# data[].attributes.headline
Understanding the Human Aspects of Animal Hoarding

# data[].attributes.subject
Understanding the Human Aspects of Animal Hoarding

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An animal hoarder is defined as someone who has accumulated a large number of animals and who: 1) fails to provide minimal standards of nutrition, sanitation, and veterinary care; 2) fails to act on the deteriorating condition of the animals (including disease, starvation or death) and the environment (severe overcrowding, extremely unsanitary conditions); and often, 3) is unaware of the negative effects of the collection on their own health and well-being and on that of other family members ( 1). Animal hoarding has been gaining more attention from researchers in various areas of study, including sociological, psychological, and veterinary fields. Animal hoarding is considered a special manifestation of compulsive hoarding ( 2, 3, 4).

The Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium reviewed the case records of 71 incidents from across the United States and Canada to determine what characterizes a typical animal hoarding case ( 5). Of the cases reviewed, 83% involved women (71% involved individuals, who were widowed, divorced, or single); 53% of the animal hoarding residences were home to other individuals including children (5%), elderly dependents and disabled people (21%). Often essential utilities and major appliances such as showers, heaters, stoves, toilets, and sinks were not functional. Residential home interiors were usually unsanitary, 93%; 70% had fire hazards; and 16% of residences involved in animal hoarding were subsequently condemned as unfit for human habitation. In 25% of the cases, the hoarder was placed under permanent or temporary protective care ( 3).

Elderly individuals are at an increased risk for zoonotic diseases due to underlying medical conditions that weaken their immune systems ( 1, 3). There is also a health risk from to ammonia, which at high concentrations causes ocular and respiratory irritation ( 1, 3). The ammonia threshold limit values (TLVs) for a healthy individual should not exceed 25 ppm over an 8-hour period ( 4). The TLV is lower if the exposure has exceeded 8 h or if the individual is elderly or has respiratory problems ( 3). For short-term exposure (15 min), the recommended TLV is 35 ppm ( 3), while 20 ppm will cause an individual to feel uncomfortable, and 100 ppm will cause irritation of the upper respiratory tract, eyes, and nose ( 4). There is little information on ammonia levels in animal hoarding cases; however, 1 case reported levels of 152 ppm ( 5).

The key problem when dealing with these cases is that the animal hoarding is a symptom of a larger maladaptive situation and it is often too complicated to be adequately addressed, given the limited resources of animal protection officers and veterinarians ( 6- 9). Simply removing the animals from the residence may not solve the problem; the person still has the ability and perhaps the need to find more animals as the rate of relapse is at least 50% ( 10, 11). Some animal hoarders may also have combative attitudes towards government or animal welfare agencies, and as a result, violence must be considered an occupational hazard in animal welfare enforcement ( 11).

In order to aid the animals, it is important for hoarders to receive the necessary help to prevent further hoarding. Researchers have attempted to match the symptoms of animal hoarding to preexisting or concurrent mental psychopathologies in order to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon and to suggest treatment options. Frost ( 12) suggests that animal hoarders may suffer from a type of delusional disorder. This is supported by the recurrent belief of the hoarder that they have a special ability to understand and empathize with their animals. Most hoarders claim that the animals are being well cared for and are healthy, despite evidence to the contrary, suggesting that hoarders possess an unrealistic belief system ( 12).

A dementia model is supported by evidence that animal hoarders tend to show no insight or empathy in relation to the poor conditions under which the animals are held. Hoarding of inanimate possessions often occurs in cases of animal hoarding, and it has been reported that 20% of dementia patients also hoard objects ( 12).

Some researchers suggest that animal hoarding can be better understood using an addictions-based model, as these individuals share many characteristics with substance abusers, including: a preoccupation with animals, denial of a problem, excuses for their behavior, claims of persecution, and neglect of personal and environmental conditions ( 12, 13). Hoarding animals can be compared to addictive behavior such as gambling and compulsive shopping, in which impulse control is impaired. The hoarders feel a need to get more animals even though they may recognize that it will cause financial, emotional, and physical stress; they are simply unable to control themselves ( 12).

Some animal hoarders have experienced traumatic childhoods leading to the inability to establish human relationships. Often this type of hoarder will cite the unconditional love of their animals as a reason why they need to be surrounded by them. Unfortunately, caring about animals is no substitute for caring for animals. This model is consistent with other models that have been suggested for the general compulsive hoarding of inanimate objects. The hoarders begin to identify themselves with the animals and fear taking a risk with human relationships ( 12). Often hoarders will describe their animals as "children" and it is clear from speaking to hoarders that their lives revolve around the unconditional love of the animals ( 3).

