Welfare
Breeding, buying dogs, rescue dogs...
Looks Can Kill
New research from the Dogs Trust has revealed various alarming reasons that people give for purchasing a dog.
Unsurprisingly, appearance is often prioritised over health and, horrifyingly, in the case of brachycephalic dogs, because of their poor health. The survey also found that “…owners who kept brachycephalic breeds tended to be younger, buying for the first time and without any prior ownership of dogs”.
Another study found that “…owners of French Bulldogs and Chihuahuas, breeds that are prone to health problems owing to their extreme body conformation, [felt that] the health of the breed was reported to be of less importance in pre-acquisition motivations when compared to the dog’s appearance…Thus, it is possible that health, as a trait, is potentially important in some owners’ acquisition motivations, though here it is poor health that is being favoured.”
This may also explain why some owners are unwilling to allow their dog to undergo life-changing surgery such as correction for BOAS. This is backed up by another study which found that “…owners of brachycephalic dogs were less likely to see either parent of their puppy: 12% of brachycephalic owners saw neither parent, compared to 5% of non-brachycephalic owners. Those who owned brachycephalic dogs were also less likely to ask for any health records, suggesting that owners of these dogs are less motivated to buy a healthy individual within a breed”.
The authors went on to say that owners deliberately purchasing unhealthy dogs diminishes the demand for healthy dogs, or at least health tested dogs and perpetuates the proliferation of puppy farms, back street breeders and online sales.
Looks really can kill.
Going Viral
Update: March 29th: The Pomeranian dog in Hong Kong that tested positive for Covid-19 tested negative again and was allowed to go home on March 8th. The dog died on March 16th. However, the owner refused to allow a post mortem examination so no cause of death could be confirmed. The dog was 17 years old.
The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) has stated that “There is no evidence that dogs play a role in the spread of this human disease or that they become sick.”
The media has been awash with articles about Covid-19 and the emergent coronavirus in the last few weeks. It is perhaps not surprising that dogs are now featuring in media stories given how many dogs are living in close quarters with humans worldwide.
In fact, humans are more likely to pass on MRSA to their dogs or pick up various zoonoses, including via feeding raw food.
At the moment, it is not possible to tell how infections of coronavirus will progress, but there is a certain amount of hype and panic because bad news sells media advertising. In perspective, approximately 3,000 have died as a result of contracting Covid-19: seasonal influenza is estimated to kill between 100 and 200 times as many humans annually.
The latest sensational headline concerns a dog in Hong Kong that has tested as “weak positive” for coronovarius following infection of his owner.
Mass culling of dogs already occurs in response to rabies outbreaks, in spite of the fact that it is ineffective in curbing the disease. It would be horrific if dogs were to suffer because of panic over this current disease outbreak. Let us hope that common sense prevails; after all, the dog is likely to have inhaled virus shed by his owner as it seems highly unlikely that Covid-19 could have jumped species so quickly.
Larking In The Park
There has been much fuss recently over a New York Times article pointing out the negative impact of dog parks which has now been picked up the BBC in their Radio 4 consumer programme You and Yours for two days running.
The situation in many US states is rather different to that pertaining in the UK where, in spite of access problems in some areas, restrictions on dogs are not quite so widespread. Michigan and Pennsylvania have state-wide “leash laws” that require owners to keep dogs on leads when off their one premises, although challenges have been raised via case law in Pennsylvania where the intent of the law was clarified to be about prevention of roaming other then preventing off-lead exercise.
Several other states prohibit dogs from being off-lead in public parks which had led to the development of the “dog park”: an enclosed area where dogs are permitted off lead. Many mandate that dogs are kept on lead in areas inhabited by livestock or wildlife.
As in the UK, dog-friendly areas vary greatly from small, sterile, parasite-ridden spaces to reasonably large areas. Urban owners are often far better served by varied dog-friendly areas to let their dogs run the owners in the countryside and the density of the dog population is higher.
As ever, the real problem is that owners do not understand their dog’s requirements for stimulation and training and far too many owners purchase dogs and then outsource their care to unqualified, incompetent walkers. The chaos that this has caused in many parks with large numbers of out of control dogs causing havoc and often being abused by their handlers led to many local authorities imposing restrictions on the number of dogs that can be walked at any one time. This in turn led to walkers going out in pairs or groups and further problems led to bans.
Many dogs are now taken out of town, with farmers hiring out fields. Far from solving problems, they continue even further away from owners and are also a poor use of agricultural land.
So are “dog parks” bad?
Well, quality off-lead stimulation and exercise is always good even if the space in which it occurs is not ideal, but how much better would it be if owners would refrain from getting a dog when they don’t have enough time or the inclination to undertake the majority of their care, if dog walkers where trained and regulated and if dogs were so well-adjusted and trained that they could be taken anywhere without fear of incident.
Coming And Going
The doyen of applied behaviourists Patricia McConnell revived a post from 2010 with an interesting link to an article about human movement.
