1. Victory! NY Bans the Gassing of Stray Pets
An especially challenging political climate in the New York State Legislature has slowed the progress of a variety of pro-animal welfare bills this year. However, hard work by legislators, committee staff, the ASPCA and New York’s animal advocates brought the humane euthanasia bill (NY A. 999B) over the finish line!
Introduced in January, the bill sat dormant until the ASPCA, working closely with Assemblywoman Amy Paulin, Senator Suzi Oppenheimer and staff, helped revive it and secure passage in the Legislature in the fall. On October 9, it was signed into law by Governor Paterson.
The new law, which goes into effect in one year, will:
Prohibit carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide poisoning (gassing) of stray and shelter animals (effective in 90 days).
Require that the euthanasia of stray and shelter animals be performed by injection.
Require that such euthanasia be performed by a certified euthanasia technician, licensed veterinarian, or licensed veterinary technician.
Prohibit intracardiac euthanasia—a painful injection right into the heart—on unsedated shelter animals.
Require that veterinarians who perform intracardiac euthanasia on unsedated animals not under the care of a shelter do so only if it is the most humane option and that they document the event and rationale.
“The ASPCA recognizes the necessity of humane euthanasia as a last-step option to spare animals further suffering,” says Debora Bresch, Esq., ASPCA Legislative Liaison to New York State. “We thank the bill’s sponsors, Assemblywoman Paulin and Senator Oppenheimer, for their tireless efforts to assure that animals receive humane treatment at the end of their lives, and look forward to the day when euthanasia of unwanted animals is an infrequent occurrence."
*Never miss an advocacy alert again—sign up for the ASPCA Advocacy Brigade to receive free legislative emails.
Click on title above for full text of law;
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=999b
Friday, November 6, 2009
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
H1N1 Flu Confirmed in Iowa Cat
By: Courtesy of AVMA
A cat in Iowa has tested positive for the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus, state officials confirmed this morning, marking the first time a cat has been diagnosed with this strain of influenza.
The cat, which has recovered, is believed to have caught the virus from someone in the household who was sick with H1N1. There are no indications that the cat passed the virus on to any other animals or people.
Prior to this diagnosis, the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus had been found in humans, pigs, birds and ferrets.
To date, H1N1 influenza virus infection of pigs has been reported in Canada, Argentina, Singapore, the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland), Ireland, Norway, the U.S. and Japan. It has also been reported in turkeys in Chile and Canada. Based on the evidence available at this time, the infections were spread from humans to the animals.
http://www.petplace.com/cats/h1n1-flu-confirmed-in-iowa-cat/page1.aspx?utm_source=catcrazynews001et&utm_medium=email&utm_content=petplace_article&utm_campaign=dailynewsletter
A cat in Iowa has tested positive for the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus, state officials confirmed this morning, marking the first time a cat has been diagnosed with this strain of influenza.
The cat, which has recovered, is believed to have caught the virus from someone in the household who was sick with H1N1. There are no indications that the cat passed the virus on to any other animals or people.
Prior to this diagnosis, the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus had been found in humans, pigs, birds and ferrets.
To date, H1N1 influenza virus infection of pigs has been reported in Canada, Argentina, Singapore, the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland), Ireland, Norway, the U.S. and Japan. It has also been reported in turkeys in Chile and Canada. Based on the evidence available at this time, the infections were spread from humans to the animals.
http://www.petplace.com/cats/h1n1-flu-confirmed-in-iowa-cat/page1.aspx?utm_source=catcrazynews001et&utm_medium=email&utm_content=petplace_article&utm_campaign=dailynewsletter
Spain: Sadistic, Sick in the Head Spanish Teenage Thugs Torture and Kill Donkey During `Celebrations'
October 31, 2009 by Serbian Animals Voice
A dozen 17-year-olds sadistically tortured a hapless donkey by beating her up and raping her with a broomstick destroying her insides yesterday in Torreorgaz, Extremadura, during the "celebrations" of the Quintos, a tradition where animals are often abused.
There is pressure on the owners of the donkey to withdraw their complaint to the police.
Please write asking for justice for the innocent animal and her owners so the monsters will not get away:
Ayuntamiento de Torreorgaz – Calle Del Moral, 1 – Teléfono: 927 20 50 01 / 927 20 52 03
Fax: 927 20 53 74 – E-Mail: aytotorreorgaz@yahoo.es
Sample letter Sample letter Sample letter Sample letter
Con horror hemos leído la noticia de la tortura a muerte de una burra por parte de unos salvajes de 17 años en su municipio. Por medio de este mensaje solicitamos que se castigue ejemplarmente a los culpables y que se prohíban "los quintos" de ahora en adelante. Su ayuntamiento queda en mi lista de lugares de España que no visitaré a menos que se civilizen.
