Will Guilt Make You Adopt A Shelter Dog?

I just read some information published by Best Friends Animal Society (which I will refer to as B.F.A.S.) which made me think twice about how some Animal Welfare groups promote the idea of adoption and rescue.

B.F.A.S. conducted a survey of young adults aged 18 to 34, and found that those surveyed were more likely to purchase a pet from a pet store or from a breeder, than to adopt a pet from a rescue organization or shelter.

This is because they believe rescue/shelter dogs to be 'damaged goods'.

• 46% of the young adults deemed rescue/shelter animals to be "less desirable" than animals obtained from a "breeder".
• 40% of the young adults believed that "homeless" animals will remain in the shelter until they are eventually adopted (though in fact, approx 4 million homeless animals are killed each year in the USA). 

Mark Cushing, founder of the Animal Policy Group, made a very interesting point about this topic. He stated that fund-raising campaigns that feature animals-in-distress may be an effective way to "guilt" people into opening up their wallets and donating to a very good cause, but showing sick and injured animals promotes the notion of shelter and rescue animals are "damaged goods".

I think his point is a valid one. In other words, supporting a worthy cause by donating to an animal welfare organization is one thing but, for many of those people, their desire to welcome so-called 'damaged goods' into their homes is quite another. 

Accordingly, animal welfare organizations will need to determine the best overall strategy for reaching their goals, both in fund-raising and promoting animals for adoption, as it's crucial that efforts for one doesn't negatively impact the other.

From my own experience, part of my desire for volunteering at my local SPCA branch was to take appealing photographs of their adoptable animals (which were predominantly cats, dogs and rabbits) to increase their 'adoption appeal'. Knowing that 'attractiveness' is a high ranking criteria for most people, the idea of volunteering my time in this way came from seeing so many shelter photos that were poor quality and/or featured an animal in an unfavourable way.

To be fair, shelter staffers have a tough enough job already, and I wouldn't expect photography skills to be a mandatory part of their skill-set, but quickly snapping the photo of an animal during the intake process is not going to do enough to provide the necessary appeal to make most people think, "Yes, I want THAT dog!" 

Let's face it, an animal that has just arrived at a shelter is already frightened and stressed; could be wet or dirty, and in dire need of bathing and/or grooming. So yes, in that state, many animals might appear to be so-called 'damaged goods'.

I have to say that taking photographs of the adoptable dogs, cats and rabbits was a very rewarding experience for me. It definitely took time and patience to get the right shot, and due to the distance from my home I could only arrange to visit once each week, but on my volunteering day the shelter staff would regularly tell me, "It's working... people are seeing the photos and are calling us!"

A great example of the adoption appeal generated by an appealing photo is a dog named "Balloo" (the black dog shown above, with the basketball). A shelter staff member told me that a call was received within hours of the photo being published on their adoptables website. The man who called asked, "Is the black dog shown with the basketball still available?" He was told "yes" and he said that he was on his way to meet the dog and begin the adoption process. Balloo was a healthy and well-mannered dog, and I'm happy to report that the adoption process went well: Balloo was adopted by the approved family the very same day his photo went online. Obviously I'm pleased for Balloo and his new family, but I am also proud to have played a role in that success.

Having said all of the above, there will always be a percentage of shelter/rescue animals that have suffered mistreatment from humans which can result in health problems and/or behaviour issues. Certainly such animals will be considered 'damaged goods' and 'undesirable' by some people but that's not a bad thing, because an animal needs to be placed in an environment where it can succeed. To put an animal with specific 'needs' in the care of well-intentioned humans who don't have the time, resources and/or knowledge how to properly tend to those needs is a losing proposition for both the animal and the humans.

Note: All of the photos featured on this page were taken by me during my volunteering, and were used to promote the animal for adoption.

Happy "National Black Dog Day"

Happy "National Black Dog Day"!

I jokingly refer to all my pets as dogs: "Groucho" is my little dog, "Nova" is my medium sized dog, and "Jet" is my big dog... and, yes, they are all black!

Are you familiar with Black Dog Syndrome? It's a phenomenon where black dogs are passed over for adoption in favour of lighter or more colourful-coated dogs. While some people might dispute this, everyone I've spoken to who are involved with shelters have agreed that "black" is not a particularly popular colour.

Perhaps not coincidentally then, black cats are known to suffer from the same phenomenon. Rather than refer to Black Dog Syndrome or Black Cat Syndrome, in our Western culture I think we should simply refer to it as "Black Animal Syndrome".

The reason for black-coated animals being less popular could be tied to one of a variety of different reasons or, more likely, a combination of different reasons. I tend to think that, these days, people think of black-coated animals as 'ordinary' and, instead, want a more unique or brighter colour in the same way that people seem to want more unique breeds: It's more about the aesthetic than anything else. Just my personal opinion though...