Another model attempts to compare animal hoarding with obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), or a symptom of this condition. Animal hoarders often feel a strong responsibility to prevent any harm from coming to animals and will perform unrealistic procedures to protect them from harm; similar to the compulsive rituals an OCD patient engages in to prevent harm from befalling themselves. Similar to the dementia model, 20 to 30% of human OCD cases involve hoarding of inanimate objects or animals, or both ( 12). One study showed that 100% of 71 cases of animal hoarding also involved hoarding of inanimate objects ( 3). This OCD, as with animal hoarding, is more common in women and is often accompanied by personal and environmental neglect, both traits of animal hoarders ( 13). Sometimes the onset of OCD coincides with early or sudden loss of a loved one, which may indicate why animal hoarders abhor the thought of euthanasia for their animals and tend to deny the deteriorating conditions of the animals' health and their environment ( 13).

Currently, animal hoarding has not been attached to any one specific psychiatric disorder and it is clear that one diagnosis may not exclude others ( 3). In order to prevent animal hoarders from relapsing, it is important that they receive the necessary care, counseling, or treatment for the underlying medical/psychiatric concern. It may be possible to determine an appropriate treatment plan based on a similar disorder, if the symptoms exhibited by the hoarder are known.

Mental health agencies, social services, and public authorities are often unable or unwilling to assist in animal hoarding cases because the animal hoarder's behavior is excused as simply a lifestyle choice and, therefore, not a public health issue ( 7). In other cases, mental incompetence had not been established and the social agencies did not pursue a goal of developing a manageable companion animal colony, despite clear risks associated with animal neglect, human injury due to falls, fire, self-neglect, poor nutrition, and poor sanitation ( 3).

There is often significant evidence of self-neglect and neglect of dependents who live in the household where hoarding exists ( 3, 11). Self-neglect is the most common form of abuse in the elderly and this may include poor nutrition, lack of medical care, poor personal care, no awareness of the consequences involved, social isolation, and extreme clutter. All of these manifestations are characteristic of animal hoarding cases; however, they are not sufficient to establish mental incompetence under most public health policies that give a high value to personal autonomy and the right to refuse treatment. This is a significant barrier to health agencies becoming involved in many animal hoarding cases ( 3, 9, 11).

Other barriers to cross-reporting of animal and human welfare situations evolve from administrative procedures, eligibility rules, and bureaucratic procedures that obstruct collaborative efforts as each agency may insist on following their own protocols or some may be bound by confidentiality requirements. Some individuals, who are trained in specific fields, may be uncomfortable dealing with issues outside their area of expertise or by working within a multidisciplinary framework. Such problems make it difficult to share information about the hoarder, which, in turn, makes it difficult to provide the individual with proper assistance ( 6, 7).

In order to help animal hoarders and the animal victims, increased collaboration among various agencies including animal protection agencies, veterinarians, and social and health services, would allow earlier intervention and prevent escalation to more serious outcome ( 3, 8). This may help decrease the overall financial and welfare costs associated with animal hoarding and increase the chances of having a successful intervention. Veterinarians are taking more of a leadership role in the concept of "One Medicine" in relation to zoonotic diseases, antimicrobial resistance, and food safety. The concept of One Medicine unites medical professionals and bridges the gap between human and animal health ( 14, 15). The enforcement of societal values as described in animal welfare legislation has been a veterinary regulatory function in most European countries and is recognized as a veterinary activity by the OIE (Office international des épizooties) ( 16). As veterinarians called to support the health of animals in incidents of hoarding we should be aware of the human health issues associated with this phenomenon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Understanding the human aspects of animal hoarding

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An animal hoarder is defined as someone who has accumulated a large number of animals and who: 1) fails to provide minimal standards of nutrition, sanitation, and veterinary care; 2) fails to act on the deteriorating condition of the animals (including disease, starvation or death) and the environment (severe overcrowding, extremely unsanitary conditions); and often, 3) is unaware of the negative effects of the collection on their own health and well-being and on that of other family members ( 1).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Animal "hoarding" can be identified when a person is housing more animals than they can adequately and appropriately care for. It is a complex issue that often encompasses mental health, animal welfare and public safety concerns. Animal hoarding is defined by an inability to provide even minimal standards of nutrition, sanitation, shelter and veterinary care-often resulting in over-breeding of animals, animal starvation, illness and even death. In some cases, guardians believe they are helping their animals and deny this inability to provide minimum care.

How We Help

The ASPCA works closely with numerous social welfare agencies in New York City to provide veterinary services such as spay/neuter and vaccines and additional resources for pet owners. We also work with pet owners who may choose to surrender some of the animals in their home and help them adequately care for their remaining pets.

In severe cases that require police intervention, the ASPCA will work with local law enforcement and prosecutors to rescue, care for, and help get justice for the animals. Our assistance may include field rescue, temporary sheltering, investigative and legal support, forensic services, veterinary and behavioral care and, where there has been either a voluntary relinquishment of animals or court ordered forfeiture, placement of animals involved.

Having multiple animals does not automatically indicate hoarding. There are several signs that may indicate that someone has an unmanageable problem:

The person owns an unusual number of animals. In some cases, the person may not know the total number of animals in their care.

The person is unable to provide minimal standards of nutrition, sanitation, shelter and veterinary care for the animals.

The home or property has deteriorated (i.e., dirty windows, broken furniture, holes in the wall and floor, extreme clutter).

