KC DOG BLOG

Top 5 +1 for December 2010

The Top 5 is my monthly countdown of the 5 most popular posts for the month based on numbers from Google Analytics. The +1 gives me a chance to highlight a post that may not have been as popular, but I wish it would have been. 

1) Ethical dilemma at the ASPCA that no one seems to be talking about -- the ASPCA hired Terry Mills, a law enforcement officer that acknowledged fighting multiple dogs in order to go under-cover in order to catch other dog fighters - -making me ponder if the ASPCA is more concerned about the welfare of animals, or catching bad guys (and there is a difference).

2) When has rescue been accomplished? -- Is it when animals are removed from a horrible situation, or when the animals actually find homes?

3) Denver Attorney "Projecting who migh sue us is something with some sensitivity around it" -- Denver blatantly disregards the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Department of Justice's Decision that the city cannot discriminate against service dogs based on breed.

4) New Dog Bite Study from HCUP and some thoughts on the media coverage of it -- my thoughts on a seemingly solid study on dog bites and how the author, and the media, tried to make into a hysteria over major increases in dog bites.

5) Burning a bridge vs building one - Kansas City, KS began door-to-door sweeps giving hefty fines to people who are not obeying their mandatory spay/neuter ordinance -- even though most are not able to comply due to costs -- and the fines are making it worse, not better.

+1) An Overnight success -- when UPAWS made a decision to institute the elements of the no kill equation, their success in eliminated killing was almost instant. 

Have a safe New Years.

Pressure on the UK mounting over Dangerous Dogs ACt

In 1991, the UK passed the Dangerous Dogs Act -- which put bans on four breeds of dogs: American Pit Bull Terriers, Fila Brasilero, Dogo Argentino and Japanese Tosas.

But in the wake of yet another fatal dog attack in the country, the pressure to repeal the ban is mounting.

In fairness, it is not just over the fatal dog attack. Attacks in the UK have gone up tremendously over the past 15 years.  The Bristol area the UK has seen dog bites quintuple over the past 4 years (although the starting number was fairly small). Attacks requiring hospitalization in the whole country have gone up 66% over the past 15 years.

The whole mess has led to calls for the UK to repeal the Dangerous Dogs Act. The nation has noted that in many ways, the ban has actually increased the demand for the banned breeds and that the problems continue to go up.  As one MP said:

"We think it is necessary to move away from breed-specific legislation to anti-social pets, so dog protection notices can be applied to the owner as well as the dog.  It's about trying to nip this in the bud before there are any injuries or fatalities."

The Animal Welfare Minister Jim Pace agrees:

"The issue of dangerous dogs is not a problem of dangerous breeds, but also one of bad owners.  They need to be held to account and stopped from ruining people's lives." 

The media is also calling for changes. One columnist from the London Telegraph, the nation's largest newspaper, is calling for the law to be changed. 

"When 'dangerous breeds' are banned, the response of those who desire to have large muscular dogs that look intimidating is predictable: they seek out a similar type dog that is not on the list of dangerous breeds.....the latest 'dog attack' episode clearly shows the uselessness of breed specific legislation."

A recent report Department for Enviornment, Food and Rural Affairs, DEFRA, released their findings, and now 88% of the responses from over fifty organizations (including the British Veterinary Medical Association, Metropolitan Police Service and National Dog Warden Association) say they don't believe the current legislation is effective at protecting the public, and 71% believe BSL should be repealed.

The UK is starting to feel the pressure and the public is realizing the failure of the legislation. Hopefully they will see that the law is failing, and put into place a solid, breed-neutral law that will target aggressive dogs, based on behavior, that will work on removing dangerous dogs regardless of what breed of dog it is.  Many other countries in Europe have repealed their breed-specific laws and replaced them with breed neutral laws - - including Scotland (to the best of their abilities, they are still technically under the Dangerous Dogs Act), Italy, and The Netherlands.

