Category: Dogs and Society

Would You Visit A Freak Show?

Posted on by

ugly dogs Human “freak shows” were popular pastimes in England from the mid-16th century until the 19th century, by which time they had spread to the United States. Popularised by figures such as PT Barnum, they were extremely successful commercially and often the best way of people with disabilities making a good living and preserving some dignity. I doubt, however that many modern audiences would find them acceptable, so why is it that we deem it permissible to exhibit such dogs?

Skeleton of a dog with short-spine syndrom

Skeleton of a dog with short-spine syndrom

A congenitally deformed dog called Quasi Modo (says it all) has just been “awarded” the title of the “World’s Ugliest Dog” in a competition in a state fair in California, USA. She is owned by a vet who has twice entered the “competition”, coming second last year and now winning it. The vet stated that “The Chinese crested and Mexican hairless ones [in the competition] were all rotten teeth, missing fur and tongues hanging out.” The vet’s dog, by contrast, is suffering from short-spine syndrome that not only results in extreme shortening of the spine, but corresponding shortening of the ligaments, a sloped profile, elongated front legs and cow hocks in the rear legs. The tail is usually absent or bobbed in such dogs. It is a genetic deformity caused by in-breeding.

Deliberate in-breeding by humans.

The vet makes many protestations, perhaps anticipating that her support for this “competition” might draw criticism. “This isn’t about making fun of her, it’s about celebrating our differences. We don’t think she’s ugly, but we love her enough that we can have a little joke”.

Her “little joke” is at the expense of a dog with fused vertebrae that result in her being unable to move her head. “She still has to turn her whole body to look at anything.” Are we meant to celebrate this level of in-breeding? Does this vet seriously think that because she “loves her enough” it makes it all right?

This is a list of the descriptions of some of the previous winners:

  • Blind
  • Bug eyes
  • Long, wagging tongue
  • Hunched
  • Peculiar walk
  • Bi-pedalism
  • Malformed nose
  • Short tufts of hair
  • Protruding tongue
  • Long, seemingly hairless legs
  • Short snout
  • Beady eyes
  • Huge-headed
  • Duck-footed
  • Deformed lips
  • Deformed eyelids.

A vet supporting this “competition” is also supporting an abysmal standard of animal welfare. I’m sure that this little dog, and perhaps others that are similarly afflicted and in caring homes, have a good quality of life but in the end, such competitions are no different to Victorian freak shows. They don’t demonstrate “love” for dogs but the fact that we have chosen to perpetuate genetic mutations such as hairlessness or colourings such as merle, piebald and white, which in some breeds goes hand in hand with congenital deformities, for no other reason than a love of novelty or the vanity of having something that draws attention to ourselves. I’m glad that there are people who are prepared to take these dogs in and give them good homes. Perhaps they think that by highlighting their own dogs that they will automatically prevent more from being bred, but that is certainly not the way that most of the media (and probably the general public view it).

When “ugly” means deformed dentition, skeletal abnormalities, ocular and aural problems and similar issues there is nothing to celebrate, even if the individual dog has a comparatively good life. Making the existence of such dogs acceptable goes hand in hand with the widespread acceptance of conditions such as severe brachycephaly and achondroplasia that cause misery for millions of affected dogs and lead to much reduced lifespans.

The prevalence of brachycephalic and achondroplastic dogs such as pugs, French bulldogs and dachshunds in recent advertising campaigns and in online posts, where their respiratory distress, limited physical ability and chronic associated illnesses are seen by many as being “cute”, is the other side of the coin. When judges and vets accept ataxic, wheezing, gasping dogs as champions, there is something surely very, very wrong.

Before anyone attempts to make a comparison with the lives of people with physical disabilities, we should remember that we have deliberately bred dogs to look like this and that for every dog that may be just plain “ugly” there are many more that suffer the consequences of our (preventable) actions. Many of those dogs, we are told, are the epitome of “beauty”. We should recognise deformities for what they are and we should regard deformed dogs as ugly – not in themselves so much as the fact that they represent some of the worst things that humans have done to dogs.

