Rest In Peace 34 guineapigs :(

[PigPandemonium]

That's completely unfair. I think maybe this is just a cultural divide that we should just accept. In britain, pet shops encourage you to keep guinea pigs outdoors weather permitting, all of my friends think it's strange and a bit sad that mine have to stay indoors and they don't get to run around and graze on grass all day. We have stricter laws on keeping dogs than in the US (that I've heard) so maybe we feel safer in the knowledge that dangerous dogs aren't around, and owners have to keep a close eye on them or they may be seen as dangerous and put down (perhaps a bit too far as they do have natural instincts...but anyway..). On the other hand, in the US people often de-claw their cats, which is NOT recommended at all here, as the cats can't then climb trees and fences if they need to escape.
As I said, just a cultural divide, for us it's sometimes better for them outside when it's properly secured - they really don't face many threats, and ok, being mauled by a dog is horrendous, but children sometimes get mauled by dogs too; should we keep our kids indoors at all time with no access to pets? it's just a tragic ACCIDENT...maybe it could have been prevented, but it doesn't mean that the rest of us don't take the proper precautions...

The point is that she now knows that it's unsafe to be keeping her guinea pigs outside, yet is still doing it. When I got my first rat I fed her nutty mixed pellets because that's what the pet store told me was best, however after I found out they were not safe for my rat, I changed. Here it's common to keep guinea pigs in extremely small cages, however once most people learn they are doing it wrong they change. That's why I judged her. Most people after learning they are treating their pet badly would change what they are doing but she is not, hence me guessing that she doesn't think of her pets so much as family but as interesting things. I don't think it's wildly unfair.

 

[AilsaStockwell]

Just because they're housed outdoors and spend most of the day in the run doesn't mean we couldn't play with them, we had cuddles, or sat in the run with them pretty much every day after school - which got us outdoors too which is always good, and even when we didn't have time they would be held to put them out in the morning and to bed at night. We could see exactly when one of ours became ill, we don't just chuck them out in the garden and leave them to it, me and my mother just feel it's much better for them to have constant grazing, and when I put mine out on the grass they sit and squeak at the bird song and now they get excited everytime the back door opens because they want to go outside. predators and weather? they have a secure run, with a lid, and a small hutch if the weather suddenly turns and a secure hutch at night, which sometimes we bring in if the temperature really drops in the winter. My mum's had guinea pigs outside for 45 odd years and not once has there been a problem, or at least one that wouldn't have happened had they been indoors (loss of movement in back legs in old age for instance), and she's lived in various neighbourhoods where there were foxes, and then a rough neighbourhood with nightmare kids around. we're having to keep more of an eye out for my indoor guinea pigs while they stay at my parents with me for the summer than we do the outdoor ones, as we don't know what the cat might do! so how does keeping them indoors have less risk?

 

[AilsaStockwell]

a fence wont keep a dog out if it really once in.. i had a medium sized dog that could clear a 8 foot fence no prob..

Ok, but I live in a cul-de-sac of 25 houses, 4 of those have dogs, and they're all house-dogs which only go out to go to the toilet, for which they're supervised, except 2 dogs which are the best behaved dogs and are loathed to leave their owners side to go into the garden at all! so if we know our neighbours have safe dogs surely it's not a problem? If somebody moved in across the road with a new dog we'd be very wary, and if there was any hint that they were a problem dog we'd have to re-think.

 

[xTayzx]

Ok guys from what im gathering they werent living outside it was just grazing time. No she has more then 34 guineapigs and disaster struck again this morning. Another 12 guineapigs were killed as they werent fast enough, 2 of the 12 were another cavy studs piggies. 29 being pedigree.
Why does she have so many guineapigs? Because she is an actual breeder. She doesnt backyard breed she breeds pigs to get them to the best and she does a real good job at it. This is a horrible day but she tracked the dog to the owner and today council will be putting the dog down hopefully. I feel sorry for the dog but the owner did not secure him in his backyard and so its the owners fault IMO.

