KC DOG BLOG

Shooting the messenger

I've been debating most of the day about writing this. I've been trying, for the most part, to have my blog posts be more positive. Call it a New Year's Resolution. But this, this is really bugging me today.

Last night, during the Academy Awards, the Center for Consumer Freedom, and the group they support, Humanewatch.org, ran a tv spot doing what they do best; criticizing the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

The spot really targets one piece of information: that according to their research, 71% of Americans believe that HSUS is a national orgnaization that gives money to local Humane Societies.  But they don't. The ad closes with the line "If you want to help pet shelters, make sure you give to your local animal shelter." You can watch the ad in its entirety here.

Now, let me first note, that I know, and understand who the CCF is. I know they're funded by large corporations essentially to lobby against changes that hurt their business. I know that they're not promoting local shelters because they love animals.

That said, their message is accurate, and does promote a worthy cause. HSUS is primarly a large lobbying and fundraising organization -- pushing for a variety of laws on the state and federal level.  They don't give much to local animal shelters. And while I don't know if their 71% of people believe they fund local animal shelters is technically accurate, it does mirror my experience -- that most people who are not directly involved in animal welfare think this. And that if people want money to go to help animals in local animal shelters, then it is imperative that they give to local shelters (most of whom badly need the money).

So while I wouldn't necessarily call myself a CCF supporter, their message is not wrong and actually promotes  a worthy cause.

So, my problem today, came in reading both the blog and email from HSUS responding to last night's advertisement.

First off, last night's ad, at least based on info on Humane Watch's facebook page, ran only in the Washington DC area. However, HSUS's response ran nationally. This seems odd to actually promote the ad to a larger network of people who never would have had a chance to see it.  But even that isn't the problem for me.

The problem, is that the response is entirely designed to shoot the messenger, the CCF. HSUS, again, uses their blog post to lay out their stance against the CCF, and Humane Watch, and their chief lobbyist Rick Berman (who HSUS refers to throughout the post as "Dr. Evil"). The post goes on to promote a new fund, the HSUS Fund to Stop Rick Berman's Campaign for Cruelty -- that people can donate to show that HSUS is stronger than the CCF. The money will go toward lobbying for laws for 'puppy mills' or 'factory farming.'

Now, I'm not going to comment on their uses of the money. I'm certainly in favor of better care for animals, whether the animals are in commercial breeding operations or on corporate farms. I don't always agree with HSUS's specific tactics on these -- but without seeing what they're promoting this go around, it's hard to say for sure.

But what bugs me is that no where in the 12 paragraph blog post, or 9 paragraph email, does HSUS acknowledge local shelters, and how they could use donations too. That these organizations, most of whom are very cash strapped, often lose money to the fundraising efforts of national organizations, but do great work in helping save the lives of dogs and cats in their own communities. It would have been really easy for HSUS to at least acknowledge, at some point, that the "takeaway" from the CCF's commercial, give to your local shelters, is actually a noble donation -- and one, in theory, that HSUS supports. I know I regularly support fundraisers of other organizations outside of my own that support a similar mission -- helping animals.

So, it seems more than a little odd to me, that in this scenario, "Dr. Evil" is promoting giving to local, needy animal shelters. And the supposed "good guy' here, the "Humane" organization, is promoting giving money to themselves. Ouch.

So HSUS, please quit making your response to shoot the messenger. If you are ashamed by their message that you don't help fund local animal shelters, change some of your policies and give generously from your rich bank accounts to help these local groups. If you don't mind people knowing that you don't give your money to local shelters and that you're lobbying for better laws, then by all means, own up to it. Lobbying for better laws can be a very noble goal and very impactful on its own merits.

And just one more thing, would it hurt to thorw the little guys a bone once in awhile?  Many of the people who work in these shelters every day are among your biggest supporters -- and when 'Dr. Evil" is pushing for people to give them money and support, and you're not, it sure makes it hard to remember who the "good guys" are supposed to be.

Ontario, Miami-Dade BSL repeals move forward

Well, it'd already been a fantatic week for BSL in the US with the news of Ohio repealing its state-wide breed-specific law (BSL).

The news continued to get better later in the week..

