Friday, July 31, 2009
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
"Rescue" shelters
This is copied/pasted from something called "The Peeing Post" which I get in my mail at least once a month.
Anyway. the basic gist of the entire newsletter is: he's talking about why he doesn't like rescue shelters and why they are unsuccessful and what should be done about them. I have never heard such an opinion but it makes a hell of a lot of sense. However, I also don't try to spend my life saving other people's thrown away dogs, anyway.
Quoted:
The elements of a sustainable solution
So, what would it takes to change the unfortunate system of rewarding what we do not want to sustain?
Answer: It would take that the act of buying a dog would carry the full liability for also "disposing" of the dog in a decent manner.
Yes, it sounds a bit cryptic. Let me illustrate with an example from my time as hazardous waste manager in Denmark. In the late eighties, it was my job to organize recycling programs with Danish municipalities, and we instigated some programs on a trial basis, in order to test our theories.
Back then, it was a problem with empty beer bottles and soft drink bottles being thrown "away" in parks, on the streets, in other people's yards, and just about everywhere. The clean-up was expensive - and not effective.
Now, first, why do people throw an empty bottle away? Answer: because it has no value. It actually represents a negative net value, because it costs time and effort to bring it home and dispose of it in the garbage. It is simpler, faster, easier, and cheaper to just toss it in the park when it is empty!
A couple of years earlier, recycling had become popular, and most municipalities did indeed organize some collection of recyclable products. But, the sad facts were that the value of the recyclable metal or glass in a bottle/can could not even pay for the transportation to the recycling facility! We talk about what today will correspond to less than a penny per bottle. People could not care less. Not worth the inconvenience of having to take it home. Because of the completely insignificant value of the material, recycling could not "pay for itself".
The real problem was that the value of the empty bottle was too low! If the bottle was worth something, people would not just toss it....
Well, money is valueless paper. Worse than empty bottles, when push really comes to shove. But money is given value - and that's why it works!
My question was, "Could we give value to an empty bottle?"
Indeed, we can! Just pay a dollar for each! And you will see how poor people, kids, and everyone else will pick up those empty bottles and bring them to you! It is a market thing.
And how can we afford to pay a dollar per empty bottle - which truly is valueless?
Simple. By demanding that the charge be included in the price of the full bottle! In principle: let the polluter pay! The polluter here is the manufacturer. He is the one that produces what later becomes waste. He must pay for the collection/disposal of that waste, in order to be allowed to sell the product! The manufacturer will, of course, simply pass on that extra expense to the the consumer by adding it to the price. And that's where it belongs.
The problem is that dogs are too cheap! Just like empty bottles, they do not represent a resale value that is sufficient for their decent "disposal"! Please note that it is the overall market value, we talk about - because that is what matters. It does not matter that, to some of us, the emotional value of dog is almost immeasurable. The fact that some people are willing to pay a much higher price than the market value simply means that those people end up attracting all the scum sellers!
What does it cost to "get rid of a dog" - in a decent way?
There are indeed legitimate reasons for people having to let go, including many reasons that are to the best for the dog, so quit that nonsense, "I would never give up my dog." It is BS. I can definitely find situations where you will know that you have no choice. Real-life situations. So let's be sober on this.
Here are some of the very likely costs:
*
An ad in the local paper: $100.
*
A vet check-up: $100.
*
Another ad in the paper: $100.
*
Third ad in the paper: $100.
*
Euthanasia: $100...
I might be off by 50% or so - but the order of magnitude does indeed creep up into a couple of hundred dollars - which is more than what it costs to get a dog from a "rescue" shelter! This means that a dog, effectively, has a negative net value; it represents a liability that is greater than its market value!
And here is what I believe is a characteristic alternative:
*
Dumping the dog at the shelter: no charge...
*
Vet check-up (paid for by the shelter): $150 (more expensive because the dog's history is unknown...)
*
Average cost of management of the facility, per dog: $300
*
Advertising to find a new home, average: $50 (collective advertising is cheaper per dog)
*
Inspection of new homes: $200 (typically donated as free work by volunteers)
My numbers might not represent all facilities - but they do represent some I know of, so I believe that the order of magnitude is correct. The main point is that the total cost (counting also volunteer work) is much more that what it costs for the individual owner to facilitate his/her own solution.
Now, don't even think about charging the past owner for delivering that dog to the shelter! Unless you want to urge those owners to kill the dogs on their own, in order to save money.... If anything should be considered here, it should be paying for receiving the dog, so that the "rescue" solution becomes overall more attractive!!!
It takes no genius to figure out that this would also make the first solution completely unattractive for an average owner... So, it would mean that all dogs go to the shelters when their owners are tired of them. Not to heaven. To the shelters.
