My last post was with regards to Veteran K-9's and their handlers. In this post, I would like to extend that thought. There are a number of ways that people can support service dogs (there are many "branches" of service that dogs perform), and if you are thinking about helping dogs somehow this holiday season, perhaps we can give you a few ideas.
I recently had a young woman call me regarding a dog with a behavior problem. Through our conversation, I found that she had recently married and had to say goodbye to her new husband as he went overseas for military service. She told me how a "rescue" person in her area had treated her poorly because she was trying to find the pup a new home. Instead of taking the time to understand her position, this person was disrespectful to her. No couple who offers such service to our country deserves to be treated in this way!
I ended up providing some counsel to her that day free of charge, acknowledged her and her husband for their sacrifices, and treated her as a friend. Especially as she was new to the area, this friendly assistance provided a welcome sense of relief for her, and that is exactly what she needed at that time. It wasn't just financial, but emotional help and some guidance for her dog ownership situation that she needed. She also needed someone to treat her respectfully.
Emotional support for military families is a start. Some of them also need foster families or help placing their pets into new homes when their leave duration is longer than expected. Financial support for spouses and children, and for pets, is also sometimes needed.
But they aren't the only ones falling on hard times. Dogs provide service to average citizens in many ways, including: hearing assistance, seizure alert, diabetic alert, leaders for the blind, support for the feeble, psychiatric assistance, and more. Some of these trained dogs are owned by people who have limited incomes. They may need financial support this winter, too. They may also appreciate their sidewalks shoveled, a warm meal and some company, or something special to show appreciation for the work their dogs do.
In addition, there are handlers of police K-9's of all types, and search and rescue dog handlers who are often not provided with any funding for their volunteer work. They all deserve some simple thanks from time to time for the work they do, but there may be something else they need this winter.
If you own a business which provides a service dog owners can benefit by, consider how you might help these special dog handlers and owners. Clearing driveways could be a big help if you own a plow. Taking some photographs of the dog and handler for use in Christmas cards would be a great way for a photographer to put their skills to use. An auto mechanic could provide a tune-up or a discount on some snow tires.
The point is, if you wish to recognize the people who share a special working relationship with their dogs, and you wish to help them through some hard times, please use your imagination. Ask them how you might help. Be respectful of dogs wearing service vests whenever you meet them (never pet a dog wearing a vest- they need to concentrate on their work), and most importantly, be respectful of their handlers and of others who sacrifice their way of life, if not their lives, for our sake.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Monday, November 9, 2009
Remember Our Veteran K-9's
As we once again approach another day set aside to remember those who make such great sacrifices for our country, let us not forget those K-9's and their handlers. These dogs make a special contribution, both to the people of their units, the innocent whose lives they make better, and the public who benefit from their achievements. They may never truly understand what brought them to their work and why people do the things they do, but they are valuable to us.
Remember the special working dogs of the past, the present, and the future. And if you are able and willing to contribute to their care and comfort while they work or in their retirement, find a way to do so.
Remember the special working dogs of the past, the present, and the future. And if you are able and willing to contribute to their care and comfort while they work or in their retirement, find a way to do so.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Is it "Animal Care & Control", or Just "Animal Control (Kill)"?
The Shelby County Sheriff's Office raided the City of Memphis Animal Shelter in August after reports of animal abuse came to light. Unfortunately for some of the animals in that "shelter", there was a lot of darkness there.
To read more from an article on this subject, visit the link I'll put at the end of my post.
This post is about why and how shelter workers sometimes choose to neglect, or even worse, abuse the animals that come under their care. Actually, "care" doesn't seem to be an adequate term to describe those folks.
I must pause here and recognize the many shelter staff and volunteers who work tirelessly around the world, doing their best to provide everything they can for the present and future lives of animals. It is not always easy or pleasant work. This post is not meant to criticize their work, but to highlight the fact that we must be sure that "shelter" means just that.
What went wrong in this case? I'll let the locals determine that. Perhaps it was poor leadership. That would be my first guess. And likely a lack of accountability. It seems to have been a system that didn't allow the voices of the good people (who stood up and cried out to defend the animals) to be truly heard soon enough, and punish effectively the criminals. At last, they were heard, though, and an outside source (the Sheriff's department) did their work. Now we can hope that justice will be found in the courts, but it is too late for the neglected and abused who suffered and died.
