I received a mass emailing that came from a group called Change.org that expressed a call to action to sign a petition that it was critical for eBay to cease carrying dogs in their classified section. Here are some of the statements in that mass emailing:

A few years ago, eBay had plans to sell animals via online auction. Responsible breeders would never sell dogs via online auction, so this would have resulted in the site becoming a haven for puppy mills. eBay users and anti-cruelty activists spearheaded — and won — the fight to prevent eBay from selling live animals.

Despite eBay’s claims that it “do[es] not condone unethical treatment of animals,” eBay now allows puppy mills to sell dogs in its classified section.

This practice enables flagrant cruelty to dogs, and it has to stop. Tell eBay to shut down its sales of cruelly treated puppies and all live animals.

Puppy mill dogs spend their entire lives in small wire cages, without companionship, and often without vet care, exercise or shelter from the elements. As far as puppy mill owners are concerned, the dogs have one purpose: to supply the pet trade.

The USDA recently admitted that they’ve failed to effectively monitor commercial breeders and puppy mills. When it comes to sites like eBay Classifieds, it’s even worse: Breeders who sell directly to customers online aren’t subject to any USDA regulations.

To learn more about this situation, I turned to the Humane Society of the United States which has a Puppy Mill Campaign division and stays on top of legislation and practices around the issue of mass production and sales of puppies to the public. As is so often the case, there is a gray area in a topic that might at first glance seem to be black or white. My contact at HSUS replied:

The Humane Society of the United States
700 Professional Drive  Gaithersburg, MD 20879
humanesociety.org

The Humane Society of the United States has had a good working relationship with eBay, as an auction site, over the year. While they have not always agreed or acquiesced to our concerns about their business in relation to animals, we have always had high-level access to discuss those issues, and they have resulted in some good outcomes, such as eBay’s banning sales of any ivory in the US, and a decision by eBay/Korea’s auction site to stop selling pets.

eBay, as an auction site, does not allow the sale of live animals in the US, primarily because they support the idea that shipping animals from one part of the country to another can be problematic for the animals. A few years ago, someone at eBay floated the idea of changing that policy, but it was killed, in part because of our input.

A couple of years ago eBay bought an on-line classified site, kijiji.com, which has since become eBay Classifieds. When they first started up, we reached out to them and urged them not to sell pets, citing the disconnect with eBay/US’s long-standing policy against auctioning live animals. However, they believed selling pets through the classified section was different because classified sales were local, and the shipping hazards wouldn’t apply. We talked to them about the problem of having ads on their site from bad breeders and puppy mills, issues with “free to good home” ads, etc. It soon became clear that, for a lot of reasons, they weren’t going to drop the pets category.

At some point, they came back to us with a proposal for us to post information on their site, to tell people about puppy mills, point to info on adoption and choosing a good breeder, etc. While our preference would be that they didn’t sell animals at all, we decided to work with them for several reasons, starting with the reality that there was virtually no chance that eBay Classifieds would, at least at this point, stop selling pets, and that even if they did, it wouldn’t eliminate on-line classified pet listings. Someone else would just pick up those ads. Since eBay Classifieds had the largest share of the market, we reasoned that it was the best chance to reach the majority of classified ad buyers with a warning message. In addition, eBay Classifieds asked us to help educate them and their staff about what to look for in puppy mill ads, and have been responsive to our requests to drop specific ads or sellers when we can provide specific evidence of a seller’s problematic history. They are also trying to get more shelters to advertise animals up for adoption.

This doesn’t mean that we won’t continue to encourage them to change their policy, but we believe we will have better success with eBay on all animal issues by continuing frank and open dialog, and open channels of access to the people there who can make decisions that benefit animals, even though we recognize we won’t always win the argument.

We recognize that there would be great symbolic value to eBay stepping away from selling pets through eBay Classifieds. But the fact remains that eliminating pets from eBay would not eliminate online pet classifieds, just move them to other sites, and sites which would likely be less responsive to messaging about pets, adoptions, puppy mills, etc. For years, before the Internet, shelters around the country, and The HSUS, tried to get newspapers not to advertise pets for sale, to no avail. Unfortunately, classified ad sales of pets isn’t new, the emphasis has just moved from print to ether.

This warning, which links to our responsible pet buyer tips, is displayed whenever you open a puppy ad on Ebay:

Important Safety Warning: Please take care when buying and selling animals. Learn more about responsible pet ownership and adoption. Avoid fraud by meeting all sellers in-person to pay for items. eBay Classifieds does not offer any transaction or payment services. Stay safe – read our safety tips.

Of course, we always recommend that anyone getting a pet consider adoption as the first option.

What I was venting about at the beginning of the October 22 DOG TALK:

On the Oct 15th DOG TALK® show my first guest was the Official Trainer of the show, Allison Denlea of Paws 4 Positive Training — a woman who did an intervention with a young Weimaraner in an abusive home and asked me to add him to my other Weims, who are all from rescues — and who herself has taken in several clients’ dogs that were unmanageable for them. Our interview was about her reasons for wanting to buy a puppy herself next time (having just lost three dogs in less than a year); on the show we discussed the ways to identify responsible, serious breeders and be assured that a dedicated breeder was paying attention to health and temperament issues in their breeding decisions.  Needless to say I took the opportunity in the interview to make this a teachable moment for one of my recurrent themes on the air and in writing — for the umpteenth time — that all puppies from any pet store anywhere come from horrible volume breeding operations and no one should ever add a puppy to their lives through a pet store or online internet sale.

Fairly straight forward, I thought.

