JustOneMorePet

Every Pet Deserves A Good Home…

STOP Los Angeles and Other Major Cities from the Unreasonable Pet Limit Laws and Restrictions

LA plans to restrict households to 3 pets total.. cats and dogs.  Nobody is suggested we allow or promoting hoarding, but a 3 pet limit, especially when we have major over-capacity in our shelters is cruel and unusual punishment for both animals and owners.

Pet ownership needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis if there is a problem, but many people can easily own 4, 5 or 6 pets or own a couple and foster pets without any problems.

Stop the killing… Stop the rules and restrictions… Stop Big Brother!!

For some people, one pet is too much.  For other people 6 are perfect.  It is a matter of time, money, desire and love.  Instead of the land of the free, we have become a land of restrictions and robots.  Adopting just one more pet is a blessing for the person who can do it and saves a life.  Temporarily fostering animals is blessing and saves many lives.  Restricting people and whole cities to 1, 2 or 3 pets for no real reason is a curse for everybody… humans and animals alike as well ad for the spirit of a country who has lost its heart!!!

Do pet-limit laws make sense?


Vinnie, a confident, social guy, would love a home, even if he had to share the space with other cats and dogs   Photo: Philip White

Many people are surprised to learn there’s a legal limit to the number of dogs and cats you can have in Los Angeles.  Whether you live in a multi-acre compound or a one bedroom apartment, by law you’re only allowed three dogs and three cats per residence.

Initially this might appear to make sense.  We’ve all seen upsetting video of animal seizures at the homes of hoarders who get in over their heads with fifty, a hundred, or even hundreds of animals.  Although hoarders may start out with good intentions, by the time authorities intervene often the dogs or cats are suffering from severe neglect.


Purebred Jack Russell Trooper would normally have been adopted quickly, but an accident left him with a limp, and without a home  Photo: Jackie Bass

The only problem with this justification for pet-limit laws is that most animal care and mental health professionals agree hoarding is a mental disorder.  People who suffer from mental disorders generally don’t curb their compulsions based on what the law allows.

The ones who are really hurt by pet-limit laws are the cats and dogs waiting for good homes, and responsible potential adopters who are unable to provide those homes because they’re afraid Animal Services will raid their home and seize their beloved pets.  What’s the use of giving an animal a home if the City can come at any time, even if the pet is well cared for, and take that animal away to a kill shelter (all L.A. City and County shelters are currently kill shelters)?


Kitty, both beautiful and very sweet, would do well in a home with other cats  Photo: Vanda Krefft

Some courageous caregivers adopt anyway, striving to keep a low profile so they can continue to provide safe homes for as many pets as they can properly provide for.  But these people, motivated by kindness and the willingness to do what it takes to give animals in need a loving home, live in constant fear of discovery – of what?  Their dedication to caring for dogs and cats?  Because they’re willing to devote their lives and money to helping homeless and often stereotypically “unadoptable” animals, they live in fear that those animals may be taken from them and killed.

I know of one family that gives a wonderful home to many handicapped and chronically ill cats.  These are nice, normal people who have accepted that they don’t get to take vacations like others do.  They aren’t going to have a hot new car, or a “media room” with the newest flat screen TV, because their money goes to cat food, medication and vet bills.  But they’re making the lives of many cats happy and love-filled who otherwise would very likely have been killed long ago.  The catch?  This family doesn’t dare tell anyone how many cats they have – not even friends and fellow rescuers.  They live their lives under a cloud, simply because they choose to do what we say we value in this culture, which is to be kind, unselfish, and giving to less fortunate creatures.

And cats are much easier to hide than dogs.  How many homeless dogs could be saved, instead of killed in City and County shelters, if every caregiver who had three dogs but had the willingness and resources to care for four or more were able to do so?  I know one woman who, damn the torpedoes, has four dogs, most of them seniors, and who is thinking about adopting a fifth special needs dog.  Her dogs are the cleanest, nicest, most well taken care of dogs you’ll ever meet, even though if she hadn’t adopted them many of them might still be languishing in shelters, or worse, given their ages and special needs.

I know some people will object that it’s “too difficult” to care for that many dogs or cats.  But it’s only too difficult if that’s not what you want to do.  For those with the time, resources and love to give, it would be nice if our City and County gave them the option to feel on secure legal footing while providing a loving family to the homeless dogs and cats of L.A.

Source – Los Angeles Pet Rescue – Examiner

Pet-Limit Laws Unconstitutional

Massachusetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Adopt Just One More…MV Temporarily Reduced Adoption Fees

And here we thought Chicago’s attempt to pass a five-dog limit was controversial!

Homeless With Pets… Choosing Pets Over Shelter

Is Your Pet a Voiceless Victim of the Tanking Economy?

Chinese City’s “One Dog” Policy Has Residents Howling

Florida’s Idea of Cat Population Control

Humane Society list of pet financial aid-related organizations

Where there is a will…

I care not for a man’s religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it." -Abraham Lincoln

September 17, 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | 10 Comments

Hundreds of family pets, protected species killed by little known federal agency

Maggie1[1]

Fox News: It was an August morning two years ago when Maggie, a spry, 7-year-old border collie, slipped through the backyard fence of her family’s suburban Oregon home. Minutes later, she was dead – her neck snapped by a body-gripping trap set by the U.S. government less than 50 feet from the home she shared with the four children who loved her.

"It is an image that will never leave me," Maggie’s owner, Denise McCurtain, of Gresham, Ore., said of her death. "She was still breathing as we tried to remove the trap. Her eyes were open and she was looking at me. All I could say was ‘I’m trying so hard. You didn’t do anything wrong.’"

Maggie’s death at a minimum was one of hundreds of accidental killings of pets over the last decade acknowledged by Wildlife Services, a little-known branch of the U.S. Department of Agriculture that is tasked with destroying animals seen as threats to people, agriculture and the environment. Critics, including a source within the USDA, told FoxNews.com that the government’s taxpayer-funded Predator Control program and its killing methods are random — and at times, illegal.

Over the years, Wildlife Services has killed thousands of non-target animals in several states – from pet dogs to protected species – caught in body-gripping conibear traps and leg hold snares, or poisoned by lethal M-44 devices that explode sodium cyanide capsules when triggered by a wild animal – or the snout of a curious family pet.

