Very interesting blog. The only thing bothering me is there have been a couple of high-profile cases where dogs got loose, the owners were on vacation, and the dogs got adopted or otherwise rescued by people that refused to return the dogs to their owners. Cases such as these are arguably statistically negligible, I'm sure, and offer an argument as to why all shelters and rescues should be regulated and subjected to some form of oversight.

And, DubV, when you finish interviewing an actual geneticist familiar with canines why don't you interview a licensed clinical social worker about all the factors that put a toddler at risk for death, sexual abuse, and injury when that toddler has a young, unmarried mother? There is a whole lot wrong in this picture. What makes me angry is children end up in bad situations and when something goes wrong it's more difficult for me to keep MY dogs. I'm getting a little tired of this nonsense.

I agree with Jim Crosby - every time a child dies like this it needs to be treated like a crime scene.

By the way, I love this sentence: "If local news is unwilling to cover local politics, local politicians will operate essentially unchecked by anyone besides the most dedicated local news consumers, who are likely to be IDEOLOGICAL ACTIVISTS (emphasis mine) of one sort or the other". How do people become "ideological activists"? Where municipal politics are concerned it's because somebody, somewhere tried to put the screws to them. ;-)

Great comments by Salon regarding news coverage of politics. You're absolutely correct, Brent, it's far worse at the municipal level. Local newspapers are quickly going by the wayside and only the most dedicated (and suspicious) residents bother to watch local government. Unfortunately as long as the streets are maintained, police and firefighters are funded, and streetlights and parks are in good shape people typically don't get interested in local government. Local politicians have far more ability to get involved in and affect people's personal lives, yet there is little voter accountability at that level of government. Municipal elections tend to have low voter turnout and public servants know they only have to, for example, get the same 500 people that voted for them the last time in a city of 50,000 people. These are typically part-time positions and the public servants have "real" jobs so there's little incentive to do "the will of the people". It's far more tempting to do "the will of the public servant" because if you aren't reelected, well, so what? Washington Post columnist George Will wrote, “First, democracy requires judicial supervision to thwart the excesses of elected officials. Second, governments closest to the people are - never mind what sentimentalists say - often the worst. This is because elected tyrants can most easily become entrenched where rival factions are few”. Unless there is a hot-button issue on the table people rarely get involved in local politics.

Okay, likw "pirvull friend" I'm confused by this story as well. I realize a three-day old infant is not a "toddler" (that's okay, Brent, you have a lot on your plate) but what in the world was a three day old infant doing in a swing? I had no children myself but I do watch my sister's children on occasion,and unless swings have changed dramatically you don't put three day old babies in swings! Perhaps someone young with an infant can weigh in on this one.

The dog bite story about the jogger, walker, or whatever he was that was (allegedly) attacked by the "pit bulls" out at Longview Lake near the marina was ridiculous. Channel 9 (KMBC) was the only local affiliate that covered the story - two or three days after the incident. We really don't know what the dogs were, and it's interesting to note that for someone that thought they were going to get killed this guy looked perfectly healthy during the interview. How is this news in a metropolitan area? We track our dogs out at Longview a lot and rarely see stray dogs. The last time we were there, though, two Great Danes literally appeared out of nowhere while a friend was working her Greater Swiss Mountain Dog. Fortunately everyone was friendly. One of the dogs had a tag - the onwer lived in Kansas City and was at some sort of running event. She said the fence needed repair and asked me no to contact animal control, LOL. The dogs returned home on their own.

"It seems that everyone realizes that Ontario's breed ban is ineffective -- except for the Liberal Government". No surprise there!

There is an overabundance of small kennels in southwest Missouri. I have plenty of friends in and near Joplin - I could find out if these are dogs that are being turned in by the public or if the shelter is being saddled with small dogs from kennels being shut down. The Joplin shelter is a rather odd duck - they built a large, new shelter but don't seem to be making much headway as far as reducing intake and euthanasias. The shelter wasn't built by the city - I seem to recall it was built by a humane organization. Lamar, Missouri is just two hours south of Kansas City but they see far more puppies in their shelter in that area than we see here. So do Joplin and Springfield.

Oh, and congrats, Brent, on the quote and the good press for KC Pet Project.

I read Jenee's article and it was a good article with some good points, but I bristled at the "We privately adopted the baby boxer a couple of weeks ago from a family in Kansas". No, sweetie. you BOUGHT a Boxer puppy from a breeder.

God bless you for the good work you're doing. I hope we see the day (soon) when you don't get 109 animals in one day.