Atte.
YOUR Name and country
—————————————————————–
Traslation of sample letter:
We have read with horror about the torture to death of a donkey by a group of 17 year old savages in your municipality. We urge you to punish the criminals making an example of them and to forbid this celebration from now on. Your part of the world is now on my list of places I will not visit in Spain until it becomes civilized.
*** SAV Comment ***
As we have declared in recent posts on this site, the EU is doing nothing to prevent animal abuses and suffering; this is a typical example. The EU is only interested inn money.
The EU would appear to be keen for other animal abusing nations to become members of its `club', much to the detriment of member states which DO show compassion towards animals.
They did it to a helpless animal they will do it to helpless children and adults also. That is a proven fact that the PTB like to ignore.
Filed under: CAMPAIGNS - Global Animal Welfare Issues,
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Pet Safety and Protection Act and the Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act
With Bowed Head, and in Terrible Pain and Anguish, He Gives Up the Ghost & Prays for an End to his Suffering 
Letters needed in support
November 3, 2009
Dear Humanitarian:
REFUGE FROM CRUEL TRAPPING ACT (H.R. 3710)
As the trapping season commences across the country with the beginning of fall, Congresswoman Nita Lowey (D-NY) has introduced legislation to end the use of brutal traps on furbearing animals within federal wildlife refuges. H.R. 3710, the Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act, which was submitted with a total of 35 original cosponsors, helps to restore the original intent of the National Wildlife Refuge System by placing a ban on the use of cruel body-gripping traps within the refuge system.
Currently, animals living within national wildlife refuges are at risk of falling victim to body-gripping traps where they may endure excruciating pain. More than half of our nation’s 550 refuges currently allow trapping using steel-jaw leghold traps, Conibear traps and snares. Steel jaw leg-hold traps clamp shut with bone-crushing force on an animal’s leg; the pain is so intense that an animal may chew off his or her own limb to escape on three legs. Conibear traps are designed to crush the animal’s spinal column for a quick kill. However, the trap often misses and clamps down on the chest or pelvis, crushing but not immediately killing the animal who suffers horribly. Snares are among the oldest form of trap, a simple noose made of thin wire, which tightens around an animal's neck or body as he struggles to get away.
H.R. 3710, the Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act, will put an end to use of these traps within the refuge system. Body-gripping traps have been restricted in several states and leghold traps have been banned in 89 other nations. Because body-gripping traps and snares do not discriminate, they jeopardize the birds, deer and threatened and endangered species inhabiting wildlife refuges. Bald eagles, Canada lynx, gray wolves and other imperiled species are frequent victims of traps set for other species.
A national Decision Research public opinion poll showed that 79% of Americans believe trapping on national wildlife refuges should be prohibited, while 88% believe wildlife and habitat preservation should be the highest priority of the refuge system. Trappers, who comprise less than one-tenth of 1% of the population, already have access to millions of acres of public and private lands outside the refuge system for their activities.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Please write or e-mail your U.S. Representative today, urging him or her to cosponsor H.R. 3710, the Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act. For more information about the bill, to find your legislator or to send an email please visit AWI’s Compassion Index at www.CompassionIndex.org.
PET SAFETY AND PROTECTION ACT (H.R. 3907 and S. 1834)
Class B dealers sell non-purpose-bred dogs and cats for research. They are supposed to acquire the animals they sell only from other dealers, pounds, and individuals who have bred and raised the animals themselves. However, these dealers routinely flout the Animal Welfare Act, obtain animals through fraud, deception, and outright theft, and falsify their records. They are notorious for keeping the animals in horrendous conditions. USDA spends hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars each year unsuccessfully trying to regulate them and has acknowledged that it cannot guarantee that dogs and cats are not being acquired illegally for use in experiments.
A National Academy of Sciences Committee report released on May 29, requested by Congress and funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), concluded there is no scientific need to purchase dogs or cats from Class B dealers for NIH research. According to the USDA, there are 10 Class B dealers selling live dogs and cats for experimentation. Of these, one has a five-year license suspension, and six are under investigation for violations of the Animal Welfare Act. In addition, there are at least 15 investigations underway related to illegal activities uncovered during the traceback of records.
