The World Famous Frawley Castle Website

■■■  Copyright Notice  ■■■


Speed Reader Page


VIDEO FILES are in Flash Player (.flv) format.  AUDIO FILES are in .mp3 format.

designed for viewing at widescreen resolution - 24" monitor - 1920x1080

The WFFCW was created August 5, 2001 :: we're 15 YEARS OLD!

7665325
WFFCW hits since April, 2003


"It's like a nightmare, isn't it?  It just keeps getting worse and worse." .... Keith McCready, in "The Color of Money"

"The only vaccine powerful enough to inoculate you from lies is the truth." .... Al Franken, famous author

WFFCW Quote Of The Second

WHAT IS THIS WEBSITE ABOUT?  Some of this is a personal website containing REBUTTAL, REPLY, and COMMENT to (primarily) public statements and accusations made by various self proclaimed "internet dog training experts".  The majority of the statements and accusations are FALSE, and refer to me, personally.  The nucleus of this website is based on verbatim quotes of public messages, most of which are archived with their respective lists.  Unless noted, nothing has been altered, other than formatting line length to screen width and changing the font style.  Other parts of this site contain OPINIONS, HUMOR, PARODY, COMEDY, and SARCASM which reflect my own personal sense of humor and viewpoints.  The First Amendment of the Constitution adequately, particularly, and specifically provides these rights.  This site is for educational and entertainment purposes.  This is emphatically not a "hate" site.  There is no hate, and never was.  Profanity is kept to a minimum, but it does exist.  If this website seems offensive to you, in any way, please leave now.  Please do not subject yourself to being offended.

TO THOSE IN FEAR OF THIS WEBSITE:  Websites can be terrifying places.  If you're afraid, we'll never understand why, but what can WE do?  You're allowed to be frightened of webpages, or anything else.  This website contains NO THREATS of any nature - no direct, indirect, implied, supplied, or personified threats - it never did and never will.  There is a lot of SARCASM here.  If you're afraid, our heart goes out to you - we don't WANT you to be afraid.  We want you to get help.  Dial 911, and scream for help.  If you wind up in a straight jacket, that's your problem.  If you don't, that's your problem, too.

COPYRIGHT © is clearly acknowledged where, when, and if applicable.  It's even acknowledged where it's not applicableThe USCO website.  This link contains verbatim United States Copyright Law, which clearly allows for rebuttal, comment, criticism, etc.  United States Copyright Law specifically states "COPYRIGHT DOES NOT APPLY TO FACTUAL INFORMATION".  (Read the law - see for yourself.)  Rebutting falsified "factual information" is not a violation of copyright law.

IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE I'M TRUTHFUL, DOWNLOAD ORIGINAL SCREEN CAPTURES 

IF I'M NOT 100% HONEST AND ACCURATE, CALL ME A LIAR and CONFRONT ME WITH FACTS

Main WFFCW Menu


Voodoo Louie Finally Gets "Removed"

SEVERE RISK

International Voodoo Louie Castle Security Threat Advisory Level

Current Voodoo Louie Warning Alert

HIGH RISK

HIGH RISK

ELEVATED RISK

GUARDED RISK

LOW RISK

Keep on typin', Louie!
Steve's message to Voodoo Louie Castle

LEERKOPF™ Frawley, Voodoo Louie Castle, AND Louie's personal "pet puppet fan club", Judith Alta Kidder, are going at it. 

Almost EVERYTHING has been deleted from this capture page except the messages from these "experts".  (This just gets easier every time.) 

PLEASE DO NOT TRUST ME.  Download the screen capture and discover for yourself if I'm lying or forging anything.

One important point about the unedited copy:  It goes on forever.  Frawley's groveling little puppets are nearly ALL beginning amateurs - hero worshippers.  All they DO is whimper, submit, and kiss Frawley's ass.  Prepare yourself - you've been warned.

LEERKOPF™ Frawley and Voodoo Louie's text are RED

Judith's text is GREEN

Steve Leigh's text is BLUE

Expect to spend some time on this page - the babbling is endless, but there are PLENTY of very funny statements contained below, and contradictions galore!  If you have the patience, please take the time to check the LINKS provided throughout this page.  By doing that, the facts will just get clearer .....

 
Ed Frawley

 

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1342
 The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training -
     
#4157584 - Mon Nov 14 2005 02:11 PM
 

Today I posted a new article I wrote titled THE THEORY OF CORRECTIONS IN DOG TRAINING - http://leerburg.com/corrections.htm I have never seen a book or training article that covered corrections in this detail - which was the reason for writing it.

Babbling nonsense.  You're simply the greatest, Frawley.  Aren't you?

I believe that new trainers - and so called professionals alike are going to learn soemthing froim this article. I hope it makes things clearer for trainers. The article is long - almost 23 typed pages

Everybody can learn something.  One thing we can learn is that LEERKOPF™ Frawley can't spell, and can't even turn on spell checking.



--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com

Edited by Ed Frawley (Mon Nov 14 2005 02:13 PM)


Lou Castle

 

Reged: Sun
Posts: 578
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Ed Frawley
     
#4157725 - Wed Nov 16 2005 09:34 PM
 

Interesting article Ed, thanks for writing it. A couple of points. I disagree with almost everything you've said about Ecollars but those disagreements have been covered in other discussions on your forum. We use the Ecollar in vastly different ways. It takes a big man to allow those who disagree with him do so in his own living room and I thank you for being a big man about our differences.

Voodoo Louie is about to be removed from a living room.  Thanks or not, out ya go, Voodoo.  You're history.

The following that I quote from the article is something that I've heard many times on many forums. When questioned about this "study" no one has ever been able to show a citation for its origin; not in any K-9 journal and not in any scientific journal. In trying to track it down it seems that it came from a statement made by a trainer at a seminar and she's never backed it up with a citation either. People have just assumed that it's true and repeated it so often that it's become accepted as true. Do you have a citation for it? I agree that chain collars will probably cause more damage than a pinch collar but I don't think that this "study" really exists.