The McCurtains, like many other families, were never informed that such deadly devices were placed so close to their home in grass near the edge of a pond where their young son kicks his soccer ball and their daughter catches turtles.

The traps, set on communal property owned by the neighborhood association, were meant to kill an infestation of nutria, rat-like pests that pose no danger to people but can be harmful to the environment. The only warning sign was a small placard in the grass that identified the device as government property and cautioned against tampering with it. The neighborhood association told the McCurtains it never would have approved such traps had it known they were so deadly.

"It’s unconscionable that anybody with an ounce of common sense would set these traps in an area frequented by the public and their pets," said Brooks Fahy, executive director of Predator Defense, a national watchdog group that advocates non-lethal predator control.

"It’s unconscionable that anybody with an ounce of common sense would set these traps in an area frequented by the public and their pets."

– Brooks Fahy, executive director of Predator Defense

The M-44’s intended targets are coyotes that kill or harass livestock primarily in the western states, where Wildlife Services is most active and critical to farmers protecting their livestock.

But, like Maggie, there often are unintended victims — like a puppy belonging to J.D. and Angel Walker of Santa Anna, Texas.

In February 2011, the couple’s 18-month-old pit bull was killed when it sniffed and pulled on a meat-scented M-44 placed about 900 feet from its home.

Kyle Traweek, the Wildlife Services employee who set the device, violated at least three M-44 restrictions set by the Environmental Protection Agency, according to Texas officials. In a June 6, 2012, letter reprimanding Traweek, the Texas Department of Agriculture said he broke EPA rules by placing the cyanide in an area where "exposure to the public and family and pets is probable."

Click here to read the letter

Traweek is no longer employed by Wildlife Services, although his departure was not related to the incident in Texas, according to a spokeswoman with the Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service (APHIS), a division of the USDA that oversees the program.

It is difficult to verify the number of accidental killings of pets each year by Wildlife Services, in part because many go unrecorded, according to multiple sources.

A management source within the USDA claims Wildlife Services employees are told not to document the accidental killings of pets if it can be avoided.

"They are told to get rid of the leash and bury the dog," said the source, who spoke to FoxNews.com on condition of anonymity.

The source also alleged that in some instances in Arizona, California and Minnesota, the killings of pets are intentional – often with the knowledge, approval and encouragement of upper level Wildlife Services management.

"There have been cases of them shooting and killing dogs," the source said. "They’ll just claim it was feral, vicious or rabid. They think they can do anything they want."

In court documents obtained by FoxNews.com, Christopher Brennan, a California-based Wildlife Services employee, told a Mendocino County Superior Court judge that he has shot hundreds of "free-ranging" dogs who he claimed were preying on livestock. During the Sept. 1, 2009, hearing – involving a restraining order between Brennan and a neighbor – the judge asked Brennan how many dogs he has killed as a government trapper over the last 10 years.

"Probably close to 400," Brennan replied, according to the court transcript.

Carol Bannerman, an APHIS spokeswoman, confirmed Tuesday that Brennan is still employed as a "wildlife specialist" for the agency. Bannerman claimed Brennan works in an area where there is a large number of unleashed dogs that harass or kill livestock — and said there is a "significant population" of privately owned guard dogs, mostly pit bulls, that are allegedly left to roam freely so they can protect illegal marijuana crops.

"None of the feral and free-ranging dogs lethally removed in California last year were non-targets," Bannerman said. "Some non-target dogs were trapped and released."

In January, a Wildlife Services employee was arrested in Arizona and charged with felony animal cruelty after allegedly using a government trap to capture a neighbor’s dog he deemed problematic. The employee, identified as Russell Files, set up the leg-hold device during work hours to trap the animal, which was covered in blood from trying to chew its way out of the device when police arrived on the scene. An APHIS official would not comment on whether Files is still working for the government, citing an ongoing investigation.

Wildlife Services described the overall harm to pets and non-target wildlife as “rare.”

"Wildlife Services provides expert federal leadership to responsibly manage one of our nation’s most precious resources — our wildlife," APHIS spokeswoman Tanya Espinosa said in a statement. “We seek to resolve conflict between people and wildlife in the safest and most humane ways possible, with the least negative consequences to wildlife overall.”

The program said that accidental killings account for less than one percent of wildlife removed for damage concerns – and claimed that number is even lower for pets.

Wildlife Services, which has been in place since 1895, touts its mission as critical, priding itself on protecting the country’s agriculture and natural resources from destructive wildlife – damage that can be costly for landowners and businesses.

According to a 2010 report by the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), U.S. farmers and ranchers spent $188 million during 2010 on non-lethal ways to protect their land and livestock. That number has declined from 2006, when NASS estimated annual investments in non-lethal methods to be at $199 million.

The USDA says that despite such investments, approximately 647,000 cattle, sheep and goat are killed by predators each year, resulting in an annual loss of more than $137 million. The lost animals do not include chickens and turkeys.

But Carson Barylak, federal policy adviser of the Animal Welfare Institute, is skeptical of the USDA’s statements. She said the danger posed by predatory animals is exaggerated.

"The very reports that Wildlife Services cite for these figures show that [attacks by wild predators have] a relatively small impact on the livestock industry. In the case of cattle, for instance, under a quarter of a percent of the nation’s stock was lost to predators in 2010 according to the program’s records."

The exact number of pet animals and protected species killed over the years by the agency is one that will likely never be known.

A report by the Sacramento Bee, which investigated the program last year, claimed its employees have accidentally killed more than 50,000 non-target animals since 2000, including federally protected golden and bald eagles. The newspaper also reported that more than 1,100 dogs, including family pets, were destroyed by government traps or poison within those same years. Other known cases include serious injuries to pets that result in leg amputations, as well as harm to humans who come in contact with the cyanide.

Doug McKenna, a longtime criminal investigator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – a separate agency that falls under the Department of Interior – said he probed many killings of non-predatory and protected species by Wildlife Services over the years.

"The Bald Eagle is a scavenger bird, so of course if it flies down to investigate a carcass that is placed near a leg hold trap, it will get caught in it," he said. If the trap is not checked in a timely manner, the eagle is left to die. Such deaths are a violation of federal law, like the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, first passed in 1940.

McKenna said that in the case of M-44 cyanide devices, state governments must grant employees permission to place them as well as post warning signs for the public.

