The Oct. 20th U.K. edition of Closer features an interview with Terri Graham, a mother of two human children.
Breastfeeding her pug Spider, she says, makes her feel like a better mom.
“Having Spider suckle on my boob means I finally feel complete and a better mother,” said Graham, who was unable to breastfeed her children for reasons unexplained.
Graham said she has been breastfeeding Spider for two years — ever since the dog licked a bottle of breast milk she had pumped for her newborn son. Apparently, Spider liked it so much, she decided to let him start drinking directly from the source.
There’s definitely a boundary line between what’s acceptable and what’s not when it comes to how close we get to our dogs, and how humanly we treate them — and we meant humanly there, not humanely. I don’t assume to be the one who defines that line, but, in my humble view, this crosses it.
Even though we “ooh” and “aww” when we see a female dog take on the feeding responsibilities to newborn animals of other species, most of us will probably “euuwwww” at this example.
The significant difference between those cases and this, of course, is that a nine-year-old pug doesn’t require breast milk to grow, and the surrogate mama dogs in those cases don’t generally seek headlines.
This, in my view, is fairly outrageous, which accounts for the story’s popularity. We seem to have an appetite for the outrageous, and no shortage of media happy to serve it up and let us suckle. A photo of the article about Graham was posted to a Reddit forum devoted to strange news, and it quickly rose to the site’s front page. It was subsequently regurgitated by The Huffington Post, and given good play by Doghatersunite.com, a website that says it serves “people who hate dog-loving idiots and their Darwin-defying fleabags.”
One has to wonder how the original publication got onto this story: A phoned-in tip? Peering through a window? Logging into breastfeedingyourdog.com? (Just kidding, there’s no such website.) Or did the subject of the story, sensing the magazine’s zeal for boob coverage, volunteer the information?
All said, while the case of the breastfeeding pug raises some interesting questions, one should probably consider the source — not just tabloid readers, but especially Spider — and perhaps seek their nourishment elsewhere.
Posted by jwoestendiek October 19th, 2012 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animals, behavior, bond, breastfeed, breastfeeding, breasts, california, closer, dog, dogs, human, humans, interspecies, magazine, milk, nourishment, pets, photo, pug, spider, tabloids, woman
Wendy Diamond started planning a lavish wedding for her Maltese after learning Lucky had cancer.
It was intended as a tribute to her famous dog, and a way to raise money for a worthy cause.
When Lucky, who held the world record for being photographed with celebrities, died last month, Diamond — a TV personality, animal welfare advocate and founder of Animal Fair magazine — apparently decided the wedding should go on.
Last night it did, with a new bride — her rescued dog, Baby Hope. Diamond was hoping to break the Guinness World Record, as she did with her photographs of Lucky, by holding the most expensive animal wedding ever, and raise money for animals at the same time.
The nuptials took place last night at the Jumeirah Essex House — Baby Hope married Chilly Pasternak, a Virginia poodle chosen in an online vote — with proceeds going to the Humane Society of New York.
The extravagant touches included a $6,000 custom wedding dress for the tiny bride, a $5,000 sushi spread, and a $15,000 seven-piece orchestra, according to the New York Daily News.
Wedding planner Harriette Rose Katz, organized the event. Kleinfeld couture bridal designers Michelle and Henry Roth tailored a $6,000 two-toned, white French lace-encrusted dress with Swarovski crystals and a silk train for the bride. TLC’s “Cake Boss” based in Hoboken is making the wedding cake
The vendors donated their services. Some 250 humans and 50 dogs were expected to attend.
Diamond adopted Lucky in 1999, and the dog inspired her to launch her Animal Fair Media empire. She photographed Lucky with hundreds of celebrities as part of a campaign to stop shelters from euthanizing pets.
After Lucky died in June — while the wedding was being planned — Diamond decided that Baby Hope, a dog she’d been fostering, would make a fine bride.
Tickets to Animal Fair’s “Pet Wedding of the Century” started at $250, with “distinguished sponsors” forking over $10,000 for a table. The couple plans a honeymoon in the Hamptons.
Posted by jwoestendiek July 13th, 2012 under Muttsblog.
