START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
Apr 17, 2007
Focus: Civil Rights
Action Request: Read
Location: United States
DOGS FACING LIFE IN JAIL

April 12 - TWO students are going to prison for a unique study into what happens when four puppies graduate from the dog house to the slammer.

Following from the success of such programs in the US, airing on a reality show called "Cell dogs", this is the first time a similar experiment will be tried in Australia.

University of Queensland's Claire Eddie and Georgia Sakrzewski will research whether the golden retriever-labrador crosses help reform inmates and improve staff morale at the Darling Downs Correctional Centre in Toowoomba, west of Brisbane.

The Pups in Prison program was today officially launched by the Minister for Police and Corrective Services, Judy Spence.

Eight inmates have been handpicked to raise and train the puppies for 16 months at the low security prison farm.

The pups will then be returned to non-profit organisation Assistance Dogs Australia and trained for another six months before being released to work with the disabled or elderly.

Similar programs have been trialled on the Gold Coast, NSW and the United States.

But UQ's Professor Jacquie Rand - who is assisting the students' research - believes it is a world-first study of the program.

"In NSW and US we have found reoffending rates were reduced, there was less prison disturbances and happier staff, but it has been mainly anecdotal reports," she said.

"We believe we are the first in the world to look at this in a scientific way.

Prof Rand said the dogs were introduced to kennels made by inmates at the prison in January and the students would begin researching initial results in two weeks.

She said the effect the puppies had on the inmates would be evaluated through questionnaires, prison visits, feedback from correctional officers and interviews with prisoners and staff.

"One of the exciting things we are looking at is whether the parenting skills will be improved with prisoners," she said.

"A lot of these prisoners have grown up where psychological and verbal abuse is the way to discipline children but you can't do that when training dogs."

Prof Rand said the dogs already appeared to have had a positive effect on the prisoners.

"Those prisoners are near the end of the first decade of their imprisonment, most commonly for serious violent offences," she said.

"If you look at their faces there is a softness there which speaks about the power of the human-animal bond."

Prof Rand said they hoped to expand the program and have dogs with behavioural problems being trained by inmates.

She said about 40 per cent of dogs who entered shelters were later euthanased - many due to behavioural problems.

"Behavioural problems in many cases can be corrected but it is labour intensive and costly," she said.

"But with prisoners with time on their hands it would be the perfect partnership."

From: http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21539788-5006007,00.html

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , ,
Posted: Apr 17, 2007 6:29am
Apr 13, 2006
Focus: Health
Action Request: Think About
Location: United States
Can Dogs and Cats Be Vegan, Too?
by Jan Allegretti
Adapted from The Complete Holistic Dog Book: Home Health Care for Our Canine Companions by Jan Allegretti and Katy Sommers
http://www.indybay.org/news/2006/04/1813627.php

When compassion for all living beings is a core value in your life, it can be disturbing to feel your commitment to a vegan lifestyle is compromised by your desire to feed canine and feline family members the best possible diet. You may have eliminated animal products from your own diet, sworn off buying leather shoes, and never ever buy cosmetics that are not cruelty free - but the meat you buy for your dogs and cats is the one relic of the so-called "livestock" industry that still shows up in your home.

As more and more people adopt a vegan diet for themselves, they also consider eliminating animal products from their dogs' and cats' diets. But is this really a healthy option? Didn't they evolve as predatory carnivores, existing on the raw flesh of their prey? Yes - and no. It's true that their ancestors were wild hunters whose diets consisted primarily of the animals they killed. But the animals we share our homes with today are genetically far removed from their wild counterparts. Think about it - does a dachshund appear to have the identical genetic profile of a wolf? Does the kitten curled up on the pillow of your bed really look like she's ready to take down an ibex? Of course not. Due to centuries of selective breeding and adaptation, the dog and cat who sleep at your side are substantially different from their ancestors. What's more, the meat we feed them is substantially different from the wild game consumed by their predecessors. The cows and chickens of today are also the result of extensive selective breeding, and their flesh carries the residue of hormones, antibiotics, and the pesticides applied to the grain they eat - hardly the same as a freshly killed jackrabbit.