When I sent out the announcement for the show the description of the guests began as follows: “DOG TALK® trainer Allison Denlea (Paws4Positive.com) discusses reasons to buy a puppy instead of adopting and how to know what you’re getting.”

Again, pretty straightforward, I believed.

Apparently NOT — there began a barrage of angry, abusive accusatory emails from people who do rescue work with dogs berating me for having this topic on the show, giving me lectures about puppy mills (yes, me, the person who lectures against the evils of puppy millers week in and week out, who has visited the Hunte Corp. “puppy mill processing facility” in Missouri, who is supporting the Prop B legislation in Missouri to improve condition for dogs in breeding facilities there, who is an ambassador for the HSUS — yes, me) and others who called me names and made threats.  I will quote from some of them in my next blog.

But here’s the rub: not one of these people had even taken the time to listen to the show and hear what we had to say! Not one — they all felt entitled to pass judgment, criticize and lecture me for so much as raising the topic of purchasing a puppy responsibly.

Are you one of these people who felt entitled to lash out, without even the courtesy of listening to the show? Are you someone who also feels entitled to express righteous indignation that I would so much as raise the subject of buying a purebred puppy? Do you sit in judgment of how other people live their lives and choose to build their families? Do you believe that by doing good deeds or charitable acts you have earned the right to lecture or even to hate people whose lifestyles don’t mirror your own?

If so, then allow me to tell you right out loud: this is America, a free country, a Democracy, and a nation where we have the good fortune to be free to make individualized decisions about most everything in our lives. Where adding a pet to our homes is concerned, as long as we are not supporting those who maintain dogs in abusive conditions (puppy millers/pet stores), nor do we do it ourselves, we should feel free to share our lives with animals as we choose.  People who do rescue work get weekly praise on my shows, get donations of my books or money, have the privilege of my invitation to their leaders and members as guests on my shows to explain and celebrate what they are doing. But nobody gives these people or their colleagues the right to sit as judge and jury on other peoples’ life choices — and certainly they are way out of line to attack me, of all people, for being immoral or allowing different points of view or choices on my shows. Keeping open lines of communication on any topic concerning animals is how everybody learns and makes the best choices they can (about getting an animal, feeding it, training it, offering it a fulfilling life).  People are going to get puppies. That is a fact of life, which some fanatics in the “animal rights” movement would actually like to stop. Since people are going buy puppies then they need to do it responsibly and with information.

To those who have not followed DOG TALK® for 6 years — for those who have not read THE DOG BIBLE — for those who haven’t heard me on my SiriusXM show CAT CHAT® let me make something very clear — fanaticism of any kind does no one any good and I do not invite it. Name-calling and finger pointing are counter-productive as well. Civility and mutual respect and decency in dealing with others is essential, whether they share our choices or not. And the Internet seems to afford some people the license to treat other people as they never would an animal.

Those who do any sort of charitable volunteer work should do so because it makes them feel better and satisfies a personal need — not because it makes them feel superior and entitled to judge and look down on others. If you want to be a do-gooder, knock yourself out. But it does not mean this gives you Godlike powers to make moral judgments on others — especially when you are misinformed and shoot from the hip.

–Tracie Hotchner

The Dog Bible

You have heard me speak about one of my most astute listeners in Atlanta, Bob, who frequents the dog park with his good pal Smokey. Bob doesn’t let a thing get past him — he checks and double-checks every product and service I align myself with — and I welcome and appreciate his careful eye.

So I was truly delighted that Bob became the FIRST Dog Talk® listener to switch to Petplan insurance from Pets Best, which I had previously recommended. There were changes in the coverage Pets Best was offering and a number of listeners told me they had problems with claims (including myself — when Scooby Doo’s torn ACL ligament was not covered because I had “only” been with the company 10 1/2 months and I had no idea they required an entire YEAR of coverage before knee surgery would be covered). So I have been looking for a company I could wholeheartedly endorse and found Petplan, which is the oldest, and world’s largest (covers 40% of ALL pets in the United Kingdom!) insurer of animals.

I also really admired Petplan for their charitable relationship with the non-profit animal group I am proud to be associated with — the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), to which they give a donation for every policy written. I have declared that for every one of my listeners or readers who signs up for Petplan I will make my own donation to HSUS. I want to support those who stand by HSUS despite misinformation and sometimes misunderstanding of their mission.

Hi Tracie – Heard your show this morning on iPod and immediately looked up Petplan insurance, and switched to it from Pet’s Best. It is a great plan and I really like the idea of the 100% reimbursement option at a reasonable cost. Almost did not do it, since you said Petplan supports the Humane Society of the United States and I am opposed to the HSUS alliance with Michael Vick (Mr. “I feel sorry for me — not the dogs I killed — so I will make a phony apology”) It was really was a big shock to me, but the insurance is worth it, in my opinion.

Ciao – from Bob & Smokey

Thank you, Bob, for your confidence in my advice and opinion where Smokey’s welfare is concerned, and yours as well. I am truly humbled by your willingness to join forces with Petplan, despite the fact that this company supports the work of the HSUS. As you know from listening to my show for years, I am an ardent supporter of the HSUS so the fit for me with this pet insurance company was perfect. In addition, Petplan also has the most inclusive coverage with no breed discrimination and very easy, straightforward claim procedure without a bunch of forms to fill in.

As far as Michael Vick goes, I hope you did listen to the full hour show I did a couple of months ago with HSUS president Wayne Pacelle in which we discussed the Michael Vick case and how HSUS is using him to help stamp out dog fighting in the inner cities. (mp3) As I explained on the air, it makes perfect sense to put Vick to work talking against dog fighting to young men in rough neighborhoods. Who else can reach these at-risk young men than someone who shared their experience — did the crime, did the time, and now is doing community service to spread the word of how wrong dog fighting is, with the backing of the HSUS.

