In a recent announcement, Greyhound Racing New Zealand (GRNZ) have announced that they are taking over Levin kennels and will run them directly instead of providing them for Greyhounds as pets (GAP).
GRNZ say that while GAP has long been their key partner and that "we remain fully committed to supporting the GAP Trust", they are also concerned that greyhound adoption numbers have been "relatively static" through GAP. Because of this, GRNZ say they are going to "step back and look at how we can reshape our rehoming efforts to increase the adoption numbers. GAP, together with other rehoming partners such as Nightrave, have an important role to play and the industry needs to work together for the best outcomes for our greyhounds."
GRNZ's announcement is interesting and deserves a closer look.
GRNZ are totally on the money when they say that greyhound adoptions have been static over recent years. A quick check of GRNZ annual reports reveals that adoptions through GAP hovered at around the 280 mark for 2017 and this number has varied up and down by approximately 40 dogs since 2014.
Could it be that this isn't a result of poor marketing by GAP, but of the fact that NZ is a small market and can only absorb so many greyhound adoptions per year?
Either way, the total number of greyhound adoptions each year is barely a drop in the bucket compared to the huge numbers of greyhounds whelped by trainers. The only limits on the number of racing hounds that can breed at the time of writing are purely economic. Given that adoption numbers are a fraction of the total racing population, you'd think GRNZ could also choose to also look at how to limit the number of hounds bred for racing. Sadly this is not happening as GRNZ don't want to harm their cash cow (erm greyhound).
Sadly doing so needn't be all that difficult. By charging steep per race, per dog entry fees and a sizeable annual racing registration fee to trainers on a per greyhound basis (the monies could in turn be passed onto greyhound adoption agencies to fund public awareness of just how amazing greyhounds are as pets), the big benefit would be that trainers might not breed as many hounds and instead instead choose to focus on a smaller number of high calibre dogs instead. This would in turn lessen the numbers of greyhounds looking to be adopted.
The reason that adoption numbers are so crucial comes down to what a horrible euphemism referred to by many as "wastage". Hounds that cannot be rehomed owing to injuries, illness or behavioural issues are killed.
The big concern with GRNZ's move is that by shifting their focus onto the smaller greyhound adoption agencies and away from GAP, GRNZ could actually make the existing situation worse. As counter intuitive as this might sound, consider the following:
According to the 2017 GRNZ annual report, GAP accounted for over 80% of all greyhound adoptions (they adopted just under 300 dogs out of a total of 460 adoptions in New Zealand). Combined the other smaller agencies combined only accounted for 160 or so dogs being adopted.
In short, it'd be fair to assume that many of the other smaller agencies, no matter how capable and well intentioned they are could find themselves under pressure to fill the adoption vacuum left by GAP.
This isn't solely an issue of these smaller organisations finding a way to adopt more dogs out either. Gap operates a large network of marketers, administrators, organisers and kennel staff throughout New Zealand. Smaller greyhound agencies could find themselves under pressure to grow and develop a similar national presence. While GRNZ are likely to fund this to a point, it will also require know-how and an immense amount of energy from the small number of staff in these smaller agencies.
The unfortunate reality is that some may succeed, but others are likely to fail. According to an MBIE study in 2014, of New Zealand's 460,000 or so small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs), around a quarter of them fail within their first three years of operation. It is probable that if put under enough pressure, this is an outcome that some smaller agencies could be faced with.
None of these smaller agencies are geared up to deliver 80% of New Zealand's greyhound adoptions. scaling up to do so will take time and expertise. If the MBIE stats are anything to go by, some smaller agencies won't survive as they find themselves having to grow from a small operation with a handful of staff to a national footprint with multiple staff.
While some will succeed, A very real possibility could be that there will be less greyhound adoption agencies in the near future than currently exist and this could drive an increase in "wastage".
I hope I am wrong about this. There are a lot of good people who have put in a huge amount of work to rehome retired racers. Here's hoping this wont turn into a case of if it isn't broken, don't fix it.
Sunday, 29 April 2018
Monday, 2 April 2018
Councils, dog attacks and muzzles!
It's been a while since I last put pinkys to keyboard, but sometimes an issue gets me so incensed that I just feel compelled to write and this one is a real doozy.
Some good friends have a beautiful black boy greyhound, he's only 4 years old but is a gentle cuddly and playful boy who we have looked after on occasion.
Recently while at an off lead area at a local beach, he was attacked and badly mauled by another dog.
100 stitches and several surgeries later he is on the mend, but his traumatic experience means he still has major fear issues being around other non-greyhound dogs. These will probably stay with him for the rest of his life.
The situation sounds incredibly unfortunate. The other dog was on a leash but unmuzzled. The leash was being held by the dog owners neighbours kid who dropped the leash, which in turn lead to the other dog attacking.
Subsequent investigations by animal control proved fruitless - they say that because the beach is an off leash area, owners enter with their dogs at their own risk and that this absolves the attacking dogs owners of any liability.
Making matters worse, the attacking dogs owners have also refused to help with vet bills which are now in excess of an eye-watering $2000 and are likely to continue to increase with further treatments. The there's training and behaviour modification needed which is also likely to be costly.
This beautiful black greyhounds owners are being left with no choice but to treat the matter as civil case and try their luck in the disputes tribunal. Even if they win, they'll most likely be left out of pocket for the time and legal advice required.
What really gets my goat about this is that this hound is just one of a growing number being attacked on a beach. Sadly this is becoming a regular thing. The really annoying is that it could be easily avoided.
All the councils need to do is make it compulsory for dogs to be muzzled and unmuzzled dogs automatically fined/liable for any damage and attacks as an incentive for dog owners to take some responsibility for their dogs.
Even if there was a fight between two dogs, damage would be minimised through the use of muzzles and dog owners would not have to resort to trying their luck at the disputes tribunal.
Sadly councils don't seem to care. It is a fair bet to say that nothing will happen - even though the number of dog attacks at off leash areas are only likely to increase.
Sigh
Some good friends have a beautiful black boy greyhound, he's only 4 years old but is a gentle cuddly and playful boy who we have looked after on occasion.
Recently while at an off lead area at a local beach, he was attacked and badly mauled by another dog.
100 stitches and several surgeries later he is on the mend, but his traumatic experience means he still has major fear issues being around other non-greyhound dogs. These will probably stay with him for the rest of his life.
The situation sounds incredibly unfortunate. The other dog was on a leash but unmuzzled. The leash was being held by the dog owners neighbours kid who dropped the leash, which in turn lead to the other dog attacking.
Subsequent investigations by animal control proved fruitless - they say that because the beach is an off leash area, owners enter with their dogs at their own risk and that this absolves the attacking dogs owners of any liability.
Making matters worse, the attacking dogs owners have also refused to help with vet bills which are now in excess of an eye-watering $2000 and are likely to continue to increase with further treatments. The there's training and behaviour modification needed which is also likely to be costly.
This beautiful black greyhounds owners are being left with no choice but to treat the matter as civil case and try their luck in the disputes tribunal. Even if they win, they'll most likely be left out of pocket for the time and legal advice required.
What really gets my goat about this is that this hound is just one of a growing number being attacked on a beach. Sadly this is becoming a regular thing. The really annoying is that it could be easily avoided.
All the councils need to do is make it compulsory for dogs to be muzzled and unmuzzled dogs automatically fined/liable for any damage and attacks as an incentive for dog owners to take some responsibility for their dogs.
Even if there was a fight between two dogs, damage would be minimised through the use of muzzles and dog owners would not have to resort to trying their luck at the disputes tribunal.
Sadly councils don't seem to care. It is a fair bet to say that nothing will happen - even though the number of dog attacks at off leash areas are only likely to increase.
Sigh
Thursday, 1 June 2017
REALLY?
Every year GAP (greyhounds as Pets), who are New Zealand's largest greyhound adoption agency runs a fundraiser/publicity event in conjunction with Animates (a large chain opf pet stores and vet clinics).
Having attended the event over numerous years, I've found it to be a great way for members of the public to meet greyhounds. The event usually results in a number of adoptions too.
I was looking forwards to attending this years event with our two hounds.
UNfortuiantely it was not to be.
I was told Animates dont want me to attend. Worse still, Animates also refused to let GAP operate out of one of their stores, citing me as the reason.
The trouble is that several years ago I'd posted on Linkedin to express my disgust at Animates selling electric shock collars and invited other linkedin users to express their distate.
This was picked up by the media and over the course of a week became a hotly debated issue.
That this happened 2 and a half years ago didnt seem to matter in the minds of Animates .
My concerns around shock collars are just as valid as nothing appears to have changed.
If anything, Animates have plummeted in my estimates. I can understand them not wanting me in their stores - the PR risk of a potential dissenter on their premises makes demanding I do not attend a logical move.
What I cannot understand is the move not to allow GAP to fundraise in one of their stores because of social media posts . I am not a GAP employee, and my relationship with GAP is limited to the small amount of fundraising I've historically done as well as the two greyhounds I'd adopted through GAP. Punishing GAP for the actions of an unrealated individual simply makes sense. Worse still, greyhounds suffer.
Animates loony logic aside, My issues with electric shock collars stem from 4 simple facts - these are:
1) training with fear rather (negative reinforcement) instead of encouragement (positive reinforcement) generally doesnt work and often results in other behavoural issues and in some cases even agression.
2) While shock collars have a place with professional trainers who know how and when to use them, numerous studies have found that non-professionals tend to overuse them. This often desensitises the dog to to shocks and this see's the collars settings eventually turned up to full. this can have two possible outcomes. Firstly the dog learns to ignore the shock and their behaviour remains uncorrected. Secondly the dog gets stressed out and redirects fear and frustrations into other behaviours which is why shock collars are often seen as not being efective or sometimes resulting in undesirable canine behaviours such as agression.
3) Anyone can buy one. While Animates claim that their shock collars are kept under lock and key, there's no restriction on who they may be sold to. While Animates can operate a measure of discretion on who they sell shock collars to, the decision is usually made by a shop assistant who is at best poorly equipped to make a decision.
4) Shock collars are potentially dangerous. There is also no regulation around the importation of shock collars into New Zealand. A common argument often cited by shock collar proponents is "I've worn one of these shock collars and zapped myself and it was fine". What is not so widely discussed are the many incidents involving faulty shock collars thatr have caused severe electrical burns to dogs or refused to turn off and delivered a constant stream of shocks until their batteries ran flat. The other lesser known fact about shoick collars is that they are typically powered by Litium ION batteries and are cranked out of factories third world nations. Given the recent Samsung Note 7 smartphone debacle which saw poorly manufactured Lithium Ion batteries exploding, the potental for canine carnage from cheaply made shock collars is huge.
Sadly at the end of the day, it is the Greyhounds that suffer.
Having attended the event over numerous years, I've found it to be a great way for members of the public to meet greyhounds. The event usually results in a number of adoptions too.
