Greyhound Victory

Greyhound racing in the state of Florida continues but with more restrictions in place to monitor their standards of care.

Paws Up!
To the Florida Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering for filing a new rule to protect racing greyhounds in the state.

According toa news story, “Florida greyhound trainers will soon have to be more transparent with their dog care. A new state animal welfare rule…requir[es] trainers to notify state regulators every time a dog dies at a track or kennel. Trainers at the state’s 13 greyhound tracks also will be banned from keeping more than one dog per cage and be forced to maintain a roster that identifies each dog. Racetrack officials have to complete weekly walk-throughs of kennels.”

Greyhound racing is still a viable “sport” though its numbers are on the decline. However, the guess is that anywhere from 20,000 to as many as 50,000 greyhounds are born each year and anywhere from 20,000 on up are killed either as puppies unsuitable for racing or retirees whose racing careers are over. While NHES would ultimately prefer to see the sport banned outright, protection of the dogs in the system is of paramount importance.

Take Action: Florida residents, contact the Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering to thank the agency for protecting greyhounds. Residents of other states where greyhound racing occurs (Arizona, Texas, Arkansas, Alabama, West Virginia, and Iowa), contact your state agency that oversees greyhound racing to determine if they are protecting the dogs who race in your state.

Leon M Biegalski, Director
Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering
1940 North Monroe Street, Suite 50
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1035

When you think about it…the words “gas chamber” and “euthanasia” do not belong in the same sentence.

Many animal shelters still consider the use of gas chambers a humane form of euthanasia.

Unwanted shelter animals are often euthanized (from the Greek, means good death) by means of a gas chamber (which means a horrible death). Depending on the size of the chamber, as many as 20 animals may be placed in an airless metal container where they are piled one upon another. The lid is closed and carbon monoxide (CO) is pumped into the chamber until all the animals die, which can take upwards of 30 minutes. The animals are in a panic and show fear and possibly aggression toward others in the crowded environment. Some come out of the chamber alive only to be placed in with another group. Such barbarism does not meet the criteria of euthanasia.

So, if euthanasia by gas chamber is so abhorrent, why is it still the method of choice for many animal shelters across the country? Convenience is often cited as one reason. A shelter can euthanize more animals at one time than it can inject each individual animal with a euthanizing agent. Cost is another, though in reality the cost to operate a gas chamber is approximately $5 an animal and for euthanasia by injection $2.30 an animal. Finally, often lack of training and lack of access to controlled substances and/or the personnel authorized by the Drug Enforcement Administration to administer them keeps a shelter from using the humane choice of hundreds of national, state, and local protection agencies—euthanasia by injection.

It is time to replace abhorrent methods of euthanasia with humane methods. Because when you think about it…the words “gas chamber” and “euthanasia” do not belong in the same sentence.

Puppies Are Protected in WV

West Virginia has recently passed SB 437, a bill that will ensure proper standards of care for dogs in commercial breeding facilities.

Paws Up!
To the West Virginia State legislature for enacting and Governor Tomblin for signing into law SB 437, the puppy mill bill.

West Virginia has joined with a number of other states that want to ensure safe, healthy standards of care for dogs living in commercial breeding establishments often referred to as puppy mills.

According to a bill recently signed by the governor, a “‘Commercial dog breeder’ means any person who (A) Maintains eleven or more unsterilized dogs over the age of one year; (B) Is engaged in the business of breeding dogs as household pets for direct or indirect sale or for exchange in return for consideration;”

Take Action: West Virginia residents, please thank your legislators and governor for protecting dogs in commercial breeding operations in West Virginia. Residents of other states, if you do not have laws protecting dogs in commercial breeding facilities, please contact your legislators and urge them to introduce legislation today.

Police Need Training or Dogs Will Continue to Be Shot

By supporting SB 226, law enforcement officials will receive training on how to handle dogs in dangerous situations.

We read too often of a police officer shooting a family dog. A recent Colorado incident underlines an issue that all police departments need to address—are their officers adequately trained in how to handle, in a non-lethal manner, off-leash dogs?

A police officer’s job is not an easy one. But officers should be trained in all aspects of their job including how to handle confrontations with off-leash dogs.

When police encounter dangerous humans, they are required to maintain restraint and use non-lethal means of subduing that person. We would like police to use that same caution and restraint when it comes to a family dog. Unfortunately, our laws do not require this: in most states shooting a dog is legally the same as breaking a car window or kicking in a door.

We need our police departments to provide clear guidelines and training on how officers can accurately assess the threat of a dog and, if dangerous, deal with it through non-lethal means. We must act on what can be done now for training police in how to handle confrontational dogs, while continuing to talk and educate on broader issues like the property status of animals.

Colorado residents, please contact your state legislators and let them know you want your law enforcement officers trained in how to handle dogs in a non-lethal manner. Tell them to support SB 226, which will provide training to law enforcement officers in how to deal with dogs.

