I ... don't understand the difference

What Michael Vick and his apologists, including Nike and Subway, don't get.

Putting on a nice sweater is not the same thing as being nice.

Casa Bonita
Tags: SOUTH
PARKmore...

Being sorry that you were caught is not the same thing as being sorry.

"Letting down the fans" is not the problem.

"Letting myself down" is not the problem.

Fearing just punishment is not the same thing as knowing what you are doing is wrong.

Enduring punishment is not the same thing as redemption.

It's not all about you. Has nothing to do with "nobody's perfect." It's not a "mistake."

And you will never get it.

A Bad Doggie Treat is Very Bland

Now a Good Doggie Treat

H/T to Carol Gravestock for this scene from the sitcom Modern Family.

(You can watch the entire episode at the link. This scene starts at about the seven-minute mark.)

A young entrepreneur is pitching his get-rich-quick scheme to a successful businessman and his soft-hearted wife

-- Are you aware, last year, Americans spent forty billion dollars on dog training?

That's not true.

-- I was surprised as you are!

We're surprised because it's not true.

-- What is this multi-billion dollar industry missing?

Multi-billion dollars.

-- I have devised a revolutionary way to communicate ...

Aaaggh ... I hate to interrupt your big pitch, but your dog is chewing my pillow.

-- Is fantastic.

It's not fantastic for my pillow.

-- It's the perfect opportunity for me to demonstrate ... the Good Doggie / Bad Doggie Training System!

Whoa, whoa, slow down -- what are we going to do about the pillow situation?

-- Watch and be amazed! Stella here is being a bad doggie ... Stella bad dog bad dog bad dog.

-- Now what does a bad dog get? A Bad Doggie Treat!

You're gonna give her a treat for doing something bad?

-- Ah -- a Bad Doggie treat. When she is good, she gets the Good Doggie treat.

Whoa wha ... What is the difference between the Bad Doggie treat and the Good Doggie treat?

-- Bacon. The Bad Doggie treat is very bland.

But she seems like she likes it.

-- Wait 'til you see the Good Doggie treat!

-- Stella sit! Now, a Good Doggie treat.

-- Yeah -- she's still full from the Bad Doggie treat. But there you have it! The Good Doggie / Bad Doggie Training System! Welcome to the ground floor!

Actually, she's peeing on the ground floor.

Quick, quick, give her a bad doggie treat!

I read the synopsis from Carol's blog to Perfesser Chaos in the car. He was using all his Powers of Spousal Listening, yet somehow missed the part where I told him it was a scene from a sitcom.

To him, the Good Doggie / Bad Doggie System seemed perfectly plausible in the context of the parade of rainbows and fairy farts training fads that shoplift the mantle of "science" while shaming owners until they are helpless milquetoasts and their dogs are rudderless terrorists.

I would like to give some Modern Family scriptwriter props for a consciously wicked sendup of stiletto-heel "dog training." One can only hope. As with other pop-constructed (non)realities, the best way to deflate them is for some ironic media hipster to find them mockworthy.

Iz Proud ...

Congratulations to the whole staff of The Allegheny Front; four finalists and two big winners in the Western PA Golden Quill competition this year.

But especially to our own Perfesser Chaos, who won Best Writing for Radio for his very first radio commentary.

On Notice

One thing I really like about Blogger, Wordpress, and some proprietary blog software is the name-links.

Commenters can choose to set up a link to their own blogs or other urls, thereby taking the opportunity to establish credibility and accountability.

A man or woman who stands behind his or her words with both name and credentials counts for a lot more than an anonymous commenter, or even the user of a consistent pseudonym.

But know this.

Any spammer, scammer, puppymiller, conspiracy theorist, or any other category of thief who comments here as a way of getting his name link "out there" and hawking his wares will find himself in spam hell and publicly called-out.

That is all.

Sioux City, IA: Still Vicious

Devoted wolf cubs will recall the clown car called Sioux City Council that kept reappearing on this blog and all over teh interwebz last summer to disgorge more hilarity just when you thought it had to be empty.

Ordinarily, a third-rate town's fourth-rate politicians and their Solonesque approach to public safety via canine racial profiling doesn't bear a special look here. Too damn many of 'em. But here, Alannis, here is some irony.

After pibble-hating councilman and cynological sage Aaron Rochester's untrained, unfenced, unsupervised, let us safely say asshole of a Labrador, bit an innocent passerby, Mr. Rochester continued to insist that the breed ban ordinance that he authored was Jesus' own animal control law.

The dog was impounded under the "one strike and you're dead" ordinance that was also thoughtfully penned by the august member of council who speculated that his own resident biter was "protecting the children." Oh woe, it seemed that Jake Manyteeth was about to be hoisted by his own(er's) petard.

But wait! What light from yonder window breaks? Jake's life is spared by a deus ex machina that is totally a surprise to his devoted master guy who sold the dog to another guy while he was impounded on death row.

Yes, Aaron Rochester claims he "sold" his death-row biting dog to someone named Lew Weinberg on July 31. On August 2, the yeller thumb-slasher was stolen from animal control during a Sunday night break-in. Rochester somehow failed to mention ("Oh, by the way...") the dog's in absentia change of master at a city council meeting on August 3. Cuz that's just how he rolls.

Over the past year, the Googles has sent me occasional updates on this devoted Iowa public servant, slayer of porch sofas* and nemesis of Girls Gone Wild buses that are clearly obscene and illegal -- a man never too busy to make light of his own starring role in multiple crimes against persons and property by, say, judging a "Jake look-alike contest" to see which Labrador most resembled that biting dog he used to own but doesn't anymore and he doesn't know anything about it, no sir.

If anyone had the brass balls to bring a nice buckskin pibble and sit it down in front of Rochester, it is not recorded.

There were also news briefs indicating that Sioux City was on the verge of repealing its obviously bogus breed ban in deference to the advice of all experts and their own legal counsel, and revising its overall vicious dog ordinance to ensure that politicians could always weasel their way out of the consequences of their negligent dog ownership things would be more fair to good dogs.

Well don't get your hopes up.

Pit bulls will remain banned in Sioux City after a 3-2 vote Monday by the City Council, but the panel gave first-round approval to some changes in the vicious-animal law.
...

Radig and Rochester argued the ban, in place since 2008 when Rochester first proposed it, was working. Hobart had voted for the ban but has since said he no longer favored it. Padgett and Fitch previously had indicated they did not like breed bans.

"I'm not going to change what the previous council did," Fitch, who took office Jan. 2, said after the meeting, "I think if we made the change those owners would get confused on what they are supposed to do."

In refusing to lift the pit bull ban, the council also did not toughen the irresponsible-pet-owner provision, as proposed by City Attorney Andrew Mai. Council members said they believed the current law could be enforced.

...

Under the proposed new law, pet owners could reclaim their pets from Animal Control during an appeals process.

Looks like the councilman got his way.

Now it will be dead-easy to disappear a genuinely vicious dog while "appealing" -- no bolt cutters required, no pesky exposure to felony burglary charges.

The new guy on the council pussied out like a little bitch thoughtfully supported the wise judgment of his predecessors so that they could avoid confusing the little people by not, you know, confiscating and killing their pets.