The Staying Power of the Dominance Theory Myth

Dominance Theory... the impetus for me to write about this topic (again) comes from social media posts I've seen from a veterinary clinic in the U.K. which provides inaccurate information about the social order and motivations of domestic dogs.

In part, their blog post reads, "... your dog has natural pack instincts that have been handed down from his wolf ancestors. This is why some dogs end up being too dominant or naughty – they’ve been led to think they’re higher up in the pack than other family members. A well behaved dog sees itself as a lower pack member – that means he doesn’t get to eat when you eat, sleep in your bed, or jump up on furniture."

Simply put, the information provided in this quote is out-of-date and incorrect. 

Most pet guardians have an inherent trust for veterinarians and have an expectation that, as professionals, their knowledge base is up-to-date as are their practices and techniques. Accordingly, I find it very troubling when professionals provide outdated information (such as the blog post I've mentioned) for general consumption.

The way I look at it, based on the possible implications, providing inaccurate information on behavioural science topics isn't that much different than providing inaccurate information on medical science topics.

Having said all of the above, and to be fair to this same veterinary clinic, their social media posts do recommend positive reinforcement practices rather than 'punishment' based practices for dogs. I definitely do thank them for that.

. 

Dog Kissing Booths - Nice In Theory But Bad In Practice

In this, my second recent post about people interacting face-to-face with dogs, I have to comment on something that I'm bumping into more and more often these days: Dog Kissing Booths.

I don't want to come across as a downer or kill-joy, and would hate to be thought of as some type of internet 'hater' who is always ready and willing to disapprove of just about anything, because my goal is this: 

• To promote dog bite risk awareness.
• To promote appropriate and safe interactions with dogs.

Quite unknowingly, people (especially children) regularly put themselves in a position to be bitten by a dog, and it just so happens that interacting face-to-face with a dog is a common cause for people to get bitten. When a dog bites it will likely never be fully trusted again or perhaps it will be 'given up on' of in one way or another, so when a dog bite happens, everyone loses... including the dog.

Education Is the Best Prevention

Education is generally accepted to be the best form of dog bite prevention, and one of the important steps within that process is to promote appropriate and safe interactions with dogs. However, by doing so we also need to point out inappropriate and risky interactions... which leads me back to the topic of dog kissing booths.

For many organizations and not-for-profit societies it's an absolute necessity to fund-raise. Simply put, it's just an economic reality and there are all sorts of ways this can be done, however, somewhere along the line, the notion of changing the occupant of the old fashioned 'carnival kissing booth' from human to canine popped into someone's head.

Nice In Theory But Bad In Practice

On the surface I totally get the appeal of the "dog kissing booth" idea because it's chock-full of warm-and-fuzzy feelings and cute photo opportunities. It's a nice idea in theory but it's bad in practice.

To be clear, I'm not saying it's a "bad idea" because I think the people lining up to be smooched are in an immediate risk of being bitten (that is, assuming the dogs being chosen are exceptionally social, exceptionally tolerant of being approached face-to-face, and being closely watched for signs of stress). What I am saying is that it's a bad idea because the kissing booth promotes and perpetuates the notion that face-to-face interactions with dogs are appropriate and safe. 

Among the strongest proponents of dog bite prevention education are animal welfare groups and dog rescue organizations, so you can imagine my astonishment when I see some groups within the welfare/rescue community promoting dog kissing booths for their own fund-raising purposes. 

Is It Just Me... Or... ???

I have made efforts to contact some welfare/rescue groups to express my concern about their promotion of face-to-fact interactions through their kissing booths but I was unable to make much headway. They either couldn't understand my point or didn't want to acknowledge it. The conversations went something like this:

Me: I think that having a kissing booth sends the wrong message about face-to-face interactions with dogs.

Typical response: "Oh you don't have anything to worry about. The dogs we're using are completely bomb-proof. We're really careful about that."

Me: Yes I'm sure the dogs are wonderful and will do well, but my point is that the kissing booth sends a message to people that face-to-face interactions with dogs are appropriate and safe.

Typical response: "Well with these dogs there's really no risk. We make sure they are really social and well-adjusted, and we've never had any issues at all in the past."

You get the picture...

Most Dog Bites Come From 'Known' Dogs

I know, I know. You're probably thinking, "I've had dogs all my life and this would never happen with my dog." but there's interesting statistical evidence that should provide a well-meaning 'wake up call' for all dog guardians:

• In the majority of dog bite incidents, the dog was either the family's own dog or it was a dog that the victim knew (ie: belonging to a neighbor, friend or other family member, etc.).