I hope you can separate your justifiable emotional reactions to Vick — what he did was heinous and a court found him guilty and sent him to Leavenworth prison — from the practical issue of whether there is a way to use Vick to make a positive difference in stamping out dog fighting in our cities. (By the way, it was solely the work of the Humane Society of the United States, which prompted the very legislation that allowed Vick to be tried and convicted). The HSUS is not attempting to be judge and jury for Vick’s dog fighting past — that has already been handled — instead, HSUS has devised a way to put a real person up in front of these kids in tough neighborhoods full of pit bulls and explain that what he did was wrong and that dogs need to be our friends and companions, not tools for violence.

On November 21st I do have Wayne Pacelle, the head of HSUS, coming on my new radio show Tracie Hotchner’s DOG TALK & CAT CHAT® on WOR 710 at 10 PM (EST). We are going to be discussing this issue. I hope you will call in to 212-766-7100 if there is anything you want to ask Mr. Pacelle or express to us on the air.

The following week I will have Def Jam founder Russell Simmons — who is a vegan, animal-loving man dedicated to educational issues — coming on the show to discuss his support of using Vick to stop other young men from going down the path he did.

But most of all I want to thank you for your trust in my advice and your swift decision to sign up for Petplan. I did the same thing and requested the reimbursement from my previous pet insurer that by law they have to pay of unused premium.

On CAT CHAT® (AUG 19, 2009) Wayne Pacelle explains why HSUS supports Philadelphia Eagles signing dog fighter Michael Vick.

I got the following long, intelligent and yet deeply disturbing letter from Dominick, a listener in Palmetto Florida, after I denounced declawing on CAT CHAT®, in a discussion about how some vet students at U.C. Davis vet school had defended their “right” to declaw cats if an owner requested it. I pointed out that they would be taking an oath as vets to “First, do no harm” and didn’t understand how they could make an ethical case for the amputation of the first joint of every toe on a cat’s feet for the convenience of humans. And I said that then I found out their vet school doesn’t even teach it anymore — thank God — because I was explaining that the AVMA has come out against the procedure — which is outlawed as animal abuse in Great Britain and other countries which may be ahead of us in animal protection laws. I also said that the Humane Society of the United States would be involved in legislation to ban the barbaric practice of declawing and that their representative from the HSVMA (Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association) would be coming on both DOG TALK® and CAT CHAT® to talk about why declawing needs to be a thing of the past.

Dominic’s letter was so long that this is only the opening – the rest is in a PDF file that you may want to open and read.

I was very upset when you announced on your CAT CHAT® program, that declawing would be illegal in the next few years. All of my cats have been declawed for the last thirty-two years, including my current three. OK, before you take me out to the parking lot and beat me up, I would like to explain my position…

I wrote back to him:

I appreciate the thought and time that went into your letter and hope you will tune in to CAT CHAT® on July 22nd when I have the representative from the Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association (HSVMA) who will explain further why I say that declawing (along with ear cropping and tail docking) are cosmetic mutilations of our pets for our convenience that must be stopped. She will also be guesting on DOG TALK® August 8th so you should sign up on my website to hear that podcast.

A few comments on your letter:

1) While I believe dogs and cats should not roam free, when you were a child 40 years ago, pets being free was the norm. There was much less danger to them than today when we have more cars and people, and we also have learned more about how cats die unnecessarily. Therefore, the fact that you proudly admit that you “stole their dogs and cats and neutered them before returning them” is a deeply troubling piece of information.

2) You sound like a dedicated and generous guardian of your animals, but despite that you have justified for yourself that clipping a bird’s wings (or keeping fish in a tank) is equivalent to removing the first joint of every toe of a cat’s paws, the most sensitive part of her body. There is no comparison between the procedures in terms of suffering or disability.

3) You say your cats all immediately ran, jumped and could still climb and “claw” with their toes the day after surgery — this is not physically possible and makes your argument about your own wonderful experiences ring false. The healing period is much longer than a day, and those cats would never be able to claw again, lacking claws. You contradicted yourself when you described Cleo sliding off you after declawing — which is what all cats who are declawed would do. They cannot climb without claws; they can only make the motions.

4) You wanted to know what to do instead of cutting off the tip of your cats’ toes? THE CAT BIBLE explains all this. I hope you have a chance to pick up a copy. First, you need to trim the sharp curved tip of a cat’s nail which is all that is needed to protect other pets and people from being hurt, and also furniture from being damaged since it is the sharp tip that allows those things to happen. You can trim it as often as you like, in a few painless seconds.

5) SOFT PAWS is an excellent product: they are nail caps which the vet can glue on (and then you can learn to do it) that remain in place for about a month. They cover the nail completely, but the cat still has total freedom to use her feet naturally

6) Statistics prove (as I point out in my book) that declawing does not keep people from surrendering their cats. In fact, 1/3 of the cats in shelters have been declawed and many are found running loose, in complete jeopardy with no way to defend themselves or even to be able to climb a tree to escape danger. So there are definitely serious behavior problems in many cats, who are ditched after the surgery. In any case, the whole idea that declawing saves cats lives is disproved by the fact of shelters being full of them.

I am sure you mean well in making the choices you have, but that doesn’t mean they are the right decisions for the cats, or a fair one. I respect your concerns and your experience, but I do hope you will listen on those dates and see if I cannot convince you to please stop doing this to the pets your clearly love so much.

