Dogs for people who suffer from allergies.

For dog lovers with bad allergies, hypoallergenic dogs may be the answer to your problems. Many dog lovers have gone for years without having their favorite furry friends around, simply because the dander from the dog coat causes them uncontrollable allergy symptoms. Unfortunately many of these potential owners didn’t know about dog breeds that are considered hypoallergenic, either because they shed only small amounts of hair or because their dog dander is not allergy producing.

 

What Causes Dog Allergies

 

It isn’t the dog itself or even the hair of the dog that causes allergies in some humans, but the dander that flakes off of the skin. Often this dander is carried over onto the dog hair that falls onto the floor, couches or beds of a home, but it is still the dander, not the hair that causes the allergies. With this in mind some humans with allergies will mistake their allergies as coming from the hair and will think that a hairless dog or a short-haired dog will produce less allergens than a long-haired dog. This simply is not the case. There are many medium to long-haired breeds that produce little to no dander, while there are some short haired breeds that produce a lot of dander. Remember that all dogs produce dander, it is just that some produce a great deal less than others. 

Tips for Reducing Pet Allergens

 

  1. Get an air purifier that can be used in the main areas of the house. Use the purifier at all times in order to effectively reduce dander.

  2. Find a high suction vaccum that will remove almost all pet dander from the home. Use this on a regular basis.

  3. Limit all dog access to your sleeping areas as well as your sitting areas.

  4. Regularly wash sheets, curtains, pillow covers, table clothes and any other removable upholstery covers.

  5. Brush dog twice a day. Give bath at least once a week to remove excess dander.

A hypoallergenic dog breed list

Afghan Hound              

American Hairless Terrier

Basenji

Bedington Terrier

Bichon Frise

Border Terrier

Chinese Crested Dog

German Shorthaired Pointer

Greyhound

Italian Greyhound

Irish Water Spaniel

King Blue Terrier

Lhasa Apso

Maltese

Mexican Hairless

Peruvian Ina

Poodles (all)

Portuguese Water Dog

Schnauzers (all)

Shih Tzu

Yorkshire Terrier

Wheaten Terrier

 

Whippet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dogs for people who suffer from allergies.

For dog lovers with bad allergies, hypoallergenic dogs may be the answer to your problems. Many dog lovers have gone for years without having their favorite furry friends around, simply because the dander from the dog coat causes them uncontrollable allergy symptoms. Unfortunately many of these potential owners didn’t know about dog breeds that are considered hypoallergenic, either because they shed only small amounts of hair or because their dog dander is not allergy producing.

 

What Causes Dog Allergies

 

It isn’t the dog itself or even the hair of the dog that causes allergies in some humans, but the dander that flakes off of the skin. Often this dander is carried over onto the dog hair that falls onto the floor, couches or beds of a home, but it is still the dander, not the hair that causes the allergies. With this in mind some humans with allergies will mistake their allergies as coming from the hair and will think that a hairless dog or a short-haired dog will produce less allergens than a long-haired dog. This simply is not the case. There are many medium to long-haired breeds that produce little to no dander, while there are some short haired breeds that produce a lot of dander. Remember that all dogs produce dander, it is just that some produce a great deal less than others. 

Tips for Reducing Pet Allergens

 

  1. Get an air purifier that can be used in the main areas of the house. Use the purifier at all times in order to effectively reduce dander.

  2. Find a high suction vaccum that will remove almost all pet dander from the home. Use this on a regular basis.

  3. Limit all dog access to your sleeping areas as well as your sitting areas.

  4. Regularly wash sheets, curtains, pillow covers, table clothes and any other removable upholstery covers.

  5. Brush dog twice a day. Give bath at least once a week to remove excess dander.

A hypoallergenic dog breed list

Afghan Hound              

American Hairless Terrier

Basenji

Bedington Terrier

Bichon Frise

Border Terrier

Chinese Crested Dog

German Shorthaired Pointer

Greyhound

Italian Greyhound

Irish Water Spaniel

King Blue Terrier

Lhasa Apso

Maltese

Mexican Hairless

Peruvian Ina

Poodles (all)

Portuguese Water Dog

Schnauzers (all)

Shih Tzu

Yorkshire Terrier

Wheaten Terrier

 

Whippet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ALERT!!!!!’JUST SAY ‘NO’ TO ANYTHING GROWN IN PA.-PLEASE READ!!