Let's consider the canine diet. The fact is, even a wolf or a coyote is not a true carnivore. He's actually more of an omnivore, or an animal that consumes both animal and vegetable foods. A wild canine nibbles on grasses and other vegetation, as well as the stomach contents of his vegan prey. All things considered, it's reasonable to assume that our dogs can rely on non-animal sources for a healthy diet.

The same is true for our cats. Their predecessors, too, eat grasses and vegan stomach contents. Some supplementation is essential if meat is eliminated from a cat's diet (see below), but there's no question they draw nutrition from vegetable sources just like the rest of us.

The truth is, many dogs and cats actually blossom when switched to a meatless regimen, with glossier coats, fresher breath and cleaner teeth, more energy at play, and a more peaceful disposition overall. Removing animal products from the diet may even help overcome some health problems, including allergies, behavioral disorders such as aggression, hypersensitivity or anxiety, and even seizures. In some cases, eliminating meat from the diet will help an overweight animal trim down while still enjoying ample, satisfying meals. Consider, too, the benefits of eliminating the possibility your companion might be exposed to toxic residues in the flesh of farm animals that are not raised organically. And of course, you'll feel much more at peace knowing your household really is cruelty free.

To make the switch to meatless fare for your animal family members, simply choose vegetable sources for the protein component of their meals. Vegetable proteins are not digested as completely as those derived from meat or dairy, so the proportions may need to be a little higher. Feeding a variety of ingredients is particularly important, to be sure your dog and cat get the balance of amino acids and other nutrients they need. Here are a few additional guidelines you may find helpful:

- The high-protein vegan foods you eat yourself will replace the meat your dog and cat used to eat. Tofu, tempeh, lentils, beans, and split peas are among your options.
- When using beans as your protein source, soak them overnight, rinse well, then cook them until they're soft, and purée the bigger, firmer varieties like garbanzos. Adding a small potato to the cooking pot will help reduce "gassiness."
- Supplement with either a vitamin B12 tablet weekly, a daily multivitamin, or B12-rich spirulina on a regular basis. Cats must receive the amino acid taurine as a supplement, as a deficiency can cause blindness. The company called Harbingers of a New Age, at http://www.vegepet.com , offers supplements designed specifically for vegan dogs and cats.
- Don't forget to include fruits as well as vegetables in the diet, to provide a broad range of nutrients - and, of course, because they taste so good!
- Since your cat may be a little fussier than your dog, you may need to flavor her vegan meals with a bit of the meat-based food she's accustomed to. Just decrease the amount gradually till she doesn't even notice it's gone. Also try adding interesting flavors like nutritional yeast, spirulina, or a touch of tomato sauce. Cats also seem to love yellow and orange foods like melon, corn, sweet potatoes, and winter squash.
- Remember to follow the golden rule of nutrition: Variety, variety, variety. Give her lentils on Tuesday, black beans on the weekend, tofu on Sunday morning. If providing a varied diet is difficult for you, follow a balanced, recipe formulated by a qualified veterinarian. Customized diets are available from a veterinary nutritionist at most veterinary schools or from http://www.PetDiets.com and other veterinary nutrition resources.
- If you need to rely on a commercial dog and cat food, there are vegan varieties available. However the same concerns about processing, preservatives, chemical additives, quality of ingredients, and lack of variety apply just as they do for meat-based diets. Scrutinize package labels and manufacturers' websites for lists of ingredients and company policies on ingredient sources and quality, processing, and so forth. Companies that offer quality vegan foods include Nature's Recipe, Natural Life, PetGuard, Three Dog Bakery, Wow-Bow, and Evolution.

Once your dog and cat start their new diets, watch for changes - for better or worse - in health or behavior. A brittle coat, low energy, or weak muscles may be a sign she's not getting enough protein. If so, be sure the protein source is easily digestible and of good quality. Cook beans a little longer or purée them; increase the amount of protein, or try different sources such as tofu and lentils.

Chances are, though, you'll find that your friends' coats become softer and shinier, their energy increases, she's less afraid of those thunderstorms, his breath is fresh, and that nasty build-up on her teeth seems to be going away. If that's the case - celebrate and carry on!

