Articles of Interest & News

 

 

Service Dog Discrimination Continues in Texas
June 17, 2009 by Jan Hoadley

In a previous article it was revealed the discrimination involving a trained service dog owned by Miss Heather Jones, a student in the Killeen Independent School District. While this reporter was told that the handler and her dog were in school there was more that was not said. Unfortunately this paints a much different view of cooperation by the Killeen ISD to comply with the ADA act which is supposed to provide protection from discrimination of all with disabilities. 

While school officials assure the callers and media that they are working to resolve the issue the means of resolution involves more discrimination. When Miss Jones had multiple seizures in class a month ago the teachers did not recognize it, did not call for an ambulance and informed her mother to come get her but did not say that she was having seizures. 

The school district claimed initially there was no other service dogs in the district. They did not mention the golden retriever therapy dog that is in a special needs classroom. The school district has in action painted a much different and more threatening picture than what they are saying in words. Indeed the school board itself did not know it was not resolved until yesterday.

The "experience in school was horrifying" Heather's mother Andrea said. Greeted by the principle, Amy Foster and a police officer she thought it was to explain to the other children that Della was a working service dog and they were not to play with or distract her. Instead they stepped into a long hall to find eight police officers waiting, falling in behind them as they walked down the hallway. Why does a school district need to employ these tactics and intimidation? They were then blindsided with a meeting, without their attorney present and a form placed before Andrea to sign. She was told whether she signed it or not it was in effect. 

 

Top of page

 

Service Dog Discrimination in Killeen Texas
June 16, 2009 by Jan Hoadley


The Rottweiler is a capable service dog and can be certified in many service capacities. Neither they nor their handler may be discriminated against. (Dog is not Della)

When Heather Jones had multiple seizures at school the Killeen (TX) Independent School District did not call emergency services but did call her mother to pick her up. Heather was in the critical care ward at Kings Daughters Hospital for two days and during that time her certified service dog slept in bed with her. Della, her service dog, reliably alerted hospital staff before Heather would have a seizure.

Due to the seriousness of the situation, when released from the hospital Della was taken to school activities under the protection of the Texas Human Resources code Section 121 that provides protection for the disabled and their service animals. The Eastern Hills Middle School and Killeen ISD refused to allow the service dog in, denying Heather participating in cheerleading, graduation or the graduation dance.

This is something that happens one time - there is no way to give that back. The reason for denying access was discrimination of another kind. Della, a certified service dog, is a Rottweiler. She has passed all training and certification, and copies of that documentation was provided to the school. At a hearing on June 4th it was provided again but the school district wanted more time to review it, with a determination made by June 12, prior to Heather starting summer school.

At the June 12 hearing the district acknowledged that the certification was valid. The district stated on today in a statement from Leslie Gilmore that she could say the student was in school today with the dog today. Ms. Gilmore was on the way to a meeting on the issue.

However, previous attempts to work with the district have been unsatisfactory. The district stated "If Heather is uncomfortable attending summer school without Della..." which indicates that a service dog is but an accessory instead of a certified medical assistant, albeit a 4 legged one. Indeed a statement was made, according to the family's attorney, "if this was a poodle we wouldn't be here." Thus it was not a service dog but the type of service dog at issue.

 

Top of page

 

A Portrait of Heidi
By Gemma Tamas
May 2008

Heidi, who disrupted, inspired and transformed my life. The first time we met, I must admit, I had mixed feelings about her. She was beautiful to look at; her lustrous jet-black hair was short and straight, her deep brown eyes sparkled with intelligence. But great intensity and strong will lurked behind it. 

Heidi! I met her every day and without realizing it, she found her way into my heart. It was all her doing! For some reason she chose me to be her friend. When we parted, she looked sad. Her eyes filled with disappointment until our next meet, when she did go out of her way to please me. I became under her spell, there was no way-out to escape from it.

Heidi! The name didn’t fit her; it sounded too gentle for such a head-strong character. I decided to look into the matter and to my surprise, I found that Heidi meant cheerful and noble. It certainly described her. During this process, I discovered Heidi was a German name and I knew her ancestors came from Germany. What a unique way to express character, origin, even looks by giving the proper name to someone, I thought. It was the beginning of something that I would never had dreamed of. I started a names’ search. By the time I finished sorting them, arranging them alphabetically by meanings and by countries, I collected over three thousand names. Without realizing what I have done, it molded into a book, an over three hundred-page book. Since I went so far, my next step was to find an artist, Akiko, who’s original drawings, by their artistic value, placed the book in a different category from being only a book of names. 

Heidi! It’s been two years we live together, Heidi and I. Since she came into my life, my life is not mine anymore. Whatever I do, I do it with her, wherever I go, we go together. Whatever I eat, she eats the same. She sleeps in my bed to keep me warm, chasing away my nightmares during the night. 

Heidi! Her dislike towards a person became my own, her fondness for someone transferred to be mine. I trust her intuitions, value them in every respect. When she viciously complained about a men I knew, she was right. I found out the men was a shifty character, not worthy of my trust. I gave up my friends, who didn’t like her, gave up my free time to be with her. I didn’t spend money on myself but willingly paid for her medications and vitamins, for her every little whim she desired. When she broke her legs, I carried her in and out from the house, in and out from the car until her legs healed. When she hurt me from sheer exuberance once her casts were off, the dozen stitches the doctor gave me, only left marks on my arms, our friendship didn’t scar by it. 

Heidi! When I am sad, she feels for me. Mopping and sighing with my sorrow, her eyes turn sad, filled with worries. When I am happy, she joins in my happiness. Then she is bouncing around with joy, her steps lively with my own. In the mornings, after spending hours at my desk, she takes me away for a walk, and rejuvenates me with her play. We walk the fields and meadows together, singing and chasing butterflies in our path. We are climbing high mountains and on our way looking down the green valleys and rivers below. 