I was looking forwards to attending this years event with our two hounds.
UNfortuiantely it was not to be.
I was told Animates dont want me to attend. Worse still, Animates also refused to let GAP operate out of one of their stores, citing me as the reason.
The trouble is that several years ago I'd posted on Linkedin to express my disgust at Animates selling electric shock collars and invited other linkedin users to express their distate.
This was picked up by the media and over the course of a week became a hotly debated issue.
That this happened 2 and a half years ago didnt seem to matter in the minds of Animates .
My concerns around shock collars are just as valid as nothing appears to have changed.
If anything, Animates have plummeted in my estimates. I can understand them not wanting me in their stores - the PR risk of a potential dissenter on their premises makes demanding I do not attend a logical move.
What I cannot understand is the move not to allow GAP to fundraise in one of their stores because of social media posts . I am not a GAP employee, and my relationship with GAP is limited to the small amount of fundraising I've historically done as well as the two greyhounds I'd adopted through GAP. Punishing GAP for the actions of an unrealated individual simply makes sense. Worse still, greyhounds suffer.
Animates loony logic aside, My issues with electric shock collars stem from 4 simple facts - these are:
1) training with fear rather (negative reinforcement) instead of encouragement (positive reinforcement) generally doesnt work and often results in other behavoural issues and in some cases even agression.
2) While shock collars have a place with professional trainers who know how and when to use them, numerous studies have found that non-professionals tend to overuse them. This often desensitises the dog to to shocks and this see's the collars settings eventually turned up to full. this can have two possible outcomes. Firstly the dog learns to ignore the shock and their behaviour remains uncorrected. Secondly the dog gets stressed out and redirects fear and frustrations into other behaviours which is why shock collars are often seen as not being efective or sometimes resulting in undesirable canine behaviours such as agression.
3) Anyone can buy one. While Animates claim that their shock collars are kept under lock and key, there's no restriction on who they may be sold to. While Animates can operate a measure of discretion on who they sell shock collars to, the decision is usually made by a shop assistant who is at best poorly equipped to make a decision.
4) Shock collars are potentially dangerous. There is also no regulation around the importation of shock collars into New Zealand. A common argument often cited by shock collar proponents is "I've worn one of these shock collars and zapped myself and it was fine". What is not so widely discussed are the many incidents involving faulty shock collars thatr have caused severe electrical burns to dogs or refused to turn off and delivered a constant stream of shocks until their batteries ran flat. The other lesser known fact about shoick collars is that they are typically powered by Litium ION batteries and are cranked out of factories third world nations. Given the recent Samsung Note 7 smartphone debacle which saw poorly manufactured Lithium Ion batteries exploding, the potental for canine carnage from cheaply made shock collars is huge.
Sadly at the end of the day, it is the Greyhounds that suffer.
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
and Afterwards...
It has been a while since my last entry and I apologise. In the 4 weeks since Bomber died, I've found it difficult to focus let alone write about him without becoming incredibly sad even though we've just had a magnitude 7.8 quake and flooding. In fact about the only thing missing at the moment is a plague of locusts and the four horsemen of the apocalypse.
The funny thing is that the support we've received from friends has been nothing short of incredible.
This contrasts so markedly from a few years back when Ally, our little black cat died. At work I was sad and when asked why, was shocked at how many people said "ah well, it's just a cat". They amazingly expected that to make me feel better.
It didn't
In fact it simply made me want to punch them in their insensitive smug idiotic faces - I didn't of course (but it was ever so tempting).
With Bombers passing, things could not have been any more different.
When we got home with Bombers body to bury him, there were flowers on our doorstep. That was just the beginning. Friends from the greyhound collective on facebook banded together to create a photo-book of him, and we've had more flowers. My family and my sisters in-laws both donated to Greyhounds as pets and sent us a beautiful block mounted canvas print of Bomber and Lottie cuddled up on the sofa together.
Not long after this a delegation of greyhound owning friends popped over with a tree and lots of food. It was wonderful. More recently we received a lovely picture of Bombie in his bathtub (he had a habit of hopping in water troughs and old bath tubs being used as water troughs. We called him Bombie the fish because of this) from the amazingly talented Elizabeth Dodds. I was so choked up with emotion when I got this picture I was literally lost for words and couldn't speak.
The thing is words cannot express how much all this kindness has meant to us.
Being surrounded by people who actually get just how painful it is to lose a much loved pet has really helped a lot. It has been humbling and has shown us just how amazing our friends and family are.
Family aside, my saint-like wife has been incredible. it has been tough for her and we've both cried rivers. Lottie has been sad and a lot quieter. Not a day doesn't go by without her, Lottie or I feeling incredibly sad. I guess that oft used cliche of "time heals all" must apply.
I know this is perhaps the shortest blog post I've written in a while, but I want to say use it to say a huge thank-you to everyone for their kind words, support for just being so understanding. It means a lot to us and I hope that somehow we can repay all the kindness, sensitivity and consideration that all these lovely people have shown us.
The funny thing is that the support we've received from friends has been nothing short of incredible.
This contrasts so markedly from a few years back when Ally, our little black cat died. At work I was sad and when asked why, was shocked at how many people said "ah well, it's just a cat". They amazingly expected that to make me feel better.
It didn't
In fact it simply made me want to punch them in their insensitive smug idiotic faces - I didn't of course (but it was ever so tempting).
With Bombers passing, things could not have been any more different.
When we got home with Bombers body to bury him, there were flowers on our doorstep. That was just the beginning. Friends from the greyhound collective on facebook banded together to create a photo-book of him, and we've had more flowers. My family and my sisters in-laws both donated to Greyhounds as pets and sent us a beautiful block mounted canvas print of Bomber and Lottie cuddled up on the sofa together.
Not long after this a delegation of greyhound owning friends popped over with a tree and lots of food. It was wonderful. More recently we received a lovely picture of Bombie in his bathtub (he had a habit of hopping in water troughs and old bath tubs being used as water troughs. We called him Bombie the fish because of this) from the amazingly talented Elizabeth Dodds. I was so choked up with emotion when I got this picture I was literally lost for words and couldn't speak.
The thing is words cannot express how much all this kindness has meant to us.
Being surrounded by people who actually get just how painful it is to lose a much loved pet has really helped a lot. It has been humbling and has shown us just how amazing our friends and family are.
Family aside, my saint-like wife has been incredible. it has been tough for her and we've both cried rivers. Lottie has been sad and a lot quieter. Not a day doesn't go by without her, Lottie or I feeling incredibly sad. I guess that oft used cliche of "time heals all" must apply.
I know this is perhaps the shortest blog post I've written in a while, but I want to say use it to say a huge thank-you to everyone for their kind words, support for just being so understanding. It means a lot to us and I hope that somehow we can repay all the kindness, sensitivity and consideration that all these lovely people have shown us.
Wednesday, 2 November 2016
Guy Fawkes Mayhem - AGAIN
I started this blog to keep a record of my hounds. What has proved interesting are the themes that keep emerging again and again. One topic that pops up at the same time each year is Guy Fawkes.
For non commonwealth citizens the term Guy Fawkes probably has no meaning. To put it into context, Guy Fawkes was a member of a small number of people who tried to blow up the UK parliament in the gunpowder conspiracy.
Bizarrely we celebrate this act of terrorism each year. Even more bizarrely we celebrate it by paying over the odds for increasingly dire fireworks (they seem to get smaller and more pathetic every year despite costing more each year). In essence we celebrate an act of terrorism by burning money. How loopy is that??
If that doesn't make you question the sanity of the average New Zealander, our unwillingness to ban the sale of fireworks to private individuals should at least leave you scratching your head and wondering.
Some argue that it is their "right" to have fun letting off fireworks. These idiots seem to be oblivious to the huge amount of damage caused by fireworks and the bill that they as taxpayers have to foot so they can have their "fun".
Perhaps most upsetting of all are the stories of terrified animals who've been horrifically maimed or died as a result of fireworks. Things have got so bad that this year the veterinary association and Wellington SPCA have backed calls for a total ban on the sale of fireworks.
Hell Pizza's usual lack of good sense and taste means they're delivering fireworks to peoples doors. I urge you not to buy any pizzas from these idiots (the packaging their pizzas arrive in are usually more tasty than their pizzas anyhow) and to register your displeasure on their website.
Sadly the madness that is Guy Fawkes will again this year as our politicians lack the guts to enact a ban on sales of fireworks to private individuals.
Here's a few pointers to help you should your hounds be stressed by fireworks.
1) Thundershirts - these swaddle the hound and really can work wonders calming them... they're a great investment if your hound goes to pieces on fireworks night.
2) Environment - make sure your hound is inside, and pull the curtains. Also play some music or turn on the TV to drown out the noise of fireworks
3) Vet - there are also a pile of great options available from your vet to calm your hounds. Visiting your vet for advice may yeild some surprisingly useful tips. Many vets will also prescribe low level tranquilisers that are safe for greyhounds and can help take the edge off their stress.
4) Prepare for the unthinkable - sometimes even with all the planning in the world, things can go wrong. Get an identity disk on your hounds collar along with its rego tags. Should your hound somehow get outside and freak out, the disk could help rescuers reunite you with your hound.
5) Sign any petitions you can and support a ban.
For non commonwealth citizens the term Guy Fawkes probably has no meaning. To put it into context, Guy Fawkes was a member of a small number of people who tried to blow up the UK parliament in the gunpowder conspiracy.
Bizarrely we celebrate this act of terrorism each year. Even more bizarrely we celebrate it by paying over the odds for increasingly dire fireworks (they seem to get smaller and more pathetic every year despite costing more each year). In essence we celebrate an act of terrorism by burning money. How loopy is that??
If that doesn't make you question the sanity of the average New Zealander, our unwillingness to ban the sale of fireworks to private individuals should at least leave you scratching your head and wondering.
Some argue that it is their "right" to have fun letting off fireworks. These idiots seem to be oblivious to the huge amount of damage caused by fireworks and the bill that they as taxpayers have to foot so they can have their "fun".
Perhaps most upsetting of all are the stories of terrified animals who've been horrifically maimed or died as a result of fireworks. Things have got so bad that this year the veterinary association and Wellington SPCA have backed calls for a total ban on the sale of fireworks.
Hell Pizza's usual lack of good sense and taste means they're delivering fireworks to peoples doors. I urge you not to buy any pizzas from these idiots (the packaging their pizzas arrive in are usually more tasty than their pizzas anyhow) and to register your displeasure on their website.
Sadly the madness that is Guy Fawkes will again this year as our politicians lack the guts to enact a ban on sales of fireworks to private individuals.
Here's a few pointers to help you should your hounds be stressed by fireworks.
1) Thundershirts - these swaddle the hound and really can work wonders calming them... they're a great investment if your hound goes to pieces on fireworks night.
