KC DOG BLOG

Weekly Roundup - Week Ending 1/30/11

It's been a really busy week with Prop B hearings going on in Jefferson City, Kansas City's primary elections are less than a month away, and overall, just a lot of dog news going on.

So with that, let's dive right into the best of the week that was.

Cities/States and Laws

A couple of weeks ago I noted that a new law that would repeal the UK's Dangerous Dogs Act was headed to committee, unfortunately, the bill has stalled. So in spite of an overwhelming amount of opposition to the current law, the government seems content to let it fail. This comes at a time where many politicians are pleading for immediate action in creating a better law to help them deal with dangerous dogs in the community.

Ogden, UT has passed a new Dangerous Dog Ordinance that targets aggressive dogs based on their behavior, not their breed.  Ogden, like many cities, started out talking about breed-specific regulations, but after careful study, came back with a breed-neutral ordinance.

There is a new bill in Wyoming that is targeting hoarders and puppy mills. I haven't had a chance to read this bill or the current law in Wyoming to know if this is any good or not -- and would welcome someone's thoughts who is closer to the situation.

The city of Cypress, in Orange County, CA, will not order all 'pit bulls' to be spayed or neutered. The city wisely looked at other case studies on such an ordinance, and listened to experts in their area, too get a good opinion on what should be done.

Aberdeen, SD appears to be looking at a potential ban on 'pit bulls' in the community after the number of bites in the community by pit bulls went from 2 to 8. Bites from other types of dogs went up by a similar number. Many of the council members seem well-informed on the issue so hopefully this will not go very far.

Vienna, WV is looking at REPEALING its dangerous dog law.

Dog Bites and Attacks

A German Shepherd in Canada was left alone outside a convenience store bit 3 different people just minutes apart while his owner was inside.

A Palmyra, IN woman had to undergo several reconstructive surgeries after being attacked by a French Mastiff that was "accidentally" left oustide by a child.

A two year old boy is recovering after being bitten in the face while he was playing with the family's pet Akita in what is being called a "freak incident". The incident happened in the UK where four different breeds of dogs are banned.

Also in the UK, a 3 year old girl was bitten in the face by a Doberman that nearly severed the little girl's nose.

A 7 year old boy in the Charlotte area was bitten in the face by a 'pit bull mix". There has been a fair amount of chatter about banning 'pit bulls' after a tragedy in the area a few weeks ago...and it's amazing how stories like this just happen to come out of the woodwork to add fuel to the fire.

A 10 year old Tennessee girl says she still has nightmares after being attacked by two mixed breed dogs in the community. The owner of the dogs was never charged in the attack.

Miscellaneous

There is a great story that has been picked up by the Associated Press that is talking about the recovery of Mike Vick's former dogs and their steady climb becoming healthy stable dogs again. It's been great to see the press this has received - - including being run nationally on Fox News.

An editorial from the Columbia Tribune that wonders how people who profes to caring about dogs can still defend Prop B in spite of how vague and ill-written the law is.

Pit Bulls: Buddy or Bully? -- a good editorial from Utica, NY that shows the positive side of 'pit bulls'.

No Kill Louisville opened up a food bank this week to help people struggling to pay for food for their pet to be able to get pet food. Pet retention is a very important part of the No Kill Equation and congrats to No Kill Louisville on a great program.

In a report from Green Bay, WI (Go Pack!) the Wisconsin State Farm Service Agency is warning farmers in the state to check for the ID of state "inspectors" after some people (assumed to be animal rights activists) were posing as state officers to get access to farms. Animal Welfare people do not have police powers. Even if you are well-intentioned, PLEASE go through local authorities in order to get information for arrests.  Posing as state officials is illegal and the info you gain will be thrown out in court.

The Week news magazine has a solid editorial on whether owning a 'pit bull' should be a crime. The story originated based on the bill in Texas that would impose a statewide ban on 'pit bulls' -- and never in my life have I seen a statewide bill without even one legislative sponsor get so much media attention.

A writer in California writes into the newspaper defending ferrets. While I tend to agree with him that governments seem to have a knee-jerk reaction to ferrets, he's not doing much to get on my good side with the comment "300 people die annually from dog bites" -- which is true only if you divide by 10 first. Listen here Mr. Ferret guy, I'm all on board with supporting your cause, but don't try to throw dogs under the bus in the process with your misinformation.  Thanks.

