NAIA Official Blog

The legislative season is underway in many states and cities, which, of course, means hundreds (thousands!) of pages of proposed laws and ordinances governing animals and animal enterprises.

In Las Vegas, Nevada, the number of dogs or cats a person can own without a permit increased from four to six, while new regulations on groomers and boarding facilities were rejected. In Monroe, Georgia, a 2014 ordinance was updated, banning the tethering of unattended pets. Meanwhile, a leash law was narrowly rejected in Clarinda County, Iowa, and Pierce County, Georgia, discovered their new ordinance on animal burials was unnecessary: there has been one on the books since 1991. And these examples are just from the last few days.

Laws regarding animals and animal issues are nothing new. The Code of Hammurabi dealt with – rather forcefully – the theft of livestock and working animals nearly 3,800 years ago! Animals play such a vital role in our day-to-day lives, it is essential that a legal framework exists to define our relationship with them. At the same time, it is important to be aware that many laws pertaining to animals, even if they sound great on the surface, can be arbitrary, redundant, or too one-size-fits-all to be fair or practical. They may be left unfunded and unenforced (or simply be unenforceable), pushed by business interests with ulterior motives, or by activists whose end goal is destroying (or possibly supplanting) a popular hobby or industry. They are also quite often crafted by lawmakers who possess little to no hands-on experience with the issues they are attempting to rectify – so even if their efforts are entirely heartfelt and come with the best of intentions, they are often operating without the full picture.

Keep this in mind. And when you hear about a new animal ordinance and wonder if you should support it or not, ask yourself a few questions. Does it seek to remedy a legitimate public health and safety or animal welfare issue? If so, will the ordinance actually be enforced? What, if any, unintended consequences or “camel’s noses under the tent” can you see? Laws are necessary, but they must also be reasonable, solve real issues, and be enforced. If they are not, they probably create at least as many problems as they solve.

Resources
★     LV Council approves increase in pet ownership, rejects more regulation of animal pros
★     ​Monroe unanimously adopts the amended Animal Ordinance in accordance with Walton County’s Ordinance
★     Proposed Clarinda leash law fails second reading after calls for stricter regulations
★     County discovers it already has large animal burial ordinance

It’s a new year, meaning lots of new laws are taking effect throughout the land, including a ban on fur in California. More accurately, a ban on the sale and manufacturing of new fur products. This kind of thing has become par for the course in California, so it shouldn’t be a surprise – though it should be troubling to you, regardless of whether or not you choose to wear real fur. The hubris of a congresswoman from sunny Glendale, California announcing to the rest of the world that fur is over – and further, that it has no place in a “sustainable future” (how many hundreds of years will it take for that faux fur coat to biodegrade, again?) would almost be laughable if there were no real-world consequences or precedents from her bill.

Unlike animal issues related to things like food production or pets that virtually everybody has a stake in, fur can be exploited by its opponents by tying it to displays of ostentatious wealth and its lack of functionality in many climates of the world (see: Glendale, California). Combining divide-and-conquer tactics with a side of pragmatic-sounding “and do we really even need this?” can be really effective. This means that as far as cause-marketed issues go, fur is fairly low-hanging fruit. Opponents of the ban were correct in saying it ultimately boiled down to one class of people wanting to tell another class what they could buy/wear…. which, again, should be highly concerning, regardless of one’s feelings about wearing fur.

New California laws in 2023 include a fur ban, new state holidays

Resources
★     Prop 12 Enforcement Will Wait in California for Supreme Court Ruling
★     Appeals Court Upholds Limit on California’s Foie Gras Ban

We have become all too familiar with sad tales of people relinquishing their dogs due to economic and housing pressure over the last year. Dogs want to stay with their people, owners are often filled with sorrow or even shame at the choices they must make, and amid the fallout numerous shelters across the country report being filled to capacity or beyond. But what about the cats? Cats, despite being the second most popular companion animal in the United States, are an animal we have heard precious little about in recent months.

