Search results for: “What Dog Food To Stay Away From”

You may or may not know this but despite all the science and stuff that we have at our disposal, carbon dating and all that malarkey, experts still don’t actually know what, when or how wolves became dogs.

They just know that they did. DNA studies have shown that what we’ve always suspected is true, dogs were once wolves but then something happened and they became dogs.

We do, of course, know how dogs became breeds. We did that. For better or worse. That was all on us.

Now an interesting theory has cropped up and it goes a little something like this:

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away (not really, it was definitely our galaxy), some cocky wolves started to hang out in little gangs around human settlements in much the same way that teenagers hang about outside of shops once its gone dark.

However, instead of trying to get older people to buy them booze, what these wolves were up to make much more sense. They were looking for food. Rather than eating humans, they were thinking it might be a good idea to eat what the humans were eating.

Now geneticists think what could have happened is that one of the key differences between our dogs and their wolfy ancestors is their ability to digest and properly process carbohydrates.

Ever seen a dog eat crisps? Well, you won’t see many wolves diving into a bag of Walkers any time soon (even if our interest in taking a dog’s diet back to basics is on the rise – raw dog food pros and cons debate anyone?).

This is the researcher’s thesis:

“The domestication of dogs was an important episode in the development of human civilization. The precise timing and location of this event is debated and little is known about the genetic changes that accompanied the transformation of ancient wolves into domestic dogs.

“Here we conduct whole-genome resequencing of dogs and wolves to identify 3.8 million genetic variants used to identify 36 genomic regions that probably represent targets for selection during dog domestication. Nineteen of these regions contain genes important in brain function, eight of which belong to nervous system development pathways and potentially underlie behavioural changes central to dog domestication.

“Ten genes with key roles in starch digestion and fat metabolism also show signals of selection. We identify candidate mutations in key genes and provide functional support for increased starch digestion in dogs relative to wolves. Our results indicate that novel adaptations allowing the early ancestors of modern dogs to thrive on a diet rich in starch, relative to the carnivorous diet of wolves, constituted a crucial step in the early domestication of dogs.”

So let’s add two and two together and see if we can make four, or a dog.

Wolves that were prone to eat human food were also the ones who were more willing to encroach on human territory. Far from being adversaries, the wolves learned that humans could be a useful source of food, even if it wasn’t the sort of food they were used to.

When those human-tolerant, or who knows, maybe even human-friendly wolves learned to stay around humans, they settled there, had their own families, sent their cubs off to good schools in the area and generally started to get along great with people.

After a while, the new wolves being produced in this environment had different digestive systems and even started their lives understanding that humans were a natural companion rather than a meal or competition for meals. Then….voila. Domesticated wolves eventually turn in to dogs.

What do you reckon? We think it’s certainly possible.

On a Sunday evening in July 2009, I was using my computer and my 5 year old Samoyed Bundy came in shaking his head (he had left my room approximately 15 mins earlier). I thought he was bringing me the ball because he wanted to play. He was also pawing at his mouth, so I thought he must have something stuck in his mouth. I had a look but couldn’t see anything. I knew something was seriously wrong so I jumped in the car and raced to the nearest 24 hour vet as fast as I could with Bundy in the back, still acting strangely with his head.

Luckily, the roads were empty and there was no one waiting at the vet. As we were led into the examination room, Bundy collapsed on the floor and was trembling all over. I then had to go back to the waiting room while they attended to him in the back. After a wait, I was led to the back where Bundy was in a cage and flailing about uncontrollably, which was very distressing for both him and me. I understand the vet gave him a shot of pentobarbital to knock him out. After another wait, I eventually went home but, obviously, I couldn’t sleep.

The next day, when I visited him, he was lying on a bed with lots of tubes and machines attached. He was unconscious but his paws and face were still twitching. It was tearing me apart to see him like that but I stayed for a few hours and held his paw, because I didn’t think he was going to make it. I don’t think the vets were very optimistic either because he was developing asperatic pneumonia.

I visited him every day and stayed for a few hours but I realised that the nurses have other animals to look after and duties to perform so I didn’t want to get in their way by staying longer. The vets and nurses that treated him gave him the best of care and I’m very grateful.

He remained unconscious for 3 or 4 days which, I’m told, is not usual but not unheard of either. The vets there treated him with a cocktail of drugs to try to control his twitching. They recommended sending him to a specialist centre so, after about 5 days, I drove him in the back of my car. He was still unconscious so a vet nurse sat with him, assisting with the oxygen.