Counsel's advice to council was ignored, 'cuz what does the city attorney know about the law anyway?

And all the "pit bulls" who never bit anyone are still vicious.

_________
* Mebbe if Rochester had a comfy couch on his front porch, the damn dog would have stayed put instead of charging down the steps and across the lawn to attempt four-fanged pollexectomy.

Much mischief can be prevented with a suitably comfy couch.

USA Board of Dog Searchin' Freedom

How did Steven Colbert find out how SAR dog handlers get "certified?" And then employ such a clever metaphor with ophthalmologists and cats to subtly reveal it?

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
USA Board of Ophthalmological Freedom
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Fox News

I'm sorry Jay. That cat told me he was certified.

Even the Devil Can't Fool a Dog

A dog's got a right to have a man around, just the same as that man's got a right to have a dog around.

Best Twilight Zone EVAR.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3, the money shot




You can get it on DVD, Volume 25 of the Twilight Zone complete set. Netflix has it.

The writer, Earl Hamner Jr., has a long list of writing credits for animal-themed television, including Lassie and Gentle Ben, and the 2006 live-action movie adaptation of Charlotte's Web. He was also the creator of the 1970's series The Waltons.

It is an old story, simply retold here.

How old?

"Shakra said, ‘Thou shalt behold thy brothers in Heaven. They have reached it before thee. Indeed, thou shalt see all of them there, with Krishna. Do not yield to grief, O chief of the Bharatas. Having cast off their human bodies they have gone there, O chief of Bharata’s race. As regards thee, it is ordained that thou shalt go thither in this very body of thine.’

"Yudhishthira said, ‘This dog, O lord of the Past and the Present, is exceedingly devoted to me. He should go with me. My heart is full of compassion for him.’

"Shakra said, ‘Immortality and a condition equal to mine, O king, prosperity extending in all directions, and high success, and all the felicities of Heaven, thou hast won today. Do thou cast off this dog. In this there will be no cruelty.’

"Yudhishthira said, ‘O thou of a 1,000 eyes. O thou that art of righteous behaviour, it is exceedingly difficult for one that is of righteous behaviour to perpetrate an act that is unrighteous. I do not desire that union with prosperity for which I shall have to cast off one that is devoted to me.’

"Indra said, ‘There is no place in Heaven for persons with dogs. Besides, the (deities called) Krodhavasas take away all the merits of such persons. Reflecting on this, act, O king Yudhishthira the just. Do thou abandon this dog. There is no cruelty in this.’

"Yudhishthira said, ‘It has been said that the abandonment of one that is devoted is infinitely sinful. It is equal to the sin that one incurs by slaying a Brahmana. Hence, O great Indra, I shall not abandon this dog today from desire of my happiness. Even this is my vow steadily pursued, that I never give up a person that is terrified, nor one that is devoted to me, nor one that seeks my protection, saying that he is destitute, nor one that is afflicted, nor one that has come to me, nor one that is weak in protecting oneself, nor one that is solicitous of life. I shall never give up such a one till my own life is at an end.’

"Indra said, ‘Whatever gifts, or sacrifices spread out, or libations poured on the sacred fire, are seen by a dog, are taken away by the Krodhavasas. Do thou, therefore, abandon this dog. By abandoning this dog thou wilt attain to the region of the deities. Having abandoned thy brothers and Krishna, thou hast, O hero, acquired a region of felicity by thy own deeds. Why art thou so stupefied? Thou hast renounced everything. Why then dost thou not renounce this dog?’ "Yudhishthira said, ‘This is well known in all the worlds that there is neither friendship nor enmity with those that are dead. When my brothers and Krishna died, I was unable to revive them. Hence it was that I abandoned them. I did not, however, abandon them as long as they were alive. To frighten one that has sought protection, the slaying of a woman, the theft of what belongs to a Brahmana, and injuring a friend, each of these four, O Shakra, is I think equal to the abandonment of one that is devoted.’"

Vaishampayana continued: "Hearing these words of king Yudhishthira the just, (the dog became transformed into) the deity of Righteousness, who, well pleased, said these words unto him in a sweet voice fraught with praise.

"Dharma said: ‘Thou art well born, O king of kings, and possessed of the intelligence and the good conduct of Pandu. Thou hast compassion for all creatures, O Bharata, of which this is a bright example. Formerly, O son, thou wert once examined by me in the woods of Dwaita, where thy brothers of great prowess met with (an appearance of) death. Disregarding both thy brothers Bhima and Arjuna, thou didst wish for the revival of Nakula from thy desire of doing good to thy (step-) mother. On the present occasion, thinking the dog to be devoted to thee, thou hast renounced the very car of the celestials instead of renouncing him. Hence. O king, there is no one in Heaven that is equal to thee. Hence, O Bharata, regions of inexhaustible felicity are thine. Thou hast won them, O chief of the Bharatas, and thine is a celestial and high goal.’"

The Mahabharata, Book 17: Mahaprasthanika Parva

ca 400 BCE


I couldn't find any reference to the animal trainer(s). While the dog is well-cast for type (Hollywood likes to cast Labradors as hounds and curs, golden retrievers as mongrels, German shepherds as wolves, and this episode is a refreshing exception), the dog work is fairly poor. Not much is expected of the hound. He's no Terry.

But he wouldn't walk into Hell with his eyes wide open, either.

Time to Shower in Boiling Clorox

Homeless, or hot property?

Sitting here, freshly scrubbed after a wet, dirty day of SAR training, I started checking some ads in a regional agricultural newspaper's online site.

Way leads on to way, and impulsively googling phone numbers from some questionable dog ads in the livestock section led to roads I wish were less taken, especially by me.

The pets/dogs classifieds of the Holmes County Bargain Hunter -- which serves eastern Ohio's Amish country -- made my skin crawl off to hide. I need another shower already.

Commingled with a modest number of the usual backyard breeder and bailing pet-owner ads is the commercial narrative of the new rural economy, one of the few facets of animal agriculture that is not yet vertically integrated, the new millenium's Mortgage Lifter:

BROKER LOOKING FOR Toy breed puppies...any kind. 10 years experience. Have lots of references. Paying $150-$300. 814-331-0247.

KENNEL SELLOUT. YORKIES, Bichons, Pomeranians, King Charles, Poodle, and Shih-Tzu. 1-4yrs. old. (423)345-3042.

LOOKING FOR LITTERS of puppies, we could pay up to $60 a pup for pure or small breeds. Call us at (330)466-7276.

ONE 9MO OLD Pom male. One AKC Pom male. Two Pom females. (740)622-1109.

PUPPIES WANTED: BOOKING litters. Cavashon’s, Schnoodles, Cavapoo’s, Cavalier King Charles, Morkies, Shorkies, Cockapoos, Shihapoos, Bichon’s and Bichon mixes, Maltishons and Maltipoo’s, Maltese cross, Puggles, Havanese cross, Yorkipoos, Yorkie mixes. Small Poo breed mixes. Designer breeds. 330-280-4531.

PUPPIES WANTED: BUYING some now, and booking ahead. Pugs, Puggles, Yorkies and mixes, Morkies, Cavashons, Havanese and mixes, Shih-Tzu’s and mixes, Bulldogs and mixes, Bichons and mixes, Maltese and mixes. We always pay and we always pick up. 330-518-9516; 330-559-9211.