Smart governments are willing to learn from their mistakes, recognize ineffective policy, and change their laws.  We'll see if "smart" applies to the UK governing body.  The pressure from the public is on.

Fight over Missouri's puppy mills continues -- and learning from the experiences of others

The fight over Missouri's puppy mills continues.

Last month, the residents in the state of Missouri voted in favor of a ballot initiative sponsored by HSUS (and others) that put harsher restrictions on 'puppy mills' in the state.

However, at least some members of the legislature appear to be primed to repeal the initiative. According to Sen. Bill Stouffer (a Republican), said of Prop B, "It does nothing to solve the problem of dog abuse. It only targets licensed dealers, and people that are ignoring the law now are not affected by this."

Another Senator, Democrat Tom Shively thinks the repeal will pass, stating that he thinks there are things the assembly can do to make the situation better for animals. "We need to stiffen the penalties and increase the fines" on breeders who fly under the radar and don't get licensed.

Meanwhile, the Missourians for the Protection of Dogs organization that promoted Prop B has purchased 6 billboards around the state capitol with a picture of a puppy and message "Missouri voters have spoken, will you listen?"

I've written a lot about the problems with Prop B -- that it doesn't focus on the core problem of lack of enforcement (nearly half of the state's estimated commercial breeding opearations are not licensed, and only about 60% of the license operations are inspected annually, even though the state requires an annual inspection).

Prop B never addressed the enforcement issues. The problem could have been addressed by having higher fines for unlicensed operations (which right now are only brought up to compliance vs fined) and by making it easier to heavily fine (and eventually shut down) habitually negligent offenders of laws and funneling all of the money to more enforcement.  Like most states, Missouri is looking at cutting tens of millions of dollars from the budget - -not ADD programs, which causes a problem when the financing problem was never addressed.

So while the fight goes on in Jefferson City about the future of Prop B, the state is looking for revenue streams for enforcement.

Retaliation?

In what seems like was probably a response to the proposal and passage of Prop B, the state legislature passed a new law. The law was simple, but has caused a bit of a stir recently in the animal welfare community. Essentially, the bill removed the exemption for paying licensing fees to the state for rescue organizations. So while all rescues used to not have to pay to be licensed, without the exemption, the rescue groups now have to pay $100 per year for a license -- with an additional $1 per saved dog fee. The purpose of the extra $1 fee is to be able to charge larger rescues more than small ones -- which makes sense (and is how the licensing works for breeders).  However, while I don't have a major problem with the $100 license fee (because it's minimal and wil go toward enforcement), I don't like disincenting people from adopting out animals.  It doesn't make sense for it to be free to KILL a dog, but a fee to save one.

Many in the rescue community (rightfully?) see this as a "gotcha" by the state legislature in a sort of retaliation for their support of Prop B.  But the response is actually sadly predictable.

Learning from Others

A couple of years ago, Washington state passed a similar law to Prop B that targeted commercial breeders with, among other things, minimum kennel size requirements (this proposed bill was nearly identical to Missouri's Prop B, but had some changes made to it along the way).  Then, two years later, the legislature looked at a law that would put the same kennel size requirements on the all dogs in the state - so in essence, making all rescues, shelters and even individual owners, have minimum kennel sizes if their dogs were kenneled "for the majority of the day". 

While the law would have been very difficult for most shelters and rescues to comply with, it could also have impacted even individual owners who kenneled their dogs while at work -- depending on how "majority of the day" was defined. 

So while losing the exemption was seen by some in Missouri as a "gotcha", losing exemptions is almost exactly what you'd expect if you followed the passage of the same law in Washington only a year earlier.

Pennsylvania

A couple of years ago, the state of Pennsylvania also passed a law targeting 'puppy mills'.  Their law also did not include a funding source.  However, realizing that enforcement was an issue, the state allowed for non-profit groups to be "initiate criminal proceedings" in the state -- including being able to get search warrants.