"Any access point into the property has to have signs that M-44’s are being used and it has to be in English and Spanish," he said.

For pet owners, seeking legal recourse against the government is a daunting and tedious process – requiring individuals to file a tort claim that typically results in families losing more money even if they win.

SEND TIPS TO NEWSMANAGER@FOXNEWS.COM

"Most people do not pursue litigation when they realize the financial cost, the time involvement and the limit on recovery for damages being the actual value of their pet," said Oregon-based attorney Daniel Stotter, who handles many of these cases.

"The bottom line is that the federal government has limited liability in all lawsuits involving tort claims, damage to property or persons. You can sue the federal government for certain things, like negligence, but you cannot seek punitive damages," he said, adding that victims are responsible for covering their own legal fees.

“The government knows that when they injure or kill an animal, they’re more likely to not have financial repercussions," he said.

For families like the McCurtains and Walkers, there is no price to be paid for the emotional toll of losing a pet.

"It is losing a member of the family," Angel Walker said. "You can’t really get past it."

March 15, 2013 Posted by | Animal or Pet Related Stories, Animal Rights And Awareness, animals, If Animlas Could Talk..., Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, NO KILL NATION, Pets, We Are All God's Creatures, Wild Animals | , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Pet ownership falls, but Americans remain faithful to dogs, study finds

Sorry, dogs,   cats are more numerous, though dogs are found in a slighly higher percentage of U.S. homes.

Dan Burn-Forti/Getty Images – Sorry, dogs, cats are more numerous, though dogs are found in a slighly higher percentage of U.S. homes.

A new survey finds that there are fewer pets in America than five years ago, but the ‘human-animal’ bond is as strong as ever.

By Brian Browdie / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS – Thursday, August 9, 2012, 5:02 PM

The economy’s bite may mean less barking.

Americans owned about 2 million fewer dogs and 7.6 million fewer cats at the end of 2011 than they did in 2006, according to a quinquennial study of ownership trends released recently by the American Veterinary Medical Association. The household-owned horse population fell to 4.9 million from 7.3 million over the same period.

Though cats remain the most prevalent pet – with a total population around 74.1 million, compared with about 70 million dogs – more than 36 percent of households own a dog, compared with fewer than one in three that own a cat.

In all, pet ownership has dropped 2.4 percent since 2006.

"Very likely it’s related to the economy," Dr. Ron DeHaven, the association’s chief executive officer, told the Daily News. "As pets are living out their natural lives, they’re not being replaced due to the economic concerns that go with responsible pet ownership."

"We do know the human-animal bond is as strong or stronger then ever," added DeHaven, who says most pet owners consider their pet to be a close companion or one of the family.

The mean number of dogs per household fell to 1.6 per household in 2011, down 5.9 percent from 2006. The number of cats per household fell to 2.1 per household, down 4.5 percent over the same period.

Spending on veterinary care continues to rise. Dog owners spent $19.1 billion on medical services for their pets in 2011, up 18.6 percent from 2006. Veterinary expenditures for cats rose 4.2 percent, to $7.4 billion.

"Preventative care in the long run is cheaper than treating a sick or injured animal," DeHaven said.

Related:

Dog and Cat Vaccines are Not Harmless Preventive Medicine

New Parasite Prevalence Maps Help Pet Owners Prepare

Don’t Get Ticked Off By Lyme Disease

Unconditional Love

Humane Society list of pet financial aid-related organizations

Where there is a will…

Declaration of the No Kill Movement in the United States

Homeless With Pets… Choosing Pets Over Shelter

Is Your Pet a Voiceless Victim of the Tanking Economy?

STOP Los Angeles and Other Major Cities from Unreasonable Pet Limit Laws and Restrictions

Southfield Implements Limit on Cats – Over Reaction!

Pet-Limit Laws Unconstitutional

Massachusetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Adopt Just One More…MV Temporarily Reduced Adoption Fees

And here we thought Chicago’s attempt to pass a five-dog limit was controversial!

Shocking Report…Gov’t to decide what pets you can own – Episode 006

Adopt Just One More Pet… MV Shelter Reduces Cat and Kitten Adoption Fees Until Sept 27th – Good Job MV!

Chinese City’s “One Dog” Policy Has Residents Howling

Florida’s Idea of Cat Population Control

Taking Away More Liberties: WI Pet Ordinance Forces Homeowners to Choose — Your Pet or Your House

August 14, 2012 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, Animal Abandonement, Animal or Pet Related Stories, Animal Rescues, animals, Dogs, Dogs, Holistic Pet Health, If Animlas Could Talk..., Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, Pet Adoption, Pet Friendship and Love, Pet Health, Pets, responsible pet ownership, We Are All God's Creatures | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Taking Away More Liberties: WI Pet Ordinance Forces Homeowners to Choose — Your Pet or Your House

Wasau Wisconsin Pet Ordinance Limits Number of Pets Homeowners Can Keep | James and Melissa Lecker

Melissa and James Lecker

Posted on March 15, 2012 at 5:03pm by Tiffany GabbayTiffany Gabbay to the Blaze

In a push many see as a gross infringement on one’s personal liberties, a small Wisconsin town is forcing homeowners who keep more than the town’s “permitted” allotment of pets a choice: Give up your animals, or give up your house.

takinglibertiesdog.jpgJames and Melissa Lecker take their dogs for a walk near their Wausau, Wis., home.

This is the dilemma currently being faced by one couple — James and Melissa Lecker — who, unbeknownst to them, moved to Wausau with four dogs.

For Melissa, there was no “choice.”

“These dogs are our family. They’re like our children,” she said.

In Wausau, homeowners are not permitted to have more than three cats, gerbils and rabbits or two dogs.

Melissa told Fox News she was in disbelief when a police officer showed up to her door to inform her that she was subject to a $100 per day fine for being over her dog “limit.”

“I had never heard of anything like that,” she said.

“They told us that the ordinance clearly states they [City council] cannot work with us… that it’s either two dogs or that you have to move, as you can’t have four dogs here.”

Meanwhile, the town’s officials said their hands are tied as the “ordinance doesn’t allow for variance.”

According to Fox, Jeff Gold, a municipal attorney from New Jersey, said the law makes sense when it comes to dogs:

“They smell. They bark. They have excrement,” said Gold.