H.R. 3907, introduced by Congressman Mike Doyle (D-NY), and S. 1834, introduced by Senator Daniel Akaka (D-HI), titled The Pet Safety and Protection Act, will end this abuse-ridden system by prohibiting Class B dealers from selling dogs and cats for use in experimentation.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Please write or e-mail your U.S. Representative and both U.S. Senators today, urging them to cosponsor H.R. 3907 or S. 1834, the Pet Safety and Protection Act. For more information about the bill or to find your legislator, please call us or visit AWI’s Compassion Index at www.CompassionIndex.org.
We hope you will share our “Dear Humanitarian” letter with family, friends and co-workers, and encourage them to contact their legislators. When contacting your members of Congress, please respectfully request a response from them on the issue(s) so that you, as a constituent, will know their position. As always, thank you very much for your help.
Sincerely,
Cathy Liss
President
Letters needed in support
November 3, 2009
Dear Humanitarian:
REFUGE FROM CRUEL TRAPPING ACT (H.R. 3710)
As the trapping season commences across the country with the beginning of fall, Congresswoman Nita Lowey (D-NY) has introduced legislation to end the use of brutal traps on furbearing animals within federal wildlife refuges. H.R. 3710, the Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act, which was submitted with a total of 35 original cosponsors, helps to restore the original intent of the National Wildlife Refuge System by placing a ban on the use of cruel body-gripping traps within the refuge system.
Currently, animals living within national wildlife refuges are at risk of falling victim to body-gripping traps where they may endure excruciating pain. More than half of our nation’s 550 refuges currently allow trapping using steel-jaw leghold traps, Conibear traps and snares. Steel jaw leg-hold traps clamp shut with bone-crushing force on an animal’s leg; the pain is so intense that an animal may chew off his or her own limb to escape on three legs. Conibear traps are designed to crush the animal’s spinal column for a quick kill. However, the trap often misses and clamps down on the chest or pelvis, crushing but not immediately killing the animal who suffers horribly. Snares are among the oldest form of trap, a simple noose made of thin wire, which tightens around an animal's neck or body as he struggles to get away.
H.R. 3710, the Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act, will put an end to use of these traps within the refuge system. Body-gripping traps have been restricted in several states and leghold traps have been banned in 89 other nations. Because body-gripping traps and snares do not discriminate, they jeopardize the birds, deer and threatened and endangered species inhabiting wildlife refuges. Bald eagles, Canada lynx, gray wolves and other imperiled species are frequent victims of traps set for other species.
A national Decision Research public opinion poll showed that 79% of Americans believe trapping on national wildlife refuges should be prohibited, while 88% believe wildlife and habitat preservation should be the highest priority of the refuge system. Trappers, who comprise less than one-tenth of 1% of the population, already have access to millions of acres of public and private lands outside the refuge system for their activities.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Please write or e-mail your U.S. Representative today, urging him or her to cosponsor H.R. 3710, the Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act. For more information about the bill, to find your legislator or to send an email please visit AWI’s Compassion Index at www.CompassionIndex.org.
PET SAFETY AND PROTECTION ACT (H.R. 3907 and S. 1834)
Class B dealers sell non-purpose-bred dogs and cats for research. They are supposed to acquire the animals they sell only from other dealers, pounds, and individuals who have bred and raised the animals themselves. However, these dealers routinely flout the Animal Welfare Act, obtain animals through fraud, deception, and outright theft, and falsify their records. They are notorious for keeping the animals in horrendous conditions. USDA spends hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars each year unsuccessfully trying to regulate them and has acknowledged that it cannot guarantee that dogs and cats are not being acquired illegally for use in experiments.
A National Academy of Sciences Committee report released on May 29, requested by Congress and funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), concluded there is no scientific need to purchase dogs or cats from Class B dealers for NIH research. According to the USDA, there are 10 Class B dealers selling live dogs and cats for experimentation. Of these, one has a five-year license suspension, and six are under investigation for violations of the Animal Welfare Act. In addition, there are at least 15 investigations underway related to illegal activities uncovered during the traceback of records.