Guys if your going to start blabbering about where guineapigs should live, before people, guineapigs roamed the grass lands in small little herds. They had no house to live in, they had to keep themselves alive by instinct. So yes they do better inside, but my pigs live outside in a hutch all day and are brought inside at night. When they go on the grass its under a mere crate(of coure we are always then when they are grazing)
This is tragedy, not a fight.
So for the sake of all 46 guineapigs that died in the last 2 days, back off! I dont want to read anymore do this do that its their fault. You dont know the whole story, I dont even but they are a very good guineapig breeder and honestly I would buy from them if I wanted another pig. Why would I not adopt? Because the only adoption place near me is 6 hours away and I dont have the time or holidays from work to travel down there and back so dont yous blow up at me. From now on, you dont like this page then leave. This was made for the guineapigs that are now gone nothing can bring them back.

 

[Meaghan]

That's completely unfair. I think maybe this is just a cultural divide that we should just accept. In britain, pet shops encourage you to keep guinea pigs outdoors weather permitting, all of my friends think it's strange and a bit sad that mine have to stay indoors and they don't get to run around and graze on grass all day. We have stricter laws on keeping dogs than in the US (that I've heard) so maybe we feel safer in the knowledge that dangerous dogs aren't around, and owners have to keep a close eye on them or they may be seen as dangerous and put down (perhaps a bit too far as they do have natural instincts...but anyway..). On the other hand, in the US people often de-claw their cats, which is NOT recommended at all here, as the cats can't then climb trees and fences if they need to escape.
As I said, just a cultural divide, for us it's sometimes better for them outside when it's properly secured - they really don't face many threats, and ok, being mauled by a dog is horrendous, but children sometimes get mauled by dogs too; should we keep our kids indoors at all time with no access to pets? it's just a tragic ACCIDENT...maybe it could have been prevented, but it doesn't mean that the rest of us don't take the proper precautions...

Two things I want to address in this: The DDA and declawing.

First off, the DDA (Dangerous Dogs Act) is actually quite a cruel law that punishes dogs for 'looking' dangerous. So, if that's what you call stricter, then yes. Unfortunately we do have quite a bit of BSL (Breed Specific Legislation) here in the US. We have also studied it here and it does nothing to improve safety in areas that it is implemented. So I really think that the public is under the illusion that you are safer because of these laws. Sadly, you aren't. The people who want to own dangerous dogs will still own them, regardless of the laws. Also, not all individual dogs of a specific breed are dangerous. The DDA targets "pit bull types", but BSL in the US has spanned 70 breeds, including Golden Retrievers, Labradors, Pugs, and French Bulldogs (yes the little flat nosed creatures), as well as the typical Pitties, Rottweilers, Dobermans, and German Shepards. I have lived around several Dobermans and Pit Bull breeds, and I currently live with a Rottweiler in Oregon. None are dangerous. It's people that make dogs dangerous by not training them properly.

Second, declawing. Yes, we declaw cats in the US. Most people are under the impression it is cruel; it is to some extent. I am torn on this issue. My family has two declawed cats. It was not my choice, and if it were, I wouldn't have declawed them. However, I do see it as necessary in certain circumstances. Sometimes, older people enjoy having cats. But older people also tend to have thinner skin, and even trimmed kitty claws will cause daily injuries (I have seen this in my own grandmother). What is more important in this? The cats claws or giving it a loving home? And that's neglecting the benefits to the people who own them too, because people who own cats and dogs tend to live longer. That's just one example, and I do think declawing should be a last resort. Cats who are declawed are typically kept indoors, like our own, so they wouldn't need to climb trees and fences.

Cultural divide or not, there is no reason to encourage keeping pets outdoors. If it isn't suitable to make your child sleep in a shed, why would you make your fur-child sleep there?

 

[pinky]

As far as guinea pigs roaming the grasslands in little herds, they're prey animals and are pretty low on the food chain.... which means they can easily become dinner for a predator and also means they hide illnesses so they have less chance of being targeted. Pups are born running so they have half a chance of surviving. Running in herds allow the strong to escape and the weak fall behind and end up being eaten. At least in the wild, they have the herd to run with. In a hutch in a yard, they're trapped and at the mercy of whatever they're exposed to.

 

[pinky]

I think declawing is cruel. It not only removes the claw, it removes part of the bone. Can you imagine have the tips of your fingers cut off and then having to use your fingers to dig in a litter box? If claws are an issue with an elderly family member, I think it might be better to get a dog.

 

[Paula]

Ok guys from what im gathering they werent living outside it was just grazing time. No she has more then 34 guineapigs and disaster struck again this morning. Another 12 guineapigs were killed as they werent fast enough, 2 of the 12 were another cavy studs piggies. 29 being pedigree.