The vets at the specialist centre ran a multitude of generalised tests including MRI and spinal taps but the results were inconclusive. After a day or so, he started to come around, semi conscious, but still twitching. The next day I visited, he was finally awake and when he saw me he started to whine with all the energy his weak body could muster, he could barely move but he still wanted to lick me and it became very emotional for both of us. Within a week, he got more responsive and stronger every day and was then allowed home.

As Bundy is 5 years old, epileptic fits were a possibility but I’m told that they do not last for 3+ days and the MRI brain scan had ruled out a brain tumour.

The vets that treated him thought it was likely he had come into contact with a toxin that acted on his nervous system. I wracked my brains as to what that could be as I wanted answers. The day of the episode, we went for a walk (on lead) at about 5 pm then he was shut inside the house and had his food about 6pm. There was no access to the garden and there are no chemicals around the house.

The previous day, I had put a new tick collar on him and noticed a very strong smell coming from it. I assumed that this must be the cause of Bundy’s condition somehow so I didn’t put another back on him.

When he was back home, I was feeding him brand new packets of his usual dry dog food that he likes and has had for years but, before the first episode, I had bought a different brand of food just for a change and added this to his usual food in a container, one that he had never had before (not sure if I can say the brand name, for legal reasons, but possibly the biggest and most popular brand in the world and the name is something to do with a dog’s heritage). Anyway, after a few weeks of feeding him brand new usual food strait out of the packet, I went back to adding some of his previous food on top. Within that week, he had a serious case of diahorreoa but I thought that could just be down to the drugs he was on.

A few days later (coincidentally, again on a Sunday night and about 2 hours later in the evening than the first episode), I noticed Bundy looking at me strangely and his legs were shaking. I immediately knew what was wrong and I drove him down to the specialist centre where he was again in intensive care for a week or so.

He came home very weak but, today, over six months later he is fit and healthy apart from his legs sometimes shaking when he stands. Obviously, there appears to be some residual nerve damage.

The vets at the specialist centre ran more tests the second time but still nothing was remarkable.

The four different vets that treated him between the two veterinary clinics and both episodes suspected intoxication by organophosphates, metaldehyde, (slug bait) or mycotoxins.

It was after this second occurrence that I realised that this new brand of dog food was the only common factor in both these cases. Perhaps it was contaminated?

I contacted the company that makes the dog food and arranged for an approximate 1kg sample to be sent off (but unfortunately I didn’t have the bag and batch code). The sample I sent did have small amounts of Bundy’s usual dog food mixed in (other brand). I sent it like this because this new food was added on top of his old food in a container and I wanted to know if they would even notice or just throw it away but, surprisingly, they did notice. I think, because of this, they did not run any tests.

A guy qualified in veterinary science, and who works for the dog food company, dealing with complaints of this nature, sent me a letter saying he had contacted my vet and discussed the causes of ‘tremorgens’ (a group of mycotoxins). These have been associated with Blue cheese, walnuts and compost as well as others and it was unlikely that their product was responsible.

Fortunately, Bundy has not been fed or been near those stated substances.

When I leave the house Bundy stays inside and he is always walked on a lead, he only goes into the garden if I go into the garden and the last time I saw a slug was about 10 years ago so he has very little chance of ever coming across something I don’t know about.

After a few weeks, I contacted the company’s vet again for the results of the test. I understand the tests didn’t show up anything abnormal. I wasn’t surprised at the company’s response because no company is ever going to test their own product and say something is wrong with it. He suggested that it was just one of those unexplained things, which I would have believed for the first episode but it is too coincidental for the second.

I got a bit annoyed with this guy because the way he dismissed my reasoning seemed arrogant.

He said that because they hadn’t had any other complaints, there was obviously nothing wrong with the batch and he also said that was the end of the matter and there was nothing else they would do.

Not being content with this dismissal or his arrogant and patronising attitude, I contacted a more senior person at the company and spoke to a technical director and arranged for another sample to be tested (I only had a handful left). He said it would be sent to Singapore, would take about 6 weeks and would cost a bit of money.

While I was waiting for these tests to be performed, I decided to conduct my own research into probable causes (something I should have done earlier) and discovered a few scientific papers freely available on the internet about Mycotoxins affecting dogs.

Roughly speaking, Mycotoxins are a group of toxins that form as a result of mould on numerous organic sources and can be deadly and cause a number of different conditions to both humans and animals. They can be found in both cereals and dry dog food, a fact which was omitted from the letter I was sent.