Tags: activist, advocate, animal fair, animal welfare, animals, baby hope, celebrities, ceremony, chilly pasternak, dog wedding, dogs, expensive, extravagant, guinness, humane society of new york, lavish, lucky, magazine, maltese, marriage, most, pet wedding of the century, pets, photographs, poodle, record, wedding, wendy diamond
So given that today is Take Your Dog to Work Day, and given that’s the practice nearly every day in the New York studios of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, it’s not surprising that, for its 15th anniversary special issue, The Bark magazine features the dogs of the show’s staff members on its cover.
Late last year, The Daily Show — it has more than a few fans of the magazine on its staff, and vice versa – invited The Bark to come meet the many dogs that roam its workplace.
Editor-in-Chief, Claudia Kawczynska jumped at the opportunity — and the result is a 10-page exclusive on the dogs of The Daily Show in this month’s issue.
The magazine also proclaimed The Daily Show the nation’s dog-friendliest workplace.
Kawczynska reports that The Daily Show officially turned dog friendly about 15 years ago when production manager Georgia Pappas asked permission to bring her Tibetan Terrier, Cosmo, to work with her.
Given both Jon Stewart and the studio’s building manager, Adriane Truex, are big dog fans, permission was granted, opening the door for other staff members to bring their dogs along to work. Today, dogs are welcomed in Jon Stewart’s office and just about everywhere else, Kawczynska notes:
“These days, the first thing new employees, show guests and visitors notice are the dogs. Free-ranging and ubiquitous, they have become an integral part of the office landscape: roaming, playing or lying about, with toys scattered everywhere. They attend staff meetings, share office chairs, charm the celeb guests –in short, The Daily Show is pretty much dog nirvana.”
About a dozen dogs might be there on any given day — and the regulars include Parker, Kweli and Ally. (You can find a slide show featuring all of them here.)
Co-executive producer Jen Flanz said the inviting atmosphere inspired her to adopt Parker, a Lab mix, from Manhattan Animal Care & Control. The only downside, Flanz noted, is that “our dogs are used to being here, being around people all day, running around and getting attention from a hundred people. So when we have time off, she bounces off the walls. They get so much activity and stimulation here.”
Artistic coordinator, Justin Chabot got his Golden Retriever, Kweli, when he was still a student in Boston. Kweli accompanies him almost everywhere, and has been trained to stick by his side when off-leash, even in Times Square. Kweli has also mastered riding on the back of Chabot’s motorcycle.
Supervising producer Tim Greenberg’s dog, Ally, a rescued Pointer-mix, is a more recent addition. Ally had fear issues and initally he only brought her to the office on slow days. Gradually, he added more time to her “work” schedule. He thinks the office visits have helped build up her self-confidence.
Good training is essential to making the office-dog dynamic work, the article notes, and employees see it as a privilege they don’t want to lose.
“We all feel this responsibility to keep the dogs pretty well-behaved,” Flanz noted. “If someone comes in and thinks this is a free-for-all, they would be mistaken.”
Greenberg noted that ”like the show itself, there really is a strict discipline underlying what looks like a free-form.”
“From my perspective, it seemed that the office camaraderie, conviviality and general bonhomie — laughter can be heard everywhere — inspires and affects both the people and the dogs … Everyone I spoke with agrees that having dogs as co-workers may have something to do with the show’s ongoing success. Not only are they great de-stressors, good for morale, comforting and relaxing, the dogs contribute their own dose of inimitable comic relief to a group that’s focused on creating and showcasing comedy”
Some guests on the show get more excited about the dogs than others. Those who staff members said most seemed to “get-down-with-the-dogs” are Jennifer Aniston, NBC news anchor Brian Williams, designer guy Tim Gunn, Ricky Gervais, Betty White and President Obama, a senator at the time.
The only guest to ever bring a dog on the set has been Ted Koppel, who came with his granddog, a black pup named Pepper.
Kawczynska got to meet Stewart, but his two French Bulldogs, Smudge and Barkley, were not there.
(Photos: Magazine cover, a French bulldog named Zuzu, and group shot of staff and dogs; by KC Bailey, courtesy of The Bark)
Posted by jwoestendiek June 22nd, 2012 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animals, betty white, Claudia Kawczynska, comedy central, daily show, dog, dog friendly, dogs, editor, guests, interviews, jennifer aniston, john oliver, jon stewart, magazine, obama, pets, staff, studio, take your dog to work day, ted koppel, television, the bark, the daily show, tim gunn, visit, work, workplace, wyatt cenac
But here are two reports, gleaned from the webpages of PeoplePets, we feel the need to share:
In the first, we learn that Skechers Fitness has replaced Kim Kardashian in its Super Bowl ad with a dog.