Heidi, who disrupted, inspired, and transformed my life. My companion, my best friend, my dog. Heidi was an abused dog. She was rescued and I adopted her or I should say she adopted me when she was a year old. Since she came to my life, my life had changed. Now, she is seven years old and she has vitiligo, a rare but benign disease. Because of that, she looks like a dog from outer space, but I love her dearly. 

 

Top of page

 

ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISM IS ALIVE AND WELL IN THE UNITED STATES
By Sylvia Panetta

The September 11, 2001 World Trade Center / Pentagon / demise-of-passengers-on-four-American-jetliners tragedy has brought the word "terrorism " out to the forefront of media all over the world.

The American Heritage School Dictionary defines terrorism as "The use of terror, violence and intimidation to frighten people into submission". What the dictionary does not elaborate on is that there are various "causes" for which groups of terrorists and their cells become active. One of these causes is animal rights.

I would like to take this opportunity to briefly discuss the animal rights mentality and then describe how a few of these fanatics created havoc with my once-peaceful life.

The Animal Rights Agenda (which lists twelve goals for the abolishment of our 
relationship and involvement with animals) appeared originally in Animals' Agenda magazine in November, 1987, and was reprinted in The Hijacking of the Humane Movement: Animal Extremism by Rod and Patti Strand [*] (Doral Publishing -1993). They are taken in part as follows:

1. We are firmly committed to the eventual abolition by law of animal research, and call for an immediate prohibition of painful experiments and tests.

2. The use of animals for cosmetics and household product testing, tobacco and alcohol testing, psychological testing, classroom demonstrations and dissection, and in weapons development or other warfare programs must be outlawed immediately.

3. We encourage vegetarianism/or ethical, ecological, and health reasons.

4. Steps should be taken to begin phasing out intensive confinement systems of livestock production, also called factory farming, which causes severe physical and psychological suffering for the animals kept in overcrowded and unnatural conditions.

5. The use of herbicides, pesticides, and other toxic agricultural chemicals should be phased out.

6. Responsibility for enforcement of animal welfare legislation must be transferred from the Department of Agriculture to an agency created for the purpose of protecting animals and the environment.

7. Commercial trapping and fur ranching should be eliminated.

8. Hunting, trapping, and fishing for sport should be prohibited.

9. Internationally, steps should be taken by the US government to prevent further destruction of rain forests.

10. We strongly discourage any further breeding of companion animals, including pedigreed or purebred dogs and cats.

11. We call for an end to the use of animals in entertainment and sports such as dog racing, dog and cock fighting, fox hunting, hare coursing, rodeos, circuses, and other spectacles and a critical reappraisal of the use of animals in quasi-educational institutions such as zoos and aquariums.

12. Advances in biotechnology are posing a threat to the integrity of species, which may ultimately reduce all living beings to the level of patentable commodities.

Although their desired results call for the outlawing and removal of our personal and professional relationship with animals, the one that we must concern ourselves with for the moment is the statement that is listed as:

"10. We strongly discourage any further breeding of companion animals, including pedigreed or purebred dogs and cats."

The strategy for which these fanatics pursue the destruction of dog breeders in the United States is very simple. Most people, when purchasing purebred dogs, want the accompanying registration papers.

Remember, there are three major reasons that papers are required:

(I) to show the dog in registry sanctioned shows

(2) to register the offspring of the registered PARENTS

(3) personal prestige

Although there are many registry organizations in the United States, I will discuss the American Kennel Club (AKC), for which my dogs are registered. Somewhere in their list of regulations, they have a rule that states if anyone is convicted in a court of law of being guilty of "animal cruelty", their privileges are automatically revoked. This means that that particular breeder is no longer allowed to, among other things, register their dogs or any progeny that are produced.

The answer to the animal rights activists' prayers. VOILA!

This makes the rest simplified for these extremists. They merely have to choose their next victim and through various methods, including, but not limited to, total fabrications, distortions, and altered photographs and video tapes, gain a victory by succeeding in obtaining a court conviction.

The breeders are usually too traumatized or are unable to fight back due to the inability to retain legal representation. Most attorneys do not perceive this type of incident as being serious and worthwhile, or they will charge extremely high fees of which the victim is unable to afford. And those lawyers that do accept the challenge, usually are not familiar with animals or animal law .The representation of their client is weak.

I became one of those victims. ..and appropriately nicknamed the "Poster Child of the Animal Rights Movement" on one of the Internet website forums. Read on, and you will understand why. Please keep in mind what I stated above. The AKC will revoke privileges if you are convicted of animal cruelty. The operative word is "animal". ..it doesn't have to be a breeding dog.

I will capsulize the incidents:

1992: (February) A neighbor, new at being an animal activist, had a personal grudge against me. In trying to make a name for herself, she filed a complaint with the police stating that one of my aged horses (40 years old) was being starved and was dying. At a ratio of three years to one, she was 120 years old in human years. The average lifespan of a horse is 25 years.

Allow me, please, to set the scene. I had six horses at the time, five of which I had rescued from an auction, doomed to go to the slaughterhouse. They were all healthy. ..and roamed a ten acre pasture. They were free-fed hay from a 200 pound round bale, given grain daily and had access to water 24 hours a day.

Although I live on a small, quiet country road, three police cars responded to her complaint, two of which formed a road block! I was verbally abused, temporarily held against my will without an arrest warrant, threatened with arrest, and was victim to an illegal search of my property .

Her veterinarian was called to the scene. He examined the horse and advised the police she was fine -just a very old senior citizen. They left without the courtesy of an apology.

The woman was advised by my attorney to cease the harassment.

1995: (May) Knowing she had been warned to stay away, she solicited another activist that lived three hours from here to come here and participate in her place. He went to their activist friends from an SPCA from another county with a totally fabricated written complaint and altered and phony photographs. The SPCA obtained a search warrant and seized my only horse. (They also did an illegal search of the dogs, even though the judge crossed it OFF the search warrant application, and then foolishly admitted in writing that they did so.)

