Why I Love Having Pets

     In my mind, having a pet is an amazing choice as long as you're willing to put in the effort. According to ASPCA, 37-47% of U.S. households have a dog, and 30-37% have a cat. Other households have a variety of pets, including rabbits, pigs, lizards, fish, and many more animals. The purpose for having a pet may be to have a companion, a service pet, a guard, or something else, but no matter the purpose, many of the same benefits are consistent.
     The CDC lists some benefits of pet owning. Having a pet can decrease blood pressure, cholesterol levels, triglyceride levels, and feelings of loneliness, and can increase opportunities for exercise, outdoor activities, and socialization. Animal Planet claims that the top five benefits of having a pet are: fewer allergies (surprisingly!), better socialization, better heart health, more exercise and weight loss, and greater sense of purpose and mood boost. Additionally, having pets can instill a sense of responsibility and teach important skills such as awareness of others' needs.
     I can attest to the fact that having pets increases my well-being. I've experienced many personal benefits of having pets throughout my life. In my household, I have had dogs, cats, iguanas, fish, hamsters, and turtles. My hamster was the first pet I took care of almost completely by myself, and I will say that it taught me responsibility. I had to be there to feed her, change her water, clean her cage, and play with her. Fish are pretty basic to take care of, but I still gained responsibility by having to feed my fish and clean their tanks. My dogs are probably what have given me the most benefit, even though I am not the only person taking care of them. They have been the most responsive to my actions and seem to be most emotionally similar to me. When I am home alone, I have to take care of their needs, but I do more than that and actually receive something in return. Playing with my dogs not only gives them exercise but also gives me something to smile about and helps me relax. Just being in the company of my dogs helps me when I am struggling emotionally and lets me know that I am safe (at least safer than I would be alone). I love when I get to see my dogs' excitement when I bring home a new toy and their joy at going on walks through my yard, and I love hearing their reactions when my family puts me on speakerphone to talk to them. It always brings a smile to my face, and I can say having pets has made me a better person.

These pups are what give me something to smile about!

     I'm lucky to have the opportunity to have pets. I have the resources and motivation necessary to take care of them and the time to give them affection. However, some people have pets but disregard their responsibilities - these people should not have pets. A "pet" is not a dog sitting outside, chained to a fence with no food or water. A "pet" is not a cat given little attention because hundreds of other cats are piled on top of it. When having a pet, it is necessary to be able to provide for that animal and to actually do so; otherwise, no one (animal or human) is really benefitting. Make sure you have the resources and drive to take care of an animal over a long period of time before making the decision to take an animal into your home - it could save an animal from being sent to a shelter or kicked into the streets and could save your own resources and time if you aren't ready to take on the responsibility. 

Finally, here are some of my favorite pictures of my two current pets: the joy-providers and tail-waggers of my life!

Pit Bulls

     Pit Bulls are one of the most misunderstood dog breeds that exist. They are made out to be vicious fighting dogs that no one should have as a pet. Because of the common misconceptions about Pit Bulls, many cities have declared them as "dangerous." Owning a Pit Bull is illegal in many cities across the United States, but why? 

     

     According to dogsbite.org, Pit Bulls accounted for 64% of dog bite-related fatalities in 2014. Cases in which Pit Bulls caused fatalities were often put into the media, perpetuating the negative views of these dogs. However, as the infographic above demonstrates, 84% of dogs involved in fatal attacks were abused or neglected. Pit Bulls are often used in dog fighting or as guard dogs, causing them to have high rates of abuse and neglect. Many Pit Bulls end up in shelters, and most are euthanized because of their bad reputations or their aggressiveness because they were raised in a dog fighting environment. However, the breed itself is not to blame: people are almost always to blame for Pit Bulls' bad behaviors. 

     Pit Bulls are actually ranked some of the most tolerant dogs. They are great with children (ranking 4/5 stars for "kid-friendly"), and great family pets (5/5 stars for "affectionate with family"). Pit Bulls have high rankings in most categories according to dogtime.com, demonstrating that the breed's reputation isn't all it seems to be. 

     Even though Pit Bulls are a naturally friendly breed, it is still important to be careful and to ensure safety, especially around small children. Adopting a former fighting dog when you have two small children at home is not a good idea, no matter what breed of dog you're adopting. Sense must still come into play, no matter what breed of dog is being considered! 

     Finally, as a wrap, here's a video of some Pit Bulls being the friendly pups that they are! 

Images from: http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2013/11/pit-bulls-are-just-about-the-nicest-dogs-there-are/ 

Information from: http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2013/11/pit-bulls-are-just-about-the-nicest-dogs-there-are/

                              http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2014.php

                              http://dogtime.com/dog-breeds/american-pit-bull-terrier 

                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLxZDX35tiI

Ignore Those Pet Stores. Adopt!

http://www.poncacityok.gov/images/pages/N504/Adopt_a_Pet.jpg

           The process of finding a pet can be quite intricate. Some people want purebred animals and partake in long searches to find the most perfect specimen of the breed, while others fall in love with an animal at first sight no matter what it looks like. Besides the health problems that arise from breeding animals, the desire to breed creates organizations that basically factory farm animals like cats and dogs.

