Save Our Dogs, a grassroots effort to save working dogs from CA AB 1634/Now SB 250, mandatory spay/neuter
Visit Save Our Dogs
Dog & Cat Owners Say No to AB 1634 SB 250 ~ ROUND 18plus!
See for FACTS on SB 250
Love your Pets? Read my files on Label Animal_Control.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Legal Broadcasting Network - Mandatory Spay and Neuter - 3 interviews

Lately, way too much going on. Thought I get this one posted at least! I have some nice photos from my crew, and also updates from Helmut. :)

For the ongoing stuff... Legislative session continues as we work to prevent Mandatory Spay and Neuter from being implemented statewide.

Head over to to see video interview regarding MSN from three champions people who love their dogs.
"The LB Network is the home base for lawyers across America as well as the professional networking page of The Legal Broadcast Network. It’s entirely Free to join and it opens the door to the future of professional networking and media for attorneys."

Dog Regulations Run Amok? The CDOC vs The City of Los Angeles

No area of the law or regulation creates more controversy and passion then anything linked to dogs, cats and other domestic pets and the lawsuit brought by Concerned Dog Owners of California (CDOC) against the City of Los Angeles over their mandatory spay and neuter regulations is no exception. Last year they filed a lawsuit to over turn the mandatory spay and neuter regulations imposed on all dog owners in the City, in which set dates for spay and neuter are established, civil and administrative penalties are outlined and entire categories of dog breeders, owners and hobbyists now fall under increasingly strict laws and oversight...

Interviews are with:
David Frei - Westminster Kennel Club
John Jensen - lead attorney on the lawsuit against the City of California
Cathie Turner - Executive Director of Concerned Dog Owners of California

the videos are also archived here.

For up-to-date info on California animal law lobbying issues for the first half of 2009, go to True Agendas.


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 6/24/2009 05:32:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Saturday, May 30, 2009

NO on SB 250!

This legislative session in California has really been a PAIN. We have a little problem in that California spends money like a bimbo and creates legislation to force compliance with any number of Politically Correct fads and hairbrained schemes without considering the collateral damage to businesses and farms. Additionally the voting population is not really involved with their own government. I guess we all like to believe that there are checks and balances and that our Constitution will prevail. If you are suspicious, you must be a tin foil hatter. Anyway, California is paying for these sins, left and right, and YET... while we are dealing with these mistakes, our pathetic government continues to pass more pork because of ideas that 'sound good' to the citizens.

If you want to cut right to the chase and do stuff about this bill, go here, a google document page where I have placed essential contact information and instructions on what to do.

The mandatory spay and neuter bill is one such idiot package. SB 250 is our current reincarnation of AB 1634 which did not pass last year when our legislators found the bill to be fundamentally flawed. However the people anxious to pass the bill are trying again. It does NOT work. It will be a disaster for our farms and for millions of dollars income for the state. Furthermore, the premise of the bill presents a false problem and presents an equally false solution!
Charts from -click to enlarge
See SAVE OUR DOGS for detail and more issues about Mandatory Spay and Neuter (MSN)

Why are some places passing this bill? In Los Angeles, it passed because the promoters flippantly stated (LIES) as if it were fact that Santa Cruz's problems would be helped with MSN. But as you can see from the chart, they are an unmitigated FAIL. Additionally, since Los Angeles willingly used false info to get the bill passed, they too have increased kills and are not solving their original problem. The first step in solving a problem is to correctly identify it.

The hydra strategy.......
The thing is now, the MSN groups are undaunted with their total failures. They seem to think that their failure is not due to them analyzing their problem but is due to all other people that do not have MSN. Thus, they have multiplied their 'divide and conquer' strategy; it resembles the life form known as a hydra. They have chopped up the bigger goals so that the smaller pieces can pass first and like that hydra, the small bits rebuild into a monster. The multiple bills come together after passage, with many complicated ordinances that can be much worse than the original big bill because the smaller ones are amended further and include even more invasive bits tacked onto them.

Read the news and you will see this in action--HSUS lobbyists go to the legislators of other states and say "your state is behind on animal care issues; this and that bill passed in California and other states." This makes legislators think it's really "by the people" since the other states were 'won' and they become convinced that HSUS represents mainstream thought. This is beyond disingenuous, but this is what they are doing.

HSUS and others in the extremist groups discuss this strategy to educate their peers in how successful it is and get sleepy little towns with their boards of supervisors swinging happily from imaginary "progressive" monkey vines.

JQP becomes part of the problem as they sit back and let these laws be enacted without seeing the need for checks and balance.

Anyway, a great post was on another of the forums I read, so I will copy bits of it here. Some of this material is revived from when we were fighting AB 1634.*

It estimated* the benefit dogs give to California ranchers at *about *$140 million.* Add to that about *$1.3 million* boosting local economies by *herding trial exhibitors.*

The AKC conducts ongoing research regarding the economic benefits of our events, and our estimates conclude that these exhibitors contributed approximately *$92 million* to local California economies.

Registries such as AKC (American Kennel Club) and CFA (Cat Fanciers of America) conduct ongoing research regarding the economic benefits of our events, and their estimates conclude that these exhibitors contribute nearly 100 million annually to local California economies. This is the contribution from dog and cat shows and does not include the money spent on vets, groomers, handlers, supplies, pet food, etc.

* So far, this looks like AKC dog shows, CFA cat shows, herding trials and working ranch dogs contribute at least $233.3 million to California's economy every year. * This doesn't include hunting trials and other canine performance events including Schutzhund events, sighthound courses, UKC or ARBA dog shows, etc.

Senate Bill 250 is the linchpin on which all the other HSUS-backed radical animal rights bills depend. Sen. Florez -thinks California can afford to lose these animals, their genetics and their owners? In addition to the *$65 million lost by Long Beach* when AKC cancelled the Eukanuba contract a couple of months ago?
See SAVE OUR DOGS (on Twitter)/web for more updates. See True Agendas (on Twitter)/web for frequently updated brief details.

Fight SB 250! (instructions link again)

Labels: , , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 5/30/2009 01:38:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Crusade against HSUS and Comic Relief from a Ninja Cat :)

Helmut at the beach with a Great Dane. (pic from earlier this year, via Geno) It's just always great to see happy pics and good news about dogs. :)

'Animal Wrongs
' seems to be a better and more accurate phrase than 'Animal Rights' as practiced by HSUS, PeTA and other supporters, including some local animal shelters. Lots of reports suggesting reform abound, but they are still killing pets as they see fit and making it difficult for pet lovers to keep their rights. Seems counter intuitive regarding 'humane' organizations but until reform happens, we still have quite a fight at hand.

Seen on Craigslist
April 19, 2009

How does HSUS Work Against Pets+Owners?

HSUS passes laws (HSUS has almost 200 laws for this year) then uses those laws for cases it plans to bring forward, then uses those cases in their incremental process to bring down both interstate commerce and pet ownership, kennels, pet stores, dog breeders, along with difficulties for agriculture and other animals.

We can guarantee that the CA Prop 2 (battery cages) will come back to haunt us in pet ownership, or farming. HSUS will probably find some other ways to outlaw farm animals or make a huge problem for farming–after all HSUS right NOW is trying to outlaw all “non-native” species including birds, herps,guineas,ferrets, turtles and many other common species in the USA that have been owned for 50-100 years.

