Here's a link to the story at The Detroit Free Press.
This is a story about some real heinous people, and has some photos of the dogs that were rescued (which are not all "Pit Bull" -- and include one small fluffy dog that was probably going to be used for bait). Two dogs were fatally wounded in fighting. The participants are residents of both Michigan and other states.
Too disturbing. I need to find some happy stories and do a happy post.
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
Monday, March 7, 2011
Monday, August 17, 2009
2008 Pennsylvania Dog Breeding Law Closing Down Puppy Mills
A 2008 "Dog Law Restricted Account" by the State of Pennsylvania is now effecting positive change for dogs in that State; it's said that this recent law is one of the strictest dog breeding laws in the nation.
"The law increases minimum cage sizes, requires veterinary care and exercise periods, and bans wire flooring...," according to today's New York Times article 2008 Law Leading to Crackdown on Pennsylvania Puppy Mills (please read for more details and to download a PDF copy of this dog breeding law).
Perhaps this is a law we could see other states adopt and enforce. I'll look for a copy of Michigan's dog breeding law (if there is one) and will post it or a link to it in the near future.
That the Professional Dog Breeders Advisory Council has decided to sue Pennsylvania for violating the federal Constitution just highlights the fact that they care nothing about the welfare of dogs and everything about making $$$ regardless of abuses they engage in. Really sad.
This is not to say that all dog breeders are "bad," but rather that there needs to be strictly enforced regulation and accountability for those that deal in propagating animal life.
"The law increases minimum cage sizes, requires veterinary care and exercise periods, and bans wire flooring...," according to today's New York Times article 2008 Law Leading to Crackdown on Pennsylvania Puppy Mills (please read for more details and to download a PDF copy of this dog breeding law).
Perhaps this is a law we could see other states adopt and enforce. I'll look for a copy of Michigan's dog breeding law (if there is one) and will post it or a link to it in the near future.
That the Professional Dog Breeders Advisory Council has decided to sue Pennsylvania for violating the federal Constitution just highlights the fact that they care nothing about the welfare of dogs and everything about making $$$ regardless of abuses they engage in. Really sad.
This is not to say that all dog breeders are "bad," but rather that there needs to be strictly enforced regulation and accountability for those that deal in propagating animal life.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Mike Vick Update, July 20 & July 27, 2009
Just want to post a quick link to a story at the New York Times, titled Vick is Released, but His Future in N.F.L. Remains Cloudy.
Vick has just finished serving a 20-month sentence on federal charges related to dogfighting.
(For previous posts about Vick -- opinions, links, etc. -- click on the Vick label in this blog's sidebar.)
UPDATE: July 27, 2009
Click here for the link to the NY Times story N.F.L. Grants Vick an Opening.
Vick has just finished serving a 20-month sentence on federal charges related to dogfighting.
(For previous posts about Vick -- opinions, links, etc. -- click on the Vick label in this blog's sidebar.)
UPDATE: July 27, 2009
Click here for the link to the NY Times story N.F.L. Grants Vick an Opening.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Texas Busts One of the Largest Dogfighting Rings in the Country
According to the NY Times: Texas "State officials said late Friday that they had begun dismantling one of the largest dogfighting rings in the country that night, arresting eight people and seizing 187 dogs used by a sophisticated network of bettors throughout eastern Texas."
Read the full NY Times story: Dogfighting Ring is Broken Up in Texas.
Or read the Houston Chronicle story Huge dogfighting ring broken up in Harris Co., DA says. This story tells more about the 17-month investigation which required infiltration into the ring by undercover investigators, the indictment of 55 people, the arrest of a school teacher, and the discovery of firearms and drugs.
Read the full NY Times story: Dogfighting Ring is Broken Up in Texas.
Or read the Houston Chronicle story Huge dogfighting ring broken up in Harris Co., DA says. This story tells more about the 17-month investigation which required infiltration into the ring by undercover investigators, the indictment of 55 people, the arrest of a school teacher, and the discovery of firearms and drugs.
UPDATE: December 7, 2008
Read the NY Times follow up story Dogfighting Subculture is Taking Hold in Texas. Sick and sad.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Cockfighting & the Law
Today's New York Times runs a story about cockfighting in New Mexico.
Last year, New Mexico became the 49th state to outlaw cockfighting; Louisiana will become the 50th next month.
Like dogfighting, so-called "game" cocks are thrown into a ring (pit) to fight each other. Gamecocks, however, wear razors/spikes/spurs strapped to their legs; they generally fight each other to the death. (Cocks - roosters - are naturally aggressive towards each other.) Like fighting dogs, the cocks fight in a pit or enclosed area, with sometimes hundreds in attendance. Now that the sport has been outlawed, it has moved the way of dogfighting: largely to rural and clandestine locations. Like dogfighting, cockfights are a haven for illegal gambling.
NM Governor Bill Richardson's did not sign a bill outlawing cockfighting until he decided to run for the U.S. presidency. Seems rather hypocritical to me that he decided not to outlaw a heinous crime until it was clear that his personal goals would be adversely affected. So much for politicians doing what's right, and doing it for the population at large. But I digress....
Read today's New York Times story A Ban on Cockfighting, but Tradition Lives On. You can view a short video there, too.
Last year, New Mexico became the 49th state to outlaw cockfighting; Louisiana will become the 50th next month.
Like dogfighting, so-called "game" cocks are thrown into a ring (pit) to fight each other. Gamecocks, however, wear razors/spikes/spurs strapped to their legs; they generally fight each other to the death. (Cocks - roosters - are naturally aggressive towards each other.) Like fighting dogs, the cocks fight in a pit or enclosed area, with sometimes hundreds in attendance. Now that the sport has been outlawed, it has moved the way of dogfighting: largely to rural and clandestine locations. Like dogfighting, cockfights are a haven for illegal gambling.