This further means that with "production" of dogs being virtually unlimited, this solution will end up in chaos. Now, don't come back and say that this can be stopped through spay/neutering. It can't. The over-supply of dogs does NOT come from private dog owners breeding uncontrollably!!! It comes from puppy mills that already don't give a shit about the law and are extremely unlikely to become lawful operations, just because some naive puppets put some regulations up to force private dogs owners to cause harm to their pets, for no legitimate reason whatsoever. Legislation cannot even stop professional dog fighting - so it takes an idiot to believe it can stop profitable breeding.
The market demand is created by the irresponsible people who fall in love with a puppy in a pet store. It is cute - and cheap.
That's where the demand is presented to the market - and that's where the supplies will go, no matter what kind of spay/neutering rules are being put in place. And THIS is where we need to hit the irresponsible buyers!
The example with the bottle deposits shows that, if we can make those people pay up front for the "disposal" of the dog, then we at least don't have to do the dirty job of cleaning up after their irresponsible action. This would be "cost neutral" to society - and also secure the dog a decent end of its life.
Now we have the unpleasant discussion about what this "clean-up" can and should consist of....
It could include of a payment to the "rescue" shelters, for them to provide the effort of finding another home to this dog. This is an uphill battle, though, because getting this procedure in motion will dramatically increase the demands for the services provided by those shelters. I am not unconditionally supporting this, but it is indeed an option worth considering if we could change the whole perspective of volunteer operation of the shelters.
It could also include of a free voucher to the vet for a euthanasia. That, I think, should be mandatory.
And it could, most certainly, include a contribution to the necessary public education in this realm! Just as for getting a driver's license or a gun license, there is no true reason why it could not be made mandatory for people who buy a dog to also attend some education on how to care for that dog in a safe and responsible way that does not infringe on other people's rights to enjoy their lives. There really is no difference.
The good news is that, with those contributions, it would triple or quadruple the price of a puppy that is sold through commercial channels to uneducated members of the public - who are those who are the main culprits for the whole calamity. But with the education requirements in place, this number could be greatly reduced - and we could prevent the suffering of a lot of animals.... And maybe the education also could have some effect on those who are forced to take it...
I should add here that, in Denmark, there is a "Dog Act" in force - a great piece of law that for some 200 years has been making trading of dogs through any commercial business enterprise illegal! In Denmark, you can ONLY buy a dog/puppy from a private breeder... And, also in North America, I know that most breeders do a great job selecting and screening, and educating their puppy buyers! They are not the problem. The problem is the commercial outlets that sustain this trade of animals for profit only - without accepting any responsibilities for the results. The results can all be dealt with if we have money available for it. So, making those businesses that are the true origin of the problem pay for solving the problems they create is the natural and logical solution.
Yes, this smacks of a huge tax on dogs! And I am fully aware that the administration of this represents a challenge on its own, since I don't have any trust in politicians or government representatives acting in good faith to serve the public interest, unless forced to. But that's a different ball game altogether.
As a relevant example to illustrate the point of price influence, please consider that the taxes on tobacco products show a direct link between the number of teenagers starting smoking and the cost of the product! In countries where the tobacco taxes have been extremely high (causing the products' prices to increase by 500% or more), there is a clear decrease in the number of smokers. And the number increases again, every time the taxes are reduced. Before Denmark was forced to "harmonize" its taxes with the remaining EU, tobacco in Denmark cost about 3 times as much as in Germany - all because of extremely high tobacco taxes. After those taxes had to come down, the smoking population in Denmark almost doubled....
And the bottle deposit stories also tell the truth about this - the administration of collecting such mandatory deposits does not increase with the size of the deposit. But the customer demand for the product does.
There are more unpleasant decisions in this...
The whole problem originates from the fact that we have an over-supply of dogs that are too cheap. And the shelters contribute to making that problem worse, not better!
So, what can be done about this over-supply?
As we discussed, we need several things in place:
1.
FEWER DOGS!
2.
A HIGHER PRICE ON DOGS.
3.
A source of funding of the public education that is required to prevent the problem.
4.
Acceptance of euthanasia as an "OK solution" to reducing the dog population and to end a dog life that has no positive perspective of happiness.
I know - that last one about euthanasia does not sit well with most "rescue" dog volunteers and dog lovers... We already discussed that. But it remains an indisputable fact that large-scale euthanasia of "rescue" dogs would quickly reduce the problem of "too many homeless dogs" - and it would most definitely also contribute to an overall increase of the market price for a dog! As we discussed, a higher market price will reduce the number of irresponsible buyers - and it will reduce the whole problem around "disposing" of unwanted dogs.