            Puppy mills are one example of these organizations. A puppy mill is a “large-scale commercial dog breeding facility where profit is given priority over the well-being of the dogs” (https://www.aspca.org/animal-cruelty/puppy-mills). Puppy mills stay in business because of the demand of certain breeds and because many people looking for pets do not know where the animals they see come from. Common pet stores often get animals from places like puppy mills but lie to customers about the origin of their animals. Because people cannot detect anything wrong with the animal at first, they assume they are doing no harm. By buying pets from pet stores, they are supporting horrible conditions and mistreatment of animals in overcrowded, filthy, disease-rampant facilities.

            Some people seeking purebred animals see no other option besides going to a pet store for a desired breed. However, there is a much better option. Shelters.

            Contrary to popular belief, shelters are not filled with only mutts. There are many purebred animals at shelters that need homes. I think saving a dog’s life is more important than having papers detailing the breed of the dog.

My Rescue, Jasper

            A website I have found that I love matches you with shelter dogs near you based on your answers to certain questions. It is called Paws Like Me (http://pawslikeme.com/). It takes into consideration so many aspects that must be considered in having a pet, and matches you up with the best options for you. Additionally, for those looking for purebred dogs, breeds can be entered, and “purebred only” is an option that can be selected. Petfinder.com is an additional website that is great for finding pets, and more than just dogs. It searches all local organizations and shelters for pets, and trust me, there are thousands of pets needing homes within a 25-mile radius of your zip code.

            Next time you’re looking for a pet, ignore the pet stores. Go to the shelter. Don’t put other animals in danger by unknowingly supporting organizations like puppy mills. Instead, save a life. The rewards are endless.

Info about puppy mills: 

http://www.riverfronttimes.com/newsblog/2015/05/05/missouri-has-the-most-problem-puppy-mills-in-the-us-humane-society-says

https://www.aspca.org/animal-cruelty/puppy-mills

Adoption websites: 

https://www.petfinder.com/

http://pawslikeme.com/

Factory Farming

Sources: 

http://www.farmsanctuary.org/learn/factory-farming/

http://www.factoryfarmmap.org/problems/

https://www.aspca.org/fight-cruelty/farm-animal-cruelty/what-factory-farm

My Take on Deep Sea Fishing

     When considering animal welfare, fish rarely come to mind. Maybe this is because fish are hardly similar to us or because we can't sense that they have feelings (physical or emotional pain). However, it is necessary to consider fish when discussing animal welfare because of our relationships with them. People fish for a variety of reasons: for food, for sport, and for relaxation are a few examples. I'd like to discuss deep sea fishing, a specific sector of fishing that I have some experience with.

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/management/recreational/documents/ethical_angler_web.pdf

     I have gone deep sea fishing twice in my life. I was young and didn't do any actual fishing the first time, but I remember clearly the second time. My family went out on a charter boat with two fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico for six hours. First, we went out to sea and stopped to fish for our bait. We used little pieces of squid to catch the bait fish. After that, we sailed for about an hour to get to deeper waters. We used the bait fish to try to catch other fish. Grouper and snapper were what we caught most often. There were many regulations with our fishing. In order to keep our catch, it had to hit a certain weight and size limit. We were also limited on the number of fish we could keep. If a fish didn't meet the standards or if we had too many already, we would release the fish.

View of the incoming storm (and some of the bait)

     Having so many regulations on the charter fishing was definitely a positive boost for ensuring animal welfare. The boat we were on also ensured that we did not put trash into the water, helping to protect the environment. However, I noticed one large breach in protecting animal welfare - the fish we kept were thrown into a cooler of ice to die rather than being immediately killed. I believe this is inhumane. When we got back to land, the fishermen filleted the fish (I assume they were dead after being in a cooler for hours) so we could take it home for food. Because we ate nearly all the fish we caught rather than keeping the fish as trophies, I think our deep sea fishing excursion was morally acceptable. However, I wish the fish were killed sooner rather than being put into shock from freezing temperatures and slowly dying. Many people may disagree because of our purpose for fishing (mainly for leisure, even though we ate the fish) or because fish were harmed in the first place, but my stance on fishing is that it is acceptable as long as we protect the environment, regulate our fishing, and use proper practices.

Our catches in Florida

     For fishing like deep sea fishing to be acceptable, certain guidelines must be followed. All laws must be followed, and the people fishing must do all they can to keep the environment clean and safe. Listed below are some links to practices to promote ethical fishing that I believe should always enforced.
http://takemefishing.org/fishing/fishopedia/fishing-and-conservation/ethical-fishing-best-practices/
http://www.discoverboating.com/resources/article.aspx?id=160
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/management/recreational/documents/ethical_angler_web.pdf

"Humanity"?

http://www.quotes-central.com/wp-content/uploads/pliki/humanity_is_2014-05-20_12-49-41.jpg

      While discussing the hierarchy of oppression and where animals fit on the hierarchy, an idea dawned upon me. Typically when we are judging animals to see how much protection and respect they should receive, we look at how human they are. For example, most people say that a dog is more human than a rat. But what gives us the right to judge everything else based on levels of humanity? The word “humanity” itself is meant to define the human species, not to be used on other species. We don’t judge ourselves on something like “cow-ity” or “bird-ness,” so why do we judge animals based on our own species? It doesn’t make sense.