NM Governor Bill Richardson's did not sign a bill outlawing cockfighting until he decided to run for the U.S. presidency. Seems rather hypocritical to me that he decided not to outlaw a heinous crime until it was clear that his personal goals would be adversely affected. So much for politicians doing what's right, and doing it for the population at large. But I digress....
Read today's New York Times story A Ban on Cockfighting, but Tradition Lives On. You can view a short video there, too.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Greyhound Protection at Tucson, Arizona, Dog Track
The following is from an email I received this morning from my pals at Michigan ReGAP (Rescued Greyhounds as Pets) about both the current status of dog racing in Colorado, and a ballot initiative in Tucson, Arizona, seeking to improve the lives of greyhound dogs at the track:
This appears to be one of those good news/bad news situations. The good news
is that the racing industry in Colorado is losing so much money that they
are having to close their tracks early -- some are afraid permanently (gee,
that would be horrible, wouldn't it?). The bad news is, that when this type
of thing happens, hundreds of dogs are at risk.
According to the Denver Post, the 2008 Colorado dog racing season will come
to an end this month after the Colorado Racing Commission and the Colorado
Greyhound Kennel Association could not agree on kennel contracts. Racing
will stop on June 28. It was scheduled to go until Sept. 1. The governing
bodies said they will work with area kennels and adoption agencies to
relocate the dogs. Bruce Seymore, director of operations for Mile High Dog
Track, says they will be reaching out to rescue groups to help place the
dogs. While that is commendable on his part, it certainly highlights the
fact that the industry has no plan in place for finding homes for the
hundreds of dogs that are continually displaced when they are no longer
profitable.
There is some speculation (Colorado's Channel 2 News) that this may be a
tactic by international investors to bring video gaming and satellite racing
to the Colorado tracks, something that is currently illegal in Colorado, but
has become a popular plan in other states.
This is definitely a situation that merits watching...
ALSO -
This article is too important for us to edit. Please click on the link and
read the entire piece. We all know that Arizona is one of the worst states
for greyhounds -- remember the 150 dogs that got "lost" on their way to
adoption groups, or the little girl that was put down while a rescue group
was en route to get her because the track didn't want to be bothered?
Arizona is also often the last stop on the way to Juarez Mexico tracks
where, believe it or not, conditions are even worse. The Tucson Dog
Protection group has proposed a ballot initiative that would mandate basic
protections for the dogs at the tracks. We need to write everyone we can to
help support this legislation.
Read the guest Op-Ed Greyhounds need the protection offered by South Tucson initiative by local veterinarian Janet Forrer.
Find out more about Tucson Dog Protection.
This appears to be one of those good news/bad news situations. The good news
is that the racing industry in Colorado is losing so much money that they
are having to close their tracks early -- some are afraid permanently (gee,
that would be horrible, wouldn't it?). The bad news is, that when this type
of thing happens, hundreds of dogs are at risk.
According to the Denver Post, the 2008 Colorado dog racing season will come
to an end this month after the Colorado Racing Commission and the Colorado
Greyhound Kennel Association could not agree on kennel contracts. Racing
will stop on June 28. It was scheduled to go until Sept. 1. The governing
bodies said they will work with area kennels and adoption agencies to
relocate the dogs. Bruce Seymore, director of operations for Mile High Dog
Track, says they will be reaching out to rescue groups to help place the
dogs. While that is commendable on his part, it certainly highlights the
fact that the industry has no plan in place for finding homes for the
hundreds of dogs that are continually displaced when they are no longer
profitable.
There is some speculation (Colorado's Channel 2 News) that this may be a
tactic by international investors to bring video gaming and satellite racing
to the Colorado tracks, something that is currently illegal in Colorado, but
has become a popular plan in other states.
This is definitely a situation that merits watching...
ALSO -
This article is too important for us to edit. Please click on the link and
read the entire piece. We all know that Arizona is one of the worst states
for greyhounds -- remember the 150 dogs that got "lost" on their way to
adoption groups, or the little girl that was put down while a rescue group
was en route to get her because the track didn't want to be bothered?
Arizona is also often the last stop on the way to Juarez Mexico tracks
where, believe it or not, conditions are even worse. The Tucson Dog
Protection group has proposed a ballot initiative that would mandate basic
protections for the dogs at the tracks. We need to write everyone we can to
help support this legislation.
Read the guest Op-Ed Greyhounds need the protection offered by South Tucson initiative by local veterinarian Janet Forrer.
Find out more about Tucson Dog Protection.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Racing Horses and Greyhounds
Another interesting blog/article in today's New York Times' The Rail, titled Injured Horses You Didn't See, by T.D. Thornton. Thornton questions whether a televised fatality will in fact impact positive change on the track, especially in light of "...15 horses at 39 North American tracks who failed to finish a race Saturday," the same day that Eight Belles was euthanized on the Kentucky Derby track. Speaking of another horse, Thornton says, "Unlike Eight Belles, whose tale will be told for decades to come, the only historical record of the gelding’s misstep will be a cryptic footnote, a dozen-year thoroughbred career distilled into a single line of agate type that reads nothing more than “trailed, pulled up ½.”
You really must read the article to better understand the frequency, severity, and sadness of the demise of many horses on the racetrack. It really draws into focus the "out of sight, out of mind" mentality of which most of us humans are prone to, and a trait which leaves many of us unaware of the same and equally distressing plight of racing greyhounds.
Read my May 3 post about Eight Belles euthanized on the track (and photos), and my May 4 post about ethics and morals of horse racing, with many links to outside stories and opinions.
You really must read the article to better understand the frequency, severity, and sadness of the demise of many horses on the racetrack. It really draws into focus the "out of sight, out of mind" mentality of which most of us humans are prone to, and a trait which leaves many of us unaware of the same and equally distressing plight of racing greyhounds.
