Swedish Vets and SKK Lead The Way

stenotic nares pug This summer, Swedish judge Åke Cronander awarded a pug an Excellent rating at a show in Sweden in spite of the fact that it was evidently in respiratory distress. He also participated in a televised debate where he stated that he had never seen a dog with breathing problems in the show ring. Following the posting of the video on social media and subsequent complaints, some Swedish owners of show pugs have attempted to claim that the dog was making “anxiety sounds” – as if that would be a good thing! They also list “pug-friendly” judges on their web site – one assumes that will be judges who are prepared to accept a gasping, snorting (and often overweight) dog as normal and award the owners an “Excellent” accolade.

Our own KC is keen to remind potential judges that they are not vets and consistently talks about lameness as if it were the only health problem that was patently evident. They seem also prepared to ignore the fact that surgery for stenotic nares in barchycephalic dogs is not uncommon and does not prevent them being shown and bred from. The UKKC lists the pug in its highest category for concern (Category 3 Breed Watch) and makes veterinary checks and reporting of concerns by judges compulsory. This does not seem to have resulted in a significant move away from distressed dogs.

To its immense credit, the Swedish Kennel Club (SKK) has made breathing problems a specific focus for concern and is currently investigating Åke Cronander’s decision, having also published a statement expressing their concern. They are also revising breeding guidelines and health advice for all bracycephalic breeds, including revising the puppy health certificates which must accompany all dogs sold by SKK members to put more emphasis on dogs’ constitution. The SKK are working in conjunction with vets and considering whether to make their breeding prototcol and veterinary certificate mandatory. In addition, they are embarking on a training programme for their judges and on an education programme for the public.

Free Microchipping West London

Hounslow Dog Warden services and the DogsTrust are offering free microchipping, health checks and vouchers for neutering, vaccinations, fleas and worming at Edensor Gardens in Chiswick, London W4 2RF on November 18th, 2015 between 11.00 hrs and 15.00 hrs.

Remember, all dogs will be required to be microchipped by April 2016 and it is owner’s responsiblity to keep their details up to date on the database.

Routine health care helps all dogs in the community stay well by providing ‘herd immunity’ and preventing the build up of worms such as toxicara canis.

Eighth Day Dogs

wanted-poster
The Dogs Trust has just released the results of its latest Stray Dogs Survey. The figures make disheartening reading.

Local authorities have a statutory duty to look after stray dogs for seven days (five days in Ireland). “Eighth Day Dogs” can be rehomed, passed to a welfare organisation or euthanased. Some local authorities have their own kennels, others tender kennelling to private companies or charities.

102,363 stray and abandoned dogs were handled by Local Authorities between 2014 – 2015 (an 8% decrease from last year). That represents an average of 1 stray for every 617 people (actual numbers vary by region).
47,000 owners abandoned their dogs

75% were seized – 1% under the Dangerous Dogs Act
1% were brought in by police
Fewer than 1% were transferred from vets, the RSPCA and dog wardens etc
16% were brought in by members of the public

Between April 1st 2014 and March 31st 2015:
An estimated 50% of stray dogs were reunited with their owners by being reclaimed during the statutory local authority kennelling period (36%) or returned directly to their owner without entering a kennel (18%)
9% were re-homed by local authorities
22% were passed on to welfare organisations or dog kennels after the statutory period
5% were euthanased (4,880 dogs)
Approximately 5,142 dogs were euthanased across the UK between April 1st 2014 and March 31st 2015
1,367 dogs were euthanased due to behavioural problems or aggression (390 under the Dangerous Dogs Act) and 717 due to ill health

1% were still in the local authority kennels after March 31st 2015
134 strays were retained by the finders
21 dogs were either dead when found or died in kennels

17,789 (20%) of the dogs taken in were already microchipped – a 4% global increase on the previous year, although it varies by region
8,833 of these dogs were reunited when the owner contacted the local authority or pound directly
Microchips alone accounted for 9,430 reunions; ID disks for 1,018 reunions and a combination of the two for 1,066 reunions
817 dogs were reunited due to already being known to the dog warden
Facebook was used to reunite 173 dogs and owners
Local/council registration schemes to reunite 98 dogs and owners
1,380 (3%) dogs taken in had no identification

306 authorities responded to the questions about dog warden services.
283 had services that were operational during working hours on Monday to Friday and 85 during working hours on Saturdays and Sundays
127 authorities had a dog warden service which worked on-call out of working hours on Monday to Friday and 119 authorities operated an on-call service out of hours on weekends

345 authorities in Great Britain reported 18,535 ‘status dogs’ (bull breeds including Staffies and Mastiffs, Rottweilers, Akitas or crosses of these) representing 21% of all strays handled.
1,023 of these (6%) were euthanased due to aggressive behaviour.

