OUR BEST FRIENDS

whs-logo

The Sergei Foundation

shelterpet_logo

B-more Dog

aldflogo

Pinups for Pitbulls

philadoptables

TFPF_Logo

Mid Atlantic Pug Rescue

Our Pack, Inc.

Maine Coonhound Rescue

Saving Shelter Pets, Inc.

mabb

LD Logo Color

Tag: banned

When dogs ruled the Hollywood shorts

Portraying dogs as humans — a topic we’ve brought up a few times, usually with a sneer — is as ensconced in Hollywood tradition as it has now become on Facebook.

Dogs talking in movies, in fact, is as nearly old as talkies themselves. In the Early Sound Era, trained dogs (aka as cheap labor) were commonly called on to appear in movies, particular movie shorts that were shown before the feature presentation in movie houses.

Of those, one series in the pack stood out: the “All-Barkie” Dogville Comedies, including “Hot Dog” (above).

From 1929 to 1931, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer produced a series of nine short comedy films, sometimes known as the “barkies.”

The actors in these films, directed by Zion Myers and conceived and co-directed by Jules White (who both later gained fame for The Three Stooges comedies), were trained dogs, usually dressed in human attire, whose voices were dubbed by human actors.

Their aim, most often, was laughs. They commonly mocked the often naughty and haughty behavior of the noble class — and spoofed the era’s movies, as well.

But as you’ll see here today, some of them had a pretty dark side.

The series is somewhat controversial today — and was even then — due to suspected methods alleged to have been used to get the dogs to pose and to appear to talk, and they stopped being made after criticism over a scene in the final one, portraying canine cannibalism.

Of course “talking dogs” were nothing new by the 1930s. Talking movies were, though, and dogs pretty much worked for free.

The films were shot with silent film and dubbed over with human speech, often using the voices of White and Myers, as well as other actors.

The Dogville shorts started with 1929’s “College Hounds”, a parody of Buster Keaton’s “College” that features a huge doggie football game. The next film was “Hot Dog,” about a murder in a seedy cabaret after a jealous husband finds out his wife has been cheating on him.

After that came “Who Killed Rover?” and a Broadway parody called “The Dogway Melody.”

Those were followed by “The Big Dog House,” “All’s Canine on the Western Front,” and “Love Tails of Morocco.”

A nationwide theatre owners poll in 1930 rated the Dogvilles as the best short subjects over more legendary comedy and musical series, according to article published last year by Atlas Obscura

Many of the dogs were supplied by renowned Hollywood animal trainer Rennie Renfro, who was present for the making of the films.

To make the canine performers appear as if they were speaking, a director or Renfro himself would stand in front of a dog and wave various lures to focus the canine’s attention. The human would then open his hand repeatedly to entice the dog to open its mouth. Other times, they gave the dogs toffee to make them chomp.

A January 1931 article in Popular Science Monthly says the directors preferred using stray and mixed-breed dogs “because they are not high strung and can get along better in groups than the animal ‘prima donnas’ of breeding.”

Based on trade papers of the time, the Dogville Comedies were well-received and director White would call the series the favorite project of his career.

But not everyone was tickled and charmed by the “Barkies.”

There are some accounts that piano wire was used to help the dogs remain upright — as if they were part dog, part marionette.

The Performing and Captive Animals’ Defense League wrote to the British Board of Film Censors to protest the release of the movies and several films in the series were banned by British censors.

The creators stopped making the Dogville Comedies in 1931 after the controversial “Trader Hound,” a spoof of the movie, “Trader Horn.” The short was banned by U.K. censors for its hints at cannibalism — albeit dogs eating dogs, as opposed to humans eating humans

In retrospect, some see the short films — just as some see The Three Stooges — as having a mean edge. On one hand, they seem aimed at children; on the other, the plots were often mature, featuring adultery and murder.

Throw in the animal welfare concerns, and the fact that humanizing dogs doesn’t do anyone any good, and they can be looked at — by me anyway — as a less than glorious chapter of Hollywood history.

