I don't know how this notion got started, that dogs should adjust their innate behavior just because they want to put a smile on an owner's face. I mean, dogs already fulfill one of the noted shortcomings of the human race by providing a large measure of comforting touch. . . do they also have to feed our egos by being subservient beings intent only on performing to our desires?
No matter what you think, dogs are creatures with their own sets of wants and needs, and sometimes these conflict with what humans want, and sometimes the dog's point of view wins out. This doesn't mean that our dogs don't love us, or are plotting against us to gain ascendancy (the laughable gist of the whole dominance theory). It simply means that sometimes, in your dog's eyes, it's simply more fulfilling to chase that fleeing squirrel or sniff that enticing bitch than it is to respond to your "come" call.
You probably love your parents and want to please them. Did that stop you from breaking curfew or hiding in the bathroom to sneak a smoke or throwing a party when your parents were away or any of the other typical transgressions of youth? Did it mean you loved your parents any less because you did these things? No. It just meant that your own desires trumped your tendency to want to please your parents by conforming to their desires. And so it is with our dogs.
This whole "he should do it because he loves me" idea has kept numerous people from using food as a motivator. Some simply fail in their training, and others resort to punitive methods. Because punishment fits in with the whole Puritan ethic we still seem to cling to, and can let us keep our fanciful thoughts about why dogs do the things they do intact, just labeling this one individual dog as a bit wilfull and in need of some correction. Just as you were probably punished when you did transgress against your parents' rules.
A lot of people are dismayed that their dog will perform better if food is offered as a reward. The really smart ones are delighted that they have such a powerful tool at their command.
I could say a lot more, but I have deadlines to meet. I just hope maybe this will spark some consideration in those who subscribe to this myth. And maybe it will give those of you trying to counteract this line of thought something else to say.
Jun 11, 2009
Even Dog Trainers Pay Their Dues
A lot of people seem to think that dog trainers always have perfect dogs. It's my experience that dog trainers often have flawed dogs, for the simple reason that they're willing to take them on, knowing what they're getting into. Such is the case with my herder/sighthound mix, Nestle.
He was in terrible shape when I adopted him from a shelter - shutdown, morose, and not enjoying the world one bit. We soon sorted that out, within a few months we were bonded, and training was well underway.
Nestle has titles in agility and freestyle, and looks good to the world outside. So much so that people have commented on how overprotective I am about him. But I know the truth - it only takes a tiny hiccup to shatter him into pieces. And a much bigger hiccup occurred late last year when I had major medical problems and, not once but three times, drove to a hospital emergency room, was admitted, and vanished form home for days.
This has resulted in Nestle being severely upset when left in the car. He has eaten bits and pieces of the interior of my Prius, as well as the wrapping of Christmas presents, a selection of water bottles, etc. So we have had to make a change in lifestyle. Sometimes the dogs have to be left home when previously they would have come with us. When they do accompany us, it's now at least partly a training outing. We leave the car, but one person stays behind to watch from some sort of cover (usually behind a parked van some spaces away - we're waiting to be arrested on suspicious of car prowling) and keep an eye on Nestle. At first we left for mere seconds. Now we're up to seven minutes, and we've been moving really slowly so as to avoid any setbacks. Each time we leave, Nestle is given a little blanket he doesn't see at other times, a Greenie chew, and a cue phrase to tell him we will be coming back soon. Each time we come back, he is greeted mildly (no big fuss).
And he is making progress. Yesterday as I was watching him, he managed to lie down for a few seconds a couple of times. He popped back up pretty quickly, but that was the first time he even tried to settle. He still is not eating the Greenie while we're gone, so that will be another big sign of progress.
We are taking a brief vacation, and it has been carefully planned to include the dogs on all possible excursions. We will have to take turns visiting the two indoor attractions - an aquarium and carousel museum - but that's a small price to pay to enjoy a trip together and continue rehabilitating my dog.
He was in terrible shape when I adopted him from a shelter - shutdown, morose, and not enjoying the world one bit. We soon sorted that out, within a few months we were bonded, and training was well underway.
Nestle has titles in agility and freestyle, and looks good to the world outside. So much so that people have commented on how overprotective I am about him. But I know the truth - it only takes a tiny hiccup to shatter him into pieces. And a much bigger hiccup occurred late last year when I had major medical problems and, not once but three times, drove to a hospital emergency room, was admitted, and vanished form home for days.
