Expert answer:3 Paragraph Min Full 2 Pages Abt Animal Abuse
Expert answer:Plz write 3 paragraph minimum full 2 pages, and each paragraph will be like:P1. Needs: This section of the paper will address the problem. For example, if you are choosing to better treatment of farm animals, the problems might be methods of keeping, killing animals, etc. You will need to provide sources for this section.P2. Policy: The policy section will address the solution to the problem. Again, if you are addressing better treatment of farm animals, this might address how to get people to provide more space for animals, government incentives, etc. This section will need to provide sources.P3. Benefits: The benefits section will address the rewards for choosing your policy. If you are choosing better treatment of animals, you will need to address how more space for animals or government incentives would benefit animals and farmers. This section should have sources as well.I attached my brainstorm, so plz follow it as much as possible.Also, each of the paragraph must be used at least 1 sources that I attached.This writing must be used at least 2 kinds total of the sources.I will do works cited, but if you will use other credible sources (.gov and .edu etc.), plz give it to me.
screen_shot_2017_12_10_at_6.26.48_pm.png
screen_shot_2017_12_10_at_6.26.54_pm.png
screen_shot_2017_12_10_at_6.27.00_pm.png
animal_abuse.pdf
animal_abuse_2.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
REVIEW — The Real Benefits Of Pet Ownership — Animals may not make us healthier, but they
help bring people together
Bradshaw, John. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]28 Oct 2017:
C.3.
It’s referred to as “the pet effect.” Some researchers have proposed that having a pet bestows a dazzling
array of health benefits, such as lower cholesterol, reduced blood pressure and a reduced risk of
cardiovascular disease. Others have claimed that pets can combat stress, relieve depression and
enhance self-esteem, and that their company makes children more empathetic. “Pet therapy” is widely
practiced in hospitals and facilities for the elderly.
Until fairly recently, many animals were seen as harmful — carriers of parasites and disease. But now
they’re considered part of a healthy lifestyle. While most people probably don’t acquire a pet because they
think it will make them live longer, they might believe it will be a kind of panacea for modern living.
The problem is that these claims about the benefits of pet ownership don’t always hold up to scientific
scrutiny. Some early studies did show that dog owners were generally in better shape than those without
dogs, but a recent analysis of the health records of more than 40,000 California residents by the Rand
Corp., working in conjunction with the University of California, Los Angeles, shows that these differences
can be attributed to other characteristics of pet owners. Owners are more likely to be white, married and
homeowners — attributes that are all linked to good health. Rather than pets making people healthy, it’s
more likely that healthy people choose to own pets. Anyone with a hint of declining health will think twice
before going out to get a dog. (They may choose a cat instead. Several studies indicate that cat owners
have poorer-than-average health. There is no reason to believe that cats make people sick; it’s more
likely that less healthy people choose cats for companions, given that they require far less work than
dogs.)
The Rand study also cast doubt on the fact that children raised alongside pets become more empathic,
acquire better social skills or have higher self-esteem. Once the many other advantages enjoyed by petowning families were factored in, these differences disappeared.
Children whose parents have spare cash to spend on education, have stable jobs and live in a house with
a yard to play safely all outperform their less fortunate peers on measures of health and behavior. These
same factors make it more likely that parents will add a pet to the family. Caring for a pet may teach
children responsibility, but it doesn’t necessarily make them better people.
Even if pets don’t make us healthier, or better, they do earn their keep in other ways. For one, they can
have a strong calming effect. Studies have shown that interacting with a dog can improve a person’s
mood. Stroking a dog results in a surge of oxytocin and endorphins — hormones that promote bonding
and feelings of well-being.
These hormonal effects are generally short-lived, but in the same way that people in long-term
relationships tend to be healthier than those who live alone, the effects may accumulate over time. Still,
as every pet owner knows, a relationship with an animal isn’t just about snuggling. For every relaxing
moment on the couch, there is a frustrating one: the dog that won’t come back when called, the cat that
scratches the drapes. This ongoing stress may explain why pet owners aren’t ultimately healthier than
those who live without them.
Of course, pet ownership can change human behavior in ways that could improve our health. Logically, a
dog that needs to be exercised daily ought to improve the owner’s health. However, studies suggest that
most owners don’t walk their dogs with sufficient vigor to improve their cardiovascular fitness. (This is
good news for dogs, for whom the daily walk is not so much a workout as a chance to catch up on sniffing
for signs of other dogs in the neighborhood, which requires a leisurely pace.) Other aspects of the walk
may provide more benefits. Recent studies have shown that regular exposure to green spaces lowers
stress in itself.
