Another Insight into PETA People and Canine Assistance Dogs

[Mom...@aol.com]

The blog this was on, is by a PETA member.

Sandy

 

 

http://blog.helpinganimals.com/2008/01/exploiting_mans_best_friend.php

 

Exploiting 'Man's Best Friend'

Last week, I ran across two articles on the same day about canine assistance programs (for people) that use dogs who were actually bred for that purpose. One article was about Guiding Eyes for the Blind, and the other one was about a police-dog training academy in the U.K. It just boggles my mind that when millions of perfectly healthy, young, and trainable dogs are being put down every year in the U.S. (and thousands in the U.K.) for lack of good homes, these outfits think it's just fine to churn out more puppies. Another canine assistance program, Dogs for the Deaf, achieves its goals exclusively with dogs rescued from animal shelters, so there's no excuse for such irresponsibility.

There are other unsavory aspects to these assistance-dog programs. According to the article mentioned above about Guiding Eyes for the Blind, the organization imposes strict rules for the puppy-raisers, such as "insisting that the dog always sleep in a kennel; not allowing [the dog] to jump up on people and furniture, and not letting the dog eat scraps from the family table. While many pet owners relish cuddling with their animals on their couches or beds, that's off limits for guide dogs in training, because teaching boundaries is so important." Depriving puppies of some of their greatest pleasures in life, such as sleeping with their guardian on the bed or snuggling on the couch, just so that they will be ready to work 24/7 at a job serving humans strikes me as very nearly the definition of exploitation.

Which brings up another ethical issue: Is it right to force a dog to bounce from breeding facility to puppy-raiser's home to training school to a home with a blind person and then to yet another home (if the dog is lucky) after becoming old or infirm? And it's my understanding that the "retired" dogs are never given the opportunity to stay in the same home with a brand-new, young guide dog¯no, that would be too confusing. Even if these organizations can find new homes for all the "retired" working dogs (and I wonder), it's still a huge adjustment for an older dog to change homes. No one seems to be concerned about this in the slightest. (My oldest dog, Rowdy, was depressed for the better part of a year after his family gave him away to me at age 7.) So the system is preprogrammed to end miserably for a dog who has been on call 24/7 for an entire lifetime. That's exploitation, in my book.

I will never forget a complaint that we received at PETA a long time ago about an assistance dog for a child who was in a wheelchair and had mental and physical developmental problems. The complainant wrote that the child persisted in picking at the skin on the dog's back (which was readily accessible with the dog standing beside the wheelchair) to the point of creating lesions and scabs, which the child would then pick off. That dog was forced to stay by that child's side while the child (through no fault of his own, of course) continued to torment the dog all day long with this neurotic behavior. No one would take action to help the dog¯that's how ingrained the idea is that human needs trump animal needs. I don't know how that case ended, but it still makes me flinch just to think about it.

Most dogs like having a job. But we humans only work an average of eight hours a day¯why should dogs have to be on call 24/7 for years on end without a vacation? Why doesn't anyone challenge the ethics of this notion? Why can't these assistance dogs be replaced with humans who are paid for their services (by the government or by nonprofit organizations or by insurance companies)? We have nannies and we have in-home nursing care¯why don't we have a service industry dedicated to helping blind, deaf, and otherwise disabled people get along? Surely, a human assistant would be infinitely more helpful than a dog simply because of the better communication and understanding. Oh, that's right¯a human assistant would have to be paid, whereas we can force a dog to do it for kibble, a kennel, and vet care. Yeah, anybody would be crazy to give up a deal like that.

---

A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps!

[K9 Mama]

Oh yes that was the blog that the other blogger was talking about as well.  The problem with  PETA, they never did any real research.  
 
Here's my take on their myths and misleading facts. Or should I say add the real facts so people know about guide dog / service dog training and what is really involved. Because this is long I will cut and paste that post with my comments below each. grins. 

 
 <It just boggles my mind that when millions of perfectly healthy, young, and trainable dogs are being put down every year in the U.S. (and thousands in the U.K.) for lack of good homes, these outfits think it's just fine to churn out more puppies. >
 

First off service dogs are not pets, therefore what may be considered healthy and trainable is not actually the case when it comes to service dogs especially the intensity of training guides. Although shelter dogs are able to be a service dog (ie guide), it's few and far in between. It takes me going over approx. 25 dogs to actually find one or even two shelter dogs that has the right temperament, socialized skills, and health. They have to pass three / four evaluations in order to even be considered as a service dog (ie guide). Compatibility is also in the evaluation. 

 
Breeding programmes of the schools especially the big business ones are in deed responsible breeders and are not puppy mills. I will grant that there may be those fly by night organizations that are really puppy mills and send out half trained dogs but this is not what this PETA individual is talking about. This person is condemning all service dog teams, trainers, and schools as they have done this sort of thing in the pass. They add police and rescue dogs as well to this mix. I would believe the reason for those two is because of their terroristic methods. Without k9 corp Peta wouldn't be caught with their pants down sort of speak.