I AGREE ABOUT %90.
Anyway. the basic gist of the entire newsletter is: he's talking about why he doesn't like rescue shelters and why they are unsuccessful and what should be done about them. I have never heard such an opinion but it makes a hell of a lot of sense. However, I also don't try to spend my life saving other people's thrown away dogs, anyway.
Quoted:
The elements of a sustainable solution
So, what would it takes to change the unfortunate system of rewarding what we do not want to sustain?
Answer: It would take that the act of buying a dog would carry the full liability for also "disposing" of the dog in a decent manner.
Yes, it sounds a bit cryptic. Let me illustrate with an example from my time as hazardous waste manager in Denmark. In the late eighties, it was my job to organize recycling programs with Danish municipalities, and we instigated some programs on a trial basis, in order to test our theories.
Back then, it was a problem with empty beer bottles and soft drink bottles being thrown "away" in parks, on the streets, in other people's yards, and just about everywhere. The clean-up was expensive - and not effective.
Now, first, why do people throw an empty bottle away? Answer: because it has no value. It actually represents a negative net value, because it costs time and effort to bring it home and dispose of it in the garbage. It is simpler, faster, easier, and cheaper to just toss it in the park when it is empty!
A couple of years earlier, recycling had become popular, and most municipalities did indeed organize some collection of recyclable products. But, the sad facts were that the value of the recyclable metal or glass in a bottle/can could not even pay for the transportation to the recycling facility! We talk about what today will correspond to less than a penny per bottle. People could not care less. Not worth the inconvenience of having to take it home. Because of the completely insignificant value of the material, recycling could not "pay for itself".
The real problem was that the value of the empty bottle was too low! If the bottle was worth something, people would not just toss it....
Well, money is valueless paper. Worse than empty bottles, when push really comes to shove. But money is given value - and that's why it works!
My question was, "Could we give value to an empty bottle?"
Indeed, we can! Just pay a dollar for each! And you will see how poor people, kids, and everyone else will pick up those empty bottles and bring them to you! It is a market thing.
And how can we afford to pay a dollar per empty bottle - which truly is valueless?
Simple. By demanding that the charge be included in the price of the full bottle! In principle: let the polluter pay! The polluter here is the manufacturer. He is the one that produces what later becomes waste. He must pay for the collection/disposal of that waste, in order to be allowed to sell the product! The manufacturer will, of course, simply pass on that extra expense to the the consumer by adding it to the price. And that's where it belongs.
This a powerful principle. It is how mining operations work in Canada. In order for a mining company to obtain a permit to mine minerals from the ground, the company must provide a deposit to the government that is sufficient to clean up the site when the mine closes! The money is paid back when the site is closed, and everything is clean and neat. And, if the company fails to do the clean-up, then the government has the money to do it!
AND:
The problem is that dogs are too cheap! Just like empty bottles, they do not represent a resale value that is sufficient for their decent "disposal"! Please note that it is the overall market value, we talk about - because that is what matters. It does not matter that, to some of us, the emotional value of dog is almost immeasurable. The fact that some people are willing to pay a much higher price than the market value simply means that those people end up attracting all the scum sellers!
What does it cost to "get rid of a dog" - in a decent way?
There are indeed legitimate reasons for people having to let go, including many reasons that are to the best for the dog, so quit that nonsense, "I would never give up my dog." It is BS. I can definitely find situations where you will know that you have no choice. Real-life situations. So let's be sober on this.
Here are some of the very likely costs:
*
An ad in the local paper: $100.
*
A vet check-up: $100.
*
Another ad in the paper: $100.
*
Third ad in the paper: $100.
*
Euthanasia: $100...
I might be off by 50% or so - but the order of magnitude does indeed creep up into a couple of hundred dollars - which is more than what it costs to get a dog from a "rescue" shelter! This means that a dog, effectively, has a negative net value; it represents a liability that is greater than its market value!
And here is what I believe is a characteristic alternative:
*
Dumping the dog at the shelter: no charge...
*
Vet check-up (paid for by the shelter): $150 (more expensive because the dog's history is unknown...)
*
Average cost of management of the facility, per dog: $300
*
Advertising to find a new home, average: $50 (collective advertising is cheaper per dog)
*
Inspection of new homes: $200 (typically donated as free work by volunteers)
My numbers might not represent all facilities - but they do represent some I know of, so I believe that the order of magnitude is correct. The main point is that the total cost (counting also volunteer work) is much more that what it costs for the individual owner to facilitate his/her own solution.
