KC DOG BLOG

Denver and their taxpayers stay losing

The city of Denver has lost in court, again.

The great folks over at the Game Dog Guardian (who are having quite a week this week) are reporting that Denver has once again lost in the courts regarding their breed ban.

This time, Denver's motion to dismiss a court case because they are claiming that there were no material facts regarding whether their breed ban was rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.

The courts denied their request. 

Even more interesting about the court's decision is that the city's 'expert' witness cited two different studies to substantiate his position that pit bulls are more likely to bite than other types of dogs. However, one of the studies is the 2000 report by the Center for Disease Control.  However, one of the writers of the CDC report, Randall Lockwood, has testified that the city's expert has 'misused' the study and noted that the information in the report cannot be used to determine that certain types of dogs are dangerous.

So the city of Denver must continue paying legal fees to defend their ordinance in court.  This of course is in addition to a legal settlement they paid back in March, and 2 other pending lawsuits regarding violation of the ADA Guidelines on people who have 'pit bulls' as service dogs.

The city continues to pay for lawsuits regarding the city's breed ban -- and continue to try to find reasons to try to avoid following the ADA guidelines - -all at the increasingly high cost of the city's taxpayers.  Maybe the city could use some of the money paying out their defense of this law to try to cover their $160 million budget shortfall. 

The city continues to flail about in support of their breed ban. It seems as if there are quite a few politicians (and a city attorney) in the area that have based a lot of their political career on the hysteria about pit bulls that seem to be willing to pay whatever tax dollars are necessary to defend the ban - -in spite of the mounting costs and evidence that they are wrong. 

There is more in the judge's decision -- and you can catch it all over at the Game Dog Guardian.   But none of it bodes well for the city of Denver -- and the taxpayers who are paying for it.

Topeka leads the way with new animal legislation (and how your city can do it too)

Last night, by a unanimous vote of the city council, the city of Topeka, KS passed their new animal welfare legislation.  Their legislation focused on 3 primary points:

1) Repealing their breed-specific legislation -- Topeka originally passed their breed ban in 1981 - -making it one of the oldest breed-specific laws in the country. About 10 years ago the city repealed the ban, but still left tough restrictions in place.  As of last night, all breed-specific restrictions are lifted and replaced with a breed-neutral, behavior-based definition of dangerous dogs.

2) A new tethering ordinance is in place -- making it illegal to tether a dog for more than 15 minutes while the dog is unsupervised. If the dog is supervised (the caretaker is within easy ear-shot of visual sight of the dog) then the dog can be tethered indefinitely.  I confess that I haven't generally loved tethering ordinances -- frankly because I think most are so poorly written that they don't really focus on the real problems or are unrealistically unenforceable. I really think this one focuses on the real issue (when a dog is left to fend for itself on a tether) while being easily enforceable.

3) Allows for TNR for feral cats. 

In all three laws, I think the city really reflected what I think is the best in current thinking in companion animal legislation -- and in the process, repealed two very archaic ideas for laws.

This has all been a pretty lengthy process.  Back in January, The University of Kansas Student Legal Defense Fund hosted a forum with Best Friends' Ledy Van Kavage who  spoke about the failures of breed-specific legislation.  A couple of members of the Topeka government attended the presentation.  When presented with the discussion about the high costs of BSL, the city attorney went back and ran the numbers -- and noted that over the past 9 years, the ordinance had caused the city animal control budget to run over by $272,000.  The city has also had really high euthanasia rates.  The assistant city attorney, Kyle Smith, estimates that the change in the ordinance will save the city from $30,000-$50,000 a year, "at least".

So the city put together a group of experts in their community and that group met to put together a new ordinance for the city.  The experts included folks from throughout the community and they put forth the current ordinance -- which passed unanimously.

The rest of the city came out in support.  The Helping Hands Humane Society supported the law "110%" because they said the current laws were a driver in the shelter's high kill rates. The local AKC club showed up and discussed how many groups (including the area Boxer club) would not come to events in the city -- which cost both the club, and the city, money.  And many other groups came out to lend their support.

In the end, Topeka set an example that breed-specific legislation does not work. They showed that any city that really wants to look at breed-specific legislation objectively, outside of pre-conceived ideas or in the face of hysteria of the moment, they will find that the legislation doesn't work, and is costly, and is not the type of legislation that is effective or good for the city or its residents.

