I'm thinkin' of just forgetting about blogging I really have nothing of interest to talk about or post anymore, and I figure there's only 2 people who read the blog anyhow, and I talk to them more frequently than I post. So I really see no purpose to this anymore.

Perhaps I'll change my mind if a meteor lands in my backyard, or if I win a mulit-million dollar lottery, or a burning bush starts up a conversation one day while we're out walking the dogs. Other than that, life is boring and why would anyone want to read such drivel? E-mail works just as well, and sometimes better.  ¶ 10:08 AM 7 Comments

  Close Calls Well, this past week we had a bit of a scare with our Bruno. For those of you who got the emails, excuse the rambling post please! For those of you who didn't get the emails, he's fine, but it was nerve wracking for a couple of days!

Bruno has been not feeling well for a couple of weeks, and then one day week before last, we went to the dog park to play, and Bruno fell out of the back of the truck! He just fell out! That night he was crying in his sleep, and the next day he wasn't very happy. So on Saturday (a week ago) we took him to the vets.

The vet palpated his back legs, and said he's likely got arthritis, and she took some blood to do the "senior wellness" tests, thinking he may have a slow thryoid because he's gained more weight than the amount of food we feed him. If you follow.

She gave us 2 prescriptions for him, Dasuquin and Derramax.

A couple days later (Tuesday) she called and said that his thyroid is within normal levels, but his calcium is really high, and something else that James couldn't remember is also high, and these combined are usually markers for bone cancer. So we had to take him back in on Thursday for x-rays and additional blood work. So the 2 days wait was a bit nauseating.

Turns out however that he's just got arthritis in his knee, and something else wrong with his back (again, James couldn't remember what she said exactly was wrong with it. Should have got him to write stuff down). She said Bruno needs to lose about 50 pounds, or his back could break! EEK!

If he lost 50 pounds though he'd weigh the same as George (who is a healthy 140 pounds) and he'd be too skinny. We figure he'd be better around 160 or 165 or so. He has a much bigger frame than George, we don't want him to look anorexic!

So now he's on a diet and walking twice a day rather than just once a day. We're trying to cut his food down from 4 cups a day to about 3, but he just went and ate his lunch, and because George wasn't there watching, he ate hers too! We'll have to pay better attention to what he's sneaking from her bowl! This is probably why she steals his treats right from his mouth! LOL!

She added Tramadol to his list of prescriptions, and he gets 4 of those twice a day. So now with his medicines and George's medicine, it'll be about $100+ per month for all those pills. That, on top f the almost $600 for the x-rays and anesthetic and pain injections, and the $200 for the Saturday visit and blood work and prescriptions, we'll be eating cheap for a while I think :-p

We're still looking to get out of this area, and had someone look at the other house the other day, but she didn't call back so we can only assume she's not a do-it-yourselfer. It needs quite a lot of work done still. But the kitchen is all painted, now we just need to put down new floor tiles and hopefully we can get out of there with enough money for a downpayment on something else closer to the border and my family.

Maybe somewhere close to a veterinary college where we can get cheap care for the dogs! Sheesh, these two cost us a fortune in medical bills!  ¶ 12:52 PM 1 Comments

  Purty eh? This is what I woke up to the other morning. I took these photos from our back door.







You have to admit, Mother Nature sure does paint a pretty picture!  ¶ 3:40 PM 1 Comments

  I found this interesting, and insightful re-posted from a message forum that I frequent:

By Sara Robinson, TomPaine.com

2008 is shaping up to be the election year that we finally get to have the Great American Healthcare Debate again. Harry and Louise are back with a vengeance. Conservatives are rumbling around the talk show circuit bellowing about the socialist threat to the (literal) American body politic. And, as usual, Canada is once again getting dragged into the fracas, shoved around by both sides as either an exemplar or a warning -- and, along the way, getting coated with the obfuscating dust of so many willful misconceptions that the actual facts about How Canada Does It are completely lost in the melee.

I'm both a health-care-card-carrying Canadian resident and an uninsured American citizen who regularly sees doctors on both sides of the border. As such, I'm in a unique position to address the pros and cons of both systems first-hand. If we're going to have this conversation, it would be great if we could start out (for once) with actual facts, instead of ideological posturing, wishful thinking, hearsay, and random guessing about how things get done up here.