The reality star strutted her considerable stuff in a pair of Skechers “Shape-Ups” during last year’s Super Bowl. This year’ spot will feature a French bulldog wearing Skechers’ “GOrun” shoes.
“We have to establish Skechers as more than a lifestyle company,” Skechers Fitness president Leonard Armato explained. Company CEO Robert Greenberg added that Kardashian’s contract came to an end — “to say that she was ‘dropped’ or ‘replaced’ is misleading and untrue.”
Semantics aside, a dog will do this year what Kim Kardashian did last year — and, even though it’s only selling shoes, we consider that progress, as we do anything that results in less TV-time for reality stars.
In the new ad — and we should point out that USA Today broke the news first – the Skechers-wearing bulldog races a group of greyhounds, and, we can only assume, wins.
The People piece includes a poll asking readers which of the two they’d rather see in a Skechers ad. When I last checked, the French bulldog had a whopping 93 percent of the vote.
Moving on to matters even more mundane — but, we’d argue, also strangely reflective of dog’s increasingly important place in society — People reports that The Bachelor is letting his dog check out some of the contestants vying for his affections.
Ben Flajnik (he’s the bachelor) took his Jack Russell terrier, Scotch, along on his date with contestant Courtney. The three enjoyed a picnic under the redwoods in Flajnik’s hometown of Sonoma, Calif.
It’s not clear if all the contestants will be meeting the dog, but that would be our advice to Ben — choose the one the dog likes best.
Posted by jwoestendiek January 11th, 2012 under Muttsblog.
Tags: ads, advertising, animals, ben flajnik, dogs, french bulldog, kardashian, kim kardashian, magazine, marketing, people, pets, reality, skechers, super bowl, television, the bachelor, tv
I eat meat.
According to an article in the upcoming issue of ESPN magazine, by senior writer David Fleming, that makes me a hypocrite.
Or so he seems to be saying as he ponders why so many people continue to criticize the quarterback, as opposed to getting on the Michael Vick bandwagon to root root root for the dog killer and his amazing on-field comeback.
Fleming attempts to get to the root of the lingering resentment against Vick by examining psychological and sociological factors that he says have resulted in an “uniquely American ethos — one that has transformed dogs into our version of Hindu’s sacred cows and one that exposes a deep-seated hypocrisy regarding animal cruelty.”
Certainly, the status of dogs has risen in the past 50 years. Maybe, as he suggests, suburbanization, the rise of technology and human loneliness had something to do with it. But it’s not a strictly American phenomenon, and it has nothing to do with religion.
What it does have to do with — and Fleming totally neglects this — is that dogs have earned their place. There is a heirarchy in the animal kingdom, and dogs have, by virtue of their record of accomplishment, risen to the top of it. Research has shown, despite what Fleming says, the many ways dogs benefit us, that their cognitive skills go beyond anything we ever expected, and their service to humanity far exceeds that of any other species.
But, to hear Fleming tell it, it’s as if dogs, with no underlying reason, suddenly and unexplicably became the most loved of animals:
“Never mind that there are no definitive studies for or against the idea that having pets makes for happier people or that many anthrozoologists question whether dogs are capable of feeling or sharing what we cherish the most about them — unconditional love. Our pooches do make us feel loved, and that easily trumps fact or reason.”
But dogs, in case he hasn’t noticed, do far more than make us feel loved. They have, to put it bluntly, risen above the herd.
Maybe it’s politically incorrect, or worse, to say that dogs occupy a level above the rest of the animal kingdom. But, in truth, how many seeing-eye chickens do you see out there? How many search and rescue turtles do you know, or seizure-detecting turkeys, or bomb-sniffing pigs?
As George Orwell wrote in Animal Farm: “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.”
Some animal rights purists don’t see it that way, and maintain the value of all animals is the same. In the article, Peter Singer — seen by some as the founder of the modern day animal rights movement — backs up what seems to be the author’s point: People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones, and if you eat McNuggets or Big Macs, or any meat, you’re a glass house dweller.