Indeed, in Vermont, humane societies and shelters aren’t reporting the same difficulties with cat relinquishments and adoptions as with dogs. And this makes sense: cats are less expensive and lower-maintenance than dogs. Cat-owning renters also face fewer hurdles when moving. It comes in handy that landlords often view cats as cleaner, quieter, more out of the way, and less of a liability than dogs. So maybe cats simply aren’t facing the same economic and housing pressures?

It’s certainly tempting (and comforting) to think so. However, smaller cat rescues in the state tell a much different tale: while it was hard for many rescues to keep cats “in stock” during 2020-21, adoptions in 2022 are way down and relinquishments are up. And at least one rescue owner is asking why some of the state’s humane societies still import cats from the southern United States while rescues and fosters are at capacity, and locals face growing wait times to surrender their own pets or strays. This isn’t an idle concern. You can argue the ethics of rescue importation until blue in the face without changing anyone’s mind, but you can’t change the math. If there isn’t enough room to house and adopt out local cats because you’re hauling in dozens of cats from out of state each month, you simply aren’t serving your community.

Resources
★     People are giving up pets. Blame inflation.
★     Higher intake, slower adoptions: Michigan animal shelters need your help

It’s officially winter, and the cold is coming on strong in many parts of the country. This year, meteorologists are predicting the coldest Christmas in decades – a chill deep enough to threaten pets, livestock, and wildlife.

For livestock, this means making sure their housing is dry and insulated, that they have plenty of food and water –  and that their water isn’t frozen. With animals that require heat lamps or heaters, care must be taken to make sure to avoid fire hazards, too – make sure the cure isn’t worse than the disease!

When it comes to our pets, care is simultaneously simpler and more complicated – use our eyes, knowledge of our companions, and a healthy dose of common sense. Don’t deny a young and healthy Alaskan Malamute a chance to rollick in the snow for a bit. That’s literally what they are made for! On the other hand, an older, short-haired pet might only be comfortable going outside for a minute or two.

Also, make sure to keep their feet clean and dry (this is especially important if you live where deicers are used). Our pets all have different needs and preferences; being aware of them and employing common sense will go a long way toward keeping them comfortable and safe during this cold snap!

Resources
★     Resources to protect animals during upcoming cold weather
★     Southern US cold snap could have iguanas falling from trees in Florida

Every December, we get a new set of think pieces on the topic of adopting pets during the holiday season. In the world of animal lovers, this may be as traditional as a 24-hour A Christmas Story marathon. Historically, discussions of holiday pet adoptions have come in the form of waggling fingers, or at the very least warnings that prospective owners be extremely thoughtful when acquiring their new pet. Blessedly, the rhetoric has become less judgmental and heated in recent years. Nevertheless, if you are a pet lover, these warnings about “Santa Cats” are the Holiday Special version of a “Never, ever leave your dog in a hot car” admonition – we’ve all heard it countless times, but its potential consequences make it worth heeding and repeating.

At NAIA, we don’t take the absolutist, finger-waggling approach toward this topic – no two people or pets are the same, and let’s be honest: if someone really wants a puppy for Christmas, they’ll find a way to get one. What we do appreciate, are collections of thoughtful and encouraging advice for prospective pet owners, such as the ones listed in this article by the Atlanta Humane Society. Instead of saying you must do this or that, they ask you to ask yourself some questions. Serious questions about how much time you have available to care for a pet. Questions about whether your living space is appropriate for pets – or if it even allows pets. Questions about safety for your family and potential pet. And finally – quite topically – asking yourself whether caring for a pet is something you can afford to add to your monthly budget?

Adding a pet (or pets!) to the family is a wonderful thing that we hope everyone gets to experience. But it is easy to be blinded by the stars in our eyes when falling in love with a puppy or kitten –  especially during such a festive time of year. Asking ourselves some pertinent questions before taking the plunge can be just the splash of cold water to the face we need… or, even better, a great way to help us realistically prepare for a new companion.

8 things to consider before adopting a pet this holiday season

Resources
★     Adopt a Pet During the Holidays? The Pros and Cons
★     Adopting a pet this holiday season? Shelters say: adopt responsibly

Saying “The Devil made me do it” is a well-known and lighthearted – but ultimately meaningless – way of exploiting theology to avoid accountability for our actions. But saying “The protozoans made me do it,” even if it doesn’t roll off the tongue quite so easily, actually has some scientific backing. There is a growing body of evidence that parasites play a large role in influencing animal behaviors… and one of the best known, Toxoplasma gondii, lives in the bellies of North America’s second-most beloved pet: the common housecat.

Many animal lovers already know about the effect of toxoplasmosis on rodents. In a nutshell, cats are the only host T. gondii can reproduce inside of… and wouldn’t you know it: toxoplasmosis-infected rats don’t show the same aversion to cat urine, making these rodents (and the parasites they are carrying) more likely to find their way into a cat’s stomach. This is a convenient coincidence (except for the rat)!

But such convenient coincidences may be just the tip of the iceberg. Newer research in the wild shows T. gondii-infected chimps and hyena cubs attracted to the urine of large, predatory cats. And infected humans display differences in behavior, too. While the odds of us being eaten by a cat are quite small, people suffering from toxoplasmosis engage in notably more risk-taking behaviors, and demonstrate less fear of failure when compared to the general population. Past experiences, our environment, genes, and social expectations are well-known factors that shape behavior, but as we’re learning with parasites like T. gondii, there may be numerous lesser-known – but significant – factors at play, as well!

Resources
★     Brain parasite may strip away rodents’ fear of predators—not just of cats
★     Toxoplasmosis in Cats

On Tuesday, a twin-engine plane packed with 53 rescue dogs enroute from Louisiana to a humane society in Wisconsin crash-landed just short of its destination at a golf club in Pewaukee, Wisconsin. It was a skillful emergency landing, and thankfully, there were only minor injuries inside the plane. Outside, snow kept people off the golf course, so the only casualty was a small tree taken out by the landing.

The story has garnered local and national notoriety and the destination shelter, Humane Animal Welfare Society (HAWS), reported hundreds of inquiries about the dogs, which means they’ll all be adopted. So – from certain disaster to hunky-dory-happily-ever-after, yes? Maybe not. The primary question remains: are loosely regulated rescue pet transports appropriate, humane, or even safe ways to deal with surplus pets? The fact is, of all the sources of dogs available to the public, these are among the most challenging because they have a demonstrable record of significant health and behavioral problems.

Concern over disease and parasites in rescue imports is often dismissed or even belittled by rescue activists, though it’s maddening to the scientists and agencies that are forced to deal with the fallout (HAWS was quarantined a few years ago when South Korean rescue imports brought canine brucellosis with them – a disease that can utterly destroy breeding programs). Canine rabies infection is fatal without post-exposure treatment, but even if exposure doesn’t result in infection, it often causes a follow-up investigation and cleanup that costs a fortune. But rabies and brucellosis are just two of many diseases found in unvetted pet transports – and many of these are not endemic to their destination sites. Importing dogs from foreign countries can put US agriculture at risk with diseases such as African swine fever, which has killed millions of hogs worldwide.

If you are adopting a pet, we urge you to seek out locally sourced dogs and cats in need of permanent, loving homes. Rescue transport may get some great headlines (just follow how this story is being covered elsewhere!), but the resources that go into it would be much better spent solving surplus and homeless pet issues at their source, via outreach, education, improving animal services, and providing low-cost vaccination and spay & neuter services.

