Category: Dogs In The Media

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.

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.

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.

RSPCA To Prioritise Animal Welfare At Last

Posted on by

RSPCA
STOP PRESS
It seems that the hope that the RSPCA would reform for the better was premature: a later statement seems to censure Cooper and return to the old, tired, adversarial rhetoric:
Update from the RSPCA council

Watch this space.

CReDO welcomes the statement from the new chief executive of the RSPCA Jeremy Cooper which acknowledges that the charity had become “too adversarial” and will now be “a lot less political”. The spending of £330,000 bringing a private prosecution against the Heythrop pack brought criticism from the presiding judge and from parliament. Further criticisms from the Charity Commision over intereference with a legal badger cull pushed the RSPCA into the realms of having a “toxic” brand, although its reputation has long been tarnished in the eyes of many members of the public.

As the Countryside Alliance have noted, the dual role of the RSPCA in investigating and prosecuting cases is problematic, so Cooper’s announcement that future cases will be passed over to the CPS is to be welcomed. Cooper has promised that the charity will now focus on the illegal puppy trade, something which concerns the public far more than hunting or even the problems of TB in cattle.

There are many areas where the public need to be educated to improve pet welfare and to understand their duty of care under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and other legislation. It is to be hoped that the RSPCA will now play a major role in promoting those campaigns rather than pursuing the agenda of the so-called “animal rights” movement.

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.

Not Worth A Sniff

Posted on by

sniff The BBC and The Guardian have produced items today that implied that sniffer dogs at Manchester airport have not been sufficiently well trained to do their job: the BBC headline is “Airport sniffer dogs find ‘cheese and sausages’ but no Class A drugs”.

In fact, they are actually talking about dogs trained for different scents. Each section has been working but the drugs section has not had a find within six months and the viabity of the while unit has been brought into question.

Lawyers have made attempts in the US to discredit the efficacy of sniffer dogs in order to get convictions overturned. The authorities then tightened up their recording procedures and improved their training. Rewarding a “no find” significantly improves the dogs’ motivation to continue working but few trainers use it.
It may be that the methods of traning need to be improved but it would be interesting to have a comparison with a similar sized airport to see what their detection rates are.

Post Scriptum: Well done to the i newspaper for reorting this in a balanced way that did not imply that drugs dogs were being distracted by meat and cheese.

Babesiosis Hits Harlow

Posted on by

babesiosis

 

Four dogs in the Harlow area of Essex have contracted tick-borne babesiosis. The Babesia parasite is transmitted mostly via a tick bite but can be transmitted via an infected dog’s bite or blood transfusion. The incubation period is approximately two weeks, but symptoms can be hidden for months or years. The parasite infects red bloods cells and replicates to produce anaemia and jaundice. There are several strains of babesia that infect dogs, some of whch are distributed worldwide, although this is the first infection reported in the UK.

 

  • Infected dogs may:
  • Lack energy
  • Be off their food
  • Have pale gums
  • Have a fever
  • Have an enlarged abdomen
  • Produce red urine or a discoloured stool
  • Have yellow or orange skin
  • Lose weight.

Young to middle-aged dogs may be more predisposed to infection as are dogs with compromised immunity. Dogs that acquire some immunity may remain carriers for years; stress or other diseases may induce sudden onset of weakness and collapse.

Treatment depends on the species of Babesia which can be identified via tests but there is no product that is licensed for use in dogs in the UK. Treatment for shock and anaemia may be required in addition in severe cases. There is no vaccination for dogs available in the UK.

Tick prevention using a prescription medication is essential. Dogs should be checked for ticks after each walk, especially after walking in woodlands and long grass. Ticks should be removed using a tick hook as soon as possible. It is important not to use tweezers or fingers, alcohol or burning to remove the tick as inexpert handling or pain in the tick can cause it to regurgitate into the wound. Any dog showing unusual symptoms should always be checked by a vet.

Crufts Catastrophe – Yet Again

Posted on by

private video I haven’t had a television for more than a decade and have been too busy to watch Crufts online. Well, that’s my excuse. In reality, I don’t thing that I can bear to look at the travesties of dogs that competitors, judges and the public not only regard as acceptable but reward and perpetuate. I have passed the Kennel Club Judge’s Examinations but have no desire to participate in perpetuating the horrors of the pedigree show ring. Dogs are stunted, neotanised, gasping for breath, weighed down by skin folds, bug eyed or, as in the case of the German Shepherd Cruaghaire Catoria, actually ataxic and terrified to boot… and that’s just the conditions that are visible. Just about the only problem that my examiner would admit to when asked by another candidate about disqualifying dogs on health grounds was lameness. We we were told also that temperament should be taken into account. Well Cruaghaire Catoria was both lame and extremely nervous.

The Kennel Club has now stated that “…we made the decision not to further highlight the unsound movement of the dog whilst we discuss ways forward to improve the health of the breed.” They have blocked the video on You Tube, and instructed Channel 4, which has been airing Crufts since the BBC pulled out on welfare grounds, to edit the footage so that Cruaghaire Catoria was not seen moving.

Thanks to Jemima Harrison and Pedigree Dogs Exposed, the footage is available along with additional information such as these comments from previous judges:

“This bitch is so correct throughout, lovely feminine head & good expression, neck well set on to body. Very good front angulation, lovely topline & good croup, very balanced hind angles. Correct height to length ratio, super underline. In movement she is outstanding so clean coming & going & her profile movement was really excellent.. Very pleased to award her the CC & BOB.”

