|Home | Bookmark | Tell||Active petitions in over 75 countries||Follow GoPetition|
Petition Tag - pets
D-LIMONENE IS A DANGEROUS CHEMICAL TO OUR COMPANION PETS.
Dogs experiencing epidermal necrosis associated with d-limoene are usually in pain and systemically ill. Anemia and liver and kidney damage may also occur. Supportive care is usually essential until the condition resolves. Severe forms of this condition are similar in severity to what is seen in third degree burn victims, with extensive skin damage resulting in skin sloughing, depression, shock, coma and often death. See Kirk's Current Veterinary Therapy XIII 1999. pp.556; Muller and Kirk's Small Animal Dermatology 1995; pp.590; In studies & cases from Journal of Venterinary Medicine, AVMA, EPA, NIH, CDC, WHO, NLM, TOXNET, PUBMED -- D-limonene's health effects on dogs and cats have documented to cause eye, skin and lung irritation in varying degrees, also exhibited hypothermia, tremors, paralysis, central nervous system effects, respiratory effects, behavioral changes, ataxia, agitation, seizures, liver & kidney failure, septicemia and other life threatening skin disorders. This chemical is being used to satisfy the "natural" marketing ploy for pet manufacturers. "Natural" does not mean harmless. Its benefits do not outweigh the harm it can do. People love their animals and they need to be made aware of this potentially life threatening chemical before another pet becomes so ill or dies.
Dog and cat owners deserve to know this type of knowledge. I experienced it first hand with my dog Ginger what illeffects d-limonene can cause. Even I as a doting pet owner never knew of this problematic chemical.
My dog Ginger cannot tell how much she suffered or her fear of almost dying, so I will.
Effective April 1, 2012 the Nova Scotia SPCA will suspend cruelty investigations province-wide. The society will no longer be responding to allegations of abuse, neglect or cruelty. This is due to inadequate sustainable funding.
As animal lovers it is our duty to ensure a safe haven for any animal that is wrongfully treated.
Current animal welfare acts in countries such as UK, USA and Australia have been reformed in the past 10 years and now go a long way towards protecting animals, however they do not go far enough and The Dog Express would like to see unity, standardization and a universal approach to animal welfare acts, especially where it concerns domesticated and working dogs.
We call for much tougher penalties and sentences when acts of cruelty, neglect and suffering are committed as 51 week jail sentences and £500 fines are not a deterrent to these kinds of people. We call for prison sentences with a minimum of 6 years where the death of a dog or cat is the result of neglect or cruelty and lifetime bans for any act causing unnecessary suffering.
We also call for sentences, fines and bans to be imposed on those who knowingly fail to report or stop any act of animal cruelty, as those who do nothing as just as accountable as those who commit the crimes.
Thousands of live animals are trafficked daily on Kijiji classifieds worldwide; even by CONVICTED animal abusers! Kijiji has NO POSSIBLE way to pre-screen sellers, nor ensure that buyers are not supporting ill practices.
Ask Kijiji to HALT the sale of live animals on their website, with the exception of valid / confirmed animal rescue organizations.
We are against animals being sold in pet stores, such as Pets at Homes or Pet Paradise, because:
- Most animals come from rodent farms, where they live in tiny, dirty accommodation and disease is spread quickly. This is in no way a moral way to breed. See: http://www.brecklagh.com/petshops.html
- Store staff are often untrained and give incorrect, appalling and dangerous advice. This leads to animals being treated badly, which goes against the Animal Welfare Act, the owner's duty: http://animalrights.about.com/od/animallaw/a/AnimalWelfareAct.htm
- People are able to buy animals on the spot without much thought, leaving animals to end up neglected, as the ownerr don't realise the effort they need to put in looking after them, or the animal is not how they expected to be like.
- No home checks are required. The animals can be sold to anyone. It wouldn't be right to let a child be adopted by a random stranger and animals are no different to humans.
- Animals are simply breed for money. There's no research behind genetic problems, which can be fatal for the animal or cause them to have a miserable life.
- Why not RECUSE these animals? Because you are just providing more funds for them to breed and collect more animals in these conditions. It stop it, we need to decrease the demand for them.
- Animals SHOULD come from responsible, trained breeders or rescue centres, who are willing to give home checks to make sure the new owners are fully prepared and loving for their new arrival(s).
- If we don't stop stores from being able to sell live animals, more and more animals will end up neglected, in bad accommodation (due to there being no home check), with genetic problems and not at all content! It's no fair for them to be treated this way as we all aim for equality and peace in this world. We believe this extends to animals, not just humans. We were all created for a purpose and we must love and respect each other, no matter who we are.
Recently, many colleges have been changing their rules to allow students to bring their pets into the dormitories, including many of our nation’s top colleges as well as many other women’s colleges.
Many studies support the idea that pets reduce stress and increase overall happiness, and different studies suggest that pets may aid students in doing better in school. With college being one of the most stressful times in our lives, we feel that the allowance of small pets in the dormitories should be established, as well as the designation of Pet Halls to allow for spayed/neutered, vaccinated cats and dogs in specific dorms.
The animals we want allowed in the dormitories are small mammals (hamsters, mice, rats, gerbils, chinchillas, ferrets, guinea pigs, etc.), certified non-venomous reptiles, and the increase of the aquarium limit to 20 gallons.
It's based on well established research showing that the single most frequent reason stated by surrendering pet owners for relinquishing their pet to the shelter is "we're moving".
That translates as "it's too hard to find a rental that will allow me to keep my pet".
So let's eliminate or minimize that cause of shelter surrenders. This should also decrease the pets left to die inside abandoned foreclosed houses. This should decrease the numbers simply turned loose to fend for themselves (and create problems for citizens).
Pass a country ordinance that adds the category "pet" to the list of categories landlords are prohibited from discriminating against in rental housing.
Preamble: Introduce a bill requiring all veterinaries to scan for microchips on all incoming pets seeking service.
Rats are some one of the most misunderstood pets in our society. Often portrayed as diseased, dirty pests, the pet rat is as far from it's wild counterpart as a domestic dog is to a wild dingo. Pet rats can be trained to do tricks, can be litter trained, are disease free and are in fact incredibly clean and clever animals.
Many shires and districts across Perth have the following by law (or similar) that restricts the sale or keeping of rats and instead lists them as pests along with mosquitos and cockroaches, regardless of their domesticity.
"(1) Subject to Sub-section (2) an owner or occupier of premises shall not, on or from those premises -
(a) keep or permit to be kept a rat; or
(b) sell or offer for sale or permit to be sold or offered for sale a rat."
Horrendously, scientific and research facilities are exempted from the ban but rescue centres, healthy rat breeders, and everyday domestic rat lovers are included!
Please sign this petition asking the Department of Environment and Conservation to allow all citizens to keep domestic rats, regardless of their location!
In Ontario, there is currently a law prohibiting landlords from discriminating against people with pets. In Alberta, that is not the case. If you search on kijiji.com you'll find pages of ads from people in desperate need of a home that allows pets, or you'll find animals being given away or sold because people cant find a home that will allow their pet.
Thousands of perfectly healthy and loving pets end up in animal shelters or rescues or abandoned because their owners just cant take them with them. Sadly, older dogs are not exempt to this and often go into a shelter and never come back out. Perfectly good homes with huge backyards that would be a pet owners dream come true, are listed as "no-pets" or "small pets only". A person with a quiet well behaved great dane is not accepted for the home but another person with a destructive and excessive barking chihuahua gets the home.
The humane society takes in over 13,000 animals each year and that's just the humane society. Children are often far more destructive than a pet, yet most homes are "family friendly". Pet owners consider their animals a part of their family as much as their children. If they move, they expect to bring their pet along.
Thousands of other animals end up in various rescue societies or are passed through several homes or put down. Not every animal is destructive and there should be a law against landlords denying a person to rent from them due to owning a dog or a cat. You can hold an irresponsible owner accountable for damages done to your property but you shouldn't deny everyone with a pet the opportunity to prove that they are a responsible owner and tenant.
Join with the American Kennel Club to express your concerns about the harsh and unintended consequences that the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposed regulations (RIN 0579-AD57) to redefine “retail pet store” would have on responsible small and hobby breeders.
