THE OTHER END OF THE LEASH

Well, we must be making progress. After reading every single one of your comments, recording them by sex, familiarity and social status (maybe, sort of, more on that later) and comparing it to Dr. Anneke Lisberg’s research on urine marking, I now am completely flummoxed about what it all might mean. But you know how the learning curve often gets steeper once you’re making some progress (same thing happens in dog training, right)…. ? Maybe total confusion means we’re getting somewhere?

Here’s what I came up with when summarizing your comments. First, an explanation: I recorded sex of over marker and over markee if known, or noted it as ‘unknown” if necessary. I recorded if the urine first deposited was from a familiar or an unfamiliar dog. Finally, I recorded the writer’s description about the social relationship of their dogs. This is obviously the fuzziest part of the project–so fuzzy for so many reasons that we can’t begin to call this “research,” but given that the traditional explanation of over marking has been that it is most often done by a “dominant” dog, it seemed impossible to ignore completely. Aware of all the obvious problems, but believing there might be some value in it, I categorized a dog as “dominant” if the writer used that term or described the dog as the one who had priority access to preferred resources. The other categories were “not dominant,” if the writer used those words or in some way stated that, in their belief, the dog was not highest in social status in a group of dogs, and “unknown” if the writer didn’t address that topic, or directly stated that they didn’t know. And yes yes yes, of course, this is a complicated and controversial topic. I address it at length in earlier posts on August 7, 2010 and in a series of posts starting on March 31st, 2010. I don’t want to get too lost in the controversy of social status here, but I will summarize that 1) the term “dominance” is misused and misunderstood relentlessly, 2) has not been discarded by researchers who study behavior in wild animals and 3) all it means, if use correctly is: who predictably would get the bone/toy/best place to sleep between 2 individuals if they both wanted it equally.  (Note one comment asked a great question: “How much of a behavior … is true submission and how much is lack of confidence in the ability to win?”  Great question, because that’s actually the EXACT definition of the terms! It’s ONLY about individual’s judgments about who is likely to win and how that informs their decisions about who gets a resource.)

Argh, I didn’t want to get lost in a discussion about social status, especially given that it’s a mine field, but again, it’s hard to talk about over marking without bringing it in. So, given that digression, here’s a summary of your comments:

MALES OVER MARKING FAMILIAR DOGS

- No “dominant” male dogs were reported out of 91 comments to over mark over the urine of familiar males or females.

- There were 14 instances of “not dominant or submissive” dogs over marking the urine of familiar males or females.

- There were 17 instances of male dogs who social status was not known or stated, who over marked the urine of familiar males or females.

FEMALES OVER MARKING FAMILIAR DOGS

- 2 “dominant females” over marked the urine of a familiar female, none over marked the urine of familiar males.

- There were 15 reports of females who were “not dominant” over marking familiar males or females, and 2 reports of “unknown” social status females over marking familiar females.

MALES AND FEMALES OVER MARKING UNFAMILIAR DOGS

- Not surprisingly, there were fewer reports of this, and the sex of the urine marked was usually unknown. There were 14 instances that I counted of males over marking the urine of unfamiliar dogs (2 “dominant,” 3 “not dominant” and 9 “unknown”) and 15 of females over marking unfamiliar dogs (6 “Dominant,” 3 “Not dominant” and 5 “Unknown.”)

What stands out most to me is that:

1. Both males and females over mark (but note that many people commented that many of their dogs never overmarked). The behavior appears to be common, but NOT universal.

2. Many more “not dominant” dogs over marked than ones described as “dominant.” I can add to that myself: I had 4 dogs for 12 years, Queen Tulip the Gr Pyr, who without question was the one would got the bone, and 3 BCs who would never have even tried once she growl/barked them away a few times. Tulip seemed to pay no attention to where the other dogs urinated, and no one ever over marked her urine. Lassie over marked Pippy Tay’s urine 95% of the time. Pippy Tay was older and would be described by many as “submissive” or “appeasing” while Lassie was less so, a “middle of the road” dog. Luke, the intact male, sometimes over marked and sometimes didn’t.