To that end, here's the first of a two-part series aimed at busting the common myths Americans routinely tell each other about Canadian health care. When the right-wing hysterics drag out these hoary old bogeymen, this time, we need to be armed and ready to blast them into straw. Because, mostly, straw is all they're made of.

1. Canada's health care system is "socialized medicine."
False. In socialized medical systems, the doctors work directly for the state. In Canada (and many other countries with universal care), doctors run their own private practices, just like they do in the US. The only difference is that every doctor deals with one insurer, instead of 150. And that insurer is the provincial government, which is accountable to the legislature and the voters if the quality of coverage is allowed to slide.

The proper term for this is "single-payer insurance." In talking to Americans about it, the better phrase is "Medicare for all."

2. Doctors are hurt financially by single-payer health care.
True and False. Doctors in Canada do make less than their US counterparts. But they also have lower overhead, and usually much better working conditions. A few reasons for this:

First, as noted, they don't have to charge higher fees to cover the salary of a full-time staffer to deal with over a hundred different insurers, all of whom are bent on denying care whenever possible. In fact, most Canadian doctors get by quite nicely with just one assistant, who cheerfully handles the phones, mail, scheduling, patient reception, stocking, filing, and billing all by herself in the course of a standard workday.

Second, they don't have to spend several hours every day on the phone cajoling insurance company bean counters into doing the right thing by their patients. My doctor in California worked a 70-hour week: 35 hours seeing patients, and another 35 hours on the phone arguing with insurance companies. My Canadian doctor, on the other hand, works a 35-hour week, period. She files her invoices online, and the vast majority are simply paid -- quietly, quickly, and without hassle. There is no runaround. There are no fights. Appointments aren't interrupted by vexing phone calls. Care is seldom denied (because everybody knows the rules). She gets her checks on time, sees her patients on schedule, takes Thursdays off, and gets home in time for dinner.

One unsurprising side effect of all this is that the doctors I see here are, to a person, more focused, more relaxed, more generous with their time, more up-to-date in their specialties, and overall much less distracted from the real work of doctoring. You don't realize how much stress the American doctor-insurer fights put on the day-to-day quality of care until you see doctors who don't operate under that stress, because they never have to fight those battles at all. Amazingly: they seem to enjoy their jobs.

Third: The average American medical student graduates $140,000 in hock. The average Canadian doctor's debt is roughly half that.

Finally, Canadian doctors pay lower malpractice insurance fees. When paying for health care constitutes a one of a family's major expenses, expectations tend to run very high. A doctor's mistake not only damages the body; it may very well throw a middle-class family permanently into the ranks of the working poor, and render the victim uninsurable for life. With so much at stake, it's no wonder people are quick to rush to court for redress.

Canadians are far less likely to sue in the first place, since they're not having to absorb devastating financial losses in addition to any physical losses when something goes awry. The cost of the damaging treatment will be covered. So will the cost of fixing it. And, no matter what happens, the victim will remain insured for life. When lawsuits do occur, the awards don't have to include coverage for future medical costs, which reduces the insurance company's liability.

3. Wait times in Canada are horrendous.
True and False again -- it depends on which province you live in, and what's wrong with you. Canada's health care system runs on federal guidelines that ensure uniform standards of care, but each territory and province administers its own program. Some provinces don't plan their facilities well enough; in those, you can have waits. Some do better. As a general rule, the farther north you live, the harder it is to get to care, simply because the doctors and hospitals are concentrated in the south. But that's just as true in any rural county in the U.S.

You can hear the bitching about it no matter where you live, though. The percentage of Canadians who'd consider giving up their beloved system consistently languishes in the single digits. A few years ago, a TV show asked Canadians to name the Greatest Canadian in history; and in a broad national consensus, they gave the honor to Tommy Douglas, the Saskatchewan premier who is considered the father of the country's health care system. (And no, it had nothing to do with the fact that he was also Kiefer Sutherland's grandfather.). In spite of that, though, grousing about health care is still unofficially Canada's third national sport after curling and hockey.

And for the country's newspapers, it's a prime watchdogging opportunity. Any little thing goes sideways at the local hospital, and it's on the front pages the next day. Those kinds of stories sell papers, because everyone is invested in that system and has a personal stake in how well it functions. The American system might benefit from this kind of constant scrutiny, because it's certainly one of the things that keeps the quality high. But it also makes people think it's far worse than it is.