Abuse Cases

Authorities in Oakland rescued 33 pit bulls from 'horrific' conditions in an East Oakland home -- where the dogs were stacked in kennels 3 high that were all caked in excrement. Several of the dogs were in such bad shape that they had to be euthanized, but others would be allowed the opportunity to find homes. Authorities were alerted to the situation when neighbors complained about the smell coming from the home. Oakland recently added an officer completely dedicated to animal cruelty -- which, along with their recent course in helping police officers learn canine behavior to help prevent unnecessary dog shootings, makes them pretty progressive in many areas related to animal cruelty.

Some startling footage of the animal shelter in Miami Dade using a "Heart Stick" to kill kittens in the shelter. The 'technique" essentially uses a needle that is painfully jabbed into the heart of a kitten with a barbituate injected straight into the heart of the cat.  Obviously there is (and should be) a lot of public criticism over this.

Authorities in Lansing, MI have found several horrible abuse cases in the area in the past few weeks -- all involving "pit bull' type dogs - and involve dogs found beaten, tied up, and frozen.  If we want to end bite cases, we can start by ending abuse cases. Authorities are working on the cases.

A South Carolina woman is being charged with animal cruelty after she hanged and burned a 1 year old 'pit bull' for chewing on her Bible (I'm sure God would be proud of her for her actions).

Blogs you should read

The Dots -- in what easily my favority blog posting of the week, The Wisconsin Watchdog writes an excellent story about "the dots" and gives the great advice to ignore the red dots. Haters will hate. Ignore them. We don't need them to move forward. Cultivate the yellow and green dots and you will be rewarded.

Some sombering stats from "I Love Charts" showing that there were more military officers that committed suicide lst year than died in actual combat. This number is sombering on a lot of fronts not even remotely related to this blog, but also a signal that there are some real issues facing our soldiers -- especially in dealing with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.  While many have been turned onto service dogs to help them cope, it becomes even more angering when cities like Denver, Aurora, CO and Lakewood, OH decide that the dogs owned by these soliders are not allowed to live in those communities.

In light of a couple of statewide initiatives passing in the November election, one Missouri State Senator has proposed a new constitutional amendment to "make it harder for wealthy individuals and organizations to buy a law in this state."  The bill would still allow for citizen's initiatives but would require signatures from all congressional districts to appear on the ballot, not just 2/3 of the districts. There were two Propositions in the state that were passed in November that were problematic, including Prop B, which were very heavily funded by private entities (including HSUS). I've spoken to this Senator about this, and has good motives for this and is not vindictive in her proposal of this amendment.

American Journalism is in trouble -- Dan Rather comments about the state of the industry.

PETA's "Better off dead" philosophy  -- Best Friends' Greg Castle has a great commentary on PETA and their "killing is kindness" mantra. It's not.

On Breed Bans and Emotion - OhMyDog! has some commentary about how intelligent conversation can get lost when the idea of banning breeds comes up.

What happened to May Ling? - Save Shelter Pets has a look at another dog that "fell through the cracks" at a kill shelter and ended up dead instead of back home where she belonged.

Great Reviews from LAAS Employees, Volunteers and Rescuers - LA Animal Watch reports that most parties in Los Angeles are happy with their new shelter directer Brenda Barnette.

The meaning of "Euthanasia" -- Animal Ark has a great post acknowledging that No Kill does not mean "no euthanasia" -- but believes in euthanasia by the true meaning of the word. The shelter had to say goodbye to a canine friend this week when he had to be euthanized.

Can we find homes for 2.4 Billion Animals a Year?  - Winograd takes aim at a person from American Humane Association who apparently has no grasp on the pet population of this country even though she claims there is pet over-population.

Set your DVRs and Houston Area folks, mark your calendars

 On April 30, No Kill Houston will be hosting a No Kill workshop featuring Nathan Winograd.  The workshop will contain information about how to increase adoptions and effectively manage a high-volume adoption facility, shelter leadership and how to save more shelter animals.

The workshop is being hosted by No Kill Houston, the No Kill Advocacy Center, Friends for Life, Spay/Houston, Alvin Friendswood Vet Clinic, American Dog Magazine, Pet Studio and No Kill Nation -- and further sponsored by Animal Wise Radio, Pets & People Alliance, Texas Dogs & Cats Magazine, Urban Paws Magazine, Homeless and Orphaned Pets Endeavor, Operation Pets Alive and Pup Scouts -- and impressive list.

The Workshop will be hosted at South Texas College of Law in the Joe Green Auditorium from 8 am to 6 pm.  More info at No Kill Houston and tickets are available at No Kill Houston's Website.