Something like thing a little dog feces on your produce isn’t something to worry about. 
Think Again

 

Awareness Day says until the authorities ADMIT, INVESTIGATE, CONTAIN, AND CLEAN UP, any contamination they
find caused by using dog feces and dog bodies as fertilizers.  ‘JUST SAY NO” TO ANYTHING GROWN IN PA.   
Please advise your friends and neighbors, regarding the health hazards associated with using these items as fertilizer. 
It is a common practice and if you live anywhere near a kennel, your own property could be contaminated because of run off.

We have tried vigilantly for over 2 years to warn everyone concerned that is it going on.
The following is an excerpt of a few of the emails we have received from people in authority who we have contacted.

 But before you read that, please read both Newspaper articles. We keep being told by the authorities
that they are not aware of the practice of feces being used as fertilizer.  What is most amazing is they say that after we tell them and forward them the information.
 

 Its time to take a stand, Shortly we will post who to call and write to regarding these issues. 
Insist on answers, farmers and kennel owners that pollute the earth need to be held accountable. 
Authorities who allow it to happen also need to be held accountable.

Click the link below to see a very interesting time-line.
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Time Line of PA dealing with the Puppy Mills and waste/composting of the dogs that are dead
(adobe reader needed)
 
Nice Article Confirming the use of dog feces as manure (adobe reader needed)

Stop EPA Plan to Exempt Factory Farms from Clean Air Standards

Our focus this year is on the environmental damage that the CAFO (
concentrated animal feeding operations of dogs) in
Pennsylvania is causing.

 Excerpt from Concentrated animal feeding operation – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The large concentration of animals, animal waste and dead animals in a small space poses many
ethical and environmental problems. Animal rights, animal welfare, and humane activists have charged that CAFO’s
are cruel to animals. As CAFO’s become increasingly common, so do concerns about air pollution
and ground water contamination.   In 24 states, isolated cases of groundwater contamination has been linked to CAFOs.
For example, the ten million hogs in North Carolina generate 19 million tons of waste per year.
The US federal government acknowledges the waste disposal issue and requires that
animal waste
be stored in lagoons. These lagoons can be as large as 7.5 acres. Lagoons not protected
with an impermeable liner can leak waste into groundwater under some conditions, as can runoff from
manure spread back onto fields as fertilizer in the case of an unforseen heavy rainfall.

If you are planning on joining us in September, please email us and let us know.  

Please respond to  AWARENESSDAY@AOL.COM

 

AWARENESS DAY asks that you boycott;

Pennsylvania Produce.

Puppy Mill Awareness Day will be Saturday, 9/20/08

IT’S FOR THE DOGS
and FOR YOUR HEALTH 

ALERT!!!!!’JUST SAY ‘NO’ TO ANYTHING GROWN IN PA.-PLEASE READ!!

Something like thing a little dog feces on your produce isn’t something to worry about. 
Think Again

 

Awareness Day says until the authorities ADMIT, INVESTIGATE, CONTAIN, AND CLEAN UP, any contamination they
find caused by using dog feces and dog bodies as fertilizers.  ‘JUST SAY NO” TO ANYTHING GROWN IN PA.   
Please advise your friends and neighbors, regarding the health hazards associated with using these items as fertilizer. 
It is a common practice and if you live anywhere near a kennel, your own property could be contaminated because of run off.

We have tried vigilantly for over 2 years to warn everyone concerned that is it going on.
The following is an excerpt of a few of the emails we have received from people in authority who we have contacted.

 But before you read that, please read both Newspaper articles. We keep being told by the authorities
that they are not aware of the practice of feces being used as fertilizer.  What is most amazing is they say that after we tell them and forward them the information.
 

 Its time to take a stand, Shortly we will post who to call and write to regarding these issues. 
Insist on answers, farmers and kennel owners that pollute the earth need to be held accountable. 
Authorities who allow it to happen also need to be held accountable.

Click the link below to see a very interesting time-line.
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Time Line of PA dealing with the Puppy Mills and waste/composting of the dogs that are dead
(adobe reader needed)
 
Nice Article Confirming the use of dog feces as manure (adobe reader needed)

Stop EPA Plan to Exempt Factory Farms from Clean Air Standards

Our focus this year is on the environmental damage that the CAFO (
concentrated animal feeding operations of dogs) in
Pennsylvania is causing.