Either the veterinary guy dealing with my complaint has limited knowledge of these potential killers (for someone in his position, this seems very remiss) or he was fully aware of the potential problems but decided to keep quiet so as not to open a can of worms.

I did provide an email link to all of the papers (listed below) but it would appear that neither of the people I have been in contact with has read them, as they have subsequently provided no comment.

A number of the cases reported in the papers show clinical symptoms which are nearly identical to Bundy’s condition and, when biological samples from the dogs were analysed, Roquefortine and Penitrem A were detected and suspected as the probable cause.

A few weeks later, I received in the post the results of the sample testing (it had been sent to a lab in Victoria, not Singapore). Only four tests were performed: two types of mycotoxin, namely Aflatoxin B1 and Patulin, and also lead and permethrin.

I consider this test to be irrelevant and inconclusive due to the fact the very small sample size was statistically insignificant and they failed to test for any of the mycotoxins that are linked to tremors in dogs.(apparently there are over 30 known)

The dog food company’s sole defence was based around the fact that they apparently hadn’t received complaints of a similar nature and that their quality control is of a very high standard, and perhaps it was the other brand of dog food that caused it?

Addressing this statement, my research has indicated that detection and confirmation of mycotoxin poisoning has been grossly under diagnosed and, as far as I am aware, the specialist centre that treated Bundy did not test for this possibility. (I’m not even sure there is a commercial laboratory in Australia that tests for most of the different types).

In my case, it was only after the second episode that I realised that this brand of dog food was the only common factor that was likely to be responsible and it is possible that many dogs that have a single episode of unexplained acute toxicoses unfortunately die or have to be euthanized due to excessive trauma, poor prognosis and/or lack of financial resources so a confirmed diagnosis and connection to the dog food is not made and hence it is not reported back to the company.

While I’m confident that their quality control is of a high standard, it is unlikely that it is one hundred percent reliable and variations in the materials and process can be expected in any product.

After doing further research I discovered a Uni in the USA (Iowa State) that specialises in veterinary medicine and also test for the two mycotoxins I’m interested in, namely Roquefortine and Penitrem A.

I spoke to a Professor of toxicology from the department and he believed that mycotoxins are not well understood and not commercially tested for because of lack of demand. I provided him with bundy’s Vet case notes and his story and he confirmed that it did indeed fit with mycotoxin poisoning.

I sent a 1kg sample of Bundy’s original food to be tested at my own expense, the test came back negative so I can be fairly confident that it wasn’t the other brand to blame which I believed was the case anyway because of the timing. THIS IS WHAT THE COMPANY SHOULD HAVE TESTED FOR!

This whole incident has caused me a great deal of stress, and some days I couldn’t eat or sleep properly.

I feel that the company didn’t take my claims seriously and underestimated two important factors:

1. When I think I am right, I don’t give in.
2. I won’t let anyone hurt my dog and get away with it.

I spent most of my college fund on Bundy’s vet bills and, as he means everything in the world to me, I will do whatever it takes to protect and look after him.

I am convinced that this brand is responsible and I want them to reimburse my vet bills and make it up to Bundy somehow but I realise that posting this statement and contacting the media in other ways will effectively put an end to any chances of financial restitution. However, I will take some comfort in the hope that this might provide an explanation and quicker diagnosis to future apparent toxic poisonings.

I also feel I have been very fair and patient with the company in question and gave them every opportunity to do the right thing but, at every stage, they have seemed intent on absolving themselves from any responsibility. I can only conclude that from the irrelevant sample tests that either the company is grossly incompetent or they deliberately tried to mislead me.

If my dog had died as a result of this, I would probably be standing outside the company’s headquarters with a placard saying that their food was responsible for poisoning my dog.

My advice would be that, if your dog exhibits any acute tremors or seizure symptoms, like Bundy had, then get the vet to check for Mycotoxins (though this might be difficult in some countries) and to keep the dog food bags for future evidence if need be.

As Bundy is a Samoyed and they are not common here, perhaps he could be more genetically pre-disposed to toxins that other breeds?

If anyone has had a similar experience or can offer a different explanation, I would welcome a response.

UPDATE: 12th Feb. 2010

I decided to contact consumer affairs and they passed me onto the Pet Food Industry Association of Australia (P.F.I.A .A) and spoke to the executive manager. I provided him with Bundy’s history and my concerns and he contacted the company and said he was satisfied with their response.

It was only after I explored their website that I read their Statement of Purpose

#1 “To promote the prepared pet food industry in general and the interests of the members of the association.”

So this guy had a conflict of interest to do anything about it as I understand the association is funded by its members.

