Wednesday, March 31, 2010

All About Pets Show this weekend.. come and visit us!

Looking for something to do this weekend?

The All About Pets Show is on at the International Center in Mississauga.

We (DLCC) have a booth all weekend. We are booth 536. We are smack dab in the middle of the show. Come on down and visit us.

I am doing a presentation at 1:30 on Friday and Saturday, 1:00 on Sunday at the Legacy Valuing Tradition Total Pet Care Stage. The topic I will be speaking on is Breed Profiling and Discrimination. One of the victims of discrimination from Brampton will be speaking with me to tell his story. We hope to "enlighten" a lot of people to "our little problem" here in Ontario.

We have lots of stuff for sale at our booth. We have T-shirts, (yes some of the Innocent Until Proven Guilty) t-shirts that everyone wants, Punish the Deed Decals, breed decals, "Pinups for Pitbulls" calendars, My Ontario Includes Pitbulls bumper stickers and much much more..

We'd love to meet you or see you again if we've met before. Philip (remember Ginger who spent 4 1/2 yrs in lockup at Toronto pound until Clay Ruby took over the case and sprung her from jail last summer) and Ginger will be hanging out all weekend. Come and meet everyone and show your support.

Hope to see you there...

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

A different POV on the OSPCA/THS situation

There is a lot of speculation and a lot of emotion surrounding how business is being handled at THS. I personally won't make any direct comments because I am not involved. 

Someone I respect issued a statement yesterday and gave me permission to post it. 

Ador-a-bull rescue was involved in assessing the dogs that were pts on Friday. I respect ADR's evaluation and wanted to post their point of view.

First of all, ADR was responding to the email directly below, which was one of many asking for answers..

“Since March 22 2010 , at the Toronto Humane Society, which is now under management by the OSPCA , during a raid last fall ( based on accusations of animal neglect..cruelty, misuse of public funds ) 6 pitbull type of dogs have been humanely euthanized, over 300 animals are missing and cannot be accounted for.

Where are the groups here in Canada, that were formed to raise awareness to BSL and the pitbull ban here in Ontario..and why have they not stepped in..and removed these dogs before they were euthanized.

The story reads the dogs were examined and found unfit, by the OSPCA staff vets..notice. .no one from an outside agency came in..

This is a political reinforce the BSL here in Ontario..and many more dogs are scheduled to be euthanized

Can one of these agencys, with money raised through public awareness..not step in and save these remaining pitbulls..and get them out of the THS...
Here is ADR's response and statement;

** We have received several emails regarding this inflammatory post, by a heavy handed "trainer", throughout the day with requests for information, opinion, etc. We aren’t looking to argue, upset anyone or cause trouble. This is our opinion based on our experience and knowledge from “behind the scenes”, which may just be a little closer to the truth than some of those based on nothing but hearsay and emotion. See below for original email.


Rescues, yes plural, including ADR, were brought in to assess the dogs that were humanely euthanized. These dogs failed assessment on a number of levels. We are not talking merely food aggression either. We are talking dogs that would turn and snap at you, growl and challenge you for simply trying to pet them. We spent and entire day at the THS. We met and assessed these dogs and it was incredibly sad how far gone/disconnected they were.

Several outside agencies deemed these dogs unfit for rescue as well. One unknown rescue, in BSL stricken Ohio, agreed to take the dog’s sight unseen. Not a responsible decision, and we’re glad the THS/OSPCA didn’t go that route.

Who has the means to rehabilitate these kinds of severe issues? DogTown is lovely, but not realistic. The THS is far from a sanctuary and independent rescue can’t take on that type of burden for liability reasons at best.

Nobody likes seeing dogs be humanely euthanized, but sometimes it’s the last kindness you can give them. This is about the reputation of the breed, but more importantly responsible ownership and public safety. These were not safe dogs; several had at least one prior bite incident (which is a DOLA infraction in itself).

As a responsible rescue you would not be getting a dog like this from us. We could not keep our volunteers if we “rescued” high strung, super anxious, unpredictable, dangerous dogs.

Yes, THS volunteers had walked some of these poor souls for years without incident, and we commend and respect them for their dedication to these animals. But did they ever feed them - or try to take away their - dinner? Play with them using HIGH value items? Try to look in their ears or trim their nails? Regular things dog owners need to do without being bitten?!

There are not more dogs scheduled to be humanely euthanized (that we are aware of). Whoever wrote this is beyond out of touch. What happened had nothing to do with pit bulls or BSL (which the OSPCA has publically stepped out against); a pug mix was humanely euthanized as well! Many pit bulls have been saved from the shelter since all this started, and that was, by far, the first choice for everyone involved.

With emails like this floating around, who could blame the OSPCA/THS teams for not wanting to work with rescue - individual, independent or organized - in the future.

In our humble opinion as dog lovers, rescuers, rescuers who have been to the THS and met the dogs, friends of the staff, friends of the legal team legal and friends with OSPCA agents CURRENTLY WORKING at the THS, and fighters of the good fight. What needs to be done is being done…responsibly and effectively.

