Category: Dog Welfare

I Hope That Bad Owners Don’t Come In Threes

Posted on by

My poor dog hasn’t had too good a time of it in the last few days. First we encountered a dog running loose in the park, owner nowhere in sight. It wasn’t until after he had happily played with my dog that I realised that his eyes were oozing with a green discharge.

Yep, conjunctivitis. I eventually caught up with the owner who casually remarked that he had been “Meaning to do something about it”. Somehow refrained from adding “What? Infect as many other dogs as you can before you consider that your dog might not be very comfortable and his eyesight might even be compromised if you leave it any longer?”

So much for the Animal Welfare Act.

Half way through a week of chloramphenicol tid, he was attacked by a seriously aggressive boxer that actually pursued him when he had moved away. OK, that was annoying. What made me really mad was that the owner admitted that she knows that her dog is aggressive and had done nothing about it. Needless to say, the dog is uncastrated. She did proceed to hit it and shout at it. Miraculously, the dog didn’t turn on her – this time. She was a polite woman who was in total denial about her dog and, even though she knew that she had little control, still let it run loose in the park, unmuzzled.

Warning other owners on the way out of the park, I discovered that they all knew exactly which dog I meant as every one of them had either had a problem or witnessed the dog attacking other dogs. So had the park warden.

No serious damage done this time, but it remains to be seen if the dog wardens from the two boroughs that run the park will follow it up.

Call Me Cassandra…

Posted on by

I met a women in the park a few months ago. She was walking a Finnish Spitz and, as they are not common where I live, I asked her if she had always owned the breed. She replied that it was her first dog. I then asked if she had bought on looks alone and been surprised at the amount of barking and relative difficulty in training, especially recall, that her dog exhibited. Astonished she agreed that all were the case. I then cheerfully informed her about the way that the Finnish spitz was bred to hunt and told her about the annual King of the Barkers competition. Needless to say, she didn’t take up my offer of help with training.

I met her again last night, now accompanied also by her other dog, a nervous Staffie cross that I would guess is a rescue. She is pregnant with twins and was cheerfully talking to another (very sensible) dog owner about it.

I asked if she had a plan in place for accustoming her dogs to the major changes that they are about to undergo.

She laughed.

I explained that I was perfectly serious. She then informed the other dog owner that she intended to breast feed and would hug each dog to either side of her while she accomplished this feat so that they felt included because “they think that they are human”.

My sincere entreaties that this would lead to potential disaster were dismissed.

Sadly I suspect that it is only a matter of time before two dogs are looking for a new home, assuming of course that they have not been put down for biting “out of the blue”.

This is not a good week. A couple of days ago, I found out that my neighbour had re-homed his lovely Australian Shepherd. I first met him with his partner and the then tiny puppy outside a local pub. The dog had not had his second vaccinations but they had carried him round the corner so that he could experience the world going by. They were first time dog owners and I suggested that they might have their hands full with such a breed. Of course, they assured me that he was centre of their world and all would be well. He went through a very nervous adolescence and my doubts grew. Then she got pregnant.

Surprise, surprise, the dog was no longer centre of their world. Last month they sent him back to the breeder because they were too busy to deal with him and he had started stalking their offspring.

They are of course to blame but then so is the breeder for selling them this dog. I hope that he has a fulfilling and happy life with a new owner. I will miss him.

(Image courtesy of Wiki Commons)

Bad Hair Day

Posted on by

I was sent a link to a news article yesterday regarding a couple whose “beloved” Samoyed had been shaved by a dog groomer.

As with everything else in the canine world, grooming is unregulated. It should come as no surprise that these groomers had no idea of the importance of the double coat in protecting against heat and cold or the consequences of clipping it off. I was pursued by a judge at a companion show who was also a groomer. She kept insisting that my Sibe needed a trim. I withdrew him from the ring and complained to the organiser after she also handled him really roughly – another common factor in dog grooming. I met a couple at another show who had not only shaved the guard hairs off their Sibe but were parading her round in full sun. Her coat had hardened and become like sharp straw.

The blame ultimately lies with the owners for buying a double-coated dog that they are then too lazy to acclimatise to being groomed. How “beloved” is a dog if you cannot even be bothered to keep its coat groomed? The groomer should of course have assessed the dog on arrival and recommended that the dog be sedated by a vet who could then remove the tangles. The owners should then have been reported under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and placed under RSPCA supervision to ensure that they maintained their grooming regime under threat of losing their dog.

That’ll be the day.

Grooming a dog is an important part of care and of bonding between owner and dog. It should be done at least daily as well as checks for lumps, ticks, grass seeds and any other abnormality. Buying a dog with a complex coat that humans have bred to need a lot of attention, not bothering to care for it then dumping the dog on a groomer who is not likely to acclimatise it gradually to being handled and groomed is not acceptable. The time to obtain advice about how to handle and groom a dog is before buying.

As with puppy farming, we need to stop treating owners as victims and put the blame – and the resources for education- squarely where it lies.

How Much Do You Love Your Dog?