THIRTY 2-1/2’X4’ WIRE dog cages made by Raber Kennels. Six 16ft sections, two 12ft sections with automatic water nipples. Can deliver. (270)528-1537 or (270)531-3751.

WANTED TO BUY: Adult kennel breed sellout. Yorkies, Maltese, Pomeranians, Shih-Tzu’s. (330)359-0245.

WANTED: SOFT-COATED WHEATON, also Brussel Griffond adults and/or puppies. Also, someone to raise Bulldogs and I will supply the dogs. (724)254-4594 or (412)289-9498.

Bad enough, the brokers looking for $60 puppies that will miraculously appreciate ten or twenty-fold by the time they reach the deli case in a week or so, the sellouts of bulk-priced breeding stock, the indelible image branded on my brain of the thirty canine livestock who have and will spend their entire miserable existences in those banks of 30" x 48" cages (with water nipples). These ads infuriate, but do not surprise. Not like some others.

There's the famous canine repro specialist vet in Cleveland I keep hearing about.

ATTENTION DOG BREEDERS
Two hour seminar by world famous canine reproduction vet, Dr. Hutchinson. A rare opportunity to learn from one of the top Veterinarians in the country. Tuesday, May 18th at Farmstead Restaurant in Berlin at 7:00pm. For information call (330)674-0810.

I don't think we'll be taking our veterinary business to the good Doctor Hutchinson; courting the custom of the puppymilling community in and around Holmes County means he will be much too busy keeping those bitches profitably whelping away in their 30" x 48" cages to bring his full specialist attention to any AI's we might one day want to have done.

In addition to building vinyl storage units, the disembodied phone number that is organizing this meeting of minds has some six-week-old Australian shepherd pups for sale. Because those pups get stale if you let them sit on the shelf too long.

Then there's the new wrinkle on "rescue:"

AA1 RESCUE now accepting puppy litters. Call when young to assure placement. Will find loving homes and spay mom. (330)242-5137.

This one is fishy. I've never heard of a rescue placing an ad looking for dogs. It's not like there is, you know, a shortage of dogs and puppies in rural eastern Ohio. I have been to the pounds; they are well-populated, and many of them are only too eager to release animals to legitimate rescues.

AA1 Rescue does not have a Petfinder listing, nor a website, nor a mention on anyone else's website, nor is it registered as a 501(c)3 with the IRS.

The only place it turns up in a Google search is in this free ad in a Cleveland publication:

AA1 PUPPY RESCUE
Lab mixed puppies, 6-8wks. SUPER SWEET, shots, dewormed. $100. 330.242.5137

The phone number, similarly, only appears in this ad. It is a cell phone in Medina, OH.

Like I said, fishy. The "rescue" that pays for ads looking for pups, but whose only web presence is in one free ad offering puppies for sale for $100. Presumably unneutered, as they don't specify the way they do for the $3 inoculation and the $.50 worming.

Then there's so-fishy-I-smell-low-tide:

GUARDIAN
ANGEL
RESCUE

Accepting puppies & dogs. We are a well-respected rescue with 12yrs. experience. We will pay up to $50 per puppy. (330)656-3524.

A rescue that pays a newspaper for an ad so they can buy puppies? At about the same price offered by the puppymill brokers in the same ad column?

Rilly?

In those twelve years of experience garnering respect, "Guardian Angel Rescue" has apparently not gotten around to getting registered as a tax-exempt charity; my fruitless search of the IRS dB reminded me, though, that there is a well-respected group in Canfield, OH, Angels for Animals, that helped out NESR with low-cost neutering on five English shepherds we once sprung from one of the rural pounds they serve.

There are Guardian Angel Rescues in Memphis, TN and Tampa, FL. Presumably not trolling rural Ohio for $50 puppies. Otherwise, no website, no Petfinder listing, no mention on anyone else's website.

The Northfield, OH cell phone that is the only point of contact for this and some similar puppy-solicitation ads, shows up on the other side as well, with paid ads that give some idea of the strict placement criteria and great care that Guardian Angel takes with its procured puppies:

A Big Puppy Sale FREE Shots. FREE Life Worming. Rescue Puppies. $35 up. 330-656-3524. 5/12/2010

There is more of the same in Akron-area ads, most of them coming up on Google but not properly cached.

Presumably, the $35 "bargain" puppies cost the guardian angels less than the $50 top price offered in the other ad. Or they are old and shopworn. The inclusion of "up" suggests that there may be no ceiling on the potential price for intact "Rescue Puppies."

I've long cautioned dog-shoppers to be as skeptical of rescues and shelters as they should be of breeders.

To make sure that the animals have had appropriate health care, that the facilities do not promote disease, that behavior and health assessments are performed appropriately and the results used to determine appropriate placements and also shared transparently with potential adopters, that dogs who need training to become adoptable receive it, that the rescue provides follow-up support as needed, including guaranteed take-back. To determine that the rescue is well-run, fiscally responsible, clear-headed as well as (reasonably) soft-hearted.

I had no idea how excessively high I was setting the bar, because I didn't know how low you could go.

I think we've got enough evidence to add, now -- Make sure the rescue is a rescue, and not a bottom-feeder among bottom-feeders, a cut-rate dog broker out to make a quick two bits on kyootness.

Extraordinary Claims Require

A great search dog is honored by the truth

It's annoying being a pretty rational, empirical person who is frequently regarded as a sort of witch doctor.

Depending on the particular religious leanings of the person in question, I'm either able to invoke cryptic Majikal Powers to Save the Day, or I'm a complete charlatan, on par with Jon Edwards and Miss Cleo.

Unfortunately, both believers and disbelievers are frequently in a position to make decisions that could save or kill someone.

It's hard to remember, after nineteen years of partnering with four different dogs' minds to exploit four different dogs' noses to accomplish feats that seem inexplicable to people who have not made a study of such things, that other people have no idea how this works.

So Perfesser Chaos and I -- and hundreds of our colleagues, in various ways -- make yet another part-time unpaid career out of studying, documenting, and explaining both the science of canine olfaction and the capabilities and limitations of real-world dog teams.

Part of that project is the collective work of establishing standards of competence. Because when you tell the chief of police that an operational dog team should be able to stay on task for x hours in y conditions, and cover that much ground to this probability of detection, it would be nice to know that the next "operational" dog team that shows up at his command post can do just that.

At this point, I cannot. A grim topic for another day. But those who don't meet basic standards of competence -- especially those who claim to have done so but have dodged any legitimate and objective quality controls -- are the #1 reason that responsible authorities (RA's) cast a jaundiced eye on those handlers who have actually done so. It's always nice to have been preceded by a slacker whose mouth wrote checks that his ass bounced.

Unfortunately, a related perennial duty of the thoughtful, legitimate, educated, careful, self-skeptical, rigorous search dog handler is to explain what a competent dog team cannot be expected to do.

Part of that is self-protection.

No Sheriff, given that our subject, an endurance speed-hiker with early-onset Alzheimers, has been missing for four days and we have a theoretical search area the size of Delaware, calling in one airscenting dog and handler, no trained search management, and no other field resources is highly unlikely to fix your problem at this point.