So, wait, in two separate incidents 34 and then 12 pigs were killed in some sort of dog attack, but the pigs aren't living outside? That's virtually unbelievable, because if they weren't living outside then why weren't they inside the day after the first attack that killed 34 of them? It's just common sense that if the animals had anywhere else to be, that's where they'd be, rather than being out and accessible for a second attack.

I don't care that she's a breeder or what the background of any of the pigs might be - they deserved better than to be mauled and attacked in such a way. The failings that put them in such a place to be attacked is a true tragedy, no matter what their pedigree background.

I also think it's unfortunate that a dog might lose its life for, once again, largely human error. His owners let him loose and the owners of the guinea pig allowed them to be outside (whether as permanent housing or not) which made them supremely vulnerable to the attack. No excuse on either part and sadly the dog will pay the price for their failings.

Do you have a link to this, by chance? I'd like to read the story myself rather than getting secondhand info. I did a brief search but wasn't able to find anything on Google. If you have something, please share.

 

[CavySpirit]

How the **** can disaster strike AGAIN???!!

xTayzx, you sound like you know this breeder personally.

She doesnt backyard breed she breeds pigs to get them to the best and she does a real good job at it.

You must the way you are making all these statements about how great and wonderful she is and how you'd adopt from her.

I'm aghast at this. What does it take for a breeder NOT do a good job for you?? Geez.

And I say bullocks to the 'cultural divide.' As was mentioned earlier, the San Francisco Bay Area and the entire West Coast has a better climate than England. It is not appropriate to house guinea pigs outdoors here, either. It's just how the British society has been socialized. It's socially acceptable to you, so you defend it. We have plenty of British members who DO take issue with housing guinea pigs outdoors for the same reasons we all give. It is socially acceptable here too, and we fight it nonetheless.

I also agree that it's a travesty that the dog has to lose his life. The owner is clearly at fault. The owner should be investigated and her animals removed.

Can't believe you think this is a good breeder. I'm also looking forward to more first-hand details, as it's getting very strange-sounding indeed.

 

[Meaghan]

I think declawing is cruel. It not only removes the claw, it removes part of the bone. Can you imagine have the tips of your fingers cut off and then having to use your fingers to dig in a litter box? If claws are an issue with an elderly family member, I think it might be better to get a dog.

My grandmother is actually afraid of dogs, so that wouldn't have worked. In some other cases, maybe people are allergic to dogs, but not cats? Maybe people are just cat people? And also, dog nails are just as damaging to elderly people as cat nails are. In any case, if the cat has a good home and has no ill effects from the declawing, it shouldn't be an issue. After all, it's better to have a home minus the claws than to be euthanized because it doesn't have a home. And every single one of our cats has literally been picked up off the street because they were sick, or adopted from a shelter. In the case of my grandmother's cats, my brother rescued them as kittens.

But I would like to say about the actual surgery itself, it doesn't remove part of the bone. It removes the most distal phalange, because unlike human nails, animal nails tend (not always) to grow out of bone instead of out of soft tissue. It is impossible to remove the nail without removing the phalange. I have done a lot of research on it, and as a Pre-Vet student I would have to say that it is overall less painful than a spay operation. Done properly, that is. If it is done by a licensed veterinarian, it is very short (less than 5 minutes for both front paws) and the cat doesn't have to go under isoflourane anesthesia, the kind that many animals are allergic to. And with proper post-surgery care, newspaper for a litter box and pain medication, there should be no complications. I see it as no more cruel than any other operation done on an animal, even less so in some cases. And I'd honestly rather see a cat declawed for a good reason (not all reasons are good reasons) than a dog's ears or tail docked for aesthetic purposes. I do not condone declawing in most cases, but I see it as a necessary evil in others (akin to tipping the ear of a feral cat, or something along that line).

In some cases of polydactylity, declawing is actually necessary because the claws can grow sideways, between pads, or in other inopportune places that could cause chronic pain and infections in a cat's paws.

