Dogs

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31120, 25 July 1966, Page 12

Dogs

Sir, —Dog ownership in areas of dense human habitation will surely have to be prohibited absolutely. Humans can be prosecuted for casting offensive matter in a public place; not so dogs, though their owners certainly should be. Dogs are not generally dosed against bacterial and viral disease, which, together with the wilful fouling of children’s play areas, parks, streets, and gardens by dog-owners, is, in combination with the common housefly, as dangerous a source of human disease as exists in our community, not to speak of the traffic hazard caused by dogs. “D.N.D.” displays muddled thinking, as garden manures are not the highly offensive wastes of entirely carnivorous animals like dogs; nor are they deposited in public thoroughfares. It is agreed that human spitting is filthy, and this, too, like abolition of dogs from our cities, is a further item requiring urgent human education.— Yours, etc., SHEEPDOG. July 24, 1966.

Sir, —In answer to “Cleanliness,” I suggest the basic need of all dog-owners is a thorough understanding of dog ownership, companionship,

and fairness to non-dog-own-ers. This falls back on the owner learning-to train his or her dog properly and competently. No dog can be under control if, when, the dog is being walked on a lead, it fouls the area it is walking in. Also no owner of a dog can be deemed a good owner if his or her dog is not trained to stay in his own yard. Having handled over 7000 dogs iri eight years in the North Island, and having bred dogs, I feel that the majority of dog-owners should not be ah lowed to own a dog, especially here in Christchurch. Before buying that adorable-looking puppy citizens should think of the great responsibility they personally will owe to society and . their dog. This entails hours of training and sacrifice.—Yours, etc., DOG BREEDER AND FORMER TRAINER. July 22, 1966.