“You’re not punishing [the Leckers], he explains. “You’re regulating society.” Wow!!  Progressive alert!

No one from Wausau, including Mayor James Tipple returned reporters calls for comment.

Melissa says she has put her house on the market and is prepared to take a $15,000 loss in order to keep her dogs.

“I hope we can work something out,” she told Fox. “But they are just being so mean. My dogs didn’t bother anyone.”

Watch the report HERE, courtesy of Fox

Melissa and James Lecker

Melissa and James Lecke

I too would fight for my pups and would take a $15,000 loss on my house.  Pets are part of your family… They are forever!  Good for James and Melissa Lecker.

These ordinances will become more and more prevalent if we do not stand-up.  They already are in towns, cities, and states with large Progressive populations like California and primarily San Francisco (who tell you who, what kind and how many), New York, large pockets of Wisconsin and the list goes on.  They are also prevalent Internationally, from China to Europe and even pockets of New Zealand, a wide open country where there are more sheep than people. Progressives hope to regulate every moment and action of everyone’s life for their idea of “the greater good”.  Every single day we are losing rights and liberties.  Time to take a stand for pets, for parental rights (of two and 4 legged kids), for individual liberties, for the inalienable rights we are all entitled to in all circumstances.

The Lecker’s situation is not an isolated case by any means.  I was personally involved in a situation in Leisure World in CA where they changed their restriction to 1 cat or 1 dog per unit (ridiculous in a community where pets are sometimes the only friends and love its residents have).  An elderly lady living there had promised her friend and neighbor that she would take her dog if anything ever happened to her because she had no family.  Right before her friend’s death LW initiated a policy of 1 pet and left a poor dying woman to fret over her beloved pet and companion in her last hours and then left her elderly friend in a position to either sell or rent out her home in Leisure World and move to keep her word and take care of her friend’s dog or try to find a home for the pup before it had to go to the shelter or rescue and probably be put down (senior dogs are hard to place).

Nobody is advocating hoarding (which is an illness and wouldn’t be stopped by laws) but good pet parents can and should be allowed to have 4 or 5 dogs, especially if they own a house, or a combination of 6 dogs and cats plus a bird, gerbils, turtles, fish etc.  Each case should be an individual matter and should only be of concern if there is a problem.  And then it should be based on ability to care for the pets in question and the circumstances.  For some people 1 pet is too much.  For most people 2 to 4 are plenty but for some 6 to 10 are perfect.  I have been to people’s houses that only have one pet (or one baby) and you can smell the litter box or diapers the second you walk in and there is a mess or fur/feathers (or dust) on the furniture. I have several friends with between 4 to 8 pets whose houses are no different than the ‘average house’; with either no pets, just kids or a just a couple of each.  And on the extreme, I had an acquaintance that was a vet tech and worked for the local vet that took in strays and hardship cases who had 23 pets, and probably fostered another 100 until permanent homes could be found, and her house was immaculate.  Today it is pets, tomorrow it will be children, activities, food, where you can live, what you can drive, how many vehicles you can own and the list will go on endlessly unless we stand up!

Our shelters are over-flowing because of the tough economic times added to by limit laws like in Wausau.  Everyone who can and wants to should be able to adopt just one or two more pets instead of continuing the flood of euthanization.

Please help the Leckers take a stand by calling, emailing and writing the City Council of Wausau as well as the Chamber of Commerce, Marathon County and state offices of Wisconsin.  I would suggest a call to Jeff Gold, the municipal attorney from New Jersey.  Today Wausau, tomorrow your town… your state… your neighborhood.

I care not for a man’s religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it." -Abraham Lincoln

Related:

STOP Los Angeles and Other Major Cities from Unreasonable Pet Limit Laws and Restrictions

Southfield Implements Limit on Cats – Over Reaction!

Pet-Limit Laws Unconstitutional

Massachusetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Adopt Just One More…MV Temporarily Reduced Adoption Fees

And here we thought Chicago’s attempt to pass a five-dog limit was controversial!

Shocking Report…Gov’t to decide what pets you can own – Episode 006

Adopt Just One More Pet… MV Shelter Reduces Cat and Kitten Adoption Fees Until Sept 27th – Good Job MV!

Homeless With Pets… Choosing Pets Over Shelter

Is Your Pet a Voiceless Victim of the Tanking Economy?

Chinese City’s “One Dog” Policy Has Residents Howling

Florida’s Idea of Cat Population Control

Humane Society list of pet financial aid-related organizations

Where there is a will…

Declaration of the No Kill Movement in the United States

This is in America: No Mercy: Calf Farm Cruelty Exposed We Are Still Euthanizing 4 Million Dogs Plus Additional Pets in Shelters in America Every Year… And We Allow the Murder of 3,700 Unborn Human Babies Per Day Through Abortion

Again, please help the Leckers take a stand by calling, emailing and writing the City Council of Wausau as well as the Chamber of Commerce, Marathon County and state offices of Wisconsin. I would suggest a call to Jeff Gold, the Progressive municipal attorney from New Jersey as well. Today Wausau, tomorrow your town… your state… your neighborhood.

March 19, 2012 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, Animal or Pet Related Stories, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Dogs, Dogs, Help Familie Keep Their Pets, If Animlas Could Talk..., Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, NO KILL NATION, Pet Adoption, Pet Friendship and Love, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change, We Are All God's Creatures | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

San Francisco City Gov Bans Pet Fish? Hello?

First the bay city decided we American’s just shouldn’t be able to decide matters such as circumcision.

A Ryukin goldfish from The 6th "Pramong N...

We shouldn’t have to worry about decisions like that since we have a brilliant and all knowing government to think for us.

Now San Francisco is taking things a step further by possibly relieving the American’s that live within its limits of the terrible right to purchase a pet goldfish.

San Francisco’s Animal Control and Welfare Commission is recommending that the City ban the sale of goldfish, tropical fish and guppies in its borders, according to Matier and Ross.

The recommendation to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors is part of the commission’s ongoing efforts to discourage “impulse buys” of animals.

The commission’s ban would cover pet stores and breeders in the City. It comes after more than a year of study and findings that aquarium fish are often mass bred under inhumane conditions or stripped from the wild.

It almost seems as if these idiots read Atlas Shrugs and instead of learning lessons from it, they got ideas.

