|
|
The following notice is provided by the Constitution and Bylaws committee. During the most recent reproduction of the updated GDUC Constitution and Bylaws there was a small but most important change omitted. BYLAW 1: A and C should read as follows: 1. DUES
Thank you for adding this critical change to your Constitution and Bylaws dated November 2002. Melita Waters, Constitution and Bylaws Chair |
|
As I finally sit myself down at the computer to compose this message, the wind is blowing, and the humidity is low, although I seem to remember the weatherman predicting rain. Inaccurate weather forecasting reminds me a bit of life, somewhat unpredictable but always there waiting to be contended with when you wake up each morning. I want to take this opportunity to wish all of you, your loved ones and of course your dogs very happy holidays and a prosperous new year. I hope this message finds all of you well, as GDUC is embarking on its next round of projects for the coming year, and we need all of you to participate. Sylvia Munos has already volunteered to assist with GDUC's brisk and growing brisker product sales. So thank you, Sylvia, and the rest of you don't be left out now. GDUC's fall convention was a huge success with all those brisk product sales, great presenters and a chance to see each other and let our guides touch noses with old friends. Lukas Franck's presentation on Wayfinding at GDUC's morning program was well received as was Dr. Autumn Davidson's luncheon presentation on Building Better Guide Dogs. You will be able to hear both these fine presentations in Pawtracks if you were unable to attend GDUC's fall meeting. The three California guide dog schools will soon be distributing "An Introduction to Consumer Groups" as part of the information students receive while in class. This cassette will inform new California guide dog handlers about the existence and mission of GDUC as well as tell people from everywhere else around the country about GDUI and its other state affiliates. In January, I will be attending the CADO conference in San Antonio with Debbie Grubb representing the interests of guide dog handlers, and as of today, the agenda has not yet been finalized. I will report to all of you in the spring edition of Forward the results of this meeting. Guide Dog Day at the Capitol will take place in the spring on Thursday, April 10 in conjunction with CCB's convention. By the time you read this, a planning meeting for this event will have taken place as a first step toward making GDDATC, Guide Dog Day at the Capitol, a memorable event with lots of PR, broad based attendance and a real celebration of guide dog teams in California. Please consider joining us in Sacramento for GDDATC and then attending CCB's convention where you can purchase fun and useful GDUC items for sale including our now famous t-shirts as well as participate in all our GDUC activities on Saturday, April 12. GDUC is proud to announce that plans are underway to produce a video to educate animal control officers, and work will begin on this project in January. I would like to conclude this message with some much deserved thanks and congratulations. First, GDUC extends its heartfelt gratitude to Kelly Tarbox and JoAnn Bitting who helped out tremendously with our convention activities. I don't know what we would have done without them. Next, I want to extend GDUC's thanks to Lee Morton and Ken Metz for their valuable service to GDUC. Lee and Ken, we will miss you on the Board but hope we can still count on you to support us in all our efforts on behalf of California guide dog teams. Congratulations go to Dan Kysor, GDUC's newly elected treasurer, to Ann Kysor, reelected as vice president and to Linda Chung, GDUC's newest and youngest Board member. Welcome aboard, and GDUC is looking forward to its association with both of you. By now, I hope all of you have received your GDUC renewal letters in the mail, and once again, I ask all of you to please consider getting more involved with GDUC and its important work. We need people from everywhere in California to contact their local animal enforcement and police departments and educate, educate, educate! Please contact me at 323-822-9872 or sharkent@aol.com to discuss what contributions you are able to make. GDUC is grateful for your support, and now, please enjoy the rest of Forward. Sheila Styron, President |
|
CCB's fall convention, GDUC's business meeting, morning program and luncheon which took place at the Atrium Hotel in Irvine, California, were a big success. We wish all of you could have been in attendance. This fall's theme was "Caring and Sharing," and there was a whole lot of that going on. This fall's convention, held October 31 to November 3, was a very well-attended celebration of CCB's accomplishments in 2002.In particular, the passage of SB 105, the Division Bill. This bill provides for a separate division for the blind within the Department of Rehabilitation. You will find more details elsewhere in CCB publications. There to help us celebrate were MJ Schmitt, Second Vice President of ACB and Ed Bradley, an ACB Board member from Houston, Texas. In a year which saw little progress, and even some setbacks for citizens who are blind, our Division Bill is, indeed, something to celebrate. There was some disappointment that we didn't get the separate Commission we wanted, but the Division Bill will allow for approval of rehab clients' individual plans by experts on the needs of people who are blind. The reorganization will begin in July, 2003. We celebrated Cathy Skyvers' six years of leadership of the California Council of the Blind. She assures us that, as past president, she will continue to be active. During Cathy's time as president, we formed the HIV/AIDS consortium, fought for equity in salaries for teachers in schools for the blind, and of course, passed the Division bill. We created a recorded scrapbook, where members eagerly provided personal tributes to Cathy. This was