Tracie

The Cat Bible

I got this nice note from Kori, who came on DOG TALK® to discuss her wonderful new family business of transporting pets from shelters where their days are numbered to those that can give them a chance at a second home. Kori is also FEMA certified so I am introducing her to my friends at HSUS and ASPCA so that they can turn to her for extra help the next time disaster strikes and affects our pets, or for helping transport dogs from puppy mills that are shut down by the efforts of these great animal care organizations. And remember — if you need to have your dog or cat driven anywhere, the Kents will do the trip in their own van “Anywhere Pets Go.”

Dear Tracie,

I’m sorry that I have not written to you any sooner, but I wanted to sincerely thank you for  our interview on your radio show.  You sincerely put me at ease, and helped me talk about everything that I felt was most important.

As far as my business, things are starting to pick up locally which as I said before will help us to be able to stay afloat and be able to begin doing our long distance transports before you know it.  I am really happy at how things are coming along and I have found a new sense of sureness that everything will work out just fine for my company despite the state of the economy.  So again, thank you, as I really enjoyed speaking with you.  I hope you will think of me in the future for another interview, as I really did enjoy this one that much.  This was my second radio interview ever, and the other person did not put me at ease the way you did.  You are a FANTASTIC host and I wish you all the best.   Keep up the good work, as you are really doing a lot for the animal community.

Kori Kent
Anywhere Pets Go
www.anywherepetsgo.com
(716)684-6667

Further Thoughts On The Dog Talk® Show About Cesar Millan’s Training Techniques

(For a description of those who participated in this show on February 28th (MP3 file link), please go the bulletin board of TracieHotchner.com)

It’s been a little while since the broadcast of the DOG TALK® show in which I led a discussion about some of Cesar Millan’s (CM) training techniques on his television show “The Dog Whisperer.” I’ve wanted to address issues raised in a small flurry of intense emails I received almost immediately after the broadcast from a handful of listeners. I thought there might be many listeners who were confused or had opinions about the show that I needed to clarify. Some of the letter-writers identified themselves as (self –appointed?) “Cesar ambassadors.” On the website of one who wrote, there were links to Cesar Millan’s online dog training sessions for $99, which was a commercial CM venture which I wasn’t aware of, but which I now realize does pop up as a Google ad whenever CM’s name is in an email. These letters arrived so immediately after the broadcast that they appeared coordinated by some sort of watch group and to have a somewhat cult-like quality. I contacted one of the friendlier letter writers for an explanation, and she replied with an answer that seemed to confirm that: “A Cesar Millan Ambassador is a volunteer advocate endorsing Cesar’s methodology in our adoptive homes, community, and in our own lives. To remain calm-assertive in any situation, whether it be at work, in a debate, or with your dog. The lessons from Cesar impact the way we react, to be positive, and to believe in yourself.”

Some of the letters were quite angry about the ideas that had been discussed and they were cross with me, personally. Most of the writers seemed not to have listened carefully to the show – or their understanding became clouded by their emotional response to the topic. Each letter had numerous complaints about comments made during the hour – except that the points they believed had been made were NOT. Misperceptions can be cleared up by listening to the show again – the beauty of podcasting DOG TALK® is that people can listen to a show a second time or hear it weeks later by going to www.DogTalkTheRadioShow.com and clicking on the show, which is identified.

Just for the record, my concerns and those of some of my guests have already been officially declared by major humane groups. We are not voices in the wilderness, so to speak. The American Humane Association (AHA) actually issued a press statement in 2006 asking the National Geographic channel to cancel “The Dog Whisperer” because of abusive techniques CM was using; the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) also stated their concerns.

But what was almost amusing about the letters I received was a common “alpha dog assertiveness” of the writers who told me how I should have run my show. They criticized how I organized the show, who got to speak and for how long, saying it was “unfair” because they felt I didn’t “do my job” which they deemed should have been as an objective moderator – despite the fact that I said right up front that I had an opinion (although I reached it objectively). Some letters were indignant about the “unfairness” of having several people speaking against CM’s techniques and only Martin Deeley to defend or explain him. Some pro-Cesar letter-writers went so far as to give me directions about how much I should talk (or not) and whether I should have interrupted a guest, or in what order I should have had them talk – and a couple of them even told me to whom I owed an apology. I will get to the “fairness” issue in a just a moment.

So let me clear up a few things about DOG TALK®: I am in charge of every aspect of my show: what happens on the air is my choice and responsibility (up to a point, obviously, given that it’s a live show that is unscripted, unplanned, uncontrolled, without even a time delay). While I obviously do not have control over things that may be said or opinions voiced, I am in full control of the intention of what information and philosophies I want to get out to the public. I plan the show, produce it, choose guests, and pick topics; all based on what interests me to learn about and also to offer to my listeners. “Fairness” is for teachers overseeing schoolyards – “fairness” has nothing to do with giving listeners new perspectives on old facts about commercial pet foods, routine vaccination, medical diets, hoarding, declawing, tail docking, ear cropping, puppy mills, etc. I do have an agenda, always. My constituents are the dogs and cats – that’s why I say I am their best friend “out there” – along with the people who share their lives. That audience expects nothing less from me than to question the status quo – to shake it up – to give them different ways of looking at things that impact their pets’ lives. Is it “fair” to the many products or services that I expose as what I see as a danger to our animals? “Fair” to whom? It’s the quality of life for the animals that interests me, first and foremost. People can speak up and speak for themselves.

My voice, attitude and opinions are the connective thread for those who are my listeners (or readers, followers, however they may identify themselves). Given that I am an expert in the field of dogs and cats – whether about nutrition, behavior, medical treatments and ethics, etc. – I am not a passive participant who sits back and gives free rein to guests or to callers. So unlike interviewers who make a list of questions and remain silent while a guest speaks his mind, I interact: on my show, it is always a dialogue. It’s part of what makes DOG TALK® unique and gained me a devoted following. I take that trust seriously, and will never compromise it for my convenience, comfort or personal gain. Sometimes it means raising prickly topics but I do that fortified by facts and the advice and opinion of trusted experts in every field.

Where dog and cat welfare is concerned, over years of dedication and immersing myself in all aspects of the field, I have drawn conclusions and formed opinions based on facts and research – I let everybody know where I stand, about everything. And I also make it clear that I am eager for and open to new information and perspectives about everything that affects the lives of our companion animals.

Just as I do with topics as diverse (and controversial) as nutrition, vaccination, surgical procedures, or medical management of diseases, I organized the CM debate to focus on what I saw as a general misunderstanding of the theories behind some of the techniques CM uses – like the alpha roll and flooding (overwhelming a frightened dog with the thing that scares him). As I said in my introduction to the DOG TALK® in question, while I do not know CM or have any personal antipathy towards him, there are some techniques that he has used on his TV show that disturb me and I believe set a poor example of how to handle those issues with a dog. As an “influencer” and a popular personality, CM has to be held to the highest standards of what is known in the dog training community. He has an amazing opportunity to educate and inspire people to manage their dogs’ lives better – and in many cases he has done just that. However, that also means that he has to keep learning and growing and educating himself about behavior theory and practice. He holds the welfare of many dogs in his hands. It is a responsibility that demands personal growth from him so that he moves beyond what has worked for him in the past and evolves as a practitioner and teacher along with the dogs and their guardians.

I have also said that CM appears to be a charming man and one with a great personal gift in working with people as well as with dogs. I have had enthusiastic second-hand feedback about him ever since I was writing THE DOG BIBLE. My friend and dog trainer, who was the training adviser on my book, thinks the world of CM, having watched him work in person. Martin Deeley and many fine trainers are understandably enthusiastic about CM’s inspiration to the general public. I hear that and applaud that effect, too, which I think is needed by dog owners who are often ignorant and lazy about teaching their dogs manners and giving them boundaries.

What does worry me – and those vet behaviorists who belong to AVSAB and many other fine dog trainers – are some of CM’s attitudes and techniques on his TV show. The issue is not whether CM is talented or how he conducts himself working with a dog in “real life” – trainers I respect tell me CM’s innate gift with dogs is such that he can work with a dog like a dancing partner. My misgivings are about the example he sets in a some episodes on TV where he overpowered or intimidated dogs, sometimes pushing them past a tolerance level so they were provoked to bite him, to be more frightened of a situation or even to distrust people. Please listen to DOG TALK® on April 25th when I discuss specific examples of these training problems.

I stated my intention about the CM show clearly on the show –which was to provoke people to stop and think for themselves when they watch “The Dog Whisperer” and really see what is going on in some of CM’s interchanges with dogs. I also hope that stimulating this sort of dialogues would reach CM – and those who would follow his techniques – and have them think twice about some of what they do. That’s all it’s about – asking you to just stop and see things from a different perspective. In fact, on his show CM has made continual changes and shifts in how he handles dogs – whether it’s in very hot weather or pushing dogs to physical limits – and he now sometimes praises a dog or even gives a reward where in the initial years he never or rarely did so. So it would seem that the commentary and criticism his show has received has had demonstrably changed the way he does some things.

The idea for this particular DOG TALK® show came about when I saw that the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB) had made a public statement speaking out against television dog trainers who use punishment-based techniques. The article quoted Dr. Sophie Yin, one of the AVSAB board members, about CM, and quoted trainer Martin Deeley defending his friend’s techniques. I had already had Martin on my show before and had scheduled him to return – so I put a notice on the AVSAB listserv asking whether Dr. Yin or anyone else would like to discuss the topic on the air. She replied, along with two other vet behaviorists, and I let Martin Deeley know this ahead of time. I was concerned about there being enough time for everyone to speak their piece, and decided to even the playing field by letting Martin listen and then speak last, since the final speaker in a debate has the advantage.

I have made clear that there are fundamentals in some of CM’s techniques which I have consistently pointed out to listeners are not a good example to set for people to follow – based on what I know about the theories of dog training, about how learning takes place in any species, and in setting up artificial expectations that serious or long-standing problem behaviors can be fixed in dramatic TV moments rather than with the slow, patient techniques that generally bring a lasting solution. My intention was for the participants to deal with training theory – and learning theory – and what techniques are effective and ultimately work. This was not about targeting an individual, but exposing some of the actions of the individual who has a devoted following – it was about the danger of a widely watched television personality recommending force-based techniques and attitudes towards dogs which are outdated and can backfire.

What About the Monks of New Skete?

As far as outdated training techniques go, my comments on the air about the Monks of New Skete and their original book “How to be Your Dog’s Best Friend: A Training Manual for Owners,” elicited a comment in one letter I received from someone outraged at what she received as my “anti-Cesar” show. She was indignant about how wrong I was about the Monks using forced-based training (I said they recommended holding dogs up by the leash, off their front feet). She declared that the Monks loved dogs and would never hurt one and I owed them an apology, too. Martin Deeley himself wrote afterward to say that Brother Christian of the Monks was his friend and loved dogs and would never hurt them. Once again, I wasn’t referring to individuals but to advice given to the public.

