Have you ever seen an Arctic Wolf in a full hunting mode pursuing wildfowl?
Well, unless you’ve ever spent some time wandering around the Canadian Arctic or Greenland you haven’t, because they’ve never been filmed doing it, that is until NOW.
written by Andrew McInnis. Appearing in K9 Magazine issue 23
Celine Jacobs is a 37 year old dog warden, employed by South Gloucestershire Council. Up until very recently, she enjoyed her job. She found that helping dogs and educating dog owners was very rewarding. She took great pride in her work and cherished the time she was able to spend in the company of dogs. Very recently she was forced to do something which went against every fibre of compassion in her body – she took a healthy, young dog to be put down. Ever since, she has struggled to come to terms with what she did, this is her story.
“The other day I had to do something that went against everything I have ever strived for, I took a lovely, young, healthy dog to the vets and I had it put to sleep, the reason for this was that he had been identified by an expert as being a Pit Bull type.
When the expert identified the dog yesterday I thought my heart would break, without an owner to fight the dog’s case the law says we have to destroy them. For seven years I have been a dog warden and for seven years I have never put a dog to sleep that wasn’t on the advice of a vet due to illness or injury.”
Red was a stray. He couldn’t help the fact that his genetics and appearance categorised him as dangerous. He was young, healthy and apparently very friendly.
“This dog was only about one year old, he was highly social with other dogs, even when a Jack Russell tried to attack him, he showed no aggression. I could touch him all over and kiss his face and cuddle him with no hint of aggression, he was well mannered and well behaved, probably the nicest dog in the kennels at the time.
Since 10.30am yesterday I have cried, all day and all night and I have thought of nothing else apart from how I could have stopped this happening, but there was nothing I could do, so this morning at 7.30am I went to the kennels and I got Red out, we walked about 5 miles and then we went in a secure paddock and played chase with a ball until he was worn out, then I took him to a food van and bought him some sausages.”
For a dog warden, having a dog put to sleep is the last resort and is typically done due to illness or injury. The experience of putting Red to sleep has left Celine traumatised.
“When we went in to the vets his tail was still wagging and he sat there licking my face and licking the tears of my face, he didn’t know I was going to have him killed. I held him all the time and he slipped away in my arms quietly, I held him even when he was dead and sobbed my heart out.
Now I feel empty, I feel like I have finally been beaten and that all I have ever tried to do has been broken, I wanted to dedicate my life to saving dogs and now I have killed a fit, healthy, happy dog and I don’t think I can live with it or continue to work as a Dog Warden.
I know a lot of people think dog wardens enjoy killing dogs, I have never been so miserable or felt that what I was doing so wrong……Now I feel that I hate people, I hate the law and I hate my job. The only small thing that has kept me from falling completely apart over this is the fact that at least I know no one can hurt him now, he will never be thrown in a pit and ripped to pieces and no one will ever abuse him or beat him. I hope he enjoyed his morning with me before he went. I know that I had to do this as it is the law and it is what my job entails, as a dog lover however it is heart breaking.”
That was Celine speaking just hours after her ordeal. But how does she feel now that she has had time to reflect?
“I am still devastated about Red and not a day passes when I do not feel that I have taken a life that I had no right to take. Red was a lovely young dog and as far as I could see there was no aggression in him towards people or other dogs. I became a dog warden to save dogs lives not to kill dogs for no other reason than the shape of their bodies. I will never forget Red, as it went against everything I believed in, I came very close to leaving the job after I killed red. It was only the massive response I had from people that made me carry on. But now every time I get called for a stray I dread it being another Pit Bull type that I may have to kill. It has taken the joy out of my job and destroyed a part of me.”
Breed specific legislation was certainly an influential factor in the sequence of events that lead to Red’s death, but how does Celine now feel about a law that she has been governed by throughout her professional life.
