ohmidog!

Petitions to reduce Baltimore city’s $1,000 leash law fine, and urge the city to provide options for dogs to excercise while off leash are now circulating in the city and on the Internet.

To sign the petition online, click here.

The petition supports a measure to reduce the $1,000 fine, and also calls upon the city to establish more dog parks and provide off-leash hours in city parks. Both matters are to come before the City Council at its 10 a.m. meeting Tuesday.

The petition reads as follows:

This petition supports the significant lowering of dog fines as introduced on April 20, 2009 by Baltimore City Council ordinance 09-0322, titled “Leash Law- Environmental and Civil Citations FOR THE PURPOSE of reducing certain civil penalties for violating animal control law requirements for leashes or other restraints; and providing for a special effective date.” Additionally, we encourage the City Council to quickly introduce additional (legislation) that will make Baltimore City more dog-friendly through new programs such as off-leash hours in public green areas and dog parks.

We, the undersigned, protest the recent January 2009 Leash Law tied to escalated fines and support the counter-ordinance 09-0322 that proposes significantly reduced fines, currently scheduled for a vote by the City Council of Baltimore at 10:00 a.m. on April 28, 2009.

As an active citywide community representing citizens of all ages, races and economic backgrounds, we share a love of our dogs—pets we responsibly exercise in public spaces. The recent dramatic increase of Baltimore City’s off-leash fines has successfully united us to petition for a variety of public opportunities to maximize dog-owning residents to responsibly use and enjoy Baltimore’s public green areas, just as major American cities have offered citizens for decades.

Read more »

The National Resources Defense Council, which warned this week of the hazards of flea and tick collars, has issued a product guide ranking the safety of more than 125 flea and tick control products.

The guide lists the products, the chemicals they contain and the risks they pose. It’s part of a NRDC’s new Green Paws campaign that helps consumers find the safest flea-control products that won’t endanger pets or children.

NRDC released a report yesterday warning of dangerously high levels of two carcinogenic neurotoxins on pet fur after the use of ordinary flea collars. The organization filed a lawsuit against companies including Petsmart, Petco and Sergeants; and it has asked the Environmental Protection Agency to ban the use of the chemicals in flea collars.

For the full product list, click here.

It’s not too often we cover cats at ohmidog!,   but National Hairball Awareness Day (it’s today, if you didn’t know) isn’t strictly about cats.

Dogs get hairballs too — as do humans, and cud-chewing animals, such as cows, oxen, sheep, goats, llamas, deer, and antelope.

As pets go, though, cats are more prone, and with almost 90 million U.S. cat owners we feel it’s our duty to pass on these hairball-alleviating tips — not just to avoid having to clean them up, but because they can pose dangers to the animal by blocking food from passing through the intestines.

The folks who make the FURminator offer the following tips, chief among them of course, buying their products:

- The more you groom your cat, the less, he or she will groom his or herself, making hairballs less likely. In addition to deshedding tools, there are shampoos that claim to reduce shedding.

- A little butter or pumpkin added to food can decrease the likelihood of hairballs, the butter helping grease the way, the pumpkin’s fiber helping to get things moving.

- Keep your cat well hydrated, placing water bowls throughought the house.

- Laxative supplements from your vet can help with chronic hairball problems.

If you want to learn even more about hairballs (and we would hope you don’t), the National Museum of Health and Medicine has a webpage devoted to them, and, should you want to make the trip to Washington (and we really, really hope you don’t)  there’s a human hairball on permanent display in the museum.

The National Museum of Health and Medicine has 24 veterinary and 3 human hairballs or “trichobezoars” in its anatomical collection. To commemorate National Hairball Awareness Day on April 27, 2006, the museum featured a temporary display of 10 of these hairballs to explore the myths and realities behind these medical curiosities. Included were hairballs from a steer, two oxen, three cows, a calf, horse, and a chicken.

As for our picture above, rather than be so tasteless as to confront you with the real thing, we’ve chosen a crocheted hairball from the collection of Fluffy Flowers.  If you’d like to learn how to make your own (and, once again, we’re hoping you don’t), you can find a tutorial here.

