* Dogs on drugs: FDA warns of dangerous drug interaction

By Christie Keith

June 26, 2008

Dogs who are taking the flea preventive drug Comfortis (spinosad) at the same time they are being given high dosages of the drug ivermectin, such as those used in the treatment of demodetic mange, are at risk of ivermectin toxicity.

The maker of the drug, Eli Lilly’s companion animal health division, does not believe that there is any risk to using the regular heartworm-prevention dose of ivermectin with Comfortis; the daily dosages used to treat some stubborn cases of demodetic mange are as much as 100 times the monthly dosage used to prevent heartworm infection. In an informational release, the company cited a supporting field study that involved hundreds of dogs (PDF file):

The administration of Comfortis and approved canine formulations of ivermectin at doses labeled for heartworm prevention has been tested and shown to be safe, including in a North American field trial involving over 450 dogs that were required to be on monthly heartworm prevention throughout the three-month study. Laboratory work has found that, even at doses of 5 times the monthly dose of spinosad combined with 10 times the monthly dose of milbemycin oxime in ivermectin-sensitive collies, there were no signs of neurotoxicity (Sherman et al., publication pending).

The FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine is advising that the two drugs not be prescribed at the same time.

Ivermectin toxicity can be fatal and requires immediate veterinary care. Early signs include vomiting, weakness, drooling, tremors and coma. Dogs also often become blind, although this is usally reversible.

With aggressive veterinary care including hospitalization with round-the-clock nursing, most dogs will recover.

High-dose use of ivermectin is considered “extra-label,” which means a use of an approved drug to treat an illness for which it has not been approved. Such use is legal under the Animal Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act of 1996; without extra-label prescribing, half or more of the drugs used in veterinary medicine every day would be unavailable, including most antibiotics.

* What do your pets think when you drink?

By Gina Spadafori

June 19, 2008

Let’s take a purely hypothetical situation.

Let’s say you’ve been working really, really hard on a long-term project, and it’s finally over but you’re still sort of keyed up and also exhausted. On top of that you’ve had a difficult day, nothing big just a lot of little annoyances adding up.

So you have a glass of wine, then two. Then somehow instead of being what you wanted, which was relaxed and heading for bed, you’re kinda silly and giggly. You laugh uproariously at Jon Stewart’s jokes, and start singing, just a little, to the pets.

And then …

You find yourself wondering: What do the dogs and cats think of your clearly aberrant behavior? Do the cats find you an embarrassment to them? Do the dogs want to party along? Before you can determine the answer, you fall asleep on the couch.

Again, purely hypothetical. But well worth it.

* Subject of earlier media frenzy, Congo bites again and is put down

By Gina Spadafori

June 21, 2008

I think to get the full flavor of this story, you’d have to live in the Tri-State area. But remember a few months ago how dog named Congo became a New Jersey media circus after he attacked a gardener and his owners fought to save his life? The whole thing was very messy, with lots of anti-immigrant overtones because the gardener was Latino and didn’t speak much English.

Congo lived. Until yesterday, when he and three other dogs were taken by the family to be killed after they attacked a relative. From the Times of Trenton:

The local couple who fought a successful high-profile campaign to spare their beloved Congo from a death sentence after he mauled a landscaper on their property last year had Congo and three of their other dogs euthanized Wednesday morning after the dogs attacked a relative visiting their home Tuesday, police said.

In the latest incident, Congo was one of four dogs that attacked 75-year-old Constance Ladd, the mother of one of the dogs’ owners, Elizabeth James, police detective Sgt. Ernie Silagyi said Wednesday.

Ladd had puncture wounds and lacerations to the top of her head, chest and right forearm and injured her hip when she fell to the ground as the dogs pounced on her, Silagyi said.

[...]

Despite the severity of the incident and the family’s decision to euthanize the dogs, the victim’s son-in-law, Guy James, strongly objected to its characterization by police as an attack by his dogs.

“I don’t want people who were supportive of Congo (after last year’s landscaper mauling) to think they were supporting a bad dog,” Guy James said in an interview. He said Tuesday’s unfortunate encounter between the dogs and his mother-in-law “wasn’t an attack at all. It was dogs jumping.”