“The legislation should assess all dogs on their temperament and the owners should be taken into account. Owners in most cases are responsible for the behaviour of the dog. I believe that before anyone is allowed a dog they should pass a compulsory basic test which shows they have some understanding of what a dog requires and what it takes to make sure the dog is well socialised and trained and will not become a danger. I also believe that a license of some description should be reintroduced, if a cost was involved it may deter people buying dogs on a whim. The owners of dangerous dogs should also be punished to make them think twice before getting another dog.”
————————————————————————
This article appears in K9 Magazine issue no 23
Pick up a copy here
————————————————————————
At the start of this week a man died on a British street.
He wasn’t stabbed, shot or run over by a car.
In fact, at the time of this being written, we don’t actually know how he died.
What we do know is that he was walking his dog, his dog of 10 years that he’d had from a puppy, he collapsed and the dog pulled at him enough to cause serious injuries.
Maybe the dog killed him by pulling at his body. Maybe whatever it was that caused him to collapse killed him. We don’t know.
But let’s deal, today at least, in what we do know.
We do know that the incidents of dogs - whatever their breed - suddenly deciding to attack and kill their owners out of nowhere, is, to say the least, very rare.
We do know that Britain (and other countries) seems to thrive on a good ‘devil dog’ story. We do know which are the breeds that have ‘earned’ that tag.
We do know the current wearer of that name is the Rottweiler. We do know the man who died at the start of a week was a Rottweiler owner. We do know that his dog did not just launch into a fatal attack on him ‘out of nowhere’. We do know that some reporting of his death has completely neglected to give the full picture.
We do know that people are influenced by what they read and hear.
We do know that people are prone to panic and make knee jerk decisions based on nothing more than hype and hot air.
We do know that people are abandoning Rottweilers in growing numbers.
We do know that when another, irresponsible, panicking, dog owner goes knee jerking all the way to the forest to dump their litter of Rottweilers and their mother who was found dead by RSPCA officers, that certain members of the media should accept their rampant, non fact based demonisation of a particular dog breed is in no small part responsible for this
Please, if you’re going to directly contribute to people making irresponsible, knee jerk decisions, don’t then weep about animal welfare issues when it suits you to do so.
We won’t overcome the problem of irresponsible owners and subsequently stop dog attacks by apportioning the blame in the wrong direction. Devil dog hype might sell papers, it doesn’t stop dog attacks and does nothing for animal welfare. It’s not part of the solution, in fact it’s part of the problem. Go here, stop dog attacks.
A recent meeting between Rottweiler breed club representatives and the Kennel Club produced a sensational claim that it was re-homed Rottweilers, placed into unsuitable homes that had ’caused most of the problems’ in relation to the highly publicised Rottweiler attacks of the past few years.
Dave Parrish, of The Rottweiler Club went on to propose re-homed Rottweilers only be placed with families who have been assessed by a local dog warden as to their suitability to manage a rescue dog.
The Kennel Club’s Holly Lee, responding to the issue of re-homing dogs said: “this was not her area of work, but she agreed that it needed looking at further.”
K9 Magazine understands a complaint has been lodged with the Kennel Club by a prominent Rottweiler re-homing charity, unhappy at the claims made in the meeting.
The sensational claim about re-homed Rottweilers was not the only shock to come from the meeting.
Asked about whether it would be possible to tighten restrictions on poorly bred dogs being sold by refusing to accept registrations from bad breeders, Holly Lee revealed the Kennel Club could not deny registrations for ‘legal reasons’.
She went onto explain that it was the Kennel Club’s “intention to eventually” demand all health tests for a breed requirement of the KC accredited breeder scheme.
Margaret Yates, on behalf of the British Rottweiler Association, expressed concern about the KC accredited breeder scheme, suggesting that anyone who applied and paid a fee would be accepted, which would mislead the public into placing greater trust in accredited breeders over non accredited ones.
Despite the British Rottweiler Association’s concerns over loose regulation of the Kennel Club accredited breeder scheme, Leanne Lewis of the Rottweiler Club of Wales proposed only Rottweilers bred within the Kennel Club’s Accredited Breeder Scheme to be registered with the Kennel Club (at all).
John Hubble, of the South Western Rottweiler Association was more directly critical of the accredited breeder scheme though.