There is a strong odor, and floors may be covered with dried feces, urine, vomit, etc.

Animals may be emaciated, lethargic and under-socialized.

Fleas and vermin are present.

The person may be isolated from social support and may neglect themselves or appear physically or mentally unwell.

In some cases, the person may desire assistance to rectify the situation, help the animals and their living environment. In other cases, the person may not have awareness of the severity or decline help intended to resolve the situation.

Depending on the severity of the situation, animal hoarding may be criminally actionable under state animal cruelty statutes, which typically requires caretakers to provide sufficient food, water and veterinary care.

Where criminal convictions are obtained, it can be important for sentences to include limitations on the number of, or the keeping of, animals; monitoring of the offender's property to prevent against re-accumulation of animals, and mandatory psychological assessments and support.

The primary characteristic of hoarding disorder is defined as "persistent difficulties discarding or parting with possessions, regardless of their actual value." The DSM‐5 ( Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition) definition of hoarding disorder specifically addresses animal hoarding, while suggesting that it may be a special manifestation of the disorder.

Animal hoarding is usually accompanied by a history of disordered or inadequate attachments to people. Most hoarders have psychological and social histories beginning in childhood that are chaotic and traumatic. Many people who exhibit hoarding behavior reportedly grew up in households with inconsistent parenting, in which animals may have been the only stable feature. Some people who hazardously accumulate animals began collecting after a traumatic event or loss, while others see themselves as "rescuers" who save animals from lives on the street. In addition to these influences, biological factors, including genetics, neurophysiology, and infectious disease, have been suggested as possible explanations for this disorder.

Large-scale institutional hoarding by entities set up as legitimate rescues and shelters poses unique challenges for law enforcement and mental health professionals. The entities may see themselves as being uniquely qualified to meet the needs of animals and lack any insight into the harm they cause, making them uncooperative when authorities attempt to intervene on behalf of the animals or the person themselves.

Here are several signs that a rescue group or shelter may involve hoarding or the mistreatment of animals:

The group is unwilling to let visitors see the location where animals are kept.

The group will not disclose the number of animals in its care and may make little effort to adopt animals out.

More animals are continually taken in, despite the poor condition of existing animals.

Legitimate shelters and rescue organizations may be viewed as an enemy. Animals may be received at a remote location (parking lot, street corner, etc.) rather than at the group's facilities to avoid visitors.

Not everyone who has multiple animals has hoarding disorder. However, if you think someone you know is struggling with animal hoarding, here are some ways you can help:

A phone call may be the first step to getting everyone the help they need. Many communities now have Hoarding Task Forces with representatives from code enforcement, mental health, social services and animal care and control experienced in working collaboratively to respond to hoarding situations. If your area does not have such a group, call your local humane law enforcement department, police department, animal welfare organization or veterinarian to initiate the process.

Contact social service groups near you. Your local department of the aging, adult protective services, health departments and other mental health agencies may be able to provide help.

Reassure the person involved that it's okay to accept help. People who accumulate animals may be worried that their animals will be killed, or that they will never see them again. Assure them that the animals need urgent care, and that immediate action is necessary.

Volunteer your time. With the removal of animals from a hoarding situation, the burden on local shelters can be staggering. Volunteer to help clean cages, socialize animals, walk dogs and perform other such necessary duties at a shelter or rescue near you.

Keep in touch. It may be appropriate for animals to be spayed and neutered and returned to their home if an overwhelmed pet owner can provide-or can be aided in providing-care. Under the guidance of an organization, help the individual with daily animal care chores. And if the person acquires new animals, help ensure that they are spayed/neutered and vaccinated.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Animal "hoarding" can be identified when a person is housing more animals than they can adequately and appropriately care for. It is a complex issue that often encompasses mental health, animal welfare and public safety concerns.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dog breeds are characterized by certain physical and behavioral traits. Each breed was developed to perform a specific job, whether that job is hunting rabbits, retrieving downed birds, herding livestock or sitting on people's laps. When developing a breed, breeders selected only those dogs that performed their job best to produce the next generation.

Physical abilities and behavior are both important facets of any breed. A well-bred dog should have both the physical attributes necessary to perform its job and the behavioral tendencies needed to learn it. It's not surprising that individuals of a specific breed tend to look and behave somewhat similarly. Pointers are more likely than Poodles to point, and sheepdogs are more likely than lapdogs to herd. However, while a dog's genetics may predispose it to perform certain behaviors, tremendous behavioral variation exists among individuals of the same breed or breed type. It's also important to note that some dog breeds are now bred for entirely different jobs than those for which they were originally developed. For example, certain strains of Golden Retrievers are now being bred as service dogs, a far cry from their original job of retrieving downed birds.

Today's pit bull is a descendant of the original English bull-baiting dog-a dog that was bred to bite and hold bulls, bears and other large animals around the face and head. When baiting large animals was outlawed in the 1800s, people turned instead to fighting their dogs against each other. These larger, slower bull-baiting dogs were crossed with smaller, quicker terriers to produce a more agile and athletic dog for fighting other dogs.