And because of that, they ended up with a very good ordinance -and one that has garnered attention from officials in Ellis, KS; Toledo, Oh; Douglasville, GA; and Denver, CO -- all of which have either current breed-specific policies or are considering them.

So if your area has breed-specific legislation, hold an informational seminar and invite your local politicians. Encourage them to set up a committee of experts in the community to look at their animal welfare policies.  If you are in a breed club - don't support events in cities with breed-specific legislation -- make it hurt their pocketbooks a bit.  And most of all, get to know your politicians and encourage them to enact more responsible legislation for cities.

A tip of the hat goes out to our friends at the Game Dog Guardian who have been involved in this from the start - -and they have more info at their website.

More info from WIBW.

And still more from the folks at Game Dog Guardian.

Weekly Roundup, week ending 9/26/10

 There was a lot of positive press this week -- especially early in the week promoting Jim Gorant's new book The Lost Dogs. "Pit Bulls", Leo, Hector, Jonnie Justice and others who have overcome amazing obstacles to become therapy dogs were highlighted on media throughout the country.

Beyond that, it was a pretty slow news week.  But here are the top stories from a fairly slow news week:

Cities/States and Laws

The city council in Ogden, UT is going to once again look at breed-specific legislation.  The council has looked at it multiple times but has repeatedly declined it -- but it is on the agenda again. Ogden Police Chief Jon Greiner notes that a lot of the problems have to do with how dogs are raised and handled that are causing many of the problems.

Kalispel, MT is looking at updating their animal control laws -- the city's laws have not been updated since 1947.  Like most cities that update their bylaws, Kalispel is focusing on owner responsibility and not o nthe dogs themselves. Some points of concern were the pet limit (4) and the requirement for people to pick up dog waste in people's yards in 48 hours -- which many didn't think was practical in Kalispel's extremely harsh winters.

Florence County, SC is looking at an ordinance that will make more restrictions on tethering.

Douglasville, GA discussed last week the option of placing restrictions on 'pit bulls' in the community -- opponents of the ordinance outnumbered those in favor 3 to 1.  No other city in the state of Georgia has breed-specific legislation.

Ypsilanti Township (MI) is looking at a potential new law that would mandate the spay/neuter of all 'pit bulls'. Hopefully through thorough research the community will realize that similar ordinances of led to the mass killing of affected breeds in places like Kansas City and Little Rock.

Hannibal, MO is looking at the idea of breed-specific legislation -- even though the chief of police, who's department would be responsible for enforcing the ban, is against the idea.

Dog Bites and Attacks

Apparently dog bites on people are the only types of bites that are going up in the UK amid controversy over the nation's failing breed ban. Apparently dogs being attacked by other dogs are up as well - -fueling even more talk of repealing the national breed ban and placing more responsibility on the dog owners.

A Belle Vernon (PA) girl received "gaping woulds" when she was attacked by the family's Labrador mix that bit her while she was playing on a trampoline outside.

Miscellaneous

A Kansas City area woman lost 150 lbs after adopting a dog from a local shelter. The woman actively walked and ran with her dog because he was always so eager to go - and in the process, she lost nearly half her body weight. You have any good stories about adoption success stories?  They make for great feel-good PR stories for shelter adoptions.

Malden, MA hosted a free lecture from Calgary's Bill Bruce -- where he talks about Calgary's success in minimizing dog bites AND becoming a No Kill community by focusing laws on owner responsibility.

In Bonne Terre, MO,  a 'pit bull' and her puppies were rescued from a home after having been abandoned for over a month after the dogs were left there after their owner "had been taken away".  A concerned neighbor had been calling about the dogs for several weeks before they were finally rescued.

The Rochester Animal Shelter is promoting adoptions of 'pit bulls' -- noting that 'pit bull paranoia' is just that, paranoia, and not based on the realities of these types of dogs.

The news story of the week belongs to the NBC affiiliate in Miami, where a woman reportedly had high blood pressue and "may have suffered a stroke" when she was trying to protect her small dog from a bigger dog.  Police never released the breed of dog involved -- but the newspaper notes that "Police have not released if the animal involved in the attack was a pit bull."  Creating hysteria anyone?