 

[pinky]

My grandmother is actually afraid of dogs, so that wouldn't have worked. In some other cases, maybe people are allergic to dogs, but not cats? Maybe people are just cat people? And also, dog nails are just as damaging to elderly people as cat nails are. In any case, if the cat has a good home and has no ill effects from the declawing, it shouldn't be an issue. After all, it's better to have a home minus the claws than to be euthanized because it doesn't have a home. And every single one of our cats has literally been picked up off the street because they were sick, or adopted from a shelter. In the case of my grandmother's cats, my brother rescued them as kittens.

But I would like to say about the actual surgery itself, it doesn't remove part of the bone. It removes the most distal phalange, because unlike human nails, animal nails tend (not always) to grow out of bone instead of out of soft tissue. It is impossible to remove the nail without removing the phalange. I have done a lot of research on it, and as a Pre-Vet student I would have to say that it is overall less painful than a spay operation. Done properly, that is. If it is done by a licensed veterinarian, it is very short (less than 5 minutes for both front paws) and the cat doesn't have to go under isoflourane anesthesia, the kind that many animals are allergic to. And with proper post-surgery care, newspaper for a litter box and pain medication, there should be no complications. I see it as no more cruel than any other operation done on an animal, even less so in some cases. And I'd honestly rather see a cat declawed for a good reason (not all reasons are good reasons) than a dog's ears or tail docked for aesthetic purposes. I do not condone declawing in most cases, but I see it as a necessary evil in others (akin to tipping the ear of a feral cat, or something along that line).

In some cases of polydactylity, declawing is actually necessary because the claws can grow sideways, between pads, or in other inopportune places that could cause chronic pain and infections in a cat's paws.

Saying it's less painful than a spay doesn't justify inflicting pain with a procedure that's not necessary. Cats also bite. Does that mean we'd have to extract its teeth? Trimming ears or docking a tail is just as cruel. It's easy to try and justify declawing by saying it keeps cats from scratching someone or shredding furniture, but if you declaw a cat and it gets out of the house, it's lost its main defense.... There's no comparison in declawing to trimming an ear of a feral. A distal phalange is a part of the bone.

 

[Paula]

Second, declawing. Yes, we declaw cats in the US. Most people are under the impression it is cruel; it is to some extent. I am torn on this issue. My family has two declawed cats. It was not my choice, and if it were, I wouldn't have declawed them. However, I do see it as necessary in certain circumstances. Sometimes, older people enjoy having cats. But older people also tend to have thinner skin, and even trimmed kitty claws will cause daily injuries (I have seen this in my own grandmother). What is more important in this? The cats claws or giving it a loving home? And that's neglecting the benefits to the people who own them too, because people who own cats and dogs tend to live longer.

I hadn't seen that this had somehow become a discussion on declawing, but now that I have I can't help but pose the question: Why should a person's enjoyment mean permanent amputation and disfigurement of an animal's phalanges? A loving home is one that would find a way around this mutilation and not one that would force an animal they "love" to endure the psychological trauma of this amputation.

 

[Meaghan]

Saying it's less painful than a spay doesn't justify inflicting pain with a procedure that's not necessary. Cats also bite. Does that mean we'd have to extract its teeth? Trimming ears or docking a tail is just as cruel. It's easy to try and justify declawing by saying it keeps cats from scratching someone or shredding furniture, but if you declaw a cat and it gets out of the house, it's lost its main defense.... There's no comparison in declawing to trimming an ear of a feral. A distal phalange is a part of the bone.

No, our cats don't bite. They also don't intentionally scratch. When I meant they can hurt elderly skin, I meant that when the reach up to paw at her, or when they walk across her lap. Simple daily things. Unfortunately, it actually was not because they were hurting ornimental things like furniture, but because they were accidentally hurting her.

And unfortunately, if the cats get out, predators are not their biggest concern. My grandmother lives where I grew up, in the SF Bay Area. She lives on a major road, an undivided four lane road that is posted at 35mph (but if you know anything about CA, its that we speed. Most go around 50mph). If they get out, they'll die from getting hit by a car much faster than they would running into trouble from predators. Claws are a moot point then. Either way, yes, accidents happen, but we are incredibly careful not to let them outside. In the 6 years they have lived there, they haven't gotten out once.

And no, the distal phalange is not part of a bone. It is the last bone on a "finger" for a cat.

I hadn't seen that this had somehow become a discussion on declawing, but now that I have I can't help but pose the question: Why should a person's enjoyment mean permanent amputation and disfigurement of an animal's phalanges? A loving home is one that would find a way around this mutilation and not one that would force an animal they "love" to endure the psychological trauma of this amputation.