Posted on by

The emphasis here is on the “how much”, not the “love”. The Office for National Statistics published the weekly expenditure on pets and pet food across the UK by region as follows:

Pets and Pet food

SE £5.30
SW £5.10
East £5.10
W Mids £4.90
Scotland £4.70
E Mids £4.70
Wales £4.60
N Ireland £4.00
Yorks & Humber £3.80
NW £3.50
NE £3.40
London £2.40

Basic Food £11.70
Treats £0.09
Vaccs £1.00
Worming £1.50
Flea £1.50
———————–
£16.60

Are they mad or were they just counting food for stick insects?
Here’s mine:

Basic Food £20.00
Cod Liver Oil £0.39
Treats £1.00
Vaccs £1.00
Worming £1.53
Flea £2.30
Toothpaste £0.75
———————–
£26.97

The PDSA PAW Report 2016 estimates that the lifetime cost of owning a dog is between £21,000 and £33,000. Assuming an average of £22,000 and a lifetime of 12 years, that works out at £43.27 per week. That of course takes into account expenditure outside of the ONS survey scope such as collar and lead, neutering and non-prophylactic veterinary costs, grooming equipment etc. 97% of dog owners in the survey underestimated the cost of owning a dog, with 9% thinking that it would be up to £500 over a lifetime, 11% between £501 and £1,000, 47% between £1,001 and £5,000, 23% between £5,001 and £10,000 and 11% more than £10,000.

The ONS survey seems to show that either owners are underestimating actual costs or they are purchasing low-quality foods and non-prescription prophylactics. 31% have not neutered their dog of which 19% “don’t believe in it”, 17% “haven’t considered it” and 14% “haven’t got round to it”.
12% of owners have not vaccinated their dogs of which 19% say that it is too expensive (possibly the same 19% that “don’t believe” in neutering), 18% believe that it is not necessary and 11% “haven’t got round to it”. 22% of owners are not bothering with vaccination boosters.
10% of owners are not even registered at a vet of which 32% don’t think that it is necessary at all, 23% don’t think it is necessary because their pet is not ill and 17% “haven’t got round to it”.

Scary isn’t it?

The 12 Hazards of Christmas

Posted on by

Actually there are probably many more, so do your vet a favour and don’t give them a reason to have their holiday disrupted. Here are a dozen to look out for:

1 Weather use of chemicals to thaw ice and snow can cause serious problems for dogs. Automotive anti-freeze, radiator coolant, windshield de-icing agents, motor oils, hydraulic brake fluid, paints and solvents that typically contain ethylene glycol are extremely toxic to dogs (and cats) and even a small quantity can cause renal failure. Dogs are particularly attracted to it because it tastes sweet (cats are not sensitive to sweetness). Clinical signs of poisoning occur between 30 minutes and 12 hours after ingestion and include ataxia, hypersalivation, vomiting, seizures, polyuria and polydipsia. 12-24 hours following exposure, tachypnoea, tachycardia, hyper or hypotension and circulatory shock may develop. Metabolic acidosis with compensatory hyperventilation can also occur. 36-72 hours following ingestion, severe renal impairment sets in resulting in inappetence, lethargy, halitosis, coma, depression, vomiting and seizures. Hypocalcaemia can result in manifestations of tetany.

De-icing gritting salts used on roads and pavements can cause problems as they freeze onto paws and coat, causing ulcers and redness to
tissue which can lead to bacterial infections. Dogs can also develop intestinal problems and gastritis from licking their paws.

2 Plants lots of common garden, park and countryside plants are toxic as are various fungi and fruits such as horse chestnuts. Be particularly aware of dogs who scavenge and may ingest poisonous plant material accidentally and discard waste promptly and securely when trimming hedges and clearing gardens. In addition, house plants and flowers can cause poisoning from contact or ingestion.

Lilies are a particular problem as the toxic pollen can be brushed of and ingested during grooming, although all parts of the plant are poisionous to dogs. Seasonal favourites poinsettias have leaves that contain an irritant sap that can cause nausea and vomiting if ingested. Affected dogs may drool and paw at their mouth. Holly and mistletoe are much more toxic and if ingested can induce vomiting and diarrhoea, excessive drooling and abdominal pain. Mistletoe can induce a sudden and severe drop in blood pressure, breathing problems and hallucinations. Seizures and death may follow. The leaves and berries of holly and mistletoe plants, including dried plants are a potential hazard. Pot pourri is also toxic.

Amaryllis plants contain lycorine and other noxious substances which cause salivation, vomiting, diarrhoea, decreased appetite and abdominal pain, lethargy and tremors. The bulb is more toxic than the flowers and stalk. Take care to pot any plants so that they do not become top-heavy and topple over when they have flowered where they then become accessible to dogs.

Early-flowering bulbs are popular indoors at this time of year and most are toxic. This includes, lilies, daffodils, hyacinths and tulips. Severe hyacinth or tulip poisoning often occurs when dogs dig up freshly planted bulbs or gain access to bulbs waiting to be planted. Typical signs of poisoning include profuse drooling, vomiting and diarrhoea. Consuming large amounts causes tachycardia, tachypnoea and difficulty breathing.

