Comments View as Flat

1. 

   amazingdrx Posted 8:35 am
   10 Aug 2009

   The crucial factor here is that dog ownership teaches humans empathy. That is especially helpful for teaching young children how to someday become good parents. That is why children should have puppies to raise. Dolls won't do it. Dog ownership also tends to prevent people from starting a family out of pure loneliness, a poor excuse for adding more humans to our already overburdened biosphere. Dogs have a smaller carbon footprint than people. Instead of grinching out on kids having pets, it would be better to shift our whole energy and agricultural economy to eliminate human caused GHG and restore soil carbon sequestration with organic fertilizer from recycled, biodigested waste biomass. Like dog poo, and human waste, and farm waste.

   Permalink

2. 

   randino Posted 9:28 am
   10 Aug 2009

   My dad was the head of the Chamber of Commerce, and I ended up being a socialist singing revolutionary Sandinista songs in Nicaragua.  My Mom's journey to being a religious sceptic began with her Southern Baptist upbringing.  Take care with how you impose your beliefs on your boy, Ken. You don't want him to end up working for Massey Energy blowing the tops off mountains, now do you? Randy Cunningham 

   Permalink

3. 

   Oemissions Posted 11:27 am
   10 Aug 2009

   So what happens if every kid in America gets a dog? That's a lot of barking.As for cats, every back alley stinks from the spraying.Sorry to poop on your kids desire, but its the same as everything: give everyone the right to have an automobile and we have a planet over run with automobiles.Consequences! Consequences! Teachable moments! 

   Permalink

4. 

   going nowhere slowly Posted 12:01 pm
   10 Aug 2009

   Daddy Ken--Poor Kuba!  No doubt you want him to grow up to be a responsible, confident, happy person who finds his own unique way of contributing to this crazy enterprise of human civilization, but for now he's stuck being Everyboy, whose every desire has to pass through the impossible filter of "What if everyone did that?"  As a former child myself, I can tell you that drove me crazy.  It's useful at the level of teaching kids not to throw trash on the ground, but it's not useful when it gets to the level of "What if every kid went to college?" or, dare I say, "What if every kid had health care?" (Horrors!) If every kid had a dog and a family that supported the proper care of a dog, I bet there would be a lot less violence and drug use among teenagers, just for starters.  Walking a dog gets people out of their houses and their shells, meeting people, observing their surroundings through the seasons--I can tell you I never noticed how much trash ends up on the ground in my neighborhood, or how many little birds die each spring and summer, or how many different kinds of mushrooms grow in a city block, or how the moss gets really green in the spring well before the grass...you get the idea.  I've made the acquaintance of the guys who hang out on park benches and kids from the projects who break my heart when they look at my sweet little dog and ask fearfully, "Do he bite?" and retired folks taking their walks and all kinds of other dog people.  I knew nothing about my neighborhood before I had a dog.If your son is not walking, or playing with, or training a dog, what will he be doing?  Playing baseball?  Playing video games?  Playing the violin?  Trolling the internet?  What are the carbon footprints of those activities?  What will he learn from them?     Normally I don't tell people how to raise their kids, but you asked, and so I put my vote in for raising each kid in a way that respects and encourages their particular abilities and interests, within the constraints of the family's budget, time, energy level, collective abilities, and interests.  Kuba is an individual.  Only you can tell if it's important for him to have a dog, with all the emotional and social rewards a dog can bring, the responsibilities a dog imposes, and the time he won't have available for other things. But please don't make a decision based on some single criterion (carbon footprint) extrapolated to the entire world.  Take that far enough, and you'll have to conclude that you probably shouldn't have had a kid to begin with.  Which would be a shame, wouldn't it?     

