02/2/14

Preventing Snake Bites

Losing dogs through snake bite is a common problem in Australia. There are a number of strategies that can be used to minimise the risk, of varying types of efficiency. I thought it’d be useful to put these ideas into one post, so that those trying to protect their dogs have some ideas to implement.

Illustration of snake prevention courtsey of Amstafomine Kennels.

Illustration of snake prevention courtesy of Amstafomine Kennels.

Keep Areas Tidy

Snakes like to hide in piles of rubbish or mess, so keeping your property tidy is the first step in mess prevention. This includes keeping weeds and grass low. Additionally, doing this keeps prey animals down – anywhere where mice and rats can hide will attract snakes to eat them.

Consider Snake Repellers

Some people swear that snake repellers work – some swear they do not. Without there being any clinical or scientific studies available (from my searching), it is up to your discretion in determining whether they are a worthwhile investment. Rumour has it that they are only effective in firm soil (not sandy soil) and that for maximum effect they should be moved on a regular basis (every few weeks).

Consider Guinea Fowl

Some types of Guinea Fowl are known to, in groups, attack and kill snakes. Having a flock of guinea fowl around your property (presuming space, time, and finances permit) may be a means to reduce or deter snakes on the property – or, at the very least, alert you to the presence of snakes in the vicinity.

Amstafomine kennels – showing snake fencing, rubber edging, and netting, all with the aim of preventing snake access.

Physical Barriers

Physically keeping snakes out of areas where dogs run is also a possibility. The photo above is the best example I’ve seen. Here, shade cloth has been used as snake fencing (as it is so narrow snakes cannot go through it). Where the shade cloth can’t cover (e.g. around the doors), rubber has been used to prevent snakes squeezing through. On top of all this, loose netting has been draped along the grounds, so snakes will get twisted and caught up before even reaching the kennels.

Have you found any other methods effective for keeping snakes at bay?

Wishing you an incident free snake season!

01/28/14

Desexing: It’s bad for vizslas, too

Late last year, a study was published looking at the incidence of cancer in desexed golden retrievers, finding a correlation between earlier desexing (before one year old) and certain types of cancer.

Now, in February, there is a new study supporting many of the findings in the golden retriever study, but this time looking at the incidence of cancers in Hungarian Vizslas. As behavioural disorders are also common in the breed, the researchers decided to look at the impact of desexing on these disorders, as well.

While we will look at their findings in more detail, the main take home points from this research are (quote):

“revealed that gonadectomized dogs had significantly higher odds than did sexually intact dogs of having mast cell tumour, hemangiosarcoma, lymphoma or lymphosarcoma, all other cancers, all types of cancer combined or behavioral disorders, regardless of the age at which the dog was gonadectomzied. The 2 exceptions were that male dogs gonadectomized at [less than or equal to] 12 months of age did not have a higher risk of developing hemangiosarcoma and dogs gonadectomized at > 6 months of age did not have a higher risk of developing a behavioural disorder, other than fear of storms.”

And it is important to note that the age of onset was earlier for all cancers and disorders when the dog was desexed.

So now that has wet your appetite, we will look at the research in more detail.

About the Study

This was a retrospective cohort study – meaning it was a piece of research based on events that had happened over time, looking back at that time.

The study included 2,505 vizslas born between 1992 and 2008. Of them:

604 of the vizslas had cancer(s),
648 had behavioural disorders,
1,421 of them were desexed,
362 vizslas were desexed at 6 months or earlier (209 of these were female, and 153 of these were male),
298 vizslas were desexed at 7-12 months (157 were female, 141 were male), and
711 vizslas were desexed at 12 months (459 females, 312 males).

Data for this study was collected from an online survey conducted during 2008, which targeted vizsla owners to partake by advertising through breed clubs, email lists, websites, magazines, and newsletters. 75% of respondents were involved with Vizsla breed clubs, so it was a biased sample.

Participants came from 25 countries in all, including the US, UK, Canada, and Australia.

This study was designed to consider age of desexing and its effects, so the owners were asked to identify when their dog was desexed, or if it was not at all. It’s important to note that many studies simply look at ‘entire’ or ‘desexed’ and don’t look at lifetime exposure to gonads – this is one of few in a new study of research actually considering the time of desexing.