I mean, San Francisco has managed to chase off most parents with children, cutting off future generations of workers, business and tax dollars. They kicked a medical industry to the curb and now Pet Smart and many other pet stores are likely to notice little value of sticking around.

Good going liberals… way to succeed as a city.

Eric Odom

Source: Eric Dom

Related:

STOP Los Angeles and Other Major Cities from Unreasonable Pet Limit Laws and Restrictions

Southfield Implements Limit on Cats – Over Reaction!

Pet-Limit Laws Unconstitutional

Massachusetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Adopt Just One More…MV Temporarily Reduced Adoption Fees

And here we thought Chicago’s attempt to pass a five-dog limit was controversial!

Homeless With Pets… Choosing Pets Over Shelter

Is Your Pet a Voiceless Victim of the Tanking Economy?

Chinese City’s “One Dog” Policy Has Residents Howling

Florida’s Idea of Cat Population Control

Humane Society list of pet financial aid-related organizations

Where there is a will…

I care not for a man’s religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it." -Abraham Lincoln

June 17, 2011 Posted by | Animal or Pet Related Stories, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Just One More Pet, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change | , , , , , | 3 Comments

Loving, intelligent – ‘Micropig’ is the new pet craze

Jane Croft,with a baby micropig

Vidya Ram

London, Sept. 18

Pigs – they’ve been the subject of many a children’s story, but somehow that “cute portrayal” has rarely translated into domestic life, with the prospect of a 200- kg giant traipsing round a home proving too daunting for even the most enthusiastic of animal lovers. Now, thanks to a new craze for “micropigs” sweeping across the United Kingdom, that could be about to change.

In the next couple of weeks, “This Little Piggy: A Celebration of the World’s Most Irresistible Pet,” launches in the UK, with serialisations in a couple of leading dailies, and television programmes, with detailed information on the history and care for these creatures, which can grow up to just 16 inches. Author and owner of the high profile Little Pig Farm, Jane Croft hopes that this will be the start. While a range of merchandise already exists, she’s hoping to take it into designer bags, a large visitors centre – and in the long term – branches in every country across the world.

Micro pigs, originally imported from Vietnam, have been around for a couple of decades, but interest had died down in recent years – rapidly reviving as a result of Croft’s farm, which has already attracted hundreds of buyers and franchisee requests from across the world since being set up in April 2009. Her hopes of building a global business have already begun to become reality: this year franchisee farms, run by trusted associates of Croft, will be set up in Japan, Korea, Canada and the US, as well as a number across Britain.

Intelligent than dogs

While the pig protagonists of books such as A.A. Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh, or E.B. White’s Charlotte’s Web (not to mention the film Babe) help the “family” appeal of pigs, they have other qualities that make them attractive pets, says Croft. Allergy-prone people are less susceptible to the hair of pigs than the fur of dogs and cats, for example. “They are also extremely intelligent…far more intelligent than dogs,” says Croft, who has several of the animals pottering around her kitchen and living room. Pigs’ intelligence has of course been picked up in literature, with characters such as the villainous Napoleon of George Orwell’s Animal Farm. However, this characteristic is something that troubles animal rights campaigners.

“It is important for people to be aware of the fact that pigs are highly intelligent and social animals,” says Helen Coen of the Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals. “The fact that these micro pigs are being marketed as an “easy” option is worrying in itself…” However, Croft insists that while some rogue breeders may give the industry a bad name, she’s always careful to vet prospective owners (and has already turned down several)– ensuring that the homes must have large outdoor space and that pigs are left alone for excessive periods of time (working owners must have at least two to ensure that the animals have company).

Either way, the pigs don’t come cheaply, starting at £550 pounds, and going up to £1,200 for the smallest 14-inch “deluxe” pigs. For those hoping to start their own business – Croft’s pigs aren’t the solution, though – it’s only neutered males that are up for sale.  There’s also a waiting list of up to six months.

To some it’s a price worth paying. “They are the incredibly affectionate, easy to look after and the cheapest thing to maintain,” says Suzanna Bowman, owner and manager of a pub in the county of North Lincolnshire, with five micropigs on her five-acre plot of land (and home).  Whether such rosy experiences of the pigs will convince buyers across the world remains to be seen.

More Stories on : Lifestyle | Animals & Livestock

Posted:  Just One More Pet

September 19, 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Massachussetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Cat Collage

A Massachusetts town has made it illegal to own more than three cats without getting a special license. Voters at a town meeting in Dudley added language to a town bylaw on Monday night that makes it illegal to own more than three cats without a $50 residential kennel license.

DUDLEY Massachusetts has made it illegal to own more than three cats without getting a $50 residential kennel license. Voters at a town meeting in Dudley added language to a town bylaw on Monday night in response to a neighborhood feud over the 15 cats owned by Mary Ellen Richards.

The Telegram & Gazette of Worcester reports that ‘one’ neighbor claimed the cats have ruined his yard.  (When you get complaints from only one person… the problem is usually the complainer!!)

Richards has put her home up for sale and says she plans to move to a “more cat-friendly community.”

Dudley is about 60 miles southwest of Boston.

This is not a good thing at a time when the kennels, shelters and rescues are over-flowing with animals of all types!!

This is just another example of taking the easy way out, punishing everyone (especially the cats/pets) and avoiding responsibility and leadership by making another restrictive law to punish everyone (or the people they choose to apply it to) instead of addressing the issue at hand, which is what leadership is all about and what our country is lacking!  Plus they add just another fee to their coffers and people’s lives that would go a long way toward cat food for hungry pets.

Generally 15 cats is too many… but 3 is too little for a true pet lover who is rescuing, fostering and keeping animals from being euthanized!!  And in today’s tough times, every incident must be looked at on an individual basis.  JOMP believes that this should be the rule everywhere!!

Animal and Pet Owner advocates and organizations everywhere should be advocating to remove the restrictions on pets and move back to a case by case basis, only if there are health or abuse violations, or at least put pressure on all counties, cities, municipalities, communities and homeowner’s associations to up the amount of pets allowed to be owned or taken care of in their community on a per person basis to at least 4 to 6 before requiring a license and to stop certain communities for restricting their residents to 1 or 2.

