technology wins out

This piece of news from the AKC was sent out this morning -- that assuming that the Club's Board follows the recommendation of its Performance Events Department and votes accordingly, the Garmin Astro and DC30 collar will be approved for field trial use effective August 1st, 2009. Mike, here at LWBD, had written an entry about this back in December.

While parent clubs voted overwhelmingly in support of GPS technology for locating dogs no longer under judgement, the minority opinions are nevertheless quite interesting:

"Based on the input received from clubs and individuals, an estimated 5% of participants are against the use of any tracking device. Further, an additional 10% of participants feel the potential for misuse of the GPS technology is so great that it outweighs the advantages of its use. An estimated 85% of participants feel all tracking devices should be allowed as long as the units are approved by the AKC and there are regulations which address potential issues regarding their use."

There are a number of new proposed regulations to go with this new technology, proposals which attempt to address the significantly different kinds of information that are now possible from a GPS-bsed unit rather than a radio-based unit. These proposed new regulations include:

"2.No Receivers Carried by the Handler and Scout – The handler and scout may not carry a receiver. If they choose to bring their receivers on course, they must be given to the judges or someone designated by the judges. 

3. Receivers in the Gallery Must Be Turned Off – No one in the gallery shall track the dogs while they are under judgment. 

4. No “Outside” Communications - No one shall communicate in any manner with the handler, scout, judges or gallery any information obtained through the use of a tracking device while the dogs are under judgment.

7. Judges May Not Consider Information Obtained Through Tracking Devices – Judges are not to consider any information obtained through the use of a tracking device. No one shall use information from a tracking device to attempt to influence a judge or to discredit the judge’s decision."

Interestingly, too, the Performance Events Department also explictly states that it plans to re-write its regulations regarding the role of the scout and that it will share any evidence of GPS-misuse directly with the American Field.

Looking at a new addition

This lovely 16 gauge A.H. Fox C grade extractor gun has come to me as a possible trade for another of my SxS guns. It is the fourth 16 gauge gun that Fox Gun Co. built when they began production of small gauge Fox guns in 1912. This gun weighs 5 lbs. 12 oz. with 28 inch barrels and is lively. It is even 'left handed". It has a few flaws - a patent Infallible Single Trigger being the main deviation from the factory standard guns. I hope to make a deal in the next few days.

Tom McGuane on writing about hunting and fishing

Re-reading a favorite book by Charley Waterman (R.I.P.) I noticed that Tom McGuane wrote the forward. As usual, he has something to say about sport, and here takes on writing about sport.

Writing about hunting and fishing is an old practice in America, partaking equally of logs, reports, adventurous accounts, and, of course, tall tales. For the most part, its excuse for existing has been to offer practical advice. Its chronic weakness is that for a writer to consistently position himself to advise, he must be or pretend to be, an expert. In today's highly deteriorated situation, almost all we have are "experts" and our sporting literature reads like some obsessive Consumer Report for outdoor gadgeteers. In sports like fly fishing and bird hunting, which appeal to either the literary or merely high falutin, the microscopic technical examination and mania for equipment has reached a point among the credulous as to drive sensible folk to catfish grappling, trotlining or the spotlighting of deer.

Well said, Tom.

The latest in sanity

California Senate Bill 250 has been amended and set for a hearing in the Senate Local Government Committee for April 15th. All California fanciers, responsible dog owners and breeders, and clubs should write and oppose this legislation. Letters must be received by April 8 to be reflected on the committee analysis.

SB 250's primary intent is to penalize owners of intact animals and force sterilization of an at-large or unlicensed dog or cat on a first offense - at the owner's sole expense. This is an unreasonable standard as even a responsible owner can have a single incident where an animal is let out by a meter reader, neighbor or faulty gate.

As amended on April 2; SB 250:

 > Allows an unaltered license to be revoked if one citation is issued for a dog being at-large or stray. No legal resourse is provided. Appeals must be made to the animal control agency that is bringing the action against the owner. It also appears that ALL intact animals in an owner's care would be subject to forced sterilization on a single offence.

> Requires a person selling, trading, or placing for adoption an unaltered animal to post the license number if the animal is older than four months, or the age required by the local licensing agency. (The prior version of the bill required a licensing number for any sale of an unaltered animal, and it was unclear how this would affect the sale of puppies and kittens younger than four months who were not required to be license.)

> Requires any unlicensed intact animal that is impounded to be sterilized, even on a first offense.

> Adds a new definition of "custodian" as follows; "Custodian" means any person who undertakes the personal care and control of a dog or cat, or any person who intentionally provides care, security, or sustenance for a dog or cat on the person's property for any period exceeding 30 days. "Custodian" does not include a licensing agency."