People who walk their dogs in public places may have noticed another manifestation of the “pet effect” -that having their dog nearby brings them into conversation with passersby. Research has confirmed that
this is a real effect, applying to men and women alike. In a 2015 study published in the journal
Anthrozoos, a young man walking around a shopping precinct with a friendly Labrador retriever by his
side was able to persuade one woman in three to part with their phone numbers, compared with less than
one in 10 when he was on his own.
This aura of trustworthiness may be the true power behind the “pet effect.” A 2015 study published in
PLOS One surveyed almost 2,000 residents in Nashville, San Diego and Portland, Ore., and found that
pet owners were more likely to get to know people in their neighborhood than those without pets. Dog
owners met other owners on walks, of course, but cat owners also bonded with one another through
mutual offers to watch each others’ pets while they were on vacation. Pets help build communities,
breaking down barriers between people and paving the way for us to build networks of friendships.
The same effect may account for much of the effectiveness of animal-assisted therapies, with the animal
drawing the patient into relaxed conversation with the human therapist.
Pets make people happy, and bring people together. Does it really matter if they don’t have the power to
prolong our lifespans?
–Dr. Bradshaw is director of the Anthrozoology Institute at the University of Bristol. His latest book is “The
Animals Among Us: How Pets Make Us Human,” to be published by Basic Books on Oct. 31.
Credit: By John Bradshaw
Things to consider before giving pets as gifts
Chicago Tribune (Online), Chicago: Tribune Interactive, LLC. Dec 14, 2017.
The blissful image of a young child or a significant other receiving a pet as a holiday gift compels many
shoppers to give pets as gifts come Christmastime.
But pets are unlike any other holiday gift, as pets are living things that require food, shelter and attention.
Because pets are unlike video games, diamond pendants and other popular holiday gifts, shoppers must
consider a host of factors before deciding whether or not to give pets as gifts this holiday season.
Living situation
Shoppers who plan to give a pet to someone they don’t live with, whether that person is a niece or
nephew or a girlfriend or boyfriend, should first consider and/or confirm the recipients’ living situation.
Landlords may forbid apartment dwellers from having pets, so it’s best to confirm with your loved one
whether his or her lease allows pets before adopting or buying the animal. If you don’t want to spoil the
surprise or you cannot confirm if a loved one’s living situation is pet-friendly, don’t adopt or buy the
animal.
Allergies
Some people, including many who profess to love pets, cannot have pets of their own because of
allergies. According to the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, as many as three in 10 people in
the United States have pet allergies. Cat allergies are twice as common as dog allergies, but gift givers
who intend to give their loved ones a dog should still confirm if the recipient has a dog allergy before
adopting or purchasing the animal. The AAFA also warns against looking for pets that are described as
“hypoallergenic.” While some people are more sensitive to certain breeds of cats and dogs than others,
there is no guarantee that a particular breed of cat or dog will not cause an allergic reaction.
Timing
There are good times to give pets as gifts, while other times can be tough. Pets need time and routine to
acclimate to their new environments, so avoid giving a new pet to a family about to embark on a lengthy
holiday vacation. Families staying home for the holidays and taking time off from school or work may be
most capable of welcoming a furry new addition into their homes. If you want to give a loved one a pet for
the holidays, delay giving the gift until things have returned to post-holiday normalcy.
Finances
Pets can be expensive, especially in the first year. According to the American Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals, the first-year cost of owning a dog is nearly $1,300, while the first-year cost of cat
ownership exceeds $1,000. These estimates include the cost of food, shelter and medical exams, among
other things. Before giving a pet to a child, consult the child’s parents to determine if the family can afford
adding a pet to the family. If parents need some financial help to afford the pet, include supplies like
bowls, leashes and toys in your holiday gift.
Pets can make for wonderful gifts. But such gifts should only be given after careful consideration of a host
of factors.
Word count: 514
Copyright Tribune Interactive, LLC Dec 14, 2017
Who’s a Good Boy?: [Science Desk]
Hoffman, Jan
Author Information
. New York Times, Late Edition (East Coast); New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]01 Aug 2017: D.1.
Bacon, a cream-colored retriever mix, took a behavior test recently at an animal shelter here. He flunked.
Bounding into the evaluation room, Bacon seemed like an affable goofball, ready for adoption. But as he
gulped down food, Dr. Sara Bennett, a veterinary behaviorist, stuck a fake plastic hand attached to a pole
into his bowl and tugged it away. Instantly, Bacon lunged at the hand, chomping down on it hard.
Shelters have used this exercise and others for some 20 years to assess whether a dog is safe enough to
be placed with a family. For dogs, the results can mean life or death.