The large number of “non dominant” over markers could be explained by demographics–perhaps there were that many more dogs described as such. But I went back and added up the number of dogs described as “dominant” or “not dominant” and there was a 1:2 ratio, which is much lower than the ratio of over markers to non over markers. My conclusion is that the one thing we should be able to take from this project is that social status is NOT a predictor of over marking within familiar dogs, at least not in the simplistic direction previously assumed.

And yet, wouldn’t you know it, Dr. Anneke Lisberg’s research on urine marking came up with very different results. In one study she presented small wooden stakes annointed with the urine of male, female, familiar, unfamiliar, intact and neutered dogs. The sample was all of Labradors (20) and she found that no females over marked (but perhaps because they couldn’t squat on the stakes?) and a strong correlation between high tail position and over marking in males. She also looked at “counter marking” in a dog park (she had no way of knowing if the mark was exactly over the urine or just adjacent) and found that both males and females counter marked, and that high tail position also correlated with frequency of counter marking. (And that high tail position also correlated with who got food tossed on the floor equidistant between 2 familiar dogs.) If marking was done to the urine of unfamiliar dogs, it was done mostly by males with high tail positions. Whew. Confused yet?

What could all this mean?  All I feel comfortable saying now is that the plot thickens. One thing that comes to mind is that 1) perhaps over marking means something different if done to familiar versus unfamiliar urine, 2) that we have no idea yet what the trigger actually is–that perhaps it has NOTHING to do with status, but something else altogether: Age? (several people mentioned that younger always over marked older). Something discernible in the urine that we have no clue about? Health status? I suspect myself, especially given Anneke’s research and the knowledge that over marking in wolves is most often done by breeding pairs (on each other’s urine) that very important messages are being sent … and we don’t have a clue yet what they are!  By the way, Anneke is continuing her urine marking studies, I can’t wait to hear the results of what she’s working on now.

A few interesting random comments: Several people have dogs who over marked coyotes (scat? urine? if urine, how know?), many of you have dogs who actually pee on other dogs (Luke did that too sometimes, as if he was too impatient to wait for the dog to finish urinating), several people mentioned dogs who began over marking once the other dog became ill, many people noted that the over marker was somewhat anxious or insecure, and a few commented what a strange world it is that we are all spending time on pee and poop. (And there was one request to talk more about poop; let’s save that for another day!

If you’re not sick of this topic, send in a comment that is VERY specific that might help us relate our observations to Dr. Lisberg’s research. Note the tail position (TP: Low= below parallel to the ground; Med = parallel to the ground; or High= close to vertical or vertical) and correlate it with over marking. Just send the facts, ma’m…. ex: Female, Med TP, OMs onto Dom Fam Female or Male, Hi TP, OM’s Subm M. Record the TP as the dog walks toward the area to urinate, not as he or she is actually urinating. If the social ranking question makes you grit your teeth, just ignore it.

MEANWHILE, back on the farm: Willie and I are going day by day. Surgically, I think he’s doing extremely well. The incision looks great, the swelling is going down and he’s doing a great job with his physical therapy exercises. He spends a tremendous time in his crate, and I spent a lot of time away from the farm. I know when I’m gone he settles in, just sleeps, rather than fussing when I’m home about why everything has changed and he isn’t out loose in the house. Actually, it’s not him that’s fussing, it’s me. I just hate walking by his crate so often and seeing his perplexed face. We’re doing okay, but I won’t pretend I don’t miss my regular life, and I’m sure he does too. I am, however, overwhelmed with thanks that Willie is such a good boy, and already was trained to accept PT while lying on his side, and is a perfect dog in his crate. (There is an exception: when I’m outside in the yard he barks if he’s stuck in the crate. This is a new issue because normally he’s outside with me or loose in the house. Right now I’m dealing with it through management and prevention: I am ignoring my garden and flowers and spending my home time cuddled with Willie on the floor or doing his PT, which takes about 1.5 hours a day. And in case you haven’t heard, Willie does indeed love me again! Whew.

I do have some great news: My kitty Sushi has had a lot of health challenges lately and I took her in yesterday for an ultrasound to check for cancer. I didn’t even mention it because it seemed like the news from the farm was just relentlessly grim. So I have GOOD news! No tumors, no bladder stones, no strange weird things appearing on the films. And now Sushi has a shaved belly, so she fits right in with Willie.  Who knew dogs and cats could get a Brazilian?

