Printer-friendly version Email story link

City loves its dogs, but loses top rank

Portland’s a no-show among country’s big five ‘Dog Towns’

By Richard D. Oxley

The Portland Tribune, Aug 14, 2008, Updated Oct 30, 2009 (4 Reader comments)

Facebook for dogs?

Many dog-oriented businesses in Portland are aimed at helping dog owners find their way.

The Hotel Monaco, on Southwest Washington Street, has employed a full-time canine “director of pet relations” to assist guests traveling with four-legged friends.

Art, a yellow lab that the hotel utilizes to greet visitors, used to be allowed on the service elevators, staff members say, but was eating too much from room-service leftovers so his weight started to suffer.

Now he’s relegated to the lobby or behind the front desk, where he serves as an enthusiastic mascot, greeting guests as they arrive. “He’s a natural. He’s perfect for the job we got him for,” said Joseph Sundberg, Art’s caretaker and the hotel bell captain. “I’ve been here since we opened in 1996. He’s been here a year and a half and his picture’s on the wall, not mine.”

Many dogs also connect through www.pdxdog.com, a Portland-based social Web site akin to Facebook.com or Myspace.com. Dogs meet for play dates, while their owners meet for walks and talk about everything from their dogs’ diet to their holistic health.

The site has attracted more than 400 members since it started up last March, according to Web site founder Andrea Schneider, with no advertising other than word of mouth.

Pooch products pricey

Doggie play dates, of course, wouldn’t be the same without high-end dog fashions.

Some owners use strollers for walks with their very young or infirm smaller dogs. Pets on Broadway in Northeast Portland sells them for $160 to $300 – more than many people pay for a baby stroller.

Over at Pampered Pooch, dogs of all shapes and sizes make their way through the salon. Besides grooming services, the shop is filled with high-end gear, including leather leads that run for $100, crystal-studded Swarovski collars costing $200, and natural food and shampoos that are imported from Paris and London.

“People get so much from their dogs, you know – so much pleasure and so much unconditional love,” said shop owner Karen Naylor. “I think that they feel, if they can, that the dog should get rewarded for that.”

At Northeast Portland’s Furever Pets, dog owners can pick up women’s designer handbags complete with built-in kennels for $50 to $200. There also are orthopedic doggie beds for about $165, and a counter full of baked treats just for canines: everything from mini-pizzas and doughnuts to cannoli, cupcakes and chili peppers.

Ben Tan, a salesman at Furever Pets, said dogs in Portland are treated much differently than in his home country.

“I’m from Malaysia, so I grew up with dogs being outside and not inside the house,” Tan said. “Here, most dogs go outside, but when they sleep, they’re inside, even the larger dogs. Some people don’t have children, or choose to not have children – they have pets.”

news@portlandtribune.com

<< Prev. Page 1 | 2

Facebook	Digg	Del.icio.us
Newsvine	Stumbleupon	Reddit

Reader comments

Re: City loves its dogs, but loses top rank

Excellent well written and informative article that truly speaks to the heart of every K-9 lover.

"Jeannie O."

(email verified)

Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 04:48 PM

Re: City loves its dogs, but loses top rank

"Given the increasing competition...it's hard to see what else local dog owners can do to win the coveted title again."

Well, for starters how about PDX making a real commitment to a decently-sized off-leash area? Dogs need large areas to run and socialize and the small areas that Portland provides just don't get it done. The Sandy River Delta area (aka "exit 18") is nice but a long way out of town. Until a few years ago Kelly Point Park was heavily used by dog owners on weekend mornings and if there was ever a place that was more ideal and less in conflict with other users I've never seen it. One road in and out, on a fenced peninsula, a large lawn area and beaches , no nearby neighborhoods impacted by noise - it was perfect. But the City decided that this area, created from dredging spoils, is a "nature preserve" and started writing tickets a few years ago. They wouldn't even consider a schedule of times that it could be used by dog owners so as not to conflict with picnickers or sunbathers. So much for the City's commitment.

"Ronald"

(email verified)

Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 05:35 PM

Re: City loves its dogs, but loses top rank

This city loves its dogs all right, I think more than its people.

Have you walked forest park lately?

It's scary with all the dogs running loose.

They need to start enforcing the leash laws!

"al m"

(email verified)

Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 08:00 PM

Re: City loves its dogs, but loses top rank

http://www.nysun.com/opinion/whats-your-paw-print/57294/

What's Your Paw Print?

