CA top humane state in nation

 The Humane Society of the United States, the nation’s largest animal protection organization, has released its second annual “Humane State Ranking,” a comprehensive report rating all 50 states on a wide range of animal protection laws dealing with pets, animal cruelty and fighting, wildlife, animals in research, horses and farm animals.

Last year, California topped the list, followed by New Jersey, Colorado, Maine and Massachusetts. This year, Illinois moved into third place, due to passage of a raft of important animal protection measures during the 2010 legislative session, including bills to prohibit the keeping of primates as pets and to protect animals from antifreeze poisoning.

Also making great strides were Louisiana, Oklahoma and Alaska. Oklahoma—one of the top three puppy-producing states in the country—gained major points for passing a comprehensive puppy mill bill in 2010, and also passed legislation protecting pets in domestic violence situations and for allowing the creation of pet trusts. Louisiana, which was the last state to ban cockfighting in 2006, strengthened its laws for spectators of cockfights. And Alaska gained points for making egregious acts of cruelty a felony on the first offense and for closing a loophole that allowed the possession of chimpanzees as pets.

“Our Humane State Ranking provides a big-picture look at how states are faring on animal-protection policies, and how they rank in the nation,” said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The HSUS. “There are some states that are adopting innovative and strong policies to protect animals, while others are lagging badly.”

In 2010, The HSUS helped pass 97 new laws and regulations to protect animals and helped to defeat dozens of other harmful measures.

At the bottom of the list, the states with the weakest animal protection laws are Alabama, Hawaii, Idaho, Mississippi, North Dakota, Ohio and South Dakota, with South Dakota ranking last with a score of eight out of 65. Idaho, Mississippi, North Dakota and South Dakota got low marks in part because they are the only four states in the country with no felony penalty for egregious acts of animal cruelty. Alabama, Hawaii, Idaho, Mississippi, North Dakota, Ohio and South Dakota are also among the 11 states that do not have felony-level penalties for cockfighting. Ohio is expected to move up in the ranking if the state follows through with a series of eight reforms advanced by The HSUS and agricultural groups in the state to deal with cockfighting, puppy mills, exotic pets, and factory farming issues.

The ranking was based on 65 different animal protection issues in 10 major animal protection categories including: animal fighting; animal cruelty; puppy mills; use of animals in research; equine protection; wildlife abuse; factory farming; fur and trapping; exotic animals; and companion animal laws.

Dogs may help reduce allergies in children

Researchers at the University of Cincinnati Medical Center may have found a new way for families to prevent eczema in their children: Adopt a dog.

The researchers studied 636 newborns at risk for developing asthma, allergies, or eczema, and found that children with dog allergies who lived in a house with dogs were far less likely to develop eczema than were allergic children who lived with no dogs. Conversely, children with dog allergies who did not own dogs were four times more likely to develop eczema.

On the other hand, children with cat allergies who lived with cats were more likely to develop eczema than were allergic children who lived in a cat-free house.

While researchers are still looking for a cause of the recent rise in childhood eczema, the study proves that dogs may be an ideal pet for families with allergy-ridden children.

“The number of children with allergic eczema is rising, but the reasons for this are unclear,” says Tolly Epstein, MD, corresponding author of the study and assistant professor at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine. “Our research suggests that exposure to dog allergens early in life may actually have a protective effect against developing future allergies among a high-risk population.”

Dogs have bigger brains than cats and why

Over millions of years dogs have developed bigger brains than cats because highly social species of mammals need more brain power than solitary animals, according to a study by Oxford University.
For the first time researchers have attempted to chart the evolutionary history of the brain across different groups of mammals over 60 million years. They have discovered that there are huge variations in how the brains of different groups of mammals have evolved over that time. They also suggest that there is a link between the sociality of mammals and the size of their brains relative to body size, according to a study published in the PNAS journal.

The research team analysed available data on the brain size and body size of more than 500 species of living and fossilised mammals. It found that the brains of monkeys grew the most over time, followed by horses, dolphins, camels and dogs. The study shows that groups of mammals with relatively bigger brains tend to live in stable social groups. The brains of more solitary mammals, such as cats, deer and rhino, grew much more slowly during the same period.

Previous research which has looked at why certain groups of living mammals have bigger brains has relied on studies of distantly-related living mammals. It was widely believed that the growth rate of the brain relative to body size followed a general trend across all groups of mammals. However, this study by Dr Susanne Shultz and Professor Robin Dunbar, from Oxford University’s Institute of Cognitive and Evolutionary Anthropology (ICEA), overturns this view. They find that there is wide variation in patterns of brain growth across different groups of mammals and they have discovered that not all mammal groups have larger brains, suggesting that social animals needed to think more.

Lead author Dr Susanne Shultz, a Royal Society Dorothy Hodgkin Fellow at ICEA, said: ‘This study overturns the long-held belief that brain size has increased across all mammals. Instead, groups of highly social species have undergone much more rapid increases than more solitary species. This suggests that the cooperation and coordination needed for group living can be challenging and over time some mammals have evolved larger brains to be able to cope with the demands of socialising.’

Co-author and Director of ICEA Professor Robin Dunbar said: ‘For the first time, it has been possible to provide a genuine evolutionary time depth to the study of brain evolution. It is interesting to see that even animals that have contact with humans, like cats, have much smaller brains than dogs and horses because of their lack of sociality.’

The research team used available data of the measurements of brain size and body size of each group of living mammals and compared them with similar data for the fossilised remains of mammals of the same lineage. They examined the growth rates of the brain size relative to body size to see if there were any changes in the proportions over time. The growth rates of each mammal group were compared with other mammal groups to see what patterns emerged.