABC – Service and Therapy Animals

Executive Director, Paws-Up, Inc.

Member, Human-Animal Mutualism Division, IAABC

 

Tara McLaughlin, CDBC, CPDT

Member, Human-Animal Mutualism Division, IAABC

 

Susan Bulanda, MA, CABC

Member Human-Animal Mutualism Division, IAABC

 

cc. PETCO

 

 

References

 

Please note, this reference list is not a comprehensive listing of all the research on these topics.

 

1 American

Academy of
Pediatrics

Committee on Public Education
Children, Adolescents, and Television
Pediatrics, Feb 2001; 107: 423 – 426.

 

1Potts Richard, Doppler Matt and Hernandez Margarita

Effects of Television Content on Physical Risk-Taking in Children

Journal of Experimental Child Psycholog, Dec 1994; 321-331

 

1Meltzoff AN

Imitation of televised models by infants

Child Development, Oct 1988; 59(5): 1221-9

 

2Johannes Schalamon, Herwig Ainoedhofer, Georg Singer, Thomas Petnehazy, Johannes Mayr, Katalin Kiss, and Michael E. Höllwarth
Analysis of Dog Bites in Children Who Are Younger Than 17 Years
Pediatrics, Mar 2006; 117: e374 – e379.

 



Things We Can Learn From a Dog

-         Never pass up the opportunity to go for a joyride

-         Allow the experience of fresh air and the wind in your face to be pure ecstacy

-         When loved ones come home, always run to greet them

-         - When it’s in your best interest, practice obedience

-         - Let others know when they’ve invaded your territory

-         - Take naps and stretch before rising

-         - Run, romp and play daily

-         - Eat with gusto and enthusiasm

-         - Be loyal- Never pretend to be something you’re not

-         - If what you want lies buried, dig until you find it

-         - When someone is having a bad day, be silent, sit close and nuzzle them gently

-         - Thrive on attention and let people touch you

-         - Avoid biting when a simple growl will do

-         - On hot days, drink lots of water and lie under a shady tree

-         - Never hold a grudge

-         - When you’re happy, dance around and wag your entire body

-         - No matter how often you’re scolded, don’t buy into the guilt thing and pout, run right back and make friends

- Delight in the simple joy of a long walk

-         - Practice unconditional love

 

 



Dog Quotes for the Day

153781yo113bgxvd.gif

“Whoever said you can’t buy happiness forgot little puppies.”
~Gene Hill

“Dogs feel very strongly that they should always go with you in the car, in case the need should arise for them to bark violently at nothing right in your ear.”
~Dave Barry

“Outside of a dog, a book is probably man’s best friend, and inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read.”
~Groucho Marx

“The scientific name for an animal that doesn’t either run from or fight its enemies is lunch.”
~Michael Friedman

“To his dog, every man is Napoleon; hence the constant popularity of dogs.”
~Aldous Huxley

“Did you ever walk into a room and forget why you walked in? I think that is how dogs spend their lives.”
~Sue Murphy

“I think animal testing is a terrible idea; they get all nervous and give the wrong answers.”
~Unknown

“No animal should ever jump up on the dining-room furniture unless absolutely certain that that he can hold his own in the conversation.”
~Fran Lebowitz

“Scratch a dog and you’ll find a permanent job.”
~Franklin P. Jones

“Ever consider what they must think of us? I mean, here we come back from a grocery store with the most amazing haul –chicken, pork, half a cow. They must think we’re the greatest hunters on earth!”
~Anne Tyler