When light points are used to delineate major joints so that the observer only sees a collection of lights, the human brain not only perceives a whole human but can ascribe male or female attributes with a high degree of accuracy. Whilst that is not too surprising, whether male or female, observers reported that figures perceived to be male always appeared to be approaching but those perceived as female were waking away.
This may shed more light (pardon the pun) on the oft-reported phenomenon that some dogs are less comfortable with men than women. Generally, it has been thought that it may be due to men being taller and larger and having deeper voices but perhaps it is also gait?
Many people intimidate dogs by their direct approach; I have lost count of the number of people who have told me that “Dogs love them” as they loom over a flinching dog, hand over the face. We owe it to dogs to be considerably more conscious of the effect that our physicality has them and maybe now we have another tool in the box to help male dog owners.
£8, 743 Or A Basket? – You Choose
A seemingly random choice, but one that was all too real for the dog owner prosecuted when a postal worker lost two fingers delivering a card to her address.
No amount of money can make up for the pain, shock and permanent disability suffered by the postal worker and all because the owner couldn’t be bothered to fix a basket to her door and then train her dog not to react.
The Communication Workers Union reported 2,484 dog attacks on postmen and women in the UK in 2019 – a 9% increase compared with 2018 and resulting in 47 attacks every week. 82% of injuries occurred at the front door or in a garden.
It is a simple matter to isolate a dog before opening a door or to fix a basket to catch the post. After all, the dog that bit the postal worker’s fingers is also now at risk from being put down if any other incident occurs through no fault of its own and the owner has a criminal record for having a dog that was dangerously out of control.
A Dog’s Dinner
A retrospective study involving 50,787 12 breeds of companion dog aged between 6½ and 8½ has found unequivocally that carrying too much weight shortens life expectancy.
The instantaneous risk of death was higher for all the obese dogs in the study and in all breeds, median life span was shorter in the overweight dogs than in the dogs of normal weight. On average:
Overweight small dogs had a reduced lifespan of 1.9 years for males and 1.8 years for females
Overweight medium-sized dogs had a reduced lifespan of 1.4 years
Overweight large dogs had a reduced lifespan of 0.6 years.
In addition to reduced lifespan, overweight dogs have reduced quality of life and are at greater risk of suffering from diabetes mellitus, musculoskeletal problems and some types of cancer. Additional weight also predisposes dogs to suffering from respiratory, cardiovascular and kidney problems and causes chronic low‐grade systemic inflammation contributing to insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome.
The financial impact of owning a dog with an obesity‐related disease has been estimated to be approximately £770 per annum. Of course, reducing food intake will save money too.
UK vets report that approximately 40% of the dogs (and cats) that they see are overweight or obese. It is nearer 60% in the USA.
Many owners know how hard it can be to resist temptation and reduce food intake and/or eat more healthily. The pet food market is big business, being calculated to be worth £4.5 billion in 2019. Owners are being persuaded to buy more and more treats for their dogs as well as basic food, with the poorest quality food being the cheapest just as humans are bombarded by adverts for junk food and sugary drinks.
The good news is, not only will it extend your dog’s life and improve his quality of life to keep his weight to a normal level, you won’t feel tempted or hungry in the process.
Next time that you reach for the dogs treats consider why you are doing it. Is it guilt because you have left your dog alone or just a way of showing your dog how much you care for him? Instead of spending money on treats, why not get a dog sitter or show your dog that you care by playing a game or going for a walk. It could be worth nearly 2 years of your dog’s life.
Home Alone
The media has been awash with items about podcasts for dogs and gadgets to monitor dogs that are left on their own for long periods.
Marketers are aware that pet ownership is big business; more than a quarter of the UK population owns a dog and/or cat and that rises to over half in the US. Mobile telephone ownership has reached saturation point in many parts of the world and automatic upgrading has slowed, so now the emphasis is on selling connectivity to the “internet of things”.
If the thought that all this interconnectivity potentially enables your every movement to be tracked too and that even your refrigerator could be used to spy on your whereabouts, this cannot under any circumstances be the right thing for canine welfare.
No amount of “algorithmically curated playlists” can make up for quality human company for most of the day. No treat dispensing or ball throwing machine can deliver as much fun as an interactive game between dog and human. Dogs will soon habituate to any noise provided for them, even if they pay it any attention in the first place. A dog with true separation disorder is just as likely to tear his nails out trying to dig through the door whether a podcast is playing or not.
If you find yourself considering whether to buy one of these gadgets, work out the purchase price, running and disposal costs and replacement price at end of life and spend the money on buying some training so that you can recall your dog reliably and pay a trainer to provide quality input while you are out. If you contemplate leaving your dog alone all day while you are at work, then please don’t get a dog. You could always volunteer at a rescue at the weekend instead.