In my mind, this information points to people employing a more relaxed set of rules around their own dogs (or dogs they are familiar with) thus allowing more 'liberties' to be taken when interacting with the 'known' dog as opposed to more strict rules for interacting with an 'unknown' dog.

In closing, I'm going to repeat some information from my previous post "People Going Face-to-Face With Dogs: Adorable or Dangerous" as published in the Animals and Society Institute policy paper entitled "Dog Bites: Problems and Solutions (Revised 2014)":

• Statistics indicate that the majority of dog bite victims are children.
• 67% of injurious dog bites to children have been shown to be preventable by changing the child's or the caregiver's behaviour in interacting with the dog.
• One study about dog bites to children found that there was no adult present in 69% of the cases studied.
• A study in 2008 published in Journal of the American Veterinary Association (2008) found that parents generally lacked knowledge of factors that were likely to increase the risk of dog bites to children, even when they were supervising child/dog interactions.

So, in the light of those statistics, education to promote appropriate and safe interactions with dogs is so very important, even if it means risking being labelled as the 'no fun police' when pointing out which interactions are inappropriate and risky.

 .

Make Sure Your Dog's Ball Isn't A Choke Risk

Lots of dogs absolutely LOVE to play ball so it's very important to make sure the ball is big enough so that it doesn't pose a choking risk.

Have a look at this quick video of "Charlie" catching an appropriately sized ball that I have tossed to him. When the ball is approaching head-on there's a lot of momentum (especially when the dog attacks the ball like Charlie does) so it's possible for a too-small ball to slip past the dog's teeth and tongue and go straight into its throat.

One of my clients told me this very thing happened to his dog. The ball was lodged too far into the dog's throat for him to remove by hand, and the only thing that saved the dog from asphyxiation was the fact that the ball had holes in it which permitted air to pass through (lucky!). This allowed my client to get his dog to the vet and have the ball removed successfully.

.

People Going Face To Face With Dogs: Adorable or Dangerous?

Sometimes it feels like no matter what you say or do, there is always someone who tells you it isn't safe, it's not healthy, or it's not a good idea.

And if one of your friends or family members don't feel the need to tell you, there will certainly be scores of people on social media eager for their chance to set you straight (at least in their eyes).

A preface like that can only mean one thing, right? Yup you guessed it, because now it's my turn to step up and say:

"Hey, you people creating and sharing all of those "cute" and "adorable" photos and videos where someone is pushing their face into a dog's face... that's not safe!" 

It's a mouthful to say, I know, but it's important to say nonetheless.

The problem I have with these supposedly "cute" and "adorable" images is that they reinforce the mistaken notion that that this type of face-to-face interaction is an appropriate and safe way to interact with a dog. The more this type of interaction is seen, the more people get conditioned to view it as a normal (thus safe) thing to do with a dog. After all, look at all the social media comments saying, "Awwww... how cute!" and "That's so adorable!"

Generally speaking, face-to-face interactions with dogs is not an appropriate or safe thing to do, but I'm not trying to say that it's unsafe for all people, with all dogs, at all times. Ultimately, your safety is dependent on whether (at that specific moment in time) the dog will willingly accept that type of interaction with you... and I put heavy emphasis on the word "willingly".

All Dogs Are Different - Some Things to Consider

• Some dogs are less tolerant than others.
• Just because a dog loves your pats and strokes doesn't mean the dog will welcome other types of interaction.
• Just because a dog was okay with your face-to-face interaction previously doesn't mean he'll be okay with it the next time.
• Just because a dog lets one person have face-to-face interactions doesn't mean the dog will let others. 
• Just because a dog lets someone have a face-to-face interaction, it doesn't mean the dog enjoys it.

What I do emphatically want to say is that (A) people should not introduce themselves to a dog in this manner, and (B) children should never be allowed to interact with a dog in this manner at any time.

From my experience I have no hesitation in suggesting that, outside of obvious growling and menacing-sounding barking, the vast majority of people don't recognize or understand the 'warning signs' dogs communicate when they are stressed, anxious or fearful. So if you do not understand canine body language yet you want a close encounter of the face-to-face kind; in my opinion you are rolling the dice when it comes to having a safe interaction. 

"Much of the exposure to dog bite injury risk can be mitigated by providing appropriate education to well-intentioned but misinformed guardians and to the general public at large." ~ Janis Bradley (Animals and Society Institute - "Dog Bites: Problems and Solutions" Policy Paper - revised 2014). 

What's That Dog Trying To Tell You?

Examples of dog body-language that say "I'm not comfortable with what you're doing" include:

• Attempting to move away from you. 
• Turns it's head away.
• Avoids direct eye contact.
• Wide eyes (showing the whites around the outside edges).
• Yawns.
• Licks its lips.
• Panting.