Ownership in the law, is of the highest legal nature, and as a concept, usually means the ultimate control over the item owned. It also usually refers to having the control legally over such item (property) and also the right to use it for as long as is allowed in the law, and in many instances, to bring a lawsuit where the owner’s rights are affected. Guardianship does NOT necessarily mean any of the same things, which is why animal rights prefers it over “owner.”

CA law has statutes that show one of the main incidents of ownership in property, is the right to TRANSFER it (Bias v Ohio Farmers Indemnity Co (1938) 28 Cal.App.2d 14,16). Or, “A common characteristic of a property right, is that it may be disposed of, transferred to another.” (Douglas Aircraft Co. v Byram (1943) 57 Cal.App.2d 311, 317)

Thefore we can see why Peta wanted to take possession/ownership of different animals because after they owned them, they could just dispose of them in the garbage dump (after killing them via lethal injection)—and they suffered no consequences. [Actually it appeared there was fraud in the procurement of the animals but we don't know if they were hit for that.]

And, we can see why HSUS doesn’t want animals TRANSFERRED to others because that’s an element of OWNERSHIP.

The obvious next step for HSUS is to claim if animals can’t be sold or transferred, then that means THEY ARE NOT PROPERTY.

HSUS is currently trying to outlaw the use (import, export, transport, breeding) or movement in interstate commerce of any non native species via HR669 in Congress by using the Lacey Act. See the PIJAC website for details, or see the post on this site with the link to PIJAC.

This would encompass virtually every bird, reptile, amphibian, fish and some mammals kept as pets. In general only a small number of species have caused environmental issues (in FL and HI.)

This nonsense by HSUS subterfuge has not been lost on us.

We are VERY aware of what HSUS and Animal Rights are trying to do. Clearly the agenda is to chip away at the ownership of animals until we miss the fact that the WORDS USED FOR OWNERSHIP have been eliminated, then next thing you know—-HSUS has eliminated the ownership of animals. No transfers, no selling, no bartering, no trading, etc. This has already been attempted in HSUS anti pet laws where a dog with cropped ears couldn’t be transferred/owned by a rescue because the rescue didn’t have the documents proving how the ears were done.

It would be easier to make “owning” something next to impossible, or exorbitantly too expensive or far too much red tape, than to outright say “you can’t own that”–which is Animal Rights done the HSUS way–as can be seen by the multidue of 180 Anti pet laws HSUS is pushing just this year…..

HSUS has a habit of purposely drafting bad laws, then getting them passed, then taking cases, and using the laws that HSUS has HELPED PASS—as proof that such ideas have already been cemented IN THE LAW. In other words, HSUS makes the very laws it fully intends to use as part of a case it has already planned, then if they win that case, it will set some precedent in the law. THIS IS THE NUMBER ONE HSUS GOAL—TO SET ANIMAL RIGHTS LAW PRECEDENT……………………

If you value your ownership over your pets and animals, and the fact that pet-related businesses are allowed to profit over the selling, buying, trading, owning, or otherwise pet-related legal businesse ownership; if you want CHOICE in what dog or cat or bird or fish that you can BUY, own, or trade or sell; if you want the ability to eat the foods you like (milk, eggs, cheese, meat) then you do NOT want to support ANY HSUS LAWS.

As has been stated on this blog ever since it started—you don’t join the KKK if you’re Black, you don’t push Hitler if you’re Jewish, and you don’t help HSUS if you value ownership of animals.

And because the Pet connection blog online, is one that keeps saying (especially author Gina Spadafori) that HSUS can be trusted to do the right thing—where HSUS cannot be trusted at all…………….it is our opinion that Pet connection lacks the ability to discern Animal Rights in disguise—-and we do not recommend anyone following the opinions of much of the blog—mostly because Spadafori only harps on Peta–but not HSUS.

Just because one authors books, doesn’t mean that one knows Animal Rights. Further, Spadifori harped on Petland claiming that they should be OUT of business if they didn’t ADOPT out dogs, rather than SELL them? That is a very very dangerous proposition, and one that we surely don’t want to push as owners. NOT if you understand the HSUS concept of animal rights–which we don’t believe Spadafori understands [unless she is animal rights herself---]

HSUS is the FAR more dangerous group—if you understand Animal Rights. Spadifori also commended HSUS on filing the lawsuit against Hunte and Petland—that is a mistake, because it indicates that one does NOT understand what HSUS is doing strategy wise.

For example, HSUS pushed the Stevens free speech case, so that Stevens would be prosecuted for selling videos which showed dog fighting (he didn’t make the videos)—BUT the Appeals court held that the statute used (which was likely pushed by HSUS)— which was set up for “crush films”, could cause LEGAL acts to become illegal if the law was upheld, and might even cause the Disney film (Bambi) to be illegal. [See the Stevens case on the Front Page on this blogsite]

Another case is Amazon, where after HSUS pushed the Stevens case (Stevens convicted under the statute ) HSUS sued Amazon to stop the sale of chicken videos or dog video sales, claiming they were violating the law. Another case is the PA commercial kennel laws pushed by HSUS and ASPCA, where after the law was passed, HSUS then sued Petland and Hunte, no doubt so they could use their own law that passed (PA) as proof of concern over the commercial kennel issues. All of this is just a part of the pattern and practice of getting incremental steps in place, passing laws, filing lawsuits, and using the laws to set up precedence for HSUS Animal Rights. We don’t doubt for a second that their entire 16 attorney team or 160 member team or whatever, just goes to the conference room and has a session on strategy for the next 5 years.

Don’t think for a second that we haven’t noticed it, because we knew it a long time ago. Another example is the DNA testing and Breed Specific Legislation that HSUS “claims” it doesn’t support?

HSUS filed an amicus animal rights brief in the DENVER 2008 case re BSL, [yes, we did read it]—- claiming that the DNA companies claimed their DNA test “was 99% accurate.” Then on the animal law and historical society page (Michigan School of Law, Animal Rights Section)—the school has pages which show “how DNA proved” that a particular dog WAS NOT a pitbull subject to BSL. But the key really is, if they can prove it ISN’T a pitbull, and it’s actually 99% accurate, can it prove that IT IS A PITBULL?

And that’s why HSUS put that amicus brief in the Federal Court to Denver. So when that issue comes up down the line, HSUS will be the first to claim that DNA testing should be used [to have pitbull dogs killed], because it’s 99% accurate, despite the fact that the AKC and UKC don’t have the exact same breed name/types for American Pitbull Terriers, or American Stafforshire Terriers. AKC doesn’t recognize the APBT. But that won’t stop HSUS—you wait and see. They like to keep people fooled.

Any Animal Rights group like HSUS that has that much time and money into killing pitbull type dogs is definitely going to try and eliminate more of those dogs, use such dogs as a ploy to raise more funding, and then kill more of them. We have long ago figured out HSUS’ pattern and practice, and that’s why we keep telling everyone not to trust HSUS. They are just Animal Rights that think no one can figure out what they are doing.


You don’t have to be an attorney or have a legal education to figure that one out. And you don’t even have to be a pet owner. You just have to have some logic and common sense to see what is going on.

