What I know - Why feeding a cat vegetarian/vegan food is no joke

I wanted to blog about this earlier in the week, but with April Fools day coming I thought this was a much more appropriate day to talk about this topic because I really wish I was kidding that there are people out there that choose to force a meat-free diet on a cat.

I have devoted a good number of posts about raw feeding and why I think it is a good idea and why I have such a problem with commercial pet foods. Fortunately, there are many more websites out there explaining the benefits of feeding raw, and how to go about it so I don't want to get into that here.

What I do want to talk about is how some companies try to confuse and obfuscate the consumer when it comes to feeding our cats.  They seem todismiss the absolute truth that cats are obligate carnivores and are designed to obtain everything they need from their prey - which they eat raw. When left to their own devices (without human interference) cats do not gravitate towards the plants that most pet food companies include in their diets. Pet food companies (which I will refer to as BPF from now on) tell consumers that adding things like fruit and veg in their diets is healthy. They count on the fact that humans know these foods are healthy because they are healthy for humans; because we are omnivores and are able to extract the nutrients locked away within those foods. Cats can not.

I have also seen first hand the health improvements raw food provides and had many more secondary accounts as well.

But that is not what this post is about.

Recently a BPF company introduced a new line of vegetarian (it contains egg) food for cats and dogs that claim it is a complete and balanced diet.

A canine and feline dinner of fresh potatoes, carrots, peas, blueberries, and cranberries from the market place with brown rice makes a flavorful and complete dinner. A healthy choice for pets susceptible to food allergies.

The outcry from cat lovers who understand that cats are obligate carnivores and that feeding them a vegetarian diet is a very bad idea. Especially since they contacted a number of cat bloggers hoping that we would pass along the information about this new diet which they were touting as an excellent option for weight loss.

Feeding your cat a diet high in plant matter will cause a cat to be malnourished

Because cats can not efficiently extract the nutrients in plants, feeding them a vegetarian or vegan diet means they will only get a portion of the nutrients you are feeding them. As a result, the cat will be malnourished and will beg for more and more food hoping to satiate their need. Cats who are commercial 'weight loss' diets often beg for food, because the food is higher in fiber hoping to keep the cat full longer, but that is not how it works in an obligate carnivore.

So why would anyone do this? The answer honestly confuses me. People I have run into that choose to feed their cats inappropriately usually do so because they have chosen to eat vegan themselves. I am guessing they take so much pride in the fact that they are not killing animals or being cruel to them to survive, that they feel the need to force that lifestyle on those around them forgetting that feeding a species something they aren't designed to eat is cruel.

I believe in the fact that cats need meat so strongly that I even refuse to feed a particular brand of cat food that only has plants on their label despite the fact they have a great deal of animal-based ingredients in it.

I really hate that now there are, at least, three brands of BPF that make veg/vegan cat food. These foods should come with huge warnings at the very least, much like tobacco products do. Some small part of me concedes that since people are going to feed their cats a vegan diet no matter what logic you throw at them, at least, there is a product out there that claims that the cat will get the nutrients they need and hopefully people will turn to them instead of feeding them on their own which is far more dangerous.

If it were up to me, these products would not be on the market. Sadly it is not up to me, but since this is my little corner of the internet, I get to stand on my soap box and say these foods are wrong. 

I will gladly talk about feline nutrition with anyone who wants to talk about it. I will help you research and learn about what is appropriate within the confines of what you are able or willing to do. I can point you in the direction of resources that aren't in the pocket of BPF.

The more we talk about this the better. You never know who might be listening.

The plant that is actively trying to kill your cat.

There are a lot of plants that are toxic to cats, but none is more so than the lily.

You hear warnings about mistletoe and poinsettias around Christmas, you hear warnings about daffodils and even peonies in the spring.  When you see an image on the internet of a cat with any sort of plant that is on the toxic list, you inevitably get someone piping up warning you that plant is toxic.

Generally, that toxicity means they have to eat a majority of the plant, and then they'll get some mild to moderate GI distress. It is by no means something you want to happen, but generally, the fears are quite overblown.

This is not true with the Lily.

The lily is the one plant where the fear mongering is actually quite warranted.  Every little thing about this plant is deadly to a cat (and a dog) and can kill your cat fairly quickly. Even with quick medical intervention a cat can still be at serious risk of death, and most cat owners have absolutely no idea.

This is one plant that you really should fear. This is one plant where you should speak up if you see it in the home of a cat lover as it can kill within hours.

Why do I make the pronouncement that the lily is actively trying to kill your cat? 

Because every single thing about it is deadly.  If your cat chews on the leaves. If your cat knocks over a vase of flowers and licks the water (or walks through it and then cleans the water off its paws). And then there is the pollen.

Most florists will pull the pollen stamens off a lily plant when they put it in a floral arrangement, but they can't pull them off the closed buds. The reason they do this is because this pollen is very sticky and it stains, and there is a lot of it.  As the plant goes through its cycle, the pollen naturally wants to fall off the stamen and spread itself in hopes of pollinating something.  So even if your cat doesn't eat your flowers, and even if it doesn't knock your plants over, your cat is still at serious risk if you bring lilies into your home. Cats just walking by lilies can die.

Sadly, most people do not know this and the giving and sending of flowers is a very popular way to celebrate, or sympathize, with a loved one. Florists appear not to be aware of this danger and since lilies are a wonderful statement flower that adds a lot of scent and pop to a bouquet they are quite favored in bouquets. I actually received a bouquet with lilies in it after specifically asking that there not be any added.

Because lilies are so toxic to cats and dogs, it would be so nice if the lily came with a warning label. Stores that sell them should put up a sign that says keep away from pets. Florists and websites that sell flowers should ask if these are being sent to a household with pets. Something. Anything.

Please, never be afraid of overreacting to seeing lilies in a pet lover's home. This is something that we need to take quite seriously.

Now, it should be said there are three very common forms of 'lily' that aren't toxic to cats or dogs, and those are the Peace, the Peruvian and the Cala lily, but if you are ever in doubt, err on the side of caution. Take the plant and the pet directly to the vet. The longer you wait, the lower your chances of survival.

When should I ask the internet for advice on my pet?

I was on Facebook the other day when I saw a post by the page Be Like Jill. Be Like Jill posts memes of a stick figure girl and then types a few lines of what Jill does or doesn't do which is in contrast to what other people do that is annoying, like blindly posting 'warnings' on the internet without checking facts or not showing up to a date on time.

This time, the meme was about getting advice on the internet.

and I saw it because the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) shared it on their page.

The hatred spewed forth in the comment section of these two instances of this meme being shared prompted me to want to create a blog post on this subject.

Having worked at a vet's office for a couple of years as a receptionist, I can tell you that there are a lot of people who make some of what this alludes to accurate and you want them to not ask strangers and wait to contact a vet, and especially not wait until Saturday morning at 11 am (when the vet closes at noon until Monday) to call in and say your dog hasn't eaten for a week and is vomiting all over the place.

and

Having spent a lot of time on the internet in pet based forums you see a lot of people asking for advice, and seeing a lot of bad advice being given, I want to agree with this sentiment. But having received a great deal of wonderful and helpful advice on the internet I bristle at the idea of blanket statements like 'don't ask the internet', or 'all advice off the internet is junk'.