very special, since Cathy knew us all as individuals, and always recognized everyone's accomplishments and contributions to CCB. CCB held its board meeting Thursday evening, followed by a Halloween costume party where prizes were awarded to people, guide dogs and canes alike. Highlights of the Board meeting included the announcement of the opening of a new thrift shop in Los Angeles to benefit CCB, which is currently experiencing financial good times. CCB has at long last received the funds from the Ellen Murphy Fund in the amount of $291,000.00. The Board voted to donate $10,000.00 to ACB's general fund, and approved the chartering of CCB's newest addition, The Greater San Joaquin Valley Chapter. All day Friday in the exhibit center, GDUC's table was doing great business selling GDUC tee-shirts, cute dog earrings, lapel pins, guide dog breed figurines and more. At Friday afternoon's opening general session, Julie Cantrell welcomed everyone to Irvine, as President of Orange County's CCB chapter. Next came a presentation by Sheri Fleichman on "The Accessible Outdoors." Sheri's group is based in the Los Angeles area and featured descriptive star gazing. There was information on the latest programs in combating hate crimes and domestic violence. If you have a particular interest in these issues, please contact the CCB office. Following, representatives from BARC updated the general session on the passage of SB105 establishing separate services for the blind within the Department of Rehabilitation in California. This represents a major victory for blind people in our state. The Friday afternoon session concluded with an update from Catherine Campisi, Director of the Department of Rehabilitation. Friday evening's general session began with the credentials report. Then came Catherine Skivers' final President's report. CCB is prospering, but Ms. Skivers encouraged everyone in attendance to continue to work hard on behalf of CCB and blind people who need us. Cathie will be missed as CCB President, but we will keep her busy as immediate past, as CCB as much as ever requires her spirit and expertise to carry out its important work. Next, Karl Augusto, President of The American Foundation for the Blind addressed us on the challenges confronting us in the blindness field today. Then came the nominating committee's report and elections. Congratulations to Jeff Thom, CCB's new President, Mitch Pomerantz, First Vice-President, Peter Pardini, Treasurer and re-elected Board members Ahmad Rahman, Rhonda King and Barbara Rhodes and newly elected Board member Frank Welte. Jeff and Peter were swept into office by acclamation, and again, congratulations to all of you. After elections, yours truly joined forces with the resolutions committee helping to put the final touches on GDUC's resolution (Resolution 2002-B10) dealing with education of law enforcement which was approved by our membership the next morning at the GDUC business meeting and then made official by acclamation during Sunday morning's general session. Saturday morning marked the second serving of continental breakfast and lots of doorprizes kicking off GDUC's business meeting where we held elections for Vice-President, Treasurer and one board position. Congratulations to Ann Kysor, re-elected to a second term as VP, Dan Kysor, our new Treasurer, and Linda Chung, GDUC's newest and youngest board member. Heartfelt thanks to Lee Morton and Ken Metz for their service to GDUC as Treasurer and Board member, although their change in status does not mean we will expect less from them. GDUC voted to raise its annual dues to $20.00 in response to ACB and GDUI increases. We passed a GDUC constitutional amendment eliminating the requirement for at least two of the Board meetings between conventions to be in person. Now all Board meetings may be by telephone. Our morning program was a fabulous presentation by Lukas Franck, supervisor of community instruction at The Seeing Eye, on Wayfinding. Wayfinding is the compilation of past, present and future practices of blind people traveling from point A to point B, and we all had a great time listening to Lukas. Did you know that the invention of air conditioning had a profound negative impact on our ability to get around? Just think about it. With all the doors and windows closed up to keep cool air in, sounds and smells that used to provide good travel cues to blind people are no longer available to us as auditory and olfactory landmarks. GDUC's 2002 fall luncheon was extremely well attended, with an outstanding presentation by Dr. Autumn Davidson, Director of GDB's Veterinary Clinic. Dr. Davidson's topic was "Veterinary Aspects of Building Better Guide Dogs," and we all learned a lot and enjoyed her presentation tremendously. Both our morning program and luncheon presentation will be featured in "Pawtracks." Saturday evening's banquet, hosted by Jeff Thom and Coletta Davis, featured many tributes to President Skivers. CCB scholarship awardees were introduced, and the official charter of the Greater San Joaquin Valley Chapter, Annette Carter, President, was presented. Guest speaker for the evening's festivities was M. J. Schmitt, Second Vice-President, American Council of the Blind. The event was made memorable by all the live and prerecorded messages to Cathie Skivers. Sunday morning's general session featured Dan Kysor's legislative report and Peter Pardini's very positive Treasurer's report. Resolutions were presented by Ken Metz, and a complete report of these will appear in The Blind Californian. As usual, the convention was busy and jam packed with activities and information. GDUC looks forward to our spring gathering in Sacramento, with Guide Dog Day at The Capitol scheduled for Thursday, April 10, and our business meeting and luncheon, Saturday, April 12. GDUC hopes to see many of you there. If this report whets your appetite for more convention information, for the first time, you can now listen to the general sessions, and even the banquet, on your computer. Just go to the CCB website, www.CCBnet.org, and follow the links. |
