talking dog

the blog must be a few years old as he refers to 1.2 M dogs euthanized. Recent ASPCA figures show 670,000 - the link in the blog actually still works and gives the right figure (670,000). I would expect that coming from 2.6 m down to 670,000 would have balanced the figures wrt certain breeds. Thus, if a breed is not popular and doesn't get picked up, the overall population number of this breed would degrease (eradication via euthanasia). In the blog the author highlights the popularity of the breed as the reason why they are found in such high numbers in shelters - that's IMO contradictive, either they are popular and get picked from the shelters, or they are not popular and then the population numbers would have declined over the last 4 years. The blog states: Then again, if Labs rank number one in popularity and number three in shelter intake – and Pits rank number one in shelter intake and somewhere lower than number one in popularity – there has to be more at work here than mere demand. and than he argues that BSLs are the reason why they end up in shelters and get euthanized? It is all a little bit too inconclusive for me - it all might have some merits, but I can't recognize them. The most cited reasons for surrendering a dog in all sources I screened so far have been personal problems, no time and allergies. Couldn't find a source till now that listed breed specific reasons as the big issue.

@PANDI-GIRL: could you provide a link to this other thread about the same topic?

you sure know what a theory is? And believe me, in some circles it is well accepted to draw conclusions based on scientific evidence from multiple, other studies put in context. And when one day an institution decides to follow up a theory by sponsoring a scientific study, the theory might be proven correct or gets rebutted. For now, I apologize for not being in the position right now for delivering a scientific study that would verify or rebut my theories. I must have missed that this is mandatory here in this forum. Eta: Btw, if you think that none of my theories are valid for your dog's behaviour, and that there are no medical /digestive conditions whatsoever, and if the behaviour is unwanted, than there is a simple remedy that would solve it: training. (It actually works and is scientifically proven).

670,000 pit bull type dogs? from where they are coming from? No matter how bad the situation is in PR - regarding the statistics no dog's life is saved by rescuing it into the USA. Those crises are just used to address the emotional state of people to keep the business going. You don't safe life from fire by dragging someone into a burning house. Eta: and of course the ones that are euthanized are the ones no one wants - today it might be a higher fraction of pit bulls, tomorrow it is another type. People have a choice, here he mutt rescued from Europe, there the terrier rescued from PR. It won't change anything wrt that over 600,000 have to be euthanized in the end.

more stories to cheer for: ...bound for California: https://cwob.org/rescue.html ...and then the ones "saved" from California: http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/yvr-airport-rescue-dogs-november-2016 These dogs were hand-picked from high-kill shelters in the Los Angeles area, where overpopulation means facilities are overwhelmed by homeless canines, and — unfortunately – hundreds are euthanized each week. it's trafficking, it's business under the disguise of animal welfare.

http://www.thedogplace.org/SHELTERS/Shelter-Imports_Witouski-102.asp

I don't know whether my theory is correct - I never had the chance to conduct a comprehensive study about this, however, the 2 studies I cited (and many others) indicate that this can be a plausible explanation for some dogs eating poo. Obesity, respectively hunger in dogs can definitely change behaviour, can increase aggression and will let them eat things that they wouldn't without this underlying hunger feeling. Same for humans - our selection of food wrt quality and health is heavily impaired if we are feeling very hungry (I remember when my wife was pregnant). In addition, dogs don't have this yuk, ew, bah attitude when it comes to food - they don't see poo as yuk, it is just something else that might be eatable. And if it still smells somehow like the food they get anyway from their owner: why not trying it. Of course, my and your observations are just anecdotal, they aren't verifying anything. Wrt nutrient deficiencies: of course, it is not the same thing as increased appetite. What I meant is that when dogs are fed with kibble, beside that this might cause nutrient deficiency due to the indigestible lysine, some ingredients will come out the other end still being what they were before. The dogs olfactory sense is superior, it is meant to draw the dog to food sources. So if they smell something they have been fed with before they might test it. IMO it is a combination of hunger / food drive and conditioning. Another of my theories is linked to territorial behaviour. If two wolf packs are in competition for a territory, they might try to remove any markings of their competitors. Urine markings get sprayed over with own urine, and poo, well, they normally don't carry poo bags with them. So for dogs eating poo it might also be linked to a buried old instinct that had some value for their ancestors. Eta: just had another idea regarding other parameters that can give poo a higher value, independent from whether it comes from a raw or kibble fed dog: I always found that the use of ABs here in Australia is shocking high. ABs will certainly render the digestive systems of dogs less effective, thus leaving more nutrients in the poo making it more attractive for other hunger driven dogs.