 

< Another canine assistance program, Dogs for the Deaf, achieves its goals exclusively with dogs rescued from animal shelters, so there's no excuse for such irresponsibility.>
 

This is true that some service dog schools uses shelters only while some use breeding and some use all three avenues which the third would be donated dogs from individuals. I have used all three myself. However when you take into consideration about what type of training guides must do vs what training a hearing dog does, one could understand having responsible school breeders as there is a big difference in task training. A a hearing dog  or most other service dogs, doesn't have to keep their human partners safe from traffic in the same way as a guide must use their intelligent for safety.  

 

< According to the article mentioned above about Guiding Eyes for the Blind, the organization imposes strict rules for the puppy-raisers, such as "insisting that the dog always sleep in a kennel; not allowing [the dog] to jump up on people and furniture, and not letting the dog eat scraps from the family table. >

 

Yes many schools and trainers will have a strict criteria for their raisers when one is dealing with the teachings of good behaviours when out in public places. As many people should know that it's much better and less stressful to teach good, wanted behaviours while enhancing their natural abilities then it is to untrained a unwanted behaviour. (ie on furniture or table scraps).  Now add the many months that a raiser has with these pups (12 months at least) if these raisers would allow such unwanted behaviours how many more months if any could a trainer have to have to untrained these behaviours that could cost a handler issues out in public. (eg jumping up on furniture instead of laying down out of the way. Begging beside another individual for food at a restaurant). 

 

Besides in dog behaviour dogs don't actually need to be on furniture it's the humans preference if we so desire. As for table scraps being that PETA's motto is no meat, all veggies this would not be a healthy nutritional diet for dogs anyways.

<While many pet owners relish cuddling with their animals on their couches or beds, that's off limits for guide dogs in training, because teaching boundaries is so important." >

First off puppy raisers cuddle with their pups more then pet owners to have that special bond as these pups also are allowed to go out into the public area when asked, or from the state laws.  However puppy raisers and even I have to consider when training pups for service dog work to have excellent house manners. Because we do not just deal with at home only as service dogs are not pets and will be with their partners 90% when out and about. If teaching as I stated above to be allowed on furniture this could become a disaster for the handler when out in public and their service dog decides hmmm, wouldn't be nice to sit on the booth in the restaurant. Nevertheless it does not stop puppy raisers from going down on the floor and playing and cuddling them. It just shows that PETA doesn't care about teaching structure therefore going into their homes you may have a full grown dog jumping up on you and you getting hurt. It also shows that this PETA person like many has a simple mind because they couldn't figure out it's much better to get down to the dogs level to cuddle and play. In other words looking at it through a dogs / puppy point of view, as puppies don't care one way or the other where they lay or play.  Give them a place where they could call their den and they are happy just the same.

 PETA once again missed the boat. 

 
>...just so that they will be ready to work 24/7 at a job serving humans strikes me as very nearly the definition of exploitation.<
 
Another myth that people seem to have about service dogs whether guides or other types. Service dogs aren't working 24/7. Nor are they expected to be on call 24/7. Although if PETA member would comprehend that dogs are solving animals and the bond that these service animals have with their partners, they would realize that some dogs will just know if their human partner needs them, even before their human partner knew it. Even pets do that because the dogs think like dogs and not like humans. (eg. I am in my bedroom on my computer. Murray had sense me not being in the living room where he was sound asleep, Snoring! Within moments he got up and came into the bed room and is now laying beside me. ) Does that mean my dog was expected to work 24/7!  No! Service dogs sleeps when they want too! They have lots of playing time and exercises. They get out and walk where many pet owners don't walk their dogs, exercise them and play with them especially after a long 8 to 16 hours of work. Murray had that before he became a service dog the 16 hours left alone with no exercising or walking! So that theory isn't factual!

 

<Is it right to force a dog to bounce from breeding facility to puppy-raiser's home to training school to a home with a blind person and then to yet another home (if the dog is lucky) after becoming old or infirm? And it's my understanding that the "retired" dogs are never given the opportunity to stay in the same home with a brand-new, young guide dog¯no, that would be too confusing. Even if these organizations can find new homes for all the "retired" working dogs (and I wonder), it's still a huge adjustment for an older dog to change homes.>
 

Although this statement is somewhat true when in puppy stage with programme.  However puppy raisers do a socialization with each others pups. In other words the pup they initially gotten may go to the other puppy raiser for a few days and back, henceforth these pups/dogs comprehends the moving around per say.  Yes after 12 to 15 months the pups goes back to the school to be trained. However in that time frame these pups have seen the trainers quite a number of times either by going to the school and having puppy classes or trainers have checked out the place. It depends on the schooling how they do things. Then at least 2 to 4 weeks the handlers are 24 / 7 with their dogs at the school so they get to bond with each other and learn each others language.  Dogs do adapt quite easily then humans give them credit and again during these months the pups have been around many different people therefore they have this different style of bonding (inner bonding with many people then like pets do) .   How many times does pet owners go on vacations and take their pets to kennels? Being in these kennels night and day!  

