Jackie's Blog

Next time you’ve finished going through the check out line in the supermarket look down the list of items on your receipt. As you glance down at all the stuff you bought focus on the pet foods that you’ve bought, chances are there will also bill be a little “t” or “x” next to the Friskies or Mighty Dog or birdseed. These little marks are the not-so-secret code that signifies your state and local governments are also sinking their teeth into these pet food purchases.
States that have a sales tax on purchases all apply that tax to pet foods. The same is true for any municipal or county sales tax that is added above the state tariff. So, the revenuers get a bite of every meal your companion animals eat.
According to a just completed poll of PawsToTalk.com readers, 92 percent of the pet owners surveyed thought that pet foods should be exempt from state and local sales taxes. Removing the sales tax on pet foods would save pet owners anywhere from 2 ½ to 8 percent on their annual pet food bill. These few pennies a can or bag can add up to significant savings over the course of a year.
Contrary to the beliefs of most pet owners, our political leaders do not consider pets as necessary components of an enriched life. The foods that we all eat everyday are not taxed because they are necessary to our existence, but the foods necessary for our pets’ lives are taxed. Likewise, pet foods are not allowable expenditures for the USDA food coupon program.
It’s the case where the can of tuna that you buy for yourself being tax exempt, while a similar can of tuna for your cat being taxed. It’s basically the same product, so why is the can with the cute kitty charged the extra tax? Here’s a tip – feed your cats a human brand of cat tuna (my cats actually prefer a cheap brand of human tuna to the pet brands).
If the sentiments expressed by the people responding to the PawsToTalk.com poll are shared by the larger population of pet owners than there is foundation for a movement to exempt companion animal foods from sales taxes (livestock feeds are already exempt in most states). I know that in these economic times state and municipal budgets are stretched but so are those of most citizens.

Soon your cat may have more followers on twitter than you do. That’s right, if Sony has its way kitty will be sending updates on how its day is going to all its loyal internet fans.

In order for Princess to become the Queen of Social Media she will have to first be fitted for a special “Lifelogging” collar. The prototype collar was recently unveiled at a technology show in Japan. Developed by Sony and the University of Tokyo, the tweeting collar can detect what your cat is doing and send a tweet to twitter via a Bluetooth connection. The collar contains an accelerometer, which detects movement, GPS and a camera, so that it knows what the cat is up to and can send one of 11 pre-set phrases to Twitter.

Okay, so this collar is smarter than my computer – it may even be smarter than the cat that’s wearing it. Plans are to make it even smarter by adding more detailed descriptors to the list of possible tweets and more camera options, perhaps someday your cat will have its own web site with streaming video of its entire day.

No offense to my feline readers but most cats don’t have what you’d call fascinating days. Cats spend the vast majority of their day sleeping. Not much to tweet about there. Add in the time a cat spends preening, eating and visiting the litter box and you’ve accounted for a big chunk of its day. They have bursts of activity during which they won’t want to stop to send a tweet.

The question is do we need any of this. With all the problems in this world that could be helped by developing technology it seems a little hollow showcasing a technology to get Tabby on Twitter. However, I’m sure my cat will soon have hundreds of Twitter followers anxious to know how it is spending its day. We’ll get an RSS feed so everybody can know immediately whenever he rolls over, stretches or when it’s time to clean its ass. I believe that this intimate knowledge of his activities may even lead to Roman getting his own reality TV show. Roman – there’s call for you, it’s the Discovery Channel!

I went to the pet shop and fell in love with the cutest little ball of fur sleeping in the window. I knew that I’d wind up taking the little pooch home with me. I was beginning to think up names when I spotted a small tag attached to its little curly tail:

WARNING: The Surgeon General Has Determined That Loving This Dog Can
Be Hazardous To Its Own Health!

A warning label – was I about to purchase a puppy or a pack of cigarettes?

While the above story isn’t quite true, it may soon happen to those looking to bring a puppy or kitten in their home, especially if that home is in Florida. According to the Associated Press the state legislature of the Sunshine State is debating a bill that would require pure-breed puppies and kittens for sale to come with a warning label. While the warning won’t physically be attached to the animal, the effects would be the same – to warn would-be buyers that pure-breed puppies and kittens can carry some hidden genetic traits that can one-day lead to the onset of diseases.

