What Do Animals Think?

[rynner2]

This is something I've pondered for quite a while, and this New Scientist article
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1 ... 125703.200
approaches the problem obliquely. (I'll post it in three parts.)

Animal welfare: See things from their perspective
23 September 2006
NewScientist.com news service
Andy Coghlan

Your dog falls ill, so you take him to the vet. After a quick consultation you take him home, and soon he appears to be better. But he is not. You and the vet have failed to realise that he is still in severe pain, and the drugs the vet has prescribed will turn him into a social outcast, a dog that may be shunned or even attacked by others.

Such mistakes can happen, say animal behaviour specialists, because our understanding of animal welfare is inadequate, and at times misguided. The human tendency to anthropomorphise means we miss out on animals' real feelings and needs, with the result that we often provide them with inappropriate housing and medical care. This is leading to the health and well being of millions of animals kept as pets, livestock or in zoos being adversely affected.

Last week, researchers gathered at a conference held at the Royal Society in London to hear the latest evidence on how animals interpret the world. One thing is clear: they do not see it the same way we do, and only by accepting that can we learn to care for them better. "The matter of central interest is the animals' own perspective on its quality of life," says James Kirkwood of the Universities Federation for animal Welfare, which co-sponsored the conference with the British Veterinary Association.

The conference comes as pressure for a similar change in attitude builds in the US, where the Institute for Laboratory Animal Research is carrying out the country's first in-depth investigation into stress and distress in laboratory animals. "There's no question, even among researchers, that quality-of-life issues are becoming of more concern," says Bernard Rollin, a philosopher at Colorado State University in Fort Collins and veteran campaigner for improved animal welfare legislation.

Different animals exhibit different behaviours and levels of intelligence, so a set of carefully designed tests is being put together to assess animals' health and welfare. The aim is to allow owners and vets to make objective decisions on how to care for them, free of subjective human assumptions. Many tests, such as those devised in the UK by Lesley Wiseman-Orr, Jacky Reid and colleagues at the University of Glasgow's Institute of Comparative Medicine, rely on a form of psychometric assessment that asks a series of specific questions about an animal's behaviour.

“A set of tests is being put together to assess animals' health and welfare and decide how best to care for them”Wiseman-Orr and Reid have designed a simple one-page questionnaire that can be used to evaluate whether a dog is in pain, an approach they say can be used to objectively evaluate the welfare of any animal in any setting. Their latest test monitors the health and welfare of dogs suffering arthritis. A series of 109 questions covering 13 facets of a dog's appearance, behaviour and habits allow a vet to track the progression of the disease and which treatments are working. The idea is to replace subjective assessments with an objective, repeatable system of logging symptoms.

David Morton of the University of Birmingham, UK, is developing a system to help vets and owners decide whether an animal is suffering so much that it ought to be put down. Its ratings weigh signs of physical distress against positive signs, such as a dog wagging its tail, to give a dispassionate measure of how an animal is faring.

Françoise Wemelsfelder of the Scottish Agricultural College in Edinburgh is looking at a different aspect of welfare: developing a way to assess the suitability of the environment in which animals are kept. She asks observers to watch recordings of groups of animals and then choose adjectives that best describe their physical condition, demeanour and behaviour in a particular environments. These "emotional profile descriptors" are placed on a grid according to how positive or negative the words are. Completed grids show clusters of words which reflect the body language of an animal in that environment.

Over 60 studies on pigs, cattle, sheep and poultry show that "without exception, we've found high levels of agreement between observers, regardless of whether they're vets, farmers or activists," says Wemelsfelder. "Shown videos, they agree what the body language of the animal means."

In the first practical pilot study of the technique, Wemelsfelder asked 11 vets of the UK State Veterinary Service to apply the technique to commercial pig farms. The completed grids show the animals were far less happy crowded into small, indoor penned enclosures. "Before this study, inspectors would simply have rated pigs as 'healthy' or 'unhealthy'," says Wemelsfelder. The new technique reveals much more about how animals react to their circumstances, which will help with the design of better enclosures and encourage animals to be housed in appropriately enriched environments.