"This has been proven through autopsies done in Germany on dogs that were trained their entire life with choke collars Vs dogs trained with prong collar."

Voodoo Louie investigated this critical issue, and finally gets the facts right here.

And this bring up a question. Since both the chain collar and your "dominant dog collar" work identically, how is it that the dominant dog collar doesn't apply the "entire force of the correction . . . to this one spot" on the dog's neck and cause identical problems? I've always thought that the force of a chain collar was spread out around the dog's entire neck, rather than have it concentrated in just one spot. The bruising from the experiment you suggest (trying it on one's leg) will extend most of the way around the leg. I think that any damage that occurs does so because the force is concentrated in such a narrow area, the width of the chain. With a pinch collar the force is also spread out around the dog's neck but it's over an area that's 1/2" wide and it's not necessary to use anywhere near the same force to get a training effect with the pinch collar.

And just one final question. Throughout the article you use the word "stem" when referring to an Ecollar "stimulation." Everyone else that I know uses the word "stim" (as a derivative of the word "stimulation) when they make this reference. Is this a misspelling, are you doing something different or is this a regional thing?

Voodoo Louie, a superb speller himself, the ecollar EXPERT, has got nothing better to do than "stem" and "stim".  He left out "stun".

--------------------
Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
www.loucastle.com


Ed Frawley

 

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1342
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Daryl Ehret
     
#4157749 - Thu Nov 17 2005 07:31 AM
 

Lou - one of the reasons I wrote this article is because of the numerous (and I mean numerous posts) you have put on my web board about ESCAPE TRAINING with an e-collar. I disagree with every post you have made concerning Escape Training with e-collars. Its old school backward training.

That's RIGHT!  Just read Frawley's "Training Techniques" and see for yourself.  Frawley wrote 'em - you'll love em.  You're simply the greatest, Frawley.  Aren't you?

There is only one place that ESCAPE TRAINING (Avoidance training is a better term) with a remote trainer should be used and thats with animal aggression and the scenarios I describe in the article under avoidance training.

Modern dog training is built on motivating a dog to want to work for you.

Take LEERKOPF™ Frawley's advice - Use a broom - poke the snot out of the SOB.

When its done correctly the dog will try and figure out what you want so it can obtain its drive goal. People should see our little Corgi pup that Cindy is working with try and figure out what she wants her to do. You can see the wheels going in her head.

Got those wheels on video?  I just want to see the wheels.

This method of training produces a dog that can think for himself. He THINKS and becomes a PROBLEM SOLVER.

No shit.  He balance checkbooks, too?

Escape training produces a dog that is guided into the correct behavior because it wants to avoid the STIM (or stem).

Which one?  "Stim"?  "Stem"?  What about "Stun"?

Lou - I strongly recommend that you start your own web discussion forum on your own web site about escape training because I am going to step in and stop it on my forum.

That'll never happen.  Voodoo Louie specializes in WRITING MESSAGES by the THOUSAND.  Where's he gonna find time to create and maintain a message forum?  Where will he find the mental capacity to install this "discussion forum"?  Go look at his pitiful "website".  He can't even keep THAT straight.     

In my opinion its a dis-service to allow what I consider abusive training methods to be touted "as the correct way to use e-collars"

Uh-oh!  Looks like the honeymoon is over.  But this isn't the FIRST forum Voodoo Louie's been tossed out of .... Discover more.

I don’t know what your point is on the choke collars. Did you not read the post I entered on finding someone that does not like you to jerk a choke that’s put around your thigh? 

There IS no point in this babbling.

If it’s so important to you to hold a piece of paper in your hand about this study - write Bernhard Flinks. Ask him about it. He discusses it in every one of his seminars.

A discussion isn't FACTS.  Where's the EVIDENCE?  Let's see some PROOF.  Go get the damn papers, scan 'em, and make a NEW "article" for your "web board".

In regard to the dominant dog collar - Loudid you read what I said? It seems not !!!!!! It seems that you argue just for the love of arguing. 

It took awhile, but it's beginning to sink in!  Good boy, LEERKOPF™ Frawley!  (Steve tosses Frawley a hot dog.)

A dominant dog collar is not used like a choke collar is used in obedience training. In obedience training handlers give the dog a POP with the leash (the level determines by the temperament of the dog). This POP is what causes the damage. (Lou I assume you understand that a dog should get a POP rather than a TUG for a correction?)  

OMG!! This is better than kindergarten!

With a dominant dog collar there is never a POP - it’s used to quickly lift the dogs feet off the ground when it shows unwarranted aggression. A dominant dog collar is used to take the air away from a dog. It’s not used to POP the dog with a correction. 

Go for it, Frawley - take that dog's AIR away.

Lou - if you dealt with many behavioral problems you would understand the difference here. On the vast majority of dogs that have been allowed to become dominant these collars only need to be used a few times before the dog figures out that the handler is someone to be taken seriously. 

Voodoo Louie HASN'T dealt with dog problems - he THINKS and FANTASIZES he has.  Just like his delusions of being Culver City PD's "Department K9 Trainer" - he "thought" he held that position for 25 years - except that position doesn't exist.  It only takes one phone call to clear up that lie.  310-837-1221 = Culver City Police.

Obviously you have not seen the training DVD I did. Probably a waste of money for you – you are a little to close minded.

WHO's closed-minded?  This shit is no different than your "Table Training" babbling from 2001. 

ALL of you self-proclaimed "internet dog experts" are closed-minded.  ALL of you know it ALL

Anyone notice that REAL trainers don't even bother with Frawley's famous "LEERKOPF™ web board"?  They won't come NEAR it.  You see anybody SERIOUS here?  Any MAJOR WUSV, BSP, DMS, KNPV, SchHUSA, DVG players?  This "web board" is just a kindergarten toy, started by kids, run by kids, and populated with kids.  The idiotic, juvenile messages prove it.

