To contact us Click HERE
A cat belonging to Jake Burris, the campaign manager for Democrat Ken Aden, was found dead with his head bashed in and the word "Liberal" spray-painted on his side. Ken Aden is running against Republican Steve Womack for Arkansas' 3rd Congressional District. The cat was left on the family house doorstep and found by Burris and his 4 children upon their return home. The Womack campaign denounced this violent and brutal act, and, the local police are investigating the matter.
I wish I could say this is unusual but violent acts against animals as a method to send a message is quite common. spcaLA's domestic violence program, Animal Safety Net, began over a decade ago to deal with the use of a pet, by the abuser, to control the behaviors of a victim. We have seen pets harmed to assert gang turf or to perform an initiation rite. We have seen pets beaten to assert power and to intimidate others into compliance. Now, we see the torture of a pet as an expression of political partisanship.
Clearly, these acts are the works of cowards who choose to bully those who can't fight back rather than to deal with their own problems. Most assuredly these animal offenders are also capable of violence against people and must be prosecuted for these offenses to stop the escalation of violence. Sadly, this is not the last of it.
This cat was an innocent - neither democrat nor republican- not conservative or liberal, neither pro nor con, not for or against. Just a cat on a walk one Sunday in Arkansas.
30 Eylül 2012 Pazar
Obama to Decide Whether to Expand Military's Animal Cruelty Policy
To contact us Click HERE
The Department of Defense is asking President Obama for permission to expand the military's current animal cruelty policy to include abandonment and to also apply to personal pets rather than just those owned by the military. The constant relocation and reassignment of military families has resulted in many pets simply being left behind, abandoned, and unattended. Stars and Stripes is reporting that the problem is so great in places like Hawaii and Germany that local shelters are reluctant to adopt pets to Americans and/or military families at all.
The military is further concerned that the problem will worsen as United Airlines, the airline contracted to transport military personnel, refuses to permit certain breeds of dogs, such as American Staffordshire Terriers, on their planes, and will not waive this restriction for the Defense Department.
While I fully support holding those who choose to have a pet responsible for caring for that pet and accountable to the authorities for not doing so, I would also suggest that the military drop United Airlines and contract with another carrier so those with "banned" family dogs can travel without the additional heartbreak of the loss of a pet or the expense of funding their own flights on another airline. It seems an unnecessary stressor for those who would otherwise not abandon their pet.
In fact, if all pet lovers chose, in sympathy, to fly with different airlines - maybe we would see an attitude change from United.
The president is expected to decide this spring.
The Department of Defense is asking President Obama for permission to expand the military's current animal cruelty policy to include abandonment and to also apply to personal pets rather than just those owned by the military. The constant relocation and reassignment of military families has resulted in many pets simply being left behind, abandoned, and unattended. Stars and Stripes is reporting that the problem is so great in places like Hawaii and Germany that local shelters are reluctant to adopt pets to Americans and/or military families at all.The military is further concerned that the problem will worsen as United Airlines, the airline contracted to transport military personnel, refuses to permit certain breeds of dogs, such as American Staffordshire Terriers, on their planes, and will not waive this restriction for the Defense Department.
While I fully support holding those who choose to have a pet responsible for caring for that pet and accountable to the authorities for not doing so, I would also suggest that the military drop United Airlines and contract with another carrier so those with "banned" family dogs can travel without the additional heartbreak of the loss of a pet or the expense of funding their own flights on another airline. It seems an unnecessary stressor for those who would otherwise not abandon their pet.
In fact, if all pet lovers chose, in sympathy, to fly with different airlines - maybe we would see an attitude change from United.
The president is expected to decide this spring.
"Something's Happening Here - What It Is Ain't Exactly Clear..."
To contact us Click HERE
I wasn’t going to write about this – but – it has beenbothering me. Last week, the aspca (NOTa national umbrella organization) subsidized adoptions across the country for acouple of days. The subsidy allowed some shelters to give away pets, or tocharge 10 or 20 dollars for the pet. So whyhas this been nagging at me?
I began to wonder why they are really doing this. Promoting adoptions is the obvious answer butis it the correct one? You and I will never know – but here is what I think.The aspca has been and is under fire for fundraising in everyone’s neighborhoodand amassing approximately 188,024,402 million dollars in New Yorkto the detriment of all the other spcas and the animals they serve. They getaway with it because consumers believe that they are the “national office” and thatevery spca in the country is a chapter which receives funding from them. Not true. Each spca is a separate and independent legalentity and it could affect the aspca’s ability to raise funds if they disclosedthat. In fact, out of that near 185,000,000million dollars, they grant out fewerthan 6 million but spend over 25 million on fundraising.
So, they throw pocket change at this adoption promotion,publicize the hell out of it and generate more smoke for the mirrors.
But was it a good event that helped animals? In Californiathey worked mostly with government pounds where adopters are not screened andall one needs is the fee to take home an animal. At no charge or even with anominal charge many animals very likely went to hoarders, backyard sellers, and other entitiesthat had only plans to resell the pets at a huge mark up. How many sales werean impulse grab where the pet was returned or simply turned out? It is easy to empty ashelter but not so easy to have the adoption stick and actually find the pet ahome. It is neither a success nor even an adoption if the pet is not kept. Doyou think the aspca is tracking that or is even concerned about that? I don't know, but if so, the event business model would have been different. Of course there are those of us who would cherish a pet for life that we found on the street or received at no cost. I am not talking about us.
