2023年12月26日 星期二

被飼主教壞 ~ 被人類誤解的狗

字數 6319

流浪比特犬到派出所1天就逆轉狗生!所有警察欽點牠當警犬 還辦入隊儀式擁專屬警徽 (2023-12-26 11:28 聯合新聞網/綜合報導)

https://pets.udn.com/pets/story/122674/7665851?list_ch2_indexgold

Hopkinsville Police Department

Hump Day mood with Chief Newby and Bolo!

https://www.instagram.com/hopkinsvillepd/p/CzZQ1WVN7h-/?hl=bg

Shelter Dog Visits Police Department For A Day And Ends Up Staying Forever

“That’s when he got really happy ... He knew.”

By Elizabeth Claire Alberts

Published on 12/22/2023 at 12:37 PM

https://www.thedodo.com/daily-dodo/shelter-dog-visits-police-department-for-one-day-and-ends-up-staying-forever

 ~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

被主人嫌棄的狗,成為國家檢疫犬。 米格魯
今周刊(2019.11月27日下午8:30 Facebook)
【豬瘟只剩"台日"沒淪陷!防疫大功臣居然是"牠"】 
非洲豬瘟疫情壟罩全球,目前東亞地區僅剩日本和台灣未淪陷! 
而防疫背後的大功臣是號稱「護國神犬」的流浪狗!
https://pse.is/KLLVG

 ~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

比特


會思考的狗行為獸醫團隊 The Thinking Dog VBT
(109.09.30.PM10:01)
{我是比特,但是我有一顆溫柔的心💗}
-第一次見到兩位姐姐時,是帶著厚厚一疊外出日誌和筆記來找我,兩位姐姐非常努力做了很多功課想要幫助芮拉聲響敏感問題。
全文:https://pse.is/v4znm

劉佳郁 >
會思考的狗行為獸醫團隊 The Thinking Dog VBT
(109. 9月24日下午6:31  Facebook)
✨還給芮菈正常運作的大腦!
內文有點長,但希望能完整傳遞芮菈行為門診前中後的改變。謝謝大家耐心閱讀!
在我見到芮菈的第一眼,她水汪汪的大眼並沒有跟我對到眼,而是轉過身背對著我,坐在角落;抱起她時,她的身體顫抖著、仍然迴避我的目光,當時的我以為她害羞所以不看我。🐶 OS: 這個人為什麼要一直盯著我看,又把我抱起來,我都迴避了她怎麼還是靠我那麼近?
同時,我知道她是比特,但不像媒體口中的惡犬、地獄犬,而是很忠心又心思敏感的大型陪伴犬。
全文:https://pse.is/vzlua

 ~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。 

 

比特犬救起受傷鳥兒腳邊守護! 見牠醒來「眼神擔心→發亮」暖暈媽(2020年08月15日 17:54:00
飼主伊麗莎白(Elizabeth Houston)表示,查理是她在2年前收編的狗狗,
https://pets.ettoday.net/news/1785394?redirect=1

~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

比特犬因外表凶惡受盡白眼 1次意外救險死婆婆 待遇大逆轉(2019/12/06 晴報)
據外國媒體「The dodo」報道,一位瑞典人Arjanit Mehana飼養了一隻比特犬Simba,因為品種的關係,不少鄰居在見到Simba時都敬而遠之,總是一臉懼怕,特別是一位老婆婆,「Simba每次和她打招呼,婆婆都會面露鄙視和恐懼的眼神避開,但Simba毫不在意。」,直到早前,主人Arjanit如常帶Simba去散步時,在回家途中,Simba似乎發現不對勁,經過婆婆家門時突然停下來,開始吠叫,即使Arjanit試圖拉走牠亦不成功。

婆婆跌倒2日無人發現
Arjanit因Simba的堅持而大感奇怪,其後聽到一個微弱的求救聲︰「請不要走」,原來婆婆不慎跌倒並摔斷了臀部,
全文:https://pse.is/NBBKK
 ~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

比特呆門的舅媽  @pit.di.amond
比特BB的心酸
寵物  2019. 12月3日 11:00
...... 從小就讓專業的訓犬師指導,成功的社會化
才四個月大的呆門已經可以聽懂很多指令
基本的等待,定點排泄,不咬人和狗,不護食
散步的時候也可以鬆繩隨行不會爆衝
(目前還在做減敏訓練,打算完成後再帶口罩出門)
遇到其他狗狗挑釁,我們也教他馬上躲開
明明呆門已經很棒了 😔
可是因為犬種的偏見,小呆門常常受委屈
就算是別人家的狗狗先兇人,也會被恐龍家長說:為什麼你們要帶那麼危險的狗出來 🙃🙃
拜託你們自己的狗沒家教,叫不回來還爆衝亂咬其他狗,說我們家阿呆很危險???
有些更可怕的看到我們呆門經過直接一腳踹過來
全文:
https://www.dcard.tw/f/pet/p/232615789-%E6%AF%94%E7%89%B9BB%E7%9A%84%E5%BF%83%E9%85%B8

【  敢踢比特犬! 看到有人牽才敢動腳吧!
以前我帶混秋田犬去散步,幾乎每天都有中年男子學狗叫、手舞足蹈的大吼大叫,狗真的叫了,再酸狗好兇,某些人類多愚蠢!
任何狗,有主人牽著,都會安全一點; 任何狗,沒有主人牽、放養亂跑,其他人都要提高警覺! 小型犬、米克斯也會很兇、會追逐。
看過 有主人牽的~法鬥犬 衝過來,然後低吼,而我的狗像是要迎戰的樣子,趕快拉開! 咦~
法鬥應該是友善的狗啊! 主人的態度導致不論品種的狗狗都危險。
 ~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

會思考的狗寵物行為訓練矯正工作室在磨鼻子動物醫院 Bisous Animal Hospital 。
2019. 10月27日下午12:36 · 中壢區 ·
我長得像比特 我驕傲!
我學帶嘴套我驕傲!......
 總之,我長得像比特我驕傲因為我比很多小型犬安靜多了,也不曾咬過人!
我學帶嘴套我驕傲,因為我的爸爸媽媽知道要怎麼保護我!
全文、影片:https://pse.is/MS5MM

會思考的狗寵物行為訓練矯正工作室在磨鼻子動物醫院 Bisous Animal Hospital 。
2019. 7月21日 · 中壢區
比特爸爸說,一森ㄧ森,為什麼我的狗狗走個二十分鐘就好像快死掉一樣,但是網路上都說每天都要遛狗一兩個小時,但是比特上次走十五分鐘就直接路倒在草皮不肯走了!是不是他身體狀況不好呢?怎麼辦才好?
是說,這種氣溫就算是半夜一森我也不想要出去走一兩個小時,熱死啦!一森我有汗腺都覺得很悶了,何況是狗狗啦!網路上的資訊一定有它的道理,但是並不是每個建議都適合所有的個體,有些狗其實討厭出門,但卻天天被逼著出門,難怪隨著時間的過去,胸背牽繩越來越難上,或是出現其他脫序的行為。我覺得好的東西不見得你也覺得好,你覺得好的東西不見得我也覺得好,每個人都有自己的喜惡,動物是有感受的呦!不妨多聽聽自己的寵物要表達的是什麼吧!
以上共勉之,好像有點圖文不符。
比特嘴巴大也是有好處的,塞藥好方便!誰說比特很兇,比特好可愛!
影片:https://pse.is/LL6V8

 

請搜尋:會思考的狗行為獸醫團隊 Facebook 談到比特犬的訓練與行為。
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

 比特犬提前感應病徵救命 主人感動:沒牠不可能活
10月17日, 2019 編輯 / 張羽緹 CTWant
圖文:https://www.ctwant.com/article/10943

媽心臟病昏倒...比特犬舔臉幫她保持清醒 急找路人求救
2019年10月14日 19:47:00 記者闕雁琳/綜合報導 ETtoday寵物雲
https://pets.ettoday.net/news/1555521?redirect=1
 ~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

比特犬外表凶猛卻藏溫柔性格 貼身保護婆婆 每走一步都回頭看(2019-07-23 17:00 香港01 撰文:何穎琪)
近年多宗比特犬傷人事件,不知不覺中彷彿將比特犬與危險畫上等號,但美國一頭3歲的比特犬卻有著與外表不符的內心。牠性格溫柔,時刻守在年邁的婆婆身邊,可謂是最忠心的守衛。
比特犬被歸類為危險狗隻,予人兇惡可怕的印象,但事實上大部分的比特犬絕非凶殘成性,而是像其他狗狗般溫柔貼心。美國一頭3歲大的比特犬Lollipop正是絕佳範例,牠雖然體格強壯,卻從未傷害他人,並時刻守在婆婆身邊。
Lollipop本來是一頭流浪狗,兩年多前在街頭遇上現任主人Cathy Officee。當時僅得8個月大的牠於街頭流浪,隨即引起一群熱心市民的注意。市民為防止牠衝出馬路釀成危險,遂用牽繩套著牠身上,並留在原地照看牠。其後,Cathy Officee恰巧駕車經過,看到停在一旁的牠,便下車向該群熱心市民查詢。聽罷前因後果,Cathy很快便決定帶牠回家。
隨後的數天,Cathy不停在附近社區張貼告示,然而沒人領回Lollipop。在確定並沒飼主尋找Lollipop後,Cathy終決定正式收養牠。Cathy直言當時感到喜悅:「在暫養牠5天後,我非常喜歡牠,沒人認領牠代表我終於可以名正言順帶牠回家。」
Cathy其後搬至與90歲母親同住,令家中的狗狗總數增加至5隻,當中包括Lollipop。牠跟婆婆的感情要好,每當婆婆靠著助行器走路時,牠也會立刻起來,在婆婆身旁擔當貼身守衛。Cathy笑言不知Lollipop目的為何:「(眾多狗狗中)只有牠會擋在婆婆前方,不知牠是準備隨時候命,還是想叫婆婆坐下。」
也許正因Cathy一家人付出過的愛及關懷,才令Lollipop變得如此貼心及溫馴。

圖文、其他文章連結:【狗不可以貌相】洛威拿
https://pse.is/KQMSH
 ~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

會思考的狗寵物行為訓練矯正工作室分享了 1 則貼文。 2019.01.26. PM02:46
這隻輔助犬跟癲癇警示犬長得也像比特也!前幾天有新聞說有比特犬的主人故意讓狗去咬流浪狗,這一切都是主人的錯啦!
並不是比特就是那樣的個性,而是因為大眾的刻板映像讓他們的行為被過度放大檢視了,這樣是不對的。
影片:
The Dodo / Service Dog Helps His Mom Do Everything She Loves
2019.01.26.AM08:00:https://bit.ly/2G1aR9w

Can a Pitbull Be a Therapy Dog or Emotional Support Dog?
31 July, 2018
https://www.servicedogcertifications.org/pitbull-therapy-dog-emotional-support/

Can a Pit Bull Be a Service Dog?
21 September, 2018
https://www.servicedogcertifications.org/can-a-pit-bull-be-a-service-dog/


2019 (108).01. 記 (大概是此時寫的感想)
以前,我在天空部落格收集很多 友善比特犬的新聞、美國也有飼主希望為比特犬聲譽平反,這些新聞被 不管部落格主死活的天空網站搞不見了!
在美國,有專門救援比特犬的協會,將比特犬訓練成為可以被領養、甚至是服務犬; 也有比特犬與一群雞,鴨,寵物鼠,兔子一起長大; youtube影片,比特犬進入鴨鴨的家,小心翼翼的用鼻子去移動幼鴨。

某專家:比特犬不適合當寵物」,對!沒有做功課、把狗當物品、把狗當畜牲、要跟狗爭老大,你真的不適合養任何狗,米克斯也不適合養。
某專家:「比特犬見狗就咬」 哼 😤
專家到底怎麼了!!?
在台灣看到任何犬,都不要貿然靠近、逗弄,我就遇過好多手殘在逗狗的人,狗是不會咬人 (目前不會),主人我會開罵,因為被打擾,看到狗就想玩並且無視主人的人還不少,都是手殘,該怪狗?