 Excerpt from Concentrated animal feeding operation – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The large concentration of animals, animal waste and dead animals in a small space poses many
ethical and environmental problems. Animal rights, animal welfare, and humane activists have charged that CAFO’s
are cruel to animals. As CAFO’s become increasingly common, so do concerns about air pollution
and ground water contamination.   In 24 states, isolated cases of groundwater contamination has been linked to CAFOs.
For example, the ten million hogs in North Carolina generate 19 million tons of waste per year.
The US federal government acknowledges the waste disposal issue and requires that
animal waste
be stored in lagoons. These lagoons can be as large as 7.5 acres. Lagoons not protected
with an impermeable liner can leak waste into groundwater under some conditions, as can runoff from
manure spread back onto fields as fertilizer in the case of an unforseen heavy rainfall.

If you are planning on joining us in September, please email us and let us know.  

Please respond to  AWARENESSDAY@AOL.COM

 

AWARENESS DAY asks that you boycott;

Pennsylvania Produce.

Puppy Mill Awareness Day will be Saturday, 9/20/08

IT’S FOR THE DOGS
and FOR YOUR HEALTH 

The Puppy Mill Industry -Buyer Beware

nullnullnullnull

BUYER BEWARE!
Definition of terms – *puppy farmer: person who breeds dogs as commercial livestock without effort applied to improving the breed *dog broker: person who acts as a middleman in the transaction of dog to buyer. He may buy the dog and resell it at a profit or may receive a commission *puppy mills: commercial dog breeding operations which may or may not keep dogs in humane conditions but who are focused on producing as many dogs as possible at as high a profit margin as possible without concerted effort toward turning out a quality product US puppy mill activity and importing by brokers reveals that*dog auction: run exactly like livestock auctions where high bidder takes the animal home An ongoing investigation of dog brokering, dog auctions,  US puppy mill activity and importing by brokers reveals that we are facing a new challenge in our breed. There is increased activity in puppy farmers’ including all purebred dogs in their inventories of brood animals. We are seeing an increase also in smaller (one dog owners) using bitches who were sold with limited registrations as unsuitable breeding stock, using these bitches for breeding and selling the pups as unregistered.Want more info?Responsible breeders will provide a copy of an AKC registration certificate for the sire and dam of any pup offered for sale.

What is a puppymill?
Help shut down puppymills
Red Flags

 
There’s also an increase in activity in importation by brokers. The imported dogs are sold without their owners having contact with the dogs’ breeders nor information on the dog’s familial background.. Registration of puppies by foreign parents may or may not be possible. Assurance of purebred status is questionable until the foreign pedigree of an import has undergone the scrutiny of the American Kennel Club. Make sure you’re getting a purebred dog by requiring proof that the parents of the dog are registered with the AKC on full privilege registrations or that the dog, itself, if imported, is registered with the AKC before you pay for it. If an imported dog is to be
registered with the AKC, this must be done by the importer. Dobermans are being offered at public auctions, events whose patrons are puppy farmers. These puppy farmers set up future suppliers for brokerages and auctions. Puppy farmers sell other puppy farmers who in turn sell to brokers who sell to pet stores who sell to buyers who have no contact with the producer of the pup and not knowledge of familial history of health.. Such producers do not know where their pups wind up and subsequently cannot follow up on the progeny of their programs. Their breeding decisions are based on factors unrelated to familial genetics because they cannot know the genetics without tracking the progeny of their programs. Responsible
breeders do not sell dogs to brokers or through agents or brokers to persons
unknown to the breeder of the dog. The public is discouraged from buying
dogs through brokers in such cases where they will have no contact with their pup’s breeder.
The puppymill industry has set up several registries to combat the challenges the AKC placed before them by instituting the frequently used sires program. Included are these undesirable registries:
FIC (federation of international canines)
CKC (continental kennel club) )
These acronyms are remarkably similar to the legitimate registries, FCI (Federation Cynologique Internationale) and CKC (Canadian Kennel Club). It is possible that imported puppies will be touted to be registered with the FIC. PLEASE pass word along to the public to beware of these puppymill registries.
We need to get the word out RESPONSIBLE BREEDERS PROVIDE COPIES OF American Kennel Club or Canadian Kennel Club REGISTRATION CERTIFICATES FOR ALL SIRES AND DAMS of pups offered for sale. This is to assure that the parents were registered with the AKC as breeding potential animals and that they are purebred.
To be registered with the AKC, ALL imported dogs MUST be registered by the importer. Do NOT be victimized by exploitive importers. REQUIRE AKC registration BEFORE spending money on any imported dog. The dog may not be purebred if it is not registered with the AKC.