2) Environment - make sure your hound is inside, and pull the curtains. Also play some music or turn on the TV to drown out the noise of fireworks
3) Vet - there are also a pile of great options available from your vet to calm your hounds. Visiting your vet for advice may yeild some surprisingly useful tips. Many vets will also prescribe low level tranquilisers that are safe for greyhounds and can help take the edge off their stress.
4) Prepare for the unthinkable - sometimes even with all the planning in the world, things can go wrong. Get an identity disk on your hounds collar along with its rego tags. Should your hound somehow get outside and freak out, the disk could help rescuers reunite you with your hound.
5) Sign any petitions you can and support a ban.
Tuesday, 1 November 2016
The Unspoken Contract
When we adopt a pet our thoughts are filled with the practicalities of feeding, where they'll sleep and so on. Little thought is given to an unspoken yet vitally important part of owning a pet. I call this the unspoken contact and it is works like this:
When you adopt a pet, your obligations are:
The unspoken part of this contract is one most of us dont want to contemplate:
What are our responsibilities to our pet at the end of their life?
Having just been there, I can't emphasise strongly enough just how important this really is. You really need to think this through.
Short of natural death or death from injury, Most pets succumb to illness. How you choose to act at this stage will play a big role in how you feel about your relationship with your pet for the rest of your life. Most important of all, it'll also dictate how your pet lives and how its life ends.
When faced with a terminally ill pet, the plain truth of the matter is that there are no good options.
If you try to prolong their life they may suffer end up enduring a lot more pain that leads to an agonising death.
It goes without saying that this is a breach of your contractual obligations to your pet.
The question you most need to ask yourself in such a dire situation is this:
Are you prolonging your pets life for your own needs or for your pets?
If you are in this terrible situation you really need to have a frank discussion with your vet.
By now you'll be feeling as if the ground has gone out from under your feet. The pain and conflict you'll feel at this stage is intense beyond description. I cant put into words what you'll be feeling right now.
This might sound crazily difficult (trust me it is). but you'll need to set aside the emotional typhoon swirling around in your head to ask your vet these questions -
If the answer to these questions are yes the illness is terminal, yes they are in pain, and no their quality of life will see them stuck in a cage and drugged to near senselessness until they die, then there really is only one option.
Trouble is that this option requires that you set aside your own pain, feelings of loss and guilt and let your pet go. They must come first and you have to be strong enough to end their suffering.
This is your obligation to them. Your needs shouldnt énter the picture and this is likely to be one of the hardest (yet selfless) decisions you'll ever have to make.
Ending the life of a much loved pet runs counter to nearly every instinct you're likely to have. Looking into their eyes knowing that you have to say goodbye forever is not something I'd wish on anyone.
This said, you also need to remember your responsibility to your pet. Namely that you need to ensure they suffer as little as possible and leave this world knowing that you love them and that they were the best thing that ever happened to you.
We just went through this with Bomber, our much loved black greyhound.
There was no good choices available to us and we put him to sleep.
It was my responsibility as his owner.
He was my dog and I made sure that he knew how much he was loved before he passed.
I bought Bombers body home and buried him. He was my dog and laying him to rest with as much love and dignity as possible was the very least I could do.
I'd be lying if I said that I am not hurting (I am horribly) and that I am not wracked with feelings of guilt at ending his life ( I am). I do however know that this was my only real choice as Bombers illness was terminal and he was in an incredible amount of pain.
So please when you adopt or when you are next cuddled up to your pet, please contemplate the unspoken contract you have with them. Doing so might help a little should you ever be faced with such a horrible situation.
When you adopt a pet, your obligations are:
- To give it as good a life as possible
- To ensure that it is physically and mentally nurtured and cared for and protected
- Making sure it knows that it is loved
The unspoken part of this contract is one most of us dont want to contemplate:
What are our responsibilities to our pet at the end of their life?
Having just been there, I can't emphasise strongly enough just how important this really is. You really need to think this through.
Short of natural death or death from injury, Most pets succumb to illness. How you choose to act at this stage will play a big role in how you feel about your relationship with your pet for the rest of your life. Most important of all, it'll also dictate how your pet lives and how its life ends.
When faced with a terminally ill pet, the plain truth of the matter is that there are no good options.
If you try to prolong their life they may suffer end up enduring a lot more pain that leads to an agonising death.
It goes without saying that this is a breach of your contractual obligations to your pet.
The question you most need to ask yourself in such a dire situation is this:
Are you prolonging your pets life for your own needs or for your pets?
If you are in this terrible situation you really need to have a frank discussion with your vet.
By now you'll be feeling as if the ground has gone out from under your feet. The pain and conflict you'll feel at this stage is intense beyond description. I cant put into words what you'll be feeling right now.
This might sound crazily difficult (trust me it is). but you'll need to set aside the emotional typhoon swirling around in your head to ask your vet these questions -
- Is your Pet in any pain and discomfort?
- Is the prognosis is terminal?
- Are there any treatment options that'll save your pet and give them a decent quality of life?
If the answer to these questions are yes the illness is terminal, yes they are in pain, and no their quality of life will see them stuck in a cage and drugged to near senselessness until they die, then there really is only one option.
Trouble is that this option requires that you set aside your own pain, feelings of loss and guilt and let your pet go. They must come first and you have to be strong enough to end their suffering.
This is your obligation to them. Your needs shouldnt énter the picture and this is likely to be one of the hardest (yet selfless) decisions you'll ever have to make.
Ending the life of a much loved pet runs counter to nearly every instinct you're likely to have. Looking into their eyes knowing that you have to say goodbye forever is not something I'd wish on anyone.
This said, you also need to remember your responsibility to your pet. Namely that you need to ensure they suffer as little as possible and leave this world knowing that you love them and that they were the best thing that ever happened to you.
We just went through this with Bomber, our much loved black greyhound.
There was no good choices available to us and we put him to sleep.
It was my responsibility as his owner.
He was my dog and I made sure that he knew how much he was loved before he passed.
I bought Bombers body home and buried him. He was my dog and laying him to rest with as much love and dignity as possible was the very least I could do.
I'd be lying if I said that I am not hurting (I am horribly) and that I am not wracked with feelings of guilt at ending his life ( I am). I do however know that this was my only real choice as Bombers illness was terminal and he was in an incredible amount of pain.
So please when you adopt or when you are next cuddled up to your pet, please contemplate the unspoken contract you have with them. Doing so might help a little should you ever be faced with such a horrible situation.
RIP Bomber (Lochinvar Elle)
died aged 6.5 years
We love you and miss you Bomber
Saying Good-bye
On Monday morning at 3am my wife awoke to Bomber (a.k.a Tinklebert Woofledink) crying in pain. She went in to see what was the matter (he often sleeps in the spare room) and he was standing, not wanting to sit and trembling with pain.
Fearing bloat (an often fatal condition which sees internal organs twist), we rush him to the emergency vet. To our relief bloat was ruled out and the vet said maybe it was pancreatitis (which dogs sometimes get). Pain medication and antibiotics were administered and we were told to take Bomber to our regular vet if there was no improvement by the morning.
Bomber came home and initially would not lie down in the bed, instead trembling in pain. Eventually he was so exhausted he lay down and dozed. There was no improvement in the morning and we took him to our vet.
Feeling a sense of dread we waited for the call from our vet. When it came the news was devastating. Xrays had revealed a large mass and it was putting pressure on his other internal organs. The vet suggested that if money were no object (when it comes to either hound money is no problem - I'd have donated kidneys to help), we should take Bomber to Massey University Veterinary Hospital, it is the best in New Zealand. It was a two hour drive and we didn't hesitate.
Dropping Bomber off we checked into a hotel and went in search of breakfast/lunch. At a cafe, Massey called and the ground fell away from my feet.
The mass inside bomber was fluid - blood. X-Rays had revealed tumors and that cancer had spread - there were a lot of them, many were well developed. The prognosis was about as bad as it gets. We were told get back to the vet hospital as soon as possible.
Arriving at Massey, Sophie the vet (who was nothing short of amazing) explained the options - there really weren't any. If they operated to drain the blood he'd just bleed more and the operation would probably kill him given his weakened condition. Even if he survived the operation, he'd probably only live for a few more pain filled weeks.
There really was only one option. I just couldn't face it. Bomber had to be put to sleep.
No words can describe the dilemma we were faced with. There were no survivable options and the only choices we had were to end Bombers life or to see him suffer until he died.
Sophie allowed us to sit with Bomber for as long as we liked. I patted him, told him I loved him and that he was a good dog. By now he was in such pain that they'd had to administer methadone, synthetic heroin. I'm not sure Bomber heard what we said but we said it anyway.
In the end I called a good friend and fellow greyhound owner who'd also been through this and spoke to her. I probably didn't make a lot of sense, I was a shell-shocked blubbering mess. Her advice really helped. We needed to let Bomber go and end his suffering. It was the only right choice there was.
I didn't know what time it was but an hour or so later we put Bomber to sleep and he gently passed.
Before he was put to sleep I reminded him that I loved him and that he was an amazing dog. I asked him to wait for me and when I die I'll look for him at the rainbow bridge.
Bomber was only six and a half years old, he should have had many more years sharing a sofa, mooching treats and going for walks.
I've cried a river and have not stopped. The grief of losing Bomber isnt 'just emotional, it is a very real physical pain. Everything hurts
Now we have a huge black greyhound sized hole in our lives and the house feels incredibly empty. There are many things that catch us and cause a tears to flow. My love for him has and never will cease. Rest in peace Bombie boy we love you so much.
Monday, 26 September 2016
Dangerous dogs and Dangerous Humans
We own two big dogs. Ok they're greyhounds. In reality this translates into them being two of the laziest, gentlest canines known.
This said, they're definitely not small. While walking Lottie and bomber we often see smaller dogs being walked across the road, as their owners wrongly assuming that they're two big dangerous dogs.
It is funny seeing how these assumptions are made about Lottie and Bomber - they're harmless. Trouble is other people don't know that.
Ironically we used to own a miniature Dachshund called Monty. He was about the size of a largish tabby cat and looked a lot like a puppy. We loved him to bits. He was tiny and kids adored him. Sadly he didn't like kids at all. We lost count of the amount of times we'd shout "don't pat him!" as he lunged snarling at the kids trying to give him a cuddle. You see he looked small and cute, but he wasn't harmless
Assumptions can be dangerous.
This seems strangely salient. New "dangerous" breed laws are about to be passed that'll require dog breeds deemed as "dangerous" be neutered and kept locked up with restricted access to a properties entrance. They'll also have to wear a specific collar to signal that they are dangerous.
This law is at best nonsense, and in reality will solve nothing. In other countries similar laws have been repealed because they've failed to make one iota of difference.
In Australia, the state of Victoria passed breed specific dog laws. These were recently dismantled as it was found that most dog control officers couldn't correctly identify dangerous breeds with enough certainty for the laws to be effective. Meanwhile dog attacks continued.