Resources
★     NAIA Leads Appeal for Healthy Dog Import Resources for USDA
★     Wisconsin animal shelter flooded by ‘hundreds’ of offers to adopt dogs who survived plane crash
★     What Imported Dogs have to do with African Swine Fever
★     Notice of Temporary Suspension of Dogs Entering the United States from Countries Classified as High Risk for Dog Rabies

Have you ever wondered about the animals who work for our military veterans? No better time to ask this question than Veterans Day! There are, of course, dogs – therapy dogs and service dogs, most often – but there are also cats, birds, reptiles, and, in the case of this story, horses.

For some veterans suffering the effects of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), spending time brushing, leading, and riding horses is a fantastic way to clear their heads while reducing anxiety and depression. A horse (like many domestic animals) can also help alleviate feelings of isolation. It is no exaggeration to say that for some people, this is the activity they most look forward to each week (the horses get treated pretty nicely, too). It was seeing reports of successful horse therapy programs throughout the country that inspired Virginia’s Copper Crest Farm to start a therapy program for veterans. And so far, it has been a tremendous help for those who have taken part in it.

The horse therapy program described in this article charges only a small fee, but its service is invaluable. It is also just one of many throughout the country – there may be one near you!

Resources
★     Equine therapy and other equine programs for military veterans & families
★     What Is Equine Therapy and Equine-Assisted Therapy?

A few years ago, it seemed like we were standing at the precipice of a major scandal after the Washington Post revealed that rescues were buying and reselling dogs from their avowed mortal enemies: commercial breeders. Yikes, can you imagine that? But this practice had been going on for some time, and by 2018, the shadow market it created had become so large, some breeders claimed to be breeding more dogs specifically for the “rescue market!” For rescue, whose goal is (or at least was) to do such a great job of emptying the shelters that they put themselves out of business, buying puppies from commercial breeders is a curiously sustainable business model.

But here we are in 2022, and as you can see by this news story, not only did the above scandal cause little more than a ripple of public outrage, this practice has actually been normalized by large humane organizations, and is even celebrated as “lifesaving.”

Of course, no matter how noble and humane a veneer you place on it, rescues buying and reselling “overstock” (or even deliberately bred) dogs from breeders or importing unvetted street dogs from overseas are not engaged in the business of solving problems. Taking and rehoming individual pets brings good feelings and is great marketing, but relying on this model means that substandard breeding operations remain in operation (or even grow), and dogs and cats in foreign countries continue to reproduce unchecked. You can look at this from a compartmentalized perspective and celebrate the individual animal rehomed, as well as taking action for action’s sake (and many people do), but again, this simply allows the underlying issues to persist. Practices like these are short-sighted at best, and cynical at worst.

To quote our own peer-reviewed dog study on the outdated perceptions that shape today’s dog marketplace:  “As Rhode Island state veterinarian Dr. Scott Marshall put it, ‘…There’s some evidence that the rescue groups are a new model for the pet shop industry.'”

Resources
★     (2018) Dog Fight: Dog rescuers, flush with donations, buy animals from the breeders they scorn
★     (2018) USDA says individuals and groups may need license if buying dogs for rescue at auction
★     (2019) NAIA: How outdated perceptions have reshaped the dog marketplace

The US Fish and Wildlife Service is being sued by the Organization of Professional Aviculturists Inc. and the Lineolated Parakeet Society. They allege that USFWS is not allowing for the importation of captive-bred parrots under the rules of the Wild Exotic Bird Conservation Act (WBCA).

Signed into law in 1992, the WBCA is meant to protect bird species bred in human care from having their wild populations affected by the wildlife trade. It also established the Exotic Bird Conservation fund for in situ conservation efforts. There is an approved list of birds from CITES that can be imported.

The plaintiffs state in the lawsuit that FWS denied their application to import birds already on the approved list, and that it is the duty of FWS, as per the act, to publish notice of list changes and invite public comment. It has been 30 years since that last happened. It will be interesting to see what happens with this lawsuit, as FWS has been remiss in their duties to not only revise the lists over time, but to implement key parts of the act.

Resources
★     Wild Bird Conservation Act
★     Red List update: parrots of the Americas in peril