Castro 1

Giovanni Castro
Lynda Haas
Writing 39C
August 12, 2015
Canine Abuse
It should not come as a surprise to see people abusing of animals in exchange
for money. Often times, people take a step beyond this reasoning and abuse animals
for the mere entertainment of observing pain. Either way, when this notion is applied
to the creature people refer to humans best-friend, it is controversial, and frankly
utterly disgraceful, to watch small defenseless newborn pups suffer both physically
and mentally to such a large extent. Bearing in mind that same newborn may never
see life beyond the cage he or she was born, the damage one creates from abuse
leaves permanent scars in all parts of the dogs body, including its mind. What some
may call puppy mills, or puppy farming, I call captivity of our best-friends;
scientists merely point the obvious with the use of numbers, however the moral issues
behind this extreme case of canine abuse is abnormal.
Let us take a step back and philosophize this animal: dogs represent the
specific domesticated group of animals, namely pets. The attribution to their group
implies that, often times, they are confused to be submissive creatures living
unconsciously. Some take a leap further and assume they are merely possessions
which would then suggest that dogs are emotionless; they are some sort of friendly
robot that eats and sleeps whenever its owner allows to. This is not the case. Animal
awareness is a growing study, which originated from Darwins understanding of
evolution in the 19th century from his work The Origin of Species, 1859 (Bekoff 2), but

Castro 2
canine appreciation was only given a large focus dating back to approximately the
1950s when behavioral psychologists John Paul Scott and John Fuller made
groundbreaking research on dog behavior (Coppinger 34). Perhaps people merely
lack sufficient information that dogs present evidence that they are in fact beings that
live beyond the scope of instinct, and offer intriguing cognitive patterns that can be
associated with human-behavior. By mentioning this, I will address the idea that dogs,
in response for being conscious animals like humans, provide a strong correlation
with their emotional side hence proving they are socially active and to some extent

Figure 1
intellects of their species.
The obvious issue with studying canine cognition is that dogs do not speak
words. As Marian Stamp Dawkins would say: Actions speak louder than words
(Dawkins 150); this proverb is what scientists and behavioral psychologists would
solely base their studies when attempting to acknowledge patterns in body-language
like twisting their necks indicating they are confused, barking and other physical
gestures such as wagging their tail. To further back this claim, Dr. Brian Hare,
professor of evolutionary anthropology at Duke University, and Vanessa Woods,
journalist, scientist and writer, mention how dogs frequently use visual signals to
communicate (Hare 135). There is therefore a possible establishment of a link

Castro 3
between dogs basic knowledge, from a humans perspective, and their emotion. As I
have mentioned previously, the fundamental understanding of animals, where these
studies were given birth are all derived from Darwins first observations and theories,
yet the central and controlling thesis also shows that 100 years later the species Canis
Familiaris, latin for dogs, started to slowly develop studies as of 1950s.
As illustrated in Figure 1, it becomes clear that dogs have different levels or
stages of contemplation. All animals, including humans have the first item within the
animals nature; the body naturally works in synchrony, meaning: if an animal feels an
urge to eat it means that unconsciously, their body sends a message to the brain, which
would then allow the animal to search for food. The second item has more conscious
thinking required by the animal: the hunting aspect is more complex than eating
because, in essence, the dog must initiate a search and use its senses to its favor.
Interestingly, the dog has such a powerful smell for hunting that research shows they
are superior to humans in detection of odorants (Greenberg 388). Nonetheless, the
dog can undergo even further complex thinking, which then develops more into
emotions. As I mentioned above, disgust is a feeling that pertains to taste; in order for
an animal to acknowledge taste, it must be a conscious reaction of not desiring a
particular thing, as in food, for example.
The informative pictorial image above was based on the article written by
Stanley Coren, who noted that there are certain emotions felt by humans that can be
attributed to dogs. As he mentions in his article, to understand what dogs feel look
at research done on emotions of humans (Coren). Dogs do have a direct manner of
speech as humans do with verbal communication, it is essentially human emotions
that dogs portray. To some extent this might be an unfair examination, however given