“If you failed aggression testing, you did not pass go,” said Mary Martin, the new director of Maricopa
County animal shelter in Phoenix, which takes in 34,000 dogs annually. Between January and June 2016,
536 dogs were euthanized for behavior, most because of test results.
But now researchers, including some developers of the tests, are concluding that they are unreliable
predictors of whether a dog will be aggressive in a home. Shelters are wrestling with whether to abandon
behavior testing altogether in their work to match dogs with adopters and determine which may be too
dangerous to be released.
In January, Ms. Martin stopped the testing. By late June, only 31 dogs had been euthanized for
aggression, based on owner reports and staff observations.
“The tests are artificial and contrived,” said Dr. Gary J. Patronek, an adjunct professor at the veterinary
medicine school at Tufts, who roiled the shelter world last summer when he published an analysis
concluding that the tests have no more positive predictive value for aggression than a coin toss.
“During the most stressful time of a dog’s life, you’re exposing it to deliberate attempts to provoke a
reaction,” Dr. Patronek said. “And then the dog does something it wouldn’t do in a family situation. So you
euthanize it?”
The debate over how dogs should be evaluated arrives as efforts to generally improve outcomes for
shelter animals are on an upswing. According to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals, annual adoption rates have risen nearly 20 percent since 2011 — a period during which owning a
“rescue dog” acquired something of a righteous hipness. Euthanasia rates are down, although the
A.S.P.C.A. said 670,000 dogs are put to death each year. Some veterinary schools even offer sheltermedicine specializations.
Shelters are helped by a burgeoning network of rescue groups. They shuttle dogs from high-kill shelters,
usually in the South and Southern California, often to foster homes and adopters in the Northeast and
Northwest, where spaying and neutering campaigns have reduced puppy availability.
It is impossible to know how many euthanized dogs scored false positives on behavior testing. Though
rare, false negatives also can occur and have proved tragic. In December, workers at Animal Care
Centers of New York City saw nothing remarkable on a standard behavior test of a dog named Blue, but
noted that he had been surrendered for biting a child. A rescue group retrieved him. Blue eventually
wound up in a retraining center in Virginia. On May 31, he was finally adopted; hours later, he attacked
and killed a 90-year-old woman.
Some high-volume shelters cannot afford time for evaluations, much less daily walks for dogs; others
have begun de-emphasizing their significance. Even Emily Weiss, the A.S.P.C.A. researcher whose
behavior assessment is one of the best-known, has stepped away from food-bowl tests, saying that 2016
research showed that programs that omit them “do not experience an increase in bites in the shelter or in
adoptive homes.”
Still, Jennifer Abrams, head of the behavior and enrichment staff at Animal Care Centers of New York
City, which sees 8,900 dogs a year, said that anxious adopters needed assurances. “People want to know
what they’re getting — that a dog won’t bite, yell and scream at other dogs on a leash,” she said.
But predicting an animal’s behavior belies the nature of dogs, Ms. Abrams said: “A dog’s behavior is
based on stimuli in the moment.” Ms. Abrams’s team conducts assessments, considering them
snapshots, while gathering information throughout the animal’s stay.
In the surge to modernize shelters, tests were an attempt to standardize measurements of a dog’s
behavior. But evaluations often became culling tools. With overcrowding a severe problem and
euthanasia the starkest solution, shelter workers saw testing as an objective way to make heartbreaking
decisions. Testing seemed to offer shelters both a shield from liability and a cloak of moral responsibility.
“We thought we had the magic bullet,” said Aimee Sadler, a shelter consultant. “‘Let’s let Lassie live and
let Cujo go.’ From a human perspective, what a relief.”
The 10- to 20-minute tests, developed by behaviorists and tweaked by practitioners, ask two basic
questions: Will the dog attack humans? What about other dogs?
Evaluators may observe the dog react to a large doll (a toddler surrogate); a hooded human, shaking a
cane; an unfamiliar leashed dog or a plush toy dog.
But these tests have never been rigorously validated.
Dr. Bennett’s 2012 study of 67 pet dogs, which compared results of two behavior tests with owners’ own
reporting, found that in the areas of aggression and fearfulness, the tests showed high percentages of
false positives and false negatives. A 2015 study of dog-on-dog aggression testing showed that shelter
dogs responded more aggressively to a fake dog than a real one.
Janis Bradley of the National Canine Research Council, co-author with Dr. Patronek of the analysis
published last fall, suggested that shelters should instead devote limited resources to “observing the
many interactions that happen between dogs and people in the daily routine of the shelter.”
