Post by RealPitBull on Mar 20, 2009 11:10:10 GMT -5
Gag the dog
By Shai Fogelman
3/14/09
Early one Saturday evening in December, five men in their mid-thirties met on the edge of one of Lod’s eastern neighborhoods. The venue was an abandoned lot surrounded by gashed sabra cactus, construction refuse and piles of old tires. The men had responded to a text message on their cellular phones, sent to a select group. The message: a dogfight was to be held on the lot.
Near the men who waited for the action to begin, an American Staffordshire Terrier was tied to a post with a metal chain. The red-nosed animal, with scars on its face and haunches, was very friendly toward the group. Its owner, Oleg, unable to come up with a more creative name, had simply called his pet Killer. “But he is a very nice dog and calm with people. He only freaks out with other dogs,” Oleg explained.
Obviously bored, Killer sat down and wagged his tail. He was lucky that evening: The fight was called off, because the other participants could not find the makeshift arena. However, knowledgeable sources say, violent criminal events of this kind take place almost every weekend in various parts of the country, generally in places law-enforcement officials avoid. The exact scale of the phenomenon is unknown, but after gathering some scraps of information, it is possible to make an educated guess.
According to Israel Police Superintendent Shaul Maimon, head of the department charged with enforcing the Animal Protection Law, the phenomenon is negligible. Only rarely do police receive reports about organized dogfights, he said: “We have set up many ambushes and lookouts, but in my 10 years in this unit, we have focused on only two active arenas. Three residents of Ofakim were arrested in one of them, tried, and given suspended sentences.”
However, according to Eti Altman, founder and spokesman of the nonprofit Let the Animals Live organization: “Every year hundreds of dogs that have been bitten are brought to the pounds and shelters of the various animal-rights organizations. Some of them were hurt in organized fights, some were attacked by other dogs in the street.” Her group’s shelter in Tel Aviv takes in “a few dozen wounded dogs a year, most of them breeds known to be popular in the world of dogfights.”
Oleg bought Killer two years ago through an ad on a site for secondhand items on the Internet. “He cost only NIS 1,000 because he had no papers, even though he was a purebred puppy,” he said.
The undeclared goal of the new regulation was to bring about the total local “extinction” of these breeds within 10 to 15 years. Despite the vigorous protests of some owners of dogs that were declared dangerous, and a court petition filed on their behalf, the regulation was approved by the Supreme Court in September 2005.
More than three years later, trade in dangerous dogs is flourishing on the Internet. They can be purchased Internet via specialty Websites by means of a simple search, or via large and well-known sites where secondhand goods are sold. For example, while researching this article, I found dozens of dangerous dogs for sale or for free at Yad2, a major secondhand site. The site’s competition, Homeless, has a permanent subcategory for these breeds.
Phone calls to about 20 people who placed these ads made it clear that nearly all were aware they were breaking the law. Most of them also expressed some concern that the dogs would be forced to take part in organized fights and promised to examine the person who would take possession of the dog carefully. In addition to the trade via the Internet, dangerous dogs are sold or given away every week without any supervision via street notices and circles of specialty merchants.
Another statistic that underscores how poorly the law is enforced shows that only 60 percent of registered female dangerous dogs have been spayed and only 36 percent of the males neutered. But it is clear to everyone involved that these figures are only the tip of the iceberg. It turns out that in the wake of the new regulation, some owners of dangerous dogs succeeded in getting the animals registered as mongrels. As such, they do not have to meet the tough new conditions. Others simply went underground and have not registered their dogs.
On that Saturday evening, Killer did not need medical attention. Oleg was disappointed that the fight had been postponed, but promised to return “like a man” with Killer next time. He declined to talk about his feelings for the dog, but every time he was asked about cruelty, he said something vague about Darwinism and natural selection. He declaimed all the mantras to the effect that, “There are no dangerous dogs, only dangerous people.” Even though he was well versed in every article of the regulation, Oleg declared repeatedly that he “doesn’t give two hoots for the law.”
