Do you have more money than God and no time in your busy day to do your bit for Global Warming?

Then check out the pricey designs that were spotted at a recent Tokyo fashion show. The latest in Japanese fur designer Chie Imai’s creations included a cape of lowly polyester sewn with chinchilla that’s being billed as “ecological fur.”

The cape, bolero and several other items use real chinchilla and mink from fur farms. But the fabric parts of the clothing use recycled polyester from Japanese plastic and pharmaceutical maker Teijin Ltd.

“We have not compromised quality. And tying ecology with fur is such a fascinating concept,” Imai cooed.

“Ecological fur” sometimes refers to fake fur, but Imai uses real fur. Her so-called ecological designs use polyester strips and fabric with genuine fur. A bolero, for instance, has real fur trim, but the fabric parts and the lining are all recycled polyester.

Imai is the latest fur designer to use synthetic materials with fur - despite complaints from animal rights activists that the term “ecological” is just “green-washing” – a ploy to distract people from the mistreatment and cruelty of animals in the fur industry.

But Imai argues that fur itself is ecological because it can be worn for generations and “returns to the earth” as organic material and causes no pollution. She trots out the tired old argument about meat-eating.

It takes more than 60 times as much energy to produce a fur coat from ranch-raised animals than it does to produce a fake fur. Plus, the waste produced on fur farms poisons our waterways. And don’t forget … unlike faux fur, the “real thing” causes millions of animals to suffer every year.

Imai’s ecological fur — ranging in price from 1.2 million yen (US$12,000) for the mink bolero to the 8.4 million yen (US$83,000) chinchilla cape — allows her clientele, which includes the Japanese royal family and clueless celebrities like Sarah Jessica Parker, to feel green, she said.

“They want to take part in being ecological, but it’s hard for them to find a way to do it.”

Watch for the Chinese dog-and-cat-fur knock-offs being flogged next to the organic food section at Wal-Mart.

Chie, what’s next? Recycling bisphenol A? Solving World Hunger?

Excerpted from Japan Times

Tokyo Correspondence

Treehugger

Another Imai airhead

Fur farming (warning: graphic images)

Earlier, we blogged about the kindness of American troops stationed in Iraq, who had bonded with animals there and made the effort to bring those animals back to the U.S. We and our readers were particularly touched by the story of Peter Neesley, whose tragic death overseas did not stop him from giving the next-best gift to his family at home - Boris and Mama, two strays that he had befriended in Baghdad, who are now paying his charity forward by being there for the family when Peter cannot.

A Soldier’s Gift

From Baghdad With Love

Operation Baghdad Pups

Meanwhile, there is darker news States-side in Lakewood, WA, where a local woman who rescued dozens of animals that were left behind by deployed soldiers is being told to give them up.

Diana VanDusen began taking in stray and unwanted pets after the animal shelter at Fort Lewis shut down 18 months ago. Most of the animals are old or disabled, and most come from military families from Fort Lewis who have had to move overseas. Some of the soldiers reclaim their pets when they return home, but others do not have such a luxury.

“The rest (of the soldiers) - they had to abandon (their pets), because they didn’t know when they were coming back,” said VanDusen. “One cat I held for two years, and no one came back for it. So I knew it was time to adopt it out. I met lot of soldiers along the way that are devastated they have to leave their pets behind.” VanDusen’s mother said soldiers found out that Diana would take their pets and hold them or adopt them out when they left for Iraq or other posts.

VanDusen keeps some of the animals in her home and the rest in an enclosed space in her backyard. But Animal Control officers told her she’s in violation of city code, which states one residence can only house up to five animals. Officers told VanDusen that she would be fined $500 if she does not reduce the number of animals in her home to five by April 14.

Van Dusen pays for veterinary care and neutering of the animals she rescues, and Animal Control officers acknowledged that all the animals were properly cared for, according to Dave Bugher, assistant city manager.

The city’s mandate leaves the soldiers’ animals with nowhere to go, VanDusen said. Many of the animals in her care are old or demand special care. In describing one of her dogs (now thankfully adopted), VanDusen said “he’s blind. He has a neurological disorder on his back legs. He’s old, he’s 14 years old. Who wants to adopt a dog that could pass away in a few months? Here, they can stay as long as they need; I don’t euthanize.”

According to her records, Van Dusen has adopted out more than 860 dogs and cats over 17 years. She said she’s rescued and taken in pets in Lakewood for five years. She said she cared for and adopted out hundreds of stray cats and dogs from Fort Lewis before its facility closed in 2006.

VanDusen said turning our backs on the soldiers’ pets is simply unacceptable. “We’re supposed to support our troops,” she said. “If they can’t support the troops by supporting the animals of the troops, then I can’t live in a city that doesn’t back our troops. Because these guys are innocent victims of what’s going on over there.”

She said she’s even considered moving. “If I could relocate myself and my animals within that deadline, I would. But you see how the housing market is right now,” she said.

At time of writing, VanDusen now has around 14 cats in her care, down from a total of 31 animals. Finding permanent homes for the remaining pets cannot happen overnight, and although she is working hard and acting in good faith to place the animals - she is taking them to the Puyallup PetSmart today for an adoptathon - she hopes the city will change its mind. Kudos to PetSmart for offering her the chance to do this each and every weekend this month.

It was hardly reasonable for Animal Control to expect that she could meet their demands by April 14 without making some heartbreaking and hard decisions for the animals. Needless to say, these draconian demands are hardly a comforting message to American troops who have had to leave their pets behind.

