OUR BEST FRIENDS

whs-logo

The Sergei Foundation

shelterpet_logo

B-more Dog

aldflogo

Pinups for Pitbulls

philadoptables

TFPF_Logo

Mid Atlantic Pug Rescue

Our Pack, Inc.

Maine Coonhound Rescue

Saving Shelter Pets, Inc.

mabb

LD Logo Color

Tag: size

Colorado bill would prohibit discriminating against dogs because of their size

Pet-Property-Rules-SignApartment complexes have them. Homeowners associations have them. Motels have them, too — rules that allow dogs to be banned because of their size.

Now, a Colorado state representative wants to correct that long-running injustice, the Denver Post reports. He has introduced a bill that would stop HOA’s or landlords from blanket bans on dogs that exceed a specified weight.

It’s high time. Size restrictions, like breed restrictions, are ridiculous, imposed and enforced by people who just don’t know any better.

And, while not to diminish all the more serious examples of it in our history, they are a form of discrimination.

HB-1126, if passed, would stop HOA’s or landlords from banning large dogs.

“It doesn’t matter the breed or the size. In a lot of ways, it’s just: ‘is this a behaved dog?'” said Rep. Paul Rosenthal (D-Denver) in introducing the legislation. “I think this is a fairness issue and right now people with big dogs are being treated unequally.”

The bill, even if it passes, would not override bans against certain breeds that some cities, like Denver, have imposed, and it would not stop landlords from banning dogs altogether.

Rosenthal said he proposed the legislation after hearing from a constituent in Englewood whose two German shepherds kept her from being able to find a housing situation she could afford.

Christy Wooten said she searched for six months for properties that would allow her two dogs, but ran into size restrictions at every turn.

“No one would accept them, and they’re not mean dogs. They’re the sweetest things. I rescued them. It broke my heart,” she said.

As a result, she gave the dogs to her ex, who now resides out of state.

“I’m surprised. With how dog-friendly Colorado seems to be, it’s a disappointment,” said Wooten. “They think they’re aggressive and they’re not.”

The bill apparently would not apply to motels and hotels, probably the worst when it comes to discriminating against large dogs. Yes, they’ll promote how “dog friendly” they are to reel in customers, but the small print often will specify “no dogs over 25, 45, 50 pounds.”

That’s ruling out a lot of dogs (and customers) — all under the false belief that a large dog is likely to cause more damage. Worse yet, it’s the kind of mindless discrimination, based on misplaced fears, that some Americans have practiced throughout history, to everyone’s detriment.

Consider how this would look in the human realm: “No customers over 225 pounds.” “We apologize, but due to liability concerns, we cannot accept NFL or NBA players.” “Sorry, fatty, there’s no room for you.”

Colorado should pass this law, and so should every other state.

Dogs make a statement at Women’s March

protest1

I want to play it safe here, so let’s just say the size of the crowds taking part in the Women’s March on Washington, and its offshoots in other locations, numbered precisely somewhere between 5,000 and 10 million.

Period.

As for how many of those were “professional protesters,” there’s really no way of saying because — other than the exception above — they don’t commonly wear signs identifying themselves as such.

Dogs were represented at what’s being widely described as the largest protest in Washington’s history (some are being so bold to suggest more than 1 million people were in attendance, 2.6 million worldwide).

Here’s a look at some of them. You can find more at Bustle.com.

protest2

protest3

protest4

protest5

protest6

(Photo credits: From top to bottom, Mark Makela / Getty Images, Melanie Goldman / Twitter, Formation / Twitter, Katrin Pribyl / Twitter, Cooks Travels / Twitter, Avery Carnage / Twitter)

Sunny goes down — because he got too big

Sunny’s first offense was growing.

Being a Rottweiller-mastiff mix, he — as  you’d expect — quickly surpassed the 100-pound mark, well over the weight limit imposed at the Florida apartment complex where his owner, Denise Wilkinson, lived.

She started searching for a new home for him, but, unable to find one by the landlord’s deadline, dropped him off at Pinellas County Animal Services, with plans to pick him back up when she found one.

On its website, the county said dogs are kept seven days there. In person, they told her 48 hours. In reality, they euthanized him before a day had passed.

When Wilkinson, a day after dropping him off, went to pick up her dog, she found out Sunny had been euthanized — within hours of being dropped off.

“He wasn’t sick; he wasn’t old. He still had a long life ahead of him,” Wilkinson told Tampa Bay Online.

Senior Animal Control Officer John Hohenstern said Sunny was aggressive and caused concerns about the safety of shelter workers. “It was determined that because of the aggression in the dog it was not an adoption candidate,” he said. “We couldn’t do anything with the dog.”

Hohenstern  said that, despite the wording on the website, Wilkinson had initialed a paper stating she understood that the surrender was is unconditional: “Pinellas County Animal Services makes no promise, actual or implied, regarding holding time, treatment, adoption or disposition of this animal.” Hohenstern said the document initialed by Wilkinson superseded the website.

The county, Tampa Bay Online reports, has since changed the language on the website.