Unfortunately, it didn't work out as they planned because I came out with my camera and took pictures of the horse before they took her away. Also, my veterinarian drove 140 miles to their facility to examine the horse. Two things they didn't count on to dispel their claims.

The animal cruelty charges were dismissed in the beginning at the arraignment level. The case never went to trial.

1997: (May) I caught the disgruntled neighbor/activist in the field with my horse! She ran as fast as she could to get to her vehicle and drove away.

I pressed charges of TRESPASSING against her.

1998: (April 17) I was falsely arrested for animal cruelty, physically assaulted twice, sexually assaulted (touched inappropriately), and tortured by two NYS troopers (police). I sustained serious injuries, including spinal injuries (cord compression, the cal sac compression with one level being totally cut off, and nerve root compression) which requires six operations with possible steel plate insertion. I also need bowel surgery, knee surgery and wrist surgery .

The complaint was again filed by the activist that lived three hours away. It was totally fabricated, including his personal resume, as in 1995. This time, not only did he use the horse to establish "probable cause" to get a search warrant for the horse, he also fabricated a story about the dogs, even though he never saw any of my dogs!

1998: (April 18) The trooper submitted false information to obtain a search warrant. In doing so, many people, including the SPCA animal activist veterinarian, arrived to execute the warrant. (This happened to be the same veterinarian that lied in the 1995 case). They brought in a deadly airborne virus which over a period of eighteen months, killed off almost all of my breeding stock, including many European imports and several litters of puppies. I lost an irreplaceable genetic pool that I developed over many years. The financial loss was a few hundred thousand dollars.

The horse was not seized. No dogs were seized.

1998: (July 17/18) During the late evening/early morning hours, a person or persons trespassed and penetrated my property and began liberating and stealing my dogs. I interrupted the theft, although I wasn't aware there were people out there. Four dogs, however, were stolen.

NOTE: The April 17, 1998 charge of animal cruelty was again dismissed at the arraignment level never went to trial.

In my quest for justice, as the plaintiff, I then proceeded to start a new trial in Federal Court. On July 6, 2001, NYS Trooper Thomas Crowley was found guilty of false arrest. The charges of excessive force, submitting false information to obtain a search warrant and malicious prosecution were dropped. I am still in a state of shock regarding the verdict.

I continue to pursue it in hopes an investigation will be initiated regarding the incident itself as well as the perjury at the Federal trial. If they proceed with an honest investigation, I presume there will be stiff penalties. ..hopefully jail sentences.

I will never recover from what has been done to me. But perhaps reiterating the experience will be enough to make you think twice about the animal rights movement and how it can effect you.

Please do not think it could never happen to you. You must be prepared. Always have a camera or camcorder handy with fresh batteries and film. You must be able to prove what your animals looked like, because their real appearance and what you will be accused of are two entirely different descriptions.

You are not immune to terrorism. Terrorism has no boundaries.

September 11, 2001 proved that.

-------------------

[*] Patti Strand is the Director of the National Animal Interest Alliance. The website address is http://www.naiaonline.org The NAIA is an educational organization concerned with animal welfare issues and provides balancing information regarding animal rights activities. It would be worthwhile for you to spend some time and peruse the site. You may also be interested in joining their ANIMAL TALK forum, an information discussion board.

@copyright spanetta September 2001

 

Top of page

 

Animal Rights = Bloody Murder!
New York Tail Docking Ban Will Murder Thousands Of Dogs That Can't Comply
by JOHN YATES
This article is archived at American Sporting Dog Alliance
Website: www.americansportingdogalliance.org
Email: asda@csonline.net

ALBANY, NY - Legislation to criminalize docking puppies' tails is a case study in mercy - animal rights style! It will result in tens of thousands of dead dogs in the first year alone, because there will be no way to allow them to stay alive in the face of criminal charges against anyone who owns them. 

The animal rights movement is all about killing animals, either literally right now or gradually, through attrition by sterilization. Every piece of animal rights legislation boils down to dead dogs, which groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals call mercy killings. PETA, which butchers about 90-percent of the dogs that enter its "shelter" in Norfolk, VA, believes that dogs are better off dead than exploited and enslaved by loving homes.

The Humane Society of the United States uses gentler rhetoric, but also creates and supports model legislation that will result in the death of thousands of animals, such as the proposed New York tail docking ban, and supports animal shelter policies that directly result in millions of unnecessary deaths by euthanasia.

The New York legislation is perhaps the clearest illustration yet of the true goals of HSUS and the rest of the animal rights movement.

AB 7218, which is before the Assembly Agriculture Committee, says that anyone who docks a puppy's tail, or has someone else perform the procedure, is guilty of a criminal misdemeanor punishable by a $500 fine. Not even veterinarians would be allowed to dock a dog's tail, except to save its life or for a health emergency.

The legislation also enables any New York animal rights group to act as vigilantes, hunt down violators, and petition the court to prosecute someone whose dog has a docked tail.

In addition, anyone who shows or exhibits a dog with a docked tail, or even attends a show or exhibition where dogs with docked tails are present, is guilty of a misdemeanor and faces a $500 fine.

Those provisions translate directly into dead dogs, by the truckload.

Here's how:

Probably a few million dogs now live in New York that already have docked tails. These dogs are from some of the most popular breeds in America, including all of the spaniels, most terriers, many herding breeds, almost all of the Continental pointing breeds, many miniature and small breeds of companion dogs, and popular companion and protection dogs such as rottweilers and doberman pinschers.

While existing dogs would be grandfathered, if they are certified as having had their tails docked before August 1, 2009, the fact is that most people who own these dogs will not know about the new law, will procrastinate, won't be able to afford a visit to their veterinarian for certification, or simply will forget about it.

