America’s Pets Packing On The Pounds

Over 45% of dogs and 58% of cats in the United States are estimated to be overweight or obese according to the Association for Pet Obesity Prevention (APOP). The 2009 National Pet Obesity Awareness Day Study, which included more than 600 dogs and cats, found that from 2007 to 2009, the number of overweight dogs and cats increased by 2% and 5%, respectively. Obesity in pets is typically defined as 30% above normal weight.
“Pet obesity is now the biggest health threat to pets in our country,” says lead researcher Dr. Ernie Ward and author of “Chow Hounds.” “The connection between obesity and illness and injury make it the number one medical issue seen in today’s veterinary hospitals.”
Obesity rates in cats were the highest at 21.4%; dogs were slightly better off with 8.6% classified as obese by veterinary clinics. According to the study, 6.7 million dogs and 20 million cats are estimated to be obese.
“The frightening fact is that pet owners are increasingly classifying their overweight pets as ‘normal,’ making the problem more difficult to address,” says Ward. “I believe owners have this misperception because they are surrounded by fatter and fatter pets.”
When asked, 33% of dog owners and 46% of cat owners with overweight pets incorrectly identified their pet as being of a normal weight; 25% of dog owners with obese dogs reported their dog was normal while 40% of obese cat owners thought their cat was a normal weight.

DrErnieWard.com, Dr. Ernie Ward, APOP founder and author of “Chow Hounds.”

Owners of Labrador Retrievers and Golden Retrievers were more likely to claim that their dog was a normal weight when it was, in reality, overweight. The study found that in general, owners of small breed dogs were more likely to correctly identify their dog as overweight than owners of large breed dogs.
Treats continue to be the main culprit for excess weight. According to Ward, 90% of dog owners and 54% of cat owners responded that they regularly gave their pets treats. “Even tiny treats can pack a punch,” warns Ward. He calls today’s treats “kibble crack” because so many brands are overloaded with sugar and fat. “Modern treats are literally rewiring our pets’ behavioral responses and creating cravings that go far beyond what is normal in many pets,” he says.
Ward stresses that pet owners need to understand the impact that treats have on their pets’ weight. For example, he equates a pig ear given to a 40-pound dog to drinking six, 12-ounce colas. “No one would sit down and drink six sodas at one time, yet that’s exactly what we’re doing when we give our pets these snacks,” says Ward. “And we rarely stop at one treat.”
Learn more about pet obesity and how to tell if your pet is packing on the pounds on the APOP website. To read a recent review of “Chow Hounds” in USA Today, click here.

Posted By: Amelia Glynn (Email, Facebook) | March 31 2010 at 01:40 PM

sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/pets/detail?entry_id=60318&tsp=1#ixzz0jnicPUED


Turtle Won’t Take Cat’s ‘No’ For An Answer


Supreme Allows Dogfighting Videos

CNN
The Supreme Court has struck down a federal law designed to stop the sale and marketing of videos showing dogfights and other acts of animal cruelty, saying it is an unconstitutional violation of free speech.
The 8-1 decision was a defeat for animal rights groups and congressional sponsors of the unusual legislation.
The specific case before the court dealt with tapes showing pit bulldogs attacking other animals and one another in staged confrontations.
The justices Tuesday concluded the scope and intent of the decade-old statute was overly broad.
“The First Amendment itself reflects a judgment by the American people that the benefits of its restrictions on the government outweigh its costs,” said Chief Justice John Roberts. He concluded Congress had not sufficiently shown “depictions” of dogfighting were enough to justify a special category of exclusion from free speech protection.
The high court threw out the conviction of Robert Stevens, a Pittsville, Virginia, man who sold videos through his business, Dogs of Velvet and Steel. According to court records, undercover federal agents found he was advertising his tapes in Sporting Dog Journal, an underground magazine on illegal dogfighting.
Among the products Stevens advertised was “Catch Dogs,” featuring pit bulls chasing wild boars on organized hunts and a “gruesome depiction of a pit bull attacking the lower jaw of a domestic farm pig,” according to the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania-based appeals court that ruled on the case earlier.
Stevens was charged in 2004 with violating interstate commerce laws by selling depictions of animal cruelty. He was later sentenced to 37 months in prison, and promptly appealed. That sentence was put on hold pending resolution of this appeal.
He argued his sentence was longer than the 14 months given professional football player Michael Vick, who ran an illegal dogfighting ring.
It was the first prosecution in the United States to proceed to trial under the 1999 law.
The video marketer is not related to Justice John Paul Stevens, who turned 90 Tuesday. The court made no mention of the milestone as it held a two-hour public session.
Nearly every state and local jurisdiction have their own laws banning mistreatment of wild and domesticated animals, and usually handle prosecutions of animal cruelty.
Several media organizations had supported Stevens, worrying the federal law could implicate reports about deer hunting, and depictions of bullfighting in Ernest Hemingway novels.
Roberts agreed, saying, “We read to create a criminal prohibition of alarming breadth.”
“Jurisdictions permit and encourage hunting, and there is an enormous national market for hunting-related depictions in which a living animal is intentionally killed,” said Roberts. “An otherwise-lawful image of any of these practices, if sold or possessed for commercial gain within a state that happens to forbid the practice, falls within the prohibition of .”
During oral arguments in October, the justices offered a number of wide-ranging hypotheticals over what the law could forbid, including: fox hunts, pate de foie gras from geese, cockfighting, bullfighting, shooting deer out of season, even Roman gladiator battles.
Only Justice Samuel Alito dissented in the case, and he focused on one of the most disturbing aspects raised in the appeal, the marketing of so-called “crush” videos, in which women – with their faces unseen – are shown stomping helpless animals such as rabbits to death with spiked-heel shoes or with their bare feet.
“The animals used in crush videos are living creatures that experience excruciating pain. Our society has long banned such cruelty,” he said. The courts, he said, have “erred in second-guessing the legislative judgment about the importance of preventing cruelty to animals.”
Roberts suggested a law specifically banning crush videos might be valid, since it was narrowly tailored to a specific type of commercial enterprise.
Alito noted that would not help dogs forced to fight each other, where, he said, “the suffering lasts for years rather than minutes.”
The government had argued a “compelling interest” in stopping people who would profit from dog attack tapes and similar depictions.
If the law had been upheld, it would have been only the second time the Supreme Court had identified a form of speech undeserving of protection by the First Amendment. The justices in 1982 banned the distribution of child pornography.
news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/20/supreme-court-strikes-down-law-banning-dogfight-videos/?hpt=T2


7 Animals Being Eaten To Extinction

With human populations increasing worldwide and consumers demanding rare and exotic meals, endangered animals are being hunted for food at an increasingly alarming rate. Due to such a diverse international culture and rich tastes, the United States is one of the largest consumers of wildlife, with mass amounts of it illegally smuggled into the country every year.
Take a look at 7 animals that are threatened with extinction if humans don’t stop eating them–you might be surprised at what you find!

Pangolin

The pangolin is a family of 8 species, also known as the scaly anteater, native to tropical regions of Asia and Africa. Large keratin scales cover its skin—a mammal adaptation unique to the pangolin. Unfortunately, the pangolin’s existence is threatened due to heavy consumption primarily in Africa, China, and Indonesia, where not only is the meat considered a delicacy but the pangolin serves as a source for many herbal medicines. The IUCN Red List has classified two species of Pangolin as endangered, with four more listed as near threatened.

Frogs

The entire frog population is being threatened from global trade in frog legs. While definite numbers are hard to track, at least 200 million frogs are consumed every year, though it’s possible that the actual number exceeds over a billion. The Giant Ditch Frog, also known as “Mountain Chicken” for its meat, is an example of a specific species that has been eaten to the point of now being critically endangered.

Monkeys and Apes

“Bush meat”, or meat from wild animals, is a primary source of protein for many people around the world, especially in Africa. Many international markets also consider the wild meat a delicacy. Hunting of various primates, chimpanzees and gorillas among them, has risen considerably due to increased malnutrition in local human populations and the global demand. More than 3.4 million metric tons of this meat is removed yearly from the Congo Basin alone—a 500 million acre region. One known species of monkey has already gone extinct from consumption, and over 300 of the 634 primate species currently face the same fate.

Turtles

Both freshwater and sea turtles have long been hunted for food and use in traditional medicines. As many as 10,000 tons of freshwater turtles are traded for consumption each year in Southeast Asia—a region where more than half the species are endangered. Turtle eggs, obviously essential to the survival of the animal, are consumed regularly. Around 422,000 turtle eggs were traded in Terengganu, Malaysia in 2007, a trade volume that more than twice exceeds the number of green turtle nestings in the area.

Elephants

Though elephants are traditionally known as being hunted for their ivory, many more are now being hunted for their meat. With drastic increases in human population, Africans are finding elephants much more valuable as food, especially with some in the cities considering the meat a delicacy. A single forest elephant in the Congo Basin may earn the seller only $180 for its tusks, but can net around $6,000 for its meat.

Bluefin Tuna

Bluefin tuna is one of the most over fished species in the ocean, and its population has decreased by 80% in the last 40 years as a result. Recent efforts to ban the international trade of the critically endangered species failed. One analysis predicts that at the current rate of consumption, Mediterranean bluefin tuna will be extinct by 2012.

Chinese Giant Salamander

The Chinese Giant Salamander is the largest living amphibian, able to reach up to 6 feet in length. The species is considered critically endangered, as hunting for their meat (considered a delicacy) combined with habitat destruction has led to an 80% decrease in their population since the 1960s.
huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/28/7-animals-being-eaten-to_n_553675.html


Bo Takes Over Press Conference

youtube.com/watch?v=7eZc52bcaaM


Wives Say Pets Are Better Listeners Than Husbands

Associated Press, Sue Manning
Husbands, if you end up in the doghouse, consider it a promotion.
A third of pet-owning married women said their pets are better listeners than their husbands, according to an Associated Press-Petside.com poll released Wednesday. Eighteen percent of pet-owning married men said their pets are better listeners than their wives.
Christina Holmdahl, 40, talks all the time to her cat, two dogs or three horses — about her husband, naturally.
“Whoever happens to be with me when I’m rambling,” said Holmdahl, who’s stationed with her husband at Ft. Stewart in Georgia. “A lot of times, I’m just venting about work or complaining about the husband.”
She thinks everyone should have a pet to talk to like her horse, Whistle, who’s been with her since she was 19.
“We all say things we don’t mean when we are upset about stuff,” she said. “When we have time to talk it out and rationalize it, we can think about it better and we can calm down and see both sides better.”
It would be a toss-up whether Bill Rothschild would take a problem to his wife of 19 years or the animal he considers a pet — a palm-sized crayfish named Cray Aiken. His daughter brought it home four years ago at the end of a second-grade science project.
Rothschild, 44, of Granite Springs, N.Y., considers Cray a better listener than his wife, “absolutely. She doesn’t listen worth anything.” He doesn’t get much feedback from the crustacean, but it’s been a different story over the years with family dogs and cats.
“You definitely feel much more comfortable sharing your problems with them,” he said. “A little lick from a big dog can go a long way.”
Overall, about one in 10 pet owners said they would talk their troubles over with their pets.
The AP-Petside.com poll also found that most people believe their pets are stable and seldom struggle with depression. Just 5% of all pet owners said they had taken an animal to a veterinarian or pet psychologist because it seemed down in the dumps. Even fewer said they’d ever given antidepressants to a pet.
But they weren’t opposed to the idea: 18% of those polled said they were at least somewhat likely to take a pet to a vet or pet psychologist if it was dejected.
When pets become the therapists, the dogs have it. Twenty-five percent of dog owners said their canines listened better than a spouse, while only 14% of cat owners chose the feline.
Ron Farber, 55, of Hoxie, Kan., said it’s easier to talk to his dog Buddy than his wife because “the dog doesn’t have an opinion.”
“I think better out loud. He doesn’t care what you say or do. He looks at you, pays attention, you walk through the problem in your mind and eventually, the answer comes. It’s not as easy when other people are offering opinions,” he said.
Farber would take Buddy to a vet if he needed help, but “I doubt there’s a dog psychologist within 300 miles.”
A pet psychologist is also called a veterinary behaviorist. Veterinarian Karen Sueda, whose office is at the VCA West Los Angeles Animal Hospital, is one of 50 certified by the American Veterinary Medical Assn.
Most of her canine patients have problems with aggression and anxiety, while her cats’ biggest problem is failure to use a litter box, she said.
Karen Manderbachs, 38, has tried drugs for her dog Kensey, a Shiba Inu who is afraid of thunder. “She sits and full body-shakes. She tries to climb the walls, will hide behind the couch. She gets frantic.”

But the first time, the pill didn’t take effect in time. The next, “she was so out of it, I couldn’t do it again.”
Without thunder, Kensey is fine and listens with the other pets — three dogs and a cat — as Manderbachs talks.
The dogs seldom react, “but if I’m upset, if I cry, they will hover around and try, in their own way, to make it better,” said the 38-year-old from Rocky Mount, N.C.
Sueda, the veterinary behaviorist, said she thinks everyone talks to their animals.
“Pets are great because they provide us with unconditional support. They never talk back, never give us the wrong opinion and they are always there for us,” she said. “As much as we love our spouses or significant others, sometimes they are not there, sometimes they have their own thoughts about how we should deal with situations. And sometimes, especially when it’s a husband or male significant other, they want to solve the problem rather than just listening to the problem.”
The AP-Petside.com Poll was conducted April 7-12 and involved landline and cellphone interviews with 1,112 pet owners nationwide. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.
latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2010/04/onethird-of-married-women-say-their-pet-is-a-better-listener-than-their-spouse-poll-finds.html


Meet Me In New Orleans: Dog Travels 1,200 Miles To Find Owner

The Times-Picayune, Richard Thompson
Days after Stephan Soleas packed his bags, and his accordion, and hitched a ride to New Orleans, his 6-year-old Labrador mix went missing near his northern New Mexico home.
In a made-for-TV twist of fate, Soleas, 26, who came to town to make music and visit with friends for a few weeks, got word Feb. 5 that his canine companion, Charlie, had surfaced on Magazine Street — nearly 1,200 miles away from where they parted ways, but only about 50 blocks from where he was now staying.
Not buying it? Neither was Soleas.
Here’s the story behind the mini-drama: A New Orleans couple traveling together in Taos, a small New Mexico town near the noted ski resort, spotted the all-white dog “just kind of running in the street, and they thought it was a stray because it didn’t have a collar,” said Teresa Gernon, who co-owns the Magazine Street Animal Clinic.
When they stopped the car and opened a door, the dog jumped right in, according to Gernon, who described the couple as longtime customers who had “the best of intentions” in helping the dog.
The couple, who, through Gernon, declined to speak with a reporter about finding the dog, spent days combing the Taos neighborhood, searching for the owner or someone who recognized the dog. A nearby veterinary clinic, not equipped with a pet microchip scanner, was no help.
So the couple, charmed by the friendly dog’s antics, scrapped plans for their return flight and rented a car to make the three-day drive back to New Orleans with the dog, whom they coincidentally christened Charlie.
Back at the Magazine Street clinic, the couple discussed plans for adoption, but when Gernon scanned the animal’s chip, Soleas came up as a match. Gernon called him the next day and was amazed to learn that he was staying just a short distance away.
Gernon said the couple took the news well. “I think they were a little sad, and a little shocked, but they were just happy that he was able to get reunited with his family,” she said.
For his part, Soleas, who plays in a band with his wife, Jemma, was relieved to have the dog back. “I’m just grateful for them,” he said. “Charlie could’ve ended up somewhere else.”
Soleas wasn’t surprised that Charlie, who he said is a certified service dog, hopped into a stranger’s car. “It’s kind of this little game that he plays,” he said, “but this time he didn’t have his collar.”
About 4 percent of dogs that arrive at shelters in the United States have been microchipped, according to figures from HomeAgain, a national recovery service. Because the chips are embedded in a pet’s flesh, they can be more effective than collars in reuniting lost pets with their owners.
The Louisiana Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals recommends steps for people who find animals they suspect are strays, including posting “lost pet” notices in the neighborhood, and checking in and reporting the find with local animal shelters, newspapers and online postings.
“I think the moral of the story is that chipping is so important for animals,” said Katherine LeBlanc, spokeswoman for the Louisiana SPCA, which received 171 reports of missing pets in December.
Gernon agreed. “It can happen to anyone, anytime,” she said.
“Any animal’s collar can come right off or be taken off or slip off, and that dog can’t just tell you who it is.”
To Soleas, who said his trip had gotten off to a rocky start before the surprise phone call, Charlie was welcome company during the Carnival season.
“Literally, my dog disappeared 10 days ago in New Mexico,” he said shortly before Barkus rolled through the French Quarter. “He wasn’t supposed to be here, and now I’ve got him walking around with me, just in time for the dog parade.”
nola.com/pets/index.ssf/2010/02/lost_dog_tale_has_happy_ending.html


Four-Legged Therapists Help Heal War Wounds

NPR, by GLORIA HILLARD
Unwanted and abandoned dogs fill shelters nationwide, and not many will get a second chance. But, in California there’s a new organization that is saving one dog at a time and, in the process, helping those who have served.