Here’s Willie boy after I said “Acupuncture” which is his cue to lie down on his right side and put head to floor.

And here he is after I took the picture above, instead of starting his therapy as usual! Anyone want to take a guess what he was thinking?

I was going to write a follow up blog about over marking, but I want to gather a bit more information before I do. I have to say that I’ve found the comments about over marking absolutely fascinating. I’m going to summarize them next week and will give you a report of what I find. I suspect there won’t be any patterns there, given how variable the sex, status and context of markings that have been described, but if that’s true, it’s interesting in itself. (Keep the comments coming to my last post on the 17th, I’ll post my summary next Tuesday.)

While I’m working on that and Willie’s recovery, here’s a laugh for you. This is another video that is just plain funny, and doesn’t involve intimidating a dog. And we all know that laughter is the best medicine. Wish I could watch old comedies with Willie! The video below made me laugh so hard I had tears in my eyes.

MEANWHILE, back on the farm: In some ways Willie is recovering well. He is eating some food (although not with much enthusiasm, could be the pain meds, could be pain, hard to say), putting weight on his leg, and the area around the surgery is swollen but not unreasonably so. I was, however, blind-sided by the change in the rehab schedule suggested, which is based on what they found in the surgery. Willie’s shoulder has a torn medial glenohumeral ligament, a torn lateral colateral ligament, a moderately inflamed supraspinatus tendon and a badly inflamed bicepital tendon. It’s a miracle how well he was doing before the surgery. Honestly, I’d say that after his 2 months of leash restriction and 2 more months of exercise restrictions only 1 in 1,000 people could see even the slightest lameness when he walked, trotted or ran.

The surgery, in which they cut out the bicepital tendon and attached the muscle directly to the bone (with a huge screw, I almost fainted when I saw the radiographs) should, we hope, resolve the pain related to that tendon, but it won’t affect anything else. So they recommended two months of complete and total “crate rest” in hopes of healing the other tissues. It’s doubtful now that he’ll ever be 100%, which was my motivation for the surgery, but I made the decision to go ahead because I thought I’d always second guess myself if I didn’t do everything I could. He’s had 3 other sessions of leash restrictions for 2 months or more each , and I want us both to never have to do them again. We may anyway, but at least we tried our hardest.

So for two months (with a small chance of sooner) it’s no movement at all, except for passive PT,  unless going outside to potty. THEN we start PT that involves 5 min walks and some active movements of his legs. He won’t be back up to speed for perhaps 6 months, and we won’t know until then how much better he’ll be.

That’s not great news. I was prepared when I took him in on Tuesday that the rehab would be extensive, but nothing this lengthy or confining. But all that has minimal effect on me compared to this: Willie won’t look at me. He refused to acknowledge me when I picked him up at the vet school. He greeted 3 vets and a PT, granted a little bit dopey and drugged, but he still licked faces and said hello. He completely ignored me. It’s continuing still. He won’t cuddle up with me; he sat this morning at the end of the leash, head and body turned away from me and whined while looking longingly up the staircase, waiting for my friend Meg to come down. I’m not making this up, he wants nothing to do with me. It’s blindingly obvious.  At first I wondered if my slight anxiety about picking him up, learning his PT passive exercises, getting all the post-surgical instructions down etc, was making him nervous and so he avoided me. Nope. That’s long over. The only hypothesis I can muster, anthropomorphic as it sounds, is that he attributes the pain and movement restrictions to me. As Meg said “Welcome to being a mom.” Of course, so far I’m the one doing all the passive PT (which he doesn’t like), so that’s not helping.

All yesterday I felt hurt (very hurt, Willie and I are best friends, and after all, he is my only dog now). I tried not to be, buckle up and be a grown up Trisha, but still, it was a tad difficult. This morning it continued, and I cycled from, yes, true confessions, a tad hurt to bit irritated. However, at the moment, everything feels so ridiculously and relentlessly difficult, that after crying on Tuesday over the bad news about his shoulder, and crying on Wednesday over the bad news about his rehab, and then feeling miserable about my dog rejecting me, I’ve evolved into just laughing. I laughed at Willie, laughed at an Alpaca at a neighbor’s who had been shorn to look like a Dr. Suess character, and most of all, laughed at myself. I think I’ll be watching those old comedy movies after all.

