OK, Fido & Fluffy, you're on your own

To my surprise and disappointment, an online notice from Lawrence Township before Hurricane Irene included a paragraph about shelters if they become necessary. The last sentence read, “Pets are prohibited at all shelter locations and pet owners need to make prior arrangements for care.”

In other words, people can be sheltered, but they should make other arrangements for their pets. Really! Like, leave them at home, wish them good luck and head for safety without them?

Wasn’t there one huge lesson learned from Katrina: that some people would not evacuate their homes if they couldn’t take their pets with them? How could officials – township and/or shelter managers – essentially tell people to leave their pets behind? Or, at some cost and inconvenience if possible at all, to board them somewhere during the storm?

Besides pet stores and veterinarians left and right and even pet TV as part of our lives these days, Lawrence Township has pet licenses and pet censuses and pet clinics for shots – yet residents are expected to turn their backs on their pets when a hurricane moves in?

This “policy” is unacceptable. There has to be better emergency management than this.

(The next post will report on what Lawrence’s mayor had to say on this subject during a phone conversation Monday evening, 8-29-11.)
#

Hurricanes, animals & questions

Before hurricane Irene blew through, I thought Harry and Billy seemed a little anxious, seeming to stay closer to us than usual. But I don’t know how indoor cats typically react to big storms – if there’s any “typical” about it.

Outside, though, for a few hours before the heavy rain started, I saw no birds or squirrels, causing me to wonder whether they were somehow, somewhere hunkered down for safety, and to hope that was so.

As for wild animals, all I could do was wonder whether they can tell when a biggie’s coming – and if, so, what they can do about it. For instance, where do deer go in a hurricane?

Evidently, some wild animals didn’t survive the storm: a radio host the morning after mentioned seeing “animal carcasses” on his drive to work. Happier news came in Sunday’s Trenton Times with a reference to Atlantic County residents “with dogs, cats and luggage” heading for shelter at Trenton’s Sun National Bank Center.

Today's paper had “Views from the state,” including a photo of a deer wading through floodwaters and another pix of National Guard members moving cats and dogs to a shelter.

Three other survivors: a creepy-crawly that quickly moved out and away from under the umbrella stand when it was repositioned, and two sizeable centipedes or millipedes – thousand-leggers! – who had taken shelter in the furled up deck umbrella. They too went on their way.
#

When threatened, more valuable

It’s funny. Till now, the seven-day holding period for animals taken to shelters didn’t seem like such a great thing. Often after that, if not adopted out or found by their owners, they might be euthanized. All the seven days did was assure them that time to be found or adopted.

But threaten to take away even that seven day period – and suddenly it’s worth fighting for.

During the last couple weeks, that’s what happened in New Jersey, as animal activists took steps to convince Governor Christie to conditionally veto S2939, a bill that would allow shelters to euthanize animals without a seven-day hold period because of their age, health or behavior.

Happily, the governor did conditionally veto the bill, calling for removal of the specific part having to do with changing the “impoundment laws” that are currently observed. So the seven-day hold remains as it was.

And suddenly it looks great! Thanks, Guv!
#

Wounds that time can't heal

It was dusk last May 13 when Mark Johnson, Princeton’s animal control officer, walked into a borough park carrying a rifle and shot two beavers. As news of the killings spread, outrage was expressed in letters to the editor and comments on newspaper coverage.

Shooting beavers is illegal in New Jersey. A spokesperson for the state’s DEP said no permit had been issued to trap the beavers, nor had there been beaver activity in the department’s Division of Fish and Wildlife.

The ACO had told a resident he encountered en route that DFW ordered the killing, according to a Princeton Packet story soon afterward.

That was all more than three months ago, yet the official reaction to date has been negligible. DEP issued one summons to the ACO on July 14, although a report about the beaver shooting incident has still not arrived. The court date is not yet known, and its location has changed twice, from local to county to Ewing Township.