Blogs Worth Reading

ACO's in Providence, RI killed a 'pit bull' type dog that was injured when hit by a car and for allegedly having Parvo -- and was killed just hours before his owners -- who were desparately searching for the dog, called about him. When they called animal control, they were lied to about the dog's where abouts and the dog was called "one of those dogs" -- which at animal control in Providence, RI, means a dead 'pit bull' as they have a bad history with pit bull type dogs.  YesBiscuit! has the details of the story.

PETA organized a raid on a new no kill cat shelter.  The cats were taken by the authorities and many of the cats were killed just a couple of days later for what the shelter workers say were very treatable diseases. No charges have been filed against the no kill shelter, but many of the "rescued" from their care are now dead.  There is little evidence thus far that the cats were not well cared for.

Good News on Bad Newz Dogs: Vick dogs lead the way for pit bulls -- Dancing Dog Blog has the scoop

HSUS praises Mike Vick's recovery in the Philadelphia Inquirer - and the Pet Connection wonders if HSUS's decision to be so supportive of Vick has anything to do with the $50,000 donation the Eagles made to the organization.

"Hoarding" and "warehousing" arise from traditional, not no kill, shelter models -- a great post from Christie over at the Pet Connection.

Power breaks and power steering: Dealing with On-Leash Aggression.  DogSpelled Forward has a great, easy training advice on dealing with a very common dog behavior problem.  Step one, pay attention to your surroundings.

Advice on spay/neuter: Make it convenient, make it free, and throw in a bag of animal food.

Dallas Animal Control continues being involved in cruelty incidents -- from YesBiscuit!

Valerie Hayes has a great overview on all of the reasons people should oppose anti-'pit bull' legislation.

YouTube Video -- We are the no kill movement

It is now foolish to deny that no kill is possible when so many areas have achieved it - -from Ryan Clinton

Everyone Needs a Harvey

I love this ad. It really is a great example of showing off the fun of adopting a pet and the joys of adopting a pet in a very clever, cheeky way.

The irony here is that unfortunately the spot isn't for  a shelter -- it's to promote the power of TV advertising. But it would be a great spot for a shelter -- and a great example of making pet adoptions fun.  Maybe we can have someone buy the idea and use it to promote shelter adoptions?  It's clever and cute.

Enjoy.

Updated: Throwing money at not solving problems

Update:  Well, right on cue, Wayne Pacelle blogged about Prop B today as well.  In the process he asked for money not once but twice to support the campaign. 

He also provides links to the Better Business Bureau's Overview -- and the article lists four recommendations for solving the problem, none of which are addressed by Prop B (you can read the full 6 page report here). Pacelle also links to the Misssouri State Auditor's Reports - the latest of which clearly points out in the executive summary that 40% of the licensed breeding operations were not even inspected -- and the USDA Report that notes that the agency isn't doing it's job.  There is absolutely nothing in Prop B, as written, that does anything to create more resources for inspections or enforcement -- which has been very clearly defined as the problem. 

*******

Campaign season is heating up -- and as predicted, the money is rolling in.

According to recently published media reports, the Missourian's for the Protection of Dogs -- the lobbying group set up to push for the new puppy mill bill in Missouri -- has raised over $1.7 million that they plan to spend on advertising to promote the law that will appear on the November ballot as Proposition B.

That $1.7 million includes $500,000 from HSUS (who had already chipped in $450,000 to get the signatures necessary to get the law on the ballot) and $200,000 from the ASPCA.

What is the biggest shame is that all of this money is going toward a ballot initiative that has very little "new" in it -- and the one new element, will likely cause more harm than good -- while doing nothing to address the real problem, which is not the need for new laws.

Universally, everyone who has studied this issues has come back with the same report -- including the MVMA, the Better Business Bureau, the USDA and the state auditor's office -- Missouri is currently not enforcing its current regulations. HSUS and the rest of the people promoting Prop B say that there are 3,000 commercial breeders in the state -- however, according to official records, only 1525 are license and only 60% of the licensed facilities were actually inspected at the time of the most recent state audit - -even though state law requires them to be inspected annually.

So if we, as a state, cannot even enforce licensing and inspection requirements - -how are we going to enforce more legislation?

******

Prop B is written to put more restrictions on commercial breeding operations in the state - and defines a commercial breeder as anyone with more than 10 breeding dogs.  Prop B calls for specific regulations on food and water, housing and vet care for animals -- all of which is already covered under the Animal Welfare Act and the Animal Care Facilities Act which already governs these breeding operations. (In fact, the ACFA actually mandates that all animals are fed every 12 hours whereas Prop B makes it only mandatory to feed every 24 hours -- so it's actually downgrading feeding requirements).