Not in our lifetime, never, never ever. The demise of HSUS will come first. Because too many people will see what they are REALLY doing. Help us spread the word! Tell everyone you know and make it a point to tell at least 10-50 other people. This is the only way that legislators are going to figure it out, and the only way the public will stop donating.

People that donate to HSUS Animal rights might as well donate to PETA. Because they are carrying out the Peta agenda.

There's been some good news but it's still no time to sit back. To see an example of how convoluted and disgusting some of the problems are, see this article on the removal of Ed Boks from L.A. Animal Services. He was major component in pushing some extremist bills in L.A. County and attempted to get all of California to buy the rotten goods.

One of the things that has taken so much time from me over the past weeks has been the effort to keep up with over two dozen animal related bills on the California agenda. The extremist strategy of chopping up the concepts of larger failed bills, into smaller bite sizes, makes it considerably more difficult to get people to realize that all of the bills are part of the greater goals.

Now for some fun.
I just have to share this video. No need for captions on this one. :)

And more fun!
Free game giveaway of the day is "Around the World in 80 Days", with only eleven hours left for downloads of an unlocked version of the game as I write. This is a beautiful match-3 game and it comes with a screen saver that increases options as you gain levels within the game. Gamezebo reviews this game and gives it a nice write up.

Labels: , , , , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 4/25/2009 12:36:00 PM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Thursday, March 26, 2009

Animal owners shrugged (for too long)

At some point, some recommendations become restrictions and political humor about it just isn't funny any more.

Legislative actions and criminalization of various aspects of animal ownership are coming down like a tsunami from Animal Rightists such as HSUS and PeTA. While it is going on like wildfires all over the country, California has a fresh new list of proposals from them to make many aspects of animal ownership or husbandry into criminal activities.

A member of one of my favorite animal husbandry and law related forums submitted this passage from page 436 of Atlas Shrugged:
"Well, what do you think they're for?"
Dr. Ferris did not notice the sudden look on Rearden's face, the look of a man hit by the first vision of that which he had sought to see. Dr. Ferris was past the stage of seeing; he was intent upon delivering the last blows to an animal caught in a trap.
"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against--then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers--and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
That playlist sound familiar?

Labels: , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 3/26/2009 04:06:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Friday, March 20, 2009

Vegans admit it's a religion

The following is both hilarious

...and sad.

From the standpoint of a microbiologist and medical technologist, the above argument (see PDF) is very selective and funny. Were I to judge this argument, I'd throw these nuts out on their glutei maximi. The man just doesn't want to get a shot, based on this. In my opinion, he should be able to have a choice on the shot but that might restrict where he can work in the hospital, as in the event of an outbreak, since people are so litigious in these times, it would help to protect the jobs of others at the hospital.

But to me... It puts flashing lights around the ignorance of vegans. NOW... if the man is truly vegan, he would not use public water nor use ice cubes manufactured for commercial use. If he were truly vegan, he would not used canned or processed foods, nor would he would eat commercial fruits and vegetables. Veganism is primarily a modern philosophical argument that does not have any strong basis in reality nor any context in human history--although some seem to believe that some primitive groups were vegan. 'Fraid not folks.

I think it might be possible to be a true vegan, and not one that just toys at the idea, if one were homesteading and lived in location where one could have control of all products utilized or otherwise consumed. Climate, diversity of life, a flexible appetite (strong stomach), and a lot of ingenuity and hard work would have to be considered. Maybe a vegan commune of sorts, where enough people could contribute their skills for vegan clothing, foods, putting things up for the winter and so on.

Want more? I generally haven't bothered to get into the mental dichotomy of the vegan philosophy. I have had family members and many friends who are vegetarian to some degree or for periods of time. The long term ones (30 years or so) are no healthier than those the same age, who lived off junk food and the vegans have actually aged faster. :( The women who were veggies prior to having a child, usually have kids with some unfortunate challenges. Younger, long term vegan mothers may not have a pelvis structure wide enough to have a baby without a C-section. And some babies from vegan moms sometimes spend some of the first days or weeks of their lives in the ICU, as they are born with various types of compromise to their health and immune systems.

Weston A Price Foundation has materials that show even the most primitive of societies ensured that women had a wide variety of food stuffs before becoming pregnant. June marriages were traditionally thought to be a favored time since the richness of nutrients in the springtime would contribute to the pregnancy to come. The richness of spring grass on dairy butter creates a naturally golden yellow product because of high level of grass nutrient early in the grazing season. Contrast commercial butter, artificially converted from ghostly white to a pale yellow with the use of annato.

Pre-pregnancy diet may be the period of time that is most critical for the development of ova (and sperm), letting the developing fetus have optimal chances to be perfect. Children, babies and fetuses are not 'lab rats' to raise on the newest vegan philosophies presented by a population of people representing between 1 and 4% of philosophical foodists... Give children every advantage--please. As I have worked in health care and clinical technology (blood & gore, analysis and diagnostic value in health care) I'm familiar with some of the patterns in some of the various dietary lifestyles, and the vegan ranks rather average or quite poorly in the long term.

Vegan IS GOOD initially, because it is an awareness training exercise; people become more aware of what they are putting into their bodies and that they begin to feel healthier because of this. They can opt to go low sugar/junk and seek nutrient dense foods, but some don't because they cannot let go of sugar and junk food habits. For some, it's easier to just generally avoid anything that seems to be animal related. ...although I have seen some enjoying marshmallow laced rice crispy treats and other animal containing foods -- oops! ...but that is okay. None of us are saints.

Older people regardless of diet may start to have less efficient absorption of some nutrients, just as all older beings can over time. Low levels of B12 with higher levels of folate in the diet can lead to rapid cognitive decline. Feel a little woozy or mental fog? ... sometimes B12 can help.

There is no such thing as a truly vegan commercial peanut butter, a truly vegan restaurant, canned food or other commercial product from a food processing facility that is properly licensed, inspected and periodically tested.

Every place has to meet inspection and cleanliness requirements. Products periodically have to be tested for coliforms and other such things and most places use water that has been tested for coliforms anyway.

This coliform testing is done by taking samples, sending them to a laboratory that plates out the specimen onto media.

Guess what this media is made of. It is an animal product.

Even ice machines, wells and sources of drinking water are periodically tested for coliforms. (remember all those lemon water scare videos on youtube?)

Your average fresh commercial tomato and lettuce is also periodically tested for coliforms using animal media. Did you hear about all that lettuce that failed coliform tests? Yes, peptone agars and broth media are not vegan.

What is this media? Here's just one recipe for laboratory media that tests water supplies & ice cubes, among other things.

Processed sugar is not vegan although that is counter intuitive to many. Processed white sugar and most processed brown sugar (is usually white sugar that is darkened with molasses) is made that way with non vegan processing. Any place that processes foods anyway, has to pass periodic inspection as mentioned above.

So, among our modern cohorts, there is not a single vegan that truly lives a "vegan" life. They are all, every single one of them, selective about what they consider big deals. Call them hypocrites or even better, hopeless idealists. But as long as they are not trying to 'evangelize' others to join their 'religion' with the use of misinformation, and as long as children and young women planning to have families get the nutrition they need, I'm just not overly concerned unless it's a member of my family.

Heart disease, insulin resistance, gut issues and high blood pressure as well as depression, some increased inability to think clearly are traits among vegans and some vegetarians, and are common long term effects of malnutrition.