Read my May 3 post about Eight Belles euthanized on the track (and photos), and my May 4 post about ethics and morals of horse racing, with many links to outside stories and opinions.
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Endangered Species Act: Yellowstone Wolves
There are almost no words that I can say to convey the utter stupidity and audacious carelessness of our current presidential administration's policy to do away with our country's wildlife and eco-systems; it's as though we're rushing head first into ecological genocide. (But, hey, business is great.)
After successfully ridding most of the western part of this country and Yellowstone National Park of all wolves nearly a century ago, the government decided in the 1990's to transplant 66 Canadian wolves in the Park. Over those short years, the number of wolves has grown to about 1,300. They were protected by the Endangered Species Act.
While scientists say that to protect and encourage healthy genetic diversity the wolves should number over 2,000 before being de-listed. The federal government thinks otherwise, and in February took the wolves off the Endangered Species list. As a result, Park employees are allowed to kill wolves they deem a "problem," and any that step out of the park onto state land are allowed to be hunted by sportsmen and ranchers alike. Several wolves have already been killed, two as "trophies."
The following is from a New York Times article titled U.S. Ends Protections For Wolves In 3 States, which I suggest you read:
State management plans allow for wolf hunting, or outright eradication in some places — including most of Wyoming — with a target population of 150 in each of the three states.
There are over 330 million people in this country, and we want to limit the numbers of wolves to 150 in each state? I say let the ranchers lose a cow or bull once a month (the average loss) in exchange for keeping a species alive, thriving, and healthy. I also say let the hunters have less elk to eat and less trophies in exchange for keeping a species alive, thriving, and healthy. For keeping our ecosystem - and human life - intact.
A New York Times editorial says the exact words that I feel about this situation; please read When Protection Vanishes, published in today's paper.
During his 7-year tenure as President, Bush has listed less than 60 animals as Endangered Species. Both Clinton and the former President Bush each listed at least 60 animals annually.
Thanks to our selfishness, we are putting ourselves in a dangerous situation where one day our wildlife will be depleted to the point of (near) extinction - leaving us without natural resources, sport, food, and jobs. Without maintaining our natural ecosystems - and the lives of those with whom we share the earth - we'll be putting an end to our own lives.
Read the Washington Post 2004 story Endangered Species Act's Protections are Trimmed.
Consider the current federal government wildlife polices in The Dog House.
(See detroit dog's March 23 post about Yellowstone Bison.)
Update 4/12/2008:
Read the New York Times story In the West, a Fierce Battle Over Wolves. It explains the current situation between those that want to hunt and/or kill wolves and those that want wolves re-listed on the Endangered Species list. (10 wolves were killed the first week they were de-listed.) The de-listing of wolves will be contested by animal welfare/rights and environmental groups in a federal court on April 28.
Check the State of Wyoming Game and Fish web site for Wolf Information (links to Weekly Wolf Update and news releases, management plans, etc.)
Let's stop trophy hunting, and re-list the wolves for greater numbers and better genetic diversity.
After successfully ridding most of the western part of this country and Yellowstone National Park of all wolves nearly a century ago, the government decided in the 1990's to transplant 66 Canadian wolves in the Park. Over those short years, the number of wolves has grown to about 1,300. They were protected by the Endangered Species Act.
While scientists say that to protect and encourage healthy genetic diversity the wolves should number over 2,000 before being de-listed. The federal government thinks otherwise, and in February took the wolves off the Endangered Species list. As a result, Park employees are allowed to kill wolves they deem a "problem," and any that step out of the park onto state land are allowed to be hunted by sportsmen and ranchers alike. Several wolves have already been killed, two as "trophies."
The following is from a New York Times article titled U.S. Ends Protections For Wolves In 3 States, which I suggest you read:
State management plans allow for wolf hunting, or outright eradication in some places — including most of Wyoming — with a target population of 150 in each of the three states.
There are over 330 million people in this country, and we want to limit the numbers of wolves to 150 in each state? I say let the ranchers lose a cow or bull once a month (the average loss) in exchange for keeping a species alive, thriving, and healthy. I also say let the hunters have less elk to eat and less trophies in exchange for keeping a species alive, thriving, and healthy. For keeping our ecosystem - and human life - intact.
A New York Times editorial says the exact words that I feel about this situation; please read When Protection Vanishes, published in today's paper.
During his 7-year tenure as President, Bush has listed less than 60 animals as Endangered Species. Both Clinton and the former President Bush each listed at least 60 animals annually.
Thanks to our selfishness, we are putting ourselves in a dangerous situation where one day our wildlife will be depleted to the point of (near) extinction - leaving us without natural resources, sport, food, and jobs. Without maintaining our natural ecosystems - and the lives of those with whom we share the earth - we'll be putting an end to our own lives.
Read the Washington Post 2004 story Endangered Species Act's Protections are Trimmed.
Consider the current federal government wildlife polices in The Dog House.
(See detroit dog's March 23 post about Yellowstone Bison.)
Update 4/12/2008:
Read the New York Times story In the West, a Fierce Battle Over Wolves. It explains the current situation between those that want to hunt and/or kill wolves and those that want wolves re-listed on the Endangered Species list. (10 wolves were killed the first week they were de-listed.) The de-listing of wolves will be contested by animal welfare/rights and environmental groups in a federal court on April 28.
Check the State of Wyoming Game and Fish web site for Wolf Information (links to Weekly Wolf Update and news releases, management plans, etc.)
Let's stop trophy hunting, and re-list the wolves for greater numbers and better genetic diversity.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Endangered Species Act: Yellowstone Bison
A short post today. Just want to post some links to a couple of stories about issues that I think are very important.