|
Editor's Note: This represents a departure from our policy of not publishing material that better fits in some other publication. Round-abouts and traffic circles represent a real danger to guide dog users and there is a definite movement to install them. Jenine says that a more formal report will be in PAWTRACKS but information is needed now for advocacy efforts. I had the pleasure of representing GDUI at a meeting on round-about design October 28 and 29 in Washington DC. This meeting was called to gather input on making round-abouts more accessible for blind and visually impaired pedestrians. Participants included staff from the Access Board, the Federal Highway Administration, the Institute of Traffic Engineers, and orientation/mobility professionals interested in pedestrian issues like accessible signals and detectable warnings, including Lukas Frankc from The Seeing Eye. Charlie Crawford and Melanie Brunson of ACB and Julie Carroll from Paralyzed Veterans of America were also there representing the disability community. This conference was outstanding in that it brought a manageable number of people together to really discuss the issue of making a complex feature like a round-about safe yet usable. First off, I learned so much I could fill volumes. The good thing is that all of the conference proceedings will be on the ITE and FHWA web sites and each participant will receive the materials in electronic format. Of course, GDUI will link to these materials from our Advocacy Center on our web site. What did I learn? Well, I learned that there is indeed a difference between a round-about and a traffic circle. In a traffic circle, cars approaching the circle have the right of way and any car inside the circle must yield to one entering. A round-about works just the opposite way. Cars coming into the circle must yield to any vehicle inside the circle, waiting for a chance to get in. This means that cars will move more slowly when approaching the circle and more quickly when exiting. Round-abouts come in many forms or geometries. The most common is a circle or near circular shape with four legs or streets entering the circle. These are called single-lane round-abouts. Each street entering the circle will have a splitter island extending down from the circle to separate the lanes coming into and out of the circle. This island may be very small. It does serve though to stop a pedestrian so he or she must look and listen to traffic exiting or entering the circle to complete the crossing. That's the thing about round-abouts. Each leg or street entering the round-about has two parts to its crossing, one for the traffic going into the circle and one for traffic coming out. Then there are multi-lane round-abouts where there are two lanes going in the same direction entering and exiting the circle. These are larger, wider crossings and probably have a wider splitter island. The group began by making some basic assumptions. The first assumption was that we all would do something to make round-abouts easier to navigate by blind people. We didn't get into philosophy of blindness skills or traffic flow design and why round-abouts anyway? That would have taken at least 10 more days to discuss. The group did briefly touch on urban planning and general design elements as part of a larger picture but it was outside of the scope of what we'd been asked to address. The other crucial assumption the group made, with frequent reminders, was the phrase "If any pedestrian, all pedestrians." This meant that anywhere one might expect or permit any pedestrian to cross a round-about or street, one should expect all pedestrians, including blind ones, to be able to do so safely. This tenet is a little harder to assume when we look at round-abouts in rural areas or near freeways or places where traffic engineers would prefer pedestrians not go. I thought the blind people and blindness professionals did a very good job of explaining that we often are forced to travel in such places for many reasons, despite signage and other barriers. The group at this meeting looked at the following primary issues. What do blind people use to know when it is safe to cross at a round-about? How can blind people know where the safe crossing point is along a path? How can blind people know when a round-about occurs and how to follow the path around to the next safe crossing point? How can drivers be encouraged to slow or stop for any pedestrian in the crosswalk or at the crossing point? 1. What do blind people use to know when it is safe to cross at a round-about? Presentations from Western Michigan University and the Transportation Research Laboratory in the U.K. discussed how people in general cross round-abouts. People must listen for gaps in the traffic entering or exiting the round-about. They then must judge if that gap is long enough to get across the street, either to the splitter island or the curb. Blind people take longer to judge this gap and often misjudge where cars are on the road. This is due to a number of factors. The group, after breakout sessions and much discussion, agreed that finding a way for blind people to better judge the gap between vehicles would help significantly in crossing. Research needs to be done on exactly how to detect these acceptable gaps. One possible solution is a road treatment that one could hear at a certain distance as a car drove over it. This would tell a person that a car was X number of feet away. Other solutions included accessible pedestrian signals tied to loops in the road that would, while not stopping traffic, at least give a notice of when the lane was clear to cross or when cars were coming. These signals would also alert drivers that a pedestrian was in the crosswalk, ready to cross. 