A Dogs Ecological Pawprint

Victoria University professors Brenda and Robert Vale are authors of the book "Time to Eat the Dog?: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living" where they preach that you should reconsider sharing your home with a dog or cat. In the book they say that the ecological impact of a med/large dog to the environment is the equivalent of driving 10,000 km a year in a Toyota Land Cruiser. Brenda Vale said, "A lot of people worry about having SUVs but they don't worry about having Alsatians (German Shepherds) and what we are saying is, well, maybe you should be because the environmental impact...is comparable."

With the ecological footprint from creating the amount of food an average dog consumes each year (164 kg of meat/95 kg of cereals), the Vale's say that instead of having a dog, it would be better for the environment if we choose to have "pets" that we can eat instead - such as chickens. Considering the ecological footprint of a person in the developed world would be 6. ha, a dog eco-footprint would be about .84 ha, and a cats eco-footprint would be 0.15 ha - it would be far more logical to eat the Vale's. While that's a true statement, I'm certainly not suggesting that!

Though it does seem that the Vale's have probably never shared their life with a dog, and are failing to comprehend that a dog is not disposable, but a member of the family.