A few days later I contacted the company again and put a few questions to the guy I spoke to many times before (manager, veterinary services).

I asked him, how many people have to complain about a product before they admit responsibility.

Unsurprisingly he failed to specifically answer. He just reiterated what he said many times before, that no one else has complained of this problem so it is not their responsibility. Imagine if you went to the doctor with an ailment and they said, “Well no one else has complained of this so nothing I can do.”

I also asked why he failed to test for Tremorgenic Mycotoxins in the samples I provided. His response was that they only had a small sample and they wanted to test for as wide range as possible? (a wide range of the toxins that don’t cause tremors?)

When I pointed out that I had spoken to and expert and had the other brand properly tested for tremorgenic mycotoxins he didn’t want to know and said it was irrelevant and rudely concluded our conversation.

Thanks to other forum members I can see that in other countries they have had serious problems with contamination of their dog food products with salmonella and melamine. Anyone would have to be crazy to feed their dog this companies products.

To me it is obvious that the dog food is responsible and the company has done nothing to prove otherwise.

Craig W. 2009.

References;

Bennett, J.W, & Klich, M. (2003) Mycotoxins. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC164220/

Bough, M, (2006) Toxicology Brief: “Tremorgenic Mycotoxicosis in Dogs”. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www.compendiumvet.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=F0E2AE6B0B7E437588DFCF8A9FCA8CAC&nm=CE+Programs&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=60963CBCF74D4156BBFCA2595B06714C&AudID=43A035C1ADDF4F5F823E087E3BEE4975

Eriksen et al, (2009) Poisoning of dogs with tremorgenic Penicillium toxins. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/13693780903225821

Hocking, A.D, Holds, K, Tobin, N.F, (1988) Intoxication by tremorgenic mycotoxin (penitrem A) in a dog. Viewed 19th December 2009 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3401148?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=10

Lowes, N.R, Smith, R.A, Beck, B.E (1992) Roquefortine in the stomach contents of dogs suspected of strychnine poisoning in Alberta. Viewed 19th December 2009 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1481371/pdf/canvetj00057-0057.pdf

Schell, M.M, (2000), Tremorgenic mycotoxin intoxication. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www2.aspca.org/site/DocServer/toxbrief_0400.pdf?docID=113

Virginia Maryland Veterinary Notes (2005), Veterinary Teaching Hospital, Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine, Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www.vetmed.vt.edu/engagement/ext/pub/VetNotes_115.pdf

Walter,S.L, (2002), Acute penitrem A and roquefortine poisoning in a dog. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC339273/?referer=www.clickfind.com.au

In recent years, pet travel between Britain and other EU countries has opened up a great deal due to the introduction of pet passports, writes Melissa Hathaway. These documents allow properly vaccinated and health checked animals to travel abroad and (crucially) re-enter the UK without pets and owners having to go through the excruciating process of pet quarantine confinement.

This has allowed loving owners to take their pets with them when going on holiday. However, should you wish to take your beloved canine companion with you on holiday, there remain certain things to consider – the main question being: Do the benefits of taking your pet with you outweigh the problems and distress it may cause? In many cases, the answer is ‘Yes’. Although kennels are often extremely good, and many people can find kind neighbours to look after their pets in the familiarity of their own homes, some dogs find separation from their owners distressing.

This is particularly true of rescue dogs which may have been passed from home to home in the past, and fear that each new separation will be forever. It’s not just the dogs who have separation problems, wither. A 2007 survey suggests that a massive 72% of owners worry about their pets when on holiday, and many are likely to take shorter holidays due to the need to return swiftly for the sake of a dog or a cat. Many people and pets thus clearly cannot relax properly when the human part of the partnership is away on holiday. For these people, pet passports are a boon. However, for those who have dogs with less separation problems, or less prone to personal worry about their dog’s welfare, there may be a few more factors to weigh up when deciding whether or not to take your dog abroad.

Transportation

Transportation of animals to faraway locations is a perennial problem. People going on long-haul flights often worry that their animals will become distressed, confined in pet carriers and exposed to all the noise, pressure changes, strange smells and so on which are inherent in an aeroplane flight. Such things are often scary for people, and it is impossible to explain them to animals. Sedation is one option if the journey is not a long one, and most vets will be experienced in such matters and able to provide drugs which will either calm your animal or send them to sleep for the duration. It is well worth noting that animal protection legislation ensures that all European airlines have to treat your pets with the greatest care and respect – although this may not be true of airlines elsewhere in the world, so be sure to research your plane provider’s pet policies before booking a flight. Sea travel is another option, for those who have the time to spare. Some Transatlantic travellers have found an excellent solution to the transportation problem in the form of travel by boat. The British have long been renowned as avid pet-lovers, which perhaps explains why the British Cunard Line is the first in the world to allow animals onto a specially adapted cruise liner. The Queen Mary 2 has a ‘Pets on Deck’ programme, in which cats and dogs can be brought on board ship and treated like honoured guests for the duration of the voyage. The liner treats lucky pets to luxury kennels (with their own ‘butler’), an indoor animal play-area, plentiful walks on deck, gourmet pet food, and frequent owner visiting hours. Ideal – if you can afford it!