The Monks’ book was one I read as a young dog enthusiast and used on my own dogs growing up. Years later I discovered that the book was promoting techniques which were confrontational and bullying. There are some aspects of the Monks’ style – once revered by me and many others – that now seem to represent the outdated kind of training theories that went out with human teaching attitudes like “spare the rod and spoil the child.” I mentioned this on the show and referred to a photo in their book of a Monk holding a dog up by the choke chain. When this letter arrived, indignant at the wrong impression I had given of the Monks training style, I revisited the book. It turns out I was wrong – there was not a picture of a dog being held up by the leash – my memory had converted it. What the book actually recommends doing is what they call a “shakedown” – complete with a photo of a monk grabbing one of their home-bred German Shepherds on both sides of the scruff of the neck, lifting him off his feet by these handfuls of fur so that the dog’s front paws are off the ground, and the monk stares right into the dog’s eyes while shaking him. If that isn’t a prescription for being bitten in the face, I don’t know what is. The book also recommends a “whop under the chin” as another form of discipline and shows a photo of teaching “heel” to a yellow Lab being startled and jerked hard on a right turn, taking him by surprise. Do I owe the Monks or anyone else an apology about the tone and attitude of their advice I was talking about? I wish I did, I wish I had misremembered and the book had been revamped and tossed out the old-school harsh, in-your-face training style. While I will certainly concede that I was wrong in the example I used of their force-based, antagonistic training style (hardly the way to treat a “best friend”) what I am sorry about is that even in a 2002 edition of the book they hadn’t removed this “alpha dog, dominating control” attitude that has since been discredited as ineffective and lacking compassion.

Several of the letters said how much Cesar loved dogs – as though anyone had suggested he didn’t! For heaven’s sake, of course these people all love dogs – that goes without saying. We’re not talking about intent or emotions – this was not character assassination, nor a popularity contest – it is about actions, and actions which are intended to teach people things. It’s possible to like CM’s TV show, enjoy his personal style, but be concerned about the general influence of out-dated harsh training techniques that research about training and teaching has shown us do not work as effectively (or kindly) as positive reinforcement techniques (which is not all about food treats, which they seemed to get confused about, too).

I am Hosting this same Discussion Live on the West Coast at U.C. DAVIS VET SCHOOL April 14th

My radio experience with this topic inspired me to take “Is the Dog Whisperer Barking Up the Wrong Tree” right to the source: the Animal Behavior Department of the prestigious U.C. Davis veterinary school in Sacramento. Nordic Naturals, the omega-3 pet oil company that is one of my website sponsors, agreed to underwrite my trip to California as an educational venture. I wanted to moderate a debate between Dr. Sophia Yin, who was the AVSAB spokesperson on my radio show and Cesar Millan himself. Unfortunately CM’s public relations person responded that he cannot be there – although she did say he would like to come on DOG TALK®, which we will be scheduling. She also said that he would have liked to come and would participate if I put together a similar round table discussion in the Fall in California.

On April 14 I will be moderating an evening event at U.C. Davis: a conversation between Dr. Yin and Dr. Melissa Bain, who is an associate professor in clinical animal behavior and president-elect of AVSAB. I will be recording and then podcasting this conversation, which should be interesting.

April 25th on DOG TALK®Another Discussion of the Topic

Saturday April 25th I will be covering a lot of the points brought up in defense of CM’s techniques – as a conversation about training theory with Parvene Farhoody, who is getting her doctorate in animal behavior and a very good dispassionate speaker who has been on the show before. There will be no call-ins that day but a good chance to listen and reflect and try to see all sides of this issue.

Tracie

The Dog Bible

I recently sent a letter to some breeders who write columns for their magazine, the AKC Gazette. I invited them to come on DOG TALK®, to talk about their breed and also to show how dedicated and responsible proper breeders are about their breeding dogs and the puppies. I got many RSVPs wanting to come on the show (and I have now initiated a new mid-show segment of DOG TALK® called “Meet the Breeders”). But then I received this response:

Hi Tracie –

Thanks for your request for me to be a guest on your show. I would be willing to discuss doing the interview with you but first want to know why you are using an endorsement of your book by Wayne Pacelle as President of HSUS. That organization has been anything but friendly to dog owners in general and has been especially unfriendly to purebred dog breeders and fanciers. I am quite surprised that you would accept an endorsement from an organization that is against the ownership of dogs.

I look forward to your reply and would be happy to discuss this with you.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey

So I replied as follows:

Dear Jeffrey,

Thanks for your prompt reply to my letter and your interest in coming on DOG TALK® so listeners can learn what a really good hobby breeder is all about.

However, I need to set the record straight about the serious and entirely untrue assertions you made about the HSUS. Your comments about HSUS are ones that have absolutely zero basis in fact, but are declarations that I have seen in the AKC Gazette and in some associated sites. It is such a terrible shame to have such a fine organization as HSUS be the target of lies and distortion of the actual agenda and programs of HSUS. What’s so amazing is that anyone is free to go to the HSUS website or even to call them in order to discover that these allegations of HSUS being “anti-dog” “anti-dog ownership” or “anti-dog breeder” have no basis in fact. Why don’t you take a minute and do just that? As an experiment, my husband just spent 15 minutes on their website and could not find one shred of evidence to support these fairly absurd and ridiculous assertions about anything at all “anti-dog” there.

There are millions upon millions of HSUS supporters who both own purebred dogs and breed them – and feel that HSUS is an important part of making this a better world for all sorts of animals, not just the pets we love. You are welcome to download and listen to Wayne Pacelle on earlier broadcasts of DOG TALK® discussing and dispelling these allegations with me – because these lies are spread day after day by people with other agendas, and then spread by people like yourself, who seem to have blindly believed what they were told.

