DEAR DR. FOX: In this season of protests, I have been increasingly troubled by people taking one or more dogs to crowded, loud and chaotic venues, where humans are so densely packed that movement is severely restricted.

My adult daughter and I recently attended the Women's March in Washington, D.C., and as attendance built at the pre-march rally, we found ourselves all but trapped in an incredibly tight crowd. As we attempted to sidle our way to the street (a process that took about 90 minutes), I was startled to see a woman struggling to make her way into the central area being led by two plump, elderly dogs, whose withers were no higher than my knee.

I was distressed that the dogs were subjected to such conditions, and I told the lady it was a bad idea, to which she took bitter exception. I have since noticed many people bringing their dogs to similar -- admittedly less densely packed, but still very loud and stressful -- events. It seems that their pets are treated less as companions than fashion accessories, which troubles me very much.

What is your guidance regarding bringing dogs to crowded public events? -- E.L., Rockville, Maryland

DEAR E.L.: I appreciate your concern about people taking dogs to public demonstrations. There are likely to be more protests in the near future, and outbreaks of unpredictable violence in some demonstrations of public outrage, with agitators bent on causing mayhem to discredit the legitimacy of protesters. I witnessed just this at the anti-World Trade Organization demonstration that I joined and spoke at in Seattle in 1999. You can even see a photo on the cover of my book "Bringing Life to Ethics: Global Bioethics for a Humane Society."

People do take offense when confronted about how they are treating their animals, especially the suggestion that they are exposing them to unnecessary stress. It is regrettable that most public demonstrations are still limited to the degree that they are generally human-centered, and not embracing all life and the environment. Bringing dogs to a predictably massive gathering of people is grossly irresponsible, self-indulgent and confirms this lack of vision and scope of concern. All life matters, and Earth justice and animal rights should have equal representation.

DEAR DR. FOX: I have three cats and a new chair. Cat No. 1 noticed it first and started scratching the side. I covered it with a throw blanket, and the cat settled down on it, staying there and getting up only to eat and use the litter box.

After two days, cat No. 2 moved to claim it. She is my loving bedmate, but she has chosen the chair over me. Cat No. 3 dared to try out the chair when No. 2 was away. No. 2 was very upset, running around sideways with a bushy tail. Now cat No. 2 is queen of the chair again.

What is going on? Is there catnip woven into the chair, or is it a game of who is the alpha female? -- C.H., Washington, D.C.

DEAR C.H.: Late German ethologist Professor Paul Leyhausen described this cat behavior as place- or situation-dominance. Cats in groups do not have a relatively clear-cut dominance hierarchy like the kind seen in wolves and dogs, who have a social order to reduce conflict. Rather, cats tend to maintain a different social order, which is based on their relatively less social and more solitary behavior in the wild. This is based on selecting their own resting places and learning quickly to obey the rule of respecting each other's favored places to avoid conflict.

Additionally, cats in the wild will patrol their territories on different time schedules to avoid accidental face-to-face confrontation, which could lead to injurious fights. The more insights the science of ethology provides, the better we may be able to understand and control our own aggressive and territorial behaviors, as Nobel laureate Konrad Lorenz offers in his seminal book "On Aggression." This would be a good read for some of our politicians today!

DOG FOOD RECALL

On New Year’s Eve 2016, three pugs became ill, and one died; these incidents are believed to be linked to Evanger's Dog and Cat Food. Lab results provided by the pet owner show the pet food contained pentobarbital, a drug used to euthanize animals.

Evanger’s Dog and Cat Food is now voluntarily recalling specific lots of its Hunk of Beef product because of a potential contaminant (pentobarbital).

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox's website at DrFoxVet.net.)

DEAR DR. FOX: Your articles about feral cats make me angry every time you write them. You are undoubtedly a knowledgeable veterinarian, but you need to stick to animal health issues and leave local politics out of your articles! You are not an expert in this area! Your comments about cats and birds incense people and cause hard feelings among neighbors. I have been active in trap-neuter-release (TNR) for many years, and I have a colony of ferals living on my property.

Dog walkers have harassed me and my friends for feeding the cats. I’ve also had two of my ferals poisoned (perhaps only by coincidence) after one of your articles.

TNR helps to stop reproduction of homeless cats and helps the community in which they live by ridding it of moles, voles and other destructive animals. You need to stick to advice about animal care.

P.S. I have 50 to 60 birds at my feeders every day. They coexist with the cats nicely. -- C.D., Fairfax Station, Virginia

DEAR C.D.: I appreciate your dedication to caring for homeless cats, but I respectfully disagree with you that it is acceptable to allow cats to roam free just because they are regarded as being "feral."

You castigate me for dabbling in "local politics" and urge that I stick to giving advice just about animal care, but animal care includes animal welfare and ethics, which can have local, national and international political and legal consequences. As a veterinarian with doctoral degrees in medicine and ethology/animal behavior, I have written extensively over the years on these matters, and the bioethical basis of my philosophy is reverential respect for all life. The human-centered pro-life ideology extended to keeping cats alive and free-roaming outdoors is a wrong-minded perversion of this ethic.

Every community can aim high in this regard. Dogs are no longer allowed to roam free, and neither should cats. Many, if not most, so-called "feral" cats are lost strays who, when rescued, can become sociable indoor cats in a few days or weeks.