108.08.25.PM09:48. 修正文
我家中型米克斯在狗公園就遇過惡霸犬,惡霸犬開心的打招呼、動作緩慢的嗅聞,反而是其他米克斯、哈士奇、小型犬暴衝粗魯的玩。
我們遇到的惡霸犬,腿短短、扁臉、很壯。
我們也遇過 藏獒,不想跟我的狗玩,只有站著,我的狗嚇到逃走,藏獒淡定,沒有盯著我的狗看、視線朝另一方。 

惡霸犬 綜合美國比特鬥牛梗 和 美國斯塔福郡梗犬的特點。
比特犬 主要是由 美系斯塔福犬 和 美國鬥牛犬 培育。 (
108.08.25.PM09:48)
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

流浪比特犬見人就抖 直到被撫摸第1下才開啟牠心門(2016年04月17日 16:38:00 ETtoday寵物雲)https://pets.ettoday.net/news/682084

當找到這隻比特犬的時候,她的嘴巴裡咬著一隻吉娃娃。他們之間的故事好感人!
July 28, 2014  編輯:Annie Huang
.... 這兩隻狗在薩凡納街道被找到。當時 Joanie 用嘴巴帶著她的朋友 Chachi 走來走去 ,每隔幾步,她就停下了舔舔 Chachi 受到感染的眼球,擔心他的安危。.....
圖文:https://pse.is/J97GW



我在寵物店的日子  2019.03.07.PM08:10
從新聞跟影片可以發現
有很多比特犬咬傷人咬傷狗的消息
但我一次都沒洗過這種犬種
甚至只看過兩次活生生的比特
全文:
https://bit.ly/2EVhZ6q
留言版:
陳巧倫:洗過喔,其實有些乖的很憨厚。 圖:
https://bit.ly/2SRJiSS
穎佳林:我也覺得跟品種無關,很多捷克也會咬狗,只是他太小隻看起來沒這
我在寵物店的日子:其實吉娃娃也挺兇猛的
Ging Ying:我在寵物店的日子 還很神經質
張凱蒂:洗過比特幼幼,其實很可愛很憨厚,兇猛的狀態都是飼主造就出來的……。
Jia-yu LI:狗都是跟主人的,我遇過的比特、惡霸、斯塔福都好憨厚好可愛,但肌肉跟噸位真的很厲害,馬步沒站穩都會被撞飛。


2019.03.07

我在路上遇過 傑克羅素梗犬 (跳跳狗),我牽著自己的狗 (體重18公斤) 與對方靠近、測試雙方反應,但不要粘在一起,雙方都有牽繩; 傑克羅素梗往前衝、低吼、完全沒有什麼安定訊號動作; 我的狗看對方有反應就想靠近的白目; 傑克羅素梗想衝撞、連續低吼,讓我覺得不妙,好像要打架,我們退開,在旁邊看著 傑克羅素梗 與 黑柴犬互動。 傑克羅素梗 仍然後強勢,我聽到柴犬唉一聲退開,雙方主人仍然近距離站者不動。 哈囉~柴犬在閃躲了 (我沒開口說,心裏想)。 原來狗互相認識,之前在附近玩過。 傑克羅素梗飼主一直說 "狗是在玩",天啊~傑克羅素梗在霸凌其他狗、當獵物? 發洩情緒! 一些主人都說「牠是在玩」 ~什麼!😒
以前養的 20幾公斤的大狗,散步被店家放養的吉娃娃追逐,吉娃娃不只追我家的狗,直到我大吼 "你不怕狗被人打",飼主才把狗關起來!關在小籠子裡,吉娃娃也很慘,爛飼主。 
狗體型小,大家都覺得沒關係,汪汪叫也很可愛; 中型犬就該戴口罩、被霸凌、任人(狗) 玩,不能反擊。 😕哼
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。 








2023年10月29日 星期日

德國 動物保護2


德國 動物保護
https://cherishdogs-animals.blogspot.com/2017/02/blog-post_23.html


客座評論:運動式打狗——公共治理的現代性缺失
德國之聲 2023.10.29. 呂恆君
呂恆君(Dr. Hangkun Strian),德國漢學家,在柏林洪堡大學亞非研究所獲得哲學博士學位。主要研究及興趣領域為文學史、電影、基督宗教本土化、國際關系等。其也是邊境牧羊犬Kelly與拉布拉多犬Balou的女主人。
https://today.line.me/tw/v2/article/nXmlBnK

中國羅威納犬傷人事件 德國養狗有何規定? (日期 25.10.2023, DW)
四川一條羅威納犬重傷兩歲女童的事件引起中國媒體的關注。那麼,在德國對於養狗有怎樣的法規?如果發生狗傷人的事件,又會如何處理?
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。

終結流浪動保聯盟(2019.9月27日下午10:10 Facebook)
......
 這是立法院「從寵物登記及絕育論動物保護法執法之研析」的頁面,大致整理重點如下:
https://www.ly.gov.tw/Pages/Detail.aspx…

1. 德國是零安樂國家
2. 德國棄養罰2萬歐元(60萬台幣)
3. 德國寵物店買不到狗

#但真的是這樣嗎?

1. 這說法根本自己打臉,內文也提到「德國很少執行安樂死」但 #不是零安樂,而且完全沒有提及德國沒有流浪犬的原因還包含聯邦狩獵法同意獵人在人類居住地區200公尺以外的區域「合法」獵殺遊蕩犬貓。 http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/9534

2. 沒錯,德國棄養罰很重,但前提是要抓的到,我國販售毒品罰則也相當重,但依然有人販毒,所以妄想用加重刑責來減少犯罪或違法行為根本是 #妄想。

3.這點完全錯誤,德國的寵物店「依然買的到狗」,只是對於寵物店的要求非常高而已。 http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/12395
Facebook 全文:https://pse.is/ME35S

留言版:
唐芯:Min Yang 可以賣狗!
德國從未立法禁止寵物店販賣犬貓。但是德國於2001年施行《犬隻命令》,具體規定養狗者應遵守飼養方法;並且適用於寵物店,但店家因空間及成本考量難以執行,才會有間接抑制寵物店販賣犬貓的說法;而且德國有一間唯一合法也是德國最大的寵物店「扎亞茨動物園」是德國唯一合法賣狗的寵物店。還賣其他動物魚類包括爬蟲動物! (2019.9月27日下午10:21)

留言版 還有可以看的
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。  
德國北威州新規定:在家不能養豺狼虎豹
【大紀元2014年11月02日訊】(大紀元記者余平德國報導)蟒蛇、毒蜘蛛、鱷魚……有誰會把這些凶猛動物養在家裏嗎?答案顯然是有,而且數量還不少。最近北威州起草了一個法案,禁止在家養這些危險的、有毒的凶猛動物。
最近柏林一位房東查看自己房子的時候,發現房客搬走了,卻留下了19條毒蛇。好在這些毒蛇被養在12個魚缸裡,不會造成甚麼危險。幾年前,北威州一個19歲青年的經歷就沒有這麼平靜了。他因為一條鉛筆粗細的眼鏡蛇幼蟲把整個一棟房子都掀得底朝天了。
這 名青年在本地一個展會上買了一條毒蛇幼蟲,可有一天發現眼鏡蛇從魚缸裡溜走了。因為這種眼鏡蛇毒性非常大,如果有人被咬傷,24小時可有生命危險。於是消 防隊出動,把小青年的住所封鎖了,樓裡的居民全部搬走,小青年住所的牆壁、地板、天花板都翻起來。一直等了三個星期,才找到這條不足30厘米的小蛇,它被 粘死在一個粘條上了,整個找蛇行動花了10萬歐元。

每年進口80萬爬行動物
像這類事件並不少見,北威州消防隊的記錄顯示,每年至少發生100起爬行寵物溜跑或者是被棄養事件。
北威州環境部長表示,過去幾年裡,該州由於危險動物打電話報警的案例比之前多兩倍還多。
聯邦統計局的數據顯示,德國每年進口80萬爬行動物,另外還有25%是非法進口的凶猛動物。估計有400萬家庭自己在家飼養了野生動物。另外有些人飼養了毒蜘蛛、毒蛇、蜥蜴、野狼等,出於某種原因不想養了,就直接把它們丟棄到公園裡,給公眾造成危害。
現在通過徵收狗稅,政府知道哪個家庭裡養狗,但是對於時常出現的危險寵物走失事件,當局往往只能被動接招。北威州政府認為,這些危險動物,尤其是劇毒的寵物,原則上一律不能養,現在已經養在家裏的需要申報、登記。
在禁養名單上的凶猛動物包括毒蜘蛛、毒蠍、毒蛇、鱷魚、老虎、狼、大象、犀牛、野狼、豹子、猴子等。

飼養危險寵物必須申報
到目前為止,德國16個聯邦州里有一半已經有相關規定,北威州只是規定,飼養這些寵物必須有專業知識,現在將出台一個相對全面的規定,目的是防止動物飼養不當,並規定了危險寵物逃跑後的做法。
北威州計劃,今後飼養危險、但沒有劇毒的動物時必須申報,這些動物包括蟒蛇、蜘蛛、老鷹等。寵物主人必須出示證明,擁有相關的專業知識。對於已經擁有危險動物的家庭,作為過渡時期的規定,允許私人一直飼養,直到這些動物死亡。

2023年10月26日 星期四

日本 動物新聞

 

未繫牽繩!4獵犬撲人撕咬 散步婦頭部見骨、單耳遭咬斷

TVBS 編輯 劉哲琪 報導 2023/09/20 16:03

日本三重縣一名60歲婦人外出散步時,遭4隻獵犬襲擊,單耳遭扯下、頭骨外露,緊急送醫治療。據了解,獵犬當時正在驅逐山豬,沒有繫上牽繩。飼主透露,牠們應該是把女性當成獵物。

《讀賣新聞》報導,這起事件發生在三重縣度會町,1名67歲男子4月9日帶著5隻米克斯獵犬(體高約60公分)外出。他鬆開獵犬的牽繩,讓牠們去驅逐山豬後,沒過多久就聽到狗叫。他過去一看,發現4隻獵犬正在攻擊一名女性,急忙拉開狗並撥打119。女性的頭部遭和手臂遭到獵犬猛咬,單耳遭到扯下,頭部還有10公分左右的傷口,深可見骨,必須接受至少半年的治療。

伊勢保健所衛生指導課在案發隔日前往飼主家,確認獵犬的飼養環境,聽取事件發生時的狀況。男子指出,獵犬當時誤以為受害女子是獵物,才會發動攻擊。三重縣食品安全課表示,咬傷人的獵犬不會受到安樂死處分,基於日本《動物愛護法》,涉案獵犬重新接受訓練後,就能再次協助狩獵。

另一方面,三重縣警伊勢署9月19日依業務過失傷害等嫌疑,將飼主函送偵辦。依據《鳥獸保護法》,使用獵犬驅除有害鳥獸時,必須由2名以上的獵人進行,但飼主當時卻單獨行動。

https://news.tvbs.com.tw/world/2248097?utm_source=linetoday&utm_medium=line

2023年8月13日 星期日

Elanco Seresto 負面新聞2

 字數 24671


Slammed for lax oversight of flea collars blamed for pet deaths, EPA seeks to hand off regulation to FDA  (March 102023

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wants to relinquish its oversight of pet pesticide products in the wake of criticism for its handling of a popular flea and tick collar linked to more than 100,000 reports of pet injuries and deaths.

Its bid to hand the job to the Food and Drug Administration caps a tumultuous period for the EPA triggered by a March 2021 Investigate Midwest/USA TODAY investigation that showed the collar has been the subject of more incident reports than any other product in EPA history.

For years, EPA scientists have questioned the agency’s ability to regulate pet products because of how it has handled complaints about Seresto since it came on the market in 2012, according to Investigate Midwest/USA TODAY reporting. The EPA said Seresto is a “key part” but not all of the reason for the proposal.

Transferring regulation to FDA is a “potential long-term solution,” said Jake Li, EPA’s deputy assistant administrator for pesticide programs, in an interview with Investigate Midwest. 

“We can't play this whack-a-mole game where every time a Seresto-like incident comes up, we have to divert our staff to it,” Li said.

Investigation:Popular flea collar linked to almost 1,700 pet deaths. The EPA has issued no warning.