2. How can blind people know where the safe crossing point is along a path? The safest place to cross streets leading into and out of round-abouts is somewhere, depending on design, back from the actual circle entrance and exit. Some means, tactile paving or other solution, needs to be in place so that the blind person can find the point in the path to cross. The group agreed that more research on surfaces and designs needed to be done to find the most appropriate way to show the person where to cross without confusing such designs with detectable warning strips. At this point in our discussions, I did mention strongly, and often, that installations of round-abouts in many suburban areas might not necessarily have sidewalks leading up to the circle as part of the planned construction and that such sidewalks were essential to pedestrian safety. Expecting to just prohibit people from crossing was not an option in many suburban areas, especially considering the way blind people travel in such areas. Living near an intersection that is destined for a round-about soon, with no sidewalks, I am clearly concerned about this issue and I know I can't be alone out there. 3. How can blind people know when a round-about occurs and how to follow the path around to the next safe crossing point? The group discussed ways to erect structures, plantings or other methods of keeping pedestrians from simply walking across the middle of the circular roadway when crossing at a round-about. Although blind people might do this inadvertently, many high school aged kids do it often just because it's shorter and they can. We learned that the word "barrier" to name such an obstruction would throw off traffic engineers because "barrier" means something very specific in traffic engineering, not the kind of obstruction we were discussing for keeping people away from the middle of round-abouts. Several terms were suggested, including "informational guidance area" and my personal favorite, "pedestrian repellent." Any obstruction would have to not obscure the line of sight for drivers but would also be high enough to be detected with a cane and sufficiently dense to prevent a dog from just walking through it. We also discussed how moving the crossing point back from the entrance/exit of the circle would affect things like access to bus stops, having to go too far out of one's way, etc. It was agreed that sidewalks were crucial to directing people around the edges of the round-about, but from there we never did quite work out just how far down the block to go. Research in the U.K. found that optimum distances for crossing round-abouts were as follows: (Table omitted) When crossing the leg where traffic is entering the round-about, the crossing should be located no more then 50 meters, approximately 150 feet, and no less than 20 meters, 60 feet, from the entrance to the circle. When crossing at the exit of the circle, the crosswalk should be located no more than 20 meters from the opening of the circle. These distances allow cars to slow or stay slow long enough to detect the pedestrian before getting engaged in entering the circle or picking up speed to exit it and the surrounding road. These distances may or may not work though in the U.S. More research needs to be done. In the U.K. they use something called a Z crossing, different from a Zebra crossing. The Z crossing has you cross to the splitter island then turn 90 degrees and walk along the island toward the circle, sometimes at an angle. You end up then at the point where you will cross the second part of the street. It's much easier to demonstrate in person than to write about. 4. How can drivers be encouraged to slow or stop for any pedestrian in the crosswalk or at the crossing point? Blindness representatives were quick and fervent in pointing out that blind people cannot "seize the intersection," meaning that we cannot be expected to just step into the street and look at cars to get them to stop. A very good video showing yield behavior of drivers to blind people with canes was shown. It, more than anything we said, illustrated the point. I reminded, as did Lukas Franc, that people using guide dogs will not step into the street and that often, the dog will stop a step back from the curb if at a wheelchair ramp or slope rather than an actual curb with a change in height. After all, the entire purpose of the dog is to prevent one from entering the street accidentally. The group was able to shift its focus then to thinking about researching ways to alert drivers that someone was standing in the crosswalk, which would include the sidewalk leading to the roadway. Several solutions came up, including some type of loop in the pavement that would detect the person standing at the curb and flash lights or other warnings for drivers. These "high tech" solutions are interesting but imho, not terribly practical. The group also discussed ways to design the roadway to decrease speed when entering and exiting the round-about. In the U.K. where they have literally thousands of round-abouts, they have done work on things like a squiggly line leading up to pedestrian crossings at round-abouts to give the optical illusion that the road is narrowing. This causes drivers to inadvertently slow down. They are also using different colors on roads to mean different things but there is no current standard for what color means what. These would be section of the road painted in red, yellow, white, etc. The group ended up with a number of statements about various categories of problems or issues. These will come out in the final report on the conference. I'll share them as soon as I receive them. The long and short of it was that we need a lot more research statistics and we need them quickly. This is why I think it is vital that GDUI continue its participation in this group. It looks as if the group will continue to meet, particularly once the Access Board has issued its Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) on the subject of round-abouts. No, I don't know when that will be. One crucial role GDUI can play in such meetings is to speak to guide dog specific issues and to back Lukas Franc as representing the guide dog movement. We are desperately needed to participate in research but as any of you know who have been research subjects, doing mobility-based research with a guide dog is difficult. There are some protocols that have to be changed a bit. One of the things I will do to follow up on this meeting is to prepare a document that explains basic guide work and how a researcher might utilize guide dog teams in the types of activities we discussed at this meeting. Anyone with experience in research is more than welcome to assist me. This meeting was an excellent gathering of thoughtful people who really did want to do something right. I appreciate the opportunity to represent all of you and hope that either Debbie or myself will be able to participate in this group again as the standards evolve. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you need more info. If you have a local traffic engineer you are working with who needs info on any of these topics, I'd suggest contacting the address below. Institute of traffic Engineers |
|
At the last convention two new officers were elected. Dan Kysor was elected Treasurer, replacing Ken Metz. Ken had been treasurer for a long time - but not as long as it seemed to him. He did a good job and we will miss him. Dan has taken hold and is going to be fine, even with his workload as Legislative Representative. Linda Chung was elected to a Director position, replacing Lee Morton. Lee has been active in GDUC in many positions including president. She will be missed. Linda is the youngest member, and brings the outlook of the younger generation to the board. Welcome to Dan and Linda, and deepest thanks for jobs well done to Ken and Lee. |
|
Do you remember the last time you had company for dinner and how embarrassed you were when you dug up several dog hairs from your best gourmet effort? That is because there is a right way and a wrong way to cook with dog hair. First, we must remember each dish calls for a different variety. If you are unfortunate enough to own only one variety, I'm sure you can come up with a friend who will be willing to exchange the proper variety of hair with you. Or, one could send off an order for a rare variety as they are light and easy to mail. There are many dishes that are basic to most menus; these can always be spiced up with the Buff variety. These are especially useful when baking biscuits, pastries and yellow cakes. The Black and Tan hairs go well with fall dishes, Thanksgiving turkey, mince, or pumpkin pies or even yams. Black of course is for your roasts, steaks, ribs and hearty dishes including stews which carry blacks well. Naturally, Chocolate will go well with most desserts, unless it is a very light Jell-O type dessert, then go back to the Silver or Buff. If you are especially interested in foreign foods most varieties can be used in Mexican, Japanese and Chinese cooking. In fact, any nationality food will accept most dog hairs without hurting the food. A good rule of thumb to remember which dog hairs go with which dish is - use them as you would a good wine - white wine and light hair with the delicate dishes. Dark wine and dark hair with the more robust, heartier dishes. Use your dog hair in Good Health!!! |
|
The Coalition of Assistance Dog Organizations (CADO) will be meeting in January in conjunction with IAADP and ADI at their joint annual convention(s). The agenda for the meeting is not available yet. It is not clear if members of GDUC or GDUI are welcome. |
|
On December 4, 5 and 6, the State Board of Guide Dogs met in Van Nuys for one of its regular open meetings. The Board Meeting date is often combined with oral and practical exams of apprentice trainers having fulfilled the requirements to become licensed. The day following the Board Meeting, the Members conduct an inspection of one of the schools. In addition to the Thursday morning testing in which two instructors passed and will become licensed, the very packed few days included three committee meetings, the Board Meeting and an inspection of Guide Dogs of America. Every school is inspected at least one time per year. The committee meetings included the Arbitration Committee, Strategic Plan Committee and Guide Dog Day Committee. The committee meetings were attended by members of at least one school, handlers GDUC, interested parties and Board Members. The meetings included enthusiastic exchanges of information and ideas and were a great beginning. The topics will be thoroughly explored and when complete, recommendations will be presented at a Board Meeting. It is important for all guide dog handlers served by a California school to be knowledgeable about the Board which is a consumer protection body. Meetings are open (with the exception of those dealing with exams) and participation and input is encouraged. We received suggestions from handlers about arbitration and certainly want to hear all suggestions, questions and problems. The primary roles of the Board is to license the three schools (Guide Dogs of America, Guide Dogs of the Desert or Guide Dogs for the Blind), requiring them to maintain at least minimum specified standards, license all instructors and assure proper use of funds. The Board can arbitrate some issues between the schools and handlers, particularly when there is a dispute regarding recalling a guide. The Board is also a source of information regarding access and laws. It is the intention of this Board to review and when necessary, attempt to change regulations and procedures in order to assure the best possible oversight and consumer protection. We are interested in the views of all interested parties and take suggestions and ideas seriously. Please call, write or email us and we will respond. Our mailing address is 400 R Street Suite 5100A, Sacramento, 95814. Telephone: 916-324-9328. Email: guidedogboard@dca.ca.gov |
|