Shelter workers can be very good at pointing fingers at dog owners (and other animal owners) for putting animals under their care. However, for every pointed finger there are a few pointing back. We are all, in a way, responsible for the animals our society produces, and for every person who volunteers and especially for those who are paid to care for them, it becomes a more direct responsibility to be sure they provide the best quality care possible. When that doesn't happen, those who notice some vast shortcomings have the responsibility to speak up.
Luckily that did happen in Memphis, and hopefully there will be some changes made there so the abuse and neglect becomes a thing of the past. Perhaps this story will inspire others who work in similar locations to speak up when they witness abuse and neglect, and perhaps prevent the needless suffering and death of the innocent.
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/nov/03/3-animal-shelter-dogs-died-lack-care-and-feeding/
To read more from an article on this subject, visit the link I'll put at the end of my post.
This post is about why and how shelter workers sometimes choose to neglect, or even worse, abuse the animals that come under their care. Actually, "care" doesn't seem to be an adequate term to describe those folks.
I must pause here and recognize the many shelter staff and volunteers who work tirelessly around the world, doing their best to provide everything they can for the present and future lives of animals. It is not always easy or pleasant work. This post is not meant to criticize their work, but to highlight the fact that we must be sure that "shelter" means just that.
What went wrong in this case? I'll let the locals determine that. Perhaps it was poor leadership. That would be my first guess. And likely a lack of accountability. It seems to have been a system that didn't allow the voices of the good people (who stood up and cried out to defend the animals) to be truly heard soon enough, and punish effectively the criminals. At last, they were heard, though, and an outside source (the Sheriff's department) did their work. Now we can hope that justice will be found in the courts, but it is too late for the neglected and abused who suffered and died.
Shelter workers can be very good at pointing fingers at dog owners (and other animal owners) for putting animals under their care. However, for every pointed finger there are a few pointing back. We are all, in a way, responsible for the animals our society produces, and for every person who volunteers and especially for those who are paid to care for them, it becomes a more direct responsibility to be sure they provide the best quality care possible. When that doesn't happen, those who notice some vast shortcomings have the responsibility to speak up.
Luckily that did happen in Memphis, and hopefully there will be some changes made there so the abuse and neglect becomes a thing of the past. Perhaps this story will inspire others who work in similar locations to speak up when they witness abuse and neglect, and perhaps prevent the needless suffering and death of the innocent.
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/nov/03/3-animal-shelter-dogs-died-lack-care-and-feeding/
Thursday, November 5, 2009
More on cats- San Francisco has outlawed declawing!
Some people have decided to declare that declawing cats, a common procedure by pet-owners for years, is cruel. As a result, San Francisco (of course, it would be California) has become the first major US city to make it an illegal procedure.
The CA VMA (Veterinary Medical Association) has opposed the legislation, primarily because they feel the decision should be left to the experts (veterinarians), not politicians (this is how I feel about all medical procedures for pets).
What's the punishment for a veterinarian and/or a pet owner who approves of a declawing? Up to six months in jail or a fine up to $1,000.
I am not a cat owner, but I am aware that there are millions of responsible cat owners in the world who feel they have worthy reasons to declaw their cats, and their veterinarians often approve of their decision (I am also aware that some practices avoid it whenever possible).
I have seen the operation done myself, and it was a very simple and quick procedure. Cats generally heal pretty quickly from the operation and are able to get around just fine afterwards. I suppose there are people who disagree with it for a number of reasons, too, and they are entitled to their opinion. Nevertheless, I don't believe that this is territory meant only for pet owners and veterinarians.
The CA VMA (Veterinary Medical Association) has opposed the legislation, primarily because they feel the decision should be left to the experts (veterinarians), not politicians (this is how I feel about all medical procedures for pets).
What's the punishment for a veterinarian and/or a pet owner who approves of a declawing? Up to six months in jail or a fine up to $1,000.
I am not a cat owner, but I am aware that there are millions of responsible cat owners in the world who feel they have worthy reasons to declaw their cats, and their veterinarians often approve of their decision (I am also aware that some practices avoid it whenever possible).