The EPA has been conducting a formal review of Seresto for nearly two years and expects to finalize the updated science assessment “in the next few months, Li said, adding that the FDA helped with the assessment, both by lending staff and a framework to evaluate post-market incident data. 

The work on Seresto illustrated the flaws with EPA’s process, Li said.

“In our ongoing review of Seresto incidents what really became evident to us is that, compared to FDA, we at EPA have far fewer resources, which means staff, expertise, infrastructure and funding, to evaluate animal safety and carry out the ongoing monitoring of products in the marketplace,” Li said.

Li said the EPA’s pesticide office has only two veterinarians on staff, and both were pulled from their regular duties to work on a review of Seresto “almost full time,” which slowed down their other jobs.

The Seresto review “has poached so much time out of people who are not assigned to any of this work that we believe there needs to be a much better solution for the long term,” Li said.

The agencies said in a joint whitepaper that FDA would need “significant new resources” to take over the management of the 600 topical products currently regulated by the EPA; however, the agencies said building a comparable program at EPA also would require even more resources and would be redundant with the FDA’s system.

FDA spokeswoman Veronika Pfaeffle said in an emailed statement that the current set-up doesn’t accommodate scientific advancement. 

“A modernized approach that better aligns with each agency’s expertise will better protect animal health and safety and improve clarity for pet owners,” Pfaeffle said in the email. 

‘FDA should be the one-stop-shop’
Under the current setup, the EPA is responsible for regulating pet pesticide products that are “not systemic,” or aren’t supposed to enter the bloodstream, while the FDA regulates “systemic” pet pesticide products, which are generally consumed by pets. 

However, the agencies said in the recent whitepaper that scientists now understand that many topical flea and tick treatments, including spot-on treatments and collars, actually do enter a pet’s bloodstream, raising questions about the EPA’s product approval process.

“Both agencies agree that FDA should be the one-stop-shop for animal drugs, for these external parasite treatments and so forth,” Li said.

The EPA and FDA are holding a joint virtual public meeting, titled “Modernizing the Approach to the EPA and FDA Oversight of Certain Products,” on March 22 at 1 p.m. EDT to discuss the changes. People can register for the meeting here. The proposal is also open for a 60-day public comment period until April 24. 

“Moving this forward is a good thing, but it will take years to do. This is the beginning of a very, very long process,” said Nathan Donley, environmental health science director of the Center for Biological Diversity, which petitioned to ban Seresto.

Donley expressed concern the EPA is allowing harm to continue by failing to take action on products like Seresto.

“It doesn't let the EPA off the hook,” Donley said. “They’ve got to do things now that are in their authority.”

Seresto is just one product connected to major concerns about pet and human safety. In October 2022, the EPA announced it would ban flea and tick collars containing the chemical tetrachlorvinphos, which has been linked to neurological damage in children.

EPA staff have also raised concerns in internal documents about pet products that contain fipronil, a chemical used in popular spot-on treatment Frontline Plus, which has been the subject of more than 5,000 human health incident reports, according to an Investigate Midwest review of incident data.

Review in the works for ‘years’
EPA staff sounded alarms about the safety of Seresto as early as 2015. But the agency did not launch a formal review until after the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity filed a petition asking the agency to cancel Seresto, following Investigate Midwest's and USA TODAY’s reporting.

Last summer, a congressional subcommittee called on the EPA to cancel Seresto’s registration, noting that Canada had rejected the collar based on the EPA’s own incident data – and the EPA found an even greater link between pet death and the collar than Canadian regulators did. 

More:Congressional subcommittee seeks voluntarily recall of Seresto flea and tick collar

For years, EPA and officials from Bayer and Elanco, which purchased the animal health division of Bayer – including Seresto – in 2020, met to discuss the agency’s issues with the product. In those meetings, company officials blamed other factors, including the high number of Seresto collars sold. 

Elanco maintains the collar is safe based on internal studies. A company-funded analysis found that the two chemicals in Seresto – imidacloprid and flumethrin – have not been responsible for any pet deaths.

EPA scientists did multiple comparisons over the years between Seresto and other products that indicated Seresto had a higher number of pet deaths than other products, documents show. Those scientists often emailed that information, until a superior told two scientists to keep their concerns off email.

Yet the EPA did not make the public aware of any risks. The EPA’s inspector general has launched a review into the agency’s handling of incident reports associated with the product.

Li said the proposal to transfer pet-pesticide product regulation to the FDA was in the works since before the public outcry over Seresto.

“Seresto is a key part of that, but it's not the only part,” Li said. “It predates Seresto by three to four years. It's really driven by the discussion between our career staff and the FDA’s career staff.”

In a March 2021 presentation made in response to the Investigate Midwest/USA TODAY story about Seresto, EPA staff pointed out that compared to the FDA, the agency’s process is lacking. The presentation noted the EPA’s process relies on company-funded studies that use less sensitive pet breeds and small sample sizes. By comparison, the FDA has a much more comprehensive pet product regulation process, which includes pre-market clinical trials and post-market surveillance.

The EPA also has no process for evaluating pet incident reports or any trigger for when incident numbers need further review.

Documents show that EPA officials briefed Ed Messina, director of the Office of Pesticide Programs, which oversees all pesticides, on the FDA/EPA issues in March 2021, shortly after the Investigate Midwest/USA TODAY story was published. 

In response, Messina attempted to reach out to the FDA, but FDA staff members declined to give Messina the email for Dr. Steven Solomon, director of the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine. 

“FDA counterparts don’t seem to want to give us his contact information. We don’t know what to do, it’s a very odd situation,” wrote Meredith Laws, an EPA employee.

Congressional action necessary to move forward
The proposal is taking “two separate but parallel tracks” – one for public input and one briefing Congress, Li said.

“In the end, Congress is the one who will decide whether and how to move this forward,” Li said. “We can only describe the challenges and what we're seeking directionally in terms of solutions.”

Li said the agencies are still briefing congressional committees on the proposal and aren’t yet finished.

Pfaeffle, the FDA spokeswoman, said in her emailed statement that the agencies are working with Congress on potential solutions. 

“We are asking for Congress’ help to work toward a modernized approach to product oversight that increases transparency and government efficiency, aligns with each agency’s expertise and provides regulatory certainty – to stakeholders, including animal owners, industry, veterinarians and others,” the statement said.

Li said the agencies have already met with industry and environmental groups to get feedback.

“We're in the very early stages of socializing this proposal,” Li said. “We decided, let’s get this out there early and start to get some high-level feedback from folks, then adjust it and see what people say.”

Investigate Midwest (previously The Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting) is an independent, nonprofit newsroom focused on exposing dangerous and costly practices of influential agricultural corporations and institutions.
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~

classaction.org
in NewswirePublished on October 13, 2022
Seresto Flea Collar Class Action Alleges Bayer, Elanco Misled Pet Owners About Deadly Product
by Corrado Rizzi

Bayer and Elanco Animal Health face a proposed class action that alleges the companies have misled consumers about the safety of Seresto tick and flea collars, which have reportedly been linked to more than 2,500 pet deaths and tens of thousands of injuries and adverse event reports.

The 88-page lawsuit alleges Bayer and Elanco, who purchased the product from Bayer in 2020, have “downplayed” reports of the serious side effects of the Seresto flea collar, even after such reports became public and the collars came under regulatory scrutiny, and have continued to falsely claim that the product is safe for pets. 

“At no point have Defendants disclosed this information to United States consumers,” the filing says, noting that the product’s label includes no warning that the Seresto collar may harm or kill pets, or that the product could cause any adverse side effects at all. 

The case states that the danger of the Seresto collar is so severe that it sparked a Congressional inquiry by the House Committee on Oversight and Reform’s Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy, who after a 16-month investigation issued a June 2022 report recommending that the Seresto flea and tick collar be recalled due to the dangers it poses to pets and humans. 

According to the suit, the problem with the collars stems from a combination of the pesticides imidacloprid and flumethrin, which, together, “magnify their harmful effects.” Per the case, one retired U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) employee said the Seresto flea and tick collars “have the most incidents of any pesticide pet product she’s ever seen,” and the Congressional Subcommittee found that the product had “nearly three times the rate of total incidents, and nearly five times the rate of ‘Death’ or ‘Major’ incidents, as the second most dangerous flea and tick product.” 

The lawsuit says Canada, after reviewing incident and toxicology reports, banned the sale of the Seresto collars as they posed “too great a risk to animals and humans to be safe for use.” Other countries, similarly, have required “severe warnings” to be placed on the packaging of the collar, including the word “POISON” in large font on the front label, the suit adds. 

Despite Bayer and Elanco’s safety claims, Seresto collars have caused millions in damages for pet owners, both in what they overpaid for the dangerous product and in veterinarian and other medical expenses, the complaint alleges. 

According to the case, Seresto flea and tick collars accounted for over $300 million in revenue for Bayer in 2019 alone. Since 2012, Bayer and Elanco have sold more than 25 million Seresto collars in the United States, the suit reports. 

“Seresto pet collars are an enormous business segment, and consequently, Defendants have refused to make the product safer or warn consumers about the potential risks,” the suit reads, calling the defendants’ description of the collars as “veterinary medicine” a “misnomer.” 

The plaintiff, a Bedford, Indiana resident, says that after placing Seresto collars around the necks of his two dogs, they each developed rashes and experienced lethargy. One dog developed “a cough, a heart murmur, and congestive heart failure and needed to be euthanized,” while the other “developed multiple tumors,” the lawsuit states. The consumer claims that his surviving dog’s condition has improved somewhat since he stopped using the Seresto collar. 

All told, the plaintiff incurred more than $4,000 in out-of-pocket medical expenses in treating his dogs, the filing says. 

Per the suit, neither the plaintiff nor other pet owners would have bought the Seresto collar had Bayer and Elanco disclosed the serious safety risks of the product. 

The case looks to cover all persons in the United States who, during the fullest period allowed by law, bought a Seresto flea and tick collar for use on a pet and not for resale. 

Warning: The complaint below contains graphic images of pets’ injuries. 

英文 文件檔。 有 受傷犬貓的圖片
Shannon v. Bayer Healthcare LLC et al. - 1:22-cv-02003
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~


TOP TAKEAWAYS: Here are 5 important things to know from the new congressional investigation into Seresto collars
by Investigate Midwest staff
June 16, 2022

After 16 months of investigating, the House Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy — part of the House Oversight Committee, the main investigative body in the U.S. House of Representatives — unfurled Wednesday its finding into the popular Seresto flea and tick collars and the Environmental Protection Agency’s role in regulating the collars. The collars work by slowly releasing two pesticides into pets’ fur to ward off fleas and ticks.

Elanco, the collars’ manufacturer, has maintained over the course of Investigate Midwest and USA TODAY’s reporting that the collars are safe. During a hearing Wednesday, Elanco’s president and CEO reiterated that point. (Read Elanco’s full statement here.)

Here are five important takeaways from the subcommittee’s investigation. 

Seresto collars have health warnings in other countries but not the U.S. Germany’s label notes the collar poses neurological risks, and Colombia’s label calls it highly toxic. Australia’s label contains the warning: “POISON.” Canada doesn’t even allow the collar to be sold.

Seresto’s first owner, Bayer, declined to update the U.S. label after updating Germany’s to note neurological risks to pets. Bayer owned Seresto’s production before Elanco purchased the company’s animal health division in 2020. The year before, the EPA asked Bayer to update the logo to reflect the one in Germany, which noted the collar’s neurological risks to pets. Bayer said the data didn’t support a label change.

Canada found incident rates involving the collars were high. In 2015, Canadian health officials examined the collars and found Seresto had an incident rate of 36 to 65 incidents per 10,000 collars sold, including three to five “death and major” incidents. The other collars in Canada at the time of the analysis had an incident rate of 0.07 per 10,000 collars sold.

The EPA confirmed Canada’s findings, and then some. After the EPA received Canada’s analysis, it performed its own. Canadian officials had studied 251 pet deaths linked to the collars and determined 84 of them, or 33%, were “probably or possibly” caused by the collar. The EPA found that 113, or 45%, were “probably or possibly” caused by the collar.