There are a lot of assumptions and other baggage that comes with owning dogs, big or small. Most assumptions are usually based on poorly informed stereo types.
These stereotypes come from many sources, with one of the more prominent sources being the media. As a journalist I've lost count of the number of times I have seen a dog attack misreported. Be it through journalists who are unfamiliar with dogs or editors hellbent on upping readership, the fact remains that the media has a hell of a lot to answer for when it comes to reporting on canine issues.
Then there's laziness. Punishing dogs (who lets face it can be killed with little or no recourse) is easier than policing people. The bottom line is this: It is also far cheaper too.
These new laws are a typical example of a band-aid applied to a gaping stab wound and are at best a vote catching move from a politician wanting to be seen to be doing something, regardless of how poorly thought through it may be.
While the numbers show a correlation between certain dog breeds and attacks, they're only half the story. Behind these statistics lurks detail that has clearly been overlooked by law makers and will almost certainly render the new laws ineffectual.
A lot of dog attacks go un-reported and many of these are from smaller breeds that are usually thought of, much like Monty, as not being dangerous. Most of the time a nip from a smaller dog isnt much of an injury compared to that inflicted by a larger breed, but still....
What is also most crucially missing from the stats is the human element. Many people fall in love with the idea of owning a dog. They adopt a small bull of fluffy pup and things are great - at least for the first few months.
Then they realise that owning a dog comes with a lot of responsibilities and requires some hard work. Dogs have to be trained, walked twice a day, groomed and fed. Sadly many people just give up and end up doing the minimum required to keep their dog alive. Many dog owners forego dog obedience classes and often lack the basic knowledge that can mean the difference between a safe happy dog and a stressed dog with aggression/fear issues.
Sadly some dogs are left roaming the streets or barely cared for. A dog - any dog is like a loaded gun. Given the wrong set of circumstances great harm can happen.
Surely it would be a smarter move to recognise that ALL dog breeds are potentially dangerous and focus on putting the legislative fence at the top of the cliff instead of doing the bare minimum and putting a largely ineffectual ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.
If a human wants to drive a car or own a gun, they must first pass some strict controls. Sadly this is not the case with owning a dog.
Make dog obedience classes mandatory. Humans learn as much as the dog at these classes. Simple things such as how to restrain, recall and tell what sort of state your dog is in are all fairly standard fare and can often mean the difference between a good and a bad outcome when it comes to dog safety.
Set up a genetic datatbase of dogs that is linked back to breeders. Fine, and shut down puppy mills. Too many dogs are re-homed to unsuitable owners which in turn acts as a root cause for so many other problems. If it isnt so easy to make a fast buck out of breeding only those who are genuinely interested in the welfare of their animals will do it.
Penalise humans first and dogs second. Most attacks happen because of lax and ignorant dog owners. Make the penalities harsh - if people face huge fines, chances are that they'll be more be more responsible about owning a dog.
Providing education for kids on how to approach a dog (e.g. ask its owner if they can pat it etc), and how to read some basic canine body language to tell if a dog is friendly or agressive etc. This alone could greatly reduce the number of dog attacks and it'd cost peanuts to put in place.
Sadly all of the above will never happen. These options would most likely sit poorly with voters and cost a lot of money.
The other thing is we need to be realistic - No dog laws are going offer a perfect solution. Even the most conscientious dog owners can slip up. Lax owners are also unlikely to comply. No laws can be 100% enforced.
Meanwhile we'll have to make do with the existing poorly thought out laws crafted by lawmakers who know next to nothing about dogs.
This said, they're definitely not small. While walking Lottie and bomber we often see smaller dogs being walked across the road, as their owners wrongly assuming that they're two big dangerous dogs.
It is funny seeing how these assumptions are made about Lottie and Bomber - they're harmless. Trouble is other people don't know that.
Ironically we used to own a miniature Dachshund called Monty. He was about the size of a largish tabby cat and looked a lot like a puppy. We loved him to bits. He was tiny and kids adored him. Sadly he didn't like kids at all. We lost count of the amount of times we'd shout "don't pat him!" as he lunged snarling at the kids trying to give him a cuddle. You see he looked small and cute, but he wasn't harmless
Assumptions can be dangerous.
This seems strangely salient. New "dangerous" breed laws are about to be passed that'll require dog breeds deemed as "dangerous" be neutered and kept locked up with restricted access to a properties entrance. They'll also have to wear a specific collar to signal that they are dangerous.
This law is at best nonsense, and in reality will solve nothing. In other countries similar laws have been repealed because they've failed to make one iota of difference.
In Australia, the state of Victoria passed breed specific dog laws. These were recently dismantled as it was found that most dog control officers couldn't correctly identify dangerous breeds with enough certainty for the laws to be effective. Meanwhile dog attacks continued.
There are a lot of assumptions and other baggage that comes with owning dogs, big or small. Most assumptions are usually based on poorly informed stereo types.
These stereotypes come from many sources, with one of the more prominent sources being the media. As a journalist I've lost count of the number of times I have seen a dog attack misreported. Be it through journalists who are unfamiliar with dogs or editors hellbent on upping readership, the fact remains that the media has a hell of a lot to answer for when it comes to reporting on canine issues.
Then there's laziness. Punishing dogs (who lets face it can be killed with little or no recourse) is easier than policing people. The bottom line is this: It is also far cheaper too.
These new laws are a typical example of a band-aid applied to a gaping stab wound and are at best a vote catching move from a politician wanting to be seen to be doing something, regardless of how poorly thought through it may be.
While the numbers show a correlation between certain dog breeds and attacks, they're only half the story. Behind these statistics lurks detail that has clearly been overlooked by law makers and will almost certainly render the new laws ineffectual.
A lot of dog attacks go un-reported and many of these are from smaller breeds that are usually thought of, much like Monty, as not being dangerous. Most of the time a nip from a smaller dog isnt much of an injury compared to that inflicted by a larger breed, but still....
What is also most crucially missing from the stats is the human element. Many people fall in love with the idea of owning a dog. They adopt a small bull of fluffy pup and things are great - at least for the first few months.
Then they realise that owning a dog comes with a lot of responsibilities and requires some hard work. Dogs have to be trained, walked twice a day, groomed and fed. Sadly many people just give up and end up doing the minimum required to keep their dog alive. Many dog owners forego dog obedience classes and often lack the basic knowledge that can mean the difference between a safe happy dog and a stressed dog with aggression/fear issues.
Sadly some dogs are left roaming the streets or barely cared for. A dog - any dog is like a loaded gun. Given the wrong set of circumstances great harm can happen.
Surely it would be a smarter move to recognise that ALL dog breeds are potentially dangerous and focus on putting the legislative fence at the top of the cliff instead of doing the bare minimum and putting a largely ineffectual ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.
If a human wants to drive a car or own a gun, they must first pass some strict controls. Sadly this is not the case with owning a dog.
Make dog obedience classes mandatory. Humans learn as much as the dog at these classes. Simple things such as how to restrain, recall and tell what sort of state your dog is in are all fairly standard fare and can often mean the difference between a good and a bad outcome when it comes to dog safety.
Set up a genetic datatbase of dogs that is linked back to breeders. Fine, and shut down puppy mills. Too many dogs are re-homed to unsuitable owners which in turn acts as a root cause for so many other problems. If it isnt so easy to make a fast buck out of breeding only those who are genuinely interested in the welfare of their animals will do it.
Penalise humans first and dogs second. Most attacks happen because of lax and ignorant dog owners. Make the penalities harsh - if people face huge fines, chances are that they'll be more be more responsible about owning a dog.
Providing education for kids on how to approach a dog (e.g. ask its owner if they can pat it etc), and how to read some basic canine body language to tell if a dog is friendly or agressive etc. This alone could greatly reduce the number of dog attacks and it'd cost peanuts to put in place.
The other thing is we need to be realistic - No dog laws are going offer a perfect solution. Even the most conscientious dog owners can slip up. Lax owners are also unlikely to comply. No laws can be 100% enforced.
Meanwhile we'll have to make do with the existing poorly thought out laws crafted by lawmakers who know next to nothing about dogs.
Thursday, 22 September 2016
Stoopid humians....
A few days back I found out that Animates, a national pet store chain are selling shock collars.
Selling a shock collar to any member of the general public is a terrible idea. Too many people want a quick fix and really have little to no dog obedience experience. Talk to any trainer and they'll agree that shock collars are a bad thing but will also say that shock collars have a use as a last resort for training.
This is despite them saying in their ""about us blurb that" it is our belief that life is better with pets, they are selling hardware that has been proven to cause significant psychological and physical injury to dogs.
I am curious as to how life is better for the dog when it is terrified and has entered a state of what trainers call "learned helplessness". Remember that Animates are suppossedly the professionals and should know about all this stuff.
More than a little disgusted, I emailed Animates to ask a) why they're selling these horrible things and b) if they'd consider removing them from sale. I do have to hand it to Animates, they promptly came back, saying they’d investigate. Their next email however proved that any investigation was really a sham and read as little more than a weakly worded justification for selling shock collars.
Here’s what they said:
“Thank you for getting back in contact with us.
Animates are very passionate about the welfare of pets and do not sell products that we deem inhumane. We are aware of some concerns around electronic collars and their usage.
However, we do stand behind Petsafe Anti-Bark Collars for the reasons outlined below, and provide ongoing training for our team members to ensure that the right collar is recommended as appropriate for the dogs' behaviour/size/age and importantly, that the collars are used correctly.
Also, many of our team members have personally experienced the sensation that a static collar emits, which is unpleasant, but not painful.”
Here's the thing, there's a growing body of evidence credible from studies conducted by scientists, dog trainers and canine behaviourists that highlight the negatives of shock collars, the fact that they are generally not good for a dogs mental state and that shock collars can also cause burn injuries. Needless to say, a common theme of these studies is that the negative outweigh the positives of shock collars by a huge margin.
That a pet store that claims to be passionate about animal welfare sells a product that has a proven track record of causing harm to animals tells me pretty much everything I need to know.
Animates also said that they'd administered shocks from the collars to their staff. I say so bloody what. the reality is that Animates employees are sentient human beings. They’re know that there is a jolt coming and what it is. For an unsuspecting dog with no idea what this pain is and when it'll next happen it’s terrifying.
It gets better though - The next part of their response was titled “WHY DO WE NEED THEM?”.
“Inappropriate animal behaviour is a significant issue for the public and in many cases, it can cause a threat to public safety. Electronic collars can be used to correct many nuisance behaviours, which could otherwise result in the euthanasia of animals.In fact, Petsafe has received many testimonials from users claiming that the collar they purchased had shock collar effectiveness"
You'll have to forgive my cynicism but these hollow blanket statements are often parroted by shock collar advocates. They also puzzle me. If On one hand Animates claim shock collars don’t hurt a dog why do they say it’s a last resort to prevent the “euthanasia of animals”. Surely that one statement contradicts the other.