The results, sadly, have been not very good.

As the state has cut funding toward enforcement, the entire burden of enforcing these cruelty laws is falling almost entirely on the non-profits.  Not only that, but the state has also quit funding the educational component for the non-profits.  So now, numerous criminal cases are being botched by inexperienced non-profit workers, leading to few prosecutions and the organizations and leading to them not being reimbursed for the substantial costs of holding these animals during the criminal proceedings.

So the end result, according to animal welfare people in Pennsylvania, is tha they are getting fewer prosecutions.

Learning from others (2) and next steps

If we're going to make progress in Missouri, it seems like we're going to have to find some middle ground and find a way to increase enforcement.  This may mean scrapping many of the components of Prop B and starting from scratch -- with higher licensing fees for breeders and higher fines (and punishiment) for people operating outside of the current laws.  All of this money should then be funneled (mandated by law) to law enforcement for these laws (all of these, BTW, are recommendations from the State Auditor's report or the Better Business Bureau recommendations).

Without the funding piece, any law wil fail, because given our government financial woes right now, there is no way animal welfare will get prioritized over other social programs that are being significantly cut.

This may also involve small licensing fees for shelters and rescues (who also benefit from better enforcement).

We have to come up with a workable solution that both the breeding community and the rescue community can somewhat agree on. The continual political "gotcha" game between the two sides will no doubt leave animals dead in the crossfire.

When has "rescue" become accomplished?

Shirley over at YesBiscuit! is working her butt off trying to find the whereabout of 44 dogs that were "rescued" by the Humane Society of the United States from an apparent hoarding operation in Alabama.

Of the 44 dogs, 10 went to Lincoln County (NC) Animal Services -- a gassing shelter with a high kill rate. Three were killed almost instantly.

Four went to the Humane Society of Charlotte.

Three went to the Charlotte-Mecklenburg shelter -- whose problems are well documented.

Ten went PAWS in Atlanta.

Seventeen are still unaccounted for -- although some likely went to a humane society in Nashville.

As she goes through looking for the dogs, I think it poses an interesting question -- such as, when does 'rescue happen'?

1) Does it happen the second the animals are removed from a horrible situation?  Even if they are then shuffled on to high-kill shelter facilities?

2) Or does it only happen once the animals find homes?

I think one could make an case for either (or both) being "rescue" -- although I would think that the general public would answer #2 -- given that most "animal rescue" organizations focus almost solely on #2.

This isn't of course the first time that HSUS has claimed that they 'rescued' animals from bad situations only to then either promote or place the animals in equally bad situations.

When HSUS raised money after the rescue of the Mike Vick Dogs, they simultaneously lobbied to have them killed.

Earlier this year, HSUS helped "save" nearly  200 dogs from a 'puppy mill' in South Dakota -- but then left town, leaving the overwhelmed local rescue to handle all of the dogs on their own, which ended up leading to at least 28 of the dogs getting sick and dying.

And following Hurricane Katrina, literally hundreds of dogs that were "saved" in a makeshift rescue facility in Gonzales, LA were shipped to organizations around the country and ended up dead in those shelters - -while HSUS raised money for their rescue efforts.

So while technically they did "rescue" the animals from horrible situations, were the animals really 'rescued"?  And how much responsibility does HSUS as an organization have in positive outcomes for the animals -- or does that responsibility rest solely on the organization that takes in the animals?

I think it's an important conversation to have in light of how much money the general public gives to HSUS for the 'rescue' of these animals....

So go over to YesBiscuit! and join the conversation...I think she's working on a really noble cause in helping find out the truth about the final outcomes of these dogs.

 

 

Weekly Roundup - Christmas week, 2010

Kind of a soft news week this week...it's amazing how much less there is to write about when city council's aren't in session and the reporters aren't out creating as much news.  It was also an understandably slower blog week this week. But still, some interesting news to cover.