Cancer

An earlier Vizsla Health Survey found that cancer, especially hemangiosarcoma and lymphoma, “was listed as the most common cause of death in the breed.” Desexing was associated with the development of these cancers, according to their survey, and also associated with the development of behavioural disorders.

This is no surprise, as numerous studies have linked desexed with various types of cancer, including hemangiosarcoma, but also prostate cancer, transitional cell carcinoma, and osteosarcoma.

This research show that a desexed vizsla was 5 times as likely to have cancer (other than mast cell cancer, hemangiosarcoma, or lymphoma or lymphosarcoma) than vizslas that were entire.

Not only were desexed dogs more likely to get cancer, but the earlier they were desexed, the earlier they were diagnosed with cancer.

All in all, dogs desexed at any age were more likely to have cancer than dogs not desexed.

Interestingly, though, “There was no significant difference in the longevity of gonadectomized Vizslas, compared with the longevity for those that remained sexually intact”. This means that even though desexed dogs were more likely to get cancer, and sooner, this didn’t seem to make them die younger.

Hemangiosarcoma

When it comes to hemangioarcoma, desexed females were 9 times as likely to get hemangiosarcoma than entire females.

For males, males neutered after 12 months of age had a higher risk of developing hemangiosarcoma.

The research makes note that this is not a ‘one off’ event: “Of concern, studies have found an increased risk of hemangiosarcoma, a common tumour that frequently leads to fatal outcomes, in gonadectomized dogs, which is in concurrence with findings for the present study.” That means that vizslas are not alone in being more likely to develop hemangiosarcoma when desexed, especially when it comes to bitches.

Mast Cell Cancer

Desexed vizslas got mast cell cancer at a significantly higher rate (3.5 times more likely) than entire dogs, and they got diagnosed with this cancer sooner than entire dogs.

Lymphosarcoma

While there was no difference between females and males in the likelihood of developing lymphoma or lymphosarcoma, desexed vizslas were significantly more likely (4.3 times as high incidence) entire.

Mammary Cancer

There is some evidence that bitches left entire for longer are more likely to develop mammary cancer. However, this study says, “authors of a recent systematic review of all reports in peer-reviewed journals on the associations among neutering, age at neutering, and mammary gland tumours concluded that the evidence that neutering reduces the risk of mammary gland neoplasia is weak and not a sound basis for firm recommendations on neutering because of limited evidence and bias in published results”. We can, at least, say there is some debate on the correlation of mammary cancers and desexing.

In regard to this study, mammary cancer was not common. There were 1,360 female dogs in the study, with 535 of them being entire, and only 11 developed mammary tumours. That is, 2% of entire bitches got breast cancer. (The authors of this study also note that 10 of those 11 bitches were desexed at later than 5 years old.)

This equates to only .4% of the dogs in the 2505 strong study developed mammary cancer. In comparison, 11% of the 2505 dogs in the study having mast cell cancer, hemosarcoma, lymphoma, or lymphosarcoma.Considering this, community emphasis on mammary cancer seems misguided as it is not biggest concern, especially in this breed.

Behavioural Disorders

There have been studies that have shown a correlation between gonadectomy and behavioural problems, but whether these affects on behaviour are ‘good’ or ‘bad’ is a matter of debate, with different studies showing different things.

The Vizsla Health Survey found that behavioural problems were prevalent in the breed, hence the focus of this study on behavioural problems. These types of behviour problems were mostly fear, anxiety, and increased arousal.

This study did something clever though: Dogs who had a behavioural problem before desexing were excluded from the analysis. The logic? “Excluding dogs that might have been gonadectomized because of a behavioural problem eliminated a confounding factor that could have incorrectly suggested a stronger association between gonadectomy and behavioural problems.”

Desexed vizslas were more likely to have behavioural problems than sexually intact dogs, and dogs desexed at or before 6 months had a 1.8 times higher incidence of behavioural disorders than sexually intact dogs. These behavioural problems included: fear of storms, separation anxiety, fear of noises, fear of gunfire, timidity, excitability, submissive urination, aggression, hyperactivity, and fear biting.

As with cancer, the younger the dog was at time of desexing, the earlier a behavioural problem was diagnosed.

Fear of storms was particularly significant. Desexed dogs were 4.1 times more likely to be scared of storms than entire dogs. Bitches were more likely to be scared of storms than males – but males desexed younger was more likely to be scared of storms earlier. (Desexing time didn’t change when females became fearful of storms.)