If you want to decorate your home with house plants, the Christmas cactus may be the safest option as it is not toxic, although ingesting large amounts of leaves can cause vomiting or diarrhoea.

The habit of bringing live fir trees into the home that was started in the mid-19thC also introduces the oils produced by fir trees into the home. These are irritating to the mouth and stomach and, if ingested, cause excessive vomiting or drooling. Needles can cause gastrointestinal irritation, obstruction and puncture. Even the water used to keep the tree alive over the holiday can harbour bacteria, moulds and fertilizers which can cause severe illness if drunk.

Much older traditions such as decorating the house with holly, ivy, yew and mistletoe could kill your dog. Holly contains toxic saponins, methylxanthines and cyanogens which produce severe gastrointestinal upset. Affected dogs smack their lips, drool and shake their heads excessively with mechanical injury from the spiny leaves.

Ivy leaves cause gastrointestinal distress, vomiting and diarrhoea when eaten and the sap can induce a skin rash and irritate mucus membranes.

All parts of the yew plant, including the berries, are extremely poisonous. Taxines in the yew cause drooling, vomiting, weakness, difficulty breathing, life-threatening changes in heart rate and blood pressure, dilated pupils, tremors, seizures and eventually coma and death.

Mistletoe ingestion causes drooling, vomiting, diarrhoea, abdominal pain, hypotension, ataxia, collapse, seizures and eventually death.

3 Chocolate or to be more precise, the theobramine that it contains, is one of the most common causes of poisoning in dogs. It has become more serious in recent years as high cocoa solid chocolate has become more prevalent. Dogs metabolise theobromine much more slowly than humans and dogs are likely to be attracted to chocolate because even high cocoa solid chocolate contains sugar. Approximately 0.02 oz/lb (1.3 g/kg) is sufficient to cause symptoms of toxicity. 1 oz of milk chocolate per pound of body weight is a potentially lethal dose in dogs and again, small amounts an cause cumulative problems. Symptoms of theobromine poisoning include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and polyuria which can progress to cardiac arrhythmias, epileptic seizures, internal bleeding, heart attacks and eventually death.

4 Dried Fruits although we no longer need to preserve fruits by drying, dried fruits are a popular staple at Christmas, whether presented on their own or in cakes, ice cream and puddings. The toxicity to dogs presented by grapes, raisins and sultanas is a relatively recent phenomenon that was first identified by the Animal Poison Control Centre run by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Approximately 140 cases were seen between April 2003 and April 2004. 50 dogs developed symptoms of renal dysfunction and 7 dogs died. The mechanism of toxicity is still not known, although it is thought most likely to be a mycotoxin. Onset of symptoms is
sudden and includes anuria, vomiting and diarrhoea followed by weakness, inappetence, polyuria and abdominal pain. Acute renal failure develops within 48 hours of ingestion. A blood test may reveal increases in blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, phosphorus and calcium. Many dried fruits such as apricot, apples and pears are preserved using sulphite or potassium sulphite (sulphur dioxide 220, sodium sulphite 221, sodium bisulphite 222, sodium metabisulphite 223, potassium metabisulphite 224, potassium sulphite 225 and potassium bisulphite 228) that liberate sulphur dioxide. Thiamine (Vitamin B1) deficiency can occur when dogs (and cats) ingest sulphite preservatives. Thiamine deficiency causes severe neurological symptoms and can be fatal. Sulphite preservatives are, incidentally, used in some commercial raw pet food products.

5 Onions, Garlic, Leeks, Shallots and Chives There are approximately 200 native, cultivated and ornamental species of allium, all of which can be toxic to dogs. Most commonly, problems are caused by onions (Allium cepa), leeks (Allium porrum), chives (Allium schoenoprasum), shallots (Allium cepa aggregatum) and garlic (Allium sativum). Even though garlic is toxic to dogs, it is used in small amounts, confusingly, therapeutically for its antibiotic, antiseptic, anti-inflammatory and anti-viral properties as well as a flea-deterrent.

It is the organosulphoxides present in the allium species that are toxic. When the plant is chewed, they are converted to a complex mixture of sulphur-containing organic compounds that are absorbed through the gastrointestinal tract and metabolised to form highly reactive oxidants. Cooking, spoilage and ageing do not reduce the potential toxicity. The main effect of the oxidants is to cause oxidative haemolysis, rupture of the cell wall or membrane (lysis) in red blood cells. The death of the red blood cells causes anaemia, methemoglobinaemia and impaired oxygen transportation which may not peak until several days after ingestion. Allicin and ajoene in garlic are potent cardiac and smooth muscle relaxants, vasodilators and hypotensive agents and ajoene and other organosulphur compounds derived from onions are potent antithrombotics. Toxicosis typically ensues after consumption of a single large quantity of allium species or as the cumulative effect of ingesting small amounts repeatedly. Consumption of as little as 15 g/kg of onions can cause toxicosis which has been observed consistently when more than 0.5% of the dog’s body weight has been consumed in one go.