I think that my disquietude comes from the fear that manyof these animals might be in awful places as a result of the aspca’s publicrelations effort to appear to be funding animals in areas in which they solicitdonations and provide nothing in return.
They could be throwing couch cushion change to seem to besomething they are not, while perhaps tossing pets to the very real wolves.
Please donate locally.
I wasn’t going to write about this – but – it has beenbothering me. Last week, the aspca (NOTa national umbrella organization) subsidized adoptions across the country for acouple of days. The subsidy allowed some shelters to give away pets, or tocharge 10 or 20 dollars for the pet. So whyhas this been nagging at me?
 |
| Courtesy spcaL |
So, they throw pocket change at this adoption promotion,publicize the hell out of it and generate more smoke for the mirrors.
But was it a good event that helped animals? In Californiathey worked mostly with government pounds where adopters are not screened andall one needs is the fee to take home an animal. At no charge or even with anominal charge many animals very likely went to hoarders, backyard sellers, and other entitiesthat had only plans to resell the pets at a huge mark up. How many sales werean impulse grab where the pet was returned or simply turned out? It is easy to empty ashelter but not so easy to have the adoption stick and actually find the pet ahome. It is neither a success nor even an adoption if the pet is not kept. Doyou think the aspca is tracking that or is even concerned about that? I don't know, but if so, the event business model would have been different. Of course there are those of us who would cherish a pet for life that we found on the street or received at no cost. I am not talking about us.
I think that my disquietude comes from the fear that manyof these animals might be in awful places as a result of the aspca’s publicrelations effort to appear to be funding animals in areas in which they solicitdonations and provide nothing in return.
They could be throwing couch cushion change to seem to besomething they are not, while perhaps tossing pets to the very real wolves.
Please donate locally.
Stop the Cruel and Bullying "Sport"of Hounding California's Bears and Bobcats
To contact us Click HERE
Senate Bill 1221 will stop the cruel and bullying pastime of “hounding” bears and bobcats.
"Hounding" is a hunting practice where dogs are first sprayed with a bear attractant and fitted with high‐tech radio collars, that permit the hunters to hunt remotely. The dogs can chase the bear or bobcats for miles until they are treed or exhausted, at which time the tip-switch on the collars alerts the hunters, who, arrive and shoot a weary animal at point blank range. Essentially, the hounds take all the risks while the "sport" hunter lounges around in the park waiting for the signal to exert him or herself enough to shoot a trapped, immobilized animal.
Notwithstanding the terrifying ordeal suffered by the target animal, the hounds don't fare much better. They are not treated as pets but as working animals. They get injured running, hit by cars, and are often wounded or killed by the target animal or any other wildlife (such as deer) that they may encounter. There are reports of shelters receiving these dogs dehydrated, skinny and injured after they are no longer any use to the "sportsman".
I respectfully submit that this form of hunting is neither sport nor sportsman like. As comedian Paul Rodriguez said: "In a sport both sides should know they are in the game".
Not only do the animals not know they are playing - the bullies are cheating.
It is time to end this practice in California. Please contact your representatives http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html and urge them to pass SB 1221.
Thank you.
Senate Bill 1221 will stop the cruel and bullying pastime of “hounding” bears and bobcats.
 |
| Courtesy Google Images |
 |
| Courtesy Google Images |
I respectfully submit that this form of hunting is neither sport nor sportsman like. As comedian Paul Rodriguez said: "In a sport both sides should know they are in the game".
Not only do the animals not know they are playing - the bullies are cheating.
It is time to end this practice in California. Please contact your representatives http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html and urge them to pass SB 1221.
Thank you.
Rihanna's Dog Got "Minxed"
To contact us Click HERE
The latest trend in manicures and pedicures is the minx manicure. It is a process where pictures and patterns are painted onto fingernails and toenails thereby instantly transforming ordinary fingers and toes into works of art.
It was only a matter of time before this new art form appeared on a pet. In this case it was Rihanna's dog. She posted a photo of her dog with the caption "Bitch got minx."
The product is said to be toxic, odorless, chemical free and perfectly safe for natural nails. However, before you try something like this on your pet, use common sense. When in doubt, ask a veterinarian - is this safe for pets? Procedures and materials deemed safe for people may still have adverse effect on animals.
If it's safe - make sure it's something your pet tolerates and is comfortable doing. If your dog needs a sedative to do it, it most likely should not be done.
Need I say- don't even think about this for a cat!
 |
| Courtesy Instagram |
It was only a matter of time before this new art form appeared on a pet. In this case it was Rihanna's dog. She posted a photo of her dog with the caption "Bitch got minx."
The product is said to be toxic, odorless, chemical free and perfectly safe for natural nails. However, before you try something like this on your pet, use common sense. When in doubt, ask a veterinarian - is this safe for pets? Procedures and materials deemed safe for people may still have adverse effect on animals.
If it's safe - make sure it's something your pet tolerates and is comfortable doing. If your dog needs a sedative to do it, it most likely should not be done.