Article Obtained From;  http://www.dpca.org/PublicEd/PEC/index.htm

Strategies for Opposing BSL

 

Fighting Breed Specific Legislation (BSL)What should you do when you learn of a proposed breed-specific bylaw that you want to fight?

The best thing you can do is to realize that there are others out there who are already informed and want to help.

 

  • Don’t waste valuable time re-inventing the wheel. 

  • Do get involved and work with a network of people who can help you to take action effectively. 

  • Keep one thing at the centre of your thoughts: your goal is to do what it takes to ensure that breed specific legislation is not passed. 

  • Offer a better alternative to legislators. 

Here are some sample media kits that you can look to if and when BSL affects your area. Take a good look at these packages, and call your local kennel club and breed clubs for contact names of others already involved. There are people who keep track of proposed legislation in most countries, and these should be the people you look to first when you decide to get involved. Remember: act strategically and don’t re-invent the wheel!

How to Respond to a Dog Bit Incident in your Community
Quite often BSL goes hand-in-hand with a bite incident in a community. This is an excellent media kit with statistics and guidance when something like this happens in your community. The most excellent advice on this page is: “Do not talk to any reporters until you have some information in front of you to work with.” Be prepared, and you better your chances of successfully meeting your goals. There is also good advice about preventing this type of incident.

Sample Letters to Send to your Legislators
Writing letters to your legislators, and encouraging others in your area to do the same, really does help. Here are some form letters that you can use to effectively present your position to politicians. Download one, fill it out, and send it to your legislator. Encourage others in your community to do the same. Remember that — like it or not — politicians are elected, and to be effective you need to speak to their political agendas and concerns.

Writing an Effective Letter to the Media
What matters most to politicians are the views and opinions of their constituents. Letters to the Editor are a powerful way to get your message across to politicians and others in your community. This article from a freelance journalists explains how you can write an effective letter to the editor.

California’s Non-Breed Specific Dangerous Dog Laws
There are better options than breed-specific laws, and this California law is one of the best. Have a look, and present it to your legislators as a better option to the BSL that they bylaw have proposed.

Better yet, why not take proactive action before BSL comes to your area? There are many things you can do to help before there is a problem. According to Ann Lettis, who has had a longtime involvement in both fighting BSL and educating the public about dogs, the first thing you should do is find out what laws currently exist in your area. Once you have this information, review those laws and

Information Obtained From;     http://www.dogwatch.net/strategy.html

FROM FIREARMS TO FIDO”Feel Good” Laws Make Things Worse

Landmark Harvard Study Confirms:
Over-Regulating Law-Abiding Citizens
Aggravates Social Problems, Creates More Scofflaws

NAIA Newsletter: October 5, 2007

PORTLAND, OR – A landmark study published last year in one of America’s most respected scholarly journals provides powerful evidence that “feel-good” legislation – indiscriminate and/or unenforceable bans, as well as draconian sanctions applied to behavior that is already illegal – degrades respect for law and reduces compliance, while aggravating (or at best, failing to improve) the problems these laws were supposedly enacted to solve.

The study specifically addresses gun laws in the U.S. and worldwide. “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International Evidence,” by Don B. Kates and Gary A. Mauser: Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, vol. 30, pages 651-694. But its broader point supports a central reality that has long been recognized by the National Animal Interest Alliance: whether lawmakers target pet owners or gun owners, ill-conceived “feel-good” laws usually just make things worse. (Dr. Mauser has been a long-time supporter and a member of the NAIA.)

Researchers Kates and Mauser compared crime statistics from more than a dozen countries including Norway, Denmark, Greece, Italy, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the U.S., and many others. Although their findings echoed two previous large-scale international studies, some observers found their conclusions surprising. According to Kates and Mauser, “Many people think that nations with more firearms will have more murder and that banning firearms will reduce murder and other violence – If anything it was the reverse.”

Specifically, the two scholars – Kates is an American constitutional lawyer; Mauser is a Canadian academic – said that “banning guns to the general public increases people’s vulnerability and fails to reduce violence because the law-abiding citizenry are victims of violent crime, not perpetrators.”