Animal rights activists will blame these people for being irresponsible, but the fact is that the dogs will pay the price. They will be killed, and the reason they will be killed is because animal rights fanatics supported a law that will cause their deaths. The owners won't be able to prove the procedure was done before August 1, and will not be able to pay a continual stream of $500 fines. The result will be euthanasia or abandonment.

Some people might think that these dogs simply will be turned over to an animal shelter or rescue group. That won't happen, because animal shelters and rescue groups also could not legally possess a dog with a docked tail.

Nor could they find them adoptive or foster homes, because those people would be guilty of a criminal act merely by possessing the dog.

It goes far deeper.

Animal shelters would have no idea who docked the tails (or when it was done) of stray dogs that are picked up or turned in, dogs that are seized from their owners because of animal cruelty allegations, or dogs that are abandoned. There would be no choice except to kill these dogs, because they could never be legal.

More dead dogs would result because puppies in several breeds (such as Brittanys and Australian shepherds) sometimes are born with naturally short tails. In a mature dog, these natural "docks" look almost identical to dogs whose tails were surgically docked as puppies. They, too, would have to be killed.

Other dogs would lose part of their tails through injuries. If tails are broken by being accidentally slammed in a door, stepped on as puppies, bitten by other dogs, or struck by heavy objects such as falling tree limbs, the part of the tail above the break sometimes atrophies and falls off, creating the false appearance of a cut off tail (sometimes there is even raw or sore flesh at the point of the break for a couple of weeks). Other puppies have the tips of their tails broken off in the mother's uterus.

More dead dogs would result from people who move to New York from other states, and bring their pets with them. They wouldn't know about the New York law, and would be faced with a painful choice when they found out. They would have to either leave New York, or kill their beloved pet.

What about people who visit New York, or just pass through the state, and bring their dogs? If their dogs have docked tails, they would technically be in violation of the law if they didn't have certification that the procedure was done prior to August 1, 2009. Almost no one would have this certification, as it is not required in other states, and the animal rights vigilantes would have a field day.

If all of those scenarios are added up, the result would be a veritable mountain of canine corpses and broken hearts.

This legislation also would have a human impact. It would destroy dog shows, field trials and competitive events in New York, including the famed Westminster dog show.

It also would destroy the businesses of several professional trainers and handlers, and ruin some of the finest breeding programs for purebred dogs in America.

It would cost the economy of New York millions of dollars in lost revenues a year, and the loss of hundreds of jobs.

It also would mean that New Yorkers no longer would have access to dogs from the nation's best bloodlines, which means New Yorkers would not be able to improve the genetics of many breeds of dogs in the state. The impact would be that New Yorkers would be forced to buy puppies that are inferior in terms of genetic soundness, health, utility and temperament. 

AB 7218 makes no sense at all from any perspective. 

Ironically, the same animal rights fanatics who say that tail docking is cruel disfigurement, probably also circumcise their own male children, pierce the ears of their own daughters, cover their own bodies with tattoos, augment their breasts, tuck their tummies and lift their faces through "vanity" surgical procedures. In contrast to what people routinely do to their own bodies, docking the tails of young puppies is an almost completely safe and almost painless procedure. Puppies experience a feeling of a light pinch for a few seconds.

We don't believe for a moment that the leaders of HSUS and PETA think tail docking is cruel. What they really want is to kill more dogs.

Here is a link to the text of the bill: http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A07218&sh=t\

The American Sporting Dog Alliance is urging all New Yorkers who truly care about dogs to immediately contact members of the Assembly Agriculture Committee to express strong opposition to AB 7218. Letters and faxes are best, followed by phone calls and emails. A combination of two or more is ideal. Please contact as many members of the committee as possible, as they all represent every New Yorker in this capacity.


Here is contact information for committee members:

Assemblyman William Magee, Chairman
LOB 828, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4807
MageeW@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Marc S. Alessi
LOB 419, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5294
AlessiM@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman George Amedore
LOB 426, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5197
AmedoreG@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Michael Benedetto
LOB 919, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5296
BenedeM@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Marc W. Butler
LOB 318, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5393
ButlerM@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Clifford W. Crouch
LOB 450, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5741
CrouchC@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblywoman Francine DelMonte
LOB 553, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5284
DelMonF@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblywoman RoAnn M. Destito
LOB 621, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5454
DestitR@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Gary D. Finch
LOB 320, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5878
FinchG@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Tim Gordon
LOB 529,Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5777
GordonT@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblywoman Aileen M. Gunther
LOB 435,Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5355
GuntheA@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Stephen Hawley
Room 531 LOB,Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5811
HawleyS@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton
LOB 555, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5444
LiftonB@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Peter D. Lopez 
LOB 429, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5363
LopezP@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Alan Maisel
528 LOB,Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5211
MaiselA@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblywoman Margaret M. Markey
LOB 654, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4755
MarkeyM@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman John J. McEneny
LOB 648, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4178
McEnenJ@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Bob Reilly
LOB 452, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5931
ReillyR@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Peter M. Rivera
LOB 826, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5102
RiveraP@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblywoman Linda B. Rosenthal
821 LOB,Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5802
RosentL@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblywoman Addie J. Russell
LOB 602,Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5545
RussellA@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Frank K. Skartados
LOB 545, Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5762
SkartadosF@assembly.state.ny.us

Assemblyman Al Stirpe
Room 430, Legislative Office Building
Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4505
StirpeA@assembly.state.ny.us

The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, breeders and professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are used for hunting. We also welcome people who work with other breeds, as legislative issues affect all of us. We are a grassroots movement working to protect the rights of dog owners, and to assure that the traditional relationships between dogs and humans maintains its rightful place in American society and life. We will not compromise on any legislation that takes away the fundamental constitutional rights of dog owners, or which reduces us to second-class citizens. The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs your help so that we can continue to work to protect the rights of dog owners. Your membership, participation and support are truly essential to the success of our mission. We are funded solely by your donations in order to maintain strict independence.