Sled Dog Sponsors

Paws Down!
To the sponsors of the Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race!

Dogs in the Iditarod endure cruel living conditions and extreme training.

Again, numerous corporations and organizations have decided to support the Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race, regardless of the inhumane treatment sled dogs suffer before, during, and after the event. The cruelty begins shortly after birth when puppies as young as four months are permanently tethered outdoors in preparation for their year-round training. The only time most of the dogs are ever off their tethers is when they are attached to dogsleds for training. Their training is often brutal, causing some dogs to be eliminated from competition, and possibly destroyed, because of injury and illness. Dogs who can no longer race or were never race-worthy to start are often shot in the head. Such animal cruelty is not to be tolerated and would not be if “generally accepted dog mushing or pulling contests” weren’t exempt from Alaska’s animal cruelty laws.

The Iditarod is a race about prize money and not about saving lives as the event it supposedly commemorates did. Today’s Iditarod is, instead, about losing lives. Since 1997, over 29 dogs have died; over 130 have died since records started being kept. There are no statistics for those who die during preparation for the race or from complications after the race. The dogs who do survive suffer from pulled muscles and stress fractures. They become sick with diarrhea, dehydration, intestinal viruses, bleeding stomach ulcers, and hypothermia. For these reasons, the Iditarod should be abolished.

Take Action:
Contact the sponsors (PDF file) of this event and urge them to withhold their sponsorship in future races. If no one sponsors the event, maybe those competing in it will stop holding it.

Push for the Ban of Gas Chambers in Texas and Hawaii

Thousands of animals are inhumanely euthanized each year by use of gas chambers.

While no one wants to see companion animals euthanized, we are all aware that shelters across this nation engage in euthanizing not only sick, disabled, and dangerous animals, but also healthy, adoptable ones. As the last act of compassion for all these lives, we should be as gentle and caring as possible. Euthanasia by sodium pentobarbital or a derivative should be the sole means of euthanizing shelter animals. However, some states still use gas chambers to euthanize animals.

Sometimes a dozen or more animals are placed in a gas chamber. Gassing often can take 30 minutes or more during which time the animals are all terrified and some panic to the point of attacking the other animals in the chamber. This is no way to euthanize an animal who, through no fault of his or her own, became a casualty of the pet overpopulation problem in this country.

Two states, Hawaii and Texas, have legislation pending, HCR 34 and SB 360 , respectively, that would require the use of sodium pentobarbital or a derivative and prohibit the use of compression or gas chambers or other means that do not immediately euthanize the animal.

Hawaii and Texas residents, contact your legislators and urge them to support legislation that will save many animals from terrible suffering. Residents of other states where gas chambers are used, contact your legislators and urge them to support humane euthanasia at animal shelters.

Puppy Mill Protection

Paws Up!
To the state of Ohio and Governor John Kasich for enacting legislation to protect dogs in large-scale commercial breeding facilities.

According to a news story, “Ohio Gov. John Kasich signed into law a measure cracking down on high-volume dog breeders or so-called puppy mills.

“Among other measures, the law now requires high-volume dog breeders that sell 60 or more dogs, or breeders that produce at least nine litters in a single calendar year, to become licensed and undergo yearly inspections.”

 

Puppy mills focus on making money, not the health and welfare of the animals they breed.

Puppy mills can house anywhere from 50 to more than 1,000 dogs who live in cramped, dark, filthy conditions with little or no human contact. To keep costs to a minimum, the dogs receive no veterinary care and often little food and water. The puppies suffer from a variety of diseases due to unsanitary conditions and lack of proper nutrition.

Licensing and inspecting these mills is a first step toward protecting the animals who find themselves unlucky enough to wind up in a mill. Creating standards of care is also important. But most important is that the general public educate itself about puppy mills. In addition, make sure any dog you, your family, and friends obtain comes from a reputable breeder or better yet from a shelter or rescue.

Take Action: Ohio residents, send a note of thanks to your legislators and the governor for their actions to protect dogs in your state. Residents of other states, contact your legislators to find out what they are doing to protect animals in commercial breeding facilities. Let them know you want those animals protected.

The Honorable John Kasich
Governor
Riffe Center, 30th Floor
77 South High Street
Columbus, OH 43215-6117
Tele. No.: 614-466-3555

Additional paws up to the Minnesota State Senate for considering a bill, S 36, which would require licensing for commercial dog and cat breeders who posses ten or more adult animals and produce more than five litters of puppies or kittens a year. The bill is in the Jobs, Agriculture and Rural Development Committee. Contact the chair of the committee to express your desire to see this legislation come to the floor for a vote this legislative session.