What else isn't vegan? HIV testing, premarital testing, a culture for a sore throat, and even an OTC pregnancy test all require animal media. This is different than the peptone media used in water testing. For example, monoclonal antibodies don't come from carrots. ;) So... how many vegans are celibate? Do they screen their partners? What method do they use, coin toss or laboratory testing?

I can forgive people for being ignorant about these issues in medical science because science and critical thinking is not a strong point in our activist, "politically correct" society. Even news is part of entertainment media. I get more than a little annoyed when cult figures like pretty boy Wayne Pacelle and others, pose to be so educated and go on pulling the wool over the eyes of their dittoheads'. I'd rather see that those who choose "vegan" know its limitations and the fallacy of the existence of a 'vegan' lifestyle.

There's a lot of misinformation out there on veggie and vegan bulletin boards. Even nutritionists who may have taken some courses in nursing, generally memorize a script and stick with it to keep their credentials. Many have never made laboratory media, and are generally not involved with endocrinology and cardiology. Simple things such as peptone broth, sheep blood agar plates or brain infusion media, ELISA or Western Blot for different lab tests that their patients may require lose their context, and they forget that these tests are only possible with animal products.

The vegan lifestyle is a selective one but it is often talked about with passion. It's like any other religion where you pick and choose just how 'fundamental' you want to be. It will be interesting if veganism proves to be a valid excuse to avoid getting a shot. :)

Tangentally related to vegetarianism are issues concerning cholesterol in the diet. Veggie groups tend to make a huge fuss about cholesterol. Basic issues are that cholesterol is not what most people have been lead to think it is. This wrong thinking is encouraged via Pharma industries because statins make them so much money. Science has shown that cholesterol is important, has reason for the way it behaves and actually exists to do you good. I'm a huge fan of, Dr. Uffe Ravnskov and Dr. Malcolm McKully. The last doctor has done a lot to clarify issues in Cholesterol. Check out his link.

Labels: , , , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 3/20/2009 02:28:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Nearly 100 Pit Bulls Killed After Dog Ban - Jacksonville, Arkansas

Nearly 100 Pit Bulls Killed After Dog Ban - KTHV | Little Rock, AR

a part near the end says...
As for pits like Rock, the shelter says it's seeing an increase of them without a legal place to call home. Jacksonville says before it passed its pit bull ban, they saw an influx of pit bulls because people were moving to town from other areas that already had bans in place.
And you know they aren't just killing 'pit bulls' but 'anything goes' whatever they feel like calling a given dog.

Labels: ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 10/21/2008 10:29:00 PM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Monday, September 01, 2008

Mandatory Spay Neuter Laws - FIGHT!

A very useful link for those opposing or exploring the broad negative implications of 'one size fits all' mandatory spay and neuter agendas. See especially, the links in the second half of the message after the horizontal line.


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 9/01/2008 03:15:00 PM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Saturday, August 23, 2008

AB 1634 is dying, and shelter programs will likely benefit

Helmut after a bath. What a head! He's still a baby tho.
He'll be two in October. Photo from Geno, who takes some of the most fun pics! :D

And YAY, major drumroll...

Today, Friday 22, 2008 we got the news that California Assembly Bill 1634 has been kicked to the curb. AB1634 was an extremist statewide, mandatory spay and neuter bill. Thank you so much Senator Cox for your support! Thank you to Senator Runner and others who realized the bill is not a solution nor an experiment that California can afford. Thank you to AKC for returning at the last minute into the flock. Major "Thank Yous" to all the people and groups who helped us fight this!
I can think of many names, such as Brat Zinmaster and Laura Sanborn whose persistent energy kept us focused but there are so many people and too many to list.

I would write more about it but I've ranted enough for now. I think the following link does a pretty good job explaining and describes the problems going on in Los Angeles. People who think that MSN can work really need to look at where some of the most enthusiastic MSN proponents live and work and get a reality check on what is really going on over there. Chicago, wake up.
Living with birddogs: AB 1634 is dying, and shelter programs will likely benefit. No time to go off guard tho. Anti-animal legislation continues to persist nation and even world wide.

And it's time, everyone. Time to buy your copies of the Anatolian Calendar which supports rescue. One hundred percent of the proceeds go to Anatolian Rescue. There are only limited numbers of copies, so be sure to get your order in NOW!

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception

Labels: , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 8/23/2008 03:30:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Friday, July 04, 2008

Happy Fourth!

I got the above picture from Geno, showing Helmut sharing something with a kitten. I love the picture, and isn't Helmut cute? (see more of his pictures on his label link) :)

Nathan Winograd's blog has some heartwretching pics and movie clips from animal control scenes. He labeled several of them as occuring at L.A. Animal Services, where Ed Boks is the General Manager. Mr. Boks has been very busy in the past year or so, trying to institute broad punitive legislation against pet owners and to cover the entire state of California. As can be seen from his actions and from his record (which includes being problematic to rescues), his interest in the welfare of animals is questionable and his interest in appropriately written legislation is poor as well.

See him below, in his own words -- what he has to say when questioned by Senator Cox.

There is a petition to have Ed Boks removed from his position as General Manager. If you agree, please sign the petition. This IS bigger than L.A. -- there are many areas around the country that are dealing with the Mandatory Spay and Neuter bills due to copycat officials that think L.A. has a good thing going. Amazingly they have not looked at the increase in animal deaths and abuse due to the MSN propaganda coming out of that area. The spending and the deaths of animals has INCREASED! These bills are seriously problematic at many levels.

See Lloyd Levine in his own words... tell Senator Cox what the bill really means in this clip.

The bill in its present form is a dangerous one and needs to be killed. Thanks for all that have been helping to get the information out there!

Happy Fourth!

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception

Labels: , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 7/04/2008 05:30:00 PM | Permanent link | (1) Comments

Blogger Edward Ott sent us a woof // July 09, 2008

I love the pictures of the Dogs. they are cvery beautiful.   

Thursday, May 08, 2008

Critical Thinking, Mandatory Spay/Neuter, & Computer Security

A little of everything in the above subject.

A few good articles that got my attention this week.
Thinking outside the box. Here's a read on that at

After reading that; the concept of critical thinking and lucid comprehension of issues take focus again with the reader -- Yet, back to real life, we continue to witness the the most juvenile and fundamentalist/extreme thinking that is driving MSN proponents everywhere (mandatory spay & neuter). Including California's truly UNHealthy Pets Act. So focused on their own limited perception of reality that they do not see, for example, how this type of legislation adversely affects grassroots efforts at wildlife conservation, the production of food and natural fiber on the farm and issues of population genetics in our pets. Health issues in animals are simply written off as well with broad blanket assumptions, with these people blowing off the experts, as if they have degrees in veterinary science and realize the difference between long term prospective and short term retrospective data. Furthermore, these bills will NOT affect the popularly demonized, commercial mass pet producers, yet the MSN proponents continue to make disingenuous references in that direction. And the sheep continue to follow.

Somewhat related: Newsweek on PeTA and Euthanasia: Euthanization is actually the cop out of MSN proponents to address the shortcomings in their logic and both HSUS and PeTA encourage killing animals rather than rehoming them. Since they are so busy killing animals, analyzing the status of the problem as encouraged in the first link is simply beyond their acceptance. I highly recommend Nathan Winograd's book, Redemption - a good take on it is here. It does encourage facing the history and issues that have compounded the lack of progression on logical solutions.