6 Nuts and Sweets All nuts present a risk to dogs as, in sufficient quantities, even those that are not toxic can cause a stomach upset, obstruction or laceration if the shells are chewed and ingested. Almonds and pistachios can cause gastrointestinal distress and even pancreatitis. Walnuts contain tremorgenic mycotoxins that can cause seizures. Macadamia nuts are very rich in fat and can cause gastrointestinal distress and pancreatitis. In addition, macadamia nuts are part of the grape family and may contain an unknown toxin that can cause neurological disruption. Pecans and hickory nuts contain the toxin juglone that can can cause gastrointestinal distress and obstruction. Raw cashews contain the toxin urushiol which is the same toxin that is in poison ivy. Contact with skin provokes severe itching which can lead to the development of open sores and raised red patches that may blister and weep. If ingested, the mouth and throat can become irritated and inflamed and they can cause gastic pain and vomiting.

Many sweets, especially the “gummy” type contain xylitol which can also be found in chewing gum, cakes, mouthwash, human toothpaste and various supplements. It is a potent, cheap sweetener that is increasingly being used as a sugar-substitute. Xylitol is a naturally occurring sugar alcohol that can be found in low concentrations in the fibres of many fruits and vegetables and is extracted from berries, oats, mushrooms, corn husks and sugar cane. The first reports of poisoning in dogs occurred in 2002 but incidents have since increased significantly. Doses greater than 500 – 1000 mg/kg body weight have proved fatal. Just one to two pieces of chewing gum can kill a small dog. Xylitol induces the release of insulin in the body causing hypoglycaemia and liver damage. Hypoglycaemia results in a loss of co-ordination, depression, collapse and seizures in as little as 30 minutes. Other signs can be rapid or delayed and include vomiting, lethargy, convulsions, coma and death.

7 Cheese whilst cheese is used as a treat by many owners, it can cause problems for dogs. Roquefort and other blue cheeses contain roquefortine C which is produced by the fungus that gives the cheese is characteristic veining. Roquefortine intoxication is characterised by vomiting, panting, muscle tremors, paddling, hyperaesthesia and seizures. Many cheeses have high levels of salt and lactose. Puppies possess abundant quantities of the enzyme lactase prior to weaning to enable them to digest their mother’s milk but adult dogs lack sufficient lactase to digest milk and milk products well and thus can show the same signs of lactose intolerance as some humans – upset stomach and diarrhoea.

8 Rubbish you may have noticed that dogs do not possess a sense of disgust, in fact they positively revel in tipping out bins however noisome. Unfortunately, moulds and other toxins produced by the decomposition of foodstuffs as well as objects that can cause mechanical injury result in many dogs becoming ill and injured over the holiday period. Mycotoxicosis can result in polypnea, tachycardia and ataxia. Prognosis will vary according to the type of toxin ingested. Dogs have evolved to swallow food quickly and regurgitate anything
that does not agree with them. If you see your dog about to eat something that he shouldn’t approach calmly; shouting and chasing is more likely to make him gulp it down and possibly injure himself, including if it makes him vomit. Contact a vet immediately of you think that your dog has swallowed something dangerous.

9 Alcohol it is hard to believe, but some people deliberately give their dogs alcohol, although it is at best unpleasant for the dog and at worst can be fatal. As with chocolate, alcohol makes dogs more intoxicated more quickly than people. Symptoms vary depending on the amount ingested and whether the dog’s stomach is full or empty. The main symptom is a depressed central nervous system which may develop 15 to 30 minutes after ingestion on an empty stomach and up to two hours later when ingested on a full stomach. Other symptoms include urinating or defecating involuntarily. Higher doses can lead to behavioural changes ranging from depression to excitement, hypothermia, slow reflexes and flatulence. Signs of advanced poisoning include depression, bradypnoea and bradycardia, metabolic acidosis and heart attack. If left untreated, this can be fatal. Alcohol is not only present in drinks but can result from the fermentation of bread dough and rotten fruit as well as being a constituent of some medications. Dogs may be attracted to alcoholic drinks because of the sugar content, especially with sweet drinks such as liqueurs or chocolates containing alcohol.

10 Bones there is no doubt about it, bones can and do cause irreparable harm and death to dogs in spite of owners who swear that they have always fed them. Dogs are not wolves. They have different digestive enzymes and different gut bacteria. Wolves also eat whole animals, hoof, hide and hair, as well as bones. This enables a protective mechanism whereby the hair wraps around bone splnters as they pass through the gut. They are expelled in pellets, rather like those that owls excrete, and so mean that the wolf’s gut is not as
vulnerable to perforation. Dogs cannot do this. There is a bone in the x-ray image on the left that defnitely does not belong to the Bichon Frise.