The complete series of Dogville Comedies has been released on DVD by Warner Bros. as part of its Warner Archive Collection.

United’s new policy limits air travel for dogs who are short-snouted or “strong-jawed”

united-airlinesleashes1

United Airlines plans to resume shipping pets as cargo in July but will do so under a new, more cautious policy that will exclude short-snouted breeds from traveling in their cargo holds.

The new policy will prohibit 25 breeds from traveling as cargo including boxers, bulldogs and pugs.

The airline announced the changes Tuesday, and said its rules and guidelines will continue to be revised under recommendations from American Humane, the animal welfare agency it is working with to improve pet travel.

The changes announced Tuesday do not affect small pets traveling in carriers that fit under seats in the cabin.

United called a temporary halt to shipping pets in March after several dogs were put on wrong flights. A French bulldog died after a flight attendant told its owner to put its carrier in an overhead bin. In 2017, 18 animals died on United, three-fourths of all such deaths on U.S. airlines.

The new policy also bans transporting what the airline referred to as “strong-jawed” breeds, such as pit bulls and mastiffs.

“Transporting pets introduces a variety of risks, and when United approached us we knew we had to take on the challenge of helping improve and ensure the health, safety and comfort of so many animals,” said Robin Ganzert, president and chief executive of American Humane.

United also said it would stop transporting animals between May 1 and Sept. 30 for travel to and from Las Vegas, Palm Springs, Phoenix and Tuscon because of the extreme summer heat in those cities.

The airline is also limiting the number of connections a pet can be routed through on a trip.

None of the policy changes affect small dogs traveling with their owners in the cabin. The restrictions on short-snouted breeds won’t apply to dogs traveling in the cabin.

The new policy doesn’t address service animals and emotional support animals, the Los Angeles Times reported.

The airline said their increase in banned breeds — from six to 25 (the full list is below) — stems primarily from concerns about the health problems that pets with short or snub noses are more likely to have while traveling in cargo holds.

Other airlines also place restrictions on pet travel. Delta, for example, does not accept snub-nosed or pug-nosed pets as checked baggage under any circumstances.

United temporarily halted transporting pets after the death of a 10-month-old French bulldog on March 12 on a flight from Houston to New York. A flight attendant, worried that the dog’s carrier did not fit under the seat, instructed the owners to put the carrier in the overhead compartment, where the dog died during a flight of more than three hours.

United took more heat on its pet transport program the following day, when the airline accidentally shipped a dog to Japan instead of Kansas City, Mo. The animal was eventually reunited with its owner. A third dog was incorrectly placed on a flight to St. Louis, which prompted the airline to divert the flight to Akron, Ohio, the dog’s intended destination.

Here is the full list of the breeds United will ban from traveling as cargo, according to the airline’s website:

Affenpinscher
American Bully
American Pit Bull Terrier/Pit Bull
American Staffordshire Terrier/”Amstaff”
Belgian Malinois
Boston Terrier
Boxer
Brussels Griffon
Bulldog
American Bulldog
English Bulldog
French Bulldog
Old English Bulldogges
Shorty Bulldogs
Spanish Alano/Spanish Bulldog/Alano Espanol
Cavalier King Charles Spaniel
Chow Chow
English Toy Spaniel/Prince Charles Spaniel
Japanese Chin/Japanese Spaniel
Lhasa Apso
Mastiff
American Mastiff
Boerboel/South African Mastiff
Bullmastiff
Ca de Bou/Mallorquin Mastiff
Cane Corso/Italian Mastiff
Dogo Argentino/Argentinian Mastiff
Dogue de Bordeaux/French Mastiff
English Mastiff
Fila Brasileiro/Brazilian Mastiff/Cao de Fila
Indian Mastiff/Alangu
Kangal/Turkish Kangal
Neapolitan Mastiff/Mastino Napoletano
Pakastani Mastiff/Bully Kutta
Pyrenean Mastiff
Presa Canario/Perro de Presa Canario/Dogo Canario/Canary Mastiff
Spanish Mastiff / Mastin Espanol
Tibetan Mastiff
Tosa/Tosa Ken/Tosa Inu/Japanese Mastiff/Japanese Tosa
Pekingese
Pug
Dutch Pug
Japanese Pug
Shar-Pei/Chinese Shar-Pei
Shih-Tzu
Staffordshire Bull Terrier/”Staffys”
Tibetan Spaniel