Getting away from animals for a bit... and along the lines of perhaps encouraging a new way of thinking, see this article about some indigenous people of Mexico who "live forever", from which article I gained the idea that many of our modern foot and leg problems seen in our society could be benefited from taking some core ideas regarding letting our footwear be more natural, so that leg strength and flexibility are natural benefits.

And tonight, I just discovered a new blog which covers issues that affect everyone using the internet - see Spyware Sucks. I've found that many people continue ignore the serious implications of HTML in email - especially as malware gets more sophisticated and do not understand that surfing and reading web pages results in thousands of downloads to their computer. From another source, Scott Dunn writes about security, "Visitors to last Thursday got more than they bargained for. A hacked Flash advertisement meant that merely viewing a page in your browser was capable of triggering a malware attack on your PC. According to an alert on the security site Websense, the ad can take control of the browser without any user interaction at all."

I'm using Firefox as my principal browser with "NoScript" which stops scripts in their tracks and another extension "AdBlock" that blocks ads which can sometimes be malicious. The combination makes some busy pages download for reading quicker since I am not getting all that garbage and it makes pages look a little different too. For example, ubiquitous links such as 'google ads' just do not show up on my Firefox browsing. NoScript does allow me to choose which sites I trust as does AdBlock.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 5/08/2008 01:23:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Nathan Winograd Chat Transcript at

Have you read "Redemption: The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America" yet?

The more you know, the better your understanding of WHY AB 1634 and similar legislation does not work.

The chat took place, Feb 1, 2008
The transcript is available now.
Thank you Rescue Network Org! (part of

Please go to the site to read the whole thing... :)

Nathan Winograd
Author of "Redemption: The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America"
February 1, 2008 (chat)

PHKeeper: On behalf of Jeff Barringer and all of us at, I sincerely wish to thank Nathan Winograd for being our part of our 10th annual Chat Week! Nathan Winograd's 2007 book "Redemption: The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America" set off a firestorm of controversy -- and inspired an army of animal lovers across the country, calling for serious reform of the American shelter system and an end to the use of killing as a tool of animal population control.

Nathan is here this evening to help us understand exactly what the No Kill Revolution is and how you can look at groundspring efforts to reform your community into No Kill. If you have a question for Nathan, please type a "?" in the room. You will be called on in order. Please do not speak openly in the room. Do not private message the hosts or our guest. Nathan when you have completed your answer, please type GA so we know to Go Ahead. Ladies and Gentlemen, Boys and Girls, furkids of all ages, I present Nathan Winograd.

continued at the site---

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception

Labels: , , , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 2/26/2008 03:02:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Monday, February 04, 2008

Mandatory Spay & Neuter in L.A. - Dragon or a Thousand Snakes in the Grass

Short on time right now, short and sweet, just a few links...

L.A. City voted on mandatory spay and neuter (MSN) of 4 month old cats and dogs on Friday without any critical analysis or study.

And... Boks entered a little poll on his blog.

As of the time I did the poll screen capture at the left:

Votes - 621 (96%) votes against MSN.
24 (3%) votes in support.

Above,the progress the last time I looked at it, Monday morning.

Blue Dog State (blog) - doesn't mince words. !!oh mama!!

Don't miss:
A thousand snakes in the grass. By Margaret Anne Cleek
"Better the dragon you see than a thousand snakes in the grass."
I think more people are waking up.

See my other posts on Animal_control

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 2/04/2008 04:43:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Thursday, January 03, 2008

Best Time to Neuter Your Pet Cat or Dog

What is the Optimal age for spay and neuter of cats and dogs?

Dr Gail C. Golab, PhD, DVM, Director of the Animal Welfare Division of the American Veterinary Association and member of the Pet-Law forum, has secured free public access to the following PDF from the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
December 1, 2007, Vol. 231, No. 11, Pages 1665-1675
doi: 10.2460/javma.231.11.1665

Determining the optimal age for gonadectomy of dogs and cats

Margaret V. Root Kustritz, DVM, PhD, DACT
Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108. (Kustritz)

If sharing the article with others, please direct them to the above link, to the PDF, rather than forwarding the document itself. This, in order to honor the American Veterinary Medical Association's Copyright.


Happy New Year to all!

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception

Labels: ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 1/03/2008 12:00:00 AM | Permanent link | (3) Comments

Blogger Neva sent us a woof // January 06, 2008

Thanks for the update....I think it said it whenever you want but before the first cycle of your female....lots of controversy on this I am sure...I am all for it whenever and however it gets the job doesn't seem to have adverse effects early or late....interesting...   

Anonymous Angel sent us a woof // January 07, 2008

Our humane society won’t spay females before 10 weeks so we get to foster until then.
I think it’s too young but if they don’t do it too many will ignore the job contract or not.   

Blogger Semavi Lady sent us a woof // January 08, 2008

Neva, agreed. I think the main thing to take away from it (with the exception of shelters) is that decisions need to be made on a case by case basis with the owner and vet being responsible for the decision made. A 110 pound male Anatolian puppy that is 7 months old and which still squats to pee, still has open growth plates, is not even the same species as a cat the same age, nor does it have the same maturity or growth rate as a small breed dog.

As to controversy, see below.

Angel, I agree that 10 weeks is too young as general shelter policy but as you know, it is a catch-22 sort of thing indeed. Shelters do not make themselves accountable for fear behaviors, other problems including female incontinence that sometimes develops as the result of their neutering policies. Their main concern is to not see the unwanted progeny of the pets they adopt out.

Shelters and societies do not keep lifelong records of the outcome of their decisions on animals that they place. They are not in the position to say early neutering benefits all the pets they place.

However, I think the source of a pet, including shelters, have the right to make policy for their *own* animal placements because each deals with specific problems, target populations and goals.

When a person makes the choice to adopt from a shelter, they have effectively elected their source and should abide the policies.   

Thursday, December 27, 2007

No-Kill Blog Wars

Animal Lovers are suing Los Angeles County Animal Control Department.

Ed Boks, major AB 1634 supporter is majorly screwing up in Los Angeles and he appears to know it. It's turning into a battle of twisty-turny, dizzifying rhetoric on his blog. Actually, everything Boks is doing is highlighting why AB 1634 cannot work, and furthermore, why it cannot work with a No Kill solution to shelter killings.

Don't miss the commentary at Gina Spadafori's Pet Connection Blog for better clarity of what is going on.

Read the quoted material posted below if you are not familiar with the issues involved. It will help you understand some of what is going on before you go to the Pet Connection.

About the law suit-

This is Zephyr who came to the shelter healthy.
She is ill in the photo above.
She and many others died there.

The national No Kill Advocacy Center, Cathy Nguyen, a volunteer animal rescuer, and Rebecca Arvizu, a Los Angeles County taxpayer and animal rescuer, have jointly filed a lawsuit against Los Angeles County, its Department of Animal Care and Control, and the Department’s Director, Marcia Mayeda. The lawsuit alleges unlawful and abusive treatment of animals at all six Los Angeles County animal shelters.