Kates and Mauser’s paper is online here: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

“For more than a decade, experts at the NAIA and its friends and supporters have seen the identical dynamic played out with regard to animal control legislation in the U.S.” said NAIA national director Patti Strand, a recognized expert on animal issues. “Too often, well-meaning American lawmakers looking for answers to animal control problems have fallen prey to attractive quick-fix solutions and feel-good laws offered by activist groups. Many such groups have considerable media savvy, and do a good job focusing media attention on their view of the issue, but they seldom have any effect on the problems they claim to address. Worse, these groups often pit lawmakers against their own constituents, painting pet owners and breeders as the problem or even the enemy – thus discouraging the sort of dialog between regulators and stakeholders that is so necessary for drafting effective laws. This process not only exacerbates the original problem, but frequently adds entirely new and unnecessary problems to the mix.”

The legislative backfire gallery – laws intended to achieve an admirable goal such as reducing neighborhood nuisances, stray cats or discarded dogs but which often achieve the opposite effect – include arbitrary pet limit laws, bans against specific breeds, penalties against feeding neighborhood cats, outlawing elective veterinary procedures like debarking and declawing or charging exorbitant licensing fees for intact animals. In addition to requiring unachievable levels of enforcement, such laws tend to push responsible pet owners underground or out of ownership, neither of which is good for the community; and they also have little effect on irresponsible owners who will continue outside the licensing system.

Bans against specific breeds produce relinquishment and euthanasia of well-behaved pets of the targeted breeds, while irresponsible and criminal pet owners just switch to new breeds and continue abusing their dogs. Penalizing home owners for feeding neighborhood cats assures that more feral cats will be euthanized. Banning elective veterinary procedures often converts a household or neighborhood concern into a shelter statistic, as pet owners give up on solving problem behaviors. Charging exorbitant license fees for intact dogs and cats causes responsible breeders to cut back or opt out and thereby reduces the best source of home-raised, healthy, well-socialized puppies and kittens. Yet it won’t affect breeders who don’t license in the first place, the ones most likely to create castaway pets. Ironically, laws that push people and their pets out of the licensing system also hamper the principal function of licensing: that of assuring rabies vaccination compliance. And unreasonable, unenforceable animal control laws erode community support for animal control.

Although such regulations may be well-meant, the unintended consequences have striking parallels to the gun control study by Kates and Mauser. Their Harvard study said: “Banning guns to felons, violent misdemeanants, juveniles and the insane (which our laws already do) is a good idea in general, though such laws are very difficult to enforce. Disarming those who only want to defend themselves, however, is a surefire road to empowering criminals at the expense of the innocent.” The result in many cases increases the crime rate rather than decreasing it, simply because, for the criminals, disarming the population increases opportunity and decreases risk.

But how does a disarmed community, becoming more vulnerable to criminal activity relate to a community that adopts burdensome licensing fees, breeding restrictions or bans on pets?

The lawmakers’ missteps in each instance have common factors, both relating to the effect on the community as a whole. Because they don’t distinguish between good and bad gun owners, gun bans diminish the freedom of law-abiding gun owners, while leaving the criminal gun owners as free as they were before the ban to continue their illegal activities; thus making gun-related crime – the original target – worse.

Unrealistic pet laws diminish the freedom of law-abiding pet owners, chase the best of them out of the supply chain, and leave scofflaw pet owners as free as they were before the imposition of restrictions to continue as an unlicensed or uncontrolled problem segment of the pet owner population. Just as law-abiding gun owners cause no problems, law-abiding pet owners cause none, either. Yet, both are hit with restrictions while the causes of problems in each case find new opportunities: one to commit armed crimes unopposed by any force, and the other to fill the void of puppy and kitten demand as responsible home-based breeders – dedicated breed enthusiasts in particular – cut back or quit.

The goal of some pet laws is to reduce surplus shelter animals by eliminating irresponsible breeding, but if only the most conscientious breeders with good placement practices obey the law, then the net result of the law is to reduce puppies and kittens from the best, most law abiding sources. It doesn’t reduce problem pet owners who cause neighborhood problems, abuse their animals or produce dogs and cats that end up in shelters. In fact, a new black-market for puppies and kittens has developed to supply the demand that formerly was met by responsible, law-abiding breeders who’ve been forced out of breeding by unreasonable laws and fees. http://www.cbp.gov/xp/CustomsToday/2006/jun_jul/other/puppies.xml

The result of this is a threefold whammy: 1) unlicensed activities continue at the same rate (or increase as the human population increases); 2) a significant number of pet owners who want to be law-abiding citizens give up banned breeds, quit feeding neighborhood cats or terminate valuable breeding programs rather than operate illegally or cope with unreasonable laws and increased fees; and 3) because demand for many beloved breeds does not decline when a law is passed, people who know little about breeds or breeding move into the void to fill demand. Unlike the overregulated compliant breeders of the past who were dedicated to improving and preserving breeds and promoting responsible pet ownership, and belonged to associations like the American Kennel Club (AKC), the United Kennel Club (UKC), Cat Fanciers Association (CFA), The International Cat Association (TICA) and many other associations organized for service and other working dogs, the newcomers appear motivated mostly by the opportunity to make a quick buck. They lack knowledge of basic husbandry and health, and don’t have good placement practices.