Critics should be reminded that the American system is not exactly instant-on, either. When I lived in California, I had excellent insurance, and got my care through one of the best university-based systems in the nation. Yet I routinely had to wait anywhere from six to twelve weeks to get in to see a specialist. Non-emergency surgical waits could be anywhere from four weeks to four months. After two years in the BC system, I'm finding the experience to be pretty much comparable, and often better. The notable exception is MRIs, which were easy in California, but can take many months to get here. (It's the number one thing people go over the border for.) Other than that, urban Canadians get care about as fast as urban Americans do.

4. You have to wait forever to get a family doctor.
False for the vast majority of Canadians, but True for a few. Again, it all depends on where you live. I live in suburban Vancouver, and there are any number of first-rate GPs in my neighborhood who are taking new patients. If you don't have a working relationship with one, but need to see a doctor now, there are 24-hour urgent care clinics in most neighborhoods that will usually get you in and out on the minor stuff in under an hour.

It is, absolutely, harder to get to a doctor if you live out in a small town, or up in the territories. But that's just as true in the U.S. -- and in America, the government won't cover the airfare for rural folk to come down to the city for needed treatment, which all the provincial plans do.

5. You don't get to choose your own doctor.
Scurrilously False. Somebody, somewhere, is getting paid a lot of money to make this kind of stuff up. The cons love to scare the kids with stories about the government picking your doctor for you, and you don't get a choice. Be afraid! Be very afraid!

For the record: Canadians pick their own doctors, just like Americans do. And not only that: since it all pays the same, poor Canadians have exactly the same access to the country's top specialists that rich ones do.

6. Canada's care plan only covers the basics. You're still on your own for any extras, including prescription drugs. And you still have to pay for it.
True -- but not as big an issue as you might think. The province does charge a small monthly premium (ours is $108/month for a family of four) for the basic coverage. However, most people never even have to write that check: almost all employers pick up the tab for their employees' premiums as part of the standard benefits package; and the province covers it for people on public assistance or disability.

"The basics" covered by this plan include 100% of all doctor's fees, ambulance fares, tests, and everything that happens in a hospital -- in other words, the really big-ticket items that routinely drive American families into bankruptcy. In BC, it doesn't include "extras" like medical equipment, prescriptions, physical therapy or chiropractic care, dental, vision, and so on; and if you want a private or semi-private room with TV and phone, that costs extra (about what you'd pay for a room in a middling hotel). That other stuff does add up; but it's far easier to afford if you're not having to cover the big expenses, too. Furthermore: you can deduct any out-of-pocket health expenses you do have to pay off your income taxes. And, as every American knows by now, drugs aren't nearly as expensive here, either.

Filling the gap between the basics and the extras is the job of the country's remaining private health insurers. Since they're off the hook for the ruinously expensive big-ticket items that can put their own profits at risk, the insurance companies make a tidy business out of offering inexpensive policies that cover all those smaller, more predictable expenses. Top-quality add-on policies typically run in the ballpark of $75 per person in a family per month -- about $300 for a family of four -- if you're stuck buying an individual plan. Group plans are cheap enough that even small employers can afford to offer them as a routine benefit. An average working Canadian with employer-paid basic care and supplemental insurance gets free coverage equal to the best policies now only offered at a few of America's largest corporations. And that employer is probably only paying a couple hundred dollars a month to provide that benefit.

7. Canadian drugs are not the same.
More preposterious bogosity. They are exactly the same drugs, made by the same pharmaceutical companies, often in the same factories. The Canadian drug distribution system, however, has much tighter oversight; and pharmacies and pharmacists are more closely regulated. If there is a difference in Canadian drugs at all, they're actually likely to be safer.

Also: pharmacists here dispense what the doctors tell them to dispense, the first time, without moralizing. I know. It's amazing.

8. Publicly-funded programs will inevitably lead to rationed health care, particularly for the elderly.
False. And bogglingly so. The papers would have a field day if there was the barest hint that this might be true.

One of the things that constantly amazes me here is how well-cared-for the elderly and disabled you see on the streets here are. No, these people are not being thrown out on the curb. In fact, they live longer, healthier, and more productive lives because they're getting a constant level of care that ensures small things get treated before they become big problems.