Worried about protecting the unsuspecting public from potential health problems State Senator Larcenia Bullard has introduced a bill (Florida Senate Bill 122) that would require anyone (breeder or retailer) who sells more than 20 animals a year to add a warning notice to the information that they provide to buyers. The actual warning reads as follows:

Dogs and cats are susceptible to more than 300 genetic disorders.
Certain breeds may be predisposed to certain health problems.
Therefore, it is recommended you get a scientific screening test for
your dog or cat to help you identify a number of genetic diseases.

While I’m all for providing the consumer with all the pertinent information they need to make an informed decision, I think that Sen. Bullard has gone slightly off the deep end with this legislation. Just look at the wording of the proposed warning. It only serves to scare some prospective pet owners away from making the commitment. Purchasing a puppy or a kitten is often a very emotional decision, so posting this glaring warning confuses more than it enlightens. “If I buy this cute little baby, will my kitty die?”

The warning gives no specific information but suggests that the owner take their new, expensive friend for a round of probably very expensive genetic tests. It would seem that the time for genetic testing would have been on the parents of the puppy or kitten – which is something that most conscientious and professional breeders do. So, in a way this bill is really an insult to good breeders.

Warning of more than 300 genetic diseases is pretty scary. In fact, according to the University of Pennsylvania, there are actually over 1,000 hereditary diseases that dogs are susceptible to and over about 250 in cats. So, why sugar coat the problem Sen. Bullard? The point is that with good breeding management and reputable retailers who buy from reputable breeders there should be no need for warning labels. It may be more important to screen the breeder you are dealing with, or if you’re buying from a store find out who the original breeder and distributor are. Many states require a money back guarantee on puppies and kittens in case of any undetected illnesses as a way of protecting pet owners.

By the way, we humans are potentially susceptible to many more than 1,000 hereditary diseases. Perhaps we need to have warning labels as well. Maybe a warning should be tattooed in certain discreet places on our reproductive apparatus – you get the picture!

Last week’s Global Pet Expo in Orlando showed once again that the way people spend on their pets can herald an economic recovery. If the manufacturers who were exhibiting their latest pet products and the retailers walking the aisles at the nation’s largest pet industry trade show are correct than consumers may well be ready to spend again, at least on their favorite companions.

It has been said that the two most recession-proof industries are the grocery industry and the pet industry. After all, you have to eat and so do your pets. You may trade down to a lower cost food, cat litter, dog coat, smaller bird cage or fewer hamster tunnels, but you still buy your animals the necessities. Despite being in a better position that many other industries the pet industry suffered as well in the current economic downturn; many retailers closed their doors and more pets were sent to shelters as their owners could no longer afford to take care of them.

If those business executives and retailers at the Global Pet Expo are correct in their outlook then we have reason to be optimistic. Pet product manufacturers are starting to see orders from retailers increase for the Spring and Summer seasons. They have responded by investing in bringing new products to the market. Compared to five years ago when some of the larger manufacturers would debut 50 or 100 new products at the show, the number of new products this year is fewer but still higher than those introduced over the past two years. Pet manufacturers are also making the larger investment to introduce complete new lines of products instead of more versions of their standard products.

The executives attending the show may be optimistic but it’s an optimism that is tempered by the realities of two years of slow sales and poor consumer reception for many of the industry’s new products. Consumer sales of pet products are starting to move ahead slowly. “We’re seeing pet owners spending more per shopping trip, as well as starting to buy more of the non-essential products (toys, clothing, etc.) again,” said one executive from a large retail pet chain.

The bottomline is that if the activity at the pet shop or in the pet aisle is any indication of the rest of the American economy then we are slowly moving ahead.

It seems that pet owners are always a good target for anyone trying to make life just a little bit tougher for a particular segment of society. Once again we’ve been singled out on so-called quality of life issues. I’ve always wondered how when politicians say that they are trying to improve the quality of life in their areas, just whose life quality they are referring to because it is usually not mine or anybody else that I know.

Here’s a good case in point. This week the town bigwigs in Piscataway, NJ enacted an ordinance against “excessive dog barking.” Actually, the town already forbid canine serenades between the hours of 8:00 pm to 8:00 am – which seemed fair and is common in most towns. The new regulation extends the prohibition from just the overnight hours to 24 hours a day. No dog excessive dog barking at any time!