Hohenstern said with more animals being surrendered, possibly because of the economy, the animal control office encourages people to consider other options before dropping a dog there. “We try to … let them know this is kind of their last resort,” Hohenstern said. “They don’t want to do this.”

My dog is bigger than your’s

daneLast week we showed you Boomer, the Landseer Newfoundland whose owner hopes to have him proclaimed the world’s tallest dog by the Guinness Book of World Records.

Now, the owner of a Great Dane in Arizona has come forward and plans to give Boomer a run for his money.

Realtor Dave Nasser’s 4-year-old dog, George, stands 42 inches tall and weighs 245 pounds, the Associated Press reports.

Nasser and some friends plan to launch a public relations drive they hope will lead to tallest dog honors, talk shows and maybe even a movie deal.

A Guinness World Records spokesman says since the death last August of Gibson, a 42.2-inch-tall Great Dane, there is no confirmed world’s tallest dog.

After reading of a North Dakota woman’s effort to get her Newf proclaimed World’s Tallest Dog, Nasser and friends decided to launch their own effort as well.

Nasser is working through an application, which requires vital stats recorded by a vet, verification of the dog’s statistics by other witnesses, a video and a press conference.  He and his friends are also planning a Facebook fan page for George.

Retailers growing more likely to allow dogs

The Los Angeles Times reports that a “surprising number” of stores have quietly opened their doors to dogs — from Nordstrom and Saks Fifth Avenue to Barneys New York.

The rules about shopping with dogs vary from store to door, mall to mall, and sometimes can even differ between a store and the mall that is in, the article points out. While Sears, Target and Staples all flatly deny entrance to dogs that aren’t providing service to the handicapped, others — rightly realizing they don’t have much room to be picky in today’s economy — are letting them in.

The Grove, a Mid-City outdoor mall in L.A., is open to all, the article said.

“Great Dane or poodle. Pure-bred or mutt. It doesn’t matter at the Grove, where any pup that is ‘Well-behaved,’ ‘on a leash’ and  ‘not wanting to bite people’ is invited, said spokeswoman Jennifer Gordon. And if that pup happens to drop a “present” under the mall’s Christmas tree … just clean it up, and all will be forgiven.”

A lot of other stores and shopping centers — in what we at ohmidog! consider blatant discrimination — allow small dogs only, some basing the cutoff point on whether the dog can fit, ala Paris Hilton’s Chihuahua, in a purse.

The news that more stores may be permitting dogs is heartening; reports that many still allow small dogs while banning big dogs are disturbing. Were I ever to encounter a store that allowed small dogs, but not mine, I’d be out the door, never to return, and making all my purchases at a place where dogs are always allowed — online.

Of manly presidents and girly dogs

Barack Obama’s use of the term “girly dog” has raised the hackles (and who knows what other body parts) of a Huffington Post blogger who says it was disparaging — a threat both to his manhood and that of his dog, Manuel.

“…Clearly Mr. Obama meant “girly” in the pejorative sense, not as an adjective denoting “nice for girls,” but rather to suggest a dog that lives in conflict with its own manly nature or the manly nature of dogs in general,” wrote blogger Billy Kimball.

I can’t get too bent out of shape about the president-elect’s remark — “girly” somehow sounds less pejorative coming from Obama’s mouth than, say, an Arnold Schwarzenegger. But, in hindsight, perhaps a more politically correct term would have been “little yappy pipsqueak dog.”

Kimball’s not willing to cut the president-elect any slack in his piece, written in response to an exchange between Obama and his wife, Michelle, during an interview with Barbara Walters. When Walters suggested the First Family get a Havanese, the small breed of dog she has (and Kimball has), Obama said, “It sounds kinda like a girly dog…We’re going to have a big rambunctious dog.”

“By saying that he wanted a ‘big, rambunctious dog,’ Obama was trying to don the mantle of the ‘guy’s guy.’ “ Kimball wrote. “Big rambunctious dogs, through their genetic link to working and hunting breeds, establish one’s bona fides with the masses. Those toy breeds who don’t have to work for living probably belong to people who don’t either – or so the conventional wisdom would have it.”

Kimball gives Obama points for considering a shelter dog, but says, “making distinctions about dogs based on breed is nothing less than a form of canine racism and exactly the sort of thing many of us had hoped we were leaving behind on Nov. 3. “

The truth is many small breeds have established themselves as some of the fiercest hunters. Kimball also misses the mark when he says Obama promised his children a dog if he won the election. Actually, he promised them one once it was over, win or lose. 

Most ludicrous, though, is Kimball’s argument that it would be irresponsible to own a large breed of dog at the White House.

“Obama is acting irresponsibly by getting a dog much larger than is practical for people in his zip code who don’t have a Rose Garden and South Lawn for it to run around on,” Kimball says.

For one thing, Obama will have a Rose Garden and a South Lawn. For another, saying big dogs shouldn’t live in the city is precisely the kind of “canine racism” Kimball seems to be accusing Obama of.

A dog’s size doesn’t define it, and it shouldn’t define us — however much some people may try to read into things.

Your little dog doesn’t mean you’re “girly,” any more than my big dog means I’m compensating for some shortcoming with my bona fides.