Existing state law already requires owners of intact animals to pay a license fee that is at least double that to license a sterilized animal (Food and Agriculture Code Section 30804.5); and provides for enhanced and graduated fines for owners whose intact dogs are impounded (Food and Agriculture Code Section 30804.7). These statutes are sufficient to incentivize owners to sterilize their animals and to address animal control concerns with specific intact animals who are repeatedly impounded.

Please help defeat this harassment... write or fax in opposition.

Dogsledding in Minnesota

A couple of weeks ago I tried something entirely new - dog sledding. My daughter, Liz, lives in Minneapolis and invited me to join her for a long weekend in the northern part of her state. We had a blast and I recommend it to anyone who has a chance.


It was chilly up there, though at 25 deg. F it was about 30 degrees warmer than the previous week. Lake Superior remained frozen quite solidly.
The outfitter had about 100 dogs in their camp. Each dog was assigned their own plywood crate and was staked to a post in front of the crate. With a bit of straw the dogs were apparently quite comfortable, despite overnight temperatures that dropped to -50 deg. F.


The outfitter had a recent litter. Liz and I each visited with these pups. They were chewers and thieves - swiped the gloves out of my jacket pocket and led me on a chase around the kennel as I tried to reclaim them. Gotta love those puppies.

Like bird dogs, these pups were incredibly eager to get out and do the work for which they were bred. They were trememdously fit, capable of pulling the sled for 3 hours straight, then reluctantly taking an hour break for lunch, and then pulling for another 3 hours. Temperatures had warmed to the 20's and the guide said that this cut their endurance!

Liz's boyfriend's family hunt waterfowl and grouse and have a couple of nice labs. Next fall I may try to arrange for a visit to the woods with them - I'll promise to bring a couple of nice setters.

Thoughts on dog ownership

While the animal rights people pound away on spay and neuter legislation they say will "reduce the population of unwanted puppies in shelters", there are a couple of things that need to be borne in mind...

1. Puppies are almost always cute and adoptable. In fact, in many areas of the country there are not enough puppies available for adoption to meet the demand. This has led to shelters importing puppies from other states, or even from foreign countries. Adoption will absorb almost all 'unwanted' puppies - if an effort is made to get them to the people who want them.

2. Most dogs are surrendered to animal shelters due to problems with the temperament of the dog, housebreaking problems, destructiveness, or aggressive type behavior. And, yes, this includes puppies adopted from shelters. Puppies, with any luck, grow into dogs and they may not be so cute and cuddly at 2 years old as they were at eight weeks. Additionally, owners usually create their own problems through neglect, lack of time and attention, and plain ignorance of what a dog needs to be a successful pet. Before deciding to get a dog or puppy, which usually entails a 10-15 year commitment of an owner's time, money and emotions, they should take the time to think about and ask themselves if they fully understand what dog ownership requires.  

This is an puppy distribution and owner education problem, not a population problem. What is needed is a positive effort to get puppies to those who want them, and to educate owners before they get a puppy. What is not needed is a punitive, heavy-handed bureaucracy put in place by ignorant, if well meaning, lawmakers.

SB 250 - Mandatory Spay/Neuter in California is back!

AB 1634 - the mandatory spay and neuter bill introduced by Senator Lloyd Levine and defeated after a prolonged struggle over the last two years is back - this time as SB 250 - introduced by Senator Dean Florez (Democrat., Fresno/Bakersfield). Kern County, the core of Flores' constituency, has the worst shelter kill record in the state. They kill a lot of adoptable dogs in Kern County. 

The name has been changed, but it's the same old crap. In a state that is struggling with huge revenue shortfalls and divisive politics do we need to pursue these costly, frivolous and punitive attacks against the property of the taxpayers? While school districts are laying off teachers are we going to be hiring more dog catchers? Apparently so.

Senator Florez' website provides a bio that includes this description of his areas of activity...

Florez has been an outspoken leader in the areas of clean air, equality in education, food safety, animal rights, high-speed rail, government accountability and infrastructure financing and development.

I guess that "Animal Rights" includes mandatory animal mutilation. Right? 

He bills himself as a finance professional and is a Harvard MBA graduate. He is Majority leader in the Senate. Perhaps he chooses to ignore the burdensome costs that this proposed law will place on municipalities (already over-stressed), enforcement professionals and the dog owning taxpayers of California - who are already seething over the mismanagement and new taxes being levied on them in Sacramento by a predominantly Democratic legislature. Do I smell revolt in the air? I sure as Hell hope so!

Here is a link to the text. Please read it, get mad, and fire off a letter to your California State Senator in opposition. Then go on strike. The idiots in Sacramento are living in a dream world, and this is another piece of compelling evidence.