The first of these is found in today's Washington Post, and is titled Since '01, Guarding Species Is Harder and subtitled Endangered Listings Drop Under Bush. As the title infers, it's become incredibly difficult during the Bush Jr. administration to get animals listed as endangered species; policy has been set to purposefully make it difficult. Why? Well, my take on it is that it's good for business, big business. During Bush's tenure thus far, less than 60 species have been listed as endangered. In contrast, during the Clinton and elder Bush's tenures an average of 60 species were listed annually. In the meantime, Bush denied an emergency listing for a sock-eye salmon which has since become extinct, as has a pygmy rabbit that he denied habitat protection.
Today's New York Times runs the story Anger Over Culling of Yellowstone's Bison, about the hunting and slaughterhouse deaths of bison that have wandered out of Yellowstone into "the state of Montana." (Sorry, no link.) When winter snows are heavy in the mountains, the bison migrate into the valley to graze on grass in attempts to stave off starvation; it's then that they are hunted or rounded up for the slaughterhouse by Park employees. What is especially terrible about this slaughter is the increased loss of genetic diversity within the herd; often four generations of females travel together, and the culling essentially wipes out entire families.
(See detroit dog's April 5 post about the Endangered Species Act and Yellowstone Wolves.)
The first of these is found in today's Washington Post, and is titled Since '01, Guarding Species Is Harder and subtitled Endangered Listings Drop Under Bush. As the title infers, it's become incredibly difficult during the Bush Jr. administration to get animals listed as endangered species; policy has been set to purposefully make it difficult. Why? Well, my take on it is that it's good for business, big business. During Bush's tenure thus far, less than 60 species have been listed as endangered. In contrast, during the Clinton and elder Bush's tenures an average of 60 species were listed annually. In the meantime, Bush denied an emergency listing for a sock-eye salmon which has since become extinct, as has a pygmy rabbit that he denied habitat protection.
Today's New York Times runs the story Anger Over Culling of Yellowstone's Bison, about the hunting and slaughterhouse deaths of bison that have wandered out of Yellowstone into "the state of Montana." (Sorry, no link.) When winter snows are heavy in the mountains, the bison migrate into the valley to graze on grass in attempts to stave off starvation; it's then that they are hunted or rounded up for the slaughterhouse by Park employees. What is especially terrible about this slaughter is the increased loss of genetic diversity within the herd; often four generations of females travel together, and the culling essentially wipes out entire families.
(See detroit dog's April 5 post about the Endangered Species Act and Yellowstone Wolves.)
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Hallmark Meat Packing Company: Meat/Cattle Industry Animal Abuse Prior to Slaughter
Note: For updated information and commentary, please see post dated February 18.
The Washington Post runs a story in today's online site exposing unlawful animal abuse at a slaughterhouse/meat packing company in California, and includes video, that is also available for view, from a six-week undercover investigative operation by The Humane Society of the United States.
The article Video Reveals Violations of Laws, Abuse of Cows at Slaughterhouse, by staff writer Rick Weiss, details routine illegal and abusive business practices by senior management staff at Chino, California, slaughterhouse Hallmark Meat Packing. Hallmark is the second largest supplier of beef to the National School Lunch Program, which also feed the needy and the elderly. [The company's Operations Manager is also President of Westland Meat Company, which is a buyer/distributor of meats from Hallmark.]
The abuses were carried out immediately prior to daily USDA inspections, and were done in attempts to force sick and injured cattle to stand up - as required by law for inspection and approval for slaughter.
The USDA will not approve for slaughter 'downed' cows, as it's indicative of the severe health problems of the cow, and the increased possibilities that the cow's meat will infect our food supplies with dangerous E. coli and salmonella bacteria, as well as a life-threatening brain encephalopathy.
The illegal acts that Hallmark Meat Packing inflicted as documented on video; I watched the video and this is what I saw:
detroit dog's thoughts: Hallmark's routine and unlawful abusive actions sadly are likely not the industry exception. Thanks to their lack of concern for human health on a national scale, these activities are doubly despicable for their abuse towards animals and people. Businesses that participate in such abusive activities should not be fined - they should be shut down. In the U.S. alone, literally billions of animals are bred and slaughtered each year for food; think of the abuse to animals and - in the long run - to people. (To read a New York Times article about how this affects global warming, read the New York Times article Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler.)
detroit dog's advice for 'humane' eating:
For a short piece about USDA follow-up on this particular case, read The New York Times article USDA to Review California Slaughterhouse.
Post update 2/1/2008:
Here's a link to a story about the video at the CNN web site. It appears that some politicians have become involved in the case, but only regarding the possible health dangers to the public. The following are the final two paragraphs from the CNN story:
Post update 2/1/2008; info courtesy 'Anonymous' comment:
Westland Meat Company
13677 Yorba Ave.
Chino, CA 91710
909-590-3340
Email is: info@westlandmeat.com
Their website is:
http://westlandmeat.com/westland%20contact.htm
The Home button is an apology letter.
Check out the lone award plaque of "Supplier of the year 2004-2005"
The Washington Post runs a story in today's online site exposing unlawful animal abuse at a slaughterhouse/meat packing company in California, and includes video, that is also available for view, from a six-week undercover investigative operation by The Humane Society of the United States.
The article Video Reveals Violations of Laws, Abuse of Cows at Slaughterhouse, by staff writer Rick Weiss, details routine illegal and abusive business practices by senior management staff at Chino, California, slaughterhouse Hallmark Meat Packing. Hallmark is the second largest supplier of beef to the National School Lunch Program, which also feed the needy and the elderly. [The company's Operations Manager is also President of Westland Meat Company, which is a buyer/distributor of meats from Hallmark.]
The abuses were carried out immediately prior to daily USDA inspections, and were done in attempts to force sick and injured cattle to stand up - as required by law for inspection and approval for slaughter.