He said “the Accredited Breeder Scheme had been rushed into existence and a lot of people see it as a platform to sell puppies.”
Responding to Mr Hubble’s criticism, Dr Sampson - of the Kennel Club Breeder scheme - said it had been “necessary to get the scheme up and running quickly as there was a huge political agenda surrounding the welfare of pure bred dogs.”
One of the leading auction houses for antiques and fine art, today announced the auctioning of a rare collection of Charles Schulz “Snoopy” and other “Peanuts” animations. Nineteen lots of Schulz’ material, from the collection of past CBS president Dr. Frank Stanton, will be offered within Skinner’s upcoming American & European Paintings and Prints sale to be held on March 7th 2008 in Skinner’s Boston gallery. The print session will begin at 12 noon, and the paintings session, including the Frank Stanton collection, will begin at 4 p.m. Stanton was a life-long animal lover and as such the proceeds from the sale of his collection will benefit two local animal organizations: the Animal Rescue League of Boston and The New England Wildlife Center.
Vets Now, an emergency out of hours veterinary clinic provider, has admitted an unusually high number of dogs recently who have been sniffing out the leftover Christmas chocolates, with almost fatal consequences.
The Vets Now Sheffield clinic alone has seen three cases in the past few weeks, highlighting the fact that many owners may be unaware of the dangers that chocolate poses if consumed by our four legged friends. Our pets are just as partial to a sweet treat as we are; however, even a small amount of chocolate, if consumed by your pet, can be enough to cause death. Dogs are most commonly affected by chocolate poisoning although cats, especially kittens, parrots and rodents are also susceptible.
Chocolate contains a substance called theobromine and although humans have no problem clearing their system of the substance, dogs in particular struggle to get rid of it. The substance can stay in a dog’s system for three days and just 50g of chocolate can be enough to kill a small dog.
Talking about the recent increase in chocolate poisoning cases, Ian Lowe, Senior Veterinary Surgeon at Vets Now Sheffield said; “We have treated an unusually high number of cases of chocolate poisoning over the past few weeks, which have probably been caused by dogs sniffing out the leftover Christmas chocolates. In all cases, the owners had been quick to recognise the signs of chocolate poisoning and have sought urgent treatment. In most cases, we have induced vomiting to empty the dogs’ stomachs and we were delighted that all three dogs who were brought to us made quick and full recoveries. Not all dogs are so lucky and if more than two hours has passed, the chocolate poisoning the symptoms can be more serious, often resulting in fitting, heart problems, a coma and even death.â€
One of the dogs who was admitted, Henry, a five year old Shar Pei from Doncaster, had eaten a box of dark chocolates filled with Cointreau and was transferred to Vets Now on a drip by his local daytime practice. His condition was extremely serious but after receiving intensive care overnight, including fluid replacement, Henry was able to soon able to drink and eat again and gave a healthy wag of the tail to show he was back on the road to recovery before being given the all clear!Â
If you suspect that your pet might have pinched a chocolate treat, please look out for the following symptoms and seek urgent veterinary treatment:
The good news is that if caught early enough, chocolate poisoning can be treated successfully but with Valentine’s Day just around the corner, you can make sure that your pet is safe by placing chocolates within reach of your loved one only!Â
To find out if Vets Now has a clinic in your area, please visit www.vets-now.com
I am a huge terrier lover and have been thinking about starting my own dog breeding business at some point. I have a savings set aside to buy a large piece of property, where there would be plenty of room for the dogs to run and I could add kennels, etc. I had seen a couple breeding books at the bookstore, but wasn’t sure which would be the most useful. Fortunately, I found reviews on dog breeding books and other breeding products. The book I chose is very informative and it’s nice to know there is a place I can go to find more information about products when I finally start with my business.
Retired Greyhound Trust (RGT) volunteer, Alison Bandurak, was chosen to receive an award for ‘services to retired greyhounds’ at this year’s British Greyhound Racing Board (BGRB) Awards ceremony.