Stunned by Animates response, I penned a reponse to the issue in a bid to raise public awareness of this issue. Here's what I wrote
I was pleasantly surprised to find that a stuff.co.nz had also picked up on the issue. It seemed like a great move - at least until I read the comments attached to story.
Many read like they had been lifted out of a shock collar marketing brochure. Other pro shock collar comments submitted were written by people who either didn't have a clue about dog training or were too lazy to try them and wanted a quick fix.
One commenter said they lived on a lifestyle block and that the collars kept her dogs off a busy road. (they were obviosuly too lazy to install fencing). The same person then mentioned in a later comment that their dog had been run over and was now a tripaw.
This highlights several things to me:
1) Shock collars are seen as a "quick fix""
In fact they're not. As the commenter found out at their dogs expense. Too many people don't do the research that is needed when buying a dog. Too many people are too lazy to invest time regularly attending dog obedience classes and learning about how their dog works. Instead they throw a shock collar around their dogs necks and go for a quick fix. It doesnt usually work well longer term.
2) The story rattled someone
The comments section in that story had been astroturfed - this is marketing slang for vested interests using comments sections to push their own agenda. That there were so many comments that'd obviously been written by the same group of people using multiple logins tell me that the story has rattled someone.
3) Shock collars should be restricted NOT banned
On the basis of this, I'd be happy to see shock sales limited to professional trainers rather than being sold willy-nilly to members of the public who will misuse them.
Thursday, 1 September 2016
The Greyhound Collective
Sometimes I almost have to pinch myself just to confirm that I'm not dreaming. Not only do I own two of the most gentle, cutest and loveable dogs in the known universe, but I also get to spend time on one of the best Facebook pages Mark Zuckerberg has probably never heard of.
Im talking about the Greyhound collective.
It is where greyhound owners from New Zealand, Australia and a growing number of other overseas locations hang out to share silly pictures of their hounds , giving advice, support and having a giggle.
Its a non political forum. No one talks about racing - or the anti-racing lobby. The hounds are front and centre and it works like a charm.
A while back an adorable hound call Will was seriously ill and needed a series of life saving operations. His owners were hit massive vet bills. The greyhound collective swung into action.
Raffles, fund raisers, donations and a hep of other bits and bobs saw a huge number of people helping Wills owners who they'd never met.
It was a truly heart warming sight and is something that happens with startling regularity on the collective.
Last year I wrote about Tiny and how he'd gone missing. What I didn't say was that of the huge number of people out looking for him, most were drawn from the Greyhound collective.
You see, the Collective just that sort of place.
If you own a greyhound, you can ask to join. The only rules involve no politics and treating other members with respect and politeness.
Im talking about the Greyhound collective.
It is where greyhound owners from New Zealand, Australia and a growing number of other overseas locations hang out to share silly pictures of their hounds , giving advice, support and having a giggle.
Its a non political forum. No one talks about racing - or the anti-racing lobby. The hounds are front and centre and it works like a charm.
A while back an adorable hound call Will was seriously ill and needed a series of life saving operations. His owners were hit massive vet bills. The greyhound collective swung into action.
Raffles, fund raisers, donations and a hep of other bits and bobs saw a huge number of people helping Wills owners who they'd never met.
It was a truly heart warming sight and is something that happens with startling regularity on the collective.
Last year I wrote about Tiny and how he'd gone missing. What I didn't say was that of the huge number of people out looking for him, most were drawn from the Greyhound collective.
You see, the Collective just that sort of place.
If you own a greyhound, you can ask to join. The only rules involve no politics and treating other members with respect and politeness.
Wednesday, 6 July 2016
Good news and not so good news
Huge news. the governor of the Australian state of New South Wales has announced that Greyhound racing will be banned based on the findings of an 800-page report tabled by a Special Commission into "widespread cruelty" in the industry. The last greyhound meetings are to be held on June 30 next year after what the NSW government said will be an "orderly industry shutdown".
The end of greyhound racing may well recieved news to those who are anti-racing, but major short term headaches still exist and the NSW premier needs to provide clarification as to what plans the state government has in place to ensure that tens of thousands of dogs are not slaughtered now that they cannot earn a living for trainers.
While I wondered if Greyhounds as Pets (GAP) NZ could somehow help, the NSW news is going to create massive logistical problems that are just far to big for NZ to make more than a tiny difference. Either way the NSW news is likely to have huge animal welfare implications.
Gap NZ typically aim to adopt 300-400 hounds a year. There are arleady a huge number of hounds in NZ looking for homes. Even if Gap NZ was to take a years worth of hounds out of NSW, it'd barely make a difference. Worse still, it'd mean many hounds in NZ already looking to be adopted will have an even longer wait.
Sadly there are no easy answers to this perplexing issue. Most trainers simply cannot afford to keep the dozens of dogs they own if they are unable to pay their way at the track. It is also unlikely that the Australian public can adopt all the dogs likely to be displaced by the shut down. Thousands of dogs will probably the euthanised.
Clearly the NSW government needs to outline what they think is an orderly shut down of the industry and how they plan to avoid such massive slaughter of innocent dogs.
Given Australia's human rights record of recent years and the shambolic state of their politics any enlightened yet costly initiatives are unlikely to happen.
Perhaps a smarter option would have been to phase out racing over a 10 year period so what dogs could be humanely re-homed. I just hope that the NZ industry and government is watching and taking learnings from what looks set to be nothing short of a horrific slow motion train-wreck that'll once again see innocent dogs paying the ultimate price for human folly.
If you are an australian greyhound owner, write to your local media and state MP. Put pressure on them to clarify how there will be an orderly shut down and what is going to be done to avoid slaughter on such a massive scale.
While the logistics of GAP NZ getting actively involved in re-homing NSW hounds makes any such initiative impossible, I fervently hope that GAP NZ offers to provide marketing and Pr resources to help drive up awareness of the plight of these gentle animals....
The other side of the issue is that a huge number of legit trainers and owners who have done no wrong will also probably hit the wall financially once the ban is put in place.....
The report makes foe harrowing reading and found that a whopping 48,000 to 68,000 greyhounds - or almost half of all greyhounds bred to race in NSW were killed in the past 12 years because they were uncompetitive.
Greyhound racing has been in a state of gradual decline for some time and feelings amongst greyhound owners tend to run high when racing is discussed, with one side pro racing and the other anti.
The end of greyhound racing may well recieved news to those who are anti-racing, but major short term headaches still exist and the NSW premier needs to provide clarification as to what plans the state government has in place to ensure that tens of thousands of dogs are not slaughtered now that they cannot earn a living for trainers.
While I wondered if Greyhounds as Pets (GAP) NZ could somehow help, the NSW news is going to create massive logistical problems that are just far to big for NZ to make more than a tiny difference. Either way the NSW news is likely to have huge animal welfare implications.
Gap NZ typically aim to adopt 300-400 hounds a year. There are arleady a huge number of hounds in NZ looking for homes. Even if Gap NZ was to take a years worth of hounds out of NSW, it'd barely make a difference. Worse still, it'd mean many hounds in NZ already looking to be adopted will have an even longer wait.
Sadly there are no easy answers to this perplexing issue. Most trainers simply cannot afford to keep the dozens of dogs they own if they are unable to pay their way at the track. It is also unlikely that the Australian public can adopt all the dogs likely to be displaced by the shut down. Thousands of dogs will probably the euthanised.
Clearly the NSW government needs to outline what they think is an orderly shut down of the industry and how they plan to avoid such massive slaughter of innocent dogs.
Given Australia's human rights record of recent years and the shambolic state of their politics any enlightened yet costly initiatives are unlikely to happen.
Perhaps a smarter option would have been to phase out racing over a 10 year period so what dogs could be humanely re-homed. I just hope that the NZ industry and government is watching and taking learnings from what looks set to be nothing short of a horrific slow motion train-wreck that'll once again see innocent dogs paying the ultimate price for human folly.
If you are an australian greyhound owner, write to your local media and state MP. Put pressure on them to clarify how there will be an orderly shut down and what is going to be done to avoid slaughter on such a massive scale.
While the logistics of GAP NZ getting actively involved in re-homing NSW hounds makes any such initiative impossible, I fervently hope that GAP NZ offers to provide marketing and Pr resources to help drive up awareness of the plight of these gentle animals....
Update
Yesterdays news weighed heavily on my mind so I decided to do some research. here's a few numbers just to give you an idea of the sheer scale of the issue:
Between 2010 and 2015 a whopping 38,524 greyhound puppies were whelped in NSW. approximately 66% of these are raced. I've been unable to find the number of hounds re-homed in NSW, but I estimate that around 2,450 were probably adopted through GAP NSW (the actual number could be a lot lower than this)...
This means that there's at least 36,000 greyhounds needing a home real soon. I don't know what the cost per hound is for welfare, nor do I know what the NSW state govt is putting up to help these dogs.
I am however very very worried for these poor animals.
Sunday, 26 June 2016
WTF???
Every once and a while I read an animal welfare story that saddens me beyond belief.
This week it is the story of Chip, a tiny puppy that was dumped in a garbage bin. Thankfully he was discovered and rescued.
You'd be forgiven for thinking that this is a happy ending and that Chip had a long and happy life ahead of him.
Sadly that probably isn't going to happen. Chip will probably die needlessly.
Despite the fact that the person who found chip (and several others) had asked to adopt him, Auckland City Council Animal Control have decided that they will most probably euthanise chip.
Their reason - Chip could be a pitbull.
I don't know about you but I'm outraged by this decision in more ways than I can count.
For a start, Chip may have classic pitbull characteristics (muscular jaws, stocky build etc), but that doesn't mean he is a pitbull. It appears that No genetic testing has been done and this life or death decision is being made purely on a subjective whim. That is simply not good enough.
Putting dogs down because they are a certain breed is shameful. We wouldn't do this humans (we were outraged when the nazi's did it back in WW2) so why are we doing it to defenseless dogs such as Chip? Besides it isn't the dog that is the issue it is human ignorance that is the real problem.
Adding further insult to injury, it turns out that Chip has had numerous offers of adoption. That's right, this entire problem already has a solution that doesn't involve the senseless killing of a puppy.
But he might be a pitbull.
so fucking what!
Pitbulls need a special type of owner who understands the breed and can look after them responsibly.
Sadly New Zealands Animal control units (who are chronically underfunded and stretched) are hamstrung by idiotic council and poorly thought through council bylaws such is the one being used as an excuse to kill Chip, even though he has a perfectly good home on offer from several experienced dog owners.