But Kelley Bollen, a behaviorist and shelter consultant in Northampton, Mass., maintained that a careful
evaluation can identify potentially problematic behaviors. Much depends on the assessor’s skill, she
added.
In fact, no qualifications exist for administering evaluations. Interpreting dogs, with their diverse dialects
and complex body language — wiggling butts, lip-licking, semaphoric ears and tails — often becomes
subjective.
Indianapolis Animal Care Services, which admitted 8,380 dogs to its municipal shelter in 2016, is often
overcrowded and understaffed, yet faces intense scrutiny to save dogs while protecting the public. Last
year it euthanized 718 dogs for behavior, based on testing and employee interactions. The agency
consulted Dr. Bennett, a shelter specialist, to better manage that difficult balance.
Even as she demonstrated assessments for staff members, Dr. Bennett noted another factor that renders
results suspect: the unquantifiable impact of shelter life on dogs.
Dogs thrive on routine and social interaction. The transition to a shelter can be traumatizing, with its
cacophony of howls and barking, smells and isolating steel cages. A dog afflicted with kennel stress can
swiftly deteriorate: spinning; pacing; jumping like a pogo stick; drooling; and showing a loss of appetite. It
may charge barriers, appearing aggressive.
Conversely, some dogs shut down in self-protective, submissive mode, masking what may even be
aggressive behavior that only emerges in a safe setting, like a home.
Little dogs can become more snippy. But no matter what evaluations may show, they always seem to get
a pass. “I’ll warn, ‘He nips and snarls,”‘ recounted Laura Waddell, a seasoned trainer who does volunteer
evaluations for Liberty Humane Society in Jersey City, N.J. “And I get back: ‘I don’t care! I’m in love!”‘
One way to reduce kennel stress, Ms. Sadler, the shelter consultant, said, is through programs like hers,
Dogs Playing for Life, which matches dogs for outside playgroups. Shelter directors say it is a more
revealing and humane way to evaluate behavior. The approach is used at many large shelters, including
in New York City, Phoenix and Los Angeles.
The most disputed of the assessments is the food test. Research has shown that shelter dogs who guard
their food bowls, as Bacon did, do not necessarily do so at home.
The exercise purports to evaluate “resource guarding” — how viciously a dog will protect a possession,
such as food, toys, people. Common-sense owners wouldn’t grab a dog’s food while it is eating. But
shelters worry about children.
Dr. Bennett suggested that Bacon’s bite of the fake hand didn’t necessitate a draconian outcome. With
counseling, she said, a household without youngsters would be fine.
The shelter workers dearly wanted to save Bacon. But they were so overwhelmed that they did not have
the capability to match him appropriately and counsel new owners.
So Bacon remained at the shelter for several weeks, waiting. Finally, Linda’s Camp K9, an Indiana petboarding business that also rescues dogs, took him on. He settled right down and recently was adopted.
Linda Candler, the director, placed him in a home without young children, teaching the owners how to
feed him so he wouldn’t be set up to fail.
“His potential made him stand out,” Ms. Candler said. “Bacon is amazing.”
Like the Science Times page on Facebook. | Sign up for the Science Times newsletter.
Dr. Sara Bennett Administering Behavior Tests to Elsey, Top, and Banco, Above, in May. (D1); Dr. Sara
Bennett Inspecting Kennels at Indianapolis Animal Care Services in Indianapolis, Right. She Administered
a Behavoir Test to Elsey, Below. Bacon, Bottom, Was Placed in a Home Without Young Children.
(Photographs by a J Mast for the New York Times) (D5)
Word count: 1520 Copyright New York Times Company Aug 1, 2017
Debating Whether Reptiles or Amphibians Should Be House Pets Klein, Joanna
Author Information
. New York Times (Online), New York: New York Times Company. Nov 10, 2017.
Reclining with a laptop on my couch in Brooklyn, I searched “buy lizard online” and clicked the first link. I
filled my cart with a flying dragon, a couple of caimans, a red-eared slider turtle, a poison dart frog and an
albino garter snake.
I agreed to the terms and conditions, certifying that I knew the laws governing reptile ownership (it is
illegal for me to own some of these reptiles in New York), that I understood exceptions for baby turtles (I
still don’t), and that I wouldn’t hold the company responsible.
Now all I had to do was provide a credit-card number and my new pets would be delivered to my doorstep
the next day.
That I can impulsively buy a reptile — or hundreds at the same time — without fully understanding what
I’m getting into is startling to some experts concerned with animal welfare. And that is only part of a
growing debate over whether it’s appropriate to keep reptiles and amphibia …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades