pet connection

It’s true, I’m lazy. That’s part of why I have sighthounds, because no one really expects you to do obedience or tracking or anything requiring, you know, serious training with a sighthound.

Which isn’t to say my dogs aren’t well-behaved. They walk quietly on a loose leash, they don’t bark, go to the bathroom in the house, or eat the sofa. And I can easily train a dog to the extent required to trot around a show ring and stand pretty for the judge.

But I happily confess I don’t have much interest in more formal training, and so I’ve been pretty happy sharing my life with a type of dog who doesn’t, either.

Now, researchers in Denmark have discovered that at least one other breed of hound, the Beagle, learns best when he learns least often. In an article published in Applied Animal Behavioral Sciences, the authors found that dogs trained once a week learned specific behaviors better than dogs trained five times a week.

In a nutshell, 18 laboratory beagles were divided into two groups. The dogs were all trained by the same person, in the same unfamiliar room. The training was done using so-called “positive” methods, including shaping and clicker training.

The results of the study show that dogs trained once a week learned the shaping exercise in significantly fewer training sessions than dogs trained five times a week. In addition, weekly trained dogs tended to have higher success rates at the different steps of the shaping exercise than the dogs trained five times a week. The dogs trained five times a week completed the shaping exercise in significantly fewer days than the weekly trained dogs. It is concluded that for dogs learning a given skill, weekly training results in better learning performance than training five times a week, when performance is measured in the number of training sessions required to reach a certain training level.

My sighthounds approve of these findings about their scenthound cousins. You can read the whole article here (PDF).

In one day, one day, the Illinois State Veterinary Medical Association sliced and diced any so-called scientific or public health argument for legally forced spay-neuter laws AND the sharp-pencil folks at the California Department of Finance took out the legs out from under the “taxpayer savings” lie.

As noted previously, forced spay-neuter laws have increased shelter kill rates and municipal animal-control costs everywhere they have been tried, even as the veterinary community is questioning whether it’s even medically recommended to spay or neuter all pets.

Why do legally mandated forced spay-neuter laws increase shelter killing? Because they force animal-lovers who need financial help with spaying or neutering to give up pets instead. And because they are pet-lovers, they get more pets, not from the shelter of the animal-control agency who forced them to give up their pets (or any shelter, because now they’re all tarred with the same brush), but from the people around the corner with an “oops” litter who didn’t even license their pet, and can’t afford to spay her, no matter what the law says. Or from a relative or friend in the next county. Or from someone selling puppies illegally from the back of a car in a parking lot — puppies that in Southern California are often smuggled in from Mexico and desperately ill. Or if they have some extra money in a few months, they’ll buy from a retail puppy-mill outlet, otherwise known as a pet store. Or a puppy-mill Web site.

So instead of one pet who would have been spayed or neutered and kept in a home with some assistance, we have two pets: A dead one in the back of the animal-control facility and new one in the pet-lover’s home, and the new one still isn’t spayed or neutered.

And around it goes again.

The previous owners of the pets who die after forced spay-neuter laws are put into place are often people who would likely do the right thing and spay or neuter their cats and dogs if they had access (this includes transportation … you can’t take pets on public transportation!) to spay-neuter services subsidized by animal charities. But when faced with a fine they can’t afford, such people give up their pets … and with no community-wide no-kill structure in place and killing for population control the shelter industry norm, that animal will likely be killed after the adoption period is over at the municipal animal control facility.

That’s the reality of laws that mandate forced spay-neuter of dogs and cats.

That doesn’t matter to the people who are leading the push for these laws. The spittle-spewing leaders of the movement pushing these laws truly do believe all breeders are the same — they’ve said so — and because of this they are happy to wipe out every heritage and working breed, and, if taken to the logical conclusion, every dog and cat. “Until there are none, adopt one” is nothing more than a feel-good slogan to keep the pet-loving foot-soldiers happy while animal-rights extremists laugh over the gullibility of animal-lovers who don’t know about PETA’s shelter kill rate and of law-makers who want nothing more than something fuzzy-good sounding on their resume, whether the law works or not. (more…)

On the first of every month we draw from the list of our newsletter subscribers for a prize package with a retail value of $1,000. We’ve had some great packages, and we have some really good ones coming up. The August package is from Hagen, and on Sept. 1 we’ll draw a winner for an entire aquarium package … everything but the fish!