When is it appropriate to ask for advice on the internet?

• when you seriously do not have a clue if what you are seeing is normal or not.
• when you have an issue with your pet and you are seriously out of your depths and want to talk to other pet owners who have gone through what you are going through.
• when you want confirmation that what you are doing is what other people have done and they have had good outcomes.
• when you are looking for resources to help you better understand what you are dealing with.
• when you have an issue and you legitimately* have no money to get the pet some help and you are looking for resources.

When is it not appropriate to take advice from people on the internet?

• if your pet is in immediate distress.
• if you are not going to listen to different responses to your problem
• if you are going to accept the first thing, or the easiest thing, that someone tells you as absolute fact 
• if you are unwilling to do some reading and looking for information on who wrote the article.

I think we have all been there, wondering what is going on with our furry friend and wondering if what we are seeing is normal. You don't want to call up the vet and feel like a fool (but don't worry, they have heard way way more embarrassing things than you can possibly imagine, they won't ever make you feel like a fool - and if they do you need a new vet). Asking the internet can be a very quick way of finding out if you have a situation that requires some medical intervention or not, especially if it is after hours and the vet's office is closed.

I also have come to learn a great deal more on how to care for my pet via the internet vs my vet. Talking with people who have dealt with the same issues I am dealing with can help me understand the situation I am in far better than a 10-minute visit with a vet (heck my last visit with the vet lasted barely five minutes).

I never want to discount the need for a good client/vet relationship. There are things a vet can do that "people on the internet" can not. They can tell the difference between a cancerous mass and a lipoma. They can put their hands on the pet and feel if the bladder is full or empty. They can run blood work and determine if a thyroid level is normal or elevated. They can take an x-ray to determine if a bone is broken or not, and if it needs to be set or surgically repaired.

But there are times when the vet simply is not well versed enough in a situation and learning more can help. I have seen cats with bladder being given convenia - which is off label - several times in a row despite it having a half-life of several weeks, heck I've seen vets give antibiotics when no infection is present. I've seen vets give very high doses of insulin to a newly diagnosed diabetic cat and not recommend home testing, heck I've even heard of vets recommend against home testing of diabetic cats.

There is bad information on the internet; 

 but there is also a lot of good.

From the very beginning of the interwebs, there has been some really horrible information out there. Vets and doctors have begun rolling their eyes at clients every time they start out saying 'but I heard on the internet' and completely dismissing what comes next. I think those vets are too complacent in their jobs and they feel they know everything. Those are the veterinarians you want to avoid. If a doctor is unwilling to help you understand why something you heard on the internet is not a good idea and even worse are unwilling to understand why something you heard on the internet might be a good idea, then that should tell you everything you need to know about them. If you can't question your veterinarian's decisions, and feel comfortable doing so, then you need a new one. You are not being a responsible guardian of your pet if you simply take the word of any one person about what you should do, even if that person is well trained or says they have a lot of experience.

Following blindly is foolish

*if you legitimately do not have any money to take care of your pet, there are resources out there. Call your local animal shelter or rescue to see if they can help point you in the right direction of local options. Letting an animal suffer from a medical condition is animal abuse and is against the law. If you can not find the money, please take your pet to your local shelter or rescue and surrender it so they can get the help needed.

Maine needs to pass L.D. 335 #CatsAgainstPuppyMills #adoptdontshop

Post by Say NO to Puppy Mills.

The State of Maine is poised to become the first in the union to ban the sale of cats and dogs in pet stores with the introduction of L.D. 335. I seriously hope they do.

I first heard of this bill through someone sharing on Facebook a news article done by the Portland Press Herald called How much is that doggie in the window made to suffer. It is an opinion piece supporting LD 335. What got me, however, were the comments..

Oh the comments on things on the internet.. one should always stay so very far away from those..

I was curious what the sentiment was of the people reading the article. I had a feeling of what I was in for because of the original post I saw on Fb, but I was still quite ticked off. Most of the comments by people from Maine (Mainers or Maniacs, you get to decide) were supportive of the article and the proposed law. There were a LOT of people from 'away' (as we like to call them) who wanted to get their two cents in. I am guessing most of them run or have some financial incentive to support USDA Commercial Breeding Facilities for dogs... aka Puppy Mills.

These people used very inflammatory words and arguments to try to encourage people against this government intrusion. They used words like 'retail rescue' to influence people into believing that rescues are just in it for the money. They cited high adoption fees as one way rescues were just in it for the money. They cited the fact that rescues are importing dogs from down south to 'sell' at their 'facilities' and 'events' (failing to call them shelters or adoption events) as examples of "Big Bad Animal Welfare Monopoly" trying to line their own pockets and pushing the little ol pet store owner around and making it impossible for them to run a legitimate business. One person even went as far as to wonder why Maine doesn't just ban pet stores all together - like there is no reason to go into a pet store other than to buy a dog.

I fear that some people will buy into the arguments. I fear some people STILL do not understand where that puppy in the window comes from. I recently had a co-worker who wanted a specific breed dog, and all of us here at the office encouraged her to find a breeder. She did, but the breeder was a responsible one and wouldn't have puppies ready for about nine months. This woman wanted one now. The breed is not very popular so there aren't many in rescues waiting to be adopted and the ones that were were old... We all counselled her on the dangers of mill dogs.. but she found a pet store that ASSURED her that they do not buy from mills, that they only buy from "reputable" "USDA inspected" facilities and the puppies were all in wonderful health.. so she bought the dog.. And that dog had a TON of health issues right off the bat, and I fear she is in for a long road of health issues that will pop up over the dog's lifetime. One opponent of banning puppy store puppies commented that with a pet store dog you get a health guarantee and you know what you are getting. Sadly that is not what happens in reality. Yes, the pet store will often take the pet back, but who wants to simply return a pup you have taken into your home? Cats and dogs are not toasters, you do not simply return the defective ones.

So this got me thinking, what do people really think when it comes to Pet Store Puppies?

I shared the photo above as probably what we think of when we think of "Puppy Mills" but what about those "reputable" and "USDA inspected" facilities? Do people really think these dogs ever see the figurative light of day? Remember these people are in this for the money so their first priority is to get as many puppies to market as they can. Dogs are kept in cages barely large enough for them. If they are lucky they might have access to run, but that would mean having to catch them if the owners needed to, which is time and work. They are usually on wire cages to facilitate easy clean up of waste. They do not have time to sit around and cuddle each one, give it kisses, play fetch with it. If you own a pet store puppy chances are it's mother sat with out love and comfort either pregnant or nursing until the day she died because she could not produce any more. If she was lucky, she might have been rescued by a local shelter, but that happens so rarely that chances are it didn't happen.

My co-worker got her dog from a pet store I stood outside of weeks before in protest. That store is now closed due to the poor health of the dogs being sold from it. There are four remaining stores in Maine that still sell puppies. One of which also assures it's clients that it's puppies come from 'reputable' commercial breeders - well I'm sure they all do, no one wants to use the dreaded term Puppy Mill - but just look at the photos and reports from these inspectors regarding the facilities. Now imagine the things that are wrong aren't there. Do you still think this is appropriate? Do you want your dog living this way? Do YOU want to live this way?