The USDA will not approve for slaughter 'downed' cows, as it's indicative of the severe health problems of the cow, and the increased possibilities that the cow's meat will infect our food supplies with dangerous E. coli and salmonella bacteria, as well as a life-threatening brain encephalopathy.
The illegal acts that Hallmark Meat Packing inflicted as documented on video; I watched the video and this is what I saw:
- electric shocks to otherwise immobile cattle's rectums, heads, necks, and spines
- pushing/raising cows with forklift prongs
- rolling cows with the forklift's wheels
- slamming cows into the killbox with forklifts
- cows being kicked in the head, and hit in the head with the ends of poles
- high intensity sprays shot up cows' nostrils ("veterinary water-boarding")
- cows dragged across the ground by their necks and legs by chains attached to vehicles
detroit dog's thoughts: Hallmark's routine and unlawful abusive actions sadly are likely not the industry exception. Thanks to their lack of concern for human health on a national scale, these activities are doubly despicable for their abuse towards animals and people. Businesses that participate in such abusive activities should not be fined - they should be shut down. In the U.S. alone, literally billions of animals are bred and slaughtered each year for food; think of the abuse to animals and - in the long run - to people. (To read a New York Times article about how this affects global warming, read the New York Times article Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler.)
detroit dog's advice for 'humane' eating:
- Buy organic foods (meats and poultries included)
- Buy cage-free and range-free animal food products (not great, but it's a start)
- Purchase products that do not participate in animal testing
- Become a vegetarian or - better yet - a vegan
- Do not eat foods from animals which are treated inhumanely on an industry-wide basis (such as goose and duck pate; even famous chef Wolfgang Puck refuses to cook it and serve it!)
For a short piece about USDA follow-up on this particular case, read The New York Times article USDA to Review California Slaughterhouse.
Post update 2/1/2008:
Here's a link to a story about the video at the CNN web site. It appears that some politicians have become involved in the case, but only regarding the possible health dangers to the public. The following are the final two paragraphs from the CNN story:
The USDA, in its news release, said it was "unfortunate" the Humane Society "did not present this information to use when these alleged violations occurred in the fall of 2007."
The Humane Society, in its statement, said it had turned the information over to "California law enforcement officials" at that time, and "local authorities asked for extra time before public release of the information."Post update 2/1/2008; info courtesy 'Anonymous' comment:
Westland Meat Company
13677 Yorba Ave.
Chino, CA 91710
909-590-3340
Email is: info@westlandmeat.com
Their website is:
http://westlandmeat.com
The Home button is an apology letter.
Check out the lone award plaque of "Supplier of the year 2004-2005"
Friday, January 18, 2008
San Francisco Zoo Tiger Attack Update
According to news reports, all 3 victims of the Christmas day tiger attack at the San Francisco Zoo had indeed taunted and purposely distracted the tiger, Tatiana.
One of the surviving victims admitted to the three men standing on a 3-foot high railing, yelling and waving at the tiger; a matching foot/shoe print of one of the men was found on the railing. Medical tests, confirmed by the victims, also show that all 3 men were drunk (one of them twice the legal limit; they'd been drinking vodka) and had been smoking marijuana. Vodka and marijuana were both found in the car of one of the victims.
For a local view of recent developments, read the San Francisco Chronicle story Mauling survivor said he yelled at tiger.
For more detailed news information, read Police: Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting at the CNN web site.
The San Francisco Zoo also has pertinent information on their web site's front page, including correspondence sent to Zoo members, a news release, a "safety enhancement update," and a photo of the tiger Tatiana. (Scroll to bottom of of main page.)
detroit dog's thoughts:
One of the surviving victims admitted to the three men standing on a 3-foot high railing, yelling and waving at the tiger; a matching foot/shoe print of one of the men was found on the railing. Medical tests, confirmed by the victims, also show that all 3 men were drunk (one of them twice the legal limit; they'd been drinking vodka) and had been smoking marijuana. Vodka and marijuana were both found in the car of one of the victims.
For a local view of recent developments, read the San Francisco Chronicle story Mauling survivor said he yelled at tiger.
For more detailed news information, read Police: Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting at the CNN web site.
The San Francisco Zoo also has pertinent information on their web site's front page, including correspondence sent to Zoo members, a news release, a "safety enhancement update," and a photo of the tiger Tatiana. (Scroll to bottom of of main page.)
detroit dog's thoughts:
- Though the wall at the SF Zoo tiger enclosure is about 4 feet lower than recommended, the Zoo is not at fault for the tiger's escape: the recommended height is not a requirement for accreditation and the Zoo wall was built almost 80 years ago. Instead zoo accreditation requirements should be revised by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. (Perhaps the AZA should be sued.)
- Such excessively stupid behavior by the 3 young men should not be rewarded (it's being said that survivors of the tiger attack, and the parents of the deceased victim, are filing suit). I say reimburse for the medical expenses only.
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
San Francisco Zoo Tiger Attack Criticism
See post of 1/18/2008 for updated info.
Just read a story at The New York Times, titled Tiger Attack Puts Focus on Zoo Director (January 8). I'll try to link to the story here, but you might need to log in at the site before reading the story.
The story notes that SF Zoo Director Manuel Mollinedo is being greatly criticized for his suggestion that perhaps the mauling victims had been taunting the tiger that attacked them. It's said that the survivors' lawyer might file defamation charges against Mollinedo and/or the SF Zoo.
We know neither why nor how the tiger escaped its enclosure -- and no other tiger has ever escaped in the Zoo's history. Therefore, I believe it is not unreasonable to wonder if the reason might be that the animal was taunted. Do we know that it wasn't? Of course, no one - including the Zoo Director - has said that the men injured in the attack were guilty of taunting the animal.