There is also an article in the Globe today;

Toronto Humane Society wants to clear its cages and start anew
The Toronto Humane Society is seeking a court’s permission to close its doors, clear the cages and make sweeping changes to its animal-care policies in a rebuilding effort that would amount to pressing the reset button on one of Canada’s oldest and largest animal charities.
The closing, which was recommended by independent animal-care experts and approved recently by the charity’s board of directors, would last approximately six to eight weeks, with the shelter likely reopening in June. Such a move would leave the fate of the dwindling number of animals still inside the shelter, estimated at about 200, in the balance. Most have health and behavioural problems and, with slim chances of being adopted, many would probably be euthanized.
In an affidavit recently filed in court, THS executive director Garth Jerome outlined his designs “to rebuild the THS as a shelter and adoption centre from the ground up, and regain the public’s confidence in the organization.”
Mr. Jerome said he would have to regain control of animal care from the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to carry out the rebuilding. A court awarded control of animal care in the shelter to the OSPCA three months ago, after the provincial organization charged five senior THS managers and its board of directors with animal cruelty. 
Read Toronto Human Society executive director Garth Jerome's affidavit
“The current situation gave the organization a chance to re-evaluate its mission and its goals,” said Frank Addario, a lawyer for the board of directors, who added he was reluctant to discuss the matter further as it remains before the courts.
The OSPCA said that “such a drastic step” should not be taken without consulting the charity’s membership.
“In addition, we do not agree that the decision to close the facility, even temporarily, should be made by the current board of directors of the Toronto Humane Society,” said Brian Shiller, a lawyer for the organization.
Most of the members of the board of directors have “indicated an intention to resign shortly,” he said, and any plan for renewal of the embattled charity should be considered at a special meeting of the members.
Mr. Jerome’s affidavit states that during the closing, the entire River Street facility would undergo a deep cleaning, staff would be retrained and a new computer system for tracking animal intake and care would be implemented, among other changes.
Ontario Superior Court Justice David Brown will consider the proposal next week, when hearings will begin on an application by some THS members and the OSPCA to have the charity’s current board of directors removed and order an election for a new board at a special meeting of the members.
The affidavit also outlines some problems that contributed to the need for a shelter overhaul, including animal corpses stored at too-warm temperatures, overcrowding, and animals whose physical and mental states had deteriorated to the point that they had little quality of life.
Euthanasia policies remain a controversial issue at the shelter, where six dogs, some of them favourites of dog-walking volunteers, were euthanized on Friday. The deaths fuelled a demonstration outside the shelter over the weekend in which protesters called the OSPCA dog murderers. However, in a statement posted on the shelter’s website, Mr. Jerome said the decision to euthanize the dogs was made by the THS.
Marcie Laking, a volunteer familiar with the dogs, most of whom were pit bulls who had lived in the shelter for years, said she blamed their deaths on bickering among THS staff, volunteers and the OSPCA.
“If we spent half as much time trying to adopt these animals as we did taking shots at each other there’d be no animals in the shelter, they’d all have homes,” she said.
According to Mr. Jerome’s affidavit, as of March 2, there were 255 animals in the care of the THS, including just 160 cats and 22 dogs. When the OSPCA took control of the shelter in November, there were more than 1,100 animals.
“It is my objective to keep the animal population at the THS moving through our facility quickly to adoptive homes or foster homes so that we do not accumulate a disproportionate number of chronically ill, unadoptable animals,” Mr. Jerome said.
“To a large extent, I believe that closely monitoring and controlling the population of unadoptable animals, coupled with an aggressive adoption campaign, will prevent the problem of overcrowding in the future.”

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Animal lovers are PO'ed at OSPCA

The Toronto Star ran a story today about a protest held at Toronto Humane Society against last weeks killing of 6 dogs and 19 cats. As I indicated in a previous post, insiders claim all the dogs were set to be handed over to other shelters and rescue groups and were waiting on transportation. The 6 dogs were killed on Friday. 

Here is what the Star reported today.

OSPCA called ‘dog murderers’

Zeus the dog was out with his owner to protest against animal euthanasia at the Toronto Humane Society's River St. animal shelter, which is currently being administered by the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

Angry dog-walkers and humane society supporters blasted the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals after six pit bulls were put down on Friday.
During a Sunday afternoon protest at the Toronto Humane Society’s River St. shelter – temporarily operated by the provincial organization – demonstrators said the new administration was “murdering” pit bulls.
“They say they are protecting animals – but they are murderers,” said Rosana Martins, a volunteer who walked several of the dogs that were euthanized.
“There is no mercy. This used to be a no-kill shelter, now it is a high-kill shelter.”
The OSPCA took over the animal care at the shelter last November, accusing THS leaders of allowing animals to live in inhumane conditions so that it could claim low euthanasia rates. The provincial organization charged several THS officials with cruelty to animals and requested a court-appointed receiver take over the THS. The hearing in that case will begin in early April, said THS spokesperson Ian McConachie.
Volunteer Andy Blau said there shelter is a “hot bed” of rumours right now with few answers from either organization and the issue of euthanasia is huge for the volunteers and donors.
“It leaves a great sense of futility for the volunteers to think “I am doing my best to make this animal’s life better but they are just going to kill it tomorrow,” Blau said.
Rosaline Ryan, a spokesperson for the OSPCA said veterinarians for both organizations made the decision to euthanize the dogs.
Ryan said she understands that emotions are running high. “The OSPCA works and deals with animals all the time so we totally understand, despite with another might say. We have feelings too, where the animals are concerned.”
The THS’s McConachie said the shelter has not adopted a “high-kill” philosophy but said a new euthanasia policy is in place that takes into account the future of very aggressive or sick animals.
“We can’t be a sanctuary. We have to be a shelter. We can’t house animals indefinitely.”
McConachie said that when the OSPCA took over animal care in late November, there were 1,100 animals at the shelter.
Since then, he said, 129 animals have been euthanized. Another 793 have been adopted (these figures include animals from the shelter’s Victoria Park location.) There are roughly 300 animals left in the shelters or foster homes. Of the 18 dogs remaining, McConachie said five or six of them are adoptable.

Horrifying allegations toward the OSPCA/THS

I was horrified to read several articles at One Bark at a Time about 5 well liked, short haired mix breeds and 19 cats were killed on Friday. According to the author, all of the dogs were waiting on transport and were approved for alternate shelters and rescues to re-home them. 

Black Friday at the Toronto Humane Society
We Failed You
Not good enough
Both the Toronto Humane Society management and the OSPCA are defending the euthanasia decisions but getting consistent reasons for the euthanasias is difficult. Initial responses were that the animals were all put down for health reasons but it was obvious to everyone who knew the dogs that they were not unhealthy. Aggressive behaviours and assessment test failures coupled with unadoptability were also brought up as reasons. This also did not sit well with staff and volunteers who believe these dogs to have been non-aggressive and adoptable.
Thank you One Bark at a Time for your excellent coverage of the OSPCA/THS situation. Your coverage from the get go has been thorough and informative. 