• Koster, Charlene & Darlene Minneapolis, KS USDA Licence # 48B0271
• Good, Alvin, Good, Mary USDA Licence # 43A5713
• Rottinghaus, Audrey (Wendy Pets) Seneca, KS USDA Licence # 48B0313

I could go on all day.

If you NEED to have a specific breed of dog, find a reputable breeder. They will want you to know about the type of dog you are getting and can discuss with you if that breed is something that will fit in your life style. I have several extended family members who said to me "If I had known then what I know know I wouldn't have bought this dog". They want you to know what you are getting, they want you to love the dog and love the breed. They want you to see the parents, learn about the linage and SEE where your dog was raised. Now in this day and age of Walmartization of everything (we want it NOW and we want it CHEAP) too many people want the type of dog they want and they do not want to wait. In that case know there are rescues for every single solitary breed out there because there are always people who thought they wanted that type of dog and then realized it was not for them. There are ways around supporting the cruelty that is the commercial breeding facilities. Remember that dogs sold online also are more often than not mill dogs. Best case scenario they came from someone who didn't get their dog fixed in time or wasn't diligent when she was in heat.

But Connie, I can hear you thinking, I would NEVER buy a cat or a dog from a pet store, so we're good. Let me ask you, have you ever bought a toy, or some food at a store that sells puppies? If so, you have supported the very system you stand against. How about having a conversation (or a blog post) about what USDA Commercial Breeding Facilities REALLY are.. so when people are assured the pets in the store aren't from mills they will know better.

and if you are in Maine, support L.D. 335

and if you aren't, you could always contact your senator and see if they might be willing to sponsor a similar bill in your state.

#BtC4Animals Bear Baiting

I live in Maine.  On the fourth day of November we will be asked to vote on a referendum banning bear baiting.

Here’s the exact language: “Do you want to ban the use of bait, dogs or traps in bear hunting except to protect property, public safety, or for research.”

The animal advocate in me says YES YES YES oh heck YES!, but the blogger in me wonders why the Maine Game Wardens and Biologists are saying vote no. So I went into this hoping to find some bit of logical sense in all this for the opposition, to educate myself and maybe learn something.

Before delving into all of that, let me share with you something. There are currently only twelve states that allow bear baiting. Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Maine is the only state in the union that allows all three methods that they are trying to ban in this vote, baiting, trapping and using dogs.

So, to find out why I should "Vote No on One" I went to savemainesbearhunt.com. I have been extremely unhappy with the "No on One" campaign commercials in general, using a lot of fear and intimidation, implying that without bear baiting, bears will be coming up and mauling your children in your backyard

There have also been commericals implying that there will be nothing that can be done if these bears do come up into your neighborhood and are aggressive.. (except the question says you can to protect property or for public safety) (interestingly enough the No on One camp does not have it's commercials on it's website but the Yes on One does.  There are some really good ones on there, but this is an exercise in why I should vote no.)

So again, why do they oppose this?




Reading "savemainesbearhunt.org" (do you find that name as irritating as I do? You can still hunt bears, you just won't be able to bait them or trap them or use hounds to hunt them) They are saying that with out these 'reliable" methods of hunting, the cull of the population would go down. That it is very hard to hunt a bear with out these methods, and with an increased population you will have increased aggression in the population as they go in search of food. A quote from that website: "Consider: A year ago, hunters shot 2,845 bears in Maine. Of those bears, at least 2,633 — a whopping 93 percent of the total harvest — were shot using the methods that may be banned come November." *  Well considering these methods are legal, and cheap and easy, who wouldn't use them?? I don't think that is much of an argument.

However, reading their own website and reading the history of bear hunting, one has to wonder what the biologists and game wardens are thinking. Currently the cull is below management levels they themselves set and the population is increasing anyway. The history of bear hunting is that we used to do it twice a year, now we currently only allow it once a year. If hunting bears is so hard and getting rid of baiting would make it that much harder, why do we not allow increased time for hunts? Why are there still caps of two bears per hunter? Couldn't better management of the population occur with a fair hunt if done right?

Another reason they say we should allow baiting and trapping is because it allows for a 'cleaner kill'. I can't really fault that reasoning. Apparently a running bear is kinda hard to hit and can cause a hunter to wound the animal and not outright kill it. When this happens with a deer, it is not hard to imagine the hunter tracking the deer through the woods to either claim his deer or finish it off and then claim it. With a bear you run the risk of running into an injured bear being mauled. Okay, point to the baiting, but it also seems to be more fair to allow the bear the chance of getting away. If you want a bear sitting still when you shoot it, set up near a berry bush, or somewhere else a bear would naturally forage for food.

Interestingly enough, the Vote No on One camp admits there are no statistics on how many bears eat at traps and are never killed. They do claim that bear population isn't influenced by baiting, but I can't see how they can possibly claim that. There is a nice chart on this video showing the population waxing and waning, but would it go lower if there weren't millions of pounds of food put in the woods to 'feed the bears'? I don't know about you, but I grew up on Yogi Bear and learned from a very early age not to feed the bears. Feeding bears gets them used to people and gets them used to coming around populated areas.. They bait bears in the same area year after year, making the bears used to being able to find easy food.

So tell me again why are we baiting bears?

While looking for videos of the commercials playing on our airways on youtube, I came across this video of a fisher cat at a bait station. So how many other animals are we feeding, because no one is required to take the food up when they aren't watching it. And if you didn't know, fisher cats also prey on house cats.

Now I should probably tell you I am not a hunter (you have probably guessed that anyway) and I really abhor the idea and the practice of hunting, but I do fully accept that unless we cull the herd, the population will explode past the point of the land being able to sustain the animals and they will suffer and starve. They will also encroach on to land that is 'occupied by people' and become a nuisance (even though they were here first) and harm will most likely come to either a person or the bear. I also accept that if the hunter is going to use the animal for which he hunts and not discard it to simply display a trophy on a wall (or a rug on the floor) that the kill has a purpose. The meat can feed a family and keep a cow or a pack of chickens from being killed. Trophy hunters are abhorrent to me.

There have been other states that have banned baiting. According to one of the Yes on One commercials, when they have banned baiting in other states they were able to maintain a stable bear population.

So, voting no on one will make it easier for people to hunt by making the bears come to the people, and hopefully allowing for a cleaner shot, and they won't have to take fifteen days to find a bear to shoot.  *sarcasm on* oh yes, let us vote no on one *sarcasm off*

I really was open to finding an actual reason why we should continue to allow baiting, using dogs and traps to maintain the bear population. I don't think it would have changed my mind in voting no, but I was hoping there was something other than 'it is easier' as a reason.

(I know I'm late on BtC, but I wanted to blog about this, and it took a while to do all the reading and catch the commercial I wanted to share)

Really Iams? Really??

So I was watching Animal Planet the other day when I saw the following commercial. If you haven't seen it, please take a look at it. See if you can spot what got me all disgruntled. (and for once it isn't about the food - although that is a whole different subject all together and yes, I can get all indignant about that too)

So did you see it?  How about now?