The Honorable Dan Sparks, Chair
Jobs, Agriculture and Rural Development Committee
75 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Room 328
St. Paul, MN 55155-1606
Tele. No.: 651-296-5307

Airport Security Especially Taxing for Animals

Cats can quickly dart away in stressful situations.

Under the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) current policies, animals are removed from their carriers at busy security checkpoints while the carrier is examined. Unfortunately, because of this policy, animals are at risk of escaping, and as a result, injury and death.

We recognize that for the safety of everyone in the airport and in the skies, kennels and carriers must be carefully inspected. However, for the animals’ sake, the inspections should take place in an enclosed area. Removing an animal from a carrier can be difficult even in the most normal of settings; but in a crowded and unfamiliar airport, it is far more challenging. Many animals, especially cats, easily slip out of collars and harnesses and out of their guardian’s arms. If the inspection takes place in an enclosed, safe place, the animal can be easily caught and placed back into the safety of the carrier.

Please join us in writing the administrator of TSA to ask the organization to amend its procedure to make it safer for everyone involved by conducting the screenings in a safe, enclosed space.

John S. Pistole
Administrator
Transportation Security Administration
601 12th Street S
Arlington, VA 22202
E-mail: TSA-ContactCenter@dhs.gov

New Zealand Dogs and Rats in Danger

Animal testing is no party for the animal.

According to a news story, “Dogs [and rats] will [be] forced to take lethal doses of party pills under a controversial scientific testing method being considered by the Government to determine whether the designer drugs are safe for humans.”

Through years of drug testing on animals, scientists the world over have learned that tests on one species do not determine how the tested product will affect another species. Each species reacts differently to substances and the reactions may be different for different ages and sexes of the animals tested. The test subjects’ nutritional status may also affect test results. Stress affects the outcomes of these tests, and most of the test subjects are under routine stress both from the unnatural environment in which they live and the way they are handled in the laboratory, not to mention the stress brought about by the actual tests themselves. In addition, substances once proven safe for human use following animal testing include asbestos, cigarette smoke, and DDT. Eventually, these substances were proven harmful to humans. Other examples of animal testing that did not detect harm to humans include tests in rats and rabbits that failed to identify the developmentally toxic effects of PCBs, ACE-inhibiting drugs, tetracycline, diethylstilboestrol (DES), and other drugs.

Advances in tissue engineering and robotics, bioinformatics, genomics, proteomics, metabonomics, systems biology, and in silico (computer-based) systems offer alternatives to animal use. Animal testing can take months if not years at expenses ranging from hundreds of thousands of dollars to multi-millions of dollars, whereas computer modeling can take place instantaneously and at far lower costs, especially the cost to the animals and their suffering. In vitro tests involving human cell and tissue cultures are faster, cheaper, and more reliable than animal tests in many instances. Many companies are changing to nonanimal alternatives.

For these reasons, testing novel recreational drugs called party pills on dogs and rats may not prove they are safe for human beings. Using non-animal testing methods may prove far more successful without the inordinate pain and suffering and loss of life current methods would incur.

Please write New Zealand’s prime minister and minister of health urging them to reconsider testing these drugs on animals. The time has come when we can no longer subject innocent animals to the pain and suffering associated with biomedical research and testing, which is often unnecessary and costly when compared with other non-animal techniques.

Right Honorable John Key
Prime Minister
Honorable Tony Ryall
Minister of Health
Care Distribution Services
Parliament Buildings
Wellington 6160
New Zealand

When you think about it…companion animals forced to live in extreme conditions need loving homes.

Beagles should not be used for product testing, but you can help by giving one a home.

Think about beagles used in laboratory experiments, or greyhounds forced to race. Puppy mill dogs come to mind also. All of these animals and many more live under extreme and often abusive, painful, and fear inducing circumstances. How do they fair when they are removed from those situations and placed in loving, permanent homes?

Some of the animals who are liberated from laboratories, race tracks, or mills need time to be rehabilitated before they are placed in forever homes. Rescue groups and sanctuaries around the country work tirelessly to help these animals overcome their past experiences. Some animals may need extended stays in foster care as they become accustomed to life outside their previous confinement. Others are ready within just a few short weeks to be adopted.

The overriding consideration on the part of anyone considering adopting an animal who has lived under extreme circumstances is patience. Patience as the animal learns what a home is, what stairs are, how grass feels under his or her paws. Patience when the animal becomes agitated at what we consider the normal sights, sounds, and smells of our home and neighborhood. Patience at what we might consider aberrant behavior, such excessive licking, salivating, or circling. Over time, many of these animals begin to relax in their new environment; begin to trust that they will not be hurt; begin to live a normal life.

Additional animals who may need rehoming after their experiences, especially in laboratories, are birds, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, rats, and mice. Of course, this begs the question, should we be testing on animals?

When you think about it…regardless of where a companion animal started his or her life, a loving and safe home is best.