The author notes, “It should be mentioned that the most common behavioral problems in Vizslas in this study did not include sexual behaviours (eg, mounting and urine marking).”

Why is it so?

Briefly, this study predicted that sex steroids such as estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone is related to immunity, especially the surveillance for cancer cells. That is, without gonads to produce sex hormones, the immune system does not function as normal.

Highlights

To me, the most important points from this study are:

There seems to be no compelling reason to desex Vizslas in regard to that individual dog’s health or temperament, on the basis of this study.
Desexing does not inevitably result in a healthier and more temperamentally stable dog.
As orthopaedic problems are not common in Vizslas, this study does not consider joint disorders and desexing, as other studies have.
Despite the incidence of cancer in neutered dogs, this study suggests that desexed and intact Vizslas live about the same length of time.
Vets need to discuss the pros and cons of desexing with clients.

Further Research Discussion

This kind of research is just the beginning! Further research can consider:

Are Vizslas special? We need to do this type of research in other breeds.
For all studies considering affects of desexing, age of desexing should be considered in the data collected. There are very few studies looking at life-long gonad exposure, and so conclusions on optimum age of desexing is hard to make.
Biological effects of removing gonads.
Sterilisation for dogs without gonadectomy – like vasectomies or hysterectomies (leaving ovaries).
Something that I have been considering for a while,” An additional potential source of confounding was that behavioural differences between sexually intact and gonadectomized dogs could have been attributable to being subjected to hospitalisation and survey at a young age, rather than to the hormonal changes conferred by gonadectomy. A prospective, randomised blinded study with a control (sham) surgery could be performed to distinguish between these 2 scenarios.”
More research on gonadectomies, on cancer, and on behaviour, and how they’re connected.

Reference:

Zink MC, Farhoody P, Elser SE, Ruffini LD, Gibbons TA, & Rieger RH (2014). Evaluation of the risk and age of onset of cancer and behavioral disorders in gonadectomized Vizslas. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 244 (3), 309-19 PMID: 24432963

Read the study here.

Image Credit: Thanks to klam101 on DeviantArt.

Further Reading:

Why would you NOT desex your dog???

Is desexing a cult?

Golden Retrievers: Cancer if you do, cancer if you don’t

DON’T Spay or Neuter Your Pets

New Research That Raises Questions About Neutering Recommendations

01/26/14

Advocate for Safety-Testing of Car Harnesses

Golden retriever puppy in car

In my last post, I described the two studies that I could find that illustrate the effectiveness of car safety harnesses for dogs.

What has become clear is that there is very little testing of pet safety restraints, and no safety standard.

As pet lovers, obviously, this is something we’d like changed. This is an advocacy post, encouraging you to write to your relevant body. The suggestions made here are Australian based, but you’re welcome to modify the following letters for appropriacy to your own bodies.

When writing your letter, you should go for human-safety approach, because, as a selfish species, humans normally like to protect other humans. Say, we want pet restraints tested because:

We need pets to be effectively restrained so they do not interfere with drivers, but also
Pets need to be prevented from becoming projectiles in an accident, and, as a niceity,
It is in the best interest of animal welfare to protect them in accidents, and save owners and bystanders the distress of an injured pet.

MAC / TAC

Both the Motor Accident Commission and the Traffic Accident Commission don’t mention pet restraints on their websites! You can contact the MAC through their online form.

To the Motor Accident Commission,

Re: Restraint of Pets in Motor Vehicles

Recently I was disturbed to be informed that dog car safety harnesses manufacturing and design is unregulated. As a result, many harnesses designed for dogs are inadequate in restraint, and so pose a risk to motorists.

Dog safety harnesses are important in restraining a pet from interfering with the driver and from becoming a projectile in an accident. Testing in Australia (by NRMA Insurance) and in the United States (by Centre for Pet Safety) showed that many pet harnesses designed for vehicle transport did not withstand the force of a car accident. This means that motorists may restrain their pets with a car harness falsely believing that doing so would prevent their pet becoming a projectile in an accident. Obviously, such an incident could cause harm to human occupants of a vehicle.

Further, there pet owners carry a level of emotional attachment to pets, and their injury or death in car accidents would be a cause of distress to passengers and onlookers.