I have a question for the town fathers, or mothers as the case may be. Just what is “excessive” barking? Is it one bark, 10 barks, an hour’s worth of barks? Does it depend on duration or on decibels? It seems excessive barking, according to the new ordinance, is in the ear of the beholder (or listener). Excessive barking is whatever the person making a complaint says it is. If your dog barks once because a cat ran across the lawn, or he bumped into the dresser, and someone complains – that’s excessive. If a dog howls for hours and nobody complains – he’s a good puppy! Kind of reminds me of the old question of that tree falling in the forest but no body is around to hear it – does it still make a sound?

What happens in Piscataway is that when a complaint is made Animal Control send the offending party a letter. This doesn’t seem very effective, if you can’t even get the dog to stop barking, how are you going to get it to sit down and read the letter? Piscataway officials claim that they received 400 complaints about barking dogs last year, which may be significant since Piscataway is not a huge metropolis. So, the mayor and town council jumped into action to save the citizenry from some evil canine plot.

The point is that it seems arbitrary to single out dog owners as opposed to any other type of noise maker. There’s no special ordinance for excessively crying babies, or for young children making noise. I’m not saying that there should be, but why then the ordinance for dogs? People will argue that it’s very hard to stop a baby from crying well it’s just as hard to stop a dog from barking. They may be scared, or protective, lonely or just like to talk – some dogs are just barkers. Of course training helps and there are those anti-barking collars but dogs will be dogs.

Certainly, the town has a right to regulate the amount of noise pollution within its boundaries and most people respect their neighbors. General noise ordinances exist in every municipality, so why have a special one just for dog owners?

So starts a new journey. PawsToTalk is about pet owners, animal lovers and all those who have an interest in pets of all types talking to one another about anything that is on their mind. Have an issue that has been bothering you, want to vent a little, or just relate something cute that your pet has done - Jackie’s blog on PawsToTalk is the place to do it.

The blog is meant to compliment the feature stories found on PawsToTalk homepage. It’s the place for readers to comment on the articles or to add their own experiences to the stories. For instance, one of the current stories, Half-Pint Sized Pets, deals with the emerging popularity of so-called Tea Cup Pigs. If you’ve had some actual experiences with these little pigs or did you have a Pot-Bellied Pig back a decade or so ago - join in the conversation and let us know what the real deal is with these animals as pets. Suggest new articles or ask questions about your own pets, answer somebody else’s question. It’s an open forum, please use it.

Speaking of fad pets there’s a situation going on now in California concerning the over-abundance of homeless Chihuahuas. It seems that residents of the state, responding to the example of several celebrities ran out to get these sweet little dogs. Unfortunately, times and tastes have changed and thousands of Chihuahuas across California found themselves in shelters or abandoned on the streets. It has literally become an epidemic with shelters throughout California overcrowded with the little dogs. The problem has gotten so bad that the shelters have started transporting the homeless Chihuahuas to shelters across the country. Shelters in New York, Texas and Colorado, among others, have already found homes for the West Coast emigres.

This brings up two points. The first is that we’ve got to encourage this type of interstate communications and coordination of adoption services. We saw the start of this cross-country cooperation in 2005 after Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast and created a crisis of homeless and abandoned pets that eventually made their way to shelters across the country. Enhancing this type of cooperation will result in better allocation of shelter resources as well as more rescued pets finding homes.

The second and more serious point is the way certain people think of animals. The Chihuahua experience in California has taught us that we place much too much emphasis on celebrities and fads, even up to the point that some people will run out and buy a pet just because Paris Hilton or some other celebrity walks around with one. Since when did a living animal become a fashion accessory for someone in the spotlight?

Would-be pet owners need to stop and think about the commitment they are about to make before they run out and follow their favorite celebrity to the pet store. Chihuahuas, while cute little dogs that make great pets, are not stuffed toys, they are animals with their own individual personalities, are very energetic and can be quite rambunctious, which is why we like being around them, Chihuahuas are dogs not some fad that can be readily discarded once the owner is tired of it. Maybe we should institute some sort of waiting period before a person is allowed to buy a larger pet (dog, cat, bird, snake) such as is currently done before someone can purchase a handgun. Not so much as a period to do background checks but more as a period for consideration by the buyer so they can truly make the commitment to their new pet. What do you think?