Please visit us on the web at http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org . Our email is asda@csonline.net

PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS

The American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org
Please Join Us 

 

Top of page

 

Why Good Dogs Go Bad
Study Shows Flaws in Aggressive Dog Disciplining
From ABCNews.com: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/DyeHard/story?id=6949062&page=1
OPINION By LEE DYE
Feb. 25, 2009

Study Shows 'Confrontational' Training Only Makes Your Pooch More Aggressive.
A police handler demonstrates an attack situation with a German shepherd dog during a tour by HRH Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall at the Metropolitan Police Dog Training Centre, Jan. 29, 2009, in Keston, London. A new study shows that owners who are too aggressive in training their dogs will only make their dogs more aggressive. (Chris Jackson/Getty Images)

People who are overly zealous in disciplining their dogs will probably make the animals even more aggressive, not less, according to a new study by veterinarians at the University of Pennsylvania.

The study involved 140 persons who turned to the animal behavior experts at Penn because their dogs needed help. The findings are consistent with other studies showing that discipline may not be the best way to correct an errant pet's attitude, but some of the statistics are a little surprising.

It's not startling to learn that kicking a bad dog will probably make him or her angry and likely to bite, but it turns out that even yelling "no" can have the opposite of the desired effect.

"This study highlights the risk of dominance-based training, which has been made popular by TV, books and punishment-based training advocates," said Meghan Herron, lead author of the study, published in the current issue of Applied Animal Behavior Science. "These techniques are fear-eliciting and may lead to owner-directed aggression."

In other words, if you kick your dog because he tried to bite you, he might end up owning your foot.

The study involved dogs that were so problematical that their owners were willing to seek professional help. A high percentage of the dogs became even more aggressive when they were kicked (43 percent), or the owner growled at the dog (41 percent), or something was physically removed from the dog's mouth (39 percent), or the dog was rolled onto its back and held down (31 percent.)

In many cases it didn't take much to make the pooch more agitated. The researchers found that 30 percent of the dogs became more aggressive when they were "stared down" by the owner. That's defined in the study as "stare at dog until he/she looks away." Only 13 of the owners admitted they actually "growled" at their dog, and nine of those dogs (41 percent) "responded aggressively."

 

Top of page

 

The Long Island Working Rottweilers ~ A Retrospective
By Steve Wolfson

In 1989, a group of Rottweiler enthusiasts and I were displeased with our local and national Rottweiler clubs’ indifference towards the working aspect of the breed. The emphasis for those clubs was on conformation, not performance. We wanted more than fulfillment in the conformation venue; we sought a Schutzhund/Performance orientation. To my surprise, our small group was not alone in our sentiments; we had many others in the Long Island, New York area that felt the same. We were committed to the idea of starting a working club dedicated to the performance aspect of the Rottweiler and initiated the Long Island Working Rottweilers. Our club had a starting roster of 50 dedicated members with me as president and Mike Prisco as training director.

At that time, the United States Rottweiler Club was offering the direction we were seeking, but was relatively unknown here on the east coast. So in 1990, when the USRC held its national show in Pennsylvania, hosted by the Berksiana Rottweiler Club, we eagerly attended.

To us, the Berksiana show was quite exciting and encompassed the working aspect we wanted to embrace. This European style show was quite different to what we were accustomed. All entries were critiqued and awarded a conformation rating by the judge. It had 300 entries, and I believe 20 entries for the ZTP! The judges chosen were from the ADRK, Kurt Lohnert and Juergen Wullf, both specialists in the Rottweiler.

The following year, my good friend Bill Alexander conducted the first American Rottweiler Verein national show on the east coast. That too had over 300 entries and about 10 entries for the Ztp. The judge for that show was retired ADRK judge George Erschinger. We also attended the first Housatonic Rottweiler Club sanctioning show in Connecticut with my good friend Dietrich Neumahr as president.

After attending those exhilarating shows, we were convinced that this was the right path to chose. We joined the USRC in 1992 and held our first sanctioning show that same year. The judges for our first club event were Volker Czechowski and Felicia Luburich. Not surprisingly, we had a super entry of 60 for our sanctioning show, which I believe is an outstanding entry for an opening event.

For our first USRC select event, we decided upon Carla Lensi as our judge. She had international recognition in the breed and was noted for her detailed judgments. This first show garnered 110 entries and was attended by over 300 spectators from the entire New York Metro area. To the Long Island Working Rottweilers credit, our other shows had on average 129 entries, aggressive spectatorship (in addition to the owners of the entries) and an average of 5 ZTP entries per show. In our 7 year membership with the USRC, and despite never hosting a national event, our club had approximately 900 entries pass through our portal, 30 ZTP’s, 1 breed symposium and 2 conformation seminars.

In 1998, we conducted a double event we were very proud of, “How to Judge the Rottweiler in Conformation and Gait”, and the USRC North East Regional Sieger Show. The lecture was conducted by Carla Lensi, our judge for the regional show, and was held at the Marriott hotel. It was an educational super event. The lecture included breakfast and lunch. It was accredited by the USRC (for those that chose to become a conformation judge) and attended by 50 people! The show was noteworthy. Although it was adjudicated by our one judge, Carla Lensi, it had a spectacular entry of 167 with spectators three people thick around the ring! Despite it not being a national, it had a generous entry in the working dog classes, 12 working dogs and 10 working bitches, and drew entries from Canada, the entire Eastern Seaboard, the Southeast and California. A great “thank you” must go to the sponsor for all our shows: the Iams Co. Their generosity and financial help made all of our shows and events successful.