Part of it is an attempt to inoculate decision-makers against bullshit.

The bullshit follows a gradient.

I remember a search about fourteen years ago, one that dragged on for days and was stumping a good DCNR incident commander (IC) and the several trained searchers who stuck it out. We were having difficulty getting additional trained resources, especially canine teams, from the immediate area. The IC asked me whether it would be worth the expense to bring in an "expert" cadaver dog team from a four-hour drive away by helicopter. Because the handler and dog were, he'd been told, sooper speshul.

I had driven three and a half hours to respond to the search. No one had offered to pay for my gas. It had not occurred to me to demand an airlift. I knew who the handler was. I'd known her since her dog -- her first dog -- was a tiny pup. In the ensuing few years, she'd devoted plenty of energy to self-promotion in her own locale. I advised him that a celebrity dog team was unlikely to solve his problem, and that a sooper speshul "cadaver" dog was not the relevant resource for an ever-expanding wilderness search area. The IC ultimately decided that one small-area cadaver dog did not merit 800 gallons of helicopter fuel. (The missing man was found, very much alive, by a ground team on a Hail Mary task at the outer limits of the search area the next day.)

Now, the would-be jetsetting team was not by any means incompetent. As far as I know, there was nothing fishy about their unit's procedures for declaring them operational; the unit was generally regarded as legitimate and as employing the usual training and certification practices for the time. The handler wasn't claiming that the dog had supernatural powers -- just that its training was "better" than that of the dogs already deployed, so much better that the team merited star treatment. She was making that claim based on an unsupportable (and ultimately falsified) opinion about the nature of the search, and an unsupportable opinion about the nature of her dog and its training relative to everybody else.

Bullshit-meter reading, about a two* out of ten.

At around the same time, the canine SAR community was graced with the collegial presence of Sandra Marie Anderson, aka Sandy Anderson, international celebrity cadaver dog handler.

There were those of us who frequently cautioned about dogs and trainers who seemed too good to be true. And there was the zombie army of Anderson's students and partisans, who attacked all skeptics with accusations of "jealousy." We were engaging in "politics," see.

Anderson's claims about her Majick Dog became increasingly far-fetched. The dog, a Doberman mix named Eagle, never missed. He found tiny scraps of remains where other dogs had "failed." This was due both to his own inherent Majickalosity and Sandra Anderson's sooper speshul training methods.

She became the darling of the FBI. Always a bad sign in dog-handler land.

She jetted to other countries to deploy the Majick Dog in high-profile, politically-charged searches for murder victims.

Took quite a while for someone to definitively swing out the mirrors and reveal the flim-flam.

A Michigan woman once recognized as one of the nation's best trainers and handlers of cadaver-sniffing dogs was sentenced yesterday to 21 months in prison for planting bones and other fake evidence in cases she worked.

Yeah, when you are finding body parts that are later discovered to be still attached to the whole bodies, when none of the DNA of the bones you find matches that of the missing people -- but it matches stuff you got at your house, when the bloody saw blade at the putative murder scene has your blood on it -- well, it would have been nice if the authorities had bothered to run some DNA panels a little sooner. Most people frown upon framing someone for murder just to shore up your own delusions of grandeur.

She got a sweetheart deal in the plea agreement.

She's out of Federal prison now, I believe past the term of her supervised probation. After getting out of prison, she married a former SAR dog handler in southwest Virginia, Dan Crumrine**, and disappeared into the identity of Sandy Crumrine, or Sandra Crumrine, Cassondra, Cassondra Cummins, Ms's "C," or "Ms. Sande" -- or, if you know any other aliases, please add them in the comments. She's apparently directing a scheme to "train service dogs for disabled children" that both fundraises and charges families, and seems to be involved a "search and rescue unit" in SW Virginia and this organization, whose mission seems a little dissipated. As the local resident who uncovered most of the post-prison aliases and connections points out about the "credentials" on the various websites:

If you look at the groups listed they either do not have a web presence, are not really a group you join ( like AKC), or are websites that she appears to own.

(edit: I was able to verify by phone that a Sandra Crumrine is listed as an obedience judge by ASCA, though the person who answered the phone indicated that she had been inactive since 1995. ASCA was, however, not aware of Ms. Anderson-Crumrine's criminal history. Ms. Anderson-Crumrine did take the trouble to update her name on the ASCA rolls after her release from the penitentiary and marriage to Dan Crumrine; the small matter of the federal felony conviction must have slipped her mind at that time.)

It has not been my experience that serial perjurers, habitual frauds, and people whose own mothers tell a judge "she's a pathological liar" are in the habit of reforming themselves and treading the straight and narrow. Give me an alley-mugger for an ex-con with prospects any day. Considering the many aliases, gravitation towards vulnerable populations, and bogus credentialing, things sure aren't looking good.

Bullshit-meter reading, This one goes to Eleven.

So that kind of defines the ends of the spectrum of SAR handler capability-inflation.

When the Level Two Majick Dog Handler fails to produce up to his own hype -- wastes all that helicopter fuel for an ego trip -- he contributes to an incident commander's suspicion that dogs may not be all they are cracked up to be.

That IC may not have the background to distinguish between one handler's baseless claim that his dog has a better nose than all the other dogs, and a more conservative handler's caution that he be careful about deploying that uncertified handler who has no training logs. It all gets dismissed as "dog handler politics."

More important, to the uneducated IC, all claims about the useful olfactory powers of trained search dogs may seem equally implausible.

Can you spot the implausible, wild-assed claims among those below?

This dog has detected a person's scent on the wind (no ground trail), and found her at a distance of over 200 meters in good atmospheric conditions.

This dog spontaneously alerted on graves that were over 30 years old.

This dog can distinguish between the individual scents of a pair of identical twins.

This dog reliably distinguishes between animal remains and human remains.

This dog can indicate the location of human remains under 50' of water.

This dog will reliably signal the absence of the lost person's trail.

This dog works confidently and independently on unstable rubble right next to bulldozers and jackhammers, and only searches for and indicates people who are buried, not workers out on the pile.

This dog has accurately followed a 48-hour old trail.

Give up?

Although any of these claims may, indeed, be utter bullshit about any given untrained or poorly-trained dog, they are all standard findings or expectations for SAR dogs properly trained in various disciplines. Some are codified in standards -- the minimum performance expected for a dog to be operational in its discipline.

While it's important to be skeptical-until-shown-otherwise of all unknown handlers who claim to have met these standard expectations (that are the subject of broad agreement about essential competencies), it's even more important that IC's and other public servants -- not to mention politicians, journalists, and the families of missing people -- understand when they are encountering an actual wild-assed claim.

The claim that one has met ordinary, industry-standard, levels of competence should require that one present ordinary proofs. Back in the day, it was training logs and some token that one had been declared operational by a unit that had published standards. Nowadays, an external (presumed to be more objective) certification by a third-party organization, to standards that are NIMS-compliant is an increasingly common additional expectation, depending on the specialty.

What if the claim is extraordinary? The handler maintains that his dog can perform feats that are orders of magnitude superior to the industry standard?