The only "new" things in Prop B are the requirements are access to outside space, a limit to the number of times a dog can be bred for sufficient rest between cycles and a limit to no more than 50 breeding dogs allowed.  I'm generally supportive of the first change -- and the second one too although it will be virtually impossible to enforce - but the 50 breeding dogs issue is very problematic and may likely cause way more harm than good.

*******

I'm not a fan of arbitrary pet limit laws -- or any arbitrary law for that matter. Pet limits create an artificial limit on the number of animals someone can keep.  The breeding dog limit does the same thing -- although on a much larger scale. The reality is that the concern should not be on the actual NUMBER of animals someone keeps -- but on the conditions that someone keeps them in. If someone has 200 breeding dogs - -but has a well-kept facility, with a lot of staff to be sure the animals are clean and well-cared for, the actual number of dogs isn't really that big of a deal.  From what I gather, many of the nicer facilities in the state are very large facilities that make a lot of revenue and they are the ones that can afford the really nice facilities and staff. 

However, with the new law, 50 would be the cutoff point -- and this could prove to be very problematic.

How so?  Here are several scenerios -- all of which could play out in some way or another if this passes.

1) Say me and a business partner, Bob, run a breeding operation together that has 100 dogs. With the new law, we decide to divide up the dogs and split into two separate operations -- each with 50 dogs apiece. In doing so, we have now doubled the amount of paperwork involved in doing the inspections (which the state is already failing to meet all of the inspection requirements) involved in inspecting these 100 dogs.  The increased work load will further inhibit the ability of inspectors to do their jobs...not make it better.

What if I have 100 dogs, and no business partner.  What would I then do with my "excess" dogs so I can comply with the new law?  Well, there are quite a few options, and none of them are particularly good for the animals.

 2) One option would be to go to a broker and sell off my "excess" 50 dogs and have a ready-made breeding operation for someone to buy into, complete with my AKC papers and everything for the breeding dogs.  This creates the same situaton as #1, more facilities to inspect and more work not getting done.

3) I could just kill the "excess" 50 dogs -- this is a very real possibility and one people should be sensitive to given the recent news of one puppy mill operator in New York gasing 93 dogs last week.

4) And the best case scenerio -- the one in which everyone supporting the bill is hoping for -- is that these operators would just cut down their number of dogs to 50, and I guess turn the rest of the dogs over to shelters. Given this scnerio, shelters throughout the midwest (many of which are already high-kill shelters) would be flooded with even more dogs -- leading to even more killing in the area shelters. In conversations with the folks at Missourians for the protection of dogs, right now ZERO of the $1.7 million that has been raised is set to be used to help save the lives of the dogs that are made homeless by the ordinance. And this is the best-case scenerio.

********

When Wayne Pacelle made his tour of Missouri last week promoting Proposition B, he showed pictures of the worst of the worst conditions and made it seem like all of these things were legal without the passing of Prop B -- which is untrue.  All of things he was describing, dogs laying in feces, dogs allowed to be sickly and die, dogs living with broken bones and compound fractures -- all of those things are currently already illegal.  

And this has been proven to be the case a lot recently. Over the past two weeks, more than 100 dogs have been rescued from horrible puppy mill conditions - -including 45 dogs in Greene County, 100 dogs in Camden County. Neither of these facilities was licensed according to reports.  The Missourian's for the Protection of Dogs even acknowledges the busts with the current laws -- while using that as evidence for the need for more laws.  Since January 2009, there have been more than 3900 dogs rescued from horrible breeding facilities  This includes more than 100 that were rescued from a bust in June after repeat violations.

******

In spite of what you're hearing, the actual LAWS in Missouri are not that bad - and most of the conditions that people get really upset about with puppy mills are already illegal.  However, if we are going to make a dent in solving the problem, we MUST focus on better enforcement of the laws that are currently in place. Now, animal welfare groups are prepared to spend up to $2 milion (or more) focusing on a law that may do more harm than good -- and that doesn't focus on the actual problem -- enforcement. If only all of that money were going to promote things that actually would be of value, paying for more enforcement, or on promoting Operation Bark Alert (which few people know anything about) we could really make a dent in the problem.

