Companion Animals
HSUS Issues Interim Policy on Individual Evaluation of Rescued Dogs
Published February 24, 2009 @ 04:35PM PT
Best Friends Animal Society announced today that "the Humane Society of the United States on February 23 issued an interim policy recommending all dogs be evaluated as individuals, and is calling a meeting of leading animal welfare organizations concerning dogs victimized by dog fighting."
Some of you may have noticed a recent update to the second of the North Carolina pit bull posts on this blog in which I noted that a group of welfare organizations, including Best Friends, which had fought to stop the killing, were publicly asking HSUS to rethink its policy regarding pit bulls rescued from fighting operations (that is, its 20-year-old policy that all dogs bred for fighting, even those not ever trained to fight, should be killed). Best Friends' post on the matter, titled "Coalition Challenges Outdated Policy" began,
Dear readers, we know that this story is difficult. Best Friends feels as you do that animal welfare organizations are more effective when we get along and work together. In this case we felt it was important to draw public attention to HSUS's policy on dogs from fighting busts because its clout and its relationships with law enforcement informs and justifies state and local animal control policies.
It then went into a recap of what happened in North Carolina and into the problems with the well-known national organization's current policy and actions in NC. I won't summarize that call-to-change now, but you can read it yourself here if you'd like to make sure you're up to speed.
Back to the more recent post, Best Friends explains what has happened since the emotional outrage over all this boiled over last week:
-Continue reading after the jump-
A Dog & Whales with a Home; Firefighters with Healthy Hearts (and, um, other parts)
Published February 19, 2009 @ 01:11PM PT
I could use some good news. Perhaps you'd like some too? (You'll have to read all the way to the end of this post for the make-you-blush "other parts" stuff.)
First, easyVegan.info tells us the story of Gramby, a pit bull who was found as a stray puppy in a town with a breed ban and who, after too long in a shelter (a great no-kill shelter, but still a shelter--no match for a loving home), has found a happy home. I really needed this particular story this week. Thanks, Kelly.
-----
Over at NRDC's Switchboard, there's a post titled "What Successful Environmental Activism Looks Like: Wild Baby Whales."
I spend most of my working hours sitting in meetings in office buildings. But over the past few days, I came face to face with what those meetings can achieve: wild baby gray whales, whales whose last unspoiled nursery was saved by NRDC and our citizen activists.
Every time I go into the field, I am reminded that environmental activism has tangible results--things you can literally touch, like the trunk of a 300-year old tree in a healthy forest or a grizzly bear footprint along a muddy stream. Being within arm's reach of the sleek, rubbery gray whales was a jolt of inspiration: this is what successful conservation feels like.
-----
Finally, after you've finished reading about Gramby and the whales, check out this super-cool article about an Austin firefighter who's spreading the plant-lovin', meat-eschewing word throughout his fire station and--now--beyond, with a book on a way of eating that does remarkable things for health (though I'll be the first to admit that my diet is not oil-free as Esselstyn's recommended diet is). Think you have to consume meat, dairy, and eggs to be strong, healthy, and--yes--tough? Tell that to this guy. Read lots more (including the "who needs Viagra?!" testimonial) after the jump.
Update on the NC Pit Bulls: 146 Killed, Including Pups Born in Custody
Published February 18, 2009 @ 01:22PM PT
Update: A group of animal welfare organizations is calling on HSUS to change its policy on this issue. It begins, "Dear readers, we know that this story is difficult. Best Friends feels as you do that animal welfare organizations are more effective when we get along and work together. In this case we felt it was important to draw public attention to HSUS's policy on dogs from fighting busts because its clout and its relationships with law enforcement informs and justifies state and local animal control policies." Read on at Best Friends' Web site: Coalition Challenges 'Outdated' Policy
---
Remember when I asked this in yesterday's post?
And I wonder--is it just the 127 who are being (or have been) killed? Or have the couple dozen puppies who have been born into the group since the raid (the article reports that court officials yesterday put the then-current count at around 150 dogs) been condemned to death too, just because they were born to fighting dogs?
News reports indicate that Wilkes County killed a total of 146 dogs yesterday in keeping with the court's ruling. In other words, yes, puppies who were born while in the "care" of a major animal welfare group and the county were killed too--not because they'd ever been fighters, not because they'd ever had any fight training, not because they needed but weren't able to be rehabilitated, but simply because they had the misfortune of being born to mothers who'd been used and abused.
I likely won't comment more on this today. I'm too furious and emotional for calm words.
127 Pit Bulls, Incl. 60 Puppies, Ordered Killed, with Welfare Group's Support
Published February 17, 2009 @ 09:26AM PT
Photo: Best Friends Animal Society
Just last night, I sat around a table with fellow animal activists from St. Louis as well as a visiting L.A.-based activist, and three of us chatted over dinner about the pit bulls we had at home, dogs who are bursting with love and affection for us; our conversation even included acknowledgment of possible aggression issues and the conscious precautions we take and the behaviors we watch out for, just to be safe. But mostly, we talked about how much we love them, about what great dogs they are.
This morning, I opened my Google Reader, and my stomach sank. The Animal Law blog had earlier this morning reported, "Judge orders that pit bulls be destroyed."