Media exposure and email campaigns may have prompted a change of heart for the city which, as of April 9, is now considering an extension of the deadline if Ms. VanDusen continues to reduce the number of animals in her care to five.

“If she is showing effort to come into compliance, we will ease on the deadline,” said Jeff Brewster, who works for the city. But the city is sticking to its maximum limit of five animals per household. “These laws we have are intended to respect and protect the privacy and peace of mind of neighbors that live nearby,” said Brewster.

Assistant city manager Bugher also said that Lakewood officials will review zoning regulations to determine if it can be allowed and under what conditions.

“I think that is just heartless,” said Denise White, who just adopted a military dog from VanDusen. ” I just think that she was doing a good service, and I don’t see where there was any harm. I really don’t.”

Burt Bray just got a dachshund named Rusty for free. He says the city should leave Diana alone. “Why can’t she just be grandfathered in?” he said.

“Not many people want 30 animals living next door to them in a city neighborhood,” said Brewster. But VanDusen said none of her neighbors ever complained.

It is this blogger’s opinion that the city needs to ease up on Ms. VanDusen, and give her whatever time she and the community needs to adopt out the remaining “excess” animals. And should it not be feasible to rehome all but five animals, considering their age and condition, surely it would not be a grave inconvenience, with the agreement of her neighbours, to grant her an exception to shelter them until their families return or for their remaining days.

It is a sad statement about our civilization that petty regulations, paperwork, and deadline-twitchy bureaucracy are allowed to get in the way of compassion.

KOMO-TV

Video at King5-TV

KOMO-Radio Update, April 9

Tacoma News-Tribune

What can you do?

Let the City of Lakewood know that you support Ms. VanDusen’s charitable efforts and a decision to work with her in good faith to ensure that all of her charges have a safe haven.

(Substitute the usual @ character for (at) in your email).

Council(at)CityofLakewood.us

info(at)cityoflakewood.us

A female collie mix, so beautiful, all gold and white and dirty; she’s in the last cage on the aisle, curled up quiet, watching everything - but when I get too close she goes completely crazy, biting at the bars, herself, anything in reach, until I back off and away. Her growl’s like ripping metal, jagged, dangerous, and strong . . . Don’t mess with me, that growl says. I may be in a cage but I can still bite.

Rachel is happiest when she’s volunteering at the animal shelter, especially after she meets the feral collie she names Grrl: they’re both angry and alone. When a teacher encourages her to write about the dog, Rachel finds another outlet for her pain and frustration. Writing about Grrl is easy. But teaching Grrl to trust her is a much tougher task. And when Griffin, the new boy in school, devises a plan to bring Grrl home, Rachel finds that the dog isn’t the only one who must learn to trust. Kathe Koja offers a raw and emotional tale about a girl who risks breaking out of her own cage to find the help she needs.

straydog is Kathe Koja’s compelling debut novel. Koja writes for young adults.

Writing straydog, my first book for young people, ushered me into a world I knew already as a reader. Many of the characters I love best in fiction — Louise Fitzhugh’s Harriet, J.D. Salinger’s Holden and Franny and Zooey, Francesca Lia Block’s Witch Baby — are people who say what they think, show their bewilderments, struggle with hard ideas, love with all their hearts; exasperating, funny, intense people. Young people.

I’m a strong supporter of animal rights, so I’m especially proud that straydog was honored by both the ASPCA and the Humane Society. I believe that you can learn everything you need to know about a person by watching the way s/he acts with animals and little kids, the powerless ones.

“So what’s up with that collie?”

Melissa’s at her desk, an old-fashioned school teacher’s desk, dented metal drawers and heaping piles of junk: fund-raising appeals, cruelty investigation forms, food orders, a busted leash tagged DON’T BUY THIS KIND!!! At the center of the heap is the brand-new computer, the one new thing in the place, a donation from some distributor. Now Melissa scrabbles like Shiva through the mess, hunting for “The pen,” she says to herself, “where is the pen ?” and then to me “What collie?” She gives me the major Melissa-stare, her wide blue eyes like What! do! you! want! Her hair’s really, really short and blonde, she gels it so it sticks up like porcupine quills. “You mean the one Jake brought in?”
“Yeah. Grrl.” It was what I called her, writing last night in my paper; it fit, it’s just right but “The feral one, you named her?” and she rolls her eyes. “Rachel, before you start, stop, all right? She’s been all her life on the streets, you know what they’re like when they’re –”

“I know, I know.” You can almost never socialize the feral ones, they’re almost always euthanized .I’ve seen dozens of dogs, and fallen in love with half of them, and cried my heart out when they died; that’s how it is here. But this one is different, somehow. There’s something about her, something in her eyes, I can’t stop thinking about her: as if I know what she’s like, know her from the inside out. And I have a plan for her, or at least the plan for a plan so “I just want to try,” I say to Melissa, “just get to know her a little. And it won’t interfere with my work schedule, I’ll still do all my regular stuff –” 

“I don’t have time — there you are! — to argue with you now,” she says, snatching up her pen. “Go away. Go talk to the dogs,” which I do, sweep and swab and water and feed, all the while sneaking little looks at Grrl in her cage lying on a blue blanket, one of the old torn-up blankets from the rescue van. Her eyes are half-closed, cloudy; the cage card says she’s got a fever from the leg infection. When I reach to put the card back she growls at me, that ripping, ugly sound: Don’t mess with me , that growl says. I may be in a cage but I can still bite.