https://www.parsemus.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Zwida-and-Kutzler-2016.pdf if you want to do more googleling for this topic: use also the term lutropin, that's another term for LH repectively Luteinizing hormone.

it might well be conditioned. When dogs are young, their digesting system is not so efficient, so their poo might have some valuable nutrients left and are attractive for them. And then they might grow into the habit. If you have an obsessive guzzler (which is more likely when the dog is de-sexed due to the LH level), then it is obviously more challenging to eradicate this habit. As long as the smell of the ingredients reminds them of their usual food they will go for it. They have actually less taste buts than humans (why would they have more, they don't chew like we do), so the decisive criteria is always the smell. All entire dogs fed raw that I know grew out of it once they got their real teeth.

Does it really matter? isn't the most important thing that we all, including myself and my friend in LA, cheering those stories and supporting those activities for the sake of dogs? In 2011, 2.7 million dogs (that's more than half of Australian's dog population) had to be euthanized in the USA - surely not enough takers. The number is now down to approx. 670,000 dogs euthanized per year. Still a huge number. The main reason: not enough takers. So what happens with dogs "rescued" from other countries without importing takers, or increasing the numbers of takers in the USA at the same time? If one of the dogs rescued from a foreign country will find a taker in the USA, that's just the death penalty for another dog in the shelters. If you "import" e.g. 1,000 dogs, you can add 1,000 dogs straight to the 670,000 that have to be euthanized as the numbers of takers won't increase automatically. That's simple math and doesn't make a good story, so let's call it rescue - sounds so much better, although it is just spending money for increasing the death toll.

A friend of mine in LA had to pay US$ 2,000 till now in fines because he refused to neuter his 2 dogs - LA County thought neutering is the silver bullet regarding overpopulation. He just loves those stories and is, naturally, a great supporter when it comes to flying dogs from other countries (the further the better) into the USA. Eta: I forgot to mention that the fines came also with 200 hours of community service (piled up over time). As a dog lover, naturally he spent all the time in the local shelters. He loved the dogs and working there. And the staff love those "volunteers". Once they found out why he was here, they let him clean out the kennels from the dogs they had to euthanize (not enough takers) - pretty boring job if you have to do it for nearly 200 hours.

yeah, good to see. Keep the refugees out but let the dogs in. Means more food, amenities and recourses for the dogs in the US, and consequently more food, amenities and recourses for refugees in Europe and the rest of the world. Good to see that America is really becoming great again and getting their priorities right.

@TtD: if you want to make your garden safer, you might want to consider also this: The worst case scenario is a snake with dogs in a plain garden where the snake can't hide and get cornered. All the snakes I found till now in our garden (eastern brown, red bellie, tiger) tried to get away to hide somewhere. You obviously want that they hide in a spot where they can't be reached by a dog, hence laying out and securing PVC pipes, e.g. along the fence, provides safety for the snake and for the dog. This hiding spots alone won't attract snakes as long as they are kept clean from food that otherwise would attract mice and rats (the prey the snakes are after). The pipes, e.g. 50 - 80 mm dia, 1.5 - 3 meters long) have also the advantage that they can be easily inspected and cleaned, and if you really find a snake one day in one of them, just close the ends with 2 pipe caps and call the snake buster. Edit to add disclaimer: I just checked - in NSW (and it might be similar in other states) it is actually illegal catching a snake without a licence! Even in your own yard! You have to call a licensed snake catcher - the last time I called one I had to wait 3 hours before he came to pick up the snake! Although illegal, I felt much safer regarding dogs, pets and kids, with the snake (red bellie) safely in the bucket and the lid closed.

@ alpha bet: I found it more likely to be an issue if you are an ambitious trainer and let's say you trained the dog 2 days in row, 3 sessions a day, and all the food are given via treats (I use raw, or hand made raw treats processed in a food dryer). So that's a little bit an unhealthy feeding pattern, bits and bits over a whole day leading to 2-3 small poos. So the third day I might feed all in one chunk, and might ad a bone / brisket in the evening. That solves the problem (if there would be one) normally for me.

https://clickertraining.com/node/988 It is good to see that more and more trainers / schools with a "purely positive" reputation are trying to get the jinn back into the bottle.