            To begin, all people have the same level of humanity. Typically in the hierarchy of oppression, some human groups are seen as being less human than others. “Humanity” defines the entire human species, not just a certain group within that species. Believing people can have different levels of humanity is a central flaw in thought and belief systems. Thinking one person is less human than another is the root of prejudice and hatred and should be targeted to change the patterns of oppression that have existed for hundreds of years.

            If saying one human is less human than another human isn’t a glaringly obvious flaw, comparing completely different species to ourselves based on a word we have created to describe ourselves is even more obvious. What gives us the right to say one animal should be killed if it enters our homes while another should not be killed under any circumstances? Or what gives us the right to say we should kill animals at all? Saying one animal is more human than another so it shouldn’t be killed does not give us that right. No other species is human, so we cannot define those species based on how human they are. We have put ourselves at the top of the hierarchy of species and therefore believe we should define all other beings based on how similar to us they are. This seems acceptable when choosing an animal for a pet; we want a pet that seems to experience emotions how we do, reacts to our actions and words in certain ways, and portrays love. However, when it comes to topics like hunting, experimentation, farming, and pests, what gives us the right to determine that an animal deserves to die and be tortured? Putting animals in an order based on humanity is wrong, and so is saying they have fewer rights because they aren’t human.

http://iqquotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/animal-quotes-3.jpg

            This brings us to a moral quandary. Sure it is wrong to say an animal doesn’t deserve rights, but how do we convince the world that animals do deserve rights and respect? If we say animals deserve the same rights we do, it seems we are confusing what is important. There are many people who the world sees as less human than other people, so isn’t this the bigger issue? I think we should focus on ensuring that all people receive equal rights and are protected, but in the process we can begin to work on protecting animals too. If people are made aware of their faulty thinking in one area, it will be easier for them to change their thinking in another similar area. This is where we must start.

Hunting

     Hunting is a pretty controversial topic in the U.S. Sides are often taken quickly - hunting is beneficial, or hunting should be banned. I grew up in a family where my grandpa, dad, uncle, and brother all hunt. Personally, I don't think I could bring myself to shoot a deer or turkey, but the men of my family always had the tradition of going down to our cabin in Dent County and shooting during deer and turkey seasons. I have always been okay with it. They hardly ever brought anything back home, and when they did, we always used the animals for meat.

http://www.prohuntersjournal.com/img/articles/hunter@sunsetV3.jpg

     Where I draw the line with hunting is when the purpose becomes solely for enjoyment or recognition rather than for food or population control. I am very against trophy hunting. We have products of taxidermy in my house, but nearly all of the animals were used for meat before being stuffed and were not killed solely to be hung on the wall. When hunting, if the largest, most majestic creature is sought out to be killed, the purpose is likely to have a trophy animal. Hunters for population control do not seek out specific animals because of size, and hunters for meat often shoot larger animals but do not care if it the best specimen of the species. My moral structures are against killing another animal to make humans feel superior. My moral structures also tell me that eating meat from an animal that lived its life naturally in the wild is far better than eating meat from an animal that was raised inhumanely in a concrete building without anything that is natural to it.
     Hunting is helpful in situations where it provides food, regulates over-population, and prevents disease spread. Laws are in place to prevent too much hunting so that populations do not dwindle to extremely low levels. Other laws also regulate how and when people can hunt, protecting the populations of animals (http://huntfish.mdc.mo.gov/hunting-trapping/regulations). However, illegal hunting is a serious issue that is killing too many animals and occasionally disregards the safety of humans. Hunting out of season, not using proper methods, and hunting on private property are all too common. It is often difficult to catch illegal hunters, and organizations like the Department of Conservation need to crack down on the issue more.

http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/nhpr/files/201210/EarthTalkLeadShotHunting.jpg

     Overall, I believe that hunting is beneficial to humans and to the environment. Without hunting, some people could not eat, overpopulation could cause environmental harm and threats to human safety, and diseases could become out of hand. Proper instruction must be given before anyone should be allowed to hunt, and hunters must be required to keep up with current laws and regulations. The negative effects of hunting, like questions of safety, could mostly be prevented with proper instruction and ensuring that regulations are followed. People against hunting may believe that it is downright immoral to kill animals, and that also is a valid viewpoint. However, my thoughts lead me to argue that humans and animals have hunted for survival all throughout history, and it appears to be a natural part of sustaining life. Hunting is only immoral in my mind when it is done for bragging rights, to witness suffering, or only to get thrill from the kill. Otherwise, hunting's benefits outweigh its negative effects, and hunting should be protected as long as it is regulated.