Violent protests, violent police

Violent Protests
I've personally seen scars on police horses caused by protesters hitting them with boards they had driven nails through during a protest at Queen's Park during the Mike Harris era. I feel passionately about a great many things - in fact that's probably an understatement - but I can't fathom sitting at home making a weapon I intended to use on an animal. Make no mistake these protesters knew mounted police would be there, and the spike boards were intended for the horses.

As an undergrad I majored in Labour Studies. There was a handful of people in the program who got involved with OCAP and felt violent protest was completely justifed and wouldn't have hesitated to throw rocks (or whatever else happened to be handy) at police officers. It astounded me that such intelligent, articulate people couldn't find a more peaceful, effective way to get a message across. I know that some protesters incite violence because I've met them, sat through lectures with them, studied with them, and drank with them. I wanted the same changes they wanted but I didn't agree that the end always justified the means. I also believe the general public is more likely to get behind a cause if they don't associate it with a bunch of people acting like thugs.

I love the spirit of a peaceful demonstration. Whether it's joining striking workers on a picket line, marching for Burma (Kiera and Chelsea's first protest btw) or demonstrating outside of a courthouse to try to save a pitbull puppy, it's important to me to stand up for what I believe in, and to do so without damaging property or doing any harm. I'm glad that most of the causes I get behind are generally supported by non-violent people. The protests and demonstrations I've attended had such vibe of empowerment, solidarity and hope. It wouldn't have the same if the atmosphere was full of tension and apprehension and hostility. My two cents.

Violent Police
A lot of people don't like police. A LOT. I've met them in university. I've met them through the campaign to save Rambo (pitbull puppy). For a long time I didn't understand it for a number of reasons. The most significant is that my father is a police officer (and fellow graduate of the Labour Studies program). I must also acknowledge that I'm white, female, and middle-class: in a nutshell, not a likely candidate to be bothered by police unless I'm blatantly breaking the law.

Given that my experiences with the police have been fairly positive I'd always figured they'd been given a bad rap. Most police officers aren't violent. Most police officers demonstrate the highest level of restraint and professionalism when dealing with all people while they are on the job. They aren't all fascist, they aren't all racist, they aren't all anything, good or bad.

Funnily enough my brother recently had an experience with police in a different municipality. The officers weren't violent but they absolutely went out of their way to be beligerent and obnoxious. They thought he'd been drinking and driving (he hadn't) and they harassed him, swore at him, called him a liar, tried to entrap him, and didn't lay off until he blew zero on the breathalyzer. My brother is a very soft-spoken, hard working, straight and narrow kind of guy and there is no doubt that he did absolutely nothing to provoke them. After I heard the story I really got it. Some police are unprofessional, behave badly, treat people poorly and leave them with a bad impression. Or worse.

Police officers are mums and daughters and dads and sons and sisters who get up every day and go out and do an unthinkably difficult, often thankless job. How well they do it, and the degree of good or bad judgement they exercise while doing it varies from officer to officer, just as it does in any field, job or profession. They undergo psychiatric evaluations, personality tests and ongoing training, but you can never entirely remove the "x" factor which is being human, and therefore inherently imperfect. Police have greater power than most and therefore a greater responsibility to conduct themselves in a manner that is beyond reproach, and most of them do most of the time. Most of them deserve more praise and recognition than they will ever receive. But then there are the duds. The duds are very much like their "thug-like protester" counterparts. They have an "end" in mind and will use inappropriate, damaging means to achieve it. Thug-like police officers harassment, intimidation and violence can all be justified. Shameful not only because of the damage they do, but because so many others do their jobs so well without resorting to those tactics. Not unlike non-violent protesters.

So protesters have grown wary of the police and the police have grown wary of protesters. Neither side is without blame and I think both sides are guilty of stereotyping the other. All because of a very small, thug-like minority. How sad when the majority of both groups are caring, dedicated people working tirelessly to make the world a little better and a little safer for everyone in it.

Test day!

Whew was I nervous! Heart pounding, shallow breathing, the whole nine yards. Chelsea being the intuitive soul that she is clearly picked up on my nervousness and was not nearly as obedient as usual.