The Before screenshot

The During screenshot
(yup, Iams can photoshop a few pounds off a cat.. impressive)

The After screenshot

So how many people think these are the same cats?  I'm not even convinced the during and the after are the same cat although it is hard to tell because of the angles.. and the cat eating out of the bowl at the end.. a different cat..

Generally this wouldn't be an issue for me in a cat food commercial, as you have specialized cats that can perform specialized tricks. However when you start saying this is the before and the after,  and this is the same kind of results your cat can achieve, you kinda need to use the same cat. If you don't you are now in the same field of scammers as the before and after shots of humans on diets on your facebook feed.. or in the back of rag magazines.

And since this is "Camo and Anna"'s commercial, I would think it would be important that an actual cat named Camo would be featured in it.. (oh come on Connie, this is TV, it's acting, it is all show, but STILL.. where is the truth in advertising?  oh wait.. I just answered my own question)

*sigh*

Since I totally expect this kind of shenanigans from Iams, I'm not bothering to write to them and complain, they won't care. But I could not just let this go without saying ANYTHING..

because.. really?!?

So tell me, are you okay with this? Am I being overly sensitive?

What I know - Seresto for fleas and ticks, is it worth it?

I have been seeing a lot of advertisements on blogs lately for Serestro, mostly because they have been sponsoring posts on blogs I read.  I am always pretty leery of new products for cats, especially when they are made for both dogs and cats, and I wanted to hold reserve judgement for this product until it had been 'out in the wild' for some time.

Having seen yet another 'blogvertisement' for it recently, I thought it was time to look into it and see what kind of reactions it is getting.  A quick trip over to Amazon.com and a click on the reviews is eye opening.

Before we get into that though, what is Seresto?  Seresto is a collar you put on your cat designed to kill fleas and ticks for eight months and costs anywhere from $50-$80 (there is also a $20 rebate on it if you go to their website). It is made and distributed by Bayer, and according to their website includes two insecticides Imidacloprid (to kill fleas) and Flumethrin (to kill ticks).

Imidacloprid has many brands and formulations for a wide range of uses, from delousing or defleaing animals to protecting trees. It is currently used in Advantage - also made by Bayer. In doing this research I've come to find out that Imidacloprid is one of those most toxic insecticides when it comes to honey bees.

Flumethrin, according to Wikipedia, is used for both fleas and ticks, and is actually used to help control mites in honey bee colonies..

You are supposed to put this collar on your cat and it is supposed to safely and effectively kill fleas and ticks for eight months.  This means the collar slowly releases these insecticides over an eight month period.  Sounds good doesn't it?

Well back to those reviews.  I went to the Bayer website and read the reviews posted there and according to the reviews there, it has a 4.2 out of 5 rating.  I have always maintained I learn far more about a product from the 1 and 2 star ratings than I ever would from the raving reviews, so I asked the site to filter me the 1 star reviews.  There were 152 of them, and most of them were from dog owners claiming the product did not work. Fleas and ticks abounded in these dogs. One cat owner said the collar came off after a few short days. Another cat owner said the collar did not come off when the cat got it's jaw stuck in the collar and had harmed itself trying to get it off.

However, Amazon reviews are vastly different. Granted these reviews are on the cat collars only, but most of the reviews there talk about hair loss, sores around where the collar is, lethargy, neurological issues and in a few instances death.  Talk about scary!  Now granted, even Frontline and Advantage have some cats and dogs who have very bad reactions to them, but one reviewer said two of her cats that were not related had issues.  How many people have issues who do not report them?

If your pet EVER has bad reaction to a medication or insecticide, PLEASE report it to your vet, and ask them to report it to the FDA This is the only way we can protect our pets. A lot of people consider a mild reaction not worth reporting, but it is.

So Seresto has a 4.0 out of 5 rating, with 210 five star ratings and 50 one star rating, but the 1 star ones scare me. If it were just a matter of continuing to find fleas and ticks on the pet, I would be much more open to giving this a try if I had an issue with fleas and ticks, but neurological issues and death? I would be hard pressed to say those risks were worth it.

Might these side effects be from the fact that counterfeit products have made it into the supply chain? Sure. This would not be the first time that counterfeit flea products have made it to mass market. Reading the reviews it seems that many people wrote that they purchased the collar from their vet, which makes this a bit less likely.

So.. Is Seresto worth it? I'm going to say for my cats, who are indoors and never get fleas and ticks, absolutely not. We have gotten fleas in the past and Frontline Plus works well for us when it happens. Fortunately I haven't seen a flea in several years. When I went to the clinic, the vet found it odd that I don't regularly apply it to my cats, and even did a flea check when I said no. I do not believe in using product unless there is a direct need for it. Would I consider it if I had a flea infestation and Frontline or Advantage (purchased from my vet because of those counterfeit products) weren't working? I am glad I do not have to go there.  At a 20% (66 negative reviews out of 316) risk of a problem, to me, that is just not worth it. To you it might be, but now you know to keep an eye out for any lethargy or any negative symptoms.

NBC's The Secret Lives of Pets is hogwash #PetCrazy

So I was looking for things to watch the other day and saw that NBC was airing an hour long special on the Secret Lives of Pets.

Are you a pet lover? Then don’t miss The Secret Lives of Pets on @DatelineNBC tonight at 10/9c. pic.twitter.com/H2anblJanK
— NBC (@nbc) September 11, 2014

I saw the Today Show do a segment on cats earlier in the week, so I was interested to see where they were going with this. Let me say this, I think the show was justification for Hoda Kotb to talk about her dog for an hour.

My biggest problem with this show were the cat 'experts'. John Bradshaw is the director of the Anthrozoology Institute at the University of Bristol in England and is touted as the author of “Cat Sense” making him sound like he is a cat expert. Looking at NBC's own profile of him though, he also studies both. This will make a bit more sense when I get into this.

They also tout Martha Stewart as a cat expert because she has a line of cat toys and has four cats.

The third expert they have seemed a bit more legitimate, but she got very little air time. Mieshelle Nagelschneider is a Harvard trained cat behaviorist (They have cat behavior classes at Harvard? really?)

Okay, so why am I calling this show hogwash? Not even a minute into the show, you hear this:

Hota: Some people when they look at cats, they think, they don't care about us..
Martha: I don't think they do care about us

This sets the tone for the entire show (save for the segment by Mieshelle and the bit by Jackson Galaxy, but those don't talk about how much the cat cares)

So Mr. Bradshaw doesn't think a purring cat is ever a happy cat. The bit on the TV (sensationalized you know) with a great big negative sign over the "Purring cat = Happy Cat"

The purr doesn't actually mean happiness, the purr is there to get you to do something. It is an instruction.

Seriously? Now granted, I will go with the fact that a purring cat doesn't always mean it is happy. Cats purr to self soothe, but I highly disagree with his assumption that it is an instruction.

So how about Cat with Toy = Cat at Play?  They say no to that one too. Mr. Bradshaw says they are hunting.  Well yes, yes they are. Cats hunt. Is anyone shocked at that? What does he expect them to play pinochle? Why does he think that they can't play at hunting? This part really REALLY gets me:

Bizarrely we found that if a cat is hungry it will play more intensely than if it is fully fed.