This has resulted in Nestle being severely upset when left in the car. He has eaten bits and pieces of the interior of my Prius, as well as the wrapping of Christmas presents, a selection of water bottles, etc. So we have had to make a change in lifestyle. Sometimes the dogs have to be left home when previously they would have come with us. When they do accompany us, it's now at least partly a training outing. We leave the car, but one person stays behind to watch from some sort of cover (usually behind a parked van some spaces away - we're waiting to be arrested on suspicious of car prowling) and keep an eye on Nestle. At first we left for mere seconds. Now we're up to seven minutes, and we've been moving really slowly so as to avoid any setbacks. Each time we leave, Nestle is given a little blanket he doesn't see at other times, a Greenie chew, and a cue phrase to tell him we will be coming back soon. Each time we come back, he is greeted mildly (no big fuss).
And he is making progress. Yesterday as I was watching him, he managed to lie down for a few seconds a couple of times. He popped back up pretty quickly, but that was the first time he even tried to settle. He still is not eating the Greenie while we're gone, so that will be another big sign of progress.
We are taking a brief vacation, and it has been carefully planned to include the dogs on all possible excursions. We will have to take turns visiting the two indoor attractions - an aquarium and carousel museum - but that's a small price to pay to enjoy a trip together and continue rehabilitating my dog.
May 22, 2009
More Truth about Aversive Training Methods
A University of Pennsylvania study was publixhed in Applied Animal Behavior Science recently. The study looked at such "firm" training techniques of hitting the dog, growling at the dog, and physically forcing the dog onto his or her back. They found that 25 percent of dogs subjected to these techniques responded with aggression. The techniques, far from asserting dominance over the dog, resulted in making dogs fearful, which then manifested as aggression. (Most canine aggression, by the way, is fear-based.)
The report mentions the popularity of Cesar Milan, the "dog whisperer," specifically, but also notes that this idea of "firm dominance" goes back many years, and will likely take years to wipe away. It seems we've already been trying for years!
The report mentions the popularity of Cesar Milan, the "dog whisperer," specifically, but also notes that this idea of "firm dominance" goes back many years, and will likely take years to wipe away. It seems we've already been trying for years!
May 15, 2009
More on Food Safety
I didn't plan on blogging again quite this soon, but an article in today's New York Times set me off - "Food Companies Are Placing the Onus for Safety on Consumers."
It seems that big agribusiness can't be bothered to guarantee that the ingredients in their products are free of contaminants, bacteria, and other things that could make us sick (or dead). So they have said it's up to the consumer to be sure that they are preparing the foods well enough to kill any bugs. Yet testing, according to the article, found that following the directions for preparing a pot pie left some of the pie below the recommended temperature while much of the crust was burned and inedible. Yummy.
I am fortunate to live in an area that offers an abundance of local foods, from meats to dairy to grains to vegetables. It is sometimes difficult to afford the added cost of buying from the farmers market rather than the supermarket, certainly, but it also certainly feels a lot better.
One positive effect of the bad economy, at least in my eyes, has been to slow the rampant development that was paving over hundreds of acres of farmland every year. A local nonprofit has been doing their best to save agricultural lands, but that is a hard fight, especially against realtor organizations from far outside our local area and with much better funding. They defeated a proposed ballot measure to help raise money to buy development rights, so that farmers could retire with a nest egg but leave their land in agricultural rather than sell it for development. They promised an "alternate solution," but of course that has not been forthcoming.
Other than fresh seafood, you have no way of knowing from whence your foodstuffs are coming. And if the source is China, it's big time buyer beware! So I am fully behind the locavore movement, and hope others out there will push to save their own local agriculture. We are still going to have to feed ourselves in the future, and I don't see how we will do that if we pave over the most productive lands.
It seems that big agribusiness can't be bothered to guarantee that the ingredients in their products are free of contaminants, bacteria, and other things that could make us sick (or dead). So they have said it's up to the consumer to be sure that they are preparing the foods well enough to kill any bugs. Yet testing, according to the article, found that following the directions for preparing a pot pie left some of the pie below the recommended temperature while much of the crust was burned and inedible. Yummy.
I am fortunate to live in an area that offers an abundance of local foods, from meats to dairy to grains to vegetables. It is sometimes difficult to afford the added cost of buying from the farmers market rather than the supermarket, certainly, but it also certainly feels a lot better.