As the manager of Monmore Green RGT near Wolverhampton, Alison recently celebrated rehoming her 1,000th greyhound. The BGRB Award recognises her ongoing dedication to caring for greyhounds after they retire from the racetrack.
Monmore Green RGT, one of 70 nationwide branches of the charity, was founded in 2002 and has gone from strength to strength thanks to Alison’s enthusiasm and hard work.
“I was really surprised when I heard I had won this award,” comments Alison. “There are thousands of volunteers working tirelessly for retired greyhounds, but everyone – be they owners, trainers, promoters or the media – has a role to play. Greyhounds are such wonderful dogs and they all deserve to have a happy retirement once their racing careers are over.”
The RGT was also celebrating as guests attending the gala dinner at London’s Royal Lancaster Hotel made this year’s awards ceremony the most successful fund raising event ever for the charity. RGT volunteers collected £10,000 in donations, raised through the sale of raffle tickets and an auction.
“It was a great evening for the RGT,” comments Ivor Stocker, RGT director. “It was fantastic to see Alison rewarded for all her hard work looking after retired greyhounds and promoting them as pets within her local community.
“The £10,000 we raised will go a long way to support the work of our many volunteers. I would like to thank everyone for their generous donations.”
To find out more about adopting a retired greyhound from your local branch or for more information about becoming an RGT volunteer log on to
www.retiredgreyhounds.co.uk or call the charity’s head office on 0844 826 842.
According to an interesting article in today’s Daily Telegraph newspaper, new research is suggesting cross breed dogs are smarter than their pedigreed counterparts:
A study by Dr David Smith of Aberdeen University’s department of animal sciences shows that crossbred dogs have better spatial awareness and problem-solving abilities than pedigrees, and are better suited for work as police dogs and as guides for the blind.
The study involved putting 100 dogs through seven tests and giving each a mark out of 30.
A collie-spaniel cross called Jet was the brightest dog, scoring maximum points, while seven out of the top 10 performing dogs were crossbreeds.
Dr Smith said: “Being a purebred does not improve the intelligence. The risk of medical problems among crossbreeds is also significantly lower.
“Crossbreeding a German shepherd with a rottweiler, for instance, would produce as good a police dog as a purebred German shepherd.”
Matthew Bottomley, the breeding manager of the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association, said: “That’s interesting because we are finding that, statistically, crossbreeds make better guide dogs.”
SOURCE: The Telegraph
For those of us who believe in the notion that a dog, is a dog, is a dog, this article will not come as a great surprise. Pedigree, cross breed, this breed, that breed. They’re all the same species ultimately. Sometimes we’re quick to forget.
I am writing in response Alison Green’s article “what we have here is failure to communicate” , in which she comments on the proposed Control of Dogs (Scotland) Bill which I launched last week at the Scottish Parliament. I of course welcome all feedback on my proposals – positive and negative – as it all helps to produce sensible, workable legislation. However, much of what Ms Green argues seems to be based on misconceptions about what exactly I propose. I am therefore taking this opportunity to clarify certain issues. I should add that Ms Green was and is welcome to contact me directly if she has any questions, as are all other readers.
I would like firstly to clarify what I mean when I say “dangerously out of control”, as Ms Green seems to have taken this to mean something different, and argues there is nothing preventative about my proposals. ‘Dangerously out of control’ does not mean the dog has attacked someone. I am referring to dogs which act aggressively, and appear to the complainant that it may attack someone. There are many dogs which clearly have an aggressive nature, yet currently their owners are left largely to do as they please. I want people to be able to complain about such dogs, and I want the authorities to be provided with a sensible range of responses for such incidents. A dog would not have to attack someone to be issued with a control order – but if it regularly behaves aggressively, then the authorities could order it to wear a muzzle, be kept on a leash etc. to minimize the risk of it actually attacking someone. This is where the preventative measures come in – I am not aiming to prevent dogs showing aggression, I am aiming to prevent such dogs being able to attack people. One of the questions I ask in my consultation is for people to describe how they think we should define “dangerously out of control” – readers are welcome to submit their own definitions.