As far as my book goes, I doubt you have actually looked at it, either, since there are multiple chapters about how to go to dog shows to investigate breeds, how to find proper breeders, charts and lists of questions to ask a prospective breeder, lists of questions a serious breeder should ask a buyer, how to pick a purebred puppy and have a continuing relationship with that breeder. If HSUS were against any of this, certainly Mr. Pacelle would have no respect for the book – nor would I have any for HSUS.

The irony from my perspective is that so many listeners to my radio shows have written since the Lisa Peterson interview and called in to ask what I could possibly want to do with “a terrible organization like AKC!” Life is funny, the way ignorance and misinformation flow in all directions. My primary interest in interviewing Lisa Peterson was to help create a bridge between members of these two organizations – I know I have an uphill battle ahead of me, but I am depending on individuals like yourself to just put a stop to all this finger-pointing and concentrate on the positive ways we can all come together to make this a safer, kinder world for dogs.

I will tell you that I was sorely disappointed to discover that many of the criticisms of AKC from my listeners turned out to have validity. I had always written and declared that AKC members have a code of ethics not to place their progeny in pet stores, and I also believed there was no AKC endorsement (i.e. AKC registration papers issued) for puppy mill puppies, which are the only ones sold in pet stores. I have since discovered that pet stores are full of AKC-registered puppies from high volume production-line breeders, via industrial-style puppy distribution centers like the Hunte Corp. I would think that dedicated hobby breeders like yourself would be as distressed by this as I am – since it goes against everything you have all worked so hard for so long to create and maintain in each of your breeds.

In any case, my goal in these interviews with breeders is to introduce people to real actual breeders who breed dogs with love and passion for excellence. I want people to see that individual members of AKC care deeply about how parent dogs should be bred and their puppies raised and shown or placed in homes. I have taken all this time to spell this out because it matters a great deal to me that who I am and what I say is very clear. And if I can open some eyes and dispel misinformation wherever I encounter it, then it has been a good day for me.

I look forward to hearing from you.

And his reply back was:

Dear Tracie,

Thanks for your response. I really cannot agree with some of the statements you made regarding HSUS and AKC and therefore think it would be best if we skip the interview. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey

So how do any of you feel about this??  Comments please!

UPDATE

So Jeffrey Pepper agreed to come on the show August 30th. In anticipation of that, I asked him to give me a bit of information about himself, since all I knew was that he was a very involved Golden breeder but I wanted to know the rest of his canine involvements for my introduction. He replied:

Briefly, I am an AKC judge presently approved for all Sporting and most of the Hound breeds as well as Cavalier King Charles Spaniels. I have been judging since 1984. I have judged all over  the US, in Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Holland, the United Kingdom, Japan, China, Korea, Indonesia and Australia. I have written 4 books on dogs and am presently completing a new (and second) book on Golden Retrievers. I am president of the Dog Judges Association of America and Treasurer of Take The Lead, a non-profit foundation providing support to people in the dog fancy who have a life threatening or terminal illness. I write regularly for Dog World magazine and the AKC Gazette.

I should add that I am not presently breeding Goldens or any other breed and I currently live with 3 geriatric Petits Bassets Griffons Vendens (PBGVs) and 3 Cavalier King Charles Spaniels. I lost my last Golden in September, 2001.  Lucy was the last of many generations of Goldens I bred under the “Pepperhill” prefix. I have bred more than 60 Golden champions and more than 50 PBGV champions, including best in show winners.

Jeff Pepper

Wowie! I felt like I hit the jackpot in Vegas. I had crossed swords with a man who it turns out is completely steeped in dog breeding across three breeds and who is such an important judge that he is president of the Dog Judges Association! I feel he will be a worthy person with whom to have this debate. While we had divergent views on puppy mills and the AKC involvement in them, that your firm but level-headed point of view would make for a really good intelligent debate on puppy mills and where the AKC is part of the problem or the solution.

Tracie

I was moved by a letter about the horrible conditions for pets in Puerto Rico. While I commend her for adopting two satos, I do know that trying to jump into the animal welfare issue in another country is a daunting task that often backfires. I contacted the HSUS to get an informed, rational reply about what we can do to help overhaul this cruel ‘system.’ Sylvia’s well-articulated letter is followed by an equally valuable one from Jessica Higgins of the Humane Society International. —Tracie

I receive your dog talk podcasts. I imagine you have probably heard about of the massacre of 80 dogs and cats that took place in Puerto Rico last October. This type of cruelty, while extreme in the numbers of animals involved, is unfortunately not unusual on this tropical island, where unwanted animals are dumped, poisoned, shot, beaten, and left to die on a daily basis. Back roads, gorges and garbage dumps are littered with the decaying carcasses of dogs and cats. Puerto Rico–”The Island of Enchantment”–is by far the worst place for animal abuse and overpopulation in the United States. As a country, we simply can’t continue to condone this kind of suffering.

Puerto Rico has a long history of animal abuse and neglect. The few public animal shelters in existence report euthanasia rates well above 90 percent. There are no pet registration laws in Puerto Rico, little spaying or neutering, and little enforcement of the animal cruelty or anti-abandonment laws. When someone wants to discard a pet, they typically dump it on the side of the road where it is killed by traffic or drop it off on a beach where it will die from abuse or starvation. There is even a strip of coastline in Yabucoa called “Dead Dog Beach” because of the number of dogs left there to die of disease, starvation, or gunshots. An article on an amazing rescuer who spent two years on Dead Dog Beach has come out in “People” magazine this month.

