ohmidog!

Relationships between dogs and their owners generally fall into three distinct categories, according to a university researcher.

As a result, says David Blouin, a cultural sociologist at Indiana University South Bend, some dogs live pampered lives while others are still expected to work for a living, all depending usually on their owner’s lot in life.

Blouin, according to Science Daily, says the attitudes of dog owners generally fall into one of three following categories:

• Humanists, who highly value their dogs and consider them close companions, treat their pets almost like pseudo people, or surrogate children.
• Protectionists, often vegetarians, greatly value animals in general, not just as pets.
• Dominionists, who see animals as less important than people, often use their dogs for hunting, guarding or pest control and require them to live outdoors.

“I found it interesting that there are different ways to relate to and think about animals and that people are able to switch and latch onto a different way of thinking about and treating animals when other things happen in their lives, like having children,” said Blouin, an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology.

Blouin conducted 28 in-depth interviews with dog owners from a Midwestern county.  Blouin said the distinct orientations toward animals are a result of personal experiences, demographic characteristics and family structure. Rural dog owners were more likely to leave their pets outside, for example. Empty-nesters seemed to be the most attached to their pets.

“People don’t make this stuff up themselves,” Blouin said. “They learn how animals should be treated. There are different ideas out there and these ideas exist in little packages, which are promoted by different groups, like the Humane Society or kennel clubs.”

 
Baltimore Animal Rescue & Care Shelter is crediting quick thinking by two young men with helping save the lives of eight puppies found sealed in a plastic container.

“Late yesterday afternoon a litter of eight retriever mix pups were found in the Highland area of Baltimore by two young men. The young men heard a noise from the container and opened it to find eight almost lifeless pups. Their quick actions in trying to cool the pups down with cool water and air conditioning helped save the pups,” said Jennifer Mead-Brause, executive director of BARCS.

The dogs had temperatures of over 107 degrees when they first arrived at BARCS. The pups were then sent to Everhart animal Hospital for further observation.

All the pups appeared to be recovering, without permanent damage – even though temperatures reached nearly 100 degrees.

Plans were to turn the puppies over to Ruff Life Rescue for their continued care and eventual adoption.

Three animal welfare groups are accusing the trustees of Leona Helmsley’s multibillion-dollar estate of ignoring her wishes that the bulk of her fortune should go to dogs.

In a court petition filed yesterday, the animal advocates said the trustees have shown “disdain” for Helmsley’s wishes by donating only $100,000 of $137 million doled out so far to dog welfare.

The petition was filed in Manhattan Surrogate’s Court on behalf of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) and Maddie’s Fund, according to an Associated Press report.

The groups want the court to throw out a judge’s February decision that gave the trustees for the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust sole authority to determine which charities would benefit from her estate.

Wayne Pacelle, chief executive officer of the Humane Society, said dog welfare was “the only charitable interest specifically designated in the trust instrument. … But what we’ve seen is an utter disdain for the cause of animal welfare and a complete writing off of the animal welfare concern.”

In April, the  trustees gave away $136 million to hospitals, foundations and the homeless. Just $100,000 went to an animal-welfare group, the ASPCA. Another $900,000 went to groups that train guide dogs for the blind.

The trust, in a statement posted on its Web site, said Helmsley, who died in 2007, never wanted her fortune just to go to dogs: “Did Leona Helmsley intend for this charitable trust to focus on the care and help of dogs, rather than people? Absolutely not,” the statement said.

Helmsley, whose fortune was estimated at $5 billion to $8 billion after her death at age 87, also named her dog, Trouble, as a beneficiary, leaving a $12 million trust fund for the white Maltese. A judge later reduced Trouble’s take to $2 million.

 
Are dogs and their humans so entwined that they tend to take after one another in appearance?

The question — one drawing increasing scrutiny from scientists — was asked, but not really answered, in a piece in the the Health section of yesterday’s New York Times.

In 2004, researchers in San Diego found that people were able to correctly match pictures of dog owners with their pets more often than not, but only when the dogs were purebreds. Similarities in facial expressions played a big role in the choices.

 The same year, a psychologist at the University of South Carolina challenged the findings in a separate study, but the San Diego researchers countered with a reanalysis that confirmed their initial findings.

Earlier this year, a scientist in England conducted a study in which 70 subjects were asked to match pictures of 41 dog owners to one of several breeds. They were able to match successfully more than half the time.