 This is a great opportunity for anyone in the South Texas area (or a cheap flight away) to learn more about how to make their community No Kill through programs that are proven to work.

Set your DVRs

Tomorrow night, 1/29, World Champion Disc Dog Wallace (pictured) will make a guest appearance on the Animal Planet Show: It's Me or the Dog, featuring trainer Victoria Stillwell.

The show will air at 8pm EST (7 pm CST) on Saturday night and will be more great airtime for a dog that continues to show the world what most owners have known for a long - that they can be, and are, great dogs.

Congrats to Wallace and set your DVRs.  I'm had the pleasure of meeting Wallace at KC Dog Advocate's Canine Legislation Conference back in 2006 and am thrilled to see him on the show.

Dog Attack Fatality in Pontotoc County, MS

Fifty one year old Ronnie Waldo died yesterday after being attacked by three dogs.  While there is somewhat limited information on the story, it seems to be as follows.

Waldo rents property from Casey Swanson.  Waldo and a friend were fixing a hot water heater at the rental property and needed a relay switch. Waldo went up to Swanson's home (Swanson was apparently gone at the time) to get a relay switch (Swanson says Waldo was a friend) and was attacked by three 'pit bulls' that were in Swanson's yard.  Two of the dogs were chained. There also was is being reported as several puppies in the yards along with the adult dogs said to be involved in the attack.  Swanson says he doesn't know why Waldo was on his property because he has beware of dogs signs all over his property.

At this point it is unclear if Waldo was familiar with the dogs - -however, as noted many times here in the past, dogs that are left chained up while unsupervised as their primary form of containment do tend to build up aggression issues. It's also been noted before that dogs behave much differently in packs than they do alone -- and in this case, it involved what may have been a stranger to them walking up into their yard when the owner wasn't home.

This story has been picked up by about 11 news outlets so far.  And I'll update when, if any, new information becomes available.

A Compromise Solution on Missouri's Proposition B

Earlier today, the Missouri State House of Representatives held a public hearing on Proposition B. Tomorrow, the Senate will have their hearing.

Based on the bills that have been proposed, there are a lot of different options for the state legislatures:

1) Do nothing, and leave Prop B as voted on by the voters in November. From what we're hearing out of Jefferson City, there doesn't appear to be a huge appetite for this.

2) Repeal Prop B.  There is a bill on the table in each house to do just that. The legislature usually doesn't completely overturn the voters, but it wouldn't be unprecedented either.

3) Keep Prop B, in its entirety, but change the wording so that all the stipulations apply to breeders, as well as shelters and rescues.  This is what SB 95 is worded to do.

4) Create some type of compromise solution -- and craft it to either apply only to commercial breeders or to all dog care facilities.

For a lot of reason I don't think either of the first two options will happen. I think there are too many problems with Prop B for it to remain in its entirety and unchanged -- and based on feedback after today's House hearings, many legislators seem to agree. I also don't think a full out repeal will be a good faith decision by the legislature in a state that does have some pretty major issues with puppy mills.  I also don't think the legislature would want to cripple the animal welfare community by passing SB 95 as written, so that leaves us with a potential compromise situation.

While a few very vocal people (including HSUS) are not willing to compromise, it seems as if that would be the most viable option. I also would also contend that a well-crafted compromise would actually be of more benefit to animals than Prop B in its entirety.

So with that, I offer my recommendations to changes to Prop B that would make it a) better for animals and b) be more palatable for the breeding community (I actually think many of them would be on-board with this).  I think I've eliminated most of the key sticking points with Prop B, and added a few things that would fix some major problems.

Things to eliminate from Prop B:

1) The 50 breeding dog limit. I think this is the one that represents significant government over-reach by limiting the size of the business. It also doesn't necessarily pertain to how animals are cared for as it is only an arbitrary number. I also think this one represents the biggest problem for the rescue community as there is no safety net in the law that covers what happens to all of the dogs that are in large breeding operations when they are forced to downsize. I think is probably the single biggest sticking point, and has the least to do with actual animal care.

Provide some compromise solutions for:

1)  The requirement that cages have solid floors. I KNOW why this was included, but I don't think it's the best solution. Put in a stipulation for small wire kennels that are encased in rubber, or something.  Living on the hard wire is not good for the dogs, however, if anyone in the rescue community has ever fostered a litter of puppies, they know one thing: puppies pee. A lot. The solid floor requirement would end up leaving animals to lay in their own pee unnecessarily.