There is some salvation for these animals. The island has a few non-profit organizations dedicated to ending the suffering of stray dogs (called “satos” by the locals). None of these groups receive any financial assistance from the government. They rescue stray cats and dogs off the streets, nurse them to health, and help rehome them. These groups partner with a network of no-kill animal shelters, primarily on the East Coast, who are in need of dogs to adopt. As small (under 30 pounds) dogs, Satos are highly desirable, because very few shelters have enough small mixed breed dogs to meet the high demand. These rescue groups also help arrange for low-cost spaying and neutering for as many local dogs as possible.

We had hoped that the October massacre would prompt the government officials of Puerto Rico to finally take action and enforce strict laws against animal cruelty, as well as implement humane animal programs, and widespread spay and neutering. So far, we’ve heard some talk, but very little action has taken place. And that is surprising, in a way, because the island can’t really afford not to take action. We know that millions of dollars in tourism revenues were lost after word spread about the pet massacre and ongoing abuse. After all, who wants to spend vacation on a beach surrounded by starving and injured dogs?

Tracie, my hope is that with your radio program you will help raise awareness about what is happening to the little citizens of this island, which is a part of the United States. The more people who know about this, the more pressure will be put on the government to make some serious changes–as opposed to empty promises. I myself have two Satos that I got directly from Puerto Rico and I could not ask for better “daughters” than these two. They truly are wonderful companions. I look at them every day and grieve for the many thousands of Satos that haven’t been lucky enough to be rescued and are still suffering on the island.

I have listed some websites that you can access for additional information and have included a recent article written by the New York Times regarding the situation on the island.

http://tinyurl.com/5trlz4 (shortened NY TIMES link)

http://www.saveasato.org

http://www.manosporpatas.org

http://www.islanddog.org/home.html

http://www.sthuberts.org/

http://sandrai.blogspot.com/

http://www.arfofrincon.org/

http://www.farodelosanimales.org/English/index.html

http://classandcircumstance.blogspot.com/

http://www.redprotectoresdeanimales.org/

http://www.boxer.dreamhost.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BgVb9WvUCQ

http://dogrescue.meetup.com/321/

This is the reply I got from Jessica Higgins – Humane Society International Program Manager, Latin America and Caribbean.

The issue of strays in PR has received a lot of press lately, largely as a result of the Barceloneta incident. The problem is that there are very few spay/neuter programs in place, and in the few that do exist, the government largely does not participate. There are exceptions, but for the most part, the municipalities are not addressing the population problem. There is also very little enforcement of existing cruelty laws (the law on the books right now is comparable to the laws in many states – but it isn’t enforced), and there are no licensing and registration procedures in place. There is a new government body that is charged with animal control called the Oficina Executive de Control Animal (OECA – Executive Office of Animal Control). They have a very small budget, but are charged with using that budget to help the municipalities develop animal control program. As far as I know, that money has not been allocated yet, but OECA is developing guidelines for the distribution of funds. It’s a challenge because no one is really trained in the subject, since PR does not have a history of humane animal control. So they’re trying to start a program with very little background in the issue.

What we’re doing: We’re supporting several spay/neuter initiatives on the island. We anticipate launching programs this year in Vieques and Isabela. We are also bringing several leaders in this emerging field to our annual Animal Care Expo for training. They’ll participate in the international track of Expo. Although PR is not technically international, they do deal with many of the same issues that groups in the developing world handle. We’re also providing a one-week internship for the director of OECA at an animal protection organization in Florida. This should be a great experience for her and will give her a better perspective on developing the programs in PR. This fall we’re hoping to offer a training workshop for the shelters that will focus on increasing adoptions, and improving animal care in the shelters. Right now most of the shelters (there are 6) have a euthanasia rate above 90%. So we’re hoping that the combination of spay/neuter and enhanced adoption programs will bring this number down.

I should mention that there is controversy over the concept of “off-island adoptions,” where strays are picked up from the beaches and relocated to homes in the US. For a thorough background on the issue, I’ve attached an article that gives the pros and cons. Dead Dog Beach is a perfect example of the downfall of such a system. We’re heard from some local groups that abandonment has increased dramatically on Dead Dog Beach, because people believe that if they leave their dog there, it will get a home in the US. So rather than take the dog to a shelter, where it will almost certainly be euthanized, they leave the dog to its fate on the beach. So the transfer of animals does help the individual being transported, but does not solve the problems of overpopulation or abandonment, and might in fact exacerbate them.

In terms of what others can do: It’s good to keep pressure on the tourism industry and government to continue developing humane programs. For example, if a visitor to Puerto Rico (or any other tourist destination, for that matter) is disturbed by the sight of homeless dogs, it can be powerful to let the tourism agencies know that. But, it’s important to state that the solution is spay/neuter, legislation and education – NOT mass eradication. Let the tourism board that you want to stay in resorts that do not participate in poisoning campaigns. The tourism agencies got many such letters after Barceloneta, but now that things have calmed down, we want them to know that visitors to their island still care about humane treatment of animals, even if it’s no longer in the news. The other thing is to support local groups that are focusing on spay/neuter. The Humane Society of Puerto Rico has an effective low-cost vet clinic in the shelter. The group that we’re working with in Isabela, PAWS, also does a great job of spay/neuter outreach. In general, I would recommend that people support groups that are focusing on low-cost spay/neuter, and not on rescue and U.S. relocation of strays. I have the utmost respect and compassion for the people doing that work, but in terms of bang for the buck, spay/neuter will have a greater impact over the long haul.

So that’s what I know. I’m happy to answer any other questions you have as best I can. Hopefully this will at least be a start.

Take care,
Jessica Higgins
Program Manager, Latin America and Caribbean
Humane Society International
2100 L St, NW
Washington, DC 20037 USA
http://www.his.org