It was a tough day for us, way busier, way more dogs - including a loose dog which apparently belongs to the farm, running around the property & into the barn. One person just shrugged and said that the dog often shows up when they rent the facility for agility and that he's harmless.
Ha. That's how you know you're speaking to someone who doesn't have a reactive dog.
I don't care if he's harmless. Having a dorky wiggly golden running up to Daisy would have pretty much ended the day for us.
Fortunately by this point, I'd put Daisy away in the car with her kong. We were just waiting for the round to finish & our scoresheets.
She had struggled with the tight quarters in the set up area, & the lack of space in the practice area, but managed to hold it together, even with dogs staring, and dogs barking/snarling at her from crates. She was tense (& yeah, I was tense too!), and our scores showed it.
It's a good thing that our first trial in December was quite a bit more quiet and gave me the confidence to come back for the 3rd leg. If *this* had been our first event, I'm not so sure that I would have come back.
You know, it's nobody else's fault that I have a reactive dog. It's not mine either - I adopted her that way and I've worked hard to get her to the point where she can pass for normal in many circumstances. And I get that the world doesn't have to bend to accomodate me & my needs.
OTOH, CARO likes to talk about how it's open to everyone, & right on the scoring sheet there is a tickmark for indicating whether a dog or handler are disabled.
And that's when I got to thinking: Is reactivity a disability?
Is it reasonable to hope for, to ask for, a bit of accomodation in the facility & event planning, so that more dogs like Daisy can participate?
My dog can do the exercises. She can function with lots of distractions.
What my dog struggles with is getting into the actual rink. Sometimes, into the actual building. I was waiting outside for ages while a group of people with dogs, including one on a flexi zinging around all over, just hung around talking, right in front of the entrance!
It wasn't urgent for me to get inside so I just waited, doing some BAT, some LAT, keeping Daisy loose and learning, but really, it was kind of silly and I suspect just due to lack of awareness on the part of the people - who I'm sure would have moved if I had asked. But you know, one doesn't always feel like asking.
Is it unreasonable to expect a bit more awareness? To make it clear to all participants that all entry ways & exit ways are to be clear or people and dogs? To not have people and dogs milling around the registration table which is RIGHT beside the entrance to the competition rink?
Would it be unreasonable to have the competition rink itself more securely fenced? With closed gates rather than huge open gaps at entry & exit? Would it change the nature of the competition too much to have rigid fencing & maybe the fence covered with tarps? To not put stations right beside the fence so that a dog has to approach the fence within feet of people & dogs on the other side of an orange plastic mesh?
With secure fences and closed gates, I'd consider moving on up the levels, which take place offleash. She's more than capable of doing the exercises, but I will not risk it with flimsy fencing and wide open gates.
So, she's done. She's Miss Daisy C-RNCL (I think. Haven't got the certificate yet!), who loves to heel, loves to prance, loves to work, but she won't compete in higher levels unless accomodations can be made.
I'm just wondering: What are we really scoring when we make it impossible for a dog to participate because of the way the venue is designed?
Could different facility set up's be used to enable more dogs to safely participate? Could we have an F Stream for Feisty Fidos where there are more secure provisions for the facility, more separation from other dogs?
What do you think? Is reactivity a disability like blindness or deafness & is it like when the handler needs a solid surface for their wheelchair? Does reactivity deserve a special accomodation?
An aside, sort of, not really related but I was thinking of it.... consider a 2009 CBC radio doc:
The Education of Ashif Jaffer (Canada) Not so long ago, the idea of a student with Down Syndrome in a university was unthinkable. Ashif Jaffer wants to change that.You can hear the doc in the archives here (it's in the 2nd half of the show, after Michael Ignatieff discussing his book). I was just thinking about the limits of accomodation when I remembered this documentary.
Yeah, I know, people not dogs, serious problems not dog reactivity, university not a dog sport .... but, still.