Do you have a comment or a question? Is there a topic you'd like to see addressed in this column? If so, send a message to Jan at AskJan@idausa.org . It won't be possible to respond to all emails personally, but she will welcome and read every one.
Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted: Apr 13, 2006 3:02am
Mar 19, 2006
Focus: Civil Rights
Action Request: Read
Location: United States

Must Love Dogs … to Death

By Jeff Perz

The Abolitionist Online asked Jeff Perz to comment on PeTA’s killing policy. This is his response.
http://www.abolitionist-online.com/article-issue03_must.love.dogs_jeff.perz.shtml


PeTA’s Position Statement

In “The Disturbing Facts About ‘No-Kill’ Shelters”, PeTA makes a couple of points that appear to be consistent with animal rights. Since PeTA is not an animal rights organisation 1, however, it also makes several suggestions that are anti-animal-rights, and it does all of this within an overall context of legitimising both the exploitation and murder of non-human animals.

First, PeTA correctly implies that most shelters that are labelled “no-kill” do not have adequate resources. Instead, however, they have employees whose actions show a lack respect for the rights of the non-human animals 2. The result for the non-human animals, as PeTA correctly notes, is that the shelters “warehouse them for years on end” 3 and this implies that they die slow miserable deaths.

Second, PeTA correctly observes that when no-kill shelters are full, they are forced to turn away non-human animals, many of whom end up in kill shelters that use painful methods of execution. PeTA proposes the alternative of diverting funds from no-kill shelters to sterilisation programs. That way, new non-human animals are never born and thus are never subjected to suffering and death. 4

The above two policies, taken in isolation and described in the best possible light, are consistent with animal rights. When the above two policies are considered in the context of PeTA’s overall statement, however, it becomes clear that they result in the abhorrent violation of animal rights, murder and grievous assault.

A positive reading of PeTA’s “The Disturbing Facts About ‘No-Kill’ Shelters” would conclude that the vast majority of resources intended for cats and dogs should be put into reputable sterilisation programmes, and any remaining resources should be put into creating many more genuine no-kill shelters that have sufficient resources and staff who respect non-human animal rights. This would be consistent with animal rights but, unfortunately, it is not what PeTA says.

Although PeTA does say that more resources should be put into sterilisation programmes because this serves the long-term goal of stopping “unwanted” non-human animals from being born and then killed, PeTA also suggests that no funds should be put towards genuine no-kill shelters. For, argues PeTA, the presence of relatively few no-kill shelters amongst many kill shelters in a society with multiple millions of dogs and cats who fend for themselves on the streets results in those dogs and cats being funnelled into certain sorts of kill shelters that PeTA disapproves of. Instead, argues PeTA, no-kill shelters should be totally scrapped and kill shelters ought to do their murdering by using painless “humane” methods. 5

Mutilation by Any Other Name

PeTA advocates “spaying” and “neutering” desexing programmes. In other words, hysterectomies (removing the uterus and ovaries) 6 and castrations (removing the testes). Hysterectomies and castrations are commonly done so cat and dog owners can more easily control their non-human animal property. These procedures result in acute pain and chronic destructive medical conditions, including very harmful hormonal imbalances 7. That is why humans never undergo hysterectomies or castrations unless they are taking a last resort to stop the spread of cancer. The viable sterilisation alternatives – tubal ligations and vasectomies – have little or no ill effects 8. Tubal ligations and vasectomies for cats and dogs are more expensive at present because they are not yet common practice and more veterinarians need to be trained in them 9. Resources should be put into tubal ligation and vasectomy sterilisation programmes for cats and dogs. Hysterectomies and castrations, however, violate the basic rights of cats and dogs: their bodily integrity, mental and physical health, well-being and freedom from pain and suffering. Tubal ligations and vasectomies do not violate their rights. 10

“Unwanted” for What Purpose?

PeTA states that its long-term goal is to “end to the killing” through “a commitment to preventing the births of unwanted animals.” 11 Why has PeTA distinguished between “unwanted” and “wanted” cats and dogs? The answer is that both are property under the law. “Wanted” cats and dogs are the property of individuals. They are commonly bought in &ldquoet” stores and exploited for their companionship. If they turn out to be “bad” companions, they are returned to the store, subjected to harsh disciplinary treatment and control measures or are “euthanised”—i.e. the killing of healthy non-human animals, otherwise known as murder. “Unwanted” cats and dogs, on the other hand, are the property of the state and are viewed as &ldquoests” or “vermin.” Thus, the state looks favourably upon their being killed.