Colorado bill would prohibit discriminating against dogs because of their size

Pet-Property-Rules-SignApartment complexes have them. Homeowners associations have them. Motels have them, too — rules that allow dogs to be banned because of their size.

Now, a Colorado state representative wants to correct that long-running injustice, the Denver Post reports. He has introduced a bill that would stop HOA’s or landlords from blanket bans on dogs that exceed a specified weight.

It’s high time. Size restrictions, like breed restrictions, are ridiculous, imposed and enforced by people who just don’t know any better.

And, while not to diminish all the more serious examples of it in our history, they are a form of discrimination.

HB-1126, if passed, would stop HOA’s or landlords from banning large dogs.

“It doesn’t matter the breed or the size. In a lot of ways, it’s just: ‘is this a behaved dog?'” said Rep. Paul Rosenthal (D-Denver) in introducing the legislation. “I think this is a fairness issue and right now people with big dogs are being treated unequally.”

The bill, even if it passes, would not override bans against certain breeds that some cities, like Denver, have imposed, and it would not stop landlords from banning dogs altogether.

Rosenthal said he proposed the legislation after hearing from a constituent in Englewood whose two German shepherds kept her from being able to find a housing situation she could afford.

Christy Wooten said she searched for six months for properties that would allow her two dogs, but ran into size restrictions at every turn.

“No one would accept them, and they’re not mean dogs. They’re the sweetest things. I rescued them. It broke my heart,” she said.

As a result, she gave the dogs to her ex, who now resides out of state.

“I’m surprised. With how dog-friendly Colorado seems to be, it’s a disappointment,” said Wooten. “They think they’re aggressive and they’re not.”

The bill apparently would not apply to motels and hotels, probably the worst when it comes to discriminating against large dogs. Yes, they’ll promote how “dog friendly” they are to reel in customers, but the small print often will specify “no dogs over 25, 45, 50 pounds.”

That’s ruling out a lot of dogs (and customers) — all under the false belief that a large dog is likely to cause more damage. Worse yet, it’s the kind of mindless discrimination, based on misplaced fears, that some Americans have practiced throughout history, to everyone’s detriment.

Consider how this would look in the human realm: “No customers over 225 pounds.” “We apologize, but due to liability concerns, we cannot accept NFL or NBA players.” “Sorry, fatty, there’s no room for you.”

Colorado should pass this law, and so should every other state.

Eating dog meat banned in Taiwan

yulin

In a landmark piece of legislation, Taiwan has outlawed the consumption of dog and cat meat.

The island’s legislature yesterday passed an amendment to its animal protection laws, imposing longer prison sentences and stiffer fines for harming animals, and explicitly banning the slaughter, sale and consumption of dogs.

The island’s official Central News Agency (CNA) said the new law reflects the transition of Taiwan “from a society in which dog meat was regularly consumed” to one where “many people treat pet cats and dogs as valued members of their families.”

The amendment also bans “walking” pets on leashes pulled by cars and motorcycles.

The amendment comes after a series of animal abuse cases, and a strong push by animal lovers and the animal welfare movement.

Last year, a group of military personnel beat and strangled a dog and tossed its body into the ocean, an assault that was captured on video.

The amended act calls for fines between $1,640 to $8,200 for people who eat or sell dog meat, and up to $65,000 for deliberately harming an animal.

Violators of the new law may also see their names, photos and crimes publicized, Taiwan’s Central News Agency said.

Previously, the Animal Protection Act, passed in 2001, only covered the slaughter and sale of dog and cat meat, and not individual consumption.