Now, don't even think about charging the past owner for delivering that dog to the shelter! Unless you want to urge those owners to kill the dogs on their own, in order to save money.... If anything should be considered here, it should be paying for receiving the dog, so that the "rescue" solution becomes overall more attractive!!!
It takes no genius to figure out that this would also make the first solution completely unattractive for an average owner... So, it would mean that all dogs go to the shelters when their owners are tired of them. Not to heaven. To the shelters.
This further means that with "production" of dogs being virtually unlimited, this solution will end up in chaos. Now, don't come back and say that this can be stopped through spay/neutering. It can't. The over-supply of dogs does NOT come from private dog owners breeding uncontrollably!!! It comes from puppy mills that already don't give a shit about the law and are extremely unlikely to become lawful operations, just because some naive puppets put some regulations up to force private dogs owners to cause harm to their pets, for no legitimate reason whatsoever. Legislation cannot even stop professional dog fighting - so it takes an idiot to believe it can stop profitable breeding.
The market demand is created by the irresponsible people who fall in love with a puppy in a pet store. It is cute - and cheap.
That's where the demand is presented to the market - and that's where the supplies will go, no matter what kind of spay/neutering rules are being put in place. And THIS is where we need to hit the irresponsible buyers!
The example with the bottle deposits shows that, if we can make those people pay up front for the "disposal" of the dog, then we at least don't have to do the dirty job of cleaning up after their irresponsible action. This would be "cost neutral" to society - and also secure the dog a decent end of its life.
Now we have the unpleasant discussion about what this "clean-up" can and should consist of....
It could include of a payment to the "rescue" shelters, for them to provide the effort of finding another home to this dog. This is an uphill battle, though, because getting this procedure in motion will dramatically increase the demands for the services provided by those shelters. I am not unconditionally supporting this, but it is indeed an option worth considering if we could change the whole perspective of volunteer operation of the shelters.
It could also include of a free voucher to the vet for a euthanasia. That, I think, should be mandatory.
And it could, most certainly, include a contribution to the necessary public education in this realm! Just as for getting a driver's license or a gun license, there is no true reason why it could not be made mandatory for people who buy a dog to also attend some education on how to care for that dog in a safe and responsible way that does not infringe on other people's rights to enjoy their lives. There really is no difference.
The good news is that, with those contributions, it would triple or quadruple the price of a puppy that is sold through commercial channels to uneducated members of the public - who are those who are the main culprits for the whole calamity. But with the education requirements in place, this number could be greatly reduced - and we could prevent the suffering of a lot of animals.... And maybe the education also could have some effect on those who are forced to take it...
I should add here that, in Denmark, there is a "Dog Act" in force - a great piece of law that for some 200 years has been making trading of dogs through any commercial business enterprise illegal! In Denmark, you can ONLY buy a dog/puppy from a private breeder... And, also in North America, I know that most breeders do a great job selecting and screening, and educating their puppy buyers! They are not the problem. The problem is the commercial outlets that sustain this trade of animals for profit only - without accepting any responsibilities for the results. The results can all be dealt with if we have money available for it. So, making those businesses that are the true origin of the problem pay for solving the problems they create is the natural and logical solution.
Yes, this smacks of a huge tax on dogs! And I am fully aware that the administration of this represents a challenge on its own, since I don't have any trust in politicians or government representatives acting in good faith to serve the public interest, unless forced to. But that's a different ball game altogether.
As a relevant example to illustrate the point of price influence, please consider that the taxes on tobacco products show a direct link between the number of teenagers starting smoking and the cost of the product! In countries where the tobacco taxes have been extremely high (causing the products' prices to increase by 500% or more), there is a clear decrease in the number of smokers. And the number increases again, every time the taxes are reduced. Before Denmark was forced to "harmonize" its taxes with the remaining EU, tobacco in Denmark cost about 3 times as much as in Germany - all because of extremely high tobacco taxes. After those taxes had to come down, the smoking population in Denmark almost doubled....
And the bottle deposit stories also tell the truth about this - the administration of collecting such mandatory deposits does not increase with the size of the deposit. But the customer demand for the product does.
There are more unpleasant decisions in this...
The whole problem originates from the fact that we have an over-supply of dogs that are too cheap. And the shelters contribute to making that problem worse, not better!
So, what can be done about this over-supply?
As we discussed, we need several things in place:
1.
FEWER DOGS!
2.
A HIGHER PRICE ON DOGS.
3.
A source of funding of the public education that is required to prevent the problem.
4.
Acceptance of euthanasia as an "OK solution" to reducing the dog population and to end a dog life that has no positive perspective of happiness.
