Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Monday, February 23, 2009
From the Best Friend's Website:
A meeting of the minds
The Humane Society of the United States on February 23 issued an interim policy recommending all dogs be evaluated as individuals, and is calling a meeting of leading animal welfare organizations concerning dogs victimized by dog fighting.
Wayne Pacelle, chief executive officer and president of the Humane Society of the United States, suggested the meeting of major stakeholders in Las Vegas to work through the associated issues. This meeting is in response to concerns expressed by Best Friends Animal Society in December 2008 regarding HSUS policies related to animals confiscated in dog-fighting busts. 
Pacelle said the meeting, scheduled for April, will include the participation of national stakeholder organizations that deal with pit bulls. 
The new interim policy announced by the HSUS, pending the outcome of the meeting, recommends that local law enforcement and animal control evaluate such dogs as individuals rather than as a category before any decision is made regarding their future. 
We expect government, corporations, and individuals to constantly re-evaluate how they deal with animal issues,” Pacelle said. “Likewise, we regularly review our own policies and procedures here at HSUS, and we think it is important to talk with professional colleagues in the movement to examine issues related to the disposition of fighting dogs."
I've got to point out a few things:
1) The HSUS is calling this meeting in response to Best Friends expressing concerns over HSUS policies?...what the hell?
The HSUS claims to represent 10.5 million people. So, am I to believe that none of the HSUS faithful are pissed off and concerned about this latest debacle? Not very likely.
Does it really take the concern of a "professional colleague", and competition for membership dues, for the HSUS leadership to start talking about making changes? Again, what about the 10.5 million and their concerns?
I have a strong suspicion this week has seen a decline in membership for the HSUS, and yet they're prepared to ignore the folks that are already sending'em money.
Watch out, Best Friends, I hope this isn't just a plan to steal your play-book.
2) National Stakeholders. I am dying to know how the HSUS defines the pit bull's National Stakeholder. Any chance my name is on that list? Doubtful.
3) Plenty of weasel words ("interim policy" and "pending the outcome") in the HSUS' new policy for recommending that all "bust dogs" be evaluated....and why the hell is this a new policy?
In short, they've got a built-in "out clause" that'll allow them to revert to their old ways once the pressure dies down.
Alright, enough of the railing.
I think this is a fine time for pit bull advocates to express their opinions to the HSUS, Best Friends, BADRAP, and the other (unnamed) "national stakeholders."
Honestly, I don't know what type of outcome to expect from this meeting.
And since it's scheduled for this coming April, a lot can happen between now and then...and I tend to believe that Wane Pacelle is hoping that some of the heat is taken off his organization by then.
A notion that will greatly influence the tone of April's meeting.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
And while I've been aware, for some time now, that many people from all walks of life are not impressed with Wayne Pacelle and the HSUS, I did find this blog post to be telling of the range in which WP offends: Wayne Pacelle: The Human Conundrum.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
U.S. Reps. Jim Moran (D-Va.) and Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.), announced today that they will co-chair the newly formed Congressional Animal Protection Caucus, working with The HSUS and HSLF to take lawmaking for animals to the next level.
Check with the Smartdogs' Blog for additional thoughts on the CAPC.
If this something you find troubling, please contact your US Representatives and Senators to inform them of your concerns. Politely, let them know how you feel about the HSUS and the propspect of them working together.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
But nonetheless, I still have to say something:
The HSUS, once again, recommended that dogs (and very young puppies) taken from a dogfighting operation be killed.
In all fairness, the HSUS does not make the call in these situations - ever. The dogs in these cases will always be at the mercy of a judge that is acting according to the local laws.
Judges, like all people, are not specialists in all matters, and as such, are likely to have no clue as to politics of the HSUS or the great dis-trust that many Americans and Canadians have for the organization...let alone a strong understanding of dog behavior.
And because this group has been around nearly 60 years, is a known player in the world of politics (read: they are powerful lobbyists), and has the word Humane in it's moniker many politicians seek their counsel, many judges seek their counsel, and many legislators seek their counsel.
So with that said, please take the time to read the following blog posts, all of which express their frustration with the lack of understanding, respect, and decency that can be found in the HSUS' actions:
Lassie, Get Help:Worse than Vick
KC Dog Blog: The Answer is Kill, Now What is the Question?
BADRAP Blog: Numb
B-MORE Bulldogs: Letter to the HSUS
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Representative John Heaton's office has confirmed that HB 667 will be amended to remove the breed-specific provisions. The AKC Government Relations department thanks all those who called, wrote letters, and emailed their representatives about this important issue. We will provide additional information once the amended text is available.
As of last night (2/17), the newly amended bill wasn't available on the Legislature's website, but I have a strong feelign that someon at the AKC wouldn't have made the above statement without having contacting Rep. Heaton's office.
Hat tip to LK in Santa Fe for the heads up.
Monday, February 16, 2009
And then, for old times sake, I thought I would take Lulu to a local golf course where many take their dogs to run on the greens. While Coco and I have logged countless hours walking the golf course, Lulu had never been.
While walking aroung the place, I remember why I stopped taking Coco, and why I had never taken Lulu: it's too crowded in the evenings and very few people have control of their dogs.
Now, don't get me wrong, this place works well for LOTS of people and their dogs but it's just not a good fit for me and my crew....and I was reminded of this tonight, and in a big way.
If a walk around a 9 hole golf course crowded with loose (albeit generally social), no-recall having dogs (and owners that see no problem with letting their dogs run up to unfamiliar animals) doesn't seem so bad, you're right, it's not so bad...but wait till you get a load of this:
So, while heading back to the car with Lulu, a woman and her dog are headed in our general direction. When I am close enough, I offer up a greeting: "Hey, how you doing?" What do I get in return?:
"that dog is starving!"