Raw bones are covered in pathogens and may transmit parasites such as tapeworm; tests have discovered salmonella, shigella, yersonia enterocolitica, echinoccus, e. coli, clostridium perfringens, campylobacter, staphlycocci and mycobacterium bovis on raw bones. Leaving a bone out for a dog to chew on over several days, especially if it is left outdoors, only increases the likelihood that it will be contaminated with life-threatening bacteria. Human health is also at risk, especially in the young, old or immuno-suppressed. Modern farming methods mean that animal bones often lack density, even those raised “organically” and are much more likely to splinter even if not cooked. Feeding raw bones can cause constipation, gastroenteritis, GI obstruction and perforation and septic peritonitis. Bones can break teeth, including the large teeth needed for chewing, and cause painful abscesses. A broken tooth may need to be extracted making it harder for the dog to eat for the rest of its life. Shards that break off while the dog is eating can pierce the tongue, cheek or soft palate or become looped around the lower jaw. Round bones can get stuck around the lower jaw behind the lower canine teeth; most dogs need to be sedated or anaesthetised in order to cut it off. Pieces of bone can lodge in the oesophagus which can be pierced as the dog swallows. It is also possible for a piece of bone to get into the trachea interfering with breathing. Large fragments of bone can get stuck in the stomach requiring abdominal surgery or endoscopy to remove. If the piece of bone is sharp, it can penetrate the stomach wall enabling the stomach contents to leak into the abdomen and causing peritonitis, which can be fatal even if treated. Bones can block the small intestine or the colon also requiring surgery to remove. They can penetrate the intestinal wall and cause peritonitis. Bone fragments may travel far enough down the GI tract to get to the large bowel and colon where they can collect and cause severe constipation. This is extremely painful as the bone fragments scrape the lining of the colon and rectum. Enemas and manipulation are generally required to evacuate the large bowel. The trauma to the colon may cause significant bleeding. Cooked bones are soft and splinter more easily than raw.

Make sure that dogs cannot get to carcasses. Small bones can present a choking hazard to dogs as with as people.

11 Silica Gel, Candles, Batteries and Toys Silica gel is considered biologically inert so when swallowed by a dog should be harmless, although the packaging may not be. However, if a large enough quantity is swallowed, the intestinal tract may be obstructed and if sachets have been in medicine containers, they will have absorbed an element of the drug which is likely to be toxic for a dog. Some moisture absorbing sachets contain reduced iron and, in sufficient quantities, this can be harmful. Be extremely careful when opening packaging and, even if you think that your dog has only ingested silica gel, obtain veterinary advice as soon as possible.

Candles present an obvious danger of injury and fire so should be sited well away from wagging tails and curious noses. Never leave candles unattended. Scented candles may release benzene and toluene into the atmosphere in quantities that are more likely to be harmful for a dog than a person. Even plain paraffin candles can release harmful substahnces when burned. Even though they are not toxic, eating candles is not going to make a dog feel good.

Many modern devices and toys contain batteries that can be within easy reach of dogs. All types of battery are toxic if the casing is punctured. Either alkaline or acidic material is likely to leak causing severe ulceration to exposed tissue. The most common ingestion is of an alkaline dry cell battery or button/disc batteries that are used for remote devices, watches, torches and toys. Alkaline dry cells contain potassium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide which, when in contact with body tissue, causes liquefaction necrosis. Newer types of disc-shaped batteries can enable an electric current to pass to the tissues of the gastrointestinal tract as the battery is ingested and excreted causing current-induced necrosis to the mouth, oesophagus, stomach or small intestine. Lithium button batteries are the most
dangerous: one 3 volt battery can result in severe necrosis within 15-30 minutes of contact. Some batteries contain heavy metals such as mercury, zinc, cobalt, lead, nickel and cadmium. Heavy metal poisoning can result if the battery remains in the gastrointestinal tract for more than 2-3 days. Oral ulcerations may not present until hours after ingestion. Black powdered material may be seen in the mouth if dry cell batteries have been punctured. Vomiting may cause corrosive injury to the oesophagus and oropharynx.

Small toys, whether intended for dogs or humans, can be swallowed and cause serious harm. Similarly, pieces may break off larger toys when chewed. Never leave dogs unsupervised with toys and discard any that are damaged, including any broken pieces. Make sure that balls and other toys are the right size for the dog and cannot get stuck in the throat or be swallowed. Make sure that human toys are not accessible to dogs especially if the dog is not being supervised.

12 Decorations although many decorations may not be made of toxic materials, they can cause injury and harm to dogs. Decorated trees often present baubles and other hangings that are tantalising for dogs especially puppies. Remember, your dog may not be able to distinguish between a glass bauble and his ball. The colours that he sees will not be as distinct as they are for humans and he will have no concept of suddenly seeing lots of apparent dog toys dangling for him to jump at. Do not place decorations at a height where they can be reached easily and never leave a dog unsupervised with a decorated tree that can topple over. Some ornaments may be decorated with toxic paints and glues.

If the tree is being watered, make sure that the dog cannot drink the water as it could contain toxins such as pesticide residues and fertilisers. Do not use aspirin or flower food in the water to keep the tree alive. Fir tree oils can irritate a dog’s mouth and stomach and cause vomiting or drooling if licked, chewed or ingested. Tree needles can obstruct or puncture the gastrointestinal tract so care should be taken to clear up shedding. (Makes a change from dog hair).

Some people hang food from trees, including chocolate. Check the list of toxic foods to make sure that any food is safe.