I know - that last one about euthanasia does not sit well with most "rescue" dog volunteers and dog lovers... We already discussed that. But it remains an indisputable fact that large-scale euthanasia of "rescue" dogs would quickly reduce the problem of "too many homeless dogs" - and it would most definitely also contribute to an overall increase of the market price for a dog! As we discussed, a higher market price will reduce the number of irresponsible buyers - and it will reduce the whole problem around "disposing" of unwanted dogs.
I AGREE ABOUT %90.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Mistakes.
Titus did have two mistakes later this morning, too.
He had one in the mesh carry bag (I'm not giving him the soft bottom during the trip tomorrow), and then had half of one in the kitchen. I scooped him up both times and stuck him outside to finish. When he was in the mesh carry bag, he started yelping to high heaven.
He's also had the runs, again, so I'm going to go out (now) and buy some chicken wings to have with the chicken breasts so the transition won't be so harsh. And plus, with traveling, at least his bowels need to be in order, if nothing else.
He had one in the mesh carry bag (I'm not giving him the soft bottom during the trip tomorrow), and then had half of one in the kitchen. I scooped him up both times and stuck him outside to finish. When he was in the mesh carry bag, he started yelping to high heaven.
He's also had the runs, again, so I'm going to go out (now) and buy some chicken wings to have with the chicken breasts so the transition won't be so harsh. And plus, with traveling, at least his bowels need to be in order, if nothing else.
Friday, July 24, 2009
"Do you need something?"
This morning, my perfectly-happy-to-be-submissive dog, Puppy, did something that severely shocked me.
Both of my dogs are Cavalier King Charles spaniels which are normally extremely quiet little creatures - unless they want something. Titus tends to bark when he wants out or when he just feels like being a little jerk and Puppy barks on extremely rare occasions - meaning, I don't even remember the last time she barked.
Except this morning, and I have to admit, I did walk straight into it.
The previous night, I had promised the old bat that I'd feed her come morning because I was giving her pig's feet and they were frozen as hard as rocks so I let them thaw a bit overnight. I'd set up tons of things to dry, also, for vacation so they'd have meat to snack on.
This morning, I jumped up at around six to take Titus out (even though he had half of the mistake in his crate when I went to pee, I think, since like I said, he'd been basically asleep before that), and left her in the room like I usually do. Then I came back, deposited my little crapper, and crawled back into bed.
Puppy has the tendency to be incredibly annoying when she wants something and this morning was no different. Being hungry and probably needing to urinate, she was getting into everything. I said her name more than on a few occasions in annoyance. And she would quietly comply and go about her business getting into something else just to keep me from sleeping.
This time, she sniffed at my nightstand which happens to have a turkey bone they've been playing over for the past week. I'd taken all the tiny pieces out of my carpet and placed them there so I wouldn't step on them. She sniffed and then, of course, I yelled "Puppy!" sharply to deter her from continuing.
Her body slowly sank back to the carpet and she sat there, looking at me (another Cavalier trait, which is so very annoying).
"Do you need something?" I said in annoyance. Usually this reply merits no real answer except more staring and possibly the act of pulling one's ears forward and a little wiggle of excitement.
Not this morning.
This morning, she barked. And fell silent. When I didn't get up, she did it again. Now, this isn't aggressive barking, per se. She is sitting in her little position, waiting patiently for me to get out of bed (again) and put my shoes on (again) and say "Let's go then," which is my morning routine.
Finally, I bolted upright like a zombie and turned towards her. She looked at me with almost pleading eyes, the whites showing, and then at once went into a lying position. Then she barked again. She was almost shaking.
My reply to her answer was "Is that so?" And I got up from my bed, put my shoes on, and said "Let's go, then." She was absolutely delighted. She jumped up and ran circles around my tiny little room before falling into place directly behind me before I opened the door.
Both of my dogs are Cavalier King Charles spaniels which are normally extremely quiet little creatures - unless they want something. Titus tends to bark when he wants out or when he just feels like being a little jerk and Puppy barks on extremely rare occasions - meaning, I don't even remember the last time she barked.
Except this morning, and I have to admit, I did walk straight into it.
The previous night, I had promised the old bat that I'd feed her come morning because I was giving her pig's feet and they were frozen as hard as rocks so I let them thaw a bit overnight. I'd set up tons of things to dry, also, for vacation so they'd have meat to snack on.
This morning, I jumped up at around six to take Titus out (even though he had half of the mistake in his crate when I went to pee, I think, since like I said, he'd been basically asleep before that), and left her in the room like I usually do. Then I came back, deposited my little crapper, and crawled back into bed.