Meanwhile, this should be a pretty active week on the blog -- I'll have a lot of year-end wrap-up material and a few other things that have been on hold until I could get the time to get to them, so hopefully I'll be able to get most of that up in the next week or two.  Hope everyone had a safe holiday.

Cities and Laws

Activists in Great Falls, MT are asking if they can have more involvement in the opearations of the local city animal shelter.

Smithville, OH has proposed a potential ban on 'pit bulls'.

In the "laws are arbitrary" category, the New London, MO city council has declared an American Bulldog to be in violation of the city's ban on 'pit bulls'. When cities can make up what dogs qualify for the ordinance and which ones don't as they go along, the law is, indeed, arbitrary.

Dog Bites and attacks

Dog attacks are very rare compared to the total number of dogs that live in the US (and internationally).  However, some times they do happen. When they do, it is always a variety of different breeds and breed types that are involved.  If we want to decrease the number of dog attacks, we must put our focus on the root causes of attacks, and not on the breeds.

A New Zealand woman was attacked by a dog that is believed to be a Rottweiler.

An 85 year old woman in Lady's Island, SC was attacked by a neighbor's American Bulldog mix. The dog's owner says the dog is a sweet dog, but that he knew the dog was often aggressive toward bicycles....and the 85 year old woman was attacked while riding a bicycle. If you dog has known circumstantial aggression issues, you need to train your dog to be able to overcome them.

A woman in the UK is dead after being attacked and killed by a Belgian Mastiff. The UK has a breed ban on four different breeds of dogs that is nearly 20 years old, but their country has been plagued by an increase in major dog bites. The country needs to change the law to focus on a dog's (and owner's) behavior, not breed. Belgian Mastiff's are not covered under the national law. The dog's owner has been arrested in conjunction with the attack.

A 2 year old Riverside, CA girl was attacked by the family's American Bulldog.  The girl was with her aunt and grandmother in the room when the adults report that the dog began looking at the young girl "oddly." Parents would do well to recognize warning sings like "odd" looks that can help them divert a dog's attention and avoid a possible situation because of it.  At least one media outlet tried to turn the event into an unprovoked pit bull attack.

A San Jose woman was attacked by two 'pit bulls' in that were roaming a neighborhood unattended.

A toddler in Australia received 300 hundred stitches in his head after being attacked by the faimly's Maremma Sheep Dog.

A 4 year old Covington, OK boy was badly attacked by a Bull Mastiff.

A 5 year old Texas boy lost a finger when it was bit off by a Labrador Retriever that he was playing with. While I realize that incidents like this can happen when young kids play with animals with teeth, it is funny that the Lab gets credit for 'playing' when a toddler loses a digit, but a lot of other breeds would not get the benefit of the doubt -- as evidenced by this story in which an 8 month old 'pit bull' puppy 'attacked' a young boy causing only 11 stitches to the boy's face. 

A nine year old Gilbert, AZ boy was bitten by a Labradoodle at the local dog park.

Two Bullmastiffs that were involved in an attack of a 10 year old boy that climbed the fence into the backyard where they were contained were returned to their owner last week -- and a week later were involved in another aggressive incident.  The dogs pinned a woman's Australian Shepherd to the ground and were aggressive toward the dog's owner -- although neither were hurt in the incident.

A Canton, OH toddler was hopsitalized after she was bitten by the neighbor's Chow-mix. The dog's owner was bringing the dog into the house where the the child was and tripped over a ball -- when he stumbled to catch himself, he stepped on the dog's foot and the dog bit the girl.  The dog is wisely going to be allowed to stay with his owners as the dog clearly isn't a'aggressive', but was reacting to being hurt.

Miscellaneous

Animals are more like us than we give them credit for some times, as is the case of some young chimps play with sticks in the same way that human children play with dolls.

A mother 'pit bull' that was ready to nurse has 'adopted' a litter of German Shepherd-mix puppies that were orphaned when their mother was hit by a car.

