The New York Times Magazine on the modern trend of designer dogs. The general theme seems to be that we want dogs that behave more like cats.

There was plenty in this article to angry up the blood, both in descriptions of the designer dog breeders and their AKC purebreed counterparts, but the description of a Pug "side-by-side" (starting on page 9) was pretty amusing:

Kolesar positioned her bitch, Birdie, on the floor. Woody sniffed rambunctiously and mounted. As the dog began his dedicated thrusting, the unlikelihood of him ever managing the transaction on his own was plain. And so, as planned all along, Jutta Beard crouched behind him and concluded things with an expeditious right hand. In an instant, she was holding up a plastic bag with a dime-size clump in its corner.

On a somewhat related note, I finally got Nintendogs for the Nintendo DS. I'd been reluctant to purchase it, since I do have a real dog, and would feel bad neglecting him for a glorified Tamagotchi. But Target had it on sale for $18 a few weeks ago, so I decided to pick one up, but had to settle for a rain check. But they finally had Dachshund & Friends (the version on sale) in stock this week, so I picked it up. It is very cute, and certainly meets my expectations. And just as I feared, it has given Tanner a complex. He's already stressed, because we put up a barrier, so he can't go into the garage anymore--given our recent inclement weather, we've given the garage to Sable, a stray that has taken up a transient residence on our property. So he already feels like his territory is being impinged, and now he hears me shouting orders to Bandit, my new Siberian Husky; I found myself teaching Bandit to sit, only to look up and see Tanner in a seated position (about the only command he knows). So I'm making an effort not to play the game in his presence.

I enjoy zoos. I have some moral qualms about some aspects of zoos, particularly in regard to the presence of primates, but tend to be willing to overlook the more problematic elements, as merely a concentration of larger social ills. Primates in captivity may be depressing (I try to avoid those exhibits as much as possible), but seem morally defensible to me as a necessary stopgap, in the face of habitat decimation and the bush meat crisis, to ensure the existence of endangered species. So I don't have a problem with the existence of zoos, but I certainly believe that their practices should be monitored and debated, and that debates like the recent debate over the presence of elephants in zoos are good for the animals and, ultimately, the zoos themselves.

I tend to side somewhat on the animal rights activists' side on the elephant issue. The present conditions at the San Diego Zoo and Wild Animal Park strike me as woefully inadequate. The Zoological Society seems to agree, as they are improving the Zoo accommodations. But, while I tended to begrudgingly accept the recent importation of several elephants from an African wildlife refuge as a lesser-evil type of situation, the concomitant need to ship off several elephants to die in Chicago and Utah was less defensible. But I certainly felt there was room for debate on the matter, and was willing to give the Zoo the benefit of the doubt, or at least agree to disagree.

I received the current issue of Zoonooz in the mail today, and the topic of the issue was elephants, promoting their new and improved elephant exhibit, currently under construction. The opening letter from the president of the Zoological Society even addressed the controversy directly, which I was happy to finally see done in the organization's official organ. Unfortunately, all the letter did was show that the San Diego Zoological Society is not as willing to tolerate dissenting opinions on the elephant issue as I am. In her letter, Berit N. Durler helpfully explains the nuances within the arguments on either side of the issue: opponents of the zoo "would rather see elephants go extinct that live in the care of humans," while zoo supporters are the only people favoring the existence of elephants. I found this false dichotomy infuriating, and quickly wrote an angry letter to President Durler, which I repost here for your own edification: Dear President Durler: I was pleased to see that the February issue of Zoonooz, which I received in the mail today, was devoted to the topic of elephants, and my interest was raised when you made reference, in your opening message, to "the controversies surrounding the management and protection of elephants in today's world." Given the press given to critics of your institution on the matter, I was eager to hear your side of the matter. Especially as, I must say, I have some misgivings regarding the conditions of elephants in your care myself. Imagine my surprise when I was informed, by you, that those who criticize your position on the matter "would rather see elephants go extinct than live in the care of humans." Really? That's our only choice, support your position or rejoice in the extinction of elephants? I didn't realize that, because I tend to think a few paltry acres is inadequate for the care of elephants, I actually was a first-class elephant-hater. Thanks for clarifying the stark contrasts in the elephant debate, and making it clear that either I'm with you, or I'm against the elephant. I thought this was an issue where we could agree to disagree, where I could support the good work of your institution, with some discomfort about some aspects of your surely well-intentioned work. But apparently there's no room for dissent at the Zoological Society of San Diego. I would hope that someone working to save animals from extinction would use the word "extinct" to raise awareness of the stakes of animal conservation, and not as a slur to fling at those who disagree with you. When animal rights activists dump manure in front of the Zoo, they look like idiots. When you start dumping the same b.s. in your Zoonooz column, you hardly come off looking better. Until more reasoned discourse prevails, I shall not be renewing my membership.

---

I currently have a Curator's Club membership at the Zoo, so I would hope they would take my opinion at least somewhat seriously, and at the very least reply with more than a form letter. Time will tell.