Dangers and Diseases

When the pet passport scheme was first introduced, it was controversial due to the worry that it would allow diseases like rabies to re-establish themselves in the UK. Over the past few decades, the UK authorities have been extremely successful in eradicating dangerous animal-borne diseases from the British Isles. However, they remain at large in many other countries worldwide, raising concerns that the free movement of pets between such countries and the UK would undo the good work of the past few decades and once again see rabies sweep across Britain. However, the authorities were not immune to such concerns. The pet passport scheme ensures that only the most stringently health-checked and vaccinated animals are allowed to travel, and imposes restrictions upon countries were dangerous animal diseases are particularly prevalent. Nonetheless, you may want to have a look at the disease dangers for dogs within the nation you are planning to visit, and either have your dog vaccinated against them or take relevant precautions against them. Some dangers, of course, are not infectious, but no less dangerous for the health of your dog. Particular plants and fungi, deadly to dogs, grow in certain parts of the world. Take note of the kind of poison-hazards you may have to watch out for. Furthermore, be aware that road safety rules are not as stringently enforced in many places as they are in Britain – so it will be a good idea to keep your dog on a tight lead when near main roads!

Is Your Holiday Pet-Friendly?

Finally, the accommodation you stay in and the kind of activities you want to participate in are of extreme relevance. Is your hotel or apartment dog-friendly? If you plan to have a beach holiday, are there dog-friendly beaches? If you want to spend your time going round museums, who will look after the dog while you are out? If you’re going on a holiday with plenty of walking through the countryside – then that would naturally be a fantastic experience for your dog, and one on which it would be a shame for him/her to miss out!

Often Worthwhile

With all of this in mind, it should be remembered that, with the right consideration and precautions, taking your dog on holiday can be a fantastic experience. You will not be worried about your dog’s welfare at home, your dog will not be pining for you, and you will both get to enjoy all the delights that foreign climes have to offer.

Photo by kajo0069

As always, there is a lot of discussion about how we can introduce laws to tackle the problem of dangerous dogs. It’s a heated debate often grounded in media hype, misguided prejudices and emotion, writes K9 Magazine’s editor Ryan O’Meara.

Rather than make kneejerk decisions on what we THINK we might know about serious and fatal dog attacks we should be prepared to focus on what we DO actually know. Agreed?

What we know should ALWAYS be the basis for what we do, rather than taking action based on what we THINK we know, particularly when it comes to legislation that has enormous consequences for decades to come.

Here’s why.

What we *think* we know is that there are certain ‘types’ of dog owners who have certain *types* of dogs that are the source of the UK’s dangerous dogs problem.

Hoodies? Status dogs? Weapon dogs? Street gangs? Drug dealers?

Well, that’s what some – ill informed, misguided types – *think* we know. Are they a problem? Absolutely. But we can categorise them a lot easier if we just accept this – a bad dog owner is a bad dog owner not because of who they are, what they look like or what they do for a living, but because of how they treat, train and use their dogs. Nothing else.

If a dog is trained to protect a drug dealer, he’s a guard dog. So if all dogs that have been encouraged to guard their owners/families are now to be categorised as ‘weapon’ dogs then we have a lot of weapon dogs in the UK.

Here’s an idea. If someone is a drug dealer, they’re a criminal. Get them off the streets. If someone is out terrorising members of the public or fellow criminals with a ‘weapon’ dog, here’s an idea – they’re ALREADY breaking the law. Get them off the streets.

So, what DO we know?

Take a look:

Cadey-Lee Deacon: Killed at her grandparent’s home by two dogs (Rottweilers) when the dog’s owner was not present. The death took place at the home where the dog’s lived. The family home.

Ellie Lawrenson: Killed at her grandmother’s home while under the supervision of her grandmother. The dog’s (Pit Bull) owner was not present at the time of the attack. The attack took place at the place where the dog lived. The family home.