As officials and the general public struggle to understand the cause of this situation and how to prevent further such incidences, it is at the least selfish and gratuitous to threaten a defamation lawsuit.
Just read a story at The New York Times, titled Tiger Attack Puts Focus on Zoo Director (January 8). I'll try to link to the story here, but you might need to log in at the site before reading the story.
The story notes that SF Zoo Director Manuel Mollinedo is being greatly criticized for his suggestion that perhaps the mauling victims had been taunting the tiger that attacked them. It's said that the survivors' lawyer might file defamation charges against Mollinedo and/or the SF Zoo.
We know neither why nor how the tiger escaped its enclosure -- and no other tiger has ever escaped in the Zoo's history. Therefore, I believe it is not unreasonable to wonder if the reason might be that the animal was taunted. Do we know that it wasn't? Of course, no one - including the Zoo Director - has said that the men injured in the attack were guilty of taunting the animal.
As officials and the general public struggle to understand the cause of this situation and how to prevent further such incidences, it is at the least selfish and gratuitous to threaten a defamation lawsuit.
Farm Animals as Pets
Another post, written as a result of things that people Google that bring them to this site.
The Dog House stats show that someone recently did an internet search for Farm Animals as Pets in [insert name of city here].
Answer: Please check your City ordinances.
Many cities have these posted on their web sites, under a subheading of "Ordinances and Enforcement" or "Code of Ordinances". The ordinances will tell you about laws/regulations in your city regarding everything from amusements to trash pickup, nuisances to trees and shrubs, and elections to "animals and fowl".
Good luck!
The Dog House stats show that someone recently did an internet search for Farm Animals as Pets in [insert name of city here].
Answer: Please check your City ordinances.
Many cities have these posted on their web sites, under a subheading of "Ordinances and Enforcement" or "Code of Ordinances". The ordinances will tell you about laws/regulations in your city regarding everything from amusements to trash pickup, nuisances to trees and shrubs, and elections to "animals and fowl".
Good luck!
Monday, January 7, 2008
Michael Vick Jail Prison Sentence Update
According to an Atlanta news story on WSBTV.com, suspended NFL Falcons pro Michael Vick has transferred prisons; on January 7, Vick was transferred from a Warsaw, Virginia, regional jail to a prison in Leavenworth, Kansas.
It is suggested that Vick will participate in drug treatment and other programs offered at the Leavenworth prison, which might then lead to a year's early release - in which case he might be available for the 2009 football season. (In September, pre federal sentencing, Vick failed a test for marijuana use.)
It is suggested that Vick will participate in drug treatment and other programs offered at the Leavenworth prison, which might then lead to a year's early release - in which case he might be available for the 2009 football season. (In September, pre federal sentencing, Vick failed a test for marijuana use.)
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Detroit and Michigan Pet Stores
Update: Check the sidebar of this blog for adoption agencies and shelters. You can find purebred dogs, cats, and rabbits, ferrets, horses, ducks, and more. Check my blog post of March 1, 2008, for a list of specific links.
An interesting article in today's online Detroit Free Press, titled Michigan agency has not punished pet stores that have been neglectful.
Just another example of Michigan government throwing itself down the toilet.
The article mentions that the State of Michigan Department of Agriculture is formally discontinuing its responsibility to the animals of Michigan - specifically those in pet stores - except in cases of "serious abuse or disease outbreaks."
Here's an example, as quoted from the Freep article:
More than 30 people have complained to the state this year about Pollywood Pets, inside the Gibraltar Trade Center in Mt. Clemens. That's more than any other store. Among the complaints: 20 kittens stuffed in a pen; sick puppies covered in feces, some injured by broken cages; guinea pigs bleeding and overcrowded, one without an eye.
Please note that the State of Michigan does not consider the above example to be "serious abuse."
The story goes on to say that inspections have not been done in years, though complaints have been filed against over 25% of southeast Michigan pet stores. Meanwhile, unlicensed stores continue sales of animals; many pets have proven to be diseased and/or otherwise injured; and dogs are being sold under the legal age limit of 8 weeks.
Please, protest pet stores! Purchase your pet - healthy and for reasonable prices - at area shelters. They've lots of dogs, cats, rabbits, rats, hamsters, guinea pigs, and (recently seen at The Humane Society in Rochester Hills) ducks! Do not continue to support these grotesque abusive people/stores that only care to make a buck irregardless of humane and legal practices.
Time to get out the camera.
An interesting article in today's online Detroit Free Press, titled Michigan agency has not punished pet stores that have been neglectful.
Just another example of Michigan government throwing itself down the toilet.
The article mentions that the State of Michigan Department of Agriculture is formally discontinuing its responsibility to the animals of Michigan - specifically those in pet stores - except in cases of "serious abuse or disease outbreaks."
Here's an example, as quoted from the Freep article:
More than 30 people have complained to the state this year about Pollywood Pets, inside the Gibraltar Trade Center in Mt. Clemens. That's more than any other store. Among the complaints: 20 kittens stuffed in a pen; sick puppies covered in feces, some injured by broken cages; guinea pigs bleeding and overcrowded, one without an eye.
Please note that the State of Michigan does not consider the above example to be "serious abuse."
The story goes on to say that inspections have not been done in years, though complaints have been filed against over 25% of southeast Michigan pet stores. Meanwhile, unlicensed stores continue sales of animals; many pets have proven to be diseased and/or otherwise injured; and dogs are being sold under the legal age limit of 8 weeks.
Please, protest pet stores! Purchase your pet - healthy and for reasonable prices - at area shelters. They've lots of dogs, cats, rabbits, rats, hamsters, guinea pigs, and (recently seen at The Humane Society in Rochester Hills) ducks! Do not continue to support these grotesque abusive people/stores that only care to make a buck irregardless of humane and legal practices.