This guy sees a sign in front of a house: "Talking Dog for Sale." He rings the bell and the owner tells him the dog is in the backyard. The guy goes into the backyard and sees a black mutt just sitting there. "You talk?" he asks. The mutt looks up and says, "Well, I discovered this gift pretty young and I wanted to help the government, so I told the CIA about my gift, and in no time they had me jetting from country to country, sitting in rooms with spies and world leaders, because no one figured a dog would be eavesdropping. I was one of their most valuable spies eight years running. "The jetting around really tired me out, and I knew I wasn't getting any younger and I wanted to settle down. So I signed up for a job at the airport to do some undercover security work, mostly wandering near suspicious characters and listening in. I uncovered some incredible dealings here and was awarded a batch of medals. "Had a wife, a mess of puppies, and now I'm just retired." The guy is amazed. He goes back in and asks the owner what he wants for the dog. The owner says, "Ten dollars." The guy says, "This dog is amazing. Why on earth are you selling him, so cheap?" The owner replies, "He's such a liar. He didn't do any of that stuff." |
|
They sort of interlock. On one hand the Segway is going to go charging down the sidewalk, plowing all before it, or knocking everything to the sides. And at the same time, sidewalks may be accessible, but not if Sacramento has its way. The Segway issue is still with us, and San Francisco has done what all cities should do and forbid it to be on the sidewalk. Sacramento is appealing a court decision that says sidewalks should be accessible too - which seems to mean that they should be clear of obstructions like bus benches, electrical boxes, and telephone junction boxes. Sacramento lost a round in federal appeals court who said yes, sidewalks should be accessible. Sacramento is going to take it to the Federal Supreme Court. They are asking all the cities in California - and elsewhere - to join in. It is good to see that not all cities are joining - and that some that said they were going to have backed out. These two subjects are, hopefully, well covered in the CCB magazine, the BLIND CALIFORNIAN. Information and advocacy is needed. |
|
In the last issue we started this column with the idea that our members would send in their views and opinions on a particular subject. The letters and view points would be published so that everyone could get a sense of the feelings of the membership. It would give an excellent place for feedback to the board and show how the membership feels and what direction fits the views of the membership. Quite arbitrarily the first subject for discussion selected was the question of tagging and certification. This was chosen as probably the topic that generates the most controversy. Unfortunately, there has been no response. It isn't hard to respond - mail or e-mail would work - even a telephone call would do. But no one bothered. Could it be that no one cares? or that no one wants to say their position? or is it a case of "let George do it." That's always a good choice - then if you don't like what results, you can always complain. But that won't work. There has been an opportunity to hash out the subject - to present your views and opinions. Without your input, delegates to CADO, representatives who go to various meetings, boards, committees and what have you have no real feeling for what the membership wants or how they feel. So the representative or delegate personally holds a position that may or may not agree with the membership - the delegate or representative is free to use their own judgement. Is that what you want? If not, if you want your opinion to be heard, send in your comments. |
|
1. starts receiving mail from AARD. |
|
Few relationships are so laden with mutual benefit as that between man and dog. Much of the credit for this unusual state of affairs, it now turns out, may lie on the canine side of the equation. Three studies in today's issue of Science shed light on the questions of when, where and how dogs were first domesticated from wolves. One suggests that a few wolves, perhaps from the same population somewhere in east Asia, are the mothers of almost all dogs alive today. Despite some researchers' belief that dogs were domesticated independently in the Old World and in the New, domestication may have happened only once, probably around 15,000 years ago. Dogs seem quickly to have become highly prized and were brought along by the settlers who reached North America via the land bridge across the Bering Strait until the last ice age. This is the conclusion of a second study, based on DNA retrieved from ancient dog bones from Mexico, Bolivia and Peru, which found that all the pre-Columbian dogs belonged to Eurasian dog lineages. A third study probes the psychology of dogs, showing that although chimpanzees may have brain power of far greater wattage, there is one task at which dogs excel, that of picking up cues from human behavior. This interpretive skill was perhaps the ability for which they were selected. The origin of dogs, as judged by their mitochondrial DNA sequences, was first addressed five years ago by Dr. Robert K. Wayne and colleagues at the University of California at Los Angeles. Dr. Wayne showed that dogs were indeed derived from wolves, as long suspected, but he set their date of origin as a separate population at 135,000 years ago. Archaeologists found the date implausible because the earliest known dog bones date to only 14,000 years ago. Dr. Peter Savolainen, a former colleague of Dr. Wayne now at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, has now proposed a date that is more palatable to archaeologists. On the basis of DNA from several wolf populations and from the hairs collected off 654 dogs around the world, Dr. Savolainen calculates a date for domestication either 40,000 years ago, if all dogs come from a single wolf, or around 15,000 years ago, the date he