Sadly and frustratingly, that's not the direction they're going.

For more:

Shutting down a puppy mill -- PetDocsOnCall

FYI - Prop B -- from the Southeast Missourian

The Missouri Vet Medical Association's View

"Free Cats" saves lives (and makes money)

I mentioned this in the weekly roundup this week -- but I think it is worthy of a post on its own.

Animal Haven, one of the no kill shelters in the Kansas City area began, in June, offering free cat adoptions for adult cats in the shetlter.

During the summer months, Animal Haven nearly doubled the number of cats adopted from the shelter during the summer months. Because of the successs, the shelter decided to extend the program. Also, because there was more space available at the shelter, Animal Haven has been better able to help out with overflow situations at other area shelters as well as pulling 28 cats from a hoarding case in western Kansas.

The shelter usually adopts cats for $75 for one cat, $100 for two. The fee includes all vaccinations, microchipping, spay/neuter, flea/tick treatment and more. The shelter continued to offer all of these services even when the free cats -- but at no cost to adopters.

Financial suicide, right?

Well, not so much.  Turns out that around 50% of their adopters opted to give the shelter a donation for the adoption even though it wasn't required.  And in addition to this, the shelter has (deservedly) gained a lot of positive publicity.

I have discussed before the potential value of pay as you wish pricing -- this is yet another shining example of the increased number of lives that can be saved with a little bit of inovation in your sheltering approach.

Bravo.

More Positive Press -- Leo gets highlighted on local San Francisco News

Yesterday was a good day for the dogs -- as author Jim Gorant made his tour promoting his book the Lost Dogs and Hector, Jonnie, Uba and other dogs rescued from Mike Vick's dog fighting ring made national TV appearances and Hector was also on NPR's Fresh Air yesterday afternoon

Not to be outdone, Leo, another dog from Bad Newz Kennels that was taken in by Our Pack, made an appearance on the CBS & CW affiliates in San Francisco last night. Leo is a certified therapy dog who regularly goes to hospitals visiting cancer patients and offering them love and support.

It's a great clip -- and worth watching the 2 minute clip. Many of these dogs have shown an amazing ability to overcome their struggles and become not just good pets, but shining examples of the love that has made dogs Man's Best Friend. 

Here's a link to the video if for some reason the embedded video doesn't work for you.

The good news spreads - Jonny Justice & Hector on the CBS Early Show (and why dogs matter)

This morning, two of the dogs from Bad Newz Kennels were on the CBS Early Show  to not only have their owners tell their story, but also to help promote Jim Gorant's new book, The Lost Dogs.  And here's the video from the segment (the video is incredible -- and well worth the 6 minutes viewing time -- Roo and Hector do a great job in the studio with the CBS folks).

The story is more positive press for the dogs that were once championed as the "most aggressive dogs in America" and to show how they were able to adapt to new environments -- with several even now working as service dogs.

The story is just more in a string of positive stories about the dogs - -reaching millions of TV viewers, newspaper readers and magazine readers.

And hopefully changing some hearts and minds along the way.

There is one really interesting piece from Gorant's book that I was planning on posting at some point, but has now popped up in its entirety on CBS News' website.

But when Gorant wrote the initial article for Sports Illustrated, SI received hundreds of letters about the article - -most were very positive. What surprised Gorant most was that the few letters they received that were negative were centered around the idea of why the big story, "they're just dogs".

In Gorant's Prologue, he addresses why it is that dogs matter so much to us as a society -- and I think does an eloquent job of doing so.  Please take the time to read the short clip.

Gorant isn't an advocate, per se, but is just a writer who is observing what he sees and I think has done a brilliant job of capturing the story of the dogs, the bust and why dogs matter to our lives.

BTW, for more reviews on the book, here are a couple more reviews:

The New Yorker

The Christian Science Monitor

The Huffington Post

 

 

 

More positive press from Parade Magazine

A couple of weeks ago, Parade Magazine ran a cover story on some of the dogs formerly of Mike Vick's kennels in promotion of Jim Gorant's new book The Lost Dogs.

Turns out they got so much response from their 31 million readers, that they did a follow-up last week -- The Top 5 Myths about pit bulls.

The article is good, and continues to do a lot to break down the stereotypes that have been created over the past couple of decades.

The truth is getting out there.