Need I say- don't even think about this for a cat!
29 Eylül 2012 Cumartesi
Democrat's Cat Killed with "Liberal" Painted on Body
To contact us Click HERE
A cat belonging to Jake Burris, the campaign manager for Democrat Ken Aden, was found dead with his head bashed in and the word "Liberal" spray-painted on his side. Ken Aden is running against Republican Steve Womack for Arkansas' 3rd Congressional District. The cat was left on the family house doorstep and found by Burris and his 4 children upon their return home. The Womack campaign denounced this violent and brutal act, and, the local police are investigating the matter.
I wish I could say this is unusual but violent acts against animals as a method to send a message is quite common. spcaLA's domestic violence program, Animal Safety Net, began over a decade ago to deal with the use of a pet, by the abuser, to control the behaviors of a victim. We have seen pets harmed to assert gang turf or to perform an initiation rite. We have seen pets beaten to assert power and to intimidate others into compliance. Now, we see the torture of a pet as an expression of political partisanship.
Clearly, these acts are the works of cowards who choose to bully those who can't fight back rather than to deal with their own problems. Most assuredly these animal offenders are also capable of violence against people and must be prosecuted for these offenses to stop the escalation of violence. Sadly, this is not the last of it.
This cat was an innocent - neither democrat nor republican- not conservative or liberal, neither pro nor con, not for or against. Just a cat on a walk one Sunday in Arkansas.
I wish I could say this is unusual but violent acts against animals as a method to send a message is quite common. spcaLA's domestic violence program, Animal Safety Net, began over a decade ago to deal with the use of a pet, by the abuser, to control the behaviors of a victim. We have seen pets harmed to assert gang turf or to perform an initiation rite. We have seen pets beaten to assert power and to intimidate others into compliance. Now, we see the torture of a pet as an expression of political partisanship.
Clearly, these acts are the works of cowards who choose to bully those who can't fight back rather than to deal with their own problems. Most assuredly these animal offenders are also capable of violence against people and must be prosecuted for these offenses to stop the escalation of violence. Sadly, this is not the last of it.
This cat was an innocent - neither democrat nor republican- not conservative or liberal, neither pro nor con, not for or against. Just a cat on a walk one Sunday in Arkansas.
Obama to Decide Whether to Expand Military's Animal Cruelty Policy
To contact us Click HERE
The Department of Defense is asking President Obama for permission to expand the military's current animal cruelty policy to include abandonment and to also apply to personal pets rather than just those owned by the military. The constant relocation and reassignment of military families has resulted in many pets simply being left behind, abandoned, and unattended. Stars and Stripes is reporting that the problem is so great in places like Hawaii and Germany that local shelters are reluctant to adopt pets to Americans and/or military families at all.
The military is further concerned that the problem will worsen as United Airlines, the airline contracted to transport military personnel, refuses to permit certain breeds of dogs, such as American Staffordshire Terriers, on their planes, and will not waive this restriction for the Defense Department.
While I fully support holding those who choose to have a pet responsible for caring for that pet and accountable to the authorities for not doing so, I would also suggest that the military drop United Airlines and contract with another carrier so those with "banned" family dogs can travel without the additional heartbreak of the loss of a pet or the expense of funding their own flights on another airline. It seems an unnecessary stressor for those who would otherwise not abandon their pet.
In fact, if all pet lovers chose, in sympathy, to fly with different airlines - maybe we would see an attitude change from United.
The president is expected to decide this spring.
The Department of Defense is asking President Obama for permission to expand the military's current animal cruelty policy to include abandonment and to also apply to personal pets rather than just those owned by the military. The constant relocation and reassignment of military families has resulted in many pets simply being left behind, abandoned, and unattended. Stars and Stripes is reporting that the problem is so great in places like Hawaii and Germany that local shelters are reluctant to adopt pets to Americans and/or military families at all.The military is further concerned that the problem will worsen as United Airlines, the airline contracted to transport military personnel, refuses to permit certain breeds of dogs, such as American Staffordshire Terriers, on their planes, and will not waive this restriction for the Defense Department.
While I fully support holding those who choose to have a pet responsible for caring for that pet and accountable to the authorities for not doing so, I would also suggest that the military drop United Airlines and contract with another carrier so those with "banned" family dogs can travel without the additional heartbreak of the loss of a pet or the expense of funding their own flights on another airline. It seems an unnecessary stressor for those who would otherwise not abandon their pet.
In fact, if all pet lovers chose, in sympathy, to fly with different airlines - maybe we would see an attitude change from United.
The president is expected to decide this spring.
"Something's Happening Here - What It Is Ain't Exactly Clear..."
To contact us Click HERE
I wasn’t going to write about this – but – it has beenbothering me. Last week, the aspca (NOTa national umbrella organization) subsidized adoptions across the country for acouple of days. The subsidy allowed some shelters to give away pets, or tocharge 10 or 20 dollars for the pet. So whyhas this been nagging at me?