Under the proposed regulations, breeders - who maintain more than four “breeding females” and who sell even one puppy sight unseen, by any means (including online, by mail or by telephone), would now be regulated as commercial breeders by the USDA. The effect of these proposed regulations would be to take away the public’s opportunity to obtain puppies from some of our nation’s top breeders who in many cases, have dedicated their lives to breeding for health, breed type and temperament.
Under current law, the federal Animal Welfare Act exempts from federal oversight “retail pet stores,” which sell puppies directly to a final customer for use as pets. This exemption means that most non-commercial small or hobby breeders do not have to be licensed and regulated by the USDA. The proposed rule rescinds the exempt “retail pet store” status of anyone selling pets at retail to buyers who do not physically enter the breeder’s facilities in order to personally observe the animals available for sale.
The rule also requires anyone who owns more than four “breeding females” and sells puppies, cats or other small/exotic pets “sight unseen,” by any means, to be licensed, regulated and inspected as a USDA commercial breeder.
The AKC shares the USDA’s concern about substandard Internet puppy sellers that operate outside the current regulations. However, the unintended consequences of this proposed rule create unreasonable hardships on small hobby breeders. This rule could threaten the future of a vast number of small responsible dog breeders and the very existence of some rare breeds in the United States.
The rule creates an unfair burden on small breeders who may depend on the ability to place dogs very selectively in known situations without physically meeting with the purchaser at the specific time of sale. Likewise, many hobbyists are comfortable purchasing an animal sight-unseen based on known pedigrees, bloodlines, previous relationships or personal knowledge of each other’s facilities and programs. Such scenarios are particularly common and necessary for breeders and fanciers of rare breeds. The proposed rule does not make allowances if the purchaser is willing to sign a waiver of an in-person sale requirement.
It is unreasonable to expect small breeders, who may keep a handful of intact females in their homes, to be able to meet exacting USDA commercial kennel engineering standards that were never intended for home environments. Other pre-existing restrictions such as local ordinances, insurance or licensing may also prevent hobbyists from adapting their facilities.
Hi I’m Excalibur and this is my mummy doing this for me. A few years ago my mum couldn’t look after me properly due to her health. So rather than watch me get unhealthy etc my mum made a hard decision to let me go to a foster mum to look after me.
My mum and the lady made a contract where when the lady didn’t want me I was to come back to my mum and also my mum is still to be my legal owner and keep paperwork except passport which was given to lady as passport has to be with the horse by law. The contract was like a loan out.
The lady was supposed to keep in contact and send regular updates which she did then the lady stopped contacting mum about year ago and mum didn’t know where I was. As mum couldn’t get in contact with lady and got no reply off her or any of her family, mum sent lots adverts on facebook, lost and missing or stolen sites and any other sites searching for me .Everyone was trying to find me. Then mum got a message on her facebook from an old friend of the foster lady saying i was in a sanctuary in Norfolk. Mum was so happy she got a lead and she rung round all the sanctuaries and finally found me in HILLSIDE ANIMAL SANCTUARY. Mum was overjoyed.
She arranged a visit to make sure it was me and has been to see me several times. What mum didn’t know and when she found out she was very shocked was that I’d been in the sanctuary for over 2 years. The foster lady had lied to mum when she said I was fine and at hers still. What upset and DISTGUSTED mum alot more is that I have a microchip with mums name on it. The sanctuary didn’t even scan me and they took me in WITHOUT a passport which if any of us public did we’d get arrested and fined for it. The worst thing is I’m stuck in the sanctuary because even though my mum is my legal owner, the founder and owner of HILLSIDE ANIMAL SANCTUARY, WENDY VALENTINE has refused twice now to give me back to my mum and hasn’t given a reason why.
Mum thinks this is hypocritical as if a member of public did this they would have to give the animal back to its real owner and even if they paid out for any vets, food, etc they won’t get compensated or receive very little. My mum is fighting for me all the way as it breaks her heart being so close and yet so far.
Mum’s other concern is if they haven’t scanned me and checked my details, how many other stolen or missing animals have they got and all it takes is to scan or check details and check any missing animals databases to make sure the animal they have received isn’t stolen etc and make a phone call to reunite all those other poor people and their missing babies. So please sign the petition to help gain a change in laws and also feel free to contact Hillside Animal Sanctuary on 01603 736200 and ask them, especially Wendy, why my mum can’t have me home where I belong and also to check if any of your missing pets are actually with the sanctuary or any other sanctuary for that matter as it seems I’m not the only one with this sort of problem and it is a problem up and down the country hence the petition.
