pet connection

What could be better than a picture of a dog (other than the real thing, of course)? Lots and lots of great pictures of dogs. Surf on over to the Canon digital photography forums if you want to see some candid camera work of dogs in all their infinite variety–216 pages worth. One of my faves is this Greyhound, and if you can tolerate dogs in costume, this Basset Hound in full Scottish regalia (toward the bottom of the page) is pretty irresistible. If not, squinch your eyes closed until you get to the photo just beneath it.

It takes imagination to assign a typeface to a dog breed, and that’s what John Farrier has done over on Neatorama. A Dalmatian as Courier Regular? A sculpted Poodle as Kunstler script medium? Me, I would have made the white Bull Terrier Bodoni bold instead of Bodoni book. What typeface is your breed? Cavaliers are Garamond. I hear Flat Coats are Comic Sans. I think probably a lot of breeds fall under that one.  (h/t to Guy Kawasaki on Twitter)

In the New York Times’ Science section, Nicholas Wade reports that some researchers now believe that dogs were domesticated in the Middle East rather than East Asia, as was previously theorized. After analyzing a large collection of wolf and dog genomes from around the world, a team led by Bridgett M. vonHoldt and Robert K. Wayne found that the Middle East was where wolf and dog genomes were most similar, he writes. The findings include interesting insights into dog types, in particular, herding breeds, sighthounds and scenthounds, as well as canine affability and ability to read human body language. As with any scientific finding, there’s debate about the researchers’ conclusions. Read the rest here.

Saving lives saves money.   I’m not asking you to take my word for it.  There’s data that backs it up. The Best Friends Animal Society commissioned a study by John Dunham & Associates, and funded by PetSmart Charities. Here’s the bottom line, from yesterday’s press release:

With an estimated 87 million free-roaming, homeless cats in the United States, it would cost governmental entities about $16 billion to trap and kill these cats as opposed to about $9 billion for supporting trap-neuter/spay-return (TNR) programs run by rescue organizations and individual volunteers.

OK, that’s a savings to John Q. Taxpayer of $7 billion, or $80.45 per feral cat not killed. As Sen. Everett Dirksen famously said, “A billion here, a billion there, sooner or later we’re talking about real money.”   This is real money, and it would make a real difference.  In fact it already is, in communities where TNR has been adopted.   I’ll get to that in a minute.

Meanwhile, the issue has direct applicability now. Today.  In the state of New Jersey.  Here’s the lede from our friend Alley Cat Rescue’s current post:

Fish and Game Council member Leonard Wolgast has sponsored a resolution to have feral cats reclassified by the NJ Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), which could put an end to TNR programs in the state and allow feral cats to be hunted.   [...]  Unfortunately, Mr. Wolgast is a member of this committee and owns property with a kennel (owned and operated by his wife’s family) that contracts with several communities in Central Jersey to pick up and euthanize cats.

First there’s the screaming conflict of interest, but let’s not waste time right now on the ethical violations haunting New Jersey’s regulatory agencies.  The bigger problem is the needless waste of both money and animals’ lives. Furthermore, hunting down feral cats to kill them doesn’t solve the problem.  You want proof of that?  I take you back to the Best Friends’ study.

“The city of San Diego had one of the earliest and most successful TNR programs. In the early 1990s, the Feral Cat Coalition of San Diego began programs aimed at curtailing the free-roaming cat population in the city as an alternative to exterminating the cats. Since 1992, not only has the city moved towards being a “no-kill” community, it has witnessed 50 percent decrease in the feral cat population.”

Fifty percent decrease.  Trap and kill didn’t do that.  TNR did, and this is conclusive data from close to two decades’ worth of TNR policy in a major city. But TNR isn’t just working in San Diego.  Again, back to the study summary:

“TNR programs have had much success on municipal levels, with some of the most comprehensive being San Diego, New York City, Mobile county, Alabama, Chicago/Cook County and Jacksonville, Florida.” (Best Friends, First Coast, the City of Jacksonville, and Jacksonville Humane Society have partnered in a program called “Feral Freedom.” The cats that arrive to the city animal shelter in traps are turned over First Coast to be spay/neutered then returned to their original trap location. These cats are referred to as “community cats.”)

TNR works, and it saves money.  So why are we still killing cats?

Photo credit: feral kitten, flickr creative commons.

I promised you updates on how our elected officials are doing with respect to the pet community.  So far, so good.

Austin approves no kill policy: The Austin, Texas, city council last week approved a no kill plan for the city’s major shelter.  From the Austin American-Statesman:

The plan includes three dozen provisions aimed at reducing euthanizations and increasing adoptions. The plan’s goal is, within two years, to have 90 percent of the animals leave the shelter alive. The city euthanized 7,003 animals last year, or 32 percent of the animals it took in.[...]