Some pit bulls were selected and bred for their fighting ability. That means that they may be more likely than other breeds to fight with dogs. It doesn't mean that they can't be around other dogs or that they're unpredictably aggressive. Other pit bulls were specifically bred for work and companionship. These dogs have long been popular family pets, noted for their gentleness, affection and loyalty. And even those pit bulls bred to fight other animals were not prone to aggressiveness toward people. Dogs used for fighting needed to be routinely handled by people; therefore aggression toward people was not tolerated. Any dog that behaved aggressively toward a person was culled, or killed, to avoid passing on such an undesirable trait. Research on pet dogs confirms that dog aggressive dogs are no more likely to direct aggression toward people than dogs that aren't aggressive to other dogs.

It is likely that that the vast majority of pit bull type dogs in our communities today are the result of random breeding-two dogs being mated without regard to the behavioral traits being passed on to their offspring. The result of random breeding is a population of dogs with a wide range of behavioral predispositions. For this reason it is important to evaluate and treat each dog, no matter its breed, as an individual.

While a dog's genetics may predispose it to behave in certain ways, genetics do not exist in a vacuum. Rather, behavior develops through a complex interaction between environment and genetics. This is an especially important consideration when we look at an individual dog versus a breed. Many diverse and sometimes subtle factors influence the development of behavior, including, but not limited to, early nutrition, stress levels experienced by the mother during pregnancy, and even temperature in the womb. And when it comes to influencing the behavior of an individual dog, factors such as housing conditions and the history of social interactions play pivotal roles in behavioral development. The factors that feed into the expression of behavior are so inextricably intertwined that it's usually impossible to point to any one specific influence that accounts for a dog becoming aggressive. This is why there is such variation in behavior between individual dogs, even when they are of the same breed and bred for the same purpose. Because of the impact of experience, the pit bull specifically bred for generations to be aggressive may not fight with dogs and the Labrador retriever bred to be a service dog may be aggressive toward people.

Early positive experiences, most notably socialization, are considered key in preventing aggressive tendencies in dogs. Puppies that learn how to interact, play and communicate with both people and members of their own and other species are less likely to show aggressive behavior as adults. Given the powerful impact of socialization, it's no surprise that dogs that are chained outside and isolated from positive human interaction are more likely to bite people than dogs that are integrated into our homes. Unfortunately, pit bull type dogs that find themselves in these conditions may be at greater risk for developing aggressive behavior. But because these factors are ones that can be controlled by better educated owners, it is possible to reduce these risks, not just in pit bulls but in dogs of all breeds.

The reality is that dogs of many breeds can be selectively bred or trained to develop aggressive traits. Therefore the responsible ownership of any dog requires a commitment to proper socialization, humane training and conscientious supervision. Despite our best efforts, there will always be dogs of various breeds that are simply too dangerous to live safely in society. We can effectively address the danger posed by these dogs by supporting the passage and vigorous enforcement of laws that focus, not on breed, but on people's responsibility for their dogs' behavior, including measures that hold owners of all breeds accountable for properly housing, supervising and controlling their dogs. Breed neutral "dangerous dog" laws, "leash laws" that prohibit dogs from running loose off their owners' property, and "anti chaining" laws can control the behavior of individual dogs and individual owners and thereby help reduce the risk of harm to people and other animals.

Laws that ban particular breeds of dogs do not achieve these aims and instead create the illusion, but not the reality, of enhanced public safety. Notably, there are no statewide laws that discriminate based on dog breed, and 18 states have taken the proactive step of expressly banning laws that single out particular breeds for disparate legal treatment. Even the White House has weighed in against laws that target specific breeds. In a a statement issued in 2013, President Obama said "[w]e don't support breed-specific legislation-research shows that bans on certain types of dogs are largely ineffective and often a waste of public resources. And the simple fact is that dogs of any breed can become dangerous when they're intentionally or unintentionally raised to be aggressive."

All dogs, including pit bulls, are individuals. Treating them as such, providing them with the care, training and supervision they require, and judging them by their actions and not by their DNA or their physical appearance is the best way to ensure that dogs and people can continue to share safe and happy lives together.

Please note: This position statement is intended to be considered in its entirety and excerpting is not recommended.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is important to evaluate and treat each dog, no matter its breed, as an individual.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Bully dog" may be a term you've heard used to describe several different breeds of dog. But what does "bully dog" mean?

You might suspect from the name that any breed with the word "bull" in it might be a bully dog breed. Indeed, that is the case with many dog breeds, such as American Pit Bull Terriers, English Bulldogs, Bull Mastiffs, and Bull Terriers.

However, there are many other dogs, like Boxers, Boston Terriers, and American Staffordshire Terriers that are considered bully dog breeds without having the word "bull" in their names.

So what do these dogs have in common that makes them all "bully breeds," and where does that name come from?

Which Breeds Are Considered Bully Dogs?

There are many breeds that we call bully dogs, and they can have vastly different looks, temperaments, and breed histories. So why do we group them all under the label of " bully dogs?"