Here’s Mr. Will and my dear friend Meg Boscov who came to help me and Willie while Jim moved his mom to Madison. Meg, with Liz Maslow, is the co-founder of Muttmatch in Philadelphia, and I honestly don’t know what I would have done without her. What a wonderful friend she is.

I was going to include a photo of Willie’s shaved shoulder (and back and belly and leg…. jeeez they go crazy with those clippers!) but he has razor burn for one thing and scratched himself badly scratching himself with his back leg while at the vet school, so although “grueseome” is a bit strong of a description of the photo, I thought it was better to spare you all, and include some spring beauty instead.

Last week I talked about John Bradshaw’s new book, Dog Sense, which I am enjoying immensely.  In it, he discusses why wolf behavior doesn’t necessarily predict dog behavior as well as any book I’ve seen. If you’re interested in this issue you definitely want to read this book.

In response to last week’s post, some thoughtful comments came in about “over marking” behavior, when one dog urinates directly on top of the urine of another. It’s traditionally been assumed to be a status-related behavior in which one dog ‘covers’ the scent of another with his or her own. However, if you look at the behavior closely, it’s not at all clear that the hypothesis holds up. Of course, as I’ve discussed in other posts, the whole concept of dominance has been mis-used and mis-understood by the public and some dog trainers for decades. (Bradshaw does a great job explaining what “dominance” is and isn’t, as has Suzanne Hetts in speeches and on her website, Animal Behavior Associates.). Remember that dominance is ONLY about who will take possession of a limited resource, and it might even be related to only one specific resource, not any others.

Nonetheless, dogs do greet one another with tail up or tail down, and they appear to be posturing in such a way to signal something–confidence? an interest in social status? But the data and observations about over marking are sending US mixed signals. My female BC Lassie always, always over marked Pippy Tay’s urine; she would actually stand behind Pippy and wait for her to go. I swear there were times on cold nights when both of us would exchange “Pip, would you hurry up and pee please?” glances. But Lassie was in no way what anyone would describe as the “dominant” or “high status” female. That was my Gr Pyr Tulip, seemed to pay no attention to where anyone else urinated at all. At the time I interpreted it thus: Tulip was exceptionally secure in her ability to possess whatever resources she wanted–none of the dogs would even think about trying to take a bone out of her mouth, and she had no need to make a point with her urine. Pippy was the super smart, obsequious one: she met all other dogs by puddling into the ground, ears back, tongue flicking, but she was nonetheless really good at getting what she wanted . Lassie’s social signals seemed to be middle-of-the-road, and I used to interpret her over-marking of Pippy Tay’s urine as a status-related one, something like the folks in corporate middle management jockeying for position while the CEO doesn’t have to worry about such things anymore.

But now I’m not sure… all I’m ever really sure of is the importance of staying open minded and to regularly re-examine one’s beliefs and assumptions. This is a perfect example of why we need more research, because we simply don’t know what over marking means. In her experiments on urine marking a few years ago, Dr. Anneke Lisbberg found no females over marking at all, but that the males who over marked tended to show the highest tail base position and be the most likely to get a bone thrown between them and another dog. I was greatly surprised that she found no females who over marked in her research–could that be because the urine was presented on a vertical surface and females simply couldn’t physically squat over it? (I’ve got a call into Dr. Lisberg, I’ll keep you posted.) By the way, if you missed it, there are two other posts about scent marking in the blog, click here to read the first.

One of the comments on last week’s post– that her “low ranking, submissive female” always waited to over mark  another dog’s urine–got me thinking about this issue again. Her suggestion, an interesting one, is that her dog was finding a way to “join up” with the other dog. I rather like this interpretation, except it would never explain Lassie’s behavior. Lassie and Pip never fought or even had any visible tension between them, but neither did they seem to enjoy each other. They basically ignored one another.