On Thursday, Ontario Bill 16 passed its second reading in the Ontario Legislature by a vote of 51-26. There is still a lot of work to do on this bill, but the next steps are for it to get a public hearing in committee (in 2005, when the BSL was passed, public commentary was overwhelmingly opposed to the breed-specific language). The committee will then debate the bill, and it would then move forward to a 3rd and final reading in the legislature. This bill has support from all three political parties in the legislature --- and continues to have strong (67%) support of the entire legislature -- so this is a great step in the right direction. More info (and images from the day) here.

Meanwhile, in Florida, HB 997, a bill that would remove Miami-Dade's beed ban, passed it's 3rd committe UNANIMOUSLY by a vote of 17-0 (4 missed). The bill has now passed through three house committees with overwhelming support -- 13-1 in Community and Military Affairs and 14-0 in Agriculture and Natural Resources.

The companion bill in the Senate, SB 1322, has passed it's two committees as well: Government Oversight and Accountability committee 9-2 and Coummunity Affairs Committee 7-0. SB 1322 will be heard in the Budget Subcommittee on Tuesday, 2/28. After that, both bills would be voted on by the entire House and Senate.  Still, a ways to go, but there has been a LOT of support for these bills thus far.

Both of these are really fantastic news for the two major BSL repeal initiatives as momentum continues in repealing unjust breed-specific laws across the continent. I'll continue to keep people posted as these bills (and others) move forward.

Observations on placing blame, economics and marketing

There was a news report earlier this week that I think a LOT of urban shelters can identify with.

The report was from Rochester, NY, and reporting that the shelter killed over 1000 'pit bulls' last year in its shelter. The report interviews several people, all pointing to "back yard breeders" as the reason for the killing. If not for all the back yard breeders breeding the dogs, and dumping them at the shelter, the killing wouldn't be happening.

I'm going to pick on Rochester, NY a bit here -- but they're not the only place I've heard this from. And while I'm not intimately familiar with the situation in Rochester, I'm familiar with similar situations that all seem to look pretty close to the same.

But while Rochester no doubt has issues with irresponsible breeding, and people getting rid of dogs, they're also victims of their own poor marketing and poor understanding of economics.

For starters, let's take a look at the website for Rochester Animal Services. This morning, there are exactly 9 dogs up on their website that are available for adoption -- including two that are listed as mixed breed pit bulls. This is a shelter that put down an average of 3 pit bulls per day last year, but only has 2 on its website right now and only 9 dogs total listed as available. Now, I don't know what the capacity of the shelter is, but I'm going to guess that this city of over 1 million people has a shelter with a capacity of more than 9 dogs.

Meanwhile, let's say I fell in love with one of these pit bull mixes, and wanted to adopt. What would that cost me? Well, if it's a puppy less than 6 months old, it will cost me $164.  A dog over 6 months old will cost me $134.

The problem with this happens to be, that according to the people who were interviewed for the original news article, 'pit bulls' are a 'dime a dozen' -- and one guy admitted to buying his pit bull for $30. So, if you are in a competitive market place why would someone come to your shelter and adopt a pit bull puppy for $164 when they can "rescue" one from the guy down the street who just had a litter for 20% of the price.

Price does matter. Ask Walmart -- who built a $400 billion business on offering lowest pricing.

I'm not saying that Rochester Animal Services should adopt dogs out for $30 (although, it's a viable option). I do think they can market the value of getting a vetted/altered dog and get a higher value for them. But I do think they need to be at least competitive with their pricing -- especially in a community like Rochester where more than 30% of the population lives below the poverty line.  One of the biggest helps in controlling animal populations is ADOPTING more dogs -- this way people get new dogs that are altered vs buying unaltered ones.

Again, I'm not saying that Rochester's problems aren't real. They no doubt are - -and are a problem in a lot of urban areas. However, there is a LOT they could be doing to minimize the strain on their shelter -- including better marketing for their adoptable dogs and lowering adoption fees so they are competitive in the market (which would not only get more out, it would prevent more from coming in because more people would begin owning altered animals).  

A lot of solutions can come from better marketing and a better understanding of economics. There are few good solutions that come from just pointing fingers at someone else as the cause of the problem.