2) Raise the max temperature of 85 degrees -- I'm not sure what the right number here is, but from the people I've talked to, they say 85 is too low for young puppies, who need a warmer temperature for their small bodies. The average body temperature for dogs is between 100.5 and 102.5 -- so warmer than it is for humans. So 85 is likely a bit cold for a well-cared for dog.

3) Eliminate the requirement for unfettered access to the outdoors. It gets cold in Missouri. The overnight low tonight is suppose to be 15 degrees and many areas of the state have about a foot of snow on the ground. The idea of allowing a young puppy unfettered access to such cold isn't humane. Again, I get what the advocates for the law were trying to do, but there has to be a better way than this.

4) There may also be issues with the "adequate rest between breeding cycles" issue (I've heard some complaints that it is actually better for dogs to have consecutive litters). I don't know about this but I'm pretty sure someone in the vet community would know for sure.

Things to completely add to the law

1) A moderate increase in licensing fees. Fees have not been raised since 1993, so a moderate increase is not unreasonable. Make sure that all fees go directly toward enforcement. I would think many of the breeding operations that are making a concerted effort would be in favor of more enforcement in shutting down unlicensed and poorly run operations to a) get out from under the cloud they're creating and b) eliminate some competition.

2) Create harsher punishments for operating without a license. Right now the current policy is to try to bring these operations into compliance. HSUS estimates that there are 3,000 commercial breeders in the state, and only about 1500 are licensed. Creating harsh penalties for operating without a license, including eliminating their right to operate for at least 5 years would get rid of the people who aren't even trying to do the basics of getting a license. Fines should be designated back into enforcement. (I would like a clause here that allows for some forgiveness for people who simply let a license temporarily lapse or have 4 or 5 dogs and don't realize they need a license to breed).

3) Harsher penalties for repeat offenders. Prop B does some of this, but it's a bit over-broad in how its worded and could be cleaned up some.

I think something like these compromise solutions would deal with the single biggest issue in the state (which is lack of enforcement), and ensure that funding for enforcement will remain while the state deals with its budget issues. I also think it gets rid of some of the biggest hot spots with Prop B while keeping most of the basic care-for-dogs elements in the law. I also then think the law could be applied to all groups (rescues and breeders) without causing undue problems for the rescues (rescues, let me know if there is a hang-up there).

My fear is that with both sides fighting for either a "keep it in its entirety" or "get rid of it altogether" from the fringe groups on each side, that opportunities to work through real solutions that could benefit both sides may be lost.  And that'd be a shame.

Thoughts?

Nine year old South Carolina girl dead form dog attack

In a tragedy in South Carolina, nine year old Kristen Dutton was attacked and killed by a Japanense Akita that was owned by her grandfather.

The dog was recently purchased by the grandfather for his grandchildren and although they had only owned the dog for 3 weeks, it does appear as if it had spent a lot of time around the victim prior to the attack.  The girl had just walked the dog and was apparently out in the back yard playing with the dog when the grandfather went inside to fix dinner. When they called the girl 15 minutes later to come in for dinner she was found badly injured on the ground from a bite in the neck and died a short time later.  Reports indicate the dog was attached to a cable run at the time of the attack. There were no witnesses.

Although there are few details in the case, I think it was great that WJBF also tried to provide some education around dog attacks to help break down some of the fear mongering that could likely follow a story like this. While dog attacks like this are exceedingly rare, they can happen, and a better understanding of canine bahavior and supervision of children around dogs is essential to stopping the ones that do occur. 

To this point, 35 media outlets have picked up the story in South Carolina.  The attack happened in McCormick, SC, a small community of 1500 people, 27% of whom live below the poverty line (more than double the national average).

Heads up on Missouri SB 95 (Related to Proposition B)

Well, this was predictable.

Two months ago, the voters in the state of Missouri passed Proposition B that would have put several stipulations onto commercial dog breeders in the state -- including a couple of stipulations that I thought were troubling such as limiting the number of breeding dogs in the state to no more than 50 dogs, and demanding unfettered access to the outdoors.

While there are a couple of proposals in both the state House and Senate that would completely repeal Proposition B (which is completely within the power of the state legislature to do under Missouri state law), there is another bill on the table that -- while it has some potential to be good - in its current form would devastate the animal rescue community.