I began to wonder why they are really doing this. Promoting adoptions is the obvious answer butis it the correct one? You and I will never know – but here is what I think.The aspca has been and is under fire for fundraising in everyone’s neighborhoodand amassing approximately 188,024,402 million dollars in New Yorkto the detriment of all the other spcas and the animals they serve. They getaway with it because consumers believe that they are the “national office” and thatevery spca in the country is a chapter which receives funding from them. Not true. Each spca is a separate and independent legalentity and it could affect the aspca’s ability to raise funds if they disclosedthat. In fact, out of that near 185,000,000million dollars, they grant out fewerthan 6 million but spend over 25 million on fundraising.
So, they throw pocket change at this adoption promotion,publicize the hell out of it and generate more smoke for the mirrors.
But was it a good event that helped animals? In Californiathey worked mostly with government pounds where adopters are not screened andall one needs is the fee to take home an animal. At no charge or even with anominal charge many animals very likely went to hoarders, backyard sellers, and other entitiesthat had only plans to resell the pets at a huge mark up. How many sales werean impulse grab where the pet was returned or simply turned out? It is easy to empty ashelter but not so easy to have the adoption stick and actually find the pet ahome. It is neither a success nor even an adoption if the pet is not kept. Doyou think the aspca is tracking that or is even concerned about that? I don't know, but if so, the event business model would have been different. Of course there are those of us who would cherish a pet for life that we found on the street or received at no cost. I am not talking about us.
I think that my disquietude comes from the fear that manyof these animals might be in awful places as a result of the aspca’s publicrelations effort to appear to be funding animals in areas in which they solicitdonations and provide nothing in return.
They could be throwing couch cushion change to seem to besomething they are not, while perhaps tossing pets to the very real wolves.
Please donate locally.
I wasn’t going to write about this – but – it has beenbothering me. Last week, the aspca (NOTa national umbrella organization) subsidized adoptions across the country for acouple of days. The subsidy allowed some shelters to give away pets, or tocharge 10 or 20 dollars for the pet. So whyhas this been nagging at me?
|
| Courtesy spcaL |
So, they throw pocket change at this adoption promotion,publicize the hell out of it and generate more smoke for the mirrors.
But was it a good event that helped animals? In Californiathey worked mostly with government pounds where adopters are not screened andall one needs is the fee to take home an animal. At no charge or even with anominal charge many animals very likely went to hoarders, backyard sellers, and other entitiesthat had only plans to resell the pets at a huge mark up. How many sales werean impulse grab where the pet was returned or simply turned out? It is easy to empty ashelter but not so easy to have the adoption stick and actually find the pet ahome. It is neither a success nor even an adoption if the pet is not kept. Doyou think the aspca is tracking that or is even concerned about that? I don't know, but if so, the event business model would have been different. Of course there are those of us who would cherish a pet for life that we found on the street or received at no cost. I am not talking about us.
I think that my disquietude comes from the fear that manyof these animals might be in awful places as a result of the aspca’s publicrelations effort to appear to be funding animals in areas in which they solicitdonations and provide nothing in return.
They could be throwing couch cushion change to seem to besomething they are not, while perhaps tossing pets to the very real wolves.
Please donate locally.
Stop the Cruel and Bullying "Sport"of Hounding California's Bears and Bobcats
To contact us Click HERE
Senate Bill 1221 will stop the cruel and bullying pastime of “hounding” bears and bobcats.
"Hounding" is a hunting practice where dogs are first sprayed with a bear attractant and fitted with high‐tech radio collars, that permit the hunters to hunt remotely. The dogs can chase the bear or bobcats for miles until they are treed or exhausted, at which time the tip-switch on the collars alerts the hunters, who, arrive and shoot a weary animal at point blank range. Essentially, the hounds take all the risks while the "sport" hunter lounges around in the park waiting for the signal to exert him or herself enough to shoot a trapped, immobilized animal.
Notwithstanding the terrifying ordeal suffered by the target animal, the hounds don't fare much better. They are not treated as pets but as working animals. They get injured running, hit by cars, and are often wounded or killed by the target animal or any other wildlife (such as deer) that they may encounter. There are reports of shelters receiving these dogs dehydrated, skinny and injured after they are no longer any use to the "sportsman".
I respectfully submit that this form of hunting is neither sport nor sportsman like. As comedian Paul Rodriguez said: "In a sport both sides should know they are in the game".
Not only do the animals not know they are playing - the bullies are cheating.
It is time to end this practice in California. Please contact your representatives http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html and urge them to pass SB 1221.
Thank you.
Senate Bill 1221 will stop the cruel and bullying pastime of “hounding” bears and bobcats.
|
| Courtesy Google Images |
|
| Courtesy Google Images |
I respectfully submit that this form of hunting is neither sport nor sportsman like. As comedian Paul Rodriguez said: "In a sport both sides should know they are in the game".
Not only do the animals not know they are playing - the bullies are cheating.
It is time to end this practice in California. Please contact your representatives http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html and urge them to pass SB 1221.
Thank you.
Rihanna's Dog Got "Minxed"
To contact us Click HERE
The latest trend in manicures and pedicures is the minx manicure. It is a process where pictures and patterns are painted onto fingernails and toenails thereby instantly transforming ordinary fingers and toes into works of art.
It was only a matter of time before this new art form appeared on a pet. In this case it was Rihanna's dog. She posted a photo of her dog with the caption "Bitch got minx."