Perhaps it is time that New Zealand's abysmal animal welfare laws were given a shot in the arm. Here's what I propose:
1) Penalise the owners/breeders, not the dog. Pitbull's can do a lot of damage to a human, and there are plenty of stories of this happening in the media. What isn't talked about so often is the sad fact that people who don't have a clue about these dogs and their unique needs tend to end up owning them. For every pitbull attack that has happened, there is usually a human being who has abdicated responsibility and who will more often than not, just go buy another dog. These people need to be held to account and more importantly educated
2) Educate, educate and educate. We have preferential owner status which equates to a discount registration fees. It seems like a good idea and a smart way to encourage responsible dog ownership. Trouble is so many people buy a cute little puppy like chip and then discover after the fact that owning a dog involves some hard (but worthwhile) work. That is why so many dogs like Chip get dumped and suffer horribly.
Surely discounting registration fees for humans who have taken their puppies to recognised and certified canine obedience classes and passed makes a tonne of sense. These classes are more about teaching human dumb-asses about their dogs than actual dog training. People who know what they are doing with a dog and who can correctly respond to a dogs needs are far less likely to have problem dogs.
Education should also being aimed at intending dog adopters. Too many people adopt a dog with zero knowledge about what is involved too many buy from puppy mills instead of adopting. Matching the right breed to peoples lifestyles and informing them about what is involved in having a new dog/puppy BEFORE any adoptions happen could save a lot of grief for both dogs and humans.
Similarly, educating kids and parents about how to approach a dog - simple things like asking the owner "can I pat your dog" before rushing up could also significantly reduce the number of dog attacks.
3) Strengthen Animal Welfare Laws. At the moment animal abusers who are caught get the equivalent of a slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket. Even though they have often inflicted horrific injuries onto a defenseless animal. The current legal framework leaves courts largely powerless and limits penalties to a fine and an unenforceable ban on owning pets. That we can send people to jail for smoking pot and let people with brutality against animals is repugnant. Animal abusers, and irresponsible owners need to be held accountable. Then there is the fact hat FBI profilers have found a huge correlation between animal abusers and murderers/violent criminals....
There is no such thing as a perfect solution, but the existing situation borders on insanity. It should be a source of shame for all New Zealanders with a conscience. Should they be applied, these three solutions could dramatically reduce the amount of animal related crime in New Zealand, saving councils a packet in enforcement costs....
If you want to let the Auckland City Council animal control unit know of your disgust at what is being proposed for Chip, there is a petition. Please sign it. It can be found at https://www.change.org/p/auckland-council-savechip please encourage everyone you know to also sign it
UPDATE: Not long after this was written the sad news came out that Chip was euthanised. A council spokesperson said Chip was seriously ill and the decision was made. Without wanting to sound like a total conspiracy nutcase, I find it a little convenient that Chip was removed from the equation and that the council so deftly side-stepped the issue of dog policies founded on ignorance.
This week it is the story of Chip, a tiny puppy that was dumped in a garbage bin. Thankfully he was discovered and rescued.
You'd be forgiven for thinking that this is a happy ending and that Chip had a long and happy life ahead of him.
Sadly that probably isn't going to happen. Chip will probably die needlessly.
Despite the fact that the person who found chip (and several others) had asked to adopt him, Auckland City Council Animal Control have decided that they will most probably euthanise chip.
Their reason - Chip could be a pitbull.
I don't know about you but I'm outraged by this decision in more ways than I can count.
For a start, Chip may have classic pitbull characteristics (muscular jaws, stocky build etc), but that doesn't mean he is a pitbull. It appears that No genetic testing has been done and this life or death decision is being made purely on a subjective whim. That is simply not good enough.
Putting dogs down because they are a certain breed is shameful. We wouldn't do this humans (we were outraged when the nazi's did it back in WW2) so why are we doing it to defenseless dogs such as Chip? Besides it isn't the dog that is the issue it is human ignorance that is the real problem.
Adding further insult to injury, it turns out that Chip has had numerous offers of adoption. That's right, this entire problem already has a solution that doesn't involve the senseless killing of a puppy.
But he might be a pitbull.
so fucking what!
Pitbulls need a special type of owner who understands the breed and can look after them responsibly.
Sadly New Zealands Animal control units (who are chronically underfunded and stretched) are hamstrung by idiotic council and poorly thought through council bylaws such is the one being used as an excuse to kill Chip, even though he has a perfectly good home on offer from several experienced dog owners.
Perhaps it is time that New Zealand's abysmal animal welfare laws were given a shot in the arm. Here's what I propose:
1) Penalise the owners/breeders, not the dog. Pitbull's can do a lot of damage to a human, and there are plenty of stories of this happening in the media. What isn't talked about so often is the sad fact that people who don't have a clue about these dogs and their unique needs tend to end up owning them. For every pitbull attack that has happened, there is usually a human being who has abdicated responsibility and who will more often than not, just go buy another dog. These people need to be held to account and more importantly educated
2) Educate, educate and educate. We have preferential owner status which equates to a discount registration fees. It seems like a good idea and a smart way to encourage responsible dog ownership. Trouble is so many people buy a cute little puppy like chip and then discover after the fact that owning a dog involves some hard (but worthwhile) work. That is why so many dogs like Chip get dumped and suffer horribly.
Surely discounting registration fees for humans who have taken their puppies to recognised and certified canine obedience classes and passed makes a tonne of sense. These classes are more about teaching human dumb-asses about their dogs than actual dog training. People who know what they are doing with a dog and who can correctly respond to a dogs needs are far less likely to have problem dogs.
Education should also being aimed at intending dog adopters. Too many people adopt a dog with zero knowledge about what is involved too many buy from puppy mills instead of adopting. Matching the right breed to peoples lifestyles and informing them about what is involved in having a new dog/puppy BEFORE any adoptions happen could save a lot of grief for both dogs and humans.
Similarly, educating kids and parents about how to approach a dog - simple things like asking the owner "can I pat your dog" before rushing up could also significantly reduce the number of dog attacks.
3) Strengthen Animal Welfare Laws. At the moment animal abusers who are caught get the equivalent of a slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket. Even though they have often inflicted horrific injuries onto a defenseless animal. The current legal framework leaves courts largely powerless and limits penalties to a fine and an unenforceable ban on owning pets. That we can send people to jail for smoking pot and let people with brutality against animals is repugnant. Animal abusers, and irresponsible owners need to be held accountable. Then there is the fact hat FBI profilers have found a huge correlation between animal abusers and murderers/violent criminals....
There is no such thing as a perfect solution, but the existing situation borders on insanity. It should be a source of shame for all New Zealanders with a conscience. Should they be applied, these three solutions could dramatically reduce the amount of animal related crime in New Zealand, saving councils a packet in enforcement costs....
If you want to let the Auckland City Council animal control unit know of your disgust at what is being proposed for Chip, there is a petition. Please sign it. It can be found at https://www.change.org/p/auckland-council-savechip please encourage everyone you know to also sign it
UPDATE: Not long after this was written the sad news came out that Chip was euthanised. A council spokesperson said Chip was seriously ill and the decision was made. Without wanting to sound like a total conspiracy nutcase, I find it a little convenient that Chip was removed from the equation and that the council so deftly side-stepped the issue of dog policies founded on ignorance.
Thursday, 26 May 2016
Its the humans stupid!
Nightly walks are a regular ritual. At the end of each day as light begins to fade Lottie (AKA the inskerator) and Bomber (AKA Tinklebertwoofledink) demand a walk. Who are we to refuse. Come rain or sun, a walk is had.
Several nights ago we were out on our neighbourhood stroll when we noticed a particularly vocal dog going nuts. It looked like it was fenced it so the hounds and us ignored and went to continue on our way.
Then the dog barrelled across to the street heckles and tail up, barking like a mad thing. It got to within 3 feet of Lottie and Bomber who both told it off in no uncertain terms.
The dog kept its distance, which by then meant it was out on the street.
It was dark and a taxi was coming. The dog wouldn't let me near it and the taxi smartly swerved to avoid it.
Heart in mouth I coaxed the dog back to its property. A neighbour to the dogs property heard the commotion and came out to see what was happening
"Oh its him, he lives there, yes this happens all the time she explained"
With my wife waiting on the street holding Lottie and Bombers lead, I gradually got the dog to follow me by calling it in an as friendly as possible voice. Several snaps were made at my hands but it eventually worked out that I was going to take it home so it started to relax.
Sadly no one was home. It appeared that all that was keeping this dog in the property was a small 1.5 metre tall gate that the dog was obviously jumping over.
Making matters worse, the dogs collar had no tags with contact details for its owners.
The whole situation was worrying on more levels than I can count.
For a start, this dog's behaviour towards us and our hounds indicated that it had obviously not been very well socialised. It is only probably a matter of time before it injures or kills another animal on the street. If not an animal, then there is a good chance that it'll maul a child or elderly person who doesn't know how to respond when confronted with an aggressive dog.
That the dog can get out so easily has escaped the attentions of its owners, who may be totally unaware of the ease with which this pooch can escape.
While the street isn't particularly busy, there is some traffic and it was only good luck that the dog didn't become road kill when confronting us.
We've since gone back and walked past the house in the evening, hoping there'd be someone home who we could talk to. Sadly no one was - this was at least 7pm - the poor animal has been left alone for at least 10-12 hours. No wonder it is so pissed off.
Fixing the property so it is escape proof or other options like enrolling the dog in doggy day care are easy to explore and could see a terrible situation averted. The owners house is in one of the most expensive suburbs in my town, so I'd be surprised if they cant afford either of these two options.
Sunday, 14 February 2016
A giant has fallen
Losing someone you love is incredibly painful.
When that
someone is an incredibly expressive giant greyhound Scooby do clone who has given
you their unconditional love with no holds barred it must be near unbearable.
Today Tiny (who I’d written about in the past) crossed the rainbow bridge.
Greyhounds are pretty healthy animals but like other large
dogs they are susceptible to osteosarcoma or bone cancer.
Sadly this is what
Tiny was diagnosed with. Tiny wasn’t a small hound, in fact he was the biggest (50Kg) who ever raced in New Zealand. He also had a big heart too. Everyone who met him instantly
fell under his spell the moment they locked eyes with his gentle gaze.
It is incredibly hard to know what to say to someone when
they lose a much loved pet. We’ve had two pets pass and each time a part of me
died with them. Even though the pain gradually becomes less unbearable, it never goes
away. That is a price I’m willing to pay and is a very small cost given the
love, laughter and smiles we’d had with our pets over the years.
Reading about Tiny’s
passing on Facebook I was momentarily stuck for something to say that didn’t sound
trite. I think after meeting Chris at Tiny’s recent get together it was
very clear how much she loved Tiny and how he adored her in equal measures. That
is such a very special thing indeed.
Tiny may have crossed the rainbow bridge, but the memories
of this affectionate and gentle giant who touched so many peoples lives will live on
and my thoughts are with both Chris and family.
Saturday, 24 October 2015
The good and the bad
As a greyhound owner in New Zealand, I belong to a facebook group called the Greyhound collective. In the group, Greyhound owners can seek advice, help each other and share photos of their hounds.
