What to Get Me For Xmas

Well maybe you weren't going to buy something for me but I bet there is someone on your list who would love a gift of a donation to help care for 100 Pitbulls seized in the OK cruelty case recently. Here's the info:

Send checks to:

110 S. Maple

Newkirk, OK 74647

Write "dogs" in the memo line.

The BAD RAP folks are heading to OK to help out. I hope I hope I hope this case has a good outcome for the victims.  The fact that the OK Sheriff asked for help with the dogs instead of simply killing them all immediately (I'm looking at you Houston SPCA) is an excellent start.  Let's keep the ball rolling by sending in a little cash.

Your Emotional Rescue Dog

Prolly not news to dog owners but now the scientific community is saying so:

Dogs are prone to complex emotions such as jealousy and pride, according to scientific research that sheds new light on their relationship with humans.
Canines do not like seeing their owners offering affection to other creatures, especially other dogs, and react negatively when their owners bring home new partners, the research found.

Check. And check.

Psychologists previously believed most animals lack the "sense of self" needed to experience so-called secondary emotions such as jealousy, embarrassment, empathy or guilt.

Sense of self? OH YES!  

CNN has an article on the same study:

Friederike Range and colleagues at the University of Vienna in Austria asked 33 trained dogs to extend a paw to a human.

The animals performed the trick virtually all of the time whether they were given a reward or not -- when alone or with another dog.

But the dogs' enthusiasm waned when they saw other dogs being rewarded but received nothing themselves.

Well duh.  Just having a guess that the researchers were NOT dog owners.

Biscuits for everyone!

Name That Animal

OK so it tells the name at the beginning of the video - but it's still interesting!  Here is the description that goes along with the vid:

Triops longicaudatus from Rodeo, New Mexico. These living fossils spend most of the year as dried-up eggs in the desert, and hatch when monsoon rains form large puddles. They grow quickly, eating fairy shrimp (also pictured in video), mosquito larvae, snails, and a variety of aquatic invertebrates. They attain a maximum size of about 4 centimeters before laying eggs as the puddles dry up. 
These animals have changed little in 70 million years. They swim with their many legs (up to 132 in large individuals) and possess 3 eyes. 
This species is an ally to humans because it eats Culex mosquitoes, carriers of West Nile Virus.

Over 100 Pitbulls Seized in OK

A self-described "dog lover" was arrested in Oklahoma Tuesday on 106 counts of animal cruelty and dogfighting:

Kay County Undersheriff Steve Kelley said his office followed up on an anonymous tip Tuesday afternoon and discovered 96 pit bull terriers in poor health at the property. The dogs were found tied to metal posts on 3-foot chains and in a barn on the property.

[...]

On Wednesday, officials searched a house on the land and found 10 puppies locked in dog carriers. One puppy died while police searched the house, and two others were taken to a local vet and euthanized.

Naturally, I'm wondering what will happen to all these abused dogs. Hopefully they won't get the Houston SPCA deluxe Pitbull treatment.

A veterinary board investigator is expected to evaluate the dogs today and give an opinion on what should be done with them.

Is this investigator a canine behaviorist, trainer or in some other way experienced with evaluating Pitbull temperaments? I'll go out on a limb and guess NO.

"The problem is not that these dogs are pit bulls,” said Kelley.

"It’s that these dogs are skin and bones and many of them have been taught to be aggressive.”

Right. That is exactly the problem - for the abuser. Because he's the one charged with the crimes here. The problem for the dogs is that they are in need of vet care and someone qualified to determine their suitability for adoption. I hope they get it. Every dog deserves a fair evaluation.

Toxic Teddy Treats

Nothing says I Love You like a sweet teddy bear stuffy holding some delicious chocolate. Unless that's [insert scary music here] MELA-CHOCOLATE! From the FDA:

Walgreens is recalling 173 teddy bears with chocolate bars sold in stores since late September 2008. Analysis by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration found that certain samples of the chocolate provided with the teddy bears were contaminated with melamine.

I guess those samples must have contained more melamine than the FDA (now) says it's A-OK for us to eat. Gee, if only some way, somehow, the FDA could have had some kind of heads up on this whole melamine issue before it hit our food supply.

Thanks for the stuffed bear but as for the chocolate, make mine Labrador please.

Pet Food Ingredient Breakdown - #3

A premium line of dog foods recently reformulated their products and, call me Suspicious Sally, but I know the country is facing an economic crunch and I wondered how the new ingredients would stand up to scrutiny. Here are the first ingredients listed in one of the new formulas:

Beef, brewers rice, whole grain wheat, corn gluten meal, poultry by-product meal, animal fat, whole grain corn, soy flour, soybean meal, dried beet pulp, fish meal, animal digest, glycerin

Beef - OK. Ideally this would be USDA inspected beef muscle meat, obtained from local, humane, sustainable farming methods - not feedlot misery. But yeah, I know I'm dreaming.

Brewer's Rice - Alcohol industry waste product which, if not bought by pet food companies, would otherwise end up in the trash bin. AAFCO allows this ingredient to contain "spent hops in an amount not to exceed 3 percent." Spent hops, when ingested by dogs, can be fatal.

Whole Grain Wheat - OK for some dogs but it is a common allergen

Corn Gluten Meal: Waste product from facilities manufacturing corn syrup, used in the extrusion process to bind kibble. Corn gluten is one of many known contaminated pet food ingredients to have poisoned pets in the past.

Poultry By-Product Meal: The bits that people won't eat (such as heads, intestines, and feet) but from what kind of poultry - anyone know? Does the manufacturer know? Apparently not.

Animal Fat - AAFCO describes this as fat from mammals and/or poultry. Dang, how would YOU like to have a dinner made from "mammals". Kinda horror flick like.

Whole Grain Corn - indigestible by dogs, another common allergen

Soy Flour and Soybean Meal - Soy is a common allergen in dogs. The flour is presumably used as a binding agent, while soybean meal is simply waste product of the soybean oil extraction process.

Dried Beet Pulp - Dried residue from sugar beets which is yet another ingredient used in pet foods which would otherwise be sent to the landfill. Pet food companies use it because it binds the stool and apparently as owners, we are so excited to see firm stool that we don't care if it's the result of some junk ingredient added to the food as opposed to an accurate reflection of good nutrition and healthy digestion. Gosh, we're dumb.

Fish Meal - What kind of fish is "Fish"? In order to comply with US Coast Guard regulations, all fish meal must be preserved with ethoxyquin. The pet food manufacturer need not list the ethoxyquin as an ingredient since they didn't add it themselves.

Animal Digest - Ick.

Glycerin - a waste product of the bio-fuel industry


Overall product ingredients review: *sounds buzzer* It looks like this company has cut corners even further in order to try and maintain profitability during the economic crisis. Too bad for the dogs who rely on this food as their main source of nourishment. To my mind, a diet of healthy table scraps would be far superior.

Justice for Murphy

While Murphy, beaten with a sledgehammer and left for dead in an Atlanta park, receives treatment at a local vet clinic, authorities have made rapid progress on his case:

DeKalb police Wednesday charged a 48-year-old man with the sledgehammer beating of a dog in a county park.

Joseph Waters was charged with a felony count of animal cruelty, said county police spokeswoman Keisha Williams.

[...]

Investigators are looking for anyone who saw anything unusual at the park from 9 p.m. Monday to 7 a.m. Tuesday.

Witnesses may call 404-294-2818.

I hope that prosecutors will take this case seriously and, if the suspect is found guilty, punish him to the fullest extent of the law.

Donations for Murphy's care can be made at any Wachovia bank in the US under the "Murphy the Dog" account.

Will update this post with additional info as I come across it.

UPDATE, 12-4-08: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports today that Murphy is able to walk, which is great news. They also describe him as being 9 years old. I have a soft spot for the old dogs. I hope that however long Murphy has left in this life, he's just crazy-happy and surrounded by love.

UPDATED: Atlanta Authorities Seek Tips in Cruelty Case

A man walking his dogs in Murphy Candler Park in Atlanta, GA came across a dog that had been beaten with a hammer and left for dead:

Robert Kennedy found Murphy while walking his own dogs in the park.

He told Channel 2 Action News that the dog was wrapped in a blanket, but not far away was a hammer with blood on the handle.

"Whoever did this to a dog is just awful," Kennedy said.

The dog did not have a collar or a microchip. So the doctors at VCA Pets are People Too, an animal hospital about a mile from the park, named him Murphy for the park where he was found.

The hospital's Dr. Stephen Pope said Murphy has a fractured skull and will likely lose his left eye, but he is hopeful about his recovery. Provided Murphy is stable, he hopes to operate Wednesday.

If you have any information about Murphy, please contact Dekalb County Animal Control at 404-294-2996. Paws up to all the good samaritans helping to save this poor dog.

UPDATE: I got in touch with the good people at the vet clinic caring for this dog and they said the gentleman who found him has set up a fund for his care at Wachovia. Donations can be made at any Wachovia bank in the US, just specify the account: Murphy The Dog.

Thoughts on the Houston Pitbull Killings

Harris County TX prosecutors are hoping to find more Pitbulls to kill. Cos 187 just ain't enough apparently. The plan:

...[A]uthorities will band together in January to launch a Crime Stoppers campaign cracking down on dogfighting.

The monthlong initiative — patterned after a similar effort in Chicago — will encourage callers to anonymously report illegal dogfighting to the Crime Stoppers tip line and will deploy a task force to investigate all leads. Crime Stoppers also will spotlight the crime on billboards across the county.

Great! What could possibly go wrong? Well for starters, authorities might kill every dog they "rescue" from any fighting operations. I am absolutely all for busting scumbag dogfighters and the freaks who like to watch. But as for killing every single dog "saved" without an individual evaluation by a qualified canine professional - not so much. Every dog deserves a fair evaluation.

And what about false tips they receive in the course of the investigation? Responsible Pitbull owners not involved in dogfighting may be targeted by neighbors who only know what Harris County and the Houston SPCA have taught the public about Pitbulls - that they are all evil and must be killed. What if those dogs get seized during the course of the investigation? Will they too be immediately killed without evaluation before any determination of guilt or innocence can be made in the case against their owners?

Which brings me back to the 187 Pitbulls killed by Harris County. The wheels of justice turn slowly. Have ANY of these suspects been convicted of a dogfighting crime yet? Cos I can't find any reports indicating they have nor can I imagine all 50 suspects having already had their day in court. Again, let me reiterate, if these people are found guilty of dogfighting, animal cruelty or anything in those realms, I absolutely agree their dogs should be confiscated by the authorities. In the meantime, the dogs should be cared for, individually evaluated and held until either the owners have been to trial, the owner signs the dogs over to authorities, and/or a judge issues an order releasing the dogs. At that point, the dogs belonging to anyone found 'not guilty' would be returned to their owners and the others would be released to rescue groups so the dogs can be rehomed.

I appreciate that when you get any large group of dogs in for evaluations, there may be some determined to be too aggressive to be handled. In the Michael Vick case, evaluations determined 1 dog out of the 50 seized had to be euthanized due to aggression. I am not advocating for every single shelter dog in the country to be adopted out. But every dog deserves a fair evaluation.

I further understand that even a normal, friendly Pitbull might have to be euthanized in a dogfighting case as this Vet points out:

"These animals really get chewed up and suffer greatly," Harkness said. "This is a point where death can be a gift."

I agree. If a Veterinarian determines the dog's case is medically hopeless and that dog is suffering, that's what euthanasia is for - to hasten the inevitable so as to avoid prolonged pain and misery for the animal. But that's not what anyone has said regarding the 187 dogs seized in the Houston case. They were killed due to "aggression" with no information provided on the individual evaluations each dog should have received. What are the odds of a group of 187 dogs each scoring an identical result on their evaluations - that is, too aggressive to be handled/recommended for euthanasia? I'd say it would be about impossible for all 187 dogs to receive the same exact determination. In fact, I am suspicious that evaluations were never performed at all, despite the reporting earlier in the case. If that is the case, then 187 dogs were senselessly killed without reason by those who "rescued" them. How is that significantly better than the situation the dogs were saved from?

I'm not asking for a blanket pass for any breed or any case. All I'm asking for on behalf of rescued dogs in shelters is a chance. Let's not pre-judge them because of who abused them or what they look like. Let's take each case, one by one, and judge the dog on his own merits. Is that too much to ask? Every dog deserves a fair evaluation.

Action: Contact the Houston SPCA and let them know, politely and respectfully, that the next group of dogs seized in a dogfighting bust deserves more than automatic death. If they need assistance, tell them to ask for it. The dog community rallies for causes every day. But we can never support senseless killing - not now, not ever. We are a no-kill nation. I hope the Houston SPCA and Harris County authorities will join us.

187 "Rescued" Dogs Killed in Houston

I am deeply saddened and disappointed to learn that all 187 dogs saved from the Houston dogfighting ring have been killed by their "rescuers". BAD RAP tells it like it is:

They did it. They went for the easy out: The most convenient, economical way to deal with an unwanted excess of abuse victims.

Thank goodness they don't "help" battered women, I guess. Read the entire post.

Info on Seized Dogs in Houston Still Sketchy - UPDATED

What has happened to the 187 Pitbulls and mixes seized in the Houston dogfighting ring case?  Does anyone know if the individual evaluations have begun?  Or if the reporting that the courts are to decide the disposition of the dogs is accurate?  If so, presumably the courts will need to review the temperament test results on each dog in order to help make a ruling.

I sent an inquiry to the Houston SPCA spokesman in order to try and clarify what appear to be conflicting internet reports on what is happening with the dogs.  I received two responses this morning but neither contained any info about the dogs.  It would be good to set the record straight and not let internet rumors run amok.  I'm sure everyone would be in agreement on that point.  Another point of agreement:  It's wonderful that these dogs were rescued from their abusers.  Hopefully now, they can go on to live the lives they were meant for - as man's best friend and family companion.  

So... anyone have any "on the record" information regarding these dogs? 

Every dog deserves a fair evaluation.

Added:  I also have a couple e-mails in to Houston newspapers requesting an update on the dogs.  Maybe they will have better luck on pinning down the status of the dogs.

UPDATE:  Harris Co Asst. DA Smith is quoted today in the Houston Chronicle as saying all 187 dogs were killed:

All 187 dogs seized in the large bust that led to the mass indictments last month, Smith said, were euthanized because of their aggression — an all-too-common end to a life of suffering.

It's hard for me to imagine how a canine behaviorist or other qualified individual came up with KILL as the bottom line finding on all 187 evaluations.  I have to wonder if the evaluations were performed by a knowledgeable, independent dog person.  Or were they performed at all?

This will not be my last post on this case.

Every dog deserves a fair evaluation.

 

Ultimate Smackdown Cage Match: FDA vs. Yellow-Bellies

Never fear: the FDA SWAT team is on da job. That's right, just when you were worried that eggs, baby formula, and other milk products were contaminated with the same toxins which killed thousands of pets in 2007, the FDA swoops in to save us all from the menace of [insert JAWS theme here] PET TURTLES:

On March 3, 2008, Strictly Reptiles Inc., a wildlife dealer in Hollywood, Fla., sold 1,000 baby yellow-bellied sliders and Mississippi map turtles to a souvenir shop in Panama City, Fla. The sale violated a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ban on small pet turtles designed to protect the public from the disease-causing bacteria Salmonella. Turtles often carry Salmonella on their outer skin and shell surfaces, and people can get Salmonella infection by coming in contact with turtles or their habitats.

On July 14, 2008, the U.S. District Court in Fort Lauderdale convicted and sentenced Strictly Reptiles for its role in illegally selling, and offering for sale, live undersized turtles. The Florida District of FDA's law enforcement arm, the Office of Criminal Investigations (OCI), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service investigated the case leading to the conviction, with help from FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine.

OK well I guess the melamine contamination is not such a worry after all. In fact, the FDA has flip-flopped on the whole melamine safety issue. When we learned about the toxin being in pet food last year, the FDA said it had "no approved use in human or animal food in the United States" and there was no safe level of melamine in foods. I'm a layman but this made sense to me since melamine is the material they use to make things like dinnerware and the Magic Eraser. But after discovering melamine and cyanuric acid in human foods this Fall, the FDA created a safety level for the poisons, except for baby milk. Now in an Olympic medal worthy double flip-flop, the FDA has determined safe levels of melamine and cyanuric acid for baby formula. I'll have one Magic Eraser on an edible melamine plate TO GO and give me a kiddie meal of cyanuric acid on the side please.

But regarding the super-dee-duper dangerous pet turtles, the FDA really had to take a stand. Some things are too important to let slide (little turtle pun there - you're welcome). See, the FDA warns us:

Small pet turtles are of particular concern because children are more prone to handling the turtles without washing their hands afterwards, and even putting the turtles in their mouths.

OK I admit I didn't have a pet turtle as a kid. So perhaps it's not surprising to learn that I never put one in my mouth. I do remember having a mouse and surely at some point I put him in my mouth but apparently that memory has been blocked. But one thing I do recall trying is dog food. In fact, I think I tried it because all the other kids I knew had tried it and I didn't want to lose my status in the Nerd Society. Maybe you or your kid has put dog biscuits or cat food or dog kibble in their mouths too. Well I'm afraid I've got some bad news, May 2008:

A salmonella outbreak that swept 19 U.S. states in late 2006 has been a mystery, until now.

Nearly 200 consumers were sickened by what investigators believed to be tainted tomatoes, or other produce.

But now, the Centers for Disease Control says the apparent source of the 2006 salmonella outbreak was tainted dog food.

More bad news, September 2008:

[P]et food is being voluntarily recalled because of potential contamination with Salmonella serotypeSchwarzengrund.
[...]
Salmonella can cause serious infections in dogs and cats, and, if there is cross contamination caused by handling of the pet food, in people as well, especially children, the aged, and people with compromised immune systems.

Still more bad news, October 2008:

The Hartz Mountain Corporation is recalling one lot of its chicken-basted rawhide chips because of possible Salmonella contamination.

Even more-more bad news, November 2008:

Mars Petcare US is extending a recall of dry pet food after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported finding Salmonella in additional samples of the company's SPECIAL KITTY Gourmet Blend cat food.

The earlier recall, issued October 27, was for cat food produced at Mars' Allenton, Pa., plant on August 11, 2008. The recall is now being extended to cover all dry pet food produced at the plant with a "best by" date between August 11, 2009 and October 3, 2009.

Holy Bad Bacteria Batman - this is starting to look like a pattern! The FDA SWAT team response to all these Salmonella pet food issues? *crickets*

But before we judge the FDA too harshly for apparently protecting big business over American citizens, let us not forget their swift and decisive take down action on the pet turtle threat. I think we'll all sleep a little better knowing that there are some safety issues that really bring the FDA out of their shells. (You're welcome, redux.)

Saving Fight Dogs - It's Not Just for Celebrity Cases

Every Dog Deserves a Fair Evaluation. Does this include dogs seized in abuse and dogfighting cases? Most definitely because in those cases, it's the humans who are the criminals, not the dogs. And what do the humans get - a fair evaluation (trial by jury of their peers) to determine whether they should be rehabilitated (such as in a prison drug program) or just returned to function as a member of our society (if found 'not guilty' of the charges brought against them).

The dogs are the crime victims. They have been physically and emotionally abused, forced to fight in order to stay alive. Seized dogs from these cases are at least entitled to a fair evaluation (a behavioral eval performed by a knowledgeable and independent trainer) to determine whether they require rehabilitation (such as carefully conducted socialization exercises) or can just return to function as a member of our society (if the eval determines the dog needs no more than the basic training required by typical rescue dogs in shelters). If the latter, the dog must be appropriately matched to an owner who can develop a successful relationship with the animal just like every other shelter dog.

In following the story of the 187 Pitbulls and mixes seized in the Houston dogfighting case this month, I came across this piece at the Pet Connection. Many of the seized dogs are apparently being held by the Houston SPCA. The group's PR manager told a Houston newspaper:

...the dogs would be put through rehabilitation tests and the courts will decide what should be done with them.

[ Note:  Due to a formatting problem, the link will not post for the above quote.  It can be found here:  http://hcnonline.com/articles/2008/11/22/north_channel_sentinel/news/112008_nc_dog_fighting.txt ]

But this same spokesman is quoted just a short time later telling a Houston blog:

“These animals are bred from a long line of fighting dogs to be aggressive,” Houston SPCA spokeswoman Meera Nandlal told Hair Balls this morning. “We have made the decision that they will be humanely euthanized.”

Was the spokesman misquoted in one of the stories? Because the two definitely don't make sense together. Presumably the Texas courts are not run by the Houston SPCA who apparently has a policy against adopting out Pitbulls.

Perhaps the Houston SPCA hasn't heard but rescue groups like BADRAP and Best Friends have had great success with the dogs seized in the Michael Vick abuse/dogfighting case. Why couldn't a similar plan be implemented for the Houston dogs? I know it's not a sexy celeb case but don't these abused dogs deserve at least the same opportunity as Vick's abused dogs? Don't all seized dogs deserve a chance? I'm not advocating for some irresponsible set-them-free-they-are-all-great-and-don't-need-evaluations hare-brained scheme. All I'm saying is, let's build upon the success of the experience with the Vick dogs - not go backwards. Let's dump old-think policies that say all dogs who look like X or who were seized in cases involving Y must be killed. We are a no-kill nation, even if some of the supposed "rescuers" in the dog world haven't caught up with the times. Let's walk the walk.

Here is my challenge to my fellow dog bloggers. Let's shine a light on the Houston case - and keep it there until we hear some definitive answers. Let's make this case a celebrity case. And readers, there's work for you too. Let's contact the Houston SPCA and let them know politely and respectfully that Every Dog Deserves a Fair Evaluation. Remind them of the success of the Vick dogs (including Leo, now a therapy dog) and let them know the dog community and their donors are watching this case. And contact the Houston media (HCNonline here) to ask for continued coverage of the case, specifically what is happening to the 187 rescued dogs.

Let's be a voice for the Houston dogs. Every Dog Deserves a Fair Evaluation.

Orijen Dry Cat Food Problems in Australia: Answers

Champion Pet Foods, makers of Orijen, have posted a pdf explaining why the Australian cats developed neurological problems and some had to be euthanized as a result. In a nutshell, Australia required Orijen cat food to be irradiated at a very high level which knocked out the food's Vitamin A and caused the fatty acids to oxidize. The Orijen dog food coming into Australia is also irradiated but no dogs have been reported ill by their owners. Champion explains:

[C]ats require higher levels of vitamins than dogs (AAFCO 2008), and cats are highly
sensitive to changes in vitamins or oxidative by-products (such as occur from irradiation).

As a result, Orijen will no longer be shipped - cat or dog (since it's possible cats could eat the dog food) - to Australia.

I think this a good response from a pet food company faced with a recall in which pets, in this case cats, became ill and died as a result of eating the company's product. Imagine if other pet food manufacturers handled past, present and future problems reported with their foods in this same manner. Yeah, I'm looking at YOU Menu Foods and Nutro. ahem.

Oh Coaty, Your Breeder Must Be So Proud!

Orijen Dry Cat Food Linked to Illness/Death in Australia

A number of cats in Australia have become ill and some have died. Orijen brand cat food is apparently the only thing these cats have in common:

A cat neurologist, Georgina Child, has put down five cats over the past week and treated or consulted with other vets about more than a dozen others suffering from paralysis.
[...]
First symptoms included wobbliness or weakness in the animal's hind legs, which could then progress to the front limbs. The condition did not appear to be infectious, Dr Child said, nor typical of a nutritional deficiency.

I hope they are able to determine the cause definitively and I'll post more information as I come across it.

Michael Vick: Morally Bankrupt

According to a newly released USDA report on the Michael Vick case, a witness told investigators that Vick put family pets (the article does not indicate how the pets were obtained) in the ring with Pit Bulls trained to fight. Of course the pets were severely injured or killed but Vick "thought it was funny to watch" according to the witness. The report also reveals how Vick lied to investigators during a polygraph test, denying he had killed "underperforming dogs". (Those would be normal, friendly Pit Bulls who suffered abuse but did not change their true nature, even to save their own lives.):

The dogs were killed by shooting, hanging, electrocution and drowning, and in at least one instance, according to one of the witnesses, when Vick and Phillips killed a red pit bull by “slamming it to the ground several times before it died, breaking the dog’s back or neck.”

Vick is due to be released from federal prison in eight months. He is currently in the midst of bankruptcy proceedings, claiming assets of $16 million and debts of $20.4 million. Court records indicate lavish homes, vehicles and other spending by Vick for himself, his family members and friends. Among Vick's assets:

His real estate holdings include the homes in Suffolk and Hampton in Virginia where his mother and fiancee live, respectively, and vacant houses in Williamsburg and Duluth, Ga. Construction continues on a $2 million home in Suffolk where he and his fiancee plan to eventually live. [emphasis added]

Now don't get me wrong. I am all for paying one's debt to society and starting over with a clean slate. But can we inject a little bit of reality into this situation? Is it necessary for Vick and fiancee to build their own $2 million home? Could they possibly manage to live in a home someone else built, perhaps valued at something less than $2 million? I know nothing of the fiancee but Vick at least appears to be employable. In fact, he may get another job in professional football, although I hope not. But assuming he gets some job, why can't they plan to budget, repay debts, scrimp and save for the future, a little at a time? Vick claims to owe 20% more money than he has. Newsflash: There are many Americans in this same (or worse) situation. They are struggling to make ends meet, sometimes relying on help from family and friends. Couldn't Vick's family and friends downgrade their lavish cars, boats and homes in order to help Vick repay his debts? I'm not saying the guy has to live in substandard housing with no health insurance, eating Top Ramen. Although a lot of guys getting out of prison do just that. For that matter, a lot of Americans, guilty of no crimes, live like that. All I'm saying is that Vick's bankruptcy filing stinks to me. And yeah, maybe I'm influenced by images of Vick laughing while family pets are torn apart by his abused Pit Bulls. And maybe I'm not thinking as kindly of him as I might otherwise because I can't help picturing him torturing "underperforming dogs" to death. And maybe I'm wincing at the idea that Vick will probably be working in the NFL again soon, raking in the dough, driving his flashy cars and living in his $2 million dollar home while the dogs he killed rot in a landfill somewhere, their bones being a last testament to the fate Vick handed down to man's best friend.

Treats on the Internets

The FDA says people are getting scammed by callers identifying themselves as FDA agents. Can you imagine the poor sod who calls my number? Before he got a chance to try the extortion scam, I would have given him such an earful about food safety and the pharmaceutical companies' stranglehold on health, he'd be admitting he wasn't with the FDA at all and I'd probably think he was just trying to get off the hook. [Note: FDA officials - call me!]

In the UK, Catherine O'Driscoll calls out the pet food companies for their part in contributing to unhealthy pets. And I just like the title: Own a Fat Dog, Go Straight to Jail

A very cute dog gets some basic training at Life on the Leash

In Clover, South Carolina, the town council is considering a vicious dog ordinance and some are questioning the need to name specific breeds, such as pitbulls:

In a memo to council, Town Administrator Allison Harvey said she couldn't find any research proving that breed-specific legislation is successful.

Right. So why are we considering it again?

Susan Thixton asks: Is it ethical for Vets to recommend pet food?

Market Watch has a piece on how one pet food company has taken heed of consumers' desire for COOL on pet foods. Sounds good. Let's hope it's the beginning of a trend.

Don't It Make My Black Coat Blue?

I notice in the Fall and Winter, certain light makes the black dogs look almost blue in photos. OK yeah, just an excuse for me to show off a couple of my pesty pets: Randi, age 6 and Patty, age 2.

Stuff I Know, Courtesy of Calvin and Hobbes

Click image for full size.

Two More Reports of Police Killing Family Dogs

In Pennsylvania:

“There is no misunderstanding,” said Mangan. “He shot my dog maliciously."

Mangan said the deputy's story that Lincoln tried to attack him doesn't add up.

"The leash doesn't go past where he shot him at. He can't go any farther; he was in his own back yard, secure, on a leash," said Mangan.

The deputy said he couldn’t see the leash. [emphasis added]

Allegheny County Sheriff’s Chief Deputy Joseph Rizzo said in a statement, "If, in any event, a Sheriff’s deputy goes to a house and there is an aggressive animal, they make every effort to get out of harms way. If a dog is going to attack the deputy, they have no recourse."

No recourse except maybe to outfit the officer with a pair of glasses. This story reads like perhaps the officer was too quick to shoot. I guess we'll know for sure when the police get done investigating themselves and determine if they acted appropriately. Stay tuned.


In Illinois:

Officer guns down family dog

Park Forest police chief says detective had no choice

There are many things a 10-year-old boy should not see. Police officers gunning down the family dog during a burglary investigation is one of them.

No kidding. These officers are not equipped with any means of fending off a dog other than a revolver? No pepper spray even? That sounds irresponsibly dangerous.

I want to support our public servants as much as anyone but honestly, when some officers conduct themselves in this Wild West manner, it's hard to stand by those kinds of actions. And although I haven't read about it happening yet (and I hope I never do), it certainly seems possible that one day, an officer might shoot the beloved companion of someone who is also a gun owner, quick to shoot, and in need of glasses. Or maybe a stray bullet from an officer's gun will miss the dog and hit a kid. I don't know but the police are contributing to a reckless environment when their position on dogs seems to be shoot first.

This is That Time of the Year

"The Holidays" are an annual excuse for all sorts of pet advice in the media. There are common sense suggestions, such as being watchful that pets don't slip out the front door amidst all the comings and goings of holiday guests, as well as good advice on preventing dogs from eating anything toxic, such as chocolate. But then you get your old "No table scraps" warnings which can range from the overly cautious (as in: your dog might get sick if he is fed leftovers from the plates of 27 Thanksgiving dinner guests - true, but does this really require a warning beyond "Duh"?) to the outright chortle worthy (as in: if you feed your dog anything more than a morsel of turkey, you'll soon find him writhing in pain from abdominal cramping while vomiting and having diarrhea - whoa, really?).

Let's get a few things straight. Healthy table scraps are good for your dog. As in all things, one must employ the higher brain functions:

• Do not feed excessive amounts of any foods (general guide - if the amount of table scraps in the dog bowl is more than the amount of food normally in the dog bowl, das too much)

• If you know your dog has a sensitive stomach, don't introduce a bowl full of new foods all at once. On the other hand, if your dogs are like mine and could eat their way through a landfill with tails-a-waggin', don't be afraid to offer a variety of healthy leftovers.

• Use caution with bones - if your dog is not accustomed to eating bones, don't feed bones on a whim "because it's a holiday" - do your research, form an educated opinion and make an informed decision.

But EVERYBODY says table scraps are bad. OK then, what is "good" - dog food? Well guess what - dog food is made up of the scraps leftover from the human food industry. These are not your healthy table scraps, more like bits and bobs humans won't eat because they are undigestible, untested, unsafe, unknown, and/or un-whatever. If you picture a turkey processing plant, you can imagine what gets tossed aside because it can't be sold to people. That stuff gets bought by pet food companies and put into your dog's kibble. I'm still not sure how feeding your dog these turkey throw away bits as an ingredient in kibble is A-OK but feeding him wholesome leftover turkey from your plate will send him into convulsions. Help me higher brain functions!

Anyway, if you decide to feed your dog healthy table scraps at the holidays, and he likes it, and you like it, maybe you don't have to wait for another holiday to try it again. At our house, healthy table scraps are part of the daily dog diet and have been for many years. Every day is a holiday!

***

Graham offers her ideal table scraps dinner (actually her "ideal" involves a bottomless bowl built into her dog bed but this is a reasonable compromise):

1/3 protein - meat (including organ meat), fish, eggs, plain yogurt
1/3 veggies - broccoli, green beans, and sweet potatoes are some of her faves
1/3 starch - rice, oatmeal, potatoes

Friends of the Blog - Pet Photos

Because I never get tired of looking at pet pictures, and because I assume everyone else is exactly like me (Note: if this is not true, please do NOT e-mail me to advise, just let me continue being happy), I'm posting some photos from friends of the blog. Please feel welcome to send in your photos for future inclusion, since we all love it so much.

The Usual(ly Ignored) Suspects

Let's say you wanted to smuggle something rilly illegal - say assault weapons with silencers - into a war zone - say Iraq. You come up with a plan to stash the weapons on pallets, surrounded by something legal, then shrink-wrap the whole deal. You know you'd have to get past US Customs and obviously, if they look at your pallets and suspect anything, all they have to do is slice the shrink-wrap, dig in and you're toast.

So the thing that you surround the weapons with - it's got to be some item that US Customs would never in a kajillion years care about inspecting. Hmm, what could that be - cases of bar soap maybe? No what if they think it's special soap for washing criminal behavior offa ya - they might check. How about crates full of hula girl bobbleheads? No the Customs agents might go catatonic, succumbing to the bobblehead trance and you couldn't get around their googly-eyed, frozen bodies. Got it: bags of dog food! US Customs will absitively posolutely not be inspecting those. That's just food for dogs, made from leftovers from the human food industry - no worries there. What possible need could there be to inspect dog food? And you know the US track record on inspecting dog food - as in, FAIL.

From ABC News:

Two other former [Blackwater] employees tell ABCNews.com they also witnessed the dog food smuggling operation. They say the weapons were actually hidden inside large sacks of dog food, packaged at company headquarters in North Carolina and sent to Iraq for the company's 20 bomb-sniffing dogs.

[Note: So did the bomb sniffing dogs actually get anything to eat after all?]

Larger items, including M-4 assault weapons, were secreted on shipping pallets surrounded by stacks of dog food bags, the former employees said. The entire pallet would be wrapped in cellophane shrink wrap, the former employees said, making it less likely US Customs inspectors would look too closely.

Last year, a US Department of Commerce inspector at JFK airport in New York discovered an unlicensed two-way radio hidden in a dog food sack being shipped by Blackwater to Iraq, according to people familiar with the incident.

A federal grand jury in North Carolina is looking into the matter.

FDA Blocks Chinese Milk Products

Finally, some action from the FDA regarding the Chinese mela-milk scandal:

The agency, in an alert posted Wednesday on its Web site, ordered the "detention without physical examination of all milk products, milk-derived ingredients and finished food products containing milk from China due to the presence of melamine and/or melamine analogs."

The agency listed dozens of products, including cereals, snack foods, cheese, ice cream, carbonated drinks, candy, puddings and pet foods as potentially contaminated with melamine, which is used in the manufacture of plastics and fertilizer.

I wonder how many people and pets have been consuming melamine tainted foods while the FDA dragged its heels. I also wonder if the practice of increasing profits by poisoning foods is isolated to the Chinese and melamine. Seems unlikely to me but since the FDA only conducts food safety testing on a tiny fraction of imports, I guess we won't find out until some other large group of people and/or pets get sick/die from eating toxic "food".

Nationwide Recall Of Infants' Mylicon Drops

I know I keep a supply of this product on hand for litters and other breeders do too. Here is what the FDA says:

Johnson & Johnson • Merck Consumer Pharmaceuticals Company (JJMCP) is voluntarily recalling approximately 12,000 units of Infants' MYLICON® GAS RELIEF DYE FREE drops (simethicone-antigas) non-staining sold in 1 oz. plastic bottles that were distributed after October 5, 2008 nationwide. The company is taking this action in consultation with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Although the potential for serious medical events is low, the company is implementing this recall to the consumer level as a precaution after determining that some bottles could include metal fragments that were generated during the manufacturing process.

Kibble Suggestions?

As you might guess, I'm in the market for suggestions on a kibble I can use as a supplement to my home prepared food for the dogs. I would like a food produced by a company who provides specifics on where their food is made, what country they buy their ingredients from and doesn't try to hide behind the old "proprietary information" excuse. As far as I'm concerned, if they won't tell, I won't buy. I would like a food tested in feed trials, not tested by chemical analysis. The proof is in the dog, not in the test tube. Ideally, I'd like the first ingredient to be a specific type of meat (chicken, beef, etc.) and any subsequent meat ingredients to be actual meat (not meal). But I know I may not find this food.

Here's what I don't want: garbage ingredients such as unspecified "meat" or "meat meal", brewer's rice, corn gluten meal, by-products, animal digest, beet pulp, etc. I also don't want a food manufactured by Menu Foods. Menu lied while pets died during the 2007 recalls. My memory is long. Also it would be nice to find a food without mystery bits in it.

Again, I know I may not find this food (except possibly in Imagination Land.) But suggestions are welcome and appreciated - and I should say straight off that I'm feeding six dogs and not wealthy, which narrows the possibilities even further, I know.

And now for something completely different: My new neighbors have six Pitbulls (a couple are leftover pups from a recent litter apparently) and now a Chihuahua puppy. The highlight of my dog walk this afternoon was when one of the Pitbull pups came up to the fence for some lovin' and my dogs did not notice for like 2 minutes. I got in 120 undisturbed seconds of sweet Pitbull love. He was soooooooooooo cute. I want him! You see how I get into trouble? (Photo is just a sample cute Pitbull pup, not actual cute Pitbull pup.) Tomorrow we go to the no-kill shelter to drop off a bin of food so we might get even more Pitbull hugs and kisses - weeeeeeee! O yeah and the Chihuahua hopped right through the hog fencing to our yard and walked around sniffing my bitches like he owned the place with all my big dogs barking up a storm right in his face. Typical!

You Must Be Joking: Chafing at the Chaff

OK, as you might recall, I have been unlucky with my recent kibble purchases - finding thingies in two different brands. And as I said, I don't buy kibble that often so two bags of kibbles-n-mystery-bits in a row seems odd to me. Yesterday, with some hesitation, I purchased a bag of Natural Balance Sweet Potato and Fish. Have you guessed yet? Bits. Again.

Honestly, I don't even know if I'm going to bother with contacting the manufacturer this time. The first bag, I contacted the manufacturer, they tested the food and basically said everything was A-OK, it was just grain chaff. Well that may be perfectly fine to them but I was not so excited to learn I was feeding my dogs chaff. Second bag, the manufacturer apparently didn't care about the info and didn't even want to see my photos or get a sample of the food. This third bag, I'm thinking if I contact them, I may be at risk of earning a reputation as one of those wacky people who make a living "falling down" in Wal-Marts and on slippery sidewalks in front of large hotels. I'm not planning on bringing any lawsuits. I would just like to know the honest answers to a few simple questions:

1. Is this just some type of coincidence or is this a symptom of a trend among pet food manufacturers? IOW, times are tough, ingredients are expensive and corners must be cut to maintain profits - thus, pet food manufacturers are bulking up their feeds with grain chaff.

2. Are these three manufacturers buying "ingredients" (if you consider grain stalks an ingredient) from the same source and thus the reason for the un-ground bits appearing in all three kibbles? Or is there some other explanation?

3. Since chaff is not specifically listed as an ingredient on any of these bags of food, are there any other ingredients the manufacturers would like to specify which perhaps they feel are covered under some other ingredient listing at present? Perhaps "chicken" is intended to include "feathers" or something like that, I don't know. But I'd like to know what exactly it is I'm paying for and feeding to my dogs. Is that too much to ask?

The HSUS and Prop. 2 in CA: The Big Picture

The NYT Magazine takes an in-depth look at the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and their support for Prop. 2 in California. Prop. 2 would require farmers to house chickens, pigs and veal calves in less restrictive conditions. It's mainly about chickens though as CA has LOTS of chicken farmers and almost no pig or veal producers. Prop. 2 requires that chickens be able to fully extend their wings without touching the sides of a cage:

That doesn’t mean that California chickens will live like the chickens in the final scene of a Proposition 2 commercial, in which a handful of them peck and strut in the grass of an idyllic farm. “Free-range” chickens have access to outdoors — though that may be only a slab of concrete — while cage-free hens live in henhouses and usually never go outside. And depending on the producer, the henhouse may be a comparatively roomy, modern system with plenty of space and sunlight. Or not. The worst-run operations are dirty, dark barns crammed with thousands of chickens that never see daylight.

The article also looks at the toning down of the shock campaigns of previous animal rights efforts in order to appeal to a larger demographic. And specifically, under Wayne Pacelle's leadership, how HSUS has shifted much of its focus away from pets and baby seals toward farm animals:

That more-palatable mainstream message, coupled with the Humane Society’s political power, is what the animal rights movement in America has needed for a long time, argues [Peter] Singer, the Princeton bioethicist.

This is a well written and thought provoking article. Read it here.

Am I Losing the Kibble Lottery?

UPDATE:  After posting this, I contacted Blue about the problem, explained that although I didn't have the bag because I had emptied the food into a bin and thrown the bag away, I did have photos and plenty of food to send them if they were interested.  I received a response asking for the codes off the bag.  I reiterated the above and haven't heard anything further.  Except today they sent me an announcement about a pet photo contest.  Tuh.

ORIGINAL POST:

I have not been a regular kibble buyer in recent years since I feed a homemade diet - either wholly or partially. So it makes me feel particularly unlucky to have bought two different brands of food recently that contain what appears to be grain chaff sticking out the kibble. Last month, it was California Natural Herring and Sweet Potato. I returned a sample of the food to the vendor and that sample was determined by Natura (manufacturer of California Natural) to contain barley chaff.

This month, it's Blue Puppy Food - Chicken and Rice. I have not yet contacted the manufacturer about the bits sticking out the kibble but they do look similar to the grain chaff I observed in the California Natural.


What bothers me is this: when a grain ingredient is listed on a dog food label, such as barley or oats, the image that comes to my mind is the part of the grain that a human would eat for breakfast - not the entire grain, including the chaff. If (at least some) pet food companies are using the entire grain (stems, stalks, what-have-you), they should make that clear to consumers. For one thing, the advertising leads us to believe the ingredients are real food, like what we might prepare ourselves at home. For another, some parts of the grain are going to be indigestible - just filler basically - and I'd like to know if I'm paying for filler. And lastly, the chaff clearly does not grind down into dust which is why I find the bits sticking out the kibble. When I imagine these pokey bits moving through the intestines of my 10 pound Chihuahua mix - eek.

So am I just unlucky or is having chaff sticking out the kibble the current trend?

Kennel Club Unveils Worst Idea Ever

The Kennel Club has taken a lot of flack in the UK due to a backwards system of rewarding show dogs who conform to breed standards based on looks rather than health, temperament and functionality as a pet (whether that be as a lap dog, sheepdog, hunting companion, etc.). Yup, the state of purebred dogs is quite a mess thanks to the Kennel Club (and other similar organizations including the American Kennel Club). So what should be done? The Kennel Club has come up with a solution. How does this idea grab you?: Take the group responsible for the mess and give them legal authority to shut down dog breeders if they find you don't comply with their rules. Sounds like a reallyterribleawful idea? Well to be fair, the Kennel Club does say that first, it's going to review its rules. Then they want the power grab. Yeah, it still sounds dreadful to me too. And a dangerous precedent setting case if it goes into effect. Other kennel clubs may try to follow suit. Additional restricting laws may be enacted in future using the Kennel Club's legal powers as precedent.

For breeders of dogs not recognized by the Kennel Club, breeders of mixed breed dogs, breeders who rely on experience, personal judgment and veterinary consultation to determine their breeding decisions - this would be the end of your breeding programs. For pet owners who want any of the previously mentioned dogs, you'd be out of luck. And for anyone who values personal freedoms at home - so sorry.

We all want healthy, happy dogs. Starting from there, we need to address the real issues - the problems brought about by closed stud books, popular sire syndrome and dog shows just to name a few. We do not need more restrictions and definitely not more restrictions imposed by the people who dragged us into this hole. You know the saying, "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging." To which I would add: Do not hand out shovels to the Kennel Club!



A better idea: The Norwegian Kennel Club has a plan which advocates "recommendations, education and cooperation with the breeders and breed clubs. It is our true belief that this is far more beneficial to the dogs' health and welfare than heavy restrictions. The goal in modern dog breeding is that all dogs shall be functionally healthy, with a construction and a mentality typical to the breed, and will live a long, healthy and happy life." Well that sounds pretty good akshually. Read more here.

How Much Melamine is Too Much?

The Washington Post reports that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has decided that melamine is ok in foods in very small amounts:

American consumers first learned of the dangers of melamine when it was found last year in pet food ingredients made in China. The Chinese suppliers of the bulk ingredients had been adding the melamine, officials determined, to boost the apparent protein levels in product testing.

At that time of course, the FDA said that melamine did not belong in foods and any food found to contain melamine was considered adulterated. Now:

The FDA set 2.5 parts per million as the maximum "tolerable" amount of melamine that could be safely consumed in other foods [besides baby formula, which is the exception to the new FDA rule]. [bracketed addition=mine]

Hmm, call me unconvinced as to the safety of daily melamine consumption - in any amount. Some consumers in Thailand seem equally suspicious and question their FDA's handling of the melamine situation:

Public Health Minister Chalerm Yubamrung did little to convince consumers otherwise when, seeking to downplay the milk scandal last Wednesday, he spoke more on the health of trade relations, than of, well, health.

[...]

Minister Chalerm's position was echoed by FDA deputy secretarty-general Narangsan Peerakit, who then evaded further questions from reporters, saying that "the minister's policy is that news reports should not have a negative impact on Chinese products".

That has a familiar ring to it! Those FDAs must share the same playbook.


A newspaper in Taiwan noted that the new US FDA rule on melamine allows significantly higher amounts of the toxin than last year's ruling which came after it was discovered that some feed animals had been fed melamine tainted pet food:

In the case of the US, the FDA said on Friday on its Web site that “in food products other than infant formula, the FDA concludes that levels of melamine and melamine-related compounds below 2.5 parts per million do not raise concerns.”

But Hsieh Yen-yao, vice superintendent of the Koo Foundation Sun Yet-Sen Cancer Center, said the US FDA had set a level of 0.05ppm for pork, chicken, fish and eggs.

That restriction is stated in the FDA’s risk assessment from last May.

Again, hmm. Perhaps the FDA document being referred to is this one but in any case, there appears to be some disagreement over "safe levels" of melamine in foods. Fluid risk assessment to fit current circumstances? I don't know but I tend to agree with Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro (D - CT), chair of the FDA Appropriations Subcommittee:

While other countries throughout the world, including the European Union, are acting to ban melamine-contaminated products from China, the FDA has chosen to establish an acceptable level for melamine in food in an attempt to convince consumers that it is not harmful. Not only is this is an insult to consumers, but it would appear that the FDA is condoning the intentional contamination of foods.

I hope Rep. DeLauro and her subcommittee fund the FDA to advance food safety inspections, especially on imports which have proven to be very risky. Domestically, the Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank is currently shutting down due to lack of funding. The program tested meat, eggs and dairy products for environmental contaminants, pesticides and drugs.

Don't Forget the Calcium, Mom

For a healthy adult dog being fed a home prepared cooked diet, it is important to understand the ratio of Calcium to Phosphorus and to create a proper balance. Opinions vary on what the ideal ratio of Calcium to Phosphorus should be in the canine diet. This veterinary article recommends a Calcium:Phosphorus of 1.2:1 while this one recommends 2:1. The first article also recommends against feeding a home prepared diet. It is from a website which sells its own brand of processed food. The second article is by Dr. Pitcairn whose pioneering book, Dr. Pitcairn's Complete Guide to Natural Health for Dogs and Cats, recommends feeding pets a balanced homemade diet. If you search the web, you will likely find other recommendations on the proper ratio of Calcium to Phosphorus with one thing in common - the amount of Calcium in the diet should be at least slightly higher than the amount of Phosphorus.

If you want to be all scientific-y about the Calcium:Phosphorus in the foods you feed your dog, you can research the Calcium and Phosphorus content of specific foods at the following pages:

• USDA National Nutrient Database pdf file on Calcium content of foods (sorted alphabetically)
• USDA National Nutrient Database pdf file on Phosphorus content of foods (sorted alphabetically)
• This page has a Calcium:Phosphorus chart of various foods
• And here is an explanation of how to calculate elemental Calcium

Calcium supplementation to the home cooked canine diet is an important consideration when diet alone does not provide the proper Calcium:Phosphorus - which is usually the case. If we look at a sample dinner of 1 cup of cooked broccoli, 1 cup of cooked long grain white rice, and 1 cooked chicken thigh (bones removed), we get a Calcium to Phosphorus ratio of approximately 1:3.2 which is not at all balanced for dogs. (Remember, we are aiming for more Calcium than Phosphorus.) Meat is high in Phosphorus and low in Calcium and so an all meat diet is not balanced for dogs either.

At the other end of the spectrum, excess Calcium in the diet may be dangerous for some dogs. Large breed puppies for example are at increased risk for skeletal abnormalities when fed diets high in Calcium. And pregnant bitches who consume too much Calcium may experience eclampsia - a life threatening veterinary emergency. But for a normal adult dog, excess Calcium is probably not a concern.

So, in short, if you're cooking for your dog, you probably need to add a Calcium supplement. (Geez, couldn't I have just said that to begin with?)

By the numbers:

Minimum Daily Requirements for Calcium (Canine)
per National Research Council (NRC) 1985 Guidelines:

(Note: The 2006 NRC guidelines don't have these same numbers by dog's body weight and are calculated differently. I'm just using the 1985 numbers as a reference.)

Growth: 320 mg/kg body weight
Adult: 119 mg/kg body weight

You can do your own math for your dog's weight using this customizable table for converting pounds to kg but here are a few samples:

20# dog needs 1079mg Ca per day (roughly half tsp eggshell powder per day)
50# dog needs 2699mg Ca per day (roughly 1 heaping tsp eggshell powder per day)
60# dog needs 3213mg Ca per day (roughly 1 and 1/2 heaping tsp eggshell powder per day)
70# dog needs 3778mg Ca per day (roughly 2 tsp eggshell powder per day)

***

Personal note: Sorry to have been absent recently but I've been down with a cold and so my online time has been limited. I need more MEs!

Miteful. Maggotful. Beneful.

The Consumerist has got not one, but two reports of maggots found in Purina Beneful dog food during the past few days. The first customer contacted Purina about the problem and was told:

"As soon as our food leaves our factory, it is no longer our responsibility."

Which sounds eerily similar to Purina's response to the mitey Beneful found in VA:

"We're slightly puzzled, but infestation in grain based foods can happen anytime after our products leave our manufacturing facility."

Gross-out alert. Shoot, I should have put that at the beginning huh?