One of those people is Leif Meisinger, a combat veteran who still wears a military-style buzz cut. His arms are tapestries of colored ink, including a few tattoos he got in Iraq.
The 40-year-old former Army gunner says he has a mild traumatic brain injury after a roadside bomb blast and has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder.
“It was like I was back in Iraq again,” he says. “I was up at night, and I would sleep during the day.”
A few months ago, something in his life changed. Meisinger received a dog from Pets for Vets — a Los Angeles-based organization that matches shelter dogs with veterans like Meisinger who are having a hard time re-entering civilian life.
“I love this dog,”

Meisinger says, “and … I’ve never really been an animal-type person.”
Four-Legged Therapists
The 215-pound soldier plays fetch with the 10-pound dog, Spyder.
“It’s the greatest thing that ever could happen to me … getting the dog,” he says. “Now I’m a social butterfly. Whereas before, I was in my house drinking, just dying … doing nothing.”
The founder of Pets for Vets, Clarissa Black, says adopting an animal can change veterans’ lives.
“It’s like having a best friend,” she says. “It’s like having a companion. Many of these guys, they talk to their dogs. They tell their dogs things they could not tell anyone else — sometimes even their therapists. And together they’re helping each other heal.”
Although her job is extremely rewarding, there are hard parts, too, such as choosing dogs out of the many that need a home.
At Los Angeles County’s high-kill animal shelter, Black looks for a retriever mix. As if reading her mind, dozens of dogs of all sizes try to get her attention.
“It’s very hard to walk down and see all the animals looking at you and knowing they need a home as well,” she says.
Breeding Connections
After volunteering in an animal therapy program at a Veterans Affairs hospital, the 27-year-old certified animal trainer saw a special need and s
tarted Pets for Vets. She’s placed eight dogs since June.
“You can just see the months and years of stress melt away from the first moment that see their dog,” Black says.
She doesn’t have much of a budget. A small band of volunteers and donations help cover her expenses to train the dogs as companion animals.
And for veterans with special emotional needs, Black, who has a degree in Animal Sciences from Cornell, says she teaches the dogs to recognize things like a panic attack by simulating the behavior herself. She then trains the dogs to react with a gentle nudge or kiss.
“It is a very good partner to group therapy or one-on-one therapy,” says Richard Beam, a spokesman for the VA Medical Center in Long Beach, Calif., which has referred patients to the Pets for Vets program. “It’s a perfect augmentation.”
“We’ve seen some of our veterans really feel connected to something,” he says, “whereas without that connection to an animal or a pet, they really did feel alone.”
That was certainly tr
ue for Meisinger, who says he still participates in group therapy at the VA once a week. But he says it’s Spyder that keeps him grounded on the other days.
“I’ll be sitting there, and I have no idea what I’m thinking, I’m just staring at something, and all of a sudden he comes up and starts licking my face, and it’s like ‘Oh whoa’ — he pulls me back,” Meisinger says. “He keeps me from going to that spot that you don’t need to go to.”
npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126162874


Legislation Aims To Decrease Bird-Building Collisions

Wildlife Extra
American Bird Conservancy (ABC) has applauded new legislation that has been introduced by Illinois Congressman Mike Quigley that will help prevent the deaths of millions of birds that collide with windows every year at thousands of federal buildings across the country.
The bill calls for each public building constructed, acquired, or altered by government organisations to incorporate, to the maximum extent possible, bird-safe building materials and design features. The legislation would require GSA to take similar actions on existing buildings, where practicable. The terms “bird-safe building materials and design features” are defined through reference to several publications addressing those topics.
Reflective windows are deadly
“This legislation will absolutely save the lives of millions of birds that mistake objects reflected in window glass, such as habitat and sky, as real. The reflection of a tree limb looks just like a real tree limb to a bird,” said ABC President George Fenwick.
Cost neutral
“I am proud to build upon the work we did in Cook County to promote bird-safe building and spearhead an initiative at the national level that will make sure our tall buildings are not safety hazards. This bill will not only save millions of birds’ lives, but it is also completely cost neutral,” said Congressman Quigley.
“Anyone who has ever spotted a cardinal in their backyard or had watched a hummingbird fly backwards understands how beautiful and important our bird species are to the natural world. I’m proud to work with the American Bird Conservancy to do all we can to make sure they continue to be a part of that world,” Quigley added.
As many a 1 billion birds die every year
“Building collisions are arguably the single greatest man-made killer of birds. From three hundred million to one billion birds or more die each year from collisions with glass on buildings – from skyscrapers to homes. While this legislation is limited to federal buildings, it’s a very good start that perhaps can lead to more widespread applications of bird-friendly designs elsewhere,” Fenwick added.
Lights out
This bill can also be a source for greater implementation nationwide of “Lights Out” campaigns. Under certain conditions, such as clouds or fog, night migrating birds fly lower and can by “trapped” by light, especially on tall structures. We don’t know why but birds are reluctant to fly from light into darkness. Once caught by lighting, birds either collide with the structure or circle it for hours until they drop from exhaustion – easy prey for cats, raccoons, or other predators or scavengers. “This legislation provides the authority for implementing actions that would reduce the number of lights that are wastefully left on, which will save energy and money, as well as birds,” Fenwick added.
The legislation proposed by Congressman Quigley is very similar to legislation he sponsored in 2008 when he was Illinois Cook County Commissioner. That legislation was approved unanimously by the Cook County Board of Commissioners.
ABC is the only national level organization to develop a program to reduce mortality from collisions and has also been promoting legislative solutions as well as voluntary ones, across the US.
$36 billion spent on birding!
According to ABC, Americans spend about $36 billion in pursuit of birding activities. One in five Americans – 48 million people – engages in bird watching, and about 42 percent travel away from home to go birding. Birding activities generate about $4.4 billion in federal tax revenues and about $6.2 billion in state tax revenues, support about 670,000 jobs, and provide $28 billion in employment income.
wildlifeextra.com/go/news/bird-legislation.html#cr


Europeans May Be Eating Cloned Animals

EUbusiness, Testbiotech
Material from cloned animals and their offspring is likely to be on the European market already. There is currently no legal regulation which would effectively exclude these imports. No public register is available to provide transparency if cloned animals, their offspring or breeding material is imported into the EU.
Questions put to companies and relevant institutions by Testbiotech as to the current frequency and quantities of imports have not been answered. It is known that imports already began being made some years ago. Once imported, genetic material from cloned animals can spread quickly throughout livestock in Europe, removing choice for farmers and consumers.
“There is a high likelihood that consumers will be served products from cloned animals or their offspring without their knowledge,” says Christoph Then at Testbiotech. “There is no transparency for consumers and farmers.”
The study was written on behalf of Martin Häusling, Green member of the European Parliament. Its purpose is to assess the current state of safety, animal welfare and possible benefits. Major problems are evident in regard to animal welfare. As long as 15 years after the cloning of the sheep ‘Dolly’, the rate of success for cloning is still poor and unintended effects are not controllable. Many cloned animals suffer from heavily damaged organs, and most of the animals die. Furthermore, uncertainties regarding food safety cannot be ruled out for the moment.
As the report also shows, new dependencies can be caused by the introduction of cloned livestock, since the process for cloning and the animals derived are subject to patents. Cloning in kangaroos, wallabies, whales, dolphins, elephants, horses, giraffes, cows or bulls, sheep, camels, llamas, pigs and hippos is claimed as an invention.
The European Parliament has already voted for a ban on cloning farm animals and the products derived from it, while the Council of European Ministers is in favour of applying the Novel Food regulation. But as Testbiotech’s report shows, the Novel Food legislation is not sufficient for solving the current problems in segregation and transparency.
eubusiness.com/topics/agri/testbiotech.10-05-04


Cupcake Cliffhanger

Will pastries get the better of Stains?


Have Fur, Will Travel: Furry Stowaways On Holiday

Tribune Media Services, Christopher Elliott
There’s an unwritten rule in travel journalism that any story about pets on planes must contain at least one Chihuahua anecdote. I know, because I’ve written many of them. So let’s get right to Charlotte Coan and her travel companion, Cricket.
Coan, a retired educator from West Yellowstone, Montana, frequently packs her nine-pound dog in her carry-on luggage. But like an increasing number of travelers, she doesn’t tell anyone. She’s been caught twice, and the airline has forced her to pay a $150 surcharge for the pet.
“When I asked why I had to pay a fee in order to stuff my dog under the seat in front of me, I was told it was their policy,” she said. “I concluded that it’s really just a ploy to charge another fee.”
A lot of travelers have been arriving at the same conclusion lately, although exact numbers are difficult to come by. Instead of paying extra “pet fees” to hotels or airlines, they’re spiriting their animal companions into their bags or under blankets in the hope of saving a few bucks.
They also are bending the truth when it comes to their pets, said Ami Moore, a Chicago-based canine behaviorist. One wealthy client recently offered Moore $10,000 to “certify” her dog as a service animal, which would have given the animal a free ride. She refused.
Why lie about your dog? Amy Luwis, a recent guest at a luxury hotel in Savannah, Georgia, persuaded the staff to waive the nonrefundable $150 pet deposit fees for her pit bull by dressing the dog in a “cute reflective red vest” and carrying an official-looking badge, which left the hotel staff with the impression that the dog was a service animal.
“I’m not proud of this charade,” said Luwis, the co-founder of a pet adoption Web site. “But after 20 years of being relegated to the dank, bad hotel rooms and too many stays in biohazard motels — or worse, having no place to stay at all — I decided to take matters into my own hands and fool the general public.”
She’s got a point. Pet owners have good reasons for smuggling Fido or Fluffy in their carry-ons.
Many airlines have raised their pet fees so high that they’re often more than the price of the owner’s ticket. And more hotels are adding nonrefundable pet deposits to the quarters they allow dog and cat owners to occupy, and they are often the worst rooms in the house. In other words, pets and their owners are in the doghouse.
Hotel owners have a different perspective, as you might expect. Elaine Fitzgerald owns and operates a group of small inns in the Fort Lauderdale, Florida, area. She offers one cat-approved unit out of 25 rental apartments but dreads the occupants who secretly bring kitty along.
“I’m not concerned about damage,” said Fitzgerald, who is a cat owner herself. “It’s cat dander. One in seven people are highly allergic to it. A cat in a unit, even for a day or two, literally poisons it for future guests. It’s even worse than cigarette smoke.”
The airline industry’s reasons for its restrictive pet policies are slightly different. Although it appears that air carriers are just trying to find another way to get money out of their passengers, it really comes down to the fact that they don’t consider themselves in the pet transportation business and want to discourage people from bringing animals on the plane.
Maybe that’s one reason we now have Pet Airways, a pets-only air carrier that launched last summer and now serves seven cities, including New York, Baltimore, Chicago and Los Angeles.
It does seem somewhat counterintuitive to alienate pet owners, who, after all, spent an estimated $45 billion on their furry companions last year despite the recession.
And to be sure, some businesses have embraced pets. Best Western, for example, has begun marketing itself as “pet friendly” with a Web site for pet owners who travel and a Web application that merges your picture with your pet’s to create what it calls “a hilarious merged image” that can be shared with your family.
The question that has largely gone unasked amid the traveling-pets scuffle is this one: If your animal could talk, would it ask to join you on vacation?
“Your best friend loves being able to be at your side any time,” said Maria Goodavage, author of “Dog Lover’s Companion to California,” one of the “Dog Lover’s Companion” series. “He’s there for you through thick and thin. Why leave him behind when you finally have time off to relax and enjoy life?”
I can understand that sentiment as a pet owner (three Bengal cats, who are watching me even as I write this). But I can’t bring myself to anthropomorphize my furry friends. In fact, I think it’s kind of insulting. My kitties would prefer to stay at home, where they have a predictable supply of cat food and toys. I miss them when I’m away, but that’s my problem.
Many pet owners reading this will take their dogs and cats along anyway, because they believe their pets can’t possibly live without them. If you do, find a pet-friendly hotel and don’t hide the animal.
It’s bad enough that you’re taking the creature out of its normal environment. Why make it deal with the stress of your lie, too?
cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/05/13/travel.with.pets/index.html?hpt=C2