 

The last part when they retire this Peta member thinks that these dogs are not lucky enough to be with a loving home. First off many schools allows handlers to keep their retired dogs and many do. Some don't because of issues it may cause with another dog.  That's just the same as pets not being compatible with one another. When that happens the handler could find a loving home or the dog goes back to the school which in turns the dog either goes to the raiser or breeder (if breed). If that is not possible then these retired dogs are put up for adoption. However they do not go into a shelter of unwanted animals. They stay at their foster homes. Until the school after intensive interviews finds that special loving home. It's not a fast process but I could tell you the waiting period for such a retired home is over 2 to 5 years because of how many people want a well trained dog.  So different then adopting pets.

  
 < (My oldest dog, Rowdy, was depressed for the better part of a year after his family gave him away to me at age 7.) >
 

Well all I could say to this piece is that the human did not bond with the dog. Go figure! LOL.   I have never seen a dog being depressed most of the year. Some dogs may get depressed and sadden especially if their human partner suddenly is gone.  And some will be depressed when a person gives up their pet. Nevertheless the time frame isn't or wasn't almost a year to get over such. But this Peta individual has just shown that they do not comprehend dogs and don't look at things in their dogs point of view (ie Rowdy). If Rowdy would have been with Me or anybody else that knows dogs and is loving and caring this issue wouldn't been an issue. At least not that long.

 

Examples: I know of an individual that had the same issue about a guide dog retired this is because the individual did not follow the criteria of a service dog in retirement. Yes schools do give a manual per say so the individual could comprehend service dogs. They just figured it is a pet and leave the pet home over 8 hours then not even give special time with the dog when she came home. It just shows that this individual didn't comprehend this dog or dogs needs. While another individual with a retired guide dog happen to be a puppy raiser has no issues with the dog. The dog was never depressed and knew the puppy raiser when he saw them. Still keeping in touch with the handler and all gets to visit at times. So there's the flip side of the story. 

 

<I will never forget a complaint that we received at PETA a long time ago about an assistance dog for a child who was in a wheelchair and had mental and physical developmental problems. The complainant wrote that the child persisted in picking at the skin on the dog's back (which was readily accessible with the dog standing beside the wheelchair) to the point of creating lesions and scabs, which the child would then pick off. That dog was forced to stay by that child's side while the child (through no fault of his own, of course) continued to torment the dog all day long with this neurotic behavior. No one would take action to help the dog¯that's how ingrained the idea is that human needs trump animal needs. I don't know how that case ended, but it still makes me flinch just to think about it.>
 

This just really gets me when people use one case if that is really the facts and I do not believe PETA getting the facts straight as they never do research. (just look at this post from PETA member).  Not to mention why would a person contact PETA as there are other places to call that covers such things. Although there are indeed some individuals that shouldn't have a dog whether be companion or service dog, one shouldn't condemn all people with animals. And that is what this PETA person is doing. Condemning people with disabilities whom has service dogs for their independents.  I'm actually shocked that this PETA person didn't use the well known case (Inky). That was national headliner as the blind individual after coming out of the bar kicked his dog and beat the dog once home. But again this is one case and others shouldn't suffer because of that individual. To make it clearer many of us (trainers, handlers, schools, breeders and organizations ) called, emailed, or showed up as professionals to have the courts through the book at that handler.

<Why can't these assistance dogs be replaced with humans who are paid for their services (by the government or by nonprofit organizations or by insurance companies)? We have nannies and we have in-home nursing care¯why don't we have a service industry dedicated to helping blind, deaf, and otherwise disabled people get along? >
 

This statement is a big insult to many including to me. Why do I have to be less of a person! I do not need a human to be independent, not to mention this doesn't make one independent but dependent on others, which don't comprehend our needs! How would it look for a person with disability having a so called nanny with them when they go to work. Again making a person with disability feel less then human.

 

An example on how a human cannot comprehend the needs of another: Shannon was sick the day we were actually going out in public to a restaurant. There wasn't really anything in the house for me to stay home we were going out with relatives. Now I am legally blind with no depth perception and I had my sister-in-law help me as I was not aware of this restaurants layout. After the fact of tripping not once , not twice but three times or more, that's when she would say a curb! Duh! How about stopping at the curb! Announcing the curb before we hit the curb! Also holding my hand isn't the way to help guide an individual. That only makes them loose their balance. And she insisted she knows best. I thought the saying was Mother knows best, not a helper. lol. Now if I had Shannon, she would know when to stop before the curb down and hop up and stop with a curb up. She would touch the door handle so I know where and which way the door opens and she could counter-balance when she feels the changes in my body.  A human cannot comprehend this type of body language until after the fact. Or have that special bond! Also it would look ridiculous to have my sister in laws head on my lap if I started feeling ill, having a migraine or just become stress out. Whereas Shannon's head on the lap or laying on my foot is all I need for the blood pressure to go down, or to alert me for my needs as no human could. 

