DEAR READERS: Please read this excerpt from the study “Relationships between Indigenous American Peoples and Wolves” by Brandy Fogg et al., published in 2023 in the Journal of Ethnobiology.

The study's abstract reads:

“We examine the historical relationship between humans and wolves as illustrated through stories of North American Indigenous peoples, especially the Great Plains and Intermountain West (regions) ... All Plains tribes examined closely have stories that describe wolves as guides, protectors or entities that directly taught or showed humans how to hunt after humans arrived in the Americas. Indigenous stories provide insights into the process of the domestication of wolves ... There appears to have existed a reciprocal relationship in which both species provided food for each other or shared food. This is important because it is often assumed by scholars from the Eurocentric tradition that the first wolves associated with humans scavenged or hung around camps waiting for scraps; thus, from this perspective, the process of domestication began with wolves being dominated by humans.

"In contrast, we argue for a coevolutionary reciprocal relationship between Homo sapiens and Canis lupus that existed from the early days of tribes until at least the nineteenth century. ... (Our results indicate that) the process of domestication may have taken a different path than is generally assumed."

It is worth remembering that white settlers, with their cattle and sheep, all but exterminated the wolf, while others engaged in the genocide of North America’s Indigenous peoples.

DEAR DR. FOX: What are your thoughts on the best ways to help animals when one of their housemates and companions dies?

I took one of my cats to be put to sleep today because she indicated it was her time. The lovely vet confirmed it. She said she’s seen dogs say goodbye to their recently deceased friends -- that letting the other animals see the body helps them process what has happened.

We did this with our cat. Her sister was curious and seemed to be processing the smells, etc., whereas our other cat displayed distress and ran away. He looked like he expected her to jump up and attack him -- as she would in life, if he got too close. I hope I didn’t cause him any upset.

Both cats seemed to understand that she wasn’t her usual self yesterday and today. -- S.B., Folkestone, England

DEAR S.B.: I sympathize with your loss. In my experience, surviving animals in the home should be allowed to see their deceased companion. As you observed, some may react with fear and run away, while others take their time, examine the body and then walk away.

Animals of many species mourn the loss of a familiar companion, whether human or nonhuman. Those who do not see the deceased and have at least a moment of mourning may search for them, call out for them and exhibit distress.

I have always provided my cats and dogs the opportunity to see their deceased animal companions. But when my wife died, it was not possible for my dog Kota to see her. For several days, Kota kept looking for her during our daily routines.

SAFE FLEA, TICK AND MOSQUITO PREVENTION

Please see this Facebook video from veterinarian Dr. Bob Goldstein to learn about safer alternatives to the poisonous products many use to keep noxious insects off their pets. Go to: facebook.com/reel/1054928742656921.

(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 DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DR. FOX: I’m 87, and have always declawed my indoor cats on their front paws with no problems. Last year, I got two ginger kittens. Before I could declaw them, they scratched my foot and I ended up in the hospital with cellulitis. After that, they were laser-declawed in the morning and were home tramping around in the afternoon.

The protection of babies, the elderly and furniture require front-declawing. The alternative is euthanizing the cats. Another option is euthanizing any vet who opposes declawing. You’re a jerk! -- L.O., Marco Island, Florida

DEAR L.O.: I am tired of responding to readers such as you, so I referred your letter to veterinarian Dr. Ron Gaskin of Shakopee, Minnesota. He has done remarkable reconstructive surgery on many cats crippled by this surgical mutilation.

Gaskin writes:

"It was shocking to read the statement that to protect humans and furniture, front-declawing cats is 'required'! Perhaps much more thought should have been given to the needs of these kittens rather than the wants of the owners. Bringing kittens into a home with elders who are not willing or able to create a feline-appropriate, safe and compassionate environment for them is inexcusable.

"Kittens have not yet had a chance to learn about boundaries. Amputating their toes for human convenience, rather than clipping their nails and providing them with suitable scratching posts, is inhumane.

"Millions of people worldwide live happily with cats whom they choose to respect and not harm. Many countries prohibit declawing, considering it cruel and unethical. At its very core, declawing inevitably changes the mechanics of cats’ paws, balance and how they walk, which in and of itself is medically unjustifiable and ethically indefensible.

"As to the comment about vets, we have sworn an oath to prevent and relieve animal suffering. Performing a painful elective procedure that provides no medical benefit to the cat, for the sole convenience of the owner, inflicts suffering rather than preventing it, and therefore violates our oath.”

DR. FOX HERE: I would add that the elderly should consider the probability of any adopted animals outliving them. Either make appropriate provisions for these animals, or instead of adopting a pet, engage in foster care for an animal shelter. Animals can thus be rehabilitated for adoption by younger people.