Johnson reports to David A. Henry, health officer with the Princeton Regional Health Dept. On August 19, Henry said he’s still waiting for the DEP report, which “may indicate what some of the conversations were between Johnson and DFW.”

Once the court case is complete, he also expects a report from the Dept. of Health and Senior Services, where animal-related laws and the Animal Welfare office reside.

Local police investigated the shootings, but their findings are “personnel matters” that can’t be discussed, Henry said in May. At the same time, he declined to say whose rifle was used to kill the beavers or whether Johnson had his permission to shoot them.

And so the wait continues.
#

3 days left to assure 7 days in shelter

The bill S2923, already a done deal in the state senate and assembly, awaits Governor Christie’s signature. He must conditionally veto it before this Thursday when otherwise it will become law.

Why? because while much of the bill is well intentioned and good for shelter animals – requiring that those who leave shelters must be spayed or neutered, for instance – one part of it is very bad for them.

It would give shelters three reasons to waive the current 7-day holding period for animals that animal control officers bring there: age, health or behavior – and euthanize them right away. That’s an awful prospect.

Age means different things to different animals; short of terminal illness, health is often misleading and treatable; behavior is a very subjective area that benefits from observation time after an animal new to a shelter has relaxed a bit.

The seven-day holding period also gives animals the chance to be found by their owners or adopted.

If the bill were amended to cut the part about eliminating the seven-day hold, it would be acceptable. Therefore, the immediate need is to ask the governor to conditionally veto S2923.

There are two ways to do that: phone 609-292-6000 and leave a message, or use webmail: http://www.state.nj.us/governor/contact/ and write a comment.

For “topic,” choose “Health and Senior Services” (the department where the Office of Animal Welfare is located). A “sub topic” must also be chosen, and since there’s no option having to do with animals, choose any of them before typing the message in the comment box.

Please don’t delay: ask the governor for a conditional veto!
#

http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/science-updates/unless-christie-vetoes-by-wed-shelter-animals-will-lose-7-lifesaving-days-in-new-jersey/

‘Today’s word’ is . . .

Vivisection: The act or practice of cutting into or otherwise injuring living animals, especially for the purpose of scientific research. (from Latin for alive and dissection)

“I am not interested to know whether vivisection produces results that are profitable to the human race or doesn't. The pain which it inflicts upon unconsenting animals is the basis of my enmity toward it, and it is to me sufficient justification of the enmity without looking further.”

--Mark Twain, author and humorist (1835-1910)
#

"Stop using chimps as guinea pigs"

In the world of animal experimentation, what could be more welcome than the animal experimenter who changes his mind? Not only that, but is now taking action to stop further “research” like the kind he was once involved with.

In the August 10 NYTimes, columnist Roscoe G. Bartlett writes about how before he was elected to Congress, he was a physiologist at the Navy’s School of Aviation Medicine, where the devices they invented were tested on primates.

First, he says, he thought the research was worth the pain inflicted on animals. Then he became aware of “its effects on primates, as well as alternatives to it.”

Now, “I no longer believe such experiments make sense — scientifically, financially or ethically,” he says.

He mentions a number of research techniques not involving animals that are cheaper faster and more effective, also pointing out that “Ending chimpanzee research and retiring the animals to sanctuaries would save taxpayers about $30 million a year.”

Bartlett cites cases of primates who have made it clear to their handlers/scientists/captors – take your choice of terms – that they don’t like their lives and want out of experimentation. “There is no question that chimpanzees experience pain, stress and social isolation in ways strikingly similar to the way humans do,” he notes.

For these reasons, Representative Bartlett (Republican of Maryland) is co-sponsoring the Great Ape Protection and Cost Savings Act with Senator Maria Cantwell, Democrat of Washington. The bill would phase out invasive research on great apes and retire the 500 federally owned chimpanzees from laboratories to sanctuaries.
#

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/11/opinion/stop-using-chimps-as-guinea-pigs.html?emc=eta1