In Orange Country CA a lady, living in a senior community, who had one dog and one cat promised her friend that if anything happened to her, she would take her pets… also one dog and one cat, because she had no relatives to take them.  Over the next year the community changed their rules to only allowing one pet; both old ladies had to hide their cats, restricting their social interactions.  And when the second elderly woman died, the “community” would not make an accepting for the surviving friend to take her friends elderly dog.  The woman hired a attorney, using up a good part of her funds to fight the community and still lost.  She had to sell her home (at a loss in this market) and move to a rental to keep her promise and save the lives of her friend’s two pets).  This should never happen!  I know of other stories where pets have been put to sleep because a friend in a senior or restricted community could not rescue them and there were not takers quick enough to rescue them from the shelter.  (All shelters and rescues should have a no kill policy… otherwise they are neither a shelter nor a rescue!!).

These kinds of rules and laws allow officials to be cowardly, enforcement agents to be overwhelmed, pet owners to be dishonest and creates enough fear or monetary distress for those that follow unfair rules to cause more pets to be euthanized.  The woman in this case is now moving, but the residents of this town are stuck with the law and fee.

If you have the means, the room and the love in your heart, every American should be allowed to adopt or rescue just one or two more pets.  If everyone adopted just one more pet the situation in our shelters would improve greatly… helping the local governments where they live and helping us move to doing the right thing by all pets and animals.  As Dr. Laura says… Now go do the right thing!!

Call Dudley Massachusetts and tell them to revoke this law and start working in your area, and nationally to have similar restrictions relaxed or removed!!! We are becoming a country of restrictions instead of a land of freedoms!

Ask Marion/JOMP

Source:  AOL news

Posted:  Just One More Pet

Related:

Tell Gaston Co NC Anima Control NO to Gas, etc – Same in Michigan!!

Florida’s Idea of Cat Population Control

PetSmart to Hold National Adoption Event

Judge Rules:  NYC Must Create More Animal Shelters

Is Your Pet a Voiceless Victim of the Tanking Economy?

Adopt Just One More Pet… MV Shelter Reduces Cat and Kitten Adoption Fees …

Where there is a will…

Homeless With Pets… Choosing Pets Over Shelter

California: Protest Governor’s Plan to Cut Shelter Funding!

Chinese City’s “One Dog” Policy Has Residents Howling

Humane Society list of pet financial aid-related organizations

HELP YOUR LOCAL SHELTER BY DONATING “STUFF” – “SPRING CLEANING IN THE FALL”

And here we thought Chicago’s attempt to pass a five-dog limit was controversial!

Adopt Just One More…MV Temporarily Reduced Adoption Fees

Community Cats in the Spotlight

November 5, 2009 Posted by | Animal or Pet Related Stories, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Just One More Pet, Pet Adoption, Pet Friendship and Love, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change, Stop Euthenization, Uncategorized, We Are All God's Creatures | , , , , | 1 Comment

Pros & Cons of Neutering–Really? There are Cons?

PupHug-FernandaCerioni

Puppies rely on us to make informed decisions. Image Copr. Fernanda Cerioni/Flickr

By Amy Shojai at Amy Shojai’s Bling, Bitches and Blood

Yes, actually, there are and that may surprise you. It did me. After all, we’ve heard from animal welfare advocates for years preaching the gospel of spay/neuter.  Heck, I preached this myself and for the majority of dogs and cats (ESPECIALLY cats!), “the big fix” is the best thing that ever happens to them.

There’s new evidence, though, that for dogs at least the pros and cons are not so black and white. While the University of Georgia’s sample of 40,139 canine death records from the Veterinary Medical Database from 1984-2004 concluded that neutered dogs could be expected to live a year and a half longer (on average) than intact dogs, other studies point out potential increases in hip dysplasia or cancer. Oy.

So what’s a responsible pet parent to do? One possible solution is a new non-surgical sterilization technique called Zeuterin from Ark Sciences, that renders the boy dogs incapable of fathering puppies but let’s them keep about 50 percent of their testosterone that makes a beneficial health difference especially in certain breeds.

Read my newest article of Zeuterin and Pros/Cons of Neutering here. My best recommendation is to find out everything you can, consult with your vet, and only then make an informed decision. What do you think? Go ahead and comment–let ‘er rip! *s*

Amy is so right, spay/neutering is not a cut and dry proposition… no pun intended! JOMP!

Related:

Pet Sterilization Laws Raise Health Concerns

Why I’ve Had a Change of Heart About Neutering Pets 

‘Zeutering’ offers dog sterilization in a ‘shot’ 

An Alternative to Surgery to Sterilize Male Dogs

Spay, Neuter, Adopt – Repeat 

Thousands of Shelter Pets Killed Every Day Yet Half of Americans Uninformed and Unaware

Lucy Pet Foundation’s Rose Parade float promotes pet spay/neuter – Features Daniel

‘Miracle’ dog that survived gassing headed to Rose Parade 

Urinary and Fecal Incontinence in Pets

STOP Los Angeles and Other Major Cities from the Unreasonable Pet Limit Laws and Restrictions

Adopt Just One More Pet and Save a Life!! – Sharing a Great Pet Adoption Pet Story!!

Taking Away More Liberties: WI Pet Ordinance Forces Homeowners to Choose — Your Pet or Your House

Southfield Implements Limit on Cats – Over Reaction!

Pet-Limit Laws Unconstitutional

Massachusetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Three Nuns Adopt the Senior Pit Bull Nobody Else Wanted

Should You Adopt a Second Dog?

‘Until One Has Loved an Animal, Part of Their Soul Remains Unawakened’ – Join the NO KILL MOVEMENT

Hopeful News: LA City Animal Shelter Deaths Plummet by Nearly Half During First Two Years of Best Friends Animal Society’s NKLA Initiative

February 22, 2014 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, Animal Related Education, Dogs, Fostering and Rescue, Pet Adoption, Pet Friendship and Love, Pet Health, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change, responsible pet ownership, Stop Euthenization | 2 Comments

Hopeful News: LA City Animal Shelter Deaths Plummet by Nearly Half During First Two Years of Best Friends Animal Society’s NKLA Initiative

“Lives are at stake.  Not only is this program important for Los Angeles, but we are laying a path forward for other cities to follow [in] making no-kill an achievable goal,”  says Batista

Digital Journal: Success of coalition approach to ending the killing of healthy animals in shelters provides road map for cities across the nation. The number of healthy or treatable dogs and cats killed in Los Angeles city animal shelters has been cut nearly in half in just two years, Best Friends Animal Society announced today.