I reply: "why would you say that?"
Some lady: "Well, look at her!"
Me: "She's not starving."
Some lady: "You can see her ribs, and you're not supposed to see that!"
Me: "I'm sorry, now where is it that you got your Veterinarian's Degree?"
Some lady: "Ohhh, O.K...C'mon [dog's name], get away from him, he's obviously out of his f**kin' gourd."
Is the dog thin? Yes.
Is she starving? No.
Does she receive an appropriate amount of food (and treats) through the day? Absolutely.
So why is she thin? Because she gets a fair amount of vigorous exercises, she is not over-fed, and she's a growing puppy.
The aspect of this whole thing that really gets me fired-up is not that someone commented about my dog's weight, but the manner in which this woman did so.
I would've answered any question this woman had about Lulu or her feeding regimens. Would've had no issue spending 5-10 minutes talking about Lulu's "lifestyle."
But there's the rub:
She didn't ask one question...she was all statements and diagnosis.
And then, when pressed for her credentials she really showed her true colors.
Lady, whoever you are, thanks for ruining my evening.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
It's being said that the Pit bull and Rottweiler language that first appeared in HB667 is going to be taken out. However, these amendments have not yet been made public...and while the info that I've received has come from reliable sources, I am going to define the mood on this end as: Cautiously Optimistic.
I have a feeling we're going to have to wait till Tues or Wed of this coming week before we can get a look at the new language: I'll be sure to keep checking at the NM State Legislature's "Bill Finder."
Keep in mind folks, simply removing the BSL language, while making these requirements for ALL DOG OWNERS, is not a good thing either - so we really need to continue to check in on this bill...but at least for the moment, hold fast, it seems the BSL aspect of this one is going away.
HB 667 will bring about the following for all Pit bull and Rottweiler owners:
home inspections by Animal Control agencies that are both unannounced and without a court issued warrant;
If the proposed legislation passes, VERY FEW people will consider adopting a Pit bull, Rottweiler or any dog with that appears to be a mix of either, which will ultimately bring about even more perfectly adoptable dogs being euthanized.
More so, many rescue organizations will avoid representing Pit bulls and Rottweilers due to these requirements.Please contact these legislators and let them know (politely) that you oppose this legislation (HB 667.)Contact info is available in the 2/10 update, via the white, highlighted text.
Monday, February 9, 2009
House Bill 667 was introduced on 2/9, and has one sponsor - Rep. Heaton - and it's current location is the
House Consumer & Public Affairs Committee:
CONSUMER & PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Meets: Tuesdays & Thursdays - 1:30 p.m. - Room 315
Gail Chasey - (D)
Antonio "Moe" Maestas - (D)
Thomas A. Anderson - (R)
Zachary J. Cook - (R)
Karen E. Giannini - (D)
Bill B. O'Neill - (D)
Al Park - (D)
Here we go, folks!
Rep. John Heaton from Carlsbad has introduced House Bill 667, which will require all pit bulls and rottweilers in the state to be registered as dangerous dogs under the Dangerous Dog Act, regardless of whether the dog has any history of violence.
Please look at the bill and contact your legislators and the sponsor to let them know that you oppose the bill.
The bill is available in PDF form via this link.
You can find your legislators through the legislative website at www.nmlegis.gov .
Please continue to check my blogs for updates, and feel free to email me with questions or suggestions.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
In the last few years, I have volunteered at community shelters, as well as adoption and education events, and it seems to me that many hosting, promoting, or volunteering at spay/neuter events have no idea (or at the very least are not providing this information) that there are potential downsides to disconnecting an animal's developmental system.
For the most part, I don't think these groups are deliberately holding back information from the public, I just don't think they've ever stopped to think about what they were doing. And those that have, are likely to feel that the ends justify the means.
Not too mention, I have a strong suspicion that a number of the Veterinarians volunteering (or greatly discounting) their services are likely to skip many (if not all) of the pre-procedure tests that are available, which could reveal conditions suggesting the animal not be altered.
As per usual, we're responsible for our animals and should research the decisions that we're making on their behalf.
* Sorry, couldn't pass on the opportunity to use the word "balls" in the title of a spay/neuter post.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Lulu is out of one of Diane Jessup's breedings: Boldog Dirk (SchH III, FR Brevet) X Boldog Freakshow (SchH B, CGC, APA WP 3) - and came to live with us when she was 5 months old.
She is a fine example of a Pit bull and a lot of fun to work with.
I cannot say enough good things about this little dog: she is full of drive, brains, and athleticism. Not too mention, a real cuddle bug.
Happy B-Day, Little One.
Why Pit bulls?
In short, I find many pit bulls to posses the qualities that I value in a canine companion: great with friendly people, loyal, goofy, energetic, athletic, intelligent, and willing. To be sure, the run-of-the-mill pit bull is a lot of dog. It is all of these qualities in a medium-sized dog that has me so taken by pit bulls.
Alas, there are many aspects of pit bull ownership that are less enjoyable. Namely, dealing with the many negative stereotypes, and the constant battle to balance the mis-information provided by the breed's detractors.
...thankfully, it only takes is a few minutes of lovin' from my doggies and I am reminded they're worth the effort.
I hope this blog gives others insight into my life with pit bulls, and most of all, provides information on the breed in general; there are a lot of misinformed generalizations about these dogs.
Please contact me with questions or comments pertaining to dogs, pit bulls, BSL, etc..
All the best,
And don't forget to visit my other blog, No BSL NM.
The HSUS attempted to fund raise for the care of Micheal Vick's dogs, while at the same time suggesting that the dogs needed to be killed.
Contact the HSUS and tell them this is unacceptable!