Jump to content
BC Boards


Registered Users
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kitch

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 04/01/1975

Profile Information

  • Location
    New York
  1. Last day to vote!! Please get as many people to vote as possible! www.tinyurl.com/gonebcr
  2. Everyone still voting every day? Only a week left. 6930 votes and still holding second place.... http://www.tinyurl.com/gonebcr And if you are wondering where the money that NEBCR wins goes, check out their newsletter. There is a breakdown of costs on page 5. http://www.nebcr.org/Newsletter/NEBCR_News...r_Fall_2010.pdf Plus, with all the news of Swafford lately, there is a nice "now and then" section of the seven swafford dogs that NEBCR took in last year. All are loved and happy now.
  3. 5147 votes and still holding on to second place. Only a few weeks left so please keep voting!
  4. Petfinder is such a pain with this contest - they've had more issues with it than any other contest. Argh - very frustrating! Currently we have 3583 votes and are in second place. We are soooooo close to first place but we can't seem to close the gap.... quick link for voting: http://www.tinyurl.com/gonebcr
  5. Yeah, Petfinder has been horrible with this contest - not letting people log in, saying valid accounts don't exist. With as tight as the competition has been, it makes it especially frustrating. Keep trying! http://www.tinyurl.com/gonebcr
  6. NEBCR dropped to dropped to 3rd place overnight. Competition is tight between the finalists....
  7. 1729 votes and currently holding onto first place.
  8. NEBCR is in first place as of this morning. Let's help them hold on to it!
  9. Woohoo! For a little while nebcr was in first place today! It is neck and neck - Every single vote counts!! thanks - that is one of my favorite pictures of Dublin.
  10. Yeah, it is a bit of a pain to get registered initially. Please keep trying - sometimes the stars align and they accept you. After that, you shouldn't have any problems. (fingers crossed)
  11. NEBCR is still in second place with 890 votes. Hopefully we can close the gap and move NEBCR into first place! $10,000 is a lot of money!
  12. NEBCR will be updating their blog regularly with the "Lucky 7's" progress....
  13. Sending a polite email after a week wouldn't bother me. Sometimes we can turn an application around in a few days, sometimes it takes a week or more, depending on how busy our lives are. We have a committee look at the apps so it is a little more than just taking the time to read through it. What bothers us is when we've only had the app for a few days and we get a snotty email saying that obviously we aren't interested in adopting out our dogs if we can't be bothered to get back to them.
  14. Yet, she often does that. I recently attended a 2 day seminar given by her. I was very disappointed. I thought her training demo was pretty good and I learned some new techniques that I have tried. I didn't agree with all of them, but I did find some I could incorporate. But once she left the field of pure, hands-on training of the basics and the mechanics of it, it went down hill. She doesn't have a good grasp of behavior, IMO. She showed a training video where she works with a dog (Dog A) that was dog-reactive to unknown dogs. The two people walk dog A and dog B toward each other, which the eventual goal of being able to walk by each other. (I wouldn't personally set it up this way, but nevertheless, this is the scenario). If Dog A doesn't react, he gets a high value treat. If Dog A does react, he gets put away in a crate for a while, and watches while Dog B gets the treats he would have gotten had he not reacted. Her explanation was that Dog A really wants the treats, even more so when he sees that his actions caused Dog B to get them instead. That this works because eventually the dogs can walk past each other. I found this reasoning a bit flawed and pointed out that the scenario may be working simply because in the hour or so that it took to get to the point of being able to walk past the other dog, Dog B became a familiar site and not as likely to cause a reaction in Dog A. Also, that the assumption of the jealousy of Dog A and his understanding of the cause and effect relationship to his actions seemed to be ascribing to the Theory of Mind scenario that she had eschewed the previous day. She responded that she was a scientist and was trained to look at things from a scientific perspective. (I got the feeling that I was being patted on the head and told this was over my head.) I responded that I was a trained scientist myself and would be interested in hearing what she was basing her conclusions on. That caught her off-balance a bit, but she just changed the topic and never did answer my question (nor call on me again). I certainly wouldn't spend the money to see her again. While she can be an engaging speaker, more times than not I found her insulting and abrasive. She would often respond to questions from the audience in an insulting manner; either calling the question, the audience member or people of that mindset "stupid". And she isn't confident enough in her own skills or ideas, to accept the possibility that people might disagree with her - hardly behaving in a professional manner, IMO. She would go on about people not being smart enough to ask the right questions, that they will always assume an intent to dogs behavior instead of describing the physical actions of the dog (which is a valid point, yet she does it herself) but then she would assume an implied intent to a question that an audience member asked. Usually, she would not be correct in her assumption (at least based on my understanding of what the person was asking) and would then go off and expound on what should have been asked, etc. The few times she got herself into a bind, she would fall back on "well, I'm a scientist so I have been trained to look at things differently" which quite frankly, made me cringe. This woman showed no evidence that she understood even the basics of the scientific method or the importance of questions or healthy skepticism in the pursuit of science. I agree, that is who she means when she says that. Unfortunately, she is very clear - or at least she was in the seminar I attended when I asked for clarification - that she believes all stock people use harsh adversives in training. She said they "might not do it in front of you, but they use them". Wow. Talk about making assumptions. The difference between her and Patricia McConnell is staggering. From what I've seen of McConnell, she is a true professional and conducts herself well. She cites other people's work, she takes pains to say whether she is giving an explanation of a theory, or giving her own opinion. Whereas, Donaldson seemed to think we should consider her opinion with the same weight as tested theories.
  15. Location: Albany, NY area Distance willing to travel: ~3 hours in any direction, though may be able to do longer if needed. This can include parts of Massachusetts, Vermont and Connecticut. Type of vehicle: PT Cruiser Hold Overnight? Yes, if needed - but only for a day or so. Extra crates: No Times available: Generally on the weekends Able to pull from shelter? Possibly. Random other info: Volunteer for NEBCR Kerry [transferred to database]
  • Create New...