Hold The Tuna: Is A Vegetarian Diet Safe For Your Cat?

Zootoo, Gabrielle Jonas
Though most vegetarians feed their pets meat or fish without flinching, some vegetarians abhor the idea of their animals eating other animals.
“A vegetarian diet for your companion animal is ethically consistent with animal rights philosophy,” says People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
Though forcing pets to live by their owners’ philosophy is unprecedented in the 15,000 years humans have been caring for pets, some vegetarians want even their pets’ nutritional supplements to be plant-based.
“If vegetarians can feed their animal a healthy diet that is vegetarian, they feel more comfortable,” says Kathy Guillermo, vice president of laboratory investigations at PETA.
But at the heart of PETA’s support of vegetarian pet diets is its objection to meat-based pet food companies conducting research on animals. Vegetarian pet food does not involve animal testing, Guillermo said. “PETA’s primary concern regarding food for companion animals is the many currently available products which are needlessly tested on animals,” she said.
But that very lack of testing is a sticking point with some veterinary experts, who argue that without such testing, the diets cannot be properly evaluated. Makers of vegetarian pet food should be willing to submit to the Association of American Feed Control Officials feeding trials for evaluation, they say.
Though vegetarian diets for dogs can be nutritionally complete, animal welfare advocates, and even some vegetarian groups, say feeding vegetarian diets to cats cannot be done correctly.
“At first, cats may appear to be doing satisfactorily on vegetarian or vegan diets,” says the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. “But over time nutritional deficiencies may occur. When it comes to felines, it really is best to provide a diet that includes meat.”
But James Peden, a leading proponent of vegetarian pet diets, and author of Vegetarian Cats & Dogs, says nutrients missing from vegetables can be added through dietary supplements — his, for instance.
Peden’s company, Harbingers of a New Age, sells Vegepet supplements. Their nutrients are derived from plants to compensate for the nutrients plants lack. Its Vegecat KibbleMix uses vegetarian sources for the essential nutrient taurine found in mollusks, as well as for the vitamin A and arachidonic acid found in liver and fish oils.
Though cats are unable to convert the beta-carotene in plants into vitamin A, they can from Vegepet supplements, according to Harbingers. “The vitamin A that we use is the synthetic acetate form is easily assimilated,” Peden said.
Research into whether cats can thrive on vegetarian diets has been contradictory.
A 2006 Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association study found that all the cats fed a vegetarian diet had adequate Vitamin B12 concentrations, and most had adequate taurine levels.
And yet another study published in the journal two years earlier found that both Vegecat KibbleMix and another vegetarian pet food had multiple nutritional inadequacies, particularly taurine.
Harbingers attributed the test results to manufacturing error during mixing as well as to an inaccurate nutrient profile of a food yeast, and corrected the problem.
“We’ve never had a recurrence of that incident, which most likely only affected 14 pounds of supplement, caused by operator error,” Peden said.
The oldest vegetarian organization in the world, The Vegetarian Society of the United Kingdom, advises caution when feeding dogs a vegetarian diet, and downright warns against feeding vegetarian diets to cats.
The high fiber content of vegetarian cat food can be filling but not adequately nutritious, the society says. The polyunsaturated fatty acids in the vegetable oils can cause a vitamin E deficiency related illness, as well, it says.
“Consider carefully before changing your cat to a vegetarian diet, says The Vegetarian Society. “Cats require certain nutrients that cannot be obtained in sufficient amounts from plants.”
When it comes to feeding pets — especially cats — a vegetarian diet, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration puts it more plainly: “They simply are not intended to eat only plants.”
zootoo.com/petnews/felinefoodtipsarevegetariandie-1587


“You know chicken is chicken, right?”