I have seen the operation done myself, and it was a very simple and quick procedure. Cats generally heal pretty quickly from the operation and are able to get around just fine afterwards. I suppose there are people who disagree with it for a number of reasons, too, and they are entitled to their opinion. Nevertheless, I don't believe that this is territory meant only for pet owners and veterinarians.
Dudley Massachusetts has some expensive cats!
This week in Dudley, Massachusetts, it became illegal to own more than three cats without a $50 residential kennel license.
I don't think they know what "kennel" means, really. Perhaps they should give it another name when the government decides what people do in their own homes with their personal property.
Mary Ellen Richards had 15 cats, and she says they are all well-cared for. She says they get all the veterinary care they need. In fact, she knows a thing or two about cats, as she helps an organization which traps feral cats for spaying/neutering and release (this is known as TNR- Trap, Neuter, Release). Many communities have such efforts as a method of keeping cat numbers under control.
But because she has more than three cats at her home, the city began fining her $100 per day. She has decided to move to "a more cat-friendly community."
I do not know if Ms. Richards keeps her cats confined inside or if they are all spayed/neutered so they do not multiply beyond her ability to care for them. But if she is providing adequate care for her cats and herself, why should it matter to the local government how many she has? This person spends her own time trying to keep the feral cat numbers down, and now she's leaving town because of these excessive fines. It could be more detrimental to that community than helpful in the long run.
If the people living in her neighborhood felt that she was not caring properly for her cats or that the animals were becoming a nuisance due to fecal matter, noise, etc., perhaps they should have reviewed their ordinances for basic cruelty/neglect and nuisance regulations and their enforcement. What they have with a pet limit law is detrimental to responsible animal owners as well.
I don't think they know what "kennel" means, really. Perhaps they should give it another name when the government decides what people do in their own homes with their personal property.
Mary Ellen Richards had 15 cats, and she says they are all well-cared for. She says they get all the veterinary care they need. In fact, she knows a thing or two about cats, as she helps an organization which traps feral cats for spaying/neutering and release (this is known as TNR- Trap, Neuter, Release). Many communities have such efforts as a method of keeping cat numbers under control.
But because she has more than three cats at her home, the city began fining her $100 per day. She has decided to move to "a more cat-friendly community."
I do not know if Ms. Richards keeps her cats confined inside or if they are all spayed/neutered so they do not multiply beyond her ability to care for them. But if she is providing adequate care for her cats and herself, why should it matter to the local government how many she has? This person spends her own time trying to keep the feral cat numbers down, and now she's leaving town because of these excessive fines. It could be more detrimental to that community than helpful in the long run.
If the people living in her neighborhood felt that she was not caring properly for her cats or that the animals were becoming a nuisance due to fecal matter, noise, etc., perhaps they should have reviewed their ordinances for basic cruelty/neglect and nuisance regulations and their enforcement. What they have with a pet limit law is detrimental to responsible animal owners as well.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
"My dog knows commands, but he doesn't listen!"
Many times dog trainers hear this type of comment from frustrated dog owners: "My dog knows commands, but he doesn't listen!" I hate to break it to them, but it has less to do with the dog listening and more to do with the relationship between the two, the owner's efforts to train the dog, and the dog's reliability (with regards to an accurate response to commands). And remember, commands are not only verbal in nature; commands/cues can come in many different forms.
Many people teach their dogs some basics as puppies, when they are fun and cute and easy to work with. Pups are taught to sit, down, stay and come, typically, in the living room or the yard, for food or a toy, for one second or two. Then the pups jump up from the sit or down, leave the stay location, and run away from the recall, but the owners find this acceptable because "he's a puppy" (by the way, I hear that phrase well into the dog's second year, but I find it a completely unacceptable excuse for a lack of manners). "My dog knows commands..." means little to me as a trainer unless I see the dog responding reliably in a new location and with multiple distractions around. Until then, the dog has some room to learn more about obedience, and most likely the owner has room to learn, too.
Training must be done past the six-month mark, and in most dogs, training should be taken fairly seriously at that point. Especially with large and powerful dogs, it is essential to give them some tools to help them learn a sense of responsibility and self-discipline. Without these and other important aspects of good character, large dogs can become a terrible nuisance (or worse, dangerous) to everyone they meet.