H.R. 3907, introduced by Congressman Mike Doyle (D-NY), and S. 1834, introduced by Senator Daniel Akaka (D-HI), titled The Pet Safety and Protection Act, will end this abuse-ridden system by prohibiting Class B dealers from selling dogs and cats for use in experimentation.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Please write or e-mail your U.S. Representative and both U.S. Senators today, urging them to cosponsor H.R. 3907 or S. 1834, the Pet Safety and Protection Act. For more information about the bill or to find your legislator, please call us or visit AWI’s Compassion Index at www.CompassionIndex.org.
We hope you will share our “Dear Humanitarian” letter with family, friends and co-workers, and encourage them to contact their legislators. When contacting your members of Congress, please respectfully request a response from them on the issue(s) so that you, as a constituent, will know their position. As always, thank you very much for your help.
Sincerely,
Cathy Liss
President
Let Them Eat Dog, He Says......
Let Them Eat Dog-Shit, says I 
Let them eat dog
by —Jonathan Safran Foer, author of the novels "Everything is Illuminated" and "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close." His new book, "Eating Animals
Posted: November 1st, 2009 - 9:23pm
Source: Wall Street Journal
Despite the fact that it's perfectly legal in 44 states, eating "man's best friend" is as taboo as a man eating his best friend. Even the most enthusiastic carnivores won't eat dogs. TV guy and sometimes cooker Gordon Ramsay can get pretty macho with lambs and piglets when doing publicity for something he's selling, but you'll never see a puppy peeking out of one of his pots. And though he once said he'd electrocute his children if they became vegetarian, one can't help but wonder what his response would be if they poached the family pooch.
Dogs are wonderful, and in many ways unique. But they are remarkably unremarkable in their intellectual and experiential capacities. Pigs are every bit as intelligent and feeling, by any sensible definition of the words. They can't hop into the back of a Volvo, but they can fetch, run and play, be mischievous and reciprocate affection. So why don't they get to curl up by the fire? Why can't they at least be spared being tossed on the fire? Our taboo against dog eating says something about dogs and a great deal about us.
The French, who love their dogs, sometimes eat their horses.
The Spanish, who love their horses, sometimes eat their cows.
The Indians, who love their cows, sometimes eat their dogs.
While written in a much different context, George Orwell's words (from "Animal Farm") apply here: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
So who's right? What might be the reasons to exclude canine from the menu? The selective carnivore suggests:
Don't eat companion animals. But dogs aren't kept as companions in all of the places they are eaten. And what about our petless neighbors? Would we have any right to object if they had dog for dinner?
OK, then: Don't eat animals with significant mental capacities. If by "significant mental capacities" we mean what a dog has, then good for the dog. But such a definition would also include the pig, cow and chicken. And it would exclude severely impaired humans.
Then: It's for good reason that the eternal taboos—don't fiddle with your crap, kiss your sister, or eat your companions—are taboo. Evolutionarily speaking, those things are bad for us. But dog eating isn't a taboo in many places, and it isn't in any way bad for us. Properly cooked, dog meat poses no greater health risks than any other meat.
Dog meat has been described as "gamey" "complex," "buttery" and "floral." And there is a proud pedigree of eating it. Fourth-century tombs contain depictions of dogs being slaughtered along with other food animals. It was a fundamental enough habit to have informed language itself: the Sino-Korean character for "fair and proper" (yeon) literally translates into "as cooked dog meat is delicious." Hippocrates praised dog meat as a source of strength. Dakota Indians enjoyed dog liver, and not so long ago Hawaiians ate dog brains and blood. Captain Cook ate dog. Roald Amundsen famously ate his sled dogs. (Granted, he was really hungry.) And dogs are still eaten to overcome bad luck in the Philippines; as medicine in China and Korea; to enhance libido in Nigeria and in numerous places, on every continent, because they taste good. For centuries, the Chinese have raised special breeds of dogs, like the black-tongued chow, for chow, and many European countries still have laws on the books regarding postmortem examination of dogs intended for human consumption.
—Jonathan Safran Foer is the author of the novels "Everything is Illuminated" and "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close." His new book, "Eating Animals," a work of nonfiction, comes out next week.
Average:
0
Categories: Animals
Comments
Compassionate1 says:
What people eat the world over is by custom and useage. Here in the U.S. our govt (the USDA) has an "offical" list of "approved" food chain animals that are acceptable for us to eat. Dogs, cats, and horses ARE NOT on that list and that is the only thing that makes them different from traditional food chain or "slaughter" animals. We simply want to keep it that way. After all, Americans DO NOT traditionally eat those animals and who is not for maintaining cultural traditions...also, we should ask ourselves, in this world of so little compassion and soooo much consumption of everything,....must we eat everything that moves or breathes? Is nothing "sacred" or special enough to warrant protection against un-necessary slaughter?