Another article at, read it here.

Sickening, what is happening in this province!

Social Mange also has a really good post; There are so many games afoot and animals are the pawns. is exposed in a well put together article

KC Dogblog has an excellent article exposing is not an "expert" organization when it comes to canine behavior. There, I've said it.
While it seems that lately, several media outlets have been treating them like they have a particular knowledge on the subject of dog bites and attacks (I'll get to a possible "why" on that later in the post), it doesn't erase the reality that is simply a website run almost entirely by an individual person who has an expertise in web design, access to google, and a desire to seek revenge on an attack that happened to her several years. Those are the qualifications behind the website. And it runs no deeper than that. And treating the website as anything more than that is a recipe bad information that will lead to less safe circumstances for people and dogs. Let me explain.
Read on...

There are some really great comments in the comments section of this article as well. 

One stand out comment in my opinion is:

"There are always two sides, and they teach the importance of providing both." This is actually the problem with modern "journalism". Sometimes there are NOT two sides (ex: creationists, birthers, "death panels" etc). By blindly following the archaic "2 sides" notion, modern journalists actually are victimized by propagandists and perpetuate the falsities that are rampant in our society. The use of as a source is an example of this. Journalists don't feel the need to verify whether her information is accurate. It's "the other side" and that's all that matters to them. They can pretend they are being impartial, when what they are doing is helping vicious people lie.

Is DNA testing in dogs a sham?

There is an article in the Toronto Star, by Nancy J. White, about a woman who sent her dog's DNA sample to three separate companies for testing. The results were, well inconclusive to say the very least. 

This reinforces what I have been saying all along about breed identification? 

Here is a picture of the dog.

DNA tests confirm we have a mutt
Companies agree there's shepherd in Whiskey

All we knew for sure was that Whiskey was a lovable, furry mutt.
Three DNA tests and $268 later, all we know for sure is that Whiskey is a lovable, furry mutt.
The results from three companies agreed only on this: our boy is one mixed-up canine cocktail and he does have some shepherd. But what kind of shepherd and what other bevy of breeds make up the mix is up for grabs.
Suggestions ran the genetic gamut from the small Norwich terrier to the enormous St. Bernard, with a bit of beagle, a dollop of Dalmatian and some Rottweiler, among others, tossed in.
He looks like none of those.
"You can't judge a dog by his cover," explains Robin Ray, marketing director for the Canine Heritage Breed test.
The revolution in DNA testing has gone to the dogs. Geneticists have mapped the genome of the domesticated dog and researchers are studying genetic influences for diseases that afflict canines as well as insight into those shared with humans, such as cancer and diabetes.
And just as DNA samples are used to trace humans' genetic ancestry, so too Rover's.
"The majority of the dogs we test come from shelters and owners are super curious," says Mindy Tenenbaum, of the Toronto company DNA My Dog. "Ninety per cent of the time people are wrong about what they think the dog is."
The companies say that knowing the breed can shed light on a mutt's potential health problems.
Tenenbaum tells the story of a large dog resembling a king shepherd with a bad skin affliction that the veterinarian couldn't cure. The owner happened to mention that DNA results showed the dog was part Siberian husky. The vet knew that huskies often get a certain type of dermatitis and successfully treated the animal.
We weren't curious so much about Whiskey's health or even his lineage as we were the tests. Crucial to the test is a company's database: How many breeds and which ones will they compare to your pet's DNA? There are about 500 breeds of domesticated dog.
The three tests we ordered, all available online, ranged in price from $70 to $108, and promised 90 per cent or better accuracy. The three companies say their DNA databases come from certified American Kennel Club dogs or, in cases of breeds not part of AKC, from top-notch breeders.
The kits arrived with instructions and swabs to collect cells from inside the dog's cheek. Whiskey barely noticed. I mailed back the DNA-swathed swabs and waited a few weeks for results.
When my family adopted Whiskey more than 10 years ago from the Toronto Humane Society, we were told he was a stray, most likely a shepherd-collie mix. That was their best guess and fine by us.
DNA My Dog, which tests for 68 popular breeds, found that Whisk was a level three Australian Shepherd, meaning he likely had a grandparent predominantly from that breed. On the great-grandparent level, there was a lot of bizarre mating going way back: Shetland sheepdog, Siberian husky, beagle, golden retriever and St. Bernard.
"Holy cow, that is a lot," says Tenenbaum when told of the findings.
A Google search of Australian shepherd shows a black and tan, hairy dog that sure looks like Whisk.
The breed is known for its intelligence, herding and guarding instincts. Sounds like Whisk. He used to nip at our heels and try to herd us together. And did I mention he was tops in his puppy obedience class?
On to company number two, the U.S.-based Wisdom Panel Insights, which tests for more than 170 breeds, the most in our three-way sample. It registered zip in the significant or intermediate categories but detected minor signs of German shepherd and traces of bearded collie and Rottweiler.
I felt confused, so I emailed Wisdon Panelstaff veterinarian and geneticist Angela Hughes a picture of my long-haired, flop-eared sweetheart who looks nothing like a German shepherd.
"I disagree," says Hughes who singled out Whisk's German shepherdy traits, such as the tan base coat and black overlay. German shepherds come in a long-coated version, she says. Both bearded collies and Rottweilers have dropped ears like Whisk. His broad skull could be rottie.
Looking at his hybrid results, she says: "I'd expect him to be a very intelligent boy." Why, yes.
The third one, Canine Heritage, tests for 106 breeds. It also drew a blank for any primary matches, but on a secondary level: Dalmatian.
"It's at the bottom of the threshold," explains marketing director Ray, calling up Whiskey's results. The spotted breed, made famous by Disney, ranked just a tad above the "In the Mix" findings: German shepherd, Australian shepherd, Norwich terrier and St. Bernard.
"Looking at the findings," says Ray, who never saw Whisk's photo, "I'd guess you have a generic black dog with a white chest spot."
Close enough. That's apparently a common look among the Heinz 57 set. Black is a dominant trait.
So whom to believe?
At the Ontario Veterinary College in Guelph, staff veterinarian Rasa Levstein says a good test must be reproducible and suggests doing all three again. No time for that.
For health purposes, she says it may be useful to know the mutt's breeds, but only if the test is accurate. Otherwise, she warns, an owner would be "barking up the wrong tree."
At the Rosedale Animal Hospital, veterinarian Ian Sandler calls the tests a good option for the curious. but not of much help clinically. Dogs have similar disease patterns depending whether they are small, medium, large or extra-large.
"Knowing specifically whether it's mostly German shepherd or golden retriever wouldn't play a huge role in how the dog is treated," he explains. "It's more of a novelty at this point. In the future, as technology improves, it may help identify the potential for various diseases."
As for Whisk, he remains our noble beast, nary a drop of blueblood in him. But his new nickname is "Aussie."