The idea of designating off leash hours for dogs in parks seems to be catching on in Massachussetts, where a handful of towns have turned to the practice in an effort to resolve the conflict between those who like to  let their dogs run freely and those who complain about it.

The town of Weston, Mass – which is currently wrestling with whether to limit off-leash dogs — may wind up taking a lesson from Wellesley, Mass., the Boston Globe reports. In Wellesley, designated off leash hours at Perrin Park seem to be working, local officials said.

The conflict in Wellesley came to a head last fall when neighbors and parents complained of uncleaned dog waste and packs of dogs running wildly and interrupting games. The town briefly banned off-leash dogs in Perrin, creating an outcry among dog lovers. Now, off-leash dogs are relegated to early morning and evening hours when the fields are not in use.

“It seems to be working pretty well so far,” aid Janet Hartke Bowser, executive director of Wellesley’s Natural Resources Commission, which oversees the dog rules. “In general, compliance has been good.”

Several other municipalities have instituted off-leash hours, are considering them, or are giving them a trial run, like the experiment we told you about last month in Newton, Mass.

In addition, Brookline launched a program in 2006 that limits accessibility to off-leash dogs to the mornings and evenings in most of the city’s 14 public parks. Arlington is planning a similar pilot program, where residents would pay $40 and non-residents $100 to walk their dogs off-leash in town parks.

Here in Baltimore, several residents proposed the city consider trying off-leash hours in a meeting with City Councilman Ed Reisinger in Riverside Park last week. The meeting was held after an outcry over the city instituting $1,000 fines for off-leash dogs. Reisinger seemed to put little stock in the suggestion, and said creating more dog parks was the solution, but a group of dog owners in Riverside is still trying to push the idea. They, and the city, might be well served by looking at Wellesley.

Dog Fancy magazine has released its annual list of America’s Best Dog Parks – and the winner is …  Freedom Bark Park in Lowell, Indiana.

“It’s never easy to create a dog park, but particularly in a small community that doesn’t even allow leashed dogs in regular parks,” explains Dog Fancy Editor Susan Chaney. “The way dog lovers pulled together in Lowell impressed us. Also factoring into our decision were the digging areas so dogs can do what they love to do and the environmental efforts of the Freedom Bark Park Committee.”

Every year, Dog Fancy asks its readers to submit nominations for America’s best dog park. Parks must have fencing, double gates and free clean-up bags to be considered. Parks are then judged based on a list of standards including: water for dogs and their people, shade, lights, parking availability and accessibility, support organizations and special events, among others.

The rest of the top ten were:
 

• Dog Wood Dog Park, Jacksonville, Fla.
• Howard and Erna Soldan Dog Park, Lansing, Mich.
• Cheyenne Park Off-Leash Area, Ely, Iowa
• Jackson’s Howlabaloo Dog Park, Edinboro, Pa.
• Happy Tails Dog Park, Dunedin, Fla.
• Shaggy Pines Dog Park, Ada, Mich.
• Ossining Dog Park, Ossining, N.Y.
• Dogwood Park at Victor Ashe Park, Knoxville, Tenn.
• Millie Bush Bark Park, Houston, Texas.

Some flea collars for cats and dogs leave cancer-causing chemicals on their fur that are hazardous to the pets and their owners, the Natural Resources Defense Council says.

The council has filed a lawsuit, asking the federal Environmental Protection Agency to order the removal of two chemicals — propoxur and TCVP, or tetrachlorvinphos — contained in many flea collars. Up until now, the EPA has said exposure to the chemicals in flea collars is insignificant.

The NRDC, in a report released yesterday, says the chemicals left residue high enough to pose a risk of cancer and neurological damage to children that is 1,000 times higher than the EPA’s acceptable levels.

“Just because a product is sold in stores doesn’t mean it’s safe,” said Dr. Gina Solomon, a physician and a toxicologist with the environmental group and an author of the study.

(To see a full list of flea and tick control products, the chemicals they contain and the risks they pose, click here.)

The federal agency had no immediate response to to the petition, or allegations that it failed to safeguard the public and their pets from dangerous pesticides, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

The lawsuit, filed in California’s Alameda County Superior Court, claims 16 retailers and manufacturers, including chain pet supply and grocery stores, failed to warn consumers that they were exposed to unsafe levels of propoxur in violation of state law.

The group conducted tests on nine dogs and five cats. The tests for TCVP were conducted on Hartz Advanced Care 3-in-1 Control Collar for Cats and Hartz Advanced Care 2-in-1 Reflecting Flea & Tick Collar for Dogs. Tests for propoxur were done on Zodiac Flea & Tick Collar for dogs and Bio Spot Flea and Tick Collar for dogs.

Pet owners calling the National Pesticide Information Center have complained that dogs and cats wearing collars containing the ingredients had stopped eating or drinking and showed symptoms including vomiting, twitching, diarrhea. There was no confirmation that the collars caused the problems.

In the tests for TCVP, after three days, 60 percent of the dogs and 40 percent of the cats had residue levels that exceed the EPA’s acceptable level for developing brains of toddlers who spend an average amount of time with a pet. For toddlers who have a lot more pet contact or have more than one pet, residue levels on 80 percent of the dogs and all of the cats would exceed the acceptable level.

In the tests for propoxur, after three days, all of the dogs had residue levels that would exceed the EPA’s acceptable level to for developing brains of toddlers spending an average amount of time with a pet.

You can read the NRDC press release here.

Read more »

From the shores (yeah, right) of Riverside to the uppermost reaches of Upper Fells Point, Baltimore dog lovers will be coming together tonight to push their plans to find a time or place for their dogs to run in a city that offers few such opportunities.

Sparked by the city’s move to increase the penalty for leash law violations to $1,000, two park-specific groups will hold meetings — at neighborhood bars, of course — to move forward with plans that, while different, share the same goal.

Those who have been trying for years to have a fenced-in dog park established within massive Patterson Park will be holding a 6:30 p.m. meeting at Three, a bar and restaurant located at the corner of E. Baltimore and S. Linwood.

Another group of concerned dog owners who frequent Riverside Park, in South Baltimore, will be meeting at 8 p.m., at Captain Larry’s, 601 E. Fort Ave., to discuss asking the city to set aside certain hours at the park during which well-behaved dogs are allowed to be off-leash.

The Riversiders were spurred into action by the city’s increased fine for violating the leash law, and apparent increased enforcement of the law so far this spring. The new fines also fired up Patterson Parkers to refocus on the their effort.

The city council, which approved the increased fine, is now reconsidering it, and a hearing on a proposal to lower it will be held Tuesday, April 28th, at 10 a.m. in the council chambers at City Hall.

While the city has recognized a need for more dog parks — and plans to open the first city-funded one in Locust Point this year — other efforts to establish them have historically met with bureaucracy and delays.

In announcing that the city would fund the construction of the dog park in Locust Point, Mayor Sheila Dixon promised as many as eight dog parks in Baltimore. So far, no others have been announced.

With the higher fines, the lack of alternatives and the tight leash the city keeps on efforts to start dog parks, it seems that dog people, taking a lesson from their dogs, are ready to pick up the ball and run with it.

We rarely meet a New Yorker cover we don’t like (New Yorkers themselves; that’s another story) — and we especially like this one of little Bo in the White House front yard.

It’s by author and illustrator Bob Staake, who has also put together a new book on the family’s quest for a dog, ”The First Pup: The Unofficial Story Of How Sasha and Malia’s Dad Got the Presidency — And How They Got a Dog.” Somewhat surprisingly, Media Bistro reports, it hasn’t found a publisher yet.

On the New Yorker‘s book blog, Staake explained how he wrote his book as the First Family debated breeds and prepared for their new puppy, the now famous Portuguese water dog Bo. He also explains the thinking behind the New Yorker cover.

