Woof.Mother Jones republished an article from fellow progressive outlet The Guardian on Saturday that argued that while dogs may be man’s best friend, they’re Mother Nature’s “villains.”The left-wing magazine highlighted new research, originally published by The Guardian, that concluded dogs have “extensive and multifarious” environmental impacts, disturbing wildlife, polluting waterways and contributing to carbon emissions. It pinpointed how canines are disturbing native wildlife, particularly shore birds.An Australian review of existing studies published in Pacific Conservation Biology analyzed dog attacks on other animals, finding that it may account for the colony collapse of little penguins in Tasmania, while a study of animals taken to the Australia Zoo wildlife hospital found that mortality was highest after dog attacks.PETA, ANIMAL RIGHTS GROUPS PRAISE TRUMP ADMIN FOR PHASING OUT ‘CRUEL TESTS ON DOGS’ AND OTHER ANIMALSIn the U.S., the report continued, studies have found that deer, foxes and bobcats were less active in or avoid wilderness areas where dogs were allowed. Other intel showed that insecticides from flea and tick medications kill aquatic invertebrates when they wash off into waterways. Dog feces, meanwhile, can leave scent traces and affect soil chemistry and plant growth.A canine’s carbon footprint is also “significant,” according to the study.A 2020 study found the dry pet food industry had an environmental footprint that is around twice the land area of the UK, with greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the 60th highest-emitting country.The owners of furry friends weren’t particularly impressed by the dog doom deep dive. They united in ripping the Mother Jones report on X, with several users responding with photos of their own beloved dogs or wondering if a rival animal wrote it.”Did… a cat write this?” columnist Tim Carney asked.Others wondered why the liberal outlet was trying to unearth the bad in what is considered a universally beloved animal.”Is there any enjoyable part of life these insufferable kill joys won’t attack?” The Young Turks host Ana Kasparian wondered.”First environmentalists came for cows and people said nothing. Now they want to sacrifice dogs to save the planet? Not a winning message by the net-zero crowd, whose track record is notoriously bad,” Gabriella Hoffman, Energy & Conservation Director for the Independent Women’s Forum Center, said.The study suggested that a way to tamp down on dogs’ environmental impact is to “keep them leashed in areas where restrictions apply and to maintain a buffer distance from nesting or roosting shorebirds.”The review’s lead author, Prof Bill Bateman of Curtin University, perhaps anticipating backlash from pet owners, said the research did not intend to be “censorious” but aimed to raise awareness of the environmental impacts of man’s best friend, according to Mother Jones. “Although we’ve pointed out these issues with dogs in natural environments… there is that other balancing side, which is that people will probably go out and really enjoy the environment around them — and perhaps feel more protective about it — because they’re out there walking their dog in it,” he said.Fox News Digital reached out to Mother Jones for comment.
Source link : https://www.foxnews.com/media/liberal-outlets-say-dogs-actually-bad-environment
Author :
Publish date : 2025-04-16 01:00:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
Liberal outlets say dogs are actually bad for the environment