In the reasoning of Fleming and the experts he quotes: (A) If you eat meat you have no right to criticize Michael Vick for killing dogs; (B) People who care about the welfare of dogs have no compassion for the welfare of people; and (C) Dog lovers should be helping the needy humans of the world.
Fleming’s article, like the book it quotes from — Hal Herzog’s “Some We Love, Some We Hate, Some We Eat: Why It’s so Hard to Think Straight About Animals” — sees society as having put dogs on a pedestal, and sees that as a symptom of our moral ambiguity when it comes to animals.
It’s all a bit reminiscent of the alarm sounded in “Petishism, Pet Cults of the Western World,” the 1968 book by Kathleen Szasz that looked at our preoccupation with dogs as something close to a psychiatric disorder.
True, we humans do some outlandishly wacky things in the name of love for our dogs, but to view the status dogs have achieved — sometimes with our help, sometimes despite it — as something fraudulent, unearned, or not to be believed is both superficial and uninformed.
There seems to be a rising tide of those who, like Szasz four decades ago, fret about the standing and privileges dogs have been afforded in western culture. Why, it’s almost as if — they say, as if it boggles their minds — we’re treating them as children.
Well, think about it. We created them. We domesticated them. We insisted they no longer be wild. We usurped them of their survival skills. We bred them into shapes we liked. We made them do chores, and put them in our handbags, and entered them in contests. We made them what they are (dependent on us), and elevated them to where they are (in our beds, on our sofas and atop the animal heap).
Given that, in my view, we have an obligation to rear them properly, much like children — and not to drown them, bludgeon them, electrocute them, shoot them, dispose of them in Dumpsters when they become inconvenient, or make them fight each other until death.
If that belief is is outlandish, call me an outlandish, politically incorrect, meat-eating hypocrite.
“People should look at what they’re eating and what they’re spending their dollars on and what kind of animal abuse they themselves are supporting,” says Singer. “And if they haven’t taken a good look at that, I don’t think they have much right to criticize Vick.”
I hate to argue with a hero, but they have every right. You don’t have to be a saint to point out a sin. Sometimes, if something enrages you to the extent you must speak out — no matter how long ago it happened, or what kind of house you live in — you’re going to hurl a stone or two.
You don’t have to be Mother Teresa to be entitled to do so.
If there are any sacred cows in this whole big picture, in my opinion, they would be the professional athletes, particularly the ones who consider themselves above the law. They, with help and repeated stroking from outfits like ESPN — Vick not only appears on the cover of the magazine, but the entire issue is devoted to him — are turned into mythical heroes, bestowed with untouchable status, and glorified out of all proportion, all for playing silly games for exorbitant salaries.
I have absolutely no problem idolizing dogs more than them.
Posted by jwoestendiek August 26th, 2011 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animal rights, animal welfare, animals, article, breeds, david fleming, dogfighting, dogs, domestication, espn, evolution, george orwell, hal herzog, heirarchy, hypocrisy, idolatry, image, kathleen szasz, lingering, magazine, meat, michael vick, news, nfl, peter singer, petishism, pets, place, resentment, sacred cows, society, sports, status
Michael Vick bares a bit of himself — literally and figuratively — in the new (September, 2011) issue of GQ, now available at a newstand near you.
In an article written by Will Leitch, Vick makes some revealing comments that seem to come from a little deeper place than his public relations team (it consists of seven members, according to the article) normally allows.
But most of them — like the tired old argument that dogfighting is part of black culture and thus OK – seem aimed at rationalizing, if not excusing, what he did to dogs. Leitch quotes Vick as saying:
“[The media] are writing as if everyone feels that way and has the same opinions they do. But when I go out in public, it’s all positive, so that’s obviously not true … You got the family dog and the white picket fence, and you just think that’s all there is. Some of us had to grow up in poverty-stricken urban neighborhoods, and we just had to adapt to our environment. I know that it’s wrong. But people act like it’s some crazy thing they never heard of. They don’t know.”
Vick didn’t make the cover of GQ — that honor went to another quarterback, the New York Jets Mark Sanchez, who was decked out for his photo shoot in a $185 sweater, a $895 pair of pants, a $590 belt and a $8,850 watch.