“…black and gold female of ideal middle size and strength, excellent general proportions, feminine expressive female with well shaped head dark eye and excellent ear carriage, normal wither into straight strong firm back, well laid croup which could be a touch longer, very good forehand with very good underline, excellent hindquarters with strong broad thighs, in top show condition, this female shows a willingness to perform in all phases, demonstrating excellent reach and drive, this was a super class of females, in my opinion this is a female who deserves the highest of accolades, a pleasure to judge. BEST BITCH AND BOB.”

Now I know what I was taught in the KC Judge’s exam and it bore no resemblance to what I saw in this bitch. I could not recognise her from the previous judges’ comments. I would like to think that no one in their right mind could fail to see that this dog was petrified, couldn’t wait to get out of the ring and was actually ataxic. Her topline was so distorted that she seemed to be crouching permanently. When she moved, the whole of her lower hind leg was placed on the ground and she scraped the top of her foot as she struggled to lift her leg high enough to take another step. This is the sort of gait that is commonly seen in dogs suffering from canine degenerative myelopathy. It is an auto-immune disease that is prevalent in German Shepherds and that causes progressive degeneration of the spinal cord resulting in weakness and eventual loss of communication between the brain and the hind legs. This bitch was passed as sound by vets.

Those breeding, judging and showing are supposed to represent the epitome in their chosen breeds so why would any of them think that it what was exhibited at Crufts this year was, in any way, shape or form, normal or acceptable? Not to mention the vet. Now I think it unlikely that this dog has degenerated since she was last judged so that, at every step of the way, a series of supposed experts have concluded that she represents some form of perfection.

Owner Susan Cuthbert has stated “Words cannot express the heart-wrenching experience that I have suffered.” Of course no acknowledgment that it is her dog who is truly suffering. Cuthbert then asks “How can you judge a dog on such a brief observation?”

Well, Ms Cuthbert, I was repeatedly told by my KC examiner that as a judge I would have fewer than two minutes to go over a dog and approximately 30 seconds to see it moving.

Personally, it took me no more than a second or so to see that this dog has an appalling topline, a severely abnormal gait and was clearly very unhappy in the ring.

The handler has further stated that the dog was overwhelmed by the noise, lights, heat and “forced photo [sic]shoots” and that this is “a situation that no owner, trainer or handler can prepare for.” One might forgive him the preposition at the end of the sentence but not that he does not realise that breeders, owners, trainers and handlers can do exactly that. If the dog was that distressed, why was she exhibited? This is supposed to be a top show dog; if her temperament is not suited to the ring, then she should not be shown and should not be bred from. If this was a one-off, she should have been withdrawn.

I took my rescue dog to Crufts a couple of years ago. He coped with the crowds, noise, heat, lights, flashing cameras (often in his face), noisy spectators and 8 hours of being patted, not always in an ideal manner. He also exhibited in the ring with Pets As Therapy. He wasn’t the slightest bit ruffled by any of it, in fact lapped it all up. So did the other PAT dogs – pets, many of them rescue dogs, who had with a minimal amount of good handling and training adapted very well to the demands of Crufts. Had my dog been at all discomfitted, I would have taken him home.

It should be remembered that Crufts was originally established with the aim of selling dog food. It now seem to be a club for the few initiates. In spite of the fact that 47,000 entries were received this year, some finalists were related or obviously known to the judges and the oft-heard complaint that the awards go to “the person on the end of the lead” may not be entirely a case of sour grapes. Even if judges are completely unbaised, awards are obviously not going only to fit, healthy and happy dogs.

The only good thing to come out of this is the outcry that it has engendered. The next good thing that should come of it is effective and immediate action by the Kennel Club to prevent all “recognised” breeds with blatent distortions and heritable problems from being bred from or shown and those that are not “recognised” to remain so. I won’t hold my breath.

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.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Posted on by

deed not breedPolice have made another appalling canine welfare blunder as it has been revealed that the Devon and Cornwall section ordered a bull breed bitch detained under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 to be left in a 3ft x 9ft kennel for two years without exercise. Kennel assistants were told not to enter the kennel of or handle any dogs held under the Act in blatant contradiction of DEFRA’s welfare guidelines which state “The welfare of any dog seized is also a factor the police need to consider and they should note their duty to ensure the welfare of animals under their control (s9 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006)”.

The dog’s owner has made 11 court appearances in an attempt to reprieve his dog but a court has now ordered that she be destroyed. Her owner stated that she had not shown any signs of aggression before being seized because of her breed. Video evidence of her behaviour was shown in court but this was of behaviour exhibited following her long confinement. She was kept in private facilities and no explanation was given as to why she could not have had free access to a secure run without the need for staff to place themselves in danger.

The BBC obtained data via a Freedom of Information request revealing that over a five year period, police seized 7,000 dogs and spent £650 on average per dog. Each police authority is recommended to employ a Dog Legislation Officer. The Metropolitan Police have 25 DLOs, mostly employed as dog handers rather than to handle dangerous dogs.
Their spending on seized dogs has risen from £405,000 in 2006 to £2.72M in 2011.

We must review the knee-jerk legislation such as that which has resulted in the Dangerous Dogs Act and make it a statutory obligation for local authorities to emply a 24 hour, 7 day a week dog warden service. We should continue to press for the compulsory education of all dog owners and take action against anyone who breaches animal welfare legislation, including the police.

Stop Press: There has been an update to the case of Stella the “pit bull”. Her owner has launched a late appeal against the destruction order and she will remain in kennels until the outcome of the appeal is known. A charity in Connecticut, USA has offered to pay all costs of relocation if she cannot be returned to her owner.

There is a now ray of hope for this dog after two years of suffering but how many more will have to suffer similar and worse fates until we control breeding, insist on compulsory education for dog owners and punish the deed not the breed.