“You put any dog on the cover and everyone goes crazy,” Staake wrote. “This cover is good at being cute, but it also works as a metaphor for Obama. The best New Yorker covers are the ones where the reader looks and brings their own interpretation, which brings the image to a new dimension.”

I don’t begin to understand the intricacies of estate law, or the intricacies of Leona Helmsley — but I do believe this: A person, even if they are certifiably insane, deserves to have their last request honored.

With the distribution of the first $136 million from Helmsley’s multibillion-dollar estate, its trustees have shown — like judges before them — they don’t give a squat about Helmsley’s wishes, or the nation’s dogs.

The bulk of the money went to medical centers; only $1 million of the estate was donated to the care of dogs, which Helmsley had designated as primary beneficiary of her $5 billion.

“This is a trifling and embarrassingly small amount,” said Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States. “Mrs. Helmsley’s wishes are clearly being subverted.”

Pacelle added, “We are extremely disappointed that less than 1 percent of the allocation announced is going to animal-related organizations, and only one-tenth of 1 percent is going to animal welfare organizations … We are in touch with the interested parties and are hoping to have a satisfactory resolution — a much larger percentage than 1 percent.”

After Helmsley’s 2007 death, it was revealed that she had drafted a statement four years earlier listing poor people and dogs as the causes to which she wanted her money donated. She crossed out the poor a year later. In February, though, a Manhattan judge ruled that the trustees had sole discretion in disbursing her assets and that the entire estate did not have to go to the dogs.

Helmsley also left $12 million to her Maltese, Trouble, but a judge reduced Trouble’s trust fund to $2 million in negotiating a $6 million settlement with two of Mrs. Helmsley’s grandchildren who were left out of her will.

Tuesday’s grants went to a digestive diseases center at New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center ($40 million) and Mount Sinai Medical Center ($35 million). The Mount Sinai money is to be used to create a center to study the electrical properties of cells and tissues and to establish a Helmsley Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, according to the New York Times. The $1 million for animal welfare was divided among 10 charities, including the ASPCA and Guide Dogs for the Blind.

I’m not sure even the honor of having a “bowel disease center” named after her would make up for the total disregard for her wishes. The trustees have shown that they are not to be trusted — at least when it comes to doling out the dough in a manner that comes anywhere close to what she wanted.

It shouldn’t be up to relatives, judges or anyone else to reinterpret the instructions one leaves upon one’s death — even if the deceased is mentally incompetent, as some might argue leaving $5 billion to dogs indicates. I’m not one of them. Who’s to say probing the mysteries of human bowels is more important than animal welfare? The trustees, apparently, in a decision that shouldn’t even be their’s to make in the first place.  A person’s last wishes — if they’re not harming anyone — should be carried out, doggone it, even if they are stark raving mad.

A homeless man who lived with his two dogs at a Los Angeles area truck yard was found shot four times in the head Tuesday, his dog Spike standing vigil over his lifeless body.

L.A. County sheriff’s officials said the 49-year-old man’s body was found in an alley shortly after people nearby heard a series of gunshots. The victim has been identified — through fingerprints on file from numerous arrests — but police were not releasing his name until relatives were notified.

Truckers had accepted the man and his dogs at the truck yard in Commerce, frequently buying tacos for him and his dogs from a lunch truck, and a security guard bought him an old van to sleep in, according to an article in yesterday’s Los Angeles Times.

They marveled at the affection he showed for his dogs, the article said, bathing them with a hose that a security guard let him use, and grieving when one of them, Chaparra, was killed a few months ago by a car.

“He used to say that his salvation would be his little dogs,” said trucker Jose Sosa, 53, who placed three votive candles on the asphalt where the victim fell.

A Mexican immigrant, the man was known only by his nicknames. Some people knew him as “Chilango,” a slang term for someone from Mexico City. Truckers and nearby business owners said they had heard that the man once owned a video store on Olympic Boulevard but that he went broke and ended up on the streets, taking in stray dogs.

“He loved those dogs. I’d tell him let’s go eat, and we’d go to the lunch truck and he would say, ‘I want this and my dogs want this,’ ” another trucker recalled.