In the DVD I explained that some people use STIM – some people use SHOCK – some people use STEM. It really does not matter what term one uses as long as its understood. It’s just like some people call these SHOCK COLLARS – some people call them E-Collars – some people call them REMOTE TRAINERS.

Thanks for clarifying that, Frawley.  You're simply the greatest.  Aren't you?

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com

Edited by Ed Frawley (Thu Nov 17 2005 02:45 PM)


Judith Alta



Reged: Wed
Posts: 4
Loc: Southwest Michigan
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Ed Frawley
     
#4157974 - Sat Nov 19 2005 01:57 PM
 

In defense of Lou Castle.

HERE SHE IS!  An official "Louie Bitch", rushing in to the rescue.

I have attended two ecollar seminars.

And now she's another ecollar EXPERT.

The first by a man who had little knowledge of dogs and worked each dog in the exact same manner as every other dog. He also worked with the ecollar set at the highest level at which the dog did not vocalize.

Who cares?

At this seminar I watched this man make mincemeat of a sweet coonhound mix.

Mincemeat?  That sounds just like that famous country and western song, "Sweet Coonhound Mix".  Who cares?

One year later I watched Lou, also with an ecollar, put that same sweet dog back together again.

Who cares?  Unless he used a screwdriver and pliers .... now that'd be something interesting.

I have watched Lou, using the ecollar, gently, and without yanking the dogs off their feet, teach them that dog agression is not the thing to do. You can find the details on his website ( http://www.loucastle.com/ ).

Lou is knowledgeable about dogs and trains each dog as an individual, working dogs on the ecollar at the lowest level they will acknowledge.

Voodoo Louie is a pathological liar.  It's proven all over the WFFCW.

I also have "known" Lou for some years on email lists, and I don't know of anyone whose methods I'd rather use.

"A sucker is born every minute."  That's a very famous quote.

I own a very DOMINANT, hard-headed, work-bred dog.

Judith has never SEEN  "a very DOMINANT, hard-headed, work-bred dog."  Three minutes with a HARD, DOMINANT dog, and Judith would be "mincemeat" - MISSION POSSIBLE.

But without the ecollar, and Lou's help, he would have gone back to the breeder soom after his first birthday. Oski will be six next month and I would never part with him. Thanks to the ecollar and Lou Castle.

Bless Voodoo Louie Castle.  Nobody will ever know the heights depths of his incredible "success".

Ed Frawley

 

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1342
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Judith Alta
     
#4158012 - Sat Nov 19 2005 08:59 PM
 

Judith - I am not sure what your point is?

None.

Did I miss something?

Nope.

or is this a case of you not reading exactly what I said?

Judith is here to defend her savior, Voodoo Louie Castle.  You a little slow on the uptake, Frawley?  That's her MISSION POSSIBLE.

This is your first post on my web board. I suggest that you go back and re-read my article on corrections. Then read the posts I have made in this threat.

Threat?  You "suing" somebody AGAIN?

Lou has 574 posts on my board.

573 too many.

His method of training is escape training (ET) also called avoidance training. ET has been around for 25 years. Lou did not invent ET. He simply uses that method to train dogs. In 574 posts he has done an excellent job of explaining his training methods.

I have written one article on what I consider a better way to train and you get defensive about Lou.

Judith is a Voodoo Louie bitch - of course she gets defensive.

I don’t dislike Lou.

Then you're one of the few that don't.  Try it - you'll like it.

Fact is I have never met him.

Fact is, "What's Love Got To Do With It?" (thanks, Tina)  Have you looked in the Blue Oyster Bar?  It's Louie's home.

I have allowed him to make hundreds of posts about a method of training I have never agreed with.

That's pretty funny, Frawley.  You expect anybody to believe it? 

I have a theory:  you kept Voodoo Louie around for awhile to PIMP HIM.  You used him to write lying, inflammatory bullshit, degrade and defame certain, select people FOR YOUR AGENDA.  That's what I think.  Need an example?

If you read my article you will find that I said “escape training works.” It’s a very quick method to train a dogs. That’s why the vast majority of professional dog trainers train their client dogs with ET. With this said ET does nothing to build the bond with the handler and dog.

The fact is

The fact is?  THE FACT IS!

ET is old school training - 25 year old school training. My methods are a better way to train.

EVERYTHING about you is better - everybody knows THAT.  You've been pimping yourself for so long, even YOU believe it.  LEERKOPF™ - you're just the GREATEST.  Aren't you?

My article is not an attack on Lou Castle (as you allude it is). My article simply explains why ET is old school and why my methods are a better way to train with a remote trainer.

Explain THIS.

In closing I have some serious questions why ANYONE would allow another trainer to take their dog and put a remote collar on it at a seminar. I too have seen many cases of abuse in this kind of scenario. This is crazy.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com


Judith Alta



Reged: Wed
Posts: 4
Loc: Southwest Michigan
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Ed Frawley
     
#4158015 - Sat Nov 19 2005 09:45 PM
 

Ed,

Part of the reason I posted was to give an example of what I have seen Lou do with the ecollar. It is far more than a punishment tool. And, properly used, it DOES help build a tight bond between dog and handler.

You TELL 'em, Judith!  Tell 'em how electricity creates BOND(Hey Judith?  Crank up that juice enough, and it's known as "arc welding"!)

Tell 'em how even the LOWEST stim is the one thing in the world the dog LOVES and WANTS more than anything else.  Electricity = BOND.  Judith = demented.

You are missing the boat if you think the ecollar is only for harsh corrections when needed. The ecollar is one of the safest and gentlest methods of teaching a dog anything that there is.

OK, DAMMIT!  It's time for a good laugh, parody, humor, and some SARCASM ....