New York Times, Jonathan Safran Foer
THE FRUITS OF FAMILY TREES
When I was young, I would often spend the weekend at my grandmother’s house. On my way in, Friday night, she would lift me from the ground in one of her fire-smothering hugs. And on the way out, Sunday afternoon, I was again taken into the air. It wasn’t until years later that I realized she was weighing me.
My grandmother survived World War II barefoot, scavenging Eastern Europe for other people’s inedibles: rotting potatoes, discarded scraps of meat, skins and the bits that clung to bones and pits. So she never cared if I colored outside the lines, as long as I cut coupons along the dashes. I remember hotel buffets: while the rest of us erected Golden Calves of breakfast, she would make sandwich upon sandwich to swaddle in napkins and stash in her bag for lunch. It was my grandmother who taught me that one tea bag makes as many cups of tea as you’re serving, and that every part of the apple is edible.
Her obsession with food wasn’t an obsession with money. (Many of those coupons I clipped were for foods she would never buy.)
Her obsession wasn’t with health. (She would beg me to drink Coke.)
My grandmother never set a place for herself at family dinners. Even when there was nothing more to be done — no soup bowls to be topped off, no pots to be stirred or ovens checked — she stayed in the kitchen, like a vigilant guard (or prisoner) in a tower. As far as I could tell, the sustenance she got from the food she made didn’t require her to eat it.
We thought she was the greatest chef who ever lived. My brothers and I would tell her as much several times a meal. And yet we were worldly enough kids to know that the greatest chef who ever lived would probably have more than one recipe (chicken with carrots), and that most great recipes involved more than two ingredients.
And why didn’t we question her when she told us that dark food is inherently more healthful than light food, or that the bulk of the nutrients are found in the peel or crust? (The sandwiches of those weekend stays were made with the saved ends of pumpernickel loaves.) She taught us that animals that are bigger than you are very good for you, animals that are smaller than you are good for you, fish (which aren’t animals) are fine for you, then tuna (which aren’t fish), then vegetables, fruits, cakes, cookies and sodas. No foods are bad for you. Sugars are great. Fats are tremendous. The fatter a child is, the fitter it is — especially if it’s a boy. Lunch is not one meal, but three, to be eaten at 11, 12:30 and 3. You are always starving.
In fact, her chicken with carrots probably was the most delicious thing I’ve ever eaten. But that had little to do with how it was prepared, or even how it tasted. Her food was delicious because we believed it was delicious. We believed in our grandmother’s cooking more fervently than we believed in God.
More stories could be told about my grandmother than about anyone else I’ve ever met — her otherwordly childhood, the hairline margin of her survival, the totality of her loss, her immigration and further loss, the triumph and tragedy of her assimilation — and while I will one day try to tell them to my children, we almost never told them to one another. Nor did we call her by any of the obvious and earned titles. We called her the Greatest Chef.
The story of her relationship to food holds all of the other stories that could be told about her. Food, for her, is not food. It is terror, dignity, gratitude, vengeance, joy, humiliation, religion, history and, of course, love. It was as if the fruits she always offered us were picked from the destroyed branches of our family tree.
POSSIBLE AGAIN
When I was 2, the heroes of all my bedtime books were animals. The first thing I can remember learning in school was how to pet a guinea pig without accidentally killing it. One summer my family fostered a cousin’s dog. I kicked it. My father told me we don’t kick animals. When I was 7, I mourned the death of a goldfish I’d won the previous weekend. I discovered that my father had flushed it down the toilet. I told my father — using other, less familial language — we don’t flush animals down the toilet. When I was 9, I had a baby sitter who didn’t want to hurt anything. She put it just like that when I asked her why she wasn’t having chicken with my older brother and me.
“Hurt anything?” I asked.
“You know that chicken is chicken, right?”
Frank shot me a look: Mom and Dad entrusted this stupid woman with their precious babies?
Her intention might or might not have been to convert us, but being a kid herself, she lacked whatever restraint it is that so often prevents a full telling of this particular story. Without drama or rhetoric, skipping over or euphemizing, she shared what she knew.
My brother and I looked at each other, our mouths full of hurt chickens, and had simultaneous how-in-the-world-could-I-have-never-thought-of-that-before-and-why-on-earth-didn’t-someone-tell-me? moments. I put down my fork. Frank finished the meal and is probably eating a chicken as I type these words.
What our baby sitter said made sense to me, not only because it seemed so self-evidently true, but also because it was the extension to food of everything my parents had taught me. We don’t hurt family members. We don’t hurt friends or strangers. We don’t even hurt upholstered furniture. My not having thought to include farmed animals in that list didn’t make them the exceptions to it. It just made me a child, ignorant of the world’s workings. Until I wasn’t. At which point I had to change my life.
Until I didn’t. My vegetarianism, so bombastic and unyielding in the beginning, lasted a few years, sputtered and quietly died. I never thought of a response to our baby sitter’s code but found ways to smudge, diminish and ignore it. Generally speaking, I didn’t cause hurt. Generally speaking, I strove to do the right thing. Generally speaking, my conscience was clear enough. Pass the chicken, I’m starving.
Mark Twain said that quitting smoking is among the easiest things you can do; he did it all the time. I would add vegetarianism to the list of easy things. In high school I became vegetarian more times than I can now remember, most often as an effort to claim a bit of identity in a world of people whose identities seemed to come effortlessly. I wanted a slogan to distinguish my mom’s Volvo’s bumper, a bake-sale cause to fill the self-conscious half-hour of school break, an occasion to get closer to the breasts of activist women. (And I continued to think it was wrong to hurt animals.) Which isn’t to say that I refrained from eating meat. Only that I refrained in public. Many dinners of those years began with my father asking, “Any dietary restrictions I need to know about tonight?”
When I went to college, I started eating meat more earnestly. Not “believing in it” — whatever that would mean — but willfully pushing the questions out of my mind. It might well have been the prevalence of vegetarianism on campus that discouraged my own — I find myself less likely to give money to a street musician whose case is overflowing with bills.
But when, at the end of my sophomore year, I became a philosophy major and started doing my first seriously pretentious thinking, I became a vegetarian again. The kind of active forgetting that I was sure meat eating required felt too paradoxical to the intellectual life I was trying to shape. I didn’t know the details of factory farming, but like most everyone, I knew the gist: it is miserable for animals, the environment, farmers, public health, biodiversity, rural communities, global poverty and so on. I thought life could, should and must conform to the mold of reason, period. You can imagine how annoying this made me.
When I graduated, I ate meat — lots of every kind of meat — for about two years. Why? Because it tasted good. And because more important than reason in shaping habits are the stories we tell ourselves and one another. And I told a forgiving story about myself to myself: I was only human.
Then I was set up on a blind date with the woman who would become my wife. And only a few weeks later we found ourselves talking about two surprising topics: marriage and vegetarianism.
Her history with meat was remarkably similar to mine: there were things she believed while lying in bed at night, and there were choices made at the breakfast table the next morning. There was a gnawing (if only occasional and short-lived) dread that she was participating in something deeply wrong, and there was the acceptance of complexity and fallibility. Like me, she had intuitions that were very strong, but apparently not strong enough.
People marry for many different reasons, but one that animated our decision to take that step was the prospect of explicitly marking a new beginning. Jewish ritual and symbolism strongly encourage this notion of demarcating a sharp division with what came before — the most well-known example being the smashing of the glass at the end of the wedding ceremony. Things were as they were, but they will be different now. Things will be better. We will be better.
Sounds and feels great, but better how? I could think of endless ways to make myself better (I could learn foreign languages, be more patient, work harder), but I’d already made too many such vows to trust them anymore. I could also think of ways to make “us” better, but the meaningful things we can agree on and change in a relationship are few.
Eating animals, a concern we’d both had and had both forgotten, seemed like a place to start. So much intersects there, and so much could flow from it. In the same week, we became engaged and vegetarian.
Of course our wedding wasn’t vegetarian, because we persuaded ourselves that it was only fair to offer animal protein to our guests, some of whom traveled from great distances to share our joy. (Find that logic hard to follow?) And we ate fish on our honeymoon, but we were in Japan, and when in Japan. . . . And back in our new home, we did occasionally eat burgers and chicken soup and smoked salmon and tuna steaks. But only whenever we felt like it.
And that, I thought, was that. And I thought that was just fine. I assumed we’d maintain a diet of conscientious inconsistency. Why should eating be different from any of the other ethical realms of our lives? We were honest people who occasionally told lies, careful friends who sometimes acted clumsily. We were vegetarians who from time to time ate meat.
But then we decided to have a child, and that was a different story that would necessitate a different story.
About half an hour after my son was born, I went into the waiting room to tell the gathered family the good news.
“You said ‘he’! So it’s a boy?”
“What’s his name?”
“Who does he look like?”
“Tell us everything!”
I answered their questions as quickly as I could, then went to the corner and turned on my cellphone.
“Grandma,” I said. “We have a baby.”
Her only phone is in the kitchen. She picked up halfway into the first ring. It was just after midnight. Had she been clipping coupons? Preparing chicken with carrots to freeze for someone else to eat at some future meal? I’d never once seen or heard her cry, but tears pushed through her words as she asked, “How much does it weigh?”
A few days after we came home from the hospital, I sent a letter to a friend, including a photo of my son and some first impressions of fatherhood. He responded, simply, “Everything is possible again.” It was the perfect thing to write, because that was exactly how it felt. The world itself had another chance.
EATING ANIMALS
Seconds after being born, my son was breast-feeding. I watched him with an awe that had no precedent in my life. Without explanation or experience, he knew what to do. Millions of years of evolution had wound the knowledge into him, as it had encoded beating into his tiny heart and expansion and contraction into his newly dry lungs.
Almost four years later, he is a big brother and a remarkably sophisticated little conversationalist. Increasingly the food he eats is digested together with stories we tell. Feeding my children is not like feeding myself: it matters more. It matters because food matters (their physical health matters, the pleasure they take in eating matters), and because the stories that are served with food matter.
Some of my happiest childhood memories are of sushi “lunch dates” with my mom, and eating my dad’s turkey burgers with mustard and grilled onions at backyard celebrations, and of course my grandmother’s chicken with carrots. Those occasions simply wouldn’t have been the same without those foods — and that is important. To give up the taste of sushi, turkey or chicken is a loss that extends beyond giving up a pleasurable eating experience. Changing what we eat and letting tastes fade from memory create a kind of cultural loss, a forgetting. But perhaps this kind of forgetfulness is worth accepting — even worth cultivating (forgetting, too, can be cultivated). To remember my values, I need to lose certain tastes and find other handles for the memories that they once helped me carry.
My wife and I have chosen to bring up our children as vegetarians. In another time or place, we might have made a different decision. But the realities of our present moment compelled us to make that choice. According to an analysis of U.S.D.A. data by the advocacy group Farm Forward, factory farms now produce more than 99 percent of the animals eaten in this country. And despite labels that suggest otherwise, genuine alternatives — which do exist, and make many of the ethical questions about meat moot — are very difficult for even an educated eater to find. I don’t have the ability to do so with regularity and confidence. (“Free range,” “cage free,” “natural” and “organic” are nearly meaningless when it comes to animal welfare.)
According to reports by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N. and others, factory farming has made animal agriculture the No. 1 contributor to global warming(it is significantly more destructive than transportation alone), and one of the Top 2 or 3 causes of all of the most serious environmental problems, both global and local: air and water pollution, deforestation, loss of biodiversity. . . . Eating factory-farmed animals — which is to say virtually every piece of meat sold in supermarkets and prepared in restaurants — is almost certainly the single worst thing that humans do to the environment.
Every factory-farmed animal is, as a practice, treated in ways that would be illegal if it were a dog or a cat. Turkeys have been so genetically modified they are incapable of natural reproduction. To acknowledge that these things matter is not sentimental. It is a confrontation with the facts about animals and ourselves. We know these things matter.
Meat and seafood are in no way necessary for my family — unlike some in the world, we have easy access to a wide variety of other foods. And we are healthier without it. So our choices aren’t constrained.
While the cultural uses of meat can be replaced — my mother and I now eat Italian, my father grills veggie burgers, my grandmother invented her own “vegetarian chopped liver” — there is still the question of pleasure. A vegetarian diet can be rich and fully enjoyable, but I couldn’t honestly argue, as many vegetarians try to, that it is as rich as a diet that includes meat. (Those who eat chimpanzee look at the Western diet as sadly deficient of a great pleasure.) I love calamari, I love roasted chicken, I love a good steak. But I don’t love them without limit.
This isn’t animal experimentation, where you can imagine some proportionate good at the other end of the suffering. This is what we feel like eating. Yet taste, the crudest of our senses, has been exempted from the ethical rules that govern our other senses. Why? Why doesn’t a horny person have as strong a claim to raping an animal as a hungry one does to confining, killing and eating it? It’s easy to dismiss that question but hard to respond to it. Try to imagine any end other than taste for which it would be justifiable to do what we do to farmed animals.
Children confront us with our paradoxes and dishonesty, and we are exposed. You need to find an answer for every why — Why do we do this? Why don’t we do that? — and often there isn’t a good one. So you say, simply, because. Or you tell a story that you know isn’t true. And whether or not your face reddens, you blush. The shame of parenthood — which is a good shame — is that we want our children to be more whole than we are, to have satisfactory answers. My children not only inspired me to reconsider what kind of eating animal I would be, but also shamed me into reconsideration.
And then, one day, they will choose for themselves. I don’t know what my reaction will be if they decide to eat meat. (I don’t know what my reaction will be if they decide to renounce their Judaism, root for the Red Sox or register Republican.) I’m not as worried about what they will choose as much as my ability to make them conscious of the choices before them. I won’t measure my success as a parent by whether my children share my values, but by whether they act according to their own.
In the meantime, my choice on their behalf means they will never eat their great-grandmother’s singular dish. They will never receive that unique and most direct expression of her love, will perhaps never think of her as the greatest chef who ever lived. Her primal story, our family’s primal story, will have to change.
Or will it? It wasn’t until I became a parent that I understood my grandmother’s cooking. The greatest chef who ever lived wasn’t preparing food, but humans. I’m thinking of those Saturday afternoons at her kitchen table, just the two of us — black bread in the glowing toaster, a humming refrigerator that couldn’t be seen through its veil of family photographs. Over pumpernickel ends and Coke, she would tell me about her escape from Europe, the foods she had to eat and those she wouldn’t. It was the story of her life — “Listen to me,” she would plead — and I knew a vital lesson was being transmitted, even if I didn’t know, as a child, what that lesson was. I know, now, what it was.
LISTEN TO ME
“We weren’t rich, but we always had enough. Thursday we baked bread, and challah and rolls, and they lasted the whole week. Friday we had pancakes. Shabbat we always had a chicken, and soup with noodles. You would go to the butcher and ask for a little more fat. The fattiest piece was the best piece. It wasn’t like now. We didn’t have refrigerators, but we had milk and cheese. We didn’t have every kind of vegetable, but we had enough. The things that you have here and take for granted. . . . But we were happy. We didn’t know any better. And we took what we had for granted, too.
“Then it all changed. During the war it was hell on earth, and I had nothing. I left my family, you know. I was always running, day and night, because the Germans were always right behind me. If you stopped, you died. There was never enough food. I became sicker and sicker from not eating, and I’m not just talking about being skin and bones. I had sores all over my body. It became difficult to move. I wasn’t too good to eat from a garbage can. I ate the parts others wouldn’t eat. If you helped yourself, you could survive. I took whatever I could find. I ate things I wouldn’t tell you about.
“Even at the worst times, there were good people, too. Someone taught me to tie the ends of my pants so I could fill the legs with any potatoes I was able to steal. I walked miles and miles like that, because you never knew when you would be lucky again. Someone gave me a little rice, once, and I traveled two days to a market and traded it for some soap, and then traveled to another market and traded the soap for some beans. You had to have luck and intuition.
“The worst it got was near the end. A lot of people died right at the end, and I didn’t know if I could make it another day. A farmer, a Russian, God bless him, he saw my condition, and he went into his house and came out with a piece of meat for me.”
“He saved your life.”
“I didn’t eat it.”
“You didn’t eat it?”
“It was pork. I wouldn’t eat pork.”
“Why?”
“What do you mean why?”
“What, because it wasn’t kosher?”
“Of course.”
“But not even to save your life?”
“If nothing matters, there’s nothing to save.”
Jonathan Safran Foer is a novelist. This article is adapted from his coming book, “Eating Animals,” which will be published in November.
nytimes.com/2009/10/11/magazine/11foer-t.html


Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Dog

Kinney, a corgi, has an obscure fondness for The Beatles…or at least their accents. Beatlemania barks on!


Dog Declares Love, Literally

I know we just met, but I think I love you, too.


Freeing Dogs With…Fences?

Tonic, Diane Herbst
Mikael Hardy was horrified to see how many people near her home in South Carolina kept their dogs chained up, outside, every hour of every day. So she got up off the couch, knocked on their doors and did something about it.
When Mikael Hardy (right) moved from Atlanta to Greenville County, S.C., she discovered a frightening way of life. Some of her new neighbors kept their dogs chained up outside every day and every night — oftentimes emaciated, sad creatures with empty water buckets and no food. “I saw all these chained dogs, and I said, ‘What is this?’” Hardy says. “I knew I needed to save them.”
Last year, Hardy, 40, started knocking on doors, asking these neighbors if she could build them a fence, get their dog spayed or neutered, and provide dog food, toys and veterinary care. For free. “At first they thought there was a catch,” she says. “They probably thought I was on crack.”
Since August of 2008, however, Hardy has persuaded almost 60 different owners to allow her to build a fence and provide romping room for some 70 dogs. The only requirement: each owner must spay or neuter their dogs before construction begins, paid for by Hardy and her nonprofit, PAWSitive Effects. Incredibly, Hardy has a 90-percent success rate. “We’ve approached this as a friendly venture, I keep on talking and eventually they say yes,” she says in her fast Southern drawl. “It is just so emotionally and physically abusive to keep these dogs at the end of a chain.”
For her first few fences, each 600 square feet, Hardy borrowed money from her mother. “

We had no money,” says Hardy, whose husband, Brad, 40, two teenage children and a loyal group of volunteers all pitch in to build the fences, which cost $400 a piece; medical costs for each dog is another $130. “The people she builds the fence for are so grateful or so thankful, and they can’t help but notice the change in their dog,” says regular volunteer Jami McLean, 32, a human resources manager for a Fortune 500 company.
“You have a dog that is snarling, defensive, and as soon as you release him into the fenced area, the dog changes immediately,” she continues. “They begin running around, sniffing, throwing their toys in the air. It is by far the most rewarding part of building the fence.”
Most everyone Hardy has encountered who chain their dogs are uneducated and poor. They tell her the dog is chained for protection. Or they need the money from the puppies. Hardy’s gift of gab works wonders. “I tell them it’s a lot easier for me to break in if they are chained,” she says. “I tell them no one wants the puppies, they just end up in a shelter.”
When not building fences, Hardy juggles co-owning a flooring company with Brad, and raising daughter Tatum, 13, and son Tyler, 14, who has bilateral ophthalmia (no eyes), autism, obsessive compulsive disorder and a low I.Q. Both kids work on the weekly fence-building projects, with a waiting list through September.

“Tyler tells people what to do,” says Hardy, laughing. The Hardy family also includes eight dogs — four rescued from living
on a chain. “It’s hard not to gush about Mikael and the whole Hardy family,” says McLean. “You see Tyler, with a lot of obstacles to overcome, and not once do you hear the kid say ‘I don’t want to do that.’”
Hardy tackles each home that she visits knowing the result will be a fence. Occasionally, she skips the fence and rescues the dog. One dog (above, left) was all skin and bones, so thin that her front left arm slipped through her collar, which embedded deep in her skin. Sores enveloped the pup’s body. “I said, ‘Keeping a dog like this is illegal,’” Hardy recalls.
The owners gave their dog to Hardy, who found a loving family — one that includes two dogs and a 30-pound cat — to adopt her. However, an angry Hardy pressed charges against the owners, who were allowed to settle their case and 30 days later obtained another dog — who they chained up. Says Hardy: “It’s deplorable.”
Hardy’s efforts are part of a burgeoning number of volunteers across the US working to let chained dogs free, sometimes with unintended results. Hardy had volunteered for the Pennsylvania-based group Dogs Deserve Better, whose founder was convicted of theft in 2007 for rescuing a chained, dying dog who could not stand, refusing to return him to his abusers. Hardy’s experience with the group eventually led to her founding PAWSitive Effects.
Since Hardy built her first fence last year, she has raised and spent some $45,000 — all from private donations. “At least I’m making a dent,” she says. “At the end of the build, when I put that dog in that fence, you’ve dramatically improved that dog’s life. It makes you feel so good.”
To take a stand and help Mikael better the life of local pups, click here to donate.
Photos courtesy of Mikael Hardy.
tonic.com/article/giving-dogs-their-freedom-one-fence-at-a-time/