Well, they all have one thing in common. They descend from Molosser dogs, which were large, muscular dogs who originated in Greece and had pendant ears and short muzzles.

Breeders originally mixed these large animals with other breeds to create dogs who would protect livestock, guard property, and help with day-to-day work.

Later on, many bully breeds would unfortunately be bred for bloodsports such as bull-baiting and bear-baiting. Once these barbaric sports were outlawed, many of these dogs continued to be bred as companion animals, though some were bred for dog fighting rings.

Bully dog breeds are generally not aggressive when given a proper home and socialization training, but like any other dog, humans can teach them bad habits. Most bully dogs are happy, family companions who are protective and loving, especially toward children in their homes.

There are so many breeds that share Molosser ancestors and fit in the bully dog category. It would be difficult to list them all. However, here are a few of the most well-known and popular bully dog breeds:

Want to know if your dog is a bully breed? Try this doggy DNA test to find out your pup's breed ancestry!

Why Do We Call Them Bully Dogs?

You may think that the term " bully dog " implies that dogs of this type are standoffish, cruel, or aggressive. However, the name "bully dog" has nothing to do with these dogs' personalities, and is instead based on their history.

Because people used these dogs in bloodsports like bull-baiting, they used the name "bully" to describe them, and it stuck. Describing them as " bully dogs " doesn't help distance these breeds from their unfortunate past.

Combine that with the fact that people have used many bully dog breeds as status symbols to invoke toughness, intimidation, and aggression - as well as people who continue to use them in illegal dog fighting rings - and it's easy to see why their undeserved reputation persists.

Despite all of these issues, bully dogs are generally kind family dogs, and many have been described as "nanny dogs" because of their protective nature towards children. When given proper training and love, bully dogs make excellent companions and pets.

However, breed specific legislation sometimes bans bully dogs, especially if they fall under the "Pit Bull" type, or even if they look like Pit Bulls.

Fear-based laws and poor training of law enforcement to identify breeds properly can spell disaster for dogs of many breeds and their families, even if they aren't Pit Bulls or bully dogs.

It's important to spread knowledge and information so bully breeds can shed their bad reputation, and so people can accept them for the loving animals that they are.

What's your favorite bully breed? Do you have a bully dog at home? Let us know in the comments below!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Are 'Bully Dog' Breeds? Why Do We Call Them Bullies? - DogTime

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are many breeds that we call bully dogs, and they can have vastly different looks, temperaments, and breed histories. So why do we group them all under the label of "bully dogs?" Well, they all have one thing in common.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Circuses Are No Fun for Animals | Saving Earth | Encyclopedia Britannica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recently, four zebras and three horses escaped from the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus in Colorado and ran loose near a busy interstate highway for 30 minutes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
mollusk, any soft-bodied invertebrate of the phylum Mollusca, usually wholly or partly enclosed in a calcium carbonate shell secreted by a soft mantle covering the body. Along with the insects and vertebrates, it is one of the most diverse groups in the animal kingdom, with nearly 100,000 (possibly as many as 150,000) described species. Each group includes an ecologically and structurally immense variety of forms: the shell-less Caudofoveata; the narrow-footed gliders (Solenogastres); the serially valved chitons (Placophora or Polyplacophora); the cap-shaped neopilinids (Monoplacophora); the limpets, snails, and slugs (Gastropoda); the clams, mussels, scallops, oysters, shipworms, and cockles (Bivalvia); the tubiform to barrel-shaped tusk shells (Scaphopoda); and the nautiluses, cuttlefishes, squids, and octopuses (Cephalopoda).

General features

Size range and diversity of structure

Typical molluscan features have been substantially altered, or even lost, in many subgroups. Among the cephalopods the giant squids ( Architeuthis), the largest living invertebrates, attain a body length of eight metres (more than 26 feet); with the tentacle arms extended, the total length reaches to 22 metres. Other cephalopods exceed a length of one metre. Many of the remaining molluscan classes show a large variation in size: among bivalves the giant clam ( Tridacna) ranges up to 135 centimetres (four feet) and the pen shell ( Pinna) from 40 to 80 centimetres; among gastropods the sea hares ( Aplysia) grow from 40 to 100 centimetres and the Australian trumpet, or baler ( Syrinx), up to 60 centimetres; among placophores the gumshoe, or gumboot chiton ( Cryptochiton), achieves a length up to 30 to 43 centimetres; and, among solenogasters, Epimenia reaches a length of 15 to 30 centimetres. Finally, gastropods of the family Entoconchidae, which are parasitic in echinoderm sea cucumbers, may reach a size of almost 1.3 metres. In contrast, there are also minute members, less than one millimetre (0.04 inch) in size, among the solenogasters and gastropods.

Distribution and abundance

The mollusks have adapted to all habitats except air. Although basically marine, bivalves and gastropods include freshwater species. Gastropods have also adapted to land, with thousands of species living a fully terrestrial existence. Found on rocky, sandy, and muddy substrata, mollusks burrow, crawl, become cemented to the surface, or are free-swimming.