If we do not find solutions to irresponsible breeding, purchasing, selling and ownership, the year on year figures will continue to spell misery for the vast numbers of unfortunate dogs that they represent.

Hooray For Crowdfunding

quill box The Guardian today reported that generous donors have helped to fund a Canadian man’s vet bills totalling $11,000 via crowdfunding.

The poor dogs encountered a porcupine with predictable results. Porcupine’s quills are barbed and usually need to be removed under sedation. They can also migrate inwards in a similar manner to grass seeds.

Luckily, they are not a problem for those of us living in Europe.

It’s good to know that our fellow human beings are capable of such altruism and there is one ray of sunshine for the downer – he has enough quills to make a lovely box!

Insurance – Safeguard or Gamble?

gambling Do you know exactly what you are getting when you take out insurance? In a sense, all insurance is a gamble and many people probably do not bother to read the small print, so get caught out by promises of wonderful deals only to find that conditions are not covered for life or a dog with an accidental injury will not be covered should a clinical condition affect the same part of the body.

Since Petplan was launched in 1976 creating the first opportunity in the UK for owners to insure pets, pet insurance has been a double edged sword. While on the one hand it enables pets who otherwise would be euthanised to go on to live full lives by making complex veterinary interventions possible, it also means that premiums remain unaffordable in practice for many in order to support the cost of bigger claims and still ensure returns for shareholders. Some owners put money into an interest account instead, but it is often not enough to cover a really large vet bill and may not be easy to release in the event of an emergency.

Anyone considering purchasing pet insurance needs to negotiate a minefield of exclusions, pre-existing condition definitions, variations in types of cover and the postcode lottery of excess charges. Now there is news that pet insurance companies under the RSA Group umbrella are piloting the placing of restrictions on which referral practices owners and vets can use. The pilot is being undertaken in the Midlands and North West and affects pets insured by More Than, John Lewis, Tesco, Argos, Homebase and Marks and Spencer. Owners will be required, with the exception of emergency referrals, to contact their insurance company before a referral is made to confirm which practice can be used. Owners that do not comply with the insurer’s choice of practice are likely to find their claim disallowed.

It seems a pointless restriction given that policies are usually limited to a fixed amount per annum or per condition. If the owner chooses to spend the whole allowance on one referral because the vet considers it the best option, then that surely is their perogative?

Furthermore, owners who have made provision for fixed cages when travelling may find that their vehicle insurance is invalid if they did not make the insurance company aware of what is considered to be a modification. I wonder how many owners are aware that, by complying with the law and considering the welfare of their dogs, they may be breaking another law by invalidating their insurance cover. Presumably, insurance companies may feel entitled to raise premiums in such “modified” vehicles. This, in conjunction with the Kennel Club’s bizarre ban on leaving show dogs in suitably fitted out, ventilated vehicles, can only further reduce the number of people participating in the pedigree show ring.

Breakdown cover can be a nightmare when travelling with dogs as most companies do not always send a vehicle out that is suitable for transporting dog cages or may make owners wait a considerable amount of time or leave it to the “discretion” (ie personal predilicitions) of the driver when choosing whether to transport dogs or not.

Whatever the personal decisions made about insurance, it always pays to consider all options and go into it with eyes wide open.

Farewell to Brian Sewell

fine art dogs The sad news that Evening Standard fine art critic Brian Sewell died on Saturday is not only a blow to the art world but to the those who champion dogs. Considered by some to be elitist and reactionary in his taste in art, he certainly could not be accused of either when it came to his approach to his beloved dogs.

He housed a variety of rescue dogs including a stressed Jack Russell rescued from euthanasia at the request of his vet after being inappropriately homed with a baby. When he moved house, his deceased dogs’ remains went with him and were re-buried. After a life devoted to writing and educating people about art, he published Sleeping with Dogs in 2013 where he revealed that he was an adherant to the philosophy that one should control the temperature of the bed by adding another dog.

Love him or loathe him, the world was a more vibrant place for his being and one can at kleast be assured that he will have left plenty of resources for the welfare of the dogs that survived him.