What about you? Do any of your dogs over mark the urine of another in your household? That of others? (Note that Dr. Lisberg distinguishes between “adjacent marking,” or going within a few feet of urine and “over marking,” or going on top of the other urine.  Be sure to make that distinction yourself if you write in.) I’d love to hear your experiences.

MEANWHILE, back on the farm: Willie is in surgery right now. I’d love to tell you that a PhD and 23 years as a behaviorist has made it easier to get through all this, by alas, it’s not so. If anything, ignorance is bliss. I’ve spent enough time with vets and had enough clients over the years to know too many horror stories of things gone wrong. What’s especially challenging is that Willie looks sooo good right now. With all the rest he’s had, along with great physical therapy and exercises, he’s superficially looking strong and sound. That explains why, when the vet did another exam today and it was obvious that flexing his shoulder caused him pain I said “Oh good!” I needed reminding why I am about to have my dog undergo an invasive procedure with a long recovery time. So the great news is that we’ll have the surgery behind us soon, and then it’s all downhill to a full recovery. It looks like he should be back up and better than ever by mid-August and oh my my that will be wonderful!

It’s stunningly beautiful out here right now. Low 60′s (actually was frost on the ground this morning!) and blue sky sunny with horse tail wispy clouds and fresh baby mint-colored leaves budding out in the trees. The Orioles are singing like flutes, and last night I went out with Willie and worked the sheep for one brief, heavenly moment before that is out of the question for two or three monhts.

By the way, Snickers, Truffles and their lambs went to a great new home on Saturday. I needed to cull them from the flock, but wouldn’t ever ship one of my ewes, so they went to a kindly woman who needed sheep for her working BC. I am confident they’ll be well cared for and it feels great to have found them such a good home. The flock seems so small now! Redford the Ram is at a friend’s and I now only have 5 ewes and 12 lambs.

Here’s Willie last night, right after his pre-surgical exam at the vet school. The harness is so that I could lift him out of the car without him having to jump down.

Well, now, this is interesting. Corsin Muller at the Clever Dog Lab in Vienna believes he has found a sex difference in the attentiveness of dogs to the expected size of a ball. Dogs were brought into a room and were allowed to play with 2 balls, one big and one small. They then were taken out of the room while the researcher set up the experiment. When the dog returned, he or she saw a ball, on the left side of a visual barrier, that gradually moved to the right and eventually behind the barrier itself. After a pause, a same or other size ball appeared on the other side, as if the ball had continued to move to the right and had passed behind the barrier. The experiments scored how long the dogs stared at the ball that appeared on the other side. This is a standard paradigm used in studies on pre-verbal children. Researchers have found that infants and young children look longer at something that surprises them, and this method has given us insight into how their minds work at different stages of development. (Ex: some species of primates and young children stare longer at two versus three balls rising from behind a curtain, if they saw three balls descend behind it seconds before.)

What surprised the researchers at the Clever Dog Lab was that female dogs behaved as if they were surprised by a different size ball appearing where they expected a smaller or larger one to show up, but male dogs did not. A write up of the research appeared in Science, you can watch a video of a test there (although I found it difficult to see much myself). Their sample size was 25 of each sex, which seems like it might be adequate, but it’s hard to tell without actually looking at the data and knowing how large the variances were. (We’re looking for the study now here at the office, if anyone’s found it let me know.)

I have virtually no explanation for why there would be a sex effect (if there is, I’m still a tad skeptical). The researchers don’t appear to have any answers either, but when interviewed, Stanley Coren (How to Speak Dog and other books) suggested that females may have more of a need to keep track of things visually, like their own puppies.  Hummm, not so sure. I’ll admit that I can be a bit sexist some times, having grown up in a world in which women should be seen and not  heard, and I’d be fun to say “Yeah, females rock!,” but still… This one has me cocking my head. What about you? Think it’s a real effect here, or perhaps a glitch in sample sizes and some especially focused females? Or more easily distracted males? There does seem to be a general belief that males tend to be more distractable, (I found from a survey on the blog about whether males or females are “easier to train”) but there really isn’t any research on it that I know of.