Friday, March 26, 2010

PETA's animal 'care' & control 'specialist' is full of CRAP!

Special Letter: Rescued pit bulls not family pets

As someone whose work involves rescuing pit bulls from abuse, I urge Livingston County Animal Control to continue protecting pit bulls by retaining the agency's current policy against adopting them out ("Livingston animal shelter extends adoption time, may drop 'bully breed' ban," March 15). We all wish for happy endings, but pit bull adoptions often end in tragedy.
Every day, PETA staffers meet sad and lonely pit bulls who have been trapped for years at the ends of heavy chains with nothing but bare patches of dirt and plastic barrels for shelter (if they're lucky), trembling in fear, full of heartworms, ribs protruding, and scarred all over from fights. In winter, they shiver from the cold and in summer, they are eaten alive by flies, fleas and ticks. They are often physically abused and starved, sometimes to death, for losing in illegal dogfights, or for being "bad guards," or "not mean enough."
Nice families rarely visit shelters in search of pit bulls, and pit bulls from unknown backgrounds don't always make good family additions. No one wants to end the euthanasia of animals at shelters more than those holding the syringe, but supplying pit bulls to dogfighters and those seeking "macho" status symbols and cheap security systems aren't solutions. Spaying and neutering to prevent more pit bulls from coming into the world is.
Teresa Lynn Chagrin ,
Animal Care & Control Specialist, PETA,
Norfolk, Va.

Teresa Lynn Chagrin you are so full of shit!
Take your pitty party and go back to the hole you climbed out of!
Way to hurl spreading the propaganda to further PETA's agenda, which is slaughtering helpless animals while preaching you are working in the "best interest" of animals, or in this case short haired mutts. 
Take your twisted views and shove them up your ass. 
Do you think we can't read? Do you think we don't know how many thousands of innocent animals PETA slaughters every year, all while taking millions of dollars from people who actually can't read!

If you are still a Bob Barker, Pam Anderson or any other PETA wanker celebrity supporter, please do yourself a favor and have a read of the following links.

The Butcher of Norfolk

The Butcher of Norfolk (4th Edition)

When you are finished reading Nathan's blog posts, do a little research. It isn't hard to scratch up information that will make your hair curl. 

Why, do you ask, would people want to harm innocent animals? 





Not sure, just guessing. If you think about giving any money or support to any organization, you should do your research. It is your money, far be it from me to tell you how to spend it, but I suspect that if people know the truth about what that money is going toward, they may change their contribution recipient?

Thursday, March 25, 2010

3-Year-Old Child Mauled By Dog

Should Golden Retrievers be banned?

According to the journalist, 

Golden Retrievers are generally among the most gentle of dogs and are usually excellent with children.
Blanket statements such as this are very dangerous. They are as dangerous as classifying dogs dangerous by breed. There is no such thing as a dangerous breed and likewise there is no such thing as an all encompassing breed "gentle/excellent with children". It depends on the owner and depends on the dog. It depends on how much training and socialization a dog has. It can also depend on other factors such as nobody noticing or identifying the warning signs of a bite. The signs are always there. There is always a reason, but many times the humans weren't paying attention or ignored the signs. 

Maybe McGuinty could have legislated bite prevention programs in schools? He is the "education" premier after all! (tongue firmly in cheek and swallowed).

Here is the rest of the article. 
h/t Social Mange

It's usually the perfect combination - a loving youngster and a gentle dog.
But something went horribly wrong at an Oshawa home Tuesday and now a three-year-old girl is facing the possibility of having plastic surgery.
Police say the youngster was being cared for by neighbours at 506 Lanlark Drive just after 1pm, and was petting a normally friendly Golden Retriever.
Cops aren't sure what provoked the animal, but it suddenly turned on the child, mauling the tot from her eye to her cheek.
The toddler was rushed to Lakeridge Health Centre, where plastic surgeons began examining the damage. It's believed her eyesight will be O.K. but she may require surgical repairs to her cheek.
The same people looking after the child were also looking after the dog for the day.
"They were petting the dog," relates Richard Ovila, the babysitter's husband. "I don't know if they were patting together or what, when all of a sudden the dog turned around and took her on the left cheek."
The dog has been seized by animal control and those who know the creature are baffled. Golden Retrievers are generally among the most gentle of dogs and are usually excellent with children.
"It was a very serious dog bite," confirms Dave Selby of Durham Regional Police.
The youngster was surprised by what happened and reportedly continually asked the doctors who were treating her why the dog bit her. But like police, they didn't have those answers, either.
"It's just a very unfortunate incident and obviously our thoughts and prayers are with that young girl right now to make sure she can get through this situation and hopefully not have too many damages as she grows older," Selby concludes.
It's not clear what will become of the canine, but the owner is the neighbour's son and he has no idea about what's happened to his beloved pet. He's currently away on vacation down south for March Break.
Authorities hope this tragic event will provide a lesson for others.
"The best thing to do is keep your children away from unknown dogs or strange dogs that you don't know their personality or behaviour," suggests Tre Smith of the Toronto Humane Society.
The little girl has been taken to the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto for further assessment. She'll be staying there until at least Wednesday.