Canada Geese Gassed And Fed To Oregon’s Homeless

CTV News
On Canada Day, one of our national symbols is under attack in Oregon State, where one town has put Canada goose on the menu at homeless shelters.
Officials in Bend, Oregon, are so fed up with the mess left by Canada geese that they’ve opted to gas 109 birds.
The local parks and recreation board says the geese were euthanized with carbon dioxide, leaving the meat safe to eat. Now the birds are heading for the dinner plates at local homeless shelters.
Sandy Klein at the NeighborImpact shelter in Bend says that the last time she got a shipment of Canada goose meat, no one knew what to do with it.
“So this year, I think I’m going to provide a recipe to go with goose meat so people know what to do. It’s a different flavour. It makes a good stew,” she said.
In fact, recipes for Canada goose meat abound on the internet, including one for that calls for garlic and rosemary.
But in Stanley Park, Vancouverites were taken aback by the idea that a Canada goose flying south might never come back, calling the euthanasia “barbaric” and even “crazy.”
Even the head of the Vancouver Park Board, Aaron Jasper, was shocked.
“We don’t take the approach of culling them. I think, if there’s deemed to be a bit of a problem with the population, our staff will identify the nests, and we’ll shake the eggs, and that’s how we address the issue of overpopulation,” Jasper said.
In Bend, the parks and recreation department held several public meetings and found that most people supported the idea. Still, it’s not planning any further kills this year.
ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100701/bc_cooked_goose_100701/20100701/?hub=BritishColumbiaHome


Survival of the Nuttiest: Smart Squirrels

The New York Times, Natalie Angier
I was walking through the neighborhood one afternoon when, on turning a corner, I nearly tripped over a gray squirrel that was sitting in the middle of the sidewalk, eating a nut. Startled by my sudden appearance, the squirrel dashed out to the road — right in front of an oncoming car.
Before I had time to scream, the squirrel had gotten caught in the car’s front hubcap, had spun around once like a cartoon character in a clothes dryer, and was spat back off. When the car drove away, the squirrel picked itself up, wobbled for a moment or two, and then resolutely hopped across the street.
You don’t get to be one of the most widely disseminated mammals in the world — equally at home in the woods, a suburban backyard or any city “green space” bigger than a mousepad — if you’re crushed by every Acme anvil that happens to drop your way.
“When people call me squirrely,” said John L. Koprowski, a squirrel expert and professor of wildlife conservation and management at the University of Arizona, “I am flattered by the term.”
The Eastern gray tree squirrel, or Sciurus carolinensis, has been so spectacularly successful that it is often considered a pest. The International Union for Conservation of Nature includes the squirrel on its list of the top 100 invasive species. The British and Italians hate gray squirrels for outcompeting their beloved native red squirrels. Manhattanites hate gray squirrels for reminding them of pigeons, and that goes for the black, brown and latte squirrel morphs, too.
Yet researchers who study gray squirrels argue that their subject is far more compelling than most people realize, and that behind the squirrel’s success lies a phenomenal elasticity of body, brain and behavior. Squirrels can leap a span 10 times the length of their body, roughly double what the best human long jumper can manage. They can rotate their ankles 180 degrees, and so keep a grip while climbing no matter which way they’re facing. Squirrels can learn by watching others — cross-phyletically, if need be. In their book “Squirrels: The Animal Answer Guide,” Richard W. Thorington Jr. and Katie Ferrell of theSmithsonian Institution described the safe-pedestrian approach of a gray squirrel eager to traverse a busy avenue near the White House. The squirrel waited on the grass near a crosswalk until people began to cross the street, said the authors, “and then it crossed the street behind them.”
In the acuity of their visual system, the sensitivity and deftness with which they can manipulate objects, their sociability, chattiness and willingness to deceive, squirrels turn out to be surprisingly similar to primates. They nest communally as multigenerational, matrilineal clans, and at the end of a hard day’s forage, they greet each other with a mutual nuzzling of cheek and lip glands that looks decidedly like a kiss. Dr. Koprowski said that when he was growing up in Cleveland, squirrels were the only wild mammals to which he was exposed. “When I got to college, I thought I’d study polar bears or mountain lions,” he said. “Luckily I ended up doing my master’s and Ph.D. on squirrels instead.”
The Eastern gray is one of about 278 squirrelly species alive today, a lineage that split off from other rodents about 40 million years ago and that includes chipmunks, marmots, woodchucks — a k a groundhogs — and prairie dogs. Squirrels are found on all continents save Antarctica and Australia, and in some of the harshest settings: the Himalayan marmot, found at up to 18,000 feet above sea level, is among the highest-living mammals of the world.
A good part of a squirrel’s strength can be traced to its elaborately veined tail, which, among other things, serves as a thermoregulatory device, in winter helping to shunt warm blood toward the squirrel’s core and in summer to wick excess heat off into the air. Rodents like rats and mice are nocturnal and have poor vision, relying on whiskers to navigate their world. The gray squirrel is diurnal and has the keen eyesight to match. “Its primary visual cortex is huge,” said Jon H. Kaas, a comparative neuroscientist atVanderbilt University, A squirrel’s peripheral vision is as sharp as its focal eyesight, which means it can see what’s above and beside it without moving its head. While its color vision may only be so-so, akin to a person with red-green colorblindness who can tell green and red from other colors but not from each other, a squirrel has the benefit of natural sunglasses, pale yellow lenses that cut down on glare.
Gray squirrels use their sharp, shaded vision to keep an eye on each other. Michael A. Steele of Wilkes University in Pennsylvania and his colleagues have studied the squirrels’ hoarding behavior, which turns out to be remarkably calculated and rococo. Squirrels may be opportunistic feeders, able to make a meal of a discarded cheeseburger, crickets or a baby sparrow if need be, but in the main they are granivores and seed hoarders. They’ll gather acorns and other nuts, assess which are in danger of germinating and using up stored nutrients, remove the offending tree embryos with a few quick slices of their incisors, and then cache the sterilized treasure for later consumption, one seed per inch-deep hole.
But the squirrels don’t just bury an acorn and come back in winter. They bury the seed, dig it up shortly afterward, rebury it elsewhere, dig it up again. “We’ve seen seeds that were recached as many as five times,” said Dr. Steele. The squirrels recache to deter theft, lest another squirrel spied the burial the first X times. Reporting in the journal Animal Behaviour, the Steele team showed that when squirrels are certain that they are being watched, they will actively seek to deceive the would-be thieves. They’ll dig a hole, pretend to push an acorn in, and then cover it over, all the while keeping the prized seed hidden in their mouth. “Deceptive caching involves some pretty serious decision making,” Dr. Steele said. “It meets the criteria of tactical deception, which previously was thought to only occur in primates.”
Squirrels are also master kvetchers, modulating their utterances to convey the nature and severity of their complaint: a moaning “kuk” for mild discomfort, a buzzing sound for more pressing distress, and a short scream for extreme dismay. During the one or two days a year that a female is fertile, she will be chased by every male in the vicinity, all of them hounding her round and round a tree with sneezelike calls, and her on top, refusing to say gesundheit. A squirrel threatened by a serious predator like a cat, dog, hawk or wayward toddler will issue a multimodal alarm, barking out a series of loud chuk-chuk-chuks with a nasally, penetrating “whaa” at the end, while simultaneously performing a tail flag — lifting its fluffy baton high over its head and flicking it back and forth rhythmically.
Sarah R. Partan of Hampshire College in Amherst, Mass., and her students have used acustom-built squirrel robot to track how real squirrels respond to the components of an alarm signal. The robot looks and sounds like a squirrel, its tail moves sort of like a squirrel’s, but because its plastic body is covered in rabbit fur it doesn’t smell like a squirrel. Yet squirrels tested in Florida and New England have responded to the knockoff appropriately, with alarm barks of their own or by running up a tree. Human passers-by have likewise been enchanted. “People are always coming over, asking what we’re doing,” said Dr. Partan. “We’ve had to abandon many trials halfway through.” An iSquirrel? Now that’s something even a New Yorker might love.
nytimes.com/2010/07/06/science/06angi.html?_r=1