Update: Upon writing this, I was notified by a couple of people from the area that it appears as if the city shelter in Rochester does not adopt pit bulls out of the shelter. While they do make them available to rescue groups, they are not mde available to the public. Obviously this would create a further gap for people who want to get a pit bull, and their availability from a means other than neighborhood bred dogs, further escalating the problem.

Mount Clemons (MI) repeals breed specific law

Last night, by a vote of 5-1, Mount Clemons, MI repealed its breed-specific law.

The ordinance had been in place since 2009, but at the time of passing the law, the council had agreed to revisit in in a couple of years. Last night, they repealed the law that made 'pit bulls' automatically "dangerous" and required the dogs to be kept in 6-foot capped kennels and muzzled when outdoors.

From the comments from the majority of the city council members, it sounds like they all get that the dog is the responsibility of the owners and that it's irresponsible dog ownership that is of issue, not specific breeds of dogs.

Mount Clemons was the second breed specific law repeal of the day -- following the erasure of Ohio's statewide law earlier that morning.

There continues to be more momentum for behavior based ordinances and against breed specific ones....here's to hoping the trend continues.

Breed Specific Law in Ohio is no more

Just a few minutes ago, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed HB 14 into law. HB 14 removes the designation of all "pit bulls' as being potentially aggressive and replaces the law with a breed-neutral, behavior based law.

A huge congrats goes out to the many people in Ohio, Representative Barbara Sears, as well as many national organizations, for their diligent work in making this happen. I've gotten the pleasure to meet many of the folks involved in this repeal over the years and am blown away by their knowledge and dedication. To everyone who worked for years to make this happen, congrats.

The repeal passed with 70% of the votes from the House of Representatives, 84% from the Senate, and a confirming approval of the Governor. Not only does the signing of the bill end the reign of the breed-specific law in Ohio, the decisiveness of the voting indicates the changing nature of attitudes about breed-specific laws among lawmakers who are continuing to note that breed-specific laws are not an effective solution to solving dog bites -- but that behavior-based ordinances are.

Ohio's Breed-Specific law has stood since 1987. At the time, the state legislature passed a bill through very quickly after a very well-publicized attack involving a physician who was attacked after visiting a prostitute. The law was passed as an act of Panic Policy-Making -- and stood for 25 years. In spite of knee jerk policy, the Ohio law has been used by breed ban advocates as a reason why breed-specific laws are a good idea (even though Ohio was the ONLY state with a law targeting breeds of dogs and 14 states actually forbid such legislation).

But the law is no more: signaling not only a change in laws but a change in attitudes, a change in perspectives, a change in the ideas of what constitutes effective canine legislation and a change in the lives of the owners of these types of dogs.

This is good for the dogs. And for the people.

Great news out of the state of Ohio today.  Great news indeed.

Cashing in on failed policy in Omaha

Under an Omaha law passed in 2008, dogs can be declared "potentially dangerous" if they bite someone, or, if they are one of 9 different breeds of dogs declared "potentially dangerous" under Omaha law. Once declared "potentially dangerous" the dog must be altered, microchipped and muzzled and licensed whenever they're out in public.  They also must be licensed for $100 year and the dog owner has to take out a $100,000 insurance policy on the dog.

Biting dogs remain on the list for 2 years (the breeds of dogs forever), and if the dog has no other violations, they can come off the list if the owner pays another $200 to the city.

A couple of weeks ago, the city of Omaha, and the Nebraska Humane Society (which handles all animal control and sheltering for the city) began discussing removing the $200 fee to remove the dog from the list. The vote passed the city council 7-0.

This isn't the first time Omaha has had to tweak its overly broad, and overly harsh, dangerous dog ordinance. The ordinance was originally passed in 2008 following a major dog attack in the community. It was passed as an act of panic policy making after the tragic attack and the city ignored all canine experts and passed an overly broad, overly taxing law targeting all dog owners and even more specifically targeting owners of certain breeds of dogs. Previously, the council had reduced fines for dogs running at large from $300 to $100 because they realized it was causing some dog owners to not get their dogs from the shelter because they couldn't afford the high fees.

And it's good that the council continues to tweak the Dangerous Dog Ordinance -- because there are many other changes that need to be made to it -- which from the start was an over-reaching, costly, and bound-to-be-ineffective boondoggle.