Puppy has the tendency to be incredibly annoying when she wants something and this morning was no different. Being hungry and probably needing to urinate, she was getting into everything. I said her name more than on a few occasions in annoyance. And she would quietly comply and go about her business getting into something else just to keep me from sleeping.
This time, she sniffed at my nightstand which happens to have a turkey bone they've been playing over for the past week. I'd taken all the tiny pieces out of my carpet and placed them there so I wouldn't step on them. She sniffed and then, of course, I yelled "Puppy!" sharply to deter her from continuing.
Her body slowly sank back to the carpet and she sat there, looking at me (another Cavalier trait, which is so very annoying).
"Do you need something?" I said in annoyance. Usually this reply merits no real answer except more staring and possibly the act of pulling one's ears forward and a little wiggle of excitement.
Not this morning.
This morning, she barked. And fell silent. When I didn't get up, she did it again. Now, this isn't aggressive barking, per se. She is sitting in her little position, waiting patiently for me to get out of bed (again) and put my shoes on (again) and say "Let's go then," which is my morning routine.
Finally, I bolted upright like a zombie and turned towards her. She looked at me with almost pleading eyes, the whites showing, and then at once went into a lying position. Then she barked again. She was almost shaking.
My reply to her answer was "Is that so?" And I got up from my bed, put my shoes on, and said "Let's go, then." She was absolutely delighted. She jumped up and ran circles around my tiny little room before falling into place directly behind me before I opened the door.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Milk Bone Crunchies
I need to be more consistent with giving him treats when he does the right thing. I forget to take treats out so I just verbal praise. But I think treating + verbal praise will get me further since it's rare that I give treats in the first place. He'll be floored that he gets a treat every time he poos outside.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Just a quick post.
Well. Titus hasn't had a mistake since Thursday, surprisingly, and he's really good about crying like high heaven for me to take him out.
The strange thing is I feel confident in letting him play, now.
When I was potty training Puppy, it just clicked one day - seriously. Like, I'm taking her out constantly and then one day she just stops peeing on every break. Then I started spacing them out and she was good. I would also give her treats. The same week she stopped peeing at every break, she stopped taking treats. It was weird. But for now I'm super proud of Ti.
And... I go on vacation next week with the both of them. THAT will be a trip because I'll be taking two crates and the last time I took Titus somewhere, he was thrown out of wack - literally - when it came to bathrooming. I'll try to just keep the exact same schedule during the trip.
That's all for now.
Ciao <3
The strange thing is I feel confident in letting him play, now.
When I was potty training Puppy, it just clicked one day - seriously. Like, I'm taking her out constantly and then one day she just stops peeing on every break. Then I started spacing them out and she was good. I would also give her treats. The same week she stopped peeing at every break, she stopped taking treats. It was weird. But for now I'm super proud of Ti.
And... I go on vacation next week with the both of them. THAT will be a trip because I'll be taking two crates and the last time I took Titus somewhere, he was thrown out of wack - literally - when it came to bathrooming. I'll try to just keep the exact same schedule during the trip.
That's all for now.
Ciao <3
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Potty Scheules.
Okay
Titus' Potty Schedule: 7, 10, 1, 4, 7, 10, 11-12 (before bed)
Puppy's Potty Schedule: (If I get up on time in the morning) 7, 12, 5, 10, 11-12 (before bed)
(If I don't get up on time) 10, 4, 8, 11-12(before bed)
Titus' Potty Schedule: 7, 10, 1, 4, 7, 10, 11-12 (before bed)
Puppy's Potty Schedule: (If I get up on time in the morning) 7, 12, 5, 10, 11-12 (before bed)
(If I don't get up on time) 10, 4, 8, 11-12(before bed)
Monday, July 13, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Titus has had a total of 3 poop mistakes today. And he still squats to poop outside, too. I don't know when they happen but I like to think he held it up until the last possible minute and just couldn't hold it anymore. He has no blanket, so he knows that he has to just sit there and look at it until I come back.
Let us not get discouraged as he had no mistakes yesterday! I did give him extra treats last night so I don't need to do that again - no matter what.
Let us not get discouraged as he had no mistakes yesterday! I did give him extra treats last night so I don't need to do that again - no matter what.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Restart.
Okay. Titus has been having some seriously dark poop. He did go to the vet today and she gave him the all clear, even did a stool sample and said it was fine so I don't know where it's coming from. Also, I will press on his belly and he doesn't yelp or anything - and he's a big baby. Also, I took his temp and it is 100.3 which is normal and he is very playful.
So... I'm hoping that he is perfectly fine but I can't help but worry, anyway.
However.