For more about declawing, see my post here: drfoxonehealth.com/post/declawing-cats.

GOOD NEWS FOR RED WOLVES

Three red wolf pups were born at the Museum of Life and Science in Durham, North Carolina. This marks another milestone in conservation efforts for the critically endangered species, which has about 20 members in the wild and 300 under human care. (Full story: The News & Observer, May 13)

This is a glimmer of hope, brought about through the dedication of many people, for an American wolf species on the verge of extinction.

(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 DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DEAR READERS: If we humans had respected water as Mother Earth’s lifeblood, plants as her lungs, animals as her children and air as our shared spirit, perhaps the Industrial Revolution would have made a better, safer world than we have today.

The Industrial Revolution has led to the creation of the technosphere, of which chemical and electropollution are harmful byproducts. These ill effects must be contained and transformed to prevent the globalization of bio-industrialized wastelands, like industrial agriculture’s millions of pesticide- and herbicide-poisoned acres, filled with genetically engineered crops.

The technosphere’s escalating energy demands -- for its ever-proliferating data centers, cybercurrency mining and transactions, and other services -- need to be tempered to reduce the severity of climate change and our exposure to associated electropollution.

For more than a decade, several authors have documented the validity of concerns over the issues of electropollution and exposure to electromagnetic fields and nonionizing radiation. Notably, physician Samuel Milham warns that because of the recent proliferation of radio frequency radiation -- from cellphones, cell towers, terrestrial antennas, Wi-Fi systems, broadband internet over power lines and other electronic equipment -- we may be facing a looming epidemic of morbidity and mortality. In his 2012 book, “Dirty Electricity,” he reveals the steps we must take, personally and as a society, to coexist with this marvelous but dangerous technology. (See also “An Electronic Silent Spring” by Katie Singer and “The Invisible Rainbow” by Arthur Firstenberg.)

In the last decade, a plethora of scientific studies have been published that support the concerns of these authors and other informed parties. From a One Health perspective, we have created a technosphere that is damaging the biosphere at many levels. It is an existential challenge to rectify this imbalance so that we can live in greater harmony with other sentient beings and achieve better health and quality of life.

BOOK REVIEW: 'OUT OF SIGHT' BY GAIL A. EISNITZ

“Out of Sight: An Undercover Investigator’s Fight for Animal Rights and Her Own Survival” is a memoir by Gail Eisnitz, chief investigator for the Humane Farming Association and recipient of the Albert Schweitzer Medal for her work on behalf of animals. Her earlier book, “Slaughterhouse: The Shocking Story of Greed, Neglect and Inhumane Treatment Inside the U.S. Meat Industry,” documented how the billions of animals that people eat are routinely mistreated and slaughtered.

The Humane Slaughter Act requires that all farm animals, except poultry, be humanely handled and rendered unconscious before being butchered. In spite of the law, farmed animals across the U.S. had no effective protection from inhumane handling and slaughter; many were being skinned and scaled alive until Eisnitz reported her findings to the media, the courts and her readers.

All who care about animals, and for the poor people (many of them immigrants) who work in animal slaughterhouses, should read Eisnitz’s work. I have visited factory farms and slaughterhouses in several countries, rich and poor, and can attest to the interminable suffering of animals raised and killed for human consumption. As Eisnitz concludes in her just-released memoir, spot checks in the U.S. only catch violators when inspectors are present.

Compounding that problem, in March, the Trump administration announced that it is starting the process of lifting the cap on slaughterhouse production line speeds. The cap is currently set at the meteoric rate of 1,106 hogs per slaughter line per hour -- roughly one hog slaughtered every four seconds. Soon, some slaughterhouses may be free to kill hogs as quickly and recklessly as they want. For poultry, who have no protections under the HSA and are often immersed in scalding tanks alive, the administration is seeking to increase evisceration line speeds from 140 birds per minute to 175 per minute. This poses a threat not only to the workers, who suffer from repetitive motion injuries, but to the animals themselves.

Farm animal welfare deficits need to be rectified, especially for mother pigs confined to narrow crates their entire lives (a practice being phased out in the U.K.), and laying hens crowded into small cages in factory farms. Dairy cows and beef cattle need better protection from extreme weather events in outdoor feedlots.

Transportation of these animals to slaughter is another issue. Shipping many animals together saves money, which means that when overcrowding, trampling, suffocation and death from extreme cold and heat occur, such losses are written off as a business expense.

Animals suffer a great deal on the way to America’s dinner tables. Arm yourself with the facts and get a copy of “Out of Sight.”

(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 DrFoxOneHealth.com.)