   Permalink

5. 

   rosalie Posted 1:52 pm
   10 Aug 2009

   As a dog lover, I find it hard to accept dogs in the city, aside from their climate footprint impacts.  We had vegetarian dogs who were happy and healthy when we lived in the country, so I know that is possible.  We gave our dog away when we moved to the city because we had already spent enough time there listening to neighbors' dogs bark and whine and howl by the hour, all heartbreaking evidence of unhappiness at being left cooped up alone.   Of course dogs are happy when their owners are with them.  What owners don't see, or hear, are the hours of unhappiness that so many of them seem to experience.  Also, there are few places for dogs to run and play in the city.  And, there is the issue of dog medical care.  While I don't want to see animals suffer, there is part of me that thinks that the huge sums of money we spend on medical care for pets while millions and millions of human children get little or none is not quite right.  I do appreciate that a dog can be a wonderful companion, and that connecting with non-humans is important, but I have seen nothing that makes me think that people who had pets growing up are any more compassionate, thoughtful, or whatever than people who didn't.   I'd vote no, but don't beat yourself up about it, espeically if it is a small dog and the dog won't be left alone much.

   Permalink

6. 

   rcyoder Posted 3:01 pm
   10 Aug 2009

   Feeding, walking, cleaning, and otherwise caring for a pet, especially one rescued from the pound, is an extremely valuable experience for any of us, especially a kid.  How better to learn to take care of "nature" than to have a dog say 'feed me!' or 'walk me!'?  The environment is not as in-your-face-demanding, but a dog will help your son learn valuable life lessons.Pet's teach us to care for others and may help us develop empathy for those who are different from us, dogs make us go for walks -- sometimes out in the wild places, and if you save an animal from death by rescuing it from the pound you gain major good karma points.  :-)Please make sure that your new friend is spayed or neutered.

   Permalink

7. 

   smgrist Posted 3:10 pm
   10 Aug 2009

   Well, first off, I'm not going to vote.  Why should my vote, or anyone elses, help you in anyway with trying to make a decision.  Simple votes tell you nothing.And every situation is different.  We lost a wonderful dog last year to bone cancer.  The dog was adopted, we had him for 13 years, and we had to put him down once he lost heart.  Since then we've bought a new house, which has allowed us to greatly expand our garden.  We're in a rural area with thousands of acres of conserved, farmed, or just plain not used land around us, and it's chock full of woodchucks and deer and raccoons and moles, etc.  We're gardening for a whole slew of univited guests.  And we want to get another dog.  Know what?  A good choice will find us with a dog that has a presence which will unnerve the deer and raccoon club.  So the food we're growing will be ours, not theirs. So, with a circumstance like that, how would that impact the carbon footprint?  Once we have the dog, well, there will be a carbon consequence, like with virtually anything else we do.  I'd go with your heart, and continue doing the best you can everyday with all the choices we have to make.  It's not a perfect world.  

   Permalink

8. 

   bailsout Posted 5:08 pm
   10 Aug 2009

   If the dog or cat is just to keep the kid content, but the concern is the environmental impact, where was the concern for the planet when the choice
   was made to have a child?  However if the choice is between a dog, a cat or another child and the parents opt for the animal, I can respect that.

   Permalink

9. 

   ActivistCEO Posted 8:30 pm
   10 Aug 2009

   Your post, and the comments made by readers, are too dismissive of the option of adopting a shelter dog.  Buying a puppy condemns a shelter dog somewhere in the U.S. to euthanasia.  Even if shelters here in the Northeast sometimes have a pretty good success rate of adopting out dogs, there are  a lot of high-kill shelters in other parts of the country.  Our shelters here bring these dogs here for adoption when they have the room and the funds.
   
   I would be no more likely to buy a puppy when shelter dogs are dying than I would be to create my own baby when children in the developing world are languishing in orphanages.
   
   Sorry, but that's the way I feel about it.

   Permalink

10. 