Cheers to Neville! Happy Retirement.

Neville is a bomb sniffing dog that was saved from being slaughtered here in Ontario after being deemed a "pitbull" under the McGuinty Liberal's draconian "pitbull" ban. Neville was shipped across the border and took up a career in Washington State, USA with Trooper David Dixon. Neville has worked in Seattle for 5 years now, but he is set to retire to the good life. He will be staying with his best friend, Trooper Dixon.

Hats off to you Neville! We here in Ontario, at least those of us who aren't Liberal MPP's are really happy for you that you got out. Congrats on your retirement. 

Neville the pit bull to retire from job as bomb sniffer for WSP
SEATTLE - He's got a reputation, but he's not living up to it.  And that's a good thing.  Neville the pit bull is working the ferry lines at Seattle's Coleman Dock. 
He isn't supposed to be here. Neville was on death row in Canada until an escape worthy of a spy novel got him across the border and into the K-9 work force. Today he protects the people who almost failed him.
"He's the kind of dog who would take a bullet for you," said Neville's handler, Trooper David Dixon. "And there are people like me who had a bad idea of pit bulls in the past that may change their mind and love them because they're great."
"He's so sweet. I love it when you pet him and he just smashes up against you. You feel the love," said Diana Cameron, who works at the espresso stand on the dock.
And after five years and 21 actual finds of weapons or explosives, Neville prepares to hang up his badge for good. He is scheduled to retire in September.
Neville was the first pit bull on explosives patrol for the Washington State Patrol.  And he's helped pave the way for four others to follow in his footsteps. 
WSP currently has five pit bulls working narcotics or explosives. But Trooper Dixon says it's not so much about the breed as it is the sniffer and the disposition.  Neville has a nose that knows and the temperament of a dedicated officer.  Not to mention his success has helped booster the reputation of a breed known more to be fighters than crime fighters.
Trooper Dixon estimates that Neville does detection work on 150,000 vehicles a year.  One dog's life was spared to benefit the lives of countless others.
Neville will remain with Trooper Dixon after his retirement.

Thursday, March 18, 2010

More good news from Denver

Latest word from Denver is a class action suit centered on three disabled people who have pit bull service dogs, has been filed.

Jennifer Edwards of the Animal Law Center has filed in federal court and already has agreements from both Denver and Aurora that they will not enforce their bans on service dogs for now. 
We wish them the best in their efforts on behalf of service dogs!

KC Dogblog has more on this story...

Monday, March 15, 2010

Is Denver running scared?

There was some great news out of Denver this week!

Most of you remember the --the Dias vs. Denver case, that was filed in 2007, dismissed in 2008 and then reinstated in 2009 by the Federal Court of Appeals and is still ongoing. That lawsuit is now in the Summary Judgment phase. The short answer of what that means is that Denver filed a motion that no matter what, the case can't win at trial so the judge just needs to sort of look at it and give a judgment without a trial. Denver filed that motion, then the plaintiffs filed a reply to that, and now Denver is going to file a reply to the plaintiffs' reply and the judge will rule on it sometime this spring. If Denver wins the motion for summary judgment, it doesn't go to trial. If the plaintiffs win, it goes to trial at some point.
There is another federal court case that has been ongoing in Denver. The Arnold vs. Denver case.
The Arnold case has been settled by the City of Denver for an undisclosed large amount of money.
Included in the monetary settlement are some procedural changes to Denver's ordinance. What those procedural changes will do is make it easier for people to understand the often inscrutable system of pit bull pick-ups at animal control. Details on that will come later. Denver will start implementing these procedural changes this spring. These changes came after hours and hours of mind-numbing meetings with the city about the minutia of the procedures. Hopefully, it will help people whose dogs were picked up and who don't have any kind of advocate with them.
One of the plaintiffs in the Arnold vs. Denver lawsuit dropped out of the settlement and will file her own lawsuit in federal court with a top constitutional law firm. This is also fantastic news!
Rumor has it there is yet another suit being filed on a constitutional basis against the city of Denver. I'll let you know the details as they are made available.
Denver's city attorney's office is short staffed so they've hired an outside law firm to handle the rest of the Dias vs. Denver case. The law firm is Wells, Anderson and Race and they began to take over the case in/around December. Denver is paying them about $150 dollars an hour to handle it. So far, payments to the law firm regarding this case are: $4768.68 in December, and $10,336.75 in January. This is from a city with a massive budget deficit! Great to see those taxpaying dollars hard at work, senselessly killing innocent dogs based on how they look!
Translation and summary of this latest news out of Denver, Co.
The city of Denver obviously knew they couldn't win the case against Arnold. Hence the settlement out of court! That is terrific news on the overturn the ban front!!
Generally speaking, many jurisdictions "think" they can "wear dog owners down" by dragging them through court and exhausting them of money. It looks as though the proverbial shoe is on the other foot. Denver is sporting a huge deficit and the dog owner court cases are mounting against them.

Round of applause for all dog owners willing to stand by their dogs and fight for their lives. Constitutional rights (as in the right to own what breed or type of dog you choose to have in your own home) is worth fighting for. Innocent lives targeted by hatred and ignorance are well worth fighting for. This insanity MUST stop once and for all. Too many innocent lives of dogs and innocent dog owners have lost their pets because of irrational fear and lack of common sense. 

There is a better way! Revenue neutral, common sense laws along with education and encouragement for proper training, containing and socializing pets is the solution. Witch hunting and attempting to wipe out a certain "look" or "type" of dogs does absolutely NOTHING to preserve public safety. It does endanger the safety of innocent dogs and haphazardly targets responsible owners who happen to own dogs that may "look" to be what the ignorant perceive to be dangerous!