Vick — wait a minute, a $590 belt??? — Vick is featured in three photos accompanying the online version of the article about him. He’s clad, or at least partially so, in what appears to be underwear/protective gear from his new sponsor, Nike.
We don’t know if that was a condition of him doing the interview, or just business as usual at GQ, taking a perfectly good story and turning it into something that doubles as advertising — not to mention also serves to make us covet unnecessary things we can’t afford, such as $590 belts.
The article itself, though, is well done. It manages to partially penetrate the facade built around Vick by his public relations team, and get beyond the canned and rehearsed remarks he normally emits while suppressing his real self and following the dictates of the image-makers. At one point, Leitch recounts one of Vick’s first appearances before students, which, in conjuntion with the Humane Society of the United States, he does from time to time, impressing upon them the evils of dogfighting.
Vick is fielding questions from students at Philadelphia’s Camelot School when one asks, in connection with Vick’s prison sentence: “Are you mad about what happened to you?”
Fifteen feet away, halfheartedly taking notes alongside a cluster of reporters, I snap to attention. What a strange question. Certainly to many, framing the past four years of Michael Vick’s life in terms of something that happened to him suggests a gross misunderstanding of how he wound up behind bars. But this is not the way the Camelot students see it at all. The kid’s question is met with head nods and shouts of “You better believe it!” and “That’s right!”
Vick, who has barely changed his expression throughout the thirty-minute session with the students, smiles wide and looks over his left shoulder, directly toward the hallway of reporters. He glances left and right, cartoonishly grinning, all mock-conspiratorial. “Where the media at?” he says, and everyone laughs.
The article, to its credit, doesn’t totally gloss over what happened to Vick’s dogs:
In April 2007 … Vick, who had been taking great pains not to be seen at the kennels, “helped out” in the killing of seven dogs—the ones who had lost in the fighting sessions. He then assisted in burying the dogs, too. A week later, police raided the compound. Vick said at the time, “I’m never at the house…. I left the house with my family members and my cousin…. They just haven’t been doing the right thing…. It’s unfortunate I have to take the heat behind it. If I’m not there, I don’t know what’s going on.” He tells me today: “I was walking away, just totally refocused on something else…. I just happened to get caught out in the yard trying to help out.”
Vick also told Leitch that he wants a dog: “I miss dogs, man. I always had a family pet, always had a dog growing up. It was almost equivalent to the prison sentence, having something taken away from me for three years. I want a dog just for the sake of my kids, but also me. I miss my companions.”
In addition to making public appearances with the Humane Society, Vick recently spoke out against the Android app called Dog Wars and appeared on Capitol Hill to back an anti-dogfighting bill.
Since his release from prison in July 2009, Michael Vick has had a team of “at least seven” PR professionals working for him, the article says. Together, they formulated a plan to redeem, if not the man, at least his image.
Rightly or wrongly, as Leitch notes, what may be working most in Vick’s favor — when it comes to the whole “redemption” thing, and putting dogfighting behind him – is his stellar performance on the field last season. Leitch concludes:
We can be repulsed by his past, we can choose not to root for him, but we can’t drown out the cheers from Eagles fans. In the $9 billion juggernaut of the NFL, Michael Vick’s transgressions just don’t matter anymore, and maybe they never did.
(Photo: From GQ, by Peter Hapak)
Posted by jwoestendiek August 19th, 2011 under Muttsblog.
Tags: article, comments, culture, dogfighting, gq, humane society of the united states, image, magazine, michael vick, nike, philadelphia eagles, public relations, quarterback, redemption, will leitch
With the sun in our faces, a coffee — both venti and bold — in my cupholder, and a gas tank half empty, we’re departing Connecticut for the 3-hour drive (we hope) to Provincetown, located at the wispy tip of Cape Cod.
We won’t be making it in time to see Provincetown get its official award as the dog-friendliest town in America, but we’ll be pulling in at some point.
Already we have veered off the course taken by John Steinbeck and Charley. His first stop after crossing the sound was to visit his son, at a school called Eaglebrook in Deerfield, Massachusetts. Our route is veering widely east, through Providence, along Cape Cod and up to the island’s northern tip.
The honor of being the dog-friendliest town is being bestowed on Provincetown today by Dog Fancy magazine, which put it at the top of its list of the of dog-friendliest cities in its 2010 DogTown USA contest.