So I start talking like I always do, to all the dogs — hey you guys, how’s it going — but once in awhile I say “Grrl”, looking into her eyes, making sure she knows it’s meant for her. “Grrl, Grrl,” almost like her growl but warm and crooning, the name and the idea came to me like a gift last night as I sat looking over the essay, two gifts at once because I’m going to write about that dog, I thought, about Grrl and from “A Dog’s Life” I changed the title to “straydog,” all one word, like a dog would think of herself.

And once I’d done that the words just, just flew, it was like I couldn’t write fast enough. It was like I knew her, knew how she would think and feel and fear, knew it all from the inside out and when I finally stopped writing — not done, only just started but my hand was hot and aching, and my eyes were as dry as little rubber balls — I felt so good, so full , I don’t know how else to explain it; like I’d eaten at a banquet, like I was a banquet. — Oh, that’s not it either, how can words say exactly what you want sometimes and sometimes nothing at all?

Winner of the Humane Society’s KIND Book Award
Winner of the ASPCA’s Henry Bergh Award
A BOOK SENSE 76 Top Ten Summer Teen Reads pick
A selection of the Junior Library Guild
A selection of the Children’s Literature Choice List for 2003

Kathe Koja website

Prime Minister Harper’s security detail has a different breed of assailant to guard against while he attends the meeting of NATO leaders in Bucharest this week: the city’s infamous stray dogs.

The New York Times published the following article on the subject, which is very similar to one published by Italian Corriere della Sera and by the International Herald Tribune. It is suspected that Romanian authorities sent a press release in order to create panic around the non-killing law, which could be approved next week by the Parliament. Romanian animal protection organizations are extremely concerned about the campaign started by Romanian newspaper Evenimentul Zilei, which is likely to jeopardize their efforts to have a non-killing law based on the “neuter and release” strategy.

Here is an excerpt from the New York Times article:

Special squads of dogcatchers are already stationed along the road from the airport to the Palace of the Parliament, where the meeting will be held this week, to prevent the beasts from harassing delegates on foot or nipping at the wheels of their motorcades.

Meanwhile, the rest of the city remains under a worsening canine occupation.

The city government reports that 9,000 people are bitten each year here by dogs, though those numbers include bites by strays and pets. Officials will not venture a guess at the number of strays, and estimates of the semi-feral population in the local news media range from 30,000 to 200,000 dogs.

But everyone agrees that the problem has been growing recently, thanks to a January law that prohibits the city from euthanizing the dogs. Also unable to spay or neuter the dogs and return them to the street, city officials are facing severe overcrowding at the pound and a paralysis of policing.

“Because the shelters are full, we cannot capture the dogs,” Simona Panaitescu, director of the city’s administration for animal supervision, said of the canine Catch-22. “We are stuck in the middle.” The city used to nab 1,500 dogs each month, according to Ms. Panaitescu, of which 80 percent were put down and 20 percent adopted.

Apparently, the impounded dogs are to be released on the streets again, once the NATO Summit has concluded.

The local debate flared up earlier this year when two women were mauled by stray dogs in separate attacks. A Japanese businessman was killed in January 2006 when he was bitten in the femoral artery.

The stray dogs of Romania are one of the longest running stories in Eastern Europe. Their population first exploded when the Communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu demolished thousands of houses to make way for an ill-considered reconstruction plan. Residents forced to move into tiny apartments had no room for their dogs, which they then put out on the street.

Throughout Romania, dogs can be seen trotting along the sides of roads and peering from perches on trash bins. At night, their baying and barking provides a constant backdrop, like the honking of car horns in big cities.

Ioana Pirvulescu, a representative of the animal-welfare group Four Paws in Bucharest, said she hoped that a new law permitting authorities to parole spayed and neutered dogs could pass as soon as next week, after the NATO meeting ends.

“Most of the dogs are peaceful and quiet dogs,” she said. “Living on the street is not easy. In a few years, they will disappear.”

She’s right; with an effective TNR (trap-neuter-return) policy, that might just happen.

Another side to the story

Visit Save the Dogs to read what the mainstream media are not telling you.

There are persistent rumours of silent night-time massacres around Bucharest Airport to rid the area of stray dogs and cats before the Nato Summit. Save The Dogs is unable to verify the rumours, even if in the past the authorities have used drastic methods to make a city seem more western when big international events were scheduled. What they can confirm is the intense activity of the dog-catchers observed by the President Sara Turetta in the area of the main road that leads to the airport recently. The association has frequently picked up stray dogs and cats from the airport, an area chosen by many Romanians to abandon their puppies and kittens.

Reports and videos

While the Canadian Parliament dithers over Senator Bryden’s do-little Animal Cruelty Bill S-203, Ontario is stepping up to a much-needed and long-overdue overhaul of its 90-year old provincial legislation.

Long-time animal protector, Hugh Coghill, the Chief Inspector with the Ontario SPCA, struggled to compose himself as he spoke to reporters.

“It’s a great day for the animals in Ontario, and that’s what we’re focused on,” he said, then took a deep breath. “Sorry. Been waiting a long time for it.”

The province’s Animal Protection Act is considered by many to be a point of shame for the province. Animal advocates claim it currently does little to ensure creatures receive the proper care and the people who mistreat them get punishments they deserve.