The new law makes Taiwan the first Asian state to impose a full ban on both the marketing of dog meat and its consumption.

The amendment’s sponsor, Kuomintang Legislator Wang Yu-min, said that while some localities already had measures banning dog and cat meat consumption, national legislation was needed, according to the China Post.

China has long been criticized for its annual dog meat festival in Yulin, where as many as 10,000 dogs are slaughtered and served as meals.

Opposition to the consumption of dog is growing in China, and in South Korea, where some are pushing the government to impose restrictions on the dog meat trade before the 2018 Winter Olympics in Seoul.

It’s my gun show and I’ll cry if I want to

gunshow

Let’s all join together in a giant boo-hoo for Thomas Allman, who says his health was put at risk when a service dog entered his gun show over the weekend.

Allman kicked out the dog — and the Bronze Star-winning veteran the dog accompanied (that’s them above) — saying the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) didn’t apply to them at his gun show. He explained his reasoning this way:

“It doesn’t apply because he’s not setting up at my gun show because we don’t allow dogs in my gun show,” he told Fox 14 News. (Click the link for video.)

The nerve of that veteran! Thinking he could just waltz into a gun show and put everyone else’s health at risk with a dog that helps him cope with injuries he received during his nearly 20 years of service in Iraq.

Did he give any thought that his actions could result in sneezes and stuffy noses among anyone who was allergic (like Allman) as they innocently shopped for new deadly weapons to add to their home arsenals?

Former U.S. Army Sergeant John Williams went to the Tri-State Gun Show at the armory in Evansville on Saturday as a vendor, but he was asked to leave because of his service dog, Winchester.

Williams, appropriately, raised a stink, and called the police, waiting outside for them to arrive and hear his complaint that his rights, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, were being violated.

Winchester was assigned to Williams by the Soldier Dogs for Independence group to help him with mobility.

The president of that group Michael Barrentine, was called to the gun show once he heard what was going on.

“There’s so much irony,” he said. “You have a 21 year veteran of the United States armed forces that’s disabled due to his military service that’s getting kicked out of the armory …”

Williams says he is still contemplating filing charges.

Thomas Allman stages several guns shows a year in Indiana (and whatever other two states comprise the “tri-state” area), allowing folks to show off, buy, sell and trade guns.

Something less than full scrutiny, apparently, is applied to those buying them: “They’ll ask them if they’re a felon or not and all we can do is take their word that they’re not,” Allman once said in a TV interview.

Allman is all for nurturing an environment in which guns can be freely sold and exchanged — something he says is necessary in today’s world.

“What would you do if ISIS came to your door today and you didn’t have any way of protecting yourself? They will come here. They’re coming folks so you better be prepared for them.”

So feel free to bring your guns to the show (unloaded please, he asks). Just don’t bring a dog.

Allman says dogs haven’t been allowed to sit at booths at his shows for the last 20 years. Apparently, he considers it OK for paid guests to bring service dogs, but not vendors (who pay a $50 registration fee).

“You want to come in the gun show and sell your guns, or walk around and look and trade guns with your service dog, we have no problem with that,” Allman said.

Under the ADA, “Allergies and fear of dogs are not valid reasons for denying access or refusing service to people using service animals.”

Allman is allergic to dogs — “I can’t stand to be sick and be put in the hospital” — and apparently gets a little anxious when they are around, as he also does amid talk of laws restricting gun sales.

ftwaynegunshow“Just cause they don’t want one, what’s the right to take anybody else’s away from them?” Allman said in a 2015 interview. “That’s my problem with it and I can’t handle that… This is what we do for a living and have a hobby of doing it and love doing it. It’s freedom. We’re in the United States. It’s freedom.”

Apparently, as he sees it, he’s the one who gets to define freedom. So his shows don’t allow cameras or news media past the entrance, don’t allow service dogs, and insist you don’t enter with a loaded weapon.