"Renderers take a potential hazard and turn it into something valuable"

How does this image grab you? An open dump truck pulls in to the back dock of your local grocery store. Workers toss in spoiled, stinking meat and trimmings that have been collected from the meat department because they are "inedible" for humans. The dump truck drives around southern Florida under the summer sun, flies buzzing at their leisure while the driver takes a coffee break before heading to the next pickup location. More rotten meat is tossed onto the truck, and more Florida sun beats down upon the stinking pile.

Cut to: You in your kitchen, pouring your pet's food from a bag with photos on it of delicious looking cuts of fresh meat. But where did the meat used to make that pet food actually come from? Yeppers, the dump truck. How do I know?

I came across this story over the weekend when the dump truck overturned and spilled the rotten meat onto the road:

It took hours for Collier County officials and Golden Gate firefighters to clean up the meat, hose down the road and brush the pavement with detergent.

[Note to self: see if they're hiring.]

“The smell was real bad,” Golden Gate fire Lt. John Handley said. “And it made a hazard because the oils in the meat seeped into the road and made it slick.”

[...]

“This is grocery store trimmings,” said Charlie Largay, president of the Miami-based Tallowmasters LLC, the owner of the overturned dump truck. “The material that is out of date or is trimmed off ... is just not thrown away into a dump. It’s recycled. It’s a high-protein product and it goes right back into animal feeds.”

[...]

“After it’s processed it comes out looking like cinnamon and it smells like dry dog food,” he said. “We sell it to the pet manufacturers for their dog food.”

Yum.

The article goes on to try and determine exactly who is responsible for overseeing what in the pet food industry but after getting the runaround, comes up with no definitive answers. Sound familiar? Read the complete article here.

Nutro Pet Foods: Toxic Zinc? Toxic Denial?

For many consumers, pet food company transparency is key to earning trust in their products. Pet owners want honest answers to direct questions - not the runaround "We can't tell you, that's proprietary info" which companies used to get away with prior to the 2007 recalls. Despite this, and in response to a mounting body of complaint evidence against their foods, Nutro's mantra seems to be: deny, deny, deny.

Here's an overview of Nutro complaints and responses:

A July 2007 story about an owner who requested vet bill reimbursement from Nutro after her dog (who was fed Nutro) died. Nutro denied the claim.

ConsumerAffairs.com wondered if there is any link between reports of sick/dead pets who ate Nutro foods and the foods themselves in a series of articles starting April 18, 2008, with updates on June 23 and August 6, 2008. In addition, the site has been collecting ongoing consumer experiences with Nutro foods, many of which describe pets who became ill while eating Nutro products but recovered after the owner switched to a different brand.

On August 14, 2008 Pet Food Products Safety Alliance (PFPSA) posted an update detailing independent lab test results they received on Nutro foods which reveal excess copper and zinc.
Their lab results are available in pdf here and here.

Nutro has responded to Consumer Affairs postings of pet illness/death and PFPSA's test results on their website. They basically state that all the food is fine, never has been a problem and they have lab test results to prove it. Notably absent: the lab test results which prove it. Hmm.

PFPSA responds to Nutro's website posting and asks concerned pet owners to compare the complaints posted at Consumer Affairs with the symptoms of zinc toxicity and decide if they are consistent.

As pet owners, all of us need to form our own opinions based on the facts as we can obtain them. It's challenging enough to filter out possible bias on both sides so I for one am grateful to PFSPA for posting their independent lab test results. This gives me something solid to examine which I can consider to be at least somewhat free of bias. Nutro, if you have independent lab test results which document that your foods do not contain excess copper and zinc, I know many of us would love to see them. Got a scanner?

Treats on the Internets

Recommended reading from around the Wide World of Web:


Smart Dogs evaluates the evaluators when it comes to testing rescue dogs with resource guarding issues:

The testers waited until the dog was busy eating the food, then began to poke annoyingly at its face with a fake hand on a stick.

This is a good piece - read the full post here.

***

Terrierman offers a hunter's perspective on why Sarah Palin's promotion of wolf killing in Alaska has nothing to do with hunting.

***

As I mentioned a few days ago, Purina Beneful dog foods were pulled from the shelves at a VA store due to grain mite contamination. Yesterday, Asbury Park Press had a Q & A feature with a Vet who offers an opinion on how dog food might become contaminated with grain mites:

For the grain mites to be so numerous, it makes me wonder how old the pet food you purchased was. I also wonder about the hygiene at the point of manufacture and the quality of the ingredients that could have come from heaven knows where, giving you even more reason to purchase ingredients yourself and make your own dog food.

***

A Daily Kos diary talks about people dumping an increased number of pets at the side of rural roads in Appalachia during the economic slide.

***

This article explains how a dysplastic Golden Retriever was treated with an injection of his own stem cells and the hope this treatment may offer other animals.

Cranky Dog Bloggers for Obama

A group of pet owners are blogging on the US Presidential race at Bark Obama! This is not a pet blog but rather a political blog written by people who love pets. You've been warned.
And: welcome!

One More Time for Old Times' Sake

Mars Petcare US is (again) recalling food due to Salmonella concerns. Affected brands include Pedigree, Ol' Roy, and Pet Pride. I guess we're supposed to be thankful that they told us about the Salmonella at all, even if it was on a Friday night, during a hurricane, and the problem has been going on for some time already.

***

Purina Beneful dog food has been pulled from the shelves of a pet supply store in Virginia due to contamination with grain mites. Predictably, Purina is trying to plant the idea that the infestation occurred after the food left their facility. It's the same old pet food corporation song and dance: deny first, discover truth later (or never, as the case may be). Hey Purina: give the American consumer a little credit here. We can comprehend that a problem like grain mites might occur with a grain based pet food product, that a company can deal with it responsibly and that future products can be deemed safe. What really pisses us off is when companies immediately respond to any and every question with We know nuffing. Again.

***

And in the oldie but goodie department, we have the Chinese adulterating food with melamine in order to try and boost profits (again). Unlike last year, when melamine tainted ingredients from China killed and sickened thousands of pets, the victims this time are infants and the tainted food is baby formula. Nice.

Got Any Old Pet Food That Fell Behind the Lazy Susan?

The website Pet Food Recall Facts is putting out a call for unopened canned/pouches of old pet food for testing:

If any pet owners have unopened samples of pet food manufactured prior to the end of December 2006, and would be willing to make them available for testing, please contact me. The samples I’m interested in would be store brands with expiration dates of “09” for canned food and “08” for pouches. I’m interested in the “loaf” style of pet food that does not list gluten as an ingredient. If anyone has such samples available for testing, I would most sincerely appreciate your making them available. Personal information of those making samples available will be held in the strictest confidence.

If you are interested in helping or learning more, visit their website.

Michigan "Pet Sellers" May Be Investigated by the FBI

The AKC alerts us to a proposed pet ordinance in Michigan - HB 6395 - that sounds a leetle scary:

If adopted, HB 6395 would:
Define anyone who sells or offers for sale more than two dogs per year, or more than one litter of dogs per year, as a "petseller."

Mandate that those who qualify as pet sellers to acquire an annual petseller license from their county animal control shelter at a cost of $200/year.

Require an applicant for a pet seller license to submit his or her fingerprints with a license application for a criminal history and FBI background check.

Give discretion to county animal control shelters to deny applications for pet seller licenses, regardless of outcome of background investigation.

If you are a Michigan resident, get your Representative's contact info and call/snail mail/fax a letter indicating your opposition to this bill.