But today, the government introduced legislation that will strengthen the Act with new measures, including new rules on the province’s 50 roadside zoos that will impose higher standards for owners and allow the Ontario SPCA to inspect them and making animal cruelty a provincial offence carrying stiffer penalties.

“It’s going to be good news for all people who love animals,” Community Safety and Correctional Services Minister Rick Bartolucci said. “I would hope that those people who have stewardship of animal care will say we’ve gone from worst to first with this legislation.”

“We always try to get people to look after their animals in a proper and humane way. And if they don’t, this legislation gives us the tools to be able to deal with it in a far more effective manner,” says Coghill.

For many, this overhaul is long overdue as Ontario has some of the most lax animal protection laws in the country. Currently, the province’s small zoos aren’t held to any standards, with many animals forced to live in filthy and flimsy pens without clean drinking water. Animal cruelty is only considered a provincial offence if the creature is involved in a commercial breeding operation.

The standard of care for animals in a commercial operation includes adequate food, water and space. However, these guidelines don’t apply to pets, who are considered possessions.

While opposition parties are pleased to see a proposed change to this legislation, they’re still waiting to see if the Liberal overhaul has any real teeth and adequate funding.

“Right now, they don’t have the budget to do the work that they’re supposed to be doing,” Ontario NDP Leader Howard Hampton said.

“If we’re going to take this issue seriously, the Ontario SPCA has to have a consistent level of funding that will allow them to do the work — something that isn’t there now.”

The proposed legislation has several aims, including:

• making it a provincial offence to cause distress to an animal
• stiffer penalties, which include jail terms, fines and lifetime bans on animal ownership
• inspection rights at facilities where animals are kept for sale or exhibit
• banning animal fighting
• and protecting veterinarians from liability when reporting allegations of cruelty.

To read the full OSPCA Act, as it currently stands, click here. To read the proposed changes, click here.

Nowhere is the sheer uselessness of the current Canadian Parliament more evident than in its handling of animal cruelty legislation.

An animal cruelty bill headed for final reading in the House of Commons on Friday has been condemned by opponents as “19th-century legislation adjusted for inflation.”

Bill S-203 is a sham

If Bill S-203 is passed in April or May, when it comes to a third and final reading in the House of Commons, our animal friends will suffer. The bill, which purports to update Canada’s Animal Cruelty Act, is a sham. Some of its critics say that its only function is to earn brownie points for politicians.

The bill’s critics include practically every animal protection group in Canada, from the SPCAs and humane societies to the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association and grassroots organizations.

The Canadian public wants better. Just read the letters to the editor every time humane society inspectors break up another miserable puppy mill hell. People will tolerate all kinds of objectionable behaviour towards humans. But when a yobbo drags his dog behind an SUV, the overwhelming public sentiment is to string him up.

And yet after more than eight years of trying, Canada’s elected Members of Parliament can’t pass a decent animal cruelty bill into law.

The current legislation, dating from 1892, is ineffective in both scope and penalty. Efforts to update it began in 1999 but quickly ran into a buzz saw of opposition from farmers and hunters.

Eventually a watered-down version passed the Commons and went to the Senate – only to be bogged down again. Animal researchers wanted to be exempted as did alligator wrestlers. Aboriginal groups worried that a ban on brutal treatment might impinge on their traditions. Jewish and Muslim groups fretted that tougher laws might affect ritual slaughter practices.

At that point, Liberal Senator John Bryden came up with the worst of all possible worlds – a new bill that would keep the loophole-ridden 1892 law as is but make the penalties (which in practice are rarely applied) harsher.

“(Prior attempts) died primarily because the bills tried to do too much,” Mr. Bryden said. “I put a bill in that didn’t change the law, it addressed the penalties.”

Harper’s Conservatives enthusiastically embraced his private member’s bill. The New Democrats and Bloc Québécois did not. Predictably, the Liberals were split.

Ajax-Pickering MP Mark Holland tried to introduce a much stronger Bill C-373. But rural Liberals tended to support Bryden’s do-little Senate version. In February, his Bill S-203 sailed through the Commons justice committee with Liberal support. Some said they didn’t much like S-203 but would pass it anyway and then fix it another year. The Canadian Federation of Humane Societies says that there’s faint hope of that happening.

“We all look forward to the day when our laws concerning the abuse of animals are brought into line with acceptable sentences. However, it is never wise to be too hasty in changing the Criminal Code, given the far-reaching and sometimes unexpected consequences that can flow from our decisions.” ~~ Senator Donald Oliver, Nova Scotia

Under S-203, there would be no legal definition of what an animal is, and animal neglect would have to be proven to be predetermined or willful in order to be prosecuted.

MPs planning to vote in favour of S-203 say that, granted, it’s not a great improvement over the old laws, but it is “a step in the right direction” that’s “better than nothing.” That is pure bull. S-203 is a useless and vacuous piece of legislation, a blocking tactic that will stall forward movement and do nothing to help animals.

Intent to harm must still be shown, and this makes it nearly impossible to get convictions, especially in cases of negligence. Fewer than 1 per cent of animal abuse complaints are successfully prosecuted, and S-203 will do nothing to change that. What good are stronger penalties when we can’t get convictions? And only animals that are somebody’s “property” are “protected” - not stray or wild animals.

A recent report by IFAW shows Canada has the worst animal cruelty laws among the 14 countries surveyed, including the Ukraine and the Philippines.

Compared with other developed countries, Canada’s Third World mentality on animal cruelty issues is beyond shameful.