Time to get out the camera.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Michael Vick Prison Sentence
(For updated info since this post, click on Vick label in the sidebar.)
NFL Pro Michael Vick today was sentenced by Judge Henry E. Hudson to 23 months in prison and 3 year's probation, and received a $5,000 fine, on federal charges related to dogfighting. Vick has admitted bankrolling the Bad Newz Kennel dogfighting ring, that operated from his 15-acre Surry County, Virginia, property.
Vick faced a 5-year prison sentence; however, he - like his co-defendants - received a sentence stronger than recommended by federal prosecutors. Interestingly enough, Vick received a sentence months longer than did his cohorts. Fourth defendant Tony Taylor still awaits sentencing. Vick surrendered himself November 19, getting a jump start on serving time. All four still face similar Virginia state charges and sentencing prospects.
I must say, though, that it's curious that Vick received a sentence harsher than his dogfighting pals. Is it because he bankrolled the operation and ran it on his property? Is it because he first denied everything and fought to "clear...(his) good name"?
Additionally, I'd thought that Vick would receive a sentence that would be timed such that he would be able to attend pro football spring training. That, obviously, will be a challenge for Vick; time off for "good behavior" is currently an unknown. Michael Vick should see the light of day again sometime in October 2009, in time for the holidays.
It's very sad - and I truly am sorry for Vick - that a man who had essentially everything - opportunity, public support and adoration, money, a great career, respect - has fallen this hard due to his own hand. In addition to putting his football career in grave danger, Vick owes almost $1 million for the care of the animals seized from his property, banks have filed suit claiming default on loans, his home is up for sale, and he has been instructed to reimburse the Atlanta Falcons approximately $20 million in signing bonus money. And, Vick has lost all product endorsements and monies.
Will Vick's fate send a message about dogfighting? About animal cruelty? I honestly do not believe Vick's story will stop whatever is being done now, at least on a large scale. Perhaps it will make similarly involved American celebrities and politicians - and other "authorities" - think twice about their involvement, if for no other reason than possible financial ruin. Perhaps Vick's sentence will act as moral or ethic preventive factor among youth, or those starting out.
We can only hope.
To read a CNN article on Vick's sentencing today, click on this link. To read the NY Times story about Vick's sentencing, click on this link.
To read a copy of Vick's guilty plea agreement on federal dogfighting charges, click on this link at Find Law.
NFL Pro Michael Vick today was sentenced by Judge Henry E. Hudson to 23 months in prison and 3 year's probation, and received a $5,000 fine, on federal charges related to dogfighting. Vick has admitted bankrolling the Bad Newz Kennel dogfighting ring, that operated from his 15-acre Surry County, Virginia, property.
Vick faced a 5-year prison sentence; however, he - like his co-defendants - received a sentence stronger than recommended by federal prosecutors. Interestingly enough, Vick received a sentence months longer than did his cohorts. Fourth defendant Tony Taylor still awaits sentencing. Vick surrendered himself November 19, getting a jump start on serving time. All four still face similar Virginia state charges and sentencing prospects.
I must say, though, that it's curious that Vick received a sentence harsher than his dogfighting pals. Is it because he bankrolled the operation and ran it on his property? Is it because he first denied everything and fought to "clear...(his) good name"?
Additionally, I'd thought that Vick would receive a sentence that would be timed such that he would be able to attend pro football spring training. That, obviously, will be a challenge for Vick; time off for "good behavior" is currently an unknown. Michael Vick should see the light of day again sometime in October 2009, in time for the holidays.
It's very sad - and I truly am sorry for Vick - that a man who had essentially everything - opportunity, public support and adoration, money, a great career, respect - has fallen this hard due to his own hand. In addition to putting his football career in grave danger, Vick owes almost $1 million for the care of the animals seized from his property, banks have filed suit claiming default on loans, his home is up for sale, and he has been instructed to reimburse the Atlanta Falcons approximately $20 million in signing bonus money. And, Vick has lost all product endorsements and monies.
Will Vick's fate send a message about dogfighting? About animal cruelty? I honestly do not believe Vick's story will stop whatever is being done now, at least on a large scale. Perhaps it will make similarly involved American celebrities and politicians - and other "authorities" - think twice about their involvement, if for no other reason than possible financial ruin. Perhaps Vick's sentence will act as moral or ethic preventive factor among youth, or those starting out.
We can only hope.
To read a CNN article on Vick's sentencing today, click on this link. To read the NY Times story about Vick's sentencing, click on this link.
To read a copy of Vick's guilty plea agreement on federal dogfighting charges, click on this link at Find Law.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Judge Henry Hudson Goes Easy on Dogfighting
Purnell Peace and Quanis Phillips, dogfighting co-defendants of NFL Falcons pro Michael Vick, were sentenced on Friday by U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson to 18 & 21 months' (respectively) prison time, in addition to a small fine (less than $300) and 3 years' probation. Third co-defendant Tony Taylor is awaiting Dec. 14 sentencing; Vick will be sentenced formally on Dec. 10, though he surrendered himself to the authorities on Nov. 19 to get an early start on serving time. (Click on the label Vick in the sidebar for related posts.)
Peace and Phillips both received longer jail sentences than suggested by federal prosecutors for their cooperation in the dogfighting case, leading some to believe that Judge Hudson won't go so easy on Vick. However, Judge Hudson has the option of sentencing according to federal guidelines that allow up to 5 years imprisonment; he can impose harsher sentences at his discretion in this case.
It appears to me that Judge Hudson was easy on Peace and Phillips. How much worse can dogfighting be to draw the maximum sentence? Does it have to be worse than hanging, drowning, and electrocuting dogs? What is worse? Phillips goes into this with about 10 prior misdemeanor convictions. Seems to me he doesn't "get" anything about the law; I can't imagine that 21 months in a cell will help. Oh, and here's a kicker: Peace gets to celebrate the holidays; he reports to jail January 3, 2008.