prefers, if three animals drawn from the same population were the wolf Eves of the dog lineage. Dr. Savolainen believes that dogs originated from wolves somewhere in East Asia, because there is greater genetic diversity, often a sign of greater antiquity, in Asian dogs than in European dogs. Separately, Dr. Wayne and another colleague, Dr. Jennifer Leonard, analyzed the DNA of New World dogs, expecting to find that they had been domesticated by American Indians from local wolves. To exclude dogs brought from Europe, Dr. Leonard gathered pre-Columbian dog bones from archaeological sites and extracted their DNA. The samples matched that of Eurasian dogs, not American wolves, showing that dogs, of at least five lineages, must have been brought from the Old World to the New by pre-Columbian settlers. These pre-Columbian dog lineages have disappeared. Even New World breeds of dog like the Eskimo dog, the Mexican hairless and the Chesapeake Bay retriever, derive from dogs brought from Europe. It is not clear why the pre-Columbian dogs were lost, but possibly American Indians preferred the European dogs for some reason and prevented their own dogs from breeding with them. The dates yielded by dog DNA suggest that wolves were domesticated by hunter-gatherers, before the invention of agriculture and permanent human settlements. But domestication is an arduous process, in which animals must be selected for a particular trait through many generations, by several generations of people. It is hard to see how hunter-gatherers could have foreseen the payoff from domesticating wolves, or would have known what traits to select for. Two experiments bear on this puzzling issue. One was started by Dmitry K. Belyaev, a biologist at the Institute of Cytology and Genetics in Novosibirsk, Russia. He spent 26 years domesticating the silver fox, using tameability as the sole criteria of selection. Dr. Lyudmila Trut, who continued Dr. Belyaev's work after his death, reported recently that after selecting from 45,000 foxes over 40 years the institute now had 100 fully tame foxes. Tameability has brought with it other changes, like floppy ears and white-tipped tails where pigment has been lost from the fur. Another experiment, reported in today's Science by Dr. Brian Hare of Harvard and colleagues, shows that dogs have a special ability to pick up human cues. Chimpanzees will notice where a person is looking but do not take the hint that the box being looked at is the one holding the hidden food. Dogs get the picture immediately, Dr. Hare reports. Wolves, though very smart, are much less adept than dogs at following human cues, suggesting that dogs may have been selected for this ability. So were dogs' ancestors selected for tameability or trainability? Dr. Ray Coppinger, a dog behavior expert at Hampshire College, believes that neither is the case. Wolves domesticated themselves, Dr. Coppinger argues in a recent book, "Dogs," written with his wife, Lorna Coppinger. Wolves, which are scavengers as well as hunters, would have hung around the campsite for scraps, and those that learned to be less afraid of people survived and flourished, in his view. "It was natural selection - the dogs did it, not people," Dr. Coppinger said. "The trouble with the theory that people domesticated dogs is that it requires thousands of dogs, just as Belyaev used thousands of foxes." From the half-tamed, camp-following wolves, he believes, people may then have adopted some cubs into the household and found that they could be trained. Hunter-gatherer peoples often bring back baby wild animals and keep them as pets until they become unmanageable. Dr. James Serpell, an expert on dog behavior at the University of Pennsylvania, believes that this is a more likely explanation of dog domestication than that people adopted scavengers. The particular population of East Asian wolves identified by Dr. Savolainen's genetic studies, Dr. Serpell suggests, might have had some special feature that made them easier to train. Once dogs had been domesticated, they would have been of great value to hunter-gatherer societies, though it is hard to know what specific quality the domesticators sought. "They could have been useful as guard dogs, for hunting, as an emergency food supply, as bed warmers," Dr. Leonard said. When two species live together for a long time, each usually influences the genetically conferred qualities of the other. People may have selected preferred abilities in the dog, but dogs too may have fostered their favorite qualities in people - not of course deliberately but simply by giving people who used dogs a better chance of surviving than people who did not. "This is a symbiotic relationship with substantial time depth," said Dr. Richard Klein, a Stanford University archaeologist. "You could imagine dogs would be useful for giving warning signals, or tracking other animals, so you can see how both sides would benefit." If people and dogs have been living together for a long time, "there would have been some coevolution of traits that made them function together better," Dr. Serpell said. Dogs' ability to pick up on human cues, as shown by Dr. Hare's study, is an example. Dr. Hare hopes to visit Novosibirsk and test Dr. Belyaev's tame silver foxes. If the foxes do just as well as dogs in interpreting human behavior, that will suggest that selecting for tameability alone brings about trainability as well, perhaps because calmer dogs are better learners. If the foxes flunk the test, however, that would indicate that trainability must be selected for separately, Dr. Hare said. Dogs were probably the first animal to be domesticated and seem to have assumed considerable importance in early human societies. Dr. Darcy Morey, a University of Kansas archaeologist who has studied dog burials all over the world, speaks of the "incredible compatibility of wolves and men." The finding that pre-Columbian settlers brought their dogs with them from the Old World is an indication of the animals' value to them. |