I hope that the vet is donating her $1,000 winnings and any other money that she may make as a result of her appearances to a campaign to improve dog welfare so that this competition can simply die out through a lack of entries.

Should I Stay or Should I Go?

Posted on by

stay or go What should the British bulldog do and what will happen to the resources? Do we get to keep our own bones or do we have to hand them over to Europe?

Regardless of your opinion on the European Union referendum next week, the fact remains that leaving the European Union may have  major effect on the ease of travel using the Pet Passport and on dog welfare, with potential changes to import and export restrictions. According to government figures for 2015, just under 92,000 Britains left and returned to Britain with one or more dogs, the vast majority having been on holiday. Of course there are also unrecorded numbers of dogs entering illegally, mostly traded as puppies. A Dogs Trust report (The Puppy Scandal) states that between 2011 and 2013 the number of dogs entering the UK legally from Lithuania increased by 780% and from Hungary 663%.

Already vets in Eastern Europe (and possible elsewhere) have colluded with dog dealers and issued pet passports with falsified data, including puppies not seen, under age puppies, dogs banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act and dogs with false
vaccination stamps indicating that rabies vaccinations had been administered. As the Dogs Trust wonders, will a vet who is prepared to falsify rabies vaccinations bother with tapeworm treatment or measures to prevent other diseases? Echinococcus multilocularis is a cyclophyllid tapeworm that is endemic in some countries that are parts of the PETS travel scheme. It is zoonotic, often asymptomatic for several years and can be fatal if untreated. It is already increasing in urban areas, largely due to the spread of urban foxes. Dogs Trust and journalists including Sam Poling have provided evidence revealing ineffective controls at UK border ports enabling puppies to enter the UK illegally virtually unhindered. There are no Animal and Plant Health Agency staff or Trading Standards personnel on duty at the main ports of entry at the weekend and puppy transporters are rarely stopped even during the week. Not all ports have a continual presence of officers, including the major port of Dover which just has APHA staff on call to respond to reported welfare concerns. There is no penalty if they are caught travelling with incorrect paperwork and the likelihood of paperwork being questioned or their vehicle searched is low. They can declare up to five puppies and smuggle in any number of puppies hidden in their vehicle which will remain unchecked. There is little or no sharing of intelligence amongst key agencies.

The Dogs Trust filmed 15 dealers who sold underage puppies ranging from 7 -12 weeks and who stated how easy it is to bring banned pit bulls into the UK and four vets from Lithuania and two vets from Hungary who admitted falsifying pet passports. They purchased pet passports from a vet that recorded false birth dates and vaccinations, including rabies, for fictitious puppies. They purchased a puppy from an online advert that had been brought into the UK from Lithuania at just ten weeks old without a rabies vaccination and two puppies in Hungary from a breeder who provided passports with false dates
of birth and fake rabies vaccination details which they subsequently rehomed in Hungary.

The Dogs Trust has called for the European Union to manage the spread of canine diseases across member states including requiring inspections of all puppies and dogs at member states’ borders. They are also calling for EU-wide improvements in breeding standards and mandatory identification and registration across all EU Member States. There is a the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals, but Britain is not a signatory. Leaving the European Union may make it harder for dogs to be imported from unscrupulous people in member states but it will also be much harder to achieve the spread of effective welfare legislation. In the meantime, diseases have no respect for national boundaries, even on islands.

One would hope that no one would make such a vital decision based on the effects on dogs alone, but there is plenty of food for thought there nonetheless.