His explanation for his actions is that these dogs were created by man especially for this vicious purpose, which he insists on calling a “sport.” Even though he gets a few hundred or a few thousand shekels from the gamblers in every fight, Oleg claimed that Killer’s upkeep is expensive and that he does not profit from the dogfights.
It would be wrong to attribute the way Oleg and others like him think to all owners of dangerous dogs. Still, most agree that the law is too general, ineffective and will not achieve its intended goal. Many believe that Oleg’s case illustrates exactly why the law is problematic.
“When these dogs come into the hands of people who are not normative, the results are unfortunate,” said Elad Abuhav, the SPCA spokesman in Tel Aviv. “If the laws that permit dogs to be owned referred to people and not to dogs, these phenomena might disappear.”
In the final analysis, he added, “the law is worthless, because it has affected only the good people who looked after their dogs devotedly. It has had no effect on those who don’t care about the law in any case.”
Like thousands of other Israelis, Ofer Golan, 36, who lives in Jaffa, had his dog, a mixed Pitbull-Rottweiler, neutered immediately after the regulation took effect.
“First of all, because it was the law, but also because, after consulting with a few experts, I reached the conclusion that neutering might be medically advantageous for the dog,” Golan explained, adding that since the recent restrictions were enacted, he has received quite a few offers from dubious people to buy the dog for a few thousand dollars.
“Even though I took part in getting this legislation passed, I understand now how problematic it is and how far we failed to change the situation. The dangerous breeds continue to be born, and that is a fact,” explained Dr. Avi Tsarfati, chief veterinarian of Rehovot.
“There is no executive branch that can enforce the law meaningfully and totally, and in passing it we pushed certain population groups, which were already on the margins of the society, over the edge. On the one hand, we try to enforce the law and demand that all owners of dangerous dogs obey the law on spaying and neutering. At the same time, it is clear to us that this demand alienates from the reporting and treatment ‘circle’ owners who don’t care about the law.”
The solutions provided for by the law are insufficient, Tsarfati added. For example, such dangerous dogs are not suitable for the security forces, the legal entities that are legally allowed to take them in.
By Shai Fogelman
3/14/09
Early one Saturday evening in December, five men in their mid-thirties met on the edge of one of Lod’s eastern neighborhoods. The venue was an abandoned lot surrounded by gashed sabra cactus, construction refuse and piles of old tires. The men had responded to a text message on their cellular phones, sent to a select group. The message: a dogfight was to be held on the lot.
Near the men who waited for the action to begin, an American Staffordshire Terrier was tied to a post with a metal chain. The red-nosed animal, with scars on its face and haunches, was very friendly toward the group. Its owner, Oleg, unable to come up with a more creative name, had simply called his pet Killer. “But he is a very nice dog and calm with people. He only freaks out with other dogs,” Oleg explained.
Obviously bored, Killer sat down and wagged his tail. He was lucky that evening: The fight was called off, because the other participants could not find the makeshift arena. However, knowledgeable sources say, violent criminal events of this kind take place almost every weekend in various parts of the country, generally in places law-enforcement officials avoid. The exact scale of the phenomenon is unknown, but after gathering some scraps of information, it is possible to make an educated guess.
According to Israel Police Superintendent Shaul Maimon, head of the department charged with enforcing the Animal Protection Law, the phenomenon is negligible. Only rarely do police receive reports about organized dogfights, he said: “We have set up many ambushes and lookouts, but in my 10 years in this unit, we have focused on only two active arenas. Three residents of Ofakim were arrested in one of them, tried, and given suspended sentences.”
However, according to Eti Altman, founder and spokesman of the nonprofit Let the Animals Live organization: “Every year hundreds of dogs that have been bitten are brought to the pounds and shelters of the various animal-rights organizations. Some of them were hurt in organized fights, some were attacked by other dogs in the street.” Her group’s shelter in Tel Aviv takes in “a few dozen wounded dogs a year, most of them breeds known to be popular in the world of dogfights.”
Oleg bought Killer two years ago through an ad on a site for secondhand items on the Internet. “He cost only NIS 1,000 because he had no papers, even though he was a purebred puppy,” he said.