Castro 4
the fact that humans consider dogs their best-friends, it makes sense to associate
dogs with these characteristics, since they socially accept and love human-beings. It
would not be the case of an alpha predator such as a lion, or a reptile, like a snake, to
collaborate with humans, even though they might have similar emotions. In the
specific case of the dog, Conrey asserts that researchers have now come to believe
that the mind of a dog is roughly equivalent to that of a human (Coren).
Now it is established that dogs have somewhat of a conscious. To take this
notion and to amplify it to a global scale, scientists have recently come to agree to a
formal thesis, as of 2012, namely The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness1.
This is an important fact that can now be ignored as an assumption when conducting
the studies of cognition of animals; as Marc Bekoff mentioned in his recently posted
article: scientists presented evidence that led to this self-obvious conclusion
(Bekoff). It is important to note that I very explicitly provided with lengthy evidence
of animal conscious as an argument to refute the confusion an average person might
have of their dog, or of other dogs, that they are soulless and forever enslaved to
humans.
To oppose this fairly common view of dogs being dependent of humans, I
would like to direct to Alexandra Horowitz book, when she mentions dogs love is
entwined with loyalty (Horowitz 21). This idea is a very authoritative notion that
goes to show that humans so selfishly ignore a dogs loyalty and then associate it with
dependence, or as Dr. James Serpell, professor of humane ethics and animal welfare at
the University of Pennsylvania, in his studies comments that families acquire a
1 The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness: Convergent evidence that
indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical,
and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity
to exhibit intentional behaviors.

Castro 5
dog for the sole reason of pet deficit2 (Serpell 163). It is an unfair balance in this
dog-human relationship, since a dog has such strong devotion to love that it basically
fascinates itself on its owner. This not only proves my first part of the thesis, that dogs
have a conscious, but also they have feelings of emotion. Love is an immeasurable
and indescribable emotion that humans share amongst themselves on a daily basis, but
it one of many emotions that the complex human brain processes. Quickly glancing
back to Figure 1, the illustration proves that there are only a handful of emotions that
a dog can have, and clearly, one of them is love. After this brief referral, bear it in
mind and turn towards Monique Udell as she puts that dogs appear to be sensitive to
the attentional state of humans (Udell Theory of Mind). This is a parallel theory to
that of dogs passion or love for the human-being, which finally lays out my key
statement that dogs are altruistic beings, making them socially acceptable and
intellects for showing human emotions.
I then uphold that it has become less of an assumption that dogs do in fact
have a conscious, given their intelligent cognitive patterning, which would then
correspond to them having emotions. I also greatly emphasize the fact that it is a
presumption that dogs have similar behavioral aspects to humans since, logically, to
associate an animal with a conscious using human emotions as a testing factor, if the
test proved to have a positive match, then there must exist a relationship between the
two beings. However, more than just establishing a connection between humans and
animals, the fact the there is a minimal recognition of a dogs existence is a
breakthrough in the social acceptance of their species. Recent studies have shown that
it is vital to acknowledge that the father of animal evolution, Charles Darwin, back in
the 1800s, already established that dogs have emotions such as love, fear, shame
2 Simply needing a pet

Castro 6
and rage, as well as dreams, and the ability to imitate and reason (Udell), proving
that dogs are, to some extent, intellects to their respective cognitive potential.
So dogs do in fact behave respectfully in human society, not as a fully active
human but as contributors, serving more as a supporter to the human owner who
acquired the pet. By mentioning this, they then do deserve mutual respect being the
benevolent creators they are and so, consequently, they deserve to have rights just as
much as a human. This is a notion that not only bothers me personally, but also
troubles a greater population worldwide, which corresponds to the growing study of
animal awareness. I shall now pose a challenge to a reflection: if dogs are
scientifically proven to have a conscious, follow to some extent social requirements to
be accepted by humans and do have emotions, what gives a human-being the right to
abuse of this animal?
I shall now turn back to my original idea and cover large basis on not only the
quality of typical puppy mills, but also the psychological factors that allow a person
proceed with this level of abuse. It is vital to comprehend the motive for why a person
thinks along the lines of abuse, therefore the scientific research of Animal Abuse and
Psychiatric Disorders (2002) serves as proof to this specific statistical analysis.
Further enhancing my argument, canine abuse has been developing from an earlier
age, as the ASPCA article on Pit Bull Cruelty Facts and FAQs accordingly states that
there are some accounts of dog fights dating back to the 1750s (Pit Bull Cruelty).
To contextualize these dog fights: approximately 260 years ago, the bulldog breed
were used to bait larger animals, once the government banned baiting, these dog
owners threw their bull dogs as gladiators and watch which dog was the strongest.

Castro 7
This idea goes to show that humans have a tendency to fulfill their satisfaction usually
by aggression, which unfortunately targets beings that are completely uninvolved.

Castro 8
My focus is nevertheless on puppy farms. There are several non-profit
organizations that attempt to battle against this crime of animal harassment. The
approach they usually take is that of precaution, meaning: they warn potential dog
customers where to purchase a dog in order to not stimulate puppy mills. Now, what
exactly consists of a puppy
mill? What makes this place be
considered a terrible
environment for dogs? In an
Australian discussion paper
Puppy Farms (2010) written by
Figure 2

Heather Neil, CEO of RSPCA

Australia, she provides photographs and very clear descriptions of the state in which
dogs are raised Figure 2 shows a rough idea of the living-conditions. Life in cages
leads to problems associated with basic care, as she states: drinking water is often
insufficient, and it may also be contaminated (Puppy farms). The consequences for
providing this type of drinking water are similar to when providing to an average
human-being since it causes serious gastrointestinal upsets (Puppy farms) leading to
diseases which, if not treated, may further result in death. In addition, lacking quality
in the supply of water is particularly disturbing to bitches: since they feed their pups,
more water is required, and given the high level of contamination, both the mother
and her pups are put into severe jeopardy. This is one of many different issues directly
linked with puppy mills. Even though this unregulated environment is an act of
astounding selfishness, what is worrying is the mental state of the person who
administers this business.

Castro 9
This notion recalls the scientific paper mentioned previously produced by
Roman Gleyzer, MD, Alan R. Felthous, MD, and Charles E. Holzer III, PhD. As these
three professionals exploits the correlation between animal mistreatment and mental
disorders, they state that starting in 1987, this behavior [cruelty to animals] was a
criterion for conduct disorder and for APD [antisocial personality disorder] (Animal
Cruelty and Psychiatric Disorders). The link between these two are abundantly strong,
given that an average human being would perceive the quality of a puppy farm as a
clear indication of mistreatment. It calls to attention that those who abuse are
diagnosed with such disorders are also subject to possessing persecutory delusions
(Animal Cruelty and Psychiatric Disorders), which looking up the definition means
that the person is delusional of thinking that it a harmful event will eventually happen.
If you take a medical perspective, the action for a person to abuse an animal may be
accounted for given the health state of that person, but should that person be operating
a business which involves lives of other beings? It is simply unfair for the dogs under
captivity to be mistreated by someone not able to handle simple tasks in life. In my
view, an average human being, a person who can function in society, should reallocate
the resources used in order to prevent abuse and create a healthy and clean
environment for these puppies.
Although puppy mill owners have their share of responsibility for the abuse of
dogs, the unfortunate truth that lied embedded within my arguments against this
horror is that all of us dog consumers are contributors. It is a profitable industry that
deals with an exceedingly high valued commodity. Dog lovers are definitely biased
towards revoking the rights of having puppy mills. Ironically, if that dog lover, who
probably owns a dog, reflects on his prior acts, the dog owner would probably not
have bought his or her pup had it not been the puppy mill. As Mary-Jo Dionne

Castro 10
mentions in her article: in our obsession with having a purebred and having it
quickly, we feed the industry (Puppy Hell: The Horrors of Puppy Mills). In basic
economics terms, the demand is so high that the quality of the good tends to fall, since
production cannot be sustainable. Dogs are victims regardless of the type of person
who owns his rights. By mentioning this, think about the word choice: owns his
rights, industry, consumers, businesses et cetera; in this sense, all these words
already suggests that dogs are inevitable targets for abuse since a person is operating
within their rights to do whatever they please with their purchase.
Confusingly, government provisions for animal cruelty date back to the 1800s,
when the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 was passed in the U.K. Parliament, implying
that this notion was spreading more than two-hundred years ago. More specifically to
canine abuse, the Australian government passed The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Act 1986, dictating that observed owners intend to provide minimum standards of
accommodation care to dogs (Code Of Practice For The Private Keeping Of
Dogs). One might think there are worldwide regulations puppy mill owners and other
abusers are not following these norms, and consequently, they should be locked away.
However, the PETA NGO states, there such things called puppy pipelines, which
basically means that dealers who want to avoid relevant U.S. laws look elsewhere
to continue doing business, like for example smugglers who bring puppies into the
U.S. from Mexico (Puppy Mills: Dogs Abused for the Pet Trade). One can then
conclude that there is seemingly no end for canine abuse. Morally correct or not, the
greatest issue of a capitalist society will always be money humans put their selfinterest before their empathy in all kinds of situations, but pertinent to the stimulation
of puppy mills is the quintessential example of such a claim.