Make sure that wiring is tucked away where it cannot be chewed or tripped over and that lights are not low enough to be chewed or cause burns if touched.

Tinsel and other strings of decorations can block and damage the intestines causing decreased appetite, vomiting, diarrhoea, lethargy and weight loss. Surgery is often necessary. Pulling tinsel from a tree could cause it to topple over and damage to wiring of lights could spark a fire or present risk of electrocution.

Click here to see just a few x-rays of things that dogs (and other pets) have swallowed.

Have a safe and happy holiday and make sure that those on-call vets can catch up with their reading.

RSPCA – How Is Your Generosity Treated?

Posted on by

rspca You don’t have to look far in the dog world and beyond to come across horrendous cases of cruelty, never mind the daily grind of neglect and abuse inflicted upon dogs and other animals. The RSPCA state that they receive calls to their cruelty line in England and Wales on average every 30 seconds, totalling 1,118,495 calls in 2015. They investigate more than 140,000 complaints of cruelty and neglect annually. So when you drop money into the collecting tin for the RSPCA, purchase something in one of their shops or attend a fundraising event on their behalf, where do you expect your money to go?

The RSPCA state that 82p in every £1 donated is spent on animal welfare, 1p on governance and 17p on fundraising and that £10 could provide a day’s boarding for a horse, £25 PPE for an inspector and £50 van equipment. Not surprisingly, they do not produce a breakdown for external barristers fees which have been recorded as being £800 – £1,200 per day in their prosecution against the Heythrop Hunt. In spite of having their own legal department, the RSPCA chose to engage Mr Carter-Manning QC who submitted costs of £73,310.80. His assistants added another £90,000 to the bill. This represents approximately 244 hours of the QC’s time which he spent watching amateur video footage. The four charges that were eventually brought against hunt staff are regarded as being so minor that they are classified as “non-recordable”. The remaining charges were dropped. In previous situations when the RSPCA has lost a case, defendants’ costs have been borne by the taxpayer. In addition, the RSPCA admiited to euthanasing 3,400 animals for non-clinical reasons in 2011 in spite of having an official no kill policy.

The RSPCA must already have marked 2016 down as being an annus horribilis following a submission to a Parliamentary committee by the National Police Chiefs Council which recommended that animal welfare prosecutions should be carried out by “a single agency, preferably a statutory body funded by Government”. The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has also questioned whether it is appropriate for the RSPCA to bring forward private prosecutions when it is also involved in campaigning and fundraising. Owen Paterson, Secretary of State, warned the RSPCA to be “wary” of muddling charity and politics. The charity regulator further ordered the RSPCA to conduct an inquiry into their organisation and structure using independent auditors. RSPCA inspectors were banned from rehoming animals unless an indepdent vet attests to have personally seen evidence of suffering following over-zealous actions against pet owners. In Scotland and Northern Ireland, animal welfare groups have the power to investigate cases, but the decision to prosecute lies with the state.

Much of the impetus behind the recommendations follows aggressive persecution of hunts, including the Heythrop. Their case cost the RSPCA £325,000 as opposed to the average cost of £2,500 per case. Other cases such as that against Cattistock Hunt in March have collapsed and, in the Cattistock case, the RSPCA withdrew all its “evidence”. The cost to charity to take the case and similar cases that far has not been revealed. Persecuting hunt staff is therefore regarded as being 100 times more important than any of the cruelty cases that they use to tug at your heart – and purse- strings.

When new CEO Jeremy Cooper took over in spring this year, it seemed that the RSPCA might extricate themselves from the mire into which they have been wallowing since following an aggressive anti-field sport agenda in the mid 1970s. He apologised for the charity becoming “too political” and referenced both hunting and the government badger cull that aims to eradicate TB in cattle. He was forced to eat his words almost immediately by the RSPCA’s governing body.

Just when it seemed that it could not get any worse, shocking revelations have been made by the Information Commissioner, responsible for dealing with the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 amongst other legislation.

The RSPCA has been fined £25,000 on the RSPCA (and the British Heart Foundation £18,000) for “wealth screening” donors. The RSPCA has paid “wealth management” companies since 2010 to trace and target new or lapsed donors illegally and pursue them for more donations by piecing together personal information obtained from other sources and trading personal details with other charities. Donors were not informed of the charity’s practices and so had not opportunity to consent or object to their use of personal data. The Information Commissioner stated “The millions of people who give their time and money to benefit good causes will be saddened to learn that their generosity wasn’t enough”. Indeed. They might also consider it a massive betrayal of trust. The RSPCA confirmed that the practice has now ended but disagreed with the Information Commissioner’s conclusions and may appeal against the decision – no doubt spending even more money on legal fees.

Whilst the RSPCA are not alone amongst charities of pursuing aggressive and even it seems illegal practices, they are one of the few that exist to help dogs and other animals. Surely the thousands of abused animals that they are supposed to protect deserve to benefit from their not-inconsiderable funds more than lawyers?