(That didn’t stop a visitor, and a drunken one at that, from loading up his .45 caliber handgun after he entered, firing it and injuring a a 72-year-old man and 16-year-old boy during the 2011 show in Evansville.)

We’d suggest that if Allman can’t handle service dogs, he stop holding public gun shows, or hire a representative to oversee them, or take a Zyrtec, or conduct his arms dealing online.

(Photos: At top, Williams and his dog, Winchester, WFIE; at bottom a photo taken at a gun show in Ft. Wayne)

Forsyth County passes tethering ban

tethered

Leaving dogs tied up for extended periods is now, with a few exceptions, flat out illegal in Forsyth County, N.C.

By a 4 to 3 vote, the county commissioners approved a ban on tethering this week, replacing an existing law many considered toothless and unenforceable.

Under the previous version of the ordinance, tethering per se was not illegal, but it could lead to additional penalties in cases of animal cruelty.

Under the new one, tethering is illegal except when it is being used for hunting, camping or other recreation where tethering is required.

Commission Chairman Dave Plyler, Everette Witherspoon, Walter Marshall and Ted Kaplan voted for the ban. Commissioners Richard Linville, Gloria Whisenhunt and Don Martin voted against it.

The vote was met with applause and cheers by animal welfare advocates attending the meeting.

Keith Murphy, Co-founder of Unchain Winston, said, “We’re really happy that it’s finally passed, we’ve been working on it for many many years.”

“When we started this in 2010 there were only 12 communities in North Carolina that had a tethering ban, now, luckily, Forsyth County has become the 26th in North Carolina to have a ban.”

“I started this the first time I was on the animal control advisory board 10 years ago,” said animal-welfare advocate Jennifer Teirney. “The people and animals of Forsyth County won this one. I’m glad to see us move forward in a progressive way.”

The old ordinance, adopted in 2011, didn’t go into effect until 2013, and many felt it didn’t go far enough.

The new ordinance allows for a grace period of one year.

If a resident violates the ordinance during the grace period, a warning ticket will be issued and the violator will receive information on the new ordinance and organizations such as Unchain Forsyth and Unchain Winston.

Those organizations build fences for families who need help unchaining their dogs.The organizations have built about 150 fences and 200 dog houses for residents.

(Photo: Fairfaxcounty.gov)

And now, the downside of doggy DNA tests

dnany

The board of a ritzy Manhattan co-op is requiring some residents undergo testing of their blood and spit to determine if they are pure enough — and of the proper type — to live there.

As of last month, dog owners living in the luxury tower at 170 West End Avenue must have their veterinarian sign off on the canine’s pedigree and, if the pet is a mix, detail the percentage of each breed, according to DNAInfo.com

The policy is designed to purge the building of any pedigrees the board deems troublesome.

And the board deems many breeds troublesome — 27 in all, including the Pomeranian and the Maltese.

Residents were informed of the new policy a few months ago.

The board policy says the 27 breeeds were chosen based on “documented information regarding their tendency towards aggressiveness.”

In the case of mixed breed dogs, the co-op board is requiring owners to have their pet undergo a DNA test. If the test shows a dog to be made up of more than 50 percent of one of the outlawed breeds, it will have to leave the building.

Initially, they wanted to require mandatory DNA testing of all dogs, but they amended the policy to require the testing “at the board’s discretion.”

The latest version of the policy, issued on May 26, says that if a dog’s breed is unknown “the board at its sole discretion may require a resident to perform DNA testing.”

The 484-unit, 42-story cooperative is one of eight buildings that comprise Lincoln Towers, a 20-acre property near Lincoln Center managed by FirstService Residential. Each building has its own co-op board and makes its own policies.

The board policy also requires that residents register their dog and provide a mugshot of the canine.

The list of banned breeds includes St. Bernards and German shepherds, pit bulls, basset hounds — and even the tiny shih tzu.

“It’s like dog racism essentially,” one resident said of the new policy. “It’s beyond offensive, it’s intrusive.”

(Photo: From NYcurbed.com)