The criteria used to select the winning city included dog-friendly open spaces and dog parks, events celebrating dogs and their owners, ample veterinary care, abundant pet supply and other services, and municipal laws that support and protect all pets.
Provincetown’s Pilgrim Bark Park finished at No. 2 in the magazine’s national dog park ratings, and Dog Fancy editor Ernie Slone called Provincetown “an entire town where virtually every establishment opens its doors to dogs – even the bank.”
We’ll see about that – chances are, it being a ritzy sort of area, we’ll be needing to visit a bank.
The drive, I expect, will be an invigorating one. Already the trees are showing a tiny tinge of fall color, a hint of the breathtaking blast and crisper temperatures that lie ahead as the season progresses and we go further north.
Come to think of it, my gas tank isn’t half empty after all; it’s half full.
Posted by jwoestendiek September 25th, 2010 under Muttsblog.
Tags: ace, america, autumn, cape cod, colors, connecticut, dog fancy, dog friendly, dog's country, dogscountry, fall, foliage, john steinbeck, leaves, magazine, massachusetts, provincetown, rhode island, road trip, travel, traveling with dogs, travels with ace, travels with charley
In 2007, it was one of the most sickening, disheartening stories of the year — NFL quarterback Michael Vick’s arrest and imprisonment on dogfighting charges. Revelations of what transpired at Bad Newz Kennels showed just how cruel some humans can be.
By 2009, though, the story of Vick’s dogs had become one of the most heartening of the decade. What made the difference? Mainly, the dogs – the pit bulls. For despite what they’d been put through, despite being abused, trained as killers or used as bait, they were — once the decision was made not to euthanize them – amazing the world with their remarkable resiliency.
Saving and rehabilitating the former fighting dogs of Michael Vick was not achieved without a battle, and not without the efforts of a lot of dog-loving, self-sacrificing humans. But the silver lining that eventually shone through the dismal story was provided mainly by the dogs, who showed that, no matter how bad a human messes them up, there’s hope.
Once again, the irrepressible species was teaching us humans a lesson.
Vick’s former pit bulls have gone on to reside in new homes with young children, become cherished pets, serve as therapy dogs and, in many cases, serve as shining examples of what is right with and special about the much-maligned breed.
How all that transpired is rivetingly detailed in a new book by Jim Gorant, “The Lost Dogs: Michael Vick’s Dogs and Their Tale of Rescue and Redemption.”
(For a preview, you can read an article by Gorant in today’s Parade magazine.)
In the book, to be released next month, Gorant expands on his 2008 Sports Illustrated story on the Vick dogs (the one that featured Baltimore’s own Sweet Jasmine on the cover), recounting how they were rescued from Vick’s estate and how — though euthanasia was routine until then for animals seized from dogfighting operations – they were saved from that fate by an outpouring of public appeals.
The outcry helped lead to a court order that Vick pay nearly a million dollars in “restitution” to the dogs — money used to allow a handful of agencies across the country to rehabilitate them.
The book recounts the ASPCA-led evaluations of each dog — and how, though there were a few hardened fighters among them, many more were dogs ready to be loved, ready to forgive and try to forget.
In “The Lost Dogs,” we learn more about Johnny Justice, the former Vick dog that participates in Paws for Tales, which lets kids get more comfortable with their reading skills by reading aloud to dogs; about Leo, who now spends three hours a week with cancer patients and troubled teens; and about Sweet Jasmine, who was coming out of her shell while living in Baltimore until she got loose and was hit by a car.
The book lists the outcomes for all 49 of the surviving pit bulls that were seized in April 2007 from Bad Newz Kennels, the Smithfield, Va., dogfighting ring run by Vick, then quarterback of the NFL’s Atlanta Falcons, now — getting a multi-million dollar second chance of his own — a quarterback for the Philadelphia Eagles.
While experts were expecting only 5 percent of Vick’s dogs could be rehabilitated, only two, initially, had to be put down. One was excessively violent and the other was suffering from an irreparable injury. For the rest, though, there was hope, and no small amount of faith – which, more than anything else is what “The Lost Dogs” is about.
Rather than showing aggression, the Vick dogs tended to be “pancake dogs”— animals so traumatized that they flattened themselves on the ground and trembled when humans neared, much like our friend Mel, the former Vick dog we recently met in our travels through Dallas.