The health care system also makes it easier on their caregiving adult children, who have more time to look in on Mom and take her on outings because they aren't working 60-hour weeks trying to hold onto a job that gives them insurance.

9. People won't be responsible for their own health if they're not being forced to pay for the consequences.
False. The philosophical basis of America's privatized health care system might best be characterized as medical Calvinism. It's fascinating to watch well-educated secularists who recoil at the Protestant obsession with personal virtue, prosperity as a cardinal sign of election by God, and total responsibility for one's own salvation turn into fire-eyed, moralizing True Believers when it comes to the subject of Taking Responsibility For One's Own Health.

They'll insist that health, like salvation, is entirely in our own hands. If you just have the character and self-discipline to stick to an abstemious regime of careful diet, clean living, and frequent sweat offerings to the Great Treadmill God, you'll never get sick. (Like all good theologies, there's even an unspoken promise of immortality: f you do it really really right, they imply, you might even live forever.) The virtuous Elect can be discerned by their svelte figures and low cholesterol numbers. From here, it's a short leap to the conviction that those who suffer from chronic conditions are victims of their own weaknesses, and simply getting what they deserve. Part of their punishment is being forced to pay for the expensive, heavily marketed pharmaceuticals needed to alleviate these avoidable illnesses. They can't complain. It was their own damned fault; and it's not our responsibility to pay for their sins. In fact, it's recently been suggested that they be shunned, lest they lead the virtuous into sin.

Of course, this is bad theology whether you're applying it to the state of one's soul or one's arteries. The fact is that bad genes, bad luck, and the ravages of age eventually take their toll on all of us -- even the most careful of us. The economics of the Canadian system reflect this very different philosophy: it's built on the belief that maintaining health is not an individual responsibility, but a collective one. Since none of us controls fate, the least we can do is be there for each other as our numbers come up.

This difference is expressed in a few different ways. First: Canadians tend to think of tending to one's health as one of your duties as a citizen. You do what's right because you don't want to take up space in the system, or put that burden on your fellow taxpayers. Second, "taking care of yourself" has a slightly expanded definition here, which includes a greater emphasis on public health. Canadians are serious about not coming to work if you're contagious, and seeing a doctor ASAP if you need to. Staying healthy includes not only diet and exercise; but also taking care to keep your germs to yourself, avoiding stress, and getting things treated while they're still small and cheap to fix.

Third, there's a somewhat larger awareness that stress leads to big-ticket illnesses -- and a somewhat lower cultural tolerance for employers who put people in high-stress situations. Nobody wants to pick up the tab for their greed. And finally, there's a generally greater acceptance on the part of both the elderly and their families that end-of-life heroics may be drawing resources away from people who might put them to better use. You can have them if you want them; but reasonable and compassionate people should be able to take the larger view.

The bottom line: When it comes to getting people to make healthy choices, appealing to their sense of the common good seems to work at least as well as Calvinist moralizing.

10. This all sounds great -- but the taxes to cover it are just unaffordable. And besides, isn't the system in bad financial shape?
False. On one hand, our annual Canadian tax bite runs about 10% higher than our U.S. taxes did. On the other, we're not paying out the equivalent of two new car payments every month to keep the family insured here. When you balance out the difference, we're actually money ahead. When you factor in the greatly increased social stability that follows when everybody's getting their necessary health care, the impact on our quality of life becomes even more signficant.

And True -- but only because this is a universal truth that we need to make our peace with. Yes, the provincial plans are always struggling. So is every single publicly-funded health care system in the world, including the VA and Medicare. There's always tension between what the users of the system want, and what the taxpayers are willing to pay. The balance of power ebbs and flows between them; but no matter where it lies at any given moment, at least one of the pair is always going to be at least somewhat unhappy.

But, as many of us know all too well, there's also constant tension between what patients want and what private insurers are willing to pay. At least when it's in government hands, we can demand some accountability. And my experience in Canada has convinced me that this accountability is what makes all the difference between the two systems.

It is true that Canada's system is not the same as the U.S. system. It's designed to deliver a somewhat different product, to a population that has somewhat different expectations. But the end result is that the vast majority of Canadians get the vast majority of what they need the vast majority of the time. It'll be a good day when when Americans can hold their heads high and proudly make that same declaration.  ¶ 7:14 AM 0 Comments

  bitch bitch whinge whinge There's not a whole heckuva lot goin' on around here. Just the usual get up go to work, come home walk the dogs, make dinner, eat dinner, sit and watch TV, go to bed, repeat.