It could also help vets find more appropriate ways to treat animals and relieve suffering. For instance, some medical therapies can interfere with how an animal interacts with others, says John Bradshaw of the University of Bristol, UK. Treat a dog with antibiotics, and you risk killing the bacteria that live in its anal sac and produce the individual scent by which it is recognisable to other dogs. "We don't think of dogs losing their identities as a result of medical treatment," he says. Our failure to see life from a dog's perspective means that vets will too freely prescribe antibiotics without considering the consequences for the animal.

“Treat a dog with antibiotics and you risk killing the bacteria that produce the scent by which it is recognisable to other dogs”Sarah Wolfensohn, head of veterinary services at the University of Oxford, is interested in addressing the issue of how animals cumulatively suffer over time, a facet of injury or illness that is often ignored by human carers. She assesses five parameters, such as the clinical status of the animal, and the extent to which the injury hampers its behaviour, and from this calculates an overall score of suffering, which can be repeatedly checked over weeks or months, she told the conference.

Wolfensohn's research, submitted to the journal Animal Welfare, could even be used to help settle some debates over animal rights. In her paper, she describes how her methodology could be used to compare the relative suffering endured by say, a dairy calf, a pet dog, or a primate used in biomedical research.

 

[rynner2]

Inside the mind of a cow
In the future, researchers hope they we will be able to more accurately gauge any physical sensations or emotions an animal is feeling by scanning its brain.

There is already a large research effort to discover and map the seats of emotion, learning and intelligence in the human brain, using techniques such as magnetic resonance imaging. Once we know what makes us tick, says Keith Kendrick of the Babraham Institute in Cambridge, UK, we might be able to locate the corresponding areas in the brains of animals. Then we could find out directly whether our pet dog or cat, or a dairy farm's top-yielding cow, is feeling happy or miserable - or perhaps that these are emotions that such animals are incapable of experiencing.

From what we already know, it seems likely that the size and development of an animal's neocortex - the largest and most distinctive part of the human brain - will determine how aware it is of its surroundings, whether it has emotions, or to what degree it is conscious. "Quality-of-life issues apply to all species with some form of neocortex," Kendrick says. "But different species experience levels of consciousness which might be much more primitive."

For example, most species only seem capable of thinking in the present, and cannot think about past or future events. Similarly, few animals appear to be self-aware, or aware that other creatures are sentient.

As experimental evidence of the mental capabilities and limitations of animals accumulates, we should be able to dismiss some of the assumptions we make about animals, says John Bradshaw of the University of Bristol, UK. As an example, he cites the scenario of a pet owner returning home to find their dog has damaged the furniture. The owner would likely admonish or punish the dog, not realising that it will have little, if any recollection of the damage it caused hours ago. If the dog learns anything from the experience, it will be to associate the punishment with the owner's angry face.

"Owners perceive pets as if they were human," says Bradshaw, who points out that anthropomorphism plays a key role in the relationship between people and their pets, possibly because looking on animals in this way is an intrinsic property of the human brain. "We must work with it and get round it rather than dismissing it," he adds.

If the dog learns anything from the experience, it will be to associate the punishment with the owner's angry face.
Don't agree with this. Confronted with the damage, dogs will clearly become sheepish - which says to me they do remember causing the damage, and also has some idea it was wrong.

Discuss!

 

[rynner2]

Birds of a feather
It is all too easy to make poor decisions about animals' welfare by failing to take into account the particular characteristics of different species.

One example is the way we view cats and dogs, and how that perception leads to inappropriate veterinary treatment, says Natalie Waran of the Unitec Institute of Technology in Auckland, New Zealand. She cites previous studies showing that vets routinely administer significantly less analgesic to cats being spayed than to dogs of equal weight, mainly because they assume that the procedure causes less pain to cats than to dogs. Yet a recent study by Waran shows that cats do indeed feel pain when spayed, and react by crouching in what Waran describes as a "half tucked up" posture.

We also tend to make anthropomorphic assumptions about which are the best environments for animals to live in. It is assumed, for example, that poultry are unhappy when crammed together in broiler houses. Yet when Marian Dawkins of the University of Oxford studied the behaviour of a select number of some 2.7 million broiler chickens in the UK, 70 per cent of the national flock, she found that the birds don't like to be alone, and naturally flock. Dawkins experimented by placing chickens at random positions in broiler houses and seeing where the birds choose to move to. "They actually choose to sit together," she says. "They are much more clumped than you would expect at random."