Mollusks are found worldwide, but there is a preponderance of some groups in certain areas of the world. The close association of many molluscan groups with their food source-whether by direct dependence on a specific food supply ( e.g., plant-eating, or herbivores) or by involvement in food chains-limits their geographic distribution; for example, bivalves of the family Teredinidae (shipworms) are associated with wood. In general, cold-water regions support fewer species.

Importance to humans

Mollusks are of general importance within food chains and as members of ecosystems. Certain species are of direct or indirect commercial and even medical importance to humans. Many gastropod species, for example, are necessary intermediate hosts for parasitic flatworms (class Trematoda, phylum Platyhelminthes), such as the species that cause schistosomiasis in humans. Most bivalves contribute to the organic turnover in the intertidal ( littoral) zones of marine and fresh water because, as filter feeders, they filter up to 40 litres (10 gallons) of water per hour. This filtering activity, however, may also seriously interfere with the various populations of invertebrate larvae ( plankton) found suspended and free-swimming in the water. One species, the zebra mussel ( Dreissena polymorpha), is regarded as a particularly harmful exotic invader. Carried from Europe in ship ballast water, zebra mussels were taken to the Great Lakes in 1986. To date, they have caused millions of dollars in commercial damage by clogging the water pipes of power plants and cooling systems. They are driving many native freshwater bivalve species to extinction.

Many gastropods, bivalves, and cephalopods are a source of food for many cultures and therefore play an important role in the fishing industries of many countries. Many shell-bearing molluscan species are also used to fabricate ornaments and are harvested for the pearl and mother-of-pearl industries.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mollusk | Definition, Characteristics, Shell, Classification, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Mollusk, any soft-bodied invertebrate of the phylum Mollusca, usually wholly or partly enclosed in a calcium carbonate shell secreted by a soft mantle covering the body. Along with the insects and vertebrates, it is one of the most diverse groups in the animal kingdom, with nearly 100,000 (possibly

# data[].attributes.headline
Parasites of Commercially Important Marine Mollusks

# data[].attributes.subject
Parasites of Commercially Important Marine Mollusks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Publisher Summary

This chapter describes several species of mollusks belonging to the family Pyramidellidae that are reported as parasites of commercially important marine mollusks. The pyramidellids are all parasites, with mollusks and annelids being the most common hosts. Others are reported as parasites of poriferans, cnidarians, sipunculids, crustaceans, echinoderms, hemichordates, and tunicates. All of the pyramidellids are ectoparasites as they are generally attached on the exterior, near the edges of the valves of pelecypods, while inserting their long proboscis into the hosts' soft tissues and feed on blood or tissue fluids. Other species, such as Odostomia tellinae, live within the mantle cavities of pelecypods but never within tissues. Species Odostomia impressa, Odostomia bisutularis, Odostomia seminude, Odostomia scalaris, Odostomia eulimoides, and Odostomia trifida of family Pyramidellidae are described and their ecology and pathology are discussed.

View full text

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Chapter 8 Parasites of Commercially Important Marine Molluscs: The Phylum Mollusca

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This chapter describes several species of mollusks belonging to the family Pyramidellidae that are reported as parasites of commercially important marine mollusks. The pyramidellids are all parasites, with mollusks and annelids being the most common hosts. Others are reported as parasites of poriferans, cnidarians, sipunculids, crustaceans, echinoderms, hemichordates, and tunicates.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The pearl production volume of Japanese marine aquacultures amounted to approximately 16 thousand tons in 2020. While losing its importance to the domestic economy, cultured pearl farming in Japan still contributes greatly to the international pearl trade, mainly due to Japanese expertise and investments in the industry.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Japan: pearl production output 2020 | Statista

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The pearl production volume of Japanese marine aquacultures amounted to approximately 16 thousand tons in 2020. While losing its importance to the domestic economy, cultured pearl farming in Japan still contributes greatly to the international pearl trade, mainly due to Japanese expertise and investments in the industry.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Are pearls ethical? Are pearls eco friendly? are pearls vegan? Eco friendly pearls, ethical pearls, why pearls can be good for the sea, sustainable pearls

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When Josh Humbert inspects his farm, he dives into the clear blue waters of a lagoon, on a picture-perfect island that is fringed with palm trees. Humbert is the manager and owner of Kamoka Pearl, a boutique family business on the French Polynesian atoll of Ahe that is trying to shake up the international pearl market by raising pearls more sustainably.

"It's like another planet," Humbert told National Geographic about Ahe, an atoll that sits just a few feet above sea level, about 300 miles (480 kilometers) northeast of Tahiti in the Tuamotu Archipelago. "There's no dirt, it's just sand and coral, so the bottoms of your bare feet don't even get dirty."

(See " Pictures: Sustainable Pearl Farming.")

Kamoka Pearl was founded in 1990 by Humbert's father and brother. A year later, halfway through college (where he studied marine biology), Josh Humbert joined the family business, which raises high-quality "Tahitian pearls" for the international jewelry market.