By ELIZABETH POWERS | June 26, 2007

One of the most liberal neighborhoods in America, zip code 10024, is where I live. It's full of people who carry cloth shopping bags, swear by fluorescent light bulbs, and think that George Bush is evil for not signing on to the Kyoto Protocol.

The neighborhood also ranks high in the nation in the number of pet food deliveries. The highest is the adjoining zip code, 10023. Parents and children now compete for space on the sidewalks and in the parks of the Upper West Side with the owners of medium- and large-sized dogs or, increasingly, of multiple small dogs. I wonder if these pet owners have calculated their dog's carbon paw print.

By this I mean the canine variation on "carbon footprint," a concept invented by environmentalists for measuring our energy consumption and, hence, our damage to the environment. The more energy we consume, so it is claimed, the more carbon dioxide we release into the atmosphere and, ergo, the more damage to the thermal equilibrium.

When we are not being told to hang out our laundry to dry, we are encouraged to visit Web sites where we can calculate our personal carbon footprint, based on household fuel use and travel. On the larger scale of things, the so-called Carbon Trust in Great Britain is trying to force companies to publish the size of the carbon footprint required to bring their products to market.

It is only by submitting to such behavior-modifying protocols, say the environmentalists, that the polar bears, the rain forest, and the earth itself can be saved. As with most seemingly well-intentioned but trendy projects, one can't help feeling that a great deal of obfuscation and hypocrisy is at work.

I'm not talking about Laurie David, living on Seinfeld royalties while traveling on her private Gulfstream jet to save the planet, or Al Gore, spending $30,000 a year on electricity for his 20-room house with a pool, but about my pet-rich neighbors on the Upper West Side.

According to the Waltham Centre for Pet Nutrition, a moderately active 80-pound dog requires 1,955 calories a day — the energy requirement of a 120-pound woman. A lactating dog of that weight requires between 3,900 and 7,800 calories daily.

Smaller dogs of, say, 20 pounds consume energy disproportionate to their weight compared to large dogs. Translated, that means two miniature poodles consume more than a German shepherd on the small side. So, when calculating one's carbon footprint, dog owners should add an extra individual, or two or three, to their household size.

While it is true that some of the carbon dioxide released into the environment as a result of the metabolism of pet food is renewable, the energetics required to produce this food fare — the factories, the delivery trucks, the metal for the cans — are often nonrenewable or renewable more in principle than in practice.

"Tin" cans, for instance, made of iron, require about half a pound of carbon, in the form of coke, per pound to manufacture. After use they go to the city dump, where they may or may not be recycled. Even the best metal-recycling systems recover only a fraction of the metal, while using huge amounts of nonrenewable energy in their operation.

Based on a report by MarketResearch.com, the American pet food market is experiencing healthy growth: "marketers continue to convert pet owners to better quality, higher priced, more upscale fare." This glowing report from October 2006 mentions the "bases" that premium pet food makers manage to cover: natural/organic, fortified/functional, weight control, breed-size specific, and gourmet, among others.

People who purchase organic pet food would hardly be so cruel as to leave Fido in a warm apartment in the summer months without air conditioning. Besides eight hours of cool air, don't forget to factor in the TV to keep him company, or the electric lights when he is home alone in the evening. In very round numbers, a single 6,000 British Thermal Unit air conditioner run for eight hours has the carbon footprint of .15 gallons of gas, which will drive a car for about 3 miles. Over its 10-year life span, a dog enjoying the benefits of air conditioning will consume about 150 gallons of fossil fuel — and that's assuming the system is operating at 100% efficiency.

And don't get me started on cats, which compete with humans in annually consuming millions of tons of various fish varieties from overfished seas.

This exposition is not about animals, however, but about the hypocrisy and willful ignorance of the liberal mindset.

After all, what is the point of feeding "natural/organic" food to animals that lick the behinds of other animals, drink from toilets, sniff up dirty curbs and sidewalks, and chew on shoes and rugs which contain dyes and other chemicals?

As with the cloth shopping bags, the fluorescent light bulbs, and the Kyoto Treaty, Upper West Siders want to appear virtuous, all the while polluting the ground under our feet and fouling the air we breathe.

Ms. Powers, an academic in New York City, is writing a memoir, "From Velveeta to Brie: How We All Became Liberals."