    Andrée Zaleska Posted 5:32 am
    11 Aug 2009

    Well, wasn't that fun! I'm Kuba's mom, weighing in here with a few extra details.First of all, let me assure you all that Kuba is as green as super-green algae. He's the oldest of our three, and the one most aware of our emperilled eath. He's the one with the perfectionist, judgemental personality that needs to make life "right". He even fought himself on the whole dog thing, once we explained that pets do contribute to the problem of global warming and resource overuse.But he's an animal lover, fond of running and wrestling and games with balls, so the fact that Kuba seems to be a perfect fit for a dog was hard to deny.There will, of course, be no puppy. It will be a shelter dog and a mutt. These are some of the compromises we've made, with Kuba's input.And this blog is all about the compromises we make between doing the right thing for us, and for the rest of the planet. A reductionist logic takes us quickly to "we never should have had kids", and then to "we should just hang ourselves". I've found that people quickly stop listening to anyone who goes that far.Expect some cute dog-and-boy photos around X-mas!Andrée

    Permalink

    1. 

       ActivistCEO Posted 5:30 am
       13 Aug 2009

       People serious about wanting to reduce their “carbon footprint” on
       the Earth have one choice available to them that may yield a large
       long-term benefit – have one less child.A study by statisticians at Oregon State University concluded that
       in the United States, the carbon legacy and greenhouse gas impact of an
       extra child is almost 20 times more important than some of the other
       environmentally sensitive practices people might employ their entire
       lives – things like driving a high mileage car, recycling, or using
       energy-efficient appliances and light bulbs. The research also makes it clear that potential carbon impacts vary
       dramatically across countries. The average long-term carbon impact of a
       child born in the U.S. – along with all of its descendants – is more
       than 160 times the impact of a child born in Bangladesh.

       Permalink

       1. 

          Andrée Zaleska Posted 5:14 pm
          13 Aug 2009

          Activist CEO--Our household is blended, and there are 3 children with 4 parents. That's one less, right?That being said, I found the decision to have children was totally unaffected by any sort of reason at all. And once they're here, you can't beat yourself up with thoughts of all the damage you did by having them without going crazy, or inflicting some kind of subtle abuse on them. Honoring creation means us too.I find myself more susceptible to the argument that one shouldn't bring any more children into this world because we cannot guarantee them a safe future. Ken and I faced that difficult decision last year, with an accidental pregnancy. Painful choice.

          Permalink

11. 

    going nowhere slowly Posted 10:08 am
    11 Aug 2009

    Andree--Thanks for your post!  I'm so glad you're going to get a dog!  It sounds like the right thing to do for you and Kuba.  Our rescue mutt is such a cute, sweet, funny pup--and she was one day away from being killed when the rescue organization sprang her from a rural shelter.  There are so many great dogs out there waiting for homes that you are sure to find a wonderful companion and save a life at the same time. I hope you have many happy years together!

    Permalink

12. 

    envy2000 Posted 7:53 am
    13 Aug 2009

    As long as you adopt a pet from a humane shelter, I think it is okay.  Shelters do not promote breeding, but instead they promote spaying, neutering and decreasing the unwanted animal population.  However, the animals that are there now need good homes.  I hope we are not saying that these animals should all be euthanized to save our carbon footprints.  If you are a responsible person who is ready for the long term commintment of dog, go for it.

    Permalink

13. 

    Jill of all trades Posted 5:27 pm
    13 Aug 2009

    Hello my fellow JP residents.I think enough has been said on the dog/no dog issue, and I am certainly on the dog side. That being said, and your posting assuring us of the rescue origins of the future canine, I can only think of one thing left to say. You made it sound as if you were planning on waiting until christmas time to get a dog? Unless there are financial or other concerns that cause you to pick a time frame like that, I would urge you to start your dog search sooner, and have it possibly last longer, than be later but brief.Huh?Here's the deal, thousands of dogs make their way through our local shelters every year. Not all of them, maybe not even most of them, are going to be the right match for your family. But the more time you give yourselves to look, to visit shelters, to take dogs out (I don't know about ARLs policies, but the MSPCA, which is just a hop, skip and a jump from the JP Green House, will let you take dogs out on walks in their fenced runs once you have an application submitted, so you can get to know your potential pet a bit better.)  The more likely you are to find the ONE in due course.Along with all that, I'm happy to hear you're looking for an older dog. I urge you to take a look at any big black dogs they have there and give them a fair shot, like older dogs, they are less likely to be adopted.