Even this weekend of the double-header Imbolc sabbat and Superbowl (and yes, I know some people who are combining the two :rolleyes: ) there's nothing to do. There was an Imbolc open ritual up in Asheville yesterday, but we're so broke we can't really afford the gas to get there.

We had thought about going up to Asheville to see Sweeney Todd maybe, but its not playing anymore anywhere. So I'll yet again have to wait for DVD. What is with this area that it'll keep dreck like Alvin & The Chipmunks playing for 6 weeks in one cinema, but stuff that I actually *want* to see is gone in less than 3 weeks? Hickory had Sweeney Todd for about a week, maybe 2, but only 2 shows per day, one at 4:10 and one at 9:50pm. So we never got there. It didn't come to Morganton at all. Other than Pirates of the Caribbean, I can't think of any Johnny Depp movie that got to Morganton. They didn't even show Finding Neverland! :-p

bleah...

But, as mentioned, I'm so broke I can't even afford a movie really. I went and rented a couple movies yesterday, and I had a freebie, so it only cost $5 for 2.

I hate being broke. I'm old enough I should be well past this point in my life! But living in small town USA as we do, where wages are about equivalent to what I was making 20 years ago back home, and cost of living going up every day, I really can't see a way out of this hole unless we leave here and can find jobs that actually pay people what they're worth. With better health benefits, and steady hours.

This is what really bugs me about this country. The richest country on the planet, and they somehow "can't afford" for universal healthcare? I'm paying about the same in income taxes here in North Carolina as what I would be paying up in Ontario for equivalent wages, and yet I have nothing to show for it! On top of my income taxes, I also pay into the Medicare coffers, but as a sponsored immigrant, I'm not eligible to ever use Medicare. :-p And as a non-citizen, I'm not allowed to vote. Howzat for taxation without representation eh? :-p

bleah...

I pay more than $400 per month for health insurance for me and James. But we still have to pay for doctor's visits because we have a $1500 annual deductible. I had 2 doctor visits this month with the endocrinologist to test my thyroid levels, we haven't got the bill for them yet, but I expect it'll be over $200. bleah...

If I didn't have that $400+ to pay per month, I might be able to keep up with some other bills. As it is, we're not starving, but we sure are fuckin' bored I'll tell ya that! When you can't even go to the local cinema and spend $15 for 2 people to see a movie (yeah, its cheap here, back home it costs $15 per person!) its pretty pathetic. Talk about working poor. UGH.

We gotta get outta this place.  ¶ 10:58 AM 1 Comments

  Sad I'm sure by now everyone has heard the news that Heath Ledger was found dead in his Manhattan apartment, of an apparent accidental prescription drugs overdose, on Tuesday this week.

I've been trying to process this information in my head all week. I quite liked Heath Ledger and his movies, what I've seen. He was an incredibly talented actor, with so much more potential to be unleashed. Now we'll never know what he would have done with the rest of his life. Dead at such a young age of 28. Way too early.

His death makes me remember other talents taken from us too young, like River Phoenix, and Kurt Cobain. Both incredibly talented, and unfortunately very messed up young men.

Heath doesn't seem to fit the mould of drug overdose victim.

Heath was different. Apparently not a drugged out spoiled celebrity, but just a bloke having a difficult time trying to sleep on a regular basis. The role of The Joker wreaked havoc with his psyche and he hasn't slept well for quite some time. I can totally understand the desperate need to get some sleep, and the possibility of overdose is immense. If you take one, and it doesn't work, so you take another, and still it doesn't work so you take something else, and then you can't remember how many you've taken. When you finally fall asleep, it may be for the last time. Did he know it was happening? Or did he just fall asleep and that was it?

Reports are confilicting. I've read both that he was found ON his bed, and that he was found on the floor at the foot of his bed. His housekeeper said he was in bed and snoring at about 1pm. When his masseuse arrived at 2:45 they were unable to wake him. So sometime between 1 and 2:45 he died.

I feel very bad for his family, including his ex-fiancee Michelle Williams, and their daughter Matilda. They were in Europe when he died, and they had to fly back to New York for his funeral. Poor Matilda is only 2 years old. Her daddy is dead. Heath's parents and sister live in Perth, Australia and had to make that long trip to New York to get his body. I think he's being buried in Australia...I just can't imagine that trip.