SB 95 -- proposed by Brian Munzlinger - essentially removes the "breeding dog" stipulation and applies the rules from Proposition B to any animal care facility in the state with more than 10 female dogs over 6 months of age. The bill, which Munzlinger is calling the "Puppy cruelty prevention act" extends the coverage of Prop B to ALL facilities housing dogs in the state.  Thus, if passed, SB 95 would essentially limit all animal facilities - breeding facilities, rescues, and shelters, in size so that no facility in the state could have more than 50 dogs over 6 months of age and all would have to supply unfettered access to the outdoors.

This type of proposal when a 'puppy mill' law has been passed to then apply it to shelters and rescues is not unprecedented at the state level and was done in Washington two years ago.

Now, the initial reaction from the animal welfare community is likely to be outrage. The new regulations would have a hugely negative impact on shelters and rescues across the state -- who don't currently have 'unfettered' access and it would be cost prohibitive for them to add it to their shelter. Also, many of the large shelters in the state -- the ones responsible for rehoming large numbers of dogs -- have well more than 50 dogs in their shelters.  This will be pretty devastating for these organizations, especially as the rescue community may be facing countless dogs coming to the shelter from commercial breeding operations that are being forced out of business (or downsizing) due to Prop B passing.

However, the bill is potentially not all bad.  Let's face it, there are quite a few animal shelters and even rescue groups in the state that could upgrade the care for the animals in their care (I particularly like the idea of mandating that shelters provide "proper veterinary care").  However, a couple of the stipulations that I think are most problematic for the commercial breeders, are also the most problematic when applied to rescue groups. 

I honestly don't think the state Legislature would do anything that would knowingly cripple animal welfare in the state although retaliation is very much a concern.  The rescue community, along with HSUS, circumvented the legislature with their citizens initiative without a lot of political clout in Jefferson City, and made no friends in the process.  I do think the proposing Senator is making a point with introducing it about a) how unfair the law largely pushed by the animal welfare community is on the breeding community and b) using it for leverage to get rid of some of the more problematic clauses in Prop B.

Wayne Pacelle (who now is apparently a licensed lobbyist in the state of Missouri,which seems odd for the CEO of a 501c3) and the rest of the HSUS crew are in Jefferson City are pushing for no compromises on Prop B. However, in the process, they may be setting rescues up for the law to impact them also...which would not be good. Meanwhile, I'm also curious why neither HSUS, nor legislative group Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation, neither has alerted the animal welfare community of the proposed SB 95 and the potential consequences of passing the citizen's initiative without the political capital in Jefferson City to prevent this kind of  retaliation from happening.

It should also be noted that Munzlinger is the same Senator that proposed last Spring that the clause that exempted shelters and rescues from paying annual licensing fees be stricken so that now all rescues have to pay the same licensing fees as breeding operations -- so this isn't new territory for Munzlinger.

It's going to be an interesting session in Jefferson City.  It may also give an opportunity to see if HSUS and others are willing to sacrifice any of the provisions of Prop B in order to help insure better care of animals in our animal shelters as well -- without, hopefully, crippling the animal welfare community in the process.

One of the first public hearings on Prop B is tomorrow at Noon down at the Capitol... and just be aware that there are a lot of alternatives to the no compromise position on Prop B -- some of which are awful, and some of which have the potential to make things a lot better for all animals in the state.

You can read SB 95 in its entirety here.

Weekly Roundup - Week Ending 1/23/11

It's been a really active week -- with a lot going on - and I have a lot to talk about early this week.  I'm going to dive right in...

Cities/states and laws

A North Carolina man is asking the state to push for state laws against 'pit bulls' -- even though such laws have proven themselves to be widely ineffective and are not recommended by experts anywhere.

Sheboygan, WI's city council unanimously approved a new Vicious Dog Ordinance that specifies dangerous and vicious dogs based on behavior. Sheboygan initially sought to regulate based on breeds, but after a lot of discussion realized a behavior-based ordinance would be better for the community.

Barstow, AZ was looking to pass a behavior-based ordinance that defined vicious and potentially dangerous dogs based on behavior, not breeds.

Aberdeen SD has scheduled a work session to discuss a breed-specific ordinance on Monday night of this week.

A Shelby, NC councilman is working to push laws restricting pit bull ownership as a knee-jerk reaction to a tragic attack in a nearby community 2 weeks ago. The Waxhaw city council has also set up a panel to discuss a new dog control law following the same incident.

Some newly proposed legislation in Maine would make landlords jointly liable for damages from dog bites -- instead of the dog's owner being solely liable. The move would likely discourage landlords from allowing pets and thus, eliminate many potential pet owners from pet ownership.