The product is said to be toxic, odorless, chemical free and perfectly safe for natural nails. However, before you try something like this on your pet, use common sense. When in doubt, ask a veterinarian - is this safe for pets? Procedures and materials deemed safe for people may still have adverse effect on animals.
If it's safe - make sure it's something your pet tolerates and is comfortable doing. If your dog needs a sedative to do it, it most likely should not be done.
Need I say- don't even think about this for a cat!
|
| Courtesy Instagram |
It was only a matter of time before this new art form appeared on a pet. In this case it was Rihanna's dog. She posted a photo of her dog with the caption "Bitch got minx."
The product is said to be toxic, odorless, chemical free and perfectly safe for natural nails. However, before you try something like this on your pet, use common sense. When in doubt, ask a veterinarian - is this safe for pets? Procedures and materials deemed safe for people may still have adverse effect on animals.
If it's safe - make sure it's something your pet tolerates and is comfortable doing. If your dog needs a sedative to do it, it most likely should not be done.
Need I say- don't even think about this for a cat!
28 Eylül 2012 Cuma
Trying a Chicken McBite is Less Risky than Being Struck by Lightning
To contact us Click HERE
Theomnipresent fast food chain, McDonalds, in an advertisement designed tointroduce a new menu item, the chicken McBite, claimed "Trying a new menuitem at McDonald's isn't risky. You know what's risky? Petting a stray pitbull". To those who understand that not all pit bulls are dangerous,though some pit bull owners are, the ad seemed like a cheap shot against analready disparaged and beleaguered breed of dog. These dogs are banned,euthanized, disallowed under home insurance policies, and automatically assumedto be vicious, just because they appear to be pit bulls. In two instances, pitbulls working as service dogs were prohibited from performing their functionsin what is currently being litigated as a violation of the American withDisabilities Act. McDonalds in playing to their “unsafetiness”perpetuates a stereotype and reinforced the seeming unsuitability of every pitbull dog as a possible family pet.McDonalds alsocrowed that it is less risky to try the chicken dish than "naming your sonSue", again suggesting acceptance of the routine tormenting and bullyingof boys with any effeminate trait! At a time when we are trying to teachopen mindedness and tolerance these ads just ring flat.Ironically, itwas also reported that a carcinogen known as tertiary butyl hydroquinone (TBHQ)is used in another McDonalds ‘chicken treat called the McNugget, ostensiblyto preserve freshness. Unlike pit bulls who can be nurtured to be lovingand loyal pets, and children who can be educated not to taunt those perceivedas different - carcinogens can’t be taught to be safe!A corporationwith the financial resources of McDonalds, that is able to fund slick “ad men”and purchase expensive air time might think about using their resources toeliminate carcinogens from their food and donating to organizations that teachresponsible pet stewardship and respect for diversity.McDonalds didapologize and did halt the pit bull advertising spot. But they need to puttheir mcmoney where there mcmouth is.
 |
| courtesy google images |
Obama to Decide Whether to Expand Military's Animal Cruelty Policy
To contact us Click HERE
The Department of Defense is asking President Obama for permission to expand the military's current animal cruelty policy to include abandonment and to also apply to personal pets rather than just those owned by the military. The constant relocation and reassignment of military families has resulted in many pets simply being left behind, abandoned, and unattended. Stars and Stripes is reporting that the problem is so great in places like Hawaii and Germany that local shelters are reluctant to adopt pets to Americans and/or military families at all.
The military is further concerned that the problem will worsen as United Airlines, the airline contracted to transport military personnel, refuses to permit certain breeds of dogs, such as American Staffordshire Terriers, on their planes, and will not waive this restriction for the Defense Department.
While I fully support holding those who choose to have a pet responsible for caring for that pet and accountable to the authorities for not doing so, I would also suggest that the military drop United Airlines and contract with another carrier so those with "banned" family dogs can travel without the additional heartbreak of the loss of a pet or the expense of funding their own flights on another airline. It seems an unnecessary stressor for those who would otherwise not abandon their pet.
In fact, if all pet lovers chose, in sympathy, to fly with different airlines - maybe we would see an attitude change from United.
The president is expected to decide this spring.
The Department of Defense is asking President Obama for permission to expand the military's current animal cruelty policy to include abandonment and to also apply to personal pets rather than just those owned by the military. The constant relocation and reassignment of military families has resulted in many pets simply being left behind, abandoned, and unattended. Stars and Stripes is reporting that the problem is so great in places like Hawaii and Germany that local shelters are reluctant to adopt pets to Americans and/or military families at all.The military is further concerned that the problem will worsen as United Airlines, the airline contracted to transport military personnel, refuses to permit certain breeds of dogs, such as American Staffordshire Terriers, on their planes, and will not waive this restriction for the Defense Department.
While I fully support holding those who choose to have a pet responsible for caring for that pet and accountable to the authorities for not doing so, I would also suggest that the military drop United Airlines and contract with another carrier so those with "banned" family dogs can travel without the additional heartbreak of the loss of a pet or the expense of funding their own flights on another airline. It seems an unnecessary stressor for those who would otherwise not abandon their pet.