Weekly Roundup - Week Ending 9/19/10

 It was a bit of an odd feeling going on a vacation with no interenet service and coming back to be completely out of the loop with what was going on. Thankfully, there were a lot of great reads out there that got me up to speed quickly. I'm still digging out a little bit, but I think I'll be close after this week's roundup. I'm going to try to scale back on the number of links in hope that you will click through to more of the stories (please do, they're worth your time -- especially the blog links at the end).

Cities and Laws

Sylvan Lake, MI has passed a ban on 'pit bulls' in their community -- ignoring the realities that such legislation has proven to not work and is not recommended on all of the experts in canine/human interactions.

Ellis, KS is looking at a new law that would potentially put restrictions on owners of several breeds of dogs.

Marion, AR is looking at a potential ban on "pit bulls".

Douglassville, GA is also looking at potential restrictions on 'pit bull' type dogs.

Authorities in Jackson, MI are loking at updating their dangerous dog law  following several bites in the community this summer. There is no indication that there is support for anything breed-specific in the community.

Aurora, CO is now having discussions on whether or not to allow 'pit bulls' as service dogs in the community. The discussion comes as the city faces a couple of lawsuits for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and a recent Department of Justice ruling that states that cities cannot discriminate against service dogs based on breed.

Worcester, MA has passed a new law that will require all 'pit bull' type dogs to be muzzled among other restrictions. Earlier this year, the Worcester Animal Rescue League said they would quit accepting all dogs from the city if the ordinance passed and now may have to make good on the threat/promise.  It's a tough call for them, as refusing to accept dogs from the city would likely lead to more dogs being killed, and yet the League will likely see an influx of dogs because of the ordinance.

Colerain Township, OH is looking at a new law that would potentially ban 'pit bulls' in the community - -in spite of all the evidence presented by animal welfare experts.  So far, no action has been taken on the ordinance.

Kirksville, MO is still looking at a possible breed ban even though over the past 4 years, the targeted breeds are only responsible for 3 of the city's 46 reported dog bite incidents. The Truman State University newspaper opposes the ban -- which gives me some hope in the future of journalism in this country.

Morton, MS passed a new law that bans all 'pit bulls' from the city limits.  The community of around 4,000 has a poverty rate of 25%  -- so I'm guessing that any dog-related problems the community may have are related to poor owner education and not what breeds may be involved.

Louisville, KY passed a No Kill Resolution last week -- saying that they aim to save all savable animals in the city.  I still question whether the city has the make-up to do it since they have historically been pretty awful when it comes to animal welfare issues, but at least they WANT to save them all...which is a good start.

Los Angeles appears well on their way to increasing the number of dogs and cats that can live in homes. The new head of animal control in LA, Brenda Barnette notes that the city may be missing out on 3/4 of a million dollars in revenue from unlicensed pets that would be licensed if they could be legally.

Santa Clara County, CA is looking at a new law that would potentially require all 'pit bulls' to be spayed or neutered -- even though such legislation has been a failure elsewhere.

Elgin, IL recently went through the process of modifying their dangerous dog ordinance. Even though the city discussed a breed ban, they ended up with a breed-neutral, behavior-based ordinance.  In the first 3 months of their behavior-based ordinance, dog related calls are down 17% vs the previous year.

Dog Bites/Attacks

I'm not going to cover a lot of the dog bites - -but there were a a few that I think are worth pointing out.

In Denver, where the controversy continues over how to keep their failing 'pit bull' ban in place in spite of the new ADA Ruling, a 7 year old boy was attacked by a 130 lbs American Bulldog (that at least one media outlet called a 'pit bull') that jumped the fence. This is the third time the dog has attacked someone in the past 16 months, and yet the dog remains in the home. 

A Florida woman was hospitalized after she and her Dachshund were attacked by two larger dogs -- a Great Dane and a German Shepherd. I always find attacks like this interesting because it makes it obviously clear that "breed" isn't a driving factor in dog attacks (as these two dogs do not share the same breed) but that the way the dogs are kept/cared for is a driving factor (a characteristic that these two dogs did share).  The same situation occurred in Scottsdale, AZ as well, when an APS worker was attacked by an American Bulldog and a Boxer.

Overland Park, KS police are looking for a mastiff that apparently attacked a man walking his young puppy - I point this out as  Overland Park has a breed ban....and yet, other types of dogs are still biting people.