The dog is never wrong.

The dog can follow scent trails that are months old.

The dog can track bullets.

The dog can track anthrax.

The dog responded to an average of more than one search a day for fourteen years, with 2.25 finds per week over her whole life.

The dog's ID is not just a reasonable means to establish probable cause, but is sufficient evidence to convict someone of a crime in the absence of any other evidence ...

These are the claims that bring reporters running, shock and awe the fatuous and desperate, and inexplicably seem to qualify the claimants as go-to guys in the eyes of the FBI and sometimes other "top level" law enforcement.

Just as Sandra Anderson's claims that Eagle was capable of things that no other dog could do made her into a celebrity -- and skeptics into pariahs -- these extraordinary claims are polarizing.

It's not because they threaten the egos of lesser handlers with mere mortal dogs.

It's because non-experts frequently can't or won't distinguish between them and the "industry standard" SAR dog abilities I listed above.

So when the "extraordinary" handler's deliberate fraud or unconscious delusion is unmasked, it's the legitimate SAR community that is left damaged. Those who perform due diligence in both their training and proofing and in their claims about their capabilities know that they will be fighting to recover from utterly unfounded guilt by association.

So what need we ask of anyone who makes extraordinary claims about his scent-detecting dog?

Presentation of extraordinary evidence.

Let's say we have a dog who we claim not only can, but HAS followed an individual human's 24-mile trail that is six months old, and was primarily left while the subject was being driven on a highway in a car, in an arid climate, in an area of moderately high vehicle and human traffic.

The dog has done this in part by being let out at off-ramps and indicating whether the car continued or exited.

Now, in case you were wondering, yes, this is an extraordinary claim.

Here is how I would test it.

An experienced, professional SAR unit that has no connection to the handler making the claim designs a double-blinded trail task.

When the trail is laid:

The trail-layer is a visitor to the area who will not return in the next six months -- a friend or relative of a team member. This is to ensure that the trail-layer will not inadvertently cross his trail in the course of normal activities and travel while it ages. The SAR team member acts as driver and selects the route. Both driver and trail-layer sign agreements that they will disclose nothing about the trail's location to any person until the trail is run.

The test administrator collects three scent articles from the trail layer on the day of the trail, and preserves them in whatever manner has been requested by the handler.

A test administrator designates a starting point. This point is selected so that there is easy, close access to more than one limited-access roadway. Three nearby highways with regular on-and-off ramps offers six possible initial directions of travel on limited-access roads. There may be other roads, not limited access, leading away from the designated start point. The driver can choose any road he wishes.

The driver and trail-layer are provided with the following instructions:

The trail layer may get into the car at the start point or walk some distance -- either on or off the road -- and be picked up to continue. Or he may lay the entire trail on foot. He is not to mark the trail in any way.

Please determine how many options there are for initial direction of travel, and use a random process (dice throw or random number generator) to choose one of them. After that, you may choose a route that suits you.

Do not double back or cross your route. Do not drive or walk parallel to a previous leg of your route any closer than 300 meters. Do not make turns that bring you closer than 300 meters to any part of your previous route. Be sure you don't double back, come within 300 meters, or cross it as you leave the area after laying the trail, either, even if it means taking a long detour.

The trail should be between ____ and ____ miles long. (The test administrator will generate these numbers with a random process. The handler will not be told the ranges, and only the trail-layer and the driver will know the actual length.)

The trail-layer will carry a top-of-the-line consumer model GPS (e.g. Garmin 60csx, Garmin Oregon, Magellan Triton) and record the track from the start point to the end point. While the trail-layer is in the vehicle and at all times, he will ensure that the GPS is positioned for optimum reception and has adequate satellite acquisition for accuracy within 20 meters.

At the end point, the trail layer will save the track and will start a new track, the purpose of which is to document that the driver and trail-layer did not cross or impinge on the trail-layer's track as they left the area.

The driver will leave an appropriate marker at the end point, something that is not likely to be removed or disturbed over six months of weathering. This may be spray paint on the roadway berm, or whatever is most likely to be durable at the end point. The marker will be symbolic/coded only, and the mark used will be known only to the test administrator, the driver, and the trail-layer. The driver will then leave the trail-layer at the end point and place four similar coded markers at similar points no less than 500 meters from the end-point or any part of the trail, and no less than 500 meters from each other, preferably further. The real and false end-markers will be waypointed on the GPS.

The trail-layer gives a scent article to the driver at the completion of the trail, and the driver preserves it in whatever manner is specified by the handler.

Upon returning home, the driver downloads the GPS tracks, labels them, and preserves them as electronic files on a thumb drive and imports them into the appropriate mapping software, where they are both preserved electronically and printed out onto maps of appropriate scale. The driver seals the maps and the thumb drive in an envelope, signs across the seal, and maintains it in a secure location along with the trail-layer's scent article.

The trail-layer retains a map that indicates the area of the trail, so that if he must travel in the vicinity, he can avoid crossing his own trail inadvertently.

Six months pass.

On the day before the team attempts to run the trail:
The driver returns to the end point directly without reiterating the trail and conceals the trail-layer's scent article within 10 meters of the end-point markings. The article is concealed from view, but marked in such a way that it can be definitively identified as the trail-layer's once revealed. The driver then returns to the "dummy" end markers and conceals an identical article that has never been in the same building or vehicle with the trail-layer at each of those locations.

The driver transfers the sealed envelope containing the records of the trail to the test administrator.

On the day the team attempts to run the trail:

The trail-layer submits a signed affidavit attesting that he or she has not been in the area of the trail since laying it.

The trail-layer and the driver submit signed affidavits attesting that neither has disclosed any information about the route of the trail to any person.

The test administrator, the handler and dog, and at least three observers convene at the designated starting point. The handler may designate up to two observers, the unit providing the testing may designate at least two observers, one of whom will serve as videographer and one of whom will ensure that the GPS is operating in good order for the duration. The observers do not need to be members of the testing team, but should be qualified SAR personnel.

A vehicle sufficient to accommodate handler, dog, and observers will be provided by whomever has such at hand. One observer will be designated the driver. The driver will stay with the vehicle, while all other observers will remain with the team.

The test administrator will bring the preserved scent articles, the same or substantially similar model GPS used by the trail-layer with adequate batteries and media for 12 hours of use, maps of the search area, the sealed envelope containing the electronic and printed definitive record of the trail, a computer and peripherals adequate to immediately download both the old and new tracks and overlay them on the appropriate mapping software, appropriate radios for communications, and a digital video camera or cameras with adequate batteries and recording media for 12 hours of use.

The start time will be early morning. The team will have 12 hours to complete the trail. The handler may take breaks as needed. Each person is responsible for his or her own food and water and personal needs for the duration. The handler will be briefed, and cautioned that accepting or soliciting help in determining the direction of the trail from any outside party or test observer will invalidate the test. The observers will be briefed and cautioned that any interference with the handler, to aid or hinder, will result in their expulsion as observers and may invalidate the test. All participants will be instructed to mute their cell phones and place or receive no calls or text messages, with the exception of emergency communications with the test administrator.

The test administrator will provide the handler with the preserved scent articles and the maps of the area when the handler states that she is ready. The clock starts at that point.