JUDITH MAKES A PHONE CALL!

You seem to approve of jerking dogs off their feet and stringing them up until they cannot breathe.

Yessuh!  He even sells a special COLLAR for it.

Granted, the occasions you mention are extreme, but, in my opinion, such methods should only be used after all other methods have failed.

Absolutely brilliant opinion.  Judith - you're not a KIDDER, are you?

There is no reason not to turn a dog over to a competant ecollar trainer. In my case the first trainer I mentioned never got his hands on my transmitter.

Was that a SEXUAL thing, Judith?  You can tell us, we'll keep it private - what did he get his hands on?  C'mon, you can share the details.  Was it good for you?

There is no way I would entrust my dog to such a person.

On the other hand I would have no qualms about handing my transmitter to Lou. Because I was somewhat knowledgable about the ecollar he did not take my transmitter.

No, Judith.  Your "knowledge" is just your interpretation.

I used it under his direction.

Judith Alta



Reged: Wed
Posts: 4
Loc: Southwest Michigan
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Valerie Tietz-Kelly
     
#4158041 - Sun Nov 20 2005 08:50 AM
 

Valerie,

Here is an excellent article on what can be done with an aggressive dog with the ecollar.

Here is an excellent example of Judith whoring for Voodoo Louie.

http://loucastle.com/simon.htm

As someone said, with a Pit Bull, especially one that has been bred for fighting, one will always have to be on the alert for agressive behavior.


Ed's edited comment:

This article has been mentioned a number of times on this web board. There are other ways that work better.

Edited by Ed Frawley (Sun Nov 20 2005 08:54 AM)


Ed Frawley

 

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1342
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: REINIER Geel
     
#4158043 - Sun Nov 20 2005 08:52 AM
 

Judith - you have now made three posts on my web board.

THREE!  And she had the nerve to DISAGREE with LEERKOPF™ Frawley!

You came here with a huge CHIP ON YOUR SHOULDER!!

That's no chip - that's Voodoo Louie Castle on her shoulder.  Judith is a leading member of the Official Voodoo Louie Department of Defense - OVLDOD.

Your posts are filled with ridiculous statements.

They sure are.  I'm sorry to AGREE with you, Frawley, but you're right this time.  It might not ever happen again, so don't get all excited, wet your pants, or buy me presents.

I am having a difficult time convincing myself not to block you from the board. Either change your attitude or go away.

Go on - block her.  You'll feel good.

For the second time I suggest you read my article. You have skimmed the article and absorbed very little.

The purpose for the article is to explain the various kinds of corrections used in dog training. It was not to list the kinds of corrections I use in training. In regard to a "Level 10 leash correction" if you took the time to read you would have seen that I said that it was very seldom needed. I suggest you not put words in my mouth.

WHY NOTYOU put words in OTHER people's mouths.  Are you exempt or something?  EXPLAIN THIS.

Did you miss the part where I said using a "dominant dog collar" is a LAST RESORT? Did you miss the part where I explained that this method is used on dogs that the owners were considering euthanizing the dog if their aggression problems were not solved?

Once again how many ways do I have to say this article is not about Lou Castle. This article is about the Theory of Corrections in Dogs.

This LEERKOPF™ "article" is just a babbling waste of time, disk space, and absurd, ridiculous "theory".  At least you're smart enough not to call it "FACT".

My advice to you Judith is to walk away from this because you seem to be on a mission and your next post will be your last if it’s filled with the kind of garbage in your last two.

LOL!  Voodoo Louie's bitch is gonna get the last word, until YOU get the last word.  Just watch.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com


Edited by Ed Frawley (Sun Nov 20 2005 10:56 AM)


Judith Alta



Reged: Wed
Posts: 4
Loc: Southwest Michigan
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Jenni Williams
     
#4158066 - Sun Nov 20 2005 02:44 PM
 

Why use abusive methods to cure dog agression when other methods, namely the ecollar, are available?

See what I mean?  It only took a few hours.

Ed Frawley

 

Reged: Wed
Posts: 1342
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Jenni Williams
     
#4158073 - Sun Nov 20 2005 04:23 PM
 

Judith wont be gracing my web board any longer.

Another one down.  This is LEERKOPF™ Frawley's CARNIVAL KINDERGARTEN WEB BOARD!

She has nothing to offer other than pig headedness, a closed mind, stupidity and her own misguided agenda.

EXACTLY like Frawley, Rambo, Castle, and the LEERKOPF™ puppets.

Kind of reminds me of my ex-wives.

You collect 'em?  You're simply the greatest, Frawley.  Aren't you?

You have nothing to offer this board other than a sour negative attitude.

--------------------
http://www.leerburg.com


Edited by Ed Frawley (Sun Nov 20 2005 07:03 PM)

Jenni Williams
Leerburg Web Board User
 

Reged: Thu
Posts: 37
Loc: Naperville, IL
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Ed Frawley
     
#4158075 - Sun Nov 20 2005 04:32 PM
 

What do you want to bet she has at least a few ex-husbands? She's certainly bitter about something...

My, my, my - what an interesting thing to say about Judith.  Who KNOWS how much she pays for husbands?  Only Judith knows.  THIS message was too good to delete.  Right on, Jenni - you're OK!  Jenni made a phone call, too! 

Lou Castle

 

Reged: Sun
Posts: 578
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
 Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training - Re: Ed Frawley
     
#4158231 - Tue Nov 22 2005 06:46 AM
 

Ed wrote: "In my opinion its a dis-service to allow what I consider abusive training methods to be touted 'as the correct way to use e-collars.' "

Like most of Voodoo's messages, this one's a multi-page exercise in babbling yipyap.  Not only does Voodoo bore you with his rhetoric, he contradicts himself so often that you can't keep up with his incoherent bullshit anyway.  What's THIS?  What's THIS?  Got no answers, do you Voodoo?  

Ed, you're article certainly wasn't about me but this bit of your post certainly was aimed directly at me. In my response to your article I congratulated you on being big enough to allow people who disagree with you to post on your forum. It now looks as if that was a bit premature.

One of the most vile criticisms that someone can level towards a dog trainer is that the tool or method that he uses is abusive, as you've done with me.

VILE CRITICISM?  How many times have YOU done exactly the same thing to ME, Voodoo?   

Since you've never seen me train any dogs and since you've probably never even seen any dogs that I've trained it's completely out of place for you to make such a statement.

SINCE WHEN?  It's OK for you to do it, but nobody else canWhat's THIS, Voodoo?

Perhaps "escape training" as you use the term is abusive. But as I do the work, it's not, not by any stretch of anyone's imagination. It's nearly identical with the Ecollar work that's done by the Dobbs Training Center, Martin Deely, LAPD, LASD, the US Secret Service, Utah State Police K-9 School and hundreds, if not thousands, more. Of nearly 600 posts on this forum, (and that doesn't include the hundreds on the "old" forum) most of them about Ecollars, this is the first time that anyone has said that they consider what I do to be "abusive." I expected better from you.

Your expectations were NOT MET.  Go read ALL your Voodoo Louie pages on the WFFCW - then run crying to your mommy.

Across the country people use the same terms differently, I'll suggest that's what's at the bottom of our difference in the use of the terms "escape" and "avoidance" training. As you use them, Ed, they're the same. In your article you mention the defining book of Ecollar terms, by Daniel Tortora. Then you proceed to say that "escape" and "avoidance" are the same thing. Tortora doesn't think so, neither do I, and neither do the vast majority of those who are fluent in Ecollars. "Escape" and "avoidance" as those terms are used in Ecollars are vastly different from one another and different from the way that you use them.

You keep calling my methods "old school" when in fact the leash and collar were used for centuries before Ecollars came along. If anything is "old school," it's the leash and collar. There's nothing wrong with being "old school," except that, to you, the term is pejorative. The technique used to "interrupt a dog's breathing" has been done far longer than either of us have been around by knowledgeable trainers who work with aggressive or dominant dogs everywhere.

I've never claimed to have invented escape training, something that you've alluded to in a post to someone else. There's nothing new about it. It's one thing that's working when a dog learns not to display aggression after having his breathing "interrupted" as you advocate. He "escapes" the discomfort by stopping that action. He "avoids" it in the future by not showing aggression again. Those are two different things that a dog learns. One is occurring during the learning phase and the other is occurring after the learning has occurred. That's how Tortora defines the terms and how I do as well. They're clearly not the same.

I've done over nearly

"Over nearly"?  GODDAMN!  This is some DEEP Voodoo.  Talk about bullshit?  ONLY Louie could come up with that!

thirty seminars around the US and in Europe. I've appeared before hundreds of people, many of them experienced handlers and trainers and no one who's seen the work has ever called it "abusive."

All together now - a big round of applause for VOODOO LOUIE, who has "appeared" before hundreds of people.  VOODOO LOUIE - who has bragged to the whole world about his electrifying "seminars" and "credentials" - about 7 million times this year alone

(Wowee!  Last time I played a blues festival I appeared before ~21,000 people.  And who cares?)

Thanks Judith for talking about what you've seen, rather than some people, who "assume" how something is done and what its effects are.

You referring to yourself now, Voodoo?  You never STOP assuming.

Judith's point was that my methods are not, in spite of your comments, abusive. She's seen it, you haven't.

She's blind.  We aren't.   

That's all she was talking about, not the rest of your article.

Hundreds of people have let me put Ecollars on their dogs at seminars and during private training sessions because my reputation as a fair and just trainer and as humane and gentle is widely known.

So is your reputation as a LIAR, Voodoo.

I'm not recently "born again," as some people. Many of the more experienced trainers here, many of them your moderators, have habitually referred people to me and my website when questions about Ecollars have arisen. They didn't seem to find my methods abusive and neither did you until now. Nearly 600 posts on your forum and only a few weeks ago did I discover that you disagreed with how I use the tool. That's fine and anyone is free to disagree, doesn't bother me in the slightest. But anyone who calls my methods "abusive" as you've done is either badly informed or uninformed. It's ignorant to call a method or tool "abusive." Abuse isn't inherent in a tool or a method, it's all in how it's used.

As usual, you're contradicting yourself, Voodoo.  Explain THIS.


Ed's comments:

OMG - MORE babbling rhetoric?  This never stops.  I'm getting too bored with this crap to comment very much more.  This shit is exhausting cause I'm laughing too hard - I'm gettin' a bellyache.

Lou - all this from the guy who writes on his web site ( http://www.loucastle.com/sit.htm)in an article on training a dog to sit " What’s happening is that the dog has come to understand what’s expected of him and is trying to shut off the stimulation a little faster. CONGRATULATIONS! You’ve just stepped into “escape training” which is just about as close to magic as we get in dog training! "

HEY!  That Voodoo shit is (not) COPYRIGHTED.  Who said YOU could reprint it?  READ YOUR OWN PRIVACY NOTICE, FrawleyATTENTION, FBI!!  Here comes another "law suite".

The point you miss is that I wrote "I have never met you." In addition I said that "this is not about Lou Castle" - its about ESCAPE TRAINING - which just happens to be the method you chose to use.  

As far as I am concerned - escape training is old school training. Maybe abusive is the wrong word - OLD SCHOOL CERTAINLY IS NOT. Lou if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then its a duck - maybe a magic duck.

Unless it's NOT a duck.  Too much Disneyland for you, Frawley?  Magic ducks?

You are right - I chose to keep my mouth shut

For the first time in LEERKOPF™ Frawley's whole life.  You're simply the greatest, Frawley.  Aren't you?

about ESCAPE TRAINING - for 574 posts - and Lou it was not easy and those days are over.