Humbert had spent part of his childhood growing up in French Polynesia with his family, under a roof of palm leaves near the ocean. He returned to Polynesia as an adult, although he moved back to the U.S. three years ago, to Oregon. His father, who is French, stays at the farm year-round. Humbert's mother is American.

(Related: " Building a Sustainable Lobster Fishery Off Honduras.")

How Pearl Farming Works

To raise pearls, Kamoka cultivates a native species of pearl oyster, Pinctada margaritifera. The oysters are placed in baskets or nets to protect them from predators, which include triggerfish, sea turtles, and eagle rays. Made out of plastic, those baskets or nets are hung vertically every three feet (one meter) on horizontal lines that range from 330 yards (300 meters) to 1.3 miles (2 kilometers).

The end of the line is anchored with a concrete block at the bottom of the lagoon, 100 to 200 feet (30 to 60 meters) down, or it is tied to a coral formation on the bottom. Vertical stabilizers are placed along the line, and buoys are interspersed to help hold the oysters at a depth of around 20 feet (6 meters).

The next step involves seeding the oyster to produce a pearl. An oyster makes pearls on its own by secreting nacre, or mother of pearl, around an irritant that gets into its shell. Contrary to popular belief, according to Humbert, that irritant is most often an invading worm that bored in, not a grain of sand.

In the case of Tahitian oysters, the pearls are often colorful-sometimes even black-due to the specific chemistry of the species.

At oyster farms, when the mollusks are large enough, a worker carefully pries open the shell and inserts a small nucleus, or bead, as well as a piece of mantle cut from another pearl oyster. That process is called grafting, and the bit of mantle helps the oyster start laying down nacre, explained Humbert.

Kamoka uses beads that have been cut from the mother of pearl in dead oyster shells, to a size of six to eight millimeters in diameter. Not every bead starts becoming a pearl, but those that do stretch out the oyster tissue around it, forming a small cavity.

To obtain another, larger pearl in the same oyster, farmers often take out the small pearl and replace it with a larger bead. In another two to three years, if all goes well, that bead will get covered with nacre, to form a large, shiny pearl.

After that pearl is harvested, the oyster is usually "sacrificed" because it is unlikely to produce another pearl so shiny. The meat may be consumed locally, although there isn't an international market for the flesh of pearl oyster species. To replace the lost oysters, farmers usually collect spat, or larva, from the lagoon where they work.

In addition to the skilled labor that grafting requires, since 2003 Kamoka has also hired a revolving cast of young people from around the world, who come to work as part of the World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms (WWOOF) program. Participants receive free room and board, as well as a chance to learn the trade, in exchange for their labor.

"We are kind of the ocean's version of organic farming," said Humbert.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When Josh Humbert inspects his farm, he dives into the clear blue waters of a lagoon, on a picture-perfect island that is fringed with palm trees. Humbert is the manager and owner of Kamoka Pearl, a boutique family business on the French Polynesian atoll of Ahe that is trying to shake up the international pearl market by raising pearls more sustainably.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why All of America's Circus Animals Could Soon be Free

# data[].attributes.subject
Why All of America's Circus Animals Could Soon be Free

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The curtain is about to fall for the last time on the self-dubbed "Greatest Show on Earth," America's biggest and longest-running traveling circus. On Sunday, after 146 years, the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus will pump its caravan brakes permanently. Other traveling circuses may not be far behind.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have joined forces on a bill that would ban the use of exotic and wild animals in traveling circuses and any other entertainment act on wheels. In late March, Representatives Raul Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat, Ryan Costello, a Pennsylvania Republican, and 22 other lawmakers introduced the Traveling Exotic Animal and Public Safety Protection Act (TEAPSPA) in the House. It would require the 19 traveling circuses in the U.S. with performing animals to to use only human entertainers-or shut down.

If the bill passes, it will end life on the road for more than 200 big cats, bears, camels, and elephants still working as circus performers. Thirty-four other countries have instituted similar bans, as have dozens of cities and counties in the U.S., including Los Angeles and San Francisco.

DO ANIMALS NEED TO BE SAVED FROM THE CIRCUS?

The welfare issues affecting wild circus animals are long documented and numerous. Animal welfare experts have found that it's grueling and stressful for animals to always be on the road, confined to tight spaces, and made to perform before screaming audiences.

"Wild animals, even if they're born in captivity, retain all their natural instincts, which are completely thwarted when they are trapped in small cages and shuttled from city to city in trucks and trailers," says Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States.

These stresses are exacerbated by the fact that the animals must perform unnatural physical acts: bears trained to prance on tightropes; elephants made to balance on chairs; tigers forced to jump through flaming hoops. The training, lifelong and relentless, is especially hard on performing animals.

It's the same with any wild animal forced to interact regularly with humans. For an animal to be tamed, it must be "broken" early. For elephants that means being struck with bullhooks -sharp metal poles-from a very early age, until they're docile enough to follow commands. For elephants in circuses, the training extends further. They don't just have to be tame enough to give tourists rides-they need to twirl and balance on their hind legs. Every time an elephant doesn't complete a perfect turn, it may be hit or otherwise disciplined. If a big cat doesn't behave, it may be whipped and deprived of food.