The videographer will begin recording, keeping the camera at all times on the team, and as much as possible keeping both dog and handler in-frame. He will continue recording for the duration of the test, including breaks, and will not stop or pause except to change batteries or media. He will endeavor to remain close enough to record all audio of conversation between persons or between handler and dog during the test.

The GPS-keeper will attach the GPS to the handler in a manner designed for optimum satellite acquisition, begin track-log recording, and will be responsible for monitoring it for accuracy and battery/media needs throughout the test. The GPS will never be turned off except to change batteries/media.

The handler may use her own GPS for navigation purposes, but agrees that the definitive record of the trail will be the one recorded on the test-GPS.

The test administrator will remain at the start point or a location nearby for the duration of the test.

Communications will be limited to hourly status reports and emergencies or technical glitches. Status reports will be simple check-ins, and will not include the team's location or current activities. The test ends when the handler identifies the end-point based on finding the scent article or the handler decides to stop.

After 12 hours have passed, if the team has not either arrived at and identified the end-point or given up, the test administrator will instruct the team and all observers to return to base.

The GPS-keeper will save the current track and start a new one for the return to base.

The administrator will then open the envelope with the printed maps and the electronic records of the trail before the handler and all observers, and while being videotaped. The administrator will then download the GPS tracks of the team's movements that day and overlay them on the map of the original trail.

All participants will receive a copy of the map with both sets of tracks, and electronic copies of all the records, including the full video record.

All participants agree that the map with both sets of tracks, and individual accounts of the test by the trail-layer, driver, observers, handler, and test administrator may be published.

What constitutes success?

Before initiating the process, all parties must agree that --

The team must correctly identify the initial direction of travel at the start point.

If the team follows the trail accurately and maintains overall progress of 1 mph (total time, not moving time), then it need not reach the end point (assuming a trail longer than 12 miles). "Accurate" shall be defined as following the actual roadway on which the trail-layer was driven, and following within 100 meters of any off-road path taken by the trail-layer.

If the handler chooses to use the vehicle to "jump track" between exits or intersections, then the team must not miss a turn or exit, nor follow a false trail more than 300 meters at a turn or or exit ramp.

Trailing the driver in places where his trail and the trail-layer's diverge does not meet the criteria for success.

Finding the end-point by any means other than following the path of the trail-layer does not meet the criteria for success.

Identifying any of the dummy markers and articles as correct does not meet the criteria for success.

Continuing to trail past the real marker -- as long as the team follows the driver and trail-layer's route -- does meet the criteria for success, i.e., the dog does not have to indicate the concealed article.

So -- sound reasonable?

I'm sure my SAR colleagues and other good minds can find ways to improve the protocol, make it tighter and fairer and more objective, and find places where I forgot to specify something that does not "go without saying" when we are being so formal.

If you were claiming that your dog could for real follow the trail of an abduction victim for 24 miles, mostly on highways, without any hints from people already working the case, is there anything in this protocol that you would find inapplicable or unfair? Anything you would want added or removed?

If someone making this extraordinary claim would not undergo this kind of test when it was offered, claiming that it is about "SAR politics," how would that reflect on the credibility of the claim for you?


______________________

* Why two? Because just about every handler with enough ego to tackle the job at all is operating at one.

** Authorities had found Anderson holed up at Crumrine's house in Virginia when she skipped out on her sentencing hearing in Michigan.

Spring Cleaning

No not that spring.

I'm sprucing up the blogroll this week. I've added some new (really new and new to me) blogs to the list, and will be adding more and reorganizing as I go. I'm cleaning out the inactive blogs, fixing links for those that have changed addresses, and culling a few that have veered off into areas that I find less interesting or less relevant to most of my readers' interests.

And, if you shitcan my comments when I disagree with you, then call me an idiot in public and shitcan my response to that, I remove you from my blogroll, no matter how interesting other things you may have to say might be. I don't think that's unfair, since my comments are thus far unmoderated, and I only remove commercial spam.

Check out the new-to-you links; there are some interesting points of view out there.

For those of you who are upset

That the Supreme Court of the United States struck down a federal law that criminalized the creation, sale or possession of "depictions of animal cruelty," please attend:

[T]he First Amendment protects against the Government; it does not leave us at the mercy of noblesse oblige. We would not uphold an unconstitutional statute merely because the Government promised to use it responsibly. (US v Stevens)

You can read the entire decision by going to this page and clicking for the PDF of United States v. Stevens.

I haven't been able to count out how many posts on this blog made me a felon* because they depicted conduct that is illegal somewhere.

Here's what the law actually said:

[T]he term ‘depiction of animal cruelty’ means any visual or auditory depiction, including any photograph, motion-picture film, video recording, electronic image, or sound recording of conduct in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed, if such conduct is illegal under Federal law or the law of the State in which the creation, sale, or possession takes place, regardless of whether the maiming, mutilation, torture, wounding, or killing took place in the State

This one is a slam-dunk for the First Amendment, and no, I seriously do not know what Alito was smoking. Though the decision did come down on 420 Day.

And the dude who won his appeal? Sold videos depicting dog fights. Possibly Not Our Sort of Person. Dunno. Haven't seen the videos, don't know anything more about him. Mr. Stevens got sentenced to three years for making videos from other people's footage. Three YEARS.

How much time did Block Courage Award winner Michael Vick serve for personally drowning and beating to death his losing dogs?

Oh yeah. Not one day.**
___________________

* Subject to the whimsy of any Federal prosecutor with a bug up his ass about something.

** Stop emailing me. Vick served time for racketeering. When he pled, the state dropped the cruelty charges. He didn't serve a millisecond for the dog abuse.

I Believe You Are Thinking of Someone Else

The sessions at the Blogpaws conference this weekend were a little short on concrete advice. Possibly I chose poorly when deciding which ones to attend.

But one speaker was absolutely black and white about this advice:

Post something every single day.

Never go over 400 words.

I think they are thinking of something else when they use the word "blog."

If you post something every single day, when the hell are you living your life and gathering what is so smugly referred to as "content?" Editing? Thinking?

I ran the numbers on some of my more widely-read recent posts. Word counts were:

3,871 (The Emperor's Striptease)
1,165 (Missing the Lesson While Learning It)
1,175 (Double-Suspension of Disbelief)
1,591 (Seized and Saved)
1,646 (Still Life)

Some of my posts are dryly factual -- "how to" posts that get a steady stream of referral hits from message boards and teh googles.

How to Use a Martingale Collar is 2,630 words.
Paper-Plate Recall: The Basics is 2,478 words

I think I'll leave the 400-word limit to those who are interested in selling fair-trade ferret toys, or whose business cards proclaim him "typist" to a blogging cat.

I'm a writer. You there, by definition, you are a reader. I assume that you have a mind for which it is worthwhile to write. I'll keep doing so. We can both keep thinking. Maybe you think I'm full of shit. You may be right. How would you find that out if I posted a daily LOLCat and 200 words on the latest faux-journalism story about How Pets Enrich Our Lives?

The third thing the same speaker advised was to always use a photo.

Woofers and Tweeters

Stick a fork in him, he's done

#1 Question people have asked me today at the BlogPaws Conference:

What is your url? Nope.