In an ideal world, the answer would be that they wouldn't have to declaw cats. But again, working in a shelter environment, seeing, I kid you not, hundreds of animals euthanized because they have no homes, I would much rather them to be declawed than die because no one wants them.

 

[pinky]

No, our cats don't bite. They also don't intentionally scratch. When I meant they can hurt elderly skin, I meant that when the reach up to paw at her, or when they walk across her lap. Simple daily things. Unfortunately, it actually was not because they were hurting ornimental things like furniture, but because they were accidentally hurting her.

And unfortunately, if the cats get out, predators are not their biggest concern. My grandmother lives where I grew up, in the SF Bay Area. She lives on a major road, an undivided four lane road that is posted at 35mph (but if you know anything about CA, its that we speed. Most go around 50mph). If they get out, they'll die from getting hit by a car much faster than they would running into trouble from predators. Claws are a moot point then. Either way, yes, accidents happen, but we are incredibly careful not to let them outside. In the 6 years they have lived there, they haven't gotten out once.

And no, the distal phalange is not part of a bone. It is the last bone on a "finger" for a cat.



In an ideal world, the answer would be that they wouldn't have to declaw cats. But again, working in a shelter environment, seeing, I kid you not, hundreds of animals euthanized because they have no homes, I would much rather them to be declawed than die because no one wants them.

I didn't say your cat bites. I said cats bite. My point is that cats are what they are. If a cat isn't suited to someone's lifestyle, get a different breed animal instead of amputating parts of its toes.

 

[Meaghan]

I didn't say your cat bites. I said cats bite. My point is that cats are what they are. If a cat isn't suited to someone's lifestyle, get a different breed animal instead of amputating parts of its toes.

I realize that you didn't mean that our cats bite. I was just making a point about that. If they were just being cats and scratching furniture or playing in their litter box or doing all the other wonderfully annoying things that cats do, it would be one thing. But it is another to have them hurting the person trying to give them a good home. Cats are probably one of the best companions for her at this point; as I mentioned before, she is afraid of dogs, she does not like rodents (sad for me, I love little critters), and ferrets are illegal in California.

As I said in the last part of my previous post, it is a better reality than leaving them to die in overcrowded Californian shelters.

 

[Paula]

In an ideal world, the answer would be that they wouldn't have to declaw cats. But again, working in a shelter environment, seeing, I kid you not, hundreds of animals euthanized because they have no homes, I would much rather them to be declawed than die because no one wants them.

What do you think happens to those cats when they develop severe behavioral issues that stem from the psychological trauma of losing -- for reasons completely unknown to them -- parts of their toes? They're returned to the shelter, or they go from home to home to home because most people aren't equipped to deal with such severe issues. I wouldn't call that a life that's preferable, because ultimately they become unadoptable and after a life of trauma and misunderstanding, they are often euthanized anyway.

 

[pinky]

I realize that you didn't mean that our cats bite. I was just making a point about that. If they were just being cats and scratching furniture or playing in their litter box or doing all the other wonderfully annoying things that cats do, it would be one thing. But it is another to have them hurting the person trying to give them a good home. Cats are probably one of the best companions for her at this point; as I mentioned before, she is afraid of dogs, she does not like rodents (sad for me, I love little critters), and ferrets are illegal in California.

As I said in the last part of my previous post, it is a better reality than leaving them to die in overcrowded Californian shelters.

I don't believe they are better off being declawed. If a cat isn't the right pet, select a different breed and another animal is being saved that would have been euthanized. The other thing is, cats have different temperaments and not all claw at people. I had a cat for 16 years and rarely ever got scratched. Guinea pigs can scratch if you're not careful. I wouldn't cut off their toes, though.

 

[Meaghan]

What do you think happens to those cats when they develop severe behavioral issues that stem from the psychological trauma of losing -- for reasons completely unknown to them -- parts of their toes? They're returned to the shelter, or they go from home to home to home because most people aren't equipped to deal with such severe issues. I wouldn't call that a life that's preferable, because ultimately they become unadoptable and after a life of trauma and misunderstanding, they are often euthanized anyway.