On Friday, Aug. 1, we’ll draw for the Petmate goodies. Here’s the list.

Are you signed up for our free monthly e-mail newsletter? If you are, you’re automatically entered in the monthly prize drawing. If you’re not, sign up here.

Hat tip to straybaby for the link to the Illinois State Veterinary Medical Association, opposing forced spay-neuter for Chicago. From the ISVMA:

The Illinois State Veterinary Medical Association (ISVMA) opposes the mandatory spay/neuter ordinance being proposed for the City of Chicago.  Although the ordinance’s stated goals to reduce the number of unwanted pets and gang activity are laudable, the reality is that it will have no effect on these problems. Instead, it will create some serious public health concerns, cause many animals to be denied necessary health care, and will trample on the personal property rights of conscientious pet owners. 

The ISVMA opposes this proposed ordinance for the following reasons: (explanations below)

• The ordinance implies that dog bites will vanish because of a simplistic, and non-scientifically based assumption that only intact animals bite.

• There is no conclusive evidence that mandatory spay/neuter programs work.

• This mandate would discourage pet owners from seeking rabies immunization if they are opposed to neutering/spaying and fear they will be reported.  Currently, we struggle to ensure the proper safeguards are in place to protect the public from rabies.  Rabies is essentially a 100% fatal disease to humans, dogs and cats.

• There are not enough resources in Chicago to enforce this law in a meaningful way.

• With regard to creating a healthier pet, there are both positive and negative affects accrued from sterilization. It appears that benefits outweigh risks; however, there are many breed and individual dog variants, suggesting that professional judgment is required to determine whether and when to neuter/spay pets.

Read the entire document; it’s well worth your time.  Should we paying attention to a retired TV game-show host or the detailed explanation of peer-reviewed work of general practice veterinarians, public-health veterinarians and veterinary behaviorists? Let’s put a cork in Bob Barker’s forced spay-neuter “tsunami” and work on community-wide, progressive, carrot-not-stick approaches to getting pets into homes and keeping them there.

I take back what I wrote yesterday. Illinois does have more common sense than California. The best the California Veterinary Medical Association could do on forced spay-neuter here (AB 1634, in its new and arguably worse incarnation coming to the California State Senate floor as early as Monday) is back away from “support” to “neutral”  after its members went ballistic.

At least in Illinois, they’ll look at the issues, the facts and the science and speak up for what works … and what doesn’t.

When you’re right, you’re right: Bob Barker is right about one thing … forced spay-neuter laws are indeed a tsunami, as in a wave that wipes out and kills everything in its path. Check out the killing and the costs that come in the wake of forced spay-neuter legislation, most recently in L.A. (Thanks to SaveOurDogs for the research and for putting it all in one place.)

Why is this even being discussed anywhere?

Disturbing story from the Northern California, of a sick jerk who was breeding and selling Cane Corsos (apparently mixed with Labs and Rotties):

Robert Brunette, 45, of Boulder Creek is wanted for cruelty to animals after they removed 38 emaciated dogs and puppies from his property Saturday finding many locked in small cages without food or water and covered in their own feces and urine.

Brunette, who denied access to the property Friday and fled when authorities returned with a search warrant Saturday, apparently returned to the ramshackled house and left more dog remains. Animal services officers caught two more dogs Tuesday and placed live traps for what they believe are eight more adult dogs roaming the more than 3-acre property in the heavily-wooded remote area near Bear Creek Road.

Brunette was nowhere to be found but they are looking for and believe they have probable cause to arrest him for crimes against animals.

Environmental health officers were also on hand Tuesday surveying the property littered with old vehicles, trash, makeshift pens, feces and dog kennels. Much of the property was also surrounded by an electric fence used to keep the dogs in place.

More details, many graphic, here. Sad to say, we don’t link to many hoarding or animal-cruelty stories because they’re just so common. But this case is something else, cruelty of a Michael Vick level.