There are still funding questions to be worked out, and as always the devil is in the details, but the Austin city council deserves a hearty handshake for standing up for what’s right. And no, there’s no truth to the rumor that they did it just to impress Christie, who was there for the  South By Southwest Interactive conference.

Georgia House sends  Grace’s Law to Senate: Gas chambers for animals are one step closer to becoming a thing of the past in Georgia after the House approved HB 788 by a vote of 115-46.   We haven’t crossed the goal line yet, though.  Now it’s on to the Georgia state senate for consideration, and after that, Gov. Sonny Purdue’s desk. Purdue, interestingly enough, is one of very few veterinarians holding public office.

Pets returning to Santa Cruz? If you live in Santa Cruz, Calif., you haven’t been able to walk your dog (or any pet, for that matter) on downtown’s main drag since 1976.  That may change soon.  The downtown merchant’s association voted overwhelmingly to recommend the city council repeal the ban, in order to add shoppers who might like to bring their pooches with them (like the dog peering out of the passing vehicle).   From the Santa Cruz Sentinel:

The Downtown Association’s specific recommendation includes the following restrictions:

• Leashes can be no shorter than 3 feet and no longer than 5 feet.
• No dogs after dark.
• No panhandling with dogs.
• A maximum of three dogs gathered together in close proximity.

Widening pet access often comes about as a result of grassroots efforts, and in this case a driving force is a woman named Whitney Wilde:

The founder of Woofers and Walkers, a dog-walking group that advocates for responsible ownership and expanded access, has collected at least 335 signatures for a council petition to repeal the ban.

“Everybody is so happy,” she said.

I wasn’t able to get confirmation as to whether or not banana slugs (the mascot of the University of California, Santa Cruz) would be allowed downtown, but I doubt it.

Pyrethrin suit in New Jersey: A series of lawsuits over the use of pyrethrin in flea and tick control products have been filed, alleging pets have been sickened by the medication, and violations of New Jersey consumer fraud laws.  The Morning Call of Allentown and Lehigh Valley and North Jersey.com say the suits have been filed  in New Jersey, as four of the five defendant companies are based in the state:

Secaucus-based Hartz Mountain Corp., Summit VetPharm LLC of Rutherford, Morristown-based Bayer Healthcare LLC, Merck & Co. Inc. of Whitehouse Station and Sanofi-Aventis Inc. of Bridgewater are named as defendants in suits filed over the last four months.[...]

Five pet owners filed suit against Hartz Mountain and Summit VetPharm last week in U.S. District Court in Newark, alleging that their flea or tick treatments contained Pyrethrin, or a synthetic version of the chemical Pyrethroids, which are ”known to poison animals.”

The suit accuses the companies of negligence, violating New Jersey’s consumer fraud law and liability for creating an ”unreasonably dangerous product.” The products named include Hartz Ultra Guard flea and tick drops and Summit VetPharm’s Vectra 3d.

Sergeant’s Pet Care Products, based in Nebraska, and Merial Ltd of Georgia are also named as defendants.  From NorthJersey.com:

Rich Parsons of California said he worried he might be carrying fleas when he returned from helping reconstruct parts of the Mississippi Gulf after Hurricane Katrina, and might infect his Scottish Terrier, Duffy. So Parsons treated his dog with Hartz flea and tick drops, the suit says.

“Duffy tragically died at the veterinarian’s facility three days later,” the suit says. It adds that the veterinarian said the death was due to a “reaction to the insecticide.”

In related news, the EPA announced it would be stepping up efforts to make topical flea and tick products safer for pets:

Steve Owens, assistant administrator of EPA’s Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, said new restrictions will be placed on flea and tick products, with additional changes for specific products likely — including possible changes in some product formulas.

[....]

The EPA said it received 44,263 reports of harmful reactions associated with topical flea and tick products in 2008, up from 28,895 in 2007. Reactions ranged from skin irritations to vomiting to seizures to, in about 600 cases, death of an animal.

[....]

In a 29-page report, the EPA said the majority of problems for dogs occurred in smaller dogs, weighing 10 to 20 pounds. Some incidents occurred when products intended for larger dogs were given to smaller animals, the report said. Chihuahuas, Shih Tzus, miniature poodles, Pomeranians and dachshunds were among breeds where problems occurred the most, the EPA said.

Similarly, many problems for cats occurred when they were given treatments intended for dogs. The EPA is likely to require companies to revamp labels to clarify that products intended for dogs should never be used on cats, Owens said.

No dog insurance necessary in Great Britain:  It was a silly idea, anyway.  However, there’s one line in the story that I must share with you:

The opposition Conservatives accused ministers of turning the issue into a “political dog’s dinner.”