In fact, if all pet lovers chose, in sympathy, to fly with different airlines - maybe we would see an attitude change from United.
The president is expected to decide this spring.
"Something's Happening Here - What It Is Ain't Exactly Clear..."
To contact us Click HERE
I wasn’t going to write about this – but – it has beenbothering me. Last week, the aspca (NOTa national umbrella organization) subsidized adoptions across the country for acouple of days. The subsidy allowed some shelters to give away pets, or tocharge 10 or 20 dollars for the pet. So whyhas this been nagging at me?
I began to wonder why they are really doing this. Promoting adoptions is the obvious answer butis it the correct one? You and I will never know – but here is what I think.The aspca has been and is under fire for fundraising in everyone’s neighborhoodand amassing approximately 188,024,402 million dollars in New Yorkto the detriment of all the other spcas and the animals they serve. They getaway with it because consumers believe that they are the “national office” and thatevery spca in the country is a chapter which receives funding from them. Not true. Each spca is a separate and independent legalentity and it could affect the aspca’s ability to raise funds if they disclosedthat. In fact, out of that near 185,000,000million dollars, they grant out fewerthan 6 million but spend over 25 million on fundraising.
So, they throw pocket change at this adoption promotion,publicize the hell out of it and generate more smoke for the mirrors.
But was it a good event that helped animals? In Californiathey worked mostly with government pounds where adopters are not screened andall one needs is the fee to take home an animal. At no charge or even with anominal charge many animals very likely went to hoarders, backyard sellers, and other entitiesthat had only plans to resell the pets at a huge mark up. How many sales werean impulse grab where the pet was returned or simply turned out? It is easy to empty ashelter but not so easy to have the adoption stick and actually find the pet ahome. It is neither a success nor even an adoption if the pet is not kept. Doyou think the aspca is tracking that or is even concerned about that? I don't know, but if so, the event business model would have been different. Of course there are those of us who would cherish a pet for life that we found on the street or received at no cost. I am not talking about us.
I think that my disquietude comes from the fear that manyof these animals might be in awful places as a result of the aspca’s publicrelations effort to appear to be funding animals in areas in which they solicitdonations and provide nothing in return.
They could be throwing couch cushion change to seem to besomething they are not, while perhaps tossing pets to the very real wolves.
Please donate locally.
I wasn’t going to write about this – but – it has beenbothering me. Last week, the aspca (NOTa national umbrella organization) subsidized adoptions across the country for acouple of days. The subsidy allowed some shelters to give away pets, or tocharge 10 or 20 dollars for the pet. So whyhas this been nagging at me?
|
| Courtesy spcaL |
So, they throw pocket change at this adoption promotion,publicize the hell out of it and generate more smoke for the mirrors.
But was it a good event that helped animals? In Californiathey worked mostly with government pounds where adopters are not screened andall one needs is the fee to take home an animal. At no charge or even with anominal charge many animals very likely went to hoarders, backyard sellers, and other entitiesthat had only plans to resell the pets at a huge mark up. How many sales werean impulse grab where the pet was returned or simply turned out? It is easy to empty ashelter but not so easy to have the adoption stick and actually find the pet ahome. It is neither a success nor even an adoption if the pet is not kept. Doyou think the aspca is tracking that or is even concerned about that? I don't know, but if so, the event business model would have been different. Of course there are those of us who would cherish a pet for life that we found on the street or received at no cost. I am not talking about us.
I think that my disquietude comes from the fear that manyof these animals might be in awful places as a result of the aspca’s publicrelations effort to appear to be funding animals in areas in which they solicitdonations and provide nothing in return.
They could be throwing couch cushion change to seem to besomething they are not, while perhaps tossing pets to the very real wolves.
Please donate locally.
Stop the Cruel and Bullying "Sport"of Hounding California's Bears and Bobcats
To contact us Click HERE
Senate Bill 1221 will stop the cruel and bullying pastime of “hounding” bears and bobcats.
"Hounding" is a hunting practice where dogs are first sprayed with a bear attractant and fitted with high‐tech radio collars, that permit the hunters to hunt remotely. The dogs can chase the bear or bobcats for miles until they are treed or exhausted, at which time the tip-switch on the collars alerts the hunters, who, arrive and shoot a weary animal at point blank range. Essentially, the hounds take all the risks while the "sport" hunter lounges around in the park waiting for the signal to exert him or herself enough to shoot a trapped, immobilized animal.
Notwithstanding the terrifying ordeal suffered by the target animal, the hounds don't fare much better. They are not treated as pets but as working animals. They get injured running, hit by cars, and are often wounded or killed by the target animal or any other wildlife (such as deer) that they may encounter. There are reports of shelters receiving these dogs dehydrated, skinny and injured after they are no longer any use to the "sportsman".
I respectfully submit that this form of hunting is neither sport nor sportsman like. As comedian Paul Rodriguez said: "In a sport both sides should know they are in the game".
Not only do the animals not know they are playing - the bullies are cheating.
It is time to end this practice in California. Please contact your representatives http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html and urge them to pass SB 1221.
Thank you.