Probably another case of stating the bleedin' obvious.

Have they never heard of

"Birds of a feather, flock together"?

 

[jefflovestone]

I often ponder this, in fact, a couple of times a day for some reason.

I wonder how 'alien' and complex their thought processes are and just what they think of in particular situations and how they literally 'experience' things with their differing senses. Just how is the world painted with their sensory palette?

Sometimes, when I'm told in no uncertain terms that a species of animal isn't particularly intelligent - the hedgehog springs to mind here - I really have my doubts. How much is down to anthropomorphism when I watch them ponder like spikey little Rodin's thinkers? I doubt they are solving complex philosophical points (negative anthropomorphism here?) but there's something going on behind those little jet eyes.

 

[Mattattattatt]

I think it's ridiculous that some people think that no other creatures at all have emotions or conciousness. All this kind of thinking stems back to the days when religion had an influence on science and humans had to be special. If you popped into the head of a crow or a hedgehog then I doubt you'd find them thinking about anything too heavy, but I think almost certainly they think, and feel.

I don't see animals as being different to us, just less complex. I'd expect their thoughts and emotions to be simpler. Probably these become more complex in social groups as they have more to think about.

 

[Timble2]

I'd guess they're thinking "food, sex, sleep, food, sex, sleep, food, sex, sleep, ...the same as us really...

 

[jefflovestone]

I think it's ridiculous that some people think that no other creatures at all have emotions or conciousness. All this kind of thinking stems back to the days when religion had an influence on science and humans had to be special. If you popped into the head of a crow or a hedgehog then I doubt you'd find them thinking about anything too heavy, but I think almost certainly they think, and feel.

I don't see animals as being different to us, just less complex. I'd expect their thoughts and emotions to be simpler. Probably these become more complex in social groups as they have more to think about.

I'm not sure about the complexity issue. Yes, I admit on a physiological level, there is less brain and that might suggest there's less going on in one sense, but I'm not sure whether that's really the case. I really think it's a case of different rather than 'less complex'.

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2001/dreaming.html

I mean is what's going on above the mere playback of the days events? Or is it more complex than that? A weird mix of genuine experiences, the abstract, the symbolic? Do animals ponder the significance of their dreams? Do they wonder 'wtf'? Anyone who has watched an animal dream and then see it suddenly wake up and have the same look on their face as we do when trying to 'shake a dream off'.

Regarding anthropomorphism, I'm wondering whether that's kind of human arrogance. Whether we are trying to separate ourselves too much from the rest of nature by imagining ourselves to be more different than we are and when we see actual similarities we write them off as anthropomorphism/projecting.

 

[mindalai]

I very often wonder what my dogs would say if they could talk. Would they think the same sort of things I imagine they do or would their thoughts be completely alien? I'd love to get inside their heads to see what really goes on in there.

I like to think I can tell if they're in pain, miserable or happy but I suppose it is possible that their emotions don't fall into the same categories that ours do.

 

[Anonymous]

Regarding anthropomorphism, I'm wondering whether that's kind of human arrogance. Whether we are trying to separate ourselves too much from the rest of nature by imagining ourselves to be more different than we are and when we see actual similarities we write them off as anthropomorphism/projecting.

I get that.

I mean, a wolf isn't going to come up to you and wag its tail at you when you walk on to the prarie is it?

Is domestication anthropomorphism in disguise?

Do wild animals have feelings and emotions?

 

[jefflovestone]

I like to think I can tell if they're in pain, miserable or happy but I suppose it is possible that their emotions don't fall into the same categories that ours do.

Do wild animals have feelings and emotions?

I think it's a case of occasionally overlapping paradigm sets. I think we share certain emotions - who hasn't seen a frightened or an angry dog for example? - but I just wouldn't be surprised if they can express a range of emotions that we can't and therefore miss.

If animals utitlise a vast array of sensory-related information than we do (data going in), what's to say that this data isn't then outputted in ways that are beyond our understanding too? After all, we're still only getting to grips with the way a lot animals actually communicate - and look at the weird and wonderful ways animals do communicate: whether it's bees doing a symbolic movement relating to where pollen can be found to a giraffe's infrasound - then what else might be going on in their heads?