It's an amazing place that's put me in touch with some truly amazing people. The real depth of the community on the collective can be incredible sometimes. Last week the ironically named Tiny, (a greyhound who at 50Kg, is anything but tiny) got spooked by some kids letting off fireworks in a park and bolted.
Tiny's distraught owners posted on the collective, letting other hound owners know to keep an eye out for their wayward hound. Reading their post my heart was in my mouth. We'd had our first dog, a miniature dachshund called Monty, escape and go missing for 6 long horrifying days.
Reading their post that night, I remembered how utterly horrific a lost dog can be and promised myself that in the morning I'd get out and have a good look for Tiny too. That morning I posted that I was going to get out and have a search and to my delight several others agreed to help.
The area where Tiny had been spooked was large and bordered by hills covered in dense bush. If Tiny wanted to stay hidden, eh;d be pretty hard to find. Wandering around we called out for Tiny (who we never saw). What we did see were others from the collective also looking for Tiny.
After heading home depressed and tired at my lack of success, I checked the collective for any more updates on Tiny and was amazed to see that he'd been found by another amazing collective member who'd been with me looking and had gone back 4 times just in case.
The whole saga has shown me that people can be incredibly decent. No one hesitated to chip in and help a Greyhound owner who needed help. The level of support from other Greyhound owners was nothing short of astonishing.
While the greyhound collective showcases the very best in people, facebook sadly also highlights the other end of the spectrum.
BassGalgo a Spanish based charity that rescues Galgos (the Spanish equivalent of greyhounds) posted an alarming photo of a Galgo that'd been chained to a fence in a carpark and left to starve. The poor Galgo is horribly emaciated but survived but has thankfully been rescued.
Incredibly Spanish hunters who use Galgos during the hunting season seem to think that it's ok to abandon these dogs by tying up in a remote location where they'll endure dehydration and starvation. Its a cruel and sickening way to treat an animal who has shown its owner nothing but loyalty. It needs to be stopped.
Amazingly there seems to be little being done to stop this horrendous practice from happening at the end of each hunting season, and the Brits and Germans who flood into Spain each summer remain blissfully unaware of the horrors being inflicted on these gentle and trusting animals.
Perhaps if the media picked up on these stories and educated tourists, the Spanish Government might be forced to get off its ineffectual behind and craft laws to prevent these sickening acts from happening.
Meanwhile if you want to help, donations can be made to http://galgosdelsol.org/ or www.baasgalgo.com. With the hunting season drawing to a close in Spain, they could really do with your help.
It's an amazing place that's put me in touch with some truly amazing people. The real depth of the community on the collective can be incredible sometimes. Last week the ironically named Tiny, (a greyhound who at 50Kg, is anything but tiny) got spooked by some kids letting off fireworks in a park and bolted.
Tiny's distraught owners posted on the collective, letting other hound owners know to keep an eye out for their wayward hound. Reading their post my heart was in my mouth. We'd had our first dog, a miniature dachshund called Monty, escape and go missing for 6 long horrifying days.
Reading their post that night, I remembered how utterly horrific a lost dog can be and promised myself that in the morning I'd get out and have a good look for Tiny too. That morning I posted that I was going to get out and have a search and to my delight several others agreed to help.
The area where Tiny had been spooked was large and bordered by hills covered in dense bush. If Tiny wanted to stay hidden, eh;d be pretty hard to find. Wandering around we called out for Tiny (who we never saw). What we did see were others from the collective also looking for Tiny.
After heading home depressed and tired at my lack of success, I checked the collective for any more updates on Tiny and was amazed to see that he'd been found by another amazing collective member who'd been with me looking and had gone back 4 times just in case.
The whole saga has shown me that people can be incredibly decent. No one hesitated to chip in and help a Greyhound owner who needed help. The level of support from other Greyhound owners was nothing short of astonishing.
While the greyhound collective showcases the very best in people, facebook sadly also highlights the other end of the spectrum.
BassGalgo a Spanish based charity that rescues Galgos (the Spanish equivalent of greyhounds) posted an alarming photo of a Galgo that'd been chained to a fence in a carpark and left to starve. The poor Galgo is horribly emaciated but survived but has thankfully been rescued.
Incredibly Spanish hunters who use Galgos during the hunting season seem to think that it's ok to abandon these dogs by tying up in a remote location where they'll endure dehydration and starvation. Its a cruel and sickening way to treat an animal who has shown its owner nothing but loyalty. It needs to be stopped.
Amazingly there seems to be little being done to stop this horrendous practice from happening at the end of each hunting season, and the Brits and Germans who flood into Spain each summer remain blissfully unaware of the horrors being inflicted on these gentle and trusting animals.
Perhaps if the media picked up on these stories and educated tourists, the Spanish Government might be forced to get off its ineffectual behind and craft laws to prevent these sickening acts from happening.
Meanwhile if you want to help, donations can be made to http://galgosdelsol.org/ or www.baasgalgo.com. With the hunting season drawing to a close in Spain, they could really do with your help.
Thursday, 22 October 2015
Time for some sanity around fireworks?
It’s almost that time of year when New Zealand is gripped
with the pyrotechnic insanity that is Guy Fawkes.
It’s something that puts dread into the hearts of many a pet
owner, exhausts animal shelters as well as fire services and yet bizarrely it goes
ahead each year like clockwork.
Calling for a ban attracts cries of “don’t spoil our fun”
from people who you’d charitably say weren’t aware of the mayhem and harm
caused. The more cynical amongst us could also say that these people lacked
empathy, simply don’t care and were too self involved to give a damn.
Amazingly many of the people who are pro fireworks were
amongst the first to express their anger at the shooting massacres in the US,
smugly proclaiming that this sort of thing hardly ever happens in NZ as we have
decent gun control laws.
Yet the reality is that for one week a year in NZ it is
perfectly legal to sell a box of low power explosives and pyrotechnic devices
to almost any consenting adult who’ll buy them. Making matters worse, many less
scrupulous retailers are also happy to sell them to kids weeks before Guy Fawkes.
The parallels between the US gun law controversy and
fireworks in NZ are eerily similar. A few crazed lunatics go on a shooting
spree and responsible gun owners fear getting penalised. Sadly it’s the few bad
apples in New Zealand that seem to go stupid with fireworks who are ruining it
for the rest who enjoy fireworks every November.
Then there’s the pro gun people who argue that in the US it
is their constitutional right to bear arms, regardless of how many kids are
killed in each monthly shooting massacre. In New Zealand it is mostly pets and
animals that cop the brunt of our crazy fireworks laws, yet some still feel
compelled to argue that do-gooders are “ruining their fun”.
This needn’t be the case. Banning the sale of fireworks to
the general public and instead investing in professional fireworks displays
managed by trained professionals could see a lot of damage, injury and
heartache ended while people still got to enjoy far better fireworks than the box of 30 second fizzers sold each year.
Meanwhile, back in 2015, its already too late. We’re now two
weeks away from Guy Fawkes yet we already have the first animal casualty.
Tiny,
a gentle and friendly greyhound was spooked by fireworks being set off at a
park by kids - even though Guy Fawkes is still a fortnight away. At the time of
writing Tiny has yet to be found and groups of greyhound owners are out
searching.
I don’t know about you, but I find it bizarre that New
Zealanders feel compelled to celebrate events that took place hundreds of years
ago in a country on the other side of the world. You’d think that for all the
clamour surrounding getting rid of the Union Jack off our flag,we’d feel a tad inclined
to drop what is essentially a UK centric event that has little if not no
relevance to New Zealand.
The select committee chair, Ruth Dyson said that she believes that most people act responsibly
and enforcing a ban would be tough on police. Well I guess poor Tiny must have
encountered two irresponsible people who purchased fireworks from an
irresponsible retailer. As for her comment about the Police, they are already
doing a tough job, Boo bloody hoo.
Here’s the rub. If the ban did go ahead and even if that
meant the life of one animal was saved, or one house was prevented from burn
down, then that’s a massively positive outcome. Taking Dyson's comments to their
logical extreme, we might as well give up on doing anything because it might be
too tough. Perhaps New Zealand needs to grow a pair, especially when a simple and sane solution is within easy reach.
P.S. Several hours after this post was written, Tiny was found and returned home. Ain't happy endings just the best thing ever?
P.S. Several hours after this post was written, Tiny was found and returned home. Ain't happy endings just the best thing ever?
Friday, 7 August 2015
Getting a greyhound can be a very humbling thing indeed. We started out with Lottie, who we've since called the Brindle Rocket on account of her love of zooming. We loved her so much that we got Bomber, who we also call tinklebert woofledink on account of his TARDIS-like bladder and epic piddles when out walking.
One of the things no one tells you when you adopt a greyhound is how utterly smoochy they are. There are literally dozens of different gestures Greyhounds have to express their happiness.
First and foremost is the lean. This is when a hound will walk right up to you and lean their bodies against you. It is pretty humbling. What they they are saying is that they trust you so much that they'll lean into you to the point that if you move, they'll fall over.
Then there's the happy puffy cheeks and teeth chattering. When a greyhound is happy they'll puff their cheeks. If they're really happy they'll also chatter their teeth. This is of course exceptionally cute to see when it happens.
There also the more generic gestures such as the tail wag, also known in our house as the helicopter bum. Greyhounds tend to have exceptionally waggy tails. We have friends who own greyhounds who've even broken their tails from excessive wagging in confined spaces.
My all time favourite is what is known amongst greyhound owners as Nitting. This happens when a hound is really REALLY happy, and will see the hound mouthing your hand. Its is sometimes mistaken for aggression, but is really a gentle "I love you" gesture and very cute. Bomber does this when he hears the leads being moved and figures out that a walk is in the offering.
If by now you've guessed that our hounds are a happy bunch, you'd be right on the money.
It is such a an utterly humbling and cute thing to know that you've made them so deliriously and utterly happy, yet at the same time you can't help smiling or even laughing out loud. I guess that's the magic of life with a Greyhound.
One of the things no one tells you when you adopt a greyhound is how utterly smoochy they are. There are literally dozens of different gestures Greyhounds have to express their happiness.
First and foremost is the lean. This is when a hound will walk right up to you and lean their bodies against you. It is pretty humbling. What they they are saying is that they trust you so much that they'll lean into you to the point that if you move, they'll fall over.
Then there's the happy puffy cheeks and teeth chattering. When a greyhound is happy they'll puff their cheeks. If they're really happy they'll also chatter their teeth. This is of course exceptionally cute to see when it happens.
There also the more generic gestures such as the tail wag, also known in our house as the helicopter bum. Greyhounds tend to have exceptionally waggy tails. We have friends who own greyhounds who've even broken their tails from excessive wagging in confined spaces.