Senate Bill 1221 will stop the cruel and bullying pastime of “hounding” bears and bobcats.
|
| Courtesy Google Images |
|
| Courtesy Google Images |
I respectfully submit that this form of hunting is neither sport nor sportsman like. As comedian Paul Rodriguez said: "In a sport both sides should know they are in the game".
Not only do the animals not know they are playing - the bullies are cheating.
It is time to end this practice in California. Please contact your representatives http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html and urge them to pass SB 1221.
Thank you.
Rihanna's Dog Got "Minxed"
To contact us Click HERE
The latest trend in manicures and pedicures is the minx manicure. It is a process where pictures and patterns are painted onto fingernails and toenails thereby instantly transforming ordinary fingers and toes into works of art.
It was only a matter of time before this new art form appeared on a pet. In this case it was Rihanna's dog. She posted a photo of her dog with the caption "Bitch got minx."
The product is said to be toxic, odorless, chemical free and perfectly safe for natural nails. However, before you try something like this on your pet, use common sense. When in doubt, ask a veterinarian - is this safe for pets? Procedures and materials deemed safe for people may still have adverse effect on animals.
If it's safe - make sure it's something your pet tolerates and is comfortable doing. If your dog needs a sedative to do it, it most likely should not be done.
Need I say- don't even think about this for a cat!
|
| Courtesy Instagram |
It was only a matter of time before this new art form appeared on a pet. In this case it was Rihanna's dog. She posted a photo of her dog with the caption "Bitch got minx."
The product is said to be toxic, odorless, chemical free and perfectly safe for natural nails. However, before you try something like this on your pet, use common sense. When in doubt, ask a veterinarian - is this safe for pets? Procedures and materials deemed safe for people may still have adverse effect on animals.
If it's safe - make sure it's something your pet tolerates and is comfortable doing. If your dog needs a sedative to do it, it most likely should not be done.
Need I say- don't even think about this for a cat!
27 Eylül 2012 Perşembe
The Trip to Obtaining Your Medical Records
To contact us Click HERE
Now that you are ready to obtain copiesof your medical records, make a list of each doctor, period that youwere a patient of this doctor, and whether the doctor is still aliveor still in practice. Then make a list of medical labs you have usedor that your doctors has used, whether they are still in business ornot, and locate their address. The purpose is if your doctor isdeceased, you may need to contact the labs for test results. Not thebest solution, but this may be all that is available to you.
To obtain copies of medical records,you have to be the patient, or the parent of a minor child or thelegal guardian of the patient for whom you seek medical records. Ifyou are a caregiver, you may be able to obtain medical records if thepatient has provided a legal medical power of attorney to theprovider. Verbal authorization generally is not sufficient, but maywork for some providers for a limited time. Forget about inquiringor obtaining medical records for your spouse, children of legal age,or parents without legal authorization.
The US Department of Health and HumanServices provides background information to help you understand whomay, or may not, be able to access your medical records. Providersare required to follow the state rules in which the records are kept. Generally, this means for an adult medical records are kept six ormore years. Most children's records are kept three to 10 yearsbeyond the age of 18 or 21. It is always wise to contact theprovider to see if the records are still available.
Your doctor or provider is required toshare any notes or records they have created or any test resultswhich they have copies. Any information provided to them by anotherdoctor is accessible if that information was used for the diagnosisor treatment being discussed with you. Diagnostic lab tests are alittle more complicated, as blood tests, CT scan, x-rays, mammograms,or other tests should be requested from the doctor who ordered them,or from your primary care physician. In most states, the lab willrefuse to provide them directly to you. For other records such ashospital records, clinics, or any other medical facility, be sure torequest the copies directly from them.
When it involves mental health andrelated records, this is an area where many doctors will refuse youaccess. If they do, they must make the reason for denial clear inwriting.
Many patients unfortunately believethey or their legal representatives are the only ones that can getcopies of their medical records. This is false; there are peoplethat can legally gain access to your medical records without yourpermission.
When you request copies, mostpractices, offices, or hospitals will have a form to complete toreceive a copies of the requested medical records. They normallywill send it to you by fax, email, postal mail, or you may pick it upfrom the doctor's office. If the facility does not have a specificform, you may write a letter, but be sure to include the followinginformation:
Now we come to the problem of gettingrecords from a doctor that has sold out, merged into anotherpractice, or had simply left the practice (whether died, quit,retired, or another reason).
If your doctor has left the practice orsold the practice or it was combined with another practice, then thenew practice should still have your records. If this is the case,follow the same procedure above as if the doctor was still working inthat practice.
If your doctor is no longer inpractice, or for some reason you cannot locate the doctor or officewhere you think your records should be, there are some steps you cantake to locate your medical records. These steps include:
1. Contact your local medical society. You may be able to lookup the phone number online or in the phone book, or you may find thecontact information you need through this list of medical societiesin each state. You will need to drill down by state to your localsociety. Someone at themedical society should be able to let you know what became of yourdoctor's practice, and will possibly know where the doctor's recordsare being housed. They may also be able to tell you how to get copiesif the procedure will vary from the basic procedure described here.2. If your local medical society does not have the information youneed, then contact your state medical society association, asper the list linked in #1 above. 3. Finally, if the medical societies cannot help you, then begincontacting other practices of the same specialty in your area.Some doctors will ask other practices of the same specialty to housetheir records when they close their practices. The idea is, that ifyour doctor is not in business any longer, then the other specialistmight want to pick you up as a patient. Simply call theoffice of each of the other same-specialty doctors and tell them, "Iwas a patient of Dr. ____'s. I am hoping to find my medical records.Can you tell me if Dr. _____ gave them to your practice?" Ifthey say yes, then ask their protocol for getting your copies. Ifthey say no, then ask if they know where those records are beingkept. If they do not know, then call the next same-specialty practiceand ask them the same question. 4. Finally, if none of these possibilities work out, contact thehospitals in your area. Unless you can determine a betterdepartment, then try Human Resources. They may know where yourrecords are being kept.