Two Thumbs Up One Thumb Down

Posted on by

distraction Normally, most of the things that I see people doing while with dogs annoys me. So, I was gratified to see two owners on consecutive days using successful distraction techniques as I walked past with my dog on a lead. Perhaps non-aversive training is beginning to percolate through after all.

thumbs down busMeanwhile, a bizarre conversation with a bus driver gets the thumbs down for TFL. I boarded the bus with my dog whereupon the driver thumped his window at me as I was moving towards the rear. Assuming that he hadn’t seen my pass, I went back only to be informed that “There’s a baby on the bus”. As I do not suffer from deafness or anosmia, I was only too aware of the fact. My reply: “Yes, and?” The driver just repeated himself and I carried on being wilfully obtuse. Eventually he said “I’m not taking responsibility….”
This time, I replied “I’m a bit worried that my dog might catch something from the baby but I think that the risk is quite low and I aim to keep well away from it, so I’ll take full responsiblity.”
I’m glad to report that my dog is showing no ill effects from the journey.

Summer Solstice Lychee and Dog Meat Festival

Posted on by

stop Yulin The China Kennel Union and its partners have been working on the design and implementation of various campaigns aiming to make Chinese legislation address animal welfare issues. There have been several initiatives aimed at dogs, including establishing winter housing facilities for strays and aiming to stamp out the practice of dog meat eating festivals, especially Yunin. Several charity events have been run between March and May, culminating in the establishment of the Anti-abuse to Animals Legislation Network Vote Platform prompting more than 150,000 people to cast their votes.

The Companion Animals Cultural Exhibition will be implemented nationwide from May to October, with an exhibition planned for June. The last ten days of June are scheduled as the Yulin Dog Meat Festival, an important focus of the activities.

Idiot of the Month

Posted on by

train window I was travelling on a crowded bank holiday train last Friday with my dog and a small amount of luggage. It was not easy to walk through the train, and all of the nearby table seats had been colonised by people with huge buggies, all of whom refused to fold them to prevent them from blocking other seats.

I ended up sitting on a dickie seat in the corridor opposite the (broken) loo. As if that wasn’t bad enough, the constant too-ing and fro-ing of restkess passengers meant that relaxation was all nigh impossible. I had hoped that the train would empty a little at the first stop when the local passengers disembarked, but no. Just when I thought that it couldn’t get any worse, a large family with copious amounts of luggage boarded. In addition to their hyper-active, noisy offspirings, they were towing a small terrier-type dog on an extendable lead. For some inexplicable reason, the poor creature had a large teddy bear strapped to its back which the owner kept adjusting. Needless to say, they let it rush straight into my dog’s face. Mr Implacable, bless him, remained lying at my feet and ignored all provocation until he was stepped on by one of the sprogs. Even then, he simply shuffled politely sideways without a sound and, to his credit, the father told the child off.

That didn’t stop him letting his dog make rushes at mine until I suggested through gritted teeth that it wasn’t a good idea to let his dog play in a confined space when both were on lead and surrounded by luggage and passing passengers. Alas, he saw this as an opportunity to attemopt to engage me in conversation and, although it failed miserably, he kept up a monologue about his dog for a while nonetheless. At that point, I gave up all attempts at doing the crossword and dug out a book. Thus, ostentatiously waving my copy of Dog on Dog Aggression, I tried to blot out the racket.

He finally gave up attempts to quiz me about my dog as the monsyllabic, non-eye contact replies sank in so looked around for something else to do. His solution to boredom? He picked up his little dog and stuck its head out of the window, regaling it with a childish monologue about passing cattle, sheep, trees and fields. By some miracle, there was no passing traffic but the dog eventually wrestled itself from his grasp and jumped from his full height to land splat on the floor. Unpeturbed, he adjusted the dratted teddy bear.

Relief came about an hour later when, in spite of nearly letting the dog fall between the gap as he alighted with the lead on full extension, they finally got off.

Where to begin?

Déjà Vu

Posted on by

deed not breed Some things recur as regularly as rain in an English summer: cyclists continue to ride up the blind side of lorries and get killed and people abuse dogs and get killed. The only difference is that, on the very rare occasions when dogs kill people, it is often not the original perpetrator of the abuse that dies. I nearly wrote “that is the victim”, but of course the initial victim is the dog.