Me: "Chelsea, sit".
Chelsea: "Piss off mummy, ask me again when you're normal".

Nevertheless, WE PASSED! There were four dog/handler pairs tested. Chelsea and I were third in line to get our results, and with a simple "congratulations" all of the tension just melted away and I realized that I hadn't drawn a normal breath for the entire two hour test! I am so, so proud of Chelsea. She's truly got a gift and I am thrilled that we'll have a chance to share it with people who would otherwise have minimal contact with "the outside world", and almost no contact with animals. Sometimes I wonder what my life would be like if I couldn't have pets due to illness or age or because I was no longer able to live independently. For me, it's unthinkable. If that day comes (and I somehow manage to refrain from throwing myself off a bridge) a visit from a therapy animal will mean the world to me.

Those who are intimately familiar with my little zoo know that when I got Kiera as a puppy my intention was to mold her in to a dog that could do therapy work. We've worked really, really hard, but as it turns out the most realistic goal we could set was helping her be a happy, confident, friendly dog. Chelsea, on the other hand, came in to my life by chance or fate or both. My only intention in adopting her was to find a great addition to our "family". I haven't put nearly the time or effort in to her training as I did with Kiera's because she's naturally such a well-behaved, well-balanced dog. As it turns out Kiera has other gifts to share, and no amount of training or socialization would have made her a candidate for this type of work. To be honest I really don't think she'd enjoy it either. Chelsea, on the other hand, is such a natural and has such a gift for relating to people that it seems like this is the job she was meant to do. I'm so grateful to be blessed with such a special little zoo. And such amazing friends! I deeply appreciate the words of encouragement and support leading up to the test. Tuesday night we'll be celebrating this milestone so if you're free and in the area pop in for a drink - it will be "Chelsea's passing party" :-)

When is a shelter not just a shelter?

Until very recently the shelter only had a handful of dogs, and was able to take in dogs from other rescues that didn't have the space or resources to care for them. Those dogs were signed over to the shelter and made available for adoption. This post is not about those dogs.

There are so many different kinds of rescues. Some are breed-specific, some are all-breed, some rescue dogs from pounds when they are scheduled to be euthanized (IMO this is "rescue" in its truest form), others only take dogs that are surrendered by their owners (IMO this is more of a re-homing agency than a rescue. There is a need for both, I just think it's important to make that disctinction).

A former employee of the shelter runs a private, breed-specific rescue. Most private rescues rely on foster homes. In the event that there aren't any foster homes available, most will either stop accepting new dogs or board the dog at a boarding facility or vet clinic until a foster home becomes available. Adopt A Dog/Save A Life is an example of an excellent, all-breed rescue that will board dogs if there isn't space in a foster home. So what's the big deal about a former employee boarding dogs from her rescue at the shelter? Glad you asked!

If the dogs were only boarded when space was available, and if the rescue paid the shelter to board its dogs it wouldn't be a big deal. Sadly, that is not the case. The shelter has very limited resources yet it is absorbing the cost of caring for these dogs (staff have to clean the runs etc. to be fair I don't know whether the rescue provides food for its dogs or not). Naturally when the rescue dogs are adopted the rescue collects the adoption fee, which is intended to partly offset expenses incurred while caring for the animal.

The second issue is the shelter's mandate. The shelter exists to provide assistance and shelter to animals in distress, including strays and animals removed from abusive/neglegent situations. Any animal at the shelter is there because there was literally no other safe place for it to go. The rescue's mandate is to re-home dogs of a particular breed when their owners don't want them anymore. So what happens when there is an influx stray, lost, injured or unwanted animals but the shelter is already boarding rescue dogs for free? Resources that should be available for the stray, lost, injured or unwanted animals simply aren't available. The biggest resource of course, is space. There is a dog at the shelter that was available for adoption until very recently. He was "pulled from adoption" because he has some issues that need work - a lot of work actually. Normally when a dog is pulled from adoption it is literally taken out of the adoption room and moved to a holding area which is a less stressful environment. Unfortunately there isn't any room for him in holding because so much space is occupied by rescue dogs that the shelter agreed to board for free. So he is still sitting in the adoption room, growing noticably more stressed and agitated. For the time being he is the dog that needs to be there, so why is his care being compromised?