It was not easy and THOSE DAYS ARE OVER.

The last time I looked I have never seen anywhere that the organizations you mentions (Dobbs Training Center, Martin Deely (never hgeard of him), LAPD, LASD, the US Secret Service, Utah State Police K-9 School) were known as experts in the field of e-collar training. Maybe your experts - not mine.

The fact is

The fact is?  THE FACT IS!

Jim Dobbs (as nice as he is) was one of the people who promoted escape training in this country.

I remember when Jim (with a serious face) said that he felt that he could train a Schutzhund dogs to bite a sleeve through Escape training. Basically saying that the dog would be stemmed (stim) until he is got on the sleeve. (boy I would liike to have seen that grip)

I have that idea right up there with back tieing a dog to a fence and beating the crap out of him until he bites. That was how things were done back in the 50's- remmber th 50's Lou? I do!!

Weren't you working in a laundromat then, Frawley, playing with soap bubbles and bleach?  Back in your "pre LEERKOPF™ dogtraining expert" days?  'Fess up - tell the truth.

Dont put words in my mouth

WHY NOT?  YOU DO.  You have privileges nobody else has?  EXPLAIN THAT page, LEERKOPF™.

- I never heard of David Tortora until you wrote this post.

Dr. DANIEL F. Tortora.  Naturally you've never heard of him, although you're the "RESIDENT EXPERT".  Ever heard of "Tri-Tronics"? 

So dont tell me that I mention his book in my article - WHAT BOOK?

"Understanding Electronic Dog-Training" - THAT BOOK.  You're simply the greatest, Frawley.  Aren't you?

With this said if he has a book that contains the concepts I wrote about I would probably say he is a pretty good dog trainer.

ROFLMAO!  Let's lay this out. 

If Dr. Tortora wrote a book that you agree with, he's probably a pretty good dog trainer?  The earliest copy I have is (c)1981.  That means he's only TWENTY FOUR YEARS ahead of your amazing "article" full of brand new, earth shattering "theory"? 

Hang on here, "Expert" Ed.  Why the hell didn't Tri-Tronics come to YOU, so YOU could write their book?  (Completely ignoring the facts that you can't spell worth shit, and you're not one of the brightest, most articulate fellows in the country.)  A few research calls to Tri-Tronics indicated that they shipped ~50,000 - 60,000 "Understanding Electronic Dog-Training" books with their ecollars .... that doesn't include giveaways, or the sales of just the book by itself. 

Where were you when they were searching for an expert writer? 

I made it very clear that you did not invent escape training. The fact is

The fact is?  THE FACT IS!

EAR PINCHES, TOE PINCHES were used as escape training until e-collars came along. I am sure you are familiar with this.

Lou - you never read what I said about dominant dog collars - why does this not surprise me - the dogs are never corrected without first getting a voice correction of "NO" and there is a space in time for them to comply. If they respond to a voice correction of "NO- nothing happens.

This is different than escape training where they get stimulation with NO forwarning until they comply. So my advise is to read first Lou and then ask yourself if there is a possibility that you may learn something. But then you have blinders on.

SO DO YOU.  Click and see your blinders.

This all comes from the guy who writes on his web site that escape training is MAGIC. Right Lou - Magic.

Now you KNOW why his name is VOODOO Louie.

Sorry I call it old school training and it works for you because you fall into the catagory of a proffesional trainer where time is money. Read my philosophy on dog trainers and you will see exactly why I dont recommend people send their dogs to most professional trainers.

Who cares what you recommend?  Most people in dogs have been laughing at you since the mid-70s.

But you're simply the greatest, Frawley.  Aren't you? 

C'mon, LEERKOPF™ - 'fess up - say it LOUD and say it PROUD:

"I AM THE GREATEST"

Don't be shy - write a whole 87 page article about it - title the article:

"How Ed LEERKOPF Frawley Became The Greatest"

THE FACT IS, that's a great title!

--------------------
Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
www.loucastle.com

Edited by Ed Frawley (Tue Nov 22 2005 08:14 PM)


 


So what did poor Voodoo Louie Castle DO after getting booted out of Frawley's LEERKOPF™ "web board"?  What do you THINK he did?  Louie rushed off to write MORE MESSAGES, naturally.  Louie went FLYING to his "fan club" and started his crying, whining, and moaning, looking for some sympathy among his devoted "fans".  Unknown to Voodoo Louie, some of his devoted "fans" forwarded his messages to me.  Is that a joke, or what?  Here comes 2 miles of Voodoo's ridiculous babbling ........

captured from groups.yahoo.com/group/Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus - emailed to me by another Voodoo Louie Castle fan .... there's LOTS of 'em
 
From: UnclLou@...
Date: Sat Nov 19, 2005  6:25 pm
Subject: Abusvie Training Claim


On the Leerburg Forum, the owner, Ed Frawley has made a comment that my use
of escape training with an Ecollar is "abusive." It's possible that he uses
the term differently than those of us who use the Ecollar do.

I'd appreciate it if a few folks that I've helped, especially those who have
seen my work, either privately or at a seminar, would drop by that board,
sign up and let your feelings be known.
I know that it's a bit of a nuisance
because you have to sign up and give your true name before you can post.

Here's the thread where it occurred.
_http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/4157584/page/0/fpa\
rt/1/vc/1_
(http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/4157584/page/0/fpa\
rt/1/vc/1)


I'd also suggest that you read his article, "The Theory of Corrections . .
." I think that most of what he wrote is off base and you'll see some of his
theories about the Ecollar. He uses the tool only to correct misbehaviors
that have been taught with other tools so he really has little idea as to how
the tool can be used.

His comments about my "abusive training methods" come after his initial
article and my response to it.


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


 


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Sun Nov 20, 2005  12:59 pm
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


In a message dated 11/19/2005 1:02:50 PM Pacific Standard Time,
sharon_7134@... writes:

I can't believe Ed Frawley has written this. I don't know how to answer a
man like him.
He's so set in his ways, and yet he just follows the flow of popular belief.