Elanco told the EPA its collar has only been linked to 12 probable or possible pet deaths. As of summer 2021, Elanco was aware of more than 2,300 pet deaths that were linked to the Seresto collars. Its own studies found that just 0.51% were “probably or possibly” caused by the collar.

Top image: Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D – Illinois) speaks at the June 15, 2022, hearing. He led the subcommittee’s investigation into Seresto.
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~

Fox 8
Seresto flea collars linked to thousands of pet deaths: Congress
by: Matt Adams
Jun 17, 2022 / 01:57 PM EDT

(WXIN) – A congressional panel has recommended the recall of flea-and-tick collars linked to 2,500 pet deaths.

The Committee on Oversight and Reform’s Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy released a 24-page report this week on Seresto Flea and Tick Collars.

The findings follow a 16-month investigation into issues with the $70 collar, which is designed to protect dogs and cats from fleas and ticks. Millions of the flea collars have been sold since 2013.

Convenience is the main selling point. While most flea-and-tick treatments need to be applied monthly, the collars claimed eight months of protection for dogs and cats. They were designed to release small amounts of pesticide over the course of several months.

The product, originally made by Bayer Animal Health, which is now owned by Elanco Animal Health headquartered in Greenfield, Indiana, has been linked to 98,000 incidents involving “unexpected effects” and 2,500 pet deaths, according to the subcommittee.

Approval process
The subcommittee found the EPA rushed the collar’s approval process and employed dodgy science in doing so. The EPA first became aware of possible problems with the collar in 2015, ranking the Seresto collars No. 1 “by a wide margin” when it came to incidents with flea-and-tick products.

Seresto collars had nearly three times the number total incidents and nearly five times the rate of “deaths” or “major” incidents when compared to the second-most problematic flea-and-tick product. Canadian regulators didn’t approve the collar, ruling it posed “too great a risk to pets and their owners.”

Despite these issues, the EPA allowed the product to remain on the market, even after determining Seresto collars “probably or possibly caused 45%” of 251 pet deaths reviewed by agency.

Within the EPA, some officials voiced frustration over the continued availability of the Seresto collars and expressed relief at a report published by Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting and USA Today in March 2021.

“I hope there is a FOIA [Freedom of Information Act request] for all communications on this so that our emails are made public,” one scientist wrote. “We have been screaming about this for many years.” Another EPA official wrote that they hoped “this time someone can blow the lid off this travesty.”

Symptoms among pets, humans
Problems from the collar included lethargy, abnormal behavior, excessive grooming and vocalization, vomiting and diarrhea among pets. Irritated skin and lesions were also common. Some pets suffered from convulsions, muscle tremors or lost control of bodily movements.

Some pet owners noticed the symptoms and removed the collars early, the report indicated, citing information from Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA).

But pets were not the only ones at risk, according to PMRA findings. From 2012 through 2015, 357 pet owners reported problems stemming from the collars. According to data obtained by the PMRA from Bayer, “major” and “moderate” incidents totaled about 106 instances.

People reported things like hives and dermatitis. Some individuals experienced respiratory and neurological effects as well as dizziness, nausea or throat irritation. The problems were “probably or possibly caused by exposure to the Seresto collar,” the PMRA found.

The Canadian agency decided the only way to stop the collars from causing problems was to prohibit them from being sold in Canada. The PMRA rejected Bayer’s application to sell the product within its borders.

The EPA compiled similar data, the subcommittee found, but despite “overwhelming evidence” of potential problems, the U.S. agency approved the product and allowed it to remain on the market for years.

Downplaying the issues
In 2017, according to a whistleblower, at least one senior official with the Trump Administration tried to “tamp down” concerns over problems with the Seresto collars.

“Acting on orders from a senior EPA official, an EPA scientist instructed two other EPA officials to stop expressing their concerns about Seresto over email,” according to the report.

From the report:

In September 2018, according to documents released via a FOIA request, an EPA scientist reported 125 pet deaths linked to the Seresto collar in the second quarter of that year—“the highest number we have seen.” The scientist added that there had been 361 deaths linked to Seresto from August 30, 2017, to April 1, 2018, reflecting a trend of increasing death incidents.

Things got even worse in November 2018, when another EPA scientist shared data for the third quarter and reported 148 pet deaths. The scientist observed that the Seresto collar was “the only product where we are seeing this trend.”

EPA inaction
The report maintained that Bayer was aware of issues with the collars. Even so, the EPA proposed only “limited actions” to address the problem. The agency met with Bayer in July 2019, although it appeared nothing came from the meeting and no regulatory action took place.

Bayer rejected suggestions such as updating warning labels on the products. The labels remained unchanged. Another suggestion involved separate registrations for cat and dog collars to allow the EPA to better track data. Bayer decided the measure was too burdensome; an EPA product manager was sympathetic and agreed.

After Elanco Animal Health’s acquisition of Bayer in 2020, the Seresto collars “immediately became Elanco’s ‘top product globally,’” the report said. Bayer said it had provided its new owner with all relevant data relating to the collars.

Elanco, like Bayer, didn’t make any changes to the label in the U.S., even after the March 2021 USA Today report came to light. Seresto labels in Colombia classified the product as “highly toxic” while Australia’s label said, “POISON.”

Panel’s recommendation
Elanco, the report said, remained in denial about problems with the collars and had “taken the position that the safety and toxicity studies of the collar’s active ingredients do not support the claim that the collar could cause serious harm to animals.”

The subcommittee launched its investigation on March 17, 2021—about nine years after the collar received regulatory approval.

After the 16-month investigation, the subcommittee made three main recommendations:

Recall Seresto collars and begin the process of canceling the collar’s registration
Strengthen the EPA’s scientific review process
Improve incident data collection

“For too long, the Seresto collar has harm to many pets, and their owners,” the report concluded.

Elanco, in a March 2021 statement, said it planned to take no market action and maintained adverse events in the U.S. were below 0.3%. It said it has sold more than 25 million Seresto collars since the EPA approved the product.
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~

beyondpesticides.org
Coverup of Dog Deaths at EPA, According to Internal Emails on Seresto Flea and Tick Collars
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~

Veterinarians puzzled by flea collar angst
As scrutiny of Seresto ramps up, EPA reexamines adverse-event reports
July 7, 2022 (published)
By Lisa Wogan



Elanco Seresto 負面新聞

 字數統計 19456

elanco seresto 

零蚤蝨 在國外 幾年前 有很多負面的案例,當台灣獸醫有推薦,我驚訝。 2022年還有負面新聞。 更多新聞,請自己 Google。


知名寵物驅蟲項圈在美涉及近1,700例寵物死亡 受害飼主呼籲通報不良反應

動物友善網 2021-03-04記者 李娉婷/報導
近日,《今日美國》(USA TODAY)和《中西部調查報告中心》(Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting)調查報導指出,美國最受歡迎寵物驅蟲產品之一的「零蚤蝨頸圈」(Seresto)自2012年在該國上市以來,已經涉及近1,700例寵物死亡事件,但負責管制含有殺蟲劑產品的美國環保局(EPA)卻沒有對此發出警告。......................
零蚤蝨頸圈是拜耳公司(Bayer)開發的寵物驅蟲項圈,由禮藍公司(Elanco)販售,作用效期可長達8個月,它含有的殺蟲劑應該能殺死跳蚤、壁蝨和和其他對寵物有害的昆蟲,並對貓狗安全,但根據監督EPA的非營利組織「生物多樣性中心」(Center for Biological Diversity)獲得的聯邦文件,自2012引進該產品以來,EPA已收到至少1,698例與零蚤蝨頸圈有關的寵物死亡報告。.............
零蚤蝨頸圈含有益達胺(imidacloprid)和氟美林(flumethrin)兩種殺蟲劑,益達胺屬於新菸鹼類殺蟲劑,是美國最常用在農作物的殺蟲劑,歐盟禁止在戶外使用這種殺蟲劑,但允許在寵物驅蟲項圈中使用,而越來越多的證據表明,這些殺蟲劑也會對哺乳動物造成傷害。
全文:https://animal-friendly.co/2021/03/04/seresto-collar/?fbclid=IwAR3SY8EK8BgBOOIfWizyNgDjN1LECg2QRn2xRKh_CbiPAAdbMRX_TOylf1o


Popular flea collar linked to almost 1,700 pet deaths. The EPA has issued no warning.
Johnathan Hettinger
Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting
usatoday:https://bit.ly/2O9Zkv0

A popular flea collar was linked to nearly 1,700 animal deaths, report says, but the EPA hasn't issued any warnings about it
Aylin Woodward
Mar 4, 2021, 7:13 AM
INSIDER:https://bit.ly/3fxBxAs
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~

United States Environmental Protection Agency (.gov)
Seresto Pet Collar Review
Related Topics: Pets
Seresto Pet Collar Review
Over the past several years, EPA has been improving its method for considering pet product-incidents, such as those reported for Seresto collars, in the pesticide registration and re-evaluation process. As part of this effort, and due to the number of Seresto-related incidents reported to EPA, the Agency began an in-depth review of the incidents of Seresto collars in 2021.

EPA has reviewed an extensive set of data it required Elanco, the current registrant of Seresto collars, to submit and reviewed the many incidents reported to EPA’s Incident Data System to determine whether the collars may contribute to an elevated number of pet-related incidents. Throughout the review process, EPA consulted with FDA, which regulates similar products for cats and dogs, including flea and tick products that are ingested. EPA used information gathered during this review process to make its determination about the product.

EPA’s Incident Review Findings
EPA’s scientific review of Seresto-related incident reports identified the need for more detailed incident reporting and public outreach. EPA analyzed all incidents that reported death for Seresto. This included 1,400 deaths reported to EPA from 2016-2020, which represent 2 percent of all Seresto incidents reported for these years. In many of the death-related incidents, critical details of the incident were often missing, preventing the Agency from determining the cause of the death.

The only reported deaths that were found to be “probably” or “definitely” related to Seresto product use were associated with mechanical strangulation or trauma caused by the collar, often associated with a failure of the release mechanism.

For all other deaths, EPA did not identify cases with a probable or definite association between collar use and death, often due to other factors impacting the animal, such as an existing medical condition. In addition, the rate of deaths reported for Seresto was similar to that for other pet products reviewed. E

EPA also analyzed all non-lethal incidents, such as neurological symptoms. In some incidents with moderate or severe clinical sign removal of the collar seemed to alleviate symptoms and/or reapplication of the collar coincided with a reoccurrence of symptoms. Based on these findings, Elanco, the registrant of Seresto, has agreed to implement the following measures:

To alert veterinarians and consumers of potential risks, the terms of continued registration require Elanco to include label warnings on Seresto products that describe common adverse effects that have been reported, along with instructions to remove the collar if those effects occur and instructions on how to report the incident. Elanco also must develop an outreach program to more effectively communicate with veterinarians and the public on the risks of using the product and other similar pesticides on pets.
To improve the quality of data reported when receiving reported incidents from consumers, Elanco must pursue additional information to the greatest extent possible to ensure that complete details of each event are captured. This information includes whether the pet had any pre-existing conditions or previous history of the reported condition. The Seresto pet collar registration has also been split into two registrations, one for cats and one for dogs, to make comparison of incident data across products easier in the future. Elanco must report incident and sales data to EPA on an annual basis.
To reduce the risk of strangulation, Elanco must evaluate potential changes to the emergency release mechanism of Seresto pet collars to prevent death by strangulation or choking. The company must submit a report detailing the data and analysis collected and performed in pursuit of this effort within one year. Based on this evaluation, EPA may require a modified release mechanism for the Seresto collar.
To allow for the continued evaluation of reported incidents, EPA has limited its current approval of Seresto collar registrations to five years. EPA will continue to evaluate Seresto incident data over that period.
To learn more, read EPA’s decision document.

Frequent Q&As
1. What are the potential risks of using Seresto pet collars on dogs and cats?

When used according to label instructions and precautions, pet products such as Seresto pet collars can be very effective, but when misapplied or not used according to directions, your pets may be unnecessarily exposed to pesticides and could become ill. More commonly reported adverse events inude itching for dogs and hair changes near the collar application site for cats. Less common, but more serious reported adverse events, include neurological symptoms, such as convulsions or ataxia.