Irish kitteh: And finally, since I didn’t have a chance to check in yesterday, a late St. Patrick’s Day smile, courtesy of lolcats, a tiny little division of Icanhascheezburger.com :

see more Lolcats and funny pictures

I always like to hear from readers, especially if you have tips, and links for interesting stories.  Give me a shout in the comments, or better yet, send me an e-mail.

Photo credit:  Hopeful dog in Santa Cruz, Dan Coyro/Sentinel.

Real Ham Bone for Dogs could be a real problem: Dogs are reported to be sickened or killed after ingesting Dynamic Pet Products’ “Real Ham Bone for Dogs,” carrying the Frick’s Quality Meats label.   According to the St. Louis Globe-Democrat, the Better Business Bureau of St. Louis has issued an alert saying the treats, made from 8-inch smoked pork femur bones, are splintering, creating intestinal blockages and death.

According to the BBB, a veterinarian who surgically removed bone fragments from one of the dogs said, “Things like this shouldn’t happen. If you can’t say it’s safe, it probably isn’t something you should have in stores.”

ConsumerAffairs.com has received similar complaints.   The bones are sold in stores such as Dollar General, as well as supermarkets nationwide.  Where is the FDA, you ask?  They are looking into it. Meanwhile, the company in question is quoted in a post from omidog saying, well, you can read it here:

The company said Thursday it was saddened to learn of the illnesses and deaths of customers’ pets, and that quality and safety remain priorities. The packaging contains a warning about the product not being for all dogs, and the possibility that it could splinter.

“That is why every package contains a label that provides detailed instructions to owners on how they can help their pets best enjoy our products,” the company said in a statement. “We strongly encourage owners to supervise their pets with any treats or snacks.”

If you have any of these treats in your home, you might want to consider not feeding them to your dogs and taking them back to the store.

Grace’s Law passes Rules Committee: The Georgia House of Representatives will vote tomorrow on final passage of Grace’s Law.   The bill is largely the product of a grassroots effort led by the Georgia Voters for Animal Welfare (GVAW).  Grace’s Law would outlaw the gassing or heartsticking (injecting lethal drugs directly into the heart of a conscious animal) of shelter pets in the state, and it was reported out of the Rules Committee on Thursday.    The full text of the bill, denoted HB 788, is here.   Here’s the reality:  Passage of the bill isn’t anything close to guaranteed.  The vote could go either way.  If you live in Georgia, please call your representative.  If you have friends or relatives in Georgia (as I do), kindly pass this along to them.    From Valerie Hayes’ Examiner.com article on the bill:

It is particularly important that residents of counties which still use the gas chamber to kill shelter pets call or write in support of Grace’s Law.  They are:

1. Ashburn, City of (In Turner County; no county facility; chamber housed in city.)
2. Butts County Animal Control
3. Cobb County Animal Control
4. Cordele, City of (Crisp County)
5. Cuthbert, City of (In Randolph County; no county facility; chamber housed in city.)
6. Haralson County Animal Shelter
7. Hawkinsville, City of (In Pulaski County; no county facility; chamber housed in city.)
8. Henry County Animal Control
9. Lakeland, City of (In Lanier County; no county facility; chamber housed in city.)
10. Mitchell County Animal Control
11. Vienna, City of Animal Shelter (In Dooly County; no county facility; chamber housed in city.)

Bedbugs?  Put a dog on the case. Let me state at the outset that this topic makes my skin crawl, but as your intrepid news editor, it’s my responsibility to pass it along.   Bedbugs are making a resurgence, and you might be surprised to know that one of the best possible methods of detection is a properly trained bedbug-sniffing dog.  The New York Times explains.

Bedbug-sniffing dogs, adorable yet stunningly accurate — entomology researchers at the University of Florida report that well-trained dogs can detect a single live bug or egg with 96 percent accuracy — are the new and furry front line in an escalating and confounding domestic war.[...]

Consider that six years ago, there were 537 bedbug complaints and 82 violations (in other words, verified infestations); last year, complaints topped out at nearly 11,000, with 4,084 violations cited (nearly double that of the previous year).

Didn’t bedbugs used to be less of a problem?  Yes.  In the 1950’s and ’60’s, they were mostly eradicated with pesticides like DDT, which have since been banned.  However, many countries overseas still have bedbug infestations, and increased international travel has brought the critters back to our shores.