We Are All Waiting...

Save All of Them!!!

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) February 06, 2014 – Cross Posted at Digital Journal, AskMarion and Just One More Pet (JOMP)

Statistics provided by LA Animal Services show that since the formation in 2012 of a 70-organization coalition led by Best Friends Animal Society, shelter deaths have dropped 48 percent. In 2011, the year before Best Friends launched its NKLA (No-Kill Los Angeles) initiative with the City of Los Angeles, approximately 17,400 healthy, treatable dogs and cats were killed in LA shelters. One year later, the number was reduced to approximately 13,400. In 2013, the number decreased further to 9,075.

“We’ve reached an incredible lifesaving milestone for shelter pets and animal lovers in Los Angeles,” says Francis Battista, a co-founder of Best Friends Animal Society, the Utah-based organization who worked closely with the city to form the partnership. “There’s no doubt we are on the right track to reach a day when animals are no longer killed in LA shelters simply because they don’t have a safe place to call home.”

Best Friends’ NKLA initiative, which is built around a partnership with the City of Los Angeles, began in January of 2012, with the goal of ending the killing of healthy and treatable pets in LA shelters by 2017. The approach provides economically targeted spay/neuter services so fewer animals enter shelters, as well as adoption incentives and promotions to ensure that more animals exit the shelters alive.

Brenda Barnette, general manager of LA Animal Services, says the partnership and resulting coalition has paid big dividends.

“The unique public-private partnership of Best Friends Animal Society and Los Angeles Animal Services has enabled us to make life-saving strides for the animals in Los Angeles,” says Barnette. “When NKLA launched two years ago we had no idea that we would exceed our goals to reduce shelter deaths and increase live outcomes for our animals so significantly.”

The number of animals killed each year in shelters around the country is around four million -approximately 9,000 every day. Best Friends, which has introduced “Save Them All” as its national call-to-action, is working with no-kill advocates across the country to bring that number down to zero.

Coalition provides replicable model for other cities

Several key factors make these kinds of strides possible in a city the size of Los Angeles.

“The main driver is that the entire coalition works toward the same goal,” says Battista. “From the beginning we knew we had to accomplish something uncommon in animal welfare: bring a large number of local groups to affiliate with a campaign in a major U.S. city. At first it wasn’t easy, but two years into it our local coalition has grown and is pulling in the same life-saving direction. Clearly, we couldn’t have done this on our own, without all the groups working together.”

Best Friends regards Los Angeles as both a trendsetter and a representative proving ground, suggesting that this type of program can be replicated in other cities around the country.

The coalition focuses on two key areas – promoting adoption as the best way for Los Angeles residents to get their pets, and making it much easier for low-income pet owners to have their pets spayed or neutered through the delivery of free or low-cost services into communities with little or no access to veterinary care.

“By establishing programs for low-income pet owners we are reaching an underserved group of animal lovers who have few resources to care for their pets,” says Battista. “We’re tweaking things as we progress to ensure that we’re making the greatest impact on the problem. The coalition is gathering momentum, and the NKLA campaign is generating more and more popular support.”

Two LA facilities boost adoption of shelter animals

Best Friends operates two dedicated facilities to increase adoptions of city shelter animals. The Best Friends Pet Adoption and Spay/Neuter Center in Mission Hills is run out of a city-owned facility and only offers for adoption shelter dogs and cats from any of the six Los Angeles shelters. The NKLA Pet Adoption Center in West Los Angeles, operated by Best Friends through a foundation grant, features homeless LA pets for adoption from a variety of coalition partners. Total adoptions from both centers numbered approximately 3,800 dogs and cats in 2013.

The Mission Hills center clinic performed more than 6,200 spay/neuter surgeries, over 3,000 of which were reserved for pets of low-income families.

Best Friends also employs special pet transports to save LA shelter animals. During the past two years several thousand LA Animal Services dogs and cats were delivered to guaranteed adoption rescue partners across the country, while more than 1,700 neonatal kittens and dozens of nursing mothers were saved though an on-site kitten nursery in Mission Hills. Additionally, the lives of hundreds of neonatal puppies and several nursing mothers were saved through a foster network.

Battista says that while Best Friends and its partners are on track to meet the goal of taking the city to no-kill by 2017, there are no plans to take the collective foot off the pedal.

“Lives are at stake,” Battista says, “so every day, the efforts of our LA team are focused on working with our coalition partners to stop the killing in shelters. Not only is this program important for Los Angeles, but we are laying a path for other large cities to follow and making no-kill an achievable goal for cities and towns across the United States.”

About Best Friends Animal Society®
Best Friends Animal Society is the only national animal welfare organization focused exclusively on ending the killing of dogs and cats in America’s shelters. An authority and leader in the no-kill movement since its founding in 1984, Best Friends runs the nation’s largest no-kill sanctuary for companion animals, as well as life-saving programs in partnership with rescue groups and shelters across the country. Since its founding, Best Friends has helped reduce the number of animals killed in shelters from 17 million per year to about 4 million. Best Friends has the knowledge, technical expertise and on-the-ground network to end the killing and Save Them All®.

To like Best Friends Animal Society on Facebook go to: http://www.facebook.com/bestfriendsanimalsociety

Follow Best Friends on Twitter: http://twitter.com/bestfriends

Related: 

Spay, Neuter, Adopt – Repeat

Thousands of Shelter Pets Killed Every Day Yet Half of Americans Uninformed and Unaware

Lucy Pet Foundation’s Rose Parade float promotes pet spay/neuter – Features Daniel

‘Miracle’ dog that survived gassing headed to Rose Parade

Why I’ve Had a Change of Heart About Neutering Pets

Pet Sterilization Laws Raise Health Concerns

STOP Los Angeles and Other Major Cities from the Unreasonable Pet Limit Laws and Restrictions

Adopt Just One More Pet and Save a Life!! – Sharing a Great Pet Adoption Pet Story!!

Taking Away More Liberties: WI Pet Ordinance Forces Homeowners to Choose — Your Pet or Your House

Southfield Implements Limit on Cats – Over Reaction!

Pet-Limit Laws Unconstitutional

Massachusetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Three Nuns Adopt the Senior Pit Bull Nobody Else Wanted

Should You Adopt a Second Dog?