Archie-Lee Hirst: Killed at his grandparent’s home while under the supervision of someone who was not the dog’s (Rottweiler) owner. The attack took place at the dog’s home, the family home, in the yard outside but the dog’s owner was not present at the time of the fatal attack.

Jaden Mack: Killed at his grandmother’s home whilst his grandmother (the dog’s owner) fell asleep, giving the dogs (Staffordshire Bull Terrier and Jack Russell Terrier) unrestricted access to the child who himself had been left on a table. The fatal attack took place at the dog’s (family) home whilst, in the same building, the dog’s owner was not physically present at the time of the attack (as she was sleeping).

John Paul Massey was killed by his uncle’s dog (Pit Bull) whilst in the care of his grandmother. The attack took place at the family home, the place where the dog lived. The dog’s owner was not present at the time of the attack.

18-month old Zumer Ahmed girl lost her life to a dog (American Bulldog) that belonged to her Uncle. The dog’s owner was not present at the time of the attack which took place in the family home where the dog lived.

On 26th of March 2013, 14-year old Jade Anderson lost her life. She was found deceased following an attack by what is thought to be four dogs. The dogs owner was not present at the time of the attack.

There are more cases like this, not just in the UK.

Breeds involved:

Rottweiler (x2 in Cadey Lee Deacon’s case, 1 in Archie Lee Hirst)

Pit Bull – Ellie Lawrenson / John Paul Massey

Staffordshire Bull Terrier and Jack Russell Terrier – Jaden Mack

Staffordshire Bull Terrier and Bull Mastiff – Jade Anderson

American Bulldog

So, 7 fatal dog attacks and 7 remarkably similar circumstances – attacks ALL happened at the location where the dog lived (dog’s family home) and in ALL cases the owner of the dog was NOT present at the time of the attack taking place.

These are the facts.

It’s not ‘status dogs’ or ‘hoodies’ or any one particular breed of dog that is responsible for killing people. It’s a lack of awareness about how dogs behave, think and react in particular circumstances. Family dogs in family homes are responsible for these 7 fatal dog attacks.

I’ll briefly touch on something from personal experience.

I have two dogs. One of those dogs gets very stressed (and I use the word advisedly) when either myself or my wife leaves the house, even for a short time. If we both leave, she settles down quickly and understands the routine involved, but if ONE of us leaves, she gets agitated, runs from room to room, stares out of the windows, paws at the doors and gets herself in to a generally unhappy state. No amount of consoling or attempts to distract her will do the trick until the family is all back together as one unit. Interestingly, my other dog does not do this. She is calm and balanced and doesn’t seem to care when people come and go, whether it’s me or my wife.

All dogs have their own individual personalities.

Forget breed traits for a moment (and please don’t think for a second that I am ignoring the importance of genetics and breeding in what makes a particular dog tick) and think about this: regardless of who the dog’s parents and grandparents happen to be, their individual personality is shaped by a hugely diverse spectrum of other, environmental factors.

My Labrador and my Rottweiler have been given very, very (almost identical) upbringings – yet one of my dogs gets incredibly agitated when either myself or my wife leaves the home and the other doesn’t care. One of my dogs is particularly fond of meeting children, one is indifferent to them. One of my dogs welcomes people who visit my home wearing a uniform with a wagging tail, the other wants to send them packing.

If you were to ask me whether I thought it’d be OK for me (or my wife) to go out and leave my dogs in the care of someone who wasn’t their owner whilst children would be present, I’d say no. Conclusively no. No. No. Not happening. No.

I’m NOT being wise after the event. I’m not being a smart Alec.

Do I ‘trust’ my dogs?

No! Of course I don’t. They’re dogs. I especially don’t ‘trust’ my dogs if I’m not even there. Placing trust in one’s dog to not eat a sausage during a training exercise is fine. Trusting a dog to behave EXACTLY how you think it’ll behave when you’re not there, isn’t. There’s no real upside to such a bet. The upside, if there is one, is; nothing bad happens. The potential downside…doesn’t bear thinking about.

Think about this; have you ever been to someone’s home where there’s a dog and the dog’s owner is not there? The person who feeds the dog, trains the dog, can CONTROL the dog is away and the dog’s been left with someone who, whilst they may know the dog, doesn’t really have the same connection with it as the owner? I have. And it can be quite an interesting experience. A dog that spends a few hours ‘acting up’ or being naughty/aggressive/unruly/unpleasant to be around suddenly turns in to soppy, obedient puppy the minute they’re reunited with their master.

I’ll relate a true story about the most dangerous dog I’ve ever encountered.