What a tragedy. Not to mention there are way too many people out there that think they can shoot with the accuracy of cops (actors) on TV programs.

the article about Kathy Warnick's salary as President of the Humane Society of Missouri made my day. :-)

Re: the number of commercial kennels being on the decline in Missouri - there are a variety of reasons. Part of it has to do with the economy. Part of it is the result of modifications to the state's ACFA law due to the whole Prop B fiasco, even though most of the changes to ACFA don't become law until 2016 and a lot of kennels are already in compliance with some, if not all of the changes. Much of it has to do with an aging populiation - like the Pom breeder in the article a lot of older breeders are retiring. Unless you have children that want to take over the business it's easier just to have a "going out of business sale". This is bad news for a lot of rescues and humane societies. They are going to lose their source of small and Toy breeds. I can't imagine "increased enforcement" is a reason, but I guess it's possible. We already had very good enforcement, despite what the media and Humane Society of Missouri preached.

Wow, Nikki, thank you SO MUCH for verifying what I've been saying for years! the first six sentences of your post just say it all and demonstrate the insanity in this picture. Certainly dogs from an unknown source are so much better than commercially-bred dogs that come with health certificates from inspected kennels. Brent, which rural Missouri shelters are "overrun" by commercially-bred dogs? I've never heard of this being a problem. Commercially bred dogs typcially don't end up in shelters unless they are from an unlicensed facility that is shut down by the state.

Santa Fe? Wow, I don't associate dog fatalities with Santa Fe.

Good grief, who tries to reason with a two year old? Seriously. That's crazy.

OH yea, Tara, just what we need - the government approving who can and can't own a dog. Good grief. Smoking police, food police, SUV police, etc. etc., and now the dog police. I remember when people didn't think it was necessary for the government to be involved in every aspect of your lives.

One thing is for certain - elderly people should not garden.

Okay, bestuvall stole my thunder: > Mandatory speutering hasn't worked anywhere! Of course people don't know about the law because people typically don't assume non-criminal behavior to be criminal. Not only that why is the reproductive status of my pets ANY of the government's business? Good grief, government typically can't manage what they are supposed to manage, so why on Earth is it a good idea for them to stick their nose into people's personal business? Not that I'm against programs that help pet owners with speutering, vaccinations, microchipping, etc. I'm all in favor of these efforts for those that need and request assistance, and my husband and I have helped with/donated to these causes. I've taken advantage of a couple of low-cost microchip events. But if I want help I will ask for it - and until them please butt out! Los Angeles built a shelter (19 million dollars????) and then lacked the funds to manage it? Gee, sounds familiar. ;-)

Very, very sad. Thank you for being compassionate.

It's wonderful BSL is being repealed in some major locations but it appears MSN, laws prohibiting tethering, and laws/ordinances that target breeders are on the rise. That's purely anecdotal and based only on posts to the AKC Legislative Liaison list, NAIA, etc. Oh well, never look a gift horse in the mouth, as they say. One horribilus at a time.

Hey folks, you BUY a pet. You ADOPT a child. If anyone ever wanted to know why people go to pet stores or look in the newspaper to purchase a pet, read the first two comments in regard to this letter. That snotty attitude is the reason a lot of dogs and cats are euthanized at the shelter. I am fully on Linda McGee's side. It's ridiculous to require a fenced yard for a small dog that's going to be indoors most of the time and hand-walked for exercise, or even for a larger breed that ended up in rescue or the shelter because it was an escape artist. What good is a fence for a fence jumper? The dog needs to be with someone that's active and likes to take long walks or jogs. Private rescues and shelters that aren't funded by tax money have the luxury of using whatever criteria they choose for potential families for their animals. Just don't complain when potential pet homes don't want to play by your rules and end up at the pet store or buying a pet out of the newspaper. That's the reason all those commercial breeders exist that Proposition B aimed to put out of business - it's a lot easier to get a Yorkie puppy at the pet store than to deal with shelters and rescues that have lengthy recorded messages and ridiculously expensive criteria. It's a pet, not an infant.

Marji makes some good points. I think there are a lot of "factors" that can certainly influence aggression without being "causes". I don't think being intact makes a dog aggressive. It can certainly be a factor depending on the circumstances. That was always one of my main arguments against MSN at City Hall. No one in Europe alters anything, and yet we don't see the Europeans and the English wandering around sporting large bandages, stitches, and missing extremeties due to the preponderance of intact dogs. Although, Brent's comments about all the attacks in the UK are giving me pause, LOL. I have a friend who had a spayed Dobe bitch that had to be put on estrogen when she was nine years old. She was spayed at six months (this was over 20 years ago, when we spayed all of them at six months). This bitch became aggressive toward the younger male Dobe, among other things, and the estrogen solved the problem. Same goes for tethering. I don't think it necessarily causes aggression but it's undeniably a factor in some attacks and bites. Both of these factors are documented in Karen Delise's book. When I was a kid everyone tethered their intact dogs and we were rarely bitten.