Given the way inter-human language has it's idiosyncrasies, limations and 'glitches' - look at how certain languages are able to express ideas and feelings that others aren't and how that becomes difficult to translate from one language to another - can you imagine how significant these might be beyond the species barrier?

 

[Mattattattatt]

If we drop into a bit of zoosemiotics, I think it was Umberto Eco who proposed the "Umwelt" - the fact that an animal's responses to the world are based on on the sum of its experiences. I wonder if feral children have the same range of emotional responses before they are made aware of human society and encouraged to feel in certain ways about world - feelings such as pride, envy, jealousy, respect etc. Embarrassment must be an example of a socially created response.

 

[rynner2]

Out walking yesterday, saw a cattlegrid. What do cows think of those?

"Uh, that looks dangerous, keep away from that..."
or
"I bet the farmer put that there to stop us going through.."

Because obviously all domesticated animals have some understanding of how humans control their lives, so might a cow infer the second idea, even if the grid was built before the cow was born?

And the biggie:-

Do animals have a sense of growing old, leading to death?

Like us, animals have the experience of starting life young (as a calf, pup, cub, kitten, whatever) and then becoming mature, and then seeing the young of their own species when they breed.

But many domesticated animals probably have little experience of seeing their own kind grow old. Farm animals might be shipped off to the abbatoir when in their prime, and (I think) very few farm animals die of old age, or even reach a great age.

And pets might live as the only animal in a human home, so the only time they meet older dogs (say), would they put the physical differences down to age, or sickness, or merely to being a different animal?

Of course there are many stories about how animals react to the death of one of their own species, or to the death of another family pet. But do animals ever think about the inevitability of their own death? What does your dog think about when you leave him in the car while you do the shopping in Tesco's?

We may never know.... :?

 

[TheQuixote]

Some of my family visited Creetown, Scotland in the summer and while they were there, they visited a nearby animal park that had a petting zoo, a few otters, a wolf and aviaries.

They were told by the park guide that one of the birds - I believe it may have been a Mynah bird - had learnt how to undo screws in part of the aviary roof which it would then open on occasion and the other birds would make a break for freedom.

The interesting thing was while the other birds caged with the Mynah would take their chance and leave the aviary, the Mynah who had opened it for them would stay. It would be the only bird left in the aviary.

While my family were there, they noticed the bird was near the roof, unscrewing bits of it with its beak.

I wonder why the bird does this although I guess I'll never know. Is he doing it out of boredom or can birds and other animals be altruistic, is he helping the other birds or is he just doing it to get rid of the other birds so he can have the aviary all to himself?

 

[rynner2]

Earlier on this MB I wrote this:

I think I've written elsewhere of my one-time Jack Russell's reaction when we came across a torn apart fox after a hunt had been through. I doubt he'd ever encountered death before, but the sight of this dog-like severed head clearly shocked him, and he was very subdued and stuck close by me for the rest of the walk home, although normally he'd have been running all over the place.

I've seen nature documentaries where chimps and elephants show mourning behaviour when one of their number dies. It's also fairly common knowledge that swans will pine after their lost partners.

http://www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewt ... 301#482301

 

[Anonymous]

I agree that animals have or appear to have feelings.

I think that they are similar to our own, but there will be differences.

Did anybody see this?

Animal welfare: See things from their perspective
23 September 2006
NewScientist.com news service
Andy Coghlan


The human tendency to anthropomorphise means we miss out on animals' real feelings and needs, with the result that we often provide them with inappropriate housing and medical care. This is leading to the health and well being of millions of animals kept as pets, livestock or in zoos being adversely affected.

NewScientist animal article

Birds tune in to keep their songs note perfect
22:00 19 September 2006
NewScientist.com news service
Roxanne Khamsi

Birdsongs are so distinctive they are often used by ornithologists to identify individual birds. Now a novel study shows that birds are not "pre-programmed" to sing their song – rather, birds listen closely to their tune to keep their songs note perfect.

The same mechanism may operate in humans, perhaps shedding light on speech disorders, the researchers say.

Songbirds do not start out life as virtuosos: they often begin by ‘babbling’ random pitches and then advance to sing sophisticated tunes with the help of a tutor.