Why is this bizarre? The cat was designed to hunt to get food, so it is designed to want to hunt more the hungrier it gets... so this is inherent. Nothing bizarre about that..

So about 25 minutes into the show Hota does a voice over bit that says

but if you really want to figure out cats, there is really only one thing to know. They are LONERS. Solitary and territorial. This means while they may like living with you, hanging out with cats is often a different story. Can you say "Cat Fight" (insert videos of cats fighting here)

and back to the interview with Mr. Bradshaw

Hoda: is it a good thing to have multiple cats living in the same environment?
John: Well if you set about it the right way, you can do it, but it is not something that anyone should set out on lightly

Okay, yes, but you shouldn't set out on owning any pet lightly, period. And while I've never had dogs, I doubt you should set on having two dogs in the same environment lightly either. But back to the show. Enter a woman with three cats that do not get along. In the segment she is sitting on the floor holding two cats, one in each arm, forcing them to be with in inches of each other. They have Ms. Nagelschneider come over and say feeding them all in the same spot is a problem and you should feed them all over the house, upstairs and down stairs, east and west because they are solitary hunters and would eat alone. She then finds problem with playing with all of the cats at the same time again mentioning how it brings out aggression. I have always fed in the same general area. I hate side by side bowls, but I feed all of my cats in the kitchen, but then again I meal feed instead of free feeding. And play might bring out aggression in the beginning, but done properly it drains energy out from a cat and helps them learn about each other and helps them 'speak the same language' if you will. Like Jackson Galaxy likes to day: Hunt, catch, kill, eat, groom, sleep.

I do like her quote about litter boxes though: Where in nature do cats all go and urinate and defecate in one spot? As well as her quote about the cat owner: She wanted to learn to think like a cat, that is the perfect cat owner.  Yup, I can't agree with that more.

Then the show goes on to talk about the "special gifts" of cats and dogs and they have a hero dog that saved its owner when she was stuck in a canyon. And a dog who is a service dog for a young girl, and then a cat who senses when people are going to die. So dogs are heroic and cats are morbid? How about the story of Tara? or Slinky Malinki?

The show ends with a "which is the better pet" segment where they get opinions of people on the street. They even did a poll on their Facebook page according to the show. I don't know how many of you watch NBC news not-news segments, but if you do, you will have come to realize pretty quickly they are very dog centric over there. I am not shocked in the least that the fans of NBC's facebook page are dog centric. But to then go on to say..

Hota: it has come down to this dogs vs cats which makes the better pet
John: A pet for most people would be a dog, if you have the time to look after it
Hota: did you just say dogs were the better pets?
John: for people who have plenty of time to look after them. For people who do not have so much time, it's a cat.

This is the 'cat expert' that they have had on several times, touting him as a cat expert, and he is saying if you don't have any time get a cat?  Seriously? Doesn't he know the more time you invest in a cat the more loving and responsive your cat is going to be? People who think cats are loners and have no use for you are people who have cats who are loners and they have no use for their people, because the people have trained them not to depend on them for affection. As someone who starts out the day with four to six cats on her, purring, snuggling, cuddling, in one great big cat pile of love, it FLOORS me when people say cats are loners and aren't affectionate. (Now for those of you who think they just want something, please know my husband gets up before I do and feeds the cats, so they are wanting nothing but to welcome me to the day)

The dog expert Brian Hare gives one of the better quotes in the cat vs dog 'debate' on this show. He said: That's like asking me if a hammer is a better tool than a screwdriver. Well done Brian.. well done indeed. It is very very true. Cats are so different from dogs that it really is an apple vs orange issue.

They end the show with Martha Stewart. They like her because she has a line of pet products for both cats and dogs (and also more likely because she works a lot with NBC [is she partnered with them? on contract? I couldn't find an answer on a quick google search, but you know they are affiliated because she shows up on the Today Show a lot])

Hota: we asked people which were better pets. Clearly people think dogs make better pets than cats.
Martha: well because they're needy, and they are obsequious
Hota: the people?
Martha: well both, so a dog will come and put his paw on you and look at you with those soulful eyes and want to be, want to be nurtured. (said in a loving nurturing way, like one might talk to a child) A cat couldn't care less. (said with almost dismissal or even disgust) 

I find it fascinating how her whole body language changes when she talks about dogs and when she talks about cats.

Martha: I like the idea that cats are independent, as opposed to dogs who are totally dependant. Cats come and go, they will be cuddled when they want to be cuddled and they will not be cuddled if they don't want to be cuddled.
Hota: Some people when they look at cats, in general, they think they are lone rangers, that they are a little haughty, they don't care about us..Martha: I don't think they do care about us. I really really don't. I think they will put up with us.

Why is it qualities you admire in a person (not cuddling when they don't want to) are traits to be put down when they are held by a cat? When you invest time in a relationship, that relationship blossoms. Cats are like little mirrors, and they give you back what they take in. As I type this, I have five cats surrounding me. I have had to kick Jack and Muffin off me more times than I care to count because I didn't want them messing up my typing. At this very moment he has his paw on me and he is looking at me with those Puss and Boots eyes.  Kit is snuggled up with my husband, her absolutely favorite place in the entire world to be. She loves him with reckless abandon. Fleurp has now shown up.. so we have six..  I wouldn't say my cats are obsequious, because they are not here to serve me, but they obviously love me and my husband and want to be near us whenever they can.

The post where I get on my soap box and rant.. again

Rene over at ATC contacted me regarding an article she saw in the May 2014 issue of Reader's Digest. She wrote a post about it, asking people to write to RD and tell them what we felt about the last two "secrets" they shared..   Yes, I was a little bitter when I wrote to them.  Rene encouraged me to share my words here since I told her I sent her an email

So in the May issue of your magazine you have an article "50 Secrets Your Pet Won't Tell You".    I take extreme exception to this article.. as none of them are really secretes, and worst of all you started dabbling in something you had no business dabbling in, pet nutrition.
"Secret" 49 regarding 'hype' about grain free food.  Who told you it was hype?  Pet food makers?  Maybe you went to an actual vet who told you this, but were they ever trained in nutrition?  Did this vet tell you that dogs and cats have COMPLETELY different nutritional needs (and the same goes for every other pet species, rabbits, birds, etc so making such a blanket statement regarding pet food is not only lazy reporting it is incompetence) Cats are "obligate carnivores" and if you do not know why that means cats shouldn't have grains in their diets, let me hand you a dictionary..
http://dictionary.reference.com/
How about you talk to a veterinarian nutritionist, one who has actually studied feline nutrition like Lisa Pierson DVM over at http://catinfo.org or Elizabeth Hodgkins DVM who wrote the book "Your Cat"  and then go consult one who studies canine nutrition.  I don't know any off the top of my head as I am an a feline advocate, but I'm sure you can find one rather easily.  http://lmgtfy.com/?q=canine+nutritionist
Lest you think I'm ragging on vets, please note that if YOU have a question of nutrition beyond 'eat more fruits and vegetables' your own doctor will refer you to a RD or an RDN (which if you aren't careful will land you in the pocket of big food - http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/10/10/how-ada-are-manipulated-by-food-industry.aspx )


As for #50, yes, raw diets MAY cause cracked teeth or bacterial infections, but you do know that more 'cooked' and 'processed' foods have been recalled for bacterial issues then raw right? How about all of those foods that have been tainted http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/2007-04-19-pet-food-usat_N.htm
I personally had a problem with a commercial treat product I purchased. Getting the company to accept any responsibility for the issue is impossible, and most companies dismiss individual claims using the excuse that anything could have caused it..  Just as GM did with their cars for 14 years..