A Lawrence area group aims to help dogs by helping people -- a solid article about our friends at the Game Dog Guardian.

This is a great story from out of Carney, MD of a badly neglected 'pit bull' that is doing well and gets a new shot at life.

Therapist uses dog for assistance for helping patients with a variety of problems.

Blogs worth reading

Rethinking spay/neuter - -I don't necessarily agree with all of their conclusions here, but this is overall a very accurate and thought-provoking post from Time 4 Dogs.

Dogs don't like hugs & kisses -- some great kids and safety advice from Doggone Safe.  Respecting how animals want to be communicated with is important -- and tip, they don't necessarily communicate the way we do.

Postion on Michael Vick's Desire for a Family Dog - the Executive Director at the Washington Animal Rescue League who's organization, at the time he was there, cared for 11 of Vick's former dogs comments on Vick's desire to own a dog again.

Michael Vick's True Message to Young People, "I got away with it and you can too" -- from Michael Mountain.

The whole "Mike Vick wants a dog" thing -- from Save a Pit Bull, Save the World

Did $50,000 to HSUS from Michael Vick's team influence its support? -- Seattle DogSpot has thoughts.

Top 10 quotes in 2010 - some great stuff here from Sarge the Elderbull.

Another 'oops' killing at Charlotte Mecklenberg AC&C --  YesBiscuit!

New Veterinary oath: What do you think?  - The Pet Connection takes a look at the new veterinary oath that now includes a commitment to the welfare of animals (not just health). The move is one that can (hopefully) start making the veterinary a community more of a leader in the animal welfare movement...

Wayne Pacelle gloats about winning a $250,000 grant from the Pepsi Refresh Grant project....claiming that everyone who was opposed to them winning was a puppy miller or cockfighter -- instead of realizing that a large number of people in the animal welfare community wanted the money to go to an organizatin that needed the money, instead of one that already takes in over $100 million a year.

Pack aggression and the media microscope -- Bad Rap looks at two similar attacks in the Bay area that included dogs acting out in Packs, and how the media coverage of the two incidents were covered very differently by the area media based on the types of dogs involved.

Attention canine, halt in the name of the law or I'l shoot - YesBiscuit! takes on the growing problem of police unnecessarily shooting dogs. The Seattle Dog Spot says this is because police are only trained for encounters with suspects dogs.

 Abuse of the Family Dog -- some great dog training advice from Sam the Dog Trainer

Merry Christmas from the KC Dog Blog

It's Christmas Eve -- and the majority of the midwest is getting a little dusting of snow - just enough to make it a white Christmas.

So from my pack to yours, I wish everyone a Merry Christmas -- or other holiday season and hope everyone and their family remains safe over the holidays from their travels.

 Thanks for reading. Thanks for spending a few minutes of your time here each day.

 

Ethical dilemma at the ASPCA that no one seems to be talking about

I've been holding off on writing about this -- because, honestly, I have a collection of thoughts and not a lot of conclusions.

Yet, while there has been a LOT of discussion on the internet about HSUS's embarrassing support of Michael Vick, the ASPCA has quietly gone about it's own (what I think is) ethical dilemma...and no one is talking about it.

Last week, the ASPCA announced that it was appointing Terry Mills as their Animal Fighting Specialist -- to provide training to law inforcement officers on how to investigate "blood sports" such as dog fighting and cock fighting.

For those who are unfamiliar with Terry Mills, you may not recognize his name, but you will be familiar with his story.

A couple of months ago, a story was launched in several alternative newspapers around the country about Mills. In 2008, Mills worked for the FBI on their domestic-terrorism task force.  As a part of the job, Mills spent 18 months under-cover in order to break up what became the largest dog-fighting bust in the history of the United States -- getting a couple of dozen people arrested, and saving more than 500 dogs from their dog fightin operations.

As a part of the undercover operation, Mills and his team became a part of the dog fighting culture...and as a part of that, began training, and fighting, their own dogs.