A better solution: Bill C-373

The member’s bill that would actually do something to help animals is Holland’s Bill C-373.

Holland’s bill introduces the term “negligent” and defines it as “departing markedly from the standard of care that a reasonable person would use.” It prohibits the killing of any animal (owned or unowned) without a lawful excuse. (Lawful excuses include hunting, fishing, farming, euthanasia and self-protection.)

It outlaws killing an animal brutally or viciously, whether or not the animal dies immediately — which means that the boys in Edmonton who tied a dog to a tree and beat it to death would not get off on the basis that it died on the first blow (according to the examining vet) and therefore didn’t suffer. Other provisions deal with aspects such as fighting and baiting. Perhaps best of all, C-373 moves these laws out of the property chapter of the Criminal Code, reflecting the contemporary view of animals as sentient beings, rather than possessions.

MPs know that most Canadians support progressive animal abuse legislation. Those who disapprove of cruelty to animals may be interested in discovering how their MPs voted.

Excerpted from Thomas Walkom (Toronto Star, April 2), Matthew Jay (Ottawa Citizen, April 2), and A.S.A. Harrison (Globe and Mail, March 25)

Update on April 10

By a vote of 189-71, Bill S-203 passed final vote in the House of Commons on April 9th. It will become law once it receives Royal Assent and Proclamation.

More than 130,000 Canadians signed petitions specifically opposing Bill S-203. A 2006 poll found 85% of Canadians want modern and effective legislation that makes it easier for law enforcement agencies to prosecute those who commit criminal acts of animal cruelty.

Stated Pat Tohill, WSPA Programs Manager: “During the debate, many MPs argued that S-203 was only a first step. Many said they would support MP Mark Holland’s Bill C-373. Most said they would support further amendments to Canada’s animal cruelty laws. We will be holding MPs to their commitment to support further amendments to Canada’s cruelty laws. Canadians will not wait another century before animals are protected from heinous acts of cruelty in Canada.”

A more comprehensive animal cruelty bill has been passed by Canada’s House of Commons twice in the past ten years, receiving the support of all political parties only to die in the Senate.

The opposing votes were from NDP and some Liberal members and one Bloc MP. Conservatives stood steadfastly in support of this shameful bill that retains the archaic and problematic offences enacted in 1892.

To those MPs who supported Bill S-203, you can tick that off your list for another hundred years. Shame on you.

Check out the Don’t Be Cruel website to see how your MP voted.

Earlier we blogged about an amazing back-to-back win by Lance Mackey and the sled dogs from his Comeback Kennel. He had just taken first place in the 2008 Iditarod, and had won the Yukon Quest.

An unidentified man driving a snowmachine early Saturday morning, possibly under the influence of alcohol, crashed into the back of the dog sled driven by two-time Iditarod champion Lance Mackey during the All-Alaska Sweepstakes and seriously injured the key sled dog in his Comeback Kennel.

Mackey broke down in tears Saturday, telling how his most-prized dog, Zorro, was critically injured as the canine was riding in the sled’s basket from Safety to Nome — less than 22 miles left in the 408-mile race.

“I was flashing them like mad with my headlamp,” Mackey said. “I was shining my headlamp right in his face, but they kept on coming at me. I jumped aside, and by 30 feet farther up the trail, there was a snowmachine sitting on the middle of my sled.”

The machine impaled the sled bag with its runners.

“Three or four dogs were sucked underneath, and Zorro was trapped in the sled bag,” Mackey said. “We had to physically remove (the snowmachine) from the sled.”

The accident happened several miles west of Safety, the third-to-last checkpoint. The driver who hit Mackey and his partner on another machine helped Mackey right the mess, then left as Mackey continued on.

Mackey’s sled made it to Nome but was ruined. It was of no consequence compared with his dogs, he said.

“I would give my life for my dogs. I can’t make anyone know how important animals are to me.”

Mackey finished the race and did not immediately know Zorro was severely injured. He got some rest and when he awoke he could see his favorite dog was in trouble and called the race veterinarian. When the vet arrived, Zorro was lying on his side and “shocky.” He was given pain medication and fluids, which stabilized him enough for a flight aboard Alaska Airlines to Pet Emergency in Anchorage. Zorro had broken ribs and perhaps internal injuries. Other dogs had injuries, but they were not life-threatening, Mackey said.

The historic All-Alaska Sweepstakes was supposed to be the final race of Zorro’s storied career.

“If he lives, I don’t think he is going to want to race to Nome again.”

Nine-year-old Zorro has been the top stud in Mackey’s Comeback Kennel, helping the cancer survivor in 2007 become the first musher to win the 1,100-mile Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race and the 1,000-mile Yukon Quest in the same year. But that year Zorro became ill at White Mountain, the Iditarod’s second-to-last checkpoint, and did not get to finish. Like his owner, Zorro made a comeback last month in the Quest, helping Mackey capture his record fourth straight title. Zorro was not part of Mackey’s 2008 champion Iditarod team because he had saved Zorro for the Sweepstakes

“He’s priceless,” said Mackey. “Nine of my Sweepstakes dogs were descendents of Zorro.” And 40 of his 80 dogs at home are related to Zorro.

Mackey wants to give the snowmachine driver a chance to come forward “like a man and make it right.”

Mackey made a plea for race officials to keep snowmachines away from the trail at the end of the race because it has become a growing safety issue. About two weeks ago on the Iditarod Trail, a snowmachine killed a dog running in Jennifer Freking’s team. The Minnesota musher was parked on the Yukon River when a snowmachine took the life of Lorne, a 3-year-old female Siberian Husky.