(PLEASE DO NOT WITHDRAW ANY DONATIONS OR SUPPORT FROM SANCTAUIRES ETC AS IT IS NOT THE ANIMAL’S FAULT)
Green practices sweep the nation and our individual communities, yet we have found that there is at least one useful practice that is not allowed in Pinellas Park, backyard poultry keeping.
Backyard poultry keeping is not permitted for residentially zoned properties in Pinellas Park even though it is allowed in other cities in Pinellas County. Even the keeping of potbellies pigs is allowed but not the raising of the much more environmentally friendly and productive chicken.
We believe that allowing backyard poultry in Pinellas park will promote individual sustainability practices and public welfare without sacrificing the safety or health of the citizens in our county.
Most Americans are aware that animals are abused and neglected daily. It is a saddening fact. There are many groups and organizations who aim to stop this cruelty to animals, such as the ASPCA. However, domestic animal abuse is not the only problem. There is another terribly depressing issue, which completely violates animal rights. Worse yet, our American government is doing very close to nothing to stop it. This is exactly why we, as citizens of the United States of America, must speak up and act out, in order to call on our government to fix these problems.
Overpopulation is a huge problem. Dogs and cats are overpopulated as is, yet greedy breeders and puppy mill owners get more and more each and every day, for the sole purpose of money. Although some puppy mills and breeders might actually care, many are careless when it comes to the wellbeing of the animals; they only want their money. As a result of this greed, numbers of euthanized animals are skyrocketing each year.
There are statistics now that in recent years, seven to eight million dogs and cats wound up in animal shelters. Of that ridiculously high number, three to four million were euthanized by the shelter due to overpopulation or disease. This is an absolutely outrageous HALF of the dogs and cats who go to a "shelter" annually and end up dead. All because said breeders and puppy mill owners continue to make more.
This petition is to have Legislative Assembly of the Province of British Columbia re-open or pass a similar bill to BILL M 203 -- 2000 PETS IN RENTAL HOUSING ACT, 2000 (http://qp.gov.bc.ca/36th4th/1st_read/mem203-1.htm), amending the Residential Tenancy Act.
In 2002, a poll conducted for the BC SPCA by McIntyre and Mustel Research, indicates that a majority (79%) of BC residents are in favour of legislation that allows pet guardians the right to keep companion animals (i.e. cat or dog) in their rental units, provided they do not cause unreasonable noise or damage.
Once again the people ask the province listen to their VOICE in this regard and enforce their WILL. The people have a VOICE and both the people and the animals deserve a LIFE with dignity. Let the people's voice be heard!
Why can I own FOUR dogs that may be up to 34" tall and weigh potentially over 190 pounds EACH such as St. Bernards, Mastiffs and Great Danes that is over 700 pounds of animal in one house! But yet I can't own a 30" tall, 100 pound goat? They are quieter, safer, and can be used as therapy animals. Many cities including Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Nashville, St. Paul, St. Louis, and even New York NY allow goats as pets.
Plus having goats is one more way for the city to make revenue with licensing fees. It's a win win for everyone!
Gunner is beloved by many and missed by his friends already in RP World Group. Gunner adds value and fun to the pages and needs to be with his family and friends.
It's not right to continue to exclude him from the group. Please send this link your family and friends, anyone who is an avid reader. We need all the help we can to overturn this decision.
THANK YOU! We love you GUNNER!!!!
At present, there is compulsory quarantine for all pets entering Australia, from 1 month to 6 months depending on where the animal is coming from. There are also some countries from which animals must complete 6 months quarantine in another country before being allowed to do some quarantine in Australia.
Apart from the fact that quarantine is exorbitantly expensive it is also considered inhumane in many countries, particularly when pets are coming from countries that do not have rabies or vaccination rules that are equally stringent to Australia.
Europe introduced the PETS program which allows pets from most countries in Europe and a large number or non European countries (including Australia) to move freely around Continental Europe and the UK without any quarantine.