Do you know why the ASPCA, the CDC and the great and awesome "Prevention" discourages raw diets? The ASPCA follows the JAVMA, which follows the money.  The major pet food companies donate a lot of money and do a lot of 'research' that supports their food products as being the best alternative (why wouldn't they, they have a financial stake in the outcome.  It would be like if PepsiCO studied the healthfulness of Pepsi and then spent millions of dollars to convince the RDs of the world that their product is fine in moderation - oh wait.. they did http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/10/10/how-ada-are-manipulated-by-food-industry.aspx )  The CDC is against it because of their absolute fear of salmonella and ecoli.  While it is appropriate that we are aware of these and other bacterial contamination, using basic sanitary practices and being aware of where you source your food - something we should be doing anyway because I don't know about you but I am not all that interested in eating killed ecoli or salmonella.
Pet food companies believe they can provide food that is 'complete and balanced' for your pet.  I find this claim fascinating in the fact that we still don't even know everything there is to know about nutrition in general.  The more the 'experts' dabble in our own health the unhealthier we are getting as a society.  Back before we had "health experts", most of the human population was thin and relatively healthy.  Moves to reclaim our health harken that we need to return to traditional foods turning away from processed foods and food like substances that were invented in the last 100 years..

it is not nearly as difficult recreating a pet's natural diet as you might thing.  Some meat, some bone, some organ.  Try to keep the bone size down to something akin to what the animal might actually take down in the wild.  A cat would never take down a cow, so giving a cat a cow bone is silly.  Yes a cat would eat dead cow if it came across it in it's travels since a cat is not above being a carrion, but on the whole if you stick to smaller prey, the cat's teeth and digestive system were designed (either by design or evolution) to rip flesh from bones, crack bones and consume them.  You will not find a wild cat who breaks into grain stores or hunts down wild corn.  Although you will find them frequently hanging out in those areas to catch the mice and the birds that feed off those grains - which is how cats became domesticated in the first place.
I have a feeling you don't really care if these 'secrets' are accurate or not, but I in good conscious could not let this go with out saying something..

Connie
Webmaster of kittyblog.net
foster home for kittens since 2002
owner of 7 raw fed cats - several of which are alive simply because they are on a raw diet.

The post where I get on my soap box and rant..

So I was surfing twitter and ran across this..

Thanks Ontario Vet College for hosting the Hill's Nutrition Symposium last Sunday! I had a great time at my alma... http://t.co/kWt2HSZvVU
— Susan Little, DVM (@catvetsusan) April 8, 2014

and wouldn't you know it, Hill's is still putting on nutritional symposiums for vets... and vet colleges are still hosting them and giving their sponsored pitches weight and gravitas they simply do not deserve.

Those of us who take up the cause - that commercial cat foods might not be all you are told that it is - learn that vets do not actually study "feline nutrition" so turning to your vet to find out what foods you should feed your cat is kinda like going to the guy who paints your car telling you what gas to buy.  People who go into the veterinarian field do take a nutrition class, but from everything I have been told it is an animal nutrition class and focuses a lot on large animals: cows, horses, etc while minimally touching on pets. Yes, they can continue on to focus more on different aspects of nutrition, but it is not required.

Remember your own MD doctor did not study nutrition, and refers you to a registered dietitian when you have questions of nutrition.. only more often than not the vet doesn't do that. Vets often rely on the nutritional information they are given by major pet food companies in the form of hand outs, pamphlets, fliers, and yes, continuing education courses such as that mentioned above. I do not want to believe that a majority of the vets do this maliciously, but because colleges continue to allow pet food companies to 'teach' nutrition, they simply rely on them because it is easy. The pet food companies also take on the legal issues if there is a problem with the food, which also covers a number of other issues for a vet. So, they are told by their collage these companies are right, they get gobs of information from the company saying they are right, they get the legal coverage, and they make money when they sell the product.  Who can turn that down??

I do hope you take a minute and go to the website for this "continuing education" "class" mentioned in Dr. Susan's tweet.. does it look like it was hosted by Hill's??  It doesn't to me, but yet Dr. Susan says that it was hosted by them, and they are prominently featured in the only photo there. (There is some more information and more pictures on this Facebook page)

Gee.  I wonder what foods this symposium is going to say is the appropriate food to be feeding. And for the love of all things scientific, why oh why is there a topic in this symposium for feeding OBLIGATE CARNIVORES that lists 'carbs' before proteins???

Topics included: “Feline Feeding Management: It’s Not Just the Food,” and “Cats, Carbs and Protein: From Research to Cinical Practice.”

(and yes, that is exactly how it is written on their website.. typo and all)

*sigh*

So when you hear someone talking about the importance of nutrition in your cat, and they tell you the vet is in the pocket of "big pet food" - this is why.  This has been going on forever, and it apparently has no intention of stopping.

I know it is an over generalization to say "your vet knows nothing about feline nutrition" and it does a disservice to those vets that do take the time when we say things like that.. and maybe you are one of the lucky ones who has a vet who actually learned what an obligate carnivore is and figured out feeding a diet high in corn, or wheat, or potatoes, or peas, or cranberries, or squash, or spinach....oh lets just go with plant based ingredients or I could be here all day... is not a good idea and decided to do a little more reading on the subject. If so, you have one of the good ones. Bring your vet some flowers or brownies next time you go in and say thank you.

If you aren't one of those people.  If your vet's lobby is covered in Hill's or Royal Canin, or bags of dry food, with lots of sponsorship looking logos all over the place, take what ever advice on food they give you with a grain of salt. There are a lot of great resources out there to help you understand what your options are for what ever your vet is suggesting and you really should look into them even if you end up following your vet's advice.  Remember, your vet works for you.. if you ever feel that you are in a situation where that is not the case, feel free to find a new vet.

A Matter of Trust

In case you feel like listening to it

So I have been thinking a lot lately about trust.  It is an integral part of what I do with kittens, engendering trust.  I spend a good deal of time getting kittens to trust me, trust their environment, and trust in strangers.It is interesting working with Odilia, because I have to consider if what I do normally actually works with those that can not see me.

I do spend time thinking of new ways to help build trust - yes, I know I'm a little odd and I am OK with that - but as a result I often think of how odd our world is.  We go through life trusting a great deal and often taking that for granted.

We trust that other people want to drive carefully and not hit us.  We trust that most people aren't going to  break into our house.  Yes, we lock our doors and we keep an eye out when we are in strange places, but we do go out, and we do not live in dungeons.

We know full well that people could do these things, but for the most part, we do not expect it because we trust..