At the time, and even now, I wrestle with the ethics of their decision. While breaking up the dog fighting operation is certainly commendable, it's extremely hard for me to stomach the idea of the "good guys" training dogs to fight and forcing them to endure such torture.  It just seems as if there had to be a better way without purposefully putting more dogs in the ring.

At the time when the article came out, Donna over at Bad Rap, who had some insider knowledge on the topic, posted her thoughts on situation:

"This topic has been especially hard for us. Yes, the investigators need a way in to the fights so they can gather the evidence needed to bring the f*ckers down, but when do you turn into one of the f*ckers in the meantime? It's been hard to reconcile."

And in the comments, I thought she had a great insight:

"Catching the bad gys can't be the motive in these campaigns....preventing the suffering of the victims HAS to be the motive if we're ever going to be able to turn the tide for these dogs."

Apparently the ASPCA has reconciled this for themselves - -and have not only embraced Mills, but have gone so far as to hire him.

"Terry's background will be a vital resource in training law enforcement to combat this cruel form of animal abuse," said senior director of ASPCA Field Investigations and Response Tim Rickey.

What the ASPCA didn't note in their press release was that Mills' background involved actually FIGHTING the dogs.

I'm sure Mills' knowledge of dog fighting will be valuable for the ASPCA as a training tool....but I'm also a bit concerned about what type of 'training' will be taking place here....and I find it a bit hard to believe that the ASPCA would hire someone who was involved in such a cruel, and ethically questionable activity (even if the intentions were good), without making any attempt to address the topic.

The whole thing is even more concerning when this occurred at the same time as HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle is out promoting Mike Vick's ability to own a dog again.  It just makes me question at what point did the animal rights organizations be so quick to embrace those that have been involved in cruelty to animals that they're out hiring them and promoting them?

 

 

Weekly Roundup - Week Ending 12/19/10

A lot of interesting news, notes and blogs this week, and because I'm already a day late on this, I'm going to dive right in.

Cities and Laws

Sheboygan, WI is looking a new dangerous dog ordinance that will focus on aggressive dogs based on their behavior, not on what they look like.

Macon, GA is also looking at an updated dangerous dog law that will focus on a dog's behavior, not it's breed.

The city council in Austin, TX passed an ordinance that puts significant requirements on retail pet sales.  For a variety of reasons I'm not a fan of these types of ordinances....and in Austin's case, there actually wasn't a retail pet store in the city to ban.  Many feel the ordinance was aimed at Pet Land -- a pet store that amid public pressure closed down earlier this year.

The Denver Daily News - Is the city bullying the disabled?  The answer is yes.

Dog Bites and Attacks

Dogs are amazingly safe. However, sometimes due to poor ownership, or poor decisions by victims (or guardians of victims), attacks do occur. When they do, a wide variety of different types of dogs are involved - -which is why focusing on the reasons for the attack, and not breeds, makes for better animal welfare policy.

A Port St. Lucie jogger and his son were attacked by a free-roaming Lab/Chow mix.  The man ended up having to kill the dog in order to keep it from continuing with the attack.

A six month old infant was rushed to the hospital wit broken ribs and a lacerated liver after a neighbor's Great Dane snatched the infant out of the mother's arms and ran 100 yards away with the infant in its mouth.

A woman in Bangor, ME is still afraid after she was attacked by the neighbor's German Shepherd mix that attacked her and her dog while out on a walk.

An 18 month old Port St. Lucie girl was bitten in the face by the family's Bull Terrier.

A Rhodesian Ridgeback in the UK has been ordered to be killed after it brutally attacked a 3 year old girl in a local pub (there are a lot of unanswered questions that should be asked after that last sentence). The UK has a breed ban on four breeds of dogs....

Speaking of the UK, a four year old girl finally returned to school this week after missing nearly a month of school after being attacked by her mother's former step father's Husky-type dog.