Once they develop their own particular melody, they use it to announce territorial claims or to attract a mate. The slight variations in the song identify one bird from another, so birds take great pains to preserve their unique tune throughout life.

NewScientist birdsong article

 

[escargot]

Animals dream, that's for sure. Anyone with a dog or cat knows that.

 

[mindalai]

Yes. and they talk in their sleep too.

 

[jefflovestone]

And the biggie:-

Do animals have a sense of growing old, leading to death?

Don't certain animals 'go off to die' (cats, elephants)? Or is this a myth? If it's not, then surely they must be aware of their mortality to go on 'the long walk'?

 

[rynner2]

Dolphin ‘dying of a broken heart’ after trainer is killed
Richard Owen in Rome

When the young dolphin was rescued from the Adriatic Sea, distressed and bruised, she was nurtured back to health by a dedicated trainer who took responsibility for her care.

Now the trainer is dead, the victim of a frenzied attack by her neighbour — and the dolphin, apparently, is dying of a broken heart.

The extraordinary story of love emerged yesterday as keepers at the Oltremare water park in Riccione appealed for international help to save the life of their dolphin.

Tamara Monti, 37, was stabbed to death at her flat in Riccione by Alessandro Doto, 35, who lived next door with his elderly parents.

He told police after his arrest that he had been driven mad by the incessant barking of Ms Monti’s two dogs — a basset hound and a mongrel — which she left in her flat all day while working at the dolphinarium.

Yesterday keepers at the water park said that they had lost not only “a marvellous trainer” but were also in danger of losing Mary G, the dolphin that Ms Monti had reared and cared for after it was found two years ago in the harbour at Ancona.

The dolphin is refusing her daily diet of milk and squid and has lost 50kg (110lb) since Ms Monti’s murder. Her weight has fallen to just 160kg (350lb) and she has failed to respond to medication for a gastric infection. Ms Monti’s fiancé, Robert Gojceta, has taken charge of the dolphin’s care but has been unable to revive her.

Leandro Stanzani, director of the water park, said that Ms Monti had become Mary G’s “substitute mother”.

“The relationship between a dolphin and its trainer is always special, but this time it was especially close” he said. “Tamara was constantly stroking Mary, who would nuzzle her cheek.” In an attempt to save the young dolphin from starvation, keepers have introduced an older dolphin called Pele into her aquarium, hoping that they will strike up a friendship and encourage her to eat. But their plan does not appear to be working. Police said Ms Monti, who was struck at least 20 times in the throat and face by her assailant as she was returning from the shops, had been planning to move because of “repeated altercations” with her neighbours over her dogs. Police said that Doto, who confessed to the killing, had been found still standing over the body “as if in a trance” with the bloodstained knife in his hand.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 403428.ece

 

[rynner2]

Orphaned sheep is baa-rking mad

An orphaned lamb is growing up in North Yorkshire thinking it is a dog after copying everything the farm's pet does.
The lamb, which does not have a name, walks to heel better than the farm's sheepdog Dip and spends its evenings sitting on the family's laps.

Broxa farmer David Dickinson introduced the two animals a week ago after the lamb's mother died shortly after giving birth.

The lamb now shares Dip's bed at night and is fed on powdered cows' milk.

'Watches telly'

Mr Dickinson's wife Carol said they did not want to leave the chocolate-coloured female lamb outside because it would be too cold for her.

She said: "During the day she follows me wherever I go basically.

"She stays in the kitchen when I go to work and then when I'm back she goes into the lounge, into the bedroom - all over.

"She even sits on the furniture and watches telly sitting on my lap - she does everything just like a dog."

However, Mr Dickinson said he had not ruled out the possibility that the lamb could end up on someone's dinner plate.
:shock:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nort ... 461949.stm

 

[OldTimeRadio]

Many years ago my younger brother, then a schoolchild himself, asked me if animals recognized their own names.

"No," I answered, "They're just syllables or collections of syllables which the animals associate with themselves."

Two minutes later he came back.

"In that case," he asked, "how do they differ from people names?"

Had to re-think things, I did.

 

[many_angled_one]

OldTimeRadio - Good point. Um, yes. I believe I may have said the same thing sometime.