I am restarting his raw diet. He hasn't eaten for nearly 12 hours and soon I'm going to give him 1/3 of a chicken wing. And for each meal he will have just that and no more because I want to see some solid, light poop before I continue. Or else I'm marching myself right back to the vet.
The prior rules about when he shall go out and last time eating and what not still stand the same. But I need to get his poop firm because it's now beginning to scare me, even if his outward signs say he's perfectly fine.
So... I'm hoping that he is perfectly fine but I can't help but worry, anyway.
However.
I am restarting his raw diet. He hasn't eaten for nearly 12 hours and soon I'm going to give him 1/3 of a chicken wing. And for each meal he will have just that and no more because I want to see some solid, light poop before I continue. Or else I'm marching myself right back to the vet.
The prior rules about when he shall go out and last time eating and what not still stand the same. But I need to get his poop firm because it's now beginning to scare me, even if his outward signs say he's perfectly fine.
"Zeus"
So... my rooommate, because I now have Titus, felt that it was absolutely necessary that she get a companion for Kiley (her jack russel terrier x chihuahua mix), one of the ugliest dogs that I've ever seen.
Now, I'm not saying Cavalier King Charles Spaniels are adorable but they are one of the best dogs to enter into an already established animal family. We already had three animals - Kiley, Puppy, and Jack (a cat) - and a choice of a fourth and fifth edition requires more than just what's cute.
I settled on another Cavalier King Charles and it took me forever just to decide that. I had been talking to the breeder since February of this year and eyeing her site and her frequency of puppies since around August before that. It was a long time, not a whim. I'd looked at so many breeder sites and damn near memorized the breed standard for the guys even before I emailed her. I also researched the common diseases AND asked her about them in turn. I have a contract and you bet I have that contract almost memorized too. We've discussed the fine details of the contract, like how to feed, what to feed (since I'm on a raw diet, after all).
I feel comfortable with my breeder and I would refer her to anyone.
My roommate? Ha! She just went out one night and came back with a puppy. I don't even know if she looked at the type of dog before they dropped money on it. They bought a bull terrier. For people who don't know what that is, it was designed to be a leaner type of pit bull, so it could attack with more speed. Yes, I said attack. Bull Terriers were bred for fighting. They are small, compact, and "bull" headed quite literally. They're not very cute even when they've been painstakingly bred to exhibit the exact breed standard. This abomination that she has looks like a mix between a pit bull and a boxer and it has docked ears. Do you dock bull terrier ears? No. And they're not even docked, they're sliced off!
I would've put my money back in my pocket RIGHT then. It's obvious that who ever did the docking isn't familiar with how it works or the breeds that it is okay to dock, because bull terriers aren't one. And yes, I know all of this off the top of my head. I don't like bull terriers, I don't like terriers. I like Cavalier King Charles Spaniels - and I know more about the dog that they just bought then they do. No surprise.
What else? They named him "Zeus" - which is almost further offending to me just because of how long it took me to think of Titus' call name. And then they go and think of essentially the same style of name. I know, it seems petty, but my roommate is not creative. If she were creative and enjoyed thinking of dog names, that's one thing, but she isn't and doesn't. I know for a fact that his name has over 50% to do with my dog's name which is just... unnerving.
I will get a picture of it... and I will post it and we shall compare the breed standard to that abomination.
Now, I'm not saying Cavalier King Charles Spaniels are adorable but they are one of the best dogs to enter into an already established animal family. We already had three animals - Kiley, Puppy, and Jack (a cat) - and a choice of a fourth and fifth edition requires more than just what's cute.
I settled on another Cavalier King Charles and it took me forever just to decide that. I had been talking to the breeder since February of this year and eyeing her site and her frequency of puppies since around August before that. It was a long time, not a whim. I'd looked at so many breeder sites and damn near memorized the breed standard for the guys even before I emailed her. I also researched the common diseases AND asked her about them in turn. I have a contract and you bet I have that contract almost memorized too. We've discussed the fine details of the contract, like how to feed, what to feed (since I'm on a raw diet, after all).
I feel comfortable with my breeder and I would refer her to anyone.
My roommate? Ha! She just went out one night and came back with a puppy. I don't even know if she looked at the type of dog before they dropped money on it. They bought a bull terrier. For people who don't know what that is, it was designed to be a leaner type of pit bull, so it could attack with more speed. Yes, I said attack. Bull Terriers were bred for fighting. They are small, compact, and "bull" headed quite literally. They're not very cute even when they've been painstakingly bred to exhibit the exact breed standard. This abomination that she has looks like a mix between a pit bull and a boxer and it has docked ears. Do you dock bull terrier ears? No. And they're not even docked, they're sliced off!