What do you blog about? Nope.

Who the hell do you think you are, anyway? For once, nope.

Can I Tweet this picture of your dog? Yep, that would be the one.

I decided to bring young Cole in his first prime-time appearance.

Other than some audible air leakage and excessive schmoozing during what were apparently very boring break-out sessions, he has been a Very Good Boy. Part of being a working dog is handling crowds and long days.

He's spent the day whoring for all the humans, and very appropriately meeting the other dogs and the nekkid cats in strollers. (No, I didn't get a picture. Everyone else did, though.)

I did not leave him at the very nice free dog-check at any point; we're very pleased with his lovely canine social skills, and will not be setting him up for any preventable relapses to the Old Way.

Anyway, I don't do da twitters and dunno how it works. Can someone translate it into middle-aged dog trainer for me?

If you prick him, does he not bleed?

Our own Perfesser Chaos has a new gig as a commentator for The Allegheny Front, a great local environmental show on the Best Radio Station Ever.

Here's his first installment.

I told him he should have mentioned to the web people Rosie's registered name: Brandywine Briar Rose.

It's true that he seems to have Special Powers over the thorned flora.

I'm racing the spring trying to get rusty old fence out of a particularly troublesome run through the woods; I'm tired of stapling up dogs. If I don't get it out before the shrubs leaf out, we're hosed.

He hasn't been out to work on this little project. "Oh, I gotta record my commentary. No chores today."

Wonder how those Special Powers would hold up against 80-year-old barbed wire?

Oh, does that matter?

From the Toronto City News:

It's usually the perfect combination - a loving youngster and a gentle dog.

But something went horribly wrong at an Oshawa home Tuesday and now a three-year-old girl is facing the possibility of having plastic surgery.

Police say the youngster was being cared for by neighbours at 506 Lanlark Drive just after 1pm, and was petting a normally friendly pit bull.

Cops aren't sure what provoked the animal, but it suddenly turned on the child, mauling the tot from her eye to her cheek.

The toddler was rushed to Lakeridge Health Centre, where plastic surgeons began examining the damage. It's believed her eyesight will be O.K. but she may require surgical repairs to her cheek.

The same people looking after the child were also looking after the dog for the day.

"They were petting the dog," relates Richard Ovila, the babysitter's husband. "I don't know if they were patting together or what, when all of a sudden the dog turned around and took her on the left cheek."

The dog has been seized by animal control and those who know the creature are baffled. Pit bulls are generally among the most gentle of dogs and are usually excellent with children.

"It was a very serious dog bite," confirms Dave Selby of Durham Regional Police.

The youngster was surprised by what happened and reportedly continually asked the doctors who were treating her why the dog bit her. But like police, they didn't have those answers, either.

"It's just a very unfortunate incident and obviously our thoughts and prayers are with that young girl right now to make sure she can get through this situation and hopefully not have too many damages as she grows older," Selby concludes.

It's not clear what will become of the canine, but the owner is the neighbour's son and he has no idea about what's happened to his beloved pet. He's currently away on vacation down south for March Break.

Authorities hope this tragic event will provide a lesson for others.

"The best thing to do is keep your children away from unknown dogs or strange dogs that you don't know their personality or behaviour," suggests Tre Smith of the Toronto Humane Society.

The little girl has been taken to the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto for further assessment. She'll be staying there until at least Wednesday.

Something is off, you say?

Why, how could the gentle pet who "turned on" the toddler be a pit bull, when Ontario has criminalized them?

Where are the cries for the dog's death, the smug Itoldyasos, the obligatory accounts of locking jaws?

Why isn't anyone being investigated for dogfighting? Cited for harboring a vicious and dangerous animal?

Oh, sorry. My bad.

My computer must have a virus that searches text and autoreplaces. "Pit bull" for "golden retriever."

Feel better now? No?

This toddler will grow up with a scar on her cheek, and maybe her psyche, but secure in the knowledge that the Ontario government has wisely protected her from all possible harm.

Dispatches from the Before Time

I recently jumped at an opportunity to acquire a well-worn, slightly water damaged, mildly smelly time capsule that has, however, miraculously retained all of its plates for 163 years.

The Dog, by William Youatt.

Mine is the 1847 American edition, edited and with additions by E.J. Lewis, M.D.

You don't have to save your pennies for an antiquarian keepsake to read it; it's available as a modern reprint, and online for free.

Mr. Youatt was a British veterinarian of wide renown who published on many species, but had a particular interest in, and love for, dogs.

He wrote this opus more than a decade before the first British dog show.

The overview of British dog breeds includes no reference to any "standards" or litany of "important" show winners and sires of show winners.

Yet there they were -- sheepdogs, cur dogs, lapdogs, esquimaux dogs, Newfoundlands and beagles, poodles and The Alpine Spaniel or Bernardine Dog.

Somehow human beings managed to develop and maintain distinct breeds without the authoritative oversight of a kennel club. No overlord to petition for, grant, or withhold permission!

Now one of the things that is explained to me from time to time is that all objections anyone has to anything on animal welfare grounds are a plot hatched last Tuesday by PeTA.

So I periodically learn, for example, that Ingrid Newkirk invented both the word puppymill and its imaginary business model some time in the 1990's. Nevermind that I can remember first encountering the term and the reality in a dog fancier magazine some years before I first encountered pubes.

One of the most adamant recurring lessons goes like this:

If I can't cut off my dog's ears and tail to suit my whimsy, then I don't really own him. They'll be coming to take him away any minute.

It is mandated in the Breed Standard because that is what is correct for the breed.

Having its roots in the Historic Vital Function Of The Breed and in The Inerrant Authority Of The Dead Breed Founders.

Only a whiny little dog-ignorant sentimental Bambi-loving vegan twinkie raises an objection to this practice, which is not cruel or painful at all.

Real Dogmen know that The Standard represents not only Knowledge Moste Anciente and Wyse, but the unanimous consensus of all the Founding Breedfathers and the Leading Men of The Day.

Men like Youatt, natch:

Cropping of the Ears. -- I had some doubt, whether I ought not to omit the mention of this cruel practice. Mr. Blaine very properly says, that "it is one that does not honour the inventor, for nature gives nothing in vain ... That must, therefore, be a false taste, that has taught us to prefer a curtailed organ to a perfect one, without gaining any convenience by the operation." He adds, and it is my only excuse for saying one word about the matter, that "custom being now fixed, directions are proper for its performance."

The owner of the dog commences with maiming him while a puppy. He finds fault with the ears that nature has given him, and they are rounded or cut into various shapes, according to his whim or caprice. It is a cruel operation. A great deal of pain is inflicted by it, and it is often a long time before the edge of the wound will heal: a fortnight or three weeks at least will elapse ere the animal is free from pain.

...

Mr. Blaine very naturally observes that, "it is not a little surprising that this cruel custom is so frequently, or almost invariably, practiced on pug dogs, whose ears, if left alone to nature, are particularly handsome and hang very gracefully. It is hardly to be conceived how the pug's head -- which is not naturally beautiful except in the eyes of a perverted taste -- is improved by suffering his ears to remain."

Ever see an ear-cropped pug?