Considering the substantial risk to human well being through unregulated car safety harnesses, I ask that you consider introducing requirements on dog car safety harnesses, including a scheme to certify harness safety through legitimate and standardised tests.

Yours sincerely,

RAA/RACV

The RAA have a page selling unbranded (almost certainly untested restraints) harnesses. You can email the RAA through info@raa.com.au (link).

To the RAA,

Re: Restraint of Pets in Motor Vehicles

Recently I was disturbed to be informed that dog car safety harnesses manufacturing and design is unregulated. As a result, many harnesses designed for dogs are inadequate in restraint, and so pose a risk to motorists.

Dog safety harnesses are important in restraining a pet from interfering with the driver and from becoming a projectile in an accident. Testing in Australia (by NRMA Insurance) and in the United States (by Centre for Pet Safety) showed that many pet harnesses designed for vehicle transport did not withstand the force of a car accident. This means that motorists may restrain their pets with a car harness falsely believing that doing so would prevent their pet becoming a projectile in an accident.

While two brands of harness have been well reviewed by both tests conducted, neither of these are available through your online store, and the one type that is available online is unbranded and presumably untested in regards to its resilience to force in an accident. Clearly, without testing, harnesses may pose a risk and cause harm to human occupants of a vehicle.

Further, there pet owners carry a level of emotional attachment to pets, and their injury or death in car accidents would be a cause of distress to passengers and onlookers.

Considering the substantial risk to human well being through unregulated car safety harnesses, I ask that you consider introducing requirements on dog car safety harnesses, including a scheme to certify harness safety through legitimate and standardised tests, and consider stocking only products that meet these standards.

Yours sincerely,

Choice

Choice have a page reporting on the NRMA Insurance testing. Choice is known for providing a neutral panel to review products. You can email Choice at ausconsumer@choice.com.au (link).

To Choice,

Re: Restraint of Pets in Motor Vehicles

Upon reading your online article on car safety restraints for dogs (“Dog car harness test”, dated 18th December 2013), I was disturbed to read that many car harnesses received a ‘fail’ score, indicating that they are inadequate in restraining pets. It is unsettling to think of many pets are being transported in car safety harnesses that have been manufactured and designed with no safety checks, as these ineffectively restrained pets pose a risk to motorists.

Dog safety harnesses are important in restraining a pet from interfering with the driver and from becoming a projectile in an accident. Like the NRMA testing in Australia, safety testing in the United States (by Centre for Pet Safety) showed that many pet harnesses designed for vehicle transport did not withstand the force of a car accident. This means that motorists may restrain their pets with a car harness falsely believing that doing so would prevent their pet becoming a projectile in an accident. Obviously, such an incident could cause harm to human occupants of a vehicle.

Further, there pet owners carry a level of emotional attachment to pets, and their injury or death in car accidents would be a cause of distress to passengers and onlookers.

Considering the substantial risk to human well being through unregulated car safety harnesses, I hope that Choice can consider providing its own testing of car safety harnesses for pets and provide pressure to government to produce a formal standard to ensure consumer confidence in car safety harnesses designed for dogs.

Yours sincerely,

Is there any other peak bodies that deserve to receive a letter, too? Let me know in the comments.

Be an animal advocate and post one or more of these letters to the relevant parties with the aim of bettering animal welfare.

01/24/14

How safe are dog car travel harnesses?

Last year, we heard that 100% of dog car harnesses were failing safety tests. The Center for Pet Safety is quoted as saying,”We tested them to the child safety restraint standard and we experienced a 100-percent failure rate to protect either the consumer or the dog”.

It’s a concerning claim. Many pet owners put their dogs on a harness because they want them to be safe during an accident, and yet it seems that harnesses won’t achieve these aims. So what’s a pet owner to do?

Golden retriever puppy in back seat of car.

Center of Pet Safety Study

Firstly, have a look at the CPS’s study. A complete summary of CPS’s investigation can be read on this PDF, but the research methods are best summarised by this flowchart:

Click to see PDF source.

So, firstly, they only tested harnesses that claimed to be tested, or claimed to offer crash protection.

Then, they did ‘quasi static testing’, which is basically they pulled on the harness attachment really hard for a sustained period to see if the harness survived or not. (Watch a video of the quasi static test.)