MEANWHILE, back on the farm: It’s time for me to bring Snickers, Truffles and their three December lambs down to the barn. They have been up in the orchard pasture for the last week so that my young lambs could have access to the creep feeders. The two ewes have problematic udders, and so I am culling them from my breeding herd. I have vowed never to ship any of my ewes, and I’m so happy to report that I’ve found a great home for the flock as a “starter herd” for someone with a Border Collie. I am confident they’ll have a good home, be taken care of well and not abused by dogs in any way. Still, it’s always a bit hard to say goodbye. I’ve been fond of them, especially because their lambs are the surprise lambs born in December when we were in New Zealand. (And whose birth resulted in the now famous line from the husband of the sitter: “Honey, come quick, there’s a little white dog in with the sheep!” I hesitate to create cyber laughing at his expense, because the man is a dear, dear person and became a great shepherd while he was here, moving heaven and earth to keep little Ferdinand alive. But still, it’s just so darn funny….).

I’ve just returned from moving the flock to the barn. I managed to worm the ewes again without any help (I’m not willing to risk Willie just days before his surgery), but the lambs were another matter altogether. They are big and fast and Hans Solo darn near smashed me into pulp, so they’ll have to wait til tomorrow. Here’s what is now called the “Insta-Flock” (as in, an “Instant, ready-made flock), in the orchard pasture right before I brought them down.

And here’s what the ewes were looking at:

Someday soon, Willie, someday soon!

There is a new book that just hit the book shelves, John Bradshaw’s Dog Sense. I just started reading it and think it is a book with a lot of value. Here’s a summary from the back of the book of some of its messages: “Don’t be an Alpha,” “Dogs can feel love but not guilt,” “Avoid punishment,” “Look beyond breed,” Respect your dog’s sense.” All good, absolutely. The question, of course, is what does the book add to the conversation, there being a good number of books on the market that say the same thing.

Here’s something, from just the first chapter that I think makes the book worthwhile: Bradshaw begins with a valuable discussion about the genetics of canids and the derivation of the domestic dog. I love his inclusion of the entire group of canids (not just grey wolves) and his important point that just because two species share most of their DNA doesn’t mean they behave in a similar way all the time. Case in point: Common Chimpanzees and Bonobos share 99.6 % of their DNA, yet their social behavior is very different. The social system of chimps is based on male-male coalitions and no small amount of coercion, force and fighting. Bonobos tend to resolve social conflicts through sex — pretty much everyone has sex with everyone else. A primatologist once said it’s like Sweden on steroids (I’m just quoting!). Obviously, individuals of the two species share more than they differ behaviorally, but they are not clones and look and behave more differently than you might expect with a .4% difference in DNA. He uses this information to remind us that wolves and dogs may be the same species, but they are not behavioral clones.

Bradshaw compares the canid genome to a “swiss army knife,” a wonderful way to describe a flexible set of predispositions and tools that can be taken and used when needed (e.g. “faculatively social” coyotes who can live alone or in groups, depending on their prey base.) If you are interested in comparative behavior, this is a valuable section. The book includes chapters titled “Why Dogs Were–Unfortunately–Turned Back into Wolves,” “Stick or Carrots–the Science of Dog Training,” “Canine Brain Power,” and “Emotional (Un)sophistication. I’ll keep reading away, and let you know what I think. Sorry I can’t provide a full book review now, I’m a tad behind what with personal issues, grading exams and finishing up the new book.

Anyone read it all yet? Any other good books you’ve discovered of interest to us all?

MEANWHILE, back on the farm: I gave the word to the vet and sitter to put my ewe, Brittany, down on Friday evening.  There was simply no saving her, she had “twisted gut” which is not treatable in sheep (it is in cows, but not sheep and goats) and so my great sheep vet (Dr. Jeff Kunart) came out and eased her away. The farm sitter, vet student Anna, said she was ready to go. A dear friend who raised dairy goats for years brought out goat milk for the lambs (thank you Donna!)  but as we expected they would have no part of being bottle fed. They’re just too old to learn a new way of feeding. But they had become partially weaned as Brittany declined, and they are just cutting their teeth, so I have hopes that they’ll make it. Other dear friends came over and disposed of Brittany’s body so that Jim and I didn’t have to come home from a funeral and bury a body. Thank you Barb and Dave, we owe you one. It takes a village. And thank all of you for your kind comments about the death of Jim’s sister. The services were beautiful and heart breaking and very special.