Examples of dog body-language that say "I'm very uncomfortable with what you're doing - please stop now!" include:

• Raised lip.
• Shows teeth.
• Snarl or growl.
• Air-snapping of jaws.
• Freezes (a bite is imminent).
• Bite.

Keeping Children Safe When Interacting With Dogs

Statistics indicate that more children are bitten by dogs than adults and, in the majority of dog bite incidents, the dog was either the family's own dog or it was a dog that the victim knew (belonging to a neighbour, friend, other family member, etc.). 

The importance of this information cannot be over-stated, because it dispels any notion that parents can employ a more relaxed set of rules (thus allowing children to take more 'liberties') when interacting with a 'known' dog as opposed to a 'strange' dog.

As published in the Animals and Society Institute policy paper entitled "Dog Bites: Problems and Solutions (Revised 2014)": 

• 67% of injurious dog bites to children have been shown to be preventable by changing the child's or the caregiver's behaviour in interacting with the dog.
• One study about dog bites to children found that there was no adult present in 69% of the cases studied.
• A study in 2008 published in Journal of the American Veterinary Association (2008) found that parents generally lacked knowledge of factors that were likely to increase the risk of dog bites to children, even when they were supervising child/dog interactions.
  
  . 

Local Pet Store Says Good-Bye to Harsh Dog Collars

Greater Vancouver pet store Tisol Pet Nutrition and Supply have announced they will no longer offer aversive dog collars for sale.

The company has specifically identified shock collars, prong/pinch collars and choke chains as the collar types that will no longer be offered.

With nine locations spanning from Vancouver to Langley, Tisol states that this decision came "... as a result of feedback from customers and dog trainers..."

.

What Does Leadership Mean To You?

I don't like to get involved in the wars-of-words that often erupt online, but after reading a woman's comment that said (and I paraphrase): "Leadership and Energy are dirty words in my vocabulary and force-free lifestyle." I couldn't help but respond - especially considering how many people agreed with her statement.

Words are a tricky thing because they can have more than one meaning, but it's really frustrating how the word "leadership" has become such a negative in the positive reinforcement and force-free dog training world. Having said that, it must be noted that even the idea of being a dog "owner" is being looked at as unsavory these days as more and more people object to the idea of "ownership" of another living being.

So... how do YOU define the word "leadership"? What does it mean to you? Here's what I think:

• Getting what you want through intimidation means you're a "bully".
• Getting what you want through mandatory compliance means you're a "dictator".
• You can't be a leader if there is no one who will follow you. 
• "Following" is a choice - you cannot force someone to follow you because forcing someone against their will would mean that you're a "dictator".
• If you get what you ask for through being fair, being trustworthy, providing choices and rewarding a job well done... you're a what??? Yes that's right, you're a "leader". 

When it comes to your family dog, you're already in the perfect position to be your dog’s leader by providing the necessities of life such as food, water, shelter and safety; but more is needed if you want to earn your dog’s ongoing trust and loyalty and encourage your dog to willingly look to you, listen to you and follow you:

• Fairness and consistency.
• Patience and encouragement.
• Praise and reward.

Now, I want to be very clear by stating that the polar opposite to my philosophy of leadership is the outdated theory of leadership through the domination of your dog... and I'm sure this is the thing that so many people are basing their anti-leadership comments about. So, in my definition of leadership I stand by the following: 

• Dominance is not leadership.
• Intimidation is not leadership.
• Force is not leadership.

Sixteen years after L. David Mech published his correction on the natural social hierarchy of wolves, ‘dominance theory’ continues to be embedded in the psyche of dog culture. That being said, force-free philosophies and practices based on modern behavioural science are making steady inroads into our social conscience, but there's still plenty of road ahead.

.  

Why I Don't Like Dog Walking With A Long Leash

It seems to me that the number of leash-reactive dogs is growing - at least that's what I've been experiencing in the region where I live.

From my vantage point I see a lot of leash-reactivity coming from dogs that are walking well out in front of their handlers, at the limit of their leash-length. Combine less than stellar socialization with this type of unstructured on-leash walking and it's the perfect recipe for leash-reactivity.

I'm just not a fan for this type of unstructured on-leash walking. There's an old saying that suggests "out of sight, out of mind," and when the dog is anywhere from six to twenty feet out in front of its handler, "out of mind" is completely accurate.

When on-leash I want the dog to be in a position to look to and listen to the handler for direction. This, rather than the dog being put into a position where it has to meet all oncoming traffic head-on and decide for itself how to handle the situation. For a dog that doesn't have the necessary socialization skills, you're just asking for reactivity.

This is one of the reasons I launched my Master The Walk program, so dog owners can lead their dogs in a structured and well-mannered walk which can go a long way in preventing behavioural issues such as on-leash reactivity.

.