Among the allegations in the 29-page complaint filed today in Superior Court, the County Department of Animal Care and Control routinely:

  • Kills healthy and treatable animals before their state mandated holding period expires;
  • Misclassifies animals as “ill” or “injured” in order to kill them before their holding period expires even though the animals are not irremediably suffering as required by state law;
  • Kills lost animals without making reasonable attempts to find the animals’ owners;
  • Fails to provide adequate veterinary care to impounded animals, resulting in animal deaths;
  • Fails to provide adequate nutrition, water, shelter and exercise to impounded animals and to treat the animals humanely and kindly;
  • Refuses to release animals to rescue groups that are willing to care for the animals until adoptive homes can be found and, instead, kills the animals.

In addition, the County Department of Animal Care and Control unlawfully retaliates against animal rescuers and volunteers who publicize its unlawful treatment of animals.

The lawsuit asks a Superior Court Judge to order Los Angeles County, its Department of Animal Care and Control, and Department Director Mayeda to comply with state laws that protect animals from arbitrary and inhumane treatment. The lawsuit is being handled by the Los Angeles law firm of Eisenberg, Raizman, Thurston, and Wong, LLP.

“The Los Angeles County animal shelter system is supposed to provide a reasonable safety net of care for lost and abandoned animals,” said Nathan J. Winograd, Director of the No Kill Advocacy Center. “Instead, the system betrays the trust of the citizens of Los Angeles County by failing to treat the animals humanely and kindly.”

“Los Angeles County and its Department of Animal Control fought the existing animal protection laws that safeguard shelter animals when those laws were pending in the legislature. They fought the laws after they became effective through a regulatory challenge. Now, it appears they have decided they are just going to ignore those laws,” stated Winograd. “But Los Angeles County shelters are supposed to enforce laws related to animal welfare, not violate the laws themselves and then retaliate against rescue groups who want to save these animals and make their demands public. This is the worst form of hypocrisy and cannot be tolerated—especially since animals are not only suffering, they are needlessly being killed because of it.”

“I have tried to work with the Department and Director Mayeda regarding the conditions at Los Angeles County shelters for many months to no avail,” said plaintiff Cathy Nguyen, who works with rescue groups trying to save animals that Los Angeles County shelters are putting to death. “I cannot sit quietly and do nothing about this and have no choice at this point but to demand that they follow the law.”

“As a taxpayer, I don’t want my taxes to pay for the killing of animals when there are rescue groups willing to save them at their own expense,” said Los Angeles county taxpayer and plaintiff Rebecca Arvizu. “These shelters also do not reflect my values and those of my fellow citizens who love animals. Since they are supposed to be working for us, I want them caring for animals humanely. That’s the law and those are the values a majority of us hold dear.”

The No Kill Advocacy Center is a national non-profit organization trying to end the systematic killing of animals in U.S. shelters. It has drafted model legislation, works with municipal and private shelters nationwide, and helps animal lovers throughout the United States reform their local shelters.

The lawsuit is based on violations of California laws, especially the 1998 Animal Shelter Law. The law sought to reform California shelters which were unnecessarily killing in the face of cost-effective lifesaving alternatives. It follows a successful lawsuit in Kern County where a Superior Court judge held the Kern County animal control shelter in violation of law and ordered that shelter to cease its legal violations.

For a copy of the press release, click here. (Please note: Images are disturbing.)

For a full media kit, which includes a copy of the 4-page Demand Letter the plaintiffs sent to Ms. Mayeda before filing their lawsuit, the 3-page letter protesting the Department’s retaliation, the 29-page Complaint, video footage, and high resolution images of animal suffering in Los Angeles County’s shelter system, click here. (Please note: Images are disturbing.)

Please help us pay for the legal costs. To donate by check or make a secure online donation, click here or go to

P.O. Box 74926 San Clemente CA 92673

Have you read "Redemption: The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America" yet?

The more you know, the better your understanding of WHY AB 1634 and similar legislation does not work.

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 12/27/2007 10:50:00 PM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Communist China and California - Control Freak Sisters

Legislation in California and across the United States of America, fueled by extremists and misinformed and/or corrupt legislators are doing their darndest to bring more authoritarian government our lives.

See the story of Mr. Chen in China who "has been fighting for the right to own the dog of his choice since 2003". Mr. Chen is now fighting China.

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 12/26/2007 10:43:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

When Lack of Common Sense Becomes Propaganda

Great video from Rexano.
Woohoo! Aside from the important subject and good coverage of the matter -- there is TEXT in the video, great for deafies like me. :)

After you view the video... go to YouTube and rate HIGH!

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception

Labels: ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 12/18/2007 08:44:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Saturday, November 24, 2007

Legalize the Constitution!

When the voices of extremists can strong arm our democratic process with use of funds accumulated via deception. When extremists can use this financial clout to broadly and wrongly profile populations as HIGH RISK for lifestyles not tolerated by these vocal extremists.

When extremists are successful in manipulating our legislators to enact wide reaching, selectively enforced and prejudicial legislation. And when the voices of the citizens to be affected are completely ignored by our legislators... something has gone terribly wrong.

Borrowed from

REXANO Editorial By Zuzana Kukol,

"No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
(US Constitution)

Las Vegas, NV, November 21, 2007--In this country called United States of America, we have this ‘document’ many heard of in school but forgot all about it. It is called US Constitution, which guarantees us freedom of speech, which we are exercising right now, writing and publishing this editorial, as well as presenting it in video form on You Tube:

US Constitution also guarantees people pursuit of happiness, which many animal owners haven’t been able to exercise lately because they have been too busy fighting all the crazy animal legislation.

Constitution also guarantees people property rights: lands and animals are some of the most ancient type of properties. Many new laws are messing with both of them, with peoples’ right to use their land without government interference and with their right to choose the types and amount of animals.

It is time to Legalize the Constitution in the USA.

Our enemies, extreme animal rights (AR) activists groups, are getting stronger and more successful at passing bans regarding how many and what species or breeds of animals we can keep, and often mandating forced sterilization of domestic pets.

It doesn’t matter if you only own one hamster, horse, domestic dog, or cat, these unfair bans will eventually affect us all, since we all have a common enemy: extreme AR groups whose final agenda is no animals in captivity, no meat on our plates and no leather good in our houses. They want to remove all animal and human contact.

Year 2007 alone brought too many mandatory spay/neuter, breed specific legislation (BSL) and anti exotic animal bills and bans to many states, localities and even federal level. In too many cases the uneducated legislators and extreme animal rights groups have been winning and responsible animal owners losing their rights to keep the animal of their choice.

Property is not a dirty word, it signifies something people love, value and cherish, and often have to work hard for. Keeping legal status of animals as property also guarantees that animals can’t be stolen from their loving owners without consequences. If we, the animal owners, continue the trend of doing nothing noteworthy in legislative area we, animal owners, are going to be extinct soon and we have only ourselves to blame. Make sure your ‘animal votes’. Choose the animal owner and animal welfare (not animal rights) friendly candidate.

Educate the legislators, friends and family, so they don’t get gagged by the anti animal propaganda.

United we stand, divided we fall, regardless of the breed or species.

As long as animal welfare and public safety laws are followed, the private ownership of all animals should be protected and legal in the USA

Just say NO! to anti animal ownership laws.
Say YES to Legalizing the US Constitution.