Here’s the rest, and there is a lot more in the Trenton paper and elsewhere, including the victim’s initial attempts to deny investigators access to photographing her wounds.

* FDA seizes foods at PETCO distribution center

By Christie Keith

June 19, 2008

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.

Forced spay/neuter law dead in California

By Christie Keith

June 19, 2008

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.

* Adopting our way out of pet overpopulation: Yes, we can

By Christie Keith

June 18, 2008

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. More

More tales of an urban dog mom: Things I don’t miss about living in the country

By Christie Keith

June 15, 2008

I lived in the country for 16 years. It’s a great place to have dogs, especially big dogs. I do miss having safe, fenced acreage where my dogs could run. I miss having a dog door they could go out of to access a secure potty yard at night. I miss the wide open spaces.

But Gina’s post earlier today about finding a tick on herself reminds me of the many things I definitely do not miss about living in the country.

Some of them have nothing to do with having dogs. Like the fact that when the power goes out, it might be out for days or even weeks. Or that when it rains, it floods, and you can end up stuck at your place until the waters go down. Or the fact that it takes 45 minutes to get to the market or, well… anywhere.

But living in San Francisco means never having to miss the following: Ticks. Heartworm. Rattlesnakes.

All those things bit my dogs and made them ill during the years I lived in the country. And in order to protect them from the first, I also had to use topical pesticides and oral preventive medications every month. As for the last, there wasn’t much I could do to protect my pets — one of my cats was horribly killed by a rattlesnake that slithered in my dog door, a story that upset me so much when it happened that this is the first time I’ve ever told it publicly. It was like a horror movie.

So while I loved my years in the country, I’m glad to be here in the city where there are simply no ticks, thus no tick diseases, no rattlesnakes, and no heartworm.

Is it perfect? No. And I’ll scream that at the top of my lungs in the middle of the night when one of the dogs suddenly needs to go to the bathroom and I have to hit the park at 3 AM. Also, searching out safe areas to let them run where there are no little dogs who Kyrie might mistake for an hors d’oeuvre. It has its challenges.

But no ticks. So it balances out, right, Gina? More

Change can come from within … and often does

By Gina Spadafori

(Note: I’ve added some material to this original post, mostly because I was too lazy to start another. Just FYI. On the updates, not the laziness.]

As I’ve mentioned a few times, I have a different, more nuanced view of the HSUS than I do of PETA.

PETA is an animal-rights group, with views that are outside of the mainstream. This is America, of course, and they are entitled to those opinions and to advocate for them in any honest and legal way possible. I disagree with many if not most of those views, but I do not disagree with their right to have those opinions. My problem with PETA is that I have often believed there’s a mis-match between what they say and do, like supporting the Vick pit bulls with a bunch of loud protesters and signs while advocating for all pit bulls to disappear.

An aside: The Bad Rap folks are having the best time ever with a related PETA statement:

But we must consider that nice families rarely come to a shelter to adopt pit bulls; almost without exception, those who want pit bulls are attracted to the “macho” image of the breed as a living weapon and seek to play up this image by putting the animals in heavy chains, taunting them into aggression, and leaving them outside in all weather extremes in order to “toughen” them. There is no denying that pit bulls are at a higher risk of suffering a horrible fate. - Jeff Haines PETA Spokesman

Hmmmm. I don’t know. The whole idea of “nice families” sounds just a tad elitist to me. What’s the subtext here? I think we all know. But I gotta say I have personally known some pretty tough looking customers who don’t live in gated communities and still manage to love and care for their pitties like family members.

Update: Well, gosh, if I’d just looked at the other blogs I usually read, I would have noticed that Luisa was ahead of me on this one, over on Lassie Get Help:

You see the weird thing that happened there? Jeff said “nice families,” but it must have been some kind of glitch, because I’m positive he meant to say “white people.” … Pit bull owners, as everyone knows, have names like Tupac McGangsta and Felony Illegalpants Martinez. They don’t vote. They don’t matter. We don’t know them and we don’t want to know them. They’re not like us.