Cats and Dogs most definately know when they have been bad! For example, I remember once when we came home and my old (sadly gone) cat Arkahm was sitting at the door waiting for us. He was unusually bouncy and affectionate, until we moved to push open the door to the living room, whereupon his tail dropped and he slunk off upstairs.
He had only gone and smashed the gallileo thermometer and gotten oil all over the carpet!!
We found him up hiding under a bed.

Cats and dogs dream as well, they have a lot of chase dreams it seems, you can see their paws moving and fangs being bared etc.

At the end of the day they are still mammals and not so different from us in the basic pattern and layout. While they may lack the larger brain size and intelligence I would suspect that all mammals over a certain size share certain inherited brain similarities such as dreaming (it must serve a function) and emotions (which is not to say they feel the same as we do). I would suspect at the least that they share our sense of fear, anger, sense of pelasure and the protective urge over their comrades as these would seem to be basic evolutionary advances.

I remember when we got our two kittens, about 9 weeks old, one of which was the small runt of the litter. His big sister Misty was terribly protective over him, to the extent that when a dog went to sniff him she charged across the room and launched herself at it then stood bristling in front of it until it ran away. Only when he got bigger and able to take care of himself did his big sis stop constantly keeping an eye on him.

 

[Awestruck_]

rynner - I think you might enjoy Animals in Translation: Using the Mysteries of Autism to Decode Animal Behavior, by Temple Grandin. She's a woman with autism who has designed more humane ways of slaughtering some animals commonly eaten by people. I've read a few excerpts, and it's very interesting. She contends that animals, and people with autism think and feel in similar ways. In part, they think in pictures, and are frightened by the same things. She says that the worst thing you can do to an animal, or a person with autism is to make them afraid. I assume because neither has higher reasoning filters to dampen fears effect on the emotions. Apparently, in her slaughter house systems the animals are relaxed and unafraid right up to the moment they are killed, (which I assume they don't see coming).

Also, you might be interested in looking into what has been written about Koko the gorilla. She was taught sign language, and she's held conversations with numerous people. Koko has been asked about death, and she signed something about sleeping and not waking up, if I remember correctly.

We all know that acquiring food is a primary concern of all animals. I remember reading when I was in school about an experiment with rats. I don't remember the details, but at some point when they were hungry the rats were given the choice of pushing levers for reward. One lever was for food, and the other would result in the lab technician petting the rat. The rats always pushed the lever that would result in petting.

I could probably write for hours about all the things I've read, and the things that I've personally experienced concerning animal's abilities to think and feel, (of which I have no doubt). What I do wonder at is the inability of some humans to grasp the obvious.

 

[ElishevaBarsabe]

I'm close to deaf, and our female cat (sadly now deceased) learned to bark -- like a dog! -- in my ear to wake me in the morning so I'd get up and feed her. It's a sound that brings you right up out of your dreams, I can tell you.

The female cat who lives with us now imitates human actions (like talking -- she's the one who says "Hello," petting, and hand-holding).

Yes, they think.

 

[rynner2]

Cockatoo guarding chocolate eggs

A cockatoo at a wildlife sanctuary has spent a fortnight trying to hatch a bowl of chocolate eggs.
Pippa has been protecting the chocolates at Nuneaton and Warwickshire Wildlife Sanctuary since she was taken outside, put on a table and saw them.

Her owner, Geoff Grewcock, said: "She went straight over, climbed on the creme eggs and that was it. She thinks they're her eggs.

"Until she clicks they're not real eggs, we'll just leave her there."

'So comical'

The 17-year-old cockatoo, who has been at the sanctuary for about four years, is expected to live until the age of 70.

Pippa is one of 300 birds at the Nuneaton sanctuary, which also has 50 animals.

Mr Grewcock described her as "very, very protective" and she had been through a "maternal stage".

He said: "She picked an egg up and threw it at a photographer with her beak as if to say 'leave my eggs alone. They're mine'.

"She's got so much character it's unbelievable. She hates men - we've had a builder in who had his neck bitten. We had to prise Pippa's beak off his neck.

"When she attacks you, she attacks your ear lobe - she goes straight through them. We do free ear piercing here.