REXANO is dedicated to the Responsible Exotic Animal Ownership while protecting public safety.

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception

- Individual Freedom and Rights of the People
- Initiatives and Referenda in Circulation as of November 21, 2007

Labels: , , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 11/24/2007 04:22:00 PM | Permanent link | (1) Comments

Anonymous jan sent us a woof // November 25, 2007

Powerful!!! Can we be extremist Constitution lovers?

"I want your animal's gonads" provided some comic relief, but it puts the mandatory s/n bills in perspective.   

Friday, November 09, 2007

Will They Ever 'Get It'?

Thoughtful comments on HSUS & Wayne Pacelle, by Gina Spadafori at the Pet Connection Blog.

I'm looking forward to Christie Keith's follow up article at SFGate on Nathan Winograd's talk about "Redemption". It will probably be in the "Your Whole Pet" November 2007 archive here. The book is on my reading list, when I get a chance. I've another post on Winograd here.

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"

Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 11/09/2007 04:47:00 PM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

PeTA vs Vick - WHO Kills More Animals?

It should go without saying that what Vick did to support dog fighting is wrong. He is not however getting a fair trial where the whole story could become public. That's a concern that borders on other issues such as some of the cover ups that can happen in our judicial system due to plea bargains. We know he denied it all at first and due to strongarming from several sources, each looking out for their own interests, a different series of events took place -- including Vick finding Jesus...

Wayne Pacelle opportunistOpportunists GALORE! I'm really tired of all the focus on this event mainly due the opportunists, HSUS and PeTA being just as horrible for grabbing the event and wringing it out like a CASH COW and using it for PR. Sport figures have gotten into trouble before with all kinds of mayhem including murder and rape of other humans. People are letting HSUS and PeTA take control.

An apt caricature, see Wayne Pacelle with a 6 figure income, wringing out these events to milk the gullible public into thinking they are doing some good with this ongoing 'croc'. HSUS has 200 Millions in assets but does little to nothing to save animals and is now mainly concerning itself with forcing idealist and costly legislation that is turning everyone into criminals.

And to top it off, PETA, which is known for its alliance with terrorist organizations that via arson and bombs, animal releases, threats and other chaos, creates major setbacks in genetics, cancer research and other necessary medical advances is asking Vick to donate to THEIR cause with time or money to show he is a 'changed man'. Frankly, finding Jesus is good. Finding PeTA is not! How is it that an organization that is so proVegan, can attack research and yet use research (albeit inconclusive research) to support a vegan lifestyle and abolish any ownership or use of animals? Opportunists galore!

Who's Killed More Animals?

[Picture of Michael Vick under which it says 8]

[Picture of a policeman preparing to bury a puppy killed by PETA
workers...under which it says 14,400]

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) loves to point the finger at others, when they should be looking at their own record of killing more than 90% of the animals left in their care. According to government records PETA has killed more than 14,400 animals since 1998.

Find out more about PETA's hypocrisy at:
PeTA Kills Animals

See the specific Photo Ad above at

Labels: , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 8/28/2007 11:05:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Savage Chickens. Puzzles and Politics

The little guy at the left could well be me or anyone else trying to deal with stress, dilemmas, and General Pandemonium (...the latter guy whose uncle must be that famous fellow by the name of Murphy).

I got a just got a chuckle out of a recent Doug Savage Savage Chickens comic. If you're not familiar with it, it's a daily comic which is drawn on a square, yellow, sticky note. I get a kick out of it since I'm quite fond of chickens, humor, sticky notes, and Doug Savage's Savage Chickens. :) Check out the Wednesday, August 08, 2007 comic called Jigsaw. While it probably isn't a political cartoon, it struck me as being rather apt in characterizing bad political "solutions" to various problems. When one or more problems with the "solution" is pointed out by the opposition, you often get flocks of adamant "chickens" with a narrow perspective, who persist with their arguments that their solution is the ONE right solution. Of course, the issues of California AB 1634 come immediately to mind but I'm sure that all of us can certainly come up with many more examples inside and outside of politics and personal lives.

Check my label's links below for misc related topic including some free jigsaw puzzles for the PC.

Labels: , , ,

Semavi Lady woofed at @ 8/12/2007 10:36:00 PM | Permanent link | (2) Comments

Anonymous jan sent us a woof // August 14, 2007

And there are all of those who think that government will solve all our problems. Without having a firm idea of what the problems are.But that seldom stops the clucking.   

Blogger Semavi Lady sent us a woof // August 17, 2007

So true. Superficial knowledge can be a dangerous thing when aimed at far reaching mandates.   

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Animal Advocates Need to Seek Common Ground

2006 Photo by Dave Koerner
Big sister, Ruya, watches over a half sibling baby brother.

Christie Keith writes "Forget all the rhetoric on both sides, and just keep the goal clear in your mind: Reducing the number of dogs and cats who die in California shelters."
Can the two sides of mandatory spay/neuter find common ground? See the whole article at SFGate.

From the very start of the issues involved with AB 1634, I've felt that if more people had a better feel for the complexity of elements involved with reducing the euthanization of pet animals and finding successful "forever homes" -- we'd have more in the way of cooperative and successful teamwork. So many have been saying, "Education doesn't work" and argue that brute strength of law is the only solution. AND then... THEY go on to illustrate by their own arguments, amazing ignorance in the complexities of the equation. Hello? Education? How about starting with up close and personal.

Education is the key.
Divide and conquer, and punitive legislation are hurtful and counterproductive.

Mind opening newsletters. . .

Seeding ideas for thoughtful consideration... see Nathan Winograd's No Kill Advocate newsletters here. A recent one, for example, had a good bit of info on how to increase successful placement of adoptable pit bulls is Issue #2 2007 (direct link to specific PDF article)

He's got a lot of articles on reforming Animal Control - under Legislation, The Dark Side of Mandatory Laws(PDF)
Which points out HSUS's dichotomy, for example, spreading fear about feral cats. He, in another document, writes (p6) also about how HSUS opposed King County in Wa State when they were adopting a real No-Kill philosophy.

There's a youtube vid featuring Nathan (about half an hour)

Go on a tour of shelters here. Shelter accountability needs to be addressed.

Nathan Winograd is doing a lot to educate and promote working together. Spend some time checking out his site, subscribe to the free e-newsletter, consider becoming a No Kill Advocate member and get the hard copy version of No Kill Sheltering Magazine.

No Kill Advocacy Site


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 7/24/2007 03:56:00 PM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Monday, July 23, 2007

Former CVMA President, John Hamil, DVM writes about AB 1634

Semavi Nipper at left in a 1992 photo.

Many Anatolians and their progeny will NOT qualify for an exemption under AB 1634 as currently suspended until 2008.

The so called "exemptions" are little more than misleading hocus-pocus and bluffery designed to appease the unknowing.

Past President of California Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) and animal advocate, writes from experience of twenty five years in trying to find solutions to the problems of animal relinquishment and euthanasia. Go here to read the TESTIMONY OF JOHN HAMIL, DVM on seven false premises of AB 1634.

At Sandiegodog blog, a piece by Laura Finco fleshes some some of it out as she writes about a neighbor. Meanwhile, in L.A. stuff like this goes on under General Manager Ed Boks - shown here to be manipulating his shelter statistics while under scrutiny.