Brittany’s orphan lambs won’t grow at the same rate as the other lambs, but they are eating “creep” feed (an area in which the lambs can enter but the ewes can’t) specially designed for young lambs. I’m thankful that I still had some of the ‘baby lamb’ food; they seem to love it and are also eating grass well. I let them out with the flock on Sunday, and they seem to be hanging around my old, noble ewe, Dorothy. I doubt very much she’ll let them nurse, and even if she did, she has barely enough milk for her own twins, but at least they have a ewe to follow.

Willie is wonderful, seems brimming with health. I’m gradually weaning him off his medicine and gradually introducing regular food back into his diet. No sign of GI trouble yet, all paws crossed because his surgery is next Tuesday. The farm is gorgeous right now. I admit I yearn for more time to enjoy it, but I’m savoring every minute I get. The birds and flowers are ridiculously colorful, the yard looks like some 1960′s psychedelic Beatles movie.

Neither of the photographs below are high quality, I had to shoot them through the kitchen window (okay, so it’s not all that clean), but you can still get a sense of how much color there is at the feeders now. There have been as many as 15 Goldfinch, 4 male Indigo Buntings, 6 Rose Breasted Grosbeaks plus Cardinals, Blue Jays, Chickadees, House Finches, Titmice, Wh Breasted Nuthatches, Downy and Hairy Woodpeckers, White-Throated and White-Crowned Sparrows, Orioles, & Red Bellied Woodpeckers at the feeders at the same time. I suspect I’m leaving some out too… After a long winter of little but white, brown and grey, you can imagine what a joy it is to see color again. Between the birds, the tulips and the daffodils, the farm is saturated with color. A magical mystery tour all on its own.

Here are 3 male Indigo Buntings, one of my favorite birds. They are common here in Wisconsin, but tend to sing high up in trees and often don’t look that colorful without the sun on them. The two gold birds are, not surprisingly, Goldfinches. I don’t know why, but our yard is seems to be Goldfinch magnet now.. . we’ve never seen so many at one time. I expect the numbers will dwindle when they get serious about their territories.

Here’s Mr. Flashy Boy, the Red-Breasted Grosbeak with a male House Finch in the background. The RBGs are gorgeous in person, with high contrast black, white and red radiating around the feeders.

I just got back from UW getting Willie measured for his Hobbles, designed to restrict his shoulder movement after his surgery for his ripped up bicepital tendon. I’m not positive that it looks exactly like this, but the photos on this link from DogLeggs are a close replicate. We also worked through some pre-surgical PT, including teaching him to balance on an exercise ball. He seemed to think it was great fun.. photos to come as soon as we can get them.

I’m curious: Has anyone out there used a similar kind of ‘hobble’ after surgery on their dog? Would love to hear your experiences.

Today’s post will be short, you’ll understand why as you continue to read.

MEANWHILE, back on the farm: It’s a beautiful, sunny spring day outside, but it’s been a challenge to enjoy it. Many of you have thoughtfully asked how Jim’s sister is doing, and so I felt it was best to say right away that Barbara passed away last night, age 57, of ovarian cancer. Her last two weeks especially were a challenge for all the family, and it is a blessing that she is now at peace. Off you go, Xena warrior girl, time to rest now that the long battle is over.

I should mention that I regret not being more active responding to comments on the last posts: I have read everything that has been written but been unable to comment due to the need to help Jim and his family. But thank you all so much for such an interesting discussion.

I’m sorry also to report that Willie, after looking great for 2 days on Panacur, has diarrhea again. One of my ewes, Brittany Spears, is very ill, and me and the vet are doing all we can to save her and her 2 three week old lambs. Life on the farm . . . what can I say?

Here’s a photo I took last night. I had moved the flock into a pasture they’ve been out of all winter (after worming them to try to fight a nasty worm that is resistant to medicine now), and the sky was so pretty I ran back down the hill to get a photo. (The sick ewe is the one on the far right.) A good time to savor the beauty of life.