Monitor your pet for side effects or signs of sensitivity after applying the product, particularly when using the product on your pet for the first time. Consumers whose pet experiences adverse reactions from treatment with a flea and tick product should consult their veterinarian immediately. They should also contact the National Pesticide Information Center, an EPA information-sharing partner that has staff who are specially trained in responding to pesticide exposure incidents, including those involving pets. For flea and tick collars specifically, pet owners should remove the collar immediately if the pet experiences any adverse reaction. In addition, consumers whose pets experienced an adverse reaction from pet collars or topical treatments should also report the incident on EPA’s website at www.epa.gov/pets.

2. Why didn’t EPA cancel Seresto pet collars?

Seresto pet collars continue to meet EPA’s standards under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) while providing important flea and tick prevention for dogs and cats, and lice control for dogs. The new mitigation measures will aid in the continued review of this product and help raise awareness in the veterinary and consumer community about potential risks from pesticide products used on pets. The new measures will also provide more information to users about how to prevent and report adverse reactions from Seresto pet collars.

3. When will the labels changes take effect?

Elanco must implement the new registration requirements by the next printing of Seresto pet collar labels, which must occur in the next 12 months. Elanco must split the pet collar registration into two registrations, one for cats and one for dogs. The company must also add label warnings on Seresto products that discuss common adverse effects that have been reported, along with instructions to remove the collar if those effects occur and instructions on how to report the incident.

4. Why is EPA continuing to review Seresto pet collars? How will EPA continue to review Seresto pet collars in the next few years?

EPA is committed to improving the process by which pet product-related incidents are considered in the pesticide registration and re-evaluation process. The Agency is requiring Elanco to report incident and sales data on an annual basis and provide additional information about incidents whenever possible. Any new data collected on Seresto will be analyzed by EPA.

5. How does the Whitepaper A Modern Approach to EPA and FDA Product Oversight impact the registration of Seresto pet collars?

The EPA and FDA whitepaper describes the current challenges and potential opportunities of a modernized approach to regulation of certain products, including products like Seresto that are topically applied to animals to control fleas or ticks. One aspect of that proposed modernized approach includes a process for transferring oversight of flea and tick pet products, such as Seresto pet collars, from EPA to FDA. The proposals in the whitepaper do not yet impact the registration of Seresto pet collars.

Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.
LAST UPDATED ON JULY 13, 2023
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~

MONEYWATCH 
Seresto flea collar should be recalled after 2,500 pet deaths, lawmakers say
moneywatch
BY AIMEE PICCHI
JUNE 17, 2022 / 9:10 AM / MONEYWATCH

The popular Seresto flea-and-tick collar should be recalled following research showing the roughly $70 device poses risks to pets and their owners, according to a new congressional report. The findings link the collar to almost 100,000 incidents and 2,500 pet deaths. 

Almost 34 million of the collars have been sold to American pet owners, who have been attracted by the product's pledge to ward off ticks and fleas for up to eight months, compared with other treatments that must be applied monthly. But the collar, made by Elanco Animal Health, is linked to a higher number of death and injury reports than competing products, claims the report from the Committee on Oversight and Reform's subcommittee on economic and consumer policy.

The report may prompt some pet owners to question if they want to buy or continue using the product, part of the $232 billion pet-care industry. During the pandemic, more Americans adopted pets, while spending on pet-related items have surged during the health crisis, according to Grand View Research. 

The subcommittee's report highlighted the number of reports of injury or death that owners linked to the collar, as well as Canada's decision to bar sales of the Seresto collar because its review of U.S. incidents and toxicology studies found it "posed too great a risk to pets and their owners to be sold in Canada."

During a hearing before the committee on Wednesday, Elanco Animal Health CEO Jeffrey Simmons said the collar is safe and had been approved by the Environmental Protection Agency, undergoing more than 80 safety, toxicity and efficacy studies.

"Adverse event reports aren't proof of causation," Simmons said in the hearing. "We haven't found a single death due to the ingredients in the collar."

In 2021, there were just over 17 incident reports for every 10,000 collars sold, with most of those issues involving irritation or redness, according to Elanco. In a statement to CBS MoneyWatch, the company said an analysis of all such reports between 2013 and 2021 shows "no established link between the active ingredients in Seresto and pet death."

Added Elanco: "Given the robust scientific evidence for Seresto's strong safety profile, we are proud to stand behind the product as an important tool to protect pets from fleas and ticks and the damaging diseases they carry."

Symptoms: Skin lesions, lethargy
The report cited findings from Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), which Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, a Democrat from Illinois and the chairman of the committee, said is akin to the EPA in the U.S.

The PMRA's analysis of symptoms experienced by hundreds of pets included skin lesions and irritated skin, which sometimes covered large areas of a pet's body and didn't resolve after the collar was removed, the report said. Other symptoms include lethargy, abnormal behavior, excessive grooming and vocalization, vomiting, diarrhea and anorexia, according to the panel.  

"These troubling symptoms appeared shortly after use of the Seresto collar began, mostly within the first month," according to the report. "Many pet owners reacted by removing their pets' collars early," it said. 

One pet owner, Thoomas Mairino, of Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, said in the hearing that the family's dog suffered from increasingly severe symptoms, including a bleeding patches on her stomach and a seizure, after they began using a Seresto collar on the advice of their veterinarian. Although they consulted with several other vets, her condition worsened, and the family eventually decided to have the dog put down. 

"The final 18 months of her life were agonizing to watch," he told lawmakers. "If I could help prevent another family from going through what my family went through, I wanted to act.

Some pet owners also reportedly experienced side effects, the panel's report added. These included skin and immune disorders, as well as respiratory, neurological and digestive impacts such as throat irritation, dizziness and nausea, it said.

The report included several recommendations, including a voluntary recall of the collars by Elanco. It also suggested that the EPA revamp its review process for products with pesticides.
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~

For Immediate Release, November 7, 2022

Contact:

Nathan Donley, (971) 717-6406, ndonley@biologicaldiversity.org

Newly Obtained EPA Documents Reveal Seresto Flea Collars Now Linked to More Than 100,000 Reports of Harm to Pets, Nearly 2,700 Deaths

Over 10 Years Agency Has Received Average of 25 Reports Daily of Injuries to Pets Wearing Seresto Collars But Taken No Action

WASHINGTON— Reports of harm to pets wearing Seresto flea collars have now soared to 100,592, including 2,698 deaths, according to new Environmental Protection Agency incident reports obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity.

There are also 894 reports of humans being harmed after exposure to the pet collar.

The new EPA data reveals that there has been an average of 25 dog and cat injury reports per day since the collars went on the market in March 2012. An average of 21 pet deaths linked to the collars have been reported each month.

“The fact that on average, 25 different people every day are linking this collar with harm to their pet, and then reporting it to the authorities, is absolutely shocking,” said Nathan Donley, environmental health science director at the Center. “This has been happening constantly for 10 years, and the EPA has done nothing.”

Earlier this year the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy held an oversight hearing and released a report based on a year-long investigation detailing the EPA’s failure to take action to protect pets from harms associated with the Seresto collars.

The committee’s report detailed how Seresto had a much higher number of total incidents and “major” and “death” incidents than any other flea and tick treatments, even when accounting for the number of collars sold.

The Seresto collar had nearly 4,000 more — or 58% more — incidents than the second-most dangerous flea-control product, and over 7,000 more — or 235% more — incidents than the third most dangerous product.

The report noted that the Seresto collar was banned in Canada after an assessment by federal regulators found that it probably or possibly caused 77% of “death” and “major” reported incidents involving its use.

The EPA’s Office of Inspector General is currently investigating whether the agency has violated federal law by failing to take action on the Seresto flea collar.

Emails previously released under the Freedom of Information Act detailed how EPA managers had reportedly instructed staff not to put in writing their concerns about Seresto. The emails revealed significant internal strife within the agency regarding the pet collars, with staff scientists and incident coordinators repeatedly urging managers to take action on Seresto.

Despite the escalating number of incidents and the consistent nature of the harms reported — such as severe rashes and seizures — the EPA has put in place no restrictions or alerted pet owners to the potential risks.

In July 2021 the agency sought public comment on the Center’s petition to cancel the registration of the Seresto.

However, the newly obtained documents reveal a process fraught with delays and no commitment to a timeline on action even as more incidents and deaths are reported. An EPA review of detailed incident reports requested in April 2021 by Elanco, the flea collar’s maker, was originally estimated to be completed in September 2022. That was subsequently pushed back to sometime in “fall.” No review has been released to date.

The EPA has steadfastly remained uncommitted to a deadline to take regulatory action on Seresto a year and a half after The Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting and USA Today published their initial investigation on the issue.

“Every single month this drags on is another month where 21 more people have to make that dreaded phone call to report that their pet died after wearing this collar. And who knows how many grieving pet owners never file a report,” said Donley. “The EPA’s delay and inaction have heartbreaking consequences every day, and it’s long past time for the agency to do its job.”

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1.7 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.
~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~。~

amazon 評價都寫很長,大家自己上去看。 貓用,有一些人說沒效、有 脖子受傷的案例; 狗用,也是有人說 沒效,仍然有跳蚤,蜱蟲。
Reviewed in the United States on July 15, 2021,7歲母貓死亡。

Crookedgoblin
1.0 out of 5 stars Made my cat sick
Reviewed in the United States on May 23, 2023
Size: 1 PackStyle: Cat OnlyVerified Purchase
I've been using Seresto collars on my dogs and cats since Seresto hit the market back in 2012. I normally purchase them from the vet but Amazon was cheaper so I went the cheaper route. Boy do I regret it. I just took my cat to the vet and had her yearly check up and had a whole senior panel run, which came back she was in perfect health. Then I put the collar on right after. Within days she had stopped eating and became very lethargic. I couldn't figure out what was causing it but after using Seresto for 11 years it never occurred to me it could be from the collar. Finally after a week I decided to remove the collar and see if it helped. Within 24 hours she's perked up and in 48 she was back to her normal self. Eating and playing again.

I've done a lot of research since and with the amount of lawsuits and pet deaths that have been brushed under the rug I will NOT be using this product anymore. Thankfully whatever it did to my cat was reversible and nothing more severe happened to her.



2023年8月8日 星期二

安樂死的重量 ─ 生命品質如何衡量?

 

2016年的文章。 現在 2023年收容所的環境與照顧 已有改善,甚至與國外同等級; 民間狗園的慘況,仍存在,延伸到 被人餵食物的遊蕩犬貓,吃 玉米粉乾糧、吃廚餘、生病了無法治療、生病了仍然不收編回家、生病了就醫之後再丟回街上,放任狗狗痛苦的咬自己,這些都是真實慘況,部份 礙媽 只會 情緒勒索、報慘況然後募款,就是不能帶回家或找地方讓生病犬貓恢復健康,帶去看醫生已經是最大的恩賜。


安樂死的重量(上)──生命品質如何衡量?

