pet connection

This just in (why do I suddenly feel like Ted Baxter?) from the FDA… and it’s time for Christie’s head to once again explode:

Today, at the request of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), U.S. Marshals seized various animal food products stored under unsanitary conditions at the PETCO Animal Supplies Distribution Center located in Joliet, Ill., pursuant to a warrant issued by the United States District Court in Chicago.

U.S. Marshals seized all FDA-regulated animal food susceptible to rodent and pest contamination. The seized products violate the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act because it was alleged in a case filed by the United States Attorney that they were being held under unsanitary conditions. (The Act uses the term “insanitary” to describe such conditions).

During an FDA inspection of a PETCO distribution center in April, widespread and active rodent and bird infestation was found. The FDA inspected the facility again in May and found continuing and widespread infestation.

“We simply will not allow a company to store foods under filthy and unsanitary conditions that occur as a direct result of the company’s failure to adequately control and prevent pests in its facility,” said Margaret O’K. Glavin, associate commissioner for regulatory affairs. “Consumers expect that such safeguards will be in place not only for human food, but for pet food as well.”

Are your pets’ foods affected by the seizure? The FDA release continues:

The distribution center in Joliet, Ill., provides pet food products and supplies to PETCO retail stores in 16 states including Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin.

What should consumers do who have purchased foods in those states? Well, there aren’t any reports of animal sickness from eating the food, but be sure to wash your hands after touching the packages you bought there:

FDA has no reports of pet illness or death associated with consumption of animal food distributed by PETCO, and does not have evidence that the food is unsafe for animals. However, the seized products were in permeable packages and held under conditions that could affect the food’s integrity and quality.

As a precaution, consumers who have handled products originating from the PETCO distribution center should thoroughly wash their hands with hot water and soap. Any surfaces that came in contact with the packages should be washed as well. Consumers are further advised as a precaution to thoroughly wash products sold in cans and glass containers from PETCO in the 16 affected states.

If a pet has become ill after eating these food products, pet owners should contact their veterinarian and report illnesses to FDA state consumer complaint coordinators.

While I applaud FDA for taking this bold action, it might be nice had they informed consumers of this problem last APRIL when they discovered it, and let us decide for ourselves if we wanted to give our money to Petco.

How was this allowed to go unreported for two months? How can FDA claim “We simply will not allow a company to store foods under filthy and unsanitary conditions that occur as a direct result of the company’s failure to adequately control and prevent pests in its facility,” when obviously, they do and they did, since April?

I won’t ask how this happened, because I know how it happened. The “small government” people always want to let market forces operate unless, you know, they don’t. In other words, letting people know what they need to know to make informed decisions is bad, protecting corporations is good.

And hey, no foreign country to blame this time, either.

AB 1634, California’s controversial proposed legislation to mandate sterilization of dogs and cats by 16 weeks of age, is dead.

Or at least, it lives on in name only; the actual language of the bill has been completely rewritten by Senator Negrete McLeod, Chairman of the Local Government Committee. From Concerned Dog Owners of California :

Under this version mandatory spay and neuter is no longer discussed except as a remedy for dogs about whom complaints, which cannot be barking dog complaints, have been made to animal control. Presumably this would include loose and roaming dogs but would be more inclusive. At the third complaint for dogs, the owner would be required to have the dog altered at his expense. Further the fines for complaints are increased.

Even Judie Mancuso, AB 1634 “campaign director” and the legislation’s most ardent proponent, couldn’t do much to spin this as other than a massive defeat. In an email to supporters, she wrote:

Earlier this week Assembly Member Lloyd Levine met with Senator Gloria Negrete McLeod to discuss AB 1634. Senator Negrete McLeod chairs the Senate Local Government Committee where AB 1634 has been held since mid-2007. The Senator presented amendments that remove all the current language of the bill and replace it with new language her office developed. The new bill targets only dogs and cats who are the subject of repeated complaints to animal control or repeated shelter impoundments. Assemblyman Levine agreed to adopt these amendments, which also adds Senator Negrete McLeod as a principal co-author.