I predict that Judge Henry Hudson will go easy on Vick. If Vick garners the same 18 months sentence, he should be out of prison just in time for pre-season football practice, if anyone will have him. And, I'm sure they will.
Hudson is a disappointment, to put it mildly. Actually, I think he doesn't have any balls; he didn't send any kind of worthwhile message. Indeed, Hudson's federal sentencing can easily influence in favor of lesser sentences for like crimes on the local level. The ripple effect could prove disturbing.
Just when you hope the federal government can be there for you in times of need.... Well, that's a joke.
Lucky Vick. Not so lucky dogs.
To read the story on CNN, click on this link. To read the story on ESPN, click on this link.
Peace and Phillips both received longer jail sentences than suggested by federal prosecutors for their cooperation in the dogfighting case, leading some to believe that Judge Hudson won't go so easy on Vick. However, Judge Hudson has the option of sentencing according to federal guidelines that allow up to 5 years imprisonment; he can impose harsher sentences at his discretion in this case.
It appears to me that Judge Hudson was easy on Peace and Phillips. How much worse can dogfighting be to draw the maximum sentence? Does it have to be worse than hanging, drowning, and electrocuting dogs? What is worse? Phillips goes into this with about 10 prior misdemeanor convictions. Seems to me he doesn't "get" anything about the law; I can't imagine that 21 months in a cell will help. Oh, and here's a kicker: Peace gets to celebrate the holidays; he reports to jail January 3, 2008.
I predict that Judge Henry Hudson will go easy on Vick. If Vick garners the same 18 months sentence, he should be out of prison just in time for pre-season football practice, if anyone will have him. And, I'm sure they will.
Hudson is a disappointment, to put it mildly. Actually, I think he doesn't have any balls; he didn't send any kind of worthwhile message. Indeed, Hudson's federal sentencing can easily influence in favor of lesser sentences for like crimes on the local level. The ripple effect could prove disturbing.
Just when you hope the federal government can be there for you in times of need.... Well, that's a joke.
Lucky Vick. Not so lucky dogs.
To read the story on CNN, click on this link. To read the story on ESPN, click on this link.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
More Michael Vick vs. Martha Stewart
In this week's posts, questions have been raised - and answered - as to whether Michael Vick, like Martha Stewart, perhaps - is being used as an 'example' and therefore enduring more public humiliation than others with like criminal convictions.
Well, the husband has reminded me of the bottom line: Vick and Stewart both broke the law.
As the saying goes: que sera, sera.
Well, the husband has reminded me of the bottom line: Vick and Stewart both broke the law.
As the saying goes: que sera, sera.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Comment: Michael Vick vs. Martha Stewart?
Blogger-pal Oswegan has left the following comment on the post below (Nov. 27): It's an interesting case. Sometimes it seems as though they are using him as an example similar to what they did to Martha Stewart.
Interesting comparison between Mike Vick and Martha Stewart. My sister has also mentioned this to me.
I believe Martha Stewart's jailing - not conviction - truly was used as an example by Big Business (not the government or the public). With Vick, I believe his arrest and resulting charges were happenstance, but justly deserved. I do hope he pays dearly for his actions; in my mind, they are more severe than Martha's. Martha's crime was about money; Vick's crime was about life.
That said, I would agree that members of "the public" - specifically animal rights groups, etc. - are holding Vick up as an example. He set himself up as a perfect target, a perfect example: he is a known face, a liked and familiar person, someone "like us" and probably better - certainly more successful. If it were the guy down the street, no one outside of his neighbors and the local SPCA would care to raise a stink. Unfortunately for Vick, and fortunately for the rest of us, the timing in this country is such that animal cruelty can now be addressed on a national scale, and the opportunity to use a nationally recognized persona as an example is not to be missed. Vick is the perfect example of the guy you would least expect and representative of how even beautiful people can do the ugliest of things. He was the best of us, and we let ourselves down. I am not at all sorry for him.
Will Vick's arrest, conviction, and jailing stop others? On a grand scale, I doubt it. But if it stops people from believing they can get away with heinous crimes simply because they have money, success, or connections - and it stops one of them or gives them pause to reconsider their actions - then I'm all for it. And if it educates the public to further put an end to this ugliness, then I'm all for that, too. At least it's a first step in the right direction.
Interesting comparison between Mike Vick and Martha Stewart. My sister has also mentioned this to me.
I believe Martha Stewart's jailing - not conviction - truly was used as an example by Big Business (not the government or the public). With Vick, I believe his arrest and resulting charges were happenstance, but justly deserved. I do hope he pays dearly for his actions; in my mind, they are more severe than Martha's. Martha's crime was about money; Vick's crime was about life.
That said, I would agree that members of "the public" - specifically animal rights groups, etc. - are holding Vick up as an example. He set himself up as a perfect target, a perfect example: he is a known face, a liked and familiar person, someone "like us" and probably better - certainly more successful. If it were the guy down the street, no one outside of his neighbors and the local SPCA would care to raise a stink. Unfortunately for Vick, and fortunately for the rest of us, the timing in this country is such that animal cruelty can now be addressed on a national scale, and the opportunity to use a nationally recognized persona as an example is not to be missed. Vick is the perfect example of the guy you would least expect and representative of how even beautiful people can do the ugliest of things. He was the best of us, and we let ourselves down. I am not at all sorry for him.
Will Vick's arrest, conviction, and jailing stop others? On a grand scale, I doubt it. But if it stops people from believing they can get away with heinous crimes simply because they have money, success, or connections - and it stops one of them or gives them pause to reconsider their actions - then I'm all for it. And if it educates the public to further put an end to this ugliness, then I'm all for that, too. At least it's a first step in the right direction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)