Some people are probably sitting and thinking why the hell would anyone mourn for someone they have never even met? I've certainly never met Heath, but I've enjoyed his movies, and I will miss his talent. He'll be forever 28, just as James Dean will forever be 25, and River Phoenix will forever be 23. The world is a bleaker place without them brightening our movie and TV screens in my opinion. The last completed movie we'll see of Heath Ledger's is The Dark Knight, in which he plays the Joker. It'll be difficult to watch, I'm sure.

I've only got a couple of his movies that I own on DVD. A Knight's Tale, and The Brothers Grimm. I've seen a few others as well though, Brokeback Mountain, Ned Kelly, The Four Feathers, The Order, 10 Things I Hate About You. Maybe I'll go rent a couple today. I haven't seen Candy or Cassanova yet.

Sleep well Heathcliff Anderw Ledger. Speedy journey to the other side.

  ¶ 10:04 AM 3 Comments

  Do Polar Bears Get Lonely? It was a couple of months (or more) ago that my Mum sent me this email with these photos of a polar bear playing with sled dogs up in Churchill Manitoba. Since then, I’ve been using the photos as desktop pictures on my PC at work, alternating them every other week or so. The other day I was experiencing some down time (read: I was bored) so I made a screen saver and power point slide show with them.

The more I look at them, the more I have to wonder, what was this bear thinking? I’m actually more curious about the bear’s state of mind than the dogs’. I have dogs, I kinda know how their brains work. If they feel threatened, as these dogs no doubt did at first glance, then they’ll bark and growl and do whatever necessary to scare off a threat.


Once a dog realizes someone/thing is not a threat, then they’re curious and always happy to make friends. Whether person, squirrel or bear I suppose.


This bear appeared every day for a week to come play with these dogs. The owner of the dogs of course first thought that his team was about to be eaten by a hungry bear, and why he’d take out his camera to photograph the carnage is beyond me. He lucked out though, and got likely the only photos ever taken, ever to be taken, of a polar bear making friends with a dog.

Despite the plight of polar bears in recent years of early ice melt and food sources becoming scarce, this one appears to have been well fed. If she had been hungry I have no doubt she’d have eaten the dogs. Why then did she decide to come and play? Why did she return every day for a week? And what happened to her after that? Where’d she go?


Was she orphaned and lonely? She doesn’t seem full grown, she’s sort of small. Did her mother die, or send her off on her own too early? Did she move on somewhere else with more opportunity, more food, a mate, or maybe other dogs to play with? Did she die hungry and alone? The fate of too many polar bears unfortunately.


Why does it eat at my mind, wondering what happened? Why does it matter? It’s a bear, playing with a dog. Hugging a dog it seems even. And the dog reciprocates willingly, even stretching up to sniff the bear’s muzzle, as dogs do with other dogs, as if to say “hey, you’ve got a bit of seal meat stuck in your teeth there…”


When the bear did not return one day, did the dogs wonder where she was? Did they sit and wait for her? Did they pine for their lost friend?

Bears are special to me, my totem, my spirit animal. I have a rather large collection of stuffed bears, of every shape, size and colour. Quite a lot of them are polar bear like. My sister and brother-in-law even “adopted” a polar bear for me from the WWF as a gift a few years ago. One of my most treasured gifts ever. They also gave me a stuffed polar bear to go with it, which after we saw the movie The Golden Compass, I’ve been thinking about making him some armour and changing his name to Gandalf.

The other evening we were watching a programme on TV about global climate change, and the presenter was up in the Arctic with a research team when they tranquilized a polar bear. The team knelt on the ground next to the bear, which was paralyzed from the tranquilizer, but still conscious. His eyes darted back and forth, tongue flicking out now and again, drool collecting on his chin. I envied the presenter the opportunity to be that close; to be able to touch the bear; feel the warmth and rare vulnerability, smell it, tangle his fingers in its fur. I envisioned myself in that situation, would I have rubbed the bear’s tummy, like I do with my dogs? Would I have hugged it, lied down with it, talked to it? I have no doubt I would have. I also have no doubt that I’d have cried at the beauty of it.

As I cry at the wonder of this young bear who decided to make friends with a sled dog.
  ¶ 6:46 PM 0 Comments