Keep in mind that when your recordshave been housed elsewhere, they will be difficult to retrieve unlessthey are among the minority of records that have already beentransferred to an electronic health record. For that reason, you willvery likely be charged for the copies you want. Learn more about howmuch you may have to pay for copies of your medical records.
To obtain copies of medical records,you have to be the patient, or the parent of a minor child or thelegal guardian of the patient for whom you seek medical records. Ifyou are a caregiver, you may be able to obtain medical records if thepatient has provided a legal medical power of attorney to theprovider. Verbal authorization generally is not sufficient, but maywork for some providers for a limited time. Forget about inquiringor obtaining medical records for your spouse, children of legal age,or parents without legal authorization.
The US Department of Health and HumanServices provides background information to help you understand whomay, or may not, be able to access your medical records. Providersare required to follow the state rules in which the records are kept. Generally, this means for an adult medical records are kept six ormore years. Most children's records are kept three to 10 yearsbeyond the age of 18 or 21. It is always wise to contact theprovider to see if the records are still available.
Your doctor or provider is required toshare any notes or records they have created or any test resultswhich they have copies. Any information provided to them by anotherdoctor is accessible if that information was used for the diagnosisor treatment being discussed with you. Diagnostic lab tests are alittle more complicated, as blood tests, CT scan, x-rays, mammograms,or other tests should be requested from the doctor who ordered them,or from your primary care physician. In most states, the lab willrefuse to provide them directly to you. For other records such ashospital records, clinics, or any other medical facility, be sure torequest the copies directly from them.
When it involves mental health andrelated records, this is an area where many doctors will refuse youaccess. If they do, they must make the reason for denial clear inwriting.
Many patients unfortunately believethey or their legal representatives are the only ones that can getcopies of their medical records. This is false; there are peoplethat can legally gain access to your medical records without yourpermission.
When you request copies, mostpractices, offices, or hospitals will have a form to complete toreceive a copies of the requested medical records. They normallywill send it to you by fax, email, postal mail, or you may pick it upfrom the doctor's office. If the facility does not have a specificform, you may write a letter, but be sure to include the followinginformation:
- your name, including yourmaiden name (if applicable)
- make sure that you date theletter for the date of delivery if possible
- your social security number
- your full date of birth
- your complete address
- your phone number or cell phonenumber
- the list of record(s) beingrequested
- the date(s) of service when youwere under this doctor's care
- delivery method preferred –pick-up, fax, email, or other method
- your signature
Now we come to the problem of gettingrecords from a doctor that has sold out, merged into anotherpractice, or had simply left the practice (whether died, quit,retired, or another reason).
If your doctor has left the practice orsold the practice or it was combined with another practice, then thenew practice should still have your records. If this is the case,follow the same procedure above as if the doctor was still working inthat practice.
If your doctor is no longer inpractice, or for some reason you cannot locate the doctor or officewhere you think your records should be, there are some steps you cantake to locate your medical records. These steps include:
1. Contact your local medical society. You may be able to lookup the phone number online or in the phone book, or you may find thecontact information you need through this list of medical societiesin each state. You will need to drill down by state to your localsociety. Someone at themedical society should be able to let you know what became of yourdoctor's practice, and will possibly know where the doctor's recordsare being housed. They may also be able to tell you how to get copiesif the procedure will vary from the basic procedure described here.2. If your local medical society does not have the information youneed, then contact your state medical society association, asper the list linked in #1 above. 3. Finally, if the medical societies cannot help you, then begincontacting other practices of the same specialty in your area.Some doctors will ask other practices of the same specialty to housetheir records when they close their practices. The idea is, that ifyour doctor is not in business any longer, then the other specialistmight want to pick you up as a patient. Simply call theoffice of each of the other same-specialty doctors and tell them, "Iwas a patient of Dr. ____'s. I am hoping to find my medical records.Can you tell me if Dr. _____ gave them to your practice?" Ifthey say yes, then ask their protocol for getting your copies. Ifthey say no, then ask if they know where those records are beingkept. If they do not know, then call the next same-specialty practiceand ask them the same question. 4. Finally, if none of these possibilities work out, contact thehospitals in your area. Unless you can determine a betterdepartment, then try Human Resources. They may know where yourrecords are being kept.
Keep in mind that when your recordshave been housed elsewhere, they will be difficult to retrieve unlessthey are among the minority of records that have already beentransferred to an electronic health record. For that reason, you willvery likely be charged for the copies you want. Learn more about howmuch you may have to pay for copies of your medical records.
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)