Bonkers Brooklyn bunny hoarder Dorota Trec says she was keeping the creatures as part of a 16-year “genetic” breeding program — and would have made “millions of dollars” by creating “blue and pastel rabbits.” Trec has been charged with animal cruelty for letting 176 now-confiscated rabbits live behind a Gowanus tire shop in a squalid, droppings-strewn “garden.” But in an interview one day before Easter, she claimed there was a scientific method to her hopping madness. “I do research a lot of Darwin,” Trec, 35, said Saturday. “These rabbits are developed by me. They’ve all originated from the Netherland dwarf and the Belgium hare. After many years, you can start to see the results.” She said she would get six more rabbits — which she plans to rescue “from the slaughterhouse” to restock her “garden.” “Hopefully, I won’t get arrested, because I was already arrested,” she joked. Trec announced her Frankenbunny claim in a bizarre $2 billion lawsuit she filed last week to get her “free-range” bunnies back from the ASPCA. “Petitioner works with genetic material developing new breeds of rabbits, for example, rabbits that are small, fit, having somewhat big ears,” she wrote in the self-filed suit, which seeks cash damages from the animal-rights activists who ratted her out. “Petitioner also develops [a] number of different colors for rabbits, having special interest in blue and pastel rabbits.” “This project is advanced now and it is worth millions of dollars.” Trec says she would spend at least four hours a day working with her “herds,” including playing her flute for them. Authorities counter that many of the rabbits were sick and injured, some with syphilis and bite wounds. Meanwhile, there was bad news for bunny lovers. The rabbits remain wards of the state and will not be available for Easter adoptions. “They are still considered evidence in a pending criminal case . . . Until the court resolves ownership issues, the rabbits cannot be made available for adoption,” said a spokeswoman for the ASPCA, which is caring for the creatures at partner veterinary facilities. She wanted to make candy-colored Easter Bunnies.
When Kim Silva, retired teacher from the American School for the Deaf, decided to start teaching sign language to her cats, she had no idea how quickly they would learn. In 2009, after losing another beloved pet, Silva and her husband, John, who are both deaf, were ready for a new feline companion. "We fell in love with Bambi on Petfinder," Silva says. Silva's previous teaching experience was pretty much limited to humans, but she was optimistic that American Sign Language would help Bambi live most fully, and that the cat would be a perfectly good student. Bambi was at a rescue shelter in Texas, though, and it would take a while before she could be brought to Connecticut, where Silva lives. In the meantime, she figured, she might as well get started with the cats she already had, even though both of them could hear. A lot of deaf dogs have learned ASL. Groups like the ASPCA say training cats in general is possible (always using positive reinforcement, of course). Still, Silva says even "some deaf people have questioned if cats could learn sign." "Bobcat immediately understood," she says. "My other cat, Bear, was very old and was not interested." Bobcat learned one sign after another "until he learned the new vocabulary," Silva says. "Bobcat was a sponge for sign language! He showed off. He was fabulous." Bambi picked up the signs even more easily, since, Silva explains, she had "peer reinforcement and copied Bobcat." Thomasina, who then joined the family in 2013, after Bear died, learned even faster. The cats have a delightfully expansive vocabulary. Among the words they now know are: "come," "more," "sit," "stay," "shake," "high five," "sleep," "circle," "shrimp,' "play," "canned food," "finish" and "dance" (though sometimes they don't feel like doing that one). They also know "off," which Silva must spell out, letter by letter. A lot of the commands are carried out in one of the videos below. Silva hopes the clip, made by her son-in-law Tim O'Donnell, will inspire others to adopt deaf cats of their own -- and teach them sign language, too. "Cats become much more interactive with people because they want to communicate," Silva says. "Bobcat was a 'pillow that ate' before he learned sign. He interacted with other cats, but ignored people. After he learned sign at age 7 years, he became the extroverted show cat! My cats will also do tricks with other people who sign with them." While the talented cats respond to Silva's commands, they don't actually sign themselves -- at least not a whole lot. "Bambi likes attention and likes to play ball. She stretches up to tap my hands signing 'play' for me to get her ball," says Silva. Still, she remains hopeful her communicative felines will one day acquire more of this rather wonderful skill. "I would like for my cats to be able to sign to me and ask for food," she says. "I have seen this online in other signing cat videos, but was not able to teach Bobcat. I will try again with Bambi and Thomasina."