Hamden, CT is talking about a new law that could potentially involve breed specific language.

Dog Bites/Attacks

A ten year old Arizona City, AZ boy was attacked by 3 dogs that were roaming at large in the comunity and ganged up on the young boy.

A four year old girl in British Columbia was attacked by 2 Bull Mastiff's owned by the family. The girl was playing in her back yard and apparently stuck her hands through the fence where the dogs were kept and was grabbed by one of the dogs and pulled partially through the fence. The dogs were clearly kept separate from the rest of the family and not well socialized with the child.

A 4 year old Union City, CA boy was bitten by 3 'pit bulls' after the boy hit a ball over the fence in his back yard and climbed over the fence into the back yard where the dogs were kept.

A 9 year old Jackson, MS boy was bitten by a 'pit bull' in the community -- the dog was described as "malnourished" and said to have "broke free from it's chain" before it attacked the boy. It is impossible to have the conversation about dog bites without looking at how the dogs are cared for.

A two year old boy in the UK was attacked by a Japanese Akita and was treated for facial injuries.  The UK of course has a breed ban on four different breeds of dogs - -but there will always be another breed of dog that will be a problem if irresponsible ownership is not addressed.

Miscellaneous

A solid, well-thought out editorial about breed-specific laws in North Carolina: Punishing pit bulls or people.

A group of folks in Philadelphia, including HSUS and the Philadelphia SPCA, launched an anti dog fighting initiative in the city. Obviously the idea of stopping dog fighting is a good one, especially given the recent increases in dog fighting busts in the community, but one has to wonder what role HSUS's promotion of the Eagle's starting QB who was involved in dog fighting has had in the increase in dog fighting in the community. This wouldn't be the first time HSUS has gone out raising money to solve a problem that they helped create. Related: It's not "Problem Solving" if you created the problem

In the "um wow" category for the week, PETA has a new page up asking for donations to them to help 'pit bulls'  -- after years of pushing pit bull-killing policies around the country.

Dallas Taxpayers have every right to be pissed about the goings on at the city shelter -- from the Dallas Observer.

Pit Bulls: Vicious Killers or Much-Maligned Breed? - A media outlet in British Columbia takes a look at the 'pit bull' in a very fair way.

The Coachella Valley Animal Shelter (CA) is drawing the ire of folks in the community for its 60% kill rates.  It is great that people are starting to demand better from their tax-funded shelters.

A Border Collie in South Carolina has a working vocabular of over 1,000 words.  This is a great story about the ability of dogs to learn words and gives some great insights into just how intelligent dogs are (and how little we truly understand them).

A disturbing story from Carson City (NV) where the animal shelter there has decided to suspend its volunteer program in an effort to re-organize.  Volunteers can be an incredible source of free, helpful labor for animals in shelters and suspending a volunteer program is almost never good for the animals.

Headlines

What do you expect a story to be about when the headline reads "Police Find 3 dead in Detroit Home, amidst several pit bulls"?  Well, the men were shot (which means the dogs weren't guilty of anything unless they now have opposable thumbs) and the dogs clearly weren't much of protection dogs by allowing their owners to be shot. The 11 dogs were removed from the house without incident. There appear to be no real suspects in the shooting.  Why were the dogs in the headline again?

Blogs worth reading

Mass Killing at a Georgia Shelter: Tragedy and opportunity - Yesbiscuit! takes a look at a horrible mass-killing (90 dogs) in Georgia and what we can learn from it.

Status update on the Alabama 44 - -YesBiscuit! updates us on the Alabama 44 -- several dogs are missing, the status of several is unknown, and 6 are dead.  HSUS continues to be silent on the issue.

Risky Business - Time4Dogs takes a look at what's really in our store-bought pet food.

Dalton McGuinty is responsible for this insanity - Brindle Stick takes a look at an incident involving a German Shepherd that attacked 3 different people and the dog's owner is not facing charges. Meanwhile, someone who merely owns a 'pit bull' type dog can be arrested for walking their dog down the street without a muzzle - and calls for a regime change in the upcoming elections.

Pets on the bed and other media scares -- Dr. Marty Becker at the Pet Connection takes a look at fear mongering statements that pets sleeping in your bed could kill you.

Culture of Cruelty - Winograd takes a look at a culture of cruelty that sadly exists within our shelter system - -noting that for many animals, the first time they experience neglect or cruelty is at the "shelter" that is supposed to protect them from it.