It’s crazy that the pit bull’s salvation may be riding on photos of happy middle-class white people with their pibbles, and crazy that I should fret, every time I send a letter to some idiot politician, that she’ll glance at my name and shrug and say, “Mexican,” and ignore everything I took the trouble to write: the facts, the science, all of it. Crazy that anyone, in 2008 for crissakes, should think that such horrifying laws do any good. It’s just nuts. More

* ProHeart6 … uh … let’s think about this one

By Gina Spadafori

June 13, 2008

Last week Dr. Everett Mobley at the Your Pet’s Best Friend blog was enthusing about the return of ProHeart 6. This week, after listening to the seminar veterinarians are required to take before prescribing the medication, he’s not quite so excited any more:

So, if you’d like to use ProHeart-6, all you have to do is schedule an extra appointment, get some extra labwork, prove that your dog is 100% healthy and in the prime of life, read your handout, and sign the release form stating that you understand it all (including risks of adverse reactions). You can visit their new website for the official line, but I think this means that we are paying for the privilege of doing “beta testing” for Fort Dodge Animal Health.

Do I think it’s safe? Probably.

Do I think it will work? I hope so.

Will I be using it? Maybe.

Read his entire blog post for the list of conditions he has to follow before prescribing ProHeart 6. You? You just have to assume all risk of the product “adversely affectings” your pet.

ProHeart 6, just to refresh everyone’s memory on this, was the subject of major whistleblower action involving the FDA. From a 2007 article in the Dallas Morning News:

The first hints of trouble came from vague warnings.

Veterinarian Victoria Hampshire heard she was “pushing too hard”; she was “alarmist.”

“When enough dogs die, this product will take care of itself,” a colleague said.

But Dr. Hampshire heard herself say: “I don’t know what I’m doing here then.”

What she was doing was her job. She kept count of side effects from animal drugs for the Food and Drug Administration. She made tallies, analyzed numbers and alerted supervisors when something seemed wrong.

And something seemed very wrong that spring of 2004.

A big drug maker had what seemed a star performer in Proheart 6, a three-year-old injected drug to prevent heartworm, a common parasite in dogs. Dr. Hampshire’s numbers showed that dogs were dying at alarming rates.

What happened next, and the price she paid for speaking up, spurred a U.S. Senate inquiry, shining a spotlight on complicated drug safety issues.

Here’s the rest. Hmmmm …. the FDA … corporate interests over consumer ones … hey, it’s just a few isolated incidents (if you don’t count incidents, that is, or share the information) … why does this sounds so familiar?

Given the FDA’s recent track record on protecting anyone, human or animal, from problems with food or drugs … well … I won’t be using any medication that doesn’t have a long-established track record for efficacy and a high level of safety. For me and my pets.

Thank heavens that my dogs have done well for years on their same heartworm preventive … and that I have a long-term proven combination of medications to control my asthma.

GAO: FDA food safety plan going nowhere fast

By Gina Spadafori

June 12, 2008

I’m sorry, but when the best the government can tell you is not to eat a raw tomato, something is seriously wrong with our food safety system. But of course, we’ve known that here for a long, long time, starting when thousands of pets were dying from tainted pet food.

That, followed by recall after recall after recall, including the largest beef recall in the history of the universe. And now … e tu, tomato?

I’ve mentioned in previous posts and comments that as a lifelong Sacramentan and 30-year-observer of/participant in the political process (the participant part as a member of the media), that no one should hold his or her breath on any change or reform at the FDA with a lame-duck adminstration running out the clock.

Right now the political cronies running federal agencies are polishing up their resumes and solidifying their contacts, so they can get the best position possible relative to their connection to whoever ends up in the White House next. (If it’s Obama, the folks in the political appointment jobs now will all go to lobbying firms, industry jobs and consulting; if it’s McCain, they’ll be scrambling to keep or improve the political appointment they have already.)

I’ve watched this behavior in Sacramento for years. If your peeps are in, you’re in. If they’re out, you’re a consultant. The music is playing now, and no one knows who’ll be sitting where until the music stops. So don’t expect anything in the way of reform until 2009, if then. Maybe we’ll get “lucky” and have another deadly food crisis early in the next president’s term so he’ll have to make it a priority.