Animals face an extremely long and stressful flight from other countries to Australia and are then expected to stay in a concrete floored barred cell for at least one month rather than experiencing the comfort of being with their families. It is true that families are allowed to visit their pets, but quarantine places are usually in distant locations with their permitted visiting hours usually only during working hours, when presumably pet owners will be at work.
By keeping fish for almost 30 years, we have witnessed first hand the thousands of creatures that are treated with It's just a fish attitude, and found out they are not just a fish. They have personality. They think, they feel and they have individual personalities. They have good days and bad days. They like some people and others they run from. They bring us joy, laughter, and greet us when we approach them. We hear the peoples complaints. We would like to speak FOR these creatures (In a language everybody can understand).
STOP THE KILLING!
Our proposal is not to shut the whole thing down but properly educate the hobbyist, the pet store owners (and staff), and wholesale facilities on how to care for these pets properly. We have less than a 1% loss by practicing a few simple principles and using virtually NO chemicals. We should not be playing vet. with these creatures lives. They get 14 feet, You can't let them go and the Aquariums won't take them.
Please help us STOP THE SALE OF NURSE SHARKS TO PET STORES.
Shelters all across America are euthanizing thousands of pets daily, from overcrowding of shelters,some in very inhumane ways, gassing chambers that leave most still alive, but unable to move that are stuffed into barrels, or plastic bags waiting to go to the landfill, and heart sticks.
We need to stop this by making it mandatory to have pets fixed, unless they have a breeders license. This will put an end to back yard breeders, Hoarders, and unwanted pets. We can stop these deaths by passing this law, please do the right thing, and stop the killing now.
Parakeets, such as the one pictured, are beautiful birds. They are very popular as pets in the UK, but many people get one without doing their homework and researching the species first. When they realise what's involved in looking after one, they simply release it into the wild.
Now Defra are saying that they could pose a threat to crops, other species and electricity pylons. No creature, other than us, deliberately harms any other species. Predators do not harm other species of animals, instead they help to maintain the populations in certain areas so that the animals do not breed too much and eat up all the food and then starve.
As for the electricity pylons and crops, we could just employ bird scarers to frighten them away humanely. Not only would this save the birds, but it would also provide employment for the unemployed.
Perhaps the most amazing thing is that the RPSB are not condemning this, but they are actually supporting it.
My eldest son Jack is Autistic. I was advised last year that a pet would be good for Jack to help with his Autism and bring him out of himself and help teach him to care for somebody else, to help give him a sense of responsibility.
After a lot of research in October last year We got small Shih-tzu puppy for him. At the time we were living in a 2 bedroomed first floor flat owned by Notting Hill Housing Group, we recently moved to a 3 bedroom house with a garden owned by Notting Hill Housing Group. I
have just received a letter saying we must get rid of our puppy or face being evicted, Whilst living in the first floor flat we were allowed to have an Alsatian for 7 years who sadly passed away 4 years ago. Since getting our puppy(Gino) my son has completely changed and come out of himself, He is due to start a mainstream secondary school in September which is something I couldn't have predicted a year ago.
To take away Gino will cause him such heartbreak and trauma it could set him right back.Gino has changed Jacks life in so many ways for the positive, please help my family.
We request that the Los Angeles City Council increase the current pet limits per household from 3 cats and 3 dogs to 5 cats and 5 dogs. We believe this will help decrease the number of animals that are euthanized in Los Angeles, which in 2009 included 19,547 cats and dogs.
Raising pet limits will help us save more lives by connecting homeless shelter animals to households who want them. Increasing pet limits will also generate badly needed revenue for Los Angeles Animal Services through registration fees.
Councilmember Bill Rosendahl introduced a motion to the City Council June 5 to increase pet limits, and Councilmember Paul Koretz seconded the motion. Los Angeles Animal Services General Manager Brenda Barnette also strongly supports increasing pet limits from 3 dogs and cats to 5 dogs and cats. As of early December 2010, the motion remains in committee.
Many areas around the country do not have such strict restrictions on household pet ownership. For example, our neighbors in the city of Santa Monica have no limits on either cats or dogs. Riverside County allows nine cats before a kennel permit is required. San Diego County and Santa Barbara County have no cat limits.