My all time favourite is what is known amongst greyhound owners as Nitting. This happens when a hound is really REALLY happy, and will see the hound mouthing your hand. Its is sometimes mistaken for aggression, but is really a gentle "I love you" gesture and very cute. Bomber does this when he hears the leads being moved and figures out that a walk is in the offering.
If by now you've guessed that our hounds are a happy bunch, you'd be right on the money.
It is such a an utterly humbling and cute thing to know that you've made them so deliriously and utterly happy, yet at the same time you can't help smiling or even laughing out loud. I guess that's the magic of life with a Greyhound.
Wednesday, 17 June 2015
Saying Goodbye is never easy. In my job I do a fair bit of overseas travel. Heading somewhere sunny and warm as winter deepens its grip is always welcome but there's one huge downside.
Saying goodbye to my hounds and my ever patient wife is always really hard, but Lottie and Bomber don't really get why I am scooting out the door suitcase in hand.
Their look of puzzlement and my own realisation that I won't see them again for a week or two makes saying goodbye incredibly difficult.
A tear or two has ben shed by me on more than one occasion.
One of the least spoken about facets of greyhounds is how expressive they are. Their big soft brown eyes and spring loaded ears, plus a tail that does double duty as a whip/helicopter rotor can tell you all you need to know about how they're feeling.
When a walk is in the offering, their ears go straight up and they'll wag their tail hysterically. Another happy gesture is cheek puffing and this often happens before a walk. Like many other greyhound owners, I find it incredibly hard not to laugh and smile at unbridled sheer joy they exhibit.
Now Me and any my wife are about to head off for a vacation, thankfully my in-laws (who are great with both hounds) are dog and house sitting. I wonder how my wife will cope?
I'll no doubt still be a teary eyed wreck.
Saying goodbye to my hounds and my ever patient wife is always really hard, but Lottie and Bomber don't really get why I am scooting out the door suitcase in hand.
Their look of puzzlement and my own realisation that I won't see them again for a week or two makes saying goodbye incredibly difficult.
A tear or two has ben shed by me on more than one occasion.
One of the least spoken about facets of greyhounds is how expressive they are. Their big soft brown eyes and spring loaded ears, plus a tail that does double duty as a whip/helicopter rotor can tell you all you need to know about how they're feeling.
When a walk is in the offering, their ears go straight up and they'll wag their tail hysterically. Another happy gesture is cheek puffing and this often happens before a walk. Like many other greyhound owners, I find it incredibly hard not to laugh and smile at unbridled sheer joy they exhibit.
Now Me and any my wife are about to head off for a vacation, thankfully my in-laws (who are great with both hounds) are dog and house sitting. I wonder how my wife will cope?
I'll no doubt still be a teary eyed wreck.
Friday, 3 April 2015
Politics
We've been greyhound owners for just over 2 years. What a time its been! Lottie (AKA the insinkerator, and/or Brindle Rocket) plus Bomber (AKA Tinklebert woofledink and/or the black piddler) have both proven to be amazing dogs, each with their own distinct foibles and traits (even if they are both super cuddly). I am of course utterly besotted with both hounds.
Reflecting on the past 2 years, it is fair to say that I've met some amazing greyhound owners who've also become firm friends.
More recently however I've been saddened to observe just how much politics are getting in the way of achieving a positive outcome for greyhounds, many of whom really need our help.
I'd recently written about how disgusted I was with a post on the "greyhound protection league" facebook page and how by attempting to make political capital out of what can only be described as a terribly sad situation, they'd lost sight of helping a greyhound. In short, political point scoring got in the way of actual greyhound protection.
Since writing that entry I was asked to leave their facebook page. I gladly left and have no intention of ever looking back.
This time I've had a run-in with another greyhound welfare group bigwig who'll remain nameless.
I noticed a facebook post on their personal page, slagging off Greyhound as Pets (GAP) who are New Zealand's biggest and most well funded greyhound adoption agency. I expressed my distaste with the semi public bagging of a fellow greyhound welfare organisation given the posters prominent position within the greyhound community. I tried to be reasonable, even polite, saying that at the end of the day surely we all want the same thing, namely a good outcome for greyhounds.
What I got back as a reply was a rant telling me how I was completely wrong and how evil GAP was.
The reply might've been articulate, but at the end of the day that didn't matter. What really matters is that the real loosers here are greyhounds. I've since un-friended this person so I don't have to read their rants ever again. I hope more people follow my steps and do likewise.
When we were thinking of adopting a greyhound, we did a heap of research - much of it online. Surely it must follow that should other people thinking of adopting a greyhound, see such rabid outpourings, they'll wonder about the whole Greyhound scene given the irrational rants happening online.
What they unfortunately wont see are the really lovely people who own and love their greyhounds deeply. Unfortunately this isn't obvious to potential adopters, many of whom will instead read rabid social media posts emanating out of these organisations and run a mile. It'd be fair to assume that any thoughts about adopting a greyhound are also likely to be long forgotten too.
So what can we learn from this? It doesn't matter if people from these greyhound rescue groups can't see eye to eye. Instead of focusing on their differences and posting divisive rants online, wouldn't a far better outcome be achieved by rising above such petty politics and looking at what they all have in common?
Thankfully it appears that these politically motivated and vitriolic ranters are only a small but particularly vocal minority.
Reflecting on the past 2 years, it is fair to say that I've met some amazing greyhound owners who've also become firm friends.
More recently however I've been saddened to observe just how much politics are getting in the way of achieving a positive outcome for greyhounds, many of whom really need our help.
I'd recently written about how disgusted I was with a post on the "greyhound protection league" facebook page and how by attempting to make political capital out of what can only be described as a terribly sad situation, they'd lost sight of helping a greyhound. In short, political point scoring got in the way of actual greyhound protection.
Since writing that entry I was asked to leave their facebook page. I gladly left and have no intention of ever looking back.
This time I've had a run-in with another greyhound welfare group bigwig who'll remain nameless.
I noticed a facebook post on their personal page, slagging off Greyhound as Pets (GAP) who are New Zealand's biggest and most well funded greyhound adoption agency. I expressed my distaste with the semi public bagging of a fellow greyhound welfare organisation given the posters prominent position within the greyhound community. I tried to be reasonable, even polite, saying that at the end of the day surely we all want the same thing, namely a good outcome for greyhounds.
What I got back as a reply was a rant telling me how I was completely wrong and how evil GAP was.
The reply might've been articulate, but at the end of the day that didn't matter. What really matters is that the real loosers here are greyhounds. I've since un-friended this person so I don't have to read their rants ever again. I hope more people follow my steps and do likewise.
When we were thinking of adopting a greyhound, we did a heap of research - much of it online. Surely it must follow that should other people thinking of adopting a greyhound, see such rabid outpourings, they'll wonder about the whole Greyhound scene given the irrational rants happening online.
What they unfortunately wont see are the really lovely people who own and love their greyhounds deeply. Unfortunately this isn't obvious to potential adopters, many of whom will instead read rabid social media posts emanating out of these organisations and run a mile. It'd be fair to assume that any thoughts about adopting a greyhound are also likely to be long forgotten too.
So what can we learn from this? It doesn't matter if people from these greyhound rescue groups can't see eye to eye. Instead of focusing on their differences and posting divisive rants online, wouldn't a far better outcome be achieved by rising above such petty politics and looking at what they all have in common?
Thankfully it appears that these politically motivated and vitriolic ranters are only a small but particularly vocal minority.
Tuesday, 31 March 2015
Lotties Cat Crush
Lottie (aka the brindle rocket or the insinkerator) isn't what you'd call a cat trainable greyhound. Normally if out walking and her ultra sensitive cat radar picks up a feline presence, she'll go nuts until she's dragged away from where her finely tuned cat detection apparatus has decided the cat in question is located. Other times of course she'll just look and wont react at all.
Lotties cat radar is truly something to behold. We can be walking down the street and no cats are in view. Suddenly Lotties ears are standing to full attention and she's detected a cat. We've lost count of the amount of times that we've been sure that there was no cat about, only to find that a cat tucked away under a gate, car, letterbox, hedge or sitting in a window 200 meters up the road. We're still not sure how Lotties nearly fool-proof cat radar works, but trust me on this, it really works.
When we adopted Lottie we were told that she was a cat question mark,or that she may be ok with cats, but then again she may not. It appeared that felines made her anxious. Our elderly cat had passed away so we weren't too worried. Lottie has since lunged, barked at and carried on like a furry nutter at cats more times than we can count. Other times she can be bizarrely uninterested.
As we're cautious sorts and are aware of Lotties generally high levels of nuttiness when it comes to cats. We watch Lottie like a hawk when out walking and keep her on a short lead should her cat radar detect a feline bogey at 3 o'clock.
Bizarrely while out walking Lottie a while back we began to notice that she was fascinated by townhouses at the end of our street. Each time we walked past, Lottie would slow down, staring across the road. She'd even hold off having a pee (even when she was clearly busting) until she was outside these townhouses so she could spend a little more time staring.
Then it dawned on us. There was an elderly (but oh so cute) ginger cat that often sat outside the townhouses and Lottie had developed a cat crush on it.
Now when we walk past Lotties ears perk up, her tail wags and she smiles. she's not interested in lunging, barking or going nuts. Instead, she'll quietly stand and look longingly at the ginger cat (who is of course is blissfully unaware that it has a greyhound admirer). We think its terribly cute.
Lotties cat radar is truly something to behold. We can be walking down the street and no cats are in view. Suddenly Lotties ears are standing to full attention and she's detected a cat. We've lost count of the amount of times that we've been sure that there was no cat about, only to find that a cat tucked away under a gate, car, letterbox, hedge or sitting in a window 200 meters up the road. We're still not sure how Lotties nearly fool-proof cat radar works, but trust me on this, it really works.
When we adopted Lottie we were told that she was a cat question mark,or that she may be ok with cats, but then again she may not. It appeared that felines made her anxious. Our elderly cat had passed away so we weren't too worried. Lottie has since lunged, barked at and carried on like a furry nutter at cats more times than we can count. Other times she can be bizarrely uninterested.
As we're cautious sorts and are aware of Lotties generally high levels of nuttiness when it comes to cats. We watch Lottie like a hawk when out walking and keep her on a short lead should her cat radar detect a feline bogey at 3 o'clock.
Bizarrely while out walking Lottie a while back we began to notice that she was fascinated by townhouses at the end of our street. Each time we walked past, Lottie would slow down, staring across the road. She'd even hold off having a pee (even when she was clearly busting) until she was outside these townhouses so she could spend a little more time staring.
Then it dawned on us. There was an elderly (but oh so cute) ginger cat that often sat outside the townhouses and Lottie had developed a cat crush on it.
Now when we walk past Lotties ears perk up, her tail wags and she smiles. she's not interested in lunging, barking or going nuts. Instead, she'll quietly stand and look longingly at the ginger cat (who is of course is blissfully unaware that it has a greyhound admirer). We think its terribly cute.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)