Also in the UK, a judge's dog apparently attacked a 20 year old student that was out sunbathing in the garden adjoining the two properties between her parent's home and the judge's.  The dog was described as a German Shepherd.

A six year old Quebec girl was brutally attacked by four Husky type dogs that jumped on the little girl as she was walking home from school.

A Seattle area woman was severely attacked by a German Shepherd that attacked her and her Welsh terrier.

A California woman suffered several pretty bad bites on her legs, face and arms after two off-leash Labradors attacked her and her Jack Russell Terrier. She says the attack could have been much worse had someone not come to her aid to help. The person who helped was also bitten.

A Florida man was severely attacked by a stray dog he took in only two days before. The dog, described as a 'pit bull', appeared to have been startled by the man and attacked him. Most of the time, attacks like this don't happen, but if you do take in stray dogs, be sure to take extra percautions in the getting-to-know you phase.

Positive Press

Part 3 of an excellent series done by a writer from the Akron Beacon. It is amazing what can be learned when reporters are actually willing to dig beyond the hype and the catchy headline and look for accurate information. Part 3 focuse on th failures of BSL and the successes of breed breed neutral legislation elsewhere.

I don't usually post opinion columns, but this one is extremely good and very detailed: Bad Pet ownership to blame for Pit Bull Ban

A happy tale of two pit bulls in Buffalo found homes together

Miscellaneous

Rescuers in Harris County, OH are calling for major shelter reforms. More here.

Tompkins County, NY - a shelter that has been No Kill for nearly a decade -- just received its largest ever donation, all during a major economic recession in this country.

More than 1,200 dogs were killed at a northwest Kansas breeding facility after an outbreak of distemper was linked to the operation. There is no word on whether any of the killed dogs actually HAD distemper, only that the link caused the operator to kill all of the animals.

The Regina Humane Society has become a safe haven for dogs that have to flea Ontario under the state's ban on 'pit bull' type dogs.

No Kill News

An article from Louisville Magazine on Shelby County, KY and it's success at becoming No Kill -- having killed only 6% of the animals they've impounded this year.

Media Hysteria

In Gallup, NM -- a mostly rural area on tribal lands  -- there was a story about a man who was allegedly mauled by a pack of dogs in the area. Sheriff's deputies found a pack of skinny, hungry dogs gnawing on the man's dead body.  Deputies believe the man could have been hit by a car based on the tire marks and vehicle debris found at the scene...however, the "dogs maul man" is the headline from the majority of the area media outlets.

Mike Vick Follow Up

I Can't believe I'm including this as a header, but there has been a LOT of feedback on Vick's announcement that he wants to own another dog again, and HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle's announcement that he thinks Vick would be a good dog owner.  Anyway, a lot of feedback out there, so I'm going to post a few:

A Political Cartoon from the Atlanta Journal Constitution

Another political Cartoon - -sorry, I can't remember the source

Humane Watch has a collection of blogs and points of view

My questions for Michael Vick - -from Michael Mountain

A Poll from USA Today (as I'm typing this, 72% of people don't think he should ever own a dog again).

Blogs worth reading

Stop calling it "euthanasia" -  The Pet Connection tells a story about real euthanasia and why it is offensive to call killing for space 'euthanasia'

The Truth Will Out - Winograd takes a look at the changes since his Redemption Book Tour in 2007 -- and how the truth about the success of the no kill movement is winning out over the archaic views of pet overpopulation.

Shelters doing good, Part 4 - -from For teh Pit Bulls.  Mall storefronts for the holidays, set your price adoptions and increasing volunteers - -all great things

Lincoln County Shelter Above the Law? -- a good expose' on the failings of the shelter in Lincoln, Co NC. 

Five reasons pet limit laws are a bad idea - -a very good post from Julie Castle at Best Friends.  She's right on all fronts.  The only disappointing part of the article is that just last month, Castle wrote another blog posting in favor of Missouri's Prop B -- which set an arbitrary limit on the number of animals someone can breed in this state. It was a bad idea for all of the reasons Castle notes a month later.