Chinese City Threatens To Club Pet Dogs to Death

Chinese flag Dayang New District in the city of Jinan has imposed draconion laws in an attempt to rid the area of dogs following alleged complaints. Notices have appeared stating:

“No person is permitted to keep a dog of any kind. Deal with it on your own or else the committee will organise people to enter your home and club the dog to death right there.”

The order cites further the maintenance of environmental hygiene and “everyone’s normal lives” as reasons.

Where does one begin? Cultural differences in eating dogs is one thing; at least there it is possible to campaign for the dogs to be kept in reasonable conditions and slaughtered humanely. This order interferes with something much more fundamental.

Some argue that one of the areas of origin of the domestic dog was China. Proto-dog/human burials have been discovered that are 12,000 years old so what could be more ‘normal’ than living with a dog? It may not be everyones’ choice and, of course irresponsible dog owners mar the environment for dogs and people. Culls may be necessary during rabies outbreaks, something that dog smugglers and puppy farmers are risking here in the UK. However culling pet dogs just for being pet dogs and that in a brutal, inhumane fashion beggars belief and is likely a legacy of Mao’s horrendous Cultural Revoltion.

It certainly puts recent council restrictions on access and attempts to criminalise dog owners for minor misdemeanours in the shade and it should make the World Dog Show have a re-think about locating in China in 2019.

Dover Council Imposes Criminal Sanctions on Dog Walkers

Dover District Council imposed a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) affective from July 27th, 2015 to be in place for three years requiring that dogs be kept on leads under threat of criminal prosecution. They state that it will “replace a number of out of date by-laws and create a more comprehensive and consistent approach when dealing with issues such as dog fouling, keeping dogs on leads and excluding dogs from specified areas.”

Having a dog off the lead on a designated highway is already illegal under the Road Traffic Act 1988, Section 27, but it is certainly not enforced in London or many other places that I have visited. This however is far more Draconian and I believe contradicts the requirements of the Anuimal Welfare Act 2006 which imposes a duty of care on dog owners to enable their dogs to exhibit “normal” behaviours – surely including having adequate, off-lead exercise?

The order:

  • Excludes dogs from:
    • enclosed children’s play areas
    • specific beaches at certain times of year
    • specific sporting or recreational facilities
    • Requires dogs to be kept on leads:
    • within specific churchyards and cemeteries
    • specific seafront promenades and seafront gardens
    • specific memorial sites and nature reserves
    • Requires dog owners to remove dog faeces
    • This applies to any land to which is open to air and to which the public have access
    • Requires dog owners to put their dog on a lead when directed to do so by an authorised officer
    • This will apply to any public land where a dog is considered to be out of control or causing alarm and distress.

Breaches of the order are liable on summary conviction to a fine of up to £1,000. Fixed penalty notices of £75.00 can also be applied.

PSPOs may be enforced by police officers, police community safety officers and any officers designated by Dover District Council.
Full details are available here .

This is insidious legislation that imposes huge restrictions on dog walkers, has the potential to criminalise responsible dog owners for making minor mistakes such as missing a doig defecating and does nothing to tackle irresponsible owners including the serious problem of untrained, out fo control dogs.

How much of it is about pandering to an anti-dog lobby, hysteria about protecting children from supposed disease and, of course, raising revue for cash-strapped councils?

Would Your Dog Survive A Fire?

V fire stn The latest government statistics for accidental fires states that there were 39,600 dwelling fires in Great Britain in 2013-14. The latest PDSA PAW Report cited that 24% of the population owns one or more dogs.

Thus if 24% of the households that suffered a fire in 2014 had one dog, 9,504 dogs would have been at risk. Furthermore, the government states that “41% of fire-related deaths in Great Britain were caused by the victim being overcome by gas, smoke or toxic fumes.”

Of course, we should all take precautions to avoid a fire starting in the first place, but in the event that it does, a new campaign Smokey Paws is raising funds to ensure that all fire applicances carry pet oxygen masks.

You can make a donation on their website or even raise funds for your local fire station to purchase masks.

You could make all the difference to a dog surviving the devastation of fire.

Dog Owners Are A Force To Be Reckoned With

dog ownership The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has just stated that 29% of households have dependent children. The latest PDSA PAW Report states that 51% of households has a pet with 24% owning dogs.

That should entitle dog owners to a significant voice in their communities and may be a useful statistic to cite when campaigning for better access, facilities and considerations such as flexible working and dog-friendly workplaces.