The following products did not pass the quasi static testing:

USA K-9 Outfitters; Champion.
In the Company of Animals; Clix.
Coastal; EZ-Rider.
Snoozer; Pet Safety Harness and Adapter.

It is only if the product passed both of those initial stages that they proceeded to crash testing.

In the same PDF, a nifty little flow chart is displayed – and ultimately it lists the harness, from left to right, as best to worst (of those tested).

So, basically, the testing concluded that the ‘best’ harness (of those tested) was the Sleepypod Clickit Utility.

A complete analysis is available on page 10 of the results.

You can find out more about the Sleepypod Clickit harness from the Sleepypod website.

NRMA Insurance Test

From my research, the only other test I can find was performed by NRMA Insurance, and yielded not dissimilar results: The Sleepypod Clickit Harness was rated on the top, and the Purina Roadie Harness was second. NRMA Insurance tested 25 harnesses, and only the above two passed. That is, 92% of harnesses failed. You can read NRMA’s brief press release: Paws and Secure Your Puppy

But harnesses are still better than nothing…

I would like to warn against ‘giving up’ on harnesses, because most of the harnesses do stop dogs become a projectile, and injuring people in the car. Little comfort, but please do restrain your pets.

Screen shot 2014-01-15 at 8.46.34 AM

My choice

Personally, I have had trouble with harnesses in the car. Any of my dogs that I have tried them on walk around and around in circles, twisting up their limbs in their harness, and looking miserable and uncomfortable.

After reading the two studies above, I am glad I made the choice to crate my dogs in the car. The crates are secured in my car with tie downs to anchor points. I am very happy with my choice, and feel that it is probably the safest option for car travel, especially in light of this study.

Our next blog post will look into ways you can advocate for better harnesses.

Further reading: Pet Auto Safety Blog

01/20/14

Cindy is an old dog that can run really fast

Elderly jack russell terrier.

Imagine you’ve recently taken a 12 year 8 month old dog into your home. She’s lazy, mostly moving from bed to bed to sleep. She comes when she’s called, goes out when she’s asked, and gets heaps excited about food. Happy and sociable with people and dogs. A joy to live with.

I hope, in doing so, you can forgive my negligence as a guest arrived. As Cindy nipped through the open door, I naturally assumed that this sociable dog would just say hi to the guest, and follow them inside. However, Cindy started sniffing a plant in the front yard. I called her, and she ignored me, and as I took a step towards her, she dashed away, stopping at the letterbox to continue sniffing. Naively, I assumed that there was just a nice smell around. As I headed towards her again, she gave me a look that could best be described as “Hahaha”, and started running, fast, away from me – and towards a busy road.

There was no chance I was going to chase her, as I am very aware that I am not as fast as a dog (they have four legs, I have two, come’n) and I did not want her to get closer to the busy road. Immediately, I thought that I could use Bandit, a dog friend she had made in foster care. If I wasn’t good enough to come back to, maybe Bandit would be.

So, hurriedly, I ran inside, threw a lead on Bandit, and took him out. Bandit was perplexed why there was a walk happening, at night, with such little fan-fare, but nonetheless was happy with the arrangement.

As I came out of the house, Cindy was nowhere to be seen. My heart was racing and I was terrified of where she had got to. Immediately, my thoughts were thinking about how she didn’t have my tag on, but she did have her surrendering owner’s tag on still, and how bad would that look if she was to get called? What if she got hit by a car? What vets are open at this time of night? Do I call the council now? Why is the husband away tonight?

Bandit and I headed towards where I last saw Cindy. Briskly walking, I hear a bush rustle and Cindy emerged. Phew! She hadn’t got to the busy road! Cindy then kept running towards the busy road – seemingly Bandit and I disturbed her bush-investigation, and now the running thing was back on. So my Bandit trick failed.

There’s no way I could catch Cindy with Bandit in toe, so back I go home, putting Bandit inside.

As I came back out, I hurriedly called a friend from Adelaide All Breed Dog Rescue Inc., “Hi. Can you come help me catch Cindy? She got out.” The friend was on her way. Phew!

So now finding Cindy again. I took a wide berth, on the other side of the road from when I last saw her, with the only intention of cutting her off from heading closer to the main road. Once my friend got there, my plan was that I could then get them to get food in my house, or open up the carport door and we could herd Cindy into the secure area. Regardless, I had decided I couldn’t do much more than keep an eye on Cindy for the time being.