According to the NHS VP of Field Operations Mark Langan, there are "hundreds" of "potentially dangerous" dogs in the city of Omaha. While many of these are potentially dangerous because of their bite history, a large number are on the list only based on their appearance because of the breed-specific clause in the law-- creating a huge issue of cost of enforcement, aribtrary breed determinations, and cost to dog owners in the city.

The ordinance has been a huge boon for the Nebraska Humane Society.  Based on the NHS contract with the city, NHS receives 100% of the impound and licensing fees -- so the high numbers of citations and 'potentially dangerous dogs" is very financially rewarding for them. NHS also received a substantial increase if fees from the city of Omaha for enforcing the new ordinance (they received an annual increase of about $75,000 a year after the ordinance passed).

Meanwhile, the law itself, is not having a positive impact public safety in Omaha. While this was something that anyone could have easily forecasted 4 years ago when their new law was passed, the numbers have completely proved this out.

Here are the dog bite numbers in Omaha since 2006:

2006 - 916

2007 - 821

2008 - 808 (note, the new ordinance declaring 9 breeds of dogs "dangerous" passed in mid 2008). In June of 2008, the city was on pace to be 14% below their 2007 numbers, but in the back half of the year (after the ordinance passed), had 41 more dog bites than the year prior and ended with only a minor decrease for the year).

2009 - 875

2010 - 913

2011 - 834

So, in spite of the city paying more money for law enforcement, and in spite of the increased revenue received via high fines, high citations, and high licensing fees, the city has yet to have lower dog bites than the years prior to passing the ordinance. So increased cost, decreased public safety. Bravo.

Meanwhile, it's worth mentioning that in earlier reports, the top biting breeds of dogs in Omaha have traditionally been Labrador Retrievers and German Shepherds -- neither of which is targeted by the breed-specific part of the city's ordinance. "Pit Bulls", which were targeted by the law, made up only about 14% of total dog bites. And while Langan and the rest of the NHS crew has said the ordinance was a success because 'pit bull' bites have gone down, their continued focus on 'pit bull' type dogs has allowed bites by all other non-restricted breeds to increase significantly.

The entire ordinance continues to be poorly thought-out, ineffective, and costly -- both to taxpayers and to dog owners. However, it has also been a financial boom for NHS -- who continues to reap financial rewards for the ordinance in spite of its ineffectiveness.  It is time for Omaha to repeal the breed-specific part of its ordinance -- for the betterment of dog owners and for the betterment of public safety.

 

Weekly Roundup - -Week ending 2/19/12

Been a busy week -- without much posting. Will hopefully get back on track in the next week or so. Meanwhile, let's look at some of the top stories and blog postings from the week:

Cities/States and Laws

Wentzville, MO is set to discuss the repeal of their breed specific law on Wednesday.

Miami-Dade lawmakers are trying to now derail the quickly moving HB 997/SB 1322 that would eliminate the county's 23 year old breed ban by now offering to put the initiative to a vote of the constituents vs having the state mandate they repeal it. The effort is a last gasp appeal to try to keep a law everyone else in the state realizes is wrong and ineffective. At least one writer says the county doesn't want to repeal its breed ban because it is a revenue stream for the city....

Ogden, UT has decided on going with a breed-neutral dangerous dog law.

Springfield, MO continues to look at alternatives to it's breed-specific legislation

Media Ridiculousness

A south Florida man accidentally shot his mother when up to 10 dogs in his house got into  a fight while his 84 year old mother was feeding them. The dogs began fighting, and the man pulled a gun to shoot one or more of the dogs but ended up hitting his mother in the leg. The woman is going to recover. Interestingly, most media outlets initially began reporting that the incident involved 10 pit bulls -- however, later follow ups note that the dogs involved included two greyhounds, two Rottweilers, a poodle, a small heading type dog, a shepherd and an assortment of mutts.   Not that the breed matters, but it is interesting just how poorly the media covered the breeds in this one.

Kansas City News

The Northland Animal Welfare Society (NAWS) had their grand opening for their new low cost spay/neuter clinic serving the areas of KCMO north of the river. Congrats guys!