For the last 10 years, the City of San Diego has not had a cat limit. The limit on dogs is 6. The Live Save rate for San Diego County Animal Services that covers both the City and the County is 82% for dogs and 54% for cats (Fiscal Year 2008-09 with intake of 48,878). During this same Fiscal Year 2008-09, the Live Save rate for Los Angeles is 73% for dogs and just under 39% for cats.
Councilmen Rosendahl wrote that “The current downturn in the economy has resulted in a higher rate of animal abandonment and has contributed to a 20% increase in the rate of impounds. To exacerbate the problem, over the past several years budget reductions in the Department of Animal Services have reduced the level of service provided to animals in the City’s shelters.”
PLEASE help get the word out! Do it for the animals who are counting on us. We must show the Council members that saying “Yes” to the increased pet limits is the right thing to do and is what the community wants.
Bill 218 or Fluffy’s Law is meant to provide landlords and their tenants with legislation to guide them in dealing with the often controversial topic of pet ownership in rental properties. There are numerous studies that show that owning a pet has measurable health benefits including increased physical fitness and lower incidents of depression. These benefits are especially pronounced in seniors who are most often tenants and frequently live alone.
The Winnipeg Humane Society has endorsed Bill 218 citing the growing number of pets that are surrendered each year due to a lack of pet-friendly rental properties in Manitoba.
Nearly each and every day our shelter faces the upset of owners turning over their pets due to a no-pet policy. Frankly I find it baffling that landlords are being so shortsighted and hard-headed on this issue. We have learned that in the 11 years Fluffy’s Law has taken effect in Ontario, only 1% of the 800,000 complaints received annually by their rental tribunal are pet related.
We were visited on Sept 1st by the dog warden informing us that we had 1 too many dogs than the town allows. We were then told that 1 dog had to go. We have had our newest dog since December of 09 and she is very much a part of the family. To let her go would be like letting go one of my kids, and totally out of the question.
I believe if you hit a cat whilst driving you should at the very least call the police, local council animal control or local vet and stay until they arrive if the cat is injured or even dead.
It would help us pet owners to know for certain what has happened to our beloved pets instead of wondering and worrying for years.
Cats are not feral if they live among a family who love them very much.
Most responsible owners have their cat micro chipped, which allows whoever has been informed about the injured/dead cat to notify the owners, also many cats have collars on with name, phone number or address .
Apartment rules and regulations states... Only if the pet is dangerous, causes allergic reactions or causes problems for other tenants or the landlord (which all must be proven to the Board), must you get rid of your pet or consider moving elsewhere as per http://www.ontariotenants.ca/law/act05.phtml#RTA76
Even if you signed a lease with a "no pets" clause, if the pet is not a problem for anybody they can not enforce it; such http://www.ontariotenants.ca/law/act02.phtml#RTA14 are invalid under the law.
You do not have to move or get rid of the pet unless the Board issues a written order to do so.
If you own a pet and are finding it hard to rent...the rule states a landlord cannot discriminate and not rent to you based on your pets... but they do... all the adds I see are NO DOGS... UNSUITABLE FOR PETS ...this is ridiculous... they cannot make their own laws but they try to... so what I recommend because they are being so dis-honest, is avoid mentioning your pet, and once you move in you will have no problems because according to the laws in Ontario they cannot do a thing, and if they bother you they can be charged up to $2500.
I would like to put forward a petition against the transportation of dogs in the back of utility vehicles, as I believe it to be cruel and dangerous for the dog.
Too many times have I seen the remains of a family pet splattered on the highway, and even (in a few instances) hanging from a rope at the back of a ute (in these instances the dog has obviously tried to jump out and the rope has been just that little bit too long).
I believe that dogs SHOULD NOT be transported in the tray of a ute (or other open vehicle) unless they are confined in a secure cage or box, which is secured to the floor of the ute tray.
Σκοπός είναι να πείσουμε τους ιδιοκτήτες των pet shop που εμπορεύονται ζώα, να σταματήσουν το εμπόριο ζώων γιατί τα ζώα μας τα αγοράζουμε αποκλειστικά από εκτροφείς ή υιοθετούμε αδέσποτα.
Στόχος: 1.000.000 υπογραφές μέχρι τον Σεπτέμβριο 2010.
Animals can get cancer from second hand smoke the same way humans can.