Well thought out article

I came across a well thought out article on a blog called Ethics Alarms.

The article is called "Pit Bulls and Bigotry". I encourage you to read this post.

 Pit Bulls and Bigotry
Writer Charles Leerhsen has experienced a conversion. After witnessing his best friend being viciously attacked and nearly killed on a city street without provocation, he has embraced bigotry with both hands. Now he writes screeds condemning not the attacker, but all individuals of the attacker’s race. In a passionate and angry essay for The Daily Beast, he denigrates not only those individuals but also anyone who defends them, such as “certain PC urban professionals who long to tell the world that they are super-sensitive and understanding souls.”
It’s an ugly essay, emotional, doctrinaire, and illogical, employing the well-worn racist technique of generalizing from the individual to the group and back again. Why would any respectable media outlet print such bile?
Read on...

PETA's 2009 numbers are in...

Nathan Winograd has an article titled The Butcher of Norfolk (4th Edition).

The numbers are finally in. In 2009, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) impounded 2,366 animals. They killed 2,301 and found homes for only 8. Another 31 were transferred to killing shelters and their fates are unknown. That’s a 97% rate of killing. While the No Kill movement is having unparalleled success and with No Kill communities now dotting the American landscape—in California, Nevada, Kansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Colorado, Utah, Virginia, and elsewhere—PETA continues to move sharply in the other direction. This is the fourth time I have run this very blog. This is my fourth plea to stop the Butcher of Norfolk.

Please read the whole article... 

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Way to hurl Bob Barker

Bob Barker Donates $2.5 Million to PETA

Bob Barker, host of “The Price is Right” from 1972 to 2007, has donated $2.5 million to animal rights charity People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). The money was used to open a new PETA office in Los Angeles.
Barker announced the donation at a ribbon-cutting ceremony in front of the renovated building on Sunset Boulevard Tuesday afternoon. Barker was joined by PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk.


This seriously cracked me up! Animal Rights Activists peed upon...

h/t Jody!

This story is satire, and I am not a supporter of violence (at least not admittedly) but this story made me laugh. I had a couple side fantasies of this happening to Pam Anderson, Heather Mills, Bill Maher, Wayne Pacelle, Ingrid Newkirk and other infamous AR wanks..


Activists Missing After Declaring “War on Leather” at Motorcycle Rally

Johnstown, PA (GlossyNews) – Local and state police scoured the hills outside rural Johnstown, Pennsylvania, after reports of three animal rights activists going missing after attempting to protest the wearing of leather at a large motorcycle gang rally this weekend. Two others, previously reported missing, were discovered by fast food workers “duct taped inside several fast food restaurant dumpsters,” according to police officials.

“Something just went wrong,” said a still visibly shaken organizer of the protest. “Something just went horribly, horribly, wrong.”
The organizer said a group of concerned animal rights activist groups, “growing tired of throwing fake blood and shouting profanities at older women wearing leather or fur coats,” decided to protest the annual motorcycle club event “in a hope to show them our outrage at their wanton use of leather in their clothing and motor bike seats.” “In fact,” said the organizer, “motorcycle gangs are one of the biggest abusers of wearing leather, and we decided it was high time that we let them know that we disagree with them using it…ergo, they should stop.”

According to witnesses, protesters arrived at the event in a vintage 1960’s era Volkswagen van and began to pelt the gang members with balloons filled with red colored water, simulating blood, and shouting “you’re murderers” to passers by. This, evidently, is when the brouhaha began.

“They peed on me!!!” charged one activist. “They grabbed me, said I looked like I was French, started calling me ‘La Trene’, and duct taped me to a tree so they could pee on me all day!”

“I…I was trying to show my outrage at a man with a heavy leather jacket, and he…he didn’t even care. I called him a murderer, and all he said was, ‘You can’t prove that.’ Next thing I know he forced me to ride on the back of his motorcycle all day, and would not let me off, because his girl friend was out of town and I was almost a woman.”
Still others claimed they were forced to eat hamburgers and hot dogs under duress. Those who resisted were allegedly held down while several bikers “farted on their heads.”

Police officials declined comments on any leads or arrests due to the ongoing nature of the investigation, however, organizers for the motorcycle club rally expressed “surprise” at the allegations.
“That’s preposterous,” said one high-ranking member of the biker organizing committee. “We were having a party, and these people showed up and were very rude to us. They threw things at us, called us names, and tried to ruin the entire event. So, what did we do? We invited them to the party! What could be more friendly than that? You know, just because we are all members of motorcycle clubs does not mean we do not care about inclusiveness. Personally, I think it shows a lack of character for them to be saying such nasty things about us after we bent over backwards to make them feel welcome.”
When confronted with the allegations of force-feeding the activists meat, using them as ad hoc latrines, leaving them incapacitated in fast food restaurant dumpsters, and ‘farting on their heads,’ the organizer declined to comment in detail. “That’s just our secret handshake,” assured the organizer.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Sarnia is bottom of my list of places I would live!

There is an article in the Sarnia Observer today.

I want to make 2 comments about this situation and quotes from the article.

First off, congrats Korinn Seabrook on getting your dogs back.

Maddi and Carter (puppies) and their father, all three boxer mixes, were seized by city animal control officers in early September. We are now into March. That is 6 - 7 months Korinn has been without her dogs.

The statement below is from city manager Lloyd Fennell.

City manager Lloyd Fennell said he's happy to see the situation resolved. It's unfortunate it took so much time, but he thinks all parties agree the right decision was made.
"Getting it right when you're dealing with someone's pet, and the protection of the public, is the ultimate thing."
The dogs must be spayed or neutered and registered with the city before they can be released. The city will review its animal control policies and from now on will consult an expert before it decides to euthanize an dog of questionable breed, Fennell said. Animal control staff were just enforcing provincial law when they seized the dogs, he said.