"A hundred years or so ago, when we were ignorant about the intelligence and emotions and ability of a species to communicate, we might have had the excuse of our own ignorance that we treated these animals so badly," says Jan Creamer, founder of Animal Defenders International and an advocate for TEAPSPA. "But we simply don't have that excuse any longer. Wild animals in circuses don't belong in an advanced, civilized society."

After a 2011 Mother Jones investigation exposed pervasive cruelty toward elephants at Ringling Bros, a number of petitions and public interest campaigns demanded change. Ringling took notice and in March 2015 announced that it would no longer feature elephant acts. The circus since retired its 13 elephants to Ringling's Florida-based Center for Elephant Conservation. The circus continued to feature big cats and other animals.

RINGLING'S FINAL BOW

In the end, removing elephants wasn't enough to save Ringling. In January, citing declining ticket sales and high operating costs, Kenneth Feld, CEO of Ringling parent company Feld Entertainment, announced the circus would close this year. It "had become an unsustainable business for the company," he said in a statement.

Ultimately, Creamer says, Ringling may have endured if it had switched to human-only performances years ago. Cirque de Soleil is an example of a hugely successful circus that has never featured animals, she notes.

Creamer says that while Ringling's shutdown is a win for wild animal welfare, the fight continues. It's why TEAPSPA is necessary, she argues, even after the country's largest circus closes its doors. According to Creamer, criminalizing the use of wild animals in circuses sends the message that the practice is wrong, and it will create a permanent solution.

"It's unfortunate such legislation is necessary, but there are findings of systemic inhumane treatment that show a solution is needed," Representative Costello says.

Abuse allegations continue to surface. A recent Humane Society investigation found that a tiger trainer who works with traveling shows, including the Carden Circus and Shrine Circuses, appears to have mistreated his tigers, potentially in violation of the Animal Welfare Act. The investigation, the results of which were released May 18, reveals ShowMe Tigers owner Ryan Easley on video beating his tigers with whips and sticks. One tiger was hit 31 times in two minutes.

CONGRESS LOOKS TO ACT

TEAPSPA, if signed into law, would be a blow to the businesses of Easley and others who supply exotic animals to circuses. Repeatedly introduced in Congress in recent years, the bill has failed to gain broad support. Until now Ringling was the biggest organization lobbying against TEAPSPA, the "political protector of the circus industry," according to Pacelle. Now that Ringling is out of the mix, the bill could gain momentum.

It has another thing going for it: Animal welfare has emerged as a unifying bipartisan issue in a contentious political landscape. Representative Earl Blumenauer, a Democrat from Oregon and a co-sponsor of the bill, says working for animal protections is "a little island of tranquility and civility."

"Animal welfare is bridge-building," he says. "It's where our constituents are. It's where more and more of our colleagues are. It's hard to describe the satisfaction when you score a victory in this area."

Opponents of TEAPSPA include The Cavalry Group, an organization that opposes "radical animal rights groups," according to its website. The organization says the bill "would deprive countless Americans of the ability to experience endangered animals up close such as elephants and tigers." They argue that doing so "fosters a love of wildlife in children that lasts a lifetime."

Creamer encourages parents instead to take their children to view wild animals in places like sanctuaries that keep animals in natural surroundings.

WHAT'S NEXT FOR THE RINGLING ANIMALS?

Feld Entertainment has applied for a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit to export 15 big cats-eight tigers, six lions and one leopard-to Zircus Krone, a circus in Germany. The cats were previously imported from Germany to perform with Ringling. The Animal Legal Defense Fund objects to the export, calling instead for the big cats to be sent to a sanctuary in the U.S. USFWS invites public comment on this petition until June 26.

The company's 13 elephants have already been retired to Ringling's Center for Elephant Conservation, not without controversy of its own. Feld Entertainment isn't otherwise publicly disclosing where the Ringling animals are going.

Creamer says that although TEAPSPA has many things working in its favor this time around, people may need to encourage their own lawmakers to sponsor the bill to improve its chances of advancing. Many lawmakers simply don't know how important animal welfare issues are to their constituents, she says.

The bill's backers are hopeful. "Animal welfare isn't a partisan issue, and I am proud to work across the aisle in order to prevent these abusive practices," Representative Costello says. "Together, we can all take part in ending animal cruelty."

Editor's Note: This story was updated on May 26 to include information on a Ringling petition to export its big cats to Germany.

Read more stories about wildlife crime and exploitation on Wildlife Watch. Send tips, feedback, and story ideas to ngwildlife@natgeo.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why All of America's Circus Animals Could Soon be Free

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The curtain is about to fall for the last time on the self-dubbed "Greatest Show on Earth," America's biggest and longest-running traveling circus. On Sunday, after 146 years, the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus will pump its caravan brakes permanently. Other traveling circuses may not be far behind.