‘Until One Has Loved an Animal, Part of Their Soul Remains Unawakened’ – Join the NO KILL MOVEMENT

February 8, 2014 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, Animal or Pet Related Stories, Animal Related Education, Animal Rescues, animals, Dogs, Dogs, Fostering and Rescue, Help Familie Keep Their Pets, Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, NO KILL NATION, Pet Friendship and Love, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change, Stop Animal Cruelty, Stop Euthenization, Success Stories, We Are All God's Creatures | 4 Comments

Spay, Neuter, Adopt – Repeat

dalmation, parrot and other pets

The Razor – Originally posted January 31, 2014, 12:13 pm:

One of the few topics of agreement between liberals and conservatives I’ve found is pets, particularly the problems caused by over population. The cool thing is that when the topic of whether Obama should be impeached or not comes up, and your liberal friend’s head is about to explode, just send him a picture of a cute dog needing rescue. Immediately all will be forgotten and instead of pistols-at-dawn (or since we’re talking leftists who support gun control, re-education camps or at the very least, IRS audits) you’ll be sharing animal rescue stories and plotting how to change attitudes towards spay and neuter programs.

Look we all know Obama is the worst president in history, but whomever takes his place will likely not be able to solve the problem of pet overpopulation. To do this requires not just changing the attitudes of those who believe it’s “unnatural” to spay or neuter a dog or keep their cat inside, it requires changing our attitudes as well.

I used to consider myself a cat person. When I was five I ended up with a tiny little kitten, the runt of the litter who wouldn’t be nursed by her mother. So my mother gave me a doll bottle with kitten formula and I nursed the kitten myself. The kitten became my first best friend. I wrote songs and poetry to her while a child and she repaid me with her company for 17 years. There have been other cats since her passing, but none like her, and because of my experience with her I shunned dogs for the most part until my son came into the picture. We ended up adopting a Bichon, and it rekindled my interest in dogs.

I realized something: I wasn’t a cat person at all. I was an animal person. I found the love I had for animals wasn’t limited to a specific species or breed, it transcended such divisions. As I grew older I met others who felt the same. Some had lived with a special dog that changed theirs lives. I’ve even met people who had a special rabbit and parakeet. There are no dog or cat people at all. There are just animal people.

And it makes sense. We are after all animals. We are products of Nature and have evolved and developed as a species alongside other animals. We have influenced their evolution and they ours. Dogs. Cats. Horses. Cows. The history of all domesticated animals are intertwined with ours as a species, and so it should not come as a surprise that today in the modern era there are people like us who still treasure the company and care of animals.

But not everyone agrees. I’ve lived in places where animals were viewed no differently from inanimate objects – property to be used and discarded at will.

One way those of us who chant the mantra of “spay and neuter” can further help the pet overpopulation problem is by adopting more animals. If you have one dog, add another from a shelter. If you have two dogs consider adding a cat – preferably two – to your home. Most domestic animals prefer the company of others of their kind, and that is true with all the animals I’ve handled whether tropical fish, cats or horses.

You don’t have  to go crazy. I don’t want anyone appearing on Animal Cops. Adopting animals is easy; caring for them on a day-to-day basis is another. I’m running two litter boxes for 8 cats and have to scoop them daily. If I don’t disaster strikes, and honestly it is a chore along with all the other animal chores I have for caring for 8 dogs, 13 chickens and 45 gallons of tropical fish that make daily life a challenge. The idea is to save as many animals as you can properly care for, and that requires having the means to pay vet bills ($4,000 one year not too long ago), the time to exercise your dogs and lavish attention on each and every one of your pets.

Making room in our hearts and homes while proselytizing about the importance of spay and neuter programs, the immorality of breeding for profit, and donating time and money to your favorite rescue group or animal shelter will speed the arrival of a time where every animal is wanted and has a forever home as each deserves.

***And although I agree whole heartedly, in general, with the pattern of spay, neuter, adopt and repeat, but in some situations allowing a pet to have one litter can be a great choice.  It is an experience that you and your children will treasure, especially if you have never experienced it and especially if you have both pet parents in the home. But again… one litter is plenty!  And there are some possible health risks involved with pet sterilization (see articles below)…  AskMarion – JOMP~

If you have enough love in your heart, there is always enough room in your home to adopt just one more pet!!  And we are not talking hoarding!!  But the idea that homeowner’s associations and even city rules have been put forth that declare that 1,2 or 3 are all the pets someone can have is ridiculous.  Everyone is different and each situation is different.  Just as for some people having ‘no human children’ is the best choice, for others 1 or 2 is plenty and for still others 5, 6, a dozen or even more is perfect… so it is with fur, feathered or scaled kids.  It is all about love and being willing to take responsibility for another life (lives)… not about a number!

4-dog-card_Us… As-We-See-Ourselves th

Us.. Angel, Angelia, Apachi, and Princess th

Related:

Thousands of Shelter Pets Killed Every Day Yet Half of Americans Uninformed and Unaware 

Lucy Pet Foundation’s Rose Parade float promotes pet spay/neuter – Features Daniel

‘Miracle’ dog that survived gassing headed to Rose Parade

Why I’ve Had a Change of Heart About Neutering Pets 

Pet Sterilization Laws Raise Health Concerns

STOP Los Angeles and Other Major Cities from the Unreasonable Pet Limit Laws and Restrictions

Adopt Just One More Pet and Save a Life!! – Sharing a Great Pet Adoption Pet Story!! 

Taking Away More Liberties: WI Pet Ordinance Forces Homeowners to Choose — Your Pet or Your House

Southfield Implements Limit on Cats – Over Reaction!

Pet-Limit Laws Unconstitutional

Massachusetts Town Puts Limits on Cat Ownership

Three Nuns Adopt the Senior Pit Bull Nobody Else Wanted 

Should You Adopt a Second Dog?

‘Until One Has Loved an Animal, Part of Their Soul Remains Unawakened’ – Join the NO KILL MOVEMENT

February 7, 2014 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, Animal or Pet Related Stories, Animal Related Education, Animal Rescues, Dogs, Fostering and Rescue, Just One More Pet, NO KILL NATION, Pet Friendship and Love, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change, responsible pet ownership, Stop Animal Cruelty, Stop Euthenization, We Are All God's Creatures | 6 Comments