As with the San Diego study, the subjects later said they matched mostly by looking for personality traits that they believed the dogs and their owners shared.

What’s not known is whether that’s because dog and owner tend to take on a similar appearance (my personal theory), or because people look for certain traits or predispositions that might match their own when choosing a dog.

(Photo: courtesy of afunnystuff.com)

An 80-pound pot-bellied pig is helping bring an 8-year-old with autism out of his shell in Fayetteville, North Carolina — or at least it was until a city inspector spotted it.

The special connection between boy and pig was interrupted last month when city inspectors — though no one had complained about the pig — left the family a notice that they were violating a city code barring hogs from the corporate limits.

As a result, the family had to return the pig, named Loopey, to where they bought it, at a ranch a half-hour away, according to the Fayetteville Observer.

Now Lisa Pia is fighting to get the law changed on behalf of her son, Anthony.

“Soon as he saw her, it was love at first sight,” Lisa Pia told WRAL News, recalling Anthony’s first meeting with the female pig they named Loopey. Anthony doted on Loopey and, as the pig grew, they comforted each other through thunderstorms and played in the family’s backyard. At night, the pig slept in Anthony’s room. Each day, Anthony raced home from school to be with his pet pig.

“We were just excited for him that finally, he’s coming out and he’s not in his shell anymore, and he’s doing things, and playing and interacting,” Pia said.

Then came an unexpected letter from city inspectors, informing the Pias of the Fayetteville ordinance that makes it “unlawful to keep hogs within the corporate limits.” A city inspector had spied Loopey in the Pias’ backyard while in the neighborhood on an unrelated matter. The Pias returned Loopey to the ranch where they had bought her. But they hope to get permission so he can return.

The Pias — wearing T-shirts emblazoned with a picture of Loopey and Anthony — appealed to the Fayetteville City Council to review the ban on swine, or make an exception for Loopey as a therapy animal for Anthony.

The city council members voted 6-2  to authorize staff members to research what would be entailed in revising the ordinance. The issue is likely to be discussed again at the city council’s next work session on September 8.

An online petition for “Friends for Loopey” has gathered nearly 5,000 signatures.

Americans are increasingly making provisions for their pets in their will, placing their pet’s medical needs over their own, and planning vacations around their pet — all signs that pets, more than ever, are considered part of the family, according to the American Pet Products Association (APPA).

The APPA has released its 2009-2010 National Pet Owners Survey, and it shows pet ownership at its highest level ever, with 71.4 million households in the U.S. owning at least one pet — 62 percent of all households.

Furthermore, during the past decade the current number of pet-owning households increased by 12 percent, up from 61.2 million pet-owning households in 1998.

According to the survey, there are 77.5 million dogs, 93.6 million cats, 171.7 million freshwater fish, 11.2 million saltwater fish, 15 million birds, 15.9 million small animals, 13.63 million reptiles and 13.3 million horses owned in the U.S.

“The findings in the survey clearly demonstrate the importance of the role our pets are playing in our every day lives. Two decades of trended data show that now more than ever people consider pets an important part of the family and are still providing for their faithful companions even in these trying times,” said Bob Vetere, president of APPA.

“As pet ownership continues to rise, so has the demand for quality products and services. This has led to an amazing evolution of innovative products and services that truly enhance the experience of owning a pet,” he added.

Since the inception of the APPA National Pet Owners Survey in 1988, dogs and cats have accounted for more than two-thirds of all households that own a pet. The actual number of pet owning households is significantly higher than it was twenty years ago, as is the overall number of U.S. households.

The survey showed 17 percent of dog owners have an electronic tracking device implanted in their dog, with the Western region having significantly more tracking devices than dogs in other regions.

The survey found dog visits to the veterinarian are up, averaging 2.8 visits a year. Thirteen percent of dogs and 21 percent of cats are considered obese or overweight by their veterinarian. When asked to indicate their priority if there was a choice between a large medical expense for themselves or their pet, 15 percent of dog owners would attend to their dog’s need before their own.

Seven percent  of dog, cat, bird and horse owners indicated they had made financial provisions for their pet in their will. One-third of dog, cat and bird owners and almost half of equine owners have named a caretaker or guardian for their pet in their will.

More than 20 percent of vacationing dog owners take their pet with them in the car when they travel. These owners take their dog on an average of five car trips per year. Three percent of dog owners take their dog to work at least more than once a month.