作者 陳玉敏 2016-08-31 獨立評論

在我懷裡死去

1997年(民國86年)8月28日傍晚,溫妮颱風遠颺,天空晴朗蔚藍。我與同事駕著車子,渾身惡臭、疲憊不堪的離開當時位於八斗子漁港旁的基隆流浪犬留置所。所內清潔人員在關上大門時,仍不斷低聲咒罵:淹死是怎樣不人道?你知道那有多快(死)嗎!本來一兩個鐘頭可以做完的事,被你們這樣搞一整天……。

車子駛離後,我們把車停靠在海岸公路旁,萬里無雲的廣闊海邊,坐在灰色車子裡,放聲痛哭。

那是台灣通過「動物保護法」的前一年,在更早的1995年,為了協助政府瞭解何謂人道「流浪動物控制與管理」,並推動相關政策制定,我們與「英國世界動物保護協會」(WSPA)合辦「流浪動物控制管理與福利政策研討會」,除了法律與教育方面的討論,也示範如何人道捕犬。

但引進「流浪動物控制管理」的知識、技能與政策觀念後,各縣市仍不時傳出活活餓死流浪犬的消息。為能全盤掌握問題、促進系統改變,我們在1996年花了近一年的時間,跑遍全台人煙罕至的深山、垃圾場、公墓、水肥場……,完成全台65處公立流浪犬收容、留置所的調查。掌握了各縣市政府由清潔隊負責捕抓流浪犬後的處置真相。

舉例來說,當時基隆留置所是以「淹死」的方式處死流浪犬,新北的瑞芳、九份、金山、鶯歌及桃園、苗栗竹南、南投草屯、台南永康、高雄鳳山、花蓮吉安等地,則是「挖坑活埋」或「讓狗活活餓死」;台北市與嘉義市以「毒氣」,宜蘭則以「電擊」處死。當時全台每年平均處死超過15萬隻流浪犬,死法幾乎毫無例外。

那是流浪犬被視為「活垃圾」、媒體專欄譏諷「捕捉流浪狗還要人道」、說自己「從事動物保護工作」會被親友及社會訕笑的年代。

從淹死、活埋到安樂死

在沒有法律能保障動物福利、減少動物受苦的狀況下,我們一邊努力推動「動物保護法」立法,一邊展開全台最早施行、同時也最有詳盡規畫,以「五聯單」的嚴謹方式,讓政府與民間共同掌握每一隻被絕育犬隻動向的流浪犬絕育計畫──「讓痛苦到牠為止」,也就是現在被喊得十分響亮的TNR或TNVR(捕捉、絕育、回置)。但施行不到兩年,相關無解的問題一一浮現,計畫也在我們手中負責任的中止(下篇將再詳述)。

在整體社會將流浪犬視為「必須清除的垃圾」氛圍下,政府毫無知識技能的以各種手法撲殺流浪犬,因此我們要求政府,若無法避免撲殺,則必須以最人道的方式為之。

當時國際間執行小動物的安樂死,普遍採取「高劑量之巴比妥酸鹽(Sodium pentobarbital for injection)注射法」,此藥經科學研究,能作用於中樞神經系統,具深層鎮靜安眠效果,且在一定劑量後,能迅速停止動物心跳,然而當時台灣並未進口。

於是除了要求政府引進外,並在英國動保組織的協助下,派任專業獸醫師來台,前往數個公立收容所,逐一示範並指導所方獸醫及工作人員,從如何「溫和的保定動物」開始,執行犬隻的「人道安樂死」。

8月28日當天,我和同事從所內狗籠裡,溫緩但十分費力的帶出一隻隻充滿驚嚇、有的退縮,有的防衛攻擊的犬隻,讓狗在我們懷中,由獸醫將高濃度的麻醉劑「巴比妥酸鹽」,透過靜脈注射到狗的身體,藉由深層的麻醉,讓狗的心跳停止,結束生命。

而原本,牠們是會被關在籠中,用起吊機將狗籠吊起,然後浸入一旁的大水槽中活活淹死的。然而沒多久,整個「愛狗圈」便開始攻擊,說我們拿了「巴比妥酸鹽」廠商的錢,引進此藥劑來台灣殺狗 、動保團體居然變成「殺狗團體」……等,也因此「檯面上」的原因,我們整個秘書處同仁在背負莫需有的指責與誣陷委屈下,離開了當年沒日沒夜奮鬥打拚的動保組織。

我是「劊子手」,促成了大撲殺?

今年7月,一場由立委召開的「零安樂政策停看聽」公聽會,一位動保組織代表在會議上痛批,要我們為20年來,數十萬無辜被撲殺的狗命負最大責任。

20年來,無數人士高喊收容所要「零撲殺、零安樂」,但台灣每年平均有十幾萬隻犬隻被捕捉、入所,以及和現在一樣,無數愛心人士以及私人狗場,因不願見到流浪犬被安樂死,大量將犬隻從公立收容所移出。

這些狗被愛心人士「救援」,「逃過」了被撲殺的命運,是否就此獲得了「善待」?我曾經拜訪過無數私人狗場,看到癱瘓的狗終身被關在籠內,幾乎成天「泡」在自己的屎尿裡。也曾看到200、300隻一眼望不盡的群養狗場,在放飯時,因為狗的護食行為,不斷發生狗咬狗的衝突;甚至一個愛心人士照顧100、200隻狗,永遠都不會知道,群體中弱勢的狗,可能久久才能吃上一口飯。

更甚者,無數在偏遠郊區的狗場,狗就只是「一口氣」活著,毫無生存品質可言。一隻車禍斷腿見骨,渾身是傷的狗,在愛心人士施放「阿彌陀佛」的唱頌聲中,痛苦的自行斷氣。愛心人士說:那是牠的命,我們不是上帝,無權為牠做安樂死,只能讓牠自己斷氣。

以美國為例,許多宣稱不做安樂死的私人收容所,因為收容量能更加有限,因此便得設定極高的「入所標準」──老的、病的、殘缺的、有行為問題的、較不具認養相的,大抵上就不收。原因無他,因為這些狗較難被認養,收容所週轉不出去。若要收容上述犬隻,則必須設定數量上限,為的是確保每一隻入所動物都能獲得妥善的照顧與福利。

因此上述那些老的、病的、殘缺的、有行為問題的、較不具認養相的狗,去了哪呢?當然還是執行安樂死的公立與部份私人收容所了。在給予入所犬隻一段時間的良好照顧後,若還是無人認養,為了讓出空間給等待進所的犬隻,則施行安樂死。

但施行安樂死的收容所,卻往往因此承受許多壓力與攻擊,並且極少獲得捐款挹注,而宣稱不做安樂死的收容所,則可以獲得較多的掌聲與捐款。

那些狗後來怎麼了?

試著想想,台灣無數宣稱不做安樂死,強調「終身收容」,並且沒有任何相關軟硬體與動物福利規範的私人收容所,在幾乎不對外開放認養的情況下,為什麼可以每隔一段時間,便前往公立收容所大量「救出」流浪犬呢?在空間與照顧人力都有限度的狀況下,這些收容所該以何種方式減量呢?是傳染病襲來犬隻的大量「自然死亡」?還是互咬傷亡?還是結紮後再被放回野外街上? 

多年來,流浪狗的問題,從中央到地方、從源頭管理到末端處理,長期遭到漠視。以源頭管理的三個面向:犬籍登記與絕育、嚴格的寵物繁殖買賣管理、飼主責任建立來說,早年屢屢可見在各式討論源頭管理的會議上,政府還會扶植「假的」動保團體在現場來癱瘓會議討論,以「假的」民主程序讓議題毫無進展。

就這樣,每年超過十萬隻的捕捉入所量,以及極低認養率的出所量,讓公立收容所不得不採取撲殺的手段減量。但也因為「愛心人士」的不斷批評,所方多年來只好採取關起門來「殺」的策略,只要不被看見,就不會有紛爭。

1998年11月動物保護法通過以後,我們持續進入公立收容所,要求瞭解安樂死的施作狀況。但在所內第一線操作人員被視為劊子手,加上沒有地方民代願意關切這種毫無掌聲的犬貓撲殺議題的情況下,幾乎沒有公立收容所願意開放民間參與。

十多年來,我們唯一被允許介入的,只有台北、桃園、台中收容所。以台北收容所為例,2009年在李文英議員及其助理的協助下,我們進入收容所,從協助自籠舍帶狗、保定開始,一次一次以行動讓施作人員卸下心房,慢慢將安樂死的標準作業流程建立起來,讓每一隻狗能被溫柔的對待,而不是粗暴的被撲殺。同年,也開始在桃園新屋收容所培訓志工,協助建立所內的工作流程及制度。新屋收容所後來甚至允許攝影師入內,為即將被安樂死的狗拍照,以「生殤相」攝影展呼籲重視流浪犬貓議題。

「零安樂」政策與英國「脫歐」

英國脫歐後的一周,我跟英國歷史最悠久的動保組織「英國防止虐待動物協會」(RSPCA)國際部門負責人談到,英國社會在面對脫歐公投的狀況,跟台灣社會在面對流浪犬「零安樂」的政策好像。

脫歐的口號簡單、清晰、易懂──脫歐!拿回英國主權、趕走移民,增加英國人工作機會!而留歐,整個社會要面對處理的問題太多太複雜,民眾不想弄懂。「安樂死」不道德,所以應該「零安樂」……。民眾想要速成的答案,最好一覺醒來,所有問題就迎刃而解。但解決問題需要每個人做些什麼?則似乎都與我無關,那都是「愛心人士」的事。

多年來各縣市未能有效推動源頭管理,民間不論投入多少流浪犬TNR(捕捉、絕育、放回)與救援收容,流浪犬數量仍未見減少。加上動保法修法將於106年2月施行公立收容所「零安樂」政策,在民眾普遍認為收容所可終身協助安養、因此更出現棄養潮的狀況下,台灣犬貓以及人與動物互動,是否因此朝向更美好的未來了?相關問題,容我下篇文章再述。 

歷史有意義嗎?我常在閱讀歷史的書籍裡,看著每個在顛險、轉折處的生命,是如何思索與選擇,亦或無從選擇的影響自我甚或無數生命的痛苦與喜樂。而他們又是如何面對自我對於「真實道德」的叩問?

余德慧教授在〈從真實道德看見「終極關懷」〉一文中寫到:所謂「真實道德」完全迥異於傳統教條式的道德。「真實道德」深植於生活的根源之處,搖擺於人的不定遭逢裡頭,無法事先被訂出規範,也無法提綱挈領地以明確的道德準繩來衡量。相反的,每個真實道德主體都只能從自身的處境裡,逐步地發展自身的主觀過程,自行發現自己與真理的關係。人生中不斷發生的事故、機緣、變化與外在的衝擊,都無法以原則性的概念加以通約,裡頭也沒有首尾一貫的邏輯,所有的變故都意味著轉化的力量,所有的轉化都朝向個體化的風格塑形,而在這過程裡,有些「真正事關緊要的東西」就會發生。而到底何者是生命最緊要的?這個問題沒有普遍的答案,只能循著個體的生命獨特機緣、命運去發現。

1997年8月至今,恰恰20個年頭。至今我仍端秤不了,屬於我的遭逢與選擇的「道德重量」。

圖:

https://opinion.cw.com.tw/blog/profile/391/article/4729?fbclid=IwAR29Q8f4ne6Mfxs3zGg4FCZC41GH2T78tPhPOopGyLB7agxMgAB-iOt4qVk

。。。。。

2023年 遊蕩犬數量高達15萬隻,都是 棄養?? 浪浪團體強調 源頭管理,避談 戶外餵養 + 未結紮而不斷的生生不息。

安樂死的重量(下)──莫讓痛苦「永不止息」
作者 陳玉敏 2016-09-27
蘇迪勒、馬勒卡颱風才走,梅姬緊隨其後。每當颱風為台灣帶來巨大風雨,臉書上好幾個以「救援流浪動物」為主題的社團,便紛紛有人貼上在不同區域的流浪狗,身處風雨中全身溼透的照片。發言者都說心疼,不斷呼籲民眾提供住家屋簷或騎樓梯間給流浪犬貓躲避風雨。

從1998年立法院通過動保法以來,流浪狗議題是耗費最大社會資源與能量,捲入無數人身心折磨──包括一個公立收容所獸醫的自殺,以及造成社會對立、內耗,進展最為緩慢的動保議題。

TNVR該立法嗎?
就在颱風來襲前夕,動保圈裡持續有人要求將「TNVR」(捕捉、絕育、施打疫苗、回置)及「精準捕抓」立法,要求政府必須編列預算為流浪犬貓絕育,並讓牠們擁有在外流浪的權利,只能「精準捕抓」造成「問題」的犬貓。部份縣市甚至因應愛心人士的要求,也為了讓收容所零安樂死政策達標,訂出流浪犬貓造成問題的認定標準,需由舉報人或鄰里長出面指認並共同前往,才可以捕捉。

整個流浪狗族群管理問題,多年來因為「TNVR入法」爭議,不斷在原地打轉。在梅姬颱風挾帶巨大風雨侵襲全台之際,我希望從一段歷史脈絡與足跡談起,釐清如今大家所論述的,究竟是一個解決流浪動物問題、並致力提升個體動物福利的議題;或其實僅是要求「人與特定物種間特定互動關係」的議題?