A 12 year old Kansas boy is pushing for a new state law that would add a bitter taste to anti-freeze after his beloved dog died from anti-freeze poisoning. According to this report, 10,000 animals each year and more than 1000 children.

Cruelty Cases

A Kansas City area family is devestated after their pet chihuahua was brutally killed and left dead in their yard.  The group Love4Paws has offered a $1500 reward for information about the attacker.

A Pit bull in Horry County, SC was found in a trash can in the back of a truck that was being repossessed. The dog was alive, but had major injuries.

A Honolulu Petco is being sued after a family took their dog in for grooming and apparently the Petco cut part of the the dog's ears off.  To make the situation worse (yes, it gets worse), instead of admitting the mistake, they just taped the pieces of the ears back on and the owners of the dog didn't notice until the ear pieces started falling off again.

No Kill News

The Elmsbrook Humane Society (WI) is being praised as a No Kill Shelter -- having a 93% live release reate in 2011.

Richland County, OH has gone 4 straight months without having to euthanize any animals.

Thoughts on Westminster

The Westminster Dog Show was this week -- and a lot of people had opinions about the show and specifically its break from Pedigree as a sponsor because Pedigree's advertising promoted adoption AND was a little sad. There was a lot of backlash on this from the rescue community.

Westminster officials made a mistake in dumping Pedigree as sponsor -- Seattle Dog Spot

And in the Comedy world, Stephen Colbert weighed in.

Blogs

Another former "Vick Dog", Grace, has earned her therapy dog stripes and just passed the Delta Pet Partners evaluation. Congrats to Bad Rap, her owners, and Grace.

The Sale of Puppies Online -- some commentary regarding the PUPS bill from Time 4 Dogs. I confess that I have not dived into the details of this bill.

It's not fair for a dog not to have a home -- For the pit bulls tells the story of a young child who's school found a pit bull roaming on the playground and took it to the pound and the young child thought it was unfair for the dog to not have a home and saved him.

As if the situation in Memphis couldn't become worse, media reports this week came out with a tape of a Memphis shelter employee who entered the shelter one night with the goal to kill all the pit bulls and anything that looks like a pit bull. While this is a more formal approach to killing almost everything in shelter regardless of what it looks like, it definitely is further insult to injury for the shelter. Memphis TV's anti-pit bull bias was also on display. Just when you thought it couldn't get worse...

TV star Jennifer Aniston adopts a pit bull mix --adding to he list of well known stars who continue to adopt pit bull type dogs from shelters.

And interesting post about Mandatory Spay/Neuter in Los Angeles from Paws & Learn Humane Education Center. They note that the law is basically unenforceable and that without the low-cost programs to support the law it is impossible for people in low cost neighborhoods to comply with the law (not that any of them realize it's the law in the first place).

How you can help -- a good blog post by Winograd not asking for money (as many national orgs tend to do) but by asking people to take proactive steps in their communities to increase life-saving.

If not for cats, we'd be covered in rats -- Yesbiscuit! looks at another value in feral cats

More on the news anchor that was bitten by the dog on live tv last week:

When "stupid" is mainstream -- Save a Pit Bull, Save the World has some good commentary on just how far removed we are from understanding animals these days 

9News in Denver did an educational piece for their news anchors to help them better understand canine behavior to hopefully help other anchors to avoid this type of situation.

Channel 9 news in Oklahoma City also had an expert that noted that all of the dog's behavior seemed to be geared to trying to get away from the news anchor -- who ended up getting bitten when she tried to kiss the dog on the nose.

Hysteria vs Education

Yesterday, tragedy struck twice in similar fashion in North America.

In McKeesport, PA, a two day old baby, Howard Nicholson, was tragically killed by the family dog. the infant was apparently left in a baby carrier on the floor. The dog, described as a Husky,had only been with the family for about a month and was left alone with the infant while the mother went to use the bathroom. The mother heard the baby cry and came in to find the child tragically bitten by the dog. The child later died at the hospital.

27% of the population of Mckeesport lives below the poverty line -- which is more than double the national average. The story was picked up by about 30 media outlets.

Meanwhile, in Airdrie, AB, another newborn infant was bitten by the family dog. The dog in this situation was also labeled as a "Husky".  Few other details are noted.