I wouldn't put it as a mistake," he said. "Animal control staff are vigilant about what they perceive as similar characteristics. For those that aren't actual breeders it probably isn't an exact science."

Lloyd, you were doing well up until your last statement. Now I have returned to thinking you are a douchebag!

Of course it was a mistake! What I assume you are saying is this and if I'm wrong prove me wrong:

1. You believe there is such a thing as a "pitbull". That is absolutely FALSE!

2. There is a threat that the public must be protected from, based on dangerous dogs classified by breeds or "non-breeds" in this situation. That is absolutely FALSE!

3. You believe that breeders or anyone else for that matter can correctly identify the lineage of mutts. That is absolutely FALSE!

3. If you can read at all, DOLA uses the word "MAY".
From DOLA:
(1.1) A proceeding may be commenced in the Ontario Court of Justice against a person if it is alleged that the person contravened a provision of this Act or the regulations or a court order made under this Act. 2005, c. 2, s. 1 (6).

So what that means is you may use DOLA but you are not obligated to murder any dog you find on the street (that ac perceives to be a "pitbull") or while our trolling that isn't an actual danger to society. Two of these dogs were puppies for shit's sake! They got loose. It happens. That hardly qualifies as public enemy #1!

There is nothing vigilant, or valiant or any other description of how Sarnia's animal control department is conducting themselves. Their job, as in all jurisdictions is to catch loose dogs, enforce dog licenses, investigate irresponsible dog owners that are causing a problem and collect a paycheck. They are not Elmer the Safety Elephant or Super Heros that are dramatically saving the public in Sarnia from supposed rogue "pitbulls".

I could do a quick check for you and see how many purebred banned dogs there are in Sarnia. You may have ZERO! There are only less than 1500 in the whole province so odds are you don't have any. If you really put your thinking cap on and do the arithmetic, you will even come to the realization that the most common mutt (the short haired mutt) walking around any town Ontario is not likely mixes derived from any of the three named banned breeds at all. How could they be. They would be some awfully busy breeding dogs.. don't yathink?

Also, while I'm at it, does the city of Sarnia have a mandatory s/n bylaw? Just wondering why Korinn Seabrook must s/n her dogs as a condition of getting them back? Or does the council also buy into the BS that unaltered dogs are dangerous? That is also absolutely FALSE! They are simply still able to breed. It isn't against the law to breed mutts, frowned on maybe? But people are purposely breeding cock-a-poos, lab-a-doos and what-have-you's and getting good money for them. Nobody is forcing them to stop?

Dogs that are trained, contained and socialized are good canine citizens. This has NOTHING to do with breed, reproductive status or looks. It has everything to do with responsible owners and thoughtful bylaws such as the Responsible Pet Ownership Bylaw in Calgary. There is nothing stopping municipalities in Ontario from adopting Calgary's bylaw and implementing something that actually works instead of senselessly targeting and killing innocent dogs!

Here is the article from the Sarnia Observer.

Three dogs mistakenly believed to be pit bulls, and sentenced to death by the city, will be set free this week.Puppies Maddi and Carter and their father, all three boxer mixes, were seized by city animal control officers in early September. According to a provincial law, any dog resembling a Staff ordshire bull terrier must be destroyed because the breed is banned. Maddi's owner, Korinn Seabrook said she's relieved her dog is coming home. "I'm beyond happy," she said. "I just wish that we didn't have to go through all of this."

Maddi escaped Seabrook's home through a broken screen door and was found by animal control running loose. When Seabrook went to the shelter to retrieve the animal she was told it would be euthanized. But, thanks to the intervention of two experts, who both agreed the dogs were not pit bulls, the pups will go free.
Seabrook will still have to pay over $600 in kennel, medical and licensing fees to get her dog back. That is deeply frustrating, she said. "They just kept trying to find a way to win," she said, of city staff . "Well, guess what, you win. I'm paying the money because I want my dog back."

Seabrook said she was amazed at the support from the community during the ordeal. She said without it they might have lost their dogs. "I'm glad there were people who stood behind us," she said. "They supported us and thankfully things are better."

City manager Lloyd Fennell said he's happy to see the situation resolved. It's unfortunate it took so much time, but he thinks all parties agree the right decision was made.  "Getting it right when you're dealing with someone's pet, and the protection of the public, is the ultimate thing.

The dogs must be spayed or neutered and registered with the city before they can be released. The city will review its animal control policies and from now on will consult an expert before it decides to euthanize an dog of questionable breed, Fennell said. Animal control staff were just enforcing provincial law when they seized the dogs, he said.
"I wouldn't put it as a mistake," he said. "Animal control staff are vigilant about what they perceive as similar characteristics. For those that aren't actual breeders it probably isn't an exact science."

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Comment from Cheri DiNovo

This is a comment from NDP MPP Cheri DiNovo on the throne speech.

So the throne speech suggests poverty will be eradicated by volunteers. Since housing wasn't mentioned - no substantive housing initiatives. Watch for cuts to our social services (hinted at) and privatization of key assets like the LCBO - pointed to. A sad day for Ontario and since prorogation killed all our private members bills - we start again. Even the Harper Tories didn't kill private members bills!

Friday, March 5, 2010

Bill 222 to have breed specific portion of DOLA repealed is dead

Thanks to McGuinty's prorogation of the Ontario Legislature, Bill 222 is dead in the water. I guess prorogation is the "trendy" thing to do? This isn't the first time McGuinty has shut down the legislature. My first inclination is to say that there is less harm done when McGuinty and company are not sitting, however all bills tabled that were up for further readings are now dead. Included is the former bill 222 by Cheri DiNovo to have the breed specific portion of DOLA repealed.

NDP MPP Cheri DiNovo will reintroduce the legislation again once the house gets back to work.

Here is an article by Amanda Street at Niagara This Week.