Anatomy of a Dog DNA Test -- more from Pet Tips and Tails on some mixed breed dogs getting DNA Tests - -this one featuring my loving mutt, Grommit.   I will post more about this one soon.

Funny visuals of cat sleeping formations -- from I Love Charts

Shelters doing Good 5 - For the Pit Bulls looks at several shelters that are running good programs that are good for animals.

When Vet Bills Bite...it can be a life or death situation -- Paw Prints Magazine has some great helpful tips for help for people facing high vet bills.

Paying the price for police advice -- YesBiscuit! takes a look at an unfortunate situation where police recommended that a woman get a dog to scare away strangers after her home got broken into, and then later shot the dog through a fence because it barked at them.

Interview with Jane Pierantozzi of the Faithful Friends of Delaware -- from Valerie Hayes

As blue as the summer sky: Austin Then & Now - Winograd takes a look at the differences in leadership in Austin and it making a difference for animals.

The Vicktims speak: What dead dogs tell us -- Gina Spadafori fo the Pet Connection takes a look at what canine forensics tell us about the brutality at Bad Newz Kennels.

Have a great week everyone.

Vick Dogs and PBS Last Night

Overall, I think it was a pretty great program.  Donna and Tim, as always, were great spokespeople for the dogs, as were Roo, Clare and Hector.  I can't help but laugh every time I see the quote from Wayne Pacelle about the dogs being the most aggressive in the country and then seeing someone talk about how the majority of the dogs were 'shut down' at the shelter.   And as Lisa noted in the comments last night,  remain stunned that anyone mistakenly thinks that PETA is spokesperson for the animals.

Overall, it was a good show.  Enjoy:

 

Watch the full episode. See more Need To Know.

 

Link to the story here.

Mike Vick's former dogs to be featured on PBS tonight!

The dogs rescued from Mike Vick's Bad Newz Kennels will be featured on the PBS program "Need to know" tonight. The program airs Friday, 1/21 at 7:30 here in Kansas City -- and 8:30 out on the east coast.  Check your local listings to be sure you catch the right time.

The journalist, William Brangham, is following up on the dogs and will be interviewing several of the owners of the dogs, as well as folks from the ASPCA, Bad Rap, and Jim Gorant -- author of the Lost Dogs.

Also, word is that there isn't going to be any of the gruesome stock footage that often accompanies these types of programs...which makes me happy.

Check it out tonight....

Panic Policy Making - an academic study & current events

A couple of years ago, two Political Science professors from West Virginia University, Susan Hunter and Richard Brisbin Jr, wrote a paper entitled:  Panic Policy Making: Canine Breed Bans in Canada and the United States. 

I was excited to read the study, as I got a preview of some of the information when Ms. Hunter presented at the KC Dog Advocates Canine Legislation Conference back in 2006.

The paper discusses breed specific legislation, and how it is mostly a symbolic reaction to a crisis, shifts the injury away from the owner and onto the dogs. Also, they claim that breed bans occur in a relatively unusual political context.

"Unlike adoption of some palliatives for risks, breed bans appear in circumstances marked by great emotionalism and limited inquiry into the sources and probability of a risk and limited consideration of altternative policies. Especially the alternatives suggested by animal rights and animal welfare advocates appear to be ignored. Therefore, to address how dog breed bans have come about, this paper proposes a framework to explain panic policy making."

According to their paper, the authors propose that breed bans usually happen in a very limited time frame and without the normal intrustion of new information and without the accumulation of increasing conflict or negative feedback about the policy (which usually occurs over time, which is limited).

For the purpose of the paper, they define Panic Policy Making as:

"The speedy creation of new laws and regulatins or new duties for governmental and private institutions in a situation of sudden, unreasoning and excessive fear and anger."

In the paper, they note 5 different stages of the panic policy-making:

Recognition: Usually a Panic Policy involves a sudden event like a crisis or disaster (often involving a serious injury) that has drawn little attention from interest groups or experts. Sometimes this event happens as a quasi-natural occurance, such as a death from a dog attack or the poisoning of a source of water.  Or it can be a manufactured occurance such as a new danger created by new policy entrepreneurs who are new in office. Individuals will then take the event or intrustion as a cause for alarm because it signals severe, catastrophic or dreadful consequences.

Construction & Interpretation of the event = fear, anxiety and panic. Panic is a self-interested action determined by an emotion-laden calcution of probabilities.  This then follows with contagion - Although panic is an individualized reaction to an injurious event, if it is shared with others, it becomes contagion.  Contagion leads to an emotional assessment of alternatives as the public will often overestimate the rist of infrequent events and underestimate the frequency of common events. Thus, individuals will like alternatives shaped by an affective prediction of panic from the future dangers and anticipation of the worst possible future.