There were many reasons for the success for our events and conformation shows. For one, they had drama and excitement. The winners were not predictable. If you won, or placed it was on the merits of your dog; the shows contained absolutely no politics! Secondly, they ran on time and were conducted in an orderly manner with strong supervision from the club. Thirdly, all our events were profitable without extracting additional unnecessary money from the participants. We went to great lengths to make all feel they had an honest chance at winning and would want to come back to enjoy the competition the following year. Additionally, the ring was the right size for shows of this style, 35 meters by 50 meters. There was no crowding. All handlers had ample space to move about and present their dogs. The judge also had ample perspective to assess the dog’s locomotion. We also strongly believed that our events should contain a venue to learn and grow in our knowledge about the Rottweiler. Therefore, we held numerous seminars and a symposium. Even though it is no longer a club, the Long Island Working Rottweilers maintains a respectable record and reputation to this day!

Included in this retrospective are photos taken by the late Doug Loving from those great shows. These photos contain friends and people, past and present. All, in their own way, had an influence on our breed here in the US. Photos are numbered below each picture. Corresponding explanations are at the end of this article.


1
2

3
4
5

6
7
8

9
10
11

12
13
14


1.Jane Hobson, Gabrielle Wodak
2.Gary Ramis & friends, Gabrielle Wodak
3.The late Mark Schwartz, Gabrielle Wodak
4.Lynne Panno, Roger Vanderyken
5.Kris Boucher, Roger Vanderyken
6.Frank Romano, Gabrielle Wodak
7.G&M Schneider, Lori Rizzitano, Roger Vanderyken 
8. The late Joe Weber, Roger Vanderyken
9. Mike & Mimi Prisco, Roger Vanderyken
10. Dietrich Neumahr, Roger Vanderyken
11. Bill Alexander, Merillio Duran, Roger Vanderyken
12. Ed Dupont, Dr. Otto Schimpf
13. Joe Allegrini, Dr. Otto Schimpf
14. John Dubarton, Dr. Otto Schimpf

 

Top of page

 

Rottweilers are happy haulers for Spencer woman
By Steve Huffman
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
The Salisbury Post


Penny, a trained Rottweiler, pulls Rebecca Pless around on a small cart in Spencer. Photo by Jon C. Lakey, Salisbury Post.



Penny, a trained Rottweiler, pulls Rebecca Pless around on a small cart in Spencer. Photo by Jon C. Lakey, Salisbury Post.

Penny, a trained Rottweiler, pulls Rebecca Pless around on a small cart in Spencer. Photo by Jon C. Lakey, Salisbury Post.


SPENCER — It was pushing 50 degrees one afternoon last week and Rebecca Pless and Penny, her 4-year-old Rottweiler, were out for a stroll.

Or a ride, depending upon one's point of view.

"I'm just curious," asked a motorist who stopped to inquire about the assemblage, "do you do that for exercise?"

Pless gave Penny a pat before answering.

"That and fun," she replied.

Penny (and sometimes Penny's son, Milton) can often be seen traversing the streets of Spencer with Pless in tow. They travel from their home on Alexander Street, covering a half-mile or so to Park Plaza where they make a loop before heading back.

The contraption that Penny pulls and Pless rides is a sulky, a two-wheeled carriage with a single seat. It's the type often used in harness racing.

Pless got the sulky in early January. Already, she and her dogs have become a hit around Spencer, something of local celebrities.

After all, when was the last time you saw a Rottweiler pulling a carriage?

Pless said residents often stop her to ask about her sulky and her dogs, both of which she's happy to discuss.

"You're just a brilliant dog, aren't you, PoPo?" Pless said, kneeling and using her pet's pet name as she lavished the canine with kisses.

Pulling the sulky isn't hard on the dogs, Pless said, nor do the animals consider it punishment.

Quite the contrary, she said, they look forward to their around-town jaunts.

Pless said Rottweilers — bruisers of dogs that can weigh as much as 100 pounds — were bred to pull wagons and do similar tasks.

Pless said that in Germany where they were first bred, Rottweilers were known as "the butcher's dog." She said the dogs would herd sheep and cattle on the way to market.

After the sheep or other animals were sold, the butcher would tie the money he'd earned around the neck of his Rottweiler for the journey home. Rottweilers have an intimidating look and thieves were reluctant to try and steal the money.

Pless, 50, has an interesting background. She's a Kannapolis native who graduated from A.L. Brown in 1977. For 10 years she worked as a stewardess for Piedmont Airlines, then U.S. Air.

Nowadays, she works part time, managing rental property for her father. Pless' husband, Randy, is a carpenter and the couple is remodeling a house across the street from where they live.

Pless said she grew up with a love of horses, an affection she's transferred to her dogs. In addition to Penny and Milton, Pless also owns Mike, another of Penny's offspring.

"I wanted a short-haired dog that didn't require a lot of grooming," Pless said of her decision to settle on Rottweilers. "I have trouble grooming myself, much less my dogs."

The sulky she owns was given to her by Bob Busby, a dog trainer and breeder from Mooresville with whom Pless has long been friends.

"Rebecca is great," said Busby, president of the Salisbury Kennel Club. "She's a great ambassador for all dogs."

Busby said he'd owned the sulky for several years, purchasing it from Bob Cooper, a man in California who builds them. They're designed, Busby said, to be pulled by large dogs.

"I got it on a whim," Busby said. "I have Rottweilers. It's natural for the dogs to want to pull wagons, and this is perfect for them."

He said Pless jumped at the opportunity when asked if she was interested in the sulky, which hadn't seen a lot of use in recent years. She re-padded its seat and gave its frame a fresh coat of red paint before leashing her dogs and hitting the road.

Pless said she's especially proud to show off Penny. The dog is an American Kennel Club and United Kennel Club champion, and has garnered numerous obedience titles.

Pless sometimes takes Penny to schools and nursing homes to interact with children and senior citizens. They all benefit, she said, from the opportunity to give Penny a pat, and Penny enjoys the attention.

Pless said Rottweilers are a loving breed, undeserving of the bad reputation that some people have given them.