AMR – Dog Owners Need To Take Responsibility

Posted on by

salmonella Two extremely worrying bulletins have been published by the Food Standards Agency this week. One concerns the recall of Nature’s Menu “Country Hunter” frozen pet food because of the presence of salmonella and the other the dangers of anti-microbial resistance to pathogens found in food.

Nature’s Menu Country Hunter food is described by the vendor as being “A tasty complete and nutritionally balanced Country Hunter raw meal of Farm Reared Turkey”… that “contains raw minced bone for added nutrition”. If the meal is already “nutritionally balanced”, why the need for raw, minced bone “for added nutrition”? This is a complete nonsense (never mind the poor punctuation) that tells the purchaser nothing. Of course, Nature’s Menu are not alone in being deliberately obscure about the marketing and labelling of pet food.

At the risk of dragging semiotics into the debate, the name “Country Hunter” strikes me also as being bizarre. Two suggestive words thrown together actually make no sense whatsoever in context. Is this meant to suggest that the turkey has been hunted in the country by a chap with a nicely oiled Purdey? Maybe not, because we are also informed by the label that the turkey is “farm-reared”. Well, it is hardly likely to be roadkill or reared round the back of the producer’s cousin’s council flat. Perhaps they are trying to suggest that it is “free-range” in the same manner as those “polite notices” are meant to fool people into thinking that they are “police notices”. Legally, to be labelled as “free range”, turkeys must have continuous access to an outdoor range that is largely covered in vegetation during the daytime. However, even if products are labelled as being derived from “free-range” livestock, which this product is not, it is entirely possible that the poultry will still spend the bulk of the day indoors and be reared in high densities because it is not economically viable to do anything else at the price you are being charged for the food and the scale on which it is produced. Possibly it is trying to suggest that you have a gun dog that lives a wonderful life doing what it was bred to do. Were that the case, you are highly unlikely to be feeding it this food.

They go on to say “We only use quality, human grade meats in our raw meals, and absolutely no meat meals or meat derivatives. All of our complete and balanced meals are veterinary approved and made to FEDIAF guidelines.” Well, here are the FEDIAF guidelines should you choose to read them. They are well-written and it is good practice to abide by them.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with meat meal. Meat meal is simply a highly concentrated protein powder that is produced when meat and water are cooked to remove most of the moisture and the resulting residue is baked. For instance, chicken comprises about 70% water and 18% protein. After rendering, the resulting chicken meal contains just 10% water but 65% protein. The important factor to consider when assessing meat meal is the quality of the meat that went into it in the first place.

Similarly, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with meat derivatives. Legally, they are defined as being “All the fleshy parts of slaughtered warm-blooded land animals, fresh or preserved by appropriate treatment and all products and derivatives of the processing of the carcass or parts of the carcass of warm-blooded land animals”. As with meat meal, the quality of the products that went into it producing the derivatives are the most important factor to consider. Feral dogs and the domestic dog’s wild cousins eat all parts of the animals that they kill or scavenge (but bear in mind that wild dogs have different digestive systems and processes in order to cope). This includes hair, hide, offal and bones – the products encompassed in the term meat derivatives. They get a nutritionally balanced diet because different parts of the animal yield different nutritional requirements. Canids, including domestic dogs, are omnivores and will eat the stomach contents of grazing animals (which cats as obligate carnivores do not) and will eat vegetation in addition to meat. Muscle meat of the type that many humans think is best for their dog is only one component of a dog’s nutritional needs and, if fed to excess without balancing nutrition, can lead to serious problems in growing dogs, especially medium and large breeds, and may overload kidneys and liver in old or sick dogs.

Adding raw, minced bone to food could also be problematic. Apart from the potential for pathogens in uncooked bones, feeding too much calcium can make your dog very ill indeed. It is not uncommon for dogs fed raw bones to accumulate large amounts in their stomachs which can cause constipation and may obstruct the gut. They can also cause tearing as they pass through the dog’s digestive system. Farm animals are bred to grow quickly which can result in their bones being less dense and thus more brittle than slower reared animals of older breeds. This can be exacerbated by the fact that, free-range or not, many farm animals sinply do not get sufficient weight-bearing exercise to assist with creating bone density. Bones can and do result in broken teeth. Balancing calcium and phosphorous levels is essential and this can be difficult as, even if they are present in the right amounts in a raw diet, they may not be nutritionally available and could be difficult to digest.

The pathogens that are indisputably present in raw food can and do harm humans as well as the dogs that are fed raw diets. Illness caused by salmonella, e. coli, listeria, giardia, campylobacter, to name but a few, can range from the unpleasant to the fatal. This is becoming a more serious problem, not just because of the popularity of feeding raw diets and the likelihood that more people are thus exposed to pathogens via pets, but because of the increasing difficulty in treating bacterial illness with antibiotics.

Anti-microbial resistance builds up because of overuse and/or misuse of antibiotics; this is now a major risk to public health worldwide. Humans are exposed to resistant bacteria through human-to-human spread, animals, the environment and the food chain. There is currently uncertainty regarding the types of anti-microbial resistant bacteria found in foods on sale in the UK and of the contribution food makes to the problem.