I would've put my money back in my pocket RIGHT then. It's obvious that who ever did the docking isn't familiar with how it works or the breeds that it is okay to dock, because bull terriers aren't one. And yes, I know all of this off the top of my head. I don't like bull terriers, I don't like terriers. I like Cavalier King Charles Spaniels - and I know more about the dog that they just bought then they do. No surprise.
What else? They named him "Zeus" - which is almost further offending to me just because of how long it took me to think of Titus' call name. And then they go and think of essentially the same style of name. I know, it seems petty, but my roommate is not creative. If she were creative and enjoyed thinking of dog names, that's one thing, but she isn't and doesn't. I know for a fact that his name has over 50% to do with my dog's name which is just... unnerving.
I will get a picture of it... and I will post it and we shall compare the breed standard to that abomination.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Third Eyelid
Also, Titus' third eyelid is showing a lot. I just noticed it today because... well I just saw it today. It looks pretty gross.
I did notice that he was trying to scratch his face more often now that I just stop and think about it but there's nothing I can do today. Everything is closed. I will probably run him up to the vet's tomorrow though (even though I have to get his shots on Friday and an extra check up is going to piss me off).
I put a little of my contact solution on his eyes and now I'm trying to get him to lie d own and take a nap or something and see if he's just tired or something like that because he was falling asleep in my arms.
They don't actually look that bad when he's alert, but they look horrible when he's just sitting in his cage, it looks like his entire eye is almost covered with the third lid. And his right eye looks a lot worse than his left.
He's not taking the nap bait either - but that's probably because he doesn't have a blanket. He'll have to deal because he really is absolutely worn out. He looks like it.
I did notice that he was trying to scratch his face more often now that I just stop and think about it but there's nothing I can do today. Everything is closed. I will probably run him up to the vet's tomorrow though (even though I have to get his shots on Friday and an extra check up is going to piss me off).
I put a little of my contact solution on his eyes and now I'm trying to get him to lie d own and take a nap or something and see if he's just tired or something like that because he was falling asleep in my arms.
They don't actually look that bad when he's alert, but they look horrible when he's just sitting in his cage, it looks like his entire eye is almost covered with the third lid. And his right eye looks a lot worse than his left.
He's not taking the nap bait either - but that's probably because he doesn't have a blanket. He'll have to deal because he really is absolutely worn out. He looks like it.
New Set of Rules
Obviously, since I am having a hell of a time with accidents - and now he's peeing in his crate too when before he'd only poop - I've got to think of a better way to do this since my current way is very obviously not working.
Here's the new set of rules:
No food after 5 pm
No water after 7 pm
Potty break times are as follows: 7, 10, 1, 4, 7, 10, 12-1 (that's pm, so whenever I go to bed), and then if that doesn't go too well, I'll add a break in the middle of the night. Problem is that right now I don't wake up to my alarm so I need to work on that, too.
Take him out after eating, after playing, 30 min after a big poop if he's still having mucus.
Treats when pottying outside, also.
I know I shouldn't give him a blanket because it gives him more incentive to hide it, but I feel bad when he has to lie on the little tray with nothing soft and you know how CKCS love soft things. But, for now, he's not getting anything because it'll help us both know when he has accidents.
-------------
I'm going to try this method for a good week and if it works, I will continue with it and if it doesn't, I will reevaluate it next Sunday.
Here's the new set of rules:
No food after 5 pm
No water after 7 pm
Potty break times are as follows: 7, 10, 1, 4, 7, 10, 12-1 (that's pm, so whenever I go to bed), and then if that doesn't go too well, I'll add a break in the middle of the night. Problem is that right now I don't wake up to my alarm so I need to work on that, too.
Take him out after eating, after playing, 30 min after a big poop if he's still having mucus.
Treats when pottying outside, also.
I know I shouldn't give him a blanket because it gives him more incentive to hide it, but I feel bad when he has to lie on the little tray with nothing soft and you know how CKCS love soft things. But, for now, he's not getting anything because it'll help us both know when he has accidents.
-------------
I'm going to try this method for a good week and if it works, I will continue with it and if it doesn't, I will reevaluate it next Sunday.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Titus poop mistake: I don't know if he gave warning, I heard nothing.
He poops like ten times for one thing... He poops both inside and out and he didn't have these constant crate accidents at my appt. It's weird and very frustrating. And Puppy is just making it worse. She woke me up to go outside 3 times tonight and joan
He poops like ten times for one thing... He poops both inside and out and he didn't have these constant crate accidents at my appt. It's weird and very frustrating. And Puppy is just making it worse. She woke me up to go outside 3 times tonight and joan
Friday, July 3, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
