Quote: charlie snyder

Nestle/Purina is a major contributor to Delta and has placed people on it's board. Nestle, as you may recall, was the target of a major boycott over it's marketing practices in developing countries. Boycotters said the company sent people all over the Third World countries to convince mothers that mother's milk was bad and their babies would only thrive on Nestles' powdered forumla. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott

Wow. There's your "root cause" of this action. Amazing.

It's so weird that this post was on here this morning. I just got off the phone with the children's hospital in my area and she said they don't allow anyone to do therapy dog work there now unless they are Delta certified. They used to use Therapy Dog Intl, but switched because of the Delta's policy with raw, and because Delta is now requiring a yearly evaluation of temperament and vaccinations.

I have emailed my area TDI evaluator to ask if their policies are still the same. Someone told me they may be forced to be stricter too because of the requirements of the facilities they visit.

 Quote: michael_wise

 Quote: konnie hein

 Quote: rob abel

The risk to fragile humans is too great...

If that is the case, then the fragile humans should probably not have furry visitors of any type, regardless of diet. JMO.

Thank you! My thoughts exactly!

So don't do TD then. Life is that simple. Just because your dog has a title and a certificate saying that they are a TD doesn't make the dog owner qualified to make a medical judgment that their dog isn't a threat to a facility full of ill patients with varying conditions. It's the owner of the facility who sets the standard of what they will allow into their center, it's the medical staff who decide if a patient is well enough to see dogs and the only way they're able to do this is IF they are able to set minimum standards for dogs to come in. Therapy dog program IMO walks a fine line between quality of life/wellness and unneeded risk. Personally I'm glad Delta society is setting higher standards concerning temperament and training and I understand the hesitation on the part of the medical staff to having a raw fed dog in their building. Their patients are after all their highest priority and risk for them equals litigation.

I have seen "therapy dogs" walked in to places where the dog was simply in no condition to be there with poop stuck to it's backside, clumps of hair falling off it's hips, or the dog lacking the simple training to walk nicely on a leash in public. I've even seen a vested therapy dog take a snap at a guy in a motorized wheelchair. You can't tell me that higher standards aren't needed.

I guess my point to you guys is that therapy dog programs are a massive privilege. Really if being told how your dog needs to behave and how clean/bacteria free your dog must be to enter is a deal breaker you probably shouldn't have been there in the first place. Personally if an activity is that important to me I'll adapt to the changes required for me to continue doing it.

I wonder what about the dogs that visit troubled youth or others that are NOT immuno compromised or even sick at all physically.

It is shed in excrement....so shouldn't they be requiring a good bath before every visit?

Someone local here that has a visiting zoo says that some ruling agency told her she had to feed frozen thawed prey to her snakes to reduce salmonella......HUH? That and the foxes, wolves and other carnivores she has have to have cooked food.

Seems like there should be some testing for shedding pathogens if they are that concerned.

Also should be noted that not all facilities require a TD certification at all. Which is a good and bad thing. I have seen certified dogs that I really wonder how they did it. I have my own dogs that visit and they are not certified. I consider it work and a privelege. So NO way would I take an animal that would endanger the residents. (and yes, I do bathe them before they visit)

Well said Melissa.

I do AAT with Drift. We work in a mental health facility, so our clients aren't physically sick. The facility we work in is happy with the work that Drift does, and is not concerned with her being certified by any specific group, just that she passes the test.

I feel very priviliged each day that I am able to take my dog to work. If they should decide to change their rules, then I would either go along with them, or choose to not take my dog to work any more. It's that simple.

Therapy dog work IS all about the clients. It's not about the handler's personal opinions about feeding, or vaccinations, or ego. It's about what's best for the clients. That's the bottom line.

My humble opinion...

--Kelly

Yes. But wouldn't it be better if the decisions they were making had some basis in documented reality? They might just as well decide that all GSDs are too high a risk. There's no evidence of that either, but you could probably scare enough uninformed people into believing it to get the rules changed. Clearly they have the right to set any standards they want to. Just as people who disagree have the right to complain. Some complainer got it changed once. It won't change again without challenge.

There are several facilities that won't allow big dogs to be TD on their property. Drift is a great TD, but she wouldn't be allowed there because she's a GSD. So, she just won't go to those facilities. Again, simple. I would be sad for the clients that I think would benefit from "Drift Therapy" but it's not my decision to make.

I have to take it on faith that the managing board of Delta took all things into consideration when they made their decision. Banning all raw fed dogs was probably the easiest solution for them. You can't say raw fed can go into this facility and not that one... it would get too complicated to keep straight.

I also have to assume that somewhere, a raw feeder took things for granted and screwed it up for the rest. That's usually how crap like this comes about.

Do I like the decision? No. Am I going to let it ruin my life? No. If the facility I work for would change their rules, I would fight for Drift's position, but again, ultimately, the decision is not mine to make. My ass is not the one getting sued if a person gets sick and they happened to have contact with a raw fed TD.

So a raw feeder really, really, really, wants to be a member of Delta. Go with THK, or home cooked. There are compromises available without completely giving up your beliefs.

Complaining may get things changed, or it could just make you look like a whiner. The coin could go either way. I would educate myself a little more about the decision, who made it, and why it was made before I started complaining too loudly though.

Again, just my opinion...

 Quote: rob abel

 Quote: charlie snyder

Nestle/Purina is a major contributor to Delta and has placed people on it's board. Nestle, as you may recall, was the target of a major boycott over it's marketing practices in developing countries. Boycotters said the company sent people all over the Third World countries to convince mothers that mother's milk was bad and their babies would only thrive on Nestles' powdered forumla. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott

Wow. There's your "root cause" of this action. Amazing.

I'd bet a large wager that this is the actual reason that RAW feed therapy dogs are not allowed, it's strictly Delta bowing to their masters.
I'm glad that I got out of therapy dogs, the politics of it *sucks*.

Great letter sent to Delta!

http://www.truthaboutpetfood.com/articles/did-purina-executive-influence-delta-society%E2%80%99s-ban-of-raw-feeding.html

Thanks for the link Tammy! That was a well written letter with lots of info to back it all up. I really have so much respect for
Lew Olson. I am reading her new book right now. It is a great read.
http://leerburg.com/9000.htm

Note: this article was Written By: Susan Thixton but she recommends the book listed above. My error.