By only expressing concern about preventing the births of “unwanted” cats and dogs, PeTA assumes and thus perpetuates the legitimacy of the institution of “wanted” or exploited cats and dogs. Although PeTA recommends not buying non-human animals from pet stores or breeders, and instead recommends sterilisation 12 , I would not be surprised if these recommendations disappeared when &ldquoet overpopulation” is no longer a reality. In other words, breeding and selling &ldquoets” for our companionship would be acceptable as long as there were no “unwanted” cats and dogs roaming the streets. This would violate the rights of non-human animals not to be bred—that is, imprisoned, raped, kidnapped and used until “defective”.

“There Are ‘rights’ and Then There Are Rights”: 13 PeTA’s Double Standard

Regarding PeTA’s argument that no-kill shelters cause more deaths by indirectly funnelling non-human animals to kill shelters, consider the following quotation from PeTA that I have modified so that it refers to human refugees instead of cats and dogs:

“No-kill” refugee camps should really be called “leave-the-killing-to-someone-else” refugee camps. Even though the Red Cross and Doctors Without Boarders are usually well meaning, they can never put up enough tents to house the millions of human beings who are dispossessed by war and famine each year. When “no-kill” refugee camps turn people away because their facilities are already bursting at the seams—what happens to these people? If they don’t die of starvation or get killed by militants, they go to camps that never turn away a refugee in need, camps that have made the difficult choice to take in every single human refugee brought to them, including those who are diseased, badly injured, aggressive, elderly, or unsocialized after spending their lives at the end of a chain in a sweatshop&mdasheople who have little chance of being adopted by rich Westerners. They take them all in, even if all they can offer the refugees are a meal, kind words, a loving touch, and a painless release [i.e. death by lethal injection] from an uncaring world.

For example, the Director of Refuge In Peace (R.I.P.) in Uganda says “There’s not a ‘no-kill’ refugee camp in this country that does not turn people away every single day. It’s a sham and a scam as far as we’re concerned.” 14

In other words, human refugees should be given a final meal, music should be played on the way to the lethal injection chamber and refugees should be given a “loving touch” of death. Respecting fundamental human rights is “a sham and a scam”.

Of course, PeTA does not make the above claims with respect to human animals. The above parody is a PeTA quotation that has been modified so that non-human animals have been replaced with human animals. But this parody shows PeTA’s double standard: human animals have the fundamental right to life, but non-human animals do not. PeTA’s double standard must be rejected, and with the following understanding:

With respect to human refugee camps that are full to capacity, the unintended side-effect of turning away people who may then die is not caused by the camps. Rather, these deaths are caused by war and starvation, which have root political causes. The causes of war and starvation should be addressed whilst simultaneously creating no-kill refugee camps, and forgetting about the ludicrous idea of having “kill refuges”. This is what we already do because humans have rights. Similarly, with respect to cat and dog shelters that are full to capacity, the unintended side-effect of turning away cats and dogs who may then die is not caused by the shelters. Rather, these deaths are caused by breeding cats and dogs and by those who operate “kill shelters.” These root causes should be addressed whilst simultaneously creating no-kill shelters, and forgetting about the oxymoron of “kill shelters”. This is what we should so because non-human animals have rights.

Not Surprising

Last June, two PeTA staff were convicted of cruelty to animals. 15 PeTA staff took dogs from shelters and then personally killed them. 16 “PeTA says it routinely picks up animals at pounds to have them adopted or, if necessary, euthanized. … Among the dead animals, though, authorities found a female cat and her two ‘very adoptable’ kittens taken from Ahoskie Animal Hospital, veterinarian Patrick Proctor said. ‘These were just kittens we were trying to find homes for,’ Proctor said. ‘PeTA said they would do that, but these cats never made it out of the county.’” 17