My plan mostly worked. She decided to run away from me, back towards my house, and away from the busy road. Excellent. She would stop and snuffle in bushes, and I would stand like a lurker in the half-light in other people’s front yards, watching.

If Cindy looked at heading towards the busy road, I’d shuffle into the path to try to prevent her. This mostly worked. But then there was this one moment, she came towards me (and the busy road), and as I puffed myself up to block her path, she ran faster and within a metre of me. I’m pretty sure I heard her say, “Hahaha, you can’t catch me!”.

Back to square one, I once again did a big loop to block her off.

My heart was in my throat as I realised she was in the yard of the house on the corner of my street and the busy road. Every car that whizzed by I held my breath.

I could hear her in the bushes, so knew where she was, and I just hoped that when she came out I could once again drive her back up the street. It was tense.

And the little white dog came out of the bush, and looked at me. Through my head, a word that rhymed with ‘duck’ was repeating over and over. She was going to do it again – she was going to run past, in a joy run, straight onto the busy road. Duck duck duck.

But she looked at me for a moment too long, and she wagged her stumpy tail, and seemed to say, “Okay, I’m done now.”

Hardly believing my luck, I used my best gravelly voice to firmly say, “Cindy! Stay!” as I reached out my hand…

I’ll stop for a moment as I realise I forgot to tell you something about Cindy. All the stuff about her being a joy to own? That’s true, except that if she doesn’t get her own way, she bites. Cindy bites.

So here I was in the dark, reaching my hand towards a white-shape of a dog that I know bites.

And I was saying to myself, “If she bites, don’t let go“.

I can still remember that as my hand wrapped around the collar, and I felt my fingers touch my palm. I instantly thought, “I got her!” and then, immediately after, “If she bites, don’t let go!”.

I took the lead I was carrying around my neck (carrying in anticipation of such a moment), and clipped it onto her collar.

And I think that’s when I started breathing again. I became very conscious of the adrenaline pulsing through my body, now that I didn’t need it anymore.

That’s when my phone buzzed in my pocket, and I saw the headlights up the road of where my friend had pulled up in front of my house. Imperfect timing.

Cindy happily walked on lead back home, wagging her stump and panting heavily from her joy run.

Oh, did I mention: Cindy’s available for adoption!

If you are interested in a dog that bites and runs away, Cindy’s the dog for you!

Cindy was surrendered to us because he owner experienced unfortunate circumstances and became homeless. Cindy and the past owner lived in a car together for a few weeks, but it just wasn’t working for everyone involved, so the difficult decision was made to surrender her into care.

I was concerned about Cindy’s health initially, as she was very quiet. We had full blood works done, and a full body x-ray, and she’s in perfect health! Her teeth are in great condition, and it’s like Cindy was waiting for the vet to tell her she was A-OK too, because she became a bit of rat bag after that. As the story above shows.

Cindy loves going for walks, and barks angrily at you when you haven’t got her lead on or opened the door quite according to her schedule. “Hurry up, human!” Or maybe it’s resentment towards being leashed in itself, given her joy in running fast, away from you.

As mentioned, Cindy made a friend in Bandit while she has been in care. Bandit and Cindy are available for adoption either individually or to the same home. They’re very different to each other, but instantly took a strong liking to one another. They have an understanding.

In case you didn’t guess, Cindy is all terrier! She’s okay with other dogs, but she’s not one for pocket pets, or birds, or cats.

Cindy’s ideal home would be an older person or couple who just want to go for a short walk once or twice a day, and want a well behaved companion the rest of the time. Cindy is a nice cuddler, and will hop on your lap for pats – but very much when she wants them. She is independent, and doesn’t mind being left alone, especially if being left alone comes with some type of food.

Cindy is now with a foster carer (with instructions: never, ever let her off lead and never leave gates or doors open) and doing well, but we would love to see her in her forever home.

For more details about Cindy and her adoption, see her PetRescue profile.

Blogging on all things dogs, particularly dog science and dog politics.

Tag Archives: dogs

Preventing Snake Bites

Desexing: It’s bad for vizslas, too

Advocate for Safety-Testing of Car Harnesses

How safe are dog car travel harnesses?

Cindy is an old dog that can run really fast