Both incidents are tragic, and my heart goes out to the families in both cases and in neither case was any type of "attack", but merely bites to very tiny, and fragile, victims.

I think it's interesting to read about these two incidents and the media portrayal of them.

There has been no hysteria about Huskies being dangerous dogs (they're not) and there has been no talk, or media polls, or any of that nonsense calling for bans on them. For the most part, the media has rationally played these out at tragic, rare, accidents. Which they are.

For the most part, the news articles are (accurately) labeling the dogs as "family dogs" and most media outlets have been talking about the dangers of leaving newborn children alone with dogs and the importance of long, slow socialization between babies and dogs.

These are good things. And while I'm excited to see the emphasis on this type of education, why is it that the media, and some hate groups, lose their freaking mind when other types of dogs are involved? 

There are a lot of great eduational resources out there in helping new parents introduce babies into a household with dogs. One of my favorites is Dogs and Storks (which is going through a rebranding to Family Paws Parent Education).  They have a fantastic, 20 minute free, online webinar about introducing babies and dogs. I highly encourage this type of program for any new parent - with a focus on fact-based education and handling dogs and children and focusing on proper supervision and separation when that isn't possible. 

Education beats hysterics every time. And hopefully we can move closer to education in all incidents, regardless of the type of dog involved in the bites.

Weekly Roundup -- Week ending 2/12/12

It's been a pretty incredible week with amazing news coming out of the state of Ohio and similarly good news coming out of Florida.  A lof of other news out there to share so let's get to it.

Cities/States and Laws

With the change in the Ohio law, the Lucas County animal shelter is ready now to begin adopting 'pit bulls' out of the shelter. The shelter had previously began transferring pit bulls to other shelters in the area, but now will begin adopting them out themselves, giving them more opportunities to be saved.

Copperas Cove, TX residents are pushing for a change to a policy that currently prevents pit bulls from being adopted from the local shelter.

Ionia, MI was once considering a ban on certain breeds of dogs but has now wisely moved to a law that will focus on responsible pet ownership.

Dog Bites Attacks

Major dog bites/attacks are very rare - -but when they happen it is a wide variety of different types of dogs that are involved, and it's impossible to judge the actions of the dogs without taking into account the people surrounding the issue.

A Braymer, MO woman was attacked by an American Bulldog last week.  The dog apparently got free from its back yard  but was still dragging the chain it was chained up to.

An Orlando woman was severely attacked by a 'pit bull' earlier this week. The woman was apparently a "well known prostitute" in town and went home with a man. The man was staying at a friend's house and said he knew the dog was aggressive (and in fact, said he was "scared to death" of the dog becuase it had bitten 5 people just in the past month). The dog ended up attacking the woman and the man fled the scene and made no attempt to help the victim. It's a classic example of really bad dog ownership, having a known aggressive dog, and making no efforts to fix the problem.

In the UK, a man is upset after he and his dog were attacked by a Great Dane. The UK has a ban on four different breeds of dogs but it doesn't do anything to address the real problem of irresponsible pet ownership.

A 3 year old Worth County, GA girl was attacked by an Australian Shepherd. The owner thinks the older dog that is losing its eyesight may have been startled by some fleeing ducks and grabbed the child's face thinking it was a duck.

In Kelso, WA, two German Shepherds have been responsible for many different violations over the past few months -- including biting two neighbors earlier this week. The dogs' owner has a history of letting the dogs roam at large.

Dog bites TV Anchor in Denver

This was an interesting story this week to see how it unfolded. But earlier this week, a man was walking his 85-pound Argentine Mastiff (Dogo Argentin0) off-leash and the dog saw a coyote and chased it onto an icy lake where the dog eventually broke through the ice. A firefighter came to the scene and put on a wetsuit and rescued the dog, Max.  The next morning, only 16 hours after being rescued, Max made an appaearance on the TV news -- and at the very end of an interview, bit the new anchor in the face.

