I’m so looking forward to your next post!

Speaking of travelling with animals, you may appreciate this image. When my first Bouvier’s breeder and her husband and young son moved from Nova Scotia to Ontario, they loaded all six of her adult Bouvs into their van, including my pup-to-be’s pregnant mom. It was over twenty years ago and it was harder then to find motels in these parts that would take pets. So they pulled up to a motel in the evening, signed in, said nothing about the dogs, and then she and her husband took turns running back and forth in the dark sneaking the dogs one or two at a time from the van into their motel room. The next morning they got up before dawn and hustled the dogs out to the van again, and left. It seems that no one ever knew the difference. And somehow, nothing started the dogs barking during the night!

As with children, it’s the responsible adult’s behaviour and competence that makes all the difference.

For about 15 years, I’ve taken my very large dog on road trips. (I’ve had more than one dog during that time, but only one at a time, just for the record.) I am usually able to find a motel somewhere that allows dogs, even big ones. When we expressed our appreciation to one Canadian motel owner, he said that in his experience it’s not the animals who have parties and trash the rooms and destroy things — it’s people. He said that people have cost him far more in repairs than anyone’s dog ever did.

Then again, my experience has been mainly in Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. And a few states.

I think those kinds of limits are probably the only way to get around it. Limits on the number of animals allowed according to space are a good compromise for people and even the animals themselves (animals become stressed when the population is too dense, and cleanups have to be done more often), and to ensure the integrity of the property. I also think that rules about having animals spayed or neutered might be helpful, as this avoids many of the damage-causing behaviours. However, an all-out ban on animals is unreasonable, and even cruel, in cases where people have no other rental options. I think that as more and more people own pets, there will be more understanding on the part of property owners.

Over the years, a number of irresponsible individuals allowed their animal companions to cause damage to their units. The cumulative costs of repairing drywall, sanding floors, replacing carpets, etc. resulted in increased monthly charges for all residents. Finally at a stormy AGM, a by-law was passed; new member residents could not bring their animal companions when they moved in; long-time residents could keep theirs but not accept any new ones into their homes. It was a sad situation; financial concerns won out over humane considerations.

It is terrible that many are condemned to live without animal companions because of the inability of a few to care responsibly for theirs.

Have a particular pet peeve, which this tweaked:

“animals will be the ones who will most suffer from any economic crisis, because they are at the bottom of the chain of concern.”

There are an uncommon number of people who live at the bottom of the food chain, including the homeless, who have animal companions. This is particularly so for people who live alone. Of those who are homeless, many are in that condition precisely because landlords and shelters won’t permit pets in their buildings. In BC, where vacancy rates are already below 1%, 99 out of 100 landlords have no-pets clauses in their leases.

People for whom their animal companions mean the difference between life and death – literally, companionship or suicide -, are left no choice. It’s either be housed or be deprived of the one living thing which helps them maintain their humanity.

I’ve two cats. They’ve kept me alive these past eight years. I’ve been eligible for subsidized housing all that time. But instead, because none of the subsidized housing in this province allows pets, more and more of my $8,000 income is going to pay the rent. Every year, the rent goes up while my income remains the same. There will come a time when my cats and I will be homeless because, at this point, am already paying 70% of my income on rent for this bachelor apt.

Whenever I raise this point with people, the property owners typically insist on their property rights. How can they not see that what’s really at issue is basic human rights; the right, in this case, to do whatever one needs to preserve one’s life? Two decades ago, Ontario saw the light, as have other provinces. Not BC, not Alberta.

Do you have an opinion on this issue?