We also trust in the corporations that make the products we use.  We trust they will make a safe and effective product.  We trust they will make foods that are healthy and good for us. We trust pet food companies to make foods that will keep our pets healthy.

If we trust but verify with our home and our car, why do we not with foods?  Well food and nutrition is much more complicated.  right?? if so, how are we still here on earth?  I mean before all this "science" we some how figured out how to feed ourselves.  So why do we not trust ourselves any more?  Why have we handed over this trust?  The more I learn about food and nutrition not only for myself but for my cats, the more I am shocked at what corporations have been able to get away with.

And now I have just found out I had my trust has been violated by a corporation in a very specific way.  I am so very upset about it.

Remember my trip to Kansas recently?  Well during that trip one of the women left early.  We were given the impression that she was not feeling well.  Well when I saw her at BlogPaws, she told a different story. She told us there were bedbugs in her hotel room and she was bitten.  I have to say it is very possible that she was making it up, but I trust that she wasn't.

I was less then thrilled at how she said she was treated.  I would have thought the hotel would have bent over backwards to make this right.  I do not blame the hotel in the least for having bedbugs, but how they deal with it makes all the difference in the world in how I feel about the situation.  And beyond how she was treated, I am quite bothered by the fact that they didn't tell those of us staying at the hotel.

I mean wouldn't you have wanted to know they were in the building so you could take extra precautions to ensure they did not enter your home???  I know I do.  I believe the responsible thing would be to take the possible hit on the chin and tell us all but they chose not to.

To make matters worse, neither did Hills.  They knew and they also did not tell us.

Bedbugs are not easy to get rid of, and to allow us to blindly go on not knowing.. to put us at risk like that..

I didn't like the way Hills did business before this.  I seriously do not like them now.

Blog the Change - Catswell

Back in January, I got a couple of packages of Catswell cat treats, and I fed them to The Crew.  Most of them did not like it, but Jack, oh my dear dear Jack, will eat anything, ate up those I gave to all of The Crew. Shortly there after he started showing signs of urinary crystals.  It progressed to the point I was fearful of it and I took him to the vet.

It has been a very slow road back to recovery.  There have been several times I thought he was better only to find a puddle of urine in the tub, or on the bathroom floor (or on the washing machine - really Jack, the washing machine?? what on earth... *sigh*) and so I continue to nurse him and make sure he continues to heal.  But at this point I feel the need to write to the makers of the product that caused this mess.

Catswell SOUNDS like a good and healthy product. The packaging hits all the buzz words in marketing for people looking for good and healthy products... "natural" "grain free" "no corn" "no soy" "no gluten" "no byproducts" "no antibiotics" "no added hormones" "real salmon" "Cage free chicken" and have names like "Happy Hips" and "VitaKitty" What you don't see, because they wrote it in VERY fine print in white on a yellow background, which makes it very hard to see is the "Made in China" stamp..

Chicken from China has a VERY dangerous track record.. Please, be aware of where your food products are coming from!

Well anyway.. I was finally comfortable that Jack isn't going to get any worse (update, yeah, about that.. not so much..), so I was writing my letter to the company and in the back of my mind I was contemplating what I might write for the Blog the Change this go around.. when I had one of those D'OH! moments. This is something that we need to change.  If it is not safe for us to consume due to how it was raised/produced, then it is not safe for our kitties..

Below is the letter I wrote and sent to Catswell / Dogswell  I do hope they take it seriously.

Catswell

c/o Dogswell

1964 Westwood Blvd.

Suite 350

Los Angeles, CA 90025

Dear Catswell

I wanted to write to you regarding an experience I had with your product earlier this year.  I apologize for my delay in writing, but I wanted to make sure the aftermath had completely finished before writing.

So earlier this year I was given an opportunity to receive two free packages of Catswell products.  I went to my local PetSmart store and got a package of Happy Hips and a package of Vitakitty.

I opened the package of Vitakitty first.  I have seven cats.  Many of them gave it huge paws down and refused to eat it, a very unusual occurrence in my household, as most treats are gobbled right up.  My eldest “Jack” however enjoyed all the treats I had dispensed for my cats. 

This was the only change to his diet in a very long time.  He has had several rounds of issues with urinary crystals, so I am careful what I feed him.  I liked that your products stated that they had no hormones, antibiotics, and more especially no fillers: no corn, soy, wheat, etc.   I read over the ingredient list carefully and while I wasn't thrilled with the plant based sources of added nutrients, I assumed it couldn't possibly have enough to have an effect on him.

What I missed was the very small ‘Made in China” fine print at the bottom.

Very shortly after feeding your product (and as you can see by the enclosed package, he did not get all that much) Jack started showing signs of urinary problems.  By the time I got him to the vet he was peeing blood and it was leaking out of him.   It was EXTREMELY unnerving for both of us.

Fortunately we have dealt with urinary crystals in the past and knew how to take care of it.  After an x-ray and an exam we gave him pain meds some additional supplements that have helped him in the past.  Slowly he recovered.  Several times I thought he was 100% only to find him peeing in the tub or on the washing machine.

At this point we haven’t had an incident in a while, and while I am not quite ready to say he is back to his old self, I am ready to say that it isn’t going to get any worse than this and my fear of what might happen to him has abated somewhat.

My beautiful boy did not deserve this.   You promote such healthy sounding products.  You sucker those of us who care about what we feed our pets with all of the current buzz words, while hiding the source of your product in fine print so fine it is easily overlooked.

Made in China; three words that have led to the deaths of so many companion animals.  With all the product contamination out there I can’t believe a company so seemingly interested in providing a “healthy” product would sell it.

Please find enclosed both packages of Catswell products I purchased, as well as a copy of the bill for $239.60 for the exam, x-rays and pain medication.

I would very much like an apology and for you to reconsider the source of the ingredients of your products.  I would also like to be reimbursed for the vet care. 

Sincerely,

Connie 

Cat Person /Rescue volunteer / Blogger

No-Kill Nation

Can someone explain this to me?  I see shelters killing animals simply because there are not people knocking down their doors to get pets, and they do not have the time, the space or the money to care for them.  We do not kill animals because we want to (as a whole, yes there are exceptions to that but lets pretend those don't exist for this discussion) we put them down because to allow them to remain alive is... well inhumane.. when there isn't space, time or money to care for them.

If we simply chose not to kill them, where would they go?  There are people who will not be convinced to get an animal from a shelter no matter what.  There are people who are not ready for an animal now for what ever reason.  I can easily say I want another pet because I so totally do.. does that mean I add to the "demand" column even though I am in no position to take on another pet??

I want a no-kill nation badly.  I so want to believe.  I live in an area where our open admission shelter (aka a kill shelter) is using the no-kill model and is doing a fabulous and amazing job getting pets into homes.  Even with all the wonderful work they do, many pets don't get to stay in their homes and are returned to the shelter.  I also constantly see pets outside of this shelter looking for homes and not being able to find them.