-Read on after the jump-
Gratuitous Photo of a Pit Bull Superhero
Published February 15, 2009 @ 06:44PM PT
This is Mabel (introduced previously, with another adorable photo, here). Really, is it just me, or is the lack of cape the only thing keeping her from looking like a pit bull superhero in this photo? (And yes, I wrote a post decrying the practice of dressing up dogs. These boots are not a fashion accessory. They are absolutely necessary in wintry weather because Mabel here apparently has the world's softest, most sensitive paw pads, and the snow and ice tore up each pad, one by one, in the first couple days after the snow fell. No amount of caution and post-walk cleaning could keep those paws protected--thus, boots.)
Doggy (and Girly) Obama Drama
Published January 17, 2009 @ 08:08AM PT
Check out this great post from easyVegan.info on the implications of the Obamas' narrowing down of what breed of dog they want as well as the myriad problems with Obama's recent use of the word "girly." (And for info on the fantastic graphic by Shepard Fairey to the right, go here.)
Highlights:
Oy. After months of equivocating on the dog issue, the Obama family has announced that they’ve narrowed their choice down to two breeds: the Labradoodle and the Portuguese Water Dog. Unfortunately, as Adopt-a-Pet.com reports, while these are not the only two “hypoallergenic” breeds available, they are harder to find on animal adoption websites. . . .
Additionally, in selecting a purebred dog, the Obamas are practically inviting greedy breeders to cash in on their (hopefully) compassionate choice by sexually exploiting and selling the “Obama dog.” (Doubly so if they adopt a breed that’s hard to find through adoption routes.) A mixed breed or mutt - particularly one of unknown heritage, which can’t easily be reproduced - would help minimize this risk.
Continue on with the post for some great analysis of Obama's unfortunate use of the word "girly" when discussing what kind of dog he didn't want in a late November interview. This language choice and its implications are particularly interesting given that, as Change.org's Women's Rights blogger Jen noted, Obama appeared on the cover of Ms. this past week:
That’s right. The “new face of feminism,” who is married to a woman and has two young daughters, doesn’t want a “girly dog.” And, ahem, sees nothing wrong with using the word “girly” as a pejorative. Nice.
The term “girly dog” is yet another example of intersecting oppressions - another instance of animal advocacy as a feminist issue.
Let’s start with the stereotype of a “girly dog.” “Girly dogs” are much like “girly girls” - small, weak, fluffy, frilly, frou-frou-ey, in need of copious amounts of grooming, with large closets (filled with sparkly pink clothes, no doubt) and even bigger (yappy) mouths. Girly dogs, like girly girls, are feminine. Submissive. Annoying. Rather useless. Lazy. Bitchy. A pain in the ass. By extension, men who “own” “girly dogs” (or are “girly” themselves) are gay. Which is almost as bad as being a woman.
Big, rambunctious dogs, on the other hand, are manly. Tough. Full of testosterone. Rebellious. Not easily controlled. Leaders, not followers. They take shit from no one - least of all, girly dogs and women. 100%, Grade A hetero. Manly dogs are no one’s bitches.
Akin to the men eat meat / women nibble on salad dichotomy, the girly / manly dog split also hurts women and animals. Here, both women and small dogs are devalued for superficial reasons; the content of their characters is based on their physical characteristics, real or imagined. That which is “girly” or feminine is dismissed, denigrated, while the “manly” or masculine is judged superior and preferable. Inherent in this equation is the “I ain’t no fag!” protestation - only homosexual men “own” small, yippy dogs. In addition to being breedist and sexist, the term “girly dog” is also homophobic.
Really, read the whole post: "Another twist in the Obama family doggy drama."
From the Experts: Stop Dressing Up Dogs; To the Experts: Stop Saying "It"
Published January 10, 2009 @ 01:24PM PT
"Animal welfare experts hot under the collar over dogs in coats"
I have a problem with people dressing their companion animals in cutesy outfits (my friend Ella the greyhound wears a simple coat in extremely cold weather, but that's because as a greyhound, with very thin skin, little fat, and little hair, she actually needs one), so I'm glad to see articles like this being published. But I have a few problems with the article itself too. It's difficult for me to take so-called animal welfare experts seriously when they refer to animals as "it" (and of course, "owner" is a whole other problem). Really--how many more instances of "it" could there be in this remark?
Helen Briggs, a spokeswoman from the RSPCA, added: "Under the Animal Welfare Act, you are obliged to provide appropriate conditions and environments for your dog. So if you are slapping a great big coat on it when it really doesn't need it, then that could cause it to suffer if it is overheating. It is the same as if you leave a dog in a car in hot weather."
Here's a thought--maybe if we want people to stop thinking of animals as things, as toys we can dress up and do countless other inappropriate, demeaning, disrespectful, and abusive things to, we could start by getting the very people who are supposed to be working on those animals' behalf to stop referring to them as things. It's frustrating enough when members of the general public (and Microsoft Word's infuriating spell check) insist on attaching "it" instead of "he" or "she" and "that" instead of "who" to living beings. But when even the so-called animal experts reduce them to mere objects with their chosen language, how are we supposed to get the rest of the world to look at them in any other way?