Fuji’s new pet camera: Are you in the market for a new digital camera?  Got a pet?  I’m assuming the answer to the second question is yes, otherwise why are you here?  Our buddy Maria Goodavage over at Dogster spotlighted an intriguing new product from Fujifilm: the FinePix Z700EXR compact camera.  Digital cameras have featured face recognition capability for some years now.  The FinePix Z700EXR goes one step better: It recognizes and optimizes photographic capture of pet faces — both dog and cat, though Maria, understandably, just talked about the dog part (she writes for Dogster, not Catster).  The camera looks pretty snazzy, and there are pets it’s particularly good at capturing, but it has some potentially annoying limitations, including:

• it doesn’t do quite so well with black, or predominately black pets (Gina just frowned)
• it’s not good with pets who are constantly in motion (sorry, FayBee, and Christie’s soon-to-be-arriving puppy)
• pets with large, predominately dark, patches around the eyes and/or nose, won’t be recognized as well
• wrinkly, short, muzzled faces (sorry, Mikkel’s pug Willy)

However, if you have a beagle,  golden retriever, Maltese, Abyssinian, Maine coon, or any of the breeds shown here, feel free to send me a camera review.

I always like to hear from readers, especially if you have tips, and links for interesting stories.  Give me a shout in the comments, or better yet, send me an e-mail.

Photo credits:  Ham Bone, baltimoresun.com. Grace, Phil Draughon.

[Update: The city council said, "Aye," followed by standing applause.] If you’re near Austin today, you might want to drop in to see the city council make history.  The Austin-American Statesman supplies the dry details, but here’s the skinny:

• $12 million will be appropriated to build a brand new shelter, and more importantly
• Austin will commit itself to a citywide no-kill policy, joining Charlottesville, Va., and Reno, among others.

Congratulations, Austin.

Microchip and insurance requirement in the UK? There’s a movement afoot in the United Kingdom to mandate microchips for all dogs.  A separate proposal would require  dog owners to buy insurance against injury to a third party.   I don’t like this as compulsory policy, but I was interested in reading Dr. Shawn Messonnier’s opinion on this.

Speaking of reporting back, an update on a previously discussed story:

No bark-softening in the Bay State: Following up on previous stories discussing the controversy over bark softening (also called debarking and devocalization), the Massachusetts House voted 150-1 last week to prohibit the procedure for any reason other than the health of the animal.   Petside’s opinion on the matter is clear:

This cruel and unnecessary procedure, along with tail docking and feline declawing, has already been humanely banned throughout the United Kingdom. But, sadly to say I was unable to find any other state in this country that has either passed or that has pending legislation to ban this senseless and dangerous surgery. In fact, California, New Jersey and Ohio have already attempted to broadly ban the procedure without any success.

…or Arizona, for that matter: Meanwhile, Chandler, Ariz. would rather assault the dogs in and near its parks with high frequency sound (thanks for that one, Anne T).

[T]he proximity to homes where backyard dogs might be exposed could upset neighborhood dogs that aren’t barking but sense they are being punished, Smith said.

Kimberly Searles, spokeswoman for the Arizona Humane Society, said the Dog Silencer “does have the potential to negatively affect dogs who are not barking, in that it can make them not want to go to the dog park if doing so is going to hurt their ears.”

You have the right to remain silent….you have the right to an attorney.  However, your pet doesn’t.  At least not in Switzerland.  (thanks, Deb)

Like, totally vetted, man: OK class, pop quiz time.  Hey, pipe down in back.  If you’ve studied this won’t be a problem.  Everyone check out that red bar on the left side of the page where all the interesting pet blogs are listed.  See anything different?  Anyone?  Bueller?  Two links are missing.  Which ones?  Nobody?  OK, I’ll give you the answer.  Pet Connection’s BFF Dr. Patty Khuly has started a brand new blog, called “Fully Vetted.”  It’s an amalgamation of her two older blogs, Dolittler and Daily Vet.  You’ll notice they’re both gone.  This will be easier for her, and of course (more importantly), easier for me to get all the good stuff in once place.

Not so much for the tootsies: And Dr. Khuly has already started us off with a short but totally sensible mini-rant on why she’d prefer not to trim toenails (I presume she’s referring to those of the pets she sees).

Let’s be honest: a dog that gets a nail trim once a year is receiving an all-but-useless service that only serves to make him more afraid of the veterinarian’s office. After all, they’ll have grown out within a month or two — less in some cases. And some dogs really don’t need trimming at all as long as they walk on surfaces that sufficiently file their toenails.

That’s why I’ve begun a campaign to reduce nail trims at my workplace. Unless the animal is easily amenable or under anesthesia, annual or semi-annual nail trims are counterproductive when conducted by a veterinarian or her staff. You want his nails trimmed? Go to the groomer. Go to PetSmart. Go anywhere else except the place where stress should be minimized for medical reasons.

She’s right.  I don’t remember the last time we had to trim Cami and Harry’s nails.

I always like to hear from readers, especially if you have tips, and links for interesting stories.  Give me a shout in the comments, or better yet, send me an e-mail.

Photo credits:  Austin skyline, utexas.edu. Pink nails, petmd.com.