Research Survey About Dog Caretakership In Victoria

[ClarePhD]

Hello Members of Dogz Online!

I would like to invite members located in Victoria to participate in a research survey concerning human/dog relations in Urban Victoria.

Do have one or more companion dogs? Do you love telling people all about your dog? Do you live in Metropolitan Melbourne and are over the age of 18? Yes, yes and yes! Then this is the survey for you!

Your participation in this survey will contribute to a study being undertaken within La Trobe University’s Social Sciences Department about dog caretakership in urban Victoria. This survey features questions about the type of dog or dogs you own, where you acquired them and how they fit in with your lifestyle. The survey should take around fifteen to twenty minutes to complete and will contribute to a broader study surrounding issues regarding companion dog breeding, adoption and welfare in the state.

Follow the link below and please share with all of your dog loving friends!

https://qtrial2016q2.az1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_3BNimsNgyZVKNnv

[Sheridan]

Caretakership? #srsly

Edited July 18, 2016 by Sheridan

[asal]

Participant Information Statement for Online Survey

"Research Title: AN INVESTOGATION INTO DOG CARETAKERSHIP IN URBAN VICTORIA

My name is Clare Fisher, I am a postgraduate research student from La Trobe University’s College of Arts, Social Sciences and Commerce. I am conducting my research under the supervision of Dr. Raymond Madden and Dr. Tarryn Phillips. You are being invited to participate in this study titled An Investigation into Dog Caretakership in Urban Victoria. I am interested in finding out about your experiences choosing and living with your dog or dogs.

Your participation in this study will require the completion of the following online survey. This should take no more than twenty minutes of your time. Your participation will be anonymous and you will not be contacted again in the future. You will not be paid for this study. The survey involves minimal risk to you. The benefits, however, may increase our understanding of why people choose certain dog breeds and how compatible they are with our own lifestyles.

You do not have to participate in this survey if you do not want to. You do not have to answer any question that you do not want to answer for any reason. We will be happy to answer any questions you have about this study. If you have any further questions about this project or if you have a research-related problem you may contact me, Clare Fisher via email [email protected] or my supervisors Raymond Madden ([email protected]) and Tarryn Phillips ([email protected]).

If you have any complaints or concerns about your participation in the study that the researcher has not been able to answer to your satisfaction, you may contact the Senior Human Ethics Officer, Ethics and Integrity, Research Office, La Trobe University, Victoria, 3086 (P: 03 9479 1443, E: [email protected]) . Please quote the application reference number: E16-055

The completion of this survey implies your consent to participate. This document is able to be downloaded and printed if you would like to keep a copy for your records. "

Well, I'll be darned we don't own a dog anymore, we "caretake" it. well until someone decides you arent a suitable carer and remove it forthwith eh? Does explain why the lady in england lost all her pets when she became ill with not a hope of getting any back once out of hospital. she had forfeited her 'Caretaker" status, the cats were lucky, although shooting her three sheep rather than let the neighbour "caretake" them for the 2 weeks she was in hospital was a bit grim for the sheep. Any distress she suffered was of no account since a good caretaker does not become emotionally attached to the client.

Edited July 18, 2016 by asal

[Rebanne]

Caretakership? #srsly

Exactly I own my dogs

[mackiemad]

I've done it.

I couldn't access the PIS (though I read it on here)

I am surprised that you have one of the top anthrozoologists in the world at your uni and you don't even have her as a secondary supervisor. Her name is Pauleen Bennett and she has done of this sort of study before tbh - which I think informed her switching from breeding Aussies to breeding lagotti.

[Lhok]

Hard to take a PHD survey seriously when you use a made up word in the title such as caretakership.

--Lhok

[persephone]

Caretakership? #srsly

'zackly ....

[asal]

Hard to take a PHD survey seriously when you use a made up word in the title such as caretakership.

--Lhok

its not made up, its a peta word

[persephone]

Hard to take a PHD survey seriously when you use a made up word in the title such as caretakership.

--Lhok

its not made up, its a peta word

that's worse :p

[mita]

There's a run-down of the legal implications in the push to move from 'pet owner' with property rights ... to 'guardian' that the author points out means just a 'caretaker'.

It's written by a lawyer for the Animal Health Institute in the US & is published on the American Veterinary Medicine Association's website. A list of consequences that could then follow for both pet owners & veterinarians is set out.

https://www.avma.org/Advocacy/StateAndLocal/Pages/owner-guardian-ahi.aspx

Edited July 18, 2016 by mita

[Jed]

Well you all knew that "Companion Animal" instead of "Pet" would like to words like "caretakers">

Yet no one said anything in opposition.