In the UK, where they have had a breed ban on 4 breeds of dogs for 2 decades, a young toddler was viciously attacked by the family's Collie. There are some pretty graphic pictures at the link --- one thing that is popular among people who berate 'pit bulls' is to show graphic pictures of the attacks --- and yet, over and over again it gets proven that you can't tell what type of dog attacked by looking at the photographs. Preventing major attacks is not about breeds, it's about responsible dog ownership and often about being sure toddlers are supervised at all times around dogs. After this attack, and a separate one involving a young child attacked by Rottweilers, the Kennel Club spokesperson notes that new dog laws in the UK "cannot come soon enough".

Miscellaneous

Young Americans continue to lose trust in the mainstream media.

Cambridge, MA is using dog poo from their dog park to create energy to run street lamps.

A solid (at least balanced) editorial that looks at whether 'pit bulls' are really more aggressive than other breeds of dogs or not (they're not).

I may post more on this in the coming week, but Animal Haven - a no kill shelter in suburban Kansas City, extended their promotion for "free cats" afer the program nearly doubled shelter adoptions during the summer months. Interestingly about 50% of the adopters went ahead and donated money to the shelter anyway -- even though it wasn't required. Moving more cats helped the shelter take in more cats from other shelters and save more lives.

In a story that created a LOT of outrage (justifiably), Police in Washington DC shot and killed a 'pit bull' at a festival in the city (I think much of the outrage comes from the photograph).  By all reports, the dog had been restrained from the few minor problems it caused, yet authorities shot the dog anyway -- give more demand for officers to be more humane in their treatment of dogs -- even dogs that are problems. For the pit bulls notes that for her, the picture says it all.  Yesbiscuit! also has a take on the story.

Blogs worth Reading

A year ago, a territory in Australia passed a law requiring that all cats have to be spayed/neutered - even though compliance of altering among OWNED cats was amazingly high.  A year later, the cat euthanasia numbers are up 30% as the ordinance continues to show that mandatory spay/neuter laws increase killing instead of decreasing it -- great overview by Saving Pets.

For your entertainment has a forward-looking post that recognizes that after No Kill is achieved by saving the 95% of the healthy/treatable animals in shelters -- it will then be time to figure out what to do with the other 5% -- and that their lives should be worth saving too.

I spend a fair amount of time here talking about the need to watch our language because language does matter -- in that spirit, O is for Onward, a new blog by Austin's Ryan Clinton, looks at the use of the word "unwanted" in reference to homeless pets.

Mandatory spay/neuter is not the way to go - Dr. Patty Khuly addresses the many problems with mandatory spay/neuter laws.

On a similar note, The Pet Connection has a great blog article entitled "It's time to try funding spay/neuter instead of mandating it" that is right on the money.

This is a story I largely avoided for a variety of reasons, but a recent article that ran in numberous alternative newspapers around the country covered in detail a lot of the behind the scenes info that led to one of the largest dog-fight busts in history last summer. Part of the story included acknowledging that under-cover investigators spent over a year actually fighting dogs in order to gain access to the inner circle of the fighting ring. There is an obvious moral issue here of whether the dogs that were compromised in the fights were worth it for the greater good of all of the dogs.  Change.org does a nice job of asking "Is it ethical for police to have a dog in the fight?"

How to rock your pet adoption listings -- great advice from Christie over at the Pet Connection.

Winograd has a great article on PETA and the need to change the mindset to quit justifying the killing in "The Butcher who cried "Hoarder""

YesBiscuit! writes about the Gaston County, NC shelter that kills 3 out of 4 animals that it impounds and then blames the public for their killing.

YesBiscuit! has an update on a South Dakota breeder who had HSUS and another local shelter bust him for alleged cruelty. They confiscated the dogs,and several of them ended up dying at the shelter. The breeder was later found not-guilty and a judge ruled that the animals were seized illegally.  Now, the breeder is suing HSUS and the local shelter for damages.

The USDA does nothing as a New York area 'puppy miller' gasses 93 of their breeding animals -- from YesBiscuit!

Saving Pets notes that the days of the "Foundation for Easily Rehomed, Well Behaved Healthy Homeless Pets are numbered -- because the expectation is that shelters will no longer only selectively save the lives of animals.

Online Colleges has a list of the top 50 Animal Welfare Blogs -- I certainly don't agre with all of their selections but am pretty proud to have been included on their list.