I cannot personally answer this because I have never seen a cat that has had behavioral issues due to declawing. I have heard of it happening, but the cats that we have do not have behavioral issues, and a few of my friends have one or two declawed cats, none of which have behavioral issues. In the shelter, none of the cats that I saw euthanized were due to behavior of being declawed. In fact, I'm pretty sure all the cats I saw euthanized that were declawed were simply elderly and sick, and the shelter had no money to treat the chronic conditions (kidney failure, diabetes, etc.). So I can't comment on that as I have no personal experience with it.

And although I am certainly no expert, I volunteered over 300 hours this past year at a shelter, and surely if it were a common occurrence to have behavioral issues with declawing, we would have at least one cat come in like that. We did take in several declawed cats (probably about 20 or 30), just none with behavioral issues.

I don't believe they are better off being declawed. If a cat isn't the right pet, select a different breed and another animal is being saved that would have been euthanized. The other thing is, cats have different temperaments and not all claw at people. I had a cat for 16 years and rarely ever got scratched. Guinea pigs can scratch if you're not careful. I wouldn't cut off their toes, though.

You don't have to believe when you look at numbers. It is just my personal opinion, but it's better than being dead. I'm sorry, I won't repeat myself about the different animals, I already explained that. A cat is a good animal temperament and requirement wise for her.

And I'm also certain that you are not almost 90 years old with paper thin skin, which would explain why you don't get scratches from daily things. I certainly don't get scratched from cats walking across my lap. The only cat scars I have are from cutting matted fur off of shelter kitties or drawing blood from them.

 

[pinky]

I cannot personally answer this because I have never seen a cat that has had behavioral issues due to declawing. I have heard of it happening, but the cats that we have do not have behavioral issues, and a few of my friends have one or two declawed cats, none of which have behavioral issues. In the shelter, none of the cats that I saw euthanized were due to behavior of being declawed. In fact, I'm pretty sure all the cats I saw euthanized that were declawed were simply elderly and sick, and the shelter had no money to treat the chronic conditions (kidney failure, diabetes, etc.). So I can't comment on that as I have no personal experience with it.

And although I am certainly no expert, I volunteered over 300 hours this past year at a shelter, and surely if it were a common occurrence to have behavioral issues with declawing, we would have at least one cat come in like that. We did take in several declawed cats (probably about 20 or 30), just none with behavioral issues.



You don't have to believe when you look at numbers. It is just my personal opinion, but it's better than being dead. I'm sorry, I won't repeat myself about the different animals, I already explained that. A cat is a good animal temperament and requirement wise for her.

And I'm also certain that you are not almost 90 years old with paper thin skin, which would explain why you don't get scratches from daily things. I certainly don't get scratched from cats walking across my lap. The only cat scars I have are from cutting matted fur off of shelter kitties or drawing blood from them.

Being 90 or having thin skin doesn't justify declawing. I'll bet if your grandmother saw the actual procedure, she'd be uncomfortable with it. I wouldn't dream of doing something that hurts an animal for my pleasure. Unfortunately, the laws aren't in place yet to prohibit declawing, but I'm sure eventually it will be illegal. It's barbaric. Your comment about it only being phalanges tells me you don't understand how horrific it really is. It is.

 

[Meaghan]

Being 90 or having thin skin doesn't justify declawing. I'll bet if your grandmother saw the actual procedure, she'd be uncomfortable with it. I wouldn't dream of doing something that hurts an animal for my pleasure. Unfortunately, the laws aren't in place yet to prohibit declawing, but I'm sure eventually it will be illegal. It's barbaric. Your comment about it only being phalanges tells me you don't understand how horrific it really is. It is.

My grandmother winces at me holding a rat or guinea pig, so yes, I'm sure she'd wince at witnessing a declawing, or any other surgical procedure. I honestly doubt that declawing will ever be completely banned, as there is no hint that even docking will be banned in the near, or far, future.

As far for it not justifying, it may not for you, but it does for her. And if you carefully check my posts above, you would have seen that it said that I would not have done it if it was me. It is not for pleasure, either, as I have told you multiple times now.

Also, I did not say it was "only" phalanges. I was correcting you saying that it was part of a bone. It is not part, it is all of one the bones in a paw, the distal phalange in all digits. It would seem that you, not myself, don't understand what declawing truly is, and how it is performed. I have seen declawing done, I know how it is.