It's a bad situation and I do hope for the bst for Kyle Dyer, the news anchor who was bitten. However, it was interesting to see how several news stations around the country actually brought on dog trainers to analyze the situation and noted that the dog, who was likely still amped up from the day before's activities (hormones can stay in a dog's body for several days after a major event), showed many signs of stress -- ears back, turning away from the news anchor, lip licking, etc. It was then, as the reporter signed off and bent over the dog to give the stressed dog a kiss on the nose that the dog bit her (this was not an "attack" as many media outlets portrayed it).  I thought this was great to see that many news outlets were breaking through the hysterics and breed stereotypes to actually have informative pieces on canine behavior so others can learn from the situation and avoid similar incidents. Here's another report with a different expert from Rhode Island. And this is a great blog on the topic by Wag & Train.

Cruelty Cases

A local Kansas City group is pushing ofr animal control to prosecute animal cruelty after the group found a dog dead in its kennel - totally emaciated.

Miscellaneous

Twenty-four dogs from Miami Dade hit the road to go to no kill shelters in other communities.

Georgia, one of the dogs from Mike Vick's dog fighting operation that has for the past 4 years been under the care of Best Friends, has been adopted into a home.

WITN TV in Washington, NC ran a 2 part series on the "pit bull" debate. It's a pretty weak effort on their part, but I wanted to post both parts so people can see what is being said ot there. Part 1. Part 2.

Are doodle dogs worth the price?

A Chicago area man says the family pit bull saved their lives when the dog alerted them of a house fire.

A Memphis area man credits the family pit bull for protecting his 2 year old grandson who had wandered away and into the woods.

Last week McDonalds made huge news by running an advertising campaign that indicated that eating their Chicken McBites was "safer" than petting a pit bull. Within a few days, McDonalds pulled the advertising and appologized to pit bull owners for the stereotyped reference.

No Kill News

Behind the big drop in euthanasia for America's dogs and cats -- a solid effort from the Christian Science Monitor.

The Southampton Animal Shelter is using a great dog socialization program to help dogs become better socialized and burn off energy. The video really shows a lot about the program.  The program has helped the New York based shelter create a 90% save rate in the community.

A TV interview with Nathan Winograd on reducing pet euthanasia.

Blogs

Greeting Dogs: Dos and Don'ts -- a pictoral review that has been floating around the internet -- but this one is at Yesbiscuit!

Is titer testing a possible solution to problems with over-vaccinating dogs?  -- Dogs Naturally takes a look.

Five great tips for writing to the editor about a dog bite story -- frm Doggone Safe

This is an unbelievable photo shoot of dogs going underwater from Little Friends Photo

Fear and loathing in Ohio -- Game Dog Guardian takes a look at fear mongering by a handful of naysayers in Ohio who are trying to scare people into not supporting HB14 vs making rational, fact-based decisions.

Repeal the Hayden Law? -- Bad Rap takes a reallyrational look at attempts to repeal Hayden's Law and why it is a bad idea.

New report says more pets in US are obese -- from Seattle Dog Spot.  Roughly 55% of adult dogs and cats are classified as obese or overweight by their veterinarians.

Incorrect Breed Identification Costs Dogs their Lives -- Maddies Fund looks at breed specific laws and poor breed identification and cost canine lives.

Book Review: When you have to say goodbye: loving and letting go of your pet

Last fall, I got a copy of a new book written by Dr. Monica Mansfield DVM entitled "When you have to say goodbye: Loving and Letting go of your pet."

The book is a 30 page, fully illustrated children's book that is designed to help children deal with the loss of a loved pet.

Losing a pet is a difficult experience for anyone -- but can be exceptionally difficult for children. This book is designed to help children cope with the loss.

This isn't a book about rainbow bridges.  It's' about explaining that pets die earlier than humans -- and sometimes there are diseases that veterinarians can't cure, and times when a pet's body just stops working.

It's about understanding that it's ok to cry, or even feel angry.  But that it's important for children to talk about their feelings, and how things like writing poems, drawing pictures, or writings stories or looking at pictures of your pet will help you remember the good times with your pet, or making a picture, or a special place for your pet's favorite toys, or planting a flower in your yard can help a child honor and remember your pet.

You can get more info about the book, author and illustrator and the book's website.

It's a cute book that, although I'm not a parent, I think could help a child deal with a very difficult experience in a child's life. The book sells on Amazon for $8.95 -- and I think would be a great addition for any veterinarian office or for a family that is dealing with the loss of a pet. As pets continue to become closer and closer to family members, this is a book that I think will provide value for many families for years to come.