[....]

I know many of you will not be happy with this proposal, and I am personally deeply disappointed that AB 1634 has been rewritten by Senator Negrete McLeod. But, please take a careful look at the new bill and the committee’s analysis, and come to your own conclusion about whether it might help decrease California’s pet overpopulation.

The original author of the bill, State Assembly Member Lloyd Levine, was term-limited out of his house seat, and was defeated in his recent bid for the State Senate.

The amended version of the bill, which will be heard by the Local Government Committee on June 25, can be read here; CDOC has promised to update with new developments throughout the day; that link also includes contact information for faxes of support and opposition to the new language, as all previously-submitted letters are out of date.

Now, time to direct our energy to supporting programs and policies in California — and the nation — that actually reduce animal shelter deaths, instead of “sound bite” legislation that does nothing to achieve that goal, and pits animal lover against animal lover in a battle over things that should be decided by pet owners and their veterinarians, not lawmakers.

Update: This from Capitol Weekly:

Judie Mancuso, the campaign director behind the effort to pass AB 1634, was less positive about the changes. For one thing, she said, the home foreclosure crisis is worsening the overpopulation problem at shelters as people give up pets when they move out of owned houses into rented apartments. For all of 2006, she said, California shelters took in 375,000 dogs, euthanizing 146,000. For 2007, shelters took in 419,000 dogs-but 10 counties have not yet reported all their numbers for last year, compared to only one that hasn’t reported 2006 numbers. The 2008 numbers, she said, are looking even worse.

Oh please. This is exactly the kind of thing that drives me crazy. In what way is people being forced to surrender their family pets because they have lost their homes due to the foreclosure crisis “pet overpopulation”? Get a grip on reality, Judie.

Update 2, the next day: The legislative analysis of the changes to the bill are here.

Oh conventional wisdom, how wrong you usually are. And never more so than about pit bulls.

Not only are most family pits friendly and wonderful companions, apparently even the “worst of the worst,” those dogs not only owned by dogfighters and bred for dogfighting but actually used in the pit, keep turning out to be not just good dogs, not just safe dogs, but wonderful dogs.

Take Leo, one of 50 pitbulls rescued from Michael Vick’s Bad Newz Kennels. After spending five weeks being trained and rehabbed by California trainer Marthina McClay, Leo has found a new purpose in life. From a feature, with video, over on MSNBC.com:

He now happily frolics in a clown collar as he makes the rounds at the Camino Infusion Center, where he brings comfort to cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.

Despite his training as a killer, Leo is a sweetheart as he visits his friends on the ward.

“He is wonderful, and all the patients love Leo,” said Paula Reed, the facility’s oncology director. “They really love his eyes and gentleness.”

Nor is that Leo’s only job.

Leo also touches young people on probation at the Alternative Placement Academy in San Jose, where the young men seem to identify with the former tough guy.

“I think they saw this dog’s awful background, and it communicates to the kids that you can end up being what you want to be,” McClay said.

It’s the age-old story of second chances. By living his, Leo helps tear down entrenched stereotypes that pit bulls are irredeemable killers.

“Leo is definitely an ambassador to the breed,” McClay said. “The staff at various facilities will say, ‘I will never see pit bulls the same again.’”

Out of the 50 dogs rescued from Bad Newz, only one had to be put down for aggressive behavior.

One.

So the next time someone says all pit bulls are dangerous and deadly and can’t be trusted, the next time PETA or anyone else calls them “time bombs” and says that all fighting dogs should be put down, tell them about Leo.

Video under the jump.

(more…)

It was an article in the Riverside Press-Enterprise, about a media conference held at the Humane Society of San Bernardino Valley in Southern California, in support of AB 1634, a law that would require all puppies and kittens in the state to be spayed or neutered by the time they are four months old.