Winograd names this year's Henry Bergh Leadership Award Winners for commitment to ending systematic killing of animals in shelters.

Cat laws are unenforceable -- Saving Pets has a great overview on why so many cat laws are not enforceable

Healthy, normal puppy flunks shelter "behavior evaluation" -- by the Pet Connection. Yet another example of why behavior evaluations should be more geared toward figuring out what issues the dog needs help with vs using them to determine life or death.

Update: Three Month old Houston area infant dead from dog attack

Updated: According to the child's mother, she apparently brought one of the Rottweilers indoors in order to give the dog a bath, and during the process, put the washer/granite in front of the door. When she was bathing the dog, the other Rottweiler (allegedly) came in and attacked the infant. However, because the door was unsecured, Deputy Thomas Gilliland said that it may be impossible to tell which dog was responsible for mauling the child.

The dogs have been described as "rottweilers, Chows and large mixed breeds", "4 Rottweilers and 5 Rottweiler mixes" and a variation of Rottweiler/pit bull mixes -- the dogs in the picture associated with this article are large, black mixed breed dogs. So based on that, i'm going with a mix of Rottweilers and mixed breed dogs -- but can't help but find humor in breed ID issues when pit bull mixes and chow mixes are now interchangable in appearance.

The child has been identified as Janet Vaughn.

*********

A three month old baby boy is tragically dead today after being attacked by a dog, owned by the family, yesterday afternoon.

According to the most recent reports, the family owned 9 dogs that all live outdoors. At around 4:00 yesterday afternoon, the woman was in the bathroom while the infant was in a swing in the living room. One of the dogs owned by the family, got through the outside door and got into the living room and attacked the infant. The mother had thought she had secured the door by putting a washing machine and a marble slab behind the door, but the dogs managed to push the door open any way and got to the child.  It does seem odd to me that there was apparently no latch on the door to the outside of the home.

The child was declared dead at the hospital shortly after arrival.

The two dogs involved in the incident were described as a Rottweiler weighing 'at least 150 lbs' and anohter one weighing an estimated '200 lbs'.  These sound abnormally large for Rottweilers....and may be slightly exaggerated by authorities.

Police removed all of the animals from the family....the dogs are being listed as 4 Rottweilers and 5 mixed breeds, although only the two Rottweilers ever made it into the home.  While so me of the reports are calling the dogs "family dogs", it is unlikely that at 3 months old, any of them had had much, if any, socialization with the young infant.

While there are a small number of people who are pushing for a statewide law in Texas that would target 'pit bull' type dogs, their hysteria-creation only continues to put the emphasis on dog breeds instead of circumstances when it comes to dog attacks....and the importance of properly socializing dogs with newborns in a household and to provide adequate separation between the dogs and the child if there is no supervision.

My heart goes out to the family in this horribly attack.  I will post more details as they become available.

This story was covered by about 30 media outlets....all in the state of Texas.

One story, four points of view, and many happy endings

Earlier this week, I posted about the nearly overnight success that the Upper Penninsula Animal Welfare Shelter saw upon making the decision to pursue no kill initiatives to decrease (and end) the killing in their shelter. While some animals still need to be euthanized due to behavior or health reasons, none is killed for space.

YesBiscuit! has four people's stories from UPAWS. They were there during the transformation of the shelter - and each of them has their own point of view on the transformation.  But for all of them it was an extremely positive experience.

It appears that there are a small number of outsiders who want to claim that No Kill cannot happen -- or that it is somehow, secretly, a horrible situation for the animals. And yet, when you hear testimonials like these, or from advocates like Valerie Hayes, you realize that for the people involved, it is a wonderful feeling not having to kill animals on a daily basis because the shelter is "full".

Go, read their stories. See the transformation. And realize it can be done.  There are too many happy endings to be had for it not to.