Puppy training and Novice/basic obedience training differ in a number of ways. A puppy is simply learning to learn, enjoying the process, and getting down some of the basics as they learn how to communicate and get around in a people-oriented society. The adolescent and adult dog should be taught to respect and trust the handler and to respond to commands quickly and reliably. This is where most people, at least in America, seem to forget their sense of responsibility and drop their training goals altogether. And this is precisely why so many people give up their dogs, get bitten by their own dogs, or kill dogs-- they don't train them properly and thoroughly beyond puppyhood.
It is often when the dog reaches adolescence or adulthood (about 6 months to three years or so) that some owners starts to blame the dog for not "listening". They need to take responsibility for the dog's instruction so he knows, first of all, exactly what is expected of him. He needs to know how to comply, when to comply, and that it is in his best interest to do so, even when he would really rather not. Unless an owner is responsible for the dog's training in this way, the dog cannot be blamed for his behavior.
It is when a dog owner becomes responsible for completing the dog's training that the blame game stops and the dog becomes easier to live with. It is much easier for a dog to "listen" to an owner who is actually providing some information, isn't it?
Many people teach their dogs some basics as puppies, when they are fun and cute and easy to work with. Pups are taught to sit, down, stay and come, typically, in the living room or the yard, for food or a toy, for one second or two. Then the pups jump up from the sit or down, leave the stay location, and run away from the recall, but the owners find this acceptable because "he's a puppy" (by the way, I hear that phrase well into the dog's second year, but I find it a completely unacceptable excuse for a lack of manners). "My dog knows commands..." means little to me as a trainer unless I see the dog responding reliably in a new location and with multiple distractions around. Until then, the dog has some room to learn more about obedience, and most likely the owner has room to learn, too.
Training must be done past the six-month mark, and in most dogs, training should be taken fairly seriously at that point. Especially with large and powerful dogs, it is essential to give them some tools to help them learn a sense of responsibility and self-discipline. Without these and other important aspects of good character, large dogs can become a terrible nuisance (or worse, dangerous) to everyone they meet.
Puppy training and Novice/basic obedience training differ in a number of ways. A puppy is simply learning to learn, enjoying the process, and getting down some of the basics as they learn how to communicate and get around in a people-oriented society. The adolescent and adult dog should be taught to respect and trust the handler and to respond to commands quickly and reliably. This is where most people, at least in America, seem to forget their sense of responsibility and drop their training goals altogether. And this is precisely why so many people give up their dogs, get bitten by their own dogs, or kill dogs-- they don't train them properly and thoroughly beyond puppyhood.
It is often when the dog reaches adolescence or adulthood (about 6 months to three years or so) that some owners starts to blame the dog for not "listening". They need to take responsibility for the dog's instruction so he knows, first of all, exactly what is expected of him. He needs to know how to comply, when to comply, and that it is in his best interest to do so, even when he would really rather not. Unless an owner is responsible for the dog's training in this way, the dog cannot be blamed for his behavior.
It is when a dog owner becomes responsible for completing the dog's training that the blame game stops and the dog becomes easier to live with. It is much easier for a dog to "listen" to an owner who is actually providing some information, isn't it?
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Dog Owners Sue After Illegal Seizure
We've heard rumors and stories of animal seizures taking place without warrants, but this one has become very real. A Louisville couple has filed a federal lawsuit against the Louisville Metro Government and certain officials who were in charge of what they claim to be an illegal entry into their home and illegal seizure of two adult dogs and a litter of puppies.
The attorney for Mr. and Mrs. James O'Neill, Jon Fleischaker, said that more lawsuits could be filed in the future, as he is aware of similar instances. This couple is suing to cover their losses, punitive damages, and for attorney's fees.
At least in this location, if the lawsuit proves that animal control officers and Animal Services acted illegally, responsible dog owners would have triumphed over this terrible violation of our basic rights, and hopefully prevent it from happening to others.
The attorney for Mr. and Mrs. James O'Neill, Jon Fleischaker, said that more lawsuits could be filed in the future, as he is aware of similar instances. This couple is suing to cover their losses, punitive damages, and for attorney's fees.
At least in this location, if the lawsuit proves that animal control officers and Animal Services acted illegally, responsible dog owners would have triumphed over this terrible violation of our basic rights, and hopefully prevent it from happening to others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
