Saturday essay: Bailey (2001-2014)
She was “the crazy dog.”
As a puppy in her first winter 12 years ago, Bailey, a female American black Labrador retriever, tired of romping on top of the heavy snow, would tunnel through it.
And by her first summer, in 2002, she developed nothing short of a tennis ball psychosis, hatching scheme after scheme to break out of the house to roam the neighborhood in pursuit of Green Sphere Nirvana. She typically would wait on the living room couch until some unsuspecting schmuck approached the front door. Then the 75-pound Bailey would impeccably time her escape to the sound of the click of the storm door latch. Hours later, she'd be spotted in one of several backyard ponds, either cooling herself or looking every bit like a Kodiak bear in pursuit of spawning salmon.
And if cleaning out a garbage can or hogging the bed were Olympic sports, Bailey would have multiple gold medals.
But the “forever puppy” that Bailey was for a dozen years began to fade not long after she turned 12 in November. And two Fridays ago, her gait ever more unsteady and her mind increasingly foggy, she had to be put down. The strokes that first were suspected turned out to be, most likely, an inoperable spinal tumor.
Surrounded by family, Bailey found her final peace on a blanket on the floor of the office of Vet Sara, a neighbor and dear friend. And near her last breath, the dog with the sloppiest of kisses managed a final and weak but sweet and elegant hand lick of thanks.
— Colin McNickle
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.