Our latest cat rescue on our property here in Minnesota, whom we had seen outdoors since May and in 20-below temperatures this December, turned out to be a total cuddle-puss and will be in a new home by the time this column appears in the paper. His veterinary care bill was $1,400, which included partial amputation of a crushed tail.

Obviously, cats who are neutered and then released outdoors are not going to breed, but they are likely to suffer far more than indoor cats (and those unadopted ones kept in enclosed sanctuaries) from injuries and disease, kill wildlife, and pose a public health risk from some of the diseases they can transmit to humans. Cats are the primary source for toxoplasmosis, a parasitic disease considered to be a leading cause of death attributed to foodborne illness in the United States. More than 60 million men, women and children in the U.S. carry the Toxoplasma parasite, but very few have symptoms because the immune system usually keeps the parasite from causing illness. However, women newly infected with Toxoplasma during pregnancy and anyone with a compromised immune system should be aware that toxoplasmosis can have severe consequences.

I wish you and all those well-meaning cat lovers who care for "feral" cat colonies would extend their compassion and respect for cats' lives to embrace all species, including moles, voles and other "destructive" animals, and give every stray cat a fair chance to become an indoor companion animal -- safe, secure and well loved. In our relationships with other animals, we must examine socially accepted norms and cultural ideologies and abandon those that cause more harm than good.

This is the last word that I will give in my column on this issue, and I hope others involved in TNR will put compassion first and think twice about the inevitable cruelty and animal suffering in the misguided and wrong-minded pro-life cult behind TNR.

U.S. PET OWNERS SPENT $63 BILLION ON PETS IN 2016

Americans' spending on pets reached a new high of $63 billion in 2016, according to the American Pet Products Association -- more than twice what owners spent on their animals in 2001. Spending on food was highest at $23 billion, with veterinary care next at $15 billion, then $14 billion for supplies and over-the-counter drugs and $5 billion for pet boarding and grooming.

NATIONWIDE: OBESITY CLAIMS FOR PETS EXPANDING

Pet health insurer Nationwide says policyholders filed 1.3 million claims for pet ailments related to obesity in 2015, accounting for $60 million in costs for veterinary care. Arthritis was the most common dog obesity-related claim, with an average cost per claim of $295, while bladder and urinary tract problems were most common among obese cats, costing an average of $442 per case.

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox's website at DrFoxVet.net.)

DEAR READERS: In America, the wolf has become a political symbol of a nation divided between the exploiters and protectors of animals and wild places. Wolves are again in the crosshairs of legislators bent on passing -- without judicial review -- Senate Bill 164, which removes federal protection under the Endangered Species Act. This legislation invites sport hunters and trappers to “harvest” wolves. It arrogantly assumes that we human hunters can replace the wolves’ role in maintaining not only healthy herds of deer and elk, but forests and biodiversity.

Abnormally high deer populations, fostered by state game agencies that profit from them and by landowners planting recreational deer feeding areas, have helped decimate wildlife habitats, while spreading chronic wasting and other deer diseases. Some of these diseases are communicable to humans, such as Lyme disease, which has become a national public health issue.

Delisting wolves will open their domain to mining, logging and other destructive human incursions. Failing protection, wolves will suffer and die under fire from new legions of hunters and trappers and the publicly subsidized beef industry that favors their eradication.

According to the Economist Intelligence Unit’s latest Democracy Index, the U.S. government has been downgraded and is no longer classed as a “full democracy.” That demotion is deserved. Our democracy will never be complete so long as its native flora and fauna continue to be marginalized. The informed majority of America can stop this destructive juggernaut of vested interests by urging their senators to oppose Senate Bill 164. In the protection of the wolf lies the preservation and restoration of democratic process, eco-justice and a humane society.

DEAR DR. FOX: I have a Yorkie who has a distinctive sweet, flowery scent on the top of his head. We thought it was possibly transferred from some of the perfumes found in soaps and such that we humans used, but it's not; it's just his own distinctive smell. This is the first time I've ever encountered this in any of my dogs. I love it. Picking him up at the end of a long day and cuddling with him and sniffing his head lets me know I'm home in a very elemental way. -- L.F. Fairfax, Virginia

DEAR DR. FOX: My first dog companion was a husky-mix. Throughout my childhood, she treated me like I was her pup and was always looking out for me. When I would get upset, Mom would apparently tell me to go smell the dog's belly, and it would calm me down. I don't remember anything about this, other than how much I loved that dog.

I am an adult now, and I have my own standard poodle. I thought I'd smell her tummy just to see if it worked. You know, the smell of the dog's tummy is sweet, like flowers and baby powder, and yes, it is still very calming. -- M.H., St. Louis

DEAR L.F and M.H: I have posted earlier responses from dog owners about their perfumed dogs and hope that your letters will encourage others to check out their own dogs for scented body areas. You both give support to pheromone research and marketing of dog-calming body scents for dogs, which you both find calming for yourselves!

We are losing our sense of smell as well as other sensibilities as we text and tweet with our less and less opposable thumbs in cyberspace. Engaging in a good dog sniff may be one way for us to recover our senses. We can also use our sense of smell to help recognize when our dogs are not well and need a change of diet or just need a bath. For most healthy dogs, this is rarely needed, except for some breeds with oily skin and older dogs with various age-related conditions.

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox's website at DrFoxVet.net.)