The undeclared goal of the new regulation was to bring about the total local “extinction” of these breeds within 10 to 15 years. Despite the vigorous protests of some owners of dogs that were declared dangerous, and a court petition filed on their behalf, the regulation was approved by the Supreme Court in September 2005.
More than three years later, trade in dangerous dogs is flourishing on the Internet. They can be purchased Internet via specialty Websites by means of a simple search, or via large and well-known sites where secondhand goods are sold. For example, while researching this article, I found dozens of dangerous dogs for sale or for free at Yad2, a major secondhand site. The site’s competition, Homeless, has a permanent subcategory for these breeds.
Phone calls to about 20 people who placed these ads made it clear that nearly all were aware they were breaking the law. Most of them also expressed some concern that the dogs would be forced to take part in organized fights and promised to examine the person who would take possession of the dog carefully. In addition to the trade via the Internet, dangerous dogs are sold or given away every week without any supervision via street notices and circles of specialty merchants.
Another statistic that underscores how poorly the law is enforced shows that only 60 percent of registered female dangerous dogs have been spayed and only 36 percent of the males neutered. But it is clear to everyone involved that these figures are only the tip of the iceberg. It turns out that in the wake of the new regulation, some owners of dangerous dogs succeeded in getting the animals registered as mongrels. As such, they do not have to meet the tough new conditions. Others simply went underground and have not registered their dogs.
On that Saturday evening, Killer did not need medical attention. Oleg was disappointed that the fight had been postponed, but promised to return “like a man” with Killer next time. He declined to talk about his feelings for the dog, but every time he was asked about cruelty, he said something vague about Darwinism and natural selection. He declaimed all the mantras to the effect that, “There are no dangerous dogs, only dangerous people.” Even though he was well versed in every article of the regulation, Oleg declared repeatedly that he “doesn’t give two hoots for the law.”
His explanation for his actions is that these dogs were created by man especially for this vicious purpose, which he insists on calling a “sport.” Even though he gets a few hundred or a few thousand shekels from the gamblers in every fight, Oleg claimed that Killer’s upkeep is expensive and that he does not profit from the dogfights.
It would be wrong to attribute the way Oleg and others like him think to all owners of dangerous dogs. Still, most agree that the law is too general, ineffective and will not achieve its intended goal. Many believe that Oleg’s case illustrates exactly why the law is problematic.
“When these dogs come into the hands of people who are not normative, the results are unfortunate,” said Elad Abuhav, the SPCA spokesman in Tel Aviv. “If the laws that permit dogs to be owned referred to people and not to dogs, these phenomena might disappear.”
In the final analysis, he added, “the law is worthless, because it has affected only the good people who looked after their dogs devotedly. It has had no effect on those who don’t care about the law in any case.”
Like thousands of other Israelis, Ofer Golan, 36, who lives in Jaffa, had his dog, a mixed Pitbull-Rottweiler, neutered immediately after the regulation took effect.
“First of all, because it was the law, but also because, after consulting with a few experts, I reached the conclusion that neutering might be medically advantageous for the dog,” Golan explained, adding that since the recent restrictions were enacted, he has received quite a few offers from dubious people to buy the dog for a few thousand dollars.
“Even though I took part in getting this legislation passed, I understand now how problematic it is and how far we failed to change the situation. The dangerous breeds continue to be born, and that is a fact,” explained Dr. Avi Tsarfati, chief veterinarian of Rehovot.
“There is no executive branch that can enforce the law meaningfully and totally, and in passing it we pushed certain population groups, which were already on the margins of the society, over the edge. On the one hand, we try to enforce the law and demand that all owners of dangerous dogs obey the law on spaying and neutering. At the same time, it is clear to us that this demand alienates from the reporting and treatment ‘circle’ owners who don’t care about the law.”
The solutions provided for by the law are insufficient, Tsarfati added. For example, such dangerous dogs are not suitable for the security forces, the legal entities that are legally allowed to take them in.
I look forward to learning much here