"Where there is a dog problem, there is always a people problem," Pless said. "I've never had an issue with these dogs in 20 years."

Cathy Rubens, an Apex resident and — like Pless — a member of the Carolina Rottweilers, agreed.

"They love to clean your face," Rubens said of the affection that Rottweilers bestow upon their owners. "They're a wonderful breed."

Rubens said she met Pless at a dog show and they've become friends through their association with the Carolina Rottweilers, an organization whose members work to promote the breed.

"She's a constant trainer," Rubens said of Pless. "She is always working with her dogs."

Like Pless, Rubens owns Rottweilers and said she's involved them over the years in a number of activities — carting, included.

"The dogs love it," Rubens said of harnessing the creatures to a cart or wagon and taking them for a spin. "These are dogs that were bred to work. They need a job. They get a sense of self-importance when they have a job."

Rubens said carting such as Pless does with her Rottweilers used to be a common practice. Centuries ago, there were plenty of carts that needed moving and Rottweilers were happy to throw their backs into the tasks.

Rubens said that not long ago, she had a friend who regularly loaded a wagon with logs for his Rottweiler to pull. The logs needed to be moved, she said, and the Rottweiler loved the chore.

"Having dogs that have jobs makes them better canine citizens," Rubens said.

Pless said she breeds her dogs on occasion, but said most people don't qualify to buy from her.

"You don't want to know what you have to go through to get a dog from me," Pless said. "That's one reason I don't breed my dogs more often than I do. I can't find people who are qualified for them."

Pless laughed as she recalled what her brother said about how particular she was with her Rottweilers.

"He said, 'When I die, I want to come back as your dog,' " Pless said. "Not just any dog, your dog."

As she climbed back into her sulky to continue her spin about Spencer, someone asked Pless where she put her feet. There are no foot rests on the sulky.

Only then did Pless admit that the art of riding a sulky as her Rottweiler pulls is still a tad short of perfected.

"You just sort of let them dangle," she said of her feet. "It makes good for a quick exit. Hang on a second and you'll see."

Pless said she hopes to have Penny adequately trained so she can pull the sulky through the streets of Salisbury and Spencer in the Holiday Caravan Parade come November.

"With horses," Pless said, "the trouble can be getting them to go. With Rottweilers, it can be getting them to stop."

Top of page

 

AVMA opposes cosmetic ear cropping, tail docking of dogs
By R. Scott Nolen
Doberman PinscherThe AVMA is calling on dog breed organizations to remove ear cropping and tail docking from their standards.
The AVMA opposes ear cropping and tail docking of dogs when performed for cosmetic reasons and calls on breed organizations to remove mention of the procedures from their standards.
The Association's Executive Board approved the revised AVMA Policy on Ear Cropping and Tail Docking of Dogs, Nov. 14. The statement reads:

EAR CROPPING AND TAIL DOCKING OF DOGS
The AVMA opposes ear cropping and tail docking of dogs when done solely for cosmetic purposes. The AVMA encourages the elimination of ear cropping and tail docking from breed standards.

The former policy, approved by the AVMA House of Delegates in 1999, pointed out that cosmetic ear cropping and tail docking afford no benefits for animal patients, and advised veterinarians that they should warn clients about related, inherent risks of anesthesia, blood loss, and infection.

The AVMA Animal Welfare Committee recommended the revised policy, which makes the policy of the Association consistent with those of the American Animal Hospital Association and the Canadian VMA.

The committee explained to the Executive Board in the recommendation's background that there is little scientific evidence that the cosmetic procedures of ear cropping and tail docking convey benefits for dogs.

Prior to the vote, Executive Board member Dr. Larry G. Dee of District IV spoke in favor of the revised policy. "Leaders take risks, and there's a risk in approving this policy, but it's a risk worth taking," observed Dr. Dee, a small animal practitioner from Hollywood, Fla.

No board member spoke against the proposal.

The American Kennel Club said labeling the procedures as cosmetic is a "severe mischaracterization that connotes a lack of respect and knowledge of history and the function of purebred dogs."

Tail docking of dogs, with some exceptions for working breeds, is banned in the United Kingdom, as is ear cropping. Australia and much of Europe prohibit both procedures. In the United States, Maine has prohibited ear cropping.

"Because the AVMA is an organization that has determined it will create animal welfare policies based on science, committee members believe there is no reasonable basis on which to continue support for these procedures being performed for cosmetic reasons," stated the Animal Welfare Committee in the background of its recommendation.

Another reason Dr. Dee cited for approving the revised policy is the growing number of veterinary students uncomfortable with what they see as needlessly painful surgeries. Student AVMA President Emi Eaton, who was present at the board meeting, agreed. "The veterinary profession has been evolving, and many of the younger student body are behind ear cropping and tail docking only for medical reasons," Eaton, a fourth-year student at the University of Illinois, said later.

–R. Scott Nolen

Read the AVMA press release about the policy on the Association's Web site at http://www.avma.org/press/releases/081126_earcrop_taildock.asp.

Top of page

Review of the 2008 NERF Seiger Show
by Karen Billings

Our Seiger Show was a hit this year on October 4th & 5th, 2008. We opened our show with the Pledge of Allegiance recited by Mirabelle, Johanna & Megan, followed by the Star Spangled Banner sung by 10 year old Megan Messina.

Once again we had lovely weather, warm enough for the humans, but cool enough for our Rottweilers. Bruce unloaded his truck with our supplies from our NERF shed early in the morning and the tent was erected with the expertise of Barnum & Bailey crew, and the ring set up. It was our 4th Seiger show and we had 80 entries, a good count considering the expense of gas and hotels during these days that we are tightening our belts. We had many Owners & Dogs come from other states, and again our friends from Canada, whom have supported 
us every year. 