"I don't use the word "pet." I think it's speciesist language. I prefer "companion animal." For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship ­ enjoyment at a distance." Ingrid Newkirk, PETA vice-president, quoted in The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223. - See more at: http://www.naiaonline.org/articles/article/quotes-from-the-leaders-of-the-animal-rights-movement#Own

[Jed]

I've done it.

I couldn't access the PIS (though I read it on here)

I am surprised that you have one of the top anthrozoologists in the world at your uni and you don't even have her as a secondary supervisor. Her name is Pauleen Bennett and she has done of this sort of study before tbh - which I think informed her switching from breeding Aussies to breeding lagotti.

Ah Pauline Bennett. Was she not the one who was in favour of anti-tail docking? Was she not the one who pushed that point to the government and helped anti-docking legislatation?

Is she not the one in favour of "caretakers" and all things PETA for companion animals? Has she not lectured on seminars on this very thing?

I think so.

http://www.latrobe.edu.au/she/staff/profile?uname=p2bennett

Edited July 18, 2016 by Jed

[Scottsmum]

Caretakership? #srsly

Exactly I own my dogs

Mine owns me ;)

[dog_fan]

I own my dog it is my property.

I am not its caretaker.

Why are you using this word?

[Sheridan]

And what is the point of the research?

[Two Best Dogs!]

What an overreactive dogpile Negative reinforcement isn't the only way to go about educating people, but if you prefer what comes out of ganging up and driving people off versus attempts at conversation and education

I've completed your survey Clare, it was pretty straightforward but I had to use the other field a couple of times. Good luck with your phd and the next few years of work. I would suggest facebook groups to get a wider representation of victorian dog owners, if you haven't already.

[dog_fan]

I am so over the language used to describe the relationship humans have with dogs. I find the use of the word caretaker offensive an it insinuates the relationship is temporary and can be ended by another person who isnt me

[_PL_]

to no-one in particular; Maybe try to explain why Companion Animal and Caretakership is objectionable to you. It may actually help the student instead of making her feel like an idiot for asking.

I've never heard of the word 'Caretakership' it seems totally made up and not really what animals need in terms of proper care. Not trying to be mean but they aren't equals and we shouldn't rob them of their identity as animals by making them helpless little humans.

'Companion Animal' is well and truly here as a definition, even in legislation eg The NSW Companion Animal Act 1998. I use the term as a reference i.e all pets, but not in relation to my own pets sitting next to me if that makes sense.

"companion animal" means each of the following:

(a) a dog,

(b) a cat,

© any other animal that is prescribed by the regulations as a

companion animal

.

Note :

The fact that an animal is not strictly a "companion" does not prevent it being a

companion animal

for the purposes of this Act. All dogs are treated as

companion animals

, even

working dogs

on rural properties, guard dogs,

police dogs

and

corrective services dogs

.

[Rebanne]

well the NSW greyhound board has just taken caretakership on every racing greyhound in NSW. That's why I hate the term. You can't even retire or rehome your own dog.

On 15 July 2016, the NSW Government introduced the Greyhound Racing Regulation 2016 which requires that owners of greyhounds registered in NSW to notify or seek consent from Greyhound Racing NSW (GRNSW) before transferring the ownership of, retiring, exporting or destroying a greyhound.

The Regulation has been prepared following the NSW Government’s decision to close down the greyhound racing industry from 1 July 2017 and will assist in the tracking and welfare of greyhounds during the wind down process.

The new Regulation requires the owner of a registered greyhound to notify GRNSW, in writing, before transferring the greyhound:

• to another registered owner, or

• to an RSPCA approved greyhound adoption program.

Participants can notify GRNSW by completing the Notification of Transfer Form and sending it to GRNSW at [email protected] or post it to PO Box 170, Concord West NSW 2138.

In addition, the Regulation prohibits a registered greyhound owner, except with the written consent of GRNSW, from:

• retiring a greyhound from racing;

• exporting a greyhound overseas;

• transferring a greyhound to a person who is not a registered owner, or

• destroying a greyhound.

To request consent from GRNSW, please complete the Consent Form and send it to GRNSW at [email protected] or post it to PO Box 170, Concord West NSW 2138.

Persons found to have breached the Regulation are liable to a maximum fine of up to $550. GRNSW may also take further action against anyone found to have breached the Regulation.

Participants must not retire a greyhound from racing, export a greyhound, transfer a greyhound to a person who is not a registered owner, or destroy a greyhound unless they have received written consent from GRNSW.

In the case of destruction of a greyhound, GRNSW consent is not required if the greyhound is destroyed by a veterinary practitioner in an emergency in order to relieve it of suffering or distress due to injury or illness.

[_PL_]

I had no idea that was even possible!! They are referring to people as 'registered greyhound owners' but it's in name only which is really really unsettling. ????