One positive effect of the bad economy, at least in my eyes, has been to slow the rampant development that was paving over hundreds of acres of farmland every year. A local nonprofit has been doing their best to save agricultural lands, but that is a hard fight, especially against realtor organizations from far outside our local area and with much better funding. They defeated a proposed ballot measure to help raise money to buy development rights, so that farmers could retire with a nest egg but leave their land in agricultural rather than sell it for development. They promised an "alternate solution," but of course that has not been forthcoming.
Other than fresh seafood, you have no way of knowing from whence your foodstuffs are coming. And if the source is China, it's big time buyer beware! So I am fully behind the locavore movement, and hope others out there will push to save their own local agriculture. We are still going to have to feed ourselves in the future, and I don't see how we will do that if we pave over the most productive lands.
May 14, 2009
Flashback to Pet Food Recall
This didn't make the news much, but it seems that there are still major problems with importing food ingredients from China. A brief report carried in the May issue of Petfood Industry states that hydrolyzed leather proten, known as a possible carcinogen, was found in batches of dairy products. Someone anonymously tipped authorities that manufacturers were trying yet again to boost apparent protein content of products by adding illegal substances. Leather protein is reported to be similar to melamine (one of the culprits in the major pet food recall), but harder to detect because it is actually a protein, albeit one that happens to be toxic.
When are we going to wake up and smell the roses and realize that we just can't trust products coming in from China? Shoot, we can't trust products coming from our own fields of spinach! We need much tighter inspection of any product coming in from China. If you knew how few inspectors were responsible for supposedly keeping us safe, you would have a panic attack. Fortunately, there are dog foods available that use only U.S.-grown products, certified organic products, and plenty of other safe choices.
When are we going to wake up and smell the roses and realize that we just can't trust products coming in from China? Shoot, we can't trust products coming from our own fields of spinach! We need much tighter inspection of any product coming in from China. If you knew how few inspectors were responsible for supposedly keeping us safe, you would have a panic attack. Fortunately, there are dog foods available that use only U.S.-grown products, certified organic products, and plenty of other safe choices.
May 6, 2009
E-Collars as "Torture"
There was a segment on one of my local news broadcasts last night about a father who is now charged with torture because he put canine shock collars on his children. According to the broadcast, he thought it was funny and got his jollies chasing his kids around and threatening to shock them or actually doing so. But this raises some important questions in my mind - is it considered torture because he wasn't training his children but just shocking them for the hell of it, or because he put the collars on humans rather than dogs?
The report even noted that "it wasn't specified if the man even owned a dog" . . . which seems to intimate that it would have been perfectly fine if he had put the collar on his dog and shocked to his heart's content.
So just what is the dividing line here? Is it acceptable to shock (or "stimulate," as the manufacturers of the e-collars like to phrase it) one species of animal but not another? (Yes, we are indeed animals.) Or is it acceptable to shock for the purposes of training but not otherwise?
Unlike a lot of positive trainers, I actually do see a (limited) place for shock collars in training. Some behaviors are so potentially unsafe that the temporary infliction of some pain seems a reasonable response to avoid worse consequences - avoiding rattlesnakes, stopping chasing of deer (for which dogs can be shot), stopping chasing of cars. Aside from the rattlesnake training, it would be less painful and just as effective to keep the dog on leash or confined in a fenced yard, but in reality this isn't going to happen a lot of the time.
What caught my attention in this news piece was the blithe assumption that the shock collar was perfectly fine for one species, but "torture" for the other. If the piece had been presented differently, emphasizing that the collar was being used solely for entertaiment of the male (it doesn't seem appropriate to call him a man or a father) and not for any even marginally legitimate purpose, it wouldn't have struck me this way. But the fact that it was presented the way that it was seems to say a lot about public opinion.
I subscribe to Gandhi's excellent quote (which I may not have word-perfect) - "A nation will be known by the way it treats its animals."
The report even noted that "it wasn't specified if the man even owned a dog" . . . which seems to intimate that it would have been perfectly fine if he had put the collar on his dog and shocked to his heart's content.
So just what is the dividing line here? Is it acceptable to shock (or "stimulate," as the manufacturers of the e-collars like to phrase it) one species of animal but not another? (Yes, we are indeed animals.) Or is it acceptable to shock for the purposes of training but not otherwise?