Once again we had a good turn out of helpers from our membership. We also had non-member volunteers. Steve Wolfson loaned us his sound system and head phones, it was a lot easier for the judge to announce her critiques. Steve gave an informative power point presentation at our judges dinner. Our Judge was Cathy Thompson who managed to stay on her feet for two long days, and do a great job of critiquing.

Noreen Ruscito did all the typing for both days and proof read all critiques herself, for which we are most grateful. She volunteered for next year also. Cheryl was our chief Steward and kept our ring running in perfect precision. Roberta took in all the entries and entered them in the Computer and also completed the catalogue along with Margaret and her typing skills. Whew! that's a lot of work. Scotti Ferguson & Pamela Clement took care of our Ways & Means table and sold tickets for our raffle.

Margaret and Maureen did a great job choosing the trophies. They were lovely and stylish. Let us not forget the unbelievable Hospitality Bags. Maureen puts together the best gifts and goodies which every entrant looks forward to receiving. Margaret and her sister made sure that all entrants had their armbands and were recorded. Tracy Benson was our photographer and did an outstanding job of getting pictures of every dog and formatted them on a CD. Each dog has at the least three poses. I suggest purchasing a CD, and you will have a nice collection of Rottweilers to observe. We had our Rottweiler Rescue booths. Old friends and long time members, Pete & Leslie Maddocks visited, as did Jennie Burkhardt. What would our show be without food. Our chefs George & Jay had all the cooking under control, and cooked to perfection.

We are already starting to plan our next years Show. We already have pledges for donations, Will you pledge a donation and volunteer a couple hours of your time???. 

 

Top of page

 

Honoring the best darn Rottweiler in Oakley
By Steve Crump

Buster the pound hound finally got his place in the sun ...

The Rottweiler and his best friend, Mercedes Bedke of Oakley, were featured on cable TV's Animal Planet on Saturday as part of a segment of "Dogs 101" about Rotties ...

Buster was adopted by Mercedes' grandparents soon after they adopted the then 8-year-old girl ...

"We (thought) get her a puppy, but no puppies come available so we got a call from the animal shelter about Buster and went and picked him up and him and her bonded ... I mean he does not leave her," Phyllis Bedke, Mercedes' grandmother, told Boise's KTVB in May 2006 ...

Mercedes was riding her horse, BJ, when the animal shied away from a fence, throwing the girl into it ...

Buster to the rescue ...

He ran to the farmhouse, barking wildly, and led Mercedes' grandparents to the badly injured girl ...

"I come back out to call her for lunch and Mercedes was gone and Buster was at the door of the house and I knew something then was really wrong," Phyllis said ...

"My dad called me and said, you need to call 911, she is hurt bad and she's unconscious," Phyllis said ...

Mercedes suffered serious head trauma, and she was airlifted to Primary Children's Hospital in Salt Lake City ...

Yet she was back home in Oakley within two weeks ... Two years on, she's doing fine ....

And Buster? ... Well, he's not going back to the pound, according to the Animal Planet report ...

"He's got a spot with us forever," Phyllis said.

 

Top of page

 

Mandatory Spay / Neuter
Another form of BSL
By Alex Wisienski

We all know there is an overpopulation of dogs and cats . There is a rising number of strays and shelters across the nation are busier than ever. Many of these pets come from puppy mills and backyard breeders that have no concern for the health or quality of the animals they sell. Many don’t even know what a standard is. Knowing this is a problem I believe mandatory laws for spay and neutering will not stop these people and will not end the problem with strays overcrowding shelters and certainly not make it safer for citizens from being bit. Unscrupulous owners and puppy mills will pay the fee for the required in-tact animal permit and continue to make a profit while the quality breeder who pays close attention to health, temperament and breed standards will be burdened by the fees and eventually cease trying. To these people it is a very expensive hobby because they love their breed and strive to maintain perfection. When the hobby becomes too costly they will be forced to stop. Meanwhile the profiteers will continue with their inferior dogs. 

Mandatory spay/neutering is a rush to action and only a quick fix remedy without thinking of the big picture. The big picture is the impact it will have on ALL domestic pets for the entire future of domestic pets…and humanity. Think of a future with scroungey sickly mutant pets from puppy mills. Or better yet, think of a future with no domestic pets at all when they reach the eventual point of extinction.

There are many ethical breeders that do not breed for profit. They breed for a healthy, premium quality animal and strive to improve the breed and compete in different venues of competition to show their hard work. Eventually these ethical breeders will be squeezed out of their passion and hobby because of costs and restrictions. I don’t know of any ethical breeder that makes a profit. In the beginning it may not be too expensive but as time passes legislators will find it to be a good source of tax revenue so costs and restrictions will quickly increase.

Now, besides having lower quality animals from profiteers, think of the spayed/neutered animals that have not grown properly or to their fullest potential for health and structure. Scientific studies have found that dogs spay/neutered before fifteen months of age were smaller. 

Dogs spay/neutered before puberty more frequently have longer limbs, lighter bone structure, less bone density, narrow chests and narrow skulls. This abnormal growth frequently results in significant alterations in body proportions and weights. It may cause increased stresses on cranial cruciate ligaments. Studies showed a higher incidence of CCL rupture, hip dysplasia, and bone cancer. Females have a five time greater risk of hemangiosarcoma and males have 2.4 times greater risk. Studies also show increased undesirable sexual behaviors, noise phobias, fearful behavior and aggression.

Other health considerations include female urinary incontinence, urethral sphincter incontinence in males, and hyperthyroidism. Adverse reactions to vaccines and infectious diseases were also more common.
Having mentioned all the health risks, you now need to consider the higher expense for pet owners to care for their beloved pet. There is also a very real possibility of price gouging by veterinarians who will take advantage of those caring pet owners. Many veterinarians are already taking advantage of the animal rights movements by intimidating or embarrassing pet owners to pay for services not really necessary. 

Scientific Reference: Chris Zink DVM, PhD, DACVP 

 

Top of page
Past Articles