"She's ever so comical - always has been."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cove ... 541785.stm

 

[rynner2]

Elgar hits right note for elephants
James Randerson, science correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Monday November 17 2008

The rousing, patriotic sweep of Elgar's Nimrod, the mournful tones of Nessun Dorma and the urgent eight-note allegro con brio opening to Beethoven's fifth - they have all been helping animal behaviour experts make life more comfortable for the elephants at Belfast zoo.

The researchers have discovered that playing classical music to the animals reduces abnormal behaviour such as swaying, pacing and trunk tossing, although they said that the elephants do not seem to have a favourite composer.

"We tend to see in some situations that elephants don't cope well with captivity because they have this inherent instinct to roam vast distances," said Dr Deborah Wells at Queen's University in Belfast. "The rationale underlying this study is really to try and improve their welfare and in particular to try to improve these stereotypical patterns of behaviour that elephants are prone to."

Wells's team recorded the behaviour of four female Asian elephants every minute for four hours a day, over three five-day periods. "Every behaviour the elephants could perform, we recorded," she said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/ ... c-wildlife

 

[AnyankaJ]

May I go right back to the beginning of this post? I kept looking for a follow-up to the opening paragraph, something that explains why the dog appears to be better, why the drugs are turning him into a social outcast. Did I miss it or is it self-evident? Puzzled.

Animal welfare: See things from their perspective
23 September 2006
NewScientist.com news service
Andy Coghlan

Your dog falls ill, so you take him to the vet. After a quick consultation you take him home, and soon he appears to be better. But he is not. You and the vet have failed to realise that he is still in severe pain, and the drugs the vet has prescribed will turn him into a social outcast, a dog that may be shunned or even attacked by others.

As for some of the other comments, e.g. punishing a dog for something it did while you were out - define the dog! Each breed has its idiosyncrasies, and within each breed there are personalities.

I live with four hounds; one of whom is perfectly capable of realising that she's been naughty and remembering it. Pointing to the damage and staring at her hard was sufficient to produce a display of guilt (which, by the way, is not necessarily a FEELING of guilt!). She's 3/4 border collie.

The other three are greyhounds. They have no sense of shame, or wrong, and punishing them only makes them believe I've gone insane. Ideally, I have to catch them in the act and create an unpleasant experience for them without letting them see that I am creating it. Jam jar lids in a plastic bag, for example, make a scary noise when thrown near the offending dog. The greyhounds generally do not make a connection between my anger and their action (unless they are trying to take my food off me), so they need to believe that the unpleasant experience is an automatic side effect of their behaviour.

 

[rynner2]

Interesting little incident here (with pics and video)..

Well, I'll be doggone! Canine caper as dog steals bone from shop at Christmas
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:55 PM on 31st December 2008

As thefts go it was pretty straightforward. The thief walked right into the shop, picked up what he wanted and walked straight back out again.
Except this criminal was a canine.
Just before Christmas the four-legged hound sauntered into Smiths Food & Drug Store in Murray, Utah, and, after a brief sniff at checkout, moved straight to aisle 16 - the pet aisle.

Once there he casually grabbed a rawhide bone (worth $2.79) and, with it safely clamped between his jaws, headed for the exit.
It was at this point that it could have all gone wrong for him as he came across the store's manager, Roger Adamson. He told CNN: 'I have never seen this dog before, he's a brand-new customer. He didn't even have his special value card.

'I looked at him and I said "Drop it". Then I decided I wanted to keep all my fingers so I didn't try to take it from him.
'He looked at me and I looked at him, and then he ran for the door and away he went - right out the front door.'
Looking back over CCTV footage, which captured the entire incident, one shop worker remarked: 'You have to see it to believe it, it's crazy.'

Latest reports suggest the four-legged thief is still at large.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... stmas.html

Did the dog smell the bone from out in the street? (There must have been a lot of other smells from a store that big.)

Anyway, this story must have amused thousands, and given the store some good publicity, for just $2.79!

 

[rynner2]

Thinking about that story reminds me of happier Xmases, years ago. We'd wrap presents for all the family, including the dog, and then open them one by one on Xmas day, first reading out the labels to see who they were for. The dog knew he had one coming, and his excitement as he waited for his present was probably greater than the kids'!

 

[BlackPeter]

You wrapped up the dog?!! :shock: