Wild animals in captivity have always been an issue worldwide. Japan is no exception, as people are becoming increasingly aware of the sad plight of animals in facilities that are less than adequate.

There are many zoos in Japan both public and private that range from a mere collection of haphazard, poorly cared for animals to large well managed institutions. Currently "Zoorasia" in Kanagawa Prefecture, or rather Yokohama City, is considered to be at the top of the list of well-managed, well-designed institutions, a lot of effort having gone into facility design to include much greenery and open spaces.
Though the concepts of landscaping and immersion are, to a certain extent, alive in a facility such as Zoorasia there are also many appalling conditions seen on the lower end of the scale. There are numerous facilities throughout Japan where animals, both wild and domestic, are kept in cramped, unsanitary conditions with no consideration given whatsoever to their natural behavior patterns. In many instances the caretakers employed in such facilities lack expertise in most areas of husbandry concerning the animals placed under their management. Basic issues such as nutrition and stress management are often ignored resulting in unhealthy, unhappy, pathetic looking animals. The problem is further aggravated by unplanned reproduction, resulting in unwanted offspring, which are then oftentimes sold to less than ideal facilities.
There are several issues here that need to be addressed in order to improve the situation.

The most obvious is that of legal implications. Though Japan has an animal welfare law, there are yet no "useful" standards within the legal framework concerning farm animals, lab animals, zoos and circuses etc., the result being the lack of decisive authorization or power for local governments to step into ungainly situations. Looking also into the past history of the judiciary system there have been very few cases where animal welfare groups have succeeded in suing individual institutions for animal abuse under the current animal welfare law. These facts put together point to the relative helplessness of any concerned party to use the legal system in order to resolve the situation.

The second point that must be considered is the role that the Japanese Association of Zoological Parks & Aquariums is or, rather, is not playing. This organization is a federation of all major zoos and aquariums in Japan both public and private. Though it would seem logical for such a federation to take on a "self-policing" role, the actual position of the Society vis-_-vis its membership remains somewhat obscure. Though animal welfare groups and the media have approached this organization repeatedly to obtain their stance on facilities that are overburdened with problems in the care and management of animals in their keep, the Society has never given any clear cut answers to the doubtful situations presented to them. The group definitely does have a role to play whether they like it or not and the future of their members seem to lie in their willingness to take on a leadership role in creating an environment inducive to change and improvement.

One final issue concerns the government body under whose jurisdiction the zoos lie. Museums and zoos (given museum status) are placed under the Ministry of Education & Science. In other words zoos are "scientific, educational" institutions by definition. Obviously many facilities are less than educational both scientifically and morally. What the Ministry thinks of the current situation is yet another piece of the problem solving puzzle.

If all three of the aforementioned areas of concern are addressed and dealt with actively by all those involved therein the welfare of many zoo animals would improve dramatically. The answer is there ... but when will it be delivered?

Avian flu has been a big scare in many Asian countries. Japan being a big importer of chicken from Thailand and other Asian nations felt quite threatened by the outbreak. However the biggest shock came with the outbreak of the disease domestically. Though the outbreak of the avian flu in Japan was limited to several localities the fact that the culprit was considered to be wild birds migrating to Japan from the Asian mainland was a most frightening piece of information for the Japanese public. Several problems arose from this situation.

One was that of prevention measures for the further spread of the disease. Because wild birds were considered to be the initial carriers of the illness here in Japan, designing "wild bird-proof" housing for chickens became an important issue. Though nets and fencing would probably have been useful enough, windowless barns were being recommended. Public bodies began to offer subsidies to rebuild facilities in chicken farms to those windowless structures. Just when battery cages and other farm animal welfare issues were beginning to be discussed in Japan, the appearance of these windowless structures is a great setback. The appearance of serious diseases such as SARS, the Avian flu, BSE etc. is a warning for humanity to take seriously the welfare and management of farm animals and other creatures exploited by man. The diseases cannot be prevented by eliminating, discriminating and containment policies. Humanity needs to reconsider how animals are integrated into human society, how they are being managed and whether or not the traditional ways have truly been safe for all those concerned.

The second issue pertaining to the avian flu epidemic in Japan is the fact that many schools and kindergartens keep pet chickens. Following the onset of the disease in Japan the veterinary associations were flooded by phone calls from these educational institutions asking about whether or not these pet birds should continue to be kept or whether they should all be euthanized. The associations as well as local veterinarians spent a great deal of time and effort educating these people about proper management, risk factors etc. reassuring them that there was no need to put healthy pet birds down. Despite these efforts some institutions went ahead and put down their birds "for the safety of the children", and others have asked public health offices and shelters to take in their birds. There have been cases where pet chickens have been abandoned. Being aware of dangerous zoonotic diseases such as the avian flu is one thing. But however necessary this awareness may be it is important that overreaction and discrimination not blind our more rational judgment if we are to continue enjoying the companionship of other members of the animal kingdom.

The Pet Food Manufacturer's Association of Japan has recently published their pet statistics for the country for the year 2003. The estimated number of dogs kept as pets in Japan is now up to 11 million 400 thousand, the highest ever since the association first started to publish such statistics in 1994. The last survey was conducted in October 2003.

According to this survey the indoor keeping of pet dogs was 46% of the total surpassing for the first time the total percentage of dogs kept solely outdoors, 44%. This seems to show that a remarkable change has taken place in the general owner mentality about appropriate pet keeping practices. In the last decade there have been steadily rising interests in such areas as hygiene and animal welfare.
There has also been an increase in the availability of more appropriate pet services such as obedience classes. All of these factors have no doubt contributed to bringing more dogs into the family home.

There is also an increase in the ratio of purebred dogs in the pet population, according to the survey. Whether this is a welcome trend or not depends on who's viewpoint one takes, but the percentage is now up to 57% of all pet dogs. This number shows an increase of 28% when compared to the figure 5 years ago. This may or may not be the direct result of the appearance of a number of purebred dogs in popular product commercials over the national television network.

Looking at the figures from the survey concerning single-person households, the rate of dog keeping is now 6%. This is double the rate from the survey conducted a decade ago, giving proof to the fact that dogs are now steadily being accepted as family members and companions by people from multivarious lifestyles. In single-person households the largest percentage of dog owners are found in the age range of 50~70 years.
Furthermore there were twice as many women as compared to men who were single-household dog owners. Of course one must remember that in Japan the average life expectancy of women is longer than that of men and hence as the age level increases there will probably be a greater number of female single-person households.

But here again the increase in the number of dogs kept by single individuals seems to emphasize the fact that dogs are indeed becoming full-fledged family members for their human companions.

A private organization in Japan recently conducted a survey of zoos in Japan. A questionnaire was sent out to a little over 100 Japanese zoos last summer by a private animal welfare organization based in Tokyo. Close to 90 zoos responded and the results have hence been published in the Japanese press.
The Ministry of the Environment has been working on revising and improving the standards of animal keeping in zoos and animal exhibits but this is the first time that the zoo administrators themselves voiced any opinions or concerns relevant to their work.

The main concern here is, of course, whether or not zoos and animal parks are able to create a good living environment for their animals. When asked what they thought of the environment that their zoo provides for the animals in their keeping, 51% of the respondents answered that "some parts of the zoo environment" were inappropriate. 7% stated that a greater part of their facility environment was inappropriate. However, at the same time 20% of the respondents declared their facility to be totally appropriate. In other words, all animals were housed in environmentally appropriate facilities. Nearly 60% felt that parts of or most of the zoo environment was inappropriate, if one adds the numbers of respondents in the earlier categories. However only 49% of the responding zoos had any plans for renovating or improving their facilities.

When asked if spectators fed the animals nearly 60% of the facilities answered "sometimes" or "all the time". As we all know this can be a major health problem for zoo animals. The practice should be discouraged and wherever possible strict supervision should be provided.

Another disturbing fact that became clear as a result of the survey was that almost 70% of the respondents had actually sold or bought animals through the services of private animal trading businesses, despite the fact that it is customary for zoos to trade animals directly with each other when "extras" arise due to successful reproduction.
Some private businesses are known to sell animals to those who may not have appropriate housing facilities outside of zoo circles and over the years the issue of ill-kept wild animals in roadside menageries have become a serious problem.

Japan does have a national association of zoos and aquaria, which could and should serve as a governing body outlining standards of animal keeping and codes of practice for all its member organizations, but they have not, as of yet, made any significant moves in this direction.

Last week the Japan Airlines System Corporation announced the introduction of a mileage program for their four-legged frequent fliers. This new program has been named the JAL Pet Club. According to the JAL spokesperson this is the first one of its kind to be introduced into the fliers' market by any domestic (Japanese) or foreign airline companies.
The JAL Pet Club is targeted specifically towards the "human" members of the JAL Mileage Bank. The owners simply present their Pet Club card when checking in and the pet-points are automatically registered. The spokesperson for JAL Systems Corp. advertised the new program by announcing that "if you fly your pet 4 times on JAL, the 5th trip for your pet will come free". The accumulated points can also be exchanged for crate rentals on flights, as well as various gift items.

JAL will also be lowering airfares for pets on many of their domestic routes through a simplification of the airfare system. Because companion animals, unlike service dogs, cannot fly in the passenger cabin, JAL has a special pet service program where for a certain charge pets are housed in rental crates provided by the airline and placed in the cargo hold where the temperature can be regulated. Service dogs (guide dogs, hearing dogs, and mobility dogs) fly free of charge with their users.

A new step in the right direction? Maybe.... if you like to, or must for one reason or another, fly with your pet. But for many owners the stress of flying is something to be avoided for the sake of one's pet. If a family must move to a new location far from their old home, then flying may be unavoidable, but for most animals the fluctuation in air pressure, the noise, the general isolation and handling by strangers in strange places can be a bit too much to handle.
In addition to this the "special service" available in the form of a rental crate gives the pet yet another unfamiliar and perhaps destabilizing element in their air travel already burdened with worries.

Rather than pet mileage points for flying repeatedly in the cargo hold, if the airline had announced a rigorous screening procedure for allowing companion animals into the passenger cabin, more owners would have been surprised and delighted at the new possibility. What owners should ask for at this point, not only to JAL, but to other carriers as well, is their past record of accidents concerning pets that fly. One hears many horror stories of the temperature control in the cargo hold not being what it should have been, dog, cats and other animals "dead on arrival" in their crates etc. If the owners were to have official statistics about just who is the "safest" carrier for their beloved animals that alone should be advertisement enough to attract all those traveling with their pets.
What about it airline companies in Japan? Will you do it?

2004 according to the oriental horoscope is the year of the monkey. Saru-mawashi, "monkey performances", have always been a very popular form of street entertainment in Japan. Somewhat similar to the organ-grinder and his monkey in the West, the Japanese "monkey-master" goes around with his monkey that has been taught to perform many tricks. There are several localities within the country that are famous for their "monkey-theaters", one of them being Nikko, an area frequented by both domestic and foreign tourists because of its spectacular Toshogu-shrine of the Tokugawa Shogunate. Nikko boasts a monkey troupe well known for its comical theatrical performances. The monkeys don a variety of costumes and appear in a great repertoire of tricks, dances, and drama. There are also individual "Stars" in the troupe that appear on television shows and special performances with their "monkey-masters".

Despite the apparent popularity of the traditional Saru-mawashi in Japan, for many years now animal protection groups have been voicing their concern over the abuse and ill-treatment of these monkeys, both in training and hence after in their keeping. These Japanese monkeys can become strong, aggressive creatures as adults and thus when training juveniles the trainer will often times use excessive punitive measures, using more force than is necessary, in order to have these monkeys grow up firmly believing that their human masters are much stronger than themselves. Because of these firmly embedded beliefs, the monkeys continue to obey the monkey-masters into adulthood.

Needless to say, this has aroused the anger of many animal welfare groups. Some years ago the welfare groups were able to put a stop to one particular kind of monkey-entertainment. In many Japanese zoos there used to be a special ride for small children called the "monkey-train". These were miniature trains drawn by locomotives through parks and zoos that the children could ride in. The special feature of the ride was the "monkey-engineer" on the locomotive (obviously restrained in position). The monkey was made to sit on the locomotive round after round as hordes of children "enjoyed" the ride. However in recent years the entrepreneurs running the parks have agreed with animal welfare that this was an ordeal for the monkeys, inhumane and totally unnecessary. As a result the popular monkey-trains have just about vanished from the Japanese amusement scene.

However the Saru-mawashi and the larger monkey troupes are still thriving. The major concern that Japanese animal welfare groups have is that this "monkey-business" will reach an all time high in the year 2004 due to the fact that it is the year of the monkey. Already, people have seen ads that announce the appearance of a famous monkey-star in an amusement establishment in central Tokyo to "celebrate the new year". T.V. shows, live entertainment.... there are great prospects indeed for the monkey business in Japan this year. But who will reap the profits? It will not be the monkeys, this much we can be sure of.

"Save rate" is a word that many animal welfare groups are concerned about. With all the unwanted pets coming into shelters, how many of them can really be put back into society to be rehomed? Though there will always be animals that cannot be rehomed for various reasons such as excessive aggression, the ideal situation would be one in which all rehomeable animals can be placed with new owners. Looking at various organizations around the world, one of the most successful is the San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals whose present save rate is as high as 78%. But this is a rare case and most organizations around the world are still struggling with their percentages.

In the case of Japan, as mentioned before on this site, there are very few private animal welfare organizations with enough money to build and run a true shelter, because of the taxation system which makes it difficult for volunteer organizations and non-profit groups to amass funds. Most unwanted pets in Japan are therefore taken in by animal control authorities, the public shelters.

According to the official statistics for 2001, the public shelters nationwide took in 117,399 dogs and 273,068 cats. In addition to these animals that were relinquished by their owners the public shelters also took in 151,574 dogs as strays.
How many of these animals were adopted out or reunited with their owners? Unfortunately, not many. The save rate for dogs was 10% and for cats, a mere 0.8%.

What can be done to improve this situation? When looking at the San Francisco Model one can see that an aggressive campaign of mass, low cost spay-neuter seems to have had a major impact on the situation. There is in fact a small-scale Japanese model, as well, that proves the effectiveness of such a program. In a small city in the vicinity of Tokyo a spay-neuter program run by a volunteer group managed to cut the number of dogs and cats euthanized to 1/8 the original level during a 10-year period. This volunteer group managed to conduct approximately 2000 spay-neuters per year. As a result in 10 years the euthanasia rate decreased, i.e. the save rate was increased.

With a little bit of determination the process can surely be repeated in other areas, or even on a nationwide scale. But unfortunately many animal welfare groups are still focusing on the "adoption aspect" of rescue operations and not enough attention is being given to how spay-neuter programs are truly the key to a successful sheltering operation. We need to involve as many organizations as possible in a nationwide effort to educate animal-welfare minded people to refocus their attention on "what really works".

Euthanasia in animal control facilities has always been a much debated issue in many countries. Despite the existence of animal protection legislation, owner education by both the public and private sector, and campaigns to promote spay and neuter programs, most countries still are faced with pet overpopulation and the need for government animal control offices to take measures to cull the numbers. Japan is no exception to the rule and public funds are spent to snuff out thousands of lives each year.

According the Ministry of Environment over 117,000 dogs and 270,000 cats were brought in to public animal control offices in the year 2001. These are not animals captured or picked up as strays by local animal wardens, but rather those dropped off by owners and other "related" persons. In addition about 150,000 dogs were picked up by animal control officers. These dogs are given anywhere between a few days to 2 weeks in a public shelter, the holding period during which the authorities attempt to track down the owners. Despite these efforts, however very few animals are reunited with their owners. About 10% of the dogs, and a mere 0.8% of the cats are lucky enough to be able to go back to their homes. Microchipping is still not a regular practice in Japanese pet keeping, the adoption of which will most likely boost the number of stray pets going back to their owner.

In recent years the combined efforts of the public sector and private animal welfare organizations have dramatically reduced the number of dogs and cats that must be euthanized but there is still no doubt "ample room" for improvement. Though most young animals, puppies and kittens, but especially puppies, are now being rehomed, the adults face a tougher deal. Many public animal control shelters will not rehome adult dogs simply because of the risk factor.
The dangers of inappropriate individuals re-entering society is a risk the government bodies find hard to take. The main problems here are the lack of expertise in selecting rehomeable individuals and the lack of personnel for adequate follow-up activities. These 2 issues are plaguing the private organizations as well and unsuccessful adoptions are not infrequent.

If the decision makers in both situations could find the courage to re-channel the flow of funds from the more immediate need of saving more lives to educating and developing a core group of truly knowledgeable personnel, these issues may find a long term solution. But until then the present situation may be hard to overcome.

The issue of non-domestic species invading the habitat of domestic animals is a serious problem for many countries. Earlier in this column, the alarming increase in the number of raccoons released into the wild by ignorant owners was brought up as an example of the troubles being caused by invasive foreign species brought into Japan by the profit-motivated pet Industry. Because of the serious nature of the problem, prefectures are beginning to pass legislation to counter the harmful effects of such alien species to the domestic fauna and flora.

The northern most island of Hokkaido has been one of the first prefectures to establish local legislation pertaining to the treatment of such species. Under the new system in Hokkaido owners of raccoons, ferrets and prairie dogs must register their pets. Japan has a national dog registry but for other pet animals there is no mandatory system of registration. Thus the new endeavor by the local government in Hokkaido is a very significant step forward.
The owners are not the only ones to whom new regulation is being applied. Pet shops (retailers) selling raccoons, ferrets and prairie dogs must also keep records of the sales of such animals. They must keep track of the names of the purchasing parties as well as their whereabouts.

The raccoon problem started in Hokkaido back in the early 1980's when a small number of raccoons imported and kept in captivity escaped into the local wilderness. Since then the raccoons have thrived on local soil and are to be found living in almost 50% of the entire island. The animals devour grains, fruits and other agricultural products. They are also known to damage the produce of local fish farms. Estimated annual losses of local establishments are calculated to be as high as 30 million yen.

The new legislation in the form of a prefectural ordinance has been put in place to prevent the emergence of a "second raccoon". Though prairie dogs and ferrets have not yet been discovered in the wild, prefectural authorities say that it is never too early to take the necessary precautions.

It is hoped that the central government will also reconsider the system under which the importation of foreign species into Japan is controlled.

Earlier in this column the growing popularity of Chihuahuas in Japan was taken up. Their popularity remains yet unabated alongside other small, compact breeds such as the Dachshund and Shitzu.

Currently there are 147 breeds registered with the Japan Kennel Club. The JKC registry covers 520,000 individuals. For the past several years the top breeds in terms of popularity has remained unchanged. The most popular breed, i.e. that with the largest number of registered individuals, is the dachshund, followed by the Chihuahua in second place. The third and fourth places go to the Corgi and Shitzu, respectively. When looking back a decade the larger breeds were more popular in this country. Siberian huskies and Golden retrievers were always at the top of the list, with the Shitzu being the only small breed included in the top ranks. Of course it must be mentioned that the statistics from the Japan Kennel Club include only pedigreed, pure bred dogs and that there is a larger population of pet dogs in the country consisting of mix breeds and non-pedigreed pure bred dogs.

However since the JKC registry is an indicator of trends in the professional world of breeders, it can be said that the "market situation" is reflected in their statistics. The increasing popularity of the smaller breeds can be attributed to the fact that there are more and more people opting to live in the city. Though buying a house in suburban utopia is still the family dream, there is also a large reverse trend of people coming back into the city to live in urban high rise developments. At the same time more and more apartments and condominiums are becoming open to pets. As a result urban high rise dwellers are now looking for companion dogs that fit their life style.

There is, however, one problem here. The would-be owners are still thinking only in terms of size. For example, the third most popular dog according to JKC statistics is the Corgi. Needless to say, the Corgi being a herding breed is quite active, much more so than some of the larger breeds. Another breed whose popularity is on the increase is the Jack Russell Terrier. Though quite small in size, the JRT is one of the most energetic and active dogs.

Thus many owners have fallen into the trap of acquiring "small dogs" with energy levels that do not fit the requirements of apartment life in the city. Experts have warned the public about the importance of choosing the right breed to fit the owner's lifestyle, but as with all trends and fashions, what continues to be "in" is not always the most rational or practical.

Dog bite accidents occur in Japan as in any other country with a large pet owning population. The Environmental Ministry of Japan under whose jurisdiction the Japanese animal welfare law lies has published statistics pertaining to dog bites for the year 2001. According to this document the total number of dog bites occurring in 2001 was 6,384 cases. Of these cases only 300 were caused by dogs that were "strays", with owner unknown at the time of the accident. The remainders were all caused by dogs that were clearly owned by an individual in the community.
The most commonly seen site of the accidents was the dogs' own abode, i.e. the greatest number of people were bitten by dogs inside the kennel, or around the area where they had been chained or confined. The next largest category was those accidents caused by dogs that had been let loose by their owners to run around freely in the community. The problem of dogs allowed to go off lead is truly a nuisance in many cultures. Ranking third were dogs that bit their victims whilst walking around on lead.

As far as breeds are considered, in those serious accidents reported by the media, there is a large number of fighting dogs, namely the Tosa, pit-bull, and the American Stafford shire Terrier. There is also a large number of Japanese breeds, such as the Kishu and Akita. There are also quite a number of mix breed dogs that have caused these accidents, but many of the mixes are of the Japanese breed types.

In recent years the number of dog bite accidents caused by dogs that have been allowed to go off lead by their owners have increased, this is probably similar to the pattern seen in many nations around the world. Another thing that people should take more seriously is the increasing number of pit-bull terriers that are entering the scene. Though the native fighter dog is the famous Tosa, the American pit-bull terrier is being both bred and imported here in Japan.
Though the Japanese people do not wish for legislation banning certain breeds, society is becoming cautions, little by little, in accepting such dogs. Nevertheless much of the Japanese public is still unaware of the situation and more public education is needed in this area.

Two things that the media fails to report in detail in most cases, is the information regarding the owner of the biting dog and the conditions under which it was kept including whether or not it had been spayed or neutered. If such details are provided for each accident, the public would most likely be able to detect a certain set of recurring conditions. These then would be the "red-light" factors, warning authorities and the pubic about a potentially dangerous situation.
It is hoped that the media will indeed get serious enough to play this important role.

A very peculiar phenomenon, unique perhaps to Japan, are the numerous amusement parks scattered around the country which are literally "petting zoos" with dogs and cats. Yes, ordinary dogs and cats as can be found in any household. The entrepreneurs sell their ware by chanting "come and play with the pets here if you can't have one in your apartment!" Many such parks will have over a hundred animals and will also parade "rare breeds".

The entertainment in such facilities can be divided into several categories.
One is the exhibit where the visitors are able to see dogs (and cats) in pens, runs, cages etc. just as they would wild animal in a zoo. Another form of entertainment, very popular, though disgustingly so, to the public, is the petting zoo. This is where visitors, children and adults alike are allowed into an enclosure housing multiple "friendly" dogs (or cats) to play with them, to enjoy mock-ownership. This is carried even further by some parks that will let a visitor "walk the dog" around the facility for a fee. It is hard to understand why anyone would pay, say 7~8 US dollars, to be allowed to walk a dog for 20~30 minutes. We know pet sitters and dog walkers who collect the money the other way around, but sure enough, there are people who will actually pay for this bizarre form of entertainment.
Another feature of many of these facilities are in-house breeding programs. The dogs (cats) are displayed, played with, rented out for short periods, and also bred to produce offspring that can then be displayed and sold to park visitors, often at outrageous prices. It is easy to see how a visitor can be "enthralled" by the display of so many interesting breeds of dogs (cats) and then be totally carried away by a "cute litter of puppies" on the side.

Does the Japanese population gleefully participate in this bedlam? Yes and No. As in most other countries there are people who are ignorant about the needs of animals and will merely take a "Disneyland view" of the whole setup. But there have also been loud voice of protest against such obvious exploitation of our companion animals. Many animal welfare groups as well as individual pet owners have condemned such parks as downright animal abuse.
And in reality these parks carry tremendous problems. One major issue has been bankruptcy. With immense running costs, dwindling public interest, and a colder economic climate several such facilities have gone bankrupt in the last several years. Unlike other amusement parks where roller coasters can simply be left to "rot and rust", the dogs and cats cannot be left to rot in the facilities after the broken entrepreneurs leave. Needless to say such events have severely taxed the resources of local animal control administrations and humane societies.

Even without the bankruptcy issue the care and quality of life for the animals have always been a problem. Stereotypical behavior, illness, hyperactivity, depression ... these are but a few of the issues any dog lover or cat lover would catch on the spot. Many of the so-called "friendly" petting zoo specimens are hardly so. Some so lacking in friendliness and so insecure that one is left worrying about the risks of accidents, especially with small children running around in these petting arenas.
The issue of poor quality breeding is also one that cannot be neglected. Genetic disorders are often found in the offspring sold by these parks and the quality of veterinary care provided in house is often very poor.

Amidst all the protests ... all the obvious issues, the Japanese media continue to portray them as "places to go with your family". Perhaps they of all people should be labeled the "guiltiest of them all".
After all is it not the mission of the media to pursue the wrongdoings of man? What can be more wrong than for man to exploit his best friend?

What is the most popular breed of dog in Japan? For the past several months the tiny Chihuahua has been the most popular breed on the Japanese pet market. Why? Putting aside all the various reasons that certainly may contribute to the breed's popularity, such as its dainty body and feisty character, the main reason that so many prospective owners seek out these little dogs is a T.V. commercial that has been aired since August 2002.

The commercial was made by a Japanese credit company. The commercial shows a middle-aged man walking through a pet shop with his daughter. The daughter stops to look at a little dog and begs her father to purchase it. Dad, of course, says "No, we can't have a dog." But when he turns around to say this to his daughter his eyes meet those of the tiny Chihuahua on display. Those big dewy eyes are almost "tearful" and Dad's heart is at once torn by a longing to take the poor creature into his arms. The commercial then runs scenes from Dad's imagination where he is running and laughing with the little companion on the beach...back to reality... a cheerful voice says " No money in your pocket? Apply for credit now at our local office! "

Did the animal community take offence? Most certainly. A large animal welfare organization based in Tokyo wrote to the credit company last summer immediately after the commercial was aired, explaining to the executives why organizations were working so hard to educate the public not to purchase or adopt pets on impulse, that it is imperative that people understand the full implications of bringing an animal into the household before actually doing so. This organization, a board member of the Japanese Coalition for Animal Welfare stated, very politely, in the letter that the said commercial seemed to "encourage" people to buy pets impulsively and was thus not conveying a very healthy public message.

The company sent a letter in reply quite agreeing with the points made by the animal welfare group, adding that that was why the character they showed as the prospective owner was a middle aged, responsible looking man. They had chosen the actor with care so that the image that the public received would be that of a kind, fairly well - to - do man with social standing, i.e. your responsible pet owner. Needless to say the company misses the point completely. Quick purchases and adoptions can lead to problems for anyone be he saint or millionaire.
And thus the animal welfare organization was forced to write a second letter saying just this. Finally the company agreed to run a short (very short!) message during the commercial, a few simple words stating the importance of understanding that "life must be treated with care." The commercial has continued to appear on the screen and the dewy eyed creature has gotten so much on-air time that more and more people are following in "Dad's" footsteps. Chihuahua's have become the craze for all would-be owners and puppy - mills are ranking in millions of yen for dogs that half resemble the breed.

Now animal welfare organizations have a new headache...lots and lots of tiny dogs with multiple health problems. When a breed gains in popularity they begin to decline in terms of quality. The age old rule is still out there working steadily on the Japanese Chihuahua population.

Sometime ago we discussed the issue of bull fighting in Japan. Needless to say Japan is no exception when it comes to the questionable use of animals in entertainment, festivities, and cultural events. Bull fighting exists in several prefectures including Okinawa and Niigata. Dog fighting is legal in all but four prefectures. Especially concerning this dog fighting, there are people who claim it to be a "valuable cultural tradition" which should be preserved. Such voices are raised mainly by people connected to that area in the island of Shikoku from hence the Tosa breed originates. Shikoku is one of the four main islands of Japan and it is in a certain locality on this island where the Tosa dogs are used to stage dog fights for entertainment. The Tosa dog fights are traditional cultural events in this area and even politicians are averse to the idea of putting a ban on these events.

However it is important to note that the Tosa dog fights are not the only kind of dog fighting going on in Japan. Away from Shikoku and all around the country there are dog fights staged locally often times by people who are connected to the underworld. Such events take place in many prefectures using the notorious pit bull terriers. The U.S. authorities and animal welfare organizations are fully aware of the fact that fighting pit bulls are being exported to Japan. The Japanese animal welfare groups are also very much aware of the issue.

Strangely, there is absolutely no reference made to such occurrences in the Japanese media. As a result the general public is totally unaware of the fact that dog fighting for entertainment staged by people of dubious background are being conducted all over the country. Most Japanese people will connect dog fighting with Shikoku Island and the Tosa dog, but almost never with pit bulls, perhaps even in their own township. The media has never made clear to the animal charities why they do not feel that pit bull fighting is worth reporting on.
Are the media owned by people from these dark circles? Or are they scared of such people?
Only those in the media are able to answer these questions.

The Japanese animal welfare law, officially known as the Animal Welfare and Control law, is coming up for a fifth year review in 2005. The Japanese Coalition for Animal Welfare, the largest federation of animal welfare organizations in the country has begun to circulate petition forms to prepare for the up-coming review. These forms outline the 8 basic points on which the Coalition feels a strong need for change.

The first point asks for a clearer definition of "cruelty" or "abuse" as well as for stronger punitive measures for acts committed. The second point states the necessity of moving animal businesses under a licensing system from the present registration system. These "animal businesses" refer to all those involved in business transactions concerning animals such as pet shops and breeders. However the Coalition is also requesting the addition of new categories here, such as riding clubs, pet sitters, service dog training centers etc. Point 3 asks for a registration system to be put in place for the keeping of multiple pets. More specifically the Coalition has asked that individual bodies keeping more than 10 dogs and cats total (other animals to be specified by local ordinances) be required to register themselves with the local governing body. The local government should also be given the right to inspect and make necessary recommendations to all such registering bodies. This change, should it be adopted, would be an effective tool with which to counter the issue of animal collectors. The fourth point states the necessity of setting up measures to control animal experiments. Though the Coalition does not put forth any concrete proposals it feels that more specific standards and conditions must be placed on animal experiments in this country. Point 5 is very specific in that it calls for a ban on the use of live animals as prizes and free gifts for promotional events and other such occasions. Points 6 and 7 concern the placement of an animal welfare officer as well as volunteer advisors for animal welfare in local governments. The eighth point concerns a partial redefinition of the word "animal" to clarify the specific entities to which the law applies.

Though these 8 points on the petition are merely "suggested changes" presented by the Coalition for Animal Welfare, they represent the areas in which animal charities have been experiencing difficulties in actually utilizing the welfare laws to protect animals. The petition will be circulated amongst interested parties throughout the country before being presented to the speakers of both the Upper and Lower Houses of the national diet for consideration. We wish the Coalition the best of luck in their endeavors.

The Pet Food Manufactures' Association of Japan has recently conducted a survey on the status of pet keeping in the country. The survey has been conducted every year since 1994 and last year's results show that dogs are still the number one pet in terms of numbers. On the national level, 16.7% of the households own dogs followed by 10.7% owning cats.

The survey also revealed the various motives behind the keeping of pets through the use of questionnaires. The most common motives such as "because they are cute and lovable" or "because we like animals" give testimony to the fact that the "warm fuzzies" factor is still the strongest reason that people are attracted to animals. However another rising motive (3.7 points up from the 2001 survey for dogs and 8.4 points up for cats) is the "therapeutical effect" that animals have on people. Many owners expressed the importance of animals as a quality-of-life-factor in their daily lives. Many people in Japan are beginning to look at pets not only as cute and cuddly creatures, but more as an integral part of their lives that has a profound effect on their psyche. This is certainly a welcome trend that will definitely lead to a change in the social perception of pets in this country.

Another interesting trend detected in the survey was the growing concern with social manners as related to pet keeping. When asked whether or not pets should be allowed in apartments 60 percent of both owners and non-owners replied that people should be allowed the freedom to bring pets into apartments so long as they stick to social rules and do not disturb or annoy their neighbors. This means that more than half of the surveyed population see pets not as a luxury or an "anomaly" but rather as a normal, or an acceptable part of a person's life bound only by the rules and laws of social order.
This is indeed an encouraging trend for pet owners and animal lovers throughout the country!

Because of the increasing number of city dogs, or rather dogs living in the city with their owners, sharing space and amenities is becoming an issue that urban administrators must face. The problem of dog poop in parks and accidents caused by off-lead canines are certainly not unique to Tokyo. These are issues common to many large cities worldwide.
In recent years Tokyo has begun to address these problems by using a method familiar to many dog owners around the world, setting up "dog-runs" in major city parks. In the Tokyo metropolitan area there are still only 3 parks that have set aside space for the canine citizens, the trend will no doubt continue to grow.

In Jindai Botanical Park in the western suburbs of Tokyo there are 2 fenced areas for dogs, each measuring 18 by 80 meters. The fence surrounding the run is 1.2 meters in height. This is the newest dog-run in Tokyo having opened at the end of 2002.
The administrators of the botanical park have not yet decided whether or not to make this run a permanent feature of the park. The trial period for the dog-run will run till May 2003, at which point a decision will be made as to its future. The run has been effectively utilized since its installation by many members of the local community and their canines. Park authorities say that on weekends there are, on the average about 50 dogs that are exercised in the run.
There are, of course, certain rules that must be followed when using the run. First and foremost, the facility is not open 24 hours, and users are not allowed on the premises "before sunrise" and must leave "at sundown". Dogs that do not respond to basic commands from their owners are not allowed to go off lead. Needless to say the owners must pick up and take home all of their dogs' "droppings".

The Bureau of construction of the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, the party responsible for the operation of the run in Jindai Botanical Park called on citizens through their website to voice their opinions on whether or not dog-runs should be installed in city parks.
This was done in August 2002, prior to the installation of the run in Jindai Botanical Park. The Bureau received almost 5000 responses. Over 90% of all dog owners who responded were enthusiastic about building dog-runs. Even for the non-owners over 50% stated that such facilities would be welcome. This positive reaction from the public encouraged the metropolitan government to go ahead with the trial run in Jindai Botanical Park.

Though dog-runs are still in their trial stages in Japan the movement is slowly gaining momentum. But further consideration must be given to appropriate management methods in order to provide a truly sound environment in which our canine citizens can reap the joys of city life.

About 10 years ago a comparative study was done to clarify the positions taken by British and Japanese veterinarians on the issue of euthanasia. The focus of the study was not so much on methods of euthanasia or the problems of pet overpopulation. Rather the study focused on the individual attitudes of veterinary practitioners concerning the euthanasia of companion animals in their practice. Would the veterinarian consent to put down a healthy animal if the owner requested that it be done? Is euthanasia a viable option in the practice for terminally ill patients? Questions such as these were the underlying theme of the survey.

Though the targeted population was small, the survey did show a significant difference in attitude between the British and the Japanese veterinarians. The Japanese veterinarians were much more reluctant as a whole to conduct euthanasia as compared to their British counterparts. And the result certainly does fall in line with the reality faced by many Japanese pet owners. Many owners have voiced complaints about their veterinarians who have refused to terminate the lives of their "very ill" or "very senile" pets despite the fact that their quality of life was no longer acceptable to both animal and owner. For these pet owners the last thing they want to do is to knock on the door of a strange veterinarian, one who has never seen their pet before, and request euthanasia, and yet many are forced to do so out of necessity.

The Japanese attitude towards death has often been traced to Buddhist teachings where "the taking of life" is to be avoided at all costs. But this does not seem to be the major factor guiding the Japanese attitude on death. The primitive Japanese religion has always considered death to be a "black" phenomenon, something unholy and dirty. And yet death had to be dealt with properly to avoid those concerned falling under its curse. Death was a scary phenomenon and the best thing was to try and avoid being involved in it. Almost all the "ghost stories" in Japan center around the theme of revenge. The ghosts will always come back to haunt and curse the guilty party for years, even generations.
Though the Japanese may not be consciously aware of such ancient beliefs, it certainly seems to be at the root of their contemplation on death. Therefore it seems as though the reluctance of the veterinary community concerning euthanasia has its origins in this realm of thought.

However when veterinary groups in other nations are publicizing their views on such things as recommended procedures, it is no longer excusable for the Japanese professionals to avoid the issue. Hopefully the Japanese Veterinary Medical Association will, in the not-too-distant future, set up some internal body to discuss and clarify their stance on euthanasia for its practicing members. The issue has been ignored for too long.

Animals in education is a very current issue in Japan.
The Ministry of Education and Science is actively promoting the idea of bringing animals into primary schools for the purpose of teaching children reverence for life and responsible ownership. The idea in itself is not a bad one. Neither is it pointed in the wrong direction.
However problems arise when these ideas are put into actual school programs. Currently the predominant system in public schools is the keeping of rabbits in outside hutches. This has caused tremendous problems in the areas of proper husbandry and animal welfare. The rabbits have been kept together in large groups with no thought given to spay and neuter programs. As a result school rabbit colonies have in many cases suffered greatly from over population. Over crowding, malnutrition, male territorial aggression have been but a few of the causes for a rapid deterioration of the living environment of school rabbits. In addition to this many schools have failed to give enough thought to daily care plans and contingency planning. As a result inadequate care during weekends and holidays, lack of budgeting for proper veterinary care in times of need etc. have further aggravated the existing issues.
In response to the deteriorating situation veterinarians have begun to take the initiative in improving the plight of these school animals. A group of veterinarians, members of the Japan Small Animal Veterinary Association, have established a committee for the promotion and support of school animals.
The group has attempted to educate both schools and local veterinarians about the need for cooperation. They have also approached regional authorities, cities and townships, for public support, especially in terms of financial support for veterinary care of school animals.
In the meantime the Ministry of Education and Science has led a research effort to "define the importance of animals in education" and has come up with definite recommendations. The Japan Science Council has also sponsored a symposium of experts to discuss the issue of school animals.
According to many veterinarians the ultimate goal is to establish a system of "classroom pets" kept inside classrooms rather than in outside hutches, nonetheless the "less desirable" existing system still provides an important impetus to young children in learning to become responsible and nurturing adults. Despite the inadequacies in the system, gradually through the efforts of various parties the school pets are seeing better days. But the situation is still far from being satisfactory and continues to be targeted by animal welfare groups.
We can only hope that the improvements to the system will continue to move forward as swiftly as is possible.

Bullfighting in Japan? Yes, there is bullfighting in Japan, the most famous one being the spectacular events staged in Okinawa, the southern most island of the country. The bullfight here is not between man and bull, but rather between bulls, similar to dog-fighting and cock-fighting. Needless to say the fighting animals do each other much physical damage. Blood is definitely spilled despite the fact that the people involved insist that it is merely "a locking of horns."

The government does not seem to view this as a gruesome, cruel event, but rather as a way to promote tourism in Okinawa. This autumn the government has called on the public of "monitors" that would be invited free of charge to a bull fighting event in Okinawa. The invitation has been extended to all those tourists who are planning to be in Okinawa on the date of the event. The invited public will be asked to complete a questionnaire at the end of the event with suggestions for further enhancement of the tourist industry.

This is nothing short of an official sanction of the bloody event and the Coalition for Animal Welfare, the largest federation of animal welfare groups in Japan has sent letters of protest to the related authorities asking for the cancellation of such an "invitation program," if not of the event itself. The letters have failed to evoke any positive response from the government. It seems as though the bull fighting is being promoted as a colorful cultural event and a perfectly legitimate one at that.

This is once again one of those issues that must be addressed on a global basis. How much cruelty can be permitted behind the fa_ade of national cultures? Animal fighting is a bloody form of entertainment in many countries. There is another Asian culture that has horse fighting in addition to the well-known dog, cock, and bull fights. In Japan the first problem is the lack of any national legislation that prohibits the fighting of animals, though there are 4 prefectures (out of the 47) that have banned dog fighting through prefectural ordinances. The Coalition will continue to do their part in lobbying for better anti-cruelty laws and protesting against atrocious events.In the meantime global efforts must also be made to create a better network through which the humane treatment of animals can be promoted on a wider scale.