So I metaphorically stand at the threshold of an open admission shelter and wonder where these people are.  Nathan Winograd says thousand of people want pets.. why then do we have to convince them to come get a shelter pet?  If what he says is true, why do we not hear the communal outcry for the need for more adoptable animals?  Why do pets on community bulletin boards sit and never find a home and end up a the shelter?  Why do pet store puppies and kittens outgrow their adorable youth stages and go on sale or go to a rescue? Why do free to good home kittens and pups not find homes?  Why is it the cat or dog on the local news that survived some tragic situation have thousands of people wanting to adopt it while every other animal in the shelter just sits there and wonders why when that one pet is adopted they don't get to go home too.

Nathan says all of these people are looking for pets.. but are they looking for pets like smokers are looking to quit or the couch potato would like to exercise?

Sometimes 1+1 does equal three.. (for very large values of one) but on the whole, that is not how the world is working.  Should we strive to change it? ABSOLUTELY!! but to imply that everyone can do it RIGHT NOW! seems to me to be cruel.  To imply that shelters are killing pets that could easily find a home just hurts.  Too many pets can not find homes. There are *thousands* right now in the US waiting for one, and a thousand more being added all the time..

I am totally open to being wrong.  If you think you can explain the dichotomy to me with serious discussion, I am so open to that..

Owner dying wants cat euthanized

So I am on Facebook, surfing pictures of cute kittens, and every now and then my feed is interrupted with images of kitties who are on "the list".  You know the one, the list of animals scheduled to die.

I hate those images.  I totally understand them. People can't stand by and do nothing (good for them) and by sharing sometimes pets get saved.  Sadly often they do not.  The reason I hate them is because often people who are in no position emotionally or financially to do something have their heart strings pulled to the point of breaking and they have to do SOMETHING.  Sometimes they take in a pet that they really shouldn't, putting an emotional and financial burden on not only themselves but everyone (and every pet) in their lives.

But often the "something" is that they lash out.

Case in point. An elderly owner is dying.  The owner has no options for the three year old "Pumpkin" and brought it to the vet to be put to sleep.

Horrific right?  There has got to be a home for such healthy kitty.  But lets remember this owner is dying.  No one is stepping up to take Pumpkin with in the owner's circle of family and friends.  What options are there?  Put an ad in Craigslist or in the paper?  Sure, but that takes time and energy and you still don't know for sure what kind of life your kitty will have.  Will it be loved and cared for or will it just exist, or worse be used for bait or something else?  Most people rule out bringing an animal to a shelter.  They don't want their beloved cats sitting in a cage being traumatized with all the other animals and noises, before either being adopted by 'someone' or being put down.  Doesn't it seem like a more humane option to have the kitty's life end in love? (I am not condoning this, but I can understand it)

So my heart breaks for Pumpkin, and Pumpkin's owner faced with a beloved pet having to live her life with out everything she has ever known or loved.  As I'm reading over comments about the situation to see if someone was able to help Pumpkin, I see so many negative comments..

• vets who would even considering killing a healthy cat should not be practicing!! 
• I cannot believe how selfish this owner is to say that, a healthy cat, the right answer find her a good home. 
• The owner should step it up and donate some money to 'Pumpkin's' new owner to help with future housing/vet bills 
• A lot of things piss me off in rescue, and this is at the top of the list. Killing your perfectly healthy pet because you are dying. There are always options!

How is attacking the owner helpful?  How is attacking the vet helpful?   You do not know the owners situation.  What if there is no money because the health care system drained it all? Most people do not have the resources to network to find a cat a new home - and remember this person is dying, how much energy do they have. Even when pets are networked so many of them are unable to find homes - remember a companion animal is killed every eight seconds because there are not enough homes and resources to care for them all.  What makes Pumpkin special?  Why is Pumpkin more deserving than the thousands of others looking for a home right now?  I bet you there are at least a thousand three year old healthy cats waiting right now.  Do they not all deserve a home?  

There are no easy answers to this post.  I abhor the idea of killing Pumpkin.  There are times when I contemplate the end of my own life and I can not stand the thought of what would happen to my cats.  There is no one in my life that would take on seven cats.  I can barely see anyone taking one.  I am very very thankful that the shelter in my area has such a wonderful adoption rate, and the chances of my cats finding new homes if the unthinkable were to happen would be pretty good.  They know me, they would do right by my cats.  But if I lived in a high kill community and I knew I was dying and I could not find homes for my beloved kitties... 

As much as I would like us to be a no-kill nation, I do not see that happening.  Maybe one day when we take care of the human beings that are falling through the cracks - the homeless, the hungry, the mentally challenged,  the abused and neglected - maybe then I might believe that no-kill is an option everywhere.  Until then I accept that kindly ending a beloved pet's life instead of letting it face the unknown is sometimes should be an option.

not that I do not think people should help to help find a home.. but I by no means would be saying cruel things about the people involved.

No means No.

Sorry, no kitties on this post.  It's my blog and I'm gonna rant if I want to.

I have a very strong aversion to having my photo taken.  When I see people with a camera I tend to run and hide.  No one around me really understands it, and I can't really explain it, but a good part of it boils down to the fact that I can not stand to see myself in photographs.  Just having a camera go off in my general direction makes me EXTREMELY uncomfortable.

My husband is constantly telling me to relax when family has a camera because they want record of my being around and I won't ever have to see the photos, but inevitably I see them... and I hate it and resent that people don't respect my feelings.

My work is redoing their website.  They took photos of all of us (except me because I refused) last year.  They want to redo them for the new website.  Once again I declined.

Well my boss - the owner of the company - brought his camera in to work today and was taking photos of people.  I hid out of view when I saw that he was pointing it towards me.  Everyone laughed.  Oh silly Connie, she's just silly.  No one seemed to care care that I didn't want my photo taken.

At one point he stood on the far side of the room with his camera, and so I hid.  It was hard to finish up my work (have you ever tried to work while hiding behind your desk?) so I kept peeking to see if he had moved on.  He hadn't.  He sat there waiting.  I told him no.  I told him I would have to leave.  I peeked again and heard the click.

I suppose I should have been a little more forceful in my no.  I should have said things that I would have felt was very rude especially since this man signs my paychecks. But these should haves are akin to 'blaming the victim'.

After I finished up my work I went over to his desk and told him I was extremely uncomfortable with his taking my picture.  He blew it off and said that no one knows who I am because they have never seen me. I told him I like it that way.  I tried explaining that I had been harassed pretty badly online once before and one of the few photos I have shared was brought into it, and he said that someone used his photo to complain about him too and he just blew it off (cause your feelings have anything to do with mine!! grrr and having someone complain about you is NOTHING like the harassment I went through) and so I went back to I am very uncomfortable with my photo being taken and I did not want it going anywhere.

He seemed to tap dance around it... throwing out words that indicated to me he has no intention of deleting the photo.  Not in a mean way, but very much like an adult talking to a child who is asking something silly.

Why can't people accept that no means no.  I don't care if you don't understand why someone is saying no.  I don't care if you think they really mean yes (like when you offer them coffee or something to eat and you fear they are only saying no because they don't want to be a bother - aka "are you sure?"  I'm pretty sure that if someone say no, they knew what they were saying) To continue on with your 'harmless" activity after someone told you no...  is simply wrong.

Please.  The next time someone says no to you, accept it and respect it.  Even if you don't understand it.  Especially if you don't understand it.