動保法之前,台灣最早也最有制度的TNR計畫
狂風驟雨中,她闖入已關閉水門的河濱公園,在水位節節抬升的堤岸邊,呼喊著一隻隻她TNR的狗。一次又一次的風災襲擊,她將家人的擔憂恐懼全然置之度外,甚至涉水進入高漲的河面,企圖將在水中載浮載沈的流浪狗撈起。整整20年,她每天在夜裡載著水桶、飼料,前往住家附近的河濱公園餵食她自願負責區域的流浪狗,為能讓牠們在低溫霜凍的嚴冬,或盛夏酷暑中,能有食物、飲水,好安度流浪生活。

然而錐心考驗何止如此,時不時就會遇上有人將犬貓遺棄在她TNR的區域,讓她陷入「紮不勝紮」的無盡折磨裡!甚至好幾次一整窩剛出生的小貓被遺棄在公園,待她發現時,小貓已遭流浪狗分屍。

此外,害怕流浪狗出沒在公園的民眾向清潔隊、動保處舉報捕捉,更讓她不斷經歷前往收容所「領狗放回、再被捕捉、再領狗放回」的迴圈磨難。她是被通稱為「愛心媽媽(人士)」的TNR流浪狗照顧者,耗盡積蓄、失去歡顏,更失去對人的信任。她是我妹妹,也是許多因為不忍而踏入流浪犬貓救援的愛心人士樣貌。

1996年,台灣通過動物保護法前三年,為了建立並提升台灣民眾飼養寵物的飼主責任,以及減少街頭流浪狗的出生,我們推動了兩項計畫。一是與英國「世界動物保護協會」(WSPA,現改名為WAP)合作的「Pet Respect尊重寵物」運動,包括倡議家犬絕育及登記等飼主責任教育;另一項則是名為「讓痛苦到牠為止──為流浪狗絕育」計畫,企圖解決在尚無法律可以保護動物、以及愛心人士餵養流浪狗卻反而造成更多犬隻生育下,流浪動物遭指責污染環境、或已絕育的浪犬遭捕捉,形成資源浪費與更多不當對待動物的問題。

這個計畫可以說是台灣第一個有制度、負責任的流浪狗TNR。強調每一個參與的志工及為流浪狗絕育的獸醫都必須「具名」負責,並與地方政府達成通報協議,讓每隻被絕育、回置的狗都有完整的「五聯單」紀錄可追蹤、備查。

五聯單通報建檔機制,是將每一隻由志工負責帶往動物醫院施予「絕育」手術的犬隻,掛上識別犬牌、回置原地後,以五聯單通報給五個單位追蹤管理。一聯由協會建檔追蹤;一聯由執行絕育的動物醫院收執,據以向協會請款;一聯送地方政府環保局,讓捕犬人員根據犬牌比對辨識犬隻,除非造成志工出面也無法解決的問題,否則不要捕捉;另一聯則送各地公立收容所,若有犬隻不小心被捕捉了,不要執行安樂死,通知協會或志工處理(因此當時的「辨識犬牌」被稱為「免死金牌」);第五聯則由該犬隻的管理人,亦即負責TNR的志工留存。

計畫的施行要求如此嚴謹,無非是希望降低已絕育的狗被回置後,所可能造成的衝突,以便達到保護犬隻的初衷。但此一運作3年,參與志工達300多人的計畫,最後卻在問題叢生又無解之下終止。

不做源頭管理,TNR迴圈,痛苦「永不止息」?
什麼問題呢?首先,在沒有法律規範飼養寵物應盡的飼主責任下,這些愛心志工幾乎天天要面對「你丟我撿」的巨大負擔,隨時都可能壓垮身心。甚至在許多空曠郊野區域,民眾得知當地有愛心人士做犬貓的TNR及餵食照顧,便棄養得更加心安理得(這狗我不要養了,但我至少給了牠一條「生路」!)

其次,為能落實區域管理責任制,不讓TNR回置的狗,可能因為吠叫、追車、追人等問題,而遭到不喜歡流浪狗的人惡意對待。因此要求參與的志工,若接到造成任何問題的通報,都必須嚴謹面對將狗帶離或執行安樂死的可能。但志工普遍都無法接受這些狀況──也就是,不論是喜歡或不喜歡狗的民眾,所指出的任何問題,愛狗者幾乎都不願接受。因此演變成:這個社區有人抗議,志工就將流浪狗移置到其他志工照顧的區域,而最常被變相移置的區域,就是廣大的河濱公園。民眾與愛心志工、民眾與流浪狗、甚至志工相互之間的衝突不斷。

三是民眾會以毒餌或暴力方式驅趕,不論有無被TNR的流浪狗,都受到同樣對待,同樣導致愛心志工身心俱疲。

四是每每在颱風或低溫寒害期間,各地志工便焦慮不已,紛紛尋求協會協助,希望能幫大批TNR犬隻找到暫時庇護。

五是發生有志工勾結獸醫,未幫犬隻絕育及施打疫苗便掛上識別犬牌,一方面向協會領款,一方面認為只要掛上「免死金牌」,就能讓犬隻不被環保局捕抓與撲殺。

最後,也是最關鍵的原因,則是在沒有法律可以施行源頭管理的狀況下,我們深刻瞭解,即使我們有再多資源,流浪狗的TNR就像無底洞,不論砸再多的經費和人力,也無法對抗人性的自私與犬隻的自然繁殖力!

對比而言,而今倡議TNR入法的人士,一方面說台灣立法已十多年,西方那一套飼主責任不可能建立,台灣多數鄉間「半放養」犬隻的文化很難改變。另一方面主張:流浪犬的問題是國家政策失當的問題,愛心人士協助做TNR是在幫政府解決問題,因此不該讓愛心人士承擔法律所要求的「飼主」責任,任何犬隻發生傷人或交通意外等問題,都必須由政府「買單」,政府只要給錢大規模的TNR或是終身安養犬隻就對了!就讓全民接受流浪狗存在台灣社會的「歷史、文化與事實」吧!

捕捉、收容流浪動物的意義──保護?還是虐待?
世界各國在社會發展的進程裡,都面對程度不一的流浪犬貓問題。這些經過人馴養而溢出的動物,造成交通安全與疫病傳播風險、噪音與環境污染、對野生動物與生態的影響等。因此除非該國的經濟民生水平與法治工具素養等有困難,否則都盡量訂定法律,從飼主責任、義務及嚴格的繁殖買賣等源頭管理著手。中段則以設置經過專業訓練,瞭解犬貓行為,以負責捕捉遊蕩犬貓的動物管制員及收容中心為原則,目的就是要保護每一隻遊蕩的犬貓,兼及人類社群的安全。

1998~99年動保法實施初期,中央業務主管機關農委會從環保署手中接下了多數位於垃圾場、水肥場、公墓、甚至肉品屠宰場內的「留置所」或收容所,共65處。但初期多數仍委由清潔隊「代管」,甚至到今天,仍有許多縣市仍將捕犬工作委由清潔隊處理。

2008年我們為改善台灣收容所的專業管理,提升所內動物福利,再度全面體檢、調查全台的收容、留置所,製作網頁「台灣奇蹟──從生命到垃圾」,大量的證據促使立法院及行政院重視,農委會及各縣市政府才逐步編列預算改善收容所專業管理問題。

政府有了法律工具,多年來卻未曾嚴格落實源頭管理,以致20年來流浪狗的入所量平均每年都維持在10萬隻上下,加上各縣市收容所的經營改善始終未能到位,民眾認養率低,在所內空間有限、狗卻源源不絕進入收容所的狀況下,各縣市都必須執行安樂死以降低數量。

但突然間,在上述問題都還沒被嚴謹制定計畫逐步解決下,「零安樂死」的法律就通過了。源頭管理尚未有效施作,收容所軟硬體品質仍亟待改善,但幾句將問題極度簡化的口號──「精準捕抓」與「TNR入法」就成了少數「動保人士」的「替代方案」!甚至有人要求:政府不須把大筆預算經費花在收容所的改善上,應該把經費投入做流浪狗的TNR。而民代也未能嚴謹評估政策可能帶來的影響,買單為其提案修法。

從1998 年的 「犬傷」到2008年的「台灣奇蹟──從生命到垃圾」,我們兩次全面性的體檢台灣流浪犬貓收容管理的政策。我們所思索的是:如果沒有動物福利做為基礎,無法提升公私立收容所及整體社會對「動物福利」內涵的瞭解、讓民眾了解飼養動物所需具備的動物福利觀念、並讓收容所扮演好流浪動物中途之家及推動飼主教育的角色,動保人士的救援將會是無止無盡的深淵。

看不見的迫遷──我們對流浪賦予過度浪漫的想像?
近幾年台灣出現一種論述──對流浪動物的「看不見的迫遷」,強調的是都市空間裡,是否也該有流浪犬貓可活動的一席之地。此觀點慢慢延伸到河濱公園,郊野甚至國家公園,都有人主張,流浪犬「本來」就生活在那裡,人類憑什麼不准牠們共享空間。

請讓我們先好好界定,狗這個由灰狼經過人類上萬年馴化(domestication)所產生的人工品系(breed),早已不是「野生動物」,被人們棄養的流浪犬,不是「野化犬」也不是「野生動物」,至於流浪犬貓在野外生存所繁殖出的下一代,縱算要稱為野化動物(naturalized animal),但野化動物同樣不等於「野生動物」。

許多愛狗人士宣稱,流浪狗是野生或野化動物,因此牠們跟所有野生動物一樣,擁有跟我們共享環境空間的權力。只要人們不捕抓不干擾,他們的流浪生活就跟野生動物一樣,不會有任何個體動物的福利問題。我們要做的只需不斷倡議並宣導民眾「正確」對待流浪狗的態度,讓流浪狗與人可以和諧共存,成為台灣良善的「風景」之一。

如果人與動物的互動關係(及其影響)可以如此簡化看待,任何動物飼養的規範與管理該說都是多餘,一切順其自然即可!不論寵物蜥蜴或寵物鼠、寵物蛇或寵物浣熊,不想養時,通通丟出來就是了,因為我們必須對所有動物同等視之,給牠們「生存空間」!

只要有流浪動物,就會存在的問題
8月中,我應高公局之邀,出席一場高速公路「路殺犬貓防治」的會議。根據高公局委託環境顧問公司的監測及調查,從98年到105年,該局接獲通報紀錄走上國道遭路殺的動物中,狗就高達7,186隻,貓則有4,805隻。除了造成用路人極大的生命安全威脅外,犬貓誤入國道,在車陣裡倉皇失措的恐懼、緊迫,以及下不來的飢渴交迫,同樣帶給動物極大的威脅。

至於流浪與半放養犬貓對野生動物所造成的威脅傷害,更是各國皆面臨的棘手問題。2015年7月,澳洲政府宣布要在5年內撲殺境內2百萬隻流浪貓,因為這個「天生的獵人」對澳洲小型哺乳類、鳥類和蜥蜴造成嚴重的威脅。澳洲政府指出:有124種瀕危物種可能遭流浪貓獵殺。而起源於英國,歷史悠久的澳洲防止虐待動物協會(RSPCA)也參與撲殺計畫,目的在確保澳洲政府在執行時使用人道方式進行。而法國鄉間、紐西蘭等地,同樣面臨流浪貓對野生動物的獵殺威脅。

前面曾提到,少數經濟民生水平與法治工具素養等亟待提升的東南亞國家,如印度、印尼、泰國……以及羅馬尼亞、經濟破產的希臘等國家,幾乎都放棄了飼主責任等源頭管理工作,在街頭流浪犬數量已失控的狀況下,選擇讓許多國外的動保慈善組織進入,投注大量資源以TNR方式期待能多少「控制」繁殖數量。這些國家或地區,就是要民眾接受永遠都會有流浪狗在街上,也可能發生各種問題。也就是,他們根本不期待能夠解決流浪犬問題了。且這個放棄源頭管理的末端手段,幾乎得「永不止息」的做,否則根本趕不上任何漏網的一公一母犬貓生育所補回來的速度。

切勿將「過渡手段」當解方
總有人會說,就算沒有TNR,目前存在的這些流浪犬貓,一樣會有種種問題。TNR反而有助於減少流浪犬貓的數量。

作為一種「過渡手段」,TNR的確可以減少一部份的犬貓出生,替代一部份的捕捉與撲殺。但如果沒有嚴格的「源頭管理」措施作為最上位的「行動綱領」,即使政府再有資源與能力進行全面、短期間大規模的TNR,但不被管束的飼主(尤其是家犬絕育)與寵物繁殖買賣的失序,仍擋不住繼續被丟出來的流浪犬貓「春風吹又生」,繼續進入下一個耗費大量資源與人力的TNR輪迴。

在有上位「源頭管理」措施的罩頂下,整體社會在一定期限內,以大規模TNR作為過渡手段,讓TNR犬貓可以不被安樂死而自然老死,這不僅需要社會高度共識,體認其為「歷史共業」而必須「相忍為國(狗、貓)」。且縱使流浪犬貓的動物福利有所欠缺,也算是得捱受一段時間的不得已選擇。但如果「TNR法制化」的訴求,不斷將流浪「正當化、浪漫化」,要民眾接受流浪犬貓的「終極存在」,那究竟是在解決問題?還是讓問題持續?同時讓救援、收容流浪犬貓的慈善事業永無止境?