Posted on November 3rd, 2009 - 4:42am
Post new comment
Your name: Compassionate1
Comment: *
http://bites.ksu.edu/news/136469/09/11/01/let-them-eat-dog#comment-118
Let them eat dog
by —Jonathan Safran Foer, author of the novels "Everything is Illuminated" and "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close." His new book, "Eating Animals
Posted: November 1st, 2009 - 9:23pm
Source: Wall Street Journal
Despite the fact that it's perfectly legal in 44 states, eating "man's best friend" is as taboo as a man eating his best friend. Even the most enthusiastic carnivores won't eat dogs. TV guy and sometimes cooker Gordon Ramsay can get pretty macho with lambs and piglets when doing publicity for something he's selling, but you'll never see a puppy peeking out of one of his pots. And though he once said he'd electrocute his children if they became vegetarian, one can't help but wonder what his response would be if they poached the family pooch.
Dogs are wonderful, and in many ways unique. But they are remarkably unremarkable in their intellectual and experiential capacities. Pigs are every bit as intelligent and feeling, by any sensible definition of the words. They can't hop into the back of a Volvo, but they can fetch, run and play, be mischievous and reciprocate affection. So why don't they get to curl up by the fire? Why can't they at least be spared being tossed on the fire? Our taboo against dog eating says something about dogs and a great deal about us.
The French, who love their dogs, sometimes eat their horses.
The Spanish, who love their horses, sometimes eat their cows.
The Indians, who love their cows, sometimes eat their dogs.
While written in a much different context, George Orwell's words (from "Animal Farm") apply here: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
So who's right? What might be the reasons to exclude canine from the menu? The selective carnivore suggests:
Don't eat companion animals. But dogs aren't kept as companions in all of the places they are eaten. And what about our petless neighbors? Would we have any right to object if they had dog for dinner?
OK, then: Don't eat animals with significant mental capacities. If by "significant mental capacities" we mean what a dog has, then good for the dog. But such a definition would also include the pig, cow and chicken. And it would exclude severely impaired humans.
Then: It's for good reason that the eternal taboos—don't fiddle with your crap, kiss your sister, or eat your companions—are taboo. Evolutionarily speaking, those things are bad for us. But dog eating isn't a taboo in many places, and it isn't in any way bad for us. Properly cooked, dog meat poses no greater health risks than any other meat.
Dog meat has been described as "gamey" "complex," "buttery" and "floral." And there is a proud pedigree of eating it. Fourth-century tombs contain depictions of dogs being slaughtered along with other food animals. It was a fundamental enough habit to have informed language itself: the Sino-Korean character for "fair and proper" (yeon) literally translates into "as cooked dog meat is delicious." Hippocrates praised dog meat as a source of strength. Dakota Indians enjoyed dog liver, and not so long ago Hawaiians ate dog brains and blood. Captain Cook ate dog. Roald Amundsen famously ate his sled dogs. (Granted, he was really hungry.) And dogs are still eaten to overcome bad luck in the Philippines; as medicine in China and Korea; to enhance libido in Nigeria and in numerous places, on every continent, because they taste good. For centuries, the Chinese have raised special breeds of dogs, like the black-tongued chow, for chow, and many European countries still have laws on the books regarding postmortem examination of dogs intended for human consumption.
—Jonathan Safran Foer is the author of the novels "Everything is Illuminated" and "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close." His new book, "Eating Animals," a work of nonfiction, comes out next week.
Average:
0
Categories: Animals
Comments
Compassionate1 says:
What people eat the world over is by custom and useage. Here in the U.S. our govt (the USDA) has an "offical" list of "approved" food chain animals that are acceptable for us to eat. Dogs, cats, and horses ARE NOT on that list and that is the only thing that makes them different from traditional food chain or "slaughter" animals. We simply want to keep it that way. After all, Americans DO NOT traditionally eat those animals and who is not for maintaining cultural traditions...also, we should ask ourselves, in this world of so little compassion and soooo much consumption of everything,....must we eat everything that moves or breathes? Is nothing "sacred" or special enough to warrant protection against un-necessary slaughter?
Posted on November 3rd, 2009 - 4:42am
Post new comment
Your name: Compassionate1
Comment: *
http://bites.ksu.edu/news/136469/09/11/01/let-them-eat-dog#comment-118
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