My (now) wife worked at a quarantine kennels for a while. I worked at kennels in the next county as a dog trainer. We were both experienced working in kennels and, as anyone who’s worked in kennels will know, you get to see ALL elements of canine behaviour. Dogs are placed in a different setting and their owners removed from the environment and it’s then that you get to see which dogs are happy to be without their owners but perhaps get upset at being in a strange, funny smelling, noisy environment.

You get to see which dogs just pine and pine for their missing friends. You get to see which dogs have been well trained and, despite not being happy, will still comply with commands even from a stranger. You get to see which dogs are perfectly friendly but have clearly never been taught a basic command in their lives. You get to see which dogs absolutely LOVE being in such a dog-filled environment and don’t seem to give two hoots about their owners not being there. You get to see other people’s dogs behaving in all manners of ways.

In all of this, I can safely say the type of BREED happens to be utterly, utterly irrelevant in relation to how the dog reacts to this environment. No two Dobermans act the same, no two German Shepherds react the same way and you’ll find you’re just as likely to get a bite from a Labrador or a Border Collie as you are from a Rottweiler or a Bull breed.

The most dangerous dog I EVER encountered was, as it happens, a Border Collie.

My (now) wife called me to let me know that a dog had come in the quarantine kennels but he was actually a boarder rather than a quarantined dog.

She told me the dog was launching itself at kennel staff from his kennel and that nobody had been able to get close to entering his kennel. (Bear in mind, these are experienced kennel staff, used to working with many different dogs in a quarantine environment).

I was asked whether I could come over and take a look at the dog and see if I could get in to his kennel and calm him down and get him to be a bit happier and a little less bitey.

A Border Collie? I thought. How bad can it be?

Jumping at the chance to act the hero, I drove over and went to see the dog.

Firstly, this was the largest Border Collie I’ve ever seen. He was (intact male) easily bigger than the Rottweiler I currently own. He was big and he was very, very (VERY) hostile.

Just walking up to his kennel, he flung himself to the front, made himself big and gave a display that could not be mistaken for anything other than extreme territorial aggression.

He was in a confined space and he wanted everyone to know that, if you entered it, he’d be willing to bite. Not just nip and retreat, bite, bite and bite some more. To say he meant business would be an understatement.

I spent a lot of time trying all manner of approaches. I tried the friendly approach. The food through the kennel approach. The pick a ball up and see if that interested him approach. The submissive approach. The assertive approach. The downright hostile approach. I tried everything I knew – and I have worked with a number of rehabilitation case dogs who were very aggressive – but absolutely nothing worked. This was a dog that would not be subdued, at all.

I admitted I couldn’t really help in terms of getting close with the dog and advised that, for the duration of his short stay at the kennels, the staff would be best advised to use the built in, sliding kennel partition so as to ensure the dog was never allowed to come in to contact with a person.

I’ve worked with more than 2,000 dogs and would like to think I have a reasonably fair ability at calling a dog’s personality. I’ll confidently go on record and say that I believe this dog had the capacity to kill. He REALLY meant business.

But here’s where the story reaches its point.

When that dog’s owner came to collect him, he turned in to the soppiest, most playful, friendly dog you could ever wish to meet. He just melted. His tail wagged, his ears set back, his hostile “I’ll kill you if you so much as come within an inch of my kennel” personality just dissolved. As fast as that. The SECOND his owner came for him, he changed.

Was he a dangerous dog?

Well, I think I already called that. He WAS the most dangerous dog I ever met. Ever. UNTIL his owner turned up, whereupon he instantly became a different dog. His personality changed like the flick of a switch.

Did he have the capacity to attack and seriously injure (possibly kill) someone? I have absolutely NO doubt that he did. But again, there’s a caveat – he became a snarling, hostile dog when his owner was not there and he found himself confronted by people he didn’t know. WHEN his owner was there, he’d lie on his back to have his belly tickled by all. What a nice dog, you’d think. But a more accurate way of putting it would be; what a nice, friendly dog (when his owner’s around), what a completely unhinged, dangerous creature (when his owner wasn’t about).

We’ve lost 6 children in under 5 years to dog attack in the UK. We must all agree, that’s 6 too many.

In ALL cases, circumstance was far, far more pertinent than the ‘type’ of owner or even the ‘type’ of dog.

What is missing is education and awareness. A distinct lack of understanding as to the risks associated with unattended dogs, children and an owner not present.

