Ethics of keeping a dog

Handed the computer over to mum to write this after she got asked at the weekend how she could justify ethically having a dog.

I'm not completely certain what exactly the questioner was meaning by the question but I'll share my answer. "I don't have children"

I presumed that he was referring to the fact that Saxen eats raw meat and that it's becoming increasingly difficult to justify eating meat if you care about the planet. It's better for the planet to drive in a 4x4 a set distance than it is to use the calories gained from beef, according to New Scientist. I don't have a link to this because I read it in a physical copy of the magazine, but if I remember correctly I remember it being covered in the letters page.

Now for a start I do believe that when it comes to the carbon footprint of meat there's beef and then there's beef. Grass fed beef has a smaller "carbon" footprint than cattle fed grains and concentrates. Of course they also produce less of other gases too. I believe there's a dairy in the US that has a significant reduction in bad gases production since switching their cattles' diet. Then of course beef that is grazed on stripped south american plains and then shipped to the UK is going to be worse than beef grazed here on dartmoor, or on the surrounding countryside. By and large I prefer to source locally raised and grass fed meat. Ideally I would feed more game too.

I also feed a lot of offal/ those parts that humans just aren't so interested in. I get my chicken carcasses from an organic producer who gives them away to a dog food company. So dog food either way because people want to buy pre-cubed chicken breast rather than whole chicken. I also feed a fair bit of ox heart at the moment. Who should see the look on people's faces when you tell them that you eat ox heart. It's priceless. VERY few people will eat it. It sells cheap or goes into cheap processed food. Something that according to the BBC website today, we need to eat less of or face an increased rish of bowel cancer. Or of course - it goes into dog food. But let's face it, I have a small budget and anything I buy is going to be a less popular body part for humans to eat. I hate waste of life and like to see as much of bodies used as possible. So no guilt there.

I guess next is the welfare issue. Again reduced by the points I made above. Free range poultry, grass fed ox heart and offal, locally produced other bits and pieces. I do something buy less well raised meat for my dog (and myself) but that stuff ends up in normal dog food too. So raw food allows me greater control to buy better.

So . . . my dog eats meat and meat isn't good for the planet. BUT the carbon footprint of my dog is smaller than that of your average human. Even if I were to keep dogs for the rest of my life I still believe that the carbon footprint would be smaller than it would be for a human. Again in New scientist I believe I read that the best thing you can do for your carbon footprint - don't have children. So I might have a dog who eats raw meat at best part of a kg a day . . . but he's got a smaller carbon footprint than the man who questioned me about it. A man who has children, travels internationally, drives a Jag and who runs a forge/workshop off coke, gas and electricity.

(this doesn't mean I judge people who have children and pets, just that it's their choice. We find ways to have the things in life we really really want. I believe it's possible to have children, dogs and no guilt about their carbon footprint, it's just harder (or easier if the lack of guilt is born of ignorance))