“The public needs to be aware of this issue,” Mackey said. “Running from Safety to Front Street is almost suicidal. I almost got hit on the way into Nome during Iditarod and then was almost hit half an hour later.”

Update on Zorro: April 6

The veterinarian treating Lance Mackey’s sled dog Zorro says he will make a full recovery from injuries suffered when he was hit by a snowmobile.

But Kobi Johnson, an Iditarod trail veterinarian and part of Mackey’s team, says Zorro’s racing days are probably over. The 9-year-old faces weeks of recovery for broken ribs and severe bruising.

Johnson says an MRI and an examination by a neurological specialist at The Animal Emergency Clinic in Tacoma found no need for emergency surgery.

In addition to four broken ribs, Zorro had a minor concussion, severe bruising in the spinal cord area of the last rib in the back, one injured disc, severe bruising to back and chest muscles, some lung bruising and some internal bleeding, which has stabilized.

The silver-sable husky mix, was sent home on Friday. He is able to walk and, even better, wag his tail!

Zorro will begin 6 - 8 months of recovery with veterinarians in Fairbanks. He will retire from racing and become a family pet, possibly siring another generation of prizewinning sled dogs.

“It’s very, very good news. It’s a huge relief,” said Zorro’s owner and musher, Iditarod champ Lance Mackey, who is in Seattle with his wife, Tonya, and Zorro. “He’ll be one of the children in the house now.”

Meanwhile, the snowmobile driver who hit Mackey’s sled dog has come forward. Mackey put out a plea Saturday in Nome for the driver to identify himself, and that happened Sunday, he said.

Mackey declined to name the individual but said the person was “absolutely devastated by what happened,” the musher told Nome radio station KNOM. Mackey said he expects the person to make reparations. He also said alcohol was involved.

Mackey’s Comeback Kennel

KOMO-TV video of Zorro heading home

Ontario has the weakest zoo regulations and animal protection laws in Canada.

There are more than 45 zoos in Ontario - more than any other province - and approximately 60% of all Canadian zoos are in Ontario.

The majority of zoos in Ontario are “roadside zoos”—small, substandard facilities that typically house animals in poor, barren conditions, and lack trained professional animal care staff and the financial resources necessary to ensure proper animal care and housing.

Ontario does not regulate the keeping of exotic wildlife in captivity. One doesn’t even need a licence to keep a lion or tiger in their backyard. 2/3 of the animals kept in Ontario zoos are exotic species.

A licence is only required to keep native wildlife in captivity and the conditions are minimal, vague and poorly enforced.

To open a zoo, no training or education is necessary and no business plan or base level of funding required.

There are no public health and safety regulations or inspections to protect zoo staff, volunteers, visitors and neighbours.

It is not a provincial offence to abuse a zoo animal.

WSPA review

Ontario is expected to introduce legislation shortly, aimed at overhauling the sadly outdated 90-year-old law that regulates these misery camps. The updated legislation is intended to set standards of care for small zoos and give the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals the right to inspect the operations. The bill, if passed, will also likely ensure there are tougher consequences for people who abuse animals by making it a provincial offence to hurt an animal.

Newfoundland and Labrador spells out how specific species should be housed and treated, and Alberta recently brought in tougher zoo regulations. In other provinces, the SPCA can go into zoos and inspect the animals.

While some are worried about how the bill might impact rural animal-owners, the plan is being hailed by animal welfare groups who say the overhaul is long overdue.

“There are some pretty sad cases out there,” said Bill Peters, national director of the Canadian Association of Zoos and Aquariums, who made recommendations to the Liberals about the new legislation. “Their standards are pretty deplorable. Some of the animals are being kept in conditions that you simply don’t want to see continue.”

Ontario’s small zoos are considered to be among the worst in the world. Investigators say they have found animals living in filthy conditions, without clean drinking water or adequate stimulation. Animals that are social and used to living in groups are kept in isolation while other more dangerous animals - like tigers and lions - are kept in flimsy cages that allow children to stick their hands right in.

In June, 2006, WSPA surveyed three of Ontario’s roadside zoos. The worst, it says, was Lickety Split Zoo in London, where footage was captured of a kangaroo unable to stand on its hind legs, a horse with cracked hoofs and several unlocked animal cages.

Some Ontario zoos won’t have much difficulty upgrading to meet new standards, Peters said. The ones who can’t should be shut down, he added. They don’t have the facilities or the educated staff to house exotic animals humanely, Peters said. “They’re simply not taking care, in any adequate sense, of the animals that they’re responsible for.”

Kristin Williams, with the Ontario SPCA, said the Liberals have given the organization cash for a voluntary inspection program but there is nothing the SPCA can do if a zoo refuses to allow an inspection. “Unfortunately, the current Ontario SPCA Act is woefully inadequate,” said Williams, who made recommendations to the Liberals on the new legislation. “It’s also very antiquated. The way people feel about their companion animals has evolved. The province wants to address those concerns and is “interested in giving the Ontario SPCA greater powers to resolve the issues that are suspected with animals in captivity.”

The new legislation comes after backbencher Liberal David Zimmer introduced a private members’ bill to regulate roadside zoos, a bill which died on the order paper when his government prorogued the legislature last year.

Melissa Tkachyk, campaigns officer with the World Society for the Protection of Animals, said she’s thrilled the province has finally decided to revamp the 1919 law. It’s time the province took a more proactive approach to the protection of animals, she said. “Of course, we always want to see things happen quicker but there has been a huge break and they haven’t got back to the legislature yet so we’ve got to be patient.”

Opposition Leader Bob Runciman is also eagerly awaiting the bill. The Conservative veteran - who has spearheaded bills to increase the penalties for people who abuse cats and dogs - said the devil will be in the small print of the legislation. The Liberals could run into trouble if they make the law too broad and subjective, allowing it to be applied to rural residents and their farm animals.

Well, that’s assuming McGuinty and his crew pass the bill this time.  Last year, McGuinty decided to end the legislative session 3-1/2 weeks ahead of schedule. Runciman’s bill took a back seat to the McGuinty crew’s overwhelming desire to get the hell out of Dodge and go blow some of that swag snagged the previous Christmas when they awarded themselves salary, RRSP and severance hikes totalling 31 per cent.

Source: Zoocheck
According to the WSPA report on zoo failures (2006), passing zoos in Ontario are the Toronto Zoo, Jungle Cat World, Muskoka Wildlife Centre and Zooz Nature Park in Stevensville, Ontario.

The 12 failing zoos are the Bear Creek Exotic Wildlife Sanctuary, Bergerons Exotic Animal Sanctuary, Bowmanville Zoo, Colasanti’s Tropical Gardens, Elmvale Jungle Zoo, Greenview Aviaries Park and Zoo, Killman Zoo, Lickety-Split Ranch and Zoo, Northwood Buffalo and Exotic Animal Ranch, Papanack Park Zoo, Pineridge Zoo and Twin Valley Zoo.

WSPA 2006 report

Zoocheck documents abysmal conditions at Killman Zoo, Twin Valley Zoo, and Lickety-Split Ranch and Zoo:

Ontario Zoocheck Report #1 (2006)

An older Zoocheck report from 1995 documents Ontario zoo investigations, and includes extensive information on recommended standards.

Report on Ontario Zoos, 1995

This week’s Darwin Awards go to Desi Life (”yes, pink and turquoise do go well together”), an offshoot of the Toronto Star catering to the growing GTA South Asian population, which arranged an ill-managed photo-shoot at the Bowmanville Zoo, to build readership by showing how exotic ancient Indian martial arts can be. And that there are no limits to human stupidity.

A dancer knocked over by a lion during a photo shoot at Bowmanville Zoo says she is happy to have come away with four broken ribs and a bloodied lung.

“To be honest, the sensation I have is a great deal of gratitude to be alive,” Gitanjali Kolanad said yesterday.

From the beginning, the 180 kilogram beast proved playful and not entirely under the control of its two minders.

Kolanad, 54, practices the ancient, and obviously ineffectual, Indian martial art of Kalaripayat, fashioned after the movements of such animals as the lion, elephant, wild boar and peacock. The magazine suggested she pose with a lion. Next time, she might just tell them where to get off, and choose a peacock instead…

A video of the session shows Leo first knocking over editor Sonia Verma. She picks herself up and smiles. He next paws the legs of photographer Richard Lautens. Off-camera, he also took a swipe at the legs of art director Spencer Wynn.

Video

The 3-year-old lion was lying nearby when an oblivious Kolanad was getting into her movements. Still wanting to frolic, the animal jumped up and fell on her, knocking the wind out of her, bruising her left lung and breaking four left ribs.

It was not an attack, the witnesses said. The lion’s mouth was not open and Kolanad was not scratched. The Bowmanville Zoo had no comment on the incident.

Focus is key in Kalaripayat, which bases its movements on the effortless power of animals. It’s a constant lesson in focus. When you lose your focus, you immediately get hit.

In the video, one minder kicks the otherwise docile beast in the neck (nice work, Tarzan) while the other pulls on Leo’s chain. The lion takes a second, unsuccessful lunge at Kolanad as she lies gasping, before he is escorted out the door.

Although unable to work for the past month and still in pain, Kolanad said she feels on the mend.

Kalari masters are experts in the use of herbs, oils and massage. They also treat broken bones and sprains, all without X-rays or anesthetics.

Next time, Desi Life, save Leo a whole lot of grief and go Photoshop your bumptious drivel. Force of Nature, indeed.

Hope these folks don’t tell their kids to go play outside and annoy the dog in the backyard. And that the Liberals don’t start banning lions and any cats that are substantially similar…

Bowmanville Zoo is one of the largest suppliers of trained animals for the feature film and television industry. Maintaining the largest stable of trained movie and television animals in Canada, the Bowmanville Zoo bring cutting edge operant conditioning techniques and behavioural modification to the animals under its stewardship. While concentrating upon the large feline predators and elephants, the zoo has enjoyed great success with a wide array of mammalian, reptilian and avian species.

Hot on the heels of last year’s recall of tainted pet food (it isn’t over yet, folks), Mars Inc. bumped up its television and magazine advertising for Pedigree® dog food. In parallel, they expanded their Indiana plant, to pump out more grain- and additive-filled kibble for the grocery store marketplace.

Not only have we been bombarded with television and magazine images of shiny golden retrievers scarfing the equivalent of Mickey Dee’s, but Mars Inc. is now pushing a shelter program – the Pedigree Adoption Drive TM campaign – to demonstrate its good corporate citizenship. Now with every bag of corn filler you buy, Mars, Inc. will donate $1.00 to help little Oliver the terrier and dogs like him find a loving, forever home.