你的期待與想像,影響的是牠們的生命
「不要問我從哪裡來」的流浪浪漫嗎?是該全面讓社會建立起嚴格的源頭管理措施,讓每個民眾如實為自己飼養的動物負責,讓愛心媽媽(人士)可以消失,不要再有如此悲苦的身分角色?還是要讓現在以及未來更多的狗過著流浪生活,去面臨種種生命威脅?

愛狗的人,真能接受「狗應該流浪」?記得2013年狂犬病爆發時,所有動保人士最懼怕的事嗎?那是一旦威脅人身安全,民眾因恐懼而產生的無理性與瘋狂,所可能對動物施加的暴力。真正尊重、愛護動物,該全力拚搏的,到底是自己的浪漫「想像」?還是動物的真實生命處境?

去脈絡的主觀期待,或許浪漫與溫暖,但必須提醒的是,當情感上選擇只看到特定物種,並且只要這個特定物種活著,而不願看到並思考其他問題時,實際行動的結果可能只是滿足自己的浪漫想像與愛心,卻無法真正幫助解決這個物種當前和未來族群面對的問題。

我們真的改變了什麼嗎?
喜歡狗的人士,希望所有人都能跟他們一樣,能與犬隻「共生共存」,訴求的是人與特定物種的特定互動關係,而不是「流浪狗『問題』」的解決,更不是整體改善或提升台灣所有犬隻及動物的福利,就更遑論「權益」了。反之,訴求犬隻的動物福利,則是無論人與狗的互動關係為何(不論你愛不愛狗),每一隻狗都應該被照顧,享有相同的生命品質。

國際同伴動物管理聯盟(ICAM)於2015年出版的《我們真的改變了什麼嗎?──狗口管理方案的監督與評估》(Are we making a difference ? -- A guide to monitoring and evaluating dog population management interventions),提醒各國「愛」狗人士,包括學者、倡議者、動保組織、贊助者,在大家關心犬隻族群管理的介入方式時,真正應該注意的是狗的福利,及其可能影響因素。每個介入的方案,是否:

1.增進狗的福利(以動物為主體的指標,animal based indicators)?
2.增進提供給狗的照顧(以資源投入為基礎的指標,resource based indicators)?
3.減少狗的密度/穩定族群?
4.減少公衛風險?
5.增進大眾觀感/意識?
6.增進送養單位表現?
7.減少犬隻對野生動物的負面影響?
8.減少犬隻對牲畜/經濟動物(livestock)的影響?

並期待,在追蹤犬隻族群管理的進展時,能以這些(以及其他可能更多的)客觀指標檢視其影響,以利政策的進一步改善。我相信這不僅是政府應該做的事,更是任何關心犬貓生命的人應該做的事。

死亡如有重量,其衡量的砝碼當是死亡的方式,和死前的痛苦與折磨程度。如果台灣公立收容所犬隻「零安樂死」的重量「歸零」了,但是更多犬隻在民間收容所或是街頭野外(TNR)因疾病「痛苦致死」或「自然死」或「橫死」,其死亡的重量卻是加倍了。

我不相信真正愛狗愛貓,尊重動物的人,會看不見這個事實。


2023年8月6日 星期日

加拿大 動物管理 (負面文)

 

加拿大 動物保護法

https://cherishdogs-animals.blogspot.com/2017/03/blog-post_14.html


加拿大 動物保護法2:

https://cherishdogs-animals.blogspot.com/2021/07/blog-post.html



Northern Saskatchewan First Nation to cull stray dogs

Band chief says wild dogs pose a safety risk to children

CBC News · Posted: Apr 08, 2015 8:00 AM EDT | Last Updated: April 8, 2015

The Fond Du Lac Denesuline First Nation in northern Saskatchewan will begin its annual spring cull of wild dogs this week. Band Chief, Earl Lidguerre, said the cull is needed to protect residents of the remote reserve.

"You don't know who the owners are because they're just loose dogs and nobody seems to have ownership of them," Lidguerre said. "Sometimes there's a pack of dogs running around and it's just not safe for the young children within the community."

Lidguerre said there are about 40 to 50 stay dogs in the community. Two weeks ago the band notified members that starting Monday April 6 any loose dogs would be put to rest.

"We shoot them but we do it with safety. One person has been doing it. He's a good hunter," Lidguerre said. "He's been doing it for the past several years without any incident or harm to the membership."

The Fond Du Lac Denesuline First Nation does not have a SPCA service or a veterinary clinic to spay and neuter wild dogs.

In 2010 a 10-year-old boy was mauled to death by dogs on the Canoe Lake First Nation.

Lidguerre said there have been no serious dog attacks on the the Fond Du Lac Denesuline First Nation so far this year.

RCMP in Fond Du Lac confirm they were notified by the band of the cull.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/northern-saskatchewan-first-nation-to-cull-stray-dogs-1.3024263

。。。。。。。。。。


CANADA

Village in Saskatchewan cancels dog cull after social media backlash

By Deb Matejicka  Global News

Posted July 18, 2019 5:53 pm

 Updated February 2, 2022 6:45 pm

https://globalnews.ca/news/5656002/saskatchewan-village-la-loche-dog-cull-cancelled/

。。。。。。。。。。


Saskatchewan First Nation says disposal of culled dogs was poorly handled

INCLUDES CORRECTION

KAMSACK, SASK.

THE CANADIAN PRESS

PUBLISHED APRIL 10, 2019

UPDATED APRIL 12, 2019

This article was published more than 4 years ago. Some information may no longer be current.

A First Nation in eastern Saskatchewan says it is reviewing its policies after 11 dead dogs that had been culled were found near railway tracks.

The RCMP began investigating last week after receiving several reports of dead dogs near the town of Runnymede near the Manitoba boundary.

The investigation led back to the Cote First Nation.

Darlene Bryant, the band’s health director, says the cull was regrettable but necessary.

She says dogs are often abandoned on the First Nation’s land north of Kamsack, Sask., and they quickly become strays that hunt for food and sometimes form packs.

Bryant says the animals tear into garbage bins and become increasingly aggressive.

“Throughout the year we’ve had nine bites,” said Bryant. “These range from the smallest child to an adult.”

It’s especially a concern for the nearly 70 children, between four and 18, who attend the First Nation’s youth centre, she said. Some children have been attacked and are now too scared to return.

Bryant said that so many dogs are left on Cote land that there are usually two or three culls a year.

The disposal of the dogs was inappropriate, said Bryant, who added that the contractor hired to cull the animals made his own decision about where to leave the bodies. The contractor won’t be hired again, she said.

There are no laws against culling dogs when they become nuisance animals, as long as the cull is done humanely.

Don Ferguson, executive director of Animal Protection Services of Saskatchewan, warns that there are consequences for people who abandon or neglect dogs.

“Abandoning their dog is contrary to the Animal Prevention Act and they could be charged if found abandoning their dogs,” he said.

He recommends that pet owners seek alternatives to leaving their pets.

“There are still agencies, like the respective humane societies and SPCAs, where they can be humanely euthanized.”

Bryant told CTV News that alternatives to culls are being sought. In the short term, she said, the band office is looking to partner with a shelter to help find homes for the dogs. There’s also some thought of the First Nation constructing its own kennels. (CTV Regina)

Editor’s note: (April 12, 2019) A previous version of this story incorrectly identified Don Ferguson as the executive director of the Saskatchewan SPCA. This version has been corrected.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-saskatchewan-first-nation-says-disposal-of-culled-dogs-was-poorly-2/

。。。。。。。。。。


Northern community faces backlash over planned dog cull

Apr 12, 2022 | 5:18 PM

Pending the hiring of a person to carry out the work, the northern community of Pelican Narrows is strongly looking at the possibility of conducting a dog cull over the Easter long weekend.

According to a statement from Chief and council, the bounty hunter will be out and about in the community, and local residents who want to save their pets are encouraged to keep them tied up. Councillor Sarah Swan explained to paNOW the situation, which she attributed to negligent owners, has gotten very bad.

“In less than one week we had 10 people (adults) taken to the clinic regarding dog bites and the nurse said one of them would have been fatal if it wasn’t caught on time,” she said.

Estimating there’s currently as many as 100 stray dogs running around the community, Swan noted an incident as recently as Tuesday morning where a pack of 20 dogs was seen in a bunch, fighting, and tearing another dog apart. She explained the community has tried using a bounty program in the past, but has had trouble hiring people to do the work.

“Some got in trouble like the owners would get mad at the bounty for killing their dogs that were unchained, untied and not taken care of,” she said.

While the planned cull this weekend is still not a guarantee, Swan explained the person hired to do the cull will pick up the stray dogs, and perform the task at the dump, away from the eyes of young children.

The community’s plans have not gone unnoticed and at least one dog rescue group has appealed through social media for the community to meet with them and develop a better plan. Swan explained the community has used a rescue group in the past, but claimed the rescuer was only taking away the smaller, hungry dogs and not the bigger, more aggressive dogs. She also added the volunteer was not from the actual community.

“She doesn’t see and hear of all these incidents happening, like she doesn’t walk our streets to see all the dog packs and all the mean dogs that are on every street”, Swan said. “She would be scared.”

Gayle Yungwirth, with North of 54 Frontline Dog Rescue, is the volunteer who has been travelling to the northern community for the past three-and-a-half years. She told paNOW she was surprised hear about the cull plans.

“To my knowledge there has not been a cull/shoot in the community since I started rescuing there in late 2018,” she said.

With respect to the situation at hand, Yungworth agreed there are a lot of dogs there, but added it is very hard to determine whether a dog is owned or not. Most dogs roam freely throughout the community and do not have collars which immediately identifies whether they are owned.

Estimating that she traveIs to Pelican Narrows at least every two weeks, and sometimes weekly, Yungwirth said they have not done a large rescue there for awhile now as they do not have access to a cargo van. The closest place to rent is Prince Albert and there is no guarantee that a vehicle is always available.

“But whenever I go there I come home with dogs. I get messages and pics on a regular basis,” she said, explaining the pickups include surrenders, dogs/pups that have come to a property but are not their dogs, strays needing help, injured dogs (from dog fights or hit by cars), sick dogs, or Momma’s and babies that have been located in a den, or under a building.

When asked what option she would propose for the community, Yungwirth suggested they hire a full-time Animal Control Officer and provide them with a vehicle and proper equipment needed to rescue animals. Other options she thinks are good are limiting the number of dogs per household; and imposting a fine for owned dogs that get retrieved for a fine. If picked up a second time, the dog gets relocated.

“All dogs must be registered and tagged at the Band or Village Office, ideally with proof of vaccinations and spayed or neutered,” she said.

Moving forward Yungwirth said she has a group chat going with the five band council members from Pelican Narrows, and has requested a meeting Wednesday in the community.

“I want to say that I have met some absolutely awesome people in these communities.There are many families that take very good care of their pets, love their animals. Many in the community help animals in need by feeding them and reaching out to me. People thank me every time I go up there for what I am doing,” she said.

圖:https://panow.com/2022/04/12/northern-community-faces-backlash-over-planned-dog-cull/