Castro 11
To conclude: what specific courses of action can those concerned with the
welfare of vulnerable pups ponder to solve such a loose-ended issue of canine abuse?
It was made explicitly clear that their lives are in danger, due to the unregulated
quality of puppy mills, the lack of animal protection from those who are mentally
challenged to sustain unaggressive acts and the driving factor of money causing a
stimulus to the market for contraband. There have been several NGO initiatives that
approach government officials with the intuition to put animal welfare in their agenda.
Is that enough? Charities can solve social and environmental
problems by posing moral concerns to society; they receive
donations, which is then applied to reduce or solve the issue. Since
capital is an issue preventing this market to shut down, the
allocation of donations may be used to provide shelter. Personally, I
associate this issue similar to that of homeless people, since pups
have no home, food or easy way to survive, a basic shelter would
improve their lives drastically. I would say that the two great issues
which are leading causes are: poorly administered government
regulations and insignificant financial compensation. Without both, it
the puppy mills will function normally without clandestine levels
growing at an exponential rate.

Castro 12

Works Cited
Puppy Mills: Dogs Abused for the Pet Trade. Peta.org. Sun. 19. Jul. 2015.
<http://www.peta.org/issues/companion-animal-issues/companion-animalsfactsheets/puppy-mills-dogs-abused-pet-trade/>.
Puppy farms. Rspca.org.au. Sun. 19. Jul. 2015.
<http://kb.rspca.org.au/afile/322/55/>.
Puppy Hell: The Horrors of Puppy Mills. Moderndogmagazine.com. Fri. 17. Jul.
2015.
<http://moderndogmagazine.com/articles/puppy-hell-horrors-puppy-mills/269>.
First came battery chickens. Now we have battery dogs. Theguardian.com. Fri. 17.
Jul. 2015. <http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/feb/03/puppy-farmsbattery-dogs>.
Animal Cruelty and Psychiatric Disorders. Jaapl.org. Thu. 16. Jul. 2015.
<http://www.jaapl.org/content/30/2/257.full.pdf+html>.
The Animal-Cruelty Syndrome. Nytimes.com. Thu. 16. Jul. 2015.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/magazine/13dogfighting-t.html?_r=0>.
Pit Bull Cruelty Facts and FAQs. Aspca.org. Mon. 20. Jul. 2015.
<http://www.aspca.org/fight-cruelty/dog-fighting/pit-bull-cruelty>.

Castro 13
Code Of Practice For The Private Keeping of Dogs. Depi.vic.gov.au. Fri. 17. Jul.
2015. < http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/pets/dogs/legal-requirements-for-dogowners/code-of-practice-for-the-private-keeping-of-dogs>.
Wikipedia. Wikipedia.com. Mon. 20. Jul. 2015.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty_to_Animals_Act_1876>.
Bekoff, Marc. The Cognitive Animal Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives on
Animal Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 2002. Print.
Coppinger, Raymond, and Lorna Coppinger. Dogs: A Startling New Understanding of
Canine Origin, Behavior, and Evolution. New York: Scribner, 2001. Print.
Dawkins, Marian Stamp. Why Animals Matter: Animal Consciousness, Animal
Welfare, and Human Well-being. New York: Oxford UP, 2012. Print.
Hare, Brian, and Vanessa Woods. The Genius of Dogs: How Dogs Are Smarter than
You Think. Penguin, 2013. Print.
Horowitz, Alexandra. Inside of a Dog: What Dogs See, Smell, and Know. New York:
Scribner, 2009. Print.
Coren, Stanley. "Which Emotions Do Dogs Actually Experience?" Psychology Today.
13 Mar. 2013. Web. 2 Aug. 2015. <https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/caninecorner/201303/which-emotions-do-dogs-actually-experience>.
Bekoff, Marc. "Scientists Conclude Nonhuman Animals Are Conscious Beings."
Psychology Today. 10 Aug. 2012. Web. 2 Aug. 2015.
<https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/animal-emotions/201208/scientistsconclude-nonhuman-animals-are-conscious-beings>.

Castro 14
Udell, Monique, and C.D.L Wynne. "A Review of Domestic Dogs' (Canis Familiaris)
Human-Like Behaviors: Or Why Behavior Analysts Should Stop Worrying and Love
Their Dogs." Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. Society for the
Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Inc., 1 Mar. 2008. Web. 2 Aug. 2015.
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2251326/>.
Greenberg, Gary. "Dogs in Service to Humans." Comparative Psychology: A
Handbook. New York: Garland Pub., 1998. Print.
Serpell, James. "Dogs as Human Companions: A Review of the Relationship." The
Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behaviour, and Interactions with People. Cambridge:
Cambridge UP, 1995. Print.