--
Denise & Murray
http://pwdsdawareness.freeforums.org
http://speak4serviceanimals.wordpress.com
http://animalsspeak.org

 

[K9 Mama]

Here is more about what signal mindedness of PETA. This is an interview with PETA vice president.  

 

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2009/01/when-we-first-r.html

 

Unleashed:  I know PETA is opposed to the consumption of animals for food or the use of their wool, skin, etc. for clothing, so I'm guessing an ideal world would have no need for "working" dogs to herd sheep, cattle, etc., or to be used for hunting.  But what about working dogs that help people, such as guide dogs for the blind, assistance dogs for the handicapped, drug-sniffing dogs, etc.?  I have a bit of background in dog training (using nonviolent methods) myself, and one thing I always marveled at was how some dogs, particularly the more intelligent and energetic types, really seem to go crazy if they don't have a "job" to do.

Nachminovitch:  PETA is all for relationships of mutual respect and benefit between dogs and humans. Unfortunately, not all working dogs have such relationships. Working dogs are sometimes forced to do jobs that are considered too dangerous for humans and that are, therefore, obviously too dangerous for a dog, too.

There will never be a perfect world, but in the world we're in now, we support some working dog situations and decry others.  Hearing dog programs that pull dogs from animal shelters and ensure that they are in safe and loving homes have our stamp of approval; they live with the family for their entire life, they learn interesting things, enjoy life, and love helping.  On the other hand, we oppose most seeing-eye-dog programs because the dogs are bred as if there are no equally intelligent dogs literally dying for homes in shelters, they are kept in harnesses almost 24/7, people are prohibited from petting or playing with them and they cannot romp and run and interact with other dogs; and their lives are repeatedly disrupted (they are trained for months in one home and bond, then sent to a second, and after years of bonding with the person they have "served," they are whisked away again because they are old and no longer "useful"). We have a member who is blind who actually moved states to avoid "returning" her beloved dog. We feel that the human community should do more to support blind people, and give dogs a break.  A deaf person can see if a dog has a medical issue such as blood in her urine, a blind person living alone cannot, and so on. 

PETA's president had a long working relationship with a program to supply police dogs from the DC Animal Shelter to the Metropolitan Police department because they were humanely trained, and enjoyed a home life with their officers. One of the dogs named after her, Kirk, was with an officer who was shot when President Regan was shot, and he retired with his officer.

**************************************************************

This again just shows that they really know nothing about service dogs. It's also shows from being within their organization with how their newsletters from their president and vice president says one thing and they tell another story. Like politicians talking out of both side of their mouths. grins.

 

Unfortunately they have blinders on as they feel that hearing dogs enjoy life and have fun with their families til the end of time. That too is not always the case! Some retired hearing dogs do not live with their partner. There are many reasons why an individual cannot have two dogs with them. One of the biggest thing is that apartment complexes do not recognize retired service dogs as service dogs. And they shouldn't as they are now somebodies pet. Even if they stay with their partner.

 

Petting and romping with other dogs. Where do they  get their information. Maybe when they are working people don't allow strangers coming up and interacting with their dogs. Some don't mind if they are asked first. But when service dogs are off duty they have lots of friends both humans and pet dogs to play with. As for the harness that's not facts either for when they may be out working yes they have a harness. However if the individual is at a job and their dog doesn't have to take them any where the harness is off. Some harnesses have where the handles detatch from harness.

 

As for a so called member of PETA having a guide dog and running away from the states to keep their dog. Well I think that's just their way of misleading  the people. Yes some schools have what is called ownership of the dogs and the reason for that is because the court system calling dogs property. They have to protect these dogs from people somehow. The stipulation of school ownership isn't that they will take your dog when retirement it's for if the dog doesn't work out they have the right to take the dog to match with another while the human gets another dog themselves.  It's also if there would be abuse these schools will have court rights to take the dog just like dog control.  Only better as these dogs wouldn't be sent into the shelter system but go to a loving home.  

 

But this article just shows that when a PETA member gets caught with saying and doing something and the higher ups says they do not tell members to do this or that well you see it comes from the president and vice president of the organization.  This is one of the reasons why a guide dog team in NYC gotten injured due to a PETA member grabbing and ranking the dog. In the name of Animal Rights. However as normal abusing and hurting the animals they claim are being abused.