Until then … well, I hate stewed tomatoes. Hate. Fortunately, I’ll have my own homegrown tomatoes, thank you, and I’ll be eating them raw.

I’m not the only one making the observation that reform ain’t going to happen this year, by the way. Congressional Quarterly takes a look at the prospects for the reform of the food safety system:

Despite a salmonella outbreak that has caused McDonald’s and Wal-Mart to stop selling tomatoes, prospects for passing significant food safety legislation this year are dimming.

“The window for Congress to take up comprehensive legislation to overhaul the food safety system continues to narrow,” said Rosa DeLauro , the Connecticut Democrat who has led the food-safety fight in the House. “Regardless of what happens this year, the real opportunity will be next year, with a new Congress, and importantly, a new administration.”

Outbreaks of e-Coli in spinach, tainted imports from China, the biggest beef recall in U.S. history and the recent warning linking salmonella to some tomato varieties have spurred a push in Congress to overhaul food-safety laws.

But with the congressional calendar dwindling and floor time in short supply, a draft House Food and Drug Administration overhaul bill has not advanced out of committee and Senate proposals have yet to be released.

Hey, but no hurry, right? I mean, it’s not as if the Government Accountability Office has issued an urgent report that the FDA has, like, no idea how to fix things.

What? You say the GAO did issue such a report? Well, whaddyaknow! From Market Watch:

Federal investigators are voicing concern to Congress Thursday that the Food and Drug Administration’s plan to keep the nation’s food supply safe lacks clear direction.

Following a string of tainted-food scares, FDA, which is responsible for overseeing about 80% of the food supply, released a food-protection plan in November — but the agency has since added few details about implementation, according to the Government Accountability Office.

The FDA provided GAO a draft work plan this month, but vagueness remains, according to testimony from GAO’s Lisa Shames, natural resources and environment director.

“While this draft work plan provides more information on the action steps and deliverables to achieve the core elements, we continue to have concerns about FDA’s lack of specificity on the necessary resources and strategies to fully implement the plan,” according to Shames’s testimony.

On Thursday, the House Energy and Commerce’s oversight and investigations subcommittee is hearing from Shames and other witnesses, including Dr. David Acheson, the FDA’s food safety czar, about the FDA’s food-protection plan. As reports about tainted tomatoes are making headlines, there’s concern that American lives are still at risk. More

Come back toto: Rottweiler has wings ... and a guardian angel

By Keith Turner

June 11, 2008

The Midwest has been hit hard of late by tremendous storms. Trees are falling, houses getting crunched and cars are being flipped on their roofs.

When a tornado hits, everything in its path is uprooted and whipped around like a chew toy in a puppy’s mouth. And then there are the animals. While many are able to run for cover or take shelter inside a safe place, others are left to fend for themselves against a wind unlike anything never before experienced.

But here’s storm story with a happy ending. A tornado touched down in the Chicago suburb of Richton Park on Sunday and the strong winds actually carried a Rottweiller more than a block away from where he had been playing in the yard just seconds before.

Here’s how the Chicago Sun-Times reported it:

The 130-pound Rott, named Chase, was getting hugs and treats Sunday from his owners, Sandra and Sidney Holmes. The dog, who was in the yard when the storm came, was found shaken but unharmed about a block from their house, they said.

After all the storm damage was assessed, the story of Chase’s unlikely travels was the talk of the neighborhood.

Marlene Smith and her grand-niece Tatiyana Smith, 15, both said they saw Chase aloft outside their house, as well as items like mailboxes.

Helene Bulliner, 10, said she also spotted Chase outside when she took shelter in her grandmother’s basement. “I see, like, a really big gust of wind, and like in the middle, I see Chase’s legs,” about four feet off the ground, she said.

Her mother, Deborah Bulliner, told her to get away from the window, but said she remembers what her daughter cried: “She said, ‘Come to the window, Mommy — It’s Chase, he’s in the air. Mommy, come look.”

Here’s the full story.
Moral of this story: When a storm’s coming, don’t forget your pet!