Pedigree® helps make sure that man’s best friend stays fit, healthy and happy. There’s a Pedigree meal for every size and shape of dog.

From the Canadian website:

As the makers of Pedigree®, everything we do is inspired by our love of dogs. We’re here to help them live a happy and healthy life, no matter what their circumstances are. That’s why we are committed to donating $150,000 and are aspiring to raise much more through our Pedigree Adoption Drive TM campaign. This money will be donated to our partner animal shelters across Canada in the effort to raise awareness of the plight of shelter dogs and help them find loving homes.

A part of each purchase from any Pedigree® Brand product (to a maximum of $150,000) goes to help shelter dogs.

From the US website:

Through no fault of their own, more than four million dogs end up in shelters and breed rescue organizations every year — and only half of them ever find a home. That’s why we created The PEDIGREE Adoption Drive Foundation, a 501 (c)(3) philanthropic organization dedicated to helping dogs in need to find loving homes.Donations to the foundation directly benefit shelters and rescue organizations nationwide. We appreciate your tax-deductible donation and for helping us raise more than $1 million in 2008. Dogs Rule.®

Meanwhile, in related news…

South Carolina residents have chipped in to donate hundreds of bags of pet food to the Anderson County animal shelter. Mars, Inc., maker of Pedigree® pet food, told the shelter it was ending gifts of pet food to their shelter. Almost 300 animals were in danger of going hungry in a matter of days.

That was the situation the Anderson County Animal Shelter faced last week when the manager learned the shelter’s primary food supplier, would no longer be able to donate.

The shelter is looking for another corporate food sponsor, a process which could take months according to the manager. But Tuesday, the community reached out, hauling in bag after bag and filling the shelter’s lobby. The shelter was running low on pet food and asked the community for help. Numerous people brought in bags of pet food, and some even braved bad weather to bring in their donations.

The shelter needs kitten, cat, puppy and dog food. Workers say they’re entering the busy spring season, where they often feed more than 400 animals each day.

Mars, Inc. was the shelter’s main primary food supplier.

The shelter manager said she is uncertain why Mars, Inc. decided to stop donating pet food, and unless the shelter can find another corporate sponsor, the shelter would need to rely on the community for help. She was also told that the decision to cut back on the food donation program was company wide and other shelters were affected.

Details at WSPA

In breaking news, the PR whizzes at Mars have done an about-turn for now.

Officials with Mars Petcare U.S., which produces Pedigree pet food and has been the shelter’s main food supplier for five years, are going to continue donating food to the Anderson County shelter, said the spokeswoman for the company, Bertille Glass.

The decision was made after Mars Petcare officials, based in Brentwood, Tenn., noticed an article that was in Tuesday’s Anderson Independent-Mail, Ms. Glass said.

“There was a miscommunication and we will provide them with food donations during this transition period,” Ms. Glass said.

Currently, Mars Petcare officials are looking into the company’s nation-wide pet food donation program to see if any changes to be made, Ms. Glass said.

Anderson Independent

What can you do?

1. Get a Letter to the Editor going, and vote with your wallet to smarten these people up. Tell Mars to quit the corporate hypocrisy. Ask them where the truth in advertising went with the Pedigree shelter ads, and when these shelters can expect to receive their share. At time of writing, the Pedigree website had a big “under construction” blank on the page reserved for its list of deserving shelters. They really do need to answer for leaving vulnerable shelters in a bind.

Write to Mars

2. Let other pet food manufacturers know that you’d be happy if they would pitch in, and take less than six months to do so.

3. Feed your dog better, for Pete’s sake.

Although living on Mickey Dee’s might be better than nothing for a few weeks if you happen to be doing time in a shelter, avoid the packaged garbage in the average grocery aisle.

USA Today just reported a massive pet food scare in Asia in 2004 - a precursor to the 2007 disaster:

“The outbreak of contamination in pet foods that killed hundreds and perhaps thousands of cats and dogs last year in the USA wasn’t the first such incident, veterinary pathologists have determined.”

“An outbreak in 2004 that also involved pet foods contaminated with industrial chemicals sickened more than 6,000 dogs and a smaller number of cats across Asia.”

“Kidney failure in the animals was linked to Pedigree dog foods and Whiskas cat foods manufactured in Thailand by Mars Inc. Thousands of pets died, according to Asian media reports at the time.”

USA Today

Sadly, Pedigree® didn’t make the cut in Greenpeace’s guide on how to avoid genetically-engineered ingredients. Read about it here and download the guide.

Exactly what are you pouring into the poor dog’s dish every day?

Pedigree® Complete Nutrition Adult Large/Small Crunchy Bites:

Ground yellow corn, meat and bone meal, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, animal fat (preserved with BHA/BHT), wheat mill run, natural poultry flavor, rice, salt, potassium chloride, caramel color, wheat flour, wheat gluten, vegetable oil, vitamins (choline chloride, dl-alpha tocopherol acetate [source of vitamin E], l-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate [source of vitamin C], vitamin A supplement, thiamine mononitrate [vitamin B1], biotin, d-calcium pantothenate, riboflavin supplement [vitamin B2], vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin B12 supplement), trace minerals (zinc sulfate, copper sulfate, potassium iodide)

Dog Food Project - Pedigree

Identifying Better Products

A Dog’s Breakfast - What’s Really In Dog Food