An anti-animal-rights organisation, the “Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF)”, focuses its attention on exposing and condemning animal welfare groups such as PeTA. I strongly reject the basic anti-animal rights assumptions of the CCF. Nevertheless, it has uncovered the officially documented fact that “From July 1998 through the end of 2004, PeTA killed over 12,400 dogs, cats, and other ‘companion animals’ – at its Norfolk, Virginia headquarters.” 18

In 1991, PeTA had a non-human animal “sanctuary” called Aspen Hill where it killed healthy19 PeTA said it did this because it wanted to spend the money that would have been required to house the rabbits and turkeys on its other campaigns. At the time, PeTA’s budget was over six million U.S. dollars per year. 20 Imagine if, during the time when humans were slaves, someone giving runaway slaves refuge murdered the slaves in order to spend more resources on other, more effective, anti-slavery advocacy. The right to life of the people in question would have been violated. The essence of a right is that it protects the individual regardless of how others might benefit. Without this principle of right, vivisection conducted upon either human or non-human animals would be justified. PeTA uses the same ends-justifies-the-means mentality that is used to justify vivisection in order to justify the murder of healthy cats and dogs in so called “shelters”. We would never tolerate this if it were applied to human beings. Thus, animal rights activists should reject PeTA’s killing policy, and the organisation itself. 21 rabbits and turkeys.


Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , ,
Posted: Mar 19, 2006 8:56pm

 

 
 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.

Author

pElAgUS hellot
, 1
Tamarindo, Costa Rica
Shares by Type:
All (1001) | Blog (255) | Alert (445) | Poll (4) | Recipe (12) | Photo (11) | Tribute (59) | Message (215)

Showing shares tagged with: dogs [show all]
SHARES FROM PELAGUS'S NETWORK
Feb
16
(0 comments  |  discussions )
“Integrity is telling myself the truth. And honesty is telling the truth to other people.”   Spencer Johnson   Many years ago, when I was in high school chemistry lab, I was assigned to do a litmus test to determin...
Feb
15
(0 comments  |  discussions )
New Petition! Speak out against Time-Warner Merger with Comcast! Let your opinion be know before your bill goes up and your programming choices dwindle. Urge DOJ and FCC to Not Allow Merger of Time-Warner and Comcast http://www.thepetitionsit e.com...
Feb
13
(0 comments  |  discussions )
New Petition! Speak out against Time-Warner Merger with Comcast! Let your opinion be know before your bill goes up and your programming choices dwindle. Urge DOJ and FCC to Not Allow Merger of Time-Warner and Comcast http://www.thepetitionsit e.com...
Jan
29
(0 comments  |  discussions )
I have recently posted some BlogSpot radio interviews and YouTube videos, publicizing my two new books, 1) Deepening Your Personal Relationships: Developing Emotional Intimacy and Good Communication. 2) Psychological Healing Through Creative Self-U...
Jan
24
by Ys A.
(0 comments  |  discussions )
Coretta Scott King: “We have done what we can to reveal the truth, and we now urge you as members of the media, and we call upon elected officials, and other persons of influence to do what they can to share the revelation of this case to the w...
Jan
23
(0 comments  |  discussions )
We declare that no man nor nation nor race have a greater right than others to enjoy the fruits of their work, as the ecological sphere is our common condition of life http://www.beat s4change.org/aims.htm Nous déclarons qu'aucun...
Jan
18
by Ys A.
(0 comments  |  discussions )
author: Ralph Nader An epidemic of sky-rocketing medical costs has afflicted our country and grown to obscene proportions. Medical bills are bloated with waste, redundancy, profiteering, fraud and outrageous over-billing. Much is wrong with the pr...
Jan
13
(0 comments  |  discussions )
Dear Friends: My two current books have been published and are available for sale through Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and the publisher’s website, http://sbprabooks.com/Max Hammer. Reading these books can be very helpful for anyone seeking ...
by Fred H.
(0 comments  |  discussions )
A stainless steel tank the size of a basketball court lies buried in the sandy soil of southeastern Washington state, an aging remnant of U.S. efforts to win World War II. The tank holds enough radioactive waste to fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool...
by Fred H.
(0 comments  |  0 discussions )
The Olympic Peninsula is home to important state-owne d forests and many of our state’s most iconic creatures. To keep these forest ecosystems healthy, WEC and our partners at Conservation Northwe st and Olympic Forest Coalit...