Whilst we have constant debates about so-called ‘status dogs’ and trying to define a breed as being dangerous based entirely on what that breed happens to look like or who its parents were, we can – tragically – expect more of the same. More deaths, more ignorance – and that’s ignorance condoned by the Government.

As a nation, we must surely accept that we would ALL be better off if dog owners were more dog aware.

Not *some* owners. Not certain *types* of owners or owners of certain *types* of dogs, all dog owners. If all dog owners knew more about dogs and what makes dogs dogs, we’d benefit. All of us. Dog owner or not.

What we have here is a people problem, not a dog problem. People who are not fully aware of how dogs brains work.

Dogs CAN grow up with children and be an exceptionally positive influence on youngsters, but a simple lack of awareness about what circumstances can lead to tragedies as a result of dogs doing what dogs are capable of doing is what’s costing youngsters their very existence on this planet and it is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Our current law doesn’t work.

The question is, will the Government be intelligent enough to recognise that fiddling around the edges of a bad law will not provide the answers we need? That focussing on ‘types’ of owners or dogs won’t prevent deaths? Or that the problem of ‘killer’ dogs is by no means confined to the mean streets of the UK, but – in fact – is most likely to manifest itself in a family home with a family dog, being cared for by grandma whilst the dog owner happens to be somewhere else.

This isn’t what we *think* might be true. This is what we KNOW to be true.

It’s time for the Government to come clean on the DEFRA consultation and acknowledge what the RSPCA have confirmed; that they’ve already made their mind up regarding key aspects of dangerous dogs legislation.

No breed bans.
No BSL.
No BS!

Education is the answer.

To eliminate stealing, whether it is overt (taking food from children) or covert (pilfering the thawing dinner steak), it is necessary to initiate a program of at least 4 weeks, during which no food is ever placed within the pup’s reach. It goes without saying that no tidbits should be given during this period.

Remedies that often fail include lacing some food with pepper or ammonia, saying “No-no” while tempting the pup, and physically punishing the animal when it approaches the family’s food. These fail because they require the presence of some agent other than the food, either the aversive-tasting element or the owner. When these elements are not present, the pup is rarely discouraged from stealing the food. It learns to discriminate between treated and untreated morsels, and to avoid food in the owner’s presence.

Begging food from the dinner table is one of the easiest things to teach a dog, and also one of the hardest habits to break. Your pet’s training to beg begins when he is a young, adorable puppy. It does not take too many repetitions before he learns that he gets fed from the table by begging. Then he sits by your chair while you are eating and stares at you. Occasionally he’ll get up on his hind legs and paw you, or he’ll nudge your arm and remind you that he is waiting. And he drools, that’s the worst part. He looks as though you never feed him.

If you don’t have this problem, prevention is quite simple. Don’t start giving your dog food from the table. If you must give your dog table scraps, give them in moderation and in his own dish after you have finished eating or, better yet, with his regular meal. Once you have a dog that begs, it becomes a self-perpetuating problem. Begging is rewarded with food.

Chances are, if you have this problem, you’ve tried to stop his begging, you’ve yelled at him when he begs, pushed him away, and even gotten really angry, but he just gets more persistent. So you’ve had to give him something to be able to eat in peace. What you have done is to reward his persistence. Each time you have tried holding out longer, but have ultimately given in, you have further trained him that no matter how far away the rainbow looks, there is a pot of gold at the end if he simply waits.

When you are tired of this behaviour and want to end it, when you get to the point that you can’t stand the drooling, the whining, the pawing and the sad eyes staring at you, then you have to steel yourself for the cure. Using the positive approach, give him the command “Down” and have him do a long “Down” by your chair during dinner. Be prepared for many interruptions initially, while you reinforce his “Down.” Each time he gets up, repeat the command and replace it if necessary so that he remains down during your dinner.

With a truly persistent begger, your first week of dinners may be quite a trial. Some dogs bark repeatedly and go through all manner of random actions to try to get you to feed them from the table. But once you have begun the training, stick with it. If you give in at any time, no matter how small the tidbit you sneak him, not only have you lost that battle, you may very well have lost the entire war. If you have made up your mind that you don’t want begging, then it’s just a matter of time before you have your dog resigned to the fact that the party is over, at least at the dinner table.

When your dog is steady enough to do the long “Down” away from your side during dinner, then establish his place where he stays while you eat. He should be put in his place every evening while you are eating, and praised when you release him at the end of the meal. It won’t be too long before you will be eating dinner in the company of a well-trained, well- behaved dog lying quietly in the corner.

This article is extracted from K9 Magazine’s ‘How To Stop Dog Begging’ – read in full here.