Forced spay-neuter: Get those phones, and faxs machines ready

By Gina Spadafori

June 5, 2008

Lloyd Levine may have lost his primary race, but his California legislation to force the spaying and neutering of the pets of people who aren’t putting any animals in shelters, AB 1634, is still not dead. In fact, it should return to a state Senate Committee on June 18.

You know, the bill that Mexican and Russian puppy-smugglers and ignorant, greedy and utterly clueless backyard breeders will completely ignore, paragons of civic responsibility that they are? The bill that targets reputable, ethical breeders but gives puppy-mill scum and their Internet and retail outlets a complete pass? The bill that won’t at all help the feral cat problem, or do anything about shelter reform as the nation’s shelters continue to bash the no-kill movement and do everything they can to blame everyone but themselves for not, you know, sheltering pets who need homes instead of killing them? The bill that disregards peer-reviewed scientific evidence that spaying and neutering — especially early — has risks for pets and needs to be made with informed consent as a result of a discussion between a responsible owner and a good veterinarian?

Yes, that bill. Or, at we call it here, the Pet Extinction Act, since groups like PETA are pushing hard for it. You know PETA, that animal “advocacy” group that kills more than 90 percent of the animals who come into their “shelter.”

Easy answers are rarely either, and sound-bite “solutions” are mostly crap.

I have run a breed rescue, never bred a litter and almost all my pets are spayed/neutered, even the rabbit. My kitten was just neutered at 10 weeks, a choice I made following discussions between me and my veterinarians, one of informed consent on my part. I manage to keep my only two intact dogs — one male, one female, both show champions, the boy proven as well for working ability — from producing unplanned puppies because, you know, I am strangely enough not an idiot. My girl may one day be bred — probably will be bred, in fact — after she has proven her working abilities and passed about a half-dozen expensive, documented veterinary health screenings that are a matter of public record. After considerable research, if she is bred at all it will be to a dog who is well-matched for her in all ways and who is likewise both a show champion with proven working ability, likewise certified clear of congenital health problems as a matter of public record. He may be thousands of miles away or even be passed on, the breeding the result of expensive artificial insemination with frozen studsicles. No matter. Because ethical, responsible breeders don’t make money on what they do, and don’t plan to.

I will, like any ethical, responsible breeder, always be there for any and all puppies who result. Always there for anyone who ends up with one of those puppies, too. That’s because all breeders are not the same, no matter what you’ve been told by the spittle-spewing backers of AB 1634.

I will do this, if I do, because some things are worth preserving and fighting for, and I truly do believe our heritage breeds of dogs are among them. Does that mean any of my dogs as individuals are “better” than any of those in shelters? Not at all. But it does mean that my two intact dogs are part of a larger picture, and I want to see that picture preserved.

You, responsible pet-owner, are not an idiot either, although animal rights zealots like those at PETA are sure counting on you to be. You are smart enough to see through to the real reason for legislation like AB 1634, and why animal-rights fanatics are so desperate to get these things passed. They want to pick off all domestic animals, one species at a time, so they cannot be “exploited.” That’s why they trash shelter reform, because no-kill communities embrace the idea that people want and will care for pets, given an opportunity. Not “exploit” them by keeping them “in slavery.” Care for them, as family members.

What can you do? (more…)

Human Aggressive Buddy

When it comes to using corrections to rehabilitate a dog or to initiate certain proper behavior, I can’t stress enough how important precise timing is to the process.

First of all, corrections must come within a fraction of a second of the unwanted behavior. Dogs are excellent “associative learners,” meaning they quickly put together cause and effect when taking in new information, but they also live in the moment. If a dog pulls on the leash when you leave the house, you can’t wait to get to the street corner to correct him.

The other part of timing is to make sure your corrections are not coming too often and too quickly. If you’re doing too many corrections at once, you’re not giving the dog’s brain enough time to absorb the communication and come up with the answer. When he’s not allowed to complete the process, he can become numb to the correction and get frustrated or irritated.

Most importantly, you need to be balanced and calm-assertive at all times during the correction process. The dog needs to know that you are there to create trust and respect. More

What, ‘Born To Run’ doesn’t work for dogs?