Many more seemed to be dogs with normal temperaments, but who had simply never been socialized.
Accomplishing that fell to the handful of animal welfare organizations that stepped forward, offering to take the Vick dogs in and work to rehabilitate them — among them Baltimore’s Recycled Love, California’s BAD RAP, (Bay Area Doglovers Responsible About Pitbulls), and Best Friends Animal Society in Utah.
As Gorant writes in the Parade magazine article, “… rescuers argued from the start that rather than be condemned as a whole, the dogs should be individually assessed and treated — and this has turned out to be one of the great lessons of the Bad Newz dogs. Generalizations and preconceptions are as unhelpful and counterproductive for pit bulls as they are for people.”
Posted by jwoestendiek August 15th, 2010 under Muttsblog.
Tags: abuse, animals, article, aspca, bad newz, bad rap, best friends, book, case, court, cruelty, dog books, dog fighting, dogfighting, dogs, euthanasia, good dog reads, jim gorant, lesson, lost dogs, magazine, maligned, michael vick, michael vick's dogs, nfl, parade, pets, philadelphia eagles, pit bull, pit bulls, pitbull, recycled love, redemption, rehabilitation, rescue, resiliency, saving, socialization, sports illustrated, sweet jasmine, temperament, the lost dogs, therapy dogs, vick, vick dogs
Runner’s World magazine isn’t on my list of must-reads, anymore than jogging is on my list of must-dos, but I’m tempted to slowly walk out and get the latest issue right now — for it has gone (you guessed it) to the dogs.
Everything you ever wanted to know about dogs and running with them seems to be covered — from the top running breeds to how to avoid dangerous run-ins with dogs. It also has an interesting debate on whether dogs should be allowed off leash on running trails.
What are the top running breeds? Depends on the type of running you are doing. Runner’s World recommends weimaraners, goldendoodles, German shorthaired pointers, vizslas and Jack Russell terriers for long steady runs of more than 10 miles.
If you’re into shorter, speedier jaunts, go with a pit bull, greyhound, retriever or beagle.
If you’re running through more rugged terrain, or obstacles, choose a border collie, vizsla or Belgian sheepdog.
The magazine also suggests certain breeds for hot weather runs and cold weather runs.
Being Runner’s World, the magazine doesn’t suggest what type of dog is best for laying around and watching TV. But I can help you out there. Bulldog!
You can find links to all the dog-related articles in the issue here.
Posted by jwoestendiek August 13th, 2010 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animals, beagle, best, border collie, breeds, dog, dogs, german shorthaired pointers, goldendoodles, greyhound, issue, jack russell terriers, jogging, magazine, off-leash, pets, pit bull, retriever, runner's world, running, running with dogs, safety, trails, training, vizslas, weimaraners
This year’s 2010 DogTown USA contest, sponsored by WAHL Clipper Corp., named the 40 dog-friendliest cities across the U.S. in honor of the magazine’s 40th anniversary.
The criteria used to select the winning city include dog-friendly open spaces and dog parks, events celebrating dogs and their owners, ample veterinary care, abundant pet supply and other services, and municipal laws that support and protect all pets.
“All dog owners know of a few local shops or restaurants that allow dogs, but it is remarkable to have an entire town where virtually every establishment opens its doors to dogs – even the bank,” says Ernie Slone, Dog Fancy editor.
“Where else can you take your dog along for a whale-watching or sunset cruise, walk miles of off-leash scenic beaches year-round and enjoy one of the nation’s finest dog parks? Provincetown nearly swept our major awards this year, with its Pilgrim Bark Park finishing at No. 2 in our national ratings of dog parks.”
Rounding out the top 10 cities, according to a press release, are:
•Fort Bragg, Calif.
•Lincoln City, Ore.
•San Diego, Calif.
•Virginia Beach, Va.
•Sioux Falls, S.D.
The complete list of all 40 cities is available in the September issue of Dog Fancy, on newsstands July 27, 2010.
Posted by jwoestendiek July 14th, 2010 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animals, benicia, carmel, city, dog, dog fancy, dog friendliest, dog friendly, dogs, fort bragg, liincoln city, list, madison, magazine, mass, massachusetts, pets, pilgrim bark park, provincetown, rankings, san diego, sioux falls, top 10, top 40, town, virginia beach