One last point and I'll put this to bed (for now). Consider the charities you donate your hard earned money to. How would you feel if you thought you were assisting animals in distress, only to learn that the beneficiary of your donation was a completely separate organization with a completely different mandate? If you'd wanted to donate to the breed-specific rescue instead, wouldn't you have just done so? Wouldn't you want your donation to be used for the animals you'd intended to help?

Quit messing with the wildlife!

My office building is surrounded by a small wooded area (for now anyway, the land is slated for development). In early spring people started noticing a couple of adult coyotes in and around the parking lot. This clearly made some people uncomfortable because our receptionist(at the request of one of the managers) sent a message out to the entire building stating that coyotes were in the area, animal control (aka The Humane Society) has been notified and do not venture outside the parking lot until the "situation" was "resolved". Initially I was annoyed. I knew the message would alarm people unnecessarily. Coyotes are timid animals and generally do not pose a threat to adults. ** The message also set an unrealistic expectation that the situation was temporary, implying that the Humane Society would be removing the coyotes. Ummm that would be a no.

ODHS's mandate is to help wildlife in distress. Unless a wild animal is in distress ODHS can not send an officer to remove it. I also wonder if people give any thought to what would happen to an animal if it was removed. A facility must be specially licensed to care for or rehabilitate wildlife. ODHS is not, so the ugly reality is that unless arrangements can be made for the animal to go to a facility that is licensed for wildlife (which are usually full), the animal must be humanely euthanized. Call me crazy, but I don't think a coyote deserves to die because it was hanging out in a parking lot. And let's not lose sight of the fact that it was only in the parking lot because the parking lot was built on top of its habitat. I sent a message in response to let people know ODHS can not remove the coyotes, they really don't pose a threat to us and we just need to adapt to our coyote neighbours and they to us. It caused a bit of a shitstorm - I knew it would but I thought it was worth it to try and get the facts out there.

Then about a week ago a guy on my floor looked out the window, saw a coyote and her pups, and promptly called - who else - ODHS. He was again advised that healthy coyotes can not be removed and are best left alone to do what they need to do. I guess most people around here have since overcome their fear of the coyotes because they've started feeding them from the picnic tables. Out goes yet another message from management imploring people not to feed them (for obvious reasons). I can only shake my head.

I love predators. I do. Sharks, lions, coyotes, wolves, raptors - I can't get enough. It has nothing to do with bloodlust, though I do appreciate the primal way in which they hunt, stalk, chase, and take down prey. They just fascinate me. For me they inspire such awe and appreciation. Predators are critical to the health of any ecosystem, and because they generally reproduce in smaller numbers and take longer to reach sexual maturity than "prey" animals the life of each individual predator is very, very important. So it grieves me when I hear people are demanding that coyotes removed because they're having a knee-jerk reaction to something they aren't familiar with. I know not everyone will feel the way I do, even if the time is taken and the effort is made to educate oneself. Understanding a predator is not synonymous with loving it, but why can't it be respected for what it is and left alone? Why do we either have to be demanding its removal or feeding it from the picnic table? What is it about human nature that makes it so difficult for us to live and let live?


** It is important to remember that coyotes are wild animals. If you know there is a coyote in the vicinity I highly recommend small children or pets be supervised when they are outdoors.

Counting down...

Chelsea's test to become a certified therapy dog with St. John Ambulance is the day after tomorrow! Eek! I met with H after work Monday to go over paperwork etc. and learned that the fail rate is a whopping 60%! I still need a sitter for Kiera too. Usually she'll just tag along but that really isn't an option in this case. I've been hoping my brother won't mind coming over and hanging out with her for a couple of hours but he seems to have developed an aversion to returning phone calls (naughty pookie). I suppose I could leave her with my parents but for reasons I won't get in to here I'm not at all comfortable asking my mother for any kind of favour right now (SNAFU: situation normal, all f&cked up - ha!). I haven't been to my parents' house for about a week, and of course a downside of that is missing my mom's puppy Lulu to pieces! Anyway, as far as Saturday goes I'm sure it will all work out, it always does. I'll just feel better when some arrangements are made for Kiera.