    Permalink

14. 

    rtl88 Posted 6:24 am
    14 Aug 2009

    As someone who grew up wanting a dog and never getting one, I don't resent my parent's decision to not get one.  The responsibility would have fallen on them and they weren't willing to do that.  That certainly didn't make me less compassionate towards animals...  perhaps more so.  I finally adopted my first dog a year and a half ago.  My dog is such an important part of my life... it was well worth the wait!  I do feel that there is a greater impact on the environment through greater consumption, however I do research products, food, alternatives to toxic flea/tick treatments etc. and hope that the power is in the buck!  Kuba's one lucky kid!

    Permalink

15. 

    Ken Ward Posted 5:12 am
    15 Aug 2009

    Thanks everyone for the comments and suggestions. As Andrée pointed out above, I'm not Kuba's father. His dad, Peter Zaleska, with whom Kuba and Simon live half time, has heartily endorsed Kuba's plan, in which the puppy/dog travels with the kids between households (both in Jamaica Plain).The landslide of get-the-kid-a-puppy-already! (make sure it's from a shelter) comments and votes doesn't so much resolve the conundrum, as outline the problem. The JP Green House is 2 things: a model residence aiming to meet the rigorous passivhaus standard in an abandoned 100 year old former corner store on a low/moderate budget - which is primarily a matter of  design/build skill, with a few trade-offs discussed in my recent post; it is also a demonstration project, whereby the decisions our blended family takes in trying to mesh the imperatives of climate action and intentional living with parenting, love and holding down a job mirror similar tensions in other homes and households. As SMGrist points out, you all don't really get a vote, but we do assume there are others wrestling with the same problems with something to say on the questions before us.That sort of a long-winded buffering of my point. Why so few comments and votes on the nix-the-puppy side of the argument? I found the back of envelope esitmate that US dogs & cats put out 3 1/2 times the carbon of the US cement industry to be astounding and worthy of consideration when it comes to our demonstration purposes. Isn't there an argument that pet ownership is a luxury that the world can no longer afford? Please do not interpret that as some call for puppy genocide. I don't know where I come down yet, but I do find the question worthy of consideration. Why should individual preference for pets be any different then say, owning a snowmobile or dirt bike?Our demonstration/model intends to sketch a lifestyle that is both satisfying and full and more in line with that which is globally sustainable. Well, no way the rest of the world can have snowmobiles and dirt bikes like Americans do, and based on the numbers, neither does does it seem possible for the rest of the world to emulate our love for pets. Pet ownership in China increased 20% between 1999-2004, that's unsustainable. As the sponsors of one petition suggest, an expanding pet industry is, in effect, trading off wild species through habitat destruction for more domestic animals.That's the short term, of course.In the mid-term, which I count as within Kuba's lifetime, we're looking at climate impacts fast and large enough to tear at the fabric of civilization. Isn't that worth more consideration here?

    Permalink

16. 

    katmainomad Posted 3:53 pm
    19 Aug 2009

    I don't think every child needs a pet. My 6 year old seems interested in a pet, but not overly, and hasn't asked for one outright. He seems content to pet friend's dogs, but he is not even that in to that. I want chickens for eggs, and I think he would be happy to have a pet hen someday. I think you could even not get a dog and Kuba would be ok. But I think, with how much he really wants one, and the qualitative differences between getting him a dog or, say, a motorbike or a cement factory, it is ok. It will help develope empathy for non-humans, based on my personal experience. I'm sure it is possible to quite drastically reduce the carbon footprint of a family pet, just as it is to do so for yourself or your children. And it is ok to be an environmental curmudgeon and not let your kids have or do things that other kids have or do - there is always something! Anyone who thinks they are emotionally screwed up because they didn't get a dog as a kid better do some deeper searching :)

    Permalink

17. 

    escatei Posted 3:43 pm
    23 Aug 2009

    Yes this is what happens when balanced argument teeters off to one side with the weight of emotion. Save a mutt from being euthanized into a crispy biscuit - thus emitting yet more carbon. Go for the blessings of genetic diversity and get yourselves a Street DAHg. Faithful. Friend.

    Permalink