In the last couple of days a Staffie has bitten several children and yesterday a man was killed by one of his dogs in Cumbria. The poor dog, reported to be a pitbull, was tasered before it was executed.

It doesn’t take much imagination to conjure up the life that the dog had led beforehand, nor the owner for that matter.

I am just finishing reading Simon Harding’s excellent book Unleashed: The Phenomena of Status Dogs and Weapon Dogs which looks at the social and political changes that have led to the rise in dog-on-human attacks. He also considers the changes to dogs caused by in-breeding and selective breeding for aggression. Far more research is needed in this area, but it is probable that some breeds of dog have been both bred and trained to maximise aggressive traits. Large numbers of dogs are abused by ignorance and poor handling even if owners do not intend that they should cause deliberate harm.

There also seems to be something of an arms race where, in areas where gangs are common, non-gang members (mostly young males) buy dogs that they think will appear to be aggressive and be a deterrent for anyone who might attack them. If they came from the local pool of back street-bred dogs, they may already be the products of selection for aggression. Although it is by no means a guarantee, the likelihood that these dogs are housed in poor conditions, largely untrained and fed a poor quality diet is high. They may be exercised on lead only or even chained up outdoors for long periods. As we reported earlier, 6% of owners surveyed by insurers More Th>n admitted to administering protein shakes so that their dog “would look more impressive in public”. Damaged trees in city parks all over the country attest to the owners who encourage their dogs to hang off branches to “toughen their jaws”.It is also possible to see ropes slung from tress with a stick tied to the bottom that dogs dangle from.

In turn, the people that own them see little future away from the depravation and “post code wars” that confine them to a few run-down streets. they too often expect life to be cut short prematurely. Even the gangs and violence don’t get them, poor health often will.

Until we address the social and political problems that give rise to the breeding and keeping of dogs that cause harm, the headlines will continue to appear with depressing regularity.

The Few Mar It For The Many

Posted on by

dogs welcome As ever a few irresponsible people place all of us in danger of having dogs banned from public spaces as a recent incident displays. Our friends at Dog Friendly have alerted us to a nasty occurence at a dog friendly pub. Investigations are still underway and so they have not named the venue or location.

The pub had asked a dog owner to keep their dog under control but it attacked another (under control) dog and a staff member was badly bitten. This is now the subject of legal action but the irresponsible owners have been reported as not showing any remorse. Shortly afterwards, the owners of the pub asked another owner to keep two dogs on a lead inside the pub as the dogs had wandered into a different area of the pub without their owners. They were met with a barrage of foul language and abuse.

There seem to be a minority of people who feel that they have a “right” to do exactly as they want and, when even the most minor objection or polite request is broached, react aggressively and obnoxiously. It is hardly surprising then that their dogs are often also unsocialised and out of control. The number of dogs off lead on roads or out of control on extendable leads beggars belief. Owners allow them to rush up to other dogs even when asked to keep clear and strangers think nothing of sticking their hands in dogs faces or ruffling their coat the wrong way without so much as eye contact with the owner (or dog). Children are allowed to do the same and woe betide the owner who askes for a dog to be left alone.

There are more and more restrictions being placed on dogs and dog owners and the behaviour of people such as this only makes it more likely that this will get worse. It is probably necessary for dog-friendly venues to train their staff as to how to react if an incident occurs so as to remain safe and indeed, on how to approach a dog generally. In the meantime, let us wish the member of staff involved a speedy recovery and hope that it has not dented the proprietors’ enthusiam for welcoming dogs.

One Law For the Rich and Famous

Posted on by

get out of jail Last August, DogsNet reported the case of Amber Heard illegally importing two terriers into Australia. Ms Heard signed a form on board her lfight stating categorically that she was not bringing any animals into the country. She later made derogatory remarks about “jobsworths wanting their 15 minutes of fame” when she was charged and her partner, actor Johhny Depp told reporters that he has received “direct orders of some kind of, I don’t know, sweaty, big-gutted man from Australia”.