|
* A cold, wet nose indicates good health - The state of a dog's proboscis is not a certain sign of health. Normal canine body temperature ranges from 101 to 103 degrees; however, veterinarians agree a dog may still have a cold, wet nose while running a temperature of 105 degrees. Never disregard other possible signs of illness simply because a dog's nose says otherwise. * Dogs eat grass because they are sick or have worms - It's actually perfectly normal for dogs to eat small amounts of grass. The ancestors of dogs have chowed down on it for centuries as a source of added roughage to the diet. A problem with consumption arises when dogs don't have access to it through the long winter. When they're suddenly exposed to fresh grass, they tend to eat too much and can't digest. Since these large quantities act as an irritant, the dog throws up. The owner then thinks the dog ate the grass to induce vomiting. But, such is not the case. * A wagging tail means a happy dog - It's not so much the wag itself so much as it's wagged that's important. A dominant, aggressive dog may wag its tail, but it will be more erect, upward. The friendly wag is horizontal and really rapid, with the entire rear end moving. Before approaching an unfamiliar dog it's best to consider its entire demeanor. Signs of aggression can include any combination of snarling, laid-back ears, raised hackles, an assertive stance and a raised, slightly wagging tail. Because dogs communicate with the tails, taking the time to learn what different uses of this highly mobile appendage mean strengthen the bond with your pet. * Dogs see only in black and white - The canine eye actually contains a variety of photoreceptors, or light detectors, that allow the animal to see. Some are shaped like rods, some like cones. Cone-shaped photoreceptors are the basis for color vision. Because dogs' eyes have significantly more rods than cones, researchers once believed dogs saw only in black and white. Research conducted in the 1980s at the University of California at Santa Barbara indicated otherwise: The studies revealed dogs could distinguish between a red ball and a blue ball, white light and colored lights, and closely related hues of violet and blue. They cannot make a distinction between colors from greenish yellow through orange and red. As more research is done, our limited understanding of canine vision is sure to shift again. |
|
Reprinted from the Whole Pet Journal "Written By and For Pet lovers with a Holistic Bent" Issue# 26, September 4, 2002 What makes Chocolate so TOXIC for dogs? How harmful are Hershey's products for dogs? From Kirk and Bistner's Handbook of Veterinary Procedures and Emergency Treatment 6th edition:
The concentration of theobromine varies with the formulation of the chocolate, therefore: Milk chocolate has 44mg/oz (154mg/100gm): toxic dose for 50 lb dog - 50 oz of milk chocolate. 9 Hershey's Kisses contain 91 mg of theobromine Semisweet chocolate has 150 mg/oz (528mg/100gm): toxic dose for 50 lb dog - 15 oz of semisweet chocolate Baking chocolate 390mg/oz (1365 mg/100gm): toxic dose for 50 lb dog - 5 oz of baking chocolate Thus a dog eating one ounce of baking chocolate would have to eat almost 3 oz of semisweet or 10 oz of milk chocolate to get the same dose of theobromine. The theobromine in candies consisting of chocolate that is coated over some other substance - as in filled candies and chocolate coated dried fruits, etc. will be more dilute than that in pure chocolate bars and solid chocolate candies. Obviously the chocolate in milk chocolate is quite dilute and this is why many dogs can eat a piece here and there and seem not to show toxic effects, how many dogs would get ahold of 50 oz at a time? This is not true of the more concentrated forms however. Dr. Sue Bank's experience was that she had two dogs, a 95 pound one and a 60 pound one. They got ahold of 2 one pound bags of Nestle's semi-sweet chocolate pieces (a bag each). The 95 pound dog survived but the 60 pound dog ingested a toxic dose. The problem with feeding a dog milk chocolate as a treat is that it develops a liking for chocolate and since dogs do not seem to be as sensitive to bitter tastes as humans - it may then eat the more concentrated, and thus quite toxic, baker's chocolate if it gets a chance or it will consume a toxic amount of milk or semi-sweet chocolate if it can get into a improperly stored supply. Treatment which is best administered by someone with medical training follows the same strategy as treatment for caffeine overdose:
Administration of an activated charcoal slurry is a major component of the treatment and needs to be administered by a veterinarian - it is not a home treatment. |
|
[NOTE: Keep in mind that Area codes may have changed since this list was compiled.] Eye Dog Foundation Fidelco Guide Dog Foundation Inc. Freedom Guide Dogs Guide Dog Foundation for the Blind, Inc. Guide Dogs for the Blind, Inc. Guide Dogs for the Blind (Oregon Campus) Guide Dogs of America Guide Dogs of the Desert, Inc. Guiding Eyes for the Blind, Inc. Kansas Specialty Dog Service Leader Dogs for the Blind, Inc. Pilot Dogs, Inc. The Seeing Eye, Inc. Southeastern Guide Dogs, Inc. Southwest Guide Dog Foundation Upstate Guide Dog Association Inc. |
|
Sheila Styron, President Ann Kysor, Vice President Abbie Vincent, Secretary Dan Kysor,Treasurer Melita Waters, Immediate Past President Jerry Arakawa, Director Linda Chung, Director Dave Foster, Editor |
 |
||
| Home | Articles | About Our Organization |
| News and Events |  |
GDUC Officers |
| "Forward" - Our Newsletter | How to contact GDUC | |
| Donations | Links | |
| Laws Regarding Guide Dogs: California Federal | ||
| Videos - Service Animals and the Law: Responding, Welcome (English), and Welcome (Spanish) | ||
|
Design & Hosting by:
Phase One Web Site Design & Hosting |
|||||||||
|
Copyright © 2001 -
Guide Dog Users of California |
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||