+++ I've been a member of his board almost since it's inception. I was #131
on the original board (it's been redone 2-3 times now) and now I think he
claims nearly 8,000 members. I've written nearly 600 posts (according ot the
stats that the site keeps) most of them about the Ecollar, and this is the
first time that he's said that anything I do is "abusive." Coincidentally,
he's
just come out with an Ecollar DVD for sale.



Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Mon Nov 21, 2005  2:15 am
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


 

In a message dated 11/19/2005 1:12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
fetch@... writes:


Frawley expressly says on his forum that he closes the discussion to any
discussion of escape training. I'm not a regular on that board and don't
know its culture. Is it one where the participants are expected to push the
envelope and not obey the moderator?

+++ No Ed is not know for tolerating those with whom he disagrees. He's
gotten less tolerant as time passes.


I'm sure I'll find things to agree in this comprehensive 8743-word article,
with but there might be a few things to question. Well that is always the
case isn't it!

+++ I think it is. It's interesting to note that there are almost no
"experienced trainers" (whatever that means) who have contributed to the
thread.
It's almost completley "pet owners" (what ever that means) who have responded
with accolades.



In just a quick skim I picked up this in his discussion of
the value (he's in favor of it) of using the verbal "NO" to correct a dog.

"I kind of compare this concept to training a dog to stop barking with
a voice command. To do it effectively many people will first teach a
dog to bark on command. Then when it understands the meaning of
BARK and the meaning of NO the two can be combined into NO BARK
and the dog understands."

Ed's dog understands an English sentence?

+++ Apparently they do. Or at least, he thinks they do. He's not known for
being a trainer. He's known for breeding lots of dogs, some good, some bad,
as with any breeder, and for having travelled and made lots of training
videos.



If the dog has learned that "NO"
means "stop what you're doing and look at me for direction" (as recommended
earlier in the section) then it will hear "NO" and that will interrupt its
barking. Dog training 101. This will work whether or not you teach the dog
to bark on command first and whether or not you add the word "BARK" after
saying "NO". Some people make dog training procedures way more mystical than
they really are.

+++ For many it's to their advantage if they do so. Then they have the
"secret key" and you have to pay them to get it.





Another example of the awesome properties of "NO" is where he says:

"One of the most gratifying moments in your dog training career
is going to be when you simply tell your dog “NO” (in a normal
tone of voice) and he stops doing something and looks at you
and says 'OK what do you want me to do?'

When that happens you have not only reached a new plateau
in dog training you have reached a point where you can literally
communicate ..."

This is sure complimentary to me because the above described reaction is
something I expect routinely in my 10-week old puppies. I consider the "NO"
message one of the more primitive types of training input that there is.
Well, that sounds a bit negative and I don't mean to be negative. Let's just
say it is a very basic communication. Useful, you bet. A "new plateau in dog
training"? Um.


+++ For many of us, it's one of the first things that dogs and puppies
learn.




This article also reminded me of something we should never forget on these
forums where everyone communicates in words. People use words differently
and give them their own meanings, but will often blend old words with new
concepts in order to trigger, for agenda reasons, linkages to other
associations with the word. Ed's use of "avoidance corrections" is a lot
different than Tortora's use of "avoidance training" in the book on remote
training that Ed refers to in the beginning of his collar chapter. (I have
heard the word "avoidance" used in yet a third way among bird dog trainers
and a fourth among Schutzhund trainers, and so on. It's a word that trainers
use in many ways.)


+++ Not as far as Ed is concerned. He only allows for one use of the word
(synonomous with "escape" and the use of avoidance in training is, as he's
stated, "abusive."


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)
 

From: UnclLou@...
Date: Mon Nov 21, 2005  2:14 am
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


 
 


In a message dated 11/19/2005 6:40:31 PM Pacific Standard Time,
armurray@... writes:

There is no way under the sun the training I've done with Ceili, under Lou's
guidance, can be termed abusive.



+++ Thanks Amber. I have to say that in years of posting about Ecollars on
Ed's site, this is the first time that he's said that he disagrees with my
method or that it's abusive. I had no idea that he disagreed with my methods.

Of course his knowledge of the Ecollar is extremely limited, he's one of
those people who believe that one can't teach with it.

+++ I'm sure it's just a coincidence but he just released his video on
Ecollars. Can't have an opposing opinion around when there's money involved!


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Wed Nov 23, 2005  3:51 pm
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Be careful who you learn from


In a message dated 11/22/2005 6:42:22 AM Pacific Standard Time,
brice@... writes:

So, we went back to the workshop, reported what findings we had to that
point in the DVD, at which time I really understood that there are people
out there that really know no better, and are taking that info as gospel.
It almost seems criminal, but that is not for me to decide. My best action
is to stay the course, and the silliness will take care of itself. That is
how I have always been, and it works just fine! The fact that I am writing
about this is a bit of a stretch for me, but I just wanted to weigh in what
I observed.



+++ Brice it's posts like this that really count. There's a saying in the
law that "silence is assent." If you don't make a comment it's assumed, that
you agree with what you've seen.

+++ I'm glad that someone else is making these comments. I'd probably be
saying something similar; but since I've been tossed off his board it would
probably look like payback.


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Tue Nov 22, 2005  12:07 pm
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


In a message dated 11/20/2005 10:32:46 PM Pacific Standard Time,
jaltak@... writes:

It is pathetic, is it not?

I really pity anyone who is so narrow minded that their brain is pinched in
the crack as these people seem to be.



+++ The sad fact is that it's become more "about the business" than "about
the dogs." As with some trainers the bottom line, has become the driving
force, not to get dogs trained. With that in mind one can't have strongly
opposing opinions present because that might mean that someone won't buy a
video or
a puppy.