A further point Ms Green makes about this – and I believe she contradicts herself – is that if your dog attacks someone in your home “surely a criminal conviction couldn’t make you feel any worse or take it any more seriously? Surely you would not have let it happen if you could have?” This may be the case, but criminal convictions do not stop the attacks from occurring in the first place. After high-profile tragic attacks occur, we often hear neighbours and friends saying they were not too surprised by the attack as the dog was known to be aggressive. We need to bring in measures that force owners of aggressive dogs to minimize the risk of their dogs being able to attack anyone.
A loophole currently exists in the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act in which attacks that occur on private property are not criminal offences. Ms Green rightly points out that civil proceedings can be brought under the 1871 Dogs Act -however, this is rarely used. With civil laws, members of the public have to fund the civil action themselves. This effectively makes the Dogs Act inaccessible to much of the population. If it were criminal law they could simply complain to their local police station.
Additionally, the police have no power of seizure under this Act, meaning that owners of dogs deemed ‘dangerously out of control’ under the 1871 Act, can remain with their owners. I gave an example in my consultation of why this is a problem. The Japanese Akita which attacked the 2-year-old girl living next door was able to remain living next door to the girl. As the attack happened in the dog’s own home, and the owner did not want the dog put down, the police have no power to remove the dog. I completely disagree with this.
Ms Green also questions why the DDA is difficult to enforce. I consulted with the Association of Chief Police officers in Scotland (ACPOS), who helpfully conducted their own investigation into enforcement of the DDA. Police receive many reports of suspected pit-bull terriers acting dangerously, but are reluctant to become involved because of the confusion surrounding this ‘breed’. Much time is wasted deciding whether or not a dog is actually a pit-bull, before they have the power to seize it and pursue the owner.
The DDA is a drain on resources because dogs the police actually seize often spend months languishing in kennels, whilst the courts decide whether or not it is of a banned type. Even vets cannot agree. It is unsurprising, given these problems, that the number of prosecutions under Section 1 of the DDA has steadily dwindled to zero in Scotland. My proposals allow police to act on dogs of any breed which is acting dangerously, instead of wasting so much resources pursuing only certain types of dog, whilst leaving owners of other breeds largely to do as they please.
Regarding my proposal to micro-chip dogs with Control Orders – this is not so the police can patrol the streets randomly scanning dogs to see if they have a control order. The microchip will record the details of the owner – so that the owner cannot escape responsibility for ensuring the requirements of the control order are met. Should the dog attack someone, its owner can easily be identified. On occasion, people awaiting court appearances have been able to escape prosecution by transferring ownership of the dog to someone else – this is another loophole that needs to be closed down.
Ms Green rightly points out that much of what I propose is technically already in existence. Certainly, the £5,000 fines and/or six months’ imprisonment are the existing punishments under the DDA. These would be used for aggravated offences (i.e. where a dog actually attacks someone), and I see no reason to change them. In addition, courts can currently order ‘any means necessary’ to control a dog. However, this power is irrelevant if it is not being used. It is not being used because, like much of existing legislation, it is unclear and difficult to enforce. I do not think it is good enough to say ‘any means necessary’ - there needs to be a clear, flexible and practical range of control orders that courts can rely on, simplifying the process for everyone. Again, I have asked people to suggest control orders as part of the consultation process.
My proposal aims “to modernize the law on dangerous dogs” – not to start from scratch. I hope that this clarifies some of the points raised in Ms Green’s article. I have consulted extensively with various stakeholders while drawing up these proposals, but I do not pretend to have all of the answers – the consultation period allows the public to provide their thoughts. I would encourage Ms Green – and all readers – to submit a response to the questions asked in the consultation, to allow them to be formally considered before the next stage of the Bill. The paper can be downloaded from www.alexneilmsp.net and responses must be submitted by 14th April. Thank you.
——————————————————————-
Alex Neil is an SNP MSP, representing Central Scotland.
He last week launched the consultation for his proposed Control of Dogs (Scotland) Bill.
All content is Copyright © 2010 Pets Doctor. Blogatize Blue theme by Roman Peciar. Powered by WordPress 2.7.1.