It is very disappointing therefore to see that a paltry $1,000 Australian Dollar fine has been levied on the couple and all charges have been dropped. They have made a public video in which Depp states bizzarly that Australians are “just as unique” as their wildlife. For good measure, Heard tried to blame the error on an assistant’s inability to fill in the correct paperwork.

CReDO Welcomes CRUFFA

Posted on by

pug Tireless campaigner for canine welfare Jemima Harrison is launching a new campaign to promote the use of healthier dogs in advertising. Dogs seem to be everywhere in adverts at the moment and, as with people, advertisers tend to plump for the quirky-looking image.

CRUFFA – the Campaign for the Responsible Use of Flat-Faced Animals in media, marketing and advertising is contacting companies that have used poor examples of brachycephalic dogs and making them aware of the problems that these dog suffer. As the campaign notes, such advertising helps to fuel demand for such pets and makes dogs that cannot regulate their temperature, breed naturally and breathe properly seem acceptable.

You can buy Jemima’s groundbreaking 2008 documentary Pedigree Dogs Exposed and the sequel Pedigree Dogs Exposed Three Years On from her website as well as reading about her other work to improve the lives of dogs.

Whilst it is heartening to think that so many people are toiling to improve the lot of dogs, it is also sad to think that the once- repsected organisation the RSPCA has fallen so far into disrepute for what many see as its politically-motivated prorities and its abysmal handling of some welfare cases. Many people who live and work with animals have a story to tell about how disppointed they are in the organisation and now MPs have launched an enquiry into the RSPCA’s role as judge and jury (and fundraiser) in prosecuting alleged abuse of animals. The situation in England and Wales is different to that in the six counties of Northern Ireland and in Scotland where animal welfare groups have the power to investigate cases, but the decision whether to prosecute lies with the state. The RSPCA investigated 159,831 complaints of cruelty in England and Wales in 2014 and prosecuted 1,132 people, claiming a “success” rate of 98.9%. MPs are investigating whether that would be a more appropriate model for the whole of the UK.

Cases of horrendous cruelty to animals are tragically almost a daily occurence and there is certainly need for an accountable body to pursue them through the legislature. However, it would be far better to prevent cases from getting that far and in this, the RSPCA has been weak. An infrastructure needs to be established including making the employment of dog wardens a statutory obligation for local authorities and serious discussions need to be had with the BVA and similar organisations as to the role that veterinary surgeons play in monitoring and acting upon poor welfare. Resources need to be made available so that potential and existing owners can access the best advice available on the requirements of keeping a dog, including their legal and moral obligations.

Potions, Pills and Prosecutable?

Posted on by

bodybuilder Research published by More Th>n insurers yesterday of a survey of 1,000 pet owners has revealed horrific results.

1.4 million owners admitted to (illegally) administering potentially toxic human medicines to cats and dogs. As the Royal Veterinary College state “It is illegal, in terms of the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966, for non-veterinary surgeons, however qualified in the human field, to treat animals.” More than one third of those surveyed were trying to avoid paying veterinary fees. Medications administered without veterinary dierction included anti-histamines (36%), paracetamol (28%), antiseptic creams, ibuprofen (17%) and aspirin (14%) for complaints ranging from injured paws to cuts and stings. 21% decided that the injury or ailment did not warrant a trip to the vets, 33% decided that their pet was suffering and needed immediate pain relief and 27% stated that they believed that over the counter human medications are safe to self-administer to pets.

As if that weren’t bad enough, 5% of the owners surveyed (that’s at least 50 animals) had been forced to consume protein shakes and bars, diet pills, vitamins or exercise supplements. 21% of owners said that they wanted to improved their pet’s fitness and stamina,
40% were aiming for rapid weight loss and 35% believed that it would make their pet more healthy. 6% of those owners confessed that they did it “so my pet would look more impressive in public”. Yes, really.

Should we just write these people off as misguided or should we consider prosecution?

Owning a pet is a responsibility and, unless we use existing legislation to combat the actions of people who take their obligations lightly, dogs will consider to suffer.