So along with encouraging pet relinquishment, feel-good laws guarantee that good breeding and placement practices will be replaced with poorer practices, and in the long term they assure an increase in shelter animals – one of the original target problems that the new restrictions were supposed to solve. Is it any wonder, then, that best estimates suggest that only about 30% of pets targeted by these ordinances are ever licensed, even though both human and pet populations are rising?

Instead of recognizing pet ownership as a widely held, positive community value and working with the pet owning community to create reasonable, enforceable laws, attempts to license the remaining 70% of household pets have focused on the empty threats of enforcing greater restrictions and heavier penalties. Empty, because funding for increased enforcement usually does not exist. So while this tactic may scare a few owners into grudging compliance, it also causes a corresponding loss of cooperation and support from the group that was already compliant. Following passage of draconian anti-breeder laws, shelter populations in the area rise.

Passing feel-good laws is akin to the old joke about the tavern drunk who was looking for his lost keys under the streetlight, rather than down the block where he actually lost them – because, he said, “the light was better.” Passing laws that strike at easy targets (the law-abiding, responsible pet owner) does little to solve the problems of noisy, abandoned or dangerous animals, euthanasia rates, and the like. It mainly alienates the pet-loving population from animal control agencies charged with enforcement, and sets up a needless conflict between groups (i.e. state or local government vs. dog and cat enthusiasts, kennel and cat clubs) that should be allies.

The good news is that some local and state governments have understood these commonsense arguments (backed by reams of studies and statistics) and have avoided passing “feel-good” laws in favor of smart, targeted legislation that actually addresses problems and puts pet owners and animal control enforcement on the same side.

NAIA applauds this enlightened legislative approach and has, in fact, helped lawmakers in numerous jurisdictions to craft superior regulations. Across the nation, NAIA has helped replace breed-specific language with language targeting at risk behavior and irresponsible and abusive pet owners. In Oregon we helped pass a landmark dangerous dog law and in Monroe County, Florida, we worked with residents and local government to replace an unenforceable $500 intact animal fee with a $35 fee, removed arbitrary restrictions on animal limits, and made other changes that vastly increase chances for compliance and cultivate goodwill and cooperation between citizens, lawmakers and animal control officials.

Over the course of the last 16 years, NAIA has played a role, directly or indirectly, in hundreds of positive legislative outcomes. We have served on national, state and local task force bodies, on blue ribbon panels, and on animal welfare, and fish and wildlife committees aimed at improving public policy affecting animals, animal ownership and the natural environment. In many cases, NAIA and its members have succeeded in launching precedent-setting initiatives. We have helped draft model laws, created reasonable standards for dog parks, removed arbitrary limit laws, improved consumer-protection laws, backed successful trap-neuter-return programs and generally helped make animal-welfare and animal-control legislation more reasonable and effective.

Similar to the gun ban study, our research, as reflected in the NAIA Guide to Pet Friendly Ordinances, shows that to be successful, ordinances must distinguish between responsible and irresponsible pet owners. They must offer support and incentives to encourage and reward responsible pet ownership; and they must enforce reasonable penalties against irresponsible pet owners to bring them into compliance.

“Lawmakers don’t have to reinvent the wheel and they certainly don’t have to emulate the failed model of gun-control legislation that ends up punishing the innocent, creating more criminals, and empowering precisely the wrong people,” said NAIA’s Strand. “The successes of well-researched animal regulations adopted in recent years by numerous jurisdictions including Oregon and Florida mentioned above, will translate beautifully into every city and state in this country.”

“We at NAIA stand ready to assist any state or local lawmaker, as we have done for the last 16 years, with expert consultation and practical information about what works and what doesn’t,” says Strand. “NAIA urges government officials and animal supporters to reject ‘feel-good’ laws in favor of proven regulatory approaches that actually ‘do good’ for the pets and pet owners of America.”

###

Permission to reprint items found in the NAIA and NAIA Trust Newsletters or on the websites is granted with proper attribution to the author and source, including the website address for each organization