2020 Foresight – A Wish List For The Year
2019 saw some legal advances for dogs with the addition of mandatory licensing for breeders and boarders but no additional resources were made available to publicise and police it so it remains largely ineffective. Much still remains to be done, not least legislation that was not drafted but not passed. The ban on third party puppy and kitten sales (aka Lucy’s Law) is due to come into force in April, but, although welcome, will have limited effects on the puppy trade.
So here is my wish list for dogs for 2020:
- Additions to the AWA 2006 to criminalise aversive training techniques including the use of shock and citronella collars
- Mandatory licensing of behaviourists, trainers, groomers and walkers, including requirements for qualifications and insurance
- Mandatory domestic passports for dogs to include origin, microchip details and health records with a compulsory section for declaration of intention to breed, including health checks and countersigned by a vet
- Limitations on the breeding of brachycephalic and achondroplastic dogs, with all such breeders requiring mandatory additional oversight
- Removal of severely affected breeds from the UKKC CC qualifications until major health improvements are endemic
- Sufficient injection resources to police existing and future legislation and for education of canine professionals and the general public
- Mandatory employment of sufficient dog wardens in every local authority
- Mandatory restriction of firework use to licensed professionals only with an obligation to use quiet fireworks and a period of public notification in advance of displays where permission is granted
- Much more implementation of existing law with owners being prosecuted for dogs off lead on roads, obesity and neglect including long periods with dogs left alone on a regular basis.
Happy New Year and here’s hoping.
The Value Of Everything
Companion animals are big business. With approximately 26% of the population owning a dog and/or a cat, feed, veterinary care and accessories alone make a large contribution to the economy. A puppy can easily cost a four figure sum, regardless of provenance; in fact, the more dubious the breeder, the likelier that the price demanded will be high.
Legally, animals are regarded as either wild, chattels or livestock. This effects any value placed on them in the event of an insurance claim or similar legal redress. This makes sense in that, whatever the emotional attachment, animals clearly do not have the capability of representing themselves in any judicial proceeding. However, it of course does not take into account the emotional value that the animal holds for humans.
Whilst this also applies to farm animals, it is the impact of valuation on companion animals that is most likely to change, if the lead taken in the USA is anything to go by. Half of the population in the USA owns at least one dog, compared to just over a quarter of the UK population. Companion dogs have been increasingly commodified in recent years and Americans spent ten times as much on companion animals than on legal marijuana and more than twice as much as on pizza.
Much of this is to be regretted, with many people breeding, buying and owning dogs as they might any other consumable, and consequential effects on canine welfare. However, the other side of that coin is that dogs are paradoxically becoming valued in an emotional sense that goes beyond their legal designation as chattels without attributing anthropomorphic “rights”.
Academics Simon F Header, Deven Carlson, Hank Jenkins Smith and Joe Ripberger used a formula, previously devised for valuing human life and calculated that the value of a companion dog is $10,000 (£7,500). A similar calculation has valued a human life at $10M (£75M). This is considerably more than the “price of a replacement” sum that could be granted in law in any compensation claim.
Of course, emotionally our canine companions are priceless and it is uncomfortable for many to consider their dog in monetary terms. In some instances, setting a so-called shadow price on the life of a dog at least takes into account that emotional value and means that in cases of negligence for instance, a much fairer level of compensation can be sought. It remains to be seen if the judiciary or professional bodies in the UK will follow the USA’s lead, but it is surely only a matter of time.
Autumn Wonders Or Autumn Disaster?
The warm and wet conditions that have been seen across most of the UK have resulted in a plethora of fungi. There are more than 15,000 species of fungus in the UK, some of which are toxic to humans and dogs.
There have been several canine fatalities and incidents in the UK this autumn.
The common names of mushrooms that shouldn’t be eaten by humans provide clues as to the likely consequences and include the deadly webcap (Cortinarius rubellus), death cap (Amanita phalloides), destroying angel (Amanita virosa), funeral bell (Galerina marginata), fool’s funnel (Clitocybe rivulosa), panther cap (Amanita pantherina) and angel’s wings (Pleurocybella porrigens)
However, a wider range of mushrooms can be fatal to dogs.
The Clitocybe family of mushrooms are among the most likely to cause toxic symptoms because of the presence of muscarine.
Clitocybe rivulosa
Inocybe fungi
Clinical signs of poisoning usually occur within two hours of ingestion and include salivation, lacrimation, urination, diarrhoea, bradycardia, hypotension, shock, dyspnea, wheezing, increased respiratory secretions, abdominal pain, miosis, visual disturbance and rhinorrhea.
Keep an eye on your dog at all times and, if you have a voracious scavenger, use a well-fitting Baskerville muzzle – it may save your dog’s life. If you suspect that your dog has eaten anything toxic, get to a vet immediately. Call when you are on your way if possible and explain the circumstances so that your vet can get specialist advice in advance and take a sample with you if you can, taking care to wash your hands thoroughly.