A bullied breed. Sandra Alway with her dog Olive, a five-year-old American Pit Bull Terrier. In 2005, the Ontario government banned pit bulls and related breeds which NDP MPP Cheri DiNovo is trying to reverse with a Private Members Bill, Bill 222.

A bullied breed

It’s the deed not the breed says MPP who tabled bill to repeal pit bull ban

Sandra Alway can’t imagine a life without her dogs. But it’s a hard reality she may soon have to face.
In 2005, the Ontario government banned pit bulls and related breeds. Alway has owned the breed she described as “incredibly smart and sweet” for 22 years. She got her first, a rescue, at age 18.
The Dog Owners Liability Act banned pit bull terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and any dog “that has an appearance and physical characteristics that are substantially similar” to those listed. Existing dogs were grandfathered into the act, but there were stipulations — muzzled and leashed in all public places, and they must be spayed or neutered.
The legislation left two options for puppies born after November 2005 — euthanization or relocation to a province that allows the breed.
“Five years later and I’m watching my dogs grow old at a rapid rate,” said Alway who has six pit bulls, the youngest of which were born just before the ban was enacted. She had 23 dogs when the ban came into effect. “I’m losing them and it’s really hard to deal with.”
Alway, who is president of the Golden Horseshoe American Pit Bull Terrier Club, said DOLA, without the breed ban, is “a perfect piece of legislation.” It includes jail time and high fines for owners of vicious dogs.
“I love DOLA, it would be fantastic piece of legislation if they just removed the breed specific legislation,” said Alway, who advocated for pit bulls when Bill 132 was brought into legislature.
With the help of Niagara West-Glanbrook MPP Tim Hudak, Alway collected more than 100,000 signatures on a petition against the breed ban. “We’re all for jail time, we’re all for high fines. If we had excluded the BSL, it would be perfect.”
The ban was brought back into the public eye on Nov. 18, 2009, when NDP MPP Cheri DiNovo introduced a Private Members Bill, 222, that called for a repeal of the breed specific legislation. “It’s the deed not the breed,” DiNovo shouted from the steps outside Queen’s Park during a rally in support of Bill 222.
The bill was tabled five months after the Supreme Court of Canada ruled it would not hear an appeal to the Supreme Court of Ontario’s decision to not rescind the government’s pit bull ban of 2005.
A recent seizure of two dogs, alleged to be pit bulls by the City of Brampton, has also brought the breed ban into the public eye. Rambo and Brittany, who the owners’ claim are boxer/American bulldog mixes, were seized by the city in January and labelled pit bulls. As the dogs are two years old, and born after the ban went into effect, the dogs were scheduled to be euthanized. The owners are taking the city to court and residents across the province are reacting.
A Facebook group, Injustice Brampton Dogs on Death Row – Free Them Now, has more than 10,000 members.
“These are puppies,” said Alway. “They’re only crime is that they are pit bulls. The ban doesn’t take into consideration how these animals are raised. How the dog behaves is a direct impact of how they were bought up. It’s bad ownership not bad dogs.”
In 2007, 43 pit bulls met their demise at the Lincoln County Humane Society. Staff do their best to relocate the animals, having sent dozens to provinces that do not ban the breed or to the United States, said Kevin Strooband, executive director. The ban, said Strooband, has not stopped people from breeding the banned dogs, noting he has seen full litters of pit bulls and related breeds since the ban was enacted.
“We, at the Lincoln County Humane Society, oppose breed specific legislation because it punishes an entire breed for attacks made by a few dogs,” said Strooband, describing the breed as a “sweet and loving” animal. “I’ve met a lot of pit bulls that are great dogs.”
A study published in the Canadian Veterinary Journal in 2008 found that out of 28 dog-bite related fatalities in Canada between 1990 and 2007, only one was caused by a breed banned under DOLA, an American Staffordshire terrier. Dogs most responsible for fatalities in that same period were listed as huskies, shepherds and Rottweiller-type dogs. According to the study, those breeds were responsible for 65 per cent of dog attack deaths.
According to a similar study in the United States, it was found that the top biters by breed are German Shepherds, Rottweillers, Cocker Spaniels, and Golden Retrievers. While it may be shocking for some to see the most common pet, a Golden Retriever, in the top four, it’s a reality, said Strooband.
A 2002 report by the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program, found that German Shepherds, Cocker Spaniels, Rottweillers and Golden Retrievers had the highest prevalence of reported dog bites.
“Pit bulls have been painted with the wrong brush,” said Strooband, who is also the lead investigator for the Ontario Society for the Protection of Animals. “The onus should be on the owners not on any specific breed. We’ve banned pit bulls, what’s next Dobermans?
Chihuahuas? When does it end?”
Welland New Democrat MPP Peter Kormos called the original bill a “knee jerk reaction” that “ignores the reality of the dog world” and “provides a false sense of security” for the public.
“At the end of the day it does nothing to protect the public from vicious Labradors, retrievers or poodles,” said Kormos, who voted against Bill 132. “A dog is inherent, through part of its genetic makeup to have an instinct to act up, to act wild. It is the responsibility of the dog owner and the dog breeder to keep that instinct in check.”
Hudak, who is now the leader of the provincial Progressive Conservative party, said his party supports Bill 222 because it is similar to a private member’s bill introduced by York North MPP Julia Munro in 2004.
“My view is, and has always been, that a category be created for vicious dogs rather than impose sanctions on an individual breed,” said Hudak. “Punish the deed not the breed.”
Hudak said Bill 132 does nothing to recognize responsible owners and does not protect the public from the “vicious dog next door.”
Calls to St. Catharines Liberal  MPP Jim Bradley were not returned.
“I do believe there is hope that one day the ban will be repealed,” said Alway. “I think it will be a while, but I have I hope. I have to. I can’t imagine not owning these dogs.”
A second reading of Bill 222 is expected to take place in the fall.
For more information on Bill 222 and to send a letter to your local MPP and Premier Dalton McGuinty, visit