Mandatory spay and neuter is a NON-solution to relinquishment, abandonment, lack of responsibility and the issues of unowned strays.

Deliberately choosing to ignore the above complex problems and lack of accountability in most animal shelters, while shifting "the blame" flaunts ignorance, denial in perception and problem solving ability.

Well, humans are fickle.

Humans and long term relationships will always have dynamics. Consider marriage, 50% of which are said to end in divorce - The remaining 50% cannot even be considered uniformly successful. Who knows how many 'stick together' despite abusive or other malignant activity? Relationship failures are complex.

Why should it be no surprise that not every pet which starts out with a home has a permanent one.

Pets being relinquished or left to run free are not caused by an "over population" problem but something more far more complex.

Homelessness, World Hunger?
- - Is it People Overpopulation?

Lessee... using the same simplistic logic of "STOP THE FLOW!" endorsed by Judie Mancuso, Lloyd Levine, and others for AB 1634-
  • Homelessness, world hunger, pollution, crime, wars, disease and even "pet overpopulation" can all be solved by stopping the source of all these problems.
  • Stop HUMAN reproduction.
Using the same principles of logic, every two year old, pre-adolescent child in California must be castrated. I'd hate to see these geniuses try to work out who gets "exemptions".

My whole point is that "stop the flow" does NOT address the problems. Profiling a population, even a pet owning one as they do is draconian, ignorant and juvenile.

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 7/23/2007 12:53:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Lassie Goes to the State Capitol! NO on AB 1634!

JULY 10, 2007

LASSIE GOES TO THE STATE CAPITOL - Brings Legislators to their knees!

Lassie and Sen. McLeod
Lassie arrived late afternoon at the State Capitol and went right to the top. No, not to the Governator, but to Senator Gloria Negrete McLeod, Chairwoman of the Local Government Committee that will hear bill AB 1634 on Wednesday morning. Nearly 1000 Californians are expected to show up for a hearing in a room that only holds 60 people. Sounds like a morning on a Los Angeles freeway!

Lassie then went calling on Legislators seeking their opposition to the bill that many are calling "the Pet Extinction Act". Lassie is really Laddie, a 7 year old massive specimen of a collie, and certainly a fine actor since he has been cast as a female dog! This is a continuation of the tradition to use a male to represent the beloved Lassie, American icon of family values and courage. And the answer is yes to the question to whether Laddie is an intact male. Her owner, world famous dog trainer, Bob Weatherwax, heir to 65 years of Lassie lore and legend, plans to breed Laddie in the near future to insure another generation of the unique collies. The Weatherwax collies are not registered since they all carry the trait of a large white blaze on the head that collies registered with the American Kennel Club do not bear. Senators and aides alike agreed that this marking was one of Laddie's best features! This unique line of collies would not be eligible for exemptions under the complex mandates of AB 1634.

Lassie and Sen. McLeod
Accompanying Lassie and Weatherwax was Jon Provost who played "Timmy" on one of the longest running shows in television history, over 20 years! Mr. Provost charmed all with his timeless boyish good looks as he spoke eloquently not only for Lassie but also all the mutts of California who are more often used for canine assistance dogs than purebreds due to cost and availablity. Mr. Provost is a honorary member on the Board of Canine Companions for Independence. Laddie is also trained and certified as a service dog.

The halls at the Capitol thronged with admirers and fans as Lassie brought them all to their knees for close-up photos snapped with the world's most famous dog that has been a favorite of Hollywood and one of California's best known icons.

It remains to be seen if even our beloved Lassie will fall victim to this far over-reaching leislation. In Bob Weatherwax's words, "It's like casting your net for tuna, and then pulling in a bunch of dolphins." We agree, it's just not right -- for California. Let's hope this ends as all the episodes in the past, with Lassie coming to the rescue!

Lassie, Lassie, everywhere!

Contact information and photo files:
Diane Amble 650-296-2169

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 7/11/2007 08:12:00 AM | Permanent link | (2) Comments

Blogger cdlcruz sent us a woof // July 11, 2007

WE DID IT! AB1654 has been euthanized. But don't get too complacent - PETA will resurrect it again in some other guise. Thanks to everyone who wrote letters, made phone calls and jammed faxes to defeat this.   

Anonymous jan sent us a woof // July 11, 2007

What a classy dog.

I kind of feel sorry for Bob Barker. He is reduced to a mindless sound bite after so many years. I'm sure he has no idea of the reality of the bill. I hope I never get that old.   

AB 1634 Lobbying Efforts

Lobbying efforts to fight this draconian bill have been exhausting but the efforts have been very positive. People are learning that there is a need to spay and neuter! People are also learning that the pet world is very complex and profiling is dangerous here, as it can be in other areas of concern.

Mancuso herself for one, has LAUGHED, and said that extermination of mixed breed pets is not possible. Because there will be more, they keep on coming.
TOUCHE! YES, Judie, we all agree this bill will not accomplish the proposed “INTENT” of the bill. You are too proud to admit it.

It is had EIGHT rewrites with line after line, conflicting its own text. (see the lines in the bill regarding vets for one)

1. This bill ENDORSES commercial producers with the broadest and complete exemptions. Commercial breeders are for profit, they do not waste time and money on health testing. They do not follow up on their placements which may well be brokered just about anywhere.

2. Since 27 June, this bill actually mandates the breeding of immature and untested dogs because their one year ticket cannot be renewed til the dogs are old enough to have any kind of offical health test.

3. The bill does not grandfather in many owners who will NOT be able to dole out the cash. Elderly, disabled, young couples, singles, poor folk of every kind, hundreds of rescuers who are working out of their pockets and homes. Where are these animals going to go? Will pets will be torn from their settled homes and euthanized if the owner doesn’t have the means?

4. Every different jurisdiction can have a different way to define many of the rules. It is a Tower of Babel with local jurisdictions being given total control.

5. NO FIT. The bill heavily profiles all owners and all breeders alike and therefore has numerous NO FIT and illogical assumptions. The majority of problems in the bill are right here.

Do you know what ‘no fit’ means? Example:
Someone is put in charge of all vehicle regulation, mandates that all vehicles with NO exceptions, must have four tires in good condition plus a spare (sounds good so far maybe?), and be parked in a garage next to the owner’s residence - or each will be fined $500. Unleash this on the constituents and THEN watch out for the bicycle, the boat, the plane, the semi, the tractor owners. What about people living in condos or apartments? What if car owners have four vehicles, is it time to hire a contractor, what if there is no room on the property that will allow them to get a permit? They have all been profiled into a law that didn’t take them into consideration. They are gonna get awfully upset. Now some of the nicest people are law breakers. Righteous people who live in a house with a garage and have a car with the requirements will of course, say, “It’s all about money!”. They are going to say to those selfish tractor drivers, “if you weren’t so selfish, you would get your act together and you too could be exempt.”

This bill is horrendously guilty of profiling and no fit. It will increase the numbers of animals killed.
It does NOTHING to promote ethical breeding nor healthy pets. The principle designers of this bill do not even own pets.

NO on AB 1634

No on California AB 1634
"California Healthy Pets Act"
Choosing a 'feel good' perky name for a bill perpetuates the GRAND deception


Semavi Lady woofed at @ 7/11/2007 07:52:00 AM | Permanent link | (0) Comments