The Iditarod Dead: Now at 6

categories: Animals in Entertainment, Companion Animals

Published March 25, 2009 @ 01:28PM PT

A sixth dog has died. She was only two years old. But I've written about the Iditarod more times than I care to count in the last couple weeks, and I just can't bring myself to do it again in great detail. So instead, I'll share with you what someone else wrote about it just this afternoon, before adding some final thoughts of my own.

Says Jeff Mackey,

Six dogs. Dead.

And for what? A belt buckle. A long shot at some money, a pickup truck, and a few endorsement deals. I suppose they think that they're covering themselves in glory, too, but it looks more like blood to me.

Consider this: Two of the dogs may have frozen to death in the punishing weather. Two others died with fluid in their lungs. The most recently reported death apparently happened during a turbulent plane flight after the "musher" gave up. Even the generally Iditarod-supportive Anchorage Daily News called the number of deaths—only five, at the time—"troubling," but that misses the point: Even one dog dead is too many, and it is unacceptable that the dogs who survive are run to exhaustion or injury, only to be stuck back on a chain until the next race.

This brings back the anger and frustration I was feeling a few days ago when I wrote about the Humane Society's refusal to take a principled stand against the race and, rather, near-endorsement of it. As you may recall, an HSUS rep was quoted as saying that HSUS is sure that Iditarod organizers are "trying to make it as safe as they can for both the animals and humans." Yet this is the highest number of (official) Iditarod deaths in more than a decade. Will this year's six dead (and who knows how many injured) change HSUS's approach? We can only hope--and insist.

---
Photo by Marc Lester, Anchorage Daily News.

Share this Post

Comments (5)

Let the mushers run the Iditarod without the dogs! Let them use their sleds and power them by pushing them! Then, the winner will have a valid reason to claim the win! The exploitation of these dogs is inexcusable... their deaths unconscionable!

Posted by Judith Atwood on 03/25/2009 @ 03:48PM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Judith
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
Interesting how it's gotten oddly quiet.

HSUS, Alaskans and others who vehemently claim the mushers would never put their dogs in harm's way (as if that's not the idea), and defenders of using dogs for entertainment and"sport" have been duly shamed and should think long and hard about their stance.

And HSUS supporters, if they're paying attention, will reallocate their charitable funds away from HSUS and to organizations that really do help animals, such as Maple Farm, Poplar Spring and Peaceful Prairie Sanctuaries.

Posted by Mary Martin on 03/26/2009 @ 04:04AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Mary
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
Thanks for letting me know about the HSUS' stance on this. I did not know this. It reminds me of the gay rights blog here on change.org where I criticized the gay rodeo and was taken to task for it. Apparently, animal abuse is all about the context in which it is committed; in this case, if it's gays and lesbians, it's beyond reproach (gay pride/gay rights being the overarching focus here).

I can't, however, understand the context in which the HSUS is supporting the Iditarod. Based on the quote you provided, it sounds as if they are playing it politically correct, trying not to take on the more popular sports that aren't as obviously cruel (at least to some), so as not to appear too 'extreme' and thus preserve its image for the bulk of its welfarist supporters.

Posted by Cynthia Yarrow on 03/28/2009 @ 10:13PM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
I consider the near-silence and refusal to come out against it--yes, for fear of losing donors, I imagine--tacit support. What I quoted in that last post was this:

"They acknowledge, however, the event's significance in commemorating. . . "

and

"'I would like to see the Iditarod celebrate the history and culture of the event and not be just a timed event, but they're trying to make it as safe as they can for both the animals and humans,' said Dave Pauli, the humane society's Western region director. 'We're definitely reformists and not abolitionists on an event like this.'"

That's not exactly a hard-hitting critique. Supporters could easily look to that statement and argue that an enormously well-known (and well-funded) and welfare organization respects that the Iditarod is "tradition" (which is a common defense of the race) and even that the group would support the grueling long-distance trek without qualification if it weren't timed. But even if that made it OK--which it wouldn't--we all know the Iditarod isn't ever going to stop being a "timed event," given that its status as a race someone can win in the fastest time possible is the whole point of the thing. So what's the point in saying "well, we could support if they'd just do X" when we know X is never going to happen?

And worst for me was this: "but they're trying to make it as safe as they can for both the animals and humans." There's barely a criticism in the remark, and then it's qualified with assurances that this HSUS office director is sure safety efforts are being undertaken. The very nature of the race puts dogs in danger, and "as safe as they can" is crap. They can make it a lot safer for dogs by not exploiting the dogs and forcing them through the race in the first place. They choose not to. And HSUS chooses not to pressure them. I find the whole statement as quoted in that article infuriating.

Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 03/29/2009 @ 06:21AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Like
Reply to thread
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Cynthia
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
Stephanie - I am wondering (and the question should be posed to HSUS) if the Humane Society of the United States's softening of its stance regarding the Idiotarod has anything to do with the hiring in 2007 of ex-LA Times staff writer/author John Balzar.

Mr. Balzar wrote a promotional book about Canada's disgusting 'Iditarod-wanna-be', the Yukon Quest race (based on Balzar's following the1998 Yukon Quest race trail). The book contains plenty of instances of dog suffering, and also allegations of Quest mushers smoking marijuana during Quest races. This is apparently highly entertaining to Mr. Balzar and to most of the 'deep-thinkers' who support the Idiotarod and Yukon Quest.

[Book excerpt] 'Best bud contest'
"…And by writing about this ticklish question, I do not mean to imply that all Quest mushers are dopers. I know half a dozen who are and I'd guess there are others. They're not all also-rans either. Getting stoned is part of their lives and, oddly, does not seem to leave them in a stupor, as it does the urban pot smokers I know. The only explanation I can offer for this, purely suppositional, is that I understand marijuana to be a mood enhancer. So perhaps these hyperactive mushers only intensify their gusto for living by puffing their pipes. Either that or their drive is so strong it overpowers the tranquilizing effect of the drug. The question these mushers ask each other is not "Do you have any pot?" but "What kind do you have?" And, it so happens along the trail, the question is answered in the form of a competition."

[Book excerpt] 'Carmacks checkpoint':
"The first checkpoint is often an unsettling site: a half dozen or more quivering, forlorn dogs in veterinary triage. A few are hooked to IVs to restore hydration. The first couple of hundred miles tend to weed out the unsound dogs. Many of the remaining animals hit a rhythm and get stronger as the miles pass, or so it seems. Maybe that's not the case. Maybe they hold their own better than the humans they are dragging behind them. Maybe they just look stronger because the mushers will get weaker so much faster. The fact is, not much science has been devoted to the physiology or psychology of long-distance sled dogs."

Condensed version of 'Yukon Alone: The World's Toughest Adventure Race' book at:
http://sleddogwatchdog.com/writings_yukon_alone.html

HSUS Executive Staff bio of John Balzar:

http://www.hsus.org/about_us/board_and_staff/experts/experts/john_balzar.html

Sled Dog Watchdog 'Help stop Yukon Quest cruelty':

http://sleddogwatchdog.com

Posted by Terry Cumming on 04/01/2009 @ 09:17AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Terry
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

Comment

Check Spelling

Email me when there are new posts to this thread
Comment Policy

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author

Stephanie is an independent animal rights advocate, a vegan, a tree-hugging environmentalist, and a freelance editor and writer. She lives in St. Louis with an aging corgi-lab and an adolescent rescued pit bull.