Me neither. Add that to the list of things for which I am deeply thankful.

Guess that particular arm of custom was not entirely fixed. I don't know whether pinna amputation never made it into the sacred texts, or was later removed.

Lucky pugs. Left without a functioning respiratory system by mandate of their "standard" and those who serve it, they have at least been permitted to retain their ears.

Dobermans, schnauzers, pit bulldogs, boxers, Boston terriers, Danes, miniature pinschers -- not so lucky.

A practice that would likely have faded away on its own accord in all but a few cases (fighting pit bulldogs, some LGDs) was codified, regularized, and made either mandatory or effectively so because kennel clubs and the dog fanciers' breed clubs were looking out for the "purity" and cosmetic uniformity of the gene pools they captured from the original landraces.

163 years after Youatt, is it too much to ask that fanciers of show dogs who do no work acknowledge the butt obvious truth that the leading dog vets of the mid-19th century could spot and name gratuitous cruelty grounded in idle vanity very well, thank you?

Or does Peter Singer have a secret time machine?

I Didn't Read the News for a Couple of Days, And This is What I Find When I Do

Andrew Joseph Stack was not a "tax protester."

He was not a freedom fighter. (How many of the gormless Teabaggers who have proclaimed him so were screaming that the pathetic Taint Bomber should have never been read his rights?)

He was not a common criminal, garden-variety murderer-of-a-stranger-who-did-him-no-harm.

He was not "just a nutjob."

This dead white lying thieving tax-dodging murdering arsonist mofo was a terrorist.

Why is this even a question?

Angry bastard flies an airplane into a government office, killing individual human beings because he wants to force political change through fear -- that's a terrorist, folks. That's the feckin' definition of terrorist. And all the dumbasses who call him a hero need a one-way trip to Gitmo for fomenting insurrection against the legitimate government.

I do not give a shit that he was a WASP terrorist.

Pour sand in his jockey shorts and give him a spray-on tan, and how many "journalists" would be fretting over what to call him?

Whoa Shep, That's Not For You

Janeen over at Smartdogs and Patrick at Terrierman have covered most of the bases on the HSUS scam that is "Humane Choice" pseudo-vegan dog food. (Not tested on animals.)

There's ways to gradually kill a dog through malnutrition that are a lot cheaper

Trust me, dogs love chicken feed. Nom nom nom. And feeding it to a housepet will allow you to experience the hygenic pleasures of poultry standards of sphincter control right in your own home.*

Plus it gives the dog a sporting chance. His "food" bowl could possibly attract a chicken, which he could then kill and eat.

I have been particularly impressed by the marketing for this granola.

Because a picture of a sneering shiny lobbyist in an a bespoke suit, $200 hair, and Very Expensive Dentistry always says great animal nutrition to me. And absolutely nothing about egomaniacal self-promotion in the absence of any self-awareness or internal editing capacity. Why not put Wayne right on the label? It would support my blink impression of the bag, in which I read the product name as "Human Choice."

Human Choice is made out of people!

Which have plenty of bio-available protein. I'm told. And if they are North American people, lots of fat for energy and flavah. Probably not so much if they are Uruguayan people. Nevertheless, long pig is long pig. Why rot it underground?

But no, they took the conventional route, the cheap choice, the trope that will play in Peoria, and put a picture of a cute mongrel puppy on the bag.

Which would be fine, except they come right out and admit that you must not feed this silage to puppies.

Yup, it is formulated for "adult maintenance." Same as the kibbled cornmeal 'n' slaughterhouse sweepings that you can buy in the dollar store (for about 1/20th the price per pound). In theory, it meets the threshold for keeping a dog alive as long as it isn't growing, lactating, working, sick, or stressed out in any way. They didn't even bother with an AAFCO feeding trial.** On paper, the forage-in-a-bag will keep 75% of adult dogs alive for six months.

But not a puppy.

Which is the very thing they put a picture of on the bag.

Kind of like this bag:






_________________________

* I suspect that, given the instructions for converting your dog from a food eater into an Uruguayan vegan over 4-6 weeks, this "food" might offer that very same benefit.

** Eight dogs. Six months. You can kill two of them and still get a pass. I am not making this up.

Phil Klass 1920-2010

A beloved fixture of the Pittsburgh writing (and reading) community has left us.

I met Phil Klass not long after we moved here, holding court as always at one of the local science fiction events. It wasn't until a bit later that I learned that he had published mostly under the name William Tenn.

I could sit in that circle and listen to Phil's stories forever. His health gave him some difficulty in speaking, and the anecdotes and jokes came slowly and in spurts, plenty of time to savor. I stayed as long as he would keep going, generally until Fruma came to collect him.

Beneath the razor wit and appreciation of the absurd that overlay his stories, there was a passion that eventually revealed itself. The Russian-British-American* Jewish socialist citizen-soldier who had been little more than a boy when he marched the German townspeople through the gates of the concentration camp and forced them to look at what they had pretended was not there -- the young man who saw -- was fueled by a boundless drive for justice.

Every funny anecdote about John Campbell's eccentricities, or how it used to be possible to pay the rent (New York City rent!) selling short stories to the pulps because per-word rates in 1946 were same as they were in 2006 (not in real dollars -- ten cents a word vs. ten cents a word -- in other words, more than a tenfold decrease in real pay), was really a story about justice or injustice, great or small.

It's something not often noticed about satirists, even the gentlest -- the wit and drive to skewer or needle or drop itching powder into the underwear of the comfortable and the powerful and the smug -- is always all about justice.

How could anyone pass up an opportunity to listen?

I had one story for him.

About a kid about eleven years old who had already cleaned out the children's room of public library and was randomly burning through adult fiction when a particularly salacious science fiction cover grabbed my attention.



Now, this was back in the mid-70's, when the Moral Majority had not yet turned public librarians into paranoid gatekeepers of our plastic little minds. As long as I was up-to-date on my overdue fines, I could check out whatever I could carry off. So I brought home a paperback full of sex and nekkid people living as rats in the walls of monster houses and women having litters. I was savvy enough to keep it out from under my parents' noses. I checked it out over and over. I knew it was trash, yet somehow it was also great.

I was eleven. I had no idea it was satire. I just knew I wanted more.

Still do, Phil. Still do.

-------------------------------------------------

* Phil Klass was the Allied forces. He was Hitler's worst nightmare personified. I never saw that before now.

FUNERAL UPDATE: Phil's funeral, scheduled for Wednesday morning, has been postponed due to the snow storm. A memorial service is planned for spring.

Irregularly Scheduled Programming

Perfesser Chaos has hooked me with repeated contact buzzes on this highly-addictive British ... well, let's call it a "car" program.

Actually, what it is is bunch of entertaining man-boy idiots who are having way too good a time playing with toys that go vroom.

I particularly enjoyed their take this week on the question "Did communism ever produce a decent car?"



Check out the four-way race that is introduced at about the 4:05 mark.

If the show was filmed in the US (which it never could be, because American man-boy idiots do not know how to be entertaining -- they always just go for the dick joke) I'd say the second-place finisher was an English shepherd.

My guess is he's one of the dogs they call "working collies" in the UK, perhaps considered a border collie, perhaps not.