By Gina Spadafori

June 9, 2008

Every time I get in the car for a long trip, the first song I listen to is the Springsteen’s classic “Born To Run.” OK, admittedly that’s a pretty silly image, a 50-year-old woman in a 10-year-old minivan that’s usually full of dogs rocking out to The Boss as she leaves her suburban driveway. But I’ve been doing this for, uh, 30-plus years and I guess now it’s sort of a superstition to start a trip this way. An auditory homage to St. Christopher, the patron saint of travelers. (I also have a St. Christopher medal in the glove box, which my Godmother gave me in 1974.)

Honestly, if I ever really thought about what my dogs think of my music selection, I’d have to admit I don’t really care. You don’t want to listen to Mary Chapin Carpenter, my darlings? Fine. Develop opposable thumbs, get a job and make your own darn car payment.

But still … in her dotage the Queen Heather (age 11.5) has developed an anxiety over car rides any longer than the trip to the coffee shop. On our recent trip to Oregon, I actually had to crate her (she was in a seat-belt harness), then get off the highway and push two valium down her after she freaked out going over the mountain pass on I-5 in light snow.

Heather has more miles on her than a rancher’s old pickup truck, having traveled happily coast-to-coast a couple times and been in nearly every state except Alaska and Hawaii. At first I thought this behavior had something to do with the altitude, or the proximity of semis, the snow, whatever. But now she can’t even handle a quick trip to my brother’s house an hour away, so obviously it’s something to do with the aging process for her.

I think long trips are now over for her, but for the shorter ones I can’t avoid, I don’t see any harm in trying “Through a Dog’s Ear: Music To Calm Your Dog in the Car,” which Keith Turner reviewed over on our DogCars.com site:

* Gratuitous dog blogging: Grass is good edition

By Gina Spadafori

June 8, 2008

So what did I do of importance yesterday? Nothing.

So what am I going to of importance today? Not much more.

A little book work, coming back from the editors. A trip to the Western States Horse Expo with my niece. Taking the two young retrievers to the river, meeting my friend Don with his two young retrievers. And somewhere in there, a nap.

I’m trying to catch up on my sleep, my laundry, my life after the spring book-writing rush.

I probably won’t be rolling happily on the lawn, but doesn’t McKenzie make it look grand?

Toronto goes to the dogs

By Kim Campbell Thornton

June 7, 2008

I just happen to be here in Toronto the weekend of Woofstock, billed as the largest outdoor festival for dogs in North America. Forget the Hockey Hall of Fame. What a great way to spend my first free morning here. Despite the heat (who would have thought that Canada would be hot and humid?), Toronto dogs and their people hit the street early to scope out the more than 200 booths for rescue groups and vendors selling treats, food, collars, frozen yogurt, dog beds, furniture-like crates and more, more, more. Toronto has a reputation as a green city, exemplified by the booths selling biodegradable poop scoop bags and organic food and treats.

We watched a Chessie try out the dock diving pool. He needed a little practice, making it only to 12 feet. I scuffled my feet as I walked so I wouldn’t step on any of the low-lying Pugs, Dachshunds, Jack Russells and Poodles. Bulldogs and Bassets, Greyhounds and Great Danes, a huddle of Havanese, a Dogue de Bordeaux, a phalene Papillon, a beautiful black Setter-y looking dog (no, it wasn’t a Flatcoat)–you name the breed, it was probably there. Later this afternoon, dogs can participate in the dock-diving competition, stupid dog tricks and other contests, the Rescue-Me Walk-a-Thon and extreme doggie makeovers (not sure I want to see the results of that one). We’ll probably go back for more later, but first–the shoe museum.

Rescue Rufus 911

People often confuse insecure dogs with aggressive dogs. An insecure dog’s actions can be similar to an aggressive dog — growling, lunging, showing teeth — but while insecurity is a behavioral issue, aggression is the result of an issue.

Dogs aren’t born aggressive; they become aggressive when insecurity, fear, anxiety, tension, or hyperactivity get out of control. With all dogs that I’ve worked with, aggression is the outcome, the explosion, the manifestation of something the dog doesn’t want anymore. I’ve found that almost every dog that trained to be calm-submissive has the potential to become aggressive. That’s why I try and educate people to prevent aggression rather than have them call me in when the dog is already a “red-zone” case. More