Cheap Meat Can Be Costly

The Huffington Post, David Kirby
Grand Lake St. Marys — Ohio’s largest inland body of water and a treasured recreational area — is dying. And if you barbecued some supermarket pork over the holiday weekend, you helped contribute to this disaster, however indirectly.
The lake’s 13,000 acres of water surrounded by parkland, cabins and campgrounds, is one of the leading summertime attractions in the area, which brings in some $216 million in tourist spending each year, $160 million directly from the lake, (not to mention 2,600 jobs). Now, many visitors are shunning the place like an oil-stained Alabama beach. Swimming and waterskiing are discouraged, and even boating might be a health risk.
The main problem is phosporous and other nutrients, mostly from farms, including the 15 or so animal factory farms in the lake’s watershed, and nutrients from the megatons of fertilizer applied on taxpayer-subsidized corn and soybean fields. Those products then become cheap feed that keeps the factory farms humming, Big Box prices low, and summertime barbequers happy.
Factory farms, in addition to their insatiable demand for subsidized feed, also generate thousands of tons of animal waste each year, far more than the surrounding land can absorb. The manure — in this part of Ohio, most factory farms are either pork, or “layer” (egg) operations — is sometimes liquefied and sprayed from giant sprinklers that spew brownish-yellow water onto cropland which — too often — runs off into streams and ditches that feed into rivers and lakes, including Grand Lake St. Marys.
The Ohio Farm Bureau insists that most of the farms in the area are “family farms,” which is true — the majority of farms in the area not factory farms, and do no generate anywhere near the amount of nutrients that industrialized operations create. And besides, even massive factory farms (officially known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, or CAFOs) are usually owned by families, although they don’t typically own the animals. They contract out to large corporations, sharecropper style, to raise them. The contractor is left with the problem of disposing of so much manure, not the company.
For years, nutrient levels in Grand Lake St. Marys have been rising. But only in the last three years have they gotten dangerously high, fueling algae blooms that strangulate fish, smother the water in a putrid green-and-turquoise foam, clog boat engines, foul the air with rancid odors, and emit toxins that can cause permanent health problems in people.
“We have a crisis situation,” Ohio Governor Ted Strickland (D) said in a letter Friday to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and, tellingly, USDA Secretary Tom Vislack. “The economic viability of this region is ultimately linked to the health of this natural resource. We have reached a tipping point where the degraded nature of the lake is causing significant loss to local businesses and the total livelihood of the region.”
In April 2009, levels of a toxin called microcystin were found to be extremely elevated, and the state issued a warning for people to “minimize contact” and avoid ingestion of the lake water.
And just two weeks ago, “the lake water turned a dark green color and became covered in a thick blue green scum,” Strickland said, adding that state testing has also detected the presence of harmful bacteria and their associated toxins, one that attacks the liver and another that causes nerve damage.
Strickland asked the Feds for immediate environmental and economic assistance and, given the EPA’s aggressive stance against farm runoff since Obama took office, his SOS will likely get some attention.
It is not logical to blame most of this mess on smaller, more sustainably run farms where animals are not packed in by the hundreds or thousands, and where there’s enough land to adequately absorb the waste, thus reducing the chance of nutrient runoff.
Besides, small farms have graced this area for generations on end, and the lake did not become a Petri dish for liver toxins until now. Something has changed, and that something — in my opinion — is factory farming and its excess manure. And local people know it.
Local residents “say stricter regulations are needed on large farms,” the Associated Press reported, “limiting when they can apply manure to their fields and how close they can plant to streams.”
When I was researching my book Animal Factory – The Looming Threat of Industrial Pig, Dairy and Poultry Farms to Humans and the Environment – I came across this same situation wherever CAFOs had invaded: the tidewater area of North Carolina, the mega-dairy region of Yakima Valley, WA, or the “poultry belt” of Arkansas (whose big chicken growers like Tyson have been sued by the Oklahoma Attorney General for allowing nutrients from poultry waste to cross the border and pollute lakes and rivers).
In each case, once pristine waters had been spoiled after the CAFOs showed up.
I also spent time in western and northwestern Ohio, where property and small business owners are growing increasingly alarmed by the number of CAFOs that have been moving into the area. And I witnessed the Maumee River, choked with agricultural nutrients, which empties into Lake Erie, site of a massive and growing “dead zone.”
The lake was the color of cappuccino, and there were warning signs about dangerous bacteria in the water. And yet, families with small children were still splashing around in the murky, foamy liquid.
I wondered if they knew that factory farming upriver was contributing to this slow death of a great lake, and if they knew that their barbequed chicken, egg salad sandwiches and pork sausages were likely produced at factory farms that leach nutrients into waterways that belong to the public.
We all contribute to factory farming every time we reach for the cheapest meat, milk and eggs at the supermarket. That bacon you had for breakfast might have come from a CAFO in the Lake St. Marys area — or else fed on discount corn grown within the watershed.
Even if you are a strict vegan, your tax dollars still go to sustain this unsustainable system. So unless you are out there actively lobbying to kill taxpayer subsidies in the Farm Bill, don’t think you get completely off the hook, either.
Which brings us back to the devastated economy of Grand Lake St. Marys – already buffeted by post-industrial job losses – and its desperate and rightfully angry people.
I know this question will not make me popular around the lake, but I do wonder how many residents there enjoyed some nice, juicy, barbequed pork ribs on the Fourth of July that were on special down at the discount center.
Like I said, we are all responsible for factory farm pollution, even those who suffer most from its excesses.
David Kirby is author of “Animal Factory – The Looming Threat of Industrial Pork, Dairy and Poultry Operations to Humans and the Environment” (St. Martin’s Press).
huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/the-price-of-cheap-meat-a_b_635599.html?ir=Food


This Water Is REALLY Bugging Me!

A dog bed might help this sleepy puppy.


VIDEO: Sea Shepherd Captain, Paul Watson, Responds To Bethune Verdict

See the full interview with Paul Watson, leader of the Sea Shepherd, after hearing Pete Bethune was given a suspended sentence.

Pete Bethune has received a two-year suspended sentence and banned from Japan for five years, for obstructing a whaling fleet in the Antarctic Ocean.

He is expected to be deported back to New Zealand on the next available flight.

Bethune, 45, was also found guilty of assault, for throwing a bottle of rancid butter at whalers on board the whaling ship Shonan Maru II.

The ruling was made at the Tokyo District Court this afternoon, after Bethune obstructed the activities of a Japanese whaling fleet in February.

The sentence is suspended for five years, meaning Bethune will not be jailed.

Watch the video

Bethune released


Whaling Activist Pete Bethune Gets Suspended Jail Term

Anti-whaling activist Pete Bethune has been given a suspended two-year prison term in Japan for boarding a Japanese harpoon ship earlier this year in Antarctic waters.

New Zealander Peter Bethune, of the Sea Shepherd conservation group, said he boarded the ship to stop the whale hunt and make a citizen’s arrest of its captain.

He pleaded guilty to four out of the five charges brought against him, but has denied assault.

Roland Buerk reports.

The New Zealander, an ex-member of direct action group Sea Shepherd, faced charges of illegally boarding a whaling ship in the Antarctic in February.

He said he wanted to detain its captain but he was instead taken to Japan, where he was arrested.

He had pleaded guilty to four out of five charges but had denied assault.

Bethune had admitted charges of trespassing, vandalism, possession of a knife and obstructing business.

He was also found guilty of assault, by throwing stink bombs made of butyric acid – rancid butter – at whalers.

His suspended sentence means that he will not be jailed. He is expected to be deported to New Zealand soon.

Bow and arrows

Large numbers of police officers were on duty outside the court in Tokyo where the verdict was delivered.

A small group of right-wing protesters brandished banners calling for a tough sentence.

Bethune was part of the Sea Shepherd anti-whaling group, which tries each year to block Japan’s annual hunt.

He was the captain of the Ady Gil, a speed boat split in two during a clash with the whalers on 6 January.

Bethune said he had boarded the Japanese vessel, the Shonan Maru 2, on 15 February to make a citizen’s arrest of the captain.

The whalers instead detained him and took him to Japan to face charges.

Sea Shepherd has since cut its ties with Bethune, saying he defied group policy by taking bows and arrows with him to the Antarctic.

Japan abandoned commercial whaling in 1986 after agreeing to a global moratorium.

But it says that whaling is part of its culture and catches hundreds of whales each year as part of what it calls a scientific research programme.

Conservationists say the whaling is a cover for the sale and consumption of whale meat.

Last month nations failed to agree a compromise deal at the annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission in Morocco.

Under the plan, Japan would phase down its annual Antarctic hunt and in return be assigned a quota for whales in its coastal waters.

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10538106.stm


Bethune Won’t Get Jail Time

Associated Press, Mari Yamaguchi
TOKYO — A Tokyo court on Wednesday convicted a New Zealand activist of obstructing the Japanese whaling mission in the Antarctic Ocean, sentencing him to a suspended prison term.
Peter Bethune was also found guilty of assault for throwing bottles of rancid butter at the whalers aboard their ship, including one that broke and gave three Japanese crew members chemical burns.
The court sentenced him to two years in prison, suspended for five years — meaning he won’t be jailed.
Bethune, 45, climbed onto the Shonan Maru 2 in February to confront its captain over the sinking of a protest vessel the previous month. The former Sea Shepherd activist was arrested when the boat returned to Japan in March.
The U.S.-based Sea Shepherd has been protesting Japan’s research whaling for years, often engaging in scuffles with Japanese whalers. The group claims the whaling mission, an allowed exception to an international ban, is a cover for commercial hunting.
Bethune’s trial began in late May. During earlier trial sessions, he said he just wanted to confront the ship’s captain and hand him a $3 million bill for the destruction of the Ady Gil, the protest ship that sank during a collision in January.
In his tearful closing statement June 10, Bethune apologized for the trouble but said he never intended to hurt anyone. He also told the court that he will likely no longer continue his anti-whaling protests.
Sea Shepherd recently said it expelled Bethune because he violated its policies against carrying weapons. The group said he had a bow and arrows with him while he was aboard the Ady Gil, although he never used them.
Japan, Norway and Iceland hunt whales under exceptions to a 1986 moratorium by the International Whaling Commission. Japan’s whaling program also involves large-scale expeditions down to the Antarctic, while other whaling countries mostly stay along their coasts.
Separately, Japan has said the leader of Sea Shepherd is now on an Interpol wanted list for allegedly ordering Bethune as part of the group’s disruption of Japanese whaling in the Antarctic Ocean.
Canadian citizen Paul Watson, 59, was placed on the Interpol list in late June at the request of Japan, which accuses his group of risking whalers’ lives during their expedition.
google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbsFQi9NRCRAFsRQfj438hRfFiBgD9GQ0TA80
theaustralian.com.au/news/world/anti-whaling-activist-peter-bethune-gets-suspended-sentence-in-japan-court/story-e6frg6so-1225889019682


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.