Sharing the spotlight with the speakers were 482 stuffed garbage bags piled high next to the podium:

Emotions weren’t evoked until it was announced that each garbage bag represented the number of dogs and cats euthanized each week at the Humane Society of San Bernardino Valley, the San Bernardino City Animal Shelter and the San Bernardino County-Devore Animal Shelter.

“That translates into 22,900 cats and dogs each year,” said Susan Dawson, president of the Humane Society’s board of directors.

Representatives from the area shelters laid out the cost in dollars and lives of their animal control system: 22,900 animals killed in the last year. Costs spiraling up towards $8 million for next year’s animal control bill.

Ken Childress, director of San Bernardino City Animal Control (where a mandatory spay/neuter law has been in place for more than a year) said “the facilities can’t keep up with the number of animals that are being dropped off by pet owners or picked up by animal-control officers.”

Then something struck me. I was reminded of a much more gruesome media conference held 18 years ago in San Mateo County, CA, when then-Peninsula Humane Society director Kim Sturla decided to teach pet owners a lesson — or in her words, “take a 2-by-4 and hit them over the head” — by killing four kittens, a cat, and three dogs on the evening news.

“Body Bag Mountain” certainly didn’t go that far. In fact, the mound of trash bags made a very good visual for the story. I applaud whoever came up with the idea. And it made me curious, so I went to the Humane Society of San Bernardino Valley’s website, to see if they applied that same PR savvy to marketing animals for adoption.

I was confused, at first, because there is no mention of adoption anywhere on their landing page. I looked and looked, and couldn’t find a link anywhere, not even clicking down deep on the site, to adoption information.

Well, I figured, it’s just bad web design. That happens. I can understand how it is. So I used Google to do a site-wide search for the word “adoption.” I got only two returns, one to a donation form, and one to an article informing readers that it is not possible to adopt our way out of pet overpopulation.

“That’s true enough,” I thought, “when you don’t even try.”

In fact, in that article, which outlines steps people can take to help animals, while they find the time to tell people to “teach peace” to children, discourage the wearing of fur, and urge people to become vegetarians, they don’t even once suggest that people adopt a pet from the shelter. They actually say not to bother, because “Adoption alone will not solve the problem of pet overpopulation.”

And then you wonder why Allan Drusys, chief of veterinary services for the Riverside County Department of Animal Services, told the audience that he “hasn’t seen a backlog of people wanting to adopt pets.”

Well, I have a suggestion.

Instead of telling people that what they can do to help animals is support mandatory spay/neuter programs, which have never worked to end animal population control killing in any community, why don’t you get whoever came up with “Body Bag Mountain” to design a PR campaign just as powerful convincing people to adopt shelter animals?

Every community that has reached the No-Kill goal or come very close has done it with a set of programs and policies that include creative, aggressive, continuous adoption outreach. Richard Avanzino of Maddie’s Fund has shown that only a very small percentage increase in shelter adoptions will completely eliminate all animal population control killing, not just in one year but on a sustainable basis. And Maddie’s Fund puts their money where their mouth is; they awarded 85 grants totalling $10 million last year to help communities in 16 states reach that goal. Did San Bernardino apply for any of those funds?

I wonder if the person who came up with “Body Bag Mountain” writes grant applications, too?

It’s not really news that former Democratic Vice-president Al Gore has endorsed the Democratic candidate for President, Barack Obama.

What’s news to me, however, is one of the reasons he’s supporting change in the upcoming election. From his endorsement speech in Detroit last night:

If you care about a clean environment, if you want a government that protects you instead of special interests, you know that elections matter.

If you care about food safety, if you like a “T” on your BLT, you know that elections matter.

If you bought poison lead-filled toys from China, or adulterated medicine made in China, if you bought tainted pet food made in China, you know that elections matter.

After the last eight years, even our dogs and cats have learned that elections matter.

You can find the video under the jump, and the passage I quoted starts right around the 7 minute mark.

(more…)