Rationalization - political leaders react to the anxiety and panic by rationalizing a public policy that can confine or eliminate that fear.  Often this comes after the media spreads the collective fear to a mass audience. This opens up the 'policy window' quite suddenly. Unlike other states of moral panic, where lobbying or changes in polical party opens the policy window, in the case of breed bans, they propose that the MEDIA opens the policy window. In these cases, the media can provide very vivid images and reactions, can amplify those reactions and reinforce these amplifications. They can then create an information cascade in which an event is repeated to the point where a rational follower will unconditionally imitate them without regard to information from other sources.

Choice - Panic policy making features limited participation, elite control and groupthink in the formulation of a response to the catastrophe -- often using heuristics and "common knowledge" instead of facts and limiting the scope of alternative policies.  Panic policymaking is thus at the extreme end of a continuum of the amount of alternatives used to formulate the new policy

The final piece is implementation -- because of the speed in processing the legislation, there is limited calculation, planning and assessment on how a new policy will actually be implemented, there is neglect in calculating the sunk costs.  Because the initial panic is cooled by the new policy, the panic eventually fades to where it was before (non-existent) and the media moves onto other issues.

The remainder of the Panic Policy paper then focuses demonstrating how panic policy making exists within the world of breed bans. They interviewed politicians and those involved in enacting breed bans throughout Canada and the United States and provided a lot of examples of how most of these cities passed bans quickly in reaction to an attack or "paranoia regarding certain breeds." One chart within the paper notes that over 40% of people who supported breed bans said they did because of media reports. Around 15% said because of community panic (often also caused by media reports), 13% "all of the above" -- so including media reports.  So media reporting is a major influencer in causing people to support breed bans.

The paper then goes into detailed case studies, including details in Ontario (where more than 40 experts and animal welfare organizations testified against the proposal but were all ignored), New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, the Kansas City metropolitan area (and I can personally vouge for the accuracy of their claims for KC and the media cascade was actually the impetous for the creation of this blog) and Wheeling, WV.

The paper is a really good read and overview of public policy decision-making -- and you can read the 51 page article in its entirety here.

Panic Policy-Making in its current form

I've been interested in the Panic Policy-making idea after I witnessed it in action in my own area - and was further confirmed when a former Denver City Council member referred to the passing of Denver's breed ban as occuring during "The Hysteria of the Moment".  Denver, of course, is still struggling with the enforcement of their breed ban.  

Ohio, the only state with any type of breed specific law, is talking about repealing their breed-specific law after their state legislature tacked the breed specific languange onto another bill back in 1987 just one day after the death of a man who was killed in a dog attack.

Meanwhile, the panic-policy-making continues.

Lincoln Park, MI is currently looking at a breed ban on 'pit bulls' following a fatal attack of a 5 year old boy involving 2 dogs -- neither of which resembled 'pit bull' type dogs.

In Waxhaw, NC, just a week after a girl was fatally attacked by two 'pit bulls', the community is considering new dog legislation. Despite the fact that the dogs' owner was recently released from jail, and had been talked to by police about allowing his dogs to roam at large, and despite the fact that the parents of the girl had been reported on "three or four occassions" as not supervising their child, and despite the fact that Waxhaw has no animal control department (in spite of a rapidly growing population, the city quickly jumped to possible new laws as a solution to the attack.

Often times, the very fact that some cities have placed bans on particular breeds of dogs is used as a reinforcement that such bans are either effective legislation or well-thought-out legislation. However, when you look the circumstances that led up to the passing of this legislation - and the often hurried approach to passing the legislation such as is panic policy making, it becomes very clear that these breed bans are most often the result of emotional, panic-driven decisions vs well-thought-out and well crafted laws.  It makes these laws take on a whole new meaning.

Meanwhile, when cities actually take the time to really study a solution, and listen to the experts in their community on the topic, they nearly always come out with a policy that focuses on reckless owners and on a dog's behavior, not breed.

If we are to make improvements to the way p0licy is handled in this country, we must put an end to the panic policy-making that rushes to quick decisions to put an end to civic panic - and instead, focuses on meeting with experts to explore all of the possibilities and effectiveness of ordinances that really do improve public safety. Knowledge and understanding how panic policy-making works is critical to ending the cycle.