+++ It used to be a very good place to get information but so many good
trainers have been squeezed out because they don't want the constant conflict
in
their lives that it's become less useful. And now that he's systematically
eliminating anyone who disagrees with him, it's becoming almost useless.


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Tue Nov 22, 2005  12:04 pm
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


In a message dated 11/20/2005 3:10:35 PM Pacific Standard Time,
jaltak@... writes:

The post where he laid into me was spent, in part, bragging about how good
he was to leave Lou on, even though he didn't agree with Lou's posts.



+++ Thanks for the effort Judith. It does a lot to counteract the suck up
pet dog owners who think that he's a dog training expert.


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Tue Nov 22, 2005  12:06 pm
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


In a message dated 11/20/2005 3:19:50 PM Pacific Standard Time,
yahoo1@... writes:

I figure that when other trainers are worried enough about you to call
you abusive, you must be doing something right. ALL of the best trainers I
know have been called abusive. Congratulations, Lou, you're in good
company!

+++ ROFL.



Has Ed Frawley actually
seen you train dogs?

+++ Ed has neither seen me train a dog nor seen any dogs that I've trained.
His comments are made in a vacuum.

+++ I think that the real difference is one of vocabulary! In posts on his
site I've described using escape training and avoidance training as the terms
are used in Ecollars (as described by Daniel Toratora in his book on
Ecollars, decades ago). In "escape training" the dog performs to escape the
stim,
to make it shut off. It's used early in the training, during the teaching
phase. In "avoidance" training, which occurs much later in the training,
during
the testing or proofing phase, the dog completely avoids the stim by
performing the behavior.

+++ Ed refuses to accept these differences. In both his video and his
article on corrections, he says that they're the same, exposing yet more lack of

knowledge about the ways that an Ecollar can be used. Ed, however refuses to
acknowledge that we're using the words differently. He says that "escape
training is abusive" and that's final. It's sad really.


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Tue Nov 22, 2005  12:07 pm
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


In a message dated 11/20/2005 3:27:05 PM Pacific Standard Time,
sharon_7134@... writes:

It seems like not too long ago he was freely recommending the e-collar for
all sorts of
things. Claimed he never took his dogs out without an e-collar. Am I
understanding you
correctly that he doesn't even want the suggestion that an e-collar could be
more humane
than some other methods?



+++ He still uses the Ecollar but now says that there "are better methods."
He uses the tool as do many people, in a punishment mode, only to correct
refused commands or "bad behavior."

+++ For aggressive dogs he recommends "interrupting the dog's breathing."
(That means using his special Dominant Dog Collar basically a snug fitting
nylon choker to lift the dog's front legs off the ground when he shows
aggression). You're supposed to lower his feet back down when he stops showing

aggression. When asked "how long" should the dog be choked (a term he
conspicuously completely avoids) he replies that "it depends on the dog."
Never mind
that some dogs will eat you for lunch for doing this!

+++ The truth is that for an all out attack he'd recommend that the dog be
choked well into unconsciousness. He used to advocate beating the dog with
fists as he was passing out but that's before he was "born again."



Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Tue Nov 22, 2005  12:08 pm
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


In a message dated 11/20/2005 2:23:19 PM Pacific Standard Time,
sharon_7134@... writes:

If you get hold of his new DVD, please do share.



+++ I haven't seen it yet but a trusted friend has told me of a few
highlights. At one point in the video he gives a dog he's working a "sit"
command.
The dog downs instead. He says, "I don't mind if you down instead."

+++ At one point he accidentally stims himself. He fumbles with the collar
and either nearly drops it or does drop it (can't remember which). This
shows graphically that in spite of what he says, he's NOT working at the lowest

level of stim that the dogs feel. I suppose that he could be working an
exceptionally resistant and stim tolerant dog, but I doubt it. In any case,
why
would you keep that blooper in a commercial video?

+++ Many of the dogs in the video display the sort of behavior that is
common when too high levels of stim are used and the dogs don't understand
what's
expected of them. Tails between legs, ears back, lips quivering, all sorts
of submissive, simpering behavior. That adds to the feeling that too high
levels of stim are used and the dog aren't comfortable with it.

+++ I'm getting a copy of the video and will report on it after viewing it.


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Tue Nov 22, 2005  2:51 pm
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


In a message dated 11/21/2005 5:51:55 PM Pacific Standard Time,
sharon_7134@... writes:

Well didn't he make the original 3-way introduction tape that was used by
Tritronics for
so long?



+++ Frawley had nothing, at all, to do with that video. It featured the
Dobbs, of the Dobbs Training Center and was produced by TriTronics.

+++ I don't think Ed has said a word about Ecollars until the release of his
DVD a few weeks ago.



Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Wed Nov 23, 2005  1:19 am
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


In a message dated 11/22/2005 6:32:43 AM Pacific Standard Time,
dognyard@... writes:

"Winning" a valid arguement by tossing out those who disagree with you
should bring about a lot of suspicion from "followers"...the fact that
it doesn't, just shows you how confusing artificial light can be.




+++ Looks like Ed "won" this disagreement. I've been banned from his forum!
Gonna go cry myself to sleep now.


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


From: UnclLou@...
Date: Tue Nov 29, 2005  1:16 pm
Subject: Re: Ecollar_Dog_Training_Plus Abusvie Training Claim


In a message dated 11/23/2005 4:14:40 PM Pacific Standard Time,
bruce@... writes:

Marketing probably.



+++ Not too long ago you could go to his site and read his articles
describing hanging a dog that showed aggressions towards his handler by
growling.
While the hanging occurred the reader was instructed to "use the dog for a
punching bag."

+++ Now that he's realized that the BIG market for dog training lies with
pets, based on their relative numbers to police, SAR and sport dogs he's become

much more politically correct.


Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA,
(UnclLou@...)
_www.loucastle.com_ (http://www.loucastle.com/)


18805