One of the points that Nature’s Menu make is that they are veterinary-approved. Well, there is a massive range of opinion amongst vets on all sorts of matters. Some recommend and practice homeopathy as well as endorsing raw diets, for instance. However, the vast majority of vets neither support homeopathy nor raw feeding. A growing amount of peer-reviewed research and evidence backs this up.

So, don’t rely on the opinion of someone in the park or the “evidence” of one dog that has supposedly had a miracle turnaround on a raw diet. Read the research, give weight to the experience of canine professionals who have fed and worked generations of dogs and, above all, bear in mind that, if you feed raw, it is not only your dog’s health and well-being that you may be compromising, but any human with whom he comes into contact.

A Thousand Little Insults

Posted on by

tight-lead I was walking alongside a local common this weekend, as it happens, without my dog. I noticed, coming towards me from the opposite direction, a woman walking a Cavalier King Charles spaniel on an extendable lead. The dog was several feet ahead of the woman and, as she got nearer, she let it veer across to the other side of the path to carry on sniffing. This meant that about 10 feet of lead was stretched across the path about a foot from the ground.

When she got to within a foot or two of me, the woman suddenly jerked the dog by the neck and, without reeling in the lead, hauled it across the path, simpering at me to show how considerate she had been.

The dog was extremely startled and, needless to say, the woman oblivious to its feelings.

I wondered how many times that this woman inflicts this treatment on her dog. Then I wondered how many owners are meting out exactly the same treatment to their dogs, day after day.

This week most right-thinking people would have been outraged by the thug who throttled his Staffy, booted his head and then swung him against the side of a train carriage. There is a petition to ask the prime minister to intervene and increase his sentence from a meagre 21 weeks. Punishment alone is unlikely to change his behaviour but this does seem a pretty feeble reaction from the judiciary who no doubt would have imposed a much tougher sentence had it been a child. The poor dog died three days later.

It is easy to feel outraged by blatent cruelty such as this, but most people are oblivious to the daily cruelty that they inflict on their dogs, choking them, shouting at them or just being mostly cross. Not training a dog to walk properly on the lead (or to cope with the environment in which they are forced to live) and lazily using gadgets such as flexi-leads, halters and headcollars in lieu of their own lack of input inflicts constant, continuous insults on dogs and damages their trust in the very people that no doubt, declaim their “love” for their pet.

Which is worse: a sudden, voilent assault or constant daily battery? Not much of a choice is it.

Idiot of the Month

Posted on by

dog-and-scooter This month’s award really does make me wonder what goes through some people’s heads when they own dogs. I was leaving the park after a good, four hour session on Saturday morning and I encountered two, apparently unaccompanied, children on scooters at the top of an underpass on the A4. One of the children was holding a small terrier-type dog on a long lead. It immediately lunged at my dog, snapping and barking, and the kid would have frozen excpet it was struggling with controlling the scotter on the slope.

I extricated myself and headed towards the alley leading off the main road where I saw a woman, evidently the one “in charge” of the two kids, sauntering along without a care in the world.

Where does one begin?

Why on earth were the kids allowed to take a reactive dog, unsupervised on a major road whilst riding scooters? Why were they allowed to take any dog for that matter? Why were they left unsupervised on scooters by a major road? Why wasn’t the dog socialised?

Why, oh why can we not do something about legislating to educate people before they buy a dog?

Going With A Bang

Posted on by

dog-firework As we are about to come into the weekend that many dog owners and owners of other animals dread, is it time to reconsider our approach to fireworks? Personally, I have always hated fireworks and have no idea why some people get pleasure out of a few flashing lights and loud bangs and screeches. It was bad enough when it was restricted to November 5th and possibly the nearest weekend, but now, any gathering seems to be an excuse for fireworks from outdoor concerts to private parties.

This not only means that the duration of firework noise is extended, but that animal owners cannot predict when to take precautions to keep them safe or just less stressed. I have never encountered neighbours who had the courtesy to warn of their intention to let off fireworks and the law is regularly flouted with regard to restrictions on when they can be used.

Every year, although there are serious injuries caused by fireworks that put unnecessary pressure on already over stretched emergency services, recent attempts to restrict fireworks to public displays only have been rejected by parliament. The subject was last debated on June 6th, 2016. The short answer was “We are aware that fireworks can cause distress to animals. Restrictions on the general public’s use of fireworks and permitted noise levels already exist and we have no plans to extend them.”

This is no much consolation to those of us who have to deal with the serious effects that animals, including dogs, have to suffer as well as the distress to owners.

It seems unlikely that a call for a ban on public sale will have any success in the foreseeable future, so what if there was more publicity about better fireworks? The town of Collecchio near Parma, Italy has introduced local legislation requiring all citizens to use silent fireworks for the good of the community. In the UK, the UK Firework Review provides information about a variety of quieter and silent fireworks. There will probably always be people who get a thrill out of creating a great deal of noise who may not be persuaded, but it is possible that a substantial majority of people might.

Surely anything that reduces the noise will make life a little easier for stressed and frightened animals and their owners?

Get out there and spread the word! In the meantime, sign the petition for the mandatory use of silent fireworks in the UK.