If your cats resist cuddling, it may be for good reason. New research suggests petting might stress out some felines. What's more, cats living in a multi-cat home may be better equipped to deal with the strains of domestic life than their solitary peers, the study researchers found. A group of researchers aimed to find out whether there is any truth to the assumption that cats kept as single pets are more likely to have a better life than cats that share their home with other felines. "Many people keep groups of cats in their home and although they might seem happy together, some people have argued that because this is an unnatural setup, it is not good for their welfare," Daniel Mills, professor of veterinary behavioral medicine at England's University of Lincoln, said in a statement. "Our research shows this is not necessarily the case." For their study, conducted in São Paulo, Brazil, Mills and colleagues collected data on 23 single-cat households, 20 two-cat households and 17 households with three or four cats. The owners completed surveys about their pets' personalities and behavior, and they also handed over samples of their felines' feces, which contain telltale traces of a stress hormone. The cats' stress levels didn't seem to vary significantly as a function of their personality type. (The researchers had the owners rate their cats as bossy, timid or easygoing.) But younger cats (those less than 2 years old) living on their own were generally more stressed than younger cats sharing their home, the study found. The researchers speculate that even if cats living under the same roof don't seem too chummy, they might be able to organize themselves in such a way as to avoid each other, and thus avoid stress. "Also, and I think very intriguingly, our data suggests that cats who tolerate, rather than enjoy or dislike being petted, seem to be the most stressed," Mills added in a statement. The researchers think this finding suggests the cats that don't like petting can avoid the affectionate hand of their owners if there are other cats in the house that enjoy or tolerate petting. The researchers warned their results should be treated with caution since there were only four cats in the study that disliked petting, according to their owners, while 13 were put in the "tolerating category" and 85 in the "enjoying" lot. If anything, the researchers say their results highlight the importance of giving individual pets control over their environment, and cat owners shouldn't impose themselves on their pets. "If you have several cats you should give them the choice of sharing or having their own special areas to eat, drink and go to the toilet," Mills said. The results were detailed in the journal Physiology and Behavior.
Nestlé Purina PetCare Company (Purina) aren’t the only people suing Blue Buffalo, now consumers have jumped on the litigation bandwagon and Blue Buffalo is getting slammed by a multitude of lawsuits alleging deceptive advertising practices. The growing number of lawsuits filed against Blue Buffalo keep growing and they are claiming, among other things, that the company falsely represented that their pet food does not contain ingredients – such as chicken/poultry by-product meals and corn – when it appears as if Blue Buffalo’s pet food might actually contain those ingredients. Because of the number of class action lawsuits involved the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation has agreed to consolidate seven false advertising class action lawsuits filed against Blue Buffalo Co. Ltd. for misleading customers about the ingredients in its pet food. They alleged that Blue Buffalo misled its customers by claiming its pet food products did not contain any chicken by-products, corn or grain and led them to pay premium prices for the pet food. The class-action lawsuit was transferred to another court where several related lawsuits making the same allegations will be heard together. The smoking e-mails It is safe to assume that Blue Buffalo was aware, at some point, that their pet food did contain the vilified ingredient they based their marketing claim on, when during pretrial discovery—the process by which litigants demand internal documents and communications that could become evidence—e-mails revealed that Purina claims reinforce its allegations. In May, e-mails between a Blue Buffalo ingredient broker (Diversified Ingredients) and a major supplier (Wilbur-Ellis) suggest strongly that they did indeed sell pet food containing by-product meal. In an e-mail to Diversified Ingredients, a broker working for Blue Buffalo, a sales manager for supplier Wilbur-Ellis wrote that it did include “some by-product meal” in shipments from a Texas plant intended for Blue Buffalo. Realizing that the inclusion of by-product meal now has potential legal consequences, Diversified Ingredients expressed alarm to Wilbur-Ellis and a way to respond to the kibble crisis: “I think if we work together, we can band-aid this situation,” Diversified’s Collin McAtee wrote on May 15 to Darwin Rusu of Wilbur-Ellis. Referring to a “smoking gun,” McAtee added, “If you are going to fill these contracts for any reason, then I’m going to have to go to Blue Buffalo to address the breach of contract and undoubtedly divulge the details of what was shipped and the possibility that Rosser’s material is the smoking gun for their problems. That I do not want to do. If the finger is pointed in that direction and then later verified to have been the cause, then Diversified and Wilbur will both have to answer to this in litigation with Blue. The liabilities in this could be enormous. You are talking about massive product recalls, potential market share loss, etc. That would undoubtedly be in the several million dollar range.” Blue Buffalo then claimed they were duped by their supplier, by publicly revealing that contrary to prior assurances, Blue Buffalo admitted that ingredients from their supplier did in fact contain poultry by-product meal after all — proving that the central allegations in Purina’s false advertising lawsuit against them. Despite Blue Buffalo’s admission, no mention was made about taking steps to recall the mislabeled pet foods, nor to compensate the millions of consumers that purchased the falsely labeled products.
Purina claims that testing of Blue Buffalo’s pet food were conducted in a “highly sophisticated, independent lab“, while Blue Buffalo calls their testing “junk science” and claims the testing was performed with a rudimentary microscope under less than optimal conditions with questionable methods. Regardless, the results of testing and analysis reveal that, in some instances, 9 out of 10 Blue Buffalo products tested contained poultry by-product meal, even though the packaging indicated otherwise. Instead, tests indicated the products contained several signature elements of poultry by-product meal: eggshell, raw feather and leg scale. Further, that quantities of grain were found in samples of Blue Buffalo’s pet food that were labeled “grain-free.”