Unlike a lot of positive trainers, I actually do see a (limited) place for shock collars in training. Some behaviors are so potentially unsafe that the temporary infliction of some pain seems a reasonable response to avoid worse consequences - avoiding rattlesnakes, stopping chasing of deer (for which dogs can be shot), stopping chasing of cars. Aside from the rattlesnake training, it would be less painful and just as effective to keep the dog on leash or confined in a fenced yard, but in reality this isn't going to happen a lot of the time.
What caught my attention in this news piece was the blithe assumption that the shock collar was perfectly fine for one species, but "torture" for the other. If the piece had been presented differently, emphasizing that the collar was being used solely for entertaiment of the male (it doesn't seem appropriate to call him a man or a father) and not for any even marginally legitimate purpose, it wouldn't have struck me this way. But the fact that it was presented the way that it was seems to say a lot about public opinion.
I subscribe to Gandhi's excellent quote (which I may not have word-perfect) - "A nation will be known by the way it treats its animals."
May 1, 2009
let's all be safe out there in the garden
Now that spring has finally arrived in the Northwest, I've been doing a ton of gardening. And it dawned on me that, as the "authority" on dogs and gardens, I really should say something hear about keeping it safe for your dog when working in the yard.
The biggest immediate hazard is snail and slug baits. The metaldehyde-based products unfortunately kill dozens of dogs every year. And there's no need for it any more, because there is a safe product called Sluggo that works perfectly well. Believe me, we grow our slugs BIG here in the Northwest, and Sluggo takes care of them efficiently and without any hazard to your dog, or to birds or other wildlife. So please don't use the old-style snail/slug baits.
Every year, lawns suck up tons of fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides. None of these are particularly friendly to the environment or to your dog. There is a growing movement afoot to change the way people think about their lawns, using organic practices rather than all the chemicals. I don't get the whole "perfect lawn" thing - clover is just fine with me, and my sheep LOVE dandelions. Please take it easy on the environment, lower your dog's risk of bladder cancer (studies have linked lawn chemicals and this cancer), and go green while keeping your lawn green.
And for weeding, especially those tap-root type weeds (like the aforementioned dandelions), there is a great tool called, funnily enough, the Weed Hound, that pulls them up quite well. It's a long-handled device, so you don't even have to bend over -- just step on the appropriate part of the tool, pull the weed out of the ground, and press the plunger to release it into a bucket, your compost pile, or whatever.
Enjoy your garden, enjoy your dog, enjoy the environment.
The biggest immediate hazard is snail and slug baits. The metaldehyde-based products unfortunately kill dozens of dogs every year. And there's no need for it any more, because there is a safe product called Sluggo that works perfectly well. Believe me, we grow our slugs BIG here in the Northwest, and Sluggo takes care of them efficiently and without any hazard to your dog, or to birds or other wildlife. So please don't use the old-style snail/slug baits.
Every year, lawns suck up tons of fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides. None of these are particularly friendly to the environment or to your dog. There is a growing movement afoot to change the way people think about their lawns, using organic practices rather than all the chemicals. I don't get the whole "perfect lawn" thing - clover is just fine with me, and my sheep LOVE dandelions. Please take it easy on the environment, lower your dog's risk of bladder cancer (studies have linked lawn chemicals and this cancer), and go green while keeping your lawn green.
And for weeding, especially those tap-root type weeds (like the aforementioned dandelions), there is a great tool called, funnily enough, the Weed Hound, that pulls them up quite well. It's a long-handled device, so you don't even have to bend over -- just step on the appropriate part of the tool, pull the weed out of the ground, and press the plunger to release it into a bucket, your compost pile, or whatever.
Enjoy your garden, enjoy your dog, enjoy the environment.
Apr 22, 2009
animal welfare/animal rights
There is a woeful lack of understanding out in the general public about the difference between animal welfare and animal rights. Well-meaning people are unfortunately supporting groups that are actually working to undermine the very things in which they believe.
Animal welfare wants to improve the lot of domesticated animals by such actions as outlawing cruel practices with livestock (such as raising veal calves in tiny boxes where they can't turn around), minimizing live animal experimentation as much as possible while acknowledging that some research is necessary and valuable (for instance, dogs suffer many of the same diseases as humans and thus are an excellent research model that benefits both species), halting animal cruelty such as dog fighting and cock fighting.
Animal rights wants to stop any sort of use of animals by humans, including barring you from owning pets. They don't often say this in public, but I have a letter somewhere from the founder of one of the most powerful groups, stating just that goal. So what are you truly supporting when you give one of these groups money? You are helping them force you to get rid of your beloved dog(s), cat(s), or whatever animal companions you may have.
It's not always clear cut, either. Some groups veer back and forth from one side of the dichotomy to the other, holding good positions and doing valuable work on one specific issue while going over the line on another.
I'm not going to name specific groups -- I'll probably get hassled enough just for going this far. But I would urge everyone to fully investigate the goals and practices of any group before offering support. Some of the most extreme groups can actually be classified as domestic terrorists who have bombed offices or universities, freed lab animals (who can no more fend for themselves in the wild than most of us could), and committed other illegal acts. Put your money where your true goals are -- if you want to support canine health or TNR programs for feral cats or stop greyhound racing or whatever, be sure whatever group you choose agrees with your goals and doesn't want to go further than you would want.
Animal welfare wants to improve the lot of domesticated animals by such actions as outlawing cruel practices with livestock (such as raising veal calves in tiny boxes where they can't turn around), minimizing live animal experimentation as much as possible while acknowledging that some research is necessary and valuable (for instance, dogs suffer many of the same diseases as humans and thus are an excellent research model that benefits both species), halting animal cruelty such as dog fighting and cock fighting.
Animal rights wants to stop any sort of use of animals by humans, including barring you from owning pets. They don't often say this in public, but I have a letter somewhere from the founder of one of the most powerful groups, stating just that goal. So what are you truly supporting when you give one of these groups money? You are helping them force you to get rid of your beloved dog(s), cat(s), or whatever animal companions you may have.
It's not always clear cut, either. Some groups veer back and forth from one side of the dichotomy to the other, holding good positions and doing valuable work on one specific issue while going over the line on another.
I'm not going to name specific groups -- I'll probably get hassled enough just for going this far. But I would urge everyone to fully investigate the goals and practices of any group before offering support. Some of the most extreme groups can actually be classified as domestic terrorists who have bombed offices or universities, freed lab animals (who can no more fend for themselves in the wild than most of us could), and committed other illegal acts. Put your money where your true goals are -- if you want to support canine health or TNR programs for feral cats or stop greyhound racing or whatever, be sure whatever group you choose agrees with your goals and doesn't want to go further than you would want.
Apr 14, 2009
The New First Dog
Well, the Obama girls have their dog at last. It was sensible of the Obamas to take some time to settle in first (though I'm sure the girls found it hard to wait). And the tale of their new pup is a pretty karmic one.
He comes from a breeder in Texas, who uses a theme to name her litters, as a lot of breeders do. The litter that was born six months ago was named on a theme of Hope and Change. One of the puppies went to Senator Ted Kenneday (his third current Portuguese Water Dog). One of the puppies went to a home in Washington, DC where they had lost one of their two older Porties. They got the puppy as company for their remaining older dog, but it turned out that the two did not get along. So the puppy was returned to the breeder. Mrs. Ted Kennedy heard about the puppy being bounced back to the owner, through a friend. And knowing that the Obamas were considering a Portugues Water Dog, she mentioned it to her husband. And lo and behold, the puppy who needed a second chance has now become the new First Dog.
His paper name is Amigo's New Hope, and he indeed has some new hope.
The breeder said "Bo," as the girls named him, should be quite the gentleman at the White House. . . until he sees the fountains. They are water dogs born and bred, after all, and he may just find the water too irresistible.
I heard that the Obamas had been in touch with Ken Ramirez, head trainer at the Shedd Aquarium in Chicago, about choosing a dog, and I hope they will stay in touch with him about training for Bo. This is a breed that can do just about anything, and needs to be kept busy both mentally and physically.
Best wishes for a long and happy life together - it seems to be in the stars.
He comes from a breeder in Texas, who uses a theme to name her litters, as a lot of breeders do. The litter that was born six months ago was named on a theme of Hope and Change. One of the puppies went to Senator Ted Kenneday (his third current Portuguese Water Dog). One of the puppies went to a home in Washington, DC where they had lost one of their two older Porties. They got the puppy as company for their remaining older dog, but it turned out that the two did not get along. So the puppy was returned to the breeder. Mrs. Ted Kennedy heard about the puppy being bounced back to the owner, through a friend. And knowing that the Obamas were considering a Portugues Water Dog, she mentioned it to her husband. And lo and behold, the puppy who needed a second chance has now become the new First Dog.
His paper name is Amigo's New Hope, and he indeed has some new hope.
The breeder said "Bo," as the girls named him, should be quite the gentleman at the White House. . . until he sees the fountains. They are water dogs born and bred, after all, and he may just find the water too irresistible.
I heard that the Obamas had been in touch with Ken Ramirez, head trainer at the Shedd Aquarium in Chicago, about choosing a dog, and I hope they will stay in touch with him about training for Bo. This is a breed that can do just about anything, and needs to be kept busy both mentally and physically.
Best wishes for a long and happy life together - it seems to be in the stars.
Mar 30, 2009
Interesting Dog Factoids in Magazines
The April issue of Smithsonian had a tiny piece about "A Wolf in Dog's Clothing." In North America, wolves come in gray and white, but also black. Stanford University scientists compared the DNA of the black wolves with the DNA of coyotes and dogs and seem to have found that the gene for black coat comes from dogs. They theorize that the wolves interbred with domesticated dogs that came across the Bering Strait on the land bridge with people migrating from Asia more than 10,000 years ago. So in an interesting circle, wolves became domestic dogs and the dogs then brought their genes back to the wolves.
A second piece was in Conservation Northwest, and it detailed a canine service I'm been reading about a lot lately - finding scat. In this particular instance, dogs are being used to find grizzly bear scat for the Cascades Carnivore Connectivity Project. They want to determine the effect of the roads crossing the Cascades on the local grizzly bear population, and the dogs locate the scat for genetic testing, and for hints on where to place hair sample devices and wildlife cameras.
A second piece was in Conservation Northwest, and it detailed a canine service I'm been reading about a lot lately - finding scat. In this particular instance, dogs are being used to find grizzly bear scat for the Cascades Carnivore Connectivity Project. They want to determine the effect of the roads crossing the Cascades on the local grizzly bear population, and the dogs locate the scat for genetic testing, and for hints on where to place hair sample devices and wildlife cameras.
Mar 27, 2009
Puppy Mills on Nightline
Tonight, Nightline will be doing an expose on Amish puppy mills in Pennsylvania. I believe this is the same guy, from Main Line Animal Rescue, who was on Oprah some time ago. He goes around and tries to rescue some of the breeding dogs and tries to get the worst operations shut down. But he is fighting a losing battle as long as people continue to buy the product from the puppy mills. So if you aren't buying from a breeder or rescuing from a shelter, you just may be part of the problem. A pet shop local to me advertises that all their puppies are from local breeders, but if you demand to see the paperwork, they came from Kansas or Arkansas. . . almost certainly from puppy mills.
I was dumb enough to buy a puppy from a pet shop back in my youth. She was far too young (6 weeks) and quite ill, and I nursed her back to health and dealt with her mental problems for 16 years. The only things I can say in my defense was that I was young and stupid and at least I made the pet shop honor their health guarantee, which contributed to getting them shut down.
Now my dogs have all come from rescue. Someday I may buy a purebred from a breeder, but I'm kind of fond of my rescues. And no matter where they may have started life - some may have originated in puppy mills, after all - I'm not putting any money in anyone's pocket.
I'm not anti-breeding. Heck, I've covered Westminster for the AKC Gazette. But I am against puppy mills. So please think before you purchase a dog.
I was dumb enough to buy a puppy from a pet shop back in my youth. She was far too young (6 weeks) and quite ill, and I nursed her back to health and dealt with her mental problems for 16 years. The only things I can say in my defense was that I was young and stupid and at least I made the pet shop honor their health guarantee, which contributed to getting them shut down.
Now my dogs have all come from rescue. Someday I may buy a purebred from a breeder, but I'm kind of fond of my rescues. And no matter where they may have started life - some may have originated in puppy mills, after all - I'm not putting any money in anyone's pocket.
I'm not anti-breeding. Heck, I've covered Westminster for the AKC Gazette. But I am against puppy mills. So please think before you purchase a dog.
Mar 19, 2009
Confidence Is Fragile
My dog Nestle had pretty much given up on the world when I adopted him from a shelter. He quickly bloomed to appreciate the good things in life - walks, meals, treats, even training. But it took a full six months for us to establish a bond, and he still spent too much time with his ears pulled back and his mouth in a tight grimace. We cautiously saw new sights, met new people and dogs, practiced agility purely for the increased confidence, and he blossomed. People who see him out and about with me think he's a perfectly sound dog. But I know differently, and that was brought home to me recently.
I had some quite serious medical problems, and through November and December, we had several occasions when we all (dogs and humans) got in the car, drove to the emergency room, and I went in and didn't come back out. This has resulted in Nestle being very anxious when left in the car. He started out just hiding and trembling on the floor in the front (the dogs ride in the back and aren't supposed to come into the front. Then he tore up some Christmas presents that were on the floor in the front. Since then he has torn up other things on the floor.
So his confidence is, as I always knew, fragile. We are working on getting his comfort level back, taking car rides and leaving the car for only short periods at a time. He has had several good days where he remained in the back, and another episode of tearing up a bag of pastries in the front. It is especially bad if I have to go to the hospital for tests or the cancer treatment center for appointments. He obviously recognizes these places.
But we are working on it, and I'm sure he will settle down again in time. It just reminds me that living with dogs is a constant work in progress.
I had some quite serious medical problems, and through November and December, we had several occasions when we all (dogs and humans) got in the car, drove to the emergency room, and I went in and didn't come back out. This has resulted in Nestle being very anxious when left in the car. He started out just hiding and trembling on the floor in the front (the dogs ride in the back and aren't supposed to come into the front. Then he tore up some Christmas presents that were on the floor in the front. Since then he has torn up other things on the floor.
So his confidence is, as I always knew, fragile. We are working on getting his comfort level back, taking car rides and leaving the car for only short periods at a time. He has had several good days where he remained in the back, and another episode of tearing up a bag of pastries in the front. It is especially bad if I have to go to the hospital for tests or the cancer treatment center for appointments. He obviously recognizes these places.
But we are working on it, and I'm sure he will settle down again in time. It just reminds me that living with dogs is a constant work in progress.
Mar 11, 2009
National Animal Identification System
Full Disclosure: This has nothing to do with dogs.
There is a proposed bill in DC right now, to have all farm animals chipped for identification purposes, so they can be tracked. Though this may sound like an excellent idea, given recent problems with disease outbreaks and contamination problems, as usual, there is a downside.
For big factory farms, the cost and additional time would be minimal. But for the small family farmer, it could be crippling. And I think we need to support and encourage the small family farm. With all the supposed focus on anti-terrorism, what do you think might be the most essential thing to have in the event of some really catastrophic event? I'm thinking a local food supply. Not depending on food items shipped from thousands of miles away.
If you're lucky enough to live where there still is local food being produced, I hope that you will make every effort to support it. The small farmer struggles constantly to keep it going. Here, we have two lively farmers' markets, and an online store where you can order local foods and pick them up at a central dispersal site. We have farm shares, and can even work on the farms to pay for part of them. People raise grass-fed beef and free-roaming chickens, organic vegetables, and even grains, which a local bakery is using to make its breads and pastries.
I hope Congress does not pass this proposed bill, at least not without a provision being made for small family farms.
There is a proposed bill in DC right now, to have all farm animals chipped for identification purposes, so they can be tracked. Though this may sound like an excellent idea, given recent problems with disease outbreaks and contamination problems, as usual, there is a downside.
For big factory farms, the cost and additional time would be minimal. But for the small family farmer, it could be crippling. And I think we need to support and encourage the small family farm. With all the supposed focus on anti-terrorism, what do you think might be the most essential thing to have in the event of some really catastrophic event? I'm thinking a local food supply. Not depending on food items shipped from thousands of miles away.
If you're lucky enough to live where there still is local food being produced, I hope that you will make every effort to support it. The small farmer struggles constantly to keep it going. Here, we have two lively farmers' markets, and an online store where you can order local foods and pick them up at a central dispersal site. We have farm shares, and can even work on the farms to pay for part of them. People raise grass-fed beef and free-roaming chickens, organic vegetables, and even grains, which a local bakery is using to make its breads and pastries.
I hope Congress does not pass this proposed bill, at least not without a provision being made for small family farms.
Mar 2, 2009
Censorship Is Not For Me
One of the television news magazines apparently recently ran a piece on AKC dog shows. I can't comment on it as I didn't see it, but I can comment on some of the fallout. I have it first-hand from people to whom it has happened that at least some AKC clubs are now trying to ban media from their shows. As most shows are held in public places, this seems like an illegal action. And besides, quite the overreaction. Yes, the press does sometimes overstep, especially in these days of "if it bleeds, it leads," but people also need to remember that the press has been responsible for uncovering things like Watergate and Love Canal.
As a long-time member of Dog Writers Association of America, I think we need to let the AKC know that trying to ban media is an excruciatingly bad idea. The people who have personally been told they will no longer be welcome at shows were also significant contributors of awards and financial support, so it's especially unfair.
And the AKC needs to remember that they aren't the only game in town - there is the UKC, which welcomes mixed breeds as well as purebreds.
Censorship is not an option. Maybe clubs need to engage in more education, as that was always stated as one of the prime objectives of the AKC regarding dog shows.
As a long-time member of Dog Writers Association of America, I think we need to let the AKC know that trying to ban media is an excruciatingly bad idea. The people who have personally been told they will no longer be welcome at shows were also significant contributors of awards and financial support, so it's especially unfair.
And the AKC needs to remember that they aren't the only game in town - there is the UKC, which welcomes mixed breeds as well as purebreds.
Censorship is not an option. Maybe clubs need to engage in more education, as that was always stated as one of the prime objectives of the AKC regarding dog shows.
Feb 20, 2009
Friends Are Everything
I received a surprise in my email this past week - a message from someone who reads my blog asking where I'd been! I didn't know I had any readers who cared enough to ask. But now here I am, back from fighting the latest round of cancer. And I have to tell you, it was borne home to me through this battle just how important good friends are.
My dog Nestle is part border collie, so even though he is now 10, he still requires a good bout of regular daily exercise. My most excellent friend and roommate Judy saw to his exercise while I was in and out of various hospitals. When I was home, she not only saw to my care, she continued to exercise Nestle. I don't think any of us would have made it through this with any shred of sanity intact without her.
So that led me to think about people who don't have such an immediate dependable support system. What happens to their pets if they are whisked off to the emergency room in the middle of the night?
I am lucky enough to also have a brother living nearby, and had it been necessary, he would have taken my dog into his home. But have you thought about this? The single individuals among you out there might want to have a plan for such an eventuality, one you keep up to date. In my case, Judy even brought Nestle to visit me in a Seattle hospital (they have regulations in place to accept canine visitors), which helped cheer my day. The whole experience has set back Nestle's tenuous self-confidence. . . now, if we visit a medical establishment, which I still have to do with some frequency, and he is left in the car, he gets a little wild with the need to tear things up to calm his nerves. He's obviously concerned that I will be disappearing again, so it's going to take some understanding and desensitizing till he can once again be calm in the car.
I know I'm sort of wandering from subject to subject here, but the overall message is that Nestle had someone who loved him to look after him when I couldn't. Please make sure that your own dog has the same support system. . . just in case.
I will try to post more regularly now that I am back working at my desk. And if any of you out there have any questions about anything I write here, please feel free to contact me. Out of necessity, I have a lot of fairly unique experience with dealing with dogs and the medical establishment simultaneously.
My dog Nestle is part border collie, so even though he is now 10, he still requires a good bout of regular daily exercise. My most excellent friend and roommate Judy saw to his exercise while I was in and out of various hospitals. When I was home, she not only saw to my care, she continued to exercise Nestle. I don't think any of us would have made it through this with any shred of sanity intact without her.
So that led me to think about people who don't have such an immediate dependable support system. What happens to their pets if they are whisked off to the emergency room in the middle of the night?
I am lucky enough to also have a brother living nearby, and had it been necessary, he would have taken my dog into his home. But have you thought about this? The single individuals among you out there might want to have a plan for such an eventuality, one you keep up to date. In my case, Judy even brought Nestle to visit me in a Seattle hospital (they have regulations in place to accept canine visitors), which helped cheer my day. The whole experience has set back Nestle's tenuous self-confidence. . . now, if we visit a medical establishment, which I still have to do with some frequency, and he is left in the car, he gets a little wild with the need to tear things up to calm his nerves. He's obviously concerned that I will be disappearing again, so it's going to take some understanding and desensitizing till he can once again be calm in the car.
I know I'm sort of wandering from subject to subject here, but the overall message is that Nestle had someone who loved him to look after him when I couldn't. Please make sure that your own dog has the same support system. . . just in case.
I will try to post more regularly now that I am back working at my desk. And if any of you out there have any questions about anything I write here, please feel free to contact me. Out of necessity, I have a lot of fairly unique experience with dealing with dogs and the medical establishment simultaneously.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)