Read more »

The first annual Ride for the Animals, benefiting the Maryland SPCA, will be Sunday, August 30.

The ride begins at noon at The Harley-Davidson/Buell Store, 8845 Pulaski Highway, in Baltimore. It ends at Padonia Station, 63 E. Padonia Road, in Timonium.

Registration opens at 10:00 a.m. and is $20 per person.

Entertainment at Padonia Station, starting at 2 p.m.,  will feature a raffle, silent auction, food and beverages for purchase and The Fabulous Skunkpuppie Band.

You don’t have to have a motorcycle to join the party at Padonia Station. However, no pets are permitted.

Email brandy@mdspca.org for more information.

If you’re one of those hard-hearted types that don’t think dogs bring humans together, consider the case of Sputnik, who bolted while being loaded into his owner’s car Thursday night, was struck by a passing car and then ran off.

More than 50 humans came together in Baltimore’s Mount Vernon neighborhood to assist in the search.

As you can see, Sputnik, a yellow Lab was found — located Friday in a parking area and reunited with his owner Kat Rafferty.

Sputnik was bruised and sore, but otherwise fine, and his owner — as seen in this photo from Facebook, where much of the search was documented — was clearly happy to have him back.

The City of Austin Parks Department plans to close a popular dog park for six to eight months because of high E. coli bacteria levels in the creek.

Officials blame the bacteria — found during regular water sampling since 2007 — on dog waste at the Bull Creek District Park, one of 12 off-leash parks in Austin.

In March 2008, the city put up signs at the park about the environmental dangers of dog waste, but problems persisted, parks Director Sara Hensley said. The department plans to require leashes at the park beginning Sept. 8. In October, plans call for the dog area to be closed entirely to plant more vegetation to helps keep pollutants from draining into the creek. City officials haven’t determined yet whether leashes would be required when the park reopens in the spring.

Heavy use of the park has worn down existing vegetation there, city officials say, and the drought has led to low, slow-moving waters in the creek where bacteria can thrive, the Austin American-Statesman reported.

Austin’s leash ordinance requires dogs to be on a leash no longer than six feet on public land. The maximum fine for violating that rule is $500.

The parks department is trying to find other spaces that could be turned into off-leash parks, Hensley said.

Debra Bailey, a task force member who formed a volunteer group last year to regularly clean up dog waste at the park, said sewage spills and other trash left in the creek could also be to blame for high bacteria levels. The city should look at other options before closing the dog park or requiring leashes, such as better enforcement and signs related to picking up dog waste, she said.

“They are blaming the dogs and not addressing other issues,” she said.

A British physician, writing in the Wall Street Journal, says, all in all, dogs may be privy to a better health care system than humans — at least in his part of the world.

“In the last few years, I have had the opportunity to compare the human and veterinary health services of Great Britain, and on the whole it is better to be a dog,”  Theodore Dalrymple, a pen name for British physician Anthony Daniels.

“As a British dog, you get to choose (through an intermediary, I admit) your veterinarian. If you don’t like him, you can pick up your leash and go elsewhere, that very day if necessary. Any vet will see you straight away, there is no delay in such investigations as you may need, and treatment is immediate. There are no waiting lists for dogs, no operations postponed because something more important has come up, no appalling stories of dogs being made to wait for years because other dogs — or hamsters — come first.

“The conditions in which you receive your treatment are much more pleasant than British humans have to endure. For one thing, there is no bureaucracy to be negotiated with the skill of a white-water canoeist; above all, the atmosphere is different … In the waiting rooms, a perfect calm reigns; the patients’ relatives are not on the verge of hysteria, and do not suspect that the system is cheating their loved one, for economic reasons, of the treatment which he needs. The relatives are united by their concern for the welfare of each other’s loved one. They are not terrified that someone is getting more out of the system than they.”

The only drawback to the superior care British dogs receive is they, or their owners, generally have to pay for it.

Still, even for those dogs, and owners, without means, there is the People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals, or PDSA, which serves as a safety net, providing free veterinary services for the poor.

The PDSA, he says, more closely resembles the National Health Service for British humans. “There is no denying that the PDSA is not